Mprwa Special Meeting Agenda Packet 11-12-15

Agenda
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

SPECIAL MEETING
5:00 PM, Thursday, November 12, 2015
SEASIDE COUNCIL CHAMBER
440 Harcourt Ave
Seaside, 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.
CONSENT AGENDA
1.
Approve Minutes from August 13, 2015 - Milton
2.
Approve Minutes from September 24, 2015 - Milton
3.
Approve and File Authority Checks Through Nov 6, 2015 - Milton
4.
Receive and Discuss if necessary, the Draft Letter the Governor's Military Council (GMC)
sent through Admiral Dan Oliver on Nov 6, 2015
5.
Receive Copy of Water Authority Financial Policies and Procedures adopted by the
Authority Board on Mar 13, 2014
6.
Adoption of Resolution 2015-XX, Approving Donald G. Freeman as Legal Counsel

through December 31, 2016 and Authorizing the Authority President to Execute
a contract extension with Perry Freeman at a Price not-to-exceed $36,000.
7.
Adoption of Resolution 2015-YY, Approving Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck as Special

Legal Counsel through December 31, 2016 and Authorizing the Authority President to
Execute a Contract Extension at a Price not-to-Exceed $100,000.
AGENDA ITEMS
8.
Receive, Discuss, and Provide Direction on Final Application to the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) to Modify Cease and Desist Order (CDO) 2009-0060 and Decide
Whether to Co-apply or Send A Letter of Support - Cullem
Thursday, November 12, 2015
9.
Receive an Update on the Summary Project Schedule and Status of the Test Slant Well
for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP) - Crooks
ADJOURNMENT
The City of Monterey is committed to including the disabled in all of its services, programs and
activities. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance
to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerks Office at (831) 646-3935.
Notification 30 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements
to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II]. Later requests will
be accommodated to the extent feasible. For communication-related assistance, dial 711 to use
the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak to City offices. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speechto-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 the City Clerk's Office at
(831) 646-3935 to coordinate use of a device.
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.
M I N U TE S
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)
Regular Meeting
7:00 PM, Thursday, August 13, 2015
COUNCIL CHAMBER
580 PACIFIC STREET
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Directors Present:
Directors Absent:
Edelen, Burnett, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Alternate Director Downey

None
Staff Present:
Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk
ROLL CALL
Vice President Kampe called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
President Burnett called in from a noticed location.
Alternate Director Downey was present for Director Roberson.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Vice President Kampe invited reports from the Board and Staff.
Executive Director Cullem reported that the Authority previously considered the final routing of
the pipelines as part of the DEIR for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP)
and subsequently the City of Monterey sent a letter to the CPUC requesting consideration of a
third alternate, less intrusive route. Additionally, he announced that Keith Van Der Matten was
appointed the General Manager of the Marina Coast Water District and is now a representative
on the TAC. He then reported that the letter to the CPUC regarding the Geo Science conflict
approved the 29th of July was mailed on July 30th. Lastly, he provided a letter to the Directors
from resident Bill Hood, to Cal Am General Manager Rob MacLean as a letter of public input.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Vice President Kampe invited public comments
George Riley expressed concern that the test well time period be too short for valuable
information and requested the Sand City pumping data be considered.
Tom Rowley, said the reason the Authority has been successful is that they approach all
issues from an independent perspective and urged the Board to take up the issue Mr.
Riley discussed.
An individual presented an alternative to the pipeline route to reduce impacts to traffic
and neighborhood.
Doug Wilhelm congratulated the Mayors for undertaking a review of the deal projects.
He hoped it was not just a show for the CPUC to prove the viability of Cal Am. He
requested agendizing a presentation on the Poseidon desalination facility.
CONSENT AGENDA
MPRWA Minutes
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Executive Director Cullem requested tabling Item #4 because no updated schedule is available.
On motion by Director Pendergrass and seconded by Director Rubio and approved by the
following roll call vote the Authority Directors approved Consent Agenda Items 1 through 3 and
tabling Item 4.
1.
Approve the Minutes of July 9, 2015 Regular Meeting

Action: Approved
2.
Approve the Minutes of July 29, 2015 Special Meeting

Action: Approved
3.
Approve and File Checks

Action: Approved
4.
Receive the Most Recent Update of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
Schedule for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project
Action: Tabled
AGENDA ITEMS
5.
Receive an Update on the Summary Project Schedule for the Monterey Peninsula Water
Supply Project (MPWSP), including Status of the Application to the Coastal Commission for an
Amended Coastal Development Permit (CDP) to Resume Slant Test Well Operations, Receive
Responses to Questions Provided to California American Water Company on July 29, 2015,
Review the Table of Permits and Approvals, and Approve a Letter to Cal Am With Regard to
Slant Well Financial Risk
Ian Crooks from Cal Am provided an update on the latest project schedule for the Monterey
Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP), which reflected what is known in the EIR at this
time. He detailed the schedule of the pipeline and thinks the construction can be done in 15-18
months and that Cal Am is working with the Design Build firm for efficiencies. Should be
breaking ground mid-2017. He then reported on the status on the application for the test slant
well. He then spoke to the responses to the questions posed by the Authority which were also
included within the agenda packet. Mr. Crooks invited questions regarding the responses.
Mr. Crooks also supplied and explained a table of permits that are anticipated as necessary for
the MPWSP project, delineated by state, federal and local permitting agencies. Also included
in the schedule necessary key documentation and the purpose of the permit. He reported
working with the TAC to review the permits in a Gant schedule noting many permits cannot be
completed until the CEQA/NEPA process is complete, but work can be done in anticipation. He
indicated that the Authority can assist with the anticipated schedule and assist with working with
the following agencies:
FORA regarding the terminal reservoir

The City of Seaside for the transfer of land
TAMC regarding acquiring utility easements
Other local permits from the individual cities.
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Regular Meeting Minutes - Thursday, August 13, 2015
2
MPRWA Minutes
Executive Director Cullem spoke to the draft letter prepared to send to Mr. MacLean regarding
the financial guarantee project slant wells. President Burnett added that the notion of the letter
is asking Cal Am to guarantee that if the test well and does not turn into a production well, that
the community would not need to pay for it. It's not appropriate for the community to bear the
full risk and costs.
Vice President Kampe invited comments from the public.
George Riley agreed with President Burnett citing concerns regarding stranded costs he
requested the Authority ask Cal Am to extend the time period for the test wells.
Mr. Check expressed concern regarding the Dana Point well data that the amount of
iron and manganese will impacts production. He expressed concern that there is no
chemical testing occurring which could have impacts to the operation of the plant.
Jan Schriner speaking as a resident and not as a Board Member of the MCWD, liked
the direction of the letter, and wanted to see if there was a rate of return based on
production instead of just the investment.
Nelson Vega thinks Mr. Check's point is valid, but we don't know the full story about
Dana point. He also requested consideration of private companys rights if they take a
risk, they should get a return and that if we ask them to take on risk, we should be
willing to share risk. Please dont lose sight of the goal to get the best price per acre
foot.
Director Edelen spoke to the regulatory hoops that are being required to jump through, are all
self-inflicted by the State government. He spoke to a desal plant in the Middle East and that did
not destroy the environment. Director Rubio spoke to his previous comment that baseline data
should have been collected for a variety of reasons, and in regards to the letter, it is a good
idea and it should be sent but at the same time the risk is already being shared by the
community in many ways. Alternate Director Downey thought the questions and answers
provided are interesting, but expressed frustration that many responses actually had no
answers. She does not want to pay for mistakes, but encouraged moving quickly when there is
a deadline.
Director Pendergrass motioned to authorize sending the proposed letter to Cal Am. It was
seconded by Director Edelen.
President Burnett requested a modification to the motion adding in the notion of stranded costs,
and inclusion of comments with pumping efficiencies. The amendments to the motion were
accepted.
The Authority Board discussed the Sand City intake and the efficiencies, water quality testing
results and the CPUC interpretation of the test wells if they would be considered stranded costs
and cannot be recovered or if it is a necessary project request and can be recovered.
On motion by Director Pendergrass and Seconded by Director Edelen and passed by the
following vote, the Authority Board approved the inclusion of stranded costs into the letter with
the same tone and principal of the draft letter, based on the discussion and authorized staff to
send the revised letter to Cal Am.

3
MPRWA Minutes
6.
Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction on Final Application to the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for a Cease and Desist Order (CDO) Extension Request,
and Authorize the Authority President to Send a Comment Letter to the Board Staff on Its Draft
Response to the Cal Am Draft CDO Application
Executive Director Cullem spoke to the previous discussions of this item and indicated a draft
response has been received on the draft application. Progress has been made but further
review and modifications are need which will be brought back to the Authority in the future.
Secondly, Mr. Cullem requested the Board to authorize President Burnet to send a comment
letter with respect to the draft responses to the State. Director Rubio expressed concern that
the Authority has not agreed with drafting a combined letter with Cal Am and the Water
Management District. His second concern is that before authorizing the comment letter, he
wants to see the draft responses and this item is too premature.
Ron Witezman questioned why we want to fine the rate as opposed to Cal Am.
Tom Rowley agreed with Mayor Rubio regarding a co-petition citing that that the
independence of the Authority is crucial to the long term accomplishments.
George Riley spoke in agreement of Mr. Rowley and Mr. Weitzman
John Narigi representing the Coalition of Peninsula Businesses, pleased with the
outcome of the final document but remains concerned regarding fault imposed for
missing the milestones. He spoke in support of unification of the Authority and the
District as long as it does not impact the protection of the community.
Jan Shriner speaking as a Marina resident spoke to the confusion of the role of
government vs business. Urged being careful of resenting state government for
protection of people's resources.
Nelson Vega spoke in support of Mr. Narigi and Director Rubio to maintain
independence.
Michael Baer expressed concern that the Authority is assuming risk by co-signing and
that it is contradictory to the letter they discussed previously.
Director Rubio reiterated that before authorizing to send a comment letter he requested to see
the letter and requested to continue both of the items.
On motion by Alternate Director Downey and seconded by Director Rubio and passed by the
Following roll call vote the Authority Directors continued the item until more information is
available.
7.
Approve a Letter from the Water Authority to the Marina City Council Inviting Marina to Name a
Non-voting Hydrogeologist to the MPWSP Hydrogeological Working Group (HWG)
Executive Director Cullem spoke to the item detailed within the letter provided in the packet.

4
MPRWA Minutes
Vice President Kampe invited Comments from the public.
Mark Baer spoke in support of allowing marina who will be impacted by the desal plant,
and questioned Mr. Williams representation.
Ron Weitzman questioned why the City of Marina and not Marina Coast Water District.
Jan Shriner agreed with Mr. Weitzman's question and encouraged someone with
historic information to help the CPUC understand, so there are no inaccurate
assumptions made.
President Burnett answered the question about extending the invitation to the City of Marina
because they are the permitting agency and it will benefit the Authority having the permitting
agency involved to address questions early on and avoid permitting delays down the road. He
then indicated Dennis Williams now represents Cal am, no longer the CPUC.
Director Downey questioned the paragraph that Marina can charge Cal Am and questioned the
intent of the statement. Director Kamp requested changing on the wording of that sentence to
eliminate "as long as the participation facilitated" and substitute with ______.
On motion by Alternate Director Downey and seconded by the Director Edelen and passed by
the following vote, the Authority Directors accepted the letter with the recommended changes.
5-0-1, Pendergrass voted no.
Director Pendergrass did not agree with the motion as it complicates the process and doesnt
think it is the right way to go.
8.
Receive Presentation, Discuss, and Provide Staff Direction on the Deep Water Desal Project
Executive Director Cullem provided procedural instructions on how the presentations would be
facilitated.
David Armanasco from Deep water Desal began by explaining theyre not in competition with
Cal Am but are a regional water solution for the Monterey area. He also shared that the State
Lands Commission is the lead agency for the DWD EIR and the Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary is the lead for the EIR. He assured the Directors that there is enough demand for this
project without the Monterey Peninsula and the project continues to move forward. He noted
that Jim Heitzinger, legal counsel was present in the audience and can respond to permitting
questions. He then introduced the General Manager of Deep water Desal, Kim Adamson who
provided the presentation. He spoke to her qualifications.
Ms. Adamson, spoke to their role as the back-up option for the WMD, they felt it was important
to do. She also clarified that there is no competition between projects. She provided a project
overview/features detailing the desalination process, potential offtakes and explained the intake
and outfall strategy as well as the project schedule, the public/private partnership models and
financing and then highlighted the risks and contingencies for the project. She indicated that
DWD has already done many of the required preliminary reports that will be required for the
EIR so their timeline is extensively truncated.
Vice President Kamp recessed the meeting at 9:06 PM. The meeting was reconvened at 9:16
PM and Mr. Kampe invited public comment on the item.

5
MPRWA Minutes
Mark Baer questioned the pipeline and the easement agreements for intake.
Ron Witezman requested clarification that they have an NOI and not a NOP.
Ms. Adamson responded to public comments that easements and permits for intake piping and
easements related to the Harbor District. She indicated the Harbor District said they would work
with them in fair dealings. They are going through Dynagy easements and confirmed that they
did an NOP according to the State Lands Commission.
Director Rubio questioned the estimated costs per acre foot and asked if that included a
conveyance costs, and in the offtakers risk to which Ms. Adamson responded she does not
have pipeline estimates for the pipeline route to the Peninsula. No cost estimates are available
but they are comparable. Alternate Director Downey questioned the total investment required
and Ms. Adamson indicated they are not ready right now and it would be shared with potential
customers and partners based on specific parameters. Director Edelen questioned how difficult
would it be to increase demand for this project in the future to which Ms Adamsan said there
may be redundancies built in for future growth but growth was not included in the existing EIR.
Vice President Kampe questioned Monterey County's requirement to have public ownership of
desal projects to which the first model falls under that ordinance and the second copies the Cal
Am project model. Legal Counsel Heitzinger responded that the ordinance will have to be
reinterpreted or changed to allow. This model would reduce the risks discussed earlier, and
believes that depending on the partner, it could significantly reduce the cost of water because it
will reduce the cost of debt and there are public policy reasons that they may want to reinterpret
their ordinance differently.
Executive Director Cullem indicated the Kennedy Jenks Study included costs and is available to
the Board and the TAC, which includes cost information, although somewhat dated. The
Directors thanked DWD staff for their presentation.
9.
Receive Presentation, Discuss, and Provide Staff Direction on the Peoples Desal Project
David Balch with the People's Moss Landing Desal project indicted that the largest differences
between the two projects is in the intake and the intake structure. Mr. Balch provided overview
of the project including the goals and objectives, the rehabilitation of existing infrastructure, the
existing water demands and needs, proposed project description, overview, the environmental
review process and their draft schedule. He indicated that the project is designed to serve North
Monterey County, and does not include growth and cited this project as being the simplest
project due to all existing infrastructure. Project Hurdles include project financing, long term
and short term, pending litigation in foreclosure of the property, but indicated that they are
working with investors, easements with the Harbor Master as the outfall pipeline easement
needs to be extended due to the expiration. Mr. Balch answered questions of the Board.

6
MPRWA Minutes
Tom Rowley spoke to the need for a back-up project and it's good to hear other projects
are moving forward.
Mr. Chevk agreed for the need for a back-up but also to create competition.
John Narigi agreed with competition but expressed concern regarding no information
about the cost of the project. He suggested the Authority resend the 8-9 questions and
request the alternative projects to answer them factually and specifically.
George Riley spoke to the SPI reports that Cal Am had a schedule advantage and since
the advantage is gone we should be addressing who can get there the quickest and to
ignore other projects is missing an opportunity.
Ron Witesman dont be afraid of Cal Am they will not cut off our water Cal am.
Mark Baer it was a horse race for the regional failed project, let it continue.
Director Rubio expressed frustration with gaps and non-answers in terms of cost conveyance
and until we can compare with specifics, he finds it hard to make an informed decision.
The Directors thanked Mr. Balch for the presentation and acknowledged there is more to learn
about all of the alternative projects.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:09 PM.
ATTEST:
Lesley Milton-Rerig, Clerk of the Authority
Bill Kampe, Authority Vice President

7
M I N U TE S
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)
Regular Alternate Meeting
7:00 PM, Thursday, September 24, 2015
COUNCIL CHAMBER
580 PACIFIC STREET
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Directors Absent:
Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Alternate Directors Downey and

Talmage
None
Staff Present:
Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk
Directors Present:
CALL TO ORDER
Vice President Kampe called the meeting to order to 7:00 PM.
Executive Director Cullem indicated that staff had started the financial audit for FY 14-15. He also
reported that the Authority is trying to coordinate a representative to attend the California Coastal
Commission meeting in October for the test well. Vice President Kampe indicated he is available
and encouraged other Directors to attend. Finally, Mr. Cullem appreciated that the Directors were
able to attend this alternate session because agendized items are time sensitive. He further
explained that the Authority made it clear that they wanted to see the letters prior to distribution
which are included in the packet. He additionally indicated that the CDO application will not be
ready for the Authority to consider the application and co-application, so we may or may not have
the October 8 meeting if there is no time sensitive actionable items. The goals is to give sufficient
time to review the draft and receive public comment or responses from Member City Councils. The
tentative date for is October 22nd at this time. Director Rubio informed the Board that he will be out
of town October 21-23rd.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Tom Rowley thanked the Board for having an independent letter and thinks that it's
important that the Authority retain its independence.
A resident spoke representing Mark Del Piero who submitted a written comment regarding,
water, desal, the slant well application and asked that no decision be made until the letter is
reviewed.
CONSENT AGENDA
1.
Approve and File Authority Checks Through September 24, 2015
Action: Approved
Director Kampe invited public comment and had no requests to speak.
On motion by Director Pendergrass, seconded by Director Rubio and passed by the following vote
the Authority Board approved the Minutes of September 24th as presented. 6-0
2.
Receive Letter from Cal Am President Rob Maclean in Response to Water Authority Letter
on Financial Guarantee for the MPWSP Slant Wells
Pulled for public comment.
Charles Chek spoke to the letter that states Cal Am denies responsibility for anything that
pertains to issues that the slant well does not perform to specifications, accept as a
functional slant well. If it is not meeting the criteria necessary to not damage aquifers, not
cause damage to Salinas Basin, it is not meeting its need and should be rejected.
On motion by Director Rubio and seconded by Director Edelen and passed unanimously, the
Authority Board received the letter. 6-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
3.
Receive, Discuss and Approve the Final Comment Letter to the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) on the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Draft
Environmental Impact Report - Cullem
Executive Director Cullem introduced the item explaining that a fourth paragraph was added by
Water Counsel and President Burnett that includes information on basic modeling and return water
alternatives. He further explained that because there will be a recirculation of the DEIR, it will
incorporate a maximum number of options for the public. This will likely be controversial, but it will
avail us of the return water alternatives and there should be a benefit to the rate payers. He
explained it is time sensitive because comments on the DEIR are due September 30th.
Vice President Kampe invited comments from the public
Norm Grut, intervenor, said it adequately addresses and details of the return of water to
satisfy the water rights issues, as well as the Water Resource Agency Act. He expressed
caution with statements that it will reduce the price of the water.
Tom Rowley spoke in support of the extended EIR comment period this this will assist with
making the document more bulletproof.
George Riley expressed concern regarding the cost of water, who would pay for it and who
would buy it. He then spoke to the chart on page 28 as misleading to the public as it may be
the design intent, but the slant well being used will not penetrated below the bay.
Charles Chek expressed frustration that the current rate payers will pay to build the facility
but that Cal Am can sell it later to those who never assisted with the production costs.
Michael Baer commented on previous comments made, expressed frustration there was no
data from the test well collected in the first week, and disagreed that the chart is misleading. He questioned the availability of the letter.
Director Rubio was glad to see the revisions as well as additional opportunity to weigh in. He
questioned the statement that it could result in operating savings, acknowledging the concerns of
the public. He supported the letter that it will clarify the Authority position on the EIR. Director
Talmage thinks that the paragraph four re-draft is reasonable and thorough.
Thursday, September 24, 2015 Regular Alternate Meeting

Page 2
Director Edelen moved to approve the final comment letter and authorize staff to send it to the
CPUC. Seconded by Director Rubio
Speaking on the second, Vice President Kampe responded to comments made by the public that
the differential of the cost paid vs the cost to produce and questioned why the facility would produce
enough water in excess of our needs. Executive Director Cullem spoke to the initial test well results
and the quantities of water delineated in the settlement agreement, including the additional water
necessary for the replenishment of the aquifers and the Seaside Basin.
Passed unanimously. 6-0
4. Discuss the Status of the Cal Am Request to Resume Test Slant Well Operations and
Authorize Sending a Letter of Support to the California Coastal Commission Prior to its
Consideration of The Request on October 6, 2015. -Crooks
Ian Crooks from Cal Am reported that there is confirmation that the item will be heard at the
California Coastal Commission in October and encouraged any support the community can
provide.
Vice President Kampe invited comments from the public and had no requests to speak.
Director Rubio moved that the letter be approved, and that the Authority Authorize staff to send the
letter of Support to the Coastal Commission. Seconded by Vice President Kampe. Speaking on the
second, Mr. Kampe requested that there be a wording change on paragraph 2, expressing concern
that when read, it implies a direct connection between the test well and the draw down, but it's not
an accurate connection. The drop could be completely independent of the test well, as the drop
continued after the test wells were shut off. Staff requested they be allowed the latitude to fix it or
replace with similar wording. As long as it does not change the intent of the letter, to support the
action, Director Rubio supported the motion change.
The motion was unanimously approved. 6-0
5. Approve Return of Excess Contributions for FY 14-15 and Approve a Reserve Fund for FY 15-16
of Approximately $179,000 from Year-end Balances -Cullem
Executive Director Cullem presented the item and explained that there was less money spent
during the Fiscal Year due to the stalled projects and delays imposed by the CPUC. Additionally,
the percent distributions have changed for fair share contributions and Mr. Cullem spoke to the
revised FY 15-16 contribution percentages to satisfy the new budget approved from the Board. He
indicated the potential credits from the remaining funds from the previous fiscal year will allow for an
"excess contribution" made by each of the Cities to cover the County of Monterey, and the funds
provided by the County will be refunded as a credit to each of the member cities. There are still
expenses, and he is leery about returning funds because there is a lot happening on the front for
the CDO extension. He requested a creation of a reserve fund in exchange of returning funds to
member cities. Mr. Cullem answered questions of the Board.
Ms. Downey questioned why Monterey County would get credit when they didn't pay all of it. Mr.
Cullem detailed all of the payments made by Monterey County, and the in-kind efforts made to the
Authority over the years. Mr. Cullem responded that he does not believe that we are going to
receive any additional funds from Monterey County.

Page 3
Tom Rowley retracted statements regarding the Countys non-participation and thanked the
staff and Directors for efforts that resulted in a partial contribution. He spoke to the efficiency
of the Authority to have a budget under $300,000 annually.
On motion by Alternate Director Talmage and seconded by Director Rubio and passed by
unanimous vote, the Authority Directors approved the return of excess contributions for FY 2014-15
as credits and approved the creation of a reserve fund for FY 15-16 to contain the year end
balances. 6-0
ADJOURNMENT
Having no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:49 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
______________________________
Lesley Milton-Rerig, City Clerk
______________________________
Bill Kampe, Authority Vice President

Page 4

Agenda Report
FROM:
Date: November 12, 2015

Item No: 1
Authority Clerk Milton
SUBJECT: Approval and File Authority Checks through November 6, 2015

RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Authority approve and file the accounts payable payments
made during the period September 18, 2015 through November 6, 2015 with total
payments for the above referenced period of $42,113.19 from the general fund account
and authorize the Directors to sign for such checks.
DISCUSSION:
At its meeting on September 12, 2013, the Authority Board approved a staff
recommendation to provide the Directors a listing of financial obligations since the last
report for inspection and confirmation. 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.
$19,866.77 City of Monterey for Executive Director Reimbursement Quarter 3

2015
$21,565.22 To Brownstein Hyatt Farber & Schreck for August, and September
Special Counsel Legal Services
$ 160.00 to Access Monterey Peninsula
$ 521.20 to Mayor Bill Kampe for travel expenses to CCC meeting
The bank balance as of November 6, 2015 is sufficient cover the above check therefore,
staff is recommending approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
Budget to Actual Report through November 6, 2015
1:29 PM
11/03/15
Accrual Basis
Profit & Loss Budget vs. Actual

July 1 through November 3, 2015
Jul 1 - Nov 3, 15
Budget
$ Over Budget
Ordinary Income/Expense
Income
47200 Program Income
47230 Membership Dues
0.00
137,000.00
-137,000.00
47240 Program Service Fees
0.00
0.00
0.00
47250 Reimbursement SPI Contract
0.00
0.00
0.00
47260 Reimburesment VE Contract
0.00
0.00
0.00
47200 Program Income - Other
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total 47200 Program Income
0.00
137,000.00
-137,000.00
49900 Uncategorized Income
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
137,000.00
-137,000.00
60901 Clerk of the Board
0.00
24,000.00
-24,000.00
60902 Executive Director
0.00
85,000.00
-85,000.00
60903 Principal Offc of the Authority
0.00
5,000.00
-5,000.00
60904 Financial Services
0.00
6,000.00
-6,000.00
60905 Misc Admin Expenses
0.00
500.00
-500.00
60900 Administration and Clerical - Other
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
120,500.00
-120,500.00
62110 Board Counsel
10,000.00
36,000.00
-26,000.00
62140 Special Counsel
20,293.90
100,000.00
-79,706.10
Total Income
Expense
60900 Administration and Clerical
Total 60900 Administration and Clerical
62100 Legal Fees
62100 Legal Fees - Other

Total 62100 Legal Fees
0.00
0.00
0.00
30,293.90
136,000.00
-105,706.10
50.00
0.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
62800 Contract Services

60801 Public Outreach
60806 Contract VE
62802 Audit Services
0.00
6,000.00
-6,000.00
1,162.50
5,000.00
-3,837.50
62804 Contract Services & Studies
0.00
0.00
0.00
62805 Contract SPI
0.00
0.00
0.00
919.80
0.00
919.80
Total 62800 Contract Services
2,132.30
11,000.00
-8,867.70
65000 Insurance
6,438.48
7,500.00
-1,061.52
65100 Travel Expenses
0.00
5,000.00
-5,000.00
66000 Payroll Expenses
0.00
0.00
0.00
68300 Contingency
0.00
10,000.00
-10,000.00
38,864.68
290,000.00
-251,135.32
62803 Televised Meeting
62800 Contract Services - Other
Total Expense
Page 1 of 4
1:29 PM
11/03/15
Accrual Basis

Jul 1 - Nov 3, 15
Net Ordinary Income
Budget
$ Over Budget
-38,864.68
-153,000.00
114,135.32
0.11
0.00
0.11
0.11
0.00
0.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.00
0.11
-38,864.57
-153,000.00
114,135.43
Other Income/Expense
Other Income
47220 Interest Earned
Total Other Income
Other Expense
80000 Ask My Accountant
Total Other Expense
Net Other Income
Net Income
Page 2 of 4
1:29 PM
11/03/15
Accrual Basis

% of Budget
Ordinary Income/Expense
Income
47200 Program Income
47230 Membership Dues
0.0%
47240 Program Service Fees
0.0%
47250 Reimbursement SPI Contract
0.0%
47260 Reimburesment VE Contract
0.0%
47200 Program Income - Other
0.0%
Total 47200 Program Income
0.0%
49900 Uncategorized Income
0.0%
Total Income
0.0%
Expense
60900 Administration and Clerical
60901 Clerk of the Board
0.0%
60902 Executive Director
0.0%
60903 Principal Offc of the Authority
0.0%
60904 Financial Services
0.0%
60905 Misc Admin Expenses
0.0%
60900 Administration and Clerical - Other
0.0%
Total 60900 Administration and Clerical
0.0%
62100 Legal Fees

62110 Board Counsel
27.78%
62140 Special Counsel
20.29%
62100 Legal Fees - Other

Total 62100 Legal Fees
0.0%
22.28%
62800 Contract Services

60801 Public Outreach
60806 Contract VE
62802 Audit Services
62803 Televised Meeting
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
23.25%
62804 Contract Services & Studies
0.0%
62805 Contract SPI
0.0%
62800 Contract Services - Other
100.0%
Total 62800 Contract Services
19.39%
65000 Insurance
85.85%
65100 Travel Expenses
0.0%
66000 Payroll Expenses
0.0%
68300 Contingency
0.0%
Total Expense
13.4%
Page 3 of 4
1:29 PM
11/03/15
Accrual Basis

% of Budget
Net Ordinary Income
25.4%
Other Income/Expense
Other Income
47220 Interest Earned
Total Other Income
100.0%
100.0%
Other Expense
80000 Ask My Accountant
Total Other Expense
Net Other Income
Net Income
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
25.4%
Page 4 of 4

Agenda Report
FROM:

Item No: 4.
Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT: Receive and Discuss the Draft Letter to the Governor's Military
Council (GMC) sent through Admiral Dan Oliver on Nov 6, 2015.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Water Authority Board receive and discuss the
attached draft letter prepared for the Governor's Military Council.
DISCUSSION:
The Water Authority was requested to prepare a letter to the GMC which
requested the Governor to insure State agencies involved with review and
approval of the extension of Cease And Desist Order (CDO) 2009-0060
and of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP) be
particularly attentive to the water needs of the Naval Post Graduate School
(NPGS) and the Defense Language Institute (DLI) in light of the next round
of Base Reduction and Closure (BRAC) expected in 2017.
The draft letter was forwarded to Admiral Dan Oliver, President of the
Naval Post Graduate School, who was scheduled to meet with the GMC
the week of November 2. Since time was of the essence, the draft was
forwarded to Adm. Oliver on November 3, 2015.
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft letter to the GMC dated November 3, 2015
History of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and the
Groundwater Replenishment Project
06/12
DRAFT
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
November 3, 2015
Governor's Military Council
c/o Vice Admiral Daniel Oliver
Directors:
Jason Burnett, President
Bill Kampe, Vice President
David Pendergrass, Secretary
Jerry Edelen, Treasurer
Ralph Rubio, Director
Clyde Roberson, Director
Executive Director:
Jim Cullem, P.E.
Re:
Water Supply Concerns Relating to the Monterey Peninsulas Military
Installations
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (Water Authority) is a joint powers
agency comprised of the six cities encompassing the Monterey Peninsula. As the Water
Authoritys President, I request your assistance in resolving water supply constraints
facing the Monterey Peninsula and its two military facilities, the Naval Postgraduate
School (NPS) and the Defense Language Institute (DLI). Specifically, I request that the
Governors Military Council work with the Governors Office to: (1) communicate the water
needs of NPS and DLI to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), which
will soon be considering a short-term solution to the Monterey Peninsulas water supply
limitations; and (2) monitor and take all appropriate actions to expedite the water supply
projects discussed below to afford a long-term solution.
The Monterey Peninsula faces significant, but solvable, water supply issues. Our primary
water supply is derived from the underflow of the Carmel River, which is supplemented to
a lesser extent by groundwater from the Seaside Groundwater Basin. The SWRCB has
ordered our water supplier, California American Water Company (Cal-Am), to eliminate
approximately three-quarters of its historical diversions from the Carmel River and has
established a deadline of January 1, 2017 to do so.1 The groundwater supply from the
Seaside Groundwater Basin is also restricted by court order to reduce and ultimately
eliminate present overdraft of the basin.
1
In 1995, the SWRCB determined that: (i) based on the hydrogeologic character of the Carmel River
Valley, the SWRCB possesses jurisdiction over the groundwater supply within the valley diverted by CalAm; (ii) Cal-Ams diversions are unpermitted, and therefore all of its diversions commenced after 1914
(when the Water Commission Act was enacted) are unauthorized; and (iii) Cal-Ams diversions are
adversely affecting the rivers riparian ecosystem. These ecological impacts include reduced river flows that
support numerous species including the Central California Coast Steelhead, a threated species under the
Endangered Species Act.
580 PACIFIC ST, ROOM 6 MONTEREY CALIFORNIA 93940 www.mprwa.org
Governor's Military Council - DRAFT

November 3, 2015
Page 2
The states deadline for Cal-Am to cease its unauthorized Carmel River diversions was
established in a cease and desist order issued in 2009 (CDO 2009-0060). Cal-Am, with
assistance from community representatives, has sought to develop a replacement water
supply for its unauthorized diversions from the Carmel River. Unfortunately, for various
reasons, a replacement water supply will not be in place by the time that the CDOs
present deadline would become effective in 2017.
As a long-term solution, two water supply projects are being designed and permitted,
which we anticipate to be available to substitute for Cal-Ams unauthorized diversions
from the Carmel River by 2020. These projects are: (1) a desalination project referred to
as the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP); and (2) a groundwater
replenishment project (GWR), formally called the Pure Water Monterey project, which
will use advanced treated waste water to replenish the Seaside Groundwater Basin for
subsequent recapture and use.
As a short-term solution, Cal-Am intends to file a petition with the SWRCB later this
month to request a modification of the CDOs 2017 deadline. The Water Authority and the
Water Management District may join in the petition if agreed to by their respective boards.
Most of the details of the proposed CDO extension have been worked out following more
than two years of negotiations among community representatives, SWRCB staff, and
environmental organizations. In short, the proposal would extend the 2017 deadline by
four years in exchange for a partial reduction in Cal-Am diversions next year coupled with
a stairstep schedule of additional reductions that would become effective over the next
five years, unless specified MPWSP/GWR milestones are met. In other words, the
Monterey Peninsula may avoid the most severe water supply reductions over the next five
years, but only if timely progress is made on a replacement supply. We believe the
extension proposal represents an appropriate compromise of the competing social,
economic, and environmental interests affected by Cal-Ams near-term river withdrawals
and also establishes a strong incentive for Cal-Am and local and state interests to
expedite the MPWSP and GWR projects.
I will provide a copy of the petition to the Council when it is finalized later this month. If the
Council concurs with the proposed terms of the CDO extension, the Water Authority
respectfully requests that the Council work with the Governors Office to encourage the
SWRCB to grant the petition. We also urge the Council to apprise the SWRCB of the
water needs of the NPS and DLI and the installations essential importance to the welfare
of California and our nations military.2
The CDO extension, if adopted, affords the Monterey community with a bridge water
supply while the replacement water supply projects proceed. Of course, the importance of
timely completion of these projects cannot be understated. Unfortunately, for a host of
reasons, delays have accompanied both projects, principally the MPWSP.3 Further delays
2
NPS is developing key defense capabilities in cyber-security, asymmetric warfare, operations research
and nano-technology. DLI is the foundation of U.S. intelligence capability and key to our nations homeland
security efforts.
3
A more detailed history of the projects is set forth in the attached chronology.
Governor's Military Council - DRAFT

November 3, 2015
Page 3
will cause significant adverse impacts to the areas water supply. A failure to satisfy
project milestones will result in substantial reductions to Cal-Ams Carmel River
withdrawals under the terms of the CDO extension, assuming it is adopted. In addition,
the projects must be fully operational by 2020 to substitute for the unauthorized Carmel
River diversions when the CDO extension terminates.
The Water Authority respectfully urges the Council to monitor the permitting of the
MPWSP and GWR, and, together with the Governors Office, make every effort to support
timely progress on these critically important projects. Upon your invitation, I would
welcome the opportunity to further brief the Council on the status and schedule of the
projects and to discuss the ways in which the Council and Governors Office could
support timely progress on the projects.
The Monterey Peninsulas mayors, who are also the directors of the Water Authority,
recognize the significant role that the NPS and DLI play in our nations military
preparedness and our communitys social and economic wellbeing. These facilities are
key economic and technology generators in our region and in California as a whole. As
discussed above, viable short- and long-term solutions are available to ensure reliable
water supplies for these facilities. However, extensive collaboration between local and
state government is needed to ensure that the CDO extension is adopted and that the
projects proceed expeditiously.
Thank you for considering these comments and requests for assistance. I look forward to
further discussing these issues with the Council. I also would be happy to participate in
any statewide effort that is mobilized to address the implications of water supply to
Californias military facilities.
Sincerely,
Jason Burnett
President, Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority
Enclosure: History of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and the Groundwater
Replenishment Project
Enclosure:
History of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project

and the Groundwater Replenishment Project
The California American Water Company (Cal Am) is facing serious hurdles in providing potable
water to customers in its Monterey Peninsula area due to several significant regulatory and courtordered restrictions affecting the two primary water sources available to Cal Am.
The first was a conclusion in 1995, by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order
WR 95-10, that 2/3 of Cal Am's long utilized extraction of water from the Carmel River basin was
illegal and adversely affected the public trust resources of the river. Subsequent efforts to get
voter and regulatory approvals for a new dam on the Carmel River or for a desalination project
(Desal) at Moss Landing were unsuccessful. In 2009, the SWRCB issued Cease and Desist
Order CDO 2009-0060 mandating that Cal Am eliminate its illegal take by January 1, 2017.
Second, in 2006, the Seaside Basin Aquifer, Cal Am's only significant alternate water supply
other than the Carmel River, was adjudicated with subsequent restrictions on all users, including
Cal Am, until the basin overdraft was corrected. This adjudication requires a step down of take
from the Seaside Basin over time, which further limits Cal Am's ability to obtain a water supply for
the Monterey Peninsula area.
In 2010, Cal Am entered a public private partnership with the Marina Coast Water District
(MCWD) and the Monterey County Water Resources agency (MCWRA) to construct and operate
a Regional Desal Facility north of Marina. In 2012, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which
was the inability to secure groundwater rights to brackish feed water from the Salinas River
Basin, that partnership fell apart.
On April 23, 2012, Cal Am filed an application with the California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) to construct a Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP) including a Desal
facility north of the City of Marina and drawing feed water from Monterey Bay. A complicating
factor has been the requirement of State agencies for Cal Am to obtain source water from
Monterey Bay by subsurface intakes versus open-water intakes, a relatively untested approach
involving the construction of slant wells, one of which has already been constructed for testing
purposes. The MPWSP also included supplemental but relatively small additional water supplies
such as aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) and recycled water projects in the City of Pacific
Grove.
Twenty-two interveners entered the process, and sixteen of these ultimately agreed to a
proposed settlement agreement which allowed for either a 9.6 million gallon per day (MGD) desal
facility, or "variant" which consists of a 6.4 MGD desal along with a Monterey Regional Water
Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA) 3.2 MGD wastewater recycling facility, known as the Pure
Water Monterey/Groundwater Replenishment project (PWM/GWR). The MPWSP DEIR identifies
the variant as the environmentally superior alternative. The GWR EIR has been completed and
certified and could produce water as early as 2018. The project awaits finalization of an umbrella
580 PACIFIC ST, ROOM 6 MONTEREY CALIFORNIA 93940 www.mprwa.org
agreement with participating public agencies and funding through the State Revolving Fund
(SRF).
The MPWSP environmental review has run into a delay due to some conflict of interest issues
with the EIR consultant. The CPUC is trying to resolve the problem in a timely way. To facilitate
its resolution, the DEIR will be re-circulated with the EIS in 2016. Following testimony from the
settling parties and others, the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN), needed
to authorize Cal Am to build the MPWSP, should be issued by the CPUC at the end of 2016. As
currently scheduled, the MPWSP should be complete and operational by the end of 2020.

Agenda Report
FROM:

Item No: 5.
SUBJECT: Receive Copy of Water Authority Financial Policies and

Procedures Adopted by the Authority Board on March 13, 2014.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Water Authority Board receive a copy of the
MPRWA Financial Policies and Procedures.
DISCUSSION:
In response to questions concerning the "whistle-blower" policy of the
MPRWA, staff has enclosed a copy of the Financial Policies and
Procedures that were adopted by the Board on March 13, 2014. The
whistle-blower policy is contained therein.
ATTACHMENTS:
A- MPRWA Financial Policies and Procedures
06/12

Financial Policies and Procedures
Adopted:
GENERAL PURPOSE
The purpose of this document is to establish guidelines for developing financial goals and objectives,
not outlined in the Bylaws or the JPA Agreement, regarding making internal financial decisions,
reporting the financial status of the Agency, and managing the Agencys funds. The adopted annual
budget provides funding approval for the purchase and payment for services. The ultimate goal is to
ensure the following:
1. The orderly and efficient receipt of funds
2. The safeguarding of cash and monetary assets.
3. The prevention or detection of errors and fraud.
4. The accuracy and completeness of the accounting records.
5. The timely preparation of reliable financial information.
POWERS AS GRANTED IN THE JPA AGREEMENT AND BYLAWS
ARTICLE 12-JPA
ACCOUNTING PRACTICES
General. The Board of Directors shall establish and maintain such funds and accounts as
12.1
may be required by generally accepted public agency accounting practices. The Authority shall
maintain strict accountability of all funds and report of all receipts and disbursements of the
Authority.
ARTICLE 13-JPA
BUDGET AND EXPENSES
13.1
Budget. Within 90 days after the first meeting of the Board of Directors, and thereafter
prior to the commencement of each fiscal year, the Board shall adopt a budget for the Authority
for the ensuing fiscal year. In the event that a budget is not so approved, the prior years budget
shall be deemed approved for the ensuing fiscal year, and any assessment(s) of contributions of
Members approved by the Board during the prior fiscal year shall again be assessed on the
Members in the same amount and terms for the ensuing fiscal year.
Page 1
13.2
Authority Funding and Contributions. For the purpose of funding the expenses and
ongoing operations of the Authority, the Board of Directors shall maintain a funding account in
connection with the annual budget process. The Board of Directors shall issue assessments for
contributions by the Members to fund said account in the amount and frequency determined
necessary by the Board. Assessments for Member contributions shall be made by each Member
in proportion to the weighted vote of each member as determined pursuant to Section 8.2, and
therefore no Member shall be required to make contributions to the Authority in excess of that
portion of each assessment that is equivalent to the weighted vote possessed by its Director.
Such contributions shall be paid by each Member to the Authority within sixty (60) days of
assessment by the Board.
13.3
Return of Contributions. In accordance with Government Code section 6512.1,
repayment or return to the Members of all or any part of any contributions made by Members
and any revenues by the Authority may be directed by the Board of Directors at such time and
upon such terms as the Board of Directors may decide; provided that (1) any distributions shall
be made in proportion to the contributions paid by each Member to the Authority, and (2) any
capital contribution paid by a Member voluntarily, and without obligation to make such capital
contribution pursuant to Sections 13.2, shall be returned to the contributing Member, together
with accrued interests at the annual rate published as the yield of the Local Agency Investment
Fund administered by the California State Treasurer, before any other return of contributions to
the Members is made. The Authority shall hold title to all funds and property acquired by the
Authority during the term of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 6-BY-LAWS
FINANCE POLICY
6.1 Deposit and Disbursement of Funds All funds of the Authority shall be deposited in one or
more depository accounts as may be designated by the Board. Such accounts shall be
independent of any account owned by or exclusively controlled by any of the Members. No
disbursements of such funds shall be made unless the same shall have been approved in the
annual operating budget, or otherwise specifically approved by the Board. All disbursements
shall be by check. Disbursements of not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) may be
issued pursuant to the Treasurer's sole signature. Disbursements in excess of five thousand
dollars ($5,000) may only be issued upon the signature of the Treasurer and President, or in the
President's absence, the Vice-President.
FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROCEDURES

1. RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORITY STAFF
It is the responsibility of the Board of Directors to formulate financial policies and review operations and
activities on a periodic basis. It is the responsibility of the Executive Director to implement all financial
policies and procedures and coordination of the following: Annual budget presentation, management
of the contracts and expenditures, monitoring accounts receivables, and approving revenue and
expenditure objectives in accordance with the Board approved expenditures and budget.
Page 2
The Executive Director, Clerk and Finance Specialist have the day-to-day operations responsibility for
managing agency funds, ensuring the accuracy of the accounting records, internal controls, financial
objectives and policies, financial statement preparation, and bank reconciliation review and approval.
The Finance Specialist, supervised by the Clerk, is responsible for the preparation of the accounts
payable processing, cash receipts input, journal entries for general ledger, form 1099 reporting, as well
as bank reconciliations.
1.c General Journal Entry Procedures, Expenditures and Disbursements
The following procedure is to ensure timely and correct payments to vendors and contractors who
provide the Authority with services; to assure that no disbursement of agency monies shall be made
unless the obligation is supported by accounting evidence in proper form, and to ensure that sufficient
money is available to make disbursements.
All expenditures shall be approved by either Board Action, or by the Executive Director through the
powers granted to him in the By-laws.
All disbursements for the authority will be made by check outlined in the process below.
Once an invoice is received, it is reviewed and approved by the Director, or staff member initiating the
service contract or monitoring the contractor performance. Once approved, a written approval is
submitted to the Clerk to verify it was an approved board action and the expenditure is recorded against
the current adopted budget.
The Clerk will forward the approved invoice to the Finance Specialist for check processing. Once the
check is processed, it is provided to the Clerk, along with all supporting documentation who will then
deliver to the directors for signature as required by the check signing policy as listed in the By-laws.
Upon payment of a bill, a copy of the check shall be stapled onto the bill with supporting documentation
and expenditure authority. The paid invoices shall be filed alphabetically according to vendor name and
shall be kept on a fiscal year basis on file.
1.a Tracking of Maximum Funds Allowed per Contractual Agreements.
The Executive Director is responsible to maintain a listing of existing contractual agreements, including
the total allow able expenses and track all amounts paid per contractual agreements as part of the cash
disbursement approval process to ensure contractual agreements are followed and the Authority has
the sufficient funds to operate.
1.e Accounts Receivable Aging Report Review & Collection
On a monthly basis, the Financial Specialist will complete an initial review of the aging report and then
send it to the Executive Director for follow up. This continuous review of the accounts receivable ledger
along with the implementation of a collection process will reduce the amount of delinquent receivables.
1.b Bank Reconciliations and Final Close Process
Page 3
Bank reconciliations shall be completed monthly by the Finance Specialist and cross-referenced with
the paid invoices. The monthly reconciliation shall be reviewed by either the Clerk of the Executive
Director and cross-referenced with the adopted budget. A final year-end reconciliation will be done by
July 15th for the previous fiscal year.
1.d Budget to Actual Review
A budget to actual review will be reviewed by the Executive Director and presented to the Board
quarterly to make sure the Authority has the flexibility to fulfill their mission statement with little to no
financial constraints.
1.f Managerial Review of Accounting Reports
The Executive Director is responsible to review all accounting reports for the Authority at least quarterly
to ensure all invoices, disbursements, encumbrances and budget to actual reports are on track for the
year and no budget line items have been exceeded without approval by the Directors.
2. ANNUAL BUDGET
The structure of the annual budget will be formatted to resemble the format of the financial statements.
This will allow for more useful comparisons between the budgeted and annual financial information as
well as more meaningful and precise analysis of budget variances.
3. WHISTLEBLOWER POLICY
This whistleblower policy is included to ensure no retaliation occurs if and when an individual makes a
good-faith report of fraud or any other illegal action. It is the responsibility of all agency representatives
to report violations or suspected violations in accordance with the Whistleblower Policy.
Suspected violations shall be reported to the Board President, or in is absence, the Board VicePresident.
All representatives of the Authority, including Directors, TAC Members and Staff are expected to
observe high standards of business and personal ethics in the conduct of their duties and
responsibilities. As representatives of the Authority, we must practice honesty and integrity in fulfilling
our responsibilities as well as comply with all applicable laws and regulations.
No representative, who, in good faith, reports a violation, shall suffer harassment, retaliation or adverse
employment consequence.
Page 4

Agenda Report
FROM:

Item No: 6.
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution 2015-XX, Approving Donald G.

Freeman as Legal Counsel through December 31, 2016 and
Authorizing the Authority President to Execute a Contract
Extension with Perry Freeman at a Price not-to-exceed
$36,000
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority
(MPRWA) adopt Resolution 2015-XX approving Donald G. Freeman as
legal counsel through December 31, 2016 and authorizing the Authority
President to execute a contract extension with Perry Freeman at a price
not-to-exceed $36,000.
DISCUSSION:
Following a formal Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for legal services for
the Water Authority conducted during August and September 2012, an AdHoc committee of the MPRWA recommended selection of Perry and
Freeman (Donald G. Freeman). On September 27, 2012, the Water
Authority adopted a resolution selecting Mr. Freeman to be legal counsel.
On December 10, 2012, Mr. Freeman provided the Water Authority with
waivers of conflict of interest from all other participating jurisdictions to
which he has professional, contractual obligations.
Due to Don Freeman's extensive knowledge of the water supply issues that
the Water Authority has dealt with the last three years, and in light of his
excellent performance in the position of Authority Counsel, the Executive
Director recommends the Authority maintains continuity with Donald G.
Freeman, at least through 31 December 2016.
06/12
The adopted budget for FY 2015-16 includes $36,000 for Legal Counsel
which should be adequate for services through June 30, 2016, by which
time a new budget for FY 2016-17 will have been adopted.
Resolution 2015-XX approves an extension of Donald G. Freeman as
Authority legal counsel through December 31, 2016 and authorizing the
Authority President to execute a contract extension accordingly.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution 2015-XX
Contract for legal services
MPRWA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY

ACKNOWLEDGING DONALD G. FREEMAN AS LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE MONTEREY
PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY AND AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT TO
EXTEND A CONSENT AND WAIVER OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
WHEREAS, Donald G. Freeman has been requested to continue to represent the

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA);
WHEREAS, Donald G. Freeman is currently the City Attorney for the City of Seaside and
the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea;
WHEREAS, Donald G. Freeman and MPRWA recognize the potential conflict of interest
which may arise as a result of Donald G. Freemans legal representation of MPRWA, City of
Seaside, and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea;
WHEREAS, MPRWA wishes to acknowledge Donald G. Freeman as legal counsel for
MPRWA;
WHEREAS, the President of MPRWA and members of the MPRWA Board of Directors
have reviewed a letter from Donald G. Freeman dated November 20, 2012, indicating that Mr.
Freeman does not believe that his legal services for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water
Authority will have any impact on his full and effective representation of each party, and does
not believe he has knowledge of any confidential information from any party which would be
material or relevant to his representation of MPRWA, the City of Seaside, and the City of
Carmel-by-the-Sea;
WHEREAS, Donald G. Freeman recognizes that by concurrently representing the
MPRWA, the City of Seaside, and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea an issue of divided loyalty,
such as in litigation, could possibly arise at some future date, and that at that time it could be
necessary for him to make full disclosure to all parties, could be subject to disqualification from
representing any party, and at such time it would be necessary for each party to seek
independent legal counsel;
WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the City of Seaside have passed their
respective Resolutions and their respective Mayors have executed the Consent and Waiver of
Conflict of Interest;
WHEREAS, the President and Board of Directors have reviewed this request with
WHEREAS, according to Rule 3-310 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct
applicable to California lawyers which requires informed written consent of all represented
parties because of concurrent representation, MPRWA recognizes that Donald G. Freeman is
the City Attorney for the City of Seaside, and for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea;
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has been fully satisfied with the performance of
Donald G. Freeman during the period of his tenure as Authority legal Counsel between
September 27, 2012 and the present;

WHEREAS, due to the critical nature of on-going legal activities associated with the
CPUC consideration of the California American Water application for the Monterey Peninsula
Water Project, the Board of Directors finds that the public interest is better served by renewing
Donald G. Freemans contract at this time than to re-advertise a request for proposal for legal
services and;
WHEREAS Board of Directors wishes to authorize the President to extend a Consent
and Waiver of Conflict of Interest, and hereby acknowledges Donald G. Freeman as legal
counsel for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority until December 31, 2016.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the President of MPRWA is hereby
authorized to extend on behalf of MPRWA a Consent and Waiver of Conflict of Interest thereby
acknowledging Donald G. Freeman as legal counsel for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water
Authority and authorizes the President to execute a contract extension with Donald G. Freeman
for legal counsel services.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER
AUTHORITY this ____day of ____ 201___, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
0
0
0
0
DIRECTORS:
DIRECTORS:
DIRECTORS:
DIRECTORS:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Clerk to the Authority
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES
Deceinber
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this V -1 day of

,
2012, by and between the MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY,
hereinafter "MPRWA", and DONALD G. FREEMAN of the Law Offices of Perry
and Freeman, hereinafter referred to as "Attorney", both of whom
understand as follows:
. A.
Term: The term of this Agreement shall be for one (1) year
commencing December 15, 2012, and shall terminate on December 14, 2013,
unless terminated pursuant to paragraph H. of this Agreement.
B.
Compensation. Attorney will provide general legal services to
MPRWA for a retainer of $2,500.00 per month commencing December 1, 2012,
for a period of 90 days at which time attorney compensation shall be
reviewed by the MPRWA Board of Directors.
Upon review by the Board of
Directors the attorney compensation may be adjusted for the balance of
the contract period.
Extraordinary legal services as set forth in
paragraph D. hereinbelow shall be charged at the rate of $350.00 per
hour.
C.
Billing and Reimbursement of Costs. For the 90 day period
commencing December 15, 2012, an accounting of services and hours will
be provided to MPRWA on a monthly basis. Attorney shall be reimbursed
for actual out-of-pocket expenses and costs advanced or paid on behalf
of the MPRWA, including court reporter fees and charges, court costs, and
costs of outside investigators or experts pertaining to MPRWA litigation.
When specifically required to travel out of the county to conduct MPRWA
related business expenses shall be billed as actual out-of-pocket costs
unless otherwise negotiated. There will be no charge for actual travel
time.
D.
Ordinary Services. Legal advice and legal opinions to MPRWA
on matters including, but not limited to, public sector policies and
procedures, the Ralph M. Brown Act, the Public Record Act, conflicts of
interest, general public agency law, Board of Directors' actions, and
attendance at regular and special meetings of the Board of Directors or
Board of Directors' committees as requested,
E.
Extraordinary Legal Services. Preparation of complex legal
documents, representing MPRWA in court appearances, litigation, or in
proceedings before other public or administrative bodies, or legal
services provided to any independent or separate agency or entity of
government not operated as an integral part of MPRWA.
F.
Miscellaneous. MPRWA recognizes that Attorney has a private
law practice currently located in Carmel-by-the-Sea, California, and will
retain that office as his principal place of business.
In addition,
MPRWA recognizes Attorney is the City Attorney for the City of Carmel-bythe-Sea and the City of Seaside as well as general legal counsel for the
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG); and that Attorney
also represents and advises other public entities upon request. The City
of Carmel-by-the-Sea approved and signed a conflict waiver on November

6, 2012. The City of Seaside approved and signed a conflict waiver on
October 18, 2012. MPRWA approved a conflict waiver on December 10, 2012.
G.
Association of Special Legal Counsel.
MPRWA and Attorney
recognize, that from time to time, it may become necessary to associate
with special legal counsel for matters involving litigation, labor
negotiations, worker's compensation personnel or bond issue proceedings
and other matters where either MPRWA Board of Directors or Attorney feel
effective representation requires special legal counsel.
H.
Termination.
Either party may terminate this Agreement
without cause by providing written notice to the other party in the
manner set forth in item I. of this Agreement at least 30 days prior to
the effective date of termination.
I.
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:
MPRWA:
ATTORNEY:
President, Board of Directors

Monterey Peninsula Regional
Water Authority
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, CA 93940
Donald G. Freeman
Perry and Freeman
P.O. Box 805
Carmel, CA 93921
J.
Immunity. . As an authorized representative of MPRWA, Attorney
shall be recognized as having rights to any immunity MPRWA is entitled
to.
In no event shall any duties contained in this Agreement, or
otherwise herein, negate any legal protections or immunities available
to the parties under local, state or federal law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, MPRWA has caused this agreement to be signed and
executed on its behalf by its President, and duly attested by its Clerk;
and the Attorney has signed and executed this agreement in duplicate
originals the day and year first hereinabove written.
MPRWA
Chuck Della Sala, President
ATTORNEY:
Donald G. Freeman
-2-
RESOLUTION NO. 2012-05 C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE MONTEREY PENINSULA
REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
AUTHORIZE PRESIDENT TO EXECUTE CONTRACT

WITH DONALD G. FREEMAN AS LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, Donald G. Freeman is an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of
California;
,
WHEREAS, Donald G. Freeman has been selected to represent the Monterey Peninsula
Regional Water Authority (MPRWA);
WHEREAS, Donald G. Freeman desires to act as Legal Counsel for the MPRWA;
WHEREAS, Donald G. Freeman agrees to provide general legal services as more
specifically described in the Employment Agreement for Legal Services attached hereto as
Exhibit A;
have reviewed the contract of Donald G. Freeman and agrees to its terms and conditions;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the President of MPRWA is hereby
authorized to execute on behalf of MPRWA a contract with Donald G. Freeman as legal counsel
for the MPRWA.
AUTHORITY this 13th day of December, 2012, by the following vote:
AYES:
4 DIRECTORS:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
0 DIRECTORS:
2 DIRECTORS:
0 DIRECTORS:
Pendergrass, Rubio, Della Sala, Carmel Alternate

Talmage
None
Kampe, Edelen,
None
APPROVED:
ATTEST

Agenda Report
FROM:

Item No: 7.
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution 2015-YY, Approving Brownstein

Hyatt Farber Schreck as Special Legal Counsel through
December 31, 2016 and Authorizing the Authority
President to Execute a Contract Extension at a Price notto-Exceed $100,000.
RECOMMENDATION:
(MPRWA) adopt Resolution 2015-YY approving Brownstein Hyatt Farber
Schreck, LLP as Special Legal Counsel for the period January 1, 2016
through December 31, 2016 and authorize the Authority President to
extend a contract with Brownstein at the current hourly rates and a total
contract price not-to-exceed $100,000.
DISCUSSION:
In March 2012, The Authority negotiated an agreement for Attorney of
Record services with Brownstein. The firm provided special expertise in
water law, at a reduced rate, in support of Water Authority formation and
activities.
For reasons outlined in the staff report on the subject at the Water Authority
meeting of November 13, 2014, the Authority extended the Brownstein
agreement to December 31, 2015 and approved preparation of a contract
accordingly.
The CPUC process, in particular hearings related to approval of the
EIR/EIS and issuance of Cal Am's Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity(CPCN), as well as expected future negotiations with the State
06/12
Water Resources Control Board on the Cease and Desist Order, will
continue to require a substantial amount of specialized legal work in 2016.
To insure continuity in Special Legal Counsel services, the Executive
Director recommends the Authority extend the contract with Brownstein
through 31 December 2016.
BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS:
In the approved budget for FY 2015-2016 the Water Authority authorized
an expenditure for Special Legal Counsel not-to-exceed $100,000. These
funds are expected to be sufficient for these legal services through the
current fiscal year. A new budget for FY 2016-2017 will need to consider
funding of Special Legal Services in June 2016.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution 2015-YY
Contract for Special Legal Counsel services
MPRWA RESOLUTION NO. 2015-YY
A RESOLUTION OF THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY

ACKNOWLEDGING Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP AS SPECIAL COUNSEL OF
RECORD FOR THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY,
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A CONSENT AND
WAIVER OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BROWNSTEIN FOR LEGAL SERVICES
WHEREAS, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP (Brownstein) has been requested
to represent the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA) as Special Counsel;
WHEREAS, Brownstein is currently acting as Special Counsel for the City of Carmelby-the-Sea and the City of Seaside;
WHEREAS, Brownstein and MPRWA recognize the potential conflict of interest which
may arise as a result of Brownsteins legal representation of MPRWA, the City of Carmel-bythe-Sea, and the City of Seaside;
WHEREAS, MPRWA wishes to acknowledge Brownstein as Special Counsel for
MPRWA;
have reviewed a letter from Brownstein indicating that Brownstein does not believe that its legal
services for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority will have any impact on its full
and effective representation of each party, and does not believe it has knowledge of any
confidential information from any party which would be material or relevant to its representation
of MPRWA, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, and the City of Seaside;
WHEREAS, Brownstein recognizes that by concurrently representing the MPRWA, the
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the City of Seaside an issue of divided loyalty, such as in
litigation, could possibly arise at some future date, and that at that time it could be necessary for
it to make full disclosure to all parties, could be subject to disqualification from representing any
party, and at such time it would be necessary for each party to seek independent legal counsel;
WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the City of Seaside have passed their
respective Resolutions and their respective representatives have executed the Consent and
Waiver of Conflict of Interest;
WHEREAS, the President and Board of Directors have reviewed this request with
WHEREAS, according to Rule 3-310 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct
applicable to California lawyers which requires informed written consent of all represented
parties because of concurrent representation, MPRWA recognizes that Brownstein is the Special
Counsel for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, and for the City of Seaside; and
WHEREAS Board of Directors wishes to authorize the Executive Director to execute a
Consent and Waiver of Conflict of Interest, and hereby acknowledges Brownstein as Special
Counsel for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Executive Director of MPRWA is
hereby authorized to execute on behalf of MPRWA a Consent and Waiver of Conflict of Interest
thereby acknowledging Brownstein as Special Counsel for the Monterey Peninsula Regional
Water Authority.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the President of MPRWA is
hereby authorized to execute on behalf of MPRWA an agreement with Brownstein for legal
services for the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority through December 31, 2016.
AUTHORITY this ____day of ____ 20____, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
0
0
0
0
DIRECTORS:
DIRECTORS:
DIRECTORS:
DIRECTORS:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Chuck Della Sala, President
Clerk to the Authority
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ___ day of _____________, 2015, by
and between the MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY, hereinafter
MPRWA, and the LAW OFFICES of BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP,
hereinafter referred to as "Attorney", both of which understand as follows:
A.
Term: The term of this Agreement shall be for one (1) year commencing January
1, 2016, and shall terminate on December 31, 2016, unless terminated pursuant to paragraph H.
of this Agreement.
B.
Compensation. Attorney will provide legal services to MPRWA at an average
rate of no more than $350.00 per hour.
C.
Billing and Reimbursement of Costs. An accounting of services and hours will be
provided to MPRWA on a monthly basis. Attorney shall be reimbursed for actual out-of-pocket
expenses and costs advanced or paid on behalf of the MPRWA, including court reporter fees and
charges, court costs, and costs of outside investigators or experts pertaining to MPRWA
litigation. Travel to conduct MPRWA related business expenses shall be billed as actual out-ofpocket costs unless otherwise negotiated. There will be no charge for actual travel time.
D.
Budget. Attorney will not accrue costs for legal services in excess of $100,000
between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016 and in without prior approval of the Authority
Executive Director.
E.
Ordinary Services. Legal advice and legal opinions to MPRWA as outlined in the
Amendment to Agreement for Legal Services dated December 5, 2013 (Exhibit A to this
Agreement) and Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP Standard Terms and Conditions (Exhibit
B to this Agreement).
F.
Miscellaneous. MPRWA recognizes that Attorney is a private law practice
currently located in Santa Barbara, California, and will retain that office as its principal place of
business. In addition, MPRWA recognizes Attorney also represents and advises other public
entities upon request. Attorney will submit conflict waivers to MPRWA whenever such
potential arise during the term of this contract.
G.
Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement without cause by
providing written notice to the other party in the manner set forth in item I. of this Agreement at
least 30 days prior to the effective date of termination.
H.
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:
MPRWA:
President, Board of Directors
Monterey Peninsula Regional
LLP
Water Authority
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, CA 93940
ATTORNEY:
Russell M. McGlothlin
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK,
21 East Carrillo Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
I.
Immunity. As an authorized representative of MPRWA, Attorney shall be
recognized as having rights to any immunity MPRWA is entitled to. In no event shall any duties
contained in this Agreement, or otherwise herein, negate any legal protections or immunities
available to the parties under local, state or federal law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, MPRWA has caused this agreement to be signed and
executed on its behalf by its President, and duly attested by its Clerk; and the Attorney has
signed and executed this agreement in duplicate originals the day and year first hereinabove
written.
MPRWA
____________________________
ATTORNEY:
ATTEST:
_____________________
Russell M. McGlothlin
_________________________
Clerk of the Board

Agenda Report
FROM:

Item No: 8.
SUBJECT: Receive, Discuss, and Provide Direction on Final Application to

the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to Modify
Cease and Desist Order (CDO) 2009-0060 and Decide
Whether to Co-apply or Send A Letter of Support
RECOMMENDATION:
(MPRWA) consider the final version of the Application for a four-year
extension of the CDO 2009-60 deadline date, and determine whether to cosign the application to modify, along with California American Water Co.
(Cal Am) and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District
(MPWMD), or alternately to send a letter of support.
DISCUSSION:
MPRWA, MPWMD, Cal Am, SWRCB staff, and others have conducted
intensive discussions over the last 18 months in an effort to craft a time
extension and other changes in CDO 2009-0060 which would include
targets that are reasonably attainable, are fair to the ratepayers, and
achieve the objective of reducing unauthorized overdrafts of the Carmel
River.
A copy of Cal Am's proposed Application to Modify with Attachment 1
(proposed modified CDO), is enclosed at Attachment A. Key elements in
Cal Am's proposal include:
A four-year extension of the CDO deadline
A new reduction schedule in regular increments during the extension
Consideration by the SWRCB of suspension of water reductions for a
missed milestone if the Board decides it was outside the control of
Cal-Am, MPWMD, and the Water Authority.
Ability carryover a certain amount of water savings from year-to-year
06/12
The MPRWA and the MPWMD, following several months of public input
and staff coordination, has considered whether they should co-sign the
Application for Extension in order to maintain local public agency standing
in the process and to emphasize community unity on the proposed CDO
modification.
Submission of an Application for Amendment is time sensitive since the
SWRCB could take up to a year to take final action, so we are anxious to
finalize the application as soon as possible.
ATTACHMENTS:
A- Cal Am Application to Modify CDO 2009-0060 with Attachment 1
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY
Anthony J. Cerasuolo (State Bar. No. 800912)
1033 B Avenue, Suite 200
Coronado, California 92118
Telephone: (619) 522-6370
Facsimile: (619) 522-6391
ELLISON, SCHNEIDER & HARRIS L.L.P.
Robert E. Donlan (State Bar No. 186185)
Shane E. C. McCoin (State Bar No. 258588)
2600 Capitol Avenue, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95816
Telephone: (916) 447-2166
Facsimile: (916) 447-3512
Attorneys for CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SHRECK, LLP
Russell M. McGlothlin (State Bar No. 208826)
1020 State Street
Santa Barbara, California 93101
Telephone: (805) 963-7000
Facsimile (805) 965-4333
Attorneys for MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
DE LAY & LAREDO
David C. Laredo (State Bar No. 66532)
606 Forest Avenue
Pacific Grove, CA 93950
Telephone: (831) 646-1502
Facsimile: (831) 646-0377
Attorneys for MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
In the Matter of the Unauthorized Diversion and Use
of Water by the California American Water
Company; Cease and Desist Order WR 2009-0060
I.
APPLICATION FOR ORDER

MODIFYING STATE WATER
BOARD ORDER WRO 2009-0060
(CEASE AND DESIST ORDER)
Introduction
Pursuant to Water Code section 1832, California American Water (CAW), Monterey
Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA) and Monterey Peninsula Water Management
1
Application for Order Modifying Cease and Desist Order WRO 2009-0060
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
District (MPWMD) (collectively, Petitioners) hereby apply to the State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) for an order modifying certain of the ordering provisions of Order WRO 20090060 (referred to herein as Order or CDO).1 In Orders WRO 2009-0060 as amended by WR
2010-0001, the SWRCB required CAW to comply with Condition 2 of SWRCB Order WR 9510 by diligently implementing various actions in collaboration with the MPRWA, MPWMD and
other community interests, including termination of unlawful diversions from the Carmel River
in accordance with the schedule and conditions set forth in the CDO. Petitioners have diligently
implemented measures to comply with the CDO, and CAW is currently meeting or has met all of
the conditions of the CDO. Despite the best efforts of these parties as described below, factors
beyond Petitioners control prevent CAW and Petitioners from implementing a replacement
water supply to eliminate all unauthorized diversions from the Carmel River before December
31, 2016 as required in the CDO. Accordingly, Petitioners hereby request that the SWRCB issue
a new order modifying and restating certain of the ordering provisions of the CDO as specifically
proposed in Attachment 1 (Proposed Order).2 In addition, Petitioners request cooperation and
assistance from the SWRCB regarding certain applications, permits, loans and grant funds to
implement projects that will reduce unauthorized diversion from, and increase the water in, the
Carmel River, particularly during drier months of the year. With the SWRCBs support for those
projects and modification of Order WRO 2009-0060, Petitioners can commit to carry out the
actions, plans and projects described in Sections III.A and III.C, which include:
Continued development and implementation of efficiency and conservation measures;
Petitioners understand that, as of its effective date, the requested Order would supersede the ordering provisions of
State Water Board WRO 2009-0060. All other provisions of State Water Board WRO 2009-0060 and all other State
Water Board orders concerning CAWs diversions from the Carmel River would remain in effect until terminated by
law or action of the State Water Board
2
The Proposed Order is the result of nearly two years of analysis and negotiations by the Petitioners, stakeholders,
resources agencies, and SWRCB staff. The Proposed Order includes significant commitments to measures to
protect and enhance aquatic resources in the Carmel River through the extension period of the Proposed Order, and
reflects an effort to maintain unequaled water conservation and use standards on the Monterey Peninsula without
causing further damage to the economy of the Peninsula. The diversion reductions proposed in the Proposed Order
will severely stretch the communities water conservation capabilities, and therefore this Application is made with
the understanding and on the condition that the SWRCB adopt an order amending the CDO that is materially the
same as the terms and conditions in the Proposed Order in Attachment 1. Petitioners reserve all rights and remedies
to protect the water supply necessary to maintain health and safety of the Monterey Peninsula, and do not intend
with this Application to waive any rights or remedies necessary to protect an adequate water supply for the public
welfare of the Monterey Peninsula.
2
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
Continued development and implementation of projects to develop alternative and

supplemental water supplies; and
Continued development and implementation of fish and wildlife protection and
enhancement measures.
[Summary of Attachment 1 and rationale behind Effective Diversion Limit, extension period,
etc. may be inserted prior to 11/12 MPRWA / 11/16 MPWMD Board meetings.]
While not signatories to this Application, many other stakeholders participated
extensively in the development of this Application. The Petitioners thank each of these groups
and request the Board recognize them for their efforts to collaborate with the Petitioners.
Without them, this Application would not be as robust and well-reasoned as it is today. These
groups include the Sierra Club, the Carmel River Steelhead Association, the Planning and
Conservation League, the Pebble Beach Company, and the Carmel Valley Ranch, among others.
Included in Attachment 3 are letters of support from non-applicant groups that participated in the
development of this Application.
The Petitioners would also like to acknowledge the significant efforts and collaboration
by Staff of the SWRCB in the development of this Application. In the face of the worst drought
in California's history, SWRCB Staff professionally and cooperatively worked with the
Petitioners over a two year period to provide feedback, to help drive consensus among
stakeholders and to assist in the development of this Application and the Proposed Order. The
Board should recognize the efforts and professionalism of its staff and their contributions to this
Application.
II.
The SWRCB has Authority to Modify the CDO

The SWRCB has broad discretion to modify a CDO and to revise a schedule of
compliance contained in a CDO. See Order WR 2010-0002. Petitioners make this Application
pursuant to Water Code section 1832, which states, in relevant part: The board may, after notice
and opportunity for hearing, upon its own motion or upon receipt of an application from an
aggrieved person, modify, revoke, or stay in whole or in part any cease and desist order issued
pursuant to this chapter. For the reasons set forth below, including the fishery protection and
enhancement measures that will be implemented by Petitioners, Petitioners submit there is good
cause for the SWRCB to modify the schedule and conditions in Order WRO 2009-0060.
3
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
III.
It is Reasonable and in the Public Interest to Modify the CDO as Requested

A. CAW and Petitioners have Diligently and Aggressively Implemented
Measures to Comply with the CDO.
1. Efficiency and Conservation Measures
Prior to and since the issuance of the CDO, Petitioners have dedicated tremendous
resources to implement efficiency and conservation measures to control and reduce customer
demand and system losses within CAWs Monterey district, such that the community is currently
outperforming the Carmel River diversion reduction targets set forth in the CDO. These include
the following specific measures:
a. Moratorium on New Connections and Increased Uses at Existing
Connections
CAW has implemented and diligently enforced a moratorium on new service connections
within its Monterey district. CAW applied for, and the California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) approved on March 24, 2011, a moratorium on new service connections and an
increased use at existing connections caused by a change in use.3 See CPUC Decision D.11-03048.
b. Revised Conservation and Rationing Plan
On July 14, 2015 CAW submitted an application to the CPUC to modify revised Rule
No. 14.1.1 in CAWs CPUC tariff, Water Conservation and Rationing Plan for the Monterey
District. CAW filed this application, with support and cooperation from MPWMD, in
recognition that Rule 14.1.1, which is based upon the MPWMD Regulation XV, Expanded
Water Conservation and Standby Rationing Plan, is outdated since it was last reviewed by the
CPUC in a 2007 proceeding. A prehearing conference was held by the CPUC Administrative
Law Judge on September 8, 2015 to discuss the parties proposed schedule and scope of the
proceeding. On November 4, 2015, the CPUC filed a scoping memo that sets the schedule for a
decision on CAWs application by approximately October 2016.
3
Prior CPUC decisions require CAW to seek CPUC authorization prior to denying service to any customer within
its service area.
4
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
c. Water Conservation Programs
CAW and MPWMD have implemented a variety of customer water conservation and
efficiency programs, including programs targeting large commercial customers such as laundries,
hotels, and car washes. CAWs efficiency standards have placed it in the lowest residential percapita usage tier under the SWRCBs recently adopted emergency urban water conservation
regulations. CAW and MPWMD have also implemented programs targeting reductions in
outdoor irrigation, including replacement of irrigated turf with drought tolerant landscaping or
artificial turf, incentives for installation of weather-based irrigation controllers, mandatory
installation of rain sensors on irrigation systems, and mandatory water efficiency requirements
for all non-residential customers and certain residential customers. See MPWMD Regulation
XIV. In February 2010, CAW implemented, with CPUC approval, a new tiered conservation rate
structure with increases directed at the top tier users to promote conservation practices and
reduce overall water usage. Compared to the five year historical tier 4 and 5 usage, tier 4 and 5
usage was down approximately 71% in Water Year 2014-2015. See Table Nine in CAWs 4th
Quarterly Report for the 2014-2015 Water Year to SWRCB pursuant to Order WRO 2009-0060.
d. Infrastructure and Operational Improvements to Reduce System
Losses and Customer Leaks
CAW has implemented and continues to implement programs to detect and reduce nonrevenue system losses, including: replacement of older water mains and service lines in areas
shown to be more leak prone; water meter replacement; active leak detection; technological
solutions to manage lost water; and operational fixes such as pressure reduction. In addition,
CAW is currently conducting a pilot test with a group of Monterey customers using remote
technology that enables participants to receive real time water consumption data for their
residential water account on their smart phone. The smart phone application can be used to set up
an alert if consumption is indicative of a water leak or if use increases. This technology allows
customers the ability to detect water leaks as they occur and to monitor their water use closely,
further encouraging water conservation.
5
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
2. CAW is Diligently Pursuing Development of a Primary Alternative
Water Supply
As directed by Order 95-10 and the Order, Petitioners have diligently pursued the
Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP), which will produce the replacement water
supply necessary to eliminate unauthorized diversions from the Carmel River.
a. Application for Approval of MPWSP and Permitting Activity
On April 23, 2012, CAW filed an application to the CPUC for approval of the MPWSP.
The MPWSP includes the following components: 1) a desalination plant and associated sourcewater slant wells and conveyance system, which can produce up to 9,752 acre-feet-annually (afa)
for system demand; 2) an Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) project to store water lawfully
diverted from the Carmel River in the Seaside Groundwater Basin for subsequent recovery, with
an expected long term average yield of 1,300 acre-feet annually; and possibly 3) a Groundwater
Replenishment (GWR) project that could treat recycled water and replenish up to 3,500 afa in the
Seaside Basin. The GWR project is being developed by the MPWMD and Monterey Regional
Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA) and, if timely approved, could result in a downsized desalination plant. The Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN),
approving the MPWSP, is anticipated from the CPUC before the end of 2016.
Significant progress has been made on the MPWSP. CAW has undertaken and
continues to advance as many aspects of the project as can be done without regulatory permits.
In that regard, CAW acquired a 45-acre parcel of land near the City of Marina to serve as the
desalination plant site. CAW has awarded a design-build contract to CDM Smith to construct
the desalination plant once all necessary permits have been obtained. CAW is also in the process
of conducting separate procurements to construct distribution system improvements and
construct the source water wells. These actions will expedite the construction of the MPWSP
once all regulatory agencies have issued their respective permits.
On April 30, 2015, the CPUC released its Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for
the MPWSP pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The release of the
6
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
DEIR began a 60-day public comment period, which was subsequently extended through
September 30, 2015. On September 8, 2015, the CPUC issued a statement that it will revise and
recirculate the MPWSP DEIR as a joint DEIR/Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).
The joint DEIR/DEIS will meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), and will be coordinated with the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS)
as the federal lead agency. MBNMSs parent agency the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), published a Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact
Statement on August 26, 2015 under NEPA for the MPWSP and held a related scoping meeting
on September 10, 2015.
Substantial progress is also being made on the GWR component of the MPWSP. On
April 23, 2015, MPWMD and MRWPCA released a DEIR for a 45-day public comment period
that closed on June 5, 2015. On October 8, 2015 MRWPCA certified its final EIR for the GWR
project.
b. Senate Bill 936 for Partial Public Financing
In September 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 936, authored by
Senators Bill Monning and Anthony Cannella and Assemblymen Mark Stone and Luis Alejo.
This legislation allows the MPWSP to utilize partial public financing if it is available at a lower
rate than conventional, private project financing.
c. Test Slant Well Project
In addition, a new test slant well located on the CEMEX property in Marina, California
was completed in March 2015. The test well was put into long term operation on April 22, 2015.
Data from the test well and an associated network of monitoring wells is posted weekly on
CAWs MPWSP website. Preliminary test well results have been promising and indicate that the
test well is operating as designed. CAW and the California Coastal Commission also
successfully defended the Coastal Development Permits underlying the test well in two separate
lawsuits challenging their validity.
3. Petitioners Have Implemented Other Projects to Replace and Authorize
7
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
Carmel River Diversions
Petitioners have developed, permitted and implemented supplemental water supply
projects to reduce unauthorized Carmel River diversions. Petitioners have also facilitated or
supported efforts by other entities to complete multiple projects and water right transactions that
will permit beneficial uses within CAWs service area.
a. Table 13 Water Rights
CAW pursued and satisfied the requirements under SWRCB Decision 1632 to obtain additional
appropriative water rights under SWRCB Permit 21330 to lawfully divert up to 1,488 afa from the
Carmel River; subject to the same by-pass flow requirements as ASR water. In Water Year 2014-2015,
CAW was able to divert 42.2 AF under the Permit, and reduce unauthorized diversions by an equal
amount.4
b. Pebble Beach Wastewater Reclamation Project

CAW has been a participant with the Pebble Beach Company (PBC), the Carmel Area
Wastewater District (CAWD), the Pebble Beach Community Services District (PBCSD), and
MPWMD in accomplishing perhaps the most renowned golf course recycled water irrigation
project in the country. The CAWD-PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project (as it is known)
treats wastewater at the CAWD plant to a tertiary level, with advanced level micro-filtration
which is then distributed by PBCSD and MPWMD as recycled water to irrigate all of the Del
Monte Forest golf courses. This project is presently supplying an average of 1,000 afa of
recycled water to the golf courses, conserving that amount of diversions from the Carmel River.
In addition to MPWMDs conservation programs, this project is one of the largest water saving
projects operating on the Monterey Peninsula. In return for its financial commitment (of which
PBC has funded over $22 million in operating shortfalls and debt service) which made the
project possible, PBC (with other Del Monte Forest landowners) received the Pebble Beach
Water Entitlement, which was fully recognized in SWRCB Order WRO 2009-0060, as modified
Decision 1632 Condition 10 provides an opportunity for the persons named in Table 13 of Decision 1632 to obtain
a water right permit with a priority superior to the MPWMDs Permit 20808. Decision1632 delegates authority to
the Chief of the Division of Water Rights to modify the quantities identified in Table 13.
8
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
by Order WR 2010-0001.
c. Additional Aquifer Storage and Recovery Capacity
As required by the Order, CAW and the MPWMD expanded the Carmel River ASR
Project to fulfill the Small Project requirement in Ordering Paragraph 3.a.(3). CAW and
MPWMD jointly hold a water right permit that allows for up to 1,920 AFA to be diverted from
the Carmel River during periods of excess flow and then injected into the Seaside Basin as part
of the ASR program. CAW and MPWSP have completed two new wells (ASR Wells #3 and #4)
at the Seaside Middle School since the CDO was issued. The addition of ASR Well #3 gives
CAW and MPWMD the ability to store and recover an expected long term average of more than
500 afa, and was completed to satisfy Condition 5 of the CDO. The addition of ASR Well #4
provides the opportunity for CAW and MPWMD to fully realize the amounts available for
diversion under the associated license when river flows exceed the corresponding flow triggers.
d. Carmel River Floodplain Restoration and Environmental
Enhancement Project and Interim Water Use Agreement
CAW supported and facilitated a water right change petition submitted by the Clint
Eastwood and Margaret Eastwood Trust (Eastwood Trust) and approved by the SWRCB on July
3, 2015 in Division Decision 2015-0001. This project includes a significant donation of land by
the Eastwood Trust to the Big Sur Land Trust as an important component of the Carmel River
Floodplain Restoration and Environmental Enhancement Project. The Carmel River Floodplain
Restoration and Environmental Enhancement Project will, among other potential things, restore
the historic floodplain and wetlands and improve flood protection in the lower Carmel River and
increase riparian habitat.
The Eastwood Trust agreed to permanently dedicate 46 afa of its existing water right to
instream flows, and to grant temporary use of up to 85 afa to assist CAW to reduce its
unauthorized diversions from the Carmel River. CAW and the Eastwood Trust expended
significant time and effort to complete this transaction and expect to begin replacing CAW
diversions with water available through the associated water right (License 13868A) in the
immediate near term. Based upon an agreement with the Eastwood Trust, the SWRCB has
9
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
ordered that all municipal water pumped under License 13868A during 2015 will be used to
offset CAWs Carmel River Diversions, and that at least 50 af and 25 af will be used to assist
CAW to reduce its unauthorized diversions from the Carmel River in 2016 and 2017,
respectively. Until the MPWSP is brought online and unauthorized diversions from the Carmel
River eliminated, the agreement with the Eastwood Trust authorizes CAW to use all water under
License 13868A that is not used by Eastwood pursuant to the License amendment.
e. Carmel River Instream Flow Enhancement Program
CAW has proposed to the SWRCB the Carmel River Instream Flow Enhancement
Program, whereby CAW will compensate Carmel River water rights holders to implement
conservation measures to reduce water diversions from the river in order to increase instream
flows for the benefit of fish and wildlife in the Carmel River. On September 8, 2015, CAW
submitted a Notice of Intent to Implement the Carmel River Flow Enhancement Program to the
SWRCB describing the proposed program which would temporarily modify the water users
water rights to allow for the instream use of water in the Carmel River.
f. City of Pacific Grove Recycled Water Project
The City of Pacific Grove certified an EIR for its Local Water Project to reduce irrigation on the
Citys municipal golf course and El Carmelo Cemetery. MPWMD provided a feasibility funding
grant to assist planning this effort. SWRCB-authorized Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF)
financing for this effort is presently pending final approval by the SWRCB. Provided the
SWRCB approves the SRF financing, the City expects to begin construction during or before
January 2016. CAW also has actively supported this project throughout the proposal and
approval process.
4. CAW and Petitioners have Implemented and Propose Additional
Measures to Enhance and Improve Conditions for Fish and Wildlife
Resources
CAW and Petitioners have permitted and implemented significant measures to enhance
and improve conditions for fish and wildlife resources in the Carmel River watershed, and to
10
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
minimize and avoid potential impacts to fish and wildlife during the extension period for the
CDO sought through this Application.
a. Funding for Carmel River Mitigation Projects
Pursuant to a 2009 agreement (amended in 2014) between CAW, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW), CAW made a one-time payment of $3.5 million in 2009, annual payments of $1.1
million per year for 2010 through 2015, and has committed to make annual payments of $1.1
million per year through 2016 to the State Coastal Conservancy (SCC) for environmental
protection and enhancement projects in the Carmel River watershed.
CAWs s payments, which total $10.1 million to date, are being used to fund the
following significant projects, which are designed to mitigate the impacts of CAWs
unauthorized diversions and are identified by the SCC through ongoing consultations with the
NMFS, CDFW, and Carmel River stakeholders primarily through the Carmel River Task Force:
Removal of Old Carmel River Dam to facilitate fish passage;
Removal of Sleepy Hollow Ford to facilitate fish passage;
Restoration of Carmel River upstream of San Clemente Dam;
Sleepy Hollow Fish Rearing Facility Intake Improvements;
Carmel River Lagoon Large Wood Augmentation;
Carmel Lagoon Water Augmentation;
Carmel Lagoon Ecological Barrier;
Additional Fish Passage Barrier Removal;
Off-stream Storage of Excess Flows in Exchange for Forbearance of Summer Pumping;
Provided that NOAA and CAW mutually agree to terms for extending the 2009 agreement
described above, CAW will make additional annual payments of $1.1 million (pro-rated for any
partial years) until unpermitted diversions of water from the Carmel River are replaced by legal
sources of water for use on projects during the requested extension period for the CDO. Use of
these funds and administrative efforts will focus, with support of CAW and other Parties, on
11
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
projects that can be implemented during the extension period to mitigate potential effects of the
extension. MPWMD will use its best efforts and cooperate with NOAA, CDFW, SCC and the
Carmel River Steelhead Association, to identify, develop, and implement mitigation efforts that
benefit the Carmel River.
b. Carmel River Reroute and San Clemente Dam Removal Project
CAW also has permitted, financed and completed significant construction activities to reroute the Carmel River and remove the San Clemente Dam. The Carmel River Reroute and San
Clemente Dam Removal Project is the largest dam removal project in California history, and was
jointly developed and/or funded by the CAW, SCC, NOAAs National Marine Fisheries Service,
the Planning and Conservation League Foundation, and the Nature Conservancy. This
monumental and innovative project will:
Remove the 106 foot high San Clemente Dam and implement a watershed restoration
process that will bring the Carmel River back to life;
Provide unimpaired access to over 25 miles of essential spawning and rearing habitat,
thereby aiding in the recovery of threatened South-Central California Coast steelhead;
Restore the rivers natural sediment flow, helping replenish sand on Carmel Beach and
improve habitat downstream of the dam for steelhead;
Re-establish a healthy connection between the lower Carmel River and the watershed
above San Clemente Dam;
Improve habitat for threatened California red-legged frogs;
Reduce beach erosion that contributes to destabilization of structures;
Provide a long-term solution to the public safety risk posed by the potential collapse of
the dam, which potentially threatens 1,500 homes and other public buildings in the event
of a large flood or earthquake;
The various construction activities that have been completed or are nearly completed to date
include: complete excavation of the re-route cut, nearly complete installation of the diversion
dike and the stabilized sediment slope, the complete demolition of San Clemente Dam itself and
12
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
the near completion of the new river channel that allows for fish passage. An additional
component of the project is the ultimate transfer of CAW property around San Clemente Dam to
the U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management, which will create additional open
space and habitat in the watershed.
c. Los Padres Dam Downstream Fish Passage Facilities
CAW and various stakeholders agreed to construct downstream fish passage facilities at
Los Padres Dam, located at approximately River Mile 24.8 on the Carmel River. CAW owns and
operates Los Padres Dam and has made various improvements to accommodate upstream fish
passage over the Dam. Currently, when lake elevations fall below the dams spillway crest, no
downstream fish passage corridor exists. To improve downstream fish passage opportunities, the
following facilities will be constructed: behavioral guidance system, floating weir surface
collector, fish bypass conduit, bypass access portals, and bypass outfall. Construction of these
facilities began in the second quarter of 2015.
d. Los Padres Dam Long Term Planning Study
In its April 10, 2015 Decision Adopting the 2015, 2016, 2017 Revenue Requirement for
California-American Water Company, the CPUC authorized CAW to fund a study to determine
the ultimate disposition of the Los Padres Dam and its effects on the Carmel River. CAW will
fund MPWMD to continue independently studying the fate of the Los Padres Dam, including
contribution from CAW of up to $1.0 million minus CAW staff time of $24K per year to assist
MPWMD. Studies will include evaluating upstream steelhead passage at Los Padres Dam,
whether the public trust resources of the Carmel River will be adversely affected or enhanced by
removal or alteration of Los Padres Dam, what options exist to maintain physical existing
surface storage in Los Padres Reservoir, and analysis of the potential geomorphic effects of a
resumption or increase of the natural flow of sediment. In addition, CAW expects to work with
MPWMD to develop the scope of work and award the feasibility study to a qualified
environmental consultant by the close of the third quarter of 2015 and anticipates completing the
study during 2018. CAW also will continue to fund mitigation measures pursuant to MPWMDs
13
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
current mitigation program through December 31, 2020.
e. Commitment to Fund and Implement Additional Mitigation Projects
Upon SWRCB approval of this Application on terms substantially similar to those
requested herein, and subject to final approval from CDFW, NOAA, and other agencies with
permitting jurisdiction, CAW will implement up to $2.5 million in other projects on the Carmel
River to improve fish passage and habitat. These include, in order of priority and estimated costs:
additional spawning gravel injections below San Clemente Dam using excess gravel from the
San Clemente Dam removal project or from Los Padres reservoir should there be an insufficient
quantity or type at San Clemente Dam ($0.2 million); improvements to the existing upstream fish
passage ladder and trap at Los Padres Dam ($0.2 million); installation of a fish screen at the
lower outlet pipe on Los Padres Dam ($0.8 million); a pit tagging program ($0.8 million); and a
through-reservoir survival study for Los Padres Reservoir ($0.5 million). Should the higher
priority projects exceed the estimated amounts, funding will be pulled from the lower priority
projects until the entire $2.5 million is utilized. Additionally, the estimated cost from the above
projects may be used to supplement other related projects occurring on the Carmel River (i.e., pit
tagging work being contemplated by MPWMD).
B. Factors Beyond CAWs and Petitioners Control Prevent Petitioners from
Achieving all CDO Conditions and Deadlines
The requested modifications are necessary because factors beyond CAWs and
Petitioners control namely the failure of the Regional Desalination Project and delays in the
CPUC approval schedule for the MPWSP make it infeasible to complete the MPWSP and
eliminate unauthorized Carmel River diversions within the current CDO schedule (i.e., by
December 31, 2016). Petitioners anticipate a final CPUC decision approving the MPWSP and
authorizing construction before the end of 2016. Once authorized, CAW expects to begin
construction of the MPWSP by mid-2017, and to begin producing potable water to replace
Carmel River diversions before the end of the requested extension period. Major infrastructure
projects of this size and scope are often subject to delays and litigation, but this anticipated
14
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
schedule reflects Petitioners best judgment if delays are kept to a minimum.
Taking into account the commitments, efforts and accomplishments described above,
Petitioners request that the SWRCB modify the CDO as shown in Attachment 1. Petitioners
make this request upon the express understanding and condition that the hearing record
developed and adduced before the SWRCB for Orders WRO 2009-0060 and WRO 2010-0001
are incorporated within the proceedings on this Application, for all purposes. Further, this
Application is made upon the express understanding and condition that the Petitioners each shall
preserve, and not waive, their collective or individual rights to petition for relief from any
provision of the order amending and restating the CDO, for any reason, upon a claim that the
order amending and restating the CDO causes a threat to public health or safety or otherwise
jeopardizes the water supply for the Monterey Peninsula. Should the SWRCB consider adoption
of an order amending and restating the CDO on terms or conditions different from the Proposed
Order submitted as Attachment 1 to this Application, Petitioners request that the SWRCB not
take action thereon until the Petitioners have been provided notice of the draft order not less than
30 days prior to any meeting to adopt the order, and provided an opportunity to augment the
record of proceedings with respect to the Application.
IV.
Petitioners Request Assistance from the SWRCB.
Taking into account the commitments, efforts and accomplishments described herein,
Petitioners request that the SWRCB commit to use reasonable efforts to assist the Petitioners
efforts to eliminate unauthorized Carmel River diversions as follows:
1. Support issuance of a CPCN from the CPUC and support CAWs request(s) to the
California Coastal Commission and other agencies with permitting jurisdiction for
expedited permit issuance for the Monterey Pipeline and other ASR related
improvements, which will facilitate increased ASR diversion during high flows and
other improved operations that will increase the amount of water in the Carmel River
during dry months;
2. Cooperate with the MPWMD and the MRWPCA to place the GWR component of the
15
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
MPWSP on the State Revolving Fund financing priority list;
3. Cooperate with the Parties in efforts to secure from the SWRCBs Division of Financial
Assistance a one percent (1.000%), thirty-year loan from the program announced March
19, 2014 for water recycling projects for the MPWMD/MRWPCA GWR project,
provided an application is submitted by December 2, 2015;
4. Cooperate with the Parties to secure prioritization of the MPWMD/MRWPCA GWR
grant request pursuant to Chapter 9 of AB 1471 (2014 Proposition 1); and
5. Support, including expedited reviewof, water rights Application 32263 of Monterey
County Water Resources Agency, and any amendments thereto, to facilitate the
MPWMD/MRWPCA GWR project.
V.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated herein, Petitioners respectfully request modification of Order WRO
2009-0060 as set forth in Attachment 1.
Respectfully Submitted,
Dated:
CALIFORNIA AMERICAN WATER
___________________________________
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER

AUTHORITY
___________________________________
MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER

MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
16
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 2
___________________________________
17
Attachment 1 to Application to Modify SWRCB Order WRO 2009-0060

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
ORDER
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT as of the effective date of this Order,1 CalAm shall cease and desist from the unauthorized diversion of water from the Carmel
River in accordance with the following schedule and conditions.
1.
Cal-Am shall diligently implement actions to terminate its unlawful diversions from the
Carmel River and shall terminate all unlawful diversions from the river no later than
December 31, 2020. 2
2.
Cal-Am shall not divert water from the Carmel River for new service connections or for
any increased use of water at existing service addresses resulting from a change in
zoning or use. Cal-Am may supply water from the river for new service connections or
for any increased use at existing service addresses resulting from a change in zoning or
use after October 20, 2009, provided that any such service had obtained all necessary
written approvals required for project construction and connection to Cal-Ams water
system prior to that date. 3
3.
Cal-Am shall adjust its diversions from the Carmel River in accordance with the
following:
a. Effective Diversion Limit. The limits set forth in this Condition 3.a., as may be
further reduced or increased pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Order, is
referred to as the Effective Diversion Limit.
(1) Immediate Reduction: Commencing on October 1, 2015 (Water Year 20152016), the Effective Diversion Limit shall be 8,671 afa.4
(2)
i.
Annual Diversion Limits:

Water Year 2016-2017 Reduction. Commencing on October 1, 2016
(Water Year 2016-2017) the Effective Diversion Limit shall be 8,310 afa,
and this Effective Diversion Limit shall be maintained through December
The effective date of this Order shall be the date of issuance. As of the effective date, this Order shall supersede the
ordering provisions of State Water Board WRO 2009-0060. All other provisions of State Water Board WRO 2009-0060
and all other State Water Board orders concerning Cal-Ams diversions from the Carmel River shall remain in effect until
terminated by law or action of the State Water Board.
2
Cal-Am lawfully diverts 3,376 afa under a legal basis of water right.
3
Multiunit residential, commercial or industrial sites may currently be served by a single water meter. The
installation of additional meters at an existing service will not be viewed as a new service connection provided that
the additional metering does not result in an increase in water use.
4 Each water year runs from October 1 to September 30 of the following year.

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
31, 2020 subject to the terms and conditions in this Order.
ii.
Seaside Groundwater Basin Limitations. The Effective Diversion Limit

shall not apply to any exceedance that Cal-Am, the Monterey Peninsula
Regional Water Authority and/or the Monterey Peninsula Water
Management District (MPWMD) (collectively Petitioners) establish was
necessary to meet reductions required by mitigation measures imposed
pursuant to the Seaside Basin Watermasters Seawater Intrusion
Response Plan or by the court pursuant to the Seaside Groundwater
Basin Judgment in response to a detection of seawater intrusion within the
Seaside Groundwater Basin.
iii.
Carryover: After October 1, 2015 if Cal-Ams actual diversions during a

given water year are less than the Effective Diversion Limit for that water
year, Cal-Am shall be credited for the difference between the Effective
Diversion Limit and Cal-Ams actual diversions. Any such credit may be
carried over to offset any exceedance of the Effective Diversion Limit in
future water years, subject to the restriction in Paragraph 3.a.(2)(iv) below.
iv.
Cap on Carryover: Notwithstanding the provision on carryover in

Paragraph 3.a.(2)(iii), in any water year the sum of (a) Cal-Ams diversions
of non-ASR5 water from the Carmel River and (b) water recovered from
ASR storage shall not exceed the Effective Diversion Limit then in effect
plus 750 afa.
v.
Milestones: For purposes of calculating a reduction to the Effective

Diversion Limit, the following Milestones and Deadlines will apply:
1. (WY
20162017)
2.(WY
2017-
Milestone
Issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity to Construct the Monterey Peninsula Water
Supply Project (MPWSP) by the California Public
Utilities Commission.
Start of construction for any of the Cal-Am
Components of the MPWSP6 and/or the Pure Water
Deadline
September 30, 2017
September 30, 2018
ASR water means Carmel River water diverted to underground Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) storage
pursuant to State Water Board Permits 20808A and 20808C, as discussed in Paragraph 3.a.(3) and Paragraph 3.c. of
this order.
6
For purposes of this proposal the Cal-Am Components of the MPWSP include: source water production wells;
desalination plant; brine disposal system; and transmission pipelines.

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
Monterey7 project, meaning commencement of
physical work after issuance of required regulatory
permits and authorizations to begin work8.
3.(WY
(1) Drilling activity for at least one MPWSP source
2018water production well9 complete; (2) foundation and
2019)
structural framing complete for MPWSP pretreatment,
seawater reverse osmosis, and administration
buildings at desalination plant; (3) excavation complete
for MPWSP brine and backwash storage basins; and
(4) 25% of MPWSP transmission pipelines installed
based on total length10.
4.(WY
(1) 50% of drilling activity complete for MPWSP source
2019water production wells based on total number of wells
2020)
required; (2) mechanical systems for MPWSP brine
and backwash storage basins complete; (3)
Construction of MPWSP filtered water tanks and
finished water tanks complete; (4) 50% of MPWSP
transmission pipelines installed based on total length,
including 100% installation of the Monterey Pipeline
and other ASR related improvements (See Footnote
9.)
5.(WY
Substantial completion of the Cal-Am Components of
2020
the MPWSP, meaning the Cal-Am Components are
2021
sufficiently complete and appropriately permitted to
and
allow delivery of MPWSP produced potable water to
beyond) Cal-Ams Monterey Main system, eliminating further
Cal-Am diversions of Carmel River water without valid
basis of right
2018)
vi.
September 30, 2019
September 30, 2020
December 31, 2020
Reductions to the Effective Diversion Limit Based on Missed

Milestones: The following reductions to the Effective Diversion Limit shall
apply if an applicable Milestone Deadline is not met:
Water Year
Oct. 1, 2016
Sept. 30, 2017
Oct. 1, 2017
Sept. 30, 2018
Oct. 1, 2018
7
Milestone
Missed
Reduction in Effective Diversion Limit
1000 AFA
Date
Reduction
Assessed
Oct. 1, 2017
1000 AFA
Oct. 1, 2018
1000 AFA
Oct. 1, 2019
The Pure Water Monterey project is a proposed advanced water recycling project, jointly developed by two public
agencies the MPWMD and the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA).
8
Such work may include, among other things, any of the following: desalination plant site grading and preparation;
electric utility installation; yard piping; subsurface excavation for structural foundations; transmission pipeline
installation.
9
Not including the MPWSP Test Well completed in 2015.
10
For transmission pipeline installation Cal-Am will prioritize installation of the Monterey Pipeline and other ASR related
improvements, which will facilitate increased ASR diversion during high flows and other improved operations that will
increase the amount of water in the Carmel River during dry months.

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
Sept. 30, 2019
Oct. 1, 2019
Sept. 30, 2020
Oct. 1, 2020
Dec. 31, 2020
1000 AFA
Oct. 1, 2020
1000 AFA
Dec. 31, 2020
If a Milestone is not achieved by its Deadline but is subsequently

achieved, the corresponding reduction to the Effective Diversion Limit shall
be reversed on the first day of the Water Year following achievement of
the Milestone. Once a Milestone has been achieved, any corresponding
reduction will not be assessed in subsequent Water Years.
vii.
Illustration: The following table illustrates the effect of the reduction in

the Effective Diversion Limit over the term of this order, and assumes no
Deadlines have been met and no carryover credits have been applied
under Paragraph 3.a.(2)(iii), and no additional water rights have been
obtained pursuant to Paragraph 6. The result is an elimination of
unauthorized diversions from the Carmel River on December 31, 2020.
Water Year
Oct. 1, 2015
Effective Diversion Limit if Milestones Missed,

No Credits Applied, No Additional Water
Rights Obtained
8,671 AFA
Sept. 30, 2016

Oct. 1, 2016
Sept. 30, 2017
Oct. 1, 2017
Sept. 30, 2018
Oct. 1, 2018
Sept. 30, 2019
Oct. 1, 2019
Sept. 30, 2020
Oct. 1, 2020
Dec. 31, 2020
Thereafter
viii.
8,310 AFA
7,310 AFA
6,310 AFA
5,310 AFA
4,310 AFA
3,376 AFA
Joint Annual Report. At least 120 days prior to each Milestone Deadline
described in Condition 3.a.(2)(v), Petitioners shall submit a joint report to
the Deputy Director, Division of Water Rights, describing progress towards
that Milestone, whether Petitioners expect the Milestone to be achieved by
its Deadline and, if not, whether the Milestone will be missed for reasons
beyond Petitioners control. The joint report will include a section that

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
evaluates the status of the threatened South-Central California Coast
Steelhead Distinct Population Segment (SCCC Steelhead DPS) in the
Carmel River. [ADDITIONAL DESCRIPTION OF PROCEDURE FOR
ADOPTING REPORT ON FISHERY STATUS, AND REPORT
CONTENTS MAY BE ADDED PRIOR TO 11/12 MPRWA / 11/16 MPWMD
BOARD MEETINGS] Within fifteen days of receiving the joint report by the
Petitioners, the Deputy Director, Division of Water Rights shall submit a
Staff Report to the State Water Board that attaches the joint report. Within
60 days of receipt of the Staff Report, the State Water Board shall receive,
at a regularly scheduled meeting, written and oral reports from Petitioners,
the Deputy Director, Division of Water Rights, and the public on progress
towards Milestones. If Petitioners joint report indicates that a Milestone is
likely to be missed, the State Water Board shall determine during that
meeting whether the cause for delay is beyond or within Petitioners
control. If the State Water Board determines that the cause is beyond
Petitioners control, it may suspend any corresponding reductions under
Condition 3.a.(2)(vi) until such time as the Petitioners can reasonably
control progress towards the Milestone.
(3) ASR Project: The amount of water diverted to underground storage under State
Water Board Permits 20808A and 20808C as of May 31 of each year shall be
included in Cal-Ams annual production of Carmel River water that is subject to
the Effective Diversion Limit, up to a maximum of 600 afa. On June 1 of each
year, Cal-Am shall submit an operating plan to the Deputy Director for Water
Rights specifying the quantity of water it intends to supply from the ASR Project
for its customers after May 31 of each year. As described in Paragraph 4 below,
after the first 600 afa have been recovered in a given Water Year, the Effective
Diversion Limit for that Water Year shall be reduced by the amount of ASR water
recovered in that Water Year.
(4) Sand City Desalination Plant: Any volume of water that is produced by the Sand
City Desalination Plant and not served to persons residing within the City of Sand
City shall be subtracted from the Effective Diversion Limit for the Water Year in
which it is produced.
(5) Pebble Beach: Within 90 days following adoption of State Water Board Order
WRO 2009-0060, the Pebble Beach Company certified, under penalty of perjury,

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
the total quantity of water annually used under its water entitlement from
MPWMD (for the funding assurances provided for the construction and
expansion of the CAWD-PBCSD wastewater reclamation project). This amount
was 36.352 afa. Ten percent (10%) of the amount reported, or 3.635 afa was to
be added to the Effective Diversion Limit to allow Cal-Am to divert water from the
river to supply water for PBC water entitlements initiated in the 12 months
following adoption of State Water Board Order WRO 2009-0060. Thereafter, PBC
has annually submitted and shall continue to annually submit, on September 30,
a report to the Deputy Director for Water Rights accounting for any additional
water that is diverted from the Carmel River as the result of an increased use of
its MPWMD water entitlement. Increased diversions from the river by Cal-Am to
satisfy PBC entitlements from MPWMD shall be added to the Effective Diversion
Limit, and are not subject to Paragraph 2 of this Order. Water Diverted from the
river by Cal-Am for PBC entitlements can only be served to properties that have
received a PBC entitlement from MPWMD and which are located in the Cal-Ams
service area. After December 31, 2020, Cal-Am shall not illegally divert water
from the river to supply the holders of PBC entitlements.
(6) Supplemental Water Rights and Acquisitions: Provided Cal-Am is able to identify
suitable and willing transacting parties, Cal-Am will exercise reasonable
additional efforts to acquire supplemental Carmel River water rights at
acceptable costs, and/or will pursue other Carmel River water acquisitions and
water right changes in order to increase flows in the Carmel River and decrease
Cal-Ams unauthorized Carmel River diversions (Carmel River Flow
Enhancement Program). Cal-Am will use best efforts to implement the Carmel
River Flow Enhancement Program to the extent it can negotiate acceptable
agreements with water right holders and provided participation will not negatively
affect the rights of potential participants. Such acquisitions or water right
changes may include leases and purchases of water rights along the Carmel
River on a temporary or permanent basis, and may include water right change
approvals or permits (permanent or temporary) from the State Water Board to
increase opportunities to increase lawful diversions or reduce unauthorized
diversions during periods of lower flow on the Carmel River. Fifty percent of
water available under any Carmel River water right that is acquired by Cal-Am
after the effective date of this Order shall be dedicated to instream use, and the
remaining fifty percent shall be used to increase the Effective Diversion Limit in

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
effect at the time a transaction is completed.
(7) Malpaso Water Company: Water provided on an interim basis by the Malpaso
Water Company LLC to Cal-Am under SWRCB License No. 13868A shall be
added to the Effective Diversion Limit for the water year in which the water is
provided to Cal-Am.
(8) Additional Conservation Measures: In consideration for this order modifying
certain provisions of WRO 2009-0060, and subject to final approval from the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, and any other agencies with permitting jurisdiction, Cal-Am shall
implement $2.5 million in other projects on the Carmel River to improve fish
passage and habitat. These include, in order of priority and estimated costs:
additional spawning gravel injections below San Clemente Dam using excess
gravel from the San Clemente Dam removal project or from Los Padres reservoir
should there be an insufficient quantity or type at San Clemente Dam ($0.2
million); improvements to the existing upstream fish passage ladder and trap at
Los Padres Dam ($0.2 million); installation of a fish screen at the lower outlet
pipe on Los Padres Dam ($0.8 million); a pit tagging program ($0.8 million); and a
through-reservoir survival study for Los Padres Reservoir ($0.5 million). Should
the higher priority projects exceed the estimated amounts, funding will be applied
from the lower priority projects and utilized until the entire $2.5 million is
exhausted. Additionally, the estimated cost from the above projects may be used
to supplement other related projects occurring on the Carmel River.
(9) Los Padres Fish Passage. Cal-Am has committed to install of downstream fish
passage facilities at Los Padres Dam and will endeavor to do so before
December 31, 2015. Cal-Am will also endeavor to remove the Old Carmel River
Dam and the Sleepy Hollow Ford before September 30, 2017.
b. Either Cal-Am or the MPWMD may petition the State Water Board Deputy Director
for Water Rights for relief from reductions imposed under this Order. No relief shall
be granted unless all of the following conditions are met: ( 1 ) Cal-Am continues the
moratorium on new service connections pursuant to Water Code section 350, and
any orders from the PUC prohibiting new connections pursuant to Public Utility
Code section 2708, and the MPWMD continues a moratorium on new service
connections under its authority; (2) the demand for potable water by Cal-Am

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
customers meets all applicable conservation standards and requirements; and (3)
a showing is made that public health and safety will be threatened if relief is not
granted. Any relief granted shall remain in effect only as long as a prohibition on
new service connections remains in effect, and compliance with applicable
conservation standards and requirements remains in effect.
c. ASR Project water stored in the Seaside groundwater basin under State Water
Board Permits 20808A and 20808C shall be used to mitigate the effect of Cal-Ams
illegal diversions from the river. ASR water should be supplied to Cal-Am
customers only during months when water is most needed in the river to preserve
steelhead.
4.
Cal-Am shall reduce its illegal diversions from the river at the same rate ASR water is
recovered from the groundwater basin. After the first 600 af have been recovered in a
given Water Year, the Effective Diversion Limit for that Water Year shall be reduced by
the amount of ASR water recovered in that Water Year.
5.
In State Water Board Order WRO 2009-0060, Cal-Am was required to implement one or
more small projects that, when taken together, totaled not less than 500 afa to reduce
unlawful diversions from the river. Cal-Am was required to identify to the Deputy Director
for Water Rights within 90 days of State Water Board Order WRO 2009-0060 the projects
that it would implement, and to implement those projects within 24 months of entry of
State Water Board Order WRO 2009-0060. Cal-Am satisfied this requirement by
completing ASR Well #3. To the maximum practicable extent, Cal-Am shall continue to
operate this small project to reduce illegal diversions from the river during the months
when surface flow in the river begins to go dry and through the months when surface flow
in the river disappears below river mile 6.5.
6.
Cal-Am shall continue to post quarterly reports on its website and file the quarterly reports
with the Deputy Director for Water Rights. The quarterly reports shall include the
following:
a. Monthly summaries of the quantity of water it diverts from the river.
b. Monthly summaries of the quantity of ASR project water diverted from the river under
State Water Board Permits 20808A and 20808C and stored in the Seaside ground
water basin. The monthly reporting shall also state the quantity of ASR water
recovered from aquifer storage, and the current balance of water in storage.

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
c. Monthly summaries of the quantity of water being produced by the Sand City
desalination plant. The reporting shall identify new service connections within Sand
City and thereafter report the quantity of water being delivered to the new
connections. The monthly reports shall specify the quantity of water used to reduce
diversions from the river during the reporting period.
d. Monthly summaries of the quantity of water saved by reducing system losses.
e. Monthly summaries of reductions in demand for potable water due to conservation
actions such as increased water rates, MPWMDs retrofit program, efforts to reduce
potable water for outdoor water use and demand reduction initiatives.
f.
Monthly summaries identifying all new service connections. The report shall include
the Cal-Am account number, the service address, the name of each authority
granting any approval required for connecting to Cal-Ams system and the name of
each authority granting any approval required before commencing construction; the
issuer of the each approval and the date of each approval shall be separately listed
for each service address.
g. Monthly summaries identifying existing service addresses that receive an increased

supply of water due to a change in zoning or use. The report shall include Cal-Am
account number, the service address and the name of each authority authorizing a
change of use or of zoning and the date of such change.
h. Each quarterly report submitted by Cal-Am shall be certified under penalty of
perjury and shall include the following declaration: I declare under penalty of
perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that all statements contained
in this report and any accompanying documents are true and correct, with full
knowledge that all statements made in this report are subject to investigation
and that any false or dishonest statement may be grounds for prosecution.
7.
Cal-Am shall file quarterly reports of its diversions under Paragraph 5 (small project) of
this Order.
8.
The Deputy Director for Water Rights is authorized to modify the timing and the content
of the reporting required by all of the provisions of this Order to more effectively carry out
the intent of this Order.
9.
As of its effective date, this Order supersedes the ordering provisions of State Water
Board Order WRO 2009-0060, but does not supersede or render moot any of the analysis
or discussion contained in State Water Board Order WRO 2009-0060. Cal-Am shall
comply with all requirements of State Water Board Order 95-10, except as modified

DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A
pursuant to State Water Board Order WRO 2009-0060 or this Order.
10.
The Deputy Director for Water Rights is directed to closely monitor Cal-Ams compliance
with Order 95-10 and this Order. Appropriate action shall be taken to insure compliance
with these Orders including the issuance of additional cease and desist orders under
Water Code section 1831, the imposition of administrative civil liability under Water Code
section 1055, and referral to the Attorney General under Water Code section 1845 for
injunctive relief and for civil liability. If additional enforcement action becomes necessary,
the Deputy Director is directed to consider including in such actions all Cal-Ams
violations of Water Code section 1052 since the adoption of Order 95-10.
11.
The conditions of this Order and Order 95-10 shall remain in effect until (a) Cal-Am
certifies, with supporting documentation, that it has obtained a permanent supply of water
that has been substituted for the water illegally diverted from the Carmel River and (b) the
Deputy Director for Water Rights concurs, in writing, with the certification.
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned Clerk to the Board does hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and
correct copy of an order duly and regularly adopted at a meeting of the State Water Resources
Control Board held on [DATE].
AYE:
NAY:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Clerk to the Board
{00338800;1}
DRAFT 11/09/15
VERSION NO. 1A

Agenda Report
FROM:

Item No: 9.
SUBJECT: Receive an Update on the Summary Project Schedule and Status of the
Test Slant Well for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project
(MPWSP)
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Water Authority Board receive a report from Cal Am on the
latest "Summary" MPWSP schedule, including an update of the "Dashboard", and a
report on the performance of, and data from, the test slant well.
DISCUSSION:
Cal Am will provide an update at the Water Authority meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
None-Current Cal Am "Summary" Schedule for Permits and Approvals to be provided
prior to the meeting.
06/12

Mprwa Special Meeting Agenda Packet 11-12-15

Uploaded by

Document Information

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 Special Meeting Agenda Packet 11-12-15

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agenda

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

Approve Minutes from August 13, 2015 - Milton

Approve Minutes from September 24, 2015 - Milton

Approve and File Authority Checks Through Nov 6, 2015 - Milton

Adoption of Resolution 2015-XX, Approving Donald G. Freeman as Legal Counsel

Adoption of Resolution 2015-YY, Approving Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck as Special

Thursday, November 12, 2015

Edelen, Burnett, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Alternate Director Downey

Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Approve the Minutes of July 9, 2015 Regular Meeting

Approve the Minutes of July 29, 2015 Special Meeting

Approve and File Checks

FORA regarding the terminal reservoir

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Thursday, August 13, 2015

George Riley spoke in agreement of Mr. Rowley and Mr. Weitzman

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Vice President Kampe invited Comments from the public.

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Lesley Milton-Rerig, Clerk of the Authority

Bill Kampe, Authority Vice President

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Alternate Directors Downey and

Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk

Pulled for public comment.

Thursday, September 24, 2015 Regular Alternate Meeting

Thursday, September 24, 2015 Regular Alternate Meeting

Vice President Kampe invited comments from the public.

Thursday, September 24, 2015 Regular Alternate Meeting

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Date: November 12, 2015

Authority Clerk Milton

SUBJECT: Approval and File Authority Checks through November 6, 2015

$19,866.77 City of Monterey for Executive Director Reimbursement Quarter 3

$ 160.00 to Access Monterey Peninsula

$ 521.20 to Mayor Bill Kampe for travel expenses to CCC meeting

Budget to Actual Report through November 6, 2015

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Profit & Loss Budget vs. Actual

47240 Program Service Fees

47250 Reimbursement SPI Contract

47260 Reimburesment VE Contract

47200 Program Income - Other

Total 47200 Program Income

49900 Uncategorized Income

60901 Clerk of the Board

60902 Executive Director

60903 Principal Offc of the Authority

60904 Financial Services

60905 Misc Admin Expenses

60900 Administration and Clerical - Other

62110 Board Counsel

62140 Special Counsel

Total 60900 Administration and Clerical

62100 Legal Fees

62100 Legal Fees - Other