Receive Update to Matrix of Water Supply Project Alternatives


Meeting Date:

March 17, 2008





David A. Berger,




General Manager

Line Item No.:


Prepared By:

Andrew Bell

Cost Estimate:



General Counsel Approval:  N/A

Committee Recommendation:  N/A

CEQA Compliance:  N/A


SUMMARY:  The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD) Board will receive a staff presentation on an updated matrix (Exhibits 15-A, 15-B, and 15-C) that compares information provided by the sponsors of seven water supply projects.  The matrix purpose is to:


Ø      summarize and consolidate information provided by proponents about current water supply project proposals in a single format; and


Ø      facilitate Board discussion of next steps regarding water project implementation as it relates to use of MPWMD resources (staff, consultants, budget) in the coming year. 


The seven projects in the 2008 matrix are:

1.      Coastal Water Project (CWP) sponsored by California American Water (CAW). 

2.      North Monterey County Desalination Project (NMCDP) sponsored by the Pajaro/Sunny Mesa Community Services District (P/SM). 

3.      Long-Term Water Supply Project/Desalination (WSP) sponsored by MPWMD. 

4.      Seawater desalination vessel, proposed by Water Standard Company

5.      Aquifer Storage and Recovery in Seaside Basin (ASR) sponsored by MPWMD. 

6.      Regional Urban Water Augmentation Project (RUWAP) sponsored by Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) and Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA).

7.      Groundwater Replenishment Project (GRP) sponsored by MRWPCA.


This is the fourth version of the matrix.  The others were presented to the Board on September 29, 2004, September 8, 2005, and October 16, 2006.  The first two versions contain six projects, and the second two contain seven projects.  The fourth project in the above list, seawater desalination vessels, was added to the 2006 matrix at the direction of the Board, following a presentation of the concept by the project proponents at an August 31, 2006 Board workshop.


The matrix is divided into three parts.  Parts I and II (Exhibits 15-A and 15-B) summarize three relatively large desalination projects that are intended, at a minimum, to comply with State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order 95-10 and meet existing water demand on the Monterey Peninsula; and two of the projects could also potentially meet future needs of the Peninsula and other coastal areas in northern Monterey County.  Part III (Exhibit 15-C) summarizes three projects that feature aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) and reclaimed water technology.  These projects alone could not fully comply with SWRCB Order 95-10, but could be combined with each other or with any of the desalination projects to meet community water supply goals, serve as back-up supply, or help reduce costs. 


Please refer to the “Discussion” section below for an overview of each project, with an emphasis on new or updated information.  It is notable that all projects would require upgrades to the existing CAW distribution system in order to receive the water. 


RECOMMENDATION:  The Board should receive the updated 2008 matrix information, ask questions, indicate whether follow-up work is needed by staff, and indicate whether a specific agenda item should be prepared for future consideration. 


BACKGROUND:  At its July 19 and 29, 2004 meetings, the Board heard presentations by and posed questions to project proponents, with emphasis on water production capacity, cost, timeline and opportunities for MPWMD participation.  The Board directed staff to prepare a matrix summarizing information provided by project proponents related to these questions, and obtain and summarize regulatory process information for discussion on September 29, 2004.  The matrix was first presented on September 29, 2004 at the MPWMD Strategic Planning Session.  Refer to the following web address for the 2004 matrix and supporting information:


On March 21, 2005, project update presentations were made by CAW, Monterey County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA), MPWMD, MRWPCA and P/SM.  At a special meeting on June 16, 2005, the Board determined that it would host an August 25, 2005 Town Hall Meeting with emphasis on public education about different water supply options.  The well-attended August 25, 2005 event featured four displays staffed by project sponsors, eight presentations to an audience of over 100 people, and a lively question/answer session.  Sponsor presentation materials may be found on the District website at:


The 2005 update to the matrix was presented at the September 8, 2005 Strategic Planning Session.  Refer to the following web address for the 2005 matrix and supporting information:


The 2006 update was presented to the Board at their October 16, 2006 meeting.  Refer to the following web address for the 2005 matrix and supporting information:


DISCUSSION:  The 2008 updated matrix serves as a “snapshot in time” to help track progress on the seven water supply projects.  The discussion below: (1) describes the matrix organization; (2) highlights each project with emphasis on what is new or different in 2008 as compared to 2006; and (3) describes next steps.


As part of the process of updating the matrix, District staff contacted proponents of each of the projects listed in Exhibits 15-A, 15-B, and 15-C and requested that updated information be provided not later than March 3, 2008.  Responses to staff’s request were received only from Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency and Marina Coast Water District.  As a result, for the other projects, staff used information previously obtained to update those portions of the matrix.  Those sources include information obtained by Bookman-Edmonston/GEI Consultants for preparation of their February 20, 2008 final report and information available to the District through its participation in the process for CAW’s application to the CPUC for the Coastal Water Project.


Matrix Organization


Throughout the matrix, numbered rows provide the information requested for the matrix.  The following lettered columns are contained in the maintenance:


Part I         Desalination Projects (Exhibit 15-A)

                  Column A -  Decision Element (topic)

                  Column B -  Coastal Water Project (CAW)

                  Column C -  North Monterey County Desalination Project (P/SM)

                  Column D -  Long-Term Water Supply Project/Desalination at Sand City (MPWMD)


Part II       Desalination Projects (Exhibit 15-B)

                  Column A -  Decision Element (topic)

                  Column B -  Seawater Desalination Vessel (Water Standard Company)


Part III      Projects Other Than Desalination (Exhibit 15-C)

                  Column A -  Decision Element (topic)

                  Column B -  Aquifer Storage and Recovery in Seaside Basin (MPWMD)

      Column C -  Regional Urban Water Augmentation Project (MCWD and MRWPCA)

                  Column D -  Groundwater Replenishment Project (MRWPCA)


Proponent information provided for three of the four desalination projects was subject to independent review by Bookman-Edmonston/GEI Consultants (B-E/GEI) and its subconsultants as presented in their February 20, 2008 final report titled “Evaluation of Seawater Desalination Projects Proposed for the Monterey Peninsula.”  Thus, numerical cost data and certain other technical information submitted by the project proponents may differ from results of the evaluation by the consultant.  In cells of Part I of the matrix where information differs, the proponent’s information is shown in regular font and the conclusion by the B-E/GEI team is shown in bold italics.


The primary matrix topics (“Decision Elements”) are as follows:


Ø      Project description,

Ø      Water yield, including recipients and phasing,

Ø      Project cost to customers, including detailed cost breakout,

Ø      Financing and assumptions,

Ø      Timeline and key milestones,

Ø      Permits needed and regulatory agencies involved,

Ø      Site control,

Ø      Project operations and proponent capabilities,

Ø      Project participants including MPWMD opportunities,

Ø      Public involvement,

Ø      List of acronyms found in the matrix.

Numbered line items refer to specific subtopics.  By necessity, the information presented in the matrix is in abbreviated form.




Coastal Water Project (Sponsor: CAW – Exhibit 15-A, Column B)

The major components of the proposed Coastal Water Project (CWP) are a seawater desalination plant in Moss Landing at the “Duke East” site on Dolan Road about one-half mile east of Highway 1; use of the intake and outfall for LS Power Group’s Moss Landing Power Plant (MLPP), formerly owned by Duke Energy.; a desalinated water conveyance system to the Monterey Peninsula, including a transmission pipeline, terminal reservoir and pumping stations; and an ASR project in the Seaside Groundwater Basin.  CAW plans to use a site on the MLPP property for a one-year pilot project, but does not yet have a long-term lease agreement for the proposed CWP facilities.  The yield goal for the “basic project” is defined as 11,730 AFY to: (a) provide 10,730 AFY to replace CAW’s Carmel River withdrawals to comply with SWRCB Order WR 95-10, and (b) 1,000 AFY to help alleviate over-pumping in the Seaside Groundwater Basin. 


New and Changed Information since October 2006:  No updated information was provided by the project proponents in response to MPWMD staff’s request to update information presented in the 2008 matrix.  The June 2006 report by MPWMD consultants evaluated project facilities and estimated costs for the desalination portion of the CWP only and did not review or evaluate the ASR component.  Based on comments received by CAW, the ASR component is included in B-E/GEI’s February 20, 2008 final report.  This report provides two sets of cost information for the CWP:  the desalination portion alone, and the desalination component combined with ASR.  The estimated project costs were escalated to 2007 dollars in the B-E/GEI final report.


North Monterey County Desalination Project (Sponsor: P/SM – Exhibit 15-A, Column C)

Information about the North Monterey County Desalination Project (NMCDP) is very similar to that provided in 2006.  Project components include a seawater desalination plant in Moss Landing, transmission pipeline to the Monterey Peninsula, and a potential 30-acre solar energy power production facility to reduce energy costs.   The proposed site is the former National Refractories and Mineral Corporation’s Moss Landing facility, with planned use of existing intake/outfall pipelines, with possible use of LS Power Group intake and outfall, if needed.  A lease agreement with the property owner has been in effect since March 2004.  The yield goal is 20,000 to 23,000 AFY or more, depending on purveyor demand.  A 20 MGD project, capable of producing up to 22,400 AFY, was used for cost estimates provided in 2006.  Total demands of 20,930 AFY are identified in P/SM materials provided to MPWMD.  The project is intended as a regional project, including meeting the needs of the expanding P/SM service area in northern Monterey County.  P/SM has entered into a management agreement with Poseidon Resources, a private corporation experienced in desalination technology.


New and Changed Information since October 2006:  No updated information was provided by the project proponents in response to MPWMD staff’s request to update information presented in the 2008 matrix.  The estimated project costs were escalated to 2007 dollars in the B-E/GEI February 28, 2008 final report.


Long-Term Water Supply Project/Desalination in Sand City (Sponsor: MPWMD – Exhibit 15-A, Column D)  

The MPWMD Water Supply Project (WSP) is comprised of a seawater desalination plant in the Sand City area with new seawater intake/brine discharge facilities at Seaside State Beach, Sand City and/or former Fort Ord.  The project design envisioned HDD wells for intake/discharge, but the geology of the former Fort Ord coastal area requires use of the existing MRWPCA outfall for large volumes of brine discharge.  The basic yield goal set in 2003 is 8,400 AFY to legalize existing community demand.  Specifically, the project goal is to meet local, near-term needs, including compliance with Order 95-10, assuming CAW diversions from the Carmel River do not exceed 11,285 AFY and total CAW production remains under 15,285 AFY. 


An administrative “Board Review Draft EIR” for the MPWMD Water Supply Project was received at the December 15, 2003 meeting.  To date, it has not been authorized to be refined to a formal Draft EIR to be circulated to the public pursuant to CEQA.  The MPWMD Board continues to place this project “on hold” pending evaluation of regional projects. 


New and Changed Information since October 2006:  At the January 24, 2008 Board meeting, the Board directed staff to prepare a report on the anticipated scope of consultant services for engineering, geotechnical, and environmental impact work needed to complete a Final EIR on the project.  Staff is scheduled to report to the Board for their March 27, 2008 workshop on the scope of services, estimated costs, and timeline for these tasks.  Regarding estimated capital and O&M costs for constructing and operating the project, B-E/GEI determined in 2006 that the estimated capital costs, including the 25% contingency amount, are reasonable.  However, they determined that the estimated energy use should be reduced by 33% due to the higher energy efficiency of currently-available reverse osmosis equipment.  This would reduce annual O&M costs by about $2 million per year.    The estimated project costs were escalated to 2007 dollars in the B-E/GEI February 28, 2008 final report.


Seawater Desalination Vessel (Proponent: Standard Water Company – Exhibit 15-B, Column B)

Representatives of three firms participating in the project, Standard Water Company, PBS&J, and GE Energy, presented the concept to the Board at a workshop on August 31, 2006.  The seawater desalination vessel project, proposed by Standard Water Company, is based upon an offshore “mother ship” containing a seawater desalination plant using reverse osmosis technology and one or more gas turbine engines to provide energy for the desalination process and associated shipboard facilities.  Treated water would be delivered to an onshore water distribution system such as CAW’s using either a pipeline placed on the seabed or a “shuttle ship” tanker to deliver water to a shoreside facility for unloading.  The initial information shown in Exhibit 15-B, Column B, was provided by Skip Griffin of PBS&J.


New and Changed Information since October 2006:    No updated information was provided by the project proponents in response to MPWMD staff’s request to update information presented in the 2008 matrix.  The estimated project costs were escalated to 2007 dollars in the B-E/GEI February 28, 2008 final report.




Aquifer Storage and Recovery in Seaside Basin (Sponsor: MPWMD – Exhibit 15-C, Column B)  

The MPWMD Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project diverts “excess” flow from the Carmel River in wet periods, as defined by state and federal resource agencies, which would then be treated and transmitted via the CAW distribution system to special injection/recovery wells in the Seaside Groundwater Basin on the former Fort Ord.  Available storage capacity in the Seaside Basin Coastal Subareas serves as an underground reservoir for the diverted water for use during dry periods.  ASR helps to improve environmental conditions in the Carmel River and Seaside Basins by reducing Carmel River diversions in dry periods, when the river environment is most vulnerable, and also helps to replenish the Seaside Basin in wet periods.  The Phase 1 ASR Project includes two injection/recovery wells located just east of General Jim Moore Boulevard south of its intersection with Eucalyptus Road. The Phase 1 project allows a maximum annual Carmel River diversion and injection of up to 2,426 AFY into the Seaside Basin.  The maximum extraction from the Seaside Basin would be 1,500 AFY.  Average values would be lower and depend on long-term weather conditions.  Computer modeling performed in mid-2006 indicates that the average project yield will be about 920 AFY with operations that maximize use of Seaside Basin water to offset Carmel River pumping in dry periods.  The MPWMD ASR project could relatively easily combine with any other project described above.


The MPWMD Phase 1 ASR is similar to, but not the same ASR project described for CAW’s CWP proposal.  In 2006 the District and CAW signed a Management and Operations Agreement (M&OA) regarding near-term and long-term ASR projects. MPWMD and CAW staff are working to develop an expanded ASR project, ranging from two additional wells intended to complete the ASR portion of the CWP to a larger project that could yield additional water supply


New and Changed Information since October 2006:  The State Water Resources Control Board issued the permanent water rights permit for the Phase 1 ASR Project in November 2007.  Drilling and outfitting of the second of the two District Phase 1 ASR injection/recovery wells was completed in 2007.  Work continues to complete improvements to the CAW distribution system to allow full use of the two wells.  Pending completion of these improvements, MPWMD plans to test the injection capacity of both wells together by using water supplied from the MCWD system.


Regional Urban Water Augmentation Project (Sponsors: MCWD and MRWPCA – Exhibit 15-C, Column C)

The Regional Urban Water Augmentation Project (RUWAP) involves two major water augmentation supply projects: seawater desalination and recycled water. In the 2004 matrix, a previous variation was referred to as the Regional Urban Recycled Water Project, and focused solely on the use of reclaimed water.  Only 300 AFY is designated for use by CAW customers for non-potable uses such as golf courses, cemeteries, parks and other landscape open space.  The RUWAP could be combined with ASR or the other desalination projects described in the matrix to meet needs of the Monterey Peninsula. 


New and Changed Information since October 2006:  Responding to MPWMD staff’s requests for updated information, MCWD provided updates to the 2006 matrix.  The 2006 information provided by MCWD states the yields to be 1,500 AFY in Phase 1 and 3,300 in Phase 2.  In 2007, MCWD amended the EIR to provide up to 1,727 AFY of reclaimed water. 


Cost information provided to MCWD in 2006 by MCWD’s consultant RMC Water and Environment indicates that the capital cost of the Phase 1 reclaimed water project is estimated to be $54 million, up from $19 million in the 2005 matrix.  For the 2006 matrix, no estimated costs were available for the desalination portion.  MCWD reported this year that their consultant RMC

completed the Desalination Basis of Design in March of 2007.  The estimated capital cost reported as of March 2007 is $42 million, annual O&M costs are estimated to be $1.8 million.


Groundwater Replenishment Project (Sponsor: MRWPCA – Exhibit 15-C, Column D)

A second, related concept known as the Groundwater Replenishment Project (GRP) is currently being evaluated by MRWPCA.  The GRP concept was not included in the 2004 matrix because little information was available, and MRWPCA was determining if the concept has merit to warrant further study.  The concept envisions treatment of recycled water to near-potable condition for groundwater percolation or injection into the Seaside Basin.  Similar to the ASR project described above, the purified, recycled water source would be available in winter, when it is not used by food crops such as artichokes, and could be put to a beneficial use rather than be discharged into the ocean.   After meeting California Department of Public Health (CDPH) treatment and migration standards, this supplemental source of water could be made available for recovery and potable reuse.  Similar technology has been very successful in Orange County in Southern California for many years by operation of the Water Factory 21 plant, which creates recycled water for injection into its groundwater basin as a seawater intrusion barrier.  Expanding on that success, the Orange County Water District recently completed an 80 million-gallon-per-day purified, recycled water project using innovative advanced treatment technology that is substantially augmenting their long-term potable water supply.  MRWPCA’s project proposes to use the new Orange County project’s treatment technology.


New and Changed Information since October 2006:  Responding to MPWMD staff’s requests for updated information, MCWD provided updates to the 2006 matrix.  In 2005 MRWPCA retained an expert consultant formerly involved in the Orange County GRP to help the agency assess and pursue the GRP locally.  In the 2005 matrix, the GRP was stated to initially produce 2,800 AFY, with possible expansion in the future, and that a pilot project was anticipated in 2006.  New information provided by MRWPCA in August 2006 stated that the initial project would produce 2,400 AFY, and that a pilot project was anticipated in 2007.  Currently, the pilot treatment facilities are planned for 2008 and 2009.  In the 2005 matrix the estimated capital cost is stated to be $26.9 million, and no annual operation and maintenance cost estimate was provided.  New information provided by MRWPCA indicates an estimated capital cost of $47.5 million, and annual operation and maintenance costs are estimated to total $1,44,000 per year.  The new information states that the goal for the unit cost of water is $2,000 per acre-foot, $800 per acre-foot more than stated in 2005.  The agency states that it is continuing to pursuing federal, state (Proposition 84), Watermaster, and CAW funding sources.  The agency has coordinated with MPWMD, CDPH and other regulatory agencies regarding hydrogeology, health issues and engineering.




The four desalination projects were compared in detail by Bookman-Edmonston/GEI Consultants in their February 20, 2008 final report, this 2008 version of the matrix will not repeat that discussion.   The other projects lend themselves to combining with or augmenting a larger, primary project and could potentially proceed on an independent path from the desalination projects.  As noted in 2004, 2005, and 2006, varying levels of effort have been expended by proponents to estimate the respective project capital and operating costs.  Though the CAW project has the most extensive cost documentation, District staff and consultants believe that cost estimates for all projects in the matrix are not fully developed and are potentially incomplete and/or inaccurate. 


Next Steps and Concepts for Future Action

The 2008 comparative matrix continues to refine water supply project information, but many information gaps still exist.  Except for the MPWMD Phase 1 ASR Project and MCWD’s RUWAP, major environmental review must be completed for each of the water supply proposals. 


The MPWMD Board should consider various options of how the 2008 matrix should be used.  These options may include, but are not limited to: 


Ø      Use the matrix solely as an informational snapshot in time.  Update the matrix in six or 12 months, when more information is available. 

Ø      Use the 2008 matrix to make a policy decision on what project(s) to support now. 

Ø      Defer a policy decision on water project alternatives described in the matrix (other than ASR Phase 1), and the role the District should assume in pursuing supply solutions, until more definitive information is available.

Ø      Consider other policy choices that may be identified by the Board.



15-A    MPWMD Comparative Matrix, Part I, Desalination Projects

15-B    MPWMD Comparative Matrix, Part II, Desalination Projects

15-C    MPWMD Comparative Matrix, Part III, Projects Other than Desalination