RULES AND REGULATIONS REVIEW COMMITTEE

ITEM:		DISCUSSION ITEM
3.	DISCUSS REFINING IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES AND TECHNICAL PROCEDURES FOR WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
Meeting Date:			January 18, 2012
From:			David J. Stoldt,
			General Manager
Prepared By:			Joe Oliver, WRD Manager, and Henrietta Stern, Project Manager
General Counsel Review: not reviewed
Committee Recommendation:
CEQA Compliance: N/A

SUMMARY: At its October 19, 2011 meeting, staff advised the Rules and Regulations Review Committee (Committee) that staff planned to revise and update the current Implementation Guidelines and well testing technical procedures associated with the Water Distribution System (WDS) Permit process. A near-term issue is adequate notification to well owners of their right to request well monitoring during a hydrogeologic assessment test, which is addressed separately in Agenda Item #2. A longer-term task is restructuring and refining the Implementation Guidelines to improve clarity for the public and technical reader.

RECOMMENDATION: Staff plans to update and refine the Implementation Guidelines in 2012. Staff envisions that the Implementation Guidelines will have two major components:

1. overall procedures geared to the general public, including forms and worksheets; and
2. technical procedures written for the qualified consultant as defined by District Rule 21-A-9 (water well professional).

At this time, the Committee should provide general comments to staff on suggested changes and improvements to the Implementation Guidelines, with emphasis on overall procedures and process. The Water Resources Division Manager will also lead a review of the current technical procedures based on feedback received through 2011. No specific text changes have been developed at this time. Once the staff-level refinements are completed, the General Manager plans to retain an independent consultant to confirm the adequacy of technical procedures as they relate to clarity and consistency with state and county laws affecting water wells.

BACKGROUND: MPWMD Rules 20, 21 and 22 form the heart of the WDS Permit process. Rule 20 states the WDS Permit is needed to create or amend a WDS, and lists a series of exemptions. Rule 21 focuses on the application itself, while Rule 22 focuses on the approval criteria. The MPWMD Rules & Regulations are provided on the District website at:

http://www.mpwmd.dst.ca.us/rules/2011/20111222/TOC.htm (click on desired rule).

Rule 21 refers to the “Implementation Guidelines” for more detailed information on various WDS actions or protocol. The draft guidelines were originally approved by the Board in April 2001, when the original Ordinance 96 became effective, with the expectation that they would be revised over time as needed. The Board has provided policy guidance via a series of ordinances when needed; these rule changes also resulted in changes to the WDS Permit process. Staff has also provided clarifying guidance through a series of memos in response to questions by the public or water well professionals. At this juncture, the Implementation Guidelines are disaggregated into a series of technical and procedural documents and memos that may be found on the District website at the “Water Well Registration, Metering and Permits” page (often called the “Wells Page”) at: http://www.mpwmd.dst.ca.us/pae/wds/wds.htm. The list of topics on this page are provided as Exhibit 3-A.

The technical procedures for well testing are currently represented by the MPWMD Procedures for Preparation of Well Source and Pumping Impact Assessments plus as a series of clarifying memos. They are written for the technical practitioner and specify how well testing and data analysis should be performed. The basic procedures are provided on the District website at:

http://www.mpwmd.dst.ca.us/pae/wds/WDSPermits/WellAssessProcedures_ver3edit_14sep05.pdf

The District must comply with state and county codes and laws relating to water wells. District staff coordinates with staff from the Monterey County Health Department, Division of Environmental Health (MCHD) on a regular basis to ensure procedures are consistent. The MCHD issues the Well Construction Permit that allows the well to physically be drilled, and also has a variety of testing requirements pursuant to state law. The County Well Construction Permit typically refers to compliance with the District’s WDS regulations as a condition of approval for wells within the MPWMD boundary.

DISCUSSION: The Implementation Guidelines are currently addressed in paragraph 7 of Rule 21-A (materials required for a WDS Application), which reads:

7. The results of Well Capacity (Aquifer Pumping) Tests for the duration specified by the Implementation Guidelines, the cost of which tests shall be borne by the Applicant, and which shall be observed by a District representative or agent; and…

As noted above, staff envisions that the Implementation Guidelines will have two major components:

1. overall procedures geared to the general public, including forms and worksheets; and
2. technical procedures written for the qualified consultant (water well professional).

Staff’s objectives include:

• maintain scientific integrity and thereby validity of the WDS Permit process;
• consistency with District policy as set in the MPWMD Rules & Regulations;
• responsiveness to the public, as feasible; and
• improved clarity for a variety of reader audiences.

Staff envisions the following tasks to accomplish this goal:

• Restructure current information on the website Wells Page;
• Review previous list of topics developed by staff which identify where text changes are needed in current documents;
• Review the MPWMD Rules & Regulations to ensure that policy goals are accurately reflected;
• Identify where a rule refinement may be needed via ordinance to avoid confusion and better express the original policy intent of the Board;
• Review testimony associated with the Beech appeal of the Flores/Pisenti WDS for examples of misinterpretation based on the current wording of the procedures;
• Better clarify what hydrogeologic evidence may be accepted by whom to ensure scientific integrity (see below).

Completion of these tasks will be a multi-month process and may be slowed by other priority projects assigned to the WRD Manager as well as budget constraints regarding hiring of consultants.

Scientific Integrity of District Decisions: Staff scientists and observing hydrogeologists in the audience at the November 21, 2011 Beech appeal were concerned that information presented as valid scientific calculations by an attorney during oral testimony, were, in fact, not accepted hydrogeologic science. Staff was not given an adequate opportunity to address and explain the inaccurate information. This type of situation could potentially harm the integrity of the WDS Permit process and/or lead to invalidated Board decisions by the Court. Thus, the Implementation Guidelines revision, and potential rule changes via ordinance should address possible means to preserve the scientific integrity of District decisions such as: (a) change WDS hearing procedures to require substantive testimony and evidence to be submitted in writing within a specified time before the hearing so it can be adequately reviewed by staff and its consultants for basic scientific accuracy; and/or (b) change WDS hearing procedures to only accept hydrogeologic assertions from a qualified consultant as defined by Rule 21-A-9, preferably signed with the person’s professional stamp. In addition, the Board may also wish to consider an informal workshop to receive a basic primer on hydrogeology, which might also be enjoyed by interested members of the public.

Related Matters

Separate related agenda items before the Committee on January 18, 2012 include:

• changes to procedures regarding notice to neighboring well owners;
• whether the District should contract directly with hydrogeologists to conduct the applicants’ well tests; and
• clarification of the appeals process for WDS.

EXHIBITS

3-A Implementation Guidelines topic list on District website

U:\staff\Board_Committees\RulesRegs\20120118\03\item3.docx