The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutREAL ESTATE, ENVIRONMENTAL & PLANNING ACTION SUMMARY 09-14-15Central Contra Costa Sanitary District SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT REAL ESTATE, ENVIRONMENTAL & PLANNING COMMITTEE ACTION SUMMARY Monday September 14, 2015 12:00 p.m. City of Modesto Recycled Water Treatment Facility 7077 Jennings Road Modesto, CA 95351 Committee: Chair Tad Pilecki Member Mike McGill Staff. Deputy General Manager Ann Sasaki Director of Engineering and Technical Services Jean -Marc Petit BOARD OF DIRECTORS: MICHAEL R. MCGILL President TAD J PILECKI President Pro Tent PAUL H CAUSEY JAMES A. NEJEDLY DAVID R. WILLIAMS PHONE: (925) 228 -9500 FAX: (925) 372 -0192 www.eetitralsaii.org Hosting Agency: Mr. Will Wong, Engineering Division Manager, City of Modesto, California- Utilities Department Public: Mr. Jim Hagstrom, Executive VP for Carollo Engineers, Inc., Walnut Creek, CA Mr. Mike Britten, Senior Vice President, Carollo Engineers, Inc., Walnut Creek, CA Mr. Ryan Sellman, Project Filed Engineer, Carollo Engineers, Inc., Walnut Creek, CA This meeting is to inspect real property located outside the jurisdiction of this agency (GC §54954(b)(2) in a nearby facility regarding the facility itself (GC §54954(b)(6)). 1. Call Meeting to Order Chair Pilecki called the meeting to order at 1:36 p.m. Real Estate, Environmental & Planning Committee Action Summary September 14, 2015 Page 2 2. Public Comments None. 3.* Discussion regarding City of Modesto involvement with the North Valley Regional Recycled Water Program (NVRRWP) Mr. Will Wong made a presentation on the North Valley Regional Recycled Water program (attached). COMMITTEE ACTION: Received the presentation. 4. Tour of City of Modesto Advanced Tertiary Recycled Water Treatment facility, located at 7077 Jennings Road, Modesto, California. Committee toured the facility. 5. Announcements None. 6. Adjournment — at 3:33 p.m. *Attachment (yQndot� em t- MODESTQ C A( I i O R N I A North Valley Regional Recycled Water Program William Wong Engineering Division Manager City of Modesm— Wioes Departrre septerrb-- ia, 2015 Existing wastewater treatment scheme San Joaquei Pr:mmy acver Ttaalrnsnt $lCOndery Trearnern - -+ kngabon �vvyrvv� 9/14/2015 Jennings Road Secondary/Tertiary Treatment Facilities —MAI i. MODESTO "r a[xc.w r•wrn Xm rwrr New wastewater treatment _" scheme MODESTO Treatment SeMnCary O Sutter 0 Treatment " r Kera . m Tuft Ti k To De' Puerto WD Na Dena Mendota Cane) 9/14/2015 K3 Domestic and Can Seg treatment processes at Jennings Plant MODESTO 0 �,,,,�No Rhea '` MM FFRs C is from M Redrculation Fecu tative Sutter Pleat Channei Ponds DAFs (a} (3) for Tovnl / ReOVaI Can Sep Irrigation land Pond Applicanons River D*4*SdOn Membranes Tork � ,., U"M 7 Fm t8N=jbon Screerks To DMC for Why go with tertiary treatment? r Needed new /expanded WWTP due to growth and increased flows • Expedited wastewater treatment to meet growth demands (Phase 1A and 16) Cost /Time Driven • Effluent discharge limitations for secondary effluent (20:1 dilution seasonal discharge, storage, Ranch /Irrigation limitations) New NPDES permit and economic downturn revised City's CIP plans (Phase 2) 9/14/2015 4 2007 vs. Present V 2007 Master Plan Issue with disposal capacity on ranch and river discharge Regulatory requirements were becoming more stringent (Nitrogen /Tertiary) d Phase 1A was designed based on cost and time d Phase 1B was not designed due to reduced growth starting in 2008 0 Present e Phase 2 was designed in place of 1B and expanded due to reduced growth. * 2008 Permit had increased discharge requirements Modesto's new wastewater facilities will be one of the leading systems in the country • State of the art treatment — one of the largest MBR plants in the country • Will produce very high quality water that will provide drought —proof water for agriculture 10 Improved reliability for the domestic and cannery flow waste transport systems • Expanded capacity to serve food processing industries • A potential energy recovery system to off -set operating costs 9/14/2015 5 North Valley Water Recycling Project to be ready by late 2017 v All water produced by BNR /Tertiary Phases 1A and 2 will be sent to the DMC for use by Del Puerto WD (14.9 mgd) d Design in 2015 V Construction 2015 — 2017 0 Operational by Late 2017 RECYCLED WASTEWATER PIPEUNE PLAN th. �+oasce,ro't SS in t..J o. GvnGOn vror ttte J000un CrW t0 �.rtpt� 4rm, M tM ox Aa.to wxr O.x net R.o DW u.,♦ .aut�f rs wvt cww+OnnC tr W 1:00- OAbet Regional effort e7t MODESTO CA I O f N I A North Valley Regional Recycled Water Program (NVRRWP) provides regional solution to part of California's water crisis by making tertiary- treated recycled water available to drought- impacted west side of Stanislaus, San Joaquin, and Merced Counties 10 Partnership formed in April 2010 with Cities of Modesto, Turlock, and Ceres, Stanislaus County, and Del Puerto Water District y Modesto chosen to administer program on behalf of Partners 9/14/2015 9 NVRRWP established to: 0 Provide a regional solution for local water supply crisis 10 Make recycled water available for agricultural irrigation and potentially wildlife refuges 10 Provide long -term, reliable water supplies to DPWD to mitigate on -going and severe contractual water supply shortages w Reduce reliance on Delta conveyance and groundwater pumping to meet unmet water supply needs Challenges for partners �04 Y Del Puerto Water District 0 Primary water source is federal allocations from Central Valley Project (CVP) CVP allocations have been restricted due to drought and environmental concerns it MODESTO Cities of Modesto and Turlock M Experiencing more stringent discharge requirements o Both Cities treat to tertiary levels with minimal reuse 9/14/2015 7 Del Puerto customers experiencing significant shortages and reduced reliability Current operations South Delta Ptan• ,vra' Lit at Verna% Stw*AaW River •; � rdelane: g ? _ Ncw Dan Pee.: ` Modesto WWTP Discharge 9 — N • � ,R v�. ^.erwn Conwd AM+�kam Turlock WWTP Discharge < z arc 3 p Merced Nver EuAeQue, swjoaawn Rner rntett Dm Delay Mendota Poo! 9/14/2015 i 100.000 90.000 -- - — - - - -- 80,000 70,000 �. tillnfllUll 60.000- - ► yO,OtN► Y n \I z 50.000-- - 40,000— U Q 30.000 t urrent 1 ear 20.000 - 1)1' \%1)(.unlra t Nuppl% 10.000 0 %1 . 0 Current operations South Delta Ptan• ,vra' Lit at Verna% Stw*AaW River •; � rdelane: g ? _ Ncw Dan Pee.: ` Modesto WWTP Discharge 9 — N • � ,R v�. ^.erwn Conwd AM+�kam Turlock WWTP Discharge < z arc 3 p Merced Nver EuAeQue, swjoaawn Rner rntett Dm Delay Mendota Poo! 9/14/2015 i Conceptual solution cants Tracy South Della Pumping— PU.P,4 Plan! plats SIR at Ver I% SfO�MOOte R'rer New Meto e C _ 7uelumrx RNer New Don PeGo Q ModestoWWTPM$d,arge _a PorB C-1 a PymP S:atlon i x - Turlock WWTP Discharge L _ C O 'rrc <d o;+r 1 C De!to Mendota Poa son leo�utn Rver ��] fHant Dare+ Projected recycled water; available MODESTO C —ioa1, 1 10 Recycled water available by 2018 (from EIR): Modesto = 14.9 MGD = 16,500 AFY Turlock = 12.6 MGD = 14,100 AFY Total = 30,600 AFY 46 Anticipated regulatory requirements for disposal into San Joaquin River will become more stringent v Recycled water treated to "Title 22" Standards = unrestricted use 9/14/2015 A] Recycled water supplies )0,000 60,000 r S0,000 CL CL vii 40,000 3 30,000 v a U 20,000 v z 10,000 ew#t MODESTO CAL I ON N I A 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Preferred alternative for delivering V W %1 A recycled water to the DMC MODESTO ' riA a r2 fru a o2 cc�u+m roan - ----, --- i O�wM1 QYK'f11 41 f P pp lY[M T2T v riwor..iu rs•¢�c r 9/14/2015 10 NVRRWP Implementation Phases Evaluate supplies /demands Develop /evaluate alternatives Draft Feasibility Study Focus on Delta - Mendota Canal as best conveyance option Revised Draft Feasibility Study May June Dec 2010 2012 2013 $LW $7WK $1S M • Facilities Planning EIR /EIS Permitting Outreach Sept 2015 Design-Build Owner Advisor Services Continued Permitting ROW Acquisition Select Design Build team Design Construction $80 M Progress to date MODESTO Feasibility Studies Complete CAtf OR Phase 1— Initial Feasibility, alternatives analysis Phase 2 — Focused on conveyance 40 Ongoing discussions with Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding permitting of recycled water introduction into Delta- Mendota Canal (DMC) Jan 2018 Cooperating with U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), who operates the DMC, to evaluate delivery to south of delta refuges 10 Secured broad support for project 9/14/2015 11 Recent activities ew! It MODESTO 10 Phase 3 Tasks CAl 101NIA d EIR /EIS for DMC delivery (EIR certified 7/7/15, EIS posted 9/11/15) d Confirm approach to BOR /Refuges (complete) 14 Confirm governance structure (Joint Powers Agreement being finalized by members) e Research funding sources (Applied for SRF loan) e Establish water rights (within 30 -60 days) CEQA /NEPA major comments v Turlock Irrigation District concerns Protest due to "inadequacy" of environmental document Primarily on cumulative impacts to Turlock groundwater sub - basin: Recharge on City -owned ranch San Joaquin River recharge v "Incomplete" project description 0 Export of groundwater outside basin 9/14/2015 12 Implementation challenges 46 Securing water rights V Obtaining new NPDES Permit 10 Approval for use of BOR Facilities e Reduced flows Securing water rights 46 Removal of discharges from San Joaquin River requires evaluating both flow and fish habitat impacts Work in both areas shows no significant impacts 46 Modesto filed wastewater change petition with State Water Board to change discharge locations (CA Water Code Section 1211) Change petition filed July 2014 Change petition notice issued in January 2015 40 2 protests received and resolved Dismissal Agreements (TID 8/5/15, Westlands 9/1/15) Waiting for SWRCB decision 4# Turlock filed petition in September 2015 9/14/2015 13 Protest of water rights transfer v Westlands Water District Unsure if Modesto has rights to tertiary water in terms of "beneficial use" Project harming Westlands' legal rights to water in DMC Water quality (salinity limits in Delta) V Turlock Irrigation District Same as CEQA /NEPA comments Reduced Groundwater Recharge Cities discharges represent less than 1% of San Joaquin River Flows San Joaqu n Rrvei al Vernal s 2000 2012 w Ih Re, yded Wa(ei F own e000 SIR B11, d V.IKJ-, 13 XD ;013 9OD ■ Rs.-MrA R'.Mn ilrwic eopo RcLyded Water 1 luw,. blank - 48&1'% Sapp 1 April • 21 tfs May- 20 ifs Z; _ Joao Mir AD Wy LL JpOO 2 oo 'XD 0 J81 Feb Ad A7 Vs, 1, -1 Aap Sp Ot: It, D. 9/14/2015 14 Delta- Mendota Canal Primary source of water to DPWD and refuges Owned by USBR (federal) under CVP, operated by SLDMWA Max capacity of 4,600 cfs Obtaining new NPDES Permit 46 Use of DMC creates an unusual permitting scenario DMC is concrete -lined engineered channel DMC is also listed by Regional Water Quality Control Board as having variety of beneficial uses Permit therefore is NPDES Permit with DMC as receiving body 0 Currently working with RWQCB 9/14/2015 is 30 c 0 Comparing recycled water quality to DMC water quality Nitrate (as N) Selenium Total Dissolved Solids Rrgded Water OW Water OWtiry L,atrtr C 00i1 - DW WQUtr* 0 0c: ecots -- - oc: cows - Rrtydrd WUrr DMCWatrrttw'ry 0-1h v Approval for the use of USBR facilities 46 Warren Act or Exchange Agreement with Reclamation to allow conveyance and storage in DMC v Agreement to be 40 years in length 10 DPWD to secure contract with Reclamation 9/14/2015 16 DW WQUWA 700 6W — - SM — — — roo — 3oo — -- — "0 too 0 -. Retydtd Water Qua* DRK Water Ouaw Approval for the use of USBR facilities 46 Warren Act or Exchange Agreement with Reclamation to allow conveyance and storage in DMC v Agreement to be 40 years in length 10 DPWD to secure contract with Reclamation 9/14/2015 16 Type of connection to DMC is under development 10 Will depend on NPDES permitting requirements and USBR preferences v May require dye testing of DMC for mixing zone analysis Gooseneck -style discharge into DMC near Patterson, California Flow increases over the next 20 years will be minimal due to water conservation Figure 2.15 Sutter Plant Average Non - Canning Season Flow Projection - +mow %mow r (Iw Ht V� hp'fv/ ' ' R R R R R R R R iL R R R� R R R ^R �`�R R� R R� R ■ 9/14/2015 17 Estimated Project Costs Base Construction $74 M $ 79M Implementation Costs $22 M $ 23M Total Capital Cost $96 M $102M Depending on grants and financing mechanisms, the first year water cost is estimated at $180 -320 per acre -foot 9/14/2015