HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-03-14 - Board of Directors Meeting Agenda Packet1.
2.
Yorba Linda
Water District
AGENDA
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING
Thursday, March 14, 2013, 8:30 AM
1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
4.
5.
7.
Gary T. Melton, President
Robert R. Kiley, Vice President
Michael J. Beverage
Ric Collett
Phil Hawkins
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Any individual wishing to address the Board is requested to identify themselves and state the matter on which
they wish to comment. If the matter is on the agenda, the Board will recognize the individual for their comment
when the item is considered. No action will be taken on matters not listed on the agenda. Comments are limited
to matters of public interest and matters within the jurisdiction of the Water District. Comments are limited to five
minutes.
SPECIAL RECOGNITION
6.1. Introduce Bryan Melton, Newly Hired Human Resources Technician
6.2. Introduce Francisco Quintero, Newly Hired Maintenance Worker I
COMMITTEE REPORTS
7.1. Citizens Advisory Committee
(Beverage)
Minutes of meeting held February 25, 2013 at 8:30 a.m.
Meeting scheduled March 25, 2013 at 8:30 a.m.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
All items listed on the consent calendar are considered to be routine matters, status reports, or documents
covering previous Board instructions. The items listed on the consent calendar may be enacted by one motion.
There will be no discussion on the items unless a member of the Board, staff, or public requests further
consideration.
8.1. Payments of Bills, Refunds, and Wire Transfers
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors ratify and authorize disbursements in
the amount of $880,409.61.
8.2. Minutes of the Board of Directors Regular Meeting held February 28, 2013
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented.
8.3. Progress Payment No. 1 for the 2012 Waterline Replacement Project, Phase II
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors approve Progress Payment No. 1 in
the net amount of $76,047.50 to TBU, Inc. for construction of the 2012 Waterline
Replacement Project, Phase 11, Job No. 2011 -20.
8.4. Request for Sole- Source Professional Services Agreement with RKI Engineering for
SCADA Control Programing Services
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors authorize the Acting General
Manager to execute the PSA with RKI Engineering LLC, with a total cost not to
exceed $48, 000.
8.5. Unaudited Financial Statements for the Period Ending December 31, 2013.
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors receive and file the Unaudited
Financial Statements for the Period Ending December 31, 2012.
9. ACTION CALENDAR
This portion of the agenda is for items where staff presentations and Board discussions are needed prior to
formal Board action.
9.1. Northeast Area Planning Study
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors receive and file the Northeast Area
Planning Study.
9.2. MWDOC Board and Elected Officials' Forum -April 4, 2013
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors designate a Director to attend this
event as the District's official representative and authorize additional Director
attendance if desired.
10. REPORTS, INFORMATION ITEMS, AND COMMENTS
10.1. President's Report
10.2. Directors' Report
MWDOC Colorado River Aqueduct Inspection Tour - March 8 -10, 2013 (Collett)
Mesa Water Reliability Facility Ceremony - March 13, 2013 (Collett /Kiley)
10.3. Acting General Manager's Report
10.4. General Counsel's Report
10.5. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks
11. COMMITTEE REPORTS CONTINUED
11.1. Executive - Administrative - Organizational Committee
(Melton /Kiley)
Minutes of meeting held February 27, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.
Meeting scheduled March 19, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
11.2. Finance - Accounting Committee
(Hawkins /Melton)
Minutes of meeting held February 25, 2013 at 12:00 p.m.
Meeting scheduled March 25, 2013 at 12:00 p.m.
11.3. Personnel -Risk Management Committee
(Collett /Beverage)
• Minutes of meeting held February 26, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
• Minutes of meeting held March 12, 2013 at 4:00 p.m. (To be provided at the next
regular Board meeting.)
• Meeting scheduled March 27, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
11.4. Planning- Engineering- Operations Committee
(Kiley /Hawkins)
• Minutes of meeting held March 7, 2013 at 3:00 p.m. (To be provided at the next regular
Board meeting.)
• Meeting scheduled April 4, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.
11.5. Public Affairs - Communications - Technology Committee
(Beverage /Collett)
• Minutes of meeting held March 4, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
• Meeting scheduled April 2, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
11.6. YLWD -City of Placentia Joint Agency Committee
(Melton /Hawkins)
Meeting to be scheduled in May 2013.
11.7. YLWD -City of Yorba Linda Joint Agency Committee
(Kiley /Beverage)
Meeting scheduled April 17, 2013 at 6:00 p.m.
11.8. YLWD - MWDOC -OCWD Joint Agency Committee
(Beverage /Melton)
Meeting scheduled March 26, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
12. INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS
12.1. WACO - March 1, 2013 (Hawkins /Kiley)
12.2. YL City Council - March 5, 2013 (Kiley)
12.3. MWDOC /MWD Workshop - March 6, 2013 (Melton /Staff)
12.4. OCWD Board -March 6, 2013 (Kiley /Staff)
12.5. YL Planning Commission - March 13, 2013 (Melton)
13. BOARD OF DIRECTORS ACTIVITY CALENDAR
13.1. Meetings from March 15, 2013 - April 30, 2013
14. CONFERENCES, SEMINARS, AND SPECIAL EVENTS
This section of the agenda is for the Board of Directors to authorize Director attendance at the listed events.
14.1. Yorba Linda Costco Business Expo - February 23, 2013
(Ratify Director Beverage's attendance.)
Mesa Water Reliability Facility Ceremony - March 13, 2013
(Ratify Director Collett and Director Kiley's attendance.)
Santa Ana River Watershed Conference - April 11, 2013
California Water Policy Conference - April 18 -19, 2013
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors authorize Director attendance at
these events if desired.
15. CLOSED SESSION
The Board may hold a closed session on items related to personnel, labor relations and /or litigation. The public is
excused during these discussions.
15.1. Conference with Legal Counsel — Pending Litigation
Pursuant to Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9 of the California Government Code
Name of Case: ACWA /JPIA, et al. vs. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania,
et al. (OC Superior Court - Case No. 00486884)
16. ADJOURNMENT
16.1. A Board of Directors Workshop Meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, March 21,
2013 at 11:00 a.m. The next Board of Directors Regular Meeting will be held Thursday,
March 28, 2013 at 8:30 a.m.
Items Distributed to the Board Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
Pursuant to Government Code section 54957.5, non - exempt public records that relate to open session agenda items
and are distributed to a majority of the Board less than seventy -two (72) hours prior to the meeting will be available for
public inspection in the lobby of the District's business office located at 1717 E. Miraloma Avenue, Placentia, CA 92870,
during regular business hours. When practical, these public records will also be made available on the District's internet
website accessible at http: / /www.ylwd.com /.
Accommodations for the Disabled
Any person may make a request for a disability - related modification or accommodation needed for that person to be
able to participate in the public meeting by telephoning the Executive Secretary at 714 - 701 -3020, or writing to Yorba
Linda Water District, P.O. Box 309, Yorba Linda, CA 92885 -0309. Requests must specify the nature of the disability and
the type of accommodation requested. A telephone number or other contact information should be included so the
District staff may discuss appropriate arrangements. Persons requesting a disability - related accommodation should
make the request with adequate time before the meeting for the District to provide the requested accommodation.
ITEM NO. 7.1
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
Subject: Citizens Advisory Committee
(Beverage)
• Minutes of meeting held February 25, 2013 at 8:30 a.m.
• Meeting scheduled March 25, 2013 at 8:30 a.m.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name:
022513 - CAC Minutes.docx
Description:
CAC Mtg Minutes 02/25/13
Type:
Minutes
MINUTES OF THE
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, February 25, 2013 8:30 a.m.
1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870
1. CALL TO ORDER
The February 25, 2013 meeting of the Yorba Linda Water District's Citizens
Advisory Committee was called to order by Chair Daniel Mole at 8:30 a.m.
The meeting was held in the Training Room at the District's Administration
Building located at 1717 East Miraloma Avenue in Placentia, California
92870.
2. ROLL CALL
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT
Daniel Mole
Lindon Baker
Modesto Llanos
Oscar Bugarini
Rick Buck
Joe Holdren
Greg Myers
Carl Boznanski
YLWD DIRECTORS PRESENT YLWD STAFF PRESENT
Michael J. Beverage, Director Damon Micalizzi, Public Information Officer
OTHER VISITORS
Lieutenant Bob Wren, Orange County Sheriff's Department
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mr. Beverage presented the Committee with Metropolitan's monthly water supply
report and informed the Committee that the litigation with Orange County
Transpiration Authority regarding the Lakeview Grade Separation Project had
been resolved.
4. PRESENTATIONS
4.1. Protecting the Water Supply — A Collaboration with the Orange County
Sheriff's Department
Mr. Micalizzi introduced Lieutenant Wren as a former colleague and
informed the Committee about collaborations with the Sheriff's
Department regarding some vandalism and illegal activity that has taken
place at some public District Water Facilities. In addition some of these
locations are bordering some homes that had been burglarized over the
past months. Lieutenant Wren spoke about the Buffer Zone Protection
Plan (BZPP), a Department of Homeland Security- administered
infrastructure protection grant program to help local law enforcement and
first responders identify and mitigate vulnerabilities at the highest -risk
critical infrastructure sites. A buffer zone is the area outside a facility that
1
an adversary can use to conduct surveillance or launch an attack. The
term is associated with identified critical infrastructure and key resources
such as a water reservoir or water treatment plant. He then updated the
Committee on efforts made by the Sheriff's Department since acquiring
the contract to provide police services to the City of Yorba Linda and some
of the challenges associated with the transition. Lt. Wren offered many
suggestions on how to best protect against burglaries and some of the
other criminal trends affecting the region.
5. DISCUSSION ITEMS
5.1. Future Agenda Items
■ Water Operations / Water Quality Presentation
6. ADJOURNMENT
6.1. The meeting was adjourned at 10:27 a.m. The next Citizens Advisory
Committee meeting is scheduled to be held Monday, March 25, 2013 at
8:30 a.m.
2
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
To: Board of Directors
From: Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Presented By: Stephen Parker, Finance
Manager
Prepared By: Maria Trujillo, Accounting
Assistant I
Budgeted
Cost Estimate:
Funding Source:
Dept:
Subject: Payments of Bills, Refunds, and Wire Transfers
SUMMARY:
ITEM NO. 8.1
Yes
$880,409.61
All Funds
Finance
Section 31302 of the California Water Code says the District shall pay demands made against it when
they have been approved by the Board of Directors. Pursuant to law, staff is hereby submitting the list of
disbursements for Board of Directors' approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors ratify and authorize disbursements in the amount of $880,409.61.
IN11 *1*•1►
The wires and major items on this disbursement list are as follows: A wire of $43,678.08 to Southern
California Edison for all sites' February services; a wire of $281,326.61 to MWDOC for January water
purchase; a check of $107,032.08 to Garcia Juarez Construction for Yorba Linda Blvd Pipeline Project
construction final payment; and, a check of $76,047.50 to TBU, Incorporated for Waterline Project
Phase II February progress payment. The balance of $148,189.35 is routine invoices.
The Accounts Payable check register total is $656,273.62; Payroll No. 5 total is $224,135.99; and, the
disbursements of this agenda report are $880,409.61. A summary of the checks is attached.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S):
The Board of Directors approves bills, refunds and wire transfers semi - monthly.
ATTACHMENTS:
CkReg31413 BOD.pdf
13 -CS 314.doc
13 CC 314.xls
Approved by the Board of Directors of the
Yorba Linda Water District
3/14/2013
PH /RK 5 -0
Description:
Type:
Check Register
Backup Material
Cap Sheet
Backup Material
Credit Card Summary
Backup Material
Check No.
60870
60871
60872
60866
60873
60874
60875
60876
60877
60878
60883
60880
60879
60881
60882
60884
60885
60886
60933
69$87
60869
60888
60889
60890
60891
60892
60893
60865
60894
60867
60895
60896
60897
60868
64898
60899
60900
60901
60902
60903
60904
60905
60906
W31413
60907
60908
60909
60910
Yorba Linda Water District
Check Register
For Checks Dated: 3/01/2013 thru 3/14/2013
Date
Vendor Name
03/14/2013
ACWA /JPIA
03/14/2013
Alternative Hose Inc.
03/14/2013
Anaheim Wheel & Tire
03/14/2013
ANNETTE CANO
03/14/2013
Anthem Blue Cross EAP
03/14/2013
Aram ark
03/14/2013
Associated Laboratories
03/14/2013
AT & T - Calnet2
03/14/2013
Autoscribe Corporation
03/14/2013
AWWA - CA -NV Section
03/14/2013
C & L Refrigeration Corp.
03/14/2013
CalCard US Bank
03/14/2013
CaliWest Car Wash Service and Su pp
03/14/2013
City Of Placentia
03/14/2013
City of Rancho Cucamonga
03/14/2013
Coastline Equipment
03/14/2013
Community Bank
03/14/2013
Culligan of Santa Ana
03/14/2013
Derek Nguyen
03/14/2013
Don Wolf & Associates Inc.
03/14/2013
EDWARD RAYMOND
03/14/2013
Eisel Enterprises, Inc.
03/14/2013
Employment Development Departm
03/14/2013
Fairway Ford Sales, Inc.
03/14/2013
Firemaster
03/14/2013
Fleet Services, Inc
03/14/2013
Flex Advantage
03/01/2013
Garcia Juarez Construction Inc
03/14/2013
Gary Melton
03/14/2013
GLENN KNIGHT
03/14/2013
Graybar Electric Co
03/14/2013
Haaker Equipment Co.
03/14/2013
Haitbrink Asphalt Paving, Inc.
03/14/2013
HYUN SOOK IM
03/14/2013
Infosend Inc.
03/14/2013
Jackson's Auto Supply - Napa
03/14/2013
Amni Systems Inc
03/14/2013
Lee & Associates
03/14/2013
Lewellyn Technology LLC
03/14/2013
Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
03/14/2013
LPR -Laser Printer Repair Co
03/14/2013
Mc Fadden -Dale Hardware
03/14/2013
Mc Master -Carr Supply Co.
03/14/2013
Municipal Water District
03/14/2013
Muzak LLC
03/14/2013
MWH Americas, Inc.
03/14/2013
Nickey Kard Lock Inc
03/14/2013
Office Solutions
Amount
Description
15.00
SO CAL HR GRP MTG KNIGHT
51.53
UNIT 139 HOSE ASSEMBLY
185.00
UNIT 152 MOUNT /BAL TIRE
134.15
CUSTOMER REFUND
164.01
ANTHEM BC EAP MARCH
1,598.96
UNIFORM
2,182.90
LAB ANALYSES JANUARY
3,09338
COMMUNICATIONS
26025
TRXIPYMT VISION GATEWY FEB
275.00
D4 /D5 REVIEW MALDONADO
1,669.92
RICHFIELD, MIRALOMA SVC CALL
15,100.38
YLWD CAL CARD VISA
747.24
CAR WASH PUMP REPAIR
338.50
ROW PERMIT
40.00
CSMFO LUNCHEON /HON.J CHANG
359.69
UNIT 139 MISC VEHICLE PARTS
5,633.27
PALM AVE BPS UPGRD RETNTN
1,665.85
WTR SOFTENER SVC
100.00
REIMBIAAEES DUES
1,966.80
CELL SENSORS
982.50
CUSTOMER REFUND
2,167.02
METER BOX ETC
2,380.80
UI BENES PIE 12/31/12
15.17
UNIT 183 SOCKET ASSEMBLY
2,639.45
FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC
46.07
WASHER TABLETS
10800
FLEX A/C PROCESSING FEBRUARY
107,03108
PALM AVE BPS UPGRD FINAL
120.76
CSDA LDR ACA -GOV FOUND MELTO
112.96
CUSTOMER REFUND
1,876.14
INVERTER ETC
2,515.37
CRAWLER REPAIR, MISC PARTS
19,658.70
PAVING WORK
125.13
CUSTOMER REFUND
12,372.13
BILL MAILING, E -BILL PROCESS
514.47
MISC VEHICLE PARTS
3,252.40
CAST IRON IMPELLAR ETC
480.00
PLUMOSA- BROKER VALUE,EVAL
691.50
ARC FLASH STUDY
4,796.00
TRG, GENL HR ISSUES JANUARY
403.71
SVC CALUMAIN DR GEAR ASSY
273.04
PURCH FEBRUARY
102.96
BRASS KEY TAG PACK ETC
281,326.61
WATER PURCH JANUARY
73.74
MUZAK VOICE MARCH
2,530.14
HLAND BSTR UPGRD CONSLT JAN
7,110.11
FUEL FEBURARY, JAN BAL
347.60
ENG111X17 PAPER, GENL SUPPLY
60911
03/14/2013
Orange County - Fire Authority
60915
03/14/2013
P.T.I. Sand & Gravel, Inc.
60912
03/14/2013
Praxair Distribution
60913
03/14/2013
Process Solutions, Inc.
60914
03/14/2013
Prudential Group Insurance
60916
03/14/2013
Quinn Power Systems Associates
60917
03/14/2013
Robert Kiley
60918
03/14/2013
Sancon Engineering Inc.
60919
03/14/2013
5implexGrinnell LP
W31313
03/13/2013
Southern Calif Edison Co.
50920
03/14/2013
Southern Calif Gas Co.
60922
03/14/2013
Step Saver Inc
60924
03/14/2013
Stephen Parker/ Petty Cash
60921
03/14/2013
Stephen Saporito
60923
03/14/2013
Steven Engineering
60925
03/14/2013
Sunrise Medical Group
60926
03/14/2013
Systems Source Inc
60927
03/14/2013
TBU Inc
60928
03/14/2013
Time Warner Cable
60929
03/14/2013
Townsend Public Affairs, Inc.
60930
03/14/2013
Village Nurseries
60931
03/14/2013
Wells Supply Co
60932
03/14/2013
Western Highway Products, Inc.
181.00
PERMIT /PASO FINO LPG TANK
1,544.54
ROAD MATERIAL
123.25
CYLINDER RENTAL
1,205.00
CHECK ON CL2 ANALYZERS
3,084.98
L1T DISABILITY MARCH
1,713.12
FAIRMONT #2 GASKETS ETC
271.96
UWI CONF FEBRUARY KILEY
14,600.00
SWR REPAIR
785.00
FIRE ALARM TEST
43,678.08
ELECTRICAL CHGS FEBRUARY
13,075.52
ALL SITES SVCS FEBRUARY
519.58
MORTON COARSE SALT
75.03
PETTY CASH /OFFICE
350.00
DMGS /LEAK DETECTION MISDIAG
38.82
PHOENIX PLUG -IN BRIDGE
849.00
ON -SITE FLU CLINfC, EMP FLU SHO-
2,108.41
PANELSIEXEC SECRETARY -DEP
76,047.50
WTRLINE PH It PROG PAY FEB
1,029.24
FIBER I NET, CABLE SVC CHGS
5,000.00
CONSULTING FEBRUARY
23.00
SOD
14.26
BLUE DOT ADHESIVE
359.94
MISC WHS PARTS
Total $656,273.52
CHECK NUMBERS:
Void Check
Manual Check
Computer Checks
WIRES:
60864
60865
60866 -60933
March 14, 2013
W -31313 Southern California
Edison
W -31413 MWDOC
TOTAL OF CHECKS AND WIRES
PAYROLL NO. 5:
Direct Deposits
Third Party Checks 5519 -5532
Payroll Taxes
$ 0.00
$ 107, 032.08
$ 224,236.85
$ 331, 268.93
$ 43,678.08
$ 281, 326.61
$ 325.004.69
$ 140, 538.43
$ 45,617.77
$ 37,979.79
$ 656,273.62
TOTAL OF PAYROLL $ 224,135.99
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISBURSEMENT TOTAL: $ 880,409.61
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MINUTE ORDER AT BOARD
MEETING OF MARCH 14, 2013
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
02/11/13
02/19/13
02/21/13
02/21/13
02/21/13
02/25/13
02/25/13
02/25/13
02/25/13
02/25/13
02/26/13
02/27/13
02/27/13
02/27/13
02/28/13
02/28/13
02/28/13
03/04/13
Cal Card Credit Card
U S Bank
02/11/2013- 3/04/13
Vendor Name
Harrington Industrial
Water Education Found.
Wells Supply
Public Retirement Journal
Marriott Oakland
Amazon
Stefano's
Thai House Restaurant
San Diego Emp.Assn.
Home Depot
Wells Supply
McMaster -Carr
Grainger
Kenworth
Bendix Training School
Placentia Recycling
AWWA
Fullerton Paint & Flooring
TOTAL
Amount
Description
31.49
Filter housing mounting brackets
58.60
Water Quality Manuals
5,524.29
WHS Stock /January
190.00
Public Retirement Seminar Knight
196.08
CSMFO Lodging Parker
(159.77)
Return Safety boots Hill,J
20.74
Lunch /Finance Accounting mtg
41.78
Lunch /Discuss HR issues w/ New Hire
75.00
SDEA Workshop Alexander
880.25
Concrete
5,383.37
WHS Stock /January
81.85
Needle valve
213.84
Sump Pump
1,636.57
Unit 197 Repair A/C
300.00
Air Brake Training Baker
129.60
Top Soil
238.00
AWWA Dues Mendum
258.69
Marking Blue Caution
15,100.38
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
ITEM NO. 8.2
Subject: Minutes of the Board of Directors Regular Meeting held February 28, 2013
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description: Type:
022813 BOD - Minutes.doc BOD Mtg Minutes 02/28/13 Minutes
Approved by the Board of Directors of the
Yorba Linda Water District
3/14/2013
PH /RK 5 -0
MINUTES OF THE
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING
Thursday, February 28, 2013, 8:30 a.m.
1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870
1. CALL TO ORDER
The February 28, 2013 Regular Meeting of the Yorba Linda Water District Board
of Directors was called to order by President Melton at 8:30 a.m. The meeting
was held in the Board Room at the District's Administration Building located at
1717 East Miraloma Avenue in Placentia, California 92870.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
President Melton led the pledge
3. ROLL CALL
niPFC:TOWR PPFSFNT
®mom
®MEN.
®lo
® ® ® ®®
® ®.0
MEN
®®
ra a01 kN
4. ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA
None.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS
None. NEW
6. CONSENT CALENDAR
Director Collett made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar and abstained
from voting on Check No. 60844 on Item No. 6.2. as he has a financial interest
with the vendor. Director Kiley seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 -0.
6.1. Minutes of the Board of Directors Regular Meeting held February 14, 2013
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors approve the minutes as
presented.
1
6.2. Payments of Bills, Refunds and Wire Transfers
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors ratify and authorize
disbursements in the amount of $537,752.75.
6.3. Terms and Conditions for Water and Sewer Service with the Olson
Company
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors approve the Terms and
Conditions for Water and Sewer Service with the Olson Company, Job No.
201301.
6.4. Purchase of Diesel Particulate Filter Systems
Recommendation. That the Board of Directors approve the transfer of
7.1A Status Report on Operations and Efficiency Study (Verbal Report)
Mr. Conklin reported that staff had been making good progress on this
project. Following the Board workshop meeting on November 15, 2012,
staff identified a list of 24 potential firms to conduct the study. This
information was presented to the Executive - Administrative - Organizational
(EAO) Committee and the list was narrowed down to 11 firms who
specifically had experience working with water districts and conducting
this type of study. Staff then requested a letter of interest and list of
references from these firms of which only 5 responded. Staff attempted to
contact a minimum of 3 references provided by each company and
presented the results to the EAO Committee at its meeting held February
27, 2013. A copy of the results was also distributed during the Board
meeting for reference. The EAO Committee supported staff's
recommendation to request a formal Statement of Qualifications (SOQ)
from 3 of the 5 firms (DeLoach & Associates, Koff & Associates and
Sjoberg Evashenk). Staff is planning to review the SOQ's and present the
results to the EAO Committee who would in turn provide a
recommendation to the Board for consideration. Staff would then meet
with the recommended firm to discuss the scope of services and fee for
subsequent consideration by the EAO Committee and Board of Directors.
2
Director Beverage suggested that the Board as a whole review the SOQ
results, conduct any necessary interviews and select the successful firm.
Directors Collett and Kiley agreed.
Mr. Conklin stated that staff would proceed accordingly.
Mrs. Botts left the meeting at this time.
8. REPORTS, INFORMATION ITEMS, AND COMMENTS
8.1. President's Report
® ®No
.1
few:: ®®
8.3. Acting General Manager's Report
Mr. Conklin stated that he had an enjoyable vacation and appreciated the
assistance provided by staff during his absence. He then reported that
construction had begun on Phase 2 of the 2012 Pipeline Replacement
Project and that a kick off meeting with the contractor for the Yorba Linda
Blvd Booster Station was scheduled for the first week of March.
Construction for the booster station project is expected to begin shortly
thereafter. Additionally, the draft environmental impact report for the
District's request for annexation to OCWD is still expected to be released
in mid - March.
3
4
Mr. Conklin then reported that for the second consecutive year, the District
had received the Excellence in Budgeting Award from the California
Society of Municipal Finance Officers. He commended the staff
responsible for their excellent work.
Mr. Conklin concluded his report by stating that he would be joining
Director Collett and Mr. Micallizzi on the upcoming Colorado River
Aqueduct Inspection Trip being sponsored by MWDOC.
Next meeting is scheduled to be held March 19, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.
Finance - Accounting Committee
(Hawkins /Melton)
G& N
Minutes of the meeting held February 25, 2013 at 12:00 p.m
provided at the next regular Board meeting.
will be
■ Next meeting is scheduled to be held March 25, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
9.3. Personnel -Risk Management Committee
(Collett /Beverage)
■ Minutes of the meeting held February 26, 2013 at 4:00 p.m. will be
provided at the next regular Board meeting.
■ Next meeting is scheduled to be held March 12, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
12
9.4. Planning- Engineering- Operations Committee
(Kiley /Hawkins)
■ Minutes of the meeting held February 13, 2013 at 3:00 p.m. were
provided in the agenda packet.
■ Next meeting is scheduled to be held March 7, 2013 at 3:00 p.m.
9.5. Public Affairs - Communications - Technology Committee
(Beverage /Collett)
AM
• Minutes of the meeting held February 20, 2013 at 4:00 p.m. were
provided in the agenda packet. I%k
• Next meeting is scheduled to be held March 4, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
9.6. YLWD -City of Placentia Joint Agency Committee
(Melton /Hawkins) 1W6 Ado
■ Next meeting is scheduled to be held in May 2013. Specific date
■ Next meeting is scheduled to be held March 25, 2013 at 8:30 a.m.
10. INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS
10.1. YL City Council — February 19, 2013 (Collett)
Director Collett attended and reported that a presentation regarding
OCSD's proposed sewer service fees was provided during the meeting.
In addition, the City Council presented a proclamation declaring "Red Shirt
Friday" in the City of Yorba Linda as well as appointed Councilmembers
Anderson and Hernandez to the newly formed joint agency committee with
5
11.
12.
the District. Also discussed was the recruitment of members for the City's
Landscape Maintenance Citizen Advisory Committee.
10.2. MWDOC Board — February 20, 2013 (Melton /Staff)
Director Melton attended and noted that it was a very brief meeting. As
was announced earlier in the month, Mr. Kevin Hunt is no longer serving
as the General Manager. Mr. Karl Seckel has been appointed as the
Interim General Manager.
11.1. Meetings from March 1, 2013 —April 30, 2013
The Board reviewed the activity calendar and made no changes.
12.1. Conference with Legal Counsel — Pending Litigation
Pursuant to Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9 of the California
Government Code
Name of Case: ACWA/JPIA, et al vs. Insurance Company of the
State of Pennsylvania, et al (OCSC — Case No.
00486884)
The Board reconvened in Open Session at 10:02 a.m. President Melton
announced that no other action was taken during Closed Session that was
required to be reported under the Brown Act.
D
13. ADJOURNMENT
13.1. The meeting was adjourned at 10:02 a.m. The next Regular Meeting of
the Board of Directors is scheduled to be held Thursday, March 14, 2013
at 8:30 a.m.
Steve Conklin
Boarc
7
Meeting Date:
To:
From:
Presented By:
Prepared By:
Subject:
SUMMARY:
AGENDA REPORT
March 14, 2013
Board of Directors
Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Budgeted:
Total Budget:
Cost Estimate:
Funding Source:
Account No:
Job No:
Dept:
Reviewed by Legal
Joe Polimino, Project Engineer CEQA Compliance:
ITEM NO. 8.3
Yes
$1.12 M
$1.5 M
Water Capital
Reserves
101 -2700
2011 -20
Engineering
No
Exempt
Progress Payment No. 1 for the 2012 Waterline Replacement Project, Phase II
Work has begun on construction of the 2012 Waterline Replacement Project, Phase II. The project
consists of replacing old waterlines and appurtenances in seven locations, ranging from 200 to
3,000 feet, with a total replacement length of approximately 6,700 feet.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors approve Progress Payment No. 1 in the net amount of $76,047.50 to
TBU, Inc. for construction of the 2012 Waterline Replacement Project, Phase II, Job No. 2011 -20.
DISCUSSION:
In accordance with the contract documents, TBU Inc. submitted a request for Progress Payment
No. 1, in the amount of $80,050.00 for completed work through February 28, 2013. During this
period, the contractor mobilized on Tamarisk Drive, set up necessary traffic controls and installed
approximately 500 feet of 8 -inch pipe. They also installed one hot tap connection in Mountain View
Ave. The status of the construction contract with TBU Inc. is as follows:
• The current contract is $1,359,300.11 and 370 calendar days starting February 1, 2013.
• If approved, Progress Payment No. 1 is $80,050.00 (5.9% of the total contract amount), less
5% retention of $4,002.50 for a net payment of $76,047.50.
• If approved, total payments to date including retention will be $80,050.00 (5.9% of the total
contract amount).
• As of February 28, 2013, 28 calendar days were used (7.6% of the contract time).
Staff reviewed the contractor's progress payment and recommend approval. A copy of Progress
Payment No. 1 is attached for your reference.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
SR 3 -A: Complete Implementation of Five Year Capital Improvement Plan from FY 2011 -2015 with
adopted amendments
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S):
The Board authorized the President and Secretary to execute a construction agreement in the
amount of $1,359,300.11 for the 2012 Waterline Replacement Project, Phase II with TBU Inc., on
November 21, 2012.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description: Type:
TBU Phase II Waterline Progress Pay Request 1.pdf TBU Inc. Progress Pay Request No. 1 Backup Material
Approved by the Board of Directors of the
Yorba Linda Water District
3/14/2013
PH /RK 5 -0
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
PROGRESS PAY REPORT
PROJECT 2012 Waterline Replacement, Phase II PROGRESS PAY REQUEST NO. 001
LOCATION Yorba Linda, CA PROJECT NO. 201120 PAGE 1 OF 1 PAGES
CONTRACTOR TBU Inc. DATE 2127113
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 1,359,300.11
AUTHORIZED CHANGE ORDERS: $ -
REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 1,359,300.11
PAY ESTIMATE FOR PERIOD February 1, 2013 TO
PREVIOUS THIS MONTH
UE OF WORK COMPLETED $ _
kNGE ORDER WORK COMPLETED $
AL VALUE OF WORK COMPLETED $
S RETENTION 5% $ _
S OTHER DEDUCTIONS Electronic Wire Fees
'EARNED TO DATE
S AMOUNT PREVIOUSLY PAID
ANCE DUE THIS ESTIMATE
ICE TO PROCEED
PLETION TIME
LOVED TIME EXTENSIONS
IL CONTRACT TIME
EXPENDED TO DATE
REMAINING
February 1, 2013
370
CALENDAR DAYS
0
CALENDAR DAYS
370
CALENDAR DAYS
28
CALENDAR DAYS
342
4CALENDAR DAYS
'ebruary 28, 2013
TO DATE
1.00 $ 80,050.00
.00 $ 80,050.00
.50 $ 76,047.50
$ 76,047.50
S _
REQUESTED BY: �_ ` i ` _ DATE:
Charles W a n Vice President, TBU Inc.
RECOMMENDED: DATE: 7/
Joe Polimino, Project Engineer, YLWD
APPROVED BY: DATE:
Steve Conklin, Engineering Manager, YLWD
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
To: Board of Directors
From: Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Presented By: Art Vega, Acting IT Manager
Prepared By: Rick Walkemeyer, SCADA
Administrator
Budgeted:
Total Budget:
Cost Estimate:
Funding Source:
Account No:
Dept:
Reviewed by Legal:
ITEM NO. 8.4
Yes
$31,500
$48,000
Operating Funds
1- 6040 - 0730 -52 &
0780 -20
Information
Technology
Yes
Subject: Request for Sole- Source Professional Services Agreement with RKI
Engineering for SCADA Control Programing Services
SUMMARY:
Attached for the Board of Directors review and consideration is a PSA with RKI Engineering LLC.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors authorize the Acting General Manager to execute the PSA with RKI
Engineering LLC, with a total cost not to exceed $48,000.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
The Public Affairs - Communications - Technology Committee discussed this item at its meeting held
on February 20, 2013 and supports staff's recommendation.
DISCUSSION:
Qualifications: RKI Engineering (Normand Iseri) has over 20 years of experience in SCADA
control systems working with several water agencies. He worked for LA Water & Power for 10 years
and holds a Master's Degree & P.E. in Electrical Engineering.
Norm has been working for the District for some time now. He has an understanding of our
operations and our control system. RKI Engineering has successfully performed many difficult tasks
with the District's SCADA system; for example, the control programming for the temporary tanks
during the Highland Reservoir Replacement Project. RKI is in the final stages of completing the
work on Well 20 and the Highland Booster Station projects. With those jobs completed a new PSA
is requested for the ongoing control- system work as described in "Exhibit A" of the PSA.
General: Norm would be used for ongoing control system jobs lasting only a few days at a time.
The jobs would be done on an hourly -rate basis with the consultant determining the methods to
accomplish the desired outcome.
RKI Engineering has developed tightly integrated programmed interfaces from the field equipment
to the Operator's interface that works well, is consistent and meets the needs of the IT and
Operations departments. The effort made over time to develop this integration would be hard to
duplicate by others with the same operating look and feel with which District staff are accustomed.
The District needs to have programing compatible to the existing systems that inter - operates with
the control system.
Sole Source Justification: The resulting programing work and integration into the control system
must match our current system. It is essential the system works the same at all locations for both
normal operations and during emergencies. The use of sole source is justified in order to match
programs currently in use throughout the District. The underlying computer code must also be the
same for troubleshooting, maintenance, and be consistent for the use of all District personnel.
Cost Information - RKI and other integrators the District has used and their hourly cost:
hlortec Chlorine SHGU Systems $ 150.00
SO Tech $ 125.00
LT & V $ 130.00
Engineering LLC 1$100.00
- Chemical PLC Upgrade
ell 20 Job
iantiago Upgrade
Part of Hidden Hills Reservoir Job)
/arious Jobs - Ongoing
Based on the above, staff recommends approval of a sole source contract with RKI Engineering per
the attached conditions with a total not to exceed $48,000.
ATTACHMENTS:
2012 PSA RKI.docx
Approved by the Board of Directors of the
Yorba Linda Water District
3/14/2013
PH /RK 5 -0
Description:
PSA Agreement
Type:
Backup Material
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
AND
RKI ENGINEERING LLC
PROJECT /SITE: VARIOUS AS REQUIRED DATE: September 13, 2012
THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") is made and entered into
on September 13, 2012, by and between the YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT, a local
public agency, created and operating under authority of Division 12 of the California Water
Code ( "District "), and RKI ENGINEERING LLC ( "Consultant ") (collectively referred to herein
as the "Parties ").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, District is engaging in the Project described in the Scope of Work attached as
Exhibit "A "; and
WHEREAS, District requires a professional consultant with the requisite knowledge, skill,
ability and expertise to provide the necessary services for District during all phases of the Project
to which the specialized services of Consultant are appropriate; and
WHEREAS, Consultant represents to District that it is fully qualified and available to perform
the services for and as requested by District; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and terms and
conditions herein, the Parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1.0. SCOPE OF WORK. The services to be provided by Consultant ( "Work ") are called out
in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. All Work
shall be performed in accordance with the standards customarily provided by an experienced and
competent professional rendering the same or similar services and in such a prompt and
continuous fashion as not to impede or delay the overall completion of the Project.
1.1. Project Manager. Consultant acknowledges that continuous and effective
communication between District, Consultant, and other consultants (as appropriate) is
necessary to the successful completion of the Project. Consultant may also be required to
furnish copies of its work product and communications to others as requested by District.
Consultant's primary contact with District shall be through District's Project Manager
specified on Exhibit "A." District's primary contact with Consultant shall be through the
1of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
Consultant's Representative, designated on Consultant's Cost Proposal attached as
Exhibit "B," and incorporated herein by reference. When requested by District,
Consultant's Representative shall attend Project meetings and will undertake, as a part of
its professional responsibility under this Agreement, to coordinate its activities with all
appropriate individuals and consultants.
1.2. Use of Designs and Drawings. All work product of Consultant, whether created
solely by Consultant or in cooperation with others, is prepared specifically and expressly
for District and all right, title, and interest therein shall be owned by District. District
shall make available to Consultant such information, documents, graphs, studies, etc.,
which District possesses or has access to, which are relevant to Consultant's Work
pursuant to this Agreement.
1.3. Review. Consultant shall furnish District with reasonable opportunities from time
to time to ascertain whether the Work of Consultant are being performed in accordance
with this Agreement. All Work done and materials furnished shall be subject to final
review and approval by District. District's interim review and approval of Consultant's
work product shall not relieve Consultant of its obligations to fully perform this Agreement.
1.4. Commencement of Work. The Project start date is called out on Exhibit "A."
1.5. Time Is Of The Essence. Consultant shall perform all Work with due diligence
as time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. Time limits applicable for
the performance of Consultant's Work are established in Exhibit "A."
2.0 COMPENSATION. As compensation for performance of the Work specified under the
Scope of Work (Exhibit "A "), District shall pay Consultant an amount not to exceed that
contained in Consultant's Cost Proposal (Exhibit "B "). Payment will be made at the rates set
forth in Consultant's Fee Schedule, which is attached as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by
reference. Costs or expenses not designated or identified in the Fee Schedule shall not be
reimbursable unless otherwise provided in this Agreement.
2.1. Invoicing. Consultant shall submit an invoice within ten (10) days after the end
of each month during the term of this Agreement describing the Work performed for
which payment is requested. District shall review and approve all invoices prior to
payment. District shall pay approved invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt.
Consultant agrees to submit additional documentation to support the invoice if requested.
If District does not approve an invoice, District shall send a notice to Consultant setting
forth the reason(s) the invoice was not approved. Consultant may re- invoice District to
cure the defects identified by District. The revised invoice will be treated as a new
submittal. District's determinations regarding verification of Consultant's performance,
accrued reimbursable expenses, if any, and percentage of completion shall be binding and
conclusive. Consultant's time records, invoices, receipts and other documentation
supporting the invoices shall be available for review by District upon reasonable notice
and shall be retained by Consultant for three (3) years after completion of the Project.
2of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
2.2. Extra Services. Before performing any services outside the scope of this
Agreement ( "Extra Services "), Consultant shall submit a written request for approval of
such Extra Services and receive written approval from District. District shall have no
responsibility to compensate Consultant for any Extra Services provided by Consultant
without such prior written approval.
3.0 TERMINATION. District may terminate this Agreement at any time upon ten (10)
days written notice to Consultant. Should District exercise the right to terminate this Agreement,
District shall pay Consultant for any Work satisfactorily completed prior to the date of
termination, based upon Consultant's Fee Schedule. Consultant may terminate this Agreement
upon ten (10) days written notice to District in the event of substantial failure by District to
perform in accordance with the terms hereof through no fault of Consultant; or in the event
District fails to pay Consultant in accordance with the terms in Section 2.0; or if Consultant's
Work hereunder is suspended for a period of time greater than ninety (90) days through no fault
of Consultant.
3.1. Withholding Payment. In the event District has reasonable grounds to believe
Consultant will be materially unable to perform the Work under this Agreement, or if
District becomes aware of a potential claim against Consultant or District arising out of
Consultant's negligence, intentional act or breach of any provision of this Agreement,
including a potential claim against Consultant by District, then District may, to the fullest
extent allowed by law, withhold payment of any amount payable to Consultant that
District determines is related to such inability to complete the Work, negligence,
intentional act, or breach.
4.0. SAFETY. Consultant shall conduct and maintain the Work so as to avoid injury or
damage to any person or property. Consultant shall at all times exercise all necessary safety
precautions appropriate to the nature of the Work and the conditions under which the Work is to
be performed, and be in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local statutory and
regulatory requirements including State of California, Department of Industrial Relations
(Cal /OSHA) regulations. Consultant is responsible for the safety of all Consultant personnel at
all times during performance of its Work, including while on District property.
5.0 INDEMNIFICATION.
5.1. When the law establishes a professional standard of care for the Consultant's
services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant will defend, indemnify and
hold harmless District, its directors, officers, employees, and authorized volunteers from
and against all claims and demands of all persons that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to
the Consultant's negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct in the performance (or
actual or alleged non - performance) of the Work under this Agreement. Consultant shall
defend itself against any and all liabilities, claims, losses, damages, and costs arising out
of or alleged to arise out of Consultant's performance or non - performance of the Work
hereunder, and shall not tender such claims to District nor to its directors, officers,
employees, or authorized volunteers, for defense or indemnity.
3of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
5.2. Other than in the performance of professional services, to the fullest extent
permitted by law, Consultant will defend, indemnify and hold harmless District, its
directors, officers, employees and authorized volunteers from and against all claims and
demands of all persons arising out the performance (or actual or alleged non-
performance) of the Work (including the furnishing of materials), including but not
limited to claims by the Consultant, Consultant's employees and any subconsultants for
damages to persons or property, except for damages resulting from the willful
misconduct, sole negligence or active negligence of District, its directors, officers,
employees, or authorized volunteers.
5.3. Consultant shall defend, at Consultant's own cost, expense and risk, any and all
such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or
instituted against District or any of its directors, officers, employees, or authorized
volunteers, with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to District. Consultant shall pay and
satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against District or any of its
directors, officers, employees, or authorized volunteers, in any and all such aforesaid suits,
actions, or other legal proceedings for which Consultant is obligated to defend, indemnify
and hold harmless District, its directors, officers, employees and authorized volunteers
under this Agreement.
5.4. Consultant shall reimburse District or its directors, officers, employees, and
authorized volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in
connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Consultant's
obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by
District or its directors, officers, employees, or authorized volunteers.
6.0 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Prior to execution of this Agreement, and at any
time thereafter on request, Consultant shall provide executed certificates of insurance and policy
endorsements acceptable to District evidencing the required coverage and limits for each
insurance policy. Each insurance policy shall be primary insurance as respects District, its
affiliated organizations and its and their respective officers, directors, trustees, employees,
agents, consultants, attorneys, successors and assigns (collectively, the "Covered Parties ") for all
liability arising out of the activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant. Any insurance,
pool coverage, or self - insurance maintained by Covered Parties shall be excess of Consultant's
insurance and shall not contribute to it. Except for the Errors and Omissions policy (Section
6.4), all insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this Agreement shall be endorsed
to waive subrogation against the Covered Parties or shall specifically allow Consultant or others
providing insurance evidence in compliance with these requirements to waive their right of
recovery prior to loss. Consultant waives its right of recovery against the Covered Parties for
damages covered by insurance required by this Agreement. Consultant shall require similar
written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subcontractors. The insurer
issuing the Workers' Compensation insurance shall amend its policy to waive all rights of
subrogation against the Covered Parties.
4of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
Each insurance policy shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that coverage shall not be
cancelled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by U.S. Mail (ten (10) days for non-
payment of premium) has been given to District. Unless otherwise approved by District, each
insurance provider shall be authorized to do business in California and have an A.M. Best rating
(or equivalent) of not less than "A- :VII." Consultant shall provide and maintain at all times
during the performance of this Agreement the following insurance: (1) Commercial General
Liability ( "CGL ") insurance; (2) Automobile Liability insurance; (3) Workers' Compensation
and Employer's Liability insurance; and (4) Errors and Omissions ( "E &O ") liability insurance.
6.1. Commercial General Liability. Each CGL policy shall identify Covered Parties
as additional insured, or be endorsed to identify Covered Parties as additional insured
using a form acceptable to the District. Coverage for additional insured shall not be
limited to vicarious liability. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. Each CGL
policy shall have liability coverage limits of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily
injury, personal injury and property damage, and either at least (a) $2,000,000 aggregate
total bodily injury, personal injury and property damage applied separately to the Project;
or at least (b) $5,000,000 general aggregate limit for all operations. CGL insurance and
endorsements shall be kept in force at all times during the performance of this Agreement
and all coverage required herein shall be maintained after the term of this Agreement so
long as such coverage is reasonably available.
6.2. Automobile Liability. Each Automobile Liability policy shall require coverage
for "any auto" and shall have limits of at least $1,000,000 for bodily injury and property
damage, each accident, and shall use ISO policy form "CA 00 O1," including owned,
non -owned and hired autos, or the exact equivalent. If Consultant owns no vehicles, this
requirement may be satisfied by a non -owned auto endorsement to the CGL policy
described above. Automobile Liability insurance and endorsements shall be kept in force
at all times during the performance of this Agreement and all coverage required herein
shall be maintained after the term of this Agreement so long as such coverage is
reasonably available.
6.3. Workers' Compensation/Employer's Liability. Consultant shall cover or
insure the existence of coverage under the applicable laws relating to Workers'
Compensation insurance, all of their employees employed directly by them or through
subconsultants at all times in carrying out the Work contemplated under this Agreement,
in accordance with the "Workers' Compensation and Insurance Act" of the California
Labor Code and any amendatory Acts. Consultant shall provide Employer's Liability
insurance with limits of at least $1,000,000 each accident, $1,000,000 disease policy
limit, and $1,000,000 disease each employee.
By Consultant's signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the
provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code, which requires every employer
to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self - insurance
in accordance with the provisions of that code, and that Consultant will comply with such
provisions before commencing Work under this Agreement. Upon the request of District,
subconsultants must provide certificates of insurance evidencing such coverage.
5of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
6.4. Errors and Omissions. Each E &O policy shall have limits of at least $1,000,000
per claim and $1,000,000 aggregate. E &O insurance and endorsements shall be kept in
force at all times during the performance of this Agreement and all coverage required
herein shall be maintained after the term of this Agreement so long as such coverage is
reasonably available.
7.0. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The Parties agree that the relationship between
District and Consultant is that of an independent contractor and Consultant shall not, in any way,
be considered to be an employee or agent of District. Consultant shall not represent or otherwise
hold out itself or any of its directors, officers, partners, employees, or agents to be an agent or
employee of District. District will not be legally or financially responsible for any damage or
loss that may be sustained by Consultant because of any act, error, or omission of Consultant or
any other consultant, nor shall Consultant make any claim against District arising out of any such
act, error, or omission.
7.1. Taxes and Benefits. Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of all
federal, state and local income tax, social security tax, Workers' Compensation
insurance, state disability insurance, and any other taxes or insurance Consultant, as an
independent contractor, is responsible for paying under federal, state or local law.
Consultant is not eligible to receive Workers' Compensation, medical, indemnity or
retirement benefits through District, including but not limited to enrollment in CalPERS.
Consultant is not eligible to receive overtime, vacation or sick pay.
7.2. Permits and Licenses. Consultant shall procure and maintain all permits, and
licenses and other government- required certification necessary for the performance of its
Work, all at the sole cost of Consultant. None of the items referenced in this section shall
be reimbursable to Consultant under the Agreement.
7.3. Methods. Consultant shall have the sole and absolute discretion in determining
the methods, details and means of performing the Work required by District. Consultant
shall furnish, at its own expense, all labor, materials, equipment, tools and transportation
necessary for the successful completion of the Work to be performed under this
Agreement. District shall not have any right to direct the methods, details and means of
the Work; however, Consultant must receive prior written approval from District before
assigning or changing any assignment of Consultant's project manager or key personnel
and before using any subconsultants or subconsultant agreements for services or
materials under this Agreement and any work authorizations.
8.0. NOTICES. Any notice may be served upon either Party by delivering it in person, or by
depositing it in a U.S. Mail Deposit Box with the postage thereon fully prepaid, and addressed to
the Party at the address set forth below:
District: Steve Conklin, Acting General Manager
Yorba Linda Water District
P.O. Box 309
6of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
Yorba Linda, California 92885 -0309
Consultant: As designated in Exhibit `B."
Any notice given hereunder shall be deemed effective in the case of personal delivery, upon
receipt thereof, or, in the case of mailing, at the moment of deposit in the course of transmission
with the United States Postal Service.
9.0 ASSIGNMENT. Neither Consultant nor District may assign or transfer this Agreement,
or any part thereof, without the prior written consent of the other Party, which shall not be
unreasonably withheld.
10.0 ATTORNEY'S FEES. In the event of any action arising out of, or in connection with,
this Agreement, or the Work to be performed hereunder, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to
have and recover, in addition to damages, injunctive or other relief, its reasonable costs and
expenses, including without limitation, its attorney's fees.
11.0. BINDING ARBITRATION. Within thirty (30) days after service of a civil action on
either Party arising out of, or in connection with, this Agreement, either Party may elect to
submit the action to binding arbitration before the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service
( "JAMS "), located in Orange County. The Parties agree that upon an election to arbitrate, any
civil action filed will be stayed until arbitration proceedings have concluded. Upon submission
of the matter to JAMS, the submitting Party shall obtain from JAMS a list of three (3) randomly
selected arbitrators and serve said list upon the other Party. In the event that there are more than
two parties to the action, the number of arbitrators randomly selected and included in the list
shall be increased by two for each additional party involved. Upon service of the randomly
selected list of arbitrators, each party shall have twenty (20) days to eliminate two arbitrators
from the list and return it to JAMS, with the selected arbitrator being the remaining name on the
list. Should more than one name remain on the list, JAMS will randomly select the arbitrator
from the names remaining on the list. Arbitration shall be scheduled for hearing on the merits no
later than six (6) months after the date the arbitrator is selected. All parties shall be permitted to
conduct discovery as provided by the current rules of the California Code of Civil Procedure. All
costs of JAMS or of the arbitrator for Work shall be divided equally among the Parties, unless
otherwise ordered by the arbitrator. In an arbitration to resolve a dispute under this provision, the
arbitrator's award shall be supported by law and substantial evidence.
12.0 FORCE MAJEURE. Upon written notice by the owing Party, the respective duties and
obligations of the Parties hereunder (except District's obligation to pay Consultant such sums as
may become due from time to time for Work rendered by it) shall be suspended while and so
long as performance thereof is prevented or impeded by strikes, disturbances, riots, fire,
governmental action, war acts, acts of God, or any other cause similar or dissimilar to the
foregoing which are beyond the reasonable control of the Party from whom the affected
performance was due.
7of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
[INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
8of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
13.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, and the attached Exhibits, represent the
entire and integrated agreement between District and Consultant and supersedes all prior
negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be
amended only by written instrument signed by both District and Consultant.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be entered into as
of the day and year written above.
District:
Yorba Linda Water District
wo
Steve Conklin, Acting General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kidman Law LLP
By:
Arthur G. Kidman, General Counsel
Attachments: Exhibit A: Scope of Work
Exhibit B: Cost Proposal for Work
Exhibit C: Fee Schedule
9of12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
Consultant:
LE
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
FXHIRIT A
SCOPE OF WORK/SERVICES
RKI Engineering will provide the following services for Yorba Linda Water District (YLWD):
A. Provide programming services for the programmable logic controllers (PLC). The PLCs will
monitor and control the YLWD Reservoirs, Booster Pump Stations, Pressure Reducing
Stations, and other facilities.
B. Provide programming services for the Local Operator Interface Terminal to provide local
control of the various YLWD facilities.
C. Provide services to configuration the SCADA system to monitor and control the various
YLWD facilities implementing control system strategies as directed by the District.
D. Provide services to develop and update the SCADA Reports.
E. Provide services to update the alarm notification system for alerting the Operators of critical
SCADA alarms.
F. Provide assistance in troubleshooting the SCADA communication and other SCADA related
problems.
G. Provide other services related to the update and maintenance of the YLWD SCADA system.
These services are ongoing work as requested by the District.
The Project Manager for this work is;
Rick Walkemeyer
SCADA Administrator
1717 E. Miraloma Ave.
Placentia, CA 92870
(714) 701 -3086 P
(714) 448 -0149 C
rwalk2ylwd. com
10 of 12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
EXHIBIT B
COST PROPOSAL FOR WORK
As shown in Exhibit C is billed on an hourly bases as generally directed by the District.
Total costs per fiscal year is Not to Exceed $48,000.00.
Primary Contractor Contact shall be;
Norman S. Iseri, P.E.
2029 Verdugo Blvd #109
Montrose, CA 91020 -1626
Cell Phone - (818)317 -3003
rki- engra- earthlink.net
11 of 12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
VENDOR
CONTRACT #
EXHIBIT C
RKI Engineering LLC
FEE SCHEDULE
As of July 1, 2012
SCADA Engineering Rate: ........................................ $100.00 per hour
SCHEDULE OF CHARGES
;e.
o Travel Time
Rate
o Weekdays up to 8 hrs /day between 7:00 am & 9:00 Rate
Pm
o Weekdays in excess of 8 hrs /day Service & 1.5 times Rate
nocturnal time between 9 p.m. & 7a.m.
o Saturdays, Sundays, Holiday.
B: EXPENCES
1.5 times Rate
o Equipment and Expenses will be invoiced at cost plus 15% handling fee.
12 of 12
YLWD Professional Services Agreement - 07/15/12
Meeting Date:
To:
From:
Presented By:
Prepared By:
Subject:
SUMMARY:
AGENDA REPORT
March 14, 2013
Board of Directors
Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Stephen Parker, Finance Dept:
Manager
Delia Lugo, Senior Accountant
ITEM NO. 8.5
Finance
Unaudited Financial Statements for the Period Ending December 31, 2013.
Presented are the Unaudited Financial Statements for the Period Ending December 31, 2012 for the
District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors receive and file the Unaudited Financial Statements for the Period
Ending December 31, 2012.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
The Finance - Accounting Committee discussed this item at is meeting held February 25, 2013 and
supports staff's recommendation.
DISCUSSION:
For the period ending December 31, 2012, staff is presenting unaudited statements in the CAFR
format. Staff has included the traditional budget to actual statements for the District as a whole, as
well as the individual water and sewer funds.
Water Operating Revenue, as presented, is 56.5% of annual budget, which is slightly higher than
the historical trend of 54.9% for the first half of the fiscal year. Other Operating Revenue 67.3% of
annual budget. Sewer Other Operating Revenue, as presented, is 63.5% of annual budget.
Variable Water Costs are 59.7% of budget, due to higher than budgeted water consumption as well
as purchasing more expensive import water prior to the January 1st rate increase. Salary Related
Expenses are 48.4% of budget due to unfilled positions. Supplies & Services are 50.4% of budget
half way through the fiscal year.
With the issuance of the 2008 Certificates of Participation (COP's) and the Refunding Revenue
Bonds, Series 2012A the District covenanted "... to fix, prescribe and collect rates and charges for
Water Service which will be at least sufficient to yield during each Fiscal Year, Net Revenues equal
to 110% of the Debt Service for such Fiscal Year."
To confirm the covenant is upheld, a calculation is made quarterly and presented to the Finance -
accounting Committee and received and filed by the Board of Directors. Accordingly, the unaudited
debt service ratio through December 2012 is shown in the calculation as 200 %. This shows strong
financial health for the District as it pertains to the debt service ratio.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
FR 1 -G: Continue to Improve Communications of the Districts Financial Information to the Board of
Directors, Member Agencies, Management, and the Financial Community
ATTACHMENTS:
FY 2013 2nd Qtr Consolidated Balance Sheet.xlsx
2013 Qtr 2 Consolidated Stmt.xlsx
2013 Qtr 2 Water Stmt.xlsx
2013 Qtr 2 Sewer Stmt.xlsx
2013 Qtr 2 Debt Service Calc.xlsx
Approved by the Board of Directors of the
Yorba Linda Water District
3/14/2013
PH /RK 5 -0
Description:
Type:
FY 2013 2nd Qtr Consolidated Balance Sheet
Backup Material
FY 2013 2nd Qtr Combined Statement
Backup Material
Fy 2013 2nd Qtr Water Statement
Backup Material
Fy 2013 2nd Qtr Sewer Statement
Backup Material
FY 2013 2nd Qtr Debt Service Ratio Calculation
Backup Material
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
UNAUDITED COMBINING SCHEDULE OF NET ASSETS
For the Period Ended December 31, 2012
(With December 31, 2011 for comparison only)
ASSETS
December 2012
December 2011
CURRENT ASSETS:
176,295
21,081
Cash and cash equivalents
$ 16,583,608
$ 27,028,937
Investment
2,151,167
2,156,687
Accounts receivable - water and sewer services
2,104,373
2,819,987
Accounts receivable - property taxes
102,192
102,192
Accrued interest receivable
9,582
23,880
Prepaid expenses & other deposits
1,090,402
303,731
Inventory
253,980
239,289
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS
22,295,304
32,674,703
NONCURRENT ASSETS
Bond issuance costs
710,839
740,765
Other post - employment benefit (OPEB) asset
176,295
21,081
Capital assets:
-
-
Non - depreciable
13,769,615
10,164,560
Depreciable, net of accumulated depreciation
187,397,599
190,292,985
TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS
202,054,348
201,219,391
TOTAL ASSETS
224,349,652
233,894,094
LIABILITIES
$ 163,881,058
$ 170,702,097
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
Accounts payable
1,866,152
4,278,869
Accrued expenses
1,271,550
207,905
Accrued interest payable
443,814
474,418
Certificates of Participation - current portion
965,000
925,000
Compensated absences
233,464
259,177
Customer and construction deposits
252,005
255,201
Deferred revenue
413,743
419,959
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES
5,445,728
6,820,529
LONG -TERM LIABILITIES (LESS CURRENT PORTION)
Deferred annexation revenue
13,905,927
14,230,314
Compensated absences
739,304
777,531
Other post - employment benefit (OPEB) liability
-
-
Certificates of Participation
40,377,635
41,363,623
TOTAL LONG TERM LIABILITIES (LESS
CURRENT PORTION)
55,022,866
56,371,468
TOTAL LIABILITIES
60,468,594
63,191,997
NET ASSETS:
$ 163,881,058
$ 170,702,097
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
UNAUDITED COMBINING SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENSES
AND CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
For the Period Ended December 31, 2012
(With fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 for comparison only)
OPERATING REVENUES:
Water sales
Sewer revenues
Other operating revenues
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES
OPERATING EXPENSES
Variable water costs
Personnel services
Supplies and services
Depreciation and amortization
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
OPERATING INCOME /(LOSS)
NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES):
Property taxes
Investment income
Interest expense
Other nonoperating revenues
Other nonoperating expenses
TOTAL NONOPERATING REVENUES /EXPENSES
NET INCOME /(LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAL
CONTRIBUTIONS
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
December 2012 December 2011
$ 14,084,755 $ 13,565,446
875,365
431,149
15,391,269
7,727,804
3,707,029
1,948,769
3,357,252
16,740,854
(1,349,585)
682,982
70,458
(912,001)
364,119
(28,434)
177,124
871,492
542,863
14,979,801
7,183,755
3,611,485
1,787,705
3,267,301
15,850,246
(870,445)
677,509
149,124
(949,017)
484,018
(86,193)
275,441
(1,172,461) (595,004)
11,295 17,061,426
(1,161,166) 16,466,422
NET ASSETS -
BEGINNING OF YEAR
165,042,224
154,235,675
NET ASSETS -
FOR PERIOD END DECEMBER 31, 2012
$ 163,881,058
$ 170,702,097
Yorba Linda Water District
Summary Financial Report
Water & Sewer Funds
For The Period Ending December 31, 2012
Revenue (Operating):
Water Revenue (Residential)
Water Revenue (Commercial & Fire Det.)
Water Revenue (Landscape /Irrigation)
Water Revenue (Service Charge)
Sewer Charge Revenue
Locke Ranch Assessments
Other Operating Revenue
Total Operating Revenue:
Revenue (Non- Operating)
Original
YTD
YTD
YTD
Budget
Actual
Under(Over)
% of
FY 2013
FY 2013
Budget
Budget
$15,405,197
$8,538,712
$6,866,485
55.43%
1,822,665
1,073,156
749,509
58.88%
4,035,121
2,629,647
1,405,474
65.17%
3,755,191
1,843,240
1,911,951
49.09%
1,548,682
764,605
784,077
49.37%
198,433
110,760
87,673
55.82%
643,737
431,149
212,588
66.98%
27,409,026
15,391,269
12,017,757
56.15%
Interest
170,000
70,458
99,542
41.45%
Property Tax
1,244,320
682,982
561,338
54.89%
Other Non - Operating Revenue
494,437
364,119
130,318
73.64%
Total Non - Operating Revenue:
1,908,757
1,117,559
791,198
58.55%
Total Revenue
29,317,783
16,508,828
12,808,955
56.31%
Expenses (Operating)
Variable Water Costs (G.W., Import & Power)
12,953,024
7,727,804
5,225,220 59.66%
Salary Related Expenses
7,648,891
3,707,029
3,941,862 48.46%
Supplies & Services
3,863,102
1,948,769
1,914,333 50.45%
Total Operating Expenses
24,465,017
13,383,602
11,081,415 54.71%
Expenses (Non- Operating)
Interest on Long Term Debt
2,011,395
912,001
1,099,394
45.34%
Other Expense
124,210
28,434
95,776
22.89%
Total Non - Operating Expenses:
2,135,605
940,435
1,195,170
44.04%
Total Expenses
26,600,622
14,324,037
12,276,585
53.85%
Net Income (Loss) Before Special Item
2,717,161
2,184,791
532,370
80.41%
Contributed Capital
-
11,295
11,295
0.00%
Net Income (Loss) Before Depreciation
2,717,161
2,196,086
543,665
80.82%
Depreciation & Amortization
6,602,339
3,357,252
3,245,087
50.85%
Total Net Income (Loss)
($3,885,178)
($1,161,166)
($2,724,012)
29.89%
Yorba Linda Water District
Water Fund
For The Period Ending December 31, 2012
YTD YTD YTD
Budget Actual Under(Over) % of
FY 2013 FY 2013 Budget Budget
Revenue (Operating)
Water Revenue (Residential)
$15,405,197
$8,538,712
$6,866,485
55.43%
Water Revenue (Commercial & Fire Det.)
1,822,665
1,073,156
749,509
58.88%
Water Revenue (Landscape /Irrigation)
4,035,121
2,629,647
1,405,474
65.17%
Water Revenue (Service Charge)
3,755,191
1,843,240
1,911,951
49.09%
Other Operating Revenue
585,929
394,444
191,485
67.32%
Total Operating Revenue:
25,604,103
14,479,199
11,124,904
56.55%
Revenue (Non- Operating):
Interest
Property Tax
Other Non - Operating Revenue
Total Non - Operating Revenue:
Total Revenue
Expenses (Operating):
Variable Water Costs (G.W., Import & Power)
Salary Related Expenses
Supplies & Services:
Communications
Contractual Services
Data Processing
Dues & Memberships
Fees & Permits
Board Election
Insurance
Materials
District Activities, Emp Recognition
Maintenance
Non - Capital Equipment
Office Expense
Professional Services
Training
Travel & Conferences
Uncollectible Accounts
Utilities
Vehicle Equipment
Supplies & Services Sub -Total
Total Operating Expenses
Expenses (Non- Operating):
Interest on Long Term Debt
Other Expense
Total Non - Operating Expenses:
Total Expenses
150,000
60,915
89,085 40.61%
1,244,320
682,982
561,338 54.89%
490,262
359,700
130,562 73.37%
1,884,582
1,103,597
780,985 58.56%
27,488,685 15,582,796 11,905,889 56.69%
12,953,024
7,727,804
5,225,220
59.66%
6,741,403
3,286,579
3,454,824
48.75%
280,232
80,797
199,435
28.83%
455,041
218,024
237,017
47.91%
125,866
58,223
67,643
46.26%
57,609
53,739
3,870
93.28%
139,165
71,894
67,271
51.66%
47,988
-
47,988
0.00%
259,656
119,157
140,499
45.89%
455,226
287,057
168,169
63.06%
17,298
9,234
8,064
53.38%
323,820
154,929
168,891
47.84%
93,507
58,414
35,093
62.47%
37,702
21,644
16,058
57.41%
749,878
429,577
320,301
57.29%
41,353
10,566
30,787
25.55%
40,833
10,033
30,800
24.57%
36,270
(478)
36,748
-1.32%
79,050
46,094
32,956
58.31%
282,400
140,573
141,827
49.78%
3,522,893
1,769,477
1,753,416
50.23%
23,217,320 12,783,860 10,433,460 55.06%
2,009,777 912,001 1,097,776 45.38%
118,210 28,434 89,776 24.05%
2,127,987 940,435 1,187,552 44.19%
25,345,307 13,724,295 11,621,012 54.15%
Net Income (Loss) Before Capital Contributions
2,143,378 1,858,501
284,877
86.71%
Capital Contributions
- 11,295
11,295
0.00%
Net Income (Loss) Before Depreciation
2,143,378 1,869,796
296,172
87.24%
Depreciation &Amortization 5,332,175 2,716,907 2,615,268 50.95%
Total Net Income (Loss) ($3,188,797) ($847,111) ($2,341,686) 26.57%
Yorba Linda Water District
Sewer Fund
For The Period Ending December 31, 2012
Expenses (Operating)
Salary Related Expenses
Supplies & Services:
Communications
Contractual Services
Data Processing
Dues & Memberships
Fees & Permits
Board Election
Insurance
Materials
District Activities, Emp Recognition
Maintenance
Non - Capital Equipment
Office Expense
Professional Services
Training
Travel & Conferences
Uncollectible Accounts
Utilities
Vehicle Equipment
Supplies & Services Sub -Total
Total Operating Expenses
Expenses (Non- Operating):
Interest Expense
Other Expense
Total Non - Operating Expenses:
Total Expenses
Net Income (Loss) Before Depreciation
Depreciation & Amortization
Total Net Income (Loss)
907,488
420,450
YTD
YTD
YTD
5,173
Budget
Actual
Under(Over)
% of
18,815
FY 2013
FY 2013
Budget
Budget
Revenue (Operating):
4,583
3,915
668
85.42%
Sewer Charge Revenue
$1,548,682
$764,605
$784,077
49.37%
Locke Ranch Assessments
198,433
110,760
87,673
55.82%
Other Operating Revenue
57,808
36,705
21,103
63.49%
Total Operating Revenue:
1,804,923
912,070
892,853
50.53%
Revenue (Non- Operating):
66,737
4,913
93.14%
17,044
Interest
20,000
9,543
10,457
47.72%
Other Non - Operating Revenue
4,175
4,419
(244)
105.84%
Total Non - Operating Revenue:
24,175
13,962
10,213
57.75%
Total Revenue
1,829,098
926,032
903,066
50.63%
Expenses (Operating)
Salary Related Expenses
Supplies & Services:
Communications
Contractual Services
Data Processing
Dues & Memberships
Fees & Permits
Board Election
Insurance
Materials
District Activities, Emp Recognition
Maintenance
Non - Capital Equipment
Office Expense
Professional Services
Training
Travel & Conferences
Uncollectible Accounts
Utilities
Vehicle Equipment
Supplies & Services Sub -Total
Total Operating Expenses
Expenses (Non- Operating):
Interest Expense
Other Expense
Total Non - Operating Expenses:
Total Expenses
Net Income (Loss) Before Depreciation
Depreciation & Amortization
Total Net Income (Loss)
907,488
420,450
487,038
46.33%
23,018
5,173
17,845
22.47%
34,280
15,465
18,815
45.11%
9,474
2,824
6,650
29.81%
4,583
3,915
668
85.42%
12,155
8,434
3,721
69.39%
3,612
-
3,612
0.00%
19,544
4,504
15,040
23.05%
34,799
9,445
25,354
27.14%
1,302
693
609
53.23%
71,650
66,737
4,913
93.14%
17,044
7,229
9,815
42.41%
2,823
1,629
1,194
57.70%
37,582
16,940
20,642
45.07%
4,747
1,932
2,815
40.70%
3,418
716
2,702
20.95%
2,730
(45)
2,775
-1.65%
5,950
3,733
2,217
62.74%
51,499
29,968
21,531
58.19%
340,209
179,292
160,917
52.70%
1,247,697 599,742 647,955 48.07%
1,618 - 1,618 0.00%
6,000 - 6,000 0.00%
7,618 - 7,618 0.00%
1,255,315 599,742 655,573 47.78%
573,783 326,290 247,493 56.87%
1,270,164 640,345 629,819 50.41%
($696,381) ($314,055) ($382,326) 45.10%
Yorba Linda Water District
Debt Service Ratio Calculation
For The Period Ending December 31, 2012
Actual Debt Service
Revenue (Operating)
Water Revenue (Residential)
$8,538,712
$8,538,712
Water Revenue (Commercial & Fire Det.)
1,073,156
1,073,156
Water Revenue (Landscape /Irrigation)
2,629,647
2,629,647
Water Revenue (Service Charge)
1,843,240
1,843,240
Other Operating Revenue
394,444
394,444
Total Operating Revenue:
14,479,199
14,479,199
Revenue (Non- Operating)
Interest
60,915
60,915
Property Tax
682,982
682,982
Other Non - Operating Revenue
359,700
359,700
Total Non - Operating Revenue:
1,103,597
1,103,597
Total Revenue
15,582,796
15,582,796
Expenses (Operating):
Variable Water Costs (G.W., Import & Power)
7,727,804
7,727,804
Salary Related Expenses
3,286,579
3,286,579
Supplies & Services:
Communications
80,797
Contractual Services
218,024
Data Processing
58,223
Dues & Memberships
53,739
Fees & Permits
71,894
Board Election
-
Insurance
119,157
Materials
287,057
District Activities, Emp Recognition
9,234
Maintenance
154,929
Non - Capital Equipment
58,414
Office Expense
21,644
Professional Services
429,577
Training
10,566
Travel & Conferences
10,033
Uncollectible Accounts
(478)
Utilities
46,094
Vehicle Equipment
140,573
Supplies & Services Sub -Total
1,769,477
1,769,477
Total Operating Expenses
12,783,860
12,783,860
Expenses (Non- Operating):
Interest on Long Term Debt
912,001
Other Expense
28,434
28,434
Total Non - Operating Expenses:
940,435.00
28,434
Total Expenses
13,724,295
12,812,294
Net Income (Loss) Before Capital Contributions
1,858,501
2,770,502
Capital Contributions
11,295
Net Income (Loss) Before Depreciation
1,869,796
2,770,502
Depreciation & Amortization
2,716,907
Total Net Income (Loss)
($847,111)
$2,770,502
DEBT SERVICE RATION CALCULATION
NET REVENUES
2,770,502
DEBT SERVICE
1,383,436
%
200%
Meeting Date:
To:
From:
Presented By:
Prepared By:
Subject:
SUMMARY:
AGENDA REPORT
March 14, 2013
Board of Directors
Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Northeast Area Planning Study
Budgeted:
Total Budget:
Cost Estimate:
Job No:
Dept:
ITEM NO. 9.1
Yes
$120,000
$102,883
2010 -11 B
Engineering
The Northeast Area Planning Study has been completed. Staff will provide a report to the Board,
summarizing the elements of the Study, including findings and recommendations. A copy of the
Executive Summary of the Study is attached. Due to the size of the complete document, we are
unable to attach it to this agenda report. Please contact the District's Executive Secretary, Annie
Alexander, for a copy of the document.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors receive and file the Northeast Area Planning Study.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
A final draft version of the Study was reviewed with the Planning- Engineering- Operations
Committee at its meeting on March 7, 2013.
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of the Northeast Area Planning Study is to evaluate the capacity of the District's
existing water distribution system facilities and to provide recommendations for new infrastructure
required to provide water under operational conditions for future demands. Included within the
additional future demands are the proposed Esperanza Hills Estates and Sage developments.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
SR 3 -13: Continue Planning for Long Term Capital Improvements and Replacements into the future
ATTACHMENTS:
Description:
Type:
Executive Summary from NEAPS Final Report.pdf Executive Summary Backup Material
NE Area Planning Study Report - Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to
Replacement Page E- 10.pdf the Meeting Backup Material
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to
Board Presentation NEAPS 03- 14- 2013.pdf the Meeting Backup Material
Approved by the Board of Directors of the
Yorba Linda Water District
3/14/2013
MB /RC 5 -0
Approved as revised.
Northeast Area Planning Study
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of the Northeast Area Planning Study is to evaluate the capacity of existing
distribution system facilities and size new infrastructure required to provide water under
anticipated operational conditions for future demands. The proposed Esperanza Hills
Estates (EHE) and Sage (SG) developments are projected to add 542 acre -feet per year
(afy) to the District's annual demands, resulting in an overall system annual demand of
25,388 afy, which equates to a 2 percent demand increase. The District's current maximum
day demand is estimated to increase by 0.7 million gallons per day (mgd) to 33.6 mgd.
Storage Evaluation
Due to topology, the proposed EHE and SG developments will need to be divided into two
pressure zones, with hydraulic grade lines at 1,200 feet above mean sea level (ft -msl) and
1,390 ft -msl. Based on updated storage criteria, these developments would require
approximately 1.3 million gallons (MG) of storage. After evaluation of the following two
alternatives, it is recommended that storage be accommodated as discussed in Option 1
below:
Option 1. The entire 1.3 MG storage would be located within both development areas.
Each zone would need 0.18 MG of dedicated fire flow storage (0.36 MG), unless
greater fire flow requirements are established by the Orange County Fire
Authority. The remaining 0.94 MG storage would need to be prorated by the
demands of each pressure zone. As detailed in Section 3.4.1, additional offsite
improvements will be required.
Option 2. Utilizing the Hidden Hills Reservoir for additional storage is not a viable option as
discussed in detail in Section 3.4.2.
Pump Station Evaluation
This project focused on the sizing of the District's Fairmont Pump Station (FPS) as the FPS
is critical to serve the new developments and is planned for replacement due to aging. The
FPS currently has a capacity of about 2,100 gallons per minute (gpm), and can be manually
operated to alternate its suction and discharge pressure zones. Sizing of the proposed FPS
was developed to include a variety of operating conditions to achieve a range of
groundwater Basin Pumping Percentages (BPP). Twelve different operating scenarios for
groundwater supplies ranging from 0 to 100 percent were developed. These scenarios were
grouped in three categories based on the different suction and discharge conditions as
listed in Section 4.5.1.
March 2013 ES -1
pw://Carollo/ Documents / Client /CANLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
To accommodate these wide variety of pumping scenarios, four groups of pump units are
required as summarized in Table ES.1. All seven pump units are recommended to be
variable frequency drives (VFDs), but could be configured as constant speed pumps with
the addition of one unit as described in Section 4.5.1.
In addition to the FPS improvements, Hidden Hills PS and Santiago PS would each need
one additional pump unit if storage for the new development is partially provided from
Hidden Hills Reservoir and the development is served from Zone 1,000 -2 (Santiago
Reservoir) or Zone 1,390 (Hidden Hills Reservoir). Details are provided in Section 4.5.2.
Table ES.1 Fairmont PS Sizing
Design
To
From
TDH
Capacity(')
Units Zone
Zone
(ft)
(gpm)
Notes
1 920
675
237
800
No standby unit included since OC89
provides reliability.
2 - 3 1,000 -1
675/780 -3
388
2,800
1 +1 configuration
4 - 6 780 -3
675
120
5,500
2 +1 configuration
No standby unit included since not
7 1,000 -1
920
212
2,800
assumed to be a typical operating
condition.
Note:
1. Rounded up to nearest 100
gpm.
It is recommended that the District include either a portable diesel generator or on -site
natural gas powered backup generator at FPS and that the PS include pressure reducing
valves to supply Zone 675 from Zone 780 -3 and supply Zone 920 from Zone 1,000 -1 to
increase operational flexibility.
Pipeline Evaluation
Based on hydraulic model analysis, two pipelines in the vicinity of FPS were also identified
as deficient, resulting in high headloss and additional pumping head requirements for the
new PS. To minimize the pump unit sizing and energy cost, it is recommended to increase
the capacity of the following pipelines with large diameter pipeline replacements or parallel
pipelines:
The 12 -inch diameter Zone 1,000 -1 pipeline extending 3,500 feet along Fairmont
Boulevard between FPS and Forest Avenue. This pipeline should be replaced by a
16 -inch diameter pipeline or paralleled with a 12 -inch diameter pipeline.
The 12 -inch diameter Zone 780 -3 pipeline extending 670 feet along Fairmont
Boulevard from Bastanchury Road onto the District's FPS. Adding a dedicated
ES -2 March 2013
pw://Carollo/ Documents / Client /CANLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
pipeline to the Bryant Cross Feeder south of Bastanchury Road would require about
800 feet of 24 -inch diameter pipeline.
Water Quality
The key steps the District can implement to limit nitrification and residual loss from
occurring are reducing water age and improving mixing within the District's reservoirs. It is
recommended that the District continue to follow its reservoir cycling practices, following the
guidelines recommended in the nitrification study.
For new reservoirs, it is recommended that the District include within the design systems to
increase cycling within the reservoirs, consisting of separate inlet and outlets (using multiple
diffused inlets where possible), samplers to provide real -time automated monitoring of
disinfection residual, and a mixing device within the reservoir. A reservoir management
system could provide this functionality in a single system along with boosting disinfection
residual.
For the Fairmont PS, it is recommended that the District incorporate a disinfection station
into the design that can inject free chlorine. If this emergency approach is not sufficient, the
next recommended step would be to install reservoir management systems (mixers,
analyzers, and potentially injection of chloramines).
Other Recommendations
This Northeast Area Planning Study is primarily limited to the system evaluation
surrounding the new Esperanza Hills /Sage developments and the FPS. It is recommended
that a comprehensive system evaluation be conducted for all pump stations and the entire
distribution system under the variety of operating scenarios. In addition, it is recommended
that the updated hydraulic model be used to optimize the system operational controls of the
system for the most common BPP target scenarios to make system operations more
consistent year- around.
March 2013 ES -3
pw://Carollo/ Documents / Client /CANLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
REVISED ITEM NO. 9.1.
District strives to maintain separation of these sources by pressure zone. However, when
these two disinfectant types mix, the reaction of free chlorine with combined chlorine can
result under certain conditions in localized break -point chlorination. During break -point
chlorination, excess free chlorine in chloraminated water consumes the available ammonia
so that the remaining disinfectant residual exists as free chlorine. As the free chlorine to
ammonia - nitrogen ratio increases, the combined chlorine breaks down to nitrogen gas,
resulting in loss of residual, unless excess free chlorine is applied. Break -point chlorination
will impact and complicate the free chlorine residual measurements during sampling. The
chloraminated water is not detectable as free chlorine, but can be measured as part of the
total chlorine samples (i.e. total chlorine residual minus free chlorine residual = chloramines
residual).
Free chlorine is a strong oxidant, readily reacting with both organics and inorganics, leading
to a gradual decay of free chlorine due to different reactivities of a variety of parameters.
Within a water distribution system, the half -life of free chlorine can range from several hours
to several days. Unlike chloramines, free chlorine reaction with natural organic matter can
lead to trace amounts of hundreds of disinfection byproducts. Since modeling the individual
reactions with organic matter would not be feasible, it is important to find modeling
parameters that can reflect changes in the various organic content, such as total organic
carbon (TOC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), and UV -254 (a standard measure of
absorbance of ultraviolet light). In addition, free chlorine also reacts with inorganics
including iron, manganese, and ammonia. As a part of this study, attempts were made to
include wall reactions between free chlorine and inorganics commonly occurring in pipeline
material; however, given the number of pipe segments within the District's distribution
system model, runtimes were found to be unfeasibly long.
Chloramines are less reactive than free chlorine, but, separate from reactions with organics
and inorganics, tend to be more unstable due to autodecom position and reaction with
inorganics and natural organic matter. Chloramine decay was modeled in this study based
on the model of chloramine decomposition included in AWWARF's Optimizing Chloramine
Treatment. This model (Valentine, Ozekin, and Vikesland, 1998) was intended to model
autodecom position of chloramines in a distribution system rather than chlorine and
chloramines interactions, and includes thirteen rate coefficients. Using this model for
chlorine and chloramine interaction would require establishing the rate coefficients for the
mixed system through similar experimental sampling as used to develop the model. Since
the District strives to maintain separation of water by supply source in different pressure
zones, and since the intended functionality for this water quality calibration is prediction of
disinfectant residual in the District's water distribution system, free chlorine was modeled as
a separate constituent, modeled using first -order decay.
In addition, the total chlorine samples were collected at different times during the day, under
different hydraulic conditions, thus "following the water" in the distribution system from the
source is challenging. The EPS calibration of the model must give a good representation of
E -10 March 2013
pw:HCaroI to /Documents /Client /CANLVV D/9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration. docx
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
Purpose of Study
• Update & Calibrate GIS -Based Hydraulic Model
• Evaluate Storage Criteria
• Identify Facility Needs for Potential Residential
Developments in northeast area
• Identify Fairmont BPS Improvements
• Perform Water Quality Evaluation
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
1
Storage Evaluation
• Current Storage Criteria:
— Operational: 100% Max Day Demand (MDD)
— Fire Flow: 1,500 GPM per Residential Zone
— Emergency: 300 -700% Average Day Demand
• Recommended Storage Criteria:
— Operational: 30% MDD
— Fire Flow: 1,500 GPM per Residential Zone
— Emergency: 100% MDD
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
2
Rasarv°!r
Legend
�
® Tanks
Uaa 1, 3
— Pipes by $one
�aay an
Reservoir
Pan els
Planned Developments
rs ', (% - $
Re° FSperanZa HIIIS
Esp- -Hils Esatequh
�wlA° 4 Estates
Sage
Gash° R sSaddle
920 ye 6
Shapell & Toll Brothers, Inc.
w
a 1 •` ''f -rl w b Ridge Way
— Sage Rape
E p g� 1,.06&— Ow Mva
Shapell Remrra
Farm r
Raaary rob Development -_/ o• ,
& Toll Brothers, Inc4 @0en
Esperanza Hills
aa9e
Estate
d Edlsop Rd
s 780 -3 fi samagu
o
E - �a
� '� s(onezavan or Reservoir �
rr
w
V 80-
�
b ✓ m /' 0
ag a
6
N.
d tl d m m k k w _ a• c, g F
� o x
r�
0 1.000 2,000 3,000
Feet
A
J 8 Ak mom'
Rob "'_ m eo
Figure 1
Development Location
e
Merch2013
Northeast Area Planning Stud
u m •g e• 4 e
Yorba Linda Water District
Storage Evaluation
• Current Storage Criteria:
— Operational: 100% Max Day Demand (MDD)
— Fire Flow: 1,500 GPM per Residential Zone
— Emergency: 300 -700% Average Day Demand
• Recommended Storage Criteria:
— Operational: 30% MDD
— Fire Flow: 1,500 GPM per Residential Zone
— Emergency: 100% MDD
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
2
Storage Evaluation (Continued)
Oii��l
• Current Storage Criteria = 85.5 MG
• Recommended NEAPS Storage = 49.5 MG
• Existing Actual Storage = 58.7 MG
Improved System Reliability = Reduced
Storage Requirements
• Completed Hidden Hills Reservoir
• Completed Highland BPS
• Added Chlorine Booster Capabilities
• Upgraded Distribution System
• Added 3 Portable Booster Pumps
• Added Portable Electrical Generator Unit
• Added New Well
• MWD Increased Reliability at Diemer
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
3
Improvements for NEA Developments
• Two New Onsite Reservoirs
• Two Booster Pump Stations
• Onsite Water and Sewerlines
• Upgrades to Fairmont BPS
• Additional Offsite Improvements (TBD)
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
4
Resarv°!r
Legend
® Tent:s
Ua>a 7, 3
caey °n
— Pipes by zo
ne Panels
Reservoir
Planned Developments
I„
I �n
wed. / , ry - a ti RidS?nRaM1 a Esperanza Hills
a "
Esperanza Hills Estates
sage
0 Estates
Shapell B Toll Brothers, Inc.
m 3 b Ridge Way
a'
s '° .,-, arg Sege Rage
Shapell E3 °mac 9voW 3� 10
-. ...
az�ae,>.�� n Development ',�J
- -- - -- &Toll Brothers. Inc - cq �'0en
° War Esperanza Hills
Sage
Estat�c,R a
780-3 o ed,
53R7+a90
� � 5ronahaven Dr R
_ r ✓ rrP trGir
,
I
s
O—
�
0ti -pm
py m,a tea, a•m� � a °r,
s'
0 1,000 2.000 3,000
a P•1 .g ° i
`s•6� s a
o
Feet
ryes m m
Figure 1
Development Location
Merh2013
k
Northeast Area Plang Sibd
ninDildo
e •� e• e 6 ��"
Yorba Linda Water
d a d
�aX I ►�
C
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
4
Fairmont BPS Improvements
• Seven New Booster Pumps
• Z675 to Z920: 800 gpm (1 pump)
• Z675/780 to Z1000: 2,800 gpm (2 pumps)
• Z675 to Z780: 5,500 gpm (3 pumps)
• Z920 to Z1000: 2,800 gpm (1pump)
• 41200 Ft. of New Pipeline — From Fairmont to
offsite locations (to convey more water)
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
5
Water Quality Improvements
• Disinfection System at Fairmont BPS
• Reservoir Management System at
Higher /More Easterly Reservoirs
• Continue Cycling Existing Reservoirs
• Sample More Constituents at Reservoirs
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
6
8. g
.o,
Legend
00� ra'
• System Valves
TRENTWD LN
_ _
r Pump Stations
rr"
Pipelines
by Pressure Zone
s
-675
BPS Fairmont Reservoir
112'
-780-1
24" 24" 24"
920
� ry> T, ••
- 1,000 -t
Fairmont Reservoir
M.
E- Parcels
27'
'1
R �•
'C
a
m B"
2 �
w •
<r�R�<ro
0 50 100
mommK== Feet
Figure 5
FaimnoM BPS Site Layout
March 2013
a' rz
Northeast Area Planning Stud
fY
Yorbs Linda Water District
18' RASTANp�URVRp �
Water Quality Improvements
• Disinfection System at Fairmont BPS
• Reservoir Management System at
Higher /More Easterly Reservoirs
• Continue Cycling Existing Reservoirs
• Sample More Constituents at Reservoirs
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
6
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
• 47 j.
9L
w
Yorba Linda Water District
FINAL REPORT
Northeast Area Planning Study
Job No. 2010 -116
March 2013
C CAM #Ww„A#%
Engineers... Working Wonders With Water°
to
7 .7
Yorba Linda Water District
Northeast Area Planning Study
2010 -11 B
REPORT
FINAL
March 2013
199 SOUTH LOS ROBLES AVENUE - SUITE 530 - PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91101 - (626) 535 -0180 - FAX (626) 535 -0185
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
Northeast Area Planning Study
FINAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... ...........................ES
-1
StorageEvaluation ............................................................... ...............................
ES -1
Pump Station Evaluation ...................................................... ...............................
ES -1
PipelineEvaluation ............................................................... ...............................
ES -2
WaterQuality ........................................................................ ...............................
ES -3
Other Recommendations ..................................................... ...............................
ES -3
1.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................................ ..............................1
2.0 PROJECTED DEMANDS ............................................................. ..............................1
2.1 Existing Demands ........................................................... ............................... 1
2.2 Planned Developments ................................................... ............................... 1
2.3 Projected Demands by Pressure Zone ........................... ............................... 5
3.0
STORAGE CRITERIA AND ANALYSIS ....................................... ..............................6
3.1
Storage Components ...................................................... ............................... 6
3.2
Recommended Storage Criteria ..................................... ............................... 8
3.3
Storage Evaluation ....................................................... ...............................
10
3.4
Storage Recommendations for Development ............... ...............................
14
4.0
PUMP
STATION CRITERIA AND ANALYSIS ............................. .............................16
4.1
Pump Station Sizing Criteria ......................................... ...............................
16
4.2
Pipeline Sizing Criteria .................................................. ...............................
17
4.3
Existing Pump Station Capacities ................................. ...............................
17
4.4
Operating Conditions Based on Supply Mix Percentages ...........................
18
4.5
Pump Station Sizing ..................................................... ...............................
21
5.0
HYDRAULIC MODELING ........................................................... .............................30
5.1
Updates to Hydraulic Model .......................................... ...............................
31
5.2
Near -Term Facilities Included in Hydraulic Model ........ ...............................
32
6.0
WATER
QUALITY ANALYSIS ..................................................... .............................32
6.1
Nitrification Action Plan and Current Operating Practices ...........................
32
6.2
Sampled Chlorine Levels in Distribution System .......... ...............................
33
6.3
Impact of Proposed Improvements on Water Quality ... ...............................
38
6.4
Recommendations .......................................................... .............................45
7.0
SUMMARY
OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .. .............................47
March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
LIST OF TABLES
Table ES.1
Fairmont PS Sizing ..................................................... ...............................
ES -2
Table 1
Estimated Development Demand ..................................... ...............................
3
Table 2
Assumed Demands for Shapell & Toll Brothers, Inc. Development .................
4
Table 3
Future Demand Summary ................................................. ...............................
4
Table 4
Projected Demands by Pressure Zone ............................. ...............................
5
Table 5
Storage Criteria for Various Southern California Purveyors .............................
9
Table6
Storage Criteria ............................................................... ...............................
10
Table 7
Existing Storage Analysis ............................................... ...............................
11
Table 8
Future Storage Analysis .................................................. ...............................
12
Table 9
Required Storage for New Development ........................ ...............................
14
Table 10
Existing Pump Station Capacity... ..................................................................
18
Table 11
Operating Conditions based on Supply Mix Percentages ..............................
19
Table 12
Pressure Zone Supply by Operating Condition ............... ...............................
20
Table 13
Fairmont Pump Station Sizing ......................................... ...............................
23
Table 14
Hidden Hills and Santiago PS Sizing .............................. ...............................
28
Table 15
Existing Pump Station Hydraulics ................................... ...............................
30
Table 16
Chlorine Residual by Sample Site and Zone .................. ...............................
34
Table 17
Sampled Water Quality Data at Reservoirs .................... ...............................
37
Table 18
Fairmont PS Sizing ......................................................... ...............................
48
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1
Development Locations .................................................... ............................... 2
Figure 2
Seasonal Valve Locations ................................................. ...............................
7
Figure 3
On -Site Storage Siting .................................................... ...............................
15
Figure 4
Percentage Groundwater of Total Supply ....................... ...............................
19
Figure 5
Fairmont PS Site ............................................................. ...............................
22
Figure 6
Fairmont PS Sizing ......................................................... ...............................
24
Figure 7
Fairmont PS Conditions 1 through 5 (Zone 780 -3 to 1,000- 1) .......................
26
Figure 8
Fairmont PS Conditions 6 and 7 (Zone 675 to 920/1,000 -1) .........................
26
Figure 9
Fairmont PS Condition 8 (Zone 675 to 780 -3) ................ ...............................
27
Figure 10
Fairmont PS Condition 9 (Zone 675 to 780 -3/1, 000- 1) ... ...............................
27
Figure 11
Potential Pipeline Improvements .................................... ...............................
29
Figure 12
Hydraulic Model Screenshot ........................................... ...............................
31
Figure 13
Sampled Chlorine Residuals by Sampling Site ............... ...............................
36
Figure 14
Predicted Effect of Development on Little Canyon Reservoir ........................
39
Figure 15
Sampled and Predicted Existing Chlorine Residuals ...... ...............................
41
Figure 16
Predicted Near -Term Chlorine Residuals ....................... ...............................
43
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A
References
Appendix B
Operating Conditions
Appendix C
Reservoir Storage Groups
Appendix D
Hydraulic Model Manual
Appendix E
Hydraulic Model Calibration
ii March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Northeast Area Planning Study
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of the Northeast Area Planning Study is to evaluate the capacity of existing
distribution system facilities and size new infrastructure required to provide water under
anticipated operational conditions for future demands. The proposed Esperanza Hills
Estates (EHE) and Sage (SG) developments are projected to add 542 acre -feet per year
(afy) to the District's annual demands, resulting in an overall system annual demand of
25,388 afy, which equates to a 2 percent demand increase. The District's current maximum
day demand is estimated to increase by 0.7 million gallons per day (mgd) to 33.6 mgd.
Storage Evaluation
Due to topology, the proposed EHE and SG developments will need to be divided into two
pressure zones, with hydraulic grade lines at 1,200 feet above mean sea level (ft -msl) and
1,390 ft -msl. Based on updated storage criteria, these developments would require
approximately 1.3 million gallons (MG) of storage. After evaluation of the following two
alternatives, it is recommended that storage be accommodated as discussed in Option 1
below:
Option 1. The entire 1.3 MG storage would be located within both development areas.
Each zone would need 0.18 MG of dedicated fire flow storage (0.36 MG), unless
greater fire flow requirements are established by the Orange County Fire
Authority. The remaining 0.94 MG storage would need to be prorated by the
demands of each pressure zone. As detailed in Section 3.4.1, additional offsite
improvements will be required.
Option 2. Utilizing the Hidden Hills Reservoir for additional storage is not a viable option as
discussed in detail in Section 3.4.2.
Pump Station Evaluation
This project focused on the sizing of the District's Fairmont Pump Station (FPS) as the FPS
is critical to serve the new developments and is planned for replacement due to aging. The
FPS currently has a capacity of about 2,100 gallons per minute (gpm), and can be manually
operated to alternate its suction and discharge pressure zones. Sizing of the proposed FPS
was developed to include a variety of operating conditions to achieve a range of
groundwater Basin Pumping Percentages (BPP). Twelve different operating scenarios for
groundwater supplies ranging from 0 to 100 percent were developed. These scenarios were
grouped in three categories based on the different suction and discharge conditions as
listed in Section 4.5.1.
March 2013 ES -1
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
To accommodate these wide variety of pumping scenarios, four groups of pump units are
required as summarized in Table ES.1. All seven pump units are recommended to be
variable frequency drives (VFDs), but could be configured as constant speed pumps with
the addition of one unit as described in Section 4.5.1.
In addition to the FPS improvements, Hidden Hills PS and Santiago PS would each need
one additional pump unit if storage for the new development is partially provided from
Hidden Hills Reservoir and the development is served from Zone 1,000 -2 (Santiago
Reservoir) or Zone 1,390 (Hidden Hills Reservoir). Details are provided in Section 4.5.2.
Table ES.1 Fairmont PS Sizing
Design
To
From
TDH
Capacity(')
Units Zone
Zone
(ft)
(gpm)
Notes
1 920
675
237
800
No standby unit included since OC89
provides reliability.
2 - 3 1,000 -1
675/780 -3
388
2,800
1 +1 configuration
4 - 6 780 -3
675
120
5,500
2 +1 configuration
No standby unit included since not
7 1,000 -1
920
212
2,800
assumed to be a typical operating
condition.
Note:
1. Rounded up to nearest 100
gpm.
It is recommended that the District include either a portable diesel generator or on -site
natural gas powered backup generator at FPS and that the PS include pressure reducing
valves to supply Zone 675 from Zone 780 -3 and supply Zone 920 from Zone 1,000 -1 to
increase operational flexibility.
Pipeline Evaluation
Based on hydraulic model analysis, two pipelines in the vicinity of FPS were also identified
as deficient, resulting in high headloss and additional pumping head requirements for the
new PS. To minimize the pump unit sizing and energy cost, it is recommended to increase
the capacity of the following pipelines with large diameter pipeline replacements or parallel
pipelines:
The 12 -inch diameter Zone 1,000 -1 pipeline extending 3,500 feet along Fairmont
Boulevard between FPS and Forest Avenue. This pipeline should be replaced by a
16 -inch diameter pipeline or paralleled with a 12 -inch diameter pipeline.
The 12 -inch diameter Zone 780 -3 pipeline extending 670 feet along Fairmont
Boulevard from Bastanchury Road onto the District's FPS. Adding a dedicated
ES -2 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
pipeline to the Bryant Cross Feeder south of Bastanchury Road would require about
800 feet of 24 -inch diameter pipeline.
Water Quality
The key steps the District can implement to limit nitrification and residual loss from
occurring are reducing water age and improving mixing within the District's reservoirs. It is
recommended that the District continue to follow its reservoir cycling practices, following the
guidelines recommended in the nitrification study.
For new reservoirs, it is recommended that the District include within the design systems to
increase cycling within the reservoirs, consisting of separate inlet and outlets (using multiple
diffused inlets where possible), samplers to provide real -time automated monitoring of
disinfection residual, and a mixing device within the reservoir. A reservoir management
system could provide this functionality in a single system along with boosting disinfection
residual.
For the Fairmont PS, it is recommended that the District incorporate a disinfection station
into the design that can inject free chlorine. If this emergency approach is not sufficient, the
next recommended step would be to install reservoir management systems (mixers,
analyzers, and potentially injection of chloramines).
Other Recommendations
This Northeast Area Planning Study is primarily limited to the system evaluation
surrounding the new Esperanza Hills /Sage developments and the FPS. It is recommended
that a comprehensive system evaluation be conducted for all pump stations and the entire
distribution system under the variety of operating scenarios. In addition, it is recommended
that the updated hydraulic model be used to optimize the system operational controls of the
system for the most common BPP target scenarios to make system operations more
consistent year- around.
March 2013 ES -3
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Northeast Area Planning Study
FINAL REPORT
1.0 BACKGROUND
The Yorba Linda Water District (District) is an independent special district that provides
water and sewer service to residents and businesses within its 27 square mile service area.
Some of the last remaining developments within the District's service area are anticipated
to be constructed in the near future. The District is undertaking this study to evaluate water
service in the northeast area of the District. Specifically, this study is intended to evaluate
the capacity of the system to supply the areas of new development and recommend sizing
of infrastructure to provide water under anticipated operational conditions for future
demands.
2.0 PROJECTED DEMANDS
2.1 Existing Demands
The District's fiscal year (FY) 2011/12 demands were 20,433 afy, averaging 18.2 mgd
(including unaccounted for water). As has been observed throughout the region, demands
for the District peaked in calendar year 2007 at 24,840 afy, falling by 25 percent to
18,654 afy in calendar year 2010. For conservative planning, existing demand distribution
for this study was based on an Average Day Demand (ADD) of 21.7 mgd, equivalent to
FY2007/08. Demands had been geospatially allocated within the hydraulic model during a
previous project based on billing data. Based on the 2005 Water Master Plan (WMP), the
District's seasonal peaking factor (MDD /ADD) is 1.48, resulting in a MDD of 32.2 mgd.
2.2 Planned Developments
Two developments are currently planned for the northeast area of the District's service
area, the Esperanza Hills Estates development and the Sage development. The locations
of these developments are shown on Figure 1. Demands were estimated for these
developments based on the water demand factors developed in the 2005 WMP and an
average density of one dwelling unit per acre. Resulting demands are shown in Table 1.
As shown in Table 1, projected ADD for both developments is 0.48 mgd, with a MDD of
0.72 mgd. While connection of the developments to the existing water distribution system
will be discussed in greater detail in Section 3.4 and 4.5, the developments will most likely
take supply from Zone 1,000 -1 or a zone downstream of Zone 1,000 -1.
March 2013 1
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Chino
Little 1 Y 3
Canyon e /
Legend
I
0 Tanks
Pipes by Zone
Parcels
a $" ': Reservoir
1� 12' -12" �o, � Planned Developments
1 160 12"
Quarterhorse 8„ N, �� a 8 Esperanza Hills Estates
Reservoir $ � ,? 12 ^j8 dgeeRd _ Esperanza Hills
16„ ^ ® 6" ..$ 8_, O RI Sage
I e - 6" ,n Estates
2„ a o I 8' B,,Saddle Shapell &Toll Brothers, Inc.
1? 6„ y
2' ��. 12" 12 V ^ - ` o r w J Ridge Way
6„
8"a' �'�..10" 10" 7o „1p„ ., 8, „� Sage Ridge
8„ 8„ Shapell B Drive
Ran
Fairmont t ,- „ �
Reservoirs "Q Development -' \ yo;,
36" n i 70• 8 , 8
1- , & Toll Brothers, Inc.
� 10„ N 8° 3" $ ��17,% 12'- 2 °° ° �8 �dy Esperanza Hills
0„ TRcy ^ �� 6„ ; ° ,° �° Sage Estates
^ 8„ � v 6.. >o„ o Q� m Rd
3s° o ,\ son
8., � � � � 8,; 8., �„ d Edi
c' 8„ o
° 780-3 3 =
2. 8 0 s ° 0 6„ 6,. �s - 10 Santiago
�.. 33^ Reservoir
i a ° 0 10° 10' �o° � 331,
` Stoneha yen Dr a° 8,.
0 6" g3
o
•��— o� &.,6 6 —. a 6, 8 1_�' Grgen Cre
' � 10' s 12„ 81/ 12 61, 8 ^�`
� 8'• 8" 8
co - -
_ J m im
`° 8 10 ' 8 = 8 L1 L= 14 ' 124" 14 14 •'g- - 780 -
g'
I t G
10„ 10 >�. 6„
8,
� p o: g o>
6), 8"
6w:
1,0 2,0 3,g L 6.
6�6 a.,� - -� ��„ 6 6 n cob 8 d
,
�,�, a 8 � : 6 • .. , � 12" _ Feet
... ^�
g' 6 8 �po �8ry„ •
Figure 1
s 8" Development L
ocation
8 ss' o °
C March 2013
c 7 2 1 2� Northeast Area Planning Stud
�6"
8 10' 6° � Yorba Linda Water District
( $„
9oineers...Workina Wonders With
Table 1 Estimated Development Demand
Development
Projected Water
Equivalent
Demand
Acreage (1,2)
WDF
ADD AAD MDD(3)
Development Homes (acres)
(gpd /ac)
(mgd) (afy) (mgd)
Esperanza Hills Estates 340 340
1,070
0.36 407.5 0.54
Sage 112 112
1,070
0.12 134.2 0.18
Total 452 452
n/a
0.48 541.7 0.72
Notes:
1. Based on discussions with developer's engineer, any disturbed area will be irrigated.
2. Using assumption of average density of 1 dwelling
unit per acre with water demand
factor (WDF) from 2005 WMP of 1,070 gpd /ac.
3. Based on seasonal peaking factor of 1.48.
In addition to the existing demands and planned development demands for the Esperanza
Hills Estates and Sage developments, infrastructure has already been constructed for the
Shapell & Toll Brothers, Inc. Development, but the houses have not yet been built. Thus,
demands were added for this development based on the hydraulic analysis conducted for
sizing its infrastructure. The Shapell & Toll Brothers, Inc. Development is served by three
separate pressure zones — Zone 780 -3, Zone 920, and Zone 1,000 -1. Resulting demands
are shown in Table 2.
As shown in Table 2, the Shapell & Toll Brothers, Inc. Development is anticipated to add
approximately 0.65 mgd of demand under MDD conditions. The total projected future
demand for the entire District's service area is summarized in Table 3.
As shown in Table 3, the District's future system ADD with the developments listed above is
projected to increase from 21.7 mgd to 22.6 mgd. This equates to a 4 percent increase.
Although this demand increase is fairly minimal system wide, the demand increase is
substantial for a few pressure zones and the associated pump station and reservoir
facilities.
March 2013 3
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Table 2 Assumed Demands for Shapell & Toll Brothers, Inc. Development
ADD AAD MDD
Pressure Zone (mgd) (afy) (mgd)
780 -3 0.27 306.3 0.40
920 0.16 175.1 0.23
1,000 -1 0.01 7.9 0.01
Total 0.44 489.2 0.65
Notes:
1. Demand distribution within hydraulic model was based on equal distribution to all nodes
within development, consistent with hydraulic analysis Shapell & Toll Brothers, Inc.
Development, Yorba Linda Water System Calculations Addendum No. 1 (Hunsaker and
Associates Irvine, Inc., 2005). Demand to each zone was based on percentage of
demand in each zone in hydraulic junction report (since totals were slightly
inconsistent).
2. Calculations within the study were completed for Peak Hour Demand conditions with a
total Peak Hour Demand of 773.4 gpm; a seasonal peaking factor of 1.48 and a peak
hour demand factor of 2.55 were assumed in order to calculate MDD and ADD based
on the 2005 WMP.
Table 3 Future Demand Summary
AAD
ADD
MDD
Component
(afy)
(mgd)
(mgd)
Existing
24,357
21.7
32.2
Esperanza Hills Estates / Sage
542
0.5
0.7
Shapell & Toll Brothers, Inc.
489
0.4
0.7
Development
Total
25,388
22.6
33.6
March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ DocumentslClienUCA/ YLWD /9047AOO /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
2.3 Projected Demands by Pressure Zone
As the capacity evaluation and sizing of pump stations and reservoir are dependent on the
demand of each pressure zone, demands are presented by pressure zone in Table 4.
Table 4
Projected Demands by Pressure Zone
Existing
Additional
Total
Demand
Development
Demand
o,
= N =
_ 14 =
0 =
L-
AAD
MDD
AAD MDD
AAD
MDD
` w E
0
L ~ E
N
Reservoir
(afy)
(mgd)
(afy) (mgd)
(afy) (mgd)
a o
a o 0
428
Highland
21486
3.3
2,486
3.3
12%
12%
430
149
0.2
149
0.2
< 1%
< 1 %
570
Lakeview
8,119
10.7
8,119
10.7
25%
24%
675
Valley View
1,413
1.9
1,413
1.9
6%
6%
675
Fairmont
3,119
4.1
3,119
4.1
18%
17%
680
Bryant Ranch
1,887
2.5
1,887
2.5
4%
4%
780 -1
Gardenia
454
0.6
454
0.6
4%
4%
780 -2
479
0.6
479
0.6
< 1 %
< 1 %
780 -3
Springview
1,418
1.9
306 0.4
1,724
2.3
10%
10%
718
62
0.1
62
0.1
< 1%
< 1%
780 -4
Elk Mountain
653
0.9
653
0.9
6%
6%
920
Quarterhorse
380
0.5
175 0.2
555
0.7
2%
2%
1,000 -1
Little Canyon
881
1.2
550 0.7
1,430
1.9
5%
7%
1,000 -2
Santiago
583
0.8
583
0.8
3%
3%
908
133
0.2
133
0.2
< 1 %
< 1 %
991
242
0.3
242
0.3
< 1 %
< 1 %
Camino de
1,165
Bryant
452
0.6
452
0.6
3%
3%
1,160
128
0.2
128
0.2
< 1%
< 1%
1,300
Chino Hills
298
0.4
298
0.4
2%
2%
1,390
Hidden Hills
197
0.3
197
0.3
< 1 %
< 1 %
1,133
78
0.1
78
0.1
< 1%
< 1%
706
748
1.0
748
1.0
< 1 %
< 1 %
Total
24,357
32.2
1,031 1.4
25,388
33.6
100%
100%
As shown in Table 4, the 1,000 Zone is divided into Zone 1,000 -1, served by Little Canyon
Reservoir, and Zone 1,000 -2, served by Santiago Reservoir. The zone is separated by an
March 2013 5
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /Client/CA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
isolation valve, labeled on Figure 2 as SV -3. This valve needs to be closed to ensure proper
cycling of Santiago Reservoir per discussions with the District's operations staff. If the
pressure zone is operated as a single pressure zone, Santiago Reservoir fills such that
cycling the reservoir becomes unfeasible.
While the demands shown in Table 4 are based on demands allocated in the hydraulic
model, the percentages of demands used in this analysis are based on input from District
operations staff, which was adjusted to account for the projected demands associated with
future development. This demand distribution is deemed more reliable, as it eliminates the
errors associated with geospatial allocation and scaling of billing data. As seen by
comparing the existing percentage of demands by pressure zone to the total projected
demand, Zone 1,000 -1 is projected to increase from five percent of the total demand to
seven percent, and increase for the pressure zone of about 40 percent. Note that the
District is planning to implement some rezoning, affecting the boundary between Zones 920
and 1,000 -1. By adjusting this boundary, the District will more fully utilize the excess
storage in Quarterhorse Reservoir. Storage capacity will be discussed in Section 3.0.
3.0 STORAGE CRITERIA AND ANALYSIS
As a part of this study, the existing water system storage criteria as outlined in the District's
2005 WMP were reviewed and recommended for revision. Storage criteria are used in
determining the required storage for the water system on a pressure zone basis and for the
system as a whole. The criteria are used to compare existing storage volumes with the
required volumes per the defined criteria to determine if the system has storage
deficiencies that need to be address by constructing additional storage reservoirs or by
sharing excess storage capacity between pressure zones. These criteria are also used to
determine the storage needs for future developments seeking to connect to the District's
distribution system.
3.1 Storage Components
Storage criteria are typically divided in to the following three components:
Operational Storage
Fire Flow Storage
Emergency Storage
The typical factors used to size operational, fire flow, and emergency storage are described
below.
Operational Storage
Operational storage is defined as the quantity of water that is required to balance daily
fluctuations in demand and water production. It is necessary to coordinate water source
6 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Legend
\Seasonal Isolation
Valves
O Tanks
ED Service Area
El Parcels
EBIR ST 'F
Pipeline
El TELEGRAPH CANYON RD \
< 7 inch
7 - 15 inch
T�l- _ > 15 inch
4 6
SV7 SV6 SV SV4
6G
_ SV1
LC SV5
LT
r�
- - �� -i
_ ��
SV3
5
2
v s .
- e ,
Cl/l/
�\
r
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
Figure 2
Seasonal Isolation Valves
March 2013
� ^ o Northeast Area Planning Study
Yorba Linda Water District
i oft 'r►w /l.%
' gineers... Workinq Wonders
production rates and available storage capacity in a water system to provide a continuous
treated water supply to the system. Water systems are often designed to supply the
average of the MDD and use reservoir storage to supply water for peak hour flows that
typically occur in mornings and late afternoons.
This operational storage is replenished during off -peak hours that typically occur during
nighttime, when demand is less. The American Water Works Association (AWWA)
recommends that operational storage be at least 25 percent of MDD (AWWA 1989).
Fire Flow Storage
Storage for fire flows is typically sized to be at least the volume equal to the maximum fire
flow and its corresponding duration within each pressure zone (either directly or from a
higher zone). This maximum fire flow is defined by land use category. For each zone, the
land use category present with the highest fire flow requirement in each zone is selected
and then multiplied with the corresponding duration to determine the minimum amount of
designated fire flow storage in that particular zone. The District has historically assumed
one fire per major pressure zone of its distribution system. The means, that subzones that
are fed through pressure reducing valves (PRVs) from a major pressure zone will rely on
the fire flow storage in that major pressure zone. In other words, only one fire per major
pressure zone and associated subzones is assumed to take place at a particular time.
Emergency Storage
Storage is also required to meet system demands during emergencies. Emergencies cover
a wide range of rare but probable events, such as water contamination, failure at water
treatment plants (WTP), power outages, transmission pipeline ruptures, several
simultaneous fires, and earthquakes. The volume of water that is needed during an
emergency is usually based on the estimated amount of time expected to elapse before the
disruptions caused by the emergency are corrected or additional supplies can be brought
online. The occurrence and magnitude of emergencies is difficult to predict and therefore,
emergency storage is typically set as a percentage of ADD or MDD rather than specifying
an exact volume as a criteria.
3.2 Recommended Storage Criteria
The District has experienced water quality issues (i.e., loss of chlorine residual) related to
high water age. The water quality concerns are particularly present in some of the pressure
zones in the eastern part of the District's service area where the water demand is very
small compared to the available storage volume, resulting in high detention times.
To mitigate this issue, the District operates some of these reservoirs at lower levels and /or
only utilizes one of two storage compartments, where reservoirs are divided into separate
compartments. This strategy has resulted in a reduced usage of the reservoir capacity and
8 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
prompted the question whether the storage criteria are too conservative to meet water
quality objectives in the system.
For comparison, Carollo prepared a table of storage criteria used by other agencies and
used in water master plans prepared by Carollo Engineers for other water utilities in
Southern California. This comparison is summarized in Table 5.
Table 5 Storage Criteria for Various Southern California Purveyors
Total
Fireflow
Emergency
Storage
Supply Operational Storage (2)
Storage
Requirement
Agency Mix(') Storage (MG)
(MG)
for YLWD (3)
City of Orange GW + IW 30% MDD 3.7
100% MDD
49.5
City of Garden
Grove GW + IW 30% MDD 2.5
100% ADD
35.6
City of Upland GW 30% MDD 2.9
100% MDD
49.5
City of Hesperia GW 30% MDD 3.5
100% MDD
49.5
El Centro IW 30% MDD 1.0
100% MDD
49.5
City of Pasadena GW + IW 30% MDD 6.8
50% MDD
33.1
Victorville Water
District GW 25% MDD 8.0
50% MDD
31.4
YLWD GW + IW 100% MDD 6.75
300 -700% ADD
85.5
Existing Storage YLWD
58.7
Notes:
1. GW = Groundwater; IW = Imported Water
2. This is combined fire flow requirement for entire distribution system of the listed agency..
3. This is the total storage required if YLWD implements the
same criteria as the listed
agency using the operational and emergency storage criteria of the corresponding agency
and 6.75 MG of fire flow storage (per the 2005 WMP).
As shown in Table 5, storage criteria varies from agency to agency but in general is
substantially less than used by the District. Operational storage typically ranges from 25 %-
30% of MDD, compared to 100% of MDD used by the District. Emergency storage typically
ranges from 50% to 100% of MDD. It should be noted that 50% of MDD is nearly typically
(using a peaking factor of 1.7 -2.0) the same as 100% of ADD.
Since the 2005 WMP, the District increased redundancy of its system supplies through
upgrades to the distribution system and the purchase of three portable booster pumps and
one portable electrical generator unit. In addition, Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California (MWDSC) increased reliability of the Diemer WTP. Further, the District's
groundwater supplies represent a point of redundancy to its water supply and storage
system.
March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /Client/CA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Based on this, it is recommended that the District revise its storage criteria to the same as
the City of Orange, as the criteria are the most conservative of the listed agencies that has
a similar water distribution system configuration (with multiple gravity pressure zones) and
the same supply mix (both imported water and groundwater supplies). The ability to use
groundwater wells to serve demands provides another form of (aquifer) storage and is
therefore relevant for comparison. These recommended revised storage criteria compared
to the District's 2005 WMP are therefore as follows:
Operational Storage: 30 percent of MDD
Fire Flow Storage: Consistent with criteria used in 2005 WMP, which was based on
land use by pressure zone
Emergency Storage: 100 percent of MDD.
3.3 Storage Evaluation
When the recommended storage criteria are adopted and applied, the District's total
required storage volume would be approximately 49.5 MG, which is about 9.2 MG less than
the District's existing volume of 56.7 MG as shown in Table 6.
Table 6 Storage Criteria
Total
Fireflow Emergency
Storage
Supply Operational Storage (2) Storage
Requirement
Mix(') Storage (MG) (MG)
for YLWD(3)
Previous Criteria GW + IW 100% MDD 6.75 300 -700% ADD
85.5
Updated Criteria GW + IW 30% MDD 6.75 100% MDD
49.5
Existing Storage YLWD
58.7
Notes:
1. GW = Groundwater; IW = Imported Water
2. This is combined fire flow requirement for entire distribution system of the listed agency..
3. This is the total storage required if YLWD implements the same criteria as the listed
agency using the operational and emergency storage criteria of the corresponding agency
and 6.75 MG of fire flow storage (per the 2005 WMP).
While the total required storage volume of 49.5 MG is sufficient when the District's storage
is considered a whole, storage capacity must be evaluated on a pressure zone by pressure
zone basis, since storage must be available where it is needed. Table 7 and Table 8
present such an analysis for the existing and future systems, with reservoirs and pressure
zones grouped based on whether storage would be available in an emergency. A figure
showing this storage grouping is included in Appendix C.
10 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Table 7
Existing Storage Analysis
Zone
Existing
Demand
AAD MDD
(afy) (mgd)
Operational
(MG)
Emergency
(MG)
Reservoir
Fire
(MG)
Size
Total
(MG)
Existing
(MG)
Balance
(MG)
428
2,486
3.3
0.99
2.22
1.20
4.40
6.0
+1.6
Subtotal
+1.6
570
430
8,119
149
10.7
0.2
3.22
0.06
7.25
0.13
1.20
11.67
0.19
8.0
-3.7
-0.2
Subtotal
-3.9
675
4,532
6.0
1.80
4.05
0.45
6.29
9.5
+3.2
Subtotal
+3.2
780 -1
780 -2
454
479
0.6
0.6
0.18
0.19
0.41
0.43
0.18
0.77
0.62
2.0
+1.2
-0.6
Subtotal
+0.6
480 -3
706
718
1,418
748
62
1.9
1.0
0.1
0.56
0.30
0.02
1.27
0.67
0.06
0.45
2.28
0.96
0.08
8.0
+5.7
-1.0
-0.1
Subtotal
+4.7
480 -4
680
653
1,887
0.9
2.5
0.26
0.75
0.58
1.68
1.20
0.84
3.63
6.0
2.3
+5.2
-1.3
Subtotal
+3.8
920
380
0.5
0.15
0.34
0.18
0.67
7.3
+6.6
Subtotal
+6.6
1,000 -1
908
1,463
133
1.9
0.2
0.58
0.05
1.31
0.12
0.18
2.07
0.17
2.0
-0.1
-0.2
Subtotal
-0.3
1,165
991
452
242
0.6
0.3
0.18
0.10
0.40
0.22
0.18
0.76
0.31
3.2
+2.4
-0.3
Subtotal
+2.1
1,300
1,160
298
128
0.4
0.2
0.12
0.05
0.27
0.11
0.18
0.56
0.16
0.5
-0.1
-0.2
Subtotal
-0.2
1,390
1,133
197
78
0.3
0.1
0.08
0.03
0.18
0.07
0.18
0.43
0.10
2.0
+1.6
-0.1
Subtotal
+1.5
Total
24,357
32.2
9.7
21.7
5.6
37.0
56.7
+19.8
Table 8 Future Storage Analysis
Zone
Existing
Demand
AAD MDD
afy mgd
Additional
Development Demand
AAD MDD
afy mgd
Total Demand
AAD MDD
afy mgd
Reservoir Size
Operational Emergency
MG MG
Fire
MG
Total
MG
Existing
MG
Balance
MG
428
2,486
3.3
2,486
3.3
0.99
2.22
1.20
4.40
6.0
+1.6
Subtotal
+1.6
570
430
8,119
149
10.7
0.2
8,119
149
10.7
0.2
3.22
0.06
7.25
0.13
1.20
11.67
0.19
8.0
-3.7
-0.2
Subtotal
-3.9
675
4,532
6.0
4,532
6.0
1.80
4.05
0.45
6.29
9.5
+3.2
Subtotal
+3.2
780 -1
780 -2
454
479
0.6
0.6
454
479
0.6
0.6
0.18
0.19
0.41
0.43
0.18
0.77
0.62
2.0
+1.2
-0.6
Subtotal
+0.6
480 -3
706
718
1,418
748
62
1.9
1.0
0.1
306.3
0.4
1,724
748
62
2.3
1.0
0.1
0.56
0.30
0.02
1.27
0.67
0.06
0.45
2.28
0.96
0.08
8.0
+5.7
-1.0
-0.1
Subtotal
+4.7
480 -4
680
653
1,887
0.9
2.5
653
1,887
0.9
2.5
0.26
0.75
0.58
1.68
1.20
0.84
3.63
6.0
2.3
+5.2
-1.3
Subtotal
+3.8
920
380
0.5
175.1
0.2
555
0.7
0.15
0.34
0.18
0.67
7.3
+6.6
Subtotal
+6.6
1,000 -1
908
1,463
133
1.9
0.2
549.6
0.7
2,013
133
2.7
0.2
0.80
0.05
1.80
0.12
0.18
2.78
0.17
2.0
-0.8
-0.2
Subtotal
-1.0
1,165
991
452
242
0.6
0.3
452
242
0.6
0.3
0.18
0.10
0.40
0.22
0.18
0.76
0.31
3.2
+2.4
-0.3
Subtotal
+2.1
1,300
1,160
298
128
0.4
0.2
298
128
0.4
0.2
0.12
0.05
0.27
0.11
0.18
0.56
0.16
0.5
-0.1
-0.2
Subtotal
-0.2
1,390
1,133
197
78
0.3
0.1
197
78
0.3
0.1
0.08
0.03
0.18
0.07
0.18
0.43
0.10
2.0
+1.6
-0.1
Subtotal
+1.5
Total
24,357
32.2
1,031.0
1.41
25,388
33.51
9.9
22.2
5.6
37.7
56.7
+19.1
As shown in Table 7, the District's overall storage demand balance is positive with 19.8 MG
more storage available than required. However, on a zone -by -zone basis, the storage
balance shows a deficit for several pressure zone groups. This does not necessarily
represent a deficiency, as in several cases, the storage deficits in lower zones can be
accommodated through excess storage in upper zones. It should be noted that this storage
analysis assumes full utilization of capacity of the reservoirs, a condition that is generally
not present as most reservoirs are typically operated between 50 and 90 percent full.
For the future storage balance, the development demands for the Esperanza Hills Estates
and Sage developments are assumed to be served from Zone 1,000 -1. As shown in
Table 8, the storage deficits for the zones described above are similar, with the exception of
Zone 1,000 -1, due to the new development demand. The storage balance deficit in this
zone is predicted to be 1.0 MG, an increase of 0.8 MG over the existing 0.2 MG deficit.
There are three pressure zone groups that show a storage capacity deficit with the revised
storage evaluation criteria, prior to adjustment for water transfer opportunities between
pressure zone groups. These "deficiencies" can be resolved as follows:
570 Zone (with Subzone 430) — Lakeview Reservoir
While Lakeview Reservoir is only 8.0 MG, required storage for this pressure zone group is
11.86 MG based on the updated criteria. Excess storage in Springview, Fairmont, and
Gardenia Reservoirs totals 8.5 MG, and can count for storage in Zone 570 given the
number of pressure reducing stations connecting these zones. District operations staff have
noted that, due to the potential for supply interruptions associated with MWD supplies,
Springview Reservoir may need to be upgraded. Lakeview Reservoir is expandable, with
the site accommodating a total of 12.0 MG.
Zone 1,300 (with Subzone 1,160) — Chino Hills Reservoir
The storage balance for Zone 1,300 shows a deficit of 0.2 MG. The Timber Ridge BPS
does include an engine driven pump, which could allow use of water from Little Canyon
Reservoir during power outages. However, the storage balance for Zone 1,000 -1 also
shows a deficit, which can be addressed as described below.
Zone 1,000 -1 and Zone 1,000 -2 — Little Canyon and Santiago Reservoirs
When considered as a whole, the storage balance for Zone 1,000 -1 shows a deficit of
0.3 MG. The excess storage capacity in Hidden Hills Reservoir could be used for Zone
1,000 -2, but currently there is no pressure reducing station from Zone 1,390 to Zone 1,000-
2 to allow flow in this direction (such a pressure reducing station could be sited at Santiago
BPS). Currently, only one of the two bays of Hidden Hills Reservoir is used, with the other
bay being inactive. The District experiences water quality issues associated with the long
residence times when the full capacity of Hidden Hills Reservoir is used.
March 2013 13
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
3.4 Storage Recommendations for Development
Given the elevation differences of the proposed development parcels, the appropriate
pressure zone hydraulic grade lines (HGLs) consistent with the YLWD zones are 1,200 ft-
msl and 1,390 ft -msl. For redundancy, each proposed pressure zone will need to include at
least a small storage tank to provide fire flow storage considering the risk of fires in the
area. Based on the revised storage criteria and the projected development demands, the
required storage for the new development is 1.3 MG as shown in Table 9.
Table 9 Required Storage for New Development
Operational Fireflow Emergency Total Storage
MDD Storage Storage (2) Storage Required
Zone (mgd) (MG) (MG) (MG) (MG)
1,200 - - 0.18 - -
1,390 - - 0.18 - -
Total 0.72 0.22 0.36 0.72 1.3
Notes:
1. Breakdown of demand between zones is not known at this time; however, it is anticipated that
each zone will require fire flow storage of 0.18 MG unless greater fire flow requirements are
established by the Orange County Fire Authority, corresponding to an assumed 1,500 gpm fire
flow requirement over a 2 hour period.
Two potential configurations for storage were investigated
Construction of all new storage tanks for the development storage requirement; and
Utilization of some of the excess storage capacity in Hidden Hills Reservoir
Following the investigation of these two alternatives, it was concluded that the dedicated
storage for the new developments would be preferred due to reliability, water quality
concerns, and reduced energy usage.
3.4.1 Alternative 1: Dedicated Storage for New Development
The initial configuration of infrastructure associated with the new developments would
consist of entirely new storage and pumping facilities. Figure 3 depicts a hydraulic
schematic of this configuration.
14 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Figure 3 On -Site Storage Siting
As shown in Figure 3, the development is anticipated to take supply from Zone 1,000 -1,
served by Little Canyon Reservoir and fed by Fairmont PS. This configuration would require
a pump station to supply the upper zone of the new development, while the lower zone
could be supplied by the HGL of Little Canyon Reservoir. The elevation of the lower
reservoir will need to account for headloss across the western portion of Zone 1,000 -1.
Infrastructure required for this alternative includes:
• Two pump stations within development, one for each pressure zone
• Two tanks with a combined capacity of 1.3 MG (sizing depends on distribution of
demands between zones)
• Pressure reducing station (if upper tank is sized to meet some demands in lower
zone)
• In -tract development pipelines
• Increase to firm capacity of Fairmont PS (see Section 4.5.1)
• Additional offsite improvements including additional well capacity and pipeline
upgrades (including zone reconfiguration improvements), to be determined by District
staff.
3.4.2 Alternative 2: Utilization of Hidden Hills Reservoir Excess Storage
As previously discussed, this is not a viable option. While this alternative could potentially
reduce the amount of storage within the development, the pipeline from Zone 1,390
represents a single point of failure that could leave the development without water supplies.
March 2013 15
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Hidden Hills
Reservoir
New Reservoirs
(1.3 KAG)
Little Canyon MinUWrHGL1,276ft +4008i= f,362ft
Santiago
Reservoir
Reservoir
1,390'
Santiago
PS
. • - 1,200'
Fairmont
,,, Min L0WHGL639ft +400 =930ft
PS
Zone 1,000
Isolation
Hidden Hills
Valve
PS
(Seasonal
Valve)
Figure 3 On -Site Storage Siting
As shown in Figure 3, the development is anticipated to take supply from Zone 1,000 -1,
served by Little Canyon Reservoir and fed by Fairmont PS. This configuration would require
a pump station to supply the upper zone of the new development, while the lower zone
could be supplied by the HGL of Little Canyon Reservoir. The elevation of the lower
reservoir will need to account for headloss across the western portion of Zone 1,000 -1.
Infrastructure required for this alternative includes:
• Two pump stations within development, one for each pressure zone
• Two tanks with a combined capacity of 1.3 MG (sizing depends on distribution of
demands between zones)
• Pressure reducing station (if upper tank is sized to meet some demands in lower
zone)
• In -tract development pipelines
• Increase to firm capacity of Fairmont PS (see Section 4.5.1)
• Additional offsite improvements including additional well capacity and pipeline
upgrades (including zone reconfiguration improvements), to be determined by District
staff.
3.4.2 Alternative 2: Utilization of Hidden Hills Reservoir Excess Storage
As previously discussed, this is not a viable option. While this alternative could potentially
reduce the amount of storage within the development, the pipeline from Zone 1,390
represents a single point of failure that could leave the development without water supplies.
March 2013 15
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
However, since emergency storage is not cycled, placing additional emergency storage in
Hidden Hills will reduce cycling, exacerbating the existing water quality issues. In addition,
pumping water through Santiago PS to an HGL of 1,390 ft -msl, and serving the 1,200 zone
through a pressure reducing valve represents an ongoing energy loss. Based on these
reasons, it is recommended that all storage be placed at the development site
(Alternative 1).
3.4.3 Additional Esperanza Hills and Sage Requirements
In addition to new storage and conveyance infrastructure required to connect the new
developments with the District's distribution system, additional offsite improvements are
required. This includes additional groundwater well capacity and other distribution pipeline
upgrades that will be determined by District staff.
4.0 PUMP STATION CRITERIA AND ANALYSIS
Since the District operates its distribution system under varying supply conditions, it is
necessary that the District's distribution system can handle several different operational
scenarios. Based on discussions with District staff, several operational supply scenarios
were identified and the required capacity of the relevant pump stations were developed
under each scenario.
4.1 Pump Station Sizing Criteria
Pump stations serving zones with gravity storage are typically sized such that the station
can meet the zone MDD with the largest pump out of service. This allows the station to
meet the average hourly demands, while peak demands are supplied from storage.
Reservoir storage is then replenished in low demand hours. However, when a pump station
operates on a time -of -use (TOU) schedule, the pump station needs to meet the zone MDD
and replenish storage in less than 24 hours. TOU operations therefore also affect pump
station capacity requirements.
The District currently operates the following pump stations on TOU:
• Hidden Hills PS
• Elk Mountain PS
• Springview PS
• Box Canyon PS
Time of use electricity rates incentivize reduced electricity usage during peak demand
periods by slightly decreasing the rate of electricity during non -peak hours in exchange for a
higher rate of electricity during peak hours. For this analysis, it is assumed the District's
16 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ DocumentslClienUCA/ YLWD /9047AOO /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
time of use peak hours are noon to 5 pm (SCE rate schedule TOU- PA -B), and that the
District targets utilization of pump units during off -peak or super- off -peak hours where
possible (11 pm to 8 am for SCE rate schedules TOU -PA -S, TOU -PA -B, TOU -PA -A, and 12
am to 6 am for TOU -PA -SOP).
Assuming that a pump station on this TOU schedule could not operate 6 hours a day
(5 hours of peak rates with a 1 -hour buffer), the pump station would need to be able to
pump the entire MDD in 18 hours. Pump stations on a TOU schedule therefore need to be
sized for 133% of MDD (24/18).
As a detailed energy cost analysis was beyond the scope of this study, it was assumed that
PS sizing for operating under only off -peak hours (9 hours per day) or super- off -peak hours
(6 hours per day) was not cost effective as this would result in significant stranded capacity
during non - summer months while only providing marginal energy rate cost savings during a
few summer months per year.
4.2 Pipeline Sizing Criteria
Where necessary, a pipeline velocity criteria of 7 fps was used to evaluate the capacity of
existing pipelines and transmission mains per input from District staff. Where exceeded,
headloss for the relevant pump station will be discussed.
4.3 Existing Pump Station Capacities
Each of the District's existing pump stations are listed in Table 10 with estimated total and
firm capacities. The total capacity is based on the District's operations staff estimates of the
amount of flow the pump station is able to handle, while the firm capacity is based on the
sum of individual design capacities of the pump units (excluding the largest unit).
It should be noted that the Yorba Linda Boulevard Pump Station, listed in Table 10, is
currently under construction, and anticipated to be online in early 2014.
March 2013 17
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Table 10
Existing Pump Station Capacity
Upstream
Total
Firm
Pump
Pressure
Downstream
Number
Capacity(')
Capacity (2)
Station
Zone
Pressure Zone
of Units
(gpm)
(gpm)
Highland
428
570
5
18,000
13,500
Lakeview
570
675
4
5,000
3,400
Elk Mountain
780 -4
1,165
3
2,500
1,200
Valley View
675
780 -1
3
2,400
1,800
Yorba Linda
570
675
3
4,500
3,950
Springview
780 -3
1,000 -1
3
1,000
685
Hidden Hills
780 -3
1,000 -2
4
2,100
1,400
Paso Fino
OC89 / 780 -2
920
3
2,400
1,700
Timber Ridge
1,000 -1
1,300
4
1,700
645
Box Canyon
780 -3
780 -4
2
4,000
2,000
Santiago
1,000 -2
1,390
3
1,300
800
Fairmont
675/780 -3
780 - 3/1,000 -1
2
2,100
1,500
Notes:
1. Total capacity
(based on operations spreadsheet
and hydraulic
model)
2. With largest unit out of service.
4.4 Operating Conditions Based on Supply Mix Percentages
As the District adjusts its supply source mix (groundwater and imported water) seasonally,
the District's transmission system must provide sufficient capability to accommodate a wide
range of different supply conditions. Because of the water quality issues related to
breakpoint chlorination, the District maintains supply separation between groundwater and
imported water. Thus, the District adjusts to supply percentages by converting pressure
zones from imported water to groundwater and vise - versa.
Based on discussions with District staff, target percentages of groundwater versus imported
water were developed to determine the likely conditions for which the pump stations should
be sized. Table 11 presents an overview of twelve different supply conditions, while a
detailed list of the supply source mix by each pressure zone is listed in and graphically
presented in Appendix B. It should be noted that the extreme supply mix conditions, such
as 100 percent imported water or groundwater, should be considered emergency conditions
because these are uncommon.
18 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ DocumentslClienUCA/ YLWD /9047AOO /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Table 11 Operating Conditions based on Supply Mix Percentages
Operating Condition
Percentage Imported Water
Percentage Groundwater
Fully Imported Water
100%
0%
0
88%
12%
1
64%
36%
2
59%
41%
3
55%
45%
4
52%
48%
5
48%
52%
6
30%
70%
7
26%
74%
8
16%
84%
9
7%
93%
Fully Groundwater
0%
100%
As shown in Table 11, when moving down the table to conditions of greater supply from
groundwater, less precision is available in selecting operating conditions (e.g., increasing to
a groundwater condition above 74% requires moving all the way to 84 %).
Historically, the District has worked around this difficulty by drastically changing supplies
seasonally to higher percentages, and maintaining lower percentages of groundwater to
make up the difference during the balance of the year. Figure 4 illustrates the District's
supply percentage of groundwater over the past four years.
100%
90%
w
G 80%
rn
M 70%
c
60%
m-
a a 50%
L �
40%
3
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009 2010 2011 2012
Figure 4 Percentage Groundwater of Total Supply
March 2013 19
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /Client/CA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Table 12 Pressure Zone Supply by Operating Condition
Percentage of
Zone MDD Reservoir
Fully IW
Condition 0
Condition 1
Condition 2
Condition 3
Condition 4
Condition 5
Condition 6
Condition 7
Condition 8
Condition 9
Fully GW
System Demand
mgd
428 3.3 Highland
IW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
12%
430 0.2
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
< 1%
570 10.7 Lakeview
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
24%
675 1.9 Valley View
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
6%
675 4.1 Fairmont
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
17%
680 2.5 Bryant Ranch
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
4%
780 -1 0.6 Gardenia
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
IW
IW
GW
IW
IW
GW
4%
780 -2 0.6
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
IW
GW
< 1%
780 -3 2.3 Springview
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
10%
718 0.1
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
< 1 %
780 -4 0.9 Elk Mountain
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
6%
920 0.7 Quarterhorse
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
IW
GW
GW
IW
IW
GW
2%
1,000 -1 1.9 Little Canyon
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
IW
GW
GW
7%
1,000 -2 0.8 Santiago
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
3%
908 0.2
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
<11%
991 0.3
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
<11%
1,165 0.6 Camino de Bryant
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
3%
1,160 0.2
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
IW
GW
GW
<11%
1,300 0.4 Chino Hills
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
IW
GW
GW
2%
1,390 0.3 Hidden Hills
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
<11%
1,133 0.1
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
<1%
706 1.0
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
IW
GW
GW
GW
<11%
Total 33.5
100%
Percentage Imported Water
100%
88%
64%
59%
55%
52%
42%
30%
26%
16%
7%
0%
Percentage Groundwater
0%
12%
36%
41%
45%
48%
58%
70%
74%
84%
93%
100%
Notes:
IW = Imported Water
GW = Groundwater
It is anticipated that this problem will become worse in the future given the increased
percentage of groundwater the District will be able to pump after annexation. In addition,
several of the zones for which supply is being changed in the higher percentage
groundwater conditions will be increasing in size given the developments discussed in
Section 2.2. Recommendations to reduce the loss of residual decay will be discussed in
Section 6.4.
4.5 Pump Station Sizing
Based on the locations of the developments identified in Section 2.2, the Hidden Hills and
Fairmont Pump Stations were identified for this project's scope of work as the primary pump
stations that will be affected by the new development. Sizing of these pump stations under
future demand conditions for various supply mix operating conditions are discussed in detail
below. For this analysis, pump station capacity of upstream pump stations (located in lower
pressure zones) were not evaluated, but increasing capacity of those pump stations may be
necessary to achieve the targeted supply mix percentages.
4.5.1 Fairmont Pump Station
Currently, the FPS supplies Zone 1,000 -1 from Zone 780 -3. Figure 6 shows the layout of
the Fairmont Reservoir and Pump Station site.
With manual reconfiguration of some isolation valves, the FPS can instead supply
groundwater to Zone 780 -3 from Zone 675. The large demand associated with Zone 780 -3
and the limited capacity of the FPS limit the usefulness of this operating scenario. The
District does maintain a portable engine driven pump at FPS to increase capacity under this
operating scenario.
As described earlier, being able to switch supply sources for Zone 1,000 -1 to groundwater
would be useful to District operating staff for adjusting supply percentages. FPS is uniquely
located within the District's distribution system to maximize this operational flexibility.
Table 13 identifies the various pump station sizing groups required for FPS under the
various operating conditions. It should be noted that the demands on the pump station were
increased by 33 percent to account for the additional capacity requirements under TOU
operations as discussed in Section 4.1.
March 2013 21
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
<b
8„
/ Q
Legend
10"
10"
• System Valves
—
TRENTINO LN
CO
4r Pump Stations
{2„
j
Pipelines
U
by Pressure Zone
Q
675
BPS
Fairmont Reservoir
780 -1
12"
o
= 0
24" 24" 24"
920
CO
N
O
2A'
1,000 -1
•
N
20„
N
e
Fairmont Reservoir
M
30" 30" 30"
30" 30"
Parcels
27"
20" �,
•
0
12"
i
D
J
m
8n 8„
Z
�
N
�
���ORNO�N
0 50 100
Feet
N
Cb
•
Figure 5
Fairmont BPS Site Layout
March 2013
8" 121'
Northeast Area Planning Stud
12"
CO
Yorba Linda Water District
18"
N "ASTANCHURYRD
12'
Table 13
Fairmont Pump Station Sizing
Supply
Mix
FPS Configuration
Demand on
FPS
Recommended
Total
Sizing w/ PS
Dynamic
Imported
From
ADD
MDD
MinDD
Sizing Factor(')
Head
Condition
Groundwater
Water
Zone
To Zone
(gpm)
(gpm)
(gpm)
(gpm)
(ft)
1
36%
64%
780 -3
1,000 -1
1,420
2,102
653
2,795
330
2
41%
59%
780 -3
1,000 -1
1,420
2,102
653
2,795
330
3
45%
55%
780 -3
1,000 -1
1,420
2,102
653
2,795
330
4
48%
52%
780 -3
1,000 -1
1,420
2,102
653
2,795
330
5
52%
48%
780 -3
1,000 -1
1,420
2,102
653
2,795
330
6
70%
30%
675
92011,000 -1
1,810
2,679
833
675
920
390
577
179
768
237
675
1,000 -1
1,420
2,102
653
2,795
388
7
74%
26%
675
92011,000 -1
1,810
2,679
833
675
920
390
577
179
768
237
675
1,000 -1
1,420
2,102
653
2,795
388
8
84%
16%
675
780 -3
4,131
6,114
1,900
5,495
120
9
93%
7%
675
780 - 311,000 -1
5,551
8,216
2,554
675
780 -3
4,131
6,114
1,900
5,495
120
675
1,000 -1
1,420
2,102
653
1,889
388
Note:
1. Includes factor to account for time -of -use operation (assuming
18 hours per day).
Sized for
MDD for Conditions
1 through
7 and ADD for Conditions 8 and 9.
March 2013 23
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
As shown in Table 13, FPS would be operated similarly under Conditions 1 through 5,
supplying imported water from Zone 780 -3 to the west portion of Zone 1,000 -1.
Conditions 6 and 7 are also identical for FPS, with the pump station supplying groundwater
from Zone 675 to both Zone 1,000 -1 and Zone 920.
Conditions 8 and 9 supply Zone 780 -3 and the eastern portion of the District's service area
with groundwater from Zone 675. In Condition 9, FPS also must supply the west half of
Zone 1,000 -1 with groundwater from Zone 675. (For FPS, Condition 9 is identical to
operating fully with groundwater).
The governing flow and head conditions for the various operating conditions for FPS are
depicted on Figure 6.
400
350
300
$ 250
x 200
0
~ 150
100
50
0
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000
Flow (gpm)
Figure 6 Fairmont PS Sizing
Based on the design points in Figure 6, it is recommended that the pump station include
seven (7) pumps:
• A single pump unit to serve Zone 920 from Zone 675
• Two pump units to serve Zone 1,000 -1 from Zone 675 or Zone 780 -3 (1 +1 PS
configuration)
• Three pump units to serve Zone 780 -3 from Zone 675 (2 +1 PS configuration)
• A single pump unit to serve Zone 1,000 -1 from Zone 920 (not included in operating
conditions, but could be used to supply imported water from Zone 920 to Zone
1,000 -1)
As listed, the pump station design points for serving Zone 1,000 -1 from Zone 675 (under
Conditions 6 and 7) and the design point for serving Zone 1,000 -1 from Zone 780 -3 (under
24 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Conditions 1 through 5) are close enough to use the same set of pumps designed for the
higher point, with a VFD reducing the head for the lower operating point. Given the range of
flows needed for demand conditions other than MDD, it is recommended to use VFDs for all
pump units for maximum operating flexibility.
Based on discussions with District operations staff, it is noted that the District does not
currently utilize VFDs in the pump stations (to reduce operational complexity). The pump
station could also be implemented without VFDs, with the addition of one unit (eight units
instead of seven units). Separate units would need to be included for supplying Zone 1,000-
1 under Conditions 0 through 5 and Condition 6.
Given the ability of Zone 920 to take imported water as a supply, it is recommended to only
place a single unit (no standby) for the pump serving Zone 920. This backup supply would
allow the District to serve all demands in Zone 920 with imported water in case of a pump
failure or power outage, rather than providing additional backup capacity for this emergency
at the FPS. It is not suggested to blend the two sources under typical operating conditions if
possible, to avoid mixing of different disinfectant agents that can aversely affect water
quality. Given the design head and flow, it may be possible to design the pump station to
operate the standby unit for the second set of pumps as an emergency backup to the first
unit.
Similarly, a single pump unit is included for supply of Zone 1,000 -1 from Zone 920. While
not addressed by any of the identified operating conditions, supply the MDD + TOU
demand for Zone 1,000 -1 of 2,795 gpm from Zone 920 is predicted to require a design
head of 211 feet. If the pipeline downstream of this pump unit is increased in size (as will be
discussed later), design head of 167 feet is predicted to be sufficient. It should be noted that
the upstream Zone 920 pipeline is predicted to flow at a velocity of about 8 fps under this
condition. If this configuration was used on a regular basis, increasing the diameter of the
upstream pipeline could result in energy savings to the District over the long term.
It is recommended that the District include a natural gas powered backup generator at FPS.
The existing pump station includes engine- driven pumps, which could operate during an
electricity outage; the new pump station should also include this capability.
In addition, District operations staff indicated that capability for supplying lower pressure
zones from upper pressure zones would increase operational flexibility. Thus, it is
recommended that the pump station include pressure reducing valves to supply Zone 675
from Zone 780 -3 and supply Zone 920 from Zone 1,000 -1. These improvements should be
coordinated with existing and planned off -site pressure reducing stations to most efficiently
provide these flows given existing pipeline capacities.
The operation of the pump station for the various operating conditions are depicted in the
following figures, with the active components of the pump station for the given operating
conditions indicated in red (Figures 7 through 10).
March 2013 25
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
675
780 -3
Figure 7
675
780 -3
Figure 8
2,795 gpm @ 211'
920
1,000 -1
CO
0
CO
o
M
O
N
�1 ^Q
v
.
N
(V
�-
O 0
>
O`er
E
CL
N
L
+ u
Q CV >
O
O
ti
fl
m
�
�
N
N
Fairmont PS Conditions 1 through 5 (Zone 780 -3 to 1,000 -1)
2,795 gpm a 211'
920 1,000 -1
i�
r7
Cq
E + U—
CL . .'
M
CO
dp
R
CO
ro
E + a
Q
� u
O
CV
780 -3
0
cv
r
@; ❑
Q
tm [V
CO
.t
h-
CV
Fairmont PS Conditions 6 and 7 (Zone 675 to 920/1,000 -1)
26 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
675
780 -3
2,795 gpm @ 211'
i--
@&D
CL ->
CD
co
to
r-
Figure 9
co
co
M
�+
CL >
LO
Fairmont PS Condition 8 (Zone 675 to 780 -3)
2,795 gpm @ 211'
E+ o
rn� >
00
v
r~
ni
Figure 10 Fairmont PS Condition 9 (Zone 675 to 780 - 3/1,000 -1)
Operation under Conditions 1, 6, and 9 were verified in the hydraulic model to check that
tank cycling would occur regularly. Pipeline sizes of 16- inches diameter were assumed for
the Zone 1,000 -1 pump units, with roughness coefficients of 130. Development demands
were assumed to use a unit diurnal pattern.
March 2013 27
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
In addition to the identified pump station improvements, pipelines in the vicinity of FPS with
velocities exceeding the sizing criteria of 7 fps were identified as potential hydraulic
bottlenecks. These pipelines are as follows and shown on Figure 11:
• The existing 12 -inch diameter Zone 1,000 -1 pipeline installed in 1986 extending 3,500
feet along Fairmont Boulevard between FPS and Forest Avenue is predicted to
experience velocities of about 7.6 fps under future system conditions (Conditions 1 — 5,
6, 7, and 9). If this segment of pipeline is upgraded to a 16 -inch diameter pipeline, the
pump station head could be reduced from approximately 388 feet to 364 feet. In
addition, it is predicted that the design head of the seventh pump unit could be reduced
in head from 211 feet to 167 feet. Based on discussions with District staff, given the age
of the pipeline, paralleling with a 16 -inch diameter pipeline and abandoning in the future
may be a preferred phasing approach.
• The 12 -inch diameter Zone 780 -3 pipeline extending 670 feet along Fairmont Boulevard
from Bastanchury Road onto the District's FPS site is predicted to experience velocities
of about 8.2 fps under future system conditions (Conditions 1 — 5). Adding a dedicated
pipeline north of the Bryant Cross Feeder to the FPS site would require about 800 feet
of 24 -inch diameter pipeline.
4.5.2 Hidden Hills and Santiago Pump Stations
If the new Esperanza Hills /Sage development is supplied from Zone 1,000 -1, Hidden Hills
and Santiago pump stations would not experience any increased demands. Both pump
stations would operate under existing conditions for all operating conditions. However, if the
Esperanza Hills Estates development connects to Zone 1,390 to utilize storage capacity in
Hidden Hills Reservoir as described in Section 3.4.2, the capacity of each pump station
needs to be increased. However, the demands would be consistent under all operating
conditions. shows the capacity analysis with the development demands.
Table 14
Hidden Hills and Santiago PS Sizing
Additional
Additional
Existing
Firm
Existing
Development
TOU
Total
Firm
Capacity
Pump
Pressure
MDD
MDD
Demand
Demand
Capacity
Needed
Station
Zone
(gpm)
(gpm)
(gpm)
(gpm)
(gpm)
(gpm)
Hidden
1,000 -2
909
500
465
1,874
1,400
474
Hills PS
(Santiago),
908, 1,390,
1,133
Santiago
1,390,
252
500
417
1,169
800
369
PS
1,133
28 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Quarter 6° $„ J Legend
16 12" Horse Pump Stations
(Reservoir E) Reservoirs
Pipeline
fig" Replace 12" with 16' 12" by Diameter
(Zone 1,000 -1; 3,50 ft) 8 inches and less
10 to 14 inches
o
12" 0 16 to 20 inches
24 inches and larger
Fairmont Blvd
Zone 780 -3 Pipeline
Fairmont Blvd
101, 10" Zone 1,000 -1 Pipeline
8 p
C Fairmont Reservoir
Parcels
1W
F ont
r 0 R servoir
[780-11. and BPS
i� Replace 12"
(Zone 780 -
8"
Bq
N
R'Y'
I.
r-
0
M
10° 0 200 400
Feet
Figure 11
I al Pipeline Improveme March 2013
east Area Planning Stud ba Linda Water District
Enaineers...Workina Wonders With Water
As shown in Table 14, the firm capacity of the existing pump stations would be insufficient
to meet MDD and the additional TOU demand after connection of the new development.
The Hidden Hills PS would require a 500 -gpm increase in firm capacity, while the Santiago
PS would require a 400 -gpm increase in firm capacity.
The current sizing of each pump station and the recommended additional units (shown in
bold) are shown in Table 15.
Table 15 Existing Pump Station Hydraulics
Size
Design Flow Design Head
Pump Station Unit Type (hp)
(gpm) (ft)
Hidden Hills PS
1(') Electric 20
600 200
2 Electric 40
650 290
3 Electric 40
650 290
4(') Electric 40
650 290
new Electric 40
650 290
Santiago PS
1 Electric 75
300 450
2 Electric 25
100 425
3 Electric 100
500 430
4 Engine 240
1,520 385
new Electric 100
500 430
Note:
1. Manufacturer pump curves note that Units 2, 3,
and 4 have a design point of 650 gpm
at 290 feet of head. 2005 WMP describes Unit 4 as 20 hp, with 200 gpm capacity, with
Units 1, 2, and 3 having a capacity of 400 gpm.
Within hydraulic model, curves for Units
1, 2, and 3 are similar, with Unit 4 providing a much lower head. To maintain
consistency with the manufacturer curve sheets, Units 2, 3, and 4 are assumed identical
here, with Unit 1 being the lower flow pump.
As shown, it is recommended that an additional unit be added to both pump stations
(identical to Unit 3 in each case).
5.0 HYDRAULIC MODELING
As a part of this study, the District's hydraulic model was updated and calibrated for fireflow,
extended period simulation (EPS) capabilities, and water quality conditions. A screenshot of
the updated hydraulic model is shown on Figure 12. Details on the hydraulic model user's
manual and calibration process are included in Appendix D and E, respectively.
30 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ DocumentslClienUCA/ YLWD /9047AOO /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Water quality analysis was conducted using the multi- species extension (MSX) capabilities
included in InfoWater MSX, as described in Appendix E.
In addition, the various operating conditions discussed in Section 4.4 were modeled within
the hydraulic model. In addition, the improvement pipelines discussed in Section 4.2, were
sized using the updated hydraulic model.
iJI:.d90:..•br �:•- ! ®':J_M�.:- V,�n.....•R v•A•.:��r
-MA
I I=mo J J
�• .: c �s plo
- �!lt' &�1 �t w,7iA0X'ti' �' 3 + + +iiiCJ111 "ter ♦. r- .. ;
so
•�,.i > >�tt�xl. ' "•- �2 °� � ,/'�� ,.,, �Y ' ?3,T tai.
t
Figure 12 Hydraulic Model Screenshot
5.1 Updates to Hydraulic Model
Prior to the calibration process, the hydraulic model was updated to reflect existing
conditions of the District's distribution system. This included interpolating elevations to all
model junctions, closing pipe segments or inserting closed valves to enforce pressure zone
boundaries, updating pump units, revising groundwater wells to utilize pump elements
rather than flow control valves, incorporating seasonal valves based on operating condition,
and more fully modeling pressure regulating stations.
Pipelines constructed since the development of the previous hydraulic model were added to
the hydraulic model from the District's GIS layers, provided on 9 August 2012. In addition,
the following projects were added to the hydraulic model based on record drawings or
construction plans provided by District staff:
• Lakeview Grade Separation Project, which included an 18 -inch diameter transmission
main relocation (dated June 2011)
March 2013 31
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
2010 Waterline Replacement Project, including replacement of two PRS and five
pipeline segments (July 2012)
Pressure Reducing Station Upgrades, including replacement of four PRS (dated
August 2011)
Well 20
During the calibration process, controls and pressure reducing station settings were added
to the hydraulic model based on discussions with District staff.
5.2 Near -Term Facilities Included in Hydraulic Model
In addition to the model updates discussed previously, several facilities that are currently in
planning or design stages were incorporated into the hydraulic model as near -term facilities.
These near -term facilities are:
• Yorba Linda Boulevard Pipeline, including installation of a 20 -inch diameter pipeline
(dated January 2012)
• Yorba Linda Boulevard Booster Pumping Station (dated August 2012)
• Yorba Linda High School Bryant Cross Feeder Replacement — 90 percent drawings
(dated December 2012)
• Well 21
While model management practices are discussed in greater detail in Appendix D, these
facilities are identified separately from existing facilities in the hydraulic model by use of the
Status field. Prior to changing these facilities from near -term (Status of "NRT ") to existing
(Status of "ACT "), the facility details should be reviewed as they may have changed during
the design and construction process.
6.0 WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
6.1 Nitrification Action Plan and Current Operating Practices
In 2002, the District conducted a nitrification study, which concluded nitrification was
occurring in some of the District's reservoirs during certain operating conditions (YLWD,
2002). Nitrification refers to the biological conversion of free ammonia (from chloramines
decay or interaction with free chlorine) to nitrite and sometimes nitrate, leading to high
microbial counts and further degradation of chloramines residual by the nitrite.
The study recommended a Nitrification Action Plan, consisting of the following steps:
32 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Alert Level — increased sampling frequency, dependent upon the severity of water
quality degradation
Action Level 1 — cycling the reservoir or reducing the reservoir operating level
Action Level 2 — super - chlorination, reservoir flushing, or sediment cleaning
The steps are triggered based on sampled levels of chlorine, nitrite, heterotrophic plate
counts (HPC), and ammonia. The plan also recommended some possible capital
improvements to increase mixing in some reservoirs.
Within chloraminated systems, nitrification occurs under high water age or conditions of
mixing free chlorine with combined chlorine, which leads to loss of residual, release of free
ammonia, and microbial growth.
Low chlorine residuals are particularly a concern to the District in the District's upper
pressure zones, where large storage volumes and low demands lead to long retention
times. District operations staff operate some of the reservoirs in the upper pressure zones
at reduced levels or reduced capacity to reduce retention times and aid in cycling.
Based on discussions with District staff, the District follows the procedures in its Nitrification
Action Plan when nitrification is occurring as indicated by the key water quality parameters
levels (e.g. total chlorine, nitrite, HPC, and total and free ammonia). Based on review of
SCADA data of reservoir levels (as a part of the hydraulic model calibration), District
operations staff are diligent about cycling reservoirs on a consistent schedule and
maintaining separation of source waters (i.e., free chlorine groundwater and combined
chlorine imported water) where possible.
6.2 Sampled Chlorine Levels in Distribution System
As a part of this project, the District provided water quality sampling data from its Total
Chlorine Residual (TCR) sampling sites. These data were analyzed to determine what
typical fluctuations in chlorine residual occur in the distribution system, and whether
breakpoint chlorination is generally occurring. Table 16 presents a summary of these data
by sampling site and hydraulic zone, with sampling sites including some low residual levels
in both free and combined chlorine (Total chlorine < 0.1 mg /L) highlighted in green.
As discussed in Section 4.4, the District changes supply sources for pressure zones to
achieve targeted supply balances (related to BPP and groundwater percentage of overall
supply). Since this analysis is covering samples taken over an entire year, some of the
identified breakpoint chlorination could be occurring during the periodic cycling of water
sources. Several sample sites are served with combined chlorine between May and
October, and free chlorine during the balance of the year.
March 2013 33
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
However, within Zone 2 breakpoint chlorination is occurring due to physical mixing of the
groundwater and imported water. This is due to the hydraulics of the east side of Zone 2
requiring additional pressure from Zone 3 via several PRS. The District's operations staff is
aware of this situation.
Table 16
Chlorine Residual by Sample Site and Zone
Average
Minimum
Average
Minimum
Combined
Combined
Free
Free
Sample
Source
Chlorine (2)
Chlorine (2)
Chlorine (2)
Chlorine (2)
Site
Zone
Water(')
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
13
1A
GW
1.09
0.65
31
1A
GW
1.09
0.77
35
1A
GW
1.23
0.76
34
1A
GW
0.94
0.61
32
1A
GW
1.13
0.76
24
2
VAR
1.86
0.02
0.78
0.02
27
2
VAR
1.67
0.02
0.47
0.02
22
2
VAR
1.69
0.01
0.51
0.02
25
2
VAR
1.69
0.05
0.66
0.05
14
2
GW
1.09
0.76
28
2
GW
1.11
0.75
30
2
GW
1.11
0.72
23
2
VAR
1.82
0.08
0.80
0.00
21
2
GW
1.11
0.71
29
2
GW
1.08
0.72
19
3A
VAR
1.55
0.07
0.93
0.28
26
3A
VAR
1.61
0.05
0.83
0.02
20
3A
VAR
1.53
0.09
0.75
0.03
16
3B
IW
1.89
1.39
17
3B
IW
2.00
1.32
36
3A
VAR
1.20
0.05
1.01
0.02
11
3A
VAR
1.19
0.05
1.06
0.06
33
3A
VAR
1.23
0.05
1.01
0.02
8
3A
VAR
1.27
0.06
1.01
0.79
6
4C
IW
2.07
1.23
34 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ DocumentslClienUCA/ YLWD /9047AOO /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Table 16
Chlorine Residual by Sample Site and Zone
Average Minimum Average
Minimum
Combined Combined Free
Free
Sample
Source Chlorine (2) Chlorine (2) Chlorine (2)
Chlorine (2)
Site
Zone Water(') (mg/L) (mg /L) (mg /L)
(mg /L)
9
4C IW 2.24 1.14
7
4C IW 2.02 1.17
10
4C IW 2.24 1.40
12
4D IW 2.00 1.63
37
4A VAR 1.29 0.08 0.91
0.05
2
5B IW 2.02 0.30
5
5B VAR 1.97 0.08 0.03
0.02
18
5U IW 1.64 0.78
15
5A VAR 1.35 0.03 0.37
0.03
3
6B IW 1.80 0.03
4
6D IW 1.23 0.25
1
6A IW 1.80 0.06
Notes:
1. IW = Imported Water; GW = Groundwater; VAR = Varies, depending on operating condition or
mixing is occurring (likely through pressure reducing stations). Several sites covert
to imported
water between May and October, such as those located within Zones 3, 4, and 5.
2. Water quality sampled weekly from January through October of 2012.
3. Since free and total chlorine are not sampled at each sampling site, judgment was used based
on source water to determine the likely state of the total chlorine.
As shown in Table 16, chlorination type is generally separated by pressure zone. As
discussed previously, supply sources to some pressure zones are adjusted seasonally to
achieve production targets. Some water quality sampling sites show signs that mixing is
occurring of free chlorinated water and water disinfected with chloramines (specifically in
Zone 2). At some sites, breakpoint chlorination is likely occurring under certain operating
conditions.
Figure 13 shows the sampled chlorine residual at each of the District's sampling sites over
the course of the year. This chart illustrates the difference in total chlorine residual for the
chloraminated and free chlorine disinfected supply water by sampling site. Free chlorine
disinfected sampling sites are shown in orange, with chloraminated sites shown in green.
Sites which appear to switch sources from groundwater during January through May to
imported water from May through October are shown in blue. Note that only a few sites are
shown to simplify the graphic.
March 2013 35
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
3.0
2.5
J
01
2.0
to
W 1.5
L) 1.0
M
0
11111111110"
MOSTLY
COMBINED
CHLORINE
� �1� ,�,�i►
fit;; .a
� �,
I
I
fil ' �►�_ , 111 _ I
��1/,►�
WY �
GROUNDWATER
.- ►
CHLORINE
RESIDUAL
TARGET
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
-x--37 —11 —7 —22 -x-35 17 21 29 —12
Figure 13 Sampled Chlorine Residuals by Sampling Site
The District also provided sampling data for each of the District's reservoirs. A summary of
this data is shown in Table 17 along with the calculated total chlorine to ammonia (as N)
ratios, which are used to determine whether free chlorine is present within the reservoir.
Notes are included to describe some of the analysis of the data shown.
36 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Table 17 Sampled Water Quality Data at Reservoirs
Total Chlorine
Chlorine:Ammonia (as N)
(mg
/L)
Ratio
Reservoir
Average
Range
Average
Range
Notes
Bryant Ranch
1.74
1.34-2.05
4.9
1.3
- 19.1
Almost entirely combined, some dichloramine
Camino de Bryant
0.84
0.25-2.03
3.1
0.3-29.7
Low residual in July, likely due to breakpoint
Chino Hills
1.34
0.07-2.17
4.2
0.8
- 11.7
Low residuals in February and November
Elk Mountain
1.51
0.06-2.04
4.6
0.3
- 11.6
Low residuals in October and November
Fairmont
0.89
0.13-2.08
6.5
0.1 -136.0
Supply switched to IW in May through October
Gardenia
1.79
0.88-2.44
12.7
0.9-126.0
Supply switched to IW in May through October
Hidden Hills
1.35
0.07-2.14
4.4
0.1
-20.5
Low residual in July, likely due to breakpoint
Lakeview
0.87
0.76-0.98
38.6
0.8-93.0
Groundwater supply
Low residual on occasion, excess ammonia in
Little Canyon
1.73
0.17-2.37
5.0
0.2-21.3
October
Low residual on occasion, periods of free
Quarter Horse
0.99
0.05-2.21
7.0
0.1
-70.0
chlorine
Santiago
1.83
1.08-2.14
4.6
1.1
-18.7
Entirely combined
Low residual in March, potentially due to
Spring View
1.85
0.47-2.28
5.2
0.5-23.5
breakpoint
Valley View
1.67
0.45-2.42
11.9
0.5-60.5
Supply switched to IW in May through October
March 2013 37
pw:l /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
6.3 Impact of Proposed Improvements on Water Quality
Since the proposed developments are anticipated to increase demand in the upper
pressure zones, connecting the developments would likely lead to decreased retention
times and simpler cycling practices.
Following water quality calibration, the hydraulic model was used to predict the effect of
connecting the developments on chlorine levels in the distribution system. Figure 15
presents predicted total chlorine residuals across the distribution system along with
sampled total chlorine residuals at the District's water quality sampling sites. It should be
noted that a comparison of the sampled residuals and predicted residuals is included in
Appendix E along with a discussion of the calibration and results. Figure 16 presents
predicted total chlorine levels under near -term conditions, assuming operating Condition 1
and summer demand conditions. Each of these maps shows the predicted residual levels at
12:00 noon. It should be noted that the simulation run time for the existing system was
longer (5 days), thus the lower residual levels in portions of the free chlorine area of the
distribution system.
As is discussed in Appendix E, a number of assumptions are made in preparing the water
quality analysis shown here; as the conditions affecting these assumptions may vary, the
District should use the results as an anticipated range rather than counting on the specific
levels shown in this analysis.
In addition, the predicted total chlorine residual within the Little Canyon reservoir is shown
under existing conditions and with the development demand connected to the distribution
system Figure 14.
38 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
25
= 20
J
'p 15
N
E
v
5
L
a
6:00 AM 12:00 PM 6:00 PM
2.0
1.8
1.60
3
1.40
3 �
1.2 cD Q
X F
1.0 y p
0-
0.8 0 O
0.62
cc
0.41—
0.2
Time of Day
Near -Term Reservoir Level (ft) — Existing Reservoir Level (ft)
Near -Term Total Chlorine (mg /L) Existing Total Chlorine Residual (mg /L)
Figure 14 Predicted Effect of Development on Little Canyon Reservoir
As shown in Figure 14, the cycling is predicted to be slightly improved after the
development has been connected, with the added demands increasing the pull of demands
during the take portion of the reservoir cycling and the increased capacity of the Fairmont
PS filling the reservoir more rapidly. As shown, chlorine levels are not predicted to change
substantially.
It should be noted that, within the hydraulic model, reservoirs are treated as fully mixed at
all times, a condition that is not realistic for most reservoirs. Thus, this prediction assumes
fully mixed reservoirs. The key steps the District can implement to limit nitrification from
occurring are reducing water age and improving mixing within the District's reservoirs.
Thus, implementing measures to more fully replicate the fully mixed condition should
reduce the loss of residual from decay and microbial reactions.
March 2013 39
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
�T
El
— —
t I 1.9
1.9
• L -LI I
1.8
Q
_s
- - -I 0.9 I ' •i
- �, • , i
• I
,
J 1.2 •
- ` 0.9: -I
Y
7.
r. III•
IJ
I
'a
Legend
Sampling Sites
El Sampled Total Cl (mg /L)
0 <0.2
TELEGRAPH CA NYON Rd 00.2-1.0
01.0-1.5
O1.5 - 2.0
�1.9�_` _' . . J 1.9.E >2.0
—`� Model Nodes
'� --� �� • Predicted Total Cl (mg /L)
\ < 0.2
Z• 0.2 - 1.0
I
-• - - �� '� - - _ �N J 1.0 - 1.5
1.9
• T ' •� -' ,� ;' 1 Service Area
1' 1
.. p
Pipeline
f *o � + • i. � !i ' - � � .._,_ � t; �, ^� 1 -� ,m �t ,, v - � ` � -� J•��
• • 4 - •� ' I `� - i by Diameter (inches)
l
• I - Ti ;.4 • / i Is i mot' \ 1 less than 8
8 to 12
• _ f `� �!�',' 'I /� `/ l E 16 and larger
-I 2
Parcels
0 0.75 1.
Miles
Figure 15 Sampled and Predicted
Existing Residuals
February 2013
Northeast Area Planning Study
Yorba Linda Water District
wineers...Working Wonders With
- 1
TELEGRAPH GANYON Rd
� • \•ter
Ltj
o
I -
I ,
II art
_
4.
do
14- tj
1 , _
_ � I
I
j
Lf
h
_j��.
0
,
'a
I'
Legend
Model Nodes
Predicted Total Cl (mg /L)
< 0.2
0.2 - 1.0
1.0 - 1.5
1.5 - 2.0
• > 2.0
QService Area
Pipeline
by Diameter (inches)
less than 8
8 to 12
16 and larger
Parcels
-J
',gineers... Working Wonders With
0 0.75 1.5
Miles
Figure 16
Predicted Near -Term
Residuals
Operating Condition 1
MDD Conditions
March 2013
Northeast Area Planning Study
Yorba Linda Water District
oft im Pw //A-
',gineers... Working Wonders With
6.4 Recommendations
Based on the modeling predictions, the District may anticipate similar residual levels in the
future as currently experienced. It is anticipated that the connection of the developments
will improve cycling of the Little Canyon reservoir as shown in Figure 14. As noted
previously, the key steps the District can implement to limit nitrification from occurring are
reducing water age and improving mixing within the District's reservoirs. Increased cycling
will help to improve mixing, but new reservoirs in the upper pressure zones will also
increase water age.
In order to limit chlorine residual loss from decay and microbial reactions, it is
recommended that the District decrease water age and improve mixing in reservoirs, induce
breakpoint chlorination to eliminate microbial populations under a free chlorine residual
shock dose when nitrification occurs, and implement a system providing real -time
automated monitoring of disinfection residual to improve reaction time to nitrification
episodes. Several of these steps are included in the District's existing nitrification action
plan; it is recommended that the District continue to follow its reservoir cycling practices,
following the guidelines recommended in the nitrification study.
Based on this study, additional recommendations are included for future new reservoirs,
chlorine residual booster stations, and to improve future water quality analyses.
6.4.1 New Reservoirs
For future new reservoirs, it is recommended that the District include the following elements
in the design phase:
• separate inlet and outlets
• mixing device within the reservoir
• samplers to provide real -time automated monitoring of disinfection residual
Reviewing record drawings of recently completed reservoirs, the District has implemented
separate inlet and outlets at several of its most recently completed reservoirs, and has
added SCADA connected total chlorine residual monitors at reservoirs where loss of
chlorine residual is of particular concern, including Hidden Hills and Camino de Bryant
reservoirs. Including multiple diffused inlets should further improve mixing with the
reservoirs.
Reservoir management systems currently on the market incorporate real -time automated
monitoring of disinfection residual and a mixing device. Models are also available with
disinfection capabilities through free chlorine injection or an automated booster
chloramination system. The District should consider the implementation of such a device in
March 2013 45
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
the design of new reservoirs. Such a system could also benefit existing reservoirs, such as
Camino de Byrant reservoir.
6.4.2 Chlorine Booster Station
In addition to efforts associated with reductions in water age and increasing reservoir
mixing, addition of a disinfection point at a strategic location in the distribution system to
increase chlorine residual would be beneficial. The benefit would be maximized where a
switch of disinfection type is in place seasonally or where mixing of residual types physically
occur within the distribution system, under which conditions chlorine residual loss is more
likely to take place.
As discussed in Section 4.5.1, Fairmont PS would be a centralized location for the future
distribution system. Incorporating a disinfection point at Fairmont PS would allow the ability
of increasing the chlorine residual for the following zones:
• Zones 1,000 -1, 1,160, and 1,300 under Operating Conditions 1 through 7 as wells
as Operating Condition 9
• Zone 920 under Operating Conditions 6 and 7
• Zones 680, 718, 780 -3, 780 -4, 908, 991, 1,000 -2, 1,133, 1,165, and 1,390 under
Operating Conditions 8 and 9. (As discussed previously, supplying this Operating
Condition is only feasible under lower demand conditions given the District's current
pump station capacities and groundwater supplies. This condition is also not
anticipated to occur frequently in the future when the District intends to achieve a
more consistent BPP target throughout the year.)
The District currently only disinfects with free chlorine. Disinfection generally occurs at
disinfection stations near the wellfield. In addition, the District maintains a disinfection
station at Lakeview PS, which is run when breakpoint chlorination is required when
supplying Zone 675 from 570.
Since Fairmont PS would convey both free - chlorine disinfected water and chloraminated
water, ideally a disinfection station that could inject both free chlorine and chloramines
would provide the most operational flexibility. However, this would be the District's first
chloramination facility, requiring the District's operational staff to begin handling
chloramines.
If a free - chlorine disinfection station is incorporated into Fairmont PS, the intended
operation would change based on the supply water (thus based on the Operating
Condition). When supplying groundwater (Operating Conditions 6, 8, and 9), the
disinfection station would simply increase free chlorine residual to the targeted residual
level. When supplying imported water, the disinfection station would need to induce
breakpoint chlorination, under an as- needed basis (e.g., when nitrification or residual loss is
46 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
occurring). Based on the District's water quality sampling records discussed in Section 6.2,
residual loss has occurred at the Little Canyon reservoir. Disinfection with free chlorine
would result in the formation of disinfection byproducts.
It should be noted that boosting disinfectant residuals for Zones 680, 718, 780 -3, 780 -4,
908, 991, 1,000 -2, 1,133, 1,165, and 1,390 under Operating Conditions 1 through 7 (the
District's typical operating conditions), would not be possible at Fairmont PS. Boosting
chlorine in the at a facility along the Bryant Cross Feeder would increase the chlorine
residual to some of these pressure zones.
Based on these advantages and disadvantages, it is recommended that the District installs
disinfection station into the design of the Fairmont PS that can inject free chlorine during
emergencies. It should be noted that this would not allow boosting disinfectant residuals in
the eastern pressure zones during Operating Conditions 1 -7, but avoids the needs of
operating staff to work with chloramines. If the District continues to experience loss of
residual in the future in the eastern pressure zones, or if this emergency approach is not
sufficient, the next recommended step would be to install reservoir management systems
(mixers, analyzers, and potentially injection of chloramines).
6.4.3 Improving Water Quality Analysis
Some recommendations that could increase the potential accuracy of future water quality
modeling include sampling for TOC at reservoir sites, sampling for both free and total
chlorine at TCR sites, sampling for pH in the reservoirs as wells as distribution system sites,
and conducting jar testing on samples of the groundwater to approximate a bulk coefficient
of decay for the free chlorine component. The nitrification study recommended increased
sampling of some of these constituents, specifically free chlorine, pH, and free ammonia.
7.0 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the analysis completed as a part of this study, the estimated storage
requirements for the new potential developments is 1.3 MG, including fire flow storage.
Based on the identified operating conditions for supplies, the recommended configuration
and sizing of pumps for the FPS is detailed in Table 18. All pump units are recommended to
be controlled by variable frequency drives (VFDs). If the District elects to install constant
speed pumps rather than VFDs, an eighth unit would be recommended at the pump station
to pump from Zone 675 to Zone 780 -3 to provide additional flexibility in the range of flows
the pump station could accommodate between Zones 675 and 780 -3.
March 2013 47
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Table 18
Fairmont PS Sizing
Total Design
To From
TDH
Capacity(')
Units
Zone Zone
(ft)
(gpm)
Notes
1
920 675
237
800
No standby unit included
since OC89 provides
reliability.
2 - 3
1,000 -1 675/780 -3
388
2,800
1 +1 configuration
4 - 6
780 -3 675
120
5,500
2 +1 configuration
7
1,000 -1 920
211
2,800
No standby unit included
since not assumed to be a
typical operating condition.
Notes:
1. Rounded up to nearest 100
gpm.
If the development connects to Zone 1,000 -2 or Zone 1,390, Hidden Hills PS and Santiago
PS would need to be increased in size. This is discussed in Section 4.5.2.
In addition, a natural gas powered generator or portable generator trailer connection at the
FPS site is recommended for emergency backup in case of an electricity outage.
Based on hydraulic model analysis, the following two pipelines were also identified as
deficient (as hydraulic bottlenecks):
The 12 -inch diameter Zone 1,000 -1 pipeline extending 3,500 feet along Fairmont
Boulevard between FPS and Forest Avenue. This pipeline should be replaced by a
16 -inch diameter pipeline or paralleled with a 12 -inch diameter pipeline.
The 12 -inch diameter Zone 780 -3 pipeline extending 670 feet along Fairmont
Boulevard from Bastanchury Road onto the District's FPS. Adding a dedicated
pipeline north of the Bryant Cross Feeder would require about 800 feet of 24 -inch
diameter pipeline.
These pipelines are recommended for increased diameter replacement or additional
parallel pipelines to be constructed as a part of upgrading the FPS.
For water quality, the key steps the District can implement to limit nitrification and residual
loss from occurring are reducing water age and improving mixing within the District's
reservoirs. It is recommended that the District continue to follow its reservoir cycling
practices, following the guidelines recommended in the nitrification study.
For new reservoirs, it is recommended that the District include within the design systems to
increase cycling within the reservoirs, consisting of separate inlet and outlets (using multiple
48 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
diffused inlets where possible), samplers to provide real -time automated monitoring of
disinfection residual, and a mixing device within the reservoir. A reservoir management
system could provide this functionality in a single system along with boosting disinfection
residual.
For the Fairmont PS, it is recommended that the District incorporate a disinfection station
into the design that can inject free chlorine during emergencies. If this emergency approach
is not sufficient, the next recommended step would be to install reservoir management
systems (mixers, analyzers, and potentially injection of chloramines).
To improve future water quality analyses, it is recommended that the District include
sampling for TOC at reservoir sites, sampling for both free and total chlorine at TCR sites,
sampling for pH in the reservoirs as wells as distribution system sites, and conducting jar
testing on samples of the groundwater to approximate a bulk coefficient of decay for the
free chlorine component.
March 2013 49
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /Northeast Area Planning Study Report.docx
Appendix A
REFERENCES
(KWC, 2012) KWC Engineers, Yorba Linda Estates Conceptual Layout, March
2012.
(SMP, 2012) Summers /Murphy and Partners, Inc., "Esperanza Hills Conceptual
Trails Plan Stonehaven Drive Option 1 ", 30 October 2012.
(YLWD, 2002) Water Reservoir Nitrification Prevention and Control Study,
September 2002.
(YLWD, 2005) Domestic Water System Master Plan, May 2005.
References: GIS Layers
Date
Layer Name Description Modified
[Original Filename] (or
Received) Source
YLWD _GIS _082012.mdb Water System GIS 20 August YLWD
2012
Elevation Contours [breakline.shp,
bridge.shp, Depression Index
Contour Hidden Segment.shp,
Depression Index Contour.shp, September
Depression Intermediate Elevation Contours 2012 YLWD
Contour.shp, Index Contour
Hidden Segment.shp, Index
Contour.shp, Intermediate
Contour.shp]
References: Water Distribution System Data
File Name
[Original Filename]
Demands - Daily Consumption and
Production - 2008 to June 2012.x1sm
Demands - Monthly Demand - 2001 to
2012.xlsx
Supply Data - Production Zone
Percentages from Operations.xlsx
Pump Tests - SCE - Valley View and
Lakeview BPS (June 2011).pdf
Pump Tests - SCE - Groundwater Wells
(2011).pdf
Pump Curve - Well 19 VFD Affinity Curve
Operating Zone.pdf
Pump Curve — Well 19 Email
Correction.pdf
Pump Curve - Well 20 (December
2011).pdf
Pump Curve — BPS (June 2011).pdf
Format Date Range, Modified
(or Received) Resolution
January 2008 —
XLS June 2012 Daily
XLS January 2001 — Monthly
July 2012
XLS
December 2012
Not
Applicable
PDF
June 2011
Not
Applicable
PDF
2011
Not
Applicable
PDF
June 2007
Not
Applicable
PDF
January 2007
Not
Applicable
PDF
June 2011
Not
Applicable
PDF
June 2011
Not
Applicable
Appendix B
SUPPLY OPERATING CONDITIONS
Figure B.1 - Condition 1
Quarterhorse
Reservoir
Gardenia
Reservoir
0051
Valley
View
Reservoir
SV50
Fairmont
Reservoir
1 :•
Paso Fino
BPS
Springview
Reservoir
Trentino PRS
OC66
7j Del Rey
PRS
Little Canyon
Reservoir
To
1,300,
Santiago
Reservoir
To 1,390,
908
Bryant
Cross
Feeder
1'
Fairmont
BPS
riiaaen rliiis
BPS
To BCB, Zones
680,780-4,
1,165, 991, and
718
(14 %)
Suppler
Imported Water: 64%
Groundwater: 36%
Figure B.2 - Condition 2
Quarterhorse
Reservoir
Valley
View
Reservoir
Gardenia
Reservoir
0051
Lakeview
BPS
1 :•
Paso Fino
BPS
Springview
Reservoir
Trentino PRS
OC66
Fairmont
Reservoir
Del Rey
PRS
Little Canyon
Reservoir
To
1,300,
.1 4 fl n
Santiago
Reservoir
To 1,390,
908
Bryant
Cross
Feeder
1'
x indicates closed seasonal valve for supply
separation in a single pressure zone
Fairmont
BPS
BPS
To BCB, Zones
680,780-4,
1,165, 991, and
718
(14 %)
Suppler
Imported Water: 59%
Groundwater: 41 %
Figure B.3 - Condition 3
Quarterhorse
Reservoir
Paso Fino
BPS
Gardenia
Reservoir
Trentin
Fairmont
Reservoir
Valley View
BPS
Lakeview
x
BPS
1 :•
Springview
Reservoir
Del Rey
PRS
Little Canyon
Reservoir
To
1,300,
.1 4 fl n
Santiago
Reservoir
To 1,390,
908
Bryant
Cross
Feeder
1'
x indicates closed seasonal valve for supply
separation in a single pressure zone
Fairmont
BPS
BPS
To BCB, Zones
680,780-4,
1,165, 991, and
718
(14 %)
Suppler
Imported Water: 55%
Groundwater: 45%
Figure B.4 - Condition 4
Gardenia
Reservoir
Quarterhorse
Reservoir
Paso Fino
Valley v •
View Fairmon
Reservoir Reservoir
Valley View
BPS
Lakeview
x
BPS
OC66
Springview
Reservoir
Del Rey
PRS
Little Canyon
Reservoir
x indicates closed seasonal valve for supply
separation in a single pressure zone
To
1,300,
1,160
Bryant
Cross
Feeder
Fairmont
BPS
Santiago
Reservoir
To 1,390,
1,133, 908
Hidden Hills
BPS
To BCB, Zones
680,780-4,
1,165, 991, and
718
(14 %)
Suppler
Imported Water: 52%
Groundwater: 48%
Figure B.5 - Condition 5
Quarterhorse
Reservoir
Valley
View
Reservoir
Gardenia
Reservoir
0051
Lakeview
BPS
Yorba Linda
BPS
Fairmont
Reservoir
Paso Finc
BPS
Trentin
Little Canyon Santiago
Reservoir Reservoir
OC89 To
1,300,
.1 4 fl n
To 1,390,
908
Suppler
Imported Water: 42%
Groundwater: 58%
:s
id
Figure B.6 - Condition 6
Valley
View
Reservoir
Gardenia
Reservoir
0051
Lakeview
BPS
Yorba Linda
BPS
Quarterhorse
Reservoir
Z
Fairmont
Reservoir
�pringview
Reservoir
Little Canyon
Reservoir
11
1 000
Bryant
Cross
Feeder
Fairmont
BPS
Santiago
Reservoir
To
1,300, To 1,390,
1,160 1,133, 908
Hidden Hills
BPS
To BCB, Zones
680,780-4,
1,165, 991, and
718
(14 %)
Note: Several facilities are not shown to simplify Supply
profile. Refer to detailed hydraulic profile (Appendix C) o
for reference of other facilities. Imported Water: 30 /o
(Del Rey PRS and OC89 would be closed) Groundwater: 70%
Figure B.7 - Condition 7
Quarterhorse
Reservoir
Gardenia
Reservoir
Valley
View
Reservoir
Valley View
BPS
Lakeview
BPS
MI
Yorba Lind
BPS
Fairmont
Reservoir
konA
E ,�l
�pringview
Reservoir
Little Canyon
Reservoir
Santiago
Reservoir
To
1,300,
.1 4 fl n
To 1,390,
908
Bryant
Cross
Feeder
Fairmont
BPS
Hidden Hills
BPS
To BCB, Zones
680,780-4,
1,165, 991, and
718
(14 %)
Zones indicates closed seasonal valve Supply MIX o
� X Imported Water: 26 /o
for supply separation in a
single pressure zone Groundwater: 74%
Figure B.8 - Condition 8
Valley
View
Reservoir
Gardenia
Reservoir
0051
Lakeview
BPS
Yorba Linda
BPS
Quarterhorse OC89 Little Canyon
Reservoir Reservoir
Paso Fin
o
BPS
Springview
Reservoir
OC66
Bryant
Fairmont Cross
Reservoir Feeder
x indicates closed seasonal valve for supply
separation in a single pressure zone
To
1,300,
1,1F^
Santiago
Reservoir
To 1,390,
908
Hidden Hills
BPS
Fairmont
BPS
CB, Zones
), 780 -4,
i, 991, and
718
(14 %)
Suppler
Imported Water: 16%
Groundwater: 84%
Figure B.9 - Condition 9
Quarterhorse
Reservoir
Valley
View
Reservoir
Gardenia
Reservoir
0051
Lakeview
BPS
Yorba Linda
BPS
Paso Fino
BPS
Fairmont
Reservoir
Little Canyon Santiago
Reservoir Reservoir
OC89 TO, To 1,390,
1,160 1,133, 908
Springview
Reservoir
IR111 111
OC66
Hidden Hills
i
BPS
xBryant
Cross To BCB, Zones
Feeder 680,780-4,
1,165, 991, and
718
Fairmont (14 %)
BPS
x indicates closed seasonal valve for supply
separation in a single pressure zone
Suppler
Imported Water: 7%
Groundwater: 93%
Appendix C
RESERVOIR STORAGE GROUPS
N
0
N
c
IL
LEGEND
1.o Mc
RESERVOIR
1000'
GROUNDWATER WELL
OMWD
BOOSTER PUMPING
1.98 MG
STATION
GARDENIA
RESERVOIR
PRESSURE REGULATING
1000'
STATION
OMWD
IMPORT WATER
1.98 MG
CONNECTION
68P
VALLEY VIEW ^
RES & BPS
PRESSURE ZONE
+6.6
(HIGH & LOW ELEVATIONS
581'
SERVED)
GARDENIA
RESERVOIR
QUARTERHORSE QUARTERHORSE II
OC -51
1000'
0 HGL = 780'
= HWL
=780'
1.98 MG
�J
0.88 MG
VALLEY VIEW ^
RES & BPS
680' HWL =675'
+6.6
L MG
ZONE
RESERVOIR
780 -1(4A)
QUARTERHORSE QUARTERHORSE II
RESERVOIR
1000'
RESERVIOIR RESERVOIR
HWL-1000'
TIM ER
HWL =920' HWL =920'
RIDGE
0.88 MG
3.75 MG 3.50 MG
900'
+6.6
RESERVOIR
820
OC -89
OC -66
MG
PASO FIND
10HGL =780'
HG1 =780'0
BPS
8.I MG g S
-1.0
ZONO 1 FAIRMONT
920 (�A) RESERVOIR
PRV
411 //-
8
60' HWL =675'
PRV' 4,49
4 ZONE 7.5 MG
633'
1 LAKEVIEW 780 -2 (4B)
RES & BPS
PRV
575' HWL =570' — 581' 43
545 ZONE 8.0 MG
675 (3A)
PRV HIGHLAND
42, 50 450'
434, RESERVOIR
HWL =428' ZONE
n I 570 (2)
00 I i 6.O MG PRV'S
8-17,19,20,40,52
PRV
51
PRV
22
7[ 'I 580'
AIRMONT
BPS
+�3. ZONE
675 (3A)
51' PRV
18,23
IGHLAND VORBA LINDA
oo' 320' BPS 321' BLVD. BPS
ZONE
428 (1A) -3.9 L4 250' PRV'S PRV
1.4 MG 5
45 - Proposed
?oo' +1.6
MG
WELL WELL WELL WELL WELL WELL WELL WELL WELL WELL
1 5 7 10 11 12 15 18 19 20
7 OU RICHFIELD PLANT
Notes: See attachment for PRV Assigned ID
Y'vrba Linda
Water District
LITTLE CANYON
RESERVOIR
1000'
HWL-1000'
TIM ER
HIDDEN HILLS
RIDGE
0.88 MG
B S
900'
SPRINGVIEW
RESERVOIR
ZONEI
000 (KB)
I
_ HWL 780'
SPRINGVIEW
8.I MG g S
-1.0
680'
681' MG
ZONE
:FjI
780 -3 (4C)
�T 330'
ZONE
430 (1 B)
271'
CHINO HILLS
RESERVOIR
0
MG
581' 580'
ZONE
PRV'S 706
24
+4.7 503'
MG
130'
ZONE
1300 (613)
PRV
32
860'
31
HWL =1390'
1�1
+1.5
1
1275' MG Boor
CAMINO DE
BRYANT
RESERVOIR 1200
0
ZONE V
1390 (6C) _ HWL = 1165'
32 MG
PRV
SANTIAGO 1065' HWL=
1045' RESERVOIR 1045' 1045'
+2.1
ZONE 11 MG SAN- UAG 36 ZONE MG
BPS 1165(5U)
1160 (6A) ZONE
133 (6D)
9 0'
890'
Q 7— 871' 870' 4
PRV ELK MTN.
ZO E 33 81 +3.8 RESERVOIR PRV'S
1000 ( B) ZONE 34-35
908(5BR1) 781 MG HWL =780'
__ ZONE
56 ELK MTN. 991 (5L)
BRYANT RANCH 6.0 MG BPS
HIDDEN HILLS RESERVOIR
BOOSTER
STATION 681, �_ HWL =680' 680' 681'
PRV- BOX CANYON
25 BOOSTER ZONE
STATION 780-4 (4D)
BRYANT CROSS FEEDER
PRV
580' 581'
30
544'
PRV 26 ZONE PRV'S
718 (4CR1) 27 -29
424' ZONE
PRV 680 (38)
21
0'
FIGURE CA
900
00
700'
600'
500
HYDRAULIC PROFILE
SCHEMATIC
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
March 2013
1000'
1500'
HIDDEN HILLS
RESERVOIR
1400'
SANTIAGO 1065' HWL=
1045' RESERVOIR 1045' 1045'
+2.1
ZONE 11 MG SAN- UAG 36 ZONE MG
BPS 1165(5U)
1160 (6A) ZONE
133 (6D)
9 0'
890'
Q 7— 871' 870' 4
PRV ELK MTN.
ZO E 33 81 +3.8 RESERVOIR PRV'S
1000 ( B) ZONE 34-35
908(5BR1) 781 MG HWL =780'
__ ZONE
56 ELK MTN. 991 (5L)
BRYANT RANCH 6.0 MG BPS
HIDDEN HILLS RESERVOIR
BOOSTER
STATION 681, �_ HWL =680' 680' 681'
PRV- BOX CANYON
25 BOOSTER ZONE
STATION 780-4 (4D)
BRYANT CROSS FEEDER
PRV
580' 581'
30
544'
PRV 26 ZONE PRV'S
718 (4CR1) 27 -29
424' ZONE
PRV 680 (38)
21
0'
FIGURE CA
900
00
700'
600'
500
HYDRAULIC PROFILE
SCHEMATIC
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
March 2013
Appendix D
HYDRAULIC MODEL MANUAL
This manual is intended as a reference for the District in utilization of the hydraulic model
prepared as a part of the Northeast Area Planning Study. For further details on the
calibration efforts, refer to Appendix E of the Northeast Area Planning Study report. An
electronic copy of the facilities model data will be included with this report.
D.1 HYDRAULIC MODEL OVERVIEW
Rapid innovations in personal computing and the large selection of software have made
network analysis modeling efficient and practical for virtually any water system. Hydraulic
modeling is an important tool for analyzing a water system. Hydraulic models can simulate
existing and future water systems, identify system deficiencies, analyze impacts from
increased demands, and evaluate the effectiveness of proposed system improvements,
including those within capital improvement plans. In addition, a hydraulic model provides
both the engineer and water system operator with a better understanding of the water
system. Hydraulic models are typically composed of three main parts:
The data file that stores the geographic location of facilities. The geographic data file
provides water system facility locations and is typically represented as an AutoCAD or
geographic information systems (GIS) file. Elements used in this file to model system
facilities include pipes, junction nodes (connection points for pipes and location of
demands), control valves, pumps, tanks, and reservoirs.
A database that defines the physical system. The database for the District's model is
linked to the geographic data file. The database includes water system facility
information such as facility size and geometry, operational characteristics, and
production /consumption data.
A computer program "calculator ". This calculator solves a series of hydraulic
equations based on information in the database file to define and generate the
performance of the water system in terms of pressure, flow and operation status.
The key to maximizing benefits from the hydraulic model is correctly interpreting the results
so the user understands how the water distribution system is affected by the various
components of the model. This understanding enables the engineer to be proactive in
developing solutions to existing and future water system goals and objectives. With this
approach, the hydraulic model is not only used to identify the adequacy of system
performance, but is also used to find solutions for operating the water system according to
established performance criteria.
Developing an accurate and reliable hydraulic model begins with entering the best available
information into the database and calibrating the model to match existing conditions in the
field. Once the model has been calibrated, it becomes a valuable tool to evaluate
operational problems and to plan distribution system improvement projects.
March 2013 D -1
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
D.2 HYDRAULIC MODEL DEVELOPMENT
D.2.1 Hydraulic Model Selection
Several software programs are widely used to model distribution systems. The variety of
program capabilities and features makes the selection of a particular software program
generally dependent upon three factors: user preference, the requirements of the particular
water distribution system, and the cost associated with the software.
The District has selected InfoWatero, developed by Innovyze, Inc., for the hydraulic
modeling of its water distribution system.
D.2.2 Previous Hydraulic Model
The District provided its previous model, also developed in InfoWater®, converted as a part
of a previous hydraulic model development and calibration effort. The previous hydraulic
model was based on the District's GIS layers. As provided, the hydraulic model did not
include junction elevations, zone delineations (through initial status set on pipeline
segments or valve elements). Groundwater wells were modeled as fixed -head reservoir
elements with flow control valves.
The District previously completed a hydraulic model update in 2005 as a part of the Water
Master Plan Update. The hydraulic model at that time was developed in H2ONETO and was
not based on the District's GIS layers. Where possible, initial controls and facility
information was adapted from the 2005 hydraulic model to provide the basis for discussions
with District operations staff in support of updating the controls.
D.2.3 Model Pipelines
Hydraulic models consist of links and nodes to model representations of physical system
components of a distribution system. Links are used to represent pipes, pumps, and control
valves. Pipeline segments represent the actual transmission or distribution water pipelines.
In the attribute table for each pipe, data typically includes diameter, length, roughness
coefficient, and pressure zone. The model calculator uses the attribute data to determine
increases or decreases in energy levels across the link. Some of the reported output data
that the model calculates for links include flows, velocities, head loss, and changes in
hydraulic grade line.
As the previous hydraulic model was based on the District's GIS layers, only pipelines
constructed since the completion of the District's previous hydraulic model were imported
from the District's GIS layers. As will be discussed later, pipeline improvements planned for
near -term implementation were also imported into the hydraulic model in a separate near -
term scenario.
D -2 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCAtYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
D.2.4 Model Nodes
Nodes represent the connections between links and may act as either a supply source,
such as a reservoir or tank, or a customer demand. Nodes also define the boundaries of
each link and separate links that may contain different attributes. Each node also has an
elevation. Attribute data associated with each node typically includes elevation, water
demand, and pressure zone. The model calculates system pressures, hydraulic grade lines,
demands, and water quality parameters at each node.
For pipelines added to the hydraulic model, junctions were automatically generated.
Elevations were interpolated for all junctions within the hydraulic model from elevation
contours provided by the District, except where more detailed information was available for
individual facilities (e.g., reservoir floor elevation was provided by District staff in a separate
spreadsheet).
D.2.5 Demand Allocation
The previous hydraulic model included demands allocated based on historical billing
records. The total model demands were compared with updated consumption data provided
by the District's operations staff and judged sufficiently consistent for use in the hydraulic
model through global adjustment to updated demand levels on a District -wide basis.
Where boundary conditions allowed for direct calculation of demands by pressure zone,
demands by pressure zone were adjusted slightly as a part of the calibration efforts.
Since the model demands were adjusted globally based on consumption levels calculated
from production data, unaccounted for water is implicitly accounted for and was not
incorporated separately.
Near -term and future demands (developed as discussed in Section 2.2 of the report) were
allocated based on the parcel areas and allocated to the Demand2 field within applicable
future scenarios.
D.3 HYDRAULIC MODEL UPDATE
The primary source for the development of the hydraulic model was the District's GIS layers
and former hydraulic model. The District provided details on the District's water distribution
system facilities as well as updated pump tests and utilization data.
D.3.1 Pipes
Pipe segment information consists of length, location, connectivity, diameter, and where
possible, material and installation year. Pipeline connectivity in the model needs to be
correct so that flow through the distribution system can be represented correctly. An
March 2013 D -3
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
estimate of initial pipe roughness or friction factor can be derived from the parameters such
as material, age, and diameter.
Pipe segment data for the District's hydraulic model was imported from the District's
previous model, including information on the material, diameter, connectivity, and location.
This information previously had been added to the model based on the District's GIS layers.
Length was calculated based on the digitized spatial alignment. The roughness coefficients
in the hydraulic model were estimated for various pipeline materials and pressure zones.
Pipelines constructed since the development of the previous hydraulic model were added to
the hydraulic model from the District's GIS layers, provided on 9 August 2012. In addition,
the following projects were added to the hydraulic model based on record drawings or
construction plans provided by District staff:
Lakeview Grade Separation Project, which included an 18 -inch diameter transmission
main relocation (dated June 2011)
2010 Waterline Replacement Project, including replacement of two PRS and five
pipeline segments (July 2012)
Additional pipelines were imported from the District's GIS database based on a spatial
overlay and attribute information. It was assumed that pipelines not represented in the
previous model, as well as accompanied by a status of "ACT" and owned by "YLWD,"
should be imported from the GIS database.
A total of 16,983 pipe segments are included in the model (compared with 16,551 pipe
segments in the previous hydraulic model; note that many of these are related to future pipe
segments and inserted nodes).
In addition to the existing pipelines, several pipelines that are currently in planning or design
stages were incorporated into the hydraulic model as near -term facilities. These near -term
facilities are:
Yorba Linda Boulevard Pipeline, including installation of a 20 -inch diameter pipeline
(dated January 2012)
Yorba Linda High School Bryant Cross Feeder Replacement — 90 percent drawings
(dated December 2012)
As will be discussed later, these pipelines are identified separately from existing facilities in
the hydraulic model by use of the Status field. Prior to changing these facilities from near -
term (Status of "NRT ") to existing (Status of "ACT "), the facility details should be reviewed
as they may have changed during the design and construction process.
D -4 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCAtYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
D.3.2 Elevations
Elevations were interpolated from 3 -foot contours provided by District GIS staff. This
contour information was used to determine junction and facility elevations throughout the
system. Where more detailed information was available (such as the previous hydraulic
model for reservoirs or facility details from District staff), these elevations were used instead
of interpolating from the contour layer.
D.3.3 Groundwater Wells
Well data includes well production capacity, pump total dynamic head, elevation,
groundwater levels, and control scheme to determine the conditions under which the wells
operate.
The District's well locations were included in the previous version of the hydraulic model
and verified with the District's GIS layers where discrepancies were identified. All
groundwater wells were converted from fixed -grade reservoir elements (with head
representing maximum head capacity of the pump station) and a flow - control valve to pump
elements with the aquifer modeled as a fixed -grade reservoir element representing the
groundwater level. As the groundwater level changes, it will need to be updated within the
hydraulic model. The description field of the reservoir elements was used to indicate the
date of the groundwater level used in the modeling.
Where possible, full pump curves were used (to increase model flexibility). Well number 19
was modeled using the variable -speed pump capabilities of InfoWater. After discussions
with District operations staff regarding the control of engine- driven pumps, the engine -
driven pumps were modeled using pump settings rather than variable -speed pump
capabilities.
District staff provided hydraulic details, including groundwater levels and pump test data
from Southern California Edison (SCE) pump tests conducted in 2011.
Two additional wells were added to the model, listed as follows:
Well 20 (added to active scenario, with controls disabling the well)
Well 21 (added to near term scenario)
D.3.4 Reservoirs
Reservoir data includes base elevation, overflow elevation, effective diameter and height.
The locations of the system's storage facilities were obtained from the previous hydraulic
model. Reservoir volumes were reconciled with volume -depth curves provided by District
staff.
March 2013 D -5
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
During the calibration process, it was noted that Quarterhorse and Hidden Hills reservoirs
were currently operated with only one bay active. For Quarterhorse, the previous hydraulic
model had modeled the reservoir as two separate tank elements, one with a volume
equivalent to about half of the total operating capacity and one with a volume equivalent to
the full operating capacity. The volume -depth curves were updated so that each tank
element corresponds to the volume of an individual bay (i.e., the North Bay with a volume of
3.7 MG and the South Bay with a volume of 3.5 MG). The North Bay was inactivated by
setting the status of the relevant model elements to "INA ". To reactivate the elements
temporarily, the facility manager can be used. To reactivate the elements within the existing
scenario, the status should be set to "ACT ".
For Hidden Hills, a volume -depth curve was added to the model representing the volume of
a single bay. This volume -depth curve is named "RESVOL_HH_INDBAY ". To change the
tank to use the full reservoir volume, change the curve to "RESVOL_HH_TOTAL ".
D.3.5 Pressure Reducing Stations
Pressure Reducing Station (PRS) information includes number of valves, valve type, valve
diameter, location, elevation, and pressure set points. District staff provided two lists of
updated hydraulic details and pressure setpoints for the District's PRSs. Previous versions
of the hydraulic model included only the larger pressure reducing valve for each PRS (40
valves in 40 PRS). This is generally sufficient for fire flow analysis, but given the water
quality modeling capabilities associated with this project, all pressure reducing valves
should be modeled within each PRS. Carollo included 48 additional valves in the model
accordingly for a total of 88 valves in 44 PRS. Pressure relief valves, which operate only
under emergency or atypical conditions, were not modeled.
PRS constructed as a part of the following projects were added since the development of
the previous hydraulic model were added to the hydraulic model from the District's GIS
layers, provided on 9 August 2012. In addition, the following projects were added to the
hydraulic model based on record drawings or construction plans provided by District staff:
2010 Waterline Replacement Project, including replacement of two PRS and five
pipeline segments (July 2012)
Pressure Reducing Station Upgrades, including replacement of four PRS (dated
August 2011)
D.3.6 Booster Pumping Stations
Data for booster pumping stations includes pump capacity, hydraulic performance curve,
number of pumps, and pump control scheme.
District staff provided updated pump test information and manufacturer pump curves, as
available. Where applicable, the individual pump units were updated within the hydraulic
D -6 March 2013
pw:// Carollo / Documents /ClienUCAtYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
model. In addition, the Yorba Linda Boulevard Booster Pumping Station (dated August
2012) project was added to the hydraulic model in the near -term scenario.
D.3.7 Operational Information
Operational information includes pump and well control schemes, PRV and PSV setpoints,
and general operating strategy. The general operating strategy includes items such as
managing blending of supplies to meet water quality objectives, water turnover in
reservoirs, and determining which water sources to use run based on water resources or
other constraints.
The District's control schemes and operating strategy is adjusted to respond to changing
demands and operational conditions. The District's control strategy relies on human
operators with detailed knowledge of the distribution system making the key decisions
about the overall control of the system. Typically, the operator adjusts controls of wells,
booster pumping stations, and imported water connections based on several priorities:
• Reservoir cycling to reduce water quality issues
• Sufficient reservoir volume in case of emergency
• Annual supply ratios /percentages of imported water versus groundwater supply
• Time of use electricity rates, only for the following sites:
— Springview BPS
— Hidden Hills BPS
— Box Canyon BPS
— Elk Mountain BPS
Based on discussions with District operations staff, most operators control the booster
pump stations to achieve cycling of each tank based on the levels shown in Table D.1.
District staff noted that the operational controls include a low -level cutoff point, generally
between 6 and 8 feet, in which an escalating series of alarms are provided to the operator
and, if not responded to, the applicable BPS units are shutoff.
It should be noted that operational controls are adjusted periodically, and thus are intended
to represent typical behavior of the water distribution system. During the calibration,
adjustments were made based on the recorded SCADA data.
D.3.8 SCADA Data
Based on discussions with District staff and initial review of the SCADA data, it was decided
to use a 7 -day period for the EPS calibration, selected between August 9th through 16th,
March 2013 D -7
pw: / /Ca ro I I o/ Documents /C I ie nVCA/Y L W D /9047A00 /De I ive ra bl es /App_D -M odel_Ma n ua I. docx
2012. During the selected EPS calibration period, District operations staff were targeting a
supply mix of 60 percent imported water and 40 percent groundwater.
Table D.1
Operational Controls
Cycled Between
Contributing
Lower
Upper
Name
BPS / Facility
(ft)
(ft)
Notes
Reservoirs
Camino de
Elk Mountain
6/8
10/12
Bryant
Elk Mountain
Box Canyon
10
16/20
Increased level when additional
storage needed.
Fairmont
Palm Avenue
12
20
Gardenia
Valley View
18
28
Hidden Hills
Santiago
3
8
Highland
wellfield
12
20
Lakeview
Highland
13
28
Little Canyon
Springview
8
18
Quarter
Paso Fino
7/8
15/16
Horse
Santiago
Hidden Hills
10
18
Springview
Fairmont
10
20
Requires call to MWDSC in order
to adjust.
Chino Hills
Timber Ridge
8
18
Valley View
Lakeview
12
20
Floats based on hydraulics in the
system.
Pressure Reducing Stations
0051
Gardenia
OC66
Springview
OC89
Paso Fino PS
Paso Fino PS boosts pressure
of OC89, so control for the two
are intertied; within the
hydraulic model, this is
accomplished using a clearwell
Pressure Reducing Stations
Copper
Bryant Ranch
10
20
Canyon
Del Rey
Fairmont
14
20
D -8 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCAtYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
The SCADA data was used to develop the diurnal patterns and establish controls for model
facilities. Further details on the calibration process are discussed in Appendix E.
D.3.1 Seasonal Valves
The District adjusts supplies to some of its pressure zones through the operation of
seasonal valves. Based on discussions with District staff seasonal valves were identified
along with the general reasons that the valves may be adjusted. The state of the seasonal
valves in August 2012 along with the details regarding their purpose are described in
Table D.2. Locations for each of the seasonal valves are included in Figure 2 of the report.
March 2013 D -9
pw: / /Ca ro I I o/ Documents /C I ie nVCA/Y L W D /9047A00 /De I ive ra bl es /App_D -M odel_Ma n ua I. docx
Table D.2 Assumed Status of Seasonal Valves
ID Zone Number
Location
Status
Use
Description
(August 2012)
SV1 3A 0 -13/
Fairmont BI. & Lariat
Open
isolates Fairmont Reservoir
Zone 3 Fairmont Reservoir
147
Dr.
from Distribution System
isolation on
Bastanchury /Fairmont
SV2 3A 0 -12/30
Bastanchury Rd. &
Open
separates Valley View and
Valley View /Fairmont
Clydesdale Dr. (on
Fairmont Portions of Zone 3A
Clydesdale isolation west
18 ")
Clydesdale
SV3 5B/5B M -16/12
Stonehaven Dr. &
Closed
separates Santiago and Little
San Antonio /Little Canyon
R1
Rockhampton Ct./
Canyon portions of Zone 5B
Heatheridge Dr.
SV4 4B 0 -12/65
Lariat Dr. /Bastanchury
Open
separates Gardenia and
Gardenia /SV zone 4
Rd., 1,200' e/o
middle portions of Zone 4B
Gardenia /SV after school
Clydesdale Dr. (on
(alternatively could also be
36 ")
looked at as moving some of
Zone 4B into 4C)
SV5 4B /3A 0 -12/58
Maple Leaf Ln. 300'
Closed
Mapleleaf
w/o Cedar Creek Dr.
SV6 3A 0 -10/67
Lakeview Av. 600' n/o
Closed
w/ SV7, separates Valley
Lakeview zone 3 Valley
Bastanchury Rd. (on
View and Fairmont Portions
View /Fairmont Shutoff
16 ")
of Zone 3A
Lakeview
SV7 3A 0 -10/95
Bastanchury Rd. 900'
Closed
w/ SV6, separates Valley
Plumosa Between airvacs
w/o Lakeview Av. (on
View and Fairmont Portions
zone 3
16 ")
of Zone 3A (Lakeview BPS
can supply Valley View)
Notes:
1.For all valves except SV3, state is assumed based on SCADA data and effect on
model.
D -10 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
D.4 SCENARIOS
Scenarios were setup in the hydraulic model to simulate different demand conditions,
operating conditions, and active facilities. To simplify organization, hierarchical scenarios
were used, as shown in the list of scenarios in Table D.3, along with a description of the
intended operating condition the scenario simulates.
Table D.3 Scenarios
Scenario Name
BASE
CALIB
CALIB_EPS_10DY
CALIB_EPS_ALLWELLS
CALIB_EPS_WATERQUAL
CALIB_EPS_AGE
CALIB_EPS_MSX
CALIB_FF_2011
CAL I B_F F_2011 _ ##
CAL I B_F F_2011 —ST—##
EXISTING
EXIST—ADD
EXIST_MDD
EXIST_MINDD
FUTURE
FUTURE_NEARTERM
FUR_NRT_MDD
Description
Base Data Scenario
Calibration Scenarios
EPS Calibration
(168 hour simulation)
All Groundwater Wells
Active
Water Quality
Scenarios
Water Age Analysis
Multi- Species Water
Quality Analysis
Fireflow Test ##
Dynamic Condition
Fireflow Test ##
Static Condition
Existing System
Scenarios
Existing System ADD
Conditions
Existing System MDD
Conditions
Existing System
MinDD Conditions
Future System
Scenarios
Future System
Scenarios
Future System MDD
Conditions
Intent
Not for Use (Folder)
Not for Use (Folder)
Validates Controls
Validates Roughness
Coefficients Between
Wellfield and
Highland Reservoir
Not for Use (Folder)
Establish Hydraulic
Retention Time
Model Chlorine
Residuals
Not for Use (Folder)
Validates Roughness
Coefficients
Validates HGL
Not for Use (Folder)
Typical Operation of
System
Peak Demand
Conditions
Minimum Demand
Conditions
Not for Use (Folder)
Not for Use (Folder)
Not for Use (Folder)
March 2013 D -11
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAfYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
Table D.3
Scenarios
Scenario Name
Description
Intent
FUR_NRT_MDD_CND1
Future System MDD —
Near -term System
Supply Operating
Maximizing Imported
Condition 1
Water
FUR_NRT_MDD_CND6
Future System MDD —
Near -term System
Supply Operating
Zones 5A and 5B
Condition 6
Groundwater
FUR_NRT_MDD_CND9
Future System MDD —
Near -term System
Supply Operating
Maximizing
Condition 9
Groundwater
Notes:
## refers to each specific calibration test, numbered 01 through 21, and represents several
scenarios.
Note that each fireflow test is
setup as a steady -state analysis using a start clock -time to
establish the time of the test.
D.5 DEMANDS
D.5.1 Demand Conditions and Demand Sets
Demand sets are used to model different scenarios for the distribution system. Within
InfoWatero, scenarios are assigned a Demand Set, corresponding to a specific demand
condition. For example, showing the system under average day demand conditions by
selecting the "EXIST—ADD" demand set.
The model is set up to utilize the demand sets to represent average day demand
conditions. For demand conditions other than ADD, the seasonal peaking factor can be
adjusted using the global multiplier in simulation options. This is intended to reduce the
complexity of adding demands to the model, as when adding a new demand to the existing
system it will not need to be manually included in the demand sets for Maximum Day
Demands, Average Day Demands, etc.
The main demand sets to be used are EXIST —ADD, representing existing demand
conditions, and NRT_ADD, representing near -term demand conditions with development
demands incorporated. The model demand sets, are shown in Table DA.
D -12 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCAtYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
Table D.4 Demand Sets
Demand Set ID
Description
Intended Use
BASE
Base Demand Set
Not for Use
CALIB FF 2011
-
Not for Use
CAL IB_FF_2011_ ##
Demand for Fireflow Test ##
Verifying Calibration
Dynamic Condition
EXIST_PREVMODEL
Demand Table from Previous
Backup
Hydraulic Model
EXIST—ADD
Existing Average Day Demand
Analysis of Existing
System
NRT ADD
Near -Term Future Demand
Analysis of Future System
Notes:
## refers to each specific calibration test, numbered 01 through 21, and represents several
scenarios.
The above demand sets are assigned to the appropriate scenarios, such that when a
scenario is selected, the demand set will become active.
D.5.2 Demand Tables
Within InfoWatere, each Demand Set consists of a demand table containing ten fields of
demands assigned to each junction, named Demand1 through Demand10. Each field can
represent a component of demand. For this model, the demand tables use only the
Demand1 and Demand2 fields.
Table D.5 Demand Table Fields
Field Name Scenarios Demand Source
Demand1 All Existing System Demands
Demand2 Calibration Fireflow Demand (based on Fireflow Test)
Demand2 Future Development Demadns
It is recommended that when testing alternatives in the existing system Demand3 through
Demand 10 are used to avoid unintentionally adding demands into the existing system
database.
March 2013 D -13
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
D.6 DATABASE FIELDS
D.6.1 Attribute Data Information
For junction elements, attribute data was added for the fields DEMAND, FACILITY, and
STATUS. Descriptions for the junction fields added to the model as well as sources are
shown in Table D.6.
Table D.6
Junction Attribute Data Fields
Field Name
Description
Valid Entries
Source
YR_INST
Indicates year facility was
Integer, blank
Added, where
installed.
used for
facilities were added
unknown
as a part of this
years.
project
YR_RETIRE
Indicates year facility is
Integer, 9999
Fully populated
anticipated to be retired.
used for
(used in facility
unknown
management to
years.
indicate an element
to be retired in future
scenarios)
ZONE
Pressure zone which junction is a
Zone name
Fully populated from
part of.
(uses number-
pipelines
letter
designation)
ELEVATION
Elevation (for pressure
Elevation, in ft-
Interpolated from
calculations)
msl
ground elevation
contours provided by
District
FAC_NODE
Indicates if the junction is a part of
Boolean
Generated by
a facility (use for output relates
(Yes or No)
Consultant
with pressure criteria)
DMD_NODE
Indicates if the junction has
Boolean
Generated by
demands allocated (use for output
(Yes or No)
Consultant, based on
relates with pressure criteria)
previous
DemandType field
STATUS
Indicates whether a facility is
ACT, INA,
Generated by
active in the existing system.
RET, NRT,
Consultant
OTH, ABN
The Junction Description field was also populated where relevant. The Junction Zone field
was fully populated and made consistent for use in Database Queries.
The DEMAND and FACILITY fields can be useful in restricting analysis to specific
conditions (e.g., does this improvement cause pressure at any demand nodes to fall below
D -14 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCAtYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
40 psi or are velocities in any pipe segments over 10 fps). Database queries using output
relates were generated and included in the domain manager for this purpose.
For pipeline elements, attribute data was used from the previous hydraulic model and
imported from the District's GIS layers for facilities that were updated. Descriptions for all
the fields added to the pipeline elements in the model as well as sources are shown in
Table D.7.
Table D.7
Pipeline Attribute Data Fields
Field Name
Description
Valid Entries
Source
YR —INST
Year pipeline installed. Adapted
Integer (1925
Previous model or GIS
from year of "ASBUILT" field. For
— 2013), 9999
database
pipelines with unknown "ASBUILT"
used for
field, used "SIGNDATE" field.
unknown
years.
YR— RETIRE
Indicates year facility is anticipated
Integer, 9999
Fully populated (used in
to be retired.
used for
facility management to
unknown
indicate an element to
years.
be retired in future
scenarios)
ZONE
Pressure zone which pipeline is a
Zone name
Previous model or GIS
part of.
(uses number-
database (fully
letter
populated and made
designation)
consistent)
MATERIAL
Pipeline material
ACP, CIL, CIN,
Previous model or GIS
CIP, CIVIL,
database
CMLCS, CO,
DIP, DW,
PVC, STL,
WS, blank for
unknown
ATLAS
Number corresponding to atlas
X-#
Previous model or GIS
map on which pipe segment
database, populated for
appears.
all added elements
OWNER
Indicates pipeline owner
YLWD,
Previous model or GIS
ANAHEIM,
database
MWDSC
DWGNO
Drawing number
Alpha numeric
Previous model or GIS
ID
database
ASBUILTNO
As build number
Alpha numeric
Previous model or GIS
ID
database
STATUS
Indicates whether a facility is
ACT, INA,
Previous model or GIS
active in the existing system.
RET, NRT,
database
OTH, ABN
March 2013 D -15
pw: / /Ca ro I I o/ Documents /C I ie nVCA/Y L W D /9047A00 /De I ive ra bl es /App_D -M odel_Ma n ua I. docx
The Pipe Description field was also populated where relevant. The STATUS fields are used
as part of facility management in switching between scenarios. For example, using the
value NRT (meaning Near Term) for a pipe segment being evaluated will prevent the
segment from being active in the Existing Scenarios.
D.7 DATA SETS
D.7.1 Pipe Sets
Pipe sets are not used in the hydraulic model; care should be taken when using pipe sets to
prevent unintended inconsistencies between hydraulic model scenarios.
D.7.2 Control Sets
32 control sets are used in the hydraulic model, listed as follows:
• EXIST_TYP_ADDExisting System Typical Controls Average Day Demand
• EXIST_TYP_MDDExisting System Typical Controls Maximum Day Demand
• EXIST_TYP_MINDDExisting System Typical Controls Minimum Day Demand
• CALIB 10D EPSCalibration Controls
• CALIB_MISC_ALLWELLSInitial Status Set for 11 July 2012 Test of All Wells
• CALIB_WQ_EPSStable Convergence Controls (for longer duration simulations)
• CALIB_FF_01 through CALIB_FF_21
• EXIST_CND06_MDDExisting System MDD - Supply Condition 6 (Zone 5A/5B GW)
• EXIST_CND01_MDDExisting System MDD - Supply Condition 1 (Zone 3A IW)
• EXIST CND09 MDD
The CALIB_ control sets are used to establish the specific and detailed controls from the
calibration period. These control sets should only be used to replicate calibration conditions.
The CALIB_FF_01 through CALIB_FF_21 control sets are static representations of the
state of the distribution system, intended for steady state runs only.
The EXIST_TYP_MDD control set represents the typical operations of the system as
determined from discussions with District operations staff. Changes to the District's typical
control strategies should be made in this control set.
If more specific controls are needed to evaluate system performance under different
conditions (e.g., proposed new level setpoints), it is recommended to copy the
EXIST_TYP_MDD control set and assign it to the specific scenario. Alternatively, when
modeling entirely new facilities, adding controls to the EXIST_TYP_MDD control set will not
D -16 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCAtYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
impact existing facilities once the new facilities have been inactivated (i.e., using control
sets across scenarios can be a good idea).
D.8 WATER QUALITY CAPABILITIES
Two sets of Simulation Options were setup for water quality analysis, a traditional water age
simulation and a multi- species chlorine residual analysis simulation.
D.8.1 Age Analysis
Age analysis is used for predicting hydraulic retention times and water age. The Scenario
CALIB_EPS_AGE is setup to perform age analysis. Age analysis can be performed in other
scenarios by changing the simulation options to MDD_SPF_AGE.
Age analysis requires significant simulation times so that times within the reservoirs
converge. Age analysis should be used with some of the longer duration Simulation Time
options for this reason. Computational performance can be increased by disabling reporting
of the bulk of the long simulation times; this is included in the EPS_30DY time options (the
EPS_30DY_DEBUG includes the full reporting for troubleshooting). It is recommended to
utilize more stable control settings for this type of analysis (as used in CALIB_WQ_EPS).
Initial values are included in the EXIST—AGE quality set that simplify this process.
D.8.2 Chlorine Residual Analysis
As discussed in detail in Appendix E, InfoWater's Multi- Species Extension (MSX) was used
to model chlorine residuals. A first -order decay equation was adapted into the built -in
chloramine decomposition model to model free chlorine decay for the groundwater supplied
zones within the District's distribution system.
To utilize the MSX capabilities, use the simulation options MDD_SPF_MSXCR. Calculated
concentrations for chlorine residual will be output in the following fields in units of mg /L:
• CCOMBCL — Combined Chlorine from the chloramines decay model, representing
the summation of monochloramine and dichloramine
• CFREECL — Free Chlorine from the first -order decay model
• CTOTALCL — Total Chlorine, the summation of the combined chlorine from the
chloramine decay model and the free chlorine from the first -order decay model
To adjust initial chlorine concentrations, select the relevant element in the Model Explorer
and click the Multi- Species Water Quality button and adjust the relevant parameters
(although injection occurs downstream of the pump units, the Reservoir elements were
used to establish initial conditions for simplicity). Global initial values can be adjusted in the
March 2013 D -17
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCA/YLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
Run Manager > Simulation Options > Quality tab > MSX Model (ChlorChl) > Species tab >
Global Init. (Note that some species are in units of mols per liter).
Note that the MSX extension dramatically increases the computational load, with a 7 -day
simulation requiring about 20 hours to simulate (on an Intel Core 2 Duo processor).
D.9 MODEL MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES
The hydraulic model is setup to use Query Sets for switching the active facility set within
each scenario. If new elements are added to the model, they will behave as active until the
model scenario is changed unless the STATUS field is properly populated. If the STATUS
field is not populated, the new element will become inactive after switching scenarios.
Ordinarily, this should cause the model to be resilient towards unintended modifications due
to temporary analysis or "what if' scenarios, but this may create some unexpected errors if,
for instance, junctions are inserted into an existing pipeline segment without the STATUS
field of the junction set to match the pipeline.
To maintain consistency with the District's GIS layers, the values in the status field of the
District's GIS layer (LIFECYCLES) was used as the STATUS field.
Two query sets are included for switching between scenarios:
FAC_EXIST: Existing system and Calibration scenarios. Includes elements with the
STATUS field of "ACT"
FAC_FUT_NEARTERM: Facilities planned in the near -term. Includes elements with
the STATUS field of "NRT" and elements with a STATUS field of "ACT" that also have
a retirement year greater than 2013.
To create elements within the existing system scenario (that are intended to remain in the
existing system scenario), populate the STATUS field of all the elements with "ACT"
(without quotes) and the YR_RETIRE field of 9999. It would be of benefit to the District to
ensure that the installation year, pressure zone, DMD_NODE, FAC_NODE, elevation, and
hydraulic data are fully populated when adding elements to the model.
No retirement year is incorporated for the existing scenario, to avoid retiring facilities
unintentionally. Instead, the STATUS field of facilities that are to be retired should be set to
RET, INA, OTH, or ABN (all values currently in the model used for this purpose).
Since the calibration scenarios are based on the existing facility set at the time of delivery of
this model, changes to the existing facilities will change the functionality of the calibration
scenarios in the future. It is recommended that checking of the original calibration be
conducted based on the delivered hydraulic model (thus, the calibration scenarios and
datasets could be deleted from other updated versions of the hydraulic model).
D -18 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCAtYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_D- Model_Manual.docx
Appendix E
HYDRAULIC MODEL CALIBRATION
This appendix provides an overview of the hydraulic model calibration efforts undertaken as
a part of the Northeast Area Planning Study.
E.1 INTRODUCTION
Calibration is a necessary element in developing an accurate hydraulic model. Calibration is
attained by comparing model results with field measurements and adjusting the model
components, such as pipe roughness coefficients and model controls, until the model
produces results that agree with the field measurements.
Following the update of the District's hydraulic model, it was calibrated so that a level of
confidence in the simulation of pressures and flows could be achieved. Calibration is
complicated by the fact that some data are static and known, some data are variable, and
others are estimated.
Data related to pipe diameter, length, roughness coefficient, and locations are known with a
great deal of certainty. Data related to the District's SCADA systems vary with time, day,
season, and the number of customers. Pump rates and discharge pressures vary
accordingly based on the demands and controls.
Hydraulic models are calibrated by comparing field data with model results to accomplish
the following purposes:
• Establish a degree of confidence in the model, allowing for use in system planning
and /or facility sizing
• Identify data errors or identify missing data parameters
• Discover anomalies in the field
This chapter discusses the field- testing used to gather data for the model calibration, the
calibration methodology, and the calibration results.
E.2 CALIBRATION METHODOLOGY
The model calibration consists of four parts:
• Macro calibration
• Fire flow test calibration
• Extended period simulation (EPS) calibration
• Water quality calibration
This section discusses the methodology for each part of the calibration.
March 2013 E -1
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAfYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
It should be noted that the model is a simulation of the behavior of the water distribution
system. The actual water distribution system is affected by many more detailed events than
can be simulated in the model and the intention of the calibration of the hydraulic model is
to predict the general behavior of the water distribution system. Thus, the focus of the
calibration was on preparing the model to predict general behavior of the system in a
variety of conditions rather than explicitly replicating the field conditions observed during the
calibration.
The methodology and results of each of these four calibration steps is described below.
E.3 MACRO CALIBRATION
This initial calibration process is a macro calibration. The purpose of macro calibration is to
make the model run under calibration day demand conditions and produce reasonable
system pressures and cycling reservoirs. Adjustments to the model made in this first step
included modifications of pipeline connectivity, operational controls, ground elevations, and
facility characteristics, as well as the facility control schemes.
The macro calibration process involved three specific focus areas to improve the accuracy
of model results. These are connectivity, system pressures, and pump stations.
The connectivity features of the hydraulic modeling software were used to verify the
connectivity of the transmission mains within the distribution system. Problems found using
the connectivity checking tools were reviewed on a case -by -case basis to determine
whether adjustments needed to be made to the connectivity. Very few pipelines needed
modifications of network connectivity.
Typical pressures were compared with the model output. This process was used to find
errors in the model, such as elevations, or pipe connectivity, as well as changes required in
how operational controls were to be implemented in the model.
Pressures and flows predicted by the model for each pump station in the system were
compared to pump tests provided by the District to verify that the pump attributes entered
into the model, such as pump power, groundwater depth and the pump curves, produce
results comparable to collected data.
EA FIRE FLOW CALIBRATION
Fire flow calibration is intended to stress the District's distribution system by creating a
differential between the hydraulic grade line (HGL) at the point of hydrant flow and the
system HGL at neighboring hydrants. In general, fire flow tests consist of using flowing
hydrants and test or pressure residual hydrants. The field tests are then simulated within
the hydraulic model to calibrate the model under steady state conditions.
E -2 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo /Documents /ClienUCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /App_E -Cal ibration.docx
Hazen - Williams roughness coefficients, or C- factors, have industry accepted value ranges
based on pipeline material, diameter, and age. Characteristics specific to the District's
distribution system such as water quality (e.g. Langelier index, pH, TDS, etc.), temperature,
construction methodologies, material suppliers, and other factors may result in roughness
coefficients that differ from the typical coefficients used the industry.
Fire flow calibration refines the initial estimation of the value of roughness coefficients that
best indicate the conditions of the District's distribution system. During average day
demand conditions, roughness coefficients have a relatively small effect on the operation of
the distribution system. As the demands increase in the system during warm weather days,
velocity within pipelines increase and roughness coefficients contribute more to overall
system head loss. The hydraulic grade line (HGL) differential caused by the fire flow test
increased the effect of the roughness coefficients on system losses. Fire flow tests
artificially create high demand events to generate more head loss, allowing a better
estimation of the pipeline roughness coefficients.
Roughness coefficients were adjusted only within a tolerance of industry accepted
roughness coefficient ranges to match measured system pressures. When the model was
unable to match the calibration results without leaving the acceptable range of roughness
coefficient values for a given pipeline material and age, further investigation of was
conducted to identify to cause of the difference between model and field results. This
investigation included the identification of closed pipelines, partially closed or
malfunctioning valves, extreme corrosion within pipelines, connectivity and diameter errors
in GIS /as- builds, and /or diurnal patterns of large water users.
The calibration of fire flow tests is intended to develop a steady state (single time step)
calibrated hydraulic model by closely matching its water model pressures to field pressures
under similar demand and system boundary conditions. The primary varied parameter for
this calibration was the pipeline roughness coefficient, although some other parameters
were adjusted during the calibration process as appropriate.
EA1 Field Testing
Fire flow calibration was completed using historical fire flow tests. Field testing for those
tests was conducted in September 2011, prior to this study.
Boundary conditions for the hydraulic model were developed based on production data
provided by District staff. For calibration purposes, the hydraulic model demands were
adjusted to match the demands experienced during the fire flow testing.
March 2013 E -3
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAfYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
Table EA
Demands During Calibration
Demand
Peaking
Production
Consumption
Factor(')
General
( m g d )
( m gd )
(Compared to
Date
Day
Temperature
ADD)
September
Thursday
85° F
20.5
22.2
1.02
22, 2011
September
Monday
79° F
19.5
23.1
1.06
26, 2011
September
Tuesday
90° F
23.3
21.2
0.98
27, 2011
Notes:
(1) Based on
ADD for 2011.
As shown in Table E.1, the demand during the calibration testing was fairly even with
average annual demand for the District's water distribution system. It is desirable to have
higher than average demands during the fire flow calibration, so that system is tested in a
stressed state, where roughness coefficients have a greater impact on the measured
pressures in the distribution system. However, the segmented nature of the District's water
distribution system (given the number of pressure zones) limits this effect on the locations of
individual fire flow tests. Sites for each of the 21 tests are presented on Figure E.1.
E.4.2 Fire Flow Calibration Methodology
Simulation options were developed for each calibration day (listed in Table E.1) to establish
global multipliers for the demands. Flow and static scenarios were then setup for each fire
flow test, with time settings developed to create a steady state scenario at the approximate
time of the test (rounded to the nearest 5- minute increment).
For each test, the nearest junction to the flowing and residual hydrants was identified. If
necessary, pipelines were split to add a new junction for each hydrant. The fire flow demand
was established on the junction representing the flowing hydrant for the flow scenario. These
demands were scaled to account for the demand multiplier and added to the Demand2 field.
Predicted pressure at the junction representing the residual hydrant was then recorded for the
static and flowing scenarios. Initial calibration results were presented to District staff and
further investigation was conducted to identify potential unknown field issues associated with
the predicted residual pressures that did not correlate well with field test results.
E -4 March 2013
pw:ll Carollo /Documents /ClienUCAI YLWD 19047A001Deliverables /App_E -Cal ibration.dou
E 4STd
®iil ��•
I ips
m;im
■I
kI
TELEGRAPH CANYON
11
Legend
O Test Site
D Tanks
QService Area
u Parcels
Pipeline
f - < 7 inch
7 - 15 inch
> 15 inch
14 66
2
��u'�OSI
Figure E.1
�0 0.5 1
j Miles
Fire Flow Test Sites
March 2013
Northeast Area Planning Study
Yorba Linda Water District
',gineers... Working Wonders
Table E.2 Fire Flow Test Calibration Results
Field
Model
Field
Model
Static
Static
Residual
Residual
Static
Residual
Model
Flow
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
Difference
Difference
Static
Residual
Test
ID
(gpm)
Date
Time
(psi)
(psi)
(psi)
(psi)
(psi)
(psi)
Difference
Difference
1
J4254
1,301
9/27
13:00
78
77
70
71
+1
-1
-1%
+1%
2
J9816
1,632
9/22
10:40
74
72
56
58
+2
-2
-3%
+3%
3
J9356
1,698
9/22
9:00
85
85
73
74
+0
-1
-1%
+2%
4
J27980
1,447
9/27
14:15
60
58
48
49
+2
-1
-4%
+2%
5
J494
1,632
9/22
11:20
65
63
55
55
+2
-0
-4%
+0%
6
J15756
1,662
9/22
13:15
95
92
85
85
+3
-0
-3%
+0%
7
J22598
1,496
9/22
13:40
95
91
65
64
+4
+1
-4%
-2%
8
J19200
1,870
9/22
14:50
96
97
87
90
-1
-3
+1%
+3%
9
J22318
1,585
9/27
11:20
84
82
74
77
+2
-3
-2%
+4%
10
J24512
1,571
9/26
8:40
58
72
48
68
-14
-20
+25%
+42%
11
J22738
1,294
9/26
9:25
70
67
40
42
+3
-2
-5%
+4%
12
J20000
1,578
9/26
10:00
95
94
70
70
+1
+0
-1%
-1%
13
J22426
1,763
9/26
10:25
123
121
90
90
+2
+0
-1%
-0%
14
J26146
1,161
9/26
10:55
97
97
60
74
-0
-14
+0%
+24%
15
J15388
2,334
9/26
13:10
111
112
105
106
-1
-1
+1%
+1%
16
J16148
630
9/26
13:45
70
71
55
57
-1
-2
+1%
+4%
17
J15610
1,264
9/26
15:05
125
125
100
101
-0
-1
+0%
+1%
18
J 13356
1,883
9/27
9:05
125
125
98
97
+0
+1
-0%
-1%
19
J19468
1,675
9/27
9:40
102
100
82
84
+2
-2
-2%
+3%
20
J15220
1,739
9/27
10:00
88
88
65
65
-0
+0
+0%
-0%
21
J18204
1,611
9/27
10:27
74
72
64
64
+2
+0
-2%
-0%
Average
0
-2
-0%
+4%
Notes:
1. Colors based on percentage difference, with green indicating correlation
between model
prediction and field testing of 5% or less,
yellow
indication 5% to 10 %, and red indicating greater than 10 %.
March 2013 E -7
pw: / /Caro I I o/ Documents /CI ienUCA/YLW D/9047A00 /Del iverables /App_E -Ca I i bration. docx
E.4.3 Fire Flow Calibration Results
Calibration results are presented in Table E.2, showing both the field test results and model
predictions for static and residual pressures. As shown, model predictions were within five
percent of field- testing results for 19 of the 21 tests.
For Test 10, model predictions of both static and residual pressures are higher than that
observed in the field.
For Test 14, model predictions of static pressures correspond to the field results. However,
after applying the fire flow demand of 1,161 gpm, the model predicts less headloss than
observed in the field results, with the model prediction for residual pressure about 14 psi
above that observed in the field.
In summary, the calibration results indicate the model generally predicts conditions similar
to those observed in the field. Within a few areas of the model, there may be unknown local
conditions, but the overall distribution system is adequately represented by the model.
Based on the results of the calibration and discussions with District staff, it was concluded
that the fireflow calibration was satisfactory.
E.5 EXTENDED PERIOD SIMULATION CALIBRATION
The EPS calibration is intended to calibrate the EPS capabilities of the hydraulic model by
closely matching the model pressures, flows, and tank levels to field conditions over a 24-
hour period of similar demand and system boundary conditions. The primary parameters
varied for this calibration were operational controls and operational control strategies;
although other parameters may also be adjusted as calibration results are generated. The
EPS calibration is considered the most important part of the model calibration, as it allows
comparison of the overall behavior of the model to the behavior of the water distribution
system during a prolonged period of time, and therefore also allows simulation of reservoir
levels which cannot be evaluated in steady state model runs.
As a part of the EPS calibration, model predictions for parameters such as tank levels and
booster pump station flows were compared against recorded SCADA data. The week of
August 9th through 16th, 2012, was selected for the EPS calibration due to the higher
demands on the system during that period.
As discussed in the Hydraulic Model Manual included in Appendix D, controls for the
hydraulic model were developed based on discussions with District operations staff based
on the operators typical operating philosophy. Because control of the District's distribution
system relies on human decision making rather than computer - controlled hydraulic
parameters, several simulation time controls or pattern -based controls were used for the
E -8 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo /Documents /ClienUCA/YLWD /9047A00 /Deliverables /App_E -Cal ibration.docx
EPS calibration. For instances where simulation time controls were used, equivalent
hydraulic parameter -based controls were developed and added to the model as disabled
controls for use in scenarios evaluating alternate demand conditions.
A comparison of model predictions to observed field conditions following calibration for tank
levels, booster pump station flows, imported water connection flows, and groundwater well
flows, and discharge pressures is included at the end of this appendix. The SCADA data is
shown as a point cloud on each chart with one - minute intervals, while model results are
represented by a solid line with a five - minute report time step. In summary, the calibration
results indicate the model generally predicts conditions similar to those observed in the
field. Within a few areas of the model, there may be unknown local conditions, but the
overall distribution system is adequately represented by the model.
Based on the results of the calibration, it can be concluded that the model is calibrated to
steady state and extended period conditions. The model provides an accurate
representation of the District's distribution system and system operations to a level suitable
for the purposes of identifying system deficiencies and evaluating capital improvements to
the District's water distribution system.
E.6 WATER QUALITY CALIBRATION
The water quality calibration is intended to calibrate the water quality results of the hydraulic
model by matching its predicted total chlorine residuals to laboratory- measured chlorine
residuals taken from sampling sites in the distribution system.
The intended functionality for this water quality calibration is prediction of disinfectant
residual in the District's water distribution system.
Traditional water quality modeling within InfoWater uses a first -order reaction rate to predict
the decay of a single constituent. Model development for this project was conducted using
InfoWater MSX, which expands this capability to model interactions between constituents.
Predicting total chlorine residuals in the distribution system requires the model to accurately
calculate flows and velocities, since the model calculates residual decay and interaction of
various water quality constituents by predicting water age from transit time. Once the
hydraulic conditions have been adequately established, water quality modeling parameters
will be adjusted. Due to the many variables that affect the decay of chlorine residuals, water
quality calibration is not an exact science, and there is greater variability in a water quality
calibration than a hydraulic calibration.
The key challenge is the fact that the District obtains chloraminated water from MWDOC
and uses sodium hypochlorite (free chlorine) to disinfect supplies from groundwater wells.
The chemical reactions between these two different types of disinfectants (i.e. free versus
combined chlorine) are fairly complex and depend upon several varying parameters. The
March 2013 E -9
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAfYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
District strives to maintain separation of these sources by pressure zone. However, when
these two disinfectant types mix, the reaction of free chlorine with combined chlorine can
result under certain conditions in localized break -point chlorination. During break -point
chlorination, excess free chlorine in chloraminated water consumes the available ammonia
so that the remaining disinfectant residual exists as free chlorine. As the free chlorine to
ammonia - nitrogen ratio increases, the combined chlorine breaks down to nitrogen gas,
resulting in loss of residual, unless excess free chlorine is applied. Break -point chlorination
will impact and complicate the free chlorine residual measurements during sampling. The
chloraminated water is not detectable as free chlorine, but can be measured as part of the
total chlorine samples (i.e. total chlorine residual minus free chlorine residual = chloramines
residual).
Free chlorine is a strong oxidant, readily reacting with both organics and inorganics, leading
to a gradual decay of free chlorine due to different reactivities of a variety of parameters.
Within a water distribution system, the half -life of free chlorine can range from several hours
to several days. Unlike chloramines, free chlorine reaction with natural organic matter can
lead to trace amounts of hundreds of disinfection byproducts. Since modeling the individual
reactions with organic matter would not be feasible, it is important to find modeling
parameters that can reflect changes in the various organic content, such as total organic
carbon (TOC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), and UV -254 (a standard measure of
absorbance of ultraviolet light). In addition, free chlorine also reacts with inorganics
including iron, manganese, and ammonia. As a part of this study, attempts were made to
include wall reactions between free chlorine and inorganics commonly occurring in pipeline
material; however, given the number of pipe segments within the District's distribution
system model, runtimes were found to be unfeasibly long.
Chloramines are less reactive than free chlorine, but, separate from reactions with organics
and inorganics, tend to be more unstable due to autodecomposition and reaction with
inorganics and natural organic matter. Chloramine decay was modeled in this study based
on the model of chloramine decomposition included in AWWARF's Optimizing Chloramine
Treatment. This model (Valentine, Ozekin, and Vikesland, 1998) was intended to model
autodecom position of chloramines in a distribution system rather than chlorine and
chloramines interactions, and includes thirteen rate coefficients. Using this model for
chlorine and chloramine interaction would require establishing the rate coefficients for the
mixed system through similar experimental sampling as used to develop the model. Since
the District strives to maintain separation of water by supply source in different pressure
zones, and since the intended functionality for this water quality calibration is prediction of
disinfectant residual in the District's water distribution system, free chlorine was modeled as
a separate constituent, modeled using first -order decay.
In addition, the total chlorine samples were collected at different times during the day, under
different hydraulic conditions, thus "following the water" in the distribution system from the
source is challenging. The EPS calibration of the model must give a good representation of
E -10 March 2013
pw: / /Caro I I o /Documents /C lien UCAN LWD /9047A00 /Del ive ra bl es /Ap p_E -Ca I ib ration. d ocx
flows through the distribution system. With only one sample at each location per day, the
temporal variation in chlorine level at each location is not well captured. The District
maintains four chlorine analyzers and provided total chlorine samples from SCADA data at
these sites to capture some chlorine variation in the system.
The water distribution model is not designed to predict the hydraulics of mixing within the
reservoirs. A computational fluid dynamic (CFD) model would need to be created for each
reservoir in order to determine how water quality (e.g. water age, temperature gradient,
chlorine residuals) changes within each reservoir.
Due to these and other unknown conditions, the water quality calibration results are
typically not as accurate as hydraulic calibration, and can be used only to estimate general
trends of chlorine decay within the distribution system.
E.6.1 Chlorine Sampling
The sampling sites for the calibration consist of the 37 total chlorine residual (TCR)
sampling sites and the 13 sampled reservoir sites. Locations of the 37 TCR sampling sites
are presented on Figure E.2 along with five SCADA analyzer locations. The sampling sites
are representative of several hydraulic zones and subzones in the distribution system
(Zones 1A through 6D), and include both free chlorinated and chloraminated sites, and
some mixed disinfectant sites. As the District normally collects its TCR samples every
Monday or Tuesday and reservoir samples on Wednesday and Thursday, the water quality
calibration date was selected to be Monday, August 13, 2012, and reservoir sampling data
from August 8th and 9th, as well as August 15th, was used for the reservoir boundary
conditions. This day (August 13, 2012) was selected to fall within the EPS calibration, thus
all hydraulic boundary conditions were recorded as part of that effort.
Table E.3 presents reservoir sampling data for August 8 and 15, 2012. The total chlorine to
ammonia ratio is included for each sample to give an indication on what reservoirs are
under free or combined chlorine conditions. It should be noted that demands were at their
highest this week; sampling data for other months of the year include samples of total
chlorine residuals at much lower levels. The presented data is for calibration purposes
rather than analysis.
March 2013 E -11
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAfYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
Table E.3
Water Quality Reservoir Sampling Data
August 8th and 9th, 2012
August 15th, 2012
Total
Total
Total
Ammonia
Cl2:
Total
Ammonia
Nitrite
Cl2:
Temp
Chlorine
as N
Nitrite as N
NH3 -N
Temp
Chlorine
as N
as N
NH3 -N
Primary
Reservoir
( °F)
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
Ratio
( °F)
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
Ratio
Supply(2)
Bryant
79.1
2.04
0.28
0.011
7.3
80.4
1.98
0.43
0.016
4.6
IW
Ranch
Elk
81.3
1.95
0.46
0.022
4.2
81.5
2.01
0.45
0.017
4.5
IW
Mountain
Camino de
IW
Bryant(')
Santiago
80.0
1.88
0.44
0.017
4.3
81.1
2.08
0.42
0.023
5.0
IW
Hidden Hills
79.8
2.14
0.48
0.013
4.5
80.4
1.58
0.26
0.025
6.1
IW
Chino Hills
81.1
1.87
0.44
0.014
4.3
82.5
2.05
0.46
0.014
IW
Little
80.2
1.48
0.39
0.031
3.8
81.6
2.04
0.45
0.014
4.5
IW
Canyon
Quarter
81.3
1.81
0.44
0.014
4.1
80.9
2.28
0.47
0.015
4.5
IW
Horse
Spring
81.3
1.95
0.45
0.013
4.9
IW
View('
Fairmont
80.7
1.93
0.46
0.008
4.2
81.1
2.33
0.46
0.015
4.3
IW
Lakeview
71.6
0.93
0.01
0.011
93.0
80.9
2.07
0.47
0.018
GW
Gardenia
79.3
2.35
0.38
0.014
6.2
80.4
1.98
0.43
0.016
5.1
IW
Valley View
82.5
2.13
0.35
0.010
6.1
81.5
2.01
0.45
0.017
4.4
IW
Notes:
1. Sample not conducted
due to low water level.
2. The District does not
separately sample free chlorine
residual; thus, for pressure zones /reservoirs supplied by Imported
Water (IW), total
chlorine
residual is assumed to
be entirely combined chlorine, while for pressure zones /reservoirs supplied by Groundwater
(GW), total chlorine residual is
assumed to be entirely
free chlorine.
E -12 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo /Documents /ClienUCA/YLW D/9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
Table EA Water Quality Analyzer SCADA Data
Total Chlorine Residual
(mg /L)
Initial Average Minimum
Maximum
Site Condition (8/9 — 8/15) (8/9-8/15)
(8/9-8/15)
Camino de Bryant 2.26 1.87 1.56
2.31
Reservoir
Hidden Hills 1.79 1.73 1.44
2.22
Reservoir — Outlet
Highland BPS 1.24 1.09 0.72
1.33
Paso Fino BPS 2.10 2.00 1.75
2.25
Lakeview Reservoir 1.24 1.04 0.77
1.35
Inlet
(Zone 2)
Lakeview BPS 1.27 1.00 0.65
1.41
(Zone 3; after
Chlorine Injector)
Notes:
1. In addition, Valley View has an analyzer connected to SCADA, but it
reported 1.15
mg /L for the entire calibration period with no variation. Reservoir sampling data will
be used instead to establish boundary conditions within the hydraulic model.
March 2013 E -13
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAfYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
Table E.5
Water Quality TCR Sampling Data
August 7th, 2012
August 13th, 2012
Total
Total
Sample
Temp
Chlorine
Assumed
Temp
Chlorine
Assumed
Site
Zone
Time
( °F)
(mg /L)
Supply
pH
Time
( °F)
(mg /L)
Supply
pH
1
6
11:01
82.9
2.06
IW
7.93
2.08
IW
2
5
11:07
81.3
2.22
IW
7.99
2.24
IW
3
6
11:40
83.3
1.89
IW
7.98
1.92
IW
4
6
12:26
83.1
1.80
IW
8.02
1.40
IW
5
5
11:49
82.0
2.00
IW
7.99
2.20
IW
6
4
12:12
83.6
2.09
IW
7.94
2.19
IW
7
4
12:36
80.6
2.29
I W
8.06
2.24
I W
8
3W
10:45
80.7
2.34
IW
8.08
2.44
IW
9
4
10:32
80.9
2.36
IW
8.08
2.23
IW
10
4
2.39
IW
12:07
81.1
2.51
IW
7.89
11
3W
1.95
IW
10:01
82.0
1.81
IW
7.94
12
4
1.97
IW
13:28
83.6
1.90
IW
7.98
13
1
1.14
GW
08:30
74.1
0.92
GW
7.44
14
2
1.12
GW
09:10
74.1
0.89
GW
7.43
15
5
1.99
IW
10:45
82.0
1.87
IW
8.00
16
3
2.25
IW
13:52
83.1
1.95
IW
7.93
17
3
2.18
IW
13:15
84.2
1.87
IW
7.94
18
5
1.34
IW
13:36
81.3
1.91
IW
7.91
19
301
2.36
IW
2.40
IW
20
301
2.29
IW
2.27
IW
21
2W
1.11
GW
0.92
GW
22
201
2.16
GW
2.11
GW
E -14 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo /Documents /ClienUCA/YLW D/9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
Table E.5
Water Quality TCR Sampling Data
August 7th, 2012
August 13th, 2012
Total
Total
Sample
Temp Chlorine
Assumed
Temp Chlorine
Assumed
Site
Zone
Time ( °F) (mg /L)
Supply pH
Time
( °F) (mg /L)
Supply pH
23
2W
2.07
IW
2.15
IW
24
21D1
2.27
GW
2.31
GW
25
21D2
2.06
GW
2.10
GW
26
31D1
2.47
IW
2.48
IW
27
21D1
2.22
GW
2.24
GW
28
2W
0.99
GW
0.95
GW
29
2W
1.00
GW
0.87
GW
30
2W
1.12
GW
0.95
GW
31
1
1.14
GW
0.86
GW
32
1
1.28
GW
0.92
GW
33
3W
1.88
IW
1.90
IW
34
1
0.86
GW
0.72
GW
35
1
1.27
GW
1.22
GW
36
3W
2.03
IW
1.90
IW
37
4W
2.17
IW
1.92
IW
Notes:
1. The District does not separately sample free chlorine residual; thus, for pressure zones
supplied by Imported Water (IW), total chlorine
residual is assumed to be entirely combined chlorine, while for pressure zones supplied by Groundwater (GW), total chlorine residual is
assumed to be entirely free chlorine.
March 2013 E -15
pw:// Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAIYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
E.6.2 Establish Boundary Conditions
To establish boundary conditions for the water quality model, the chlorine dosage at each
point of entry into the distribution system was input into the hydraulic model. The boundary
conditions assumed are listed in Table E.6. It should be noted that this is a targeted dosage
rather than sampled data.
Table E.6 Assumed Supply Water Quality
Total Organic
Total Chlorine Carbon
Source (mg /L) (mg /L) pH
Imported Water 2.5 0.93 8.00
Connections
Groundwater Wells 1.4 2.4 7.76
(after injection)
For the groundwater wells, the chlorine residual was assumed at the reservoir model
elements for simplicity even though the chlorine injectors are actually located further
downstream for some of the groundwater wells. Note that the TOC and pH are not required
for the single -order decay model used for water in the free chlorine zones, but were
included for consistency.
In addition, the District maintains a chlorine injection station at the Lakeview BPS site.
Within the model, this is assumed to be located at Junction J5358. During the calibration
this site was not operating as the Lakeview BPS did not flow since upper /downstream
zones were being supplied with imported water.
For the imported water connections, all water quality parameters listed in Table E.6 were
assigned to the reservoir elements. Based on MWDOC's standard operations, it was
assumed that the chlorine residual was entirely monochloramine and that no dichloramine
is present in the source water. For reference, MWDOC's target total chlorine to ammonia
(as N) ratio is 5 to 1.
The District does not collect samples of TOC at its reservoirs during routine sampling. To
approximate initial TOC conditions within each reservoir, the TOC concentrations at the
sources were used based on whether a reservoir was primarily supplied by groundwater or
imported water. However, based on analysis of some of the sampling site data, moving
further into the distribution system TOC levels decrease slightly through reaction with
chlorine to form disinfection byproducts; thus, TOC levels should be slightly lower at the
reservoir sites than in the source water. With TOC data unavailable, the effect of reduced
TOC concentration on the decay rate was assumed to be negligible within the hydraulic
model.
E -16 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCANLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.doex
Legend
Chlorine Analyzers (SCADA)
O [Hourly Sampling Data]
TCR Sampling Sites
O [Weekly Sampling Data]
I] Sampled Reservoirs
�T o [Weekly Sampling Data]
37' -
El TELEGRAPH CANYON Rd � � Service Area
Parcels
- - ^- ❑ � Pipeline
36 p by Diameter (inches)
p
s _ 4 15 - 3 less than 8
8 to 12
U 33 2 g
� 8 � � 16 and lar er
I RE � O MA
M 1V
• -a
--
I JIM
MA
. � �■r � � r - _ -- - 1 � ��,� vim'
0 I I 11.
i
MEMO
ME
z■ �. ��
— •.■ ■ �� cnioanu
A ■1 ■� ���- % - I
Miles
a
♦ 1 6f� Quality
Sampling Sites
NortheastArea Planning Study
• •. Linda Water District
',gineers... Working Wonders
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
E -18 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCANLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.doex
E.6.3 Establish Initial Conditions
To determine the initial chlorine residual across the distribution system (for the start, or hour
0, of the modeling scenario), the residual levels shown in Table E.7 were used for an initial
global residual. Initial water quality at reservoirs were taken from sampling data shown in
Table E.3.
Table E.7 Assumed Initial Water Quality
Total Chlorine
Source (mg /L)
Imported Water Supplied Zones 2.2
Groundwater Supplied Zones
1.4
The hydraulic model was then run under an EPS until the water quality levels throughout
the distribution system stabilized. Since the chlorine residuals at each reservoir were known
(via the sampling), this stabilization occurs fairly quickly within the hydraulic model, during
the period of the calibration.
E.6.4 Decay Rates
While the reaction rates are included in the chloramine decay model based on published
literature, the decay of free chlorine and chloramines in the District's distribution system is
dependent upon a large number of factors, including but not limited to temperature, pH,
Total Chlorine: Ammonia -N ratio, TOC concentration, source water quality makeup,
interactions with pipe wall materials, hydraulic retention time, and interactions within the
Districts reservoirs.
For the chloramine model used in this analysis, decay in chlorine residual is included in four
components of the chloramines model — autodecomposition of monochloramine,
monochloramine interaction with organic matter, monochloramine decay through
conversion to hypochlorous acid and interaction with organic matter, and dichloramine
decay through interaction with a reactive intermediate. The interactions with organic matter
assume dual -phase kinetics of NOM oxidation by chloramines - an initial rapid loss of
chloramines residual followed by a slow decrease in residual. In order to adapt this
chloramines decay model to the District's specific water quality, the fast reactive fraction of
the direct monochloramine interaction with TOC was adjusted iteratively based on SCADA
results.
Following the calibration process, the resultant reactive fractions used for the model were:
March 2013 E -19
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAfYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
• Fast Reactive Fraction: 0.0025 (decay through monochloramine -TOC interaction)
• Slow Reactive Fraction: 0.3 (decay through HOCI -TOC Interaction)
For free chlorine, the assumed first order decay includes two components, a bulk rate of
decay and a wall rate of decay. In absence of jar test data, these rates were iteratively
adjusted based on available SCADA data for known groundwater supplied portions of the
model. Following the calibration process, the resultant decay coefficients used for the
model were:
• Bulk Decay Coefficient: 0.02
• Wall Decay Coefficient: 0.05
For reference, a 1996 AWWARF study evaluating several water distribution systems
reported a range of bulk first -order decay coefficients between 0.01 and 0.74 ( AWWARF,
1996). It should be noted that first -order decay will vary with TOC concentrations, which
were assumed from average annual TOC levels within the source water from the District's
2012 annual water quality report.
E.6.5 Water Quality Calibration
Calibration is conducted by comparing the actual chlorine residual levels recorded at the
sampling sites to the predicted values in the hydraulic model. This comparison is shown in
Table E.B. As listed in Table E.5, sampling times were only available for a few of the sites;
for sites without sampling time data available, residuals for the entire 24 -hour period of the
sampling day were averaged for this comparison.
Table E.8 Comparison of Sampled Residuals to Model Predictions
Difference
Sampled
Model
[Sample -
Assumed
Residua 1(2)
Prediction
Prediction]
Sample Site
Zone
Supply(')
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
1
6
1W
2.1
1.4
+0.7
2
5
IW
2.2
2.1
+0.1
3
6
1W
1.9
1.4
+0.6
4
6
1W
1.4
1.0
+0.4
5
5
IW
2.2
2.0
+0.2
6
4
IW
2.2
2.1
+0.1
7
4
IW
2.2
1.8
+0.5
8
3W
IW
2.4
2.0
+0.5
9
4
IW
2.2
2.4
-0.2
10
4
1W
2.5
1.9
+0.6
11
3W
IW
1.8
2.4
-0.6
12
4
IW
1.9
1.4
+0.5
E -20 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCANLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
Table E.8 Comparison of Sampled Residuals to Model Predictions
Difference
Sampled
Model
[Sample -
Assumed
Residua 1(2) Prediction
Prediction]
Sample Site
Zone
Supply(')
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
(mg /L)
13
1
GW
0.9
0.7
+0.2
14
2
GW
0.9
0.4
+0.5
15
5
IW
1.9
1.1
+0.7
16
3
IW
2.0
1.3
+0.6
17
3
1W
1.9
1.0
+0.9
18
5
IW
1.9
1.4
+0.6
19
301
IW
2.4
2.2
+0.2
20
31D1
IW
2.3
2.1
+0.1
21
2W
GW
0.9
1.1
-0.1
22
21D1
GW
2.1
2.1
-0.0
23
2W
IW
2.2
2.0
+0.1
24
201
GW
2.3
2.1
+0.2
25
21D2
GW
2.1
2.0
+0.1
26
301
IW
2.5
2.3
+0.2
27
201
GW
2.2
2.2
+0.1
28
2W
GW
1.0
0.3
+0.6
29
2W
GW
0.9
0.6
+0.3
30
2W
GW
1.0
0.6
+0.3
31
1
GW
0.9
0.5
+0.4
32
1
GW
0.9
0.5
+0.4
33
3W
IW
1.9
2.0
-0.1
34
1
GW
0.7
0.6
+0.1
35
1
GW
1.2
0.9
+0.4
36
3W
IW
1.9
1.7
+0.2
37
4W
IW
1.9
1.6
+0.3
Notes:
1. Based on hydraulic
model
prediction of supply water.
2. Sampling times
were only
available for sites at which physical constituents
were
also sampled
(which are adjusted biweekly). For unknown sampling times, average water quality
levels for the
24 -hr period on
the sampling day were used for model predictions.
As seen in Table E.8, overall the model is predicting residuals slightly below or equivalent
to the sampled residuals, indicating the model is conservative. Overall, the calibration
results show that the model predicts lower residuals in areas where lower residuals were
sampled, and higher residuals in areas where higher residuals were sampled. However, the
District should not expect that the model predictions to accurately predict exact chlorine
March 2013 E -21
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienVCAfYLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
residuals, likely due to the number of assumptions made in setting the boundary conditions
for this model, and the theoretical nature of the modeled reactions and limitations thereof.
The differences between sampled and predicted residual are shown by location in
Figure E.3. As shown on Figure E.3, the hydraulic model predicts results consistent with the
District's sampling results in much of Zones 1, 2, and 3. The model predicts lower residuals
than seen in the sampling results in several of the upper pressure zones.
Based on the results of the calibration, water quality results should be used for general
trends, but not detailed analysis. The model provides an accurate representation of the
District's distribution system and system operations to a level suitable for the purposes of
identifying system deficiencies and evaluating capital improvements to the District's water
distribution system.
E -22 March 2013
pw: / /Carollo/ Documents /ClienUCANLWD /9047A00/ Deliverables /App_E- Calibration.docx
Legend
by Difference (mg/L)
< 0.25
EBIR ST 0.25-0.50
+0.3
❑ TELEGRAPH CANYON R 0.50-0.75
AA
0.75-1.0
> 1.0
+0.7
-0.6
Predicted Residual
Total Cl (mg/L)
X41 1
+0.5 --0.6
<0 .2 C Vii;
Uj
+0.3::�
ck —1.0
0.2
1.! +0 6 1 IN
U.3
1.0-1.5
27.
4 ✓ +0.6 - 1.5-2.0
11' 1
+0.4
+0.4
+U.0
A�
X 5)
4-
Tanks
.51
ED Service Area
IL
Parcels
+06
Pipeline
6 inch and less
0/1/616 8 to 12 inch
1
Fj 0 VI-0 16 inch and larger
0 0.5 1
Miles
Predicted Water Quality
Correlation with Field Results
Northeast Area Planning Study
Yorba Linda Water District
wineem Workinq Wonders With
LZ)
20
w 15
d
d
J
Y
10
H
5
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
20
15
d
y 10
J
Y
C
H
5
I
V l
0 .......................................
8/9 8/10 8/11 8112 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
15
Hidden Hil
.� ,O it II
w
J
Y
C
H
5
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
20
Quarterhorse Reservoir Level
VIII III III III III I��II UIIIIIII Iu III uuu u11111
15
Q
a>i 10
J
Y
C
F
5
r
I
0 V L
819 8/10 8111 8/12 8/13 8/14 8115 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction - QH1 —Model Prediction - QH2
20
15
d
N 10
J
Y
C
H
5
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
co
20
S15
N
d
J
Y
10
F
5
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
25
20
1C 15
d
J
Y
10
H
5
Springview Reservoir Level
Iflllll► �IINIIFfiIIIIIIIIIiI�IflMMll�lll�lll !Any �11111fl11
II II I IIIIIIIII III' Il l 111 l ll ll l 111 l ll l 111 ll l l llll1919111199911;!I
_ • - II11111111111 I-I I_ I_ II_I_IIIII- IIIII_IIIII-IIIII- IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII° IILIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I
li11�
iTA
1 1111 1 1 11 1 11111 111 I1 1 1I
_
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
J,UV V
Elk Mountain BPS Flow
1 0,4
2,500
2,000 _.
a
31,500
O
LL
1,000 it I
500 111111111 HIM
I
0
'.I
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
Valley View Reservoir Level
25
�.20 4 i
d ii Will
a0i15
J -_
Y 1
i I
� l
10
5
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
5,500 Box Canyon •
111
u.
mom'
lmnnn•mn?
nnnnn nnomni:•c•s.
nllnnll nnmm�uililn.l
m nm nmm�numml
11
I
1 1 1EIEE9IEIE :EE ' 1 "; �EEEa1E1I1EnIE111E1
'11111111111111111111111111111 1111 111111n1111111,;,,,,,,,,,,,�„�
4,000 mm lnm mmmnnnnm m1 1
i.....1
unn SIR nnnnnunnx �m nnnnnunmm�ni
" HEEEEiEEEEE' �EEEEE IE E9 1 iEEEEEEE99EEEEiEEEEEEE
;11111111111 " "11111111 1 11 ('1'11'1 "11'11"
0111iio �uii m °;1
loon nn 1 mr n nnnnnnnl
inninnift 1mi'iIln
liiinn In inn nom....
is iiiunn mnnln iiiii iiiinnnmiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiimm�nlnnnnnmm�lm mnnnnnmin nn nnnnmmnm mnmml
non nm inn mmnnnnn nmmnmm mnnnnn nmm�mn nnnnnnl nnnnnnnnl nn innnnnmmm nn nnnnnmmm .nn nom
11111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 n111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111 VIII 1111111
unmm�' inn mmnnnnn nunmunnl mm�nnn nmm..mnl ..." mnl nnnnnnnm u'n nnmmnnnn nn numnunnnn inn nom
11 nnmmm in mmnnmm nnmmnnu nnmmm nnmmmnl nnnnnnl nnnmm�nn 1m nmlmunnm m1 nnmmnnnm am nom
nnnnnn nnumm�mmn nnnnnnnu
In nmmm nnnnnnnl nnnnnnl nnnnnnnm inn unnnnnnnm mn nnnnmm�nn nn nom
' 1 mmi n°n�iinniinnii1li 1n iinn i1i u miimiimmiiin�inininininn nnnnnmm� nnnnnm lnnnmil nnnnun�nmul� ; i innmmnnnn nn niil i niin m m� mnn
iuin m mil nn ii niinlnnmm� lull ii
mmm�mmm munnn
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil iiiii liiiiiiliiiiiiiiiii! Viii
ininusuiluiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiuiiiiiiiliiiiliili 'viii
' 1 1 nnmmnuun nunmmm mmnmmu muumuu nummmn nlnlmml nlulmunnn nu mmmmnmm nu mmnmmlml ant nnul
iii i............iui�.......... iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii' iiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiiliii' iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 'iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
IIInIIIIIiIIIIII IIilIIIIIIIIBII IIIIIIIIInII ;iIVIII ®111111IIIIIIIIIIAIII IAIIIIIIIIIIIIIi lies lIIIII (IIII I�IIIICAIIIIIIIIIIBII IIIIIIIII�IL'IIIII IIII IIIIII
1 1 111n1111IIIIInII IIIIIIIIIOInll llllllllll 111111 1111111111111 II111 1111111Ill llnlllllllll n11 111111111 1111 111111111111111111 111111In111111111111111111111 1111 im
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iii lliiiiiuiiiiiiiiiiilliiiiiiiiiiiiuiniiiriKill11111ii
1 nn°on11n n1 1n1mn n° on" o..°n .. I °a .nnm nn E
I VIBURNUM, ;; iHil ;;;;;;;;;;;1;1 m ;;;;;;;;;;;1;;1 1;
mnnmm�nm mnnnmm�nl mnn
'
9,000
8,500
8,000
-
-...
.:...
7,500
-.-
--
_
--
--
7,000
6,500
-
6,000
5,500
CL 5,000
-_
T
-
4,500
--
O
4,000
LL 3,500
--
1
- - - --
I +
3,000
I
H
F-1111
2,500
—
+
-
2,000
1,500
1,000
1
-
500
8/9
8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
J,UV V
Hidden Hills BPS Flow -! to I
2,500
thil L. III
IIIIF
�I
2,000 _. _ -
RIII
CIL
LL`
1,000
500 -
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
1,000
Springview BPS Flow
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII
a
500
3
0
LL
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
4,VVU
Lakeview BPS Flow
3,500 - -- - - +- - - - - -- - - -- -- _ -
F! _
3,000 -- - -- - -- - - -.
2,500 -------------- - - -- - - - -. -
i III
a :
Z-2,000
-tit -tdith
LL
1,500 111 1 1 11111 Hill 1111111 IIIIIIIIIHIIIIIIIIIIII
I I
1,000
500
IN" AIIIIIIIIIIIIII11w JAM .4011 ''1
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
2,000
1,500
E
2
� 1,000
3
0
LL
500
Trentino PRS F "'II ��III' IIIIIIIIII' IIIIIIIII' 11 'III'IIII'II'III�IIIII'_II'I�I
low
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
—Model Prediction • SCADA Data
a
rn
3
0
LL
1,500
1,000
500
Santiago BPS iiiiiiiiiiimiiimiiiiiimi iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiu
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
L,UUV
2,000
£ 1,500
CL
3
0
LL 1,000
500
0
8/9 8110 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
-Model Prediction • SCADA Data
2,000
1,500
Q
� 1,000
3
0
LL
500
0 ' LLILIL
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
Model Prediction • SCADA Data - Flow Parameter 1 • SCADA Data - Flow Parameter 2
Paso Fino BPS Discharge Pressure
100 -
,r
. ...............
80 -, - .•
y 11 -rC
60 AN
Q
7 III I I
40
a II li
20
0
819 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8116
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
2,500
2,000
£ 1,500
Q
3
0
LL 1,000
500
Paso Fino BPS Flow _.
iiiiiiiiiiiiii�l�illillilli�ilillillillillillillll�ll�ilillilli�11111111111111iliiliiiliiliiliiliiililliiliiliiilillii�iilliilillii�iillllllm
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
LVV
Elk e
180 - • -- - - - -- -
Mountain Discharge Pressure
160 - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - -- - -__' - - - - - --
-
140 _I r
.N 120
Q - to
100 -
N li
N
1 _.
i 80
�I ,
a II
I u. i:. I I I #r
I i
60
I
40
I-
I
i I -
20
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
SCADA Data Model Prediction
Q
3
0
LL
500
Valley View BPS, Flow
0
8/9 8110 8/11 . 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data —Model Prediction
Hidden Hills iBPS Discharge Pressure
e
150
N
Q
d
7
N 100
i
a
50
V 8/9 8 /10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
—SCADA Data —Model Prediction
nom nnnm
mmm mm�nm noon
• • :' � •- ' - 111111 null 1111
:1
m'.�mnlmmm Im Im � Imo _ -1
, _ ' N11111111NIIIINIIIFlIIINI'• "` .�� I nln11n1111V'rd• ;'r'1
�tlII�1' 'rl,� 1111111111111111' . +'':.� � � *INII 11 P�!:Allllll 1
„/��•� y, 711111111111P..':illllllll�� - - -" III- <Allllllllll
- '•IIIINI':A 11111111 non.. - '.•nN':i viii -� Iu11 11111111
.1 s
ryry111 � „„
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111111111101 1 1 1 1 1 1
- ' nnnnnnnnnnmm�nnnmmmnnmmnnnnnnnnnmm�nnnnmmnnnnnmmmnnnnmm�nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
i i i i i i i i i i u i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i u i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i u i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i u i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
1pp i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i i i i i u i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
' 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
1 Inlnl 11 111 lull) 111111 1 I 1 111 I nln III In 1 II 1 Inl Iln 1 nl 1 11 Inln II 111 1 nl Ilnll 1 11
1
1
IIIIIIIIt111111111I11I111111111I111111111111111I111111I111111111111t11111I111111111111111n111111111111111I11111t111111111111I111111I11111I111111111111I111111
11111111111111 1 111 1 111111111111111 1 1111111111111111 111111111 11111111111111111111111 111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 1111111111111 1 1111111111 1 111111111 111
' IIIIIt11111111111111111111111111111111111111111t111111111I111111111111111I111111111111111n11111111t111111I1111111111111111111111111Illllllllllllllllll [111111
Hillmulumnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnmm�nnnmm�nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
nnnm...... nnnnnnnnnnnnmm�nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnm
nnnnnnnnnnnnnunnnnnnnnnnnnnnnmm�nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
nnnuunnnnnuuuunuuuunnnnnunununnnnunnnnnnnnuununnnununnnuunnnn
1
yv
Lakeview BPS Discharge Pressure
80 a eVle
70 --------- - - - -- - -- - - -- - -. -. - - -.. -.
1
I I
60 - - - --
0)
S50
7t7ffl
H 40 - - r N
VId
I`
CL
30 1111 t — -
1.L
20 - ... -.- -- - - - - -- - - - -- - -__ _- -- - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - -- - - -- - - --
10 ___ 11 111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
Box-Canyon BPS Discharge Pressure
_.I
ri
J11II'll 1-11-7
_.. I... •. -_
150
N
Q
m
N 100
i
CL
50
0
819 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8116
Time of Day
SCADA Data —Model Prediction
LVV
Santiago BPS Discharge Pressure
180T -- ;
160 11111111 1111., 1 1111,11111 — '
1 11.1. 1111 1 11
140 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJIll 111111H
.Q 120 --
,111 - 1,.11 - --
II1
100
N
y _ II 1 1
a
80 -
UHHHHHH 11111, -11 LI.�I 11,111 11 1 I. .II
60
40
1.
i I _
20
1111. I 111_1.
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
SCADA Data Model Prediction
150
N
Q
m
N 100
i
EL
all
0
• . ' . • IIYIYIIIIIIIIIII■ �MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIII�
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I �IIIIIIIIIIIIII�I�
i��ll�iii���lllllllllll! ������iii��lllllllllllll !�jllllll!„IIIIIIIIIII�i;irlN �
.Ililllllllll r.... r llilllllllllll111111 !!!.111dlllllll�l• I��illlll I � �� I
�����I IIIIIIIIIIII, Ilii1IIIIn��IIIIIPD0! I611III161IIIII IIII iIIIIPIIIIIIIIII11'�IIIh".°;;__I�
� Illlliilnm'° °!:IIILIIrr /�' "'� '�� ®�' .11 Iln!1lllll6uun11�
nlllllllllllll IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �IIIIIIII1111111111111111n1n1 �I�
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII Illllllllllllllllllllnllllllllllllllllll IIIIIII�IU Illl�lnllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
IIIIIIIIIIII III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII� 111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
819 8/10 8111 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
SCADA Data —Model Prediction
ILV
_I
Springview BPS Discharge Pr essure
100
I
1:1
v 60 _ I 1111
y .IIII -
U
N IIII
li iil i I{ I I��
40 - — - - -- -- - - - - - — -- — -
I I
20
III,.
0819 8/10. .8/11. ..8/12 13 _8/ 1111 __
8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
—SCADA Data —Model Prediction
11000 OC 51 Plow - T -
1-51
10,000 - -- - - -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9,500
9,000
8,500
8,000 - -- -- - -,,' -
7,500 -- �-
. 7,000
Q. 6,500 -- I... - - - -' -- -
- --
07 6,000
3 5,500 _. - - -- +-- - L - - -- + - - - -- - -_ -- _- -- _- - - - -..
0 5,000
LL 4,500 -- - - --
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0 .' «.
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8116
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
4,VVU
Del Rey PRS Flow,
4,000 l _. - -- -
r. _
3,500
I � I
3,000 - 111111H ii i 11, -
i
x2,500 - - - -- -- - -- - - -- _..
0 2,000
LL
Ii I I
1,500 Ilr
I
is
IN r II I 1- II r r 11 it
1,000 1 -- - -- - --
III I I l
500 _ ' I
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
-Model Prediction • SCADA Data
IL,VUU
11.,500 - F- -- - - -- - --
11,000
10,500
10,000 -- � -- - - -- - -- - __
I
9,500 - r - - -
9,000 -
8,500
8,000 -- - - - - - --
7s00 - - - -
7,000
2 6,500 -- - - - - - - -- -- - - ------ -- - - --
6,000 -- - - - - - -
5,500 - --------------
-
LL 5,000 -
hI1I:iI:1i,,[irj 41 111
4,500 -
4,000
3,500 - -
3,000
2,500 it
2,000
1,500 -
1,000 .. _-
500 - -
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
2,000
1,500
E
2
� 1,000
3
0
LL
500
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8112 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
-Model Prediction • SCADA Data
L,VUV
2,000
£ 1,500
CL
3
0
LL 1,000
500
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
-Model Prediction • SCADA Data
07 Flow
Well...,.....
2,500 - - --
I
I'
2,000
i
CL L...
I
liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 11 WIN
ILL
- - I
1,000 .I'..._
500
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
—Model Prediction • SCADA Data
1,500
Well 12 Flow
1,000
3
0
ILLa
500
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
—Model Prediction • SCADA Data
2,000
1,500
E
CL
1,000
ILL
0
500
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
—Model Prediction • SCADA Data
1 1,500
E
ILLa
0
1,000
500
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
• SCADA Data Model Prediction
J,UV V
Well 18 Flow
2,500
� I �
!L
- -- - --
2,000 - _ - T -- - -- -- - r— - -
E CL
X1,500
c
1 I I I I I II
1,000 .!
11111111111111111 mill
500
I
0
8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16
Time of Day
-Model Prediction • SCADA Data
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
To: Board of Directors
From: Steve Conklin, Acting General
Manager
Presented By: Steve Conklin, Acting General Dept:
Manager
Prepared By: Annie Alexander, Executive
Secretary
ITEM NO. 9.2
Board of Directors
Subject: MWDOC Board and Elected Officials' Forum -April 4, 2013
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors designate a Director to attend this event as the District's official
representative and authorize additional Director attendance if desired.
DISCUSSION:
MWDOC has invited the District to attend its 5th, semi - annual Elected Officials' Forum on April 4,
2013. They have requested that the Board designate one Director to attend the event as the
District's official representative. Other Directors and District staff are also welcome to attend.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
CP 1 -C: Have Board of Directors and YLWD Staff Attend More Events and Inter - governmental
Meetings within the Local Community
ATTACHMENTS:
Description: Type:
MWDOC Forum.pdf Backup Material Backup Material
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to
MWDOC Forum Invite Letter.pdf Backup Material
the Meeting
The Municipal Water District of Orange County ( MWDOC) is
the wholesale water provider and regional planning agency for
twenty -eight member agencies. Our activities include
Metropolitan representation, Metropolitan policy, rate
development and implementation, water use efficiency, water
resource planning, Federal and State grant procurement,
government relations, (public information, and education in
support of our member agencies.
Your city or water district will be receiving an official invitation
shortly from your MWDOC district representative, inviting you
to our fifth, semi - annual Elected Officials' Forum . Invitation
letters are addressed to the City Mayor or Water Board
President. The City Manager or General Manager and Director
of Public Works have been copied. Use this link to view the
Agenda.
darner Ave
'Fountain
MUNICIPAL
W ATE R
Valley
DISTRICT
ben Ave
OF
PRAhFGE
Dis Ave "''
C011IJTY
The Municipal Water District of Orange County ( MWDOC) is
the wholesale water provider and regional planning agency for
twenty -eight member agencies. Our activities include
Metropolitan representation, Metropolitan policy, rate
development and implementation, water use efficiency, water
resource planning, Federal and State grant procurement,
government relations, (public information, and education in
support of our member agencies.
Your city or water district will be receiving an official invitation
shortly from your MWDOC district representative, inviting you
to our fifth, semi - annual Elected Officials' Forum . Invitation
letters are addressed to the City Mayor or Water Board
President. The City Manager or General Manager and Director
of Public Works have been copied. Use this link to view the
Agenda.
darner Ave
'Fountain
We request that each city and water district designate one
elected official to attend the meeting as their official
Valley
representative. Other elected officials and /or staff are welcome
ben Ave
to attend as well.
Dis Ave "''
In order to provide name plates and sufficient seating, please
Ireeld Ave
use the link below to register your official representative and
any other attendees from your city or water district.
MESA VERDE
Adams A++e Register Now!
+a° 24 a tie"oft Corporation
Our CityiWater District can't make it
If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions, please
do not hesitate to contact our Interim General Manager, Karl
Seckel at (714) 593 -5024 or kseckela- mwdoc.com.
Sincerely,
Joan Finnegan
President
Municipal Water District of Orange County
( MWDOC)
AGENDA
Welcome and Introductions
MWDOC's 2013 -14 Draft Budget
Update RE: Desalination Projects
- Huntington Beach, Poseidon
- Dana Point, SOCOD
Water Supply Outlook
Comments and Roundtable
Topics for November Meeting
Irfl / b
I
\s I`LL
f j►
f"
Street Address: 18700 Ward Street Fountain Valley CA 92708
Phone Number: (714) 963 -3058 Website: www.mwdoc.com
MUNICIPAL
WATER
DISTRICT
OF
ORANGE
COUNTY
AGENDA
Welcome and Introductions
MWDOC's 2013 -14 Draft Budget
Update RE: Desalination Projects
- Huntington Beach, Poseidon
- Dana Point, SOCOD
Water Supply Outlook
Comments and Roundtable
Topics for November Meeting
Irfl / b
I
\s I`LL
f j►
f"
Street Address: 18700 Ward Street Fountain Valley CA 92708
Phone Number: (714) 963 -3058 Website: www.mwdoc.com
MUNICIPAL
WATr=P
131STRiCT
ccauNYY
ITEM NO. 9.2.
March 5, 2013
LID
MAR 11. 100
StreetAddress:
18700 Ward Street
The Honorable Gary Melton
Fountain V0ey, California 92708
President
Y
Yorba Linda Water District
Mailing Address:
P.O. BOX 309
P.O. Box 20895
Fountain Valley, CA 92728 -0895
Yorba Linda, CA 92885 -030/9
(714) 963 -3058
Dear Preside ton, L�` ��Y
Fax: (714) 964 -9389
www.mwdoc.com
Subject: MWDOC Board and Member Agency Elected Officials' Forum
Joan C. Finnegan
President
Thursday, Aril 4 201.3 — 5 :3 0 m to 7:00 m
y� 1� � p 1�
Jeffery M. Thomas
Vice President
The Municipal Water District of Orange County ( MWDOC) is the wholesale
Brett R. Barbre
water provider and regional planning agency for twenty -seven water retailers
Director
and the Orange County Water District. Our activities include Metropolitan
Larry D. Dick
Director
representation, Metropolitan policy and rate development and implementation,
Wayne A. Clark
water use efficiency, water resource planning, Federal and State grant
Director
procurement, governmental relations and public information and education in
Susan Hinman
Director
support of our member agencies.
Wayne Osborne
Director
We would like to invite you to our fifth elected officials' forum to increase
Kevin P. Hunt, P.E.
elected officials' knowledge of and input to MWDOC and its activities. We
General Manager
are holding our meeting on April 4, 2013 from 5:30 pm to 7:00 pm at our
office at 18700 Ward Street in the Boardroom. The draft agenda is enclosed.
MEMBER AGENCIES
City of Brea
We request that each City and water district designate an elected official to
City of Buena Park
attend the meeting as their official representative. Other elected officials or
East Orange County Water District
staff are, of course, welcome. Because of the hour, we will provide a modest
El Toro Water District
meal of sandwiches and salads.
Emerald Bay Service District
City of Fountain Valley
City of Garden Grove
Thank you for your participation in this event. In order to provide name
Golden State water co.
plates and sufficient seating, please notify Pat Meszaros at 714/593 -5025
City of Huntington Beach
meszaros mwdoc.com) of your official designee and number of persons
Irvine Ranch Water District
attending.
Laguna Beach County Water District
City of La Habra
City of La Palma
Please do not hesitate to call our Interim General Manager, Karl Seckel, at
Mesa water District
714/593 -5024 (Lseckel@mwdoc.com should you have any questions or
Moulton Niguel Water District
suggestions.
City of Newport Beach
City of Orange
Orange County Water District
S mcerely,
City of San Clemente
/.
City of San Juan Capistrano
%z
Santa Margarita Water District
y.
City of Seal Beach
Brett R. Barbre
Serrano Water District
Director, Division 1
South Coast Water District
Trabuco Canyon Water District
City of Tustin
C: teven Conklin, Acting General Manager
City of Westminster
Yorba Linda Water District
Backup Material Distributed Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
ITEM NO. 11.1
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
Subject: Executive - Administrative - Organizational Committee
(Melton /Kiley)
• Minutes of meeting held February 27, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.
• Meeting scheduled March 19, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name:
022713 EAO - Minutes.docx
Description:
EAO Mtg Minutes 02/27/13
Type:
Minutes
MINUTES OF THE
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
EXEC-ADM IN-ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday, February 27, 2013 9:00 a.m.
1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870
1. CALL TO ORDER
2.
K�
4.
5.
The February 27, 2013 meeting of the Yorba Linda Water District's Executive -
Administrative- Organizational Committee was called to order by Director Melton
at 9:00 a.m. The meeting was held in the Admin Conference Room at the
District's Administration Building located at 1717 East Miraloma Avenue in
Placentia, California 92870.
ROLL CALL
COMMITTEE STAFF
Director Gary T. Melton, Chair Steve Conklin, Acting General Manager
Director Robert R. Kiley Damon Micalizzi, Public Info Officer
Cindy Botts, Management Analyst
OTHER ATTENDEES
Arthur G. Kidman, Partner, Kidman Law LLP
Heather Stratman, Senior Director, Townsend Public Affairs, Inc.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
ACTION CALENDAR
4.1. Request to Support Re- Election of Melody A. McDonald for the
ACWA /JPIA Executive Committee
The Committee reviewed the subject request and deferred consideration,
pending receipt of other similar requests.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
5.1. Legislative Affairs Update (Verbal Report)
Reviewed with Committee that Mr. Micalizzi had been contacted by OCTA
to pursue joint public outreach effort for the upcoming Lakeview Grade
Separation Project. Mr. Conklin noted that his staff is in contact with
OCTA engineering staff for final review of pipeline design plans for the
project.
Discussed that Mr. Jim Ruth, OCSD General Manager is retiring in March,
and that Jim Herberg will be the new GM. Mr. Conklin was asked to
1
contact Mr. Herberg to schedule meeting for a discussion regarding seats
on the OCSD Board.
Mrs. Stratman and Mr. Kidman discussed various bills in the state
legislature that may be of interest to the District.
Mrs. Stratman left the meeting at this time.
5.2. OCWD Annexation Project Status
Mr. Conklin reported that the draft Annexation EIR is planned for public
release by OCWD in March for a 45 -day review period. He noted that the
annexation appears to be on schedule for consideration of approval by the
OCWD Board by late summer.
5.3. Security Measures at Valley View Reservoir (Verbal Report)
Mr. Micalizzi reported that signs are in place and that OC Sheriff has
included the site as part of its community drive -by presence. Following
discussion, the Committee asked that staff add additional signs, and
proceed with purchase of motion - activated lights and a "dummy" camera
as added deterrents.
5.4. Status of Plumosa Property (Verbal Report)
Mr. Conklin reported that a Broker Opinion of Value was received on
February 20 for the subject property. Copies of the document were
provided to the Committee for review. He noted that the document
indicated that the property might have an estimated value for office use in
the range of $400,000 to $450,000, though its location and lack of parking
makes this a low likely -hood. The document indicated that the property
might have a value if sold to a residential developer in the $450,000 to
$525,000 range, with a fairly high likely -hood of sales success. Following
discussion, the Committee asked staff to proceed with the process for sale
of the property as surplus, which first requires offering it for sale to the City
and /or other public agency.
5.5. Status Report on Operations and Efficiency Study (Verbal Report)
Mr. Conklin and Mrs. Botts reported on the outcome of the reference
checks of the five firms shortlisted, as summarized in a handout provided
to the Committee. Following discussion, the Committee supported the staff
recommendation that three firms be further shortlisted for receipt of the
Request for SOQ, including DeLoach & Assoc, Koff & Assoc, and Sjoberg
Evashenk. The Committee agreed that this item will be presented to the
Board on February 26 for review and concurrence before proceeding.
5.6. Customer Service Feedback Report (To be provided at the meeting.)
Mr. Conklin handed out copies and reviewed the subject report with the
Committee
2
5.7. Alternative Work Schedule Comparison Data
Copies of the data collected over the last 12 months were provided to the
Committee, and the results and findings were presented by Mrs. Botts. It
was noted that for the categories plotted, some values were higher and
some lower so it is difficult to draw firm conclusions. It was pointed out
that, over the prior year, electricity and regular fuel use were down slightly,
that 21 % more miles of sewer was cleaned, and that sick -leave time taken
was down 25 %. It was also noted by Mr. Conklin that there have been no
customer complaints received due to Friday closure and that staff morale
is positive with the "4 -10" as a benefit, at little or no cost to the District.
The Committee did not recommend any changes from the current work
week.
5.8. Directors' and Acting General Manager Fees and Expenses (Oct -Dec
2012)
These were reviewed by the Committee with no comments provided.
5.9. Status of Strategic Plan Initiatives
Mr. Conklin reviewed the status of the above with the Committee.
5.10. Review of Proposed Supplies and Services Budgets
This item was added to the agenda, as it was inadvertently not included at
the time the agenda was prepared. Mr. Conklin reviewed with the
Committee the draft Supplies and Services budgets for the Board of
Directors and for Administration. Following discussion, the Committee
recommended no changes to the draft budgets.
5.11. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks
None.
The Committee adjourned to Closed Session at 10:58 a.m. Directors Melton and Kiley
were present. Also present were Messrs. Conklin and Kidman.
6. CLOSED SESSION
6.1. Conference with Legal Counsel — Pending Litigation
Pursuant to Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9 of the California
Government Code
Name of Case: ACWA/JPIA, et al vs. Insurance Company of the
State of Pennsylvania, et al (OC Superior Court —
Case No. 00486884)
The Committee reconvened in Open Session at 11:09 a.m. Director Melton announced
that no action was taken during Closed Session that was required to be reported under
the Brown Act.
3
7. ADJOURNMENT
7.1. The meeting was adjourned at 11:09 a.m. The next Executive -
Administrative- Organizational Committee meeting is scheduled to be held
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
12
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
Subject: Finance - Accounting Committee
(Hawkins /Melton)
ATTACHMENTS:
Name:
022513 FA - Minutes.doc
ITEM NO. 11.2
• Minutes of meeting held February 25, 2013 at 12:00 p.m.
• Meeting scheduled March 25, 2013 at 12:00 p.m.
Description:
FA Mtg Minutes 02/25/13
Type:
Minutes
MINUTES OF THE
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
FINANCE - ACCOUNTING COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, February 25, 2013 12:00 p.m.
1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870
1. CALL TO ORDER
2.
3.
4.
5.
The February 25, 2013 meeting of the Yorba Linda Water District's Finance -
Accounting Committee was called to order by Director Hawkins at 12:00 p.m.
The meeting was held in the Admin Conference Room at the District's
Administration Building located at 1717 East Miraloma Avenue in Placentia,
California 92870.
ROLL CALL
COMMITTEE
Director Phil Hawkins, Chair
Director Gary T. Melton
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
ACTION CALENDAR
STAFF
Stephen Parker, Finance Manager
4.1. Unaudited Financial Statements for the Period Ending December 31, 2012
Mr. Parker presented the full accrual quarterly financial statements for the
Committee to recommend the Board receive and file. He shared that most
of our expenses were in line with the budget half way through the year,
with the exception of water - related charges, but that those were offset with
water - related revenues that were higher than budget as well. Mr. Parker
also shared the debt service coverage calculation, which at 200% was
healthy. The Committee supported staff's recommendation.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
5.1. GFOA and CSMFO Budget Award Notification
Mr. Parker was pleased to notify the Committee that the District was
notified it received the Excellence in Budgeting Award from the California
Society of Municipal Finance Officers and the Distinguished Budgeted
Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers Association of
the United States and Canada relating to the District's FY 12/13 Operating
Budget.
5.2. FY 2013/14 Budget Calendar
Mr. Parker provided the Committee with an updated Budget Calendar and
identified changes from the previous calendar in red.
1
5.3. Draft Finance Department Budget
Mr. Parker presented the Committee with the Finance Department's draft
budget for FY 13/14. Mr. Parker described the major differences and the
Committee was satisfied with the budget as presented. The Committee
did ask Mr. Parker to provide the Finance Department's forecast for the
current fiscal year as a future staff task.
5.4. Investment Report for Period Ending January 2013
Mr. Parker pointed out that the District's portfolio yield increased to 0.71 %
in conjunction with the January Investment Report. He also shared some
of the District's significant balance changes, which in January was
primarily a reduction of Operating Reserves due to the payment of OCWD
annexation charges and semi - annual replenishment assessments.
5.5. Budget to Actual Results for January 2013
Mr. Parker reviewed the January Budget to Actual Results. As the
balances were not significantly different from the schedules presented with
the Unaudited Financial Statements for the Period Ending December 31,
2012, there were no further questions. Mr. Parker asked if it would be
helpful to provide a detailed listing of significant variances in the supplies
and services section of the budget. The Committee requested that Mr.
Parker provide this at a future meeting.
5.6. Status of Strategic Plan Initiatives
Mr. Parker reported on the status of strategic plan initiatives related to
fiscal responsibility. The Committee recommended that this item be
tabled until such time that there are fiscal responsibility - related goals that
are being pursued.
5.7. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks
• Remove the Strategic Plan Initiatives from future Finance - Accounting
Committee Meetings.
• Provide detail for significant variances in individual line items in
supplies and services expenses.
• Provide the Finance Department forecast for FY 12/13.
6. ADJOURNMENT
6.1. The meeting was adjourned at 1:03 p.m. The next Finance - Accounting
Committee meeting is scheduled to be held Monday, March 25, 2013 at
12:00 p.m.
2
ITEM NO. 11.3
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
Subject: Personnel -Risk Management Committee
(Collett /Beverage)
• Minutes of meeting held February 26, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
• Minutes of meeting held March 12, 2013 at 4:00 p.m. (To be provided at the
next regular Board meeting.)
• Meeting scheduled March 27, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description: Type:
022613 PRM - Minutes.doc PRM Mtg Minutes 02/26/13 Minutes
MINUTES OF THE
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
PERSONNEL -RISK MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Tuesday, February 26, 2013 4:00 p.m.
1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870
1. CALL TO ORDER
The February 26, 2013 meeting of the Yorba Linda Water District's Public Affairs -
Communications- Technology Committee was called to order by Director Collett
at 4:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Admin Conference Room at the
District's Administration Building located at 1717 East Miraloma Avenue in
Placentia, California 92870.
F,
K�
4.
ROLL CALL
COMMITTEE
Director Ric Collett, Chair
Director Michael J. Beverage
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
STAFF
Gina Knight, HR and Risk Manager
4.1. Status of Compensation Study for the Position of General Manager
(Verbal Report)
Staff presented a revised salary study spreadsheet that included all the
data collected to date indentifying the present salary of other water
agencies' General Managers. The Committee selected several agencies
similar to the District to be used for comparison to determine the
appropriate salary for the District's future General Manager. Staff was
directed to prepare a new spreadsheet that included the agencies
selected for comparison along with the revised spreadsheet with all the
data collected and to present both spreadsheets to the full Board of
Directors at a future Board workshop to establish the salary for the
General Manager position.
4.2. Draft Employment Contract for the Position of General Manager (Verbal
Report)
Staff presented the Committee with a draft employment contract prepared
by the District's employment counsel. The Committee members reviewed
the entire document and made recommendations to staff. Staff was
directed to make the revisions and to present the revised draft
employment contract to the full Board of Directors at a future Board
workshop.
1
4.3. Title Signs for Management Staff Offices (Verbal Report)
On February 5, 2013, staff was directed to review all of the District's
Manager's Title plates to ensure the proper title was listed. Staff reported
that all of the Manager's Title plates were reviewed and replaced with new
plates identifying the correct position title. Staff was asked to review
Management staffs' business cards for purposes of uniformity.
4.4. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks
The Committee Chairperson Collett asked staff to add Job Descriptions
and Titles to future agendas as this is an ongoing assignment. This item
will remain on future agendas until all job descriptions are reviewed.
5. ADJOURNMENT
5.1. The meeting was adjourned at 6:10 p.m. The next Personnel -Risk
Management Committee meeting is scheduled to be held Tuesday, March
12, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
2
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
Subject: Public Affairs - Communications - Technology Committee
(Beverage /Collett)
• Minutes of meeting held March 4, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
• Meeting scheduled April 2, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description:
030413 PACT - Minutes.docx PACT Mtg Minutes 03/04/12
ITEM NO. 11.5
Type:
Backup Material
MINUTES OF THE
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
PUBLIC AFFAIRS - COMMUNICATIONS - TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, March 4, 2013 4:00 p.m.
1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870
1. CALL TO ORDER
2.
K�
CI
The March 4, 2013 meeting of the Yorba Linda Water District's Public Affairs -
Communications- Technology Committee was called to order by Director
Beverage at 4:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Admin Conference Room at
the District's Administration Building located at 1717 East Miraloma Avenue in
Placentia, California 92870.
ROLL CALL
COMMITTEE STAFF
Director Michael J. Beverage, Chair Steve Conklin, Acting General Mgr
Director Ric Collett Art Vega, Acting IT Manager
Damon Micalizzi, Public Info Officer
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.1. Draft IT Department Budget
The Committee reviewed the draft budget and suggested that the budget
be looked at further to reduce the proposed increases compared to last
year. The Committee requested the information for travel and conferences
be itemized, listing the attendees and expected benefits.
4.2. Draft Public Affairs Division Budget
The Committee reviewed the draft budget and requested no changes. It
was noted that there was some flexibility with the potential of moving
certain items and projects to the future if needed for budget space.
4.3. Draft Spring Newsletter
The Committee reviewed and approved the Draft Spring Newsletter. The
Newsletter is scheduled to be mailed on March 21, 2013.
4.4. YLWD Lobby Signage — Updated Core Values Proof
The Committee reviewed the latest proof of the District's Core Values
signage for above the entryway to the Board Room and requested
changes that will narrow the overall width of the sign.
1
5.
4.5. Status of Public Outreach Activities
The Committee reviewed the status report of Public Outreach Activities
and discussed the consideration future purchase of additional promotional
items.
4.6. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks
None.
ADJOURNMENT
5.1. The meeting was adjourned at 5:15
Communications - Technology Committee
Monday, April 2, 2013 at 4:00 p.m.
2
p.m. The next Public Affairs -
meeting is scheduled to be held
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
Subject: Meetings from March 15, 2013 - April 30, 2013
ATTACHMENTS:
Description:
BOD - Activities Calendar.pdf Backup Material
ITEM NO. 13.1
Type:
Backup Material
Board of Directors Activity Calendar
Event Date Time Attendance by:
March 2013
Exec - Admin- Organizational Committee Meeting
Tue, Mar 19
4:OOPM
Melton /Kiley
Yorba Linda City Council
Tue, Mar 19
6:30PM
Collett
MWDOC Board
Wed, Mar 20
8:30AM
Melton
OCWD Board
Wed, Mar 20
5:30PM
Kiley
Board of Directors Workshop Meeting
Thu, Mar 21
11:OOAM
Kiley
Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting
Mon, Mar 25
8:30AM
Beverage
Finance - Accounting Committee Meeting
Mon, Mar 25
12:OOPM
Hawkins /Melton
Joint Committee Meeting with MWDOC and OCWD
Tue, Mar 26
4:OOPM
Beverage /Melton
Personnel -Risk Management Committee Meeting
Wed, Mar 27
4:OOPM
Collett /Beverage
Yorba Linda Planning Commission
Wed, Mar 27
7:OOPM
Hawkins
Board of Directors Regular Meeting
Thu, Mar 28
8:30AM
Melton
April 2013
Board of Directors Workshop Meeting
Mon, Apr 1
11:OOAM
Pub Affairs - Communications -Tech Committee Meeting
Tue, Apr 2
4:OOPM
Beverage /Collett
Yorba Linda City Council
Tue, Apr 2
6:30PM
Kiley
MWDOC /MWD Workshop
Wed, Apr 3
8:30AM
Melton
OCWD Board
Wed, Apr 3
5:30PM
Kiley
Planning- Engineering- Operations Committee Meeting
Thu, Apr 4
3:OOPM
Kiley /Hawkins
MWDOC Elected Officials Forum
Thu, Apr 4
5:30PM
WACO
Fri, Apr 5
7:30AM
Hawkins /Kiley
Personnel -Risk Management Committee Meeting
Tue, Apr 9
4:OOPM
Collett /Beverage
LAFCO
Wed, Apr 10
8:30AM
Beverage
Yorba Linda Planning Commission
Wed, Apr 10
7:OOPM
Melton
Board of Directors Regular Meeting
Thu, Apr 11
8:30AM
Exec - Admin- Organizational Committee Meeting
Tue, Apr 16
4:OOPM
Melton /Kiley
Yorba Linda City Council
Tue, Apr 16
6:30PM
Collett
MWDOC Board
Wed, Apr 17
8:30AM
Melton
OCWD Board
Wed, Apr 17
5:30PM
Kiley
Joint Committee Meeting with City of Yorba Linda
Wed, Apr 17
6:OOPM
Kiley /Beverage
Board of Directors Workshop Meeting
Thu, Apr 18
8:30AM
Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting
Mon, Apr 22
8:30AM
Beverage
Finance - Accounting Committee Meeting
Mon, Apr 22
12:OOPM
Hawkins /Melton
Yorba Linda Planning Commission
Wed, Apr 24
7:OOPM
Hawkins
Board of Directors Regular Meeting
Thu, Apr 25
8:30AM
3/6/2013 4:06:40 PM
ITEM NO. 14.1
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 14, 2013
Subject: Yorba Linda Costco Business Expo - February 23, 2013
(Ratify Director Beverage's attendance.)
Mesa Water Reliability Facility Ceremony - March 13, 2013
(Ratify Director Collett and Director Kiley's attendance.)
Santa Ana River Watershed Conference - April 11, 2013
California Water Policy Conference - April 18 -19, 2013
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors authorize Director attendance at these events if desired.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name Description: Type:
Mesa Water.pdf Backup Material Backup Material
SAWPA Conference.pdf Backup Material Backup Material
CA Water Policy Conf.pdf Backup Material Backup Material
Approved by the Board of Directors of the
Yorba Linda Water District
3/14/2013
PH /RC 5 -0
r- BOARD OF DIRECTORS
join us � C &6214
James R. Filler
N Paxen# L" Waft &kbifityl
President
Shawn Dewane
The Board of Directors of Mesa Water District
'r First Vice President
James F. Atkinson
cordially invite yori to a VIP ceremony
Vice President
commemorating the largest accomplishment
Fred R. Bockmiller, Jr., PE,
in Mesa Water's history.
Vice President
Ethan Temionka Mesa Wafter Reliability Facility
Vice President Wednesday, March 13, 2013 1 -3 pm
A'1 1350 Gisler Avenue, Costa Mesa
RSVP by March 6, 2013 at (714) 866 -9209 or event@MesaWater.org
MesaWater
DISTRICT
i
-DF3
_xh77-
M esaWate r
DISTRICT
r.rrtiW r1o.r lw..tPr
Aixica# F IAN
The state-of-the art Mesa Water Reliability Fac&)y (MWRF) produces water from _
on aquifer of amber - tinted water deep below the Earth`s surface. _
The ancient redwoods give the deep groundwater its amber color.
Please join us in commemorating Mesa Water Reliabrlity Day,
celebrofing the District achie ving its Board of Director's
long standing vision of being 100 percent locally reliable.
r -A"
fik
The event will feature tours of the MWRI, its water -wise gardens,
and light refreshments will he served.
Business attire: slacks and no/low- heeled, closed -tae shoes please.
2013 Santa Ana River Watershed
Conference
rr,, , Mv, ;Wz_
WA The Power
o ft P armr,er,s
��
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Westin South Coast Plaza
Costa Mesa, CA
MARK YOUR CALENDARS!
Convened by the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) and coordinated by the Water Education
Foundation
It's up to US to address 21st century challenges! Fiscal crisis, energy costs, weather changes, the
Delta, drought AND enough water for people, fish and food.
Together We Can Achieve So Much More
• Powerful partnerships unlock synergy and efficiencies.
• Partnerships foster innovation to meet our challeges.
• Together we will see each problem as interrelated.
• This collaborative working conference will produce a framework for the Santa Ana River Watershed.
For more information, contact the Water Education Foundation at (916) 444 -6240.
Sponsorship and vendor opportunities are available for this one -day conference.
Click here to learn more or contact Jean Nordmann at inordmann(&watereducation.org or (916) 444 -6240 for
more information.
CaliforniaWater Policy 22
Still Thirsty After All These Years �
April IA— 19 ')nil I! .
P
Crowne Plaza Hotel, Los Angeles Airport
SPONSORS INCLUDE:
MWD of Southern Cahtorn ia
East Bay MUD
San Francisco PUC
Mann Muricipad Water District
San Diego County Water Authority
Central Basin MWD
Irvine Ranch Water District
Long Beach Water Department
West Win MWD
Register Now! 11 a
WWW.00WOter37ollC4ol ?%J
or 858 -272 -6804 Co' r
6.
V
California Water Policy Conference
4209 Huer{ano Ave. • San Diego, CA 921 17
We are honored to announce that our opening
keynote speaker will be Karen Ross,
Secretary of the Cofifornia Department of Food and
Agriculture. Secretary Ross has deep leadership
experience in agricultural issues nationally,
internationa ly and here in Californ ia.
Agenda highlights also include 12 workshops on ROSS
a wide range of topics including;
Human Right to Water: theory vs Reality
Managing Water Runoff' Compliance is Not o Dirty Word
More in Wet Less in Dry. Is It Practical?
To Frack or Not to Frack Is That the Question?
California and Mexico:
A New Erc of Partnership on the Colorado River?
Beyond the Sound Bites: How Will the BDCP'Mork?
Location
Crowne Plaza LAX, Los Angeles, CA. 800 - 227 -6963.
Reserve your room before March 29.
For more complete agenda, registration info and other details go to
wwwc!2W0tC4ohCyojg
li
G