HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 APPROVE CONTRACT WITH OCWD REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF WELLS FOR SANTA ANA RIVER CONSERVATION & CONJUNCTIVE USE PROGRAM WATER BANK DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
6
• Agenda Item os
AGENDA REPORT Reviewed: 5W
City Manager Ub
Finance Director
E=7-
MEETING
DATE: FEBRUARY 2, 2020
TO: MATTHEW S. WEST, CITY MANAGER
FROM: DOUGLAS S. STACK, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: APPROVE CONTRACT WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF WELLS FOR SANTA ANA RIVER
CONSERVATION AND CONJUNCTIVE USE PROGRAM (SARCCUP) WATER
BANK
SUMMARY
The Orange County Water District (OCWD) in partnership with Santa Ana Watershed Project
Authority (SAWPA) has been awarded $7,875,700 in Proposition 84 grant funds from the
Department of Water Resources (DWR) for the Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive
Use Program (SARCCUP). Grant funds have been dedicated to construct five additional ground
water wells within the OCWD service boundaries. Tustin has been selected as one of the five
participating agencies to this agreement and is eligible to receive up to $1,575,140 in matching
grant proceeds to assist in the construction of a new ground water well serving the City of Tustin.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Approve the SARCCUP Contract with Orange County Water District and authorize the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute the contract; and
2. Authorize filing of CEQA Notice of Exemption with the County of Orange.
FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funding has been budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program for fiscal year 2020-
21 for the ongoing effort to utilize these grant funds. Additional budgetary allocations will be
requested through the biennial budget process for fiscal years 2021-22 and 2022-23, which is
currently under way.
The preliminary estimates for the removal of the existing well, drilling, construction and
development of the replacement well is estimated to be approximately $4.5 million. This includes
design, construction management, inspection, materials testing, and costs associated with the
well equipping phase. The SARCCUP / OCWD grant of$1,575,140 will be applied to the overall
construction costs, reducing the City's estimated project costs to approximately $2.9 million. This
will be further refined as the drilling phase is completed and aquifer yield and ground water quality
are assessed.
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Approve Contract with the Orange County Water District
February 2, 2021
Page 2
CORRELATION TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN
The Contract with OCWD contributes to the fulfillment of the City's Strategic Plan Goal B: Public
Safety and Protection of Assets. Specifically, the project implements Strategy 1, which among
other items, is to ensure continuous maintenance and improvement of public facilities. In addition,
Goal D: Foster strong relationships within the community, specifically, Strategy 2, enhance
collaborative efforts with agencies within and outside Tustin on issues of mutual interest and
concern.
BACKGROUND
A coalition of regional water supply agencies including San Bernardino Valley Water District,
Eastern Municipal Water District, Inland Empire Utilities Agency, Western Municipal Water
District, and Orange County Water District partnered with the SAWPA as recipients of a $64
million-dollar grant administered through the DWR.
The awarded project is a multi-agency, watershed-wide program designed to develop dry-year
yield (DYY). This program allows for the storage of excess water in Orange County ground water
basin during wet years, when excess water might be available from the State Water Project. This
water is then stored until a time, such as an extended drought condition, that would require the
extraction and use of this water as part of the county-wide drought relief efforts.
OCWD will receive $7,875,700 of the available $64M in grant funds to drill five new groundwater
wells to assist in extraction of this water during dry years. Tustin has been selected as an
Operating Party to the OCWD Agreement, and such will receive $1,575,140 in grant funds to
assist in construction of a new City water well. The SARCCUP Contract has been reviewed and
approved by the City Attorney's Office.
Terms of the grant require matching funds. It is estimated the City's portion of this project will
exceed $4M, exceeding the match funds requirement of the contract. It also requires the new well
be complete and operational by September 2023, staff estimates the final design and construction
schedules to reflect the following:
February 2, 2021 Approve OCWD Contract
July/August 2021 Final Design
December 2021 Award Phase 1 Well Drilling
September 2022 Award Phase II, Well Equipping
September 2023 Well Complete and Operational
The new well will be owned and operated by the City, with no restrictions placed on the operation
of this well. The well can be used year-around to help the meet City's overall annual water
demands. The addition of the new well provides a new source of supply to the City's water system
and adds reliability and redundancy to the overall water operation. Production rates for the
proposed well are expected to range from approximately 1,500 gallons per minute (gpm)to 2,000
gpm•
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Approve Contract with the Orange County Water District
February 2, 2021
Page 3
A thorough environmental review and consultation with the City Attorney's Office have determined
the project is Categorically Exempt under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
requirements. A Notice of Exemption has been prepared for the project in accordance with
Section 15303 and will be recorded with the County of Orange following Council approval.
Dou s . Stack, P.E.
Dir ct f Public Works/City Engineer
Attachment: 1. OCWD SARCCUP Well Contract
2. Preliminary Well Design Beneta Replacement Well
3. CEQA Notice of Exemption
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
CONTRACT BETWEEN ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND
REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF WELLS FOR
SANTA ANA RIVER CONSERVATION AND CONJUNCTIVE USE PROGRAM
(SARCCUP) WATER BANK
This CONTRACT BETWEEN ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND
REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF WELLS FOR
SANTA ANA RIVER CONSERVATION AND CONJUNCTIVE USE PROGRAM WATER
BANK ("Program") is entered into as of , 2021 ( "Effective Date"), by
and between the ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a special governmental district
organized and existing pursuant to the Orange County Water District Act, Chapter 924,
Stats. 1933, as amended ("Program Agency" or "OCWD") and the ,
("Operating Party") (the Program Agency and the Operating Party are collectively referred
to herein as the "Parties").
RECITALS
A. The Program Agency has entered into an amended agreement with the
Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority ("SAWPA") to receive grant funds from the
Department of Water Resources ("DWR") for the Santa Ana River Conservation and
Conjunctive Use Program ("SARCCUP" or"Program"), a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (such agreement is hereinafter
referred to as the "OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement").
B. Pursuant to the terms of the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement,
Program Agency may store at least 36,000 acre-feet of water ("Program Stored Water")
from SARCCUP in the Orange County Groundwater Basin ("Basin") managed by
Program Agency and may call upon Operating Party and other groundwater producers
("Producers") in the Basin to participate in collectively extracting up to 12,000 acre-feet
per year of Program Stored Water from the Basin.
C. Extraction of Program Stored Water will be facilitated by, among other
things, OCWD potentially raising the Basin Production Percentage ("BPP"), for all
Producers in the Basin; however, the setting of the BPP will continue to occur on an
annual basis based upon Basin conditions, and future increases of the BPP do not
exclude other methods and programs that OCWD could implement to facilitate Operating
Parties extracting the Program Stored Water.
D. As part of the Program and based upon the grant funds Program Agency
anticipates receiving from DWR, OCWD is providing funding towards the construction
(not operations and maintenance costs)of five extraction wells that will assist in producing
the Program Stored Water. The wells to be constructed are listed in Exhibit B.
E. The Operating Party desires to participate in the Program, provide a well
site, and serve as the operator of one of the five extraction wells ("Program Well") to be
constructed in its service area for the purpose of, among other things, producing Program
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Stored Water from the Basin; and,
F. The Operating Party and the Program Agency have heretofore processed,
or shall process, necessary documents to comply with the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA") with respect to the Program and construction of the Program Well.
EXECUTORY AGREEMENTS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the facts recited above and the
covenants, conditions and promises contained herein, the Parties hereto hereby agree
as follows:
SECTION 1. TERM.
The term of this Contract (hereinafter the "Contract") shall commence as of the
Effective Date, and shall expire after 30 years, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the
provisions of this Contract, or as a result of actions taken by SAWPA and/or DWR per
Section 23 of the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement.
SECTION 2. OBLIGATIONS OF THE PROGRAM AGENCY.
2.1 . Fulfillment of the Terms and Conditions of the OCWD-SAWPA
Subgrantee Agreement. Pursuant to this Contract, the Program Agency shall fulfill the
terms of the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement, as it may be modified from time to
time, for as long as such Agreement remains in existence.
2.2. Role as Lead for Labor Compliance. The Program Agency shall act
as the lead agency to comply with the applicable Labor Compliance Program
requirements described in Section 18 of the DWR-SAWPA Grant Agreement (No.
4600011515). The Operating Party is responsible, at its cost, to meet OCWD's Labor
Compliance Program' applicable requirements and provide all records to Program
Agency where requested by OCWD or otherwise required by this Agreement.
2.3. Grant Reimbursement. The Program Agency will submit invoices
and other required documents to SAWPA on a quarterly basis. All funds to be reimbursed
to Operating Party are for construction activities only (Category D of Grant). The Program
Agency is not responsible for the timing of grant reimbursement from SAWPA or DWR,
which could take several months, and Program Agency shall not be responsible to
reimburse Operating Party's costs incurred per this Agreement until such time as Program
Agency is reimbursed by SAWPA and/or DWR. As mentioned in Section 4 of the OCWD-
SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement, work performed after January 17, 2014 is eligible for
grant reimbursement and work performed to advance the Project after January 1 , 2011
is eligible to be counted towards the local funding match.
1 OCWD's LCP is attached hereto, and incorporated herein as Exhibit C.
-2-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
SECTION 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE OPERATING PARTY.
3.1 . Obligations of Operating Party as Condition of Receiving SARCCUP
Funds. The Operating Party is required to construct and obtain permitting for one
Program Well on land owned or otherwise controlled by Operating Party. Following
construction and permitting, Operating Party must properly staff, operate and maintain
the SARCCUP funded Program Well as part of its public water system for the duration of
this Contract.2 Operating Party shall—by virtue of its entry into this Contract—assume all
obligations that OCWD has under OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement with regard to
staffing, operating, maintaining and repairing the Program Well. Operating Party agrees
that it shall be solely responsible for the proper operation, maintenance, repair and use
of the Program Well per this Contract and Section 9 of the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee
Agreement, and that Operating Party shall not take actions that cause Program Agency
to violate the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement.
3.2. Construction. The Program Well construction plans and
specifications will incorporate all mitigation requirements arising out of processing
necessary CEQA documents for the Program Well. Construction plans, specifications
and any other grant required documents shall be submitted to the Program Agency in a
form that can be easily transmitted to SAWPA. All contracts for Program Well
construction shall be let by competitive bid procedures that assure award of the contract
to the lowest responsible bidder, except as may be otherwise authorized under the
enabling authority for the Operating Party and/or the California Public Contract Code, and
in accordance with the SAWPA-OCWD Subgrantee Agreement. Operating Party shall
be responsible for required signage at each well location and ensuring that construction
of the Program Well is completed no later than September 30, 2023 (unless the period
for completion is extended by SAWPA and/or DWR). The design and materials utilized
for the Program Well shall be consistent with all applicable regulations. Upon completion
of the Program Well, the Operating Party shall transmit a written notice of completion to
the Program Agency ("Notice of Completion").
3.3. Invoicing. The Operating Party shall pay the costs of constructing
the Program Well and directly related facilities. Invoices and other required
documentation for Program Well construction will be submitted to the Program Agency in
a format that can be easily transmitted to SAWPA for grant reimbursement. The
Operating Party hereby acknowledges that the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement
provides grant funding totaling seven million, eight hundred seventy-five thousand, seven
hundred dollars ($7,875,700) to be used towards the construction of five Program Wells
that may be constructed by different Operating Parties. Each Operating Party is
potentially eligible to receive up to a maximum reimbursement of one million, five hundred
seventy-five thousand, one hundred forty dollars ($1 ,575,140) in grant funding to be
applied to well construction and equipping (Category D of Grant). The Operating Party
shall expend an equal amount of its own funds towards well construction and equipping
("Local Match"). Operating Party shall, as a condition of receiving funds from Program
2 Periodic shut down of the Program Well by Operating Party is authorized for the reasons listed in
Section 9 and Footnote 2 of the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement (as amended).
-3-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Agency, demonstrate a minimum 50/50 cost share of grant funding. Should the Local
Match be less than the available grant funding per well, funding from Program Agency to
Operating Party will be reduced to equal the Local Match.
3.4. Compliance with SARCCUP Agreement. The Operating Party shall
comply with all applicable grant requirements described in the DWR-SAWPA Grant
Agreement or OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement to the same extent as Program
Agency would be required to comply with such requirements.
3.5. Program Well Site. The Operating Party is solely responsible for
providing a site for the Program Well and for completing all CEQA and other
environmental permitting work that may be required to construct and operate the Program
Well.
3.6. Ownership and Operation and Maintenance. The Operating Party
shall own the Program Well, and at its sole cost and expense, operate and maintain the
Program Well in as good and efficient condition as upon its construction, ordinary and
reasonable wear and depreciation excepted, and otherwise in accordance with industry
standards (and applicable standards and requirements of DWR, in its funding capacity
under the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement), and as required by the OCWD-
SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement. The Operating Party is not responsible for reductions
in the Program Well operations resulting from changed groundwater basin water levels.
3.6.1 . The Operating Party shall provide for all repairs, renewals,
and replacements due to normal wear and tear necessary to the efficient operation of the
Program Well during the term of the Contract and shall provide personnel sufficient in
numbers and qualifications to operate and maintain the Program Well.
3.6.2. The Operating Party shall promptly provide requested
documentation to the Program Agency regarding operation and maintenance of the
Program Well, including but not limited to any documentation required under the OCWD-
SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement or otherwise requested by DWR and/or SAWPA.
3.6.3. The Operating Party may use the Program Well for all
purposes related to Operating Party's normal operations so long as such use does not
interfere with the Program and the Operating Party maintains sufficient excess operable
production capacity as necessary to meet its Program Stored Water extraction obligations
as set forth in Paragraph 3.8 below.
3.7. Reports. The Operating Party shall promptly provide any and all
budgeting documents and other reports pertaining to the Program Well and its overall
groundwater pumping capacity or operations as may reasonably be required by the
Program Agency.
3.7.1 . The Operating Party shall retain books, records, and other
material concerning the Project Well, and funding thereof, in accordance with generally
accepted government accounting standards for a minimum of three (3) years after final
payment is made by Program Agency to Operating Party.
-4-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
3.8. Extraction of Program Stored Water. The Operating Party shall
make reasonable and good faith efforts to extract Program Stored Water from the
Program Well or any other existing wells operated by Operating Party when requested by
Program Agency. The Operating Party shall pay for such produced Program Stored
Water based on the sum of the then current Replenishment Assessment, Additional
Replenishment Assessment and, if applicable, the Basin Equity Assessment. The
extraction of Program Stored Water shall replace imported water the Operating Party was
planning to purchase.
3.9. Expiration. The Operating Party's obligations under this Contract
shall expire in 30 years unless sooner terminated per this Agreement or per Section 23
of the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement.
SECTION 4. INDEMNIFICATION.
4.1 . Program Agency Indemnification Obligation. The Program Agency
shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Operating Party and its respective officers,
agents and employees, from any and all costs, damages, penalties or other liabilities
resulting or alleged to result from the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the
Program Agency in the performance of the Program Agency's duties under this Contract.
4.2. Operating Party Indemnification Obligation. The Operating Party
shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Program Agency and its respective
officers, agents and employees, from any and all costs, damages, penalties or other
liabilities to the extent resulting or alleged to result from: (a) Operating Party's negligence
or willful misconduct; (b) actions/omissions of Operating Party that cause Program
Agency to violate the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement, or which cause SAWPA
to violate its grant agreement with DWR; (c) contractor claims associated with the
Program Well; (d) Operating Party's failure, or alleged failure, to properly comply with
CEQA or other environmental laws or regulations. The indemnification obligation
described herein shall not arise where liability is caused by Program Agency's sole active
negligence or willful misconduct.
4.3. The indemnification provisions set forth in this Section 4 shall survive
the termination of the Contract and the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement and
continue in full force.
SECTION 5. INSURANCE.
5.1 . The Operating Party shall obtain and maintain for the duration of this
Contract all of the applicable types of insurance that Program Agency is required to obtain
under Section 30 of the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement, in amounts equal to or
greater than the amounts specified in this Contract. Each policy shall name the Program
Agency, DWR, and SAWPA as additional insureds. The insurance obligations of
Operating Party shall include, but are not limited to:
5.1 .1 . Commercial General Liability. The Operating Party shall procure,
pay for and keep in full force and effect and at all times during the term of
-5-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
this Contract, commercial general liability insurance insuring against liability
for personal injury, bodily injury, death and damage to property (including
the Program Well) arising from the construction, operation or maintenance
of the Program Well, and Operating Party's performance of its obligations
under the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement and this Contract. Said
insurance shall include coverage in an amount equal to at least Five Million
Dollars ($5,000,000), shall contain "blanket contractual liability" and "broad
form property damage" endorsements, and shall name the Program
Agency, DWR, and SAWPA as additional insureds.
5.1 .2. Worker's Compensation Insurance. Pursuant to Section 3700 of the
California Labor Code, the Operating Party shall procure, pay for and keep
in full force and effect at all times during the term of the Contract workers'
compensation insurance with employer's liability in the amounts required by
law with respect to the construction, operation, and maintenance of the
Program Well.
5.1 .3. Casualty Insurance. The Operating Party shall procure, pay for and
keep in full force and effect at all times during the term of this Contract,
property casualty insurance (including coverage against damage to or loss
of the Program Well by reason of fire, smoke, lightning, flooding, vandalism,
malicious mischief and explosion) in an amount equal to the total cost of the
construction of the Program Well, which policy shall provide that all
proceeds thereunder shall be payable to the Program Agency.
5.1 .4 Automobile Liability Insurance. The Operating Party will provide proof
of automobile liability insurance as required by the State of California
Department of Motor Vehicles with coverage of at least One Million Dollars
($1 ,000,000).
5.2. Endorsements. Endorsements evidencing the coverage required in
this Contract and showing Program Agency as additional insureds shall be furnished to
the Program Agency.
5.3. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. The insurance required by
this Contract may contain deductibles or self-insured retentions. The Operating Party
shall be solely responsible for any such deductibles and/or self-insured retentions which
may be applicable to insurance coverage obtained by the Operating Party.
5.4. The Operating Party may comply with this Section 5 by providing
insurance with substantially the same limits of coverage through the California Insurance
Pool Authority, the Association of California Water Agencies Joint Powers Insurance
Authority ("JPIA") or other like municipal self-insurance pool.
-6-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
SECTION 6. MISCELLANEOUS.
6.1 . Termination Prior to Expiration of Contract.
6.1 .1 . Material Breach by Operating Party. The Program Agency
may terminate this Contract in the event of Operating Party's material violation of any
provision of this Contract upon written notice by Program Agency to Operating Party after
the failure by Operating Party to come into compliance within a reasonable time as
established by Program Agency and/or SAWPA. In the event of such termination, the
Operating Party, upon demand, shall, within 60 days of notification by Program Agency,
repay to Program Agency an amount equal to the amount of grant funds disbursed by
Program Agency to Operating Party for the Program Well. In the event of termination,
prejudgment interest, unless waived by Program Agency, shall accrue on all amounts due
from the date that notice of termination is mailed to the Operating Party to the date full
repayment is received by Program Agency.
6.1 .2. Termination of Funding for Program Well. The Program
Agency may terminate this Contract prior to disbursement of funds for the Program Well
should SAWPA and/or DWR terminate the "Well Component" funded via DWR Grant
Agreement No. 4600011515 and the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement. Upon
DWR or SAWPA terminating funding, Program Agency shall not be liable to Operating
Party for any damages, costs or expenses resulting from such termination.
6.1 .3. Early Termination by Operating Party. The Operating Party
may terminate this Contract prior to the conclusion of the 30 year term if the Program Well
is never constructed through no fault of Operating Party, or if the Program Well is
constructed upon obtaining written permission for early termination from Program
Agency, SAWPA and DWR. Program Agency will not unreasonably withhold such
permission.
6.2. Notices. Any notice, instrument, payment or document required to
be given or delivered under this Contract shall be given or delivered by personal delivery,
by facsimile, or by depositing the same in the United States mail depository, first class
postage prepaid, and addressed as follows:
If to Program Agency:
Orange County Water District
Box 8300
Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8300
Attn: General Manager
If to Operating Party:
The City of Tustin, Water Services
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
-7-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Attn: Mike Grisso, Water Services Manager
or such other address as any party may direct in writing to all of the other Parties. Service
of any instrument or document shall be deemed complete upon receipt if delivered
personally, or forty-eight (48) hours after deposit of such instrument or document in the
United States mail depository, first class postage prepaid and addressed as set forth
above.
6.3. Binding Effect. All of the terms, conditions and provisions of this
Contract shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the Parties hereto.
6.4. Counterparts. This Contract may be executed by the Parties in
counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect
as if all of the Parties had executed the same instrument.
6.5. Integration. This Contract, in conjunction with the OCWD-SAWPA
Subgrantee Agreement, represents the entire understanding of the Parties as to those
matters contained herein. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or
effect with respect to those matters covered by this Contract.
6.6. Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this
Contract shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, then this portion shall be
severed and the remainder of this Contract shall not be affected and shall have full force
and effect, unless the Parties otherwise agree in writing, which agreement shall not be
unreasonably withheld.
6.7. Waiver. Failure of a party to insist upon the strict performance of any
of the provisions of this Contract by the other party, or the failure by a party to exercise
its rights upon the default of the other party, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's
right to insist and demand strict compliance by the other party with the terms of this
Contract thereafter.
6.8. Interpretation and Governing Law. This Contract shall be governed
by the laws of the State of California and construed as if drafted by all the Parties hereto.
The headings contained within this Contract are for convenience only and shall have no
force or effect in the construction of this Contract.
6.9. Modification. This Contract may not be modified, altered or amended
except in writing, signed by authorized officials of the Parties.
6.10. Successors in Interest. Subject to Paragraph 6.13 below, all of the
terms, provisions, covenants and obligations contained in this Contract shall be binding
upon and inure to the benefit of the respective party provided herein, and its respective
successors and assigns.
6.11. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Contract is made and entered into
for the sole protection and benefit of the Parties. No other person shall have any right of
action based upon any provision of this Contract.
-8-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
6.12. Further Assurances. Each party, upon the request of the other,
agrees to perform such further acts and to execute and deliver such other documents as
are reasonably necessary to carry out the provisions of the Contract, including applicable
provisions of the OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement which are incorporated herein
by reference.
6.13. Assignment. Absent prior written authorization from Program
Agency, and if necessary, SAWPA and DWR, no party shall transfer the Contract, in
whole or in part, or any of its interests hereunder, to any other person or entity. Any
attempt to transfer or assign this Contract, or any privilege hereunder, without such prior
written consent, shall be void and confer no right on any person or entity that is not a party
to this Contract and shall constitute a material breach of the Contract by the Party seeking
to assign without the consent of the other Party. Nothing contained herein shall prevent
the Parties from subcontracting for the performance of obligations hereunder, provided,
however, no such subcontracting shall relieve the Parties from the performance of
obligations required herein.
6.14. Authority to Execute. Each of the persons executing this Contract on
behalf of the respective Parties warrants and represents that he or she has the authority
to execute this Contract on behalf of that party and warrants and represents that he or
she has the authority to bind that respective party to the performance of its obligations
hereunder.
[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS:]
-9-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Contract to be duly
executed by their authorized officers as of the date first written above.
ATTEST: ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
By By
Secretary General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Rutan & Tucker, LLP
General Counsel
ATTEST: THE CITY OF TUSTIN
By By
Erica Yasuda, City Clerk Letitia Clark, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Kendig, Tustin City Attorney
-10-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Exhibit A — OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement
-11-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Exhibit B — List of Wells to be Constructed
Participating Selected Well Site Location and Estimated Capacity
Agency Well Site
East Orange 210 N. McPherson Rd, Orange, CA. Est. 1 ,800 gpm
County Water North Well capacity.
District
627 West La Palma Ave., Anaheim, CA. Replaces well
City of Fullerton Well 7A 7, located at Main Plant where there are five other
wells. Est. 2,000-4,000 gpm capacity.
Mesa Water Well No. 14 3120 S. Croddy Way, Santa Ana. Est. 3,000 -4,000
m capacity.
City of Orange Well 29 1715 W. Struck Ave, Orange, CA 92866. Est. 3,000
m capcity.
City of Tustin Replace 18001 Beneta Way, Tustin, Ca. 92780. Est. 1 ,500 gpm
Beneta well capacity.
-12-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Exhibit C — OCWD Labor Compliance Program
-13-
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Technical Memorandum
Well Site Assessment and
PreliminaryDesignWell
Beneta Replacement Well
PREPARED FOR:
City of Tustin ' ` •- ell
1
September 30, 2020 1 14A
JP
KYLE Groundwater
557 E.Pasadena Street,Ste.z
Pomona,CA 91767 1 626-379-7569
www.kylegroundwater.com
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
Well Site Assessment and
Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin
Beneta Well Replacement
Draft
Prepared For:
AKM Consulting Engineers
City of Tustin
O N3DROO
J'Fi �O
U �
y
Russell J. Kyle, PG, CHGJ',► 4130122
KYLE Groundwater, Inc. 9lFC�CAL�FC��
Project No.3011.003 1( KYLEGroundyvater
September 2020 Page i
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background............................................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Project Location.................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Purpose &Scope................................................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 HYDROGEOLOGY.......................................................................................................................................2
2.1 Geologic Setting..................................................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Groundwater..........................................................................................................................................................3
2.2.1 Groundwater Occurrence........................................................................................................................3
2.2.2 Aquifer Systems........................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2.3 Aquifer Yield................................................................................................................................................. 3
2.2.4 Historical Groundwater Elevations.....................................................................................................4
2.2.5 Wellfield Interference............................................................................................................................... 5
2.2.6 Groundwater Quality................................................................................................................................6
2.2.6.1 Naturally-Occurring Groundwater Contaminants ..............................................................6
2.2.6.1.1 Total Dissolved Solids................................................................................................................. 6
2.2.6.1.2 Nitrate................................................................................................................................................6
2.2.6.1.3 Iron..................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.6.1.4 Color................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.6.2 Anthropogenic Groundwater Contaminants......................................................................... 8
2.2.6.2.1 Perchlorate......................................................................................................................................8
2.2.6.2.2 PFOS/PFOA................................................................................................................................... 8
2.2.6.2.3 Point-Source Threats to Groundwater Quality................................................................. 9
2.2.6.3 Depth-Specific Groundwater Quality......................................................................................11
3.0 ANTICIPATED CONDITIONS............................................................................................................... 12
3.1 Drilling....................................................................................................................................................................12
3.2 Production Capacity..........................................................................................................................................12
3.3 Groundwater Quality........................................................................................................................................12
4.0 PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN CRITERIA........................................................................................ 13
4.1 Recommended Well Destruction Method................................................................................................13
4.2 Recommended Well Drilling Method.........................................................................................................13
4.3 Preliminary Well Design..................................................................................................................................13
4.4 Materials................................................................................................................................................................14
4.4.1 Well Casing&Screen...............................................................................................................................14
Project No.3011.003 t KYLEG 0LwKh rater
September 2020 Page ii
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
4.4.2 Gravel Envelope and Slot Size.............................................................................................................14
4.4.3 Annular Cement Seal...............................................................................................................................15
4.4.4 Accessory Tubing......................................................................................................................................15
5.0 CONSTRUCTION LOGISTICS................................................................................................................ 16
5.1 Construction Constraints................................................................................................................................16
5.2 Construction Water Source............................................................................................................................16
5.3 Noise Mitigation..................................................................................................................................................16
5.4 Cuttings and Fluids Disposal.........................................................................................................................16
5.5 Discharge Considerations...............................................................................................................................16
5.6 Permitting Considerations .............................................................................................................................18
5.6.1 Required Setbacks....................................................................................................................................18
5.6.2 Control Zone Requirement...................................................................................................................18
6.0 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS................................................................... 19
7.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................ 20
Project No.3011.003 KYLEc-woun water
September 2020 Page iii
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
FIGURES
Figure 1. General Project Location
Figure 2. City of Tustin Wellfield Area
Figure 3. Historical Groundwater Elevations
Figure 4. Historical TDS Concentrations
Figure 5. Historical Nitrate Concentrations
Figure 6. Historical Iron Concentrations
Figure 7. Historical Color Concentrations
Figure 8. Historical Perchlorate Concentrations
Figure 9. Sites of Environmental Concern
Figure 10. Preliminary Well Design Profile
Figure 11. Conceptual Well Construction Site Layout
Figure 12. Water Source and Discharge Conveyance
Figure 13. Regulatory Compliance Map
TABLES
Table 1. Summary of Well Construction Details
Table 2. Engineer's Estimate of Well Destruction Costs
Table 3. Engineer's Estimate of Well Construction Costs
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Depth-Specific Groundwater Quality(OCWD SC-5)
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGroundwater
September 2020 Page iv
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AKM AKM Consulting Engineers
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
bgs Below Ground Surface
City City of Tustin
DDW California State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water
DIPE Diisopropyl Ether
DFSP Defense Fuel Support Point
DWR California Department of Water Resources
GRO Gasoline Range Organics
gpm Gallons per Minute
ID Inside Diameter
KGI KYLE Groundwater, Inc.
LNAPL Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MCAS Marine Corps Air Station
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
mg/L Milligrams per Liter
mg/kg Milligrams per kilogram
µg/L Micrograms per Liter
msl Mean Sea Level
MTBE Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether
ND Below Laboratory Reporting Limits
OD Outside Diameter
ppm Parts per Million
PFOA Perfluorooctanoic acid
PFOS Perfluorooctanes ulfonic acid
SVE Soil Vapor Extraction
TBA Tertiary-Butyl Ether
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
TPHg Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Gasoline
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
UST Underground Storage Tank
VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds
Project No.3011.003 KVLEGro wKhArater
September 2020 Page v
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
The City of Tustin (City)is seeking to destroy the existing Beneta Well and construct and equip a new
water supply well, designated Beneta Well Replacement,within close proximity to original well.
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed well site is located at the site of the existing Beneta Well within the Irvine subbasin of
the of the Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin,approximately 8 miles southeast of the
City of Anaheim (see Figure 1). Specifically, the site is located at 18001 Beneta Way in the City of
Tustin,Orange County,California (see Figure 2).
1.3 PURPOSE&.SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to assess the proposed well site as to suitability for installation of a
replacement groundwater production well and develop a preliminary well design. The scope of work
performed to achieve project objectives included the following.
• Site reconnaissance
• Review of existing hydrogeologic data and reports
• Summary of the hydrogeologic setting
• Assessment of potential sources of groundwater contamination
• Development of anticipated conditions
• Preparation of a preliminary well design
• Assessment of anticipated well destruction procedures
• Evaluation of construction logistics and constraints
• Evaluation of permitting and regulatory constraints
• Preparation of engineer's estimates of well replacement costs
Project No.3011.003it,KYLEG�rndwater
September 2020 Page 1
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
2.0 HYDROGEOLOGY
2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING
The study area is located within the Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin (OCB), a
broad alluvial feature overlying north and central Orange County and covering an area of
approximately 350 square miles known as the Tustin and Downey Plains. The OCB is bounded by
the Puente and Chino Hills to the north,the Santa Ana Mountains to the east,the San Joaquin Hills to
the south, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and the Orange and Los Angeles County line to the
northwest(DWR, 2004). The Newport-Inglewood fault zone also forms the southwestern boundary
to all but shallow aquifers within the basin (OCWD, 2015).
The OCB can be subdivided into several areas or subbasins generally distinguished based on average
elevation. These include the Main Basin,where the majority of groundwater production occurs, the
Yorba Linda Subbasin, located north of the Anaheim forebay area, the La Habra Subbasin, located
immediately north of the Orange County Water District(OCWD) boundary, and the Irvine Subbasin,
the southernmost portion of the basin situated between the Santa Ana Mountains and San Joaquin
Hills (OCWD, 2015).
The OCB is divided into two primary hydrologic regions, the Forebay and Pressure areas (see
Figure 1). Groundwater flow is typically less impeded by fine-grained sediments within the Forebay
area, allowing for a more direct hydraulic connection between surface water and/or shallow
groundwater, and deeper aquifer units, and as such, is considered an area of recharge to the OCB.
The Pressure area is generally characterized by the presence of fine sediments (i.e., silt and clay)
which impede vertical groundwater flow,forming confined aquifer systems (OCWD, 2013).
The City's wellfield spans the boundary between the Irvine Subbasin and the Main Basin,within the
Forebay area of the OCB (see Figures 1 and 2). The Beneta well site is situated within the Forebay
area of the Main Basin (see Figure 2).
Recharge to the OCB primarily includes percolation of flows within the Santa Ana River, direct
infiltration of precipitation, and artificial recharge of treated waste water through injection. Flow
within the Santa Ana River,the largest source of surface water recharge to the OCB,includes natural
flow, reclaimed water, and imported water that is spread within a system of percolation basins
located in the Forebay area (DWR, 2004).
The sediments that fill the OCB consist of a series of interbedded continental and marine sand, silt,
and clay deposits. The effective depth to the base of usable groundwater within the basin is
approximately 2,000 feet (OCWD, 2015). The thickness of water-bearing units in the southeastern
area of the basin underlying the City of Irvine,and along the margins of the basin,is known to be less
than 1,000 feet(OCWD, 2015).
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGrourndwater
September 2020 Page 2
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
2.2 GROUNDWATER
2.2.1 GROUNDWATER OCCURRENCE
Groundwater within the Principal aquifer of the OCB generally flows south and southwest from areas
of recharge in the northeast (i.e., the Santa Ana Mountains) to the Pacific Ocean in the southwest
(OCWD, 2019). There is a sizable pumping depression in the vicinity of the City of Santa Ana due to
the large concentration of pumping wells in that area (OCWD, 2020b).
2.2.2 AQUIFER SYSTEMS
The basin has been divided into three aquifer systems based on geological information and
potentiometric head differences: the Shallow aquifer system, the Principal (Middle) aquifer system,
and the Deep aquifer system. The Shallow aquifer consists of Holocene alluvium, older alluvium,
stream terraces, and Pleistocene deposits of the La Habra Formation (DWR, 2004), is comprised of
sand, gravel, conglomerate, silt, and clay, and is present throughout the entire basin to depths of
approximately 250 feet below ground surface (bgs; OCWD, 2015). Groundwater pumped from the
Shallow aquifer is primarily used for agricultural and industrial supply,although some Cities produce
municipal water supplies from this aquifer. The Principal aquifer system contributes the vast
majority of groundwater pumped from the basin and consists of the lower-Pleistocene Coyote Hills
and San Pedro Formations. The Principal aquifer is composed of sand, gravel, and clay to depths
ranging from 200 to 1,300 feet (OCWD, 2015). The Deep aquifer system consists of the upper-
Pliocene Fernando Group which is composed of sand and conglomerate to depths of up to 2,000 feet.
Groundwater from this aquifer is typically deemed unusable due to poor quality (primarily color),
and the great depths required to reach this water (DWR, 2004 and OCWD, 2015). Groundwater
pumped from this aquifer typically requires some form of treatment.
It is anticipated that a new municipal well within the vicinity of the proposed well site will target
groundwater production from the Principal aquifer as this aquifer is considered the primary source
of groundwater supply within the OCB. However,it is recommended that drilling extend beyond the
depth of this aquifer in an effort characterize the deeper aquifers and assess the ability of those
aquifers to produce good quality groundwater at acceptable rates.
2.2.3 AQUIFER YIELD
Aquifer transmissivity is defined as the rate of water flow through a vertical section of aquifer one
foot in width under a hydraulic gradient of 1 and is typically expressed in units of gallons per day per
foot (gpd/foot). This parameter is a measure of the capability of an aquifer to transmit water and
can be best estimated from data collected during controlled pumping tests (Cooper and Jacob, 1946).
When pumping test data is not available, transmissivity can be estimated from measurements of
specific capacity (Ferris, 1963), or the amount of drawdown measured within a well pumping at a
known rate. It should be noted that there are many variables affecting transmissivity values as
determined from well data, including but not limited to,well depth, aquifers screened, effectiveness
Project No.3011.003 it,
September 2020 Page 3
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
of well development,well age,well interference,and the quality of the data collected. However,when
taken as a whole,these data do allow for an effective assessment of aquifer production potential.
Specific capacity and pumping test data were compiled for selected production wells within the
vicinity of the proposed well site (see Table 1) and were utilized to provide an indication of the
potential yield of the local aquifer system. Wherever possible, data collected at the time of well
construction were utilized as these data are least affected by fouling of the well screen and are
typically most representative of aquifer conditions. Reported specific capacity data for the project
area ranges from 10 to 51 gpm per foot (gpm/foot) with an average of 24 gpm/foot, suggesting
aquifer transmissivities ranging from approximately 16,500 to 100,000 gpd/foot, and averaging
approximately 63,300 gpd/foot. These specific capacity data suggest transmissivity values that are
relatively consistent with published transmissivity data for the aquifers in this area (Singer, 1973)
and generally indicate the presence of productive aquifers within the vicinity of the well site.
Instantaneous discharge rates for the aforementioned wells range from approximately 400 to
3,300 gpm with an average of approximately 1,398 gpm (see Table 1). The closest active well to the
proposed well site (i.e., Columbus Tustin) has historically reported an instantaneous pumping rate
of 1,500 gpm with a specific capacity of 20 gpm/foot(see Table 1). Generally,these data indicate the
presence of productive aquifers across the study area and the potential for relatively good production
potential at the proposed well site.
2.2.4 HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS
Like many basins in Southern California, historical groundwater elevations in the OCB exhibited a
significant period of decline through the 1950s due to excessive groundwater extraction for
agricultural purposes. Groundwater levels then showed a period of rise through the late-1960s due
to reduced pumping and the onset of artificial recharge activities, resulting in the basin being
considered fully replenished by 1965 (OCWD, 2015). Since that time, groundwater levels in the
Forebay area have generally stabilized while levels generally continue to decline in the coastal
portions of the Pressure area(OCWD, 2015).
Historical groundwater elevations for selected completions of OCWD's multi-completion monitoring
well SC-5,located approximately 1.7 miles northwest of the proposed well site,are shown on Figure 3
(OCWD,2020a). Over the period of record from 1991 through 2 02 0,groundwater elevations exhibit
three periods of general decline followed by periods of increasing water levels, presumably
associated with periods of drought followed by periods of increased precipitation (see Figure 3).
Groundwater levels have been increasing since the end of the most recent drought in 2015 and have
essentially returned to levels reported in the mid-1990s. Groundwater levels in all selected
monitoring well completions exhibit seasonal fluctuation on the order of approximately 50 to 60 feet,
likely associated with patterns of precipitation and pumping.
Project No.3011.003it,KYLEG�r�dwater
September 2020 Page 4
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
2.2.5 WELLFIELD INTERFERENCE
Installing groundwater production wells within close proximity to one another will typically result
in additional water level drawdown and increased pumping costs. The magnitude of water level
interference imparted on existing wells within 1 mile of each proposed well was estimated using the
Theis equation for non-steady radial flow to pumping wells (below;Theis, 1935).
S(r, t) = 116Q W�u) and u = 1.87r 2S
7, Tt
It was assumed that the pumping rate of the new well (Q) would be 1,500 gpm and that the well
would be continuously operational. An estimated aquifer transmissivity (T) of approximately
63,000 gpd/foot was used based on the average capacity data obtained from vicinity wells (Theis,
1963). An estimated well efficiency of 70% and an estimated aquifer storativity (S) of 0.01 was
assumed. The distance between wells (r) was measured directly using Google Earth. Water level
interference was calculated based on a variety of pumping durations (t).
Utilizing these assumptions, the predicted additional drawdown from water level interference was
estimated and is summarized in the following table. Actual water level interference may vary
depending upon pumping schedules, actual aquifer parameters,well construction details, and other
factors. However,it is considered reasonable to utilize these values as a metric for determining the
relative magnitude of water level interference.
Estimated Water Level Interference (Wells within 1 Mile)
Well Distance from Duration of Pumping,(t)
Name New Well,(r)
[feet] 1 day 0 days 6 months
Columbus Tustin 1,045 2 11 16
Newport 3,055 0 5 10
Vandenberg 3,245 0 5 10
Main Street Well 3,265 0 5 10
Main Street Well 3 3,315 0 5 9
17th Street Well 4 4,205 0 4 8
Pasadena Avenue 5,090 0 3 7
The estimated water level interference from pumping of a replacement well at a continuous rate of
1,500 gpm is estimated to range from approximately 2 to 16 feet at the Columbus Tustin well (i.e.,
the closest active well to the proposed well site) depending on the duration of pumping. Interference
is estimated to decline in those wells located farther from the proposed well site, particularly for
lesser pumping durations.
Project No.3011.003 it,
September 2020 Page 5
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
2.2.6 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Potential non-point source constituents of concern within groundwater in the vicinity of the Tustin
wellfield include total dissolved solids (TDS),nitrate,iron,and color. Additionally,the area is known
to be impacted by anthropogenic point-source contaminants such as perchlorate, volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), and emerging contaminants such as perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and
perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA).
2.2.6.1 NATURALLY-OCCURRING GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS
2.2.6.1.1 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
TDS is a measure of the dissolved mineral content of water and is commonly used as a metric for the
general quality of groundwater. The average groundwater TDS concentration within the OCB for
2018-19 reportedly ranged from a low 249 milligrams per liter (mg/L) in coastal areas to a high of
669 mg/L in inland areas, and averaged approximately 447 mg/L (OCWD, 2020b).
The concentration of TDS for selected production wells within approximately one mile of the
proposed well site range from between 330 and 1,570 mg/L, and average approximately 914 mg/L
over the period of record from August 1989 to May 2020 (see Figure 4).
Groundwater pumped from 17th Street Well 4 and the Newport Well exhibit TDS concentrations
periodically in excess of the California Division of Drinking Water (DDW) upper and short-term
secondary maximum contaminant levels(MCLS)of 1,000 and 1,500 mg/L,respectively. Both of these
wells have shown a fairly significant decreasing trend from 2016 to present. Water from these wells
is currently treated at the City of Tustin 17th Street Desalter to reduce TDS and nitrate concentrations.
Groundwater pumped from Main Street Wells 3 and 4 exhibit TDS concentrations ranging from
464 to 966 mg/L, and averaging 740 mg/L, in excess of the DDW recommended secondary MCL of
500 mg/L,and demonstrating a generally increasing trend since 2005/2006. Water from these wells
is currently treated at the City of Tustin Main Street Treatment Plant.
The remaining wells (Beneta, Columbus Tustin,Pasadena Avenue,and Vandenberg)have historically
reported TDS concentrations ranging from 330 to 778 mg/L, and averaging 494 mg/L over the
period of record (see Figure 4). Nearby Columbus Tustin reports much lower TDS concentrations
than the existing Beneta Well,likely due to being screened within deeper aquifer units.
2.2.6.1.2 NITRATE
Nitrate is regulated under the DDW primary MCL of 10 mg/L and is a well-known contaminant
derived from percolation of nitrogen-based fertilizers applied to crops, high-density animal
operations,wastewater treatment,and from leaking septic tanks. Elevated nitrate is known to affect
infants under the age of six months as it can interfere with the ability of blood to carry oxygen, and
lead to shortness of breath and oxygen deprivation (EPA, 2016). Elevated nitrate within the OCB is
primarily associated with past and present agricultural activities.
Project No.3011.003 �+KYLEGroun water
September 2020 Page 6 l�
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
The concentration of nitrate for selected production wells within approximately one mile of the
proposed well site range from between approximately 1.7 and 22.2 mg/L, and average
approximately 11 mg/L over the period of record from August 1989 to May 2020 (see Figure 5). As
with TDS, groundwater pumped from 17th Street Well 4, Newport,and Main Street Wells 3 and 4 are
treated to reduce elevated nitrate concentrations in excess of the primary MCL. These wells also
exhibit increasing and decreasing trends that may be tied to periods of drought(see Figure 5).
The remaining wells (Beneta,Columbus Tustin,Pasadena Avenue,and Vandenberg)have historically
reported nitrate concentrations ranging from approximately 1.7 to 15 mg/L, averaging
approximately 5.4 mg/L over the period of record (see Figure 5). As with TDS, nearby Columbus
Tustin reports much lower concentrations of nitrate than the existing Beneta Well likely due to being
screened within deeper aquifer units.
2.2.6.1.3 IRON
Iron is regulated under the DDW secondary drinking water MCL of 300 micrograms per liter (µg/L)
as it is considered aesthetically displeasing in terms of the color, odor, and taste. Additionally, iron
precipitates may stain household fixtures,and clog water supply infrastructure (EPA, 2016).
Iron concentrations for selected production wells within approximately one mile of the proposed
well site range from below laboratory reporting limits to 340 µg/L, and average approximately
14µg/L over the period of record from August 1989 to May 2020. Iron has only once exceeded the
secondary MCL of 300 µg/L, as reported by the Beneta Well in February 1998 (see Figure 6). It
should be noted that iron concentrations show no predictable trend and are not consistently
reported above laboratory reporting limits. As such,it is considered likely that these reported values
are related to sampling and/or laboratory error (i.e., sediment and/or casing material contained
within the sample and digested by the laboratory during sample preparation).
2.2.6.1.4 COLOR
Color within the OCB Basin is typically associated with dissolved organic carbon compounds such as
humic and fulvic acids, which are produced during the microbially-mediated breakdown of organic
matter. Color is commonly,but not always,associated with deeper aquifer systems along the coastal
areas of the OCB. Water from the deeper aquifer is of generally good quality but is not typically used
without treatment due to it being considered aesthetically displeasing. Color is regulated under the
DDW secondary drinking water MCL of 15 color units although it should be noted that if not treated,
even low concentrations of color can result in service complaints.
Color concentrations for selected production wells within approximately one mile of the proposed
well site range from below laboratory reporting limits to 8 Color Units, and average approximately
1.1 Color Units over the period of record from August 1989 to May 2020 (see Figure 7). Color has
Project No.3011.003 KYLE GrourmMater
September 2020 Page 7 IL
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
never been reported to exceed the secondary MCL of 15 Color Units and has not been reported above
laboratory reporting limits since 2007 (see Figure 7).
2.2.6.2 ANTHROPOGENIC GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS
2.2.6.2.1 PERCHLORATE
Perchlorate is a naturally-occurring and anthropogenic compound commonly used in solid rocket
propellants, munitions, fireworks, airbag initiators for vehicles, matches, signal flares, and in some
electroplating operations. Perchlorate is also known to occur naturally and is found as a natural
impurity in nitrate fertilizers from Chile that have been applied for agricultural purposes in the
United States, and within Orange County (OCWD, 2015). Water imported from the Colorado River
and used for artificial recharge purposes within Orange County has also been documented to contain
elevated levels of perchlorate.
Perchlorate concentrations for selected production wells within approximately one mile of the
proposed well site range from below laboratory reporting limits to 10.7 µg/L, and average
approximately 3.3 µg/L over the period of record from February 1998 to May 2020, periodically
exceeding the primary MCL of 6 µg/L (see Figure 8). Concentrations within the existing Beneta Well
ranged from below laboratory detection limits to a high of 6.4 µg/L over the period of record from
February 1998 to August 2011, exceeding the primary MCL on two occasions (see Figure 8).
Perchlorate concentrations reported in the nearby Columbus Tustin Well have been below
laboratory reporting limits throughout the entire period of record from February 1998 to
January 2020,likely due to this well being screened deeper than the Beneta Well and less impacted
by contaminants associated with shallow aquifer recharge (i.e., impacted by agricultural activity).
2.2.6.2.2 PFOS/PFOA
PFOS and PFOA are fluorinated organic chemicals used extensively in the manufacture of consumer
products such as carpets,clothing,fabrics for furniture,paper packaging for food,and other materials
(e.g., cookware) designed to be waterproof,stain-resistant,or non-stick. In addition,they have been
used in fire-retarding foam and various industrial processes (SWRCB, 2020a). Exposure through
drinking water has become an increasing concern due to the tendency of these chemicals to
accumulate in groundwater. Studies indicate that exposure to PFOA and PFOS may result in adverse
health effects, including developmental effects to fetuses during pregnancy, cancer, liver effects,
immune effects, and thyroid effects (SWRCB, 2020a). PFOS and PFOA are currently regulated under
DDW Notification Levels of 0.0065 µg/L and 0.0051 µg/L, respectively.
PFOS and PFOA have been reported in OCWD multi-completion monitoring well SC-5, located
approximately 1.7 miles northwest of the proposed well site. PFOS has been reported at
concentrations ranging from 0.0089 to 0.0368 µg/L in MP2 through MP5 (i.e., screen depths of 196
to 206, 290 to 300, 468.4 to 478.4, and 667 to 677 feet), in excess of the DDW Notification Level of
0.0065 µg/L. PFOA has been reported at concentrations ranging from 0.0171 to 0.0237 µg/L in MP2
Project No.3011.003 �+KYL.ECiPO[1F1LMId�Y
September 2020 Page 8 l�
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
through MP5, in excess of the DDW Notification Level of 0.0051 µg/L. Both PFOS and PFOA were
reported below laboratory reporting limits within MP6 through MP10 (i.e., screen depths of 804 to
814, 932 to 942, 1,020 to 1,030, 1,234 to 1,244,and 1,426 to 1,436 feet).
2.2.6.2.3 POINT-SOURCE THREATS TO GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Point sources of contamination are specific sites or locations where contaminants have been released
to the subsurface. In areas where there are few or no impermeable layers separating shallow aquifers
from deeper aquifers, such as near the mountain fronts and forebay areas, there is the potential
threat that these contaminants can readily migrate from the surface to aquifers utilized for water
supply. These contaminants can also migrate readily through improperly abandoned wells,and wells
screened across multiple aquifer systems.
Figure 9 shows the location of various point sources of contamination in the vicinity of the proposed
well site, including leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites, permitted underground storage
tanks (USTs), Cleanup Program Sites, Military Cleanup Program Sites, and Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC) sites. The location and status of potential sources of contamination were
obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker database (SWRCB, 2020b).
There are 51 cases of environmental concern within approximately one-mile of the proposed well
site, of which 28 are closed cases, 13 are permitted tanks with no reported leaks (i.e.,UST), four are
DTSC sites with no further action required, two are DTSC sites with no available details or
information, two are open-case LUST sites, one is an open-case military cleanup site, and one is an
open-case cleanup program site with no available details. Open-case sites with readily available
details and information are summarized below.
Site Name Global
Well Site
MOBIL#18-FHW T0605999019 LUST OPEN-ASSESSMENT&INTERIM 2,710 feet SE
CLEANUP SITE .
LUST
CHEVRON#9-8149T0605901622 ; CLEANUP SITE ;OPEN-VERIFICATION MONITORING 2,535 feet SE
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY MILITARY
TUSTIN RELEASE AREA T0605901423 ; CLEANUP SITE OPEN-REMEDIATION 2,530 feet E
Mobil#18-FHW
This open-case LUST site is located at the intersection of Newport Avenue and Old Irvine Boulevard
in the City of Tustin. Mobil Oil operated a gasoline service station at the site until February 1995, at
which time Mobil removed four single-walled USTs and closed the station. The site was then
developed as an oil change business in December 2000. In January 1995,prior to removing the USTs,
Mobil drilled 18 borings and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Gasoline (TPHg) was detected at a
concentration of 18,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in a soil sample collected from a single
boring at 25 feet bgs. Additionally, benzene was detected at a concentration of 2,300 µg/L in a
groundwater sample collected from a monitoring well installed at the site (RWQCB, 2020b).
Project No.3011.003 �+KYL.ECiPO[1F1LMId�P
September 2020 Page 9 l�
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
Exploratory work conducted over the period between 1995 and 1996 revealed further
contamination of soil and groundwater. In December 2004, Mobil installed a soil vapor extraction
(SVE)system,and,from April 2005 to November 2006, Mobil operated the SVE system and removed
13,085 pounds of petroleum hydrocarbons from shallow soil vapor (RWQCB, 2020b).
Two other groundwater cleanup cases (listed in the table above) are active in the vicinity of this site
(i.e., Chevron #9-8149 and a former jet fuel pipeline owned by the United States Navy and operated
by the Defense Logistics Agency [DLA]) have contributed petroleum products to the comingled
groundwater plume beneath the area. However, the highest concentrations of petroleum
hydrocarbons detected at the site have been shown to be associated with the former gasoline station
(RWQCB,2020b). The DLA is currently implementing a corrective action plan to remediate the entire
comingled groundwater plume beneath the area through cooperation with both Mobil and Chevron.
A closure request was submitted to the RWQCB on May 20, 2020 that was subsequently denied.
Chevron #9-8149
This open-case LUST site is a former commercial petroleum fueling facility located at the southwest
corner of a 1.2-acre triangular parcel that has been developed as a parking lot. An unauthorized UST
release was reported in November 1992 upon removal of four USTs, following which, an unknown
volume of soil impacted by petroleum hydrocarbons was excavated and disposed of offsite (RWQCB,
2020a). Following removal of the USTs, three new gasoline USTs were installed in a different
location. The station ceased operation in October 2003 and the three USTs, pump islands, and
associated piping were removed (RWQCB, 2020a). As mentioned above, this site is part of a
comingled plume formed by two other open-case cleanup sites.
Soil vapor extraction conducted in June 2004 resulted in removal of 1,096 pounds of vapor-phase
TPHg. The UST release is limited to soil and shallow groundwater. The affected groundwater is not
currently being used as a source of drinking water, and it is highly unlikely that the contaminated
groundwater will be used as a source of drinking water in the foreseeable future. However, the
RWQCB has determined that the site does not currently meet water quality objectives and has denied
a request for closure submitted by the Responsible Party on August 7, 2014 .
Defense Logistics Agency- Tustin Release Area
This open-case military cleanup site is located at the intersection of Newport Avenue and Old Irvine
Boulevard in the City of Tustin. In 1988, a leak was detected in a pipeline that conveyed JP-5 from
the Defense Fuel Support Point Norwalk (DFSP Norwalk) tank farm to the E1 Toro Marine Corps Air
Station (MCAS El Toro). Subsequent investigations revealed that the leak amounted to an estimated
750,000 gallons of JP-5 which contributed contaminants such as TPH as JP-5, Gasoline Range
Organics (GRO), BTEX„ 1,2-DCA, diisopropyl ether (DIPE), methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE),
tertiary-butyl alcohol (TBA), and other volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to groundwater (SGI,
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGrOmKhArater
September 2020 Page 10
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
2020). Groundwater beneath the area occurs within interbedded gravel, sand, silt, and clay. This
shallow groundwater is not currently used for domestic,agricultural,or commercial purposes due to
elevated TDS and the low production potential of the water-bearing zones (SGI, 2020).
The pipeline was repaired and returned to service, and was subsequently removed from service on
April 14, 1999. MCAS El Toro was closed on July 2, 1999 and DFSP Norwalk was closed in 2001 (SGI,
2020). As discussed above, two former service stations operated by Mobil and Chevron, have
experienced gasoline leaks that have comingled with the JP-5 plume.
Recovery of Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPLs) by vacuum truck began in 1992 and was
suspended in 2006 following removal of approximately 63,000 gallons of hydrocarbons (SGI, 2020).
LNAPL recovery by vacuum truck resumed intermittently in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2019.
Additionally, LNAPL was recovered in 2014 and 2019 using fuel-absorbent socks. A total of
517.7 gallons of LNAPL were recovered during the fourth quarter of 2019 using vacuum trucks and
fuel-absorbent socks (SGI, 2020).
2.2.6.3 DEPTH-SPECIFIC GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Historical groundwater quality data for selected constituents as reported for OCWD multi-
completion monitoring well SC-5, located approximately 1.7 miles northwest of the proposed well
site are provided in Appendix A. Depth-specific TDS data show concentrations occurring in two
general groupings: concentrations in excess of 500 mg/L within the five shallowest well completions
(i.e., MP1 to MPS), and below 500 mg/L with the five deepest well completions (i.e., MP6 to MP10).
Similarly, nitrate concentrations are generally in excess of the primary MCL of 10 mg/L in shallow
completions MP1 to MP3, and MPS, and below the MCL in deeper completions MP4, and MP6 to
MP10. Perchlorate has only been reported above laboratory reporting limits for the shallowest two
monitoring well completions(i.e.,MP1 and MP2),in some cases exceeding the primary MCL of 6µg/L.
Color has been sporadically reported in several monitoring well completions but does not seem to
follow any observable trend.
These data indicate elevated concentrations of contaminants within shallow aquifers that are
generally associated with surface application of nitrate-based fertilizers and/or spreading of
imported water (i.e., TDS,nitrate,and perchlorate).
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGrourmMater
September 2020 Page 11 IL
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
3.0 ANTICIPATED CONDITIONS
3.1 DRILLING
Subsurface materials in this area of the OCB are expected to consist of sand,gravel, cobbles,silt, and
clay in varying proportions. The effective base of the water-bearing aquifers is anticipated to occur
at a depth of approximately 800 to 1,000 feet bgs in the vicinity of the proposed well site (Singer,
1973). Based on recent historical water levels within nearby wells,the depth to groundwater in the
vicinity of the proposed well site is anticipated to range from between approximately 140 to 160 feet
bgs within upper principal aquifer(see Figure 3).
3.2 PRODUCTION CAPACITY
Instantaneous discharge rates for wells within one mile of the proposed well site range from
approximately 700 to 3,000 gpm with an average of approximately 1,764 gpm (see Table 1). The
closest active well to the proposed well site (i.e., Columbus Tustin) has historically reported an
instantaneous pumping rate of 1,500 gpm with a specific capacity of 20 gpm/foot (see Table 1).
These data, combined with published aquifer transmissivity data for the area, suggest aquifers of
relatively good yield in the vicinity of the proposed well site (see Section 2.2.3). As such, it is
anticipated that a properly designed and constructed well in this area would be capable of producing
approximately 1,500 to 1,800 gpm, depending on local variations in aquifer thickness.
3.3 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Groundwater quality data from nearby wells suggest that it is likely possible to design a water supply
well at the proposed well site that provides acceptable water quality with the possible exception of
PFOS and PFOA. It should be noted that actual groundwater flow and quality may differ and/or
change over time, and as such, it is critical that depth-specific groundwater quality (including PFOS
and PFOA) and hydraulic heads be properly characterized prior to well construction. The following
table summarizes the estimated groundwater quality based on reported water quality for the
Columbus Tustin Well as it is anticipated that the new well will target those same aquifers and be
screened deeper than the Beneta Well.
Estimated Groundwater Quality Blend
TDS Nitrate as N Iron Color
Regulatory Limit 500 10 300 15 6
Estimated 420 5 ND ND ND
Contamination from anthropogenic sources are not expected as there are no significant reported
impacts to the deeper aquifers within the area. However, it is recommended that a new well be
constructed with a deep annular cement seal in addition to the 50-foot sanitary seal required by
DDW, and that isolated aquifer zone testing be performed to verify depth-specific groundwater
quality and identify possible contaminants within the various aquifers to be screened.
Project No.3011.003 �`+KYLEGCCUM �3ter
September 2020 Page 12
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
4.0 PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN CRITERIA
The following sections outline preliminary procedures, protocols, and design elements that are
anticipated for destruction of the existing Beneta Well and installation of a new municipal water
supply well at the proposed well site. It should be noted the design details presented herein are
preliminary and must be refined following drilling and testing of the pilot borehole.
4.1 RECOMMENDED WELL DESTRUCTION METHOD
The Beneta Well was constructed in 1976 and consists of 14-inch inside diameter(ID) steel casing of
an unknown type set to a total depth of 620 feet bgs. The well casing is perforated with 0.125-inch
vertical mill slots extending from 290 to 590 feet bgs. The gravel envelope as indicated on the well
completion report consists of a 3/8-inch special blend.
Prior to destruction of the well itself,the pump and motor should be removed and any aboveground
infrastructure (including the pump pedestal) shall be destroyed. It is recommended that any
sediment and debris within the well sump be cleaned to total depth,as completely as is practical,and
neat cement installed via tremie pipe from the bottom of the well to 5 feet bgs. The ground
surrounding the cement-filled well casing should be excavated to a depth of 6 feet bgs and the top of
the casing cut to 5 feet bgs and flared. Additional cement should then be pumped into the excavation
burying the top of the casing and forming a "mushroom cap" over the entire well. Native material
should then be placed over the destroyed well and compacted.
4.2 RECOMMENDED WELL DRILLING METHOD
Prior to drilling, it is recommended that a 36-inch outside diameter (OD) conductor casing be
installed within a 48-inch diameter borehole to a minimum depth of 50 feet. The conductor casing
will be sealed with 10.3-sack sand-cement grout to satisfy Orange County Health Care Agency
Environmental Health Division (Orange County Health). A two-pass well drilling method is
recommended and will consist of drilling and enlargement of a pilot borehole utilizing the reverse
circulation rotary drilling method. This drilling method offers clean and representative lithologic
samples and provides for relatively stable large-diameter boreholes. It is recommended that a
17.5-inch diameter pilot borehole be drilled first to an anticipated depth of approximately 1,100 feet
bgs, within which, borehole geophysics and isolated aquifer zone testing will be conducted.
Information gathered during drilling and testing of the pilot borehole will be utilized to prepare a
final well design should it be decided to proceed with well installation. Following the final design
phase, the pilot borehole will be reamed (i.e., enlarged) to diameters of 34- and 30-inches to
accommodate the well casing and screen,and ancillary tubing.
4.3 PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN
The anticipated design for a municipal water supply well within the study area is shown on Figure 10
and summarized in the following table. It should be noted that this design is conceptual at this time
and will require modification and refinement based on the results of drilling and testing.
Project No.3011.003 t KVLEGFOUrKiwra6er
September 2020 Page 13
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
Preliminary Well Design Details
Depth Borehole Casing Casing Wall Slot
Interval Diameter Diameter Thickness Size Material Description
[feet bgs] [inches] [inches] [inches] [inches]
+0.5-50 48 36 3/8 ASTM A139 Grade B Mild Steel Conductor Casing
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
0-500 34 10.3-Sack Sand-Cement Grout Seal
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
500-503 34 Fine Transition Sand(#60)
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
503-1,030 34/30 Engineered Gravel Envelope(CEMEX Lapis Lustre 6 x 12)
+1-510 34 3 Sch.40 ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Gravel Fill Pipe(x2)
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
+1-598* 34 2 Sch.40 ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Sounding Tube
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
+2-520 34 20 ID 3/8 ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Blank Casing
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
520-600 34 20 ID 5/16 ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Blank Casing
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
600-1,000 30 20 ID 5/16 0.080 ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Ful-Flo®Louvered Well Screen
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
1,000-1,010 30 20 ID 5/16 ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Blank Casing with End Cap
1,010-1,030 30 Gravel-Filled Borehole
* The anticipated depth of the sounding tube entrance box is 596 to 598 feet bgs.
4.4 MATERIALS
In an effort to extend the life expectancy of the well and improve the quality of its service life, it is
recommended that, at a minimum, all well components,with the exception of the conductor casing,
be constructed of ASTM A778 304L stainless steel materials. Under favorable conditions, a well
constructed of these materials will have an expected service life of approximately 75 years or greater.
4.4.1 WELL CASING&.SCREEN
It is recommended that the proposed well casing and screen be a minimum 20-inch ID throughout its
entire length. The recommended wall thickness is 3/8-inch for the upper blank section (+2 to
520 feet bgs) to allow for greater resistance to hydrostatic forces during installation of very deep
annular cement seal. The recommended wall thickness for the remaining sections of blank well
casing and screen (i.e., 520 to 1,010 feet bgs) is 5/16-inch.
4.4.2 GRAVEL ENVELOPE AND SLOT SIZE
A properly engineered gravel envelope design will prevent migration of fine sediments through the
well intake structure while allowing for an efficient well with minimum drawdown. Based on
previous municipal well installation projects within similar aquifer materials, a CEMEX Lapis Lustre
6 x 12 gravel envelope, or approved equal,with a complimentary 0.080-inch Ful-Flo®louvered slot
has proved successful and is recommended in this case. However, the final design of the gravel
envelope gradation will ultimately be based on mechanical grading analysis of formation samples
collected during drilling of the pilot borehole.
Project No.3011.003it,KYLEG�r�dwater
September 2020 Page 14
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
4.4.3 ANNULAR CEMENT SEAL
To provide additional protection against migration of surface contaminants,and to protect the upper
sections of casing, it is recommended that a deep annular cement seal be installed from ground
surface to a depth of approximately 500 feet bgs. The final depth of the annular cement seal will be
confirmed based on the results of pilot borehole drilling and geophysical borehole logging.
4.4.4 ACCESSORY TUBING
Installation of a deep annular cement seal will necessitate the addition of two (2) 3-inch Schedule
(Sch.) 40 304L stainless steel gravel fill pipes to a depth of 510 feet bgs. These gravel fill pipes will
allow replenishment of the gravel envelope should it settle during well development and routine
operation of the well. It is further recommended that a 2-inch Sch. 40 304L stainless steel sounding
tube be installed, entering the casing at depths of 596 to 598 feet bgs through a 3-inch x 3-inch x
2-foot long manufactured transition box. This will allow access for an electric wireline water level
meter or pressure transducer such that accurate water level measurements can be taken once the
well is permanently equipped and operational.
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGroundhnrter
September 2020 Page 15
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
5.0 CONSTRUCTION LOGISTICS
5.1 CONSTRUCTION CONSTRAINTS
Typically, the absolute minimum space required to drill and construct a new municipal supply well
using the reverse circulation rotary drilling method is approximately 120 by 60 feet (i.e.,
7,200 square feet), but this would require a nearby staging area for storage of equipment and
materials, and would present difficulties with the drilling and construction process. An ideal space
for drilling and construction is 150 by 150 feet(i.e.,22,500 square feet). The estimated construction
area as shown on Figure 11, including the additional area of park space required for construction is
approximately 12,200 square feet. As such,the site offers adequate space for well drilling operations,
provided that the temporary holding tanks can be situated on Beneta Way.
Prior to beginning well drilling and construction,it will be necessary to destroy the existing Beneta
Well and aboveground infrastructure to accommodate drilling equipment. Additionally, it will be
necessary to remove the four poplar trees situated along the western boundary of the well site, and
potentially other trees,as necessary,within the park.
5.2 CONSTRUCTION WATER SOURCE
The proposed source of construction water is the fire hydrant located on the sidewalk immediately
south of the southeast corner of the well site, approximately 100 feet from the proposed location of
the new well (see Figure 12). Use of this hydrant will require the drilling contractor to provide a
temporary means of conveyance from the hydrant to the proposed well location, and any associated
crossings to maintain sidewalk access to pedestrians.
5.3 NOISE MITIGATION
The proposed well site is adjacent to sensitive noise receptors (i.e., residential structures), and as
such, will require containment with temporary noise mitigating structures during construction.
These noise mitigating structures should be a minimum of 24 feet in height,STC-32 rated per ASTM
E413-16, and will require geotechnical and structural calculations from a Registered Structural
Engineer to verify compliance with appropriate California building codes for temporary structures.
Additional noise mitigation measures and/or monitoring may be necessary, along with community
outreach prior to construction. The conceptual layout of these structures is shown on Figure 11.
5.4 CUTTINGS AND FLUIDS DISPOSAL
All drill cuttings and fluids used to drill the well (i.e., drilling mud) will be disposed of offsite by the
drilling contractor. However, it will be necessary to temporarily store cuttings on site for drying
prior to hauling them offsite for disposal.
5.5 DISCHARGE CONSIDERATIONS
Waste fluids generated during development and testing of any new well must be legally disposed of
at designated discharge points by means of temporary above-ground piping. It is anticipated that the
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGI�
September 2020 Page 16
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
discharge point will be to the east-west oriented Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD)
drainage channel immediately north of the well site, approximately 100 feet from the proposed well
location. This will require traffic-rated ramps to cross access roadways and the use of an energy
dissipation device to prevent erosion of the channel and its banks at the point of discharge. It will
likely be necessary to obtain a permit OCFCD to allow encroachment of the discharge pipeline and
associated discharges. High turbidity water generated during the initial stages of well development
must first be conveyed to covered holding tanks to allow settling of suspended solids prior to
discharge. This will necessitate use of at least two 21,000-gallon covered temporary holding tanks
measuring approximately 8 feet wide by 40 feet long(see Figures 11 and 12). The typical estimated
discharge events and associated duration and volumes of waste water anticipated to be discharged
for a well of this size are summarized in the following table. These values are for planning purposes
only and are subject to change based on actual conditions encountered.
Summary of Anticipated Discharges During Construction
Discharge Duration Discharge Rate Discharge Vol.
Event Work Days Hours lgp-1 [gall
I ated Aquifer Zone Testing
Day 1 1 18 200 216,000
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 2 2 18 200 216,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 3 3 18 200 216,000
Day 4 4 18 200 216,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 5 5 18 200 216,000
lroLl Development Pumping pr
Day 1 6 24 150 216,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 2 7 24 150 216,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 3 8 24 150 216,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 4 9 24 150 216,000
................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 5 10 24 150 216,000
F 1 Development Pumping
Day 1 11 101,800 1,080,000
................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 2 12 10 1,800 1,080,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 3 13 10 1,800 1,080,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 4 14 10 1,800 1,080,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 5 15 10 1,800 1,080,000
........................................................................................................................................................................................i.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
Day 6 16 10 1,800 1,080,000
Step Drawdown Testing
2 750 90,000
.......................................................i............................................................................i...........................................................................
2 1,500 180,000
Day 1 17
....................................................................................................................................................................................... ....
2 2,250 270,000
.......................................................i............................................................................:...........................................................................
2 3,000 360,000
Constant Rate Test
Day 1 18 302 1,800 2,592,000
TOTAL: 18 12,132,000
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGroundwater
September 2020 Page 17
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
5.6 PERMITTING CONSIDERATIONS
5.6.1 REQUIRED SETBACKS
DDW and Orange County Health require that certain minimum distances be maintained between a
potable water supply well and specific activities and infrastructure which may present a sanitary
hazard. The most common setback requirements include the following:
• Sanitary Sewer Line or Lateral: 50 feet
• Sewer Manhole: 100 feet
• Sewer Manhole: 50 feet
• Storm Drain or Drainage Channel: 50 feet
• Petroleum Transmission Mains: 500 feet
• Dwelling: 25 feet
The proposed well location currently meets all applicable minimum setback requirements as
stipulated by DDW and Orange County Health.
5.6.2 CONTROL ZONE REQUIREMENT
The area of the proposed well site is sufficient to allow the location of a well that will comply with
the California Code of Regulations (CCR) control zone requirement, which states that the area
surrounding a new municipal water supply well must be under the control of the well owner to a
radius of at least 50 feet. However, depending on requirements stipulated by DDW, it may be
necessary to obtain a memorandum of understanding regarding the use of pesticides and/or
herbicides within the portion of the control zone that intercepts the park.
Project No.3011.003 KVLEGroundv�rater
September 2020 Page 18
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
6.0 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Engineer's estimates for destruction of the existing Beneta Well and drilling, construction, and
development of the replacement well are included in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. These estimates
were based on recent winning bids in the southern California area for large diameter municipal
supply wells, and recent steel prices obtained from Roscoe Moss Company. These estimates should
be revised should a significant period of time elapse between the date of this report and bidding of
the drilling contract. The estimated cost to destroy the existing well, as shown in Table 2, is
approximately$75,000, including a 10%contingency. The estimated cost to install the replacement
well per the design included herein,as shown in Table 3, is approximately$1.43 million including a
10% contingency. The total project cost to destroy the existing well and construct the replacement
well is estimated to be approximately$1.5 million. This excludes design,construction management,
and inspection,and any costs associated with the well equipping phase.
Project No.3011.003 it,
September 2020 Page 19
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
7.0 REFERENCES
American Water Works Association, 2020. Water Wells. ANSI/AWWA A100-20. July 1, 2020.
Batu, Vedat, 1998. Aquifer Hydraulics -A Comprehensive Guide to H,ydrogeologic Data Anal,. A
Wiley-Interscience Publication. John Wiley&Sons, Inc., 1998.
California Department of Water Resources, 2020. Well Completion Report Map Application:
https://dwr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=18107858Oa214cO986e
2da28f8623b37. Accessed: September 2020.
California Department of Water Resources,2004. Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin.
California's Groundwater Bulletin No. 118. February 27, 2004.
California Department of Water Resources, 1991. California Well Standards. Bulletin 74-81 and
Supplement 74-90. Sacramento, California. June 1991.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil,Gas,and Geothermal Resources,2019. Online
Well Information Database. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dog/Pages/WellFinder.aspx.
Accessed: January 2019.
California State Water Resources Control Board, 2020a. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and
Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) Website. Accessed: September 30, 2020.
California State Water Resources Control Board, 2020b. GeoTracker Online Database:
http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov. Accessed:August 2020.
California State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water, 2020c. Electronic Data
Transfer (EDT) Library-Water Quali , Analyses Database Files. Accessed: August 2020.
Cooper, H.H., Jr., and Jacob, C.E., 1946. A Generalized Graphical Method for Evaluating Formation
Constants and Summarizing Well Field History. Transactions, American Geophysical Union,
Vol. 27, No.4.
Driscoll, Fletcher G., 1986. Groundwater and Wells. Second Edition. Johnson Screens, St. Paul,
Minnesota. 1986.
Ferris, J.G., Knowles, R.H., Brown, R.S., and Stallman, R.W., 1963. Theory of Aquifer Tests. U.S.
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1536-E.
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, 2018. Online Groundwater Well Database:
http://dpw.lacounty.gov/general/wells/. Accessed: May 11, 2018.
Orange County Water District, 2020a. Groundwater Elevations and Water Quality for Multi-Port
Monitoring Well SC-5. September 22, 2020.
Orange County Water District, 2020b. 2018-2019 Engineer's Report on Groundwater Conditions,
Water Supply and Basin Utilization in the Orange County Water District. February 2020.
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGrourmMater
September 2020 Page 20 IL
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers Well Site Assessment and Preliminary Well Design
City of Tustin City of Tustin Beneta Well Replacement
Orange County Water District, 2019. June 2019 Groundwater Elevation Contours for the Principal
Aquifer. December 2, 2019.
Orange County Water District, 2015. Groundwater Management Plan 2015 Update. June 17, 2015.
Orange County Water District, 2013. 2011-12 Report on Groundwater Recharge in the Orange
County Groundwater Basin. July 2013.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 2020. National Pipeline Mapping System
(NPMS) Public Map Viewer: https://pvnpms.phmsa.dot.gov/publicviewer. Accessed
August 2020.
Roscoe Moss Company, 1991. Handbook of Groundwater Development. A Wiley-Interscience
Publication. John Wiley&Sons, Inc., 1990.
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board,2020a. Review Summary Report-Additional Work
-Third Review-June 2020. June 2020.
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2020b. Comments on the Low Threat Closure
Request for the Former Mobil Station 18-FHW at 12972 Newport Avenue in Tustin,California
- Geotracker ID No.T0605999019. April 20, 2020.
Singer, John A., 1973. Geoh,, d�gy and Artificial Recharge Potential of the Irvine Area - Orange
County, California. USGS Open-File Report 73-264. January 8, 1973.
SGI Environmental, 2020. Groundwater Monitoring and Sampling Report-Fourth Quarter 2019 -El
Toro Pipeline Release Site. Prepared for: Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management
for Energy. January 30, 2020.
Theis, C.V., Brown, R.H., and Meyer, R.R., 1963. Estimating the Transmissibility of Aquifers from the
Specific Capacity of Wells. United States Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1536-1, pp
331-340. 1963.
Theis, C.V., 1935. The Relation Between the Lowering of the Piezometric surface and the Rate and
Duration of Discharge of a Well Using Groundwater Storage. Transactions, American
Geophysical Union.Washington D.C.,pp 518 524.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2016. Secondary Drinking Water Standards:
Guidance for Nuisance of Chemicals. www.epa.gov. January 2016.
Project No.3011.003 KYLEGrourmMater
September 2020 Page 21 IL
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
FIGURES
41
KYLE C irKiwater
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
r ino
I— Forl
• 1L rrIL - S - I CH!
Firestone Bop ` y\
Scout Re�-r,ation
WILa Habra - — — — — ORANGE — — �` CHMO HILLS
Subbasin -
Nor,.valk ` Chino Hills — —
I �^b ,. > �="��, :=tate Park
'. Yorba Linda �
Itl -;w -� • • . Subbasin
- •: Fl_lllertr �� - - - - - - - - - -
_r' r �
Main Basin
11 i
p
C \
! Main Basin ess40.01-
e0••• T u s;ilrl
1
vV h a ing
IIUlltlllgtoll
,' Irvine Rant h
` Subbasin
� � 10,Beach
: i�L it ri'� y into I'darclarit
i cy^rt &.-o;ll ! ,
Nlission_1fej�;
r� HILLS Lagul7a
Lu
agna Hills
Laguna
st
Coast
Cry sta I bYi den
Cove State _
` Park Park A-liso vi@jo
Laguna Niguel
Subbasin Boundary L .iuna Beach
• • • • • Forebay/Pressure Area Delineation
Project Area (see Figure 2) San-Jiian
j OCWD Service Boundary " C�apistranno
Groundwater Basin Boundary - Dana Point
Coastal Plain of Orange County
GENERAL PROJECT LOCATION
WELL SITE ASSESSMENT AND N
PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN KYLEGroundwater
BENETA WELL REPLACEMENT
CITY OF TUSTIN 0 2 4 PROJECT NO. FIGURE
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 2020 Miles 3011.003 1
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Fairhaven Yorba Well
Park
v y Q
' E Santa Clara Ave c - Prospect Well (U Main Basin
Q -,=OCWD MW SC-5 w _
® z North Tustin
z - Tustin Ave Well Ervin Lr ♦♦
4-
♦
E 17th St 17th Street Well 4 ���'S�� ♦♦
n 155 E,.,,Vandenberg Well ri/►h St �>
Q Center ® �
C ♦♦ .S�y/
5 E Fruit St Livingston Well ♦ G
C—
a
abrillo
- Newport Well
Park ® O
Columbus Tustin Well un,, Beneta Well ♦♦
gain f , ♦
In St E-4th.St Iry ine-BIvd
E 3rti St
E 2n1 St ♦♦
E 1'st St.
.,)m �W&1st,St-E-1st•St
Pasadena Ave Well Ui ♦♦ °a�
Santa Ana 31 �` C TUe1ir+ ♦ o �°
v Main Street Well 3 ♦ `�/
t. i. Pren �!i ♦ �.. /
• —
Park 132 ft ^� ♦ �4n ��i,
O Main Street'Well4 04 ��6
•• v'y J U
Ate••••. to gnal:wy_ ♦♦♦ s�',`Sf
OSS' G•. j 5°r Q a ♦♦
•0 d IRWD Well 21 P'
`-� E tv1-100 •• IRWD Well 22
rn • 07 .
;'• c :r ♦♦ Pankey Well L� Z
���� •••• ♦♦ Walnut Ave Well 7q`�
Edinger Ave Wel ♦ •• ® 1''
,♦ ® City of Tustin Well (Active)
a ♦♦♦ F� City of Tustin Well (Inactive)cu •
u 55 ♦♦ �+�°� a
4", q,,e City of Santa Ana Well (Active)
♦♦
Irvine Subbasin ® IRWD Well (Active)
♦♦♦ ��\ `�
- � OCWD Monitoring Well
a ,�� - - - - Subbasin Boundary
♦,' �'"Z • • • • • Forebay/Pressure Area Delineation
CITY OF TUSTIN WELLFIELD AREA
WELL SITE ASSESSMENT AND N
PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN KYLEGroundvvater
BENETA WELL REPLACEMENT A %,
CITY OF TUSTIN 0 1,250 2,500 PROJECT NO. FIGURE
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 2020 Feet 3011.003 2
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Figure 3
Historical Groundwater Elevations
OCWD Monitoring Well SC-5
250
200
Reference Poi t Elevat1—op—=177.02 eet a sl
150
100
d
d
w_
G
0 50 Ali A
i+
O
�1
W
a� 0
U1 un Ixm
3
c
-50
—MP3 290 300 eetbgs)
-100
—MP4(468.4-478.4 feet bgs)
—MPS(667-677 feet bgs)
-150
—MP7(932-942 feet bgs)
-200
-
.ti .--i .--i .--i - .--i .--i .--i .--i .--i N N N
Source:Orange County Water District,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Figure 4
Historical TDS Concentrations
Selected Production Wells
2,500
t 17th Street Well 4 Screened Intervals(DWR)(feet bgs)
—*--Beneta 17th Street Well 4:200-240;270-310;400-480
--4--Columbus Tustin Columbus Tustin: 560-670;708-728;815-865;890-910;1,020-1,050;1,090-1,160
Beneta:290-590
+Main Street We113
Main Street Well 3:300-630
--4--Main Street Well 4 Main Street Well 4: 335-500;540-660;725-765;785-835;855-880
2,000 ♦Newport Newport:234-267
+Pasadena Avenue Pasadena Avenue:440-795;855-900;1,060-1,095;1,195-1,225
+Vandenberg Vendenberg:480-900
a
b1,500 Sho -Ter S con a MCL=1, 00 /
G
0
m
b
c
U
0 1,000 Upper Sec nda M L=1,0 0 m /L
A
F
Recomi rienoed ecor dary MC =500 n Tg/L �
500
0
CO ON cD .-I N M zt N �O 1\ CO ON cD .-I N M d' N �D t, N � cD .--1 N M d' N ID 11 CO a, cD .--I
N N � � � a, a, a, a, � a, a, O O O O O O O O O O .--I N N
a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, C, C, C, O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
�--I .--I .--I �--I .--I .--I �--I .--I .--I �--I .--I .--I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Figure 5
Historical Nitrate Concentrations
Selected Production Wells
40 r�
t 17th Street Well 4 Screened Intervals(DWR)(feet bgs)
—*--Beneta 17th Street Well 4:200-240;270-310;400-480
36 —$--Columbus Tustin Columbus Tustin: 560-670;708-728;815-865;890-910;1,020-1,050;1,090-1,160
Beneta:290-590
—0--Main Street Well 3
Main Street Well 3: 300-630
+Main Street We114 Main Street Well 4: 335-500;540-660;725-765;785-835;855-880
32 --*—Newport Newport:234-267
♦Pasadena Avenue Pasadena Avenue:440-795;855-900;1,060-1,095;1,195-1,225
28 +Vandenberg Vendenberg:480-900
a
own
E 24
c
0
M
20
c
U -
G
U 16
.2
M
s
-
---
z 12 _ ------
Primary MCL= 0 /L
- ------ -------------- -8
0
N01 O .--I N M d' N � 1\ OJ O+ O .-I N M d' N � t, N � O .--I N CO d' N �O 1\ OJ O+ O
N N C), 01 01 a, a, a, a, 01 a, a, O O O O O O O O O O .--I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I N N
0, 0, 0, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
- .--I .--I - .--I .--I - .--I .--I - .--I .--I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Figure 6
Historical Iron Concentrations
Selected Production Wells
800
t 7th Street Well 4 Screened Intervals(DWR)(feet bgs)
t Beneta 17th Street Well 4:200-240;270-310;400-480
Columbus Tustin Columbus Tustin: 560-670;708-728;815-865;890-910;1,020-1,050;1,090-1,160
700 Beneta:290-590
Main Street Well 3
Main Street Well 3: 300-630
Main Street Well 4 Main Street Well 4: 335-500;540-660;725-765;785-835;855-880
+Newport Newport:234-267
600 Pasadena Avenue Pasadena Avenue:440-795;855-900;1,060-1,095;1,195-1,225
t Vandenberg Vendenberg:480-900
a
500
0
0
m
,- 400
c
U
0
0
Secon ary MC =300µg/L
0 300
200 TiL +
100
0
CO cr, O .--I N M d' N �D t, CO cr� O .--I N M d' N �D 1\ N cr, O .--I N M d' N �O 1\ CO ON O
N N cr, cr, cr, a, a, a, a, cr, a, a, O O O O O O O O O O .--I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I N N
a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, C, O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
H H H H H H H H H H H H N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Figure 7
Historical Color Concentrations
Selected Production Wells
40
t 17th Street Well 4 Screened Intervals(DWR)(feet bgs)
t Beneta 17th Street Well 4:200-240;270-310;400-480
Columbus Tustin Columbus Tustin: 560-670;708-728;815-865;890-910;1,020-1,050;1,090-1,160
35 +Main Street Well 3 Beneta:290-590
Main Street Well 3: 300-630
--*—Main Street Well 4
Main Street Well 4: 335-500;540-660;725-765;785-835;855-880
+Newport Newport:234-267
30 Pasadena Avenue Pasadena Avenue:440-795;855-900;1,060-1,095;1,195-1,225
+Vandenberg Vendenberg:480-900
N
E 25
3
G
0
m
b 20
c
U
G
0
U
15 Secor dary MC =15 Units
0
U
10
5
0
CO cr, O .--I N M d' In ID t, CO cr� O .--I N M d' In ID t, N cr, O .--I N M d' Ln `0r'
Co 0, O .--I
N N � � � � � � � � � � O O O O O O O O O O .--I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I N N
a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
�--I .--I .--I �--I .--I .--I �--I .--I .--I �--I .--I .--I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Figure 8
Historical Perchlorate Concentrations
Selected Production Wells
30
s 17th Street Well 4 Screened Intervals(DWR)(feet bgs)
t Beneta 17th Street Well 4:200-240;270-310;400-480
t Columbus Tustin Columbus Tustin:560-670;708-728;815-865;890-910;1,020-1,050;1,090-1,160
Beneta:290-590
t Main Street Well 3
25 Main Street Well 3: 300-630
t Main Street Well 4 Main Street Well 4: 335-500;540-660;725-765;785-835;855-880
+Newport Newport:234-267
Pasadena Avenue Pasadena Avenue:440-795;855-900;1,060-1,095;1,195-1,225
t Vandenberg Vendenberg:480-900
2
J 0
Op
Vf
G
O
15
U
U
G
O
U
N
a+
O
0
10
N
Prim ry MCL 6µ /L
---- ------- ------- -- ---- -- ----
5
0
Co ON O .-I N M d' In %O t, CO ON O .-I N M t to %o t, 000, O .--I NM d' Ln �O t, CJ O+ O .-I
N N a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, C, C, O O O O O O O O O O .--I .--I .--I .--I .--I .--I .--I
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
H H H H H H H H H H H H N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
.:YMain Basin
E Santa Clara Ave -_
c
Z
I Ln
D� 114:e
L+II
Cataluna Ave ■ - LL J� -. .. -
- r3us Ave _ Nor
o Bonner Dr Anglin Ln oshun Ln n J `9 Erin t��
am
- x _ tford Ave '� _ - Muriel PI
u -
rn
� ^ lnnon'• ♦
■ r- AvOum Ave C`�.r
Enedrter erle Vons o _ - <^, ♦ o
y P
■ Vandi,i"''g Ln :I estop Ph c o ♦♦
„
VP CaIma v ■ I P>v
- e Vavue,lin Ave ♦ ^�
Ston Ave J ,
Ja .,
e *�
%ands I've �' Biyelovr Park
V n N Orange Tree Ln Kirk Ave d _ P� ♦
i.lity `F
Norwood Park PI ¢_ .�� ♦ S�3I'�;
p0
n ty 1 r Dr � ♦ ['� ji
�.k'hel Pa i"e Ct4atham Dr = rren Ave
dmalct xodora Dr East Tustin
VtllagP Dr a Sherb,00k Dr _
Lucero VJay ♦ o� Red Hill
Amaganset WaY (Di
c Beneta Way.
Weslbury Ln _ ♦�? eJ�
o
M1li II21 Df Colunbus Park
J ♦
- �� Pl;,
Tustin k Liilran'✓'JJy ro S
55 _- 1
E=4lhTSt
—Irvin etBlvd � - ,♦
��x a
•n v N Kohrs , ■■ C S e ��,
Z z / ♦ h B�t4 Qbv e' -
s St wrtstTS'f E•1:sltSj ♦ h�
a < ♦
mZ ♦ O
Santa - - _ o Tustin ♦ %% 5
Q..me Falk W 3rd SI -w _ u a ,♦ FvSv '19 'Oi C¢' __
Prentice Fark
E Main St 732,@ 3 IN Alain St E r'b in op
♦
_ LLa S
>
p De Anza Ln
q� ♦ a
� Sa bV 5th St W E6th Sl z t�
Loa Itoa Ln a ota.,y P, ♦ <v, Pin s:`I
EU Aapw� Y♦ Sv,'✓ O Park ,5c'J O 6e y `�J Cha
`Alba Xe Aye a a
�041� - ♦i /vi ■ col i(.
LL m - - IoP sson Q
6 Brow Heruga
�r.1-�1,ri A•:e 55 m MCI.,i ♦ 3 O b '�� Park
• c r
:J V
A�� . • ® _ ® Beneta Well (Proposed) 0 DTSC Cleanup Site
SS4 Permitted Underground Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline
��q��o ' . • • Storage Tank (Active)
°' • • . ♦♦ ■ LUST Cleanup Site -Open Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
• (Active)
♦♦, ■ LUST Cleanup Site -Closed
■ . - - - - Subbasin Boundary
I I.............. ,•' ❑ Cleanup Program Site -Open • • . . . Forebay/Pressure Area Delineation
' ■ ® Cleanup Program Site -Closed 1-Mile Radius
❑ ♦,' ❑ Military Program Site -Open
SITES OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN
WELL SITE ASSESSMENT AND N
PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN KYLEGroundwater
BENETA WELL REPLACEMENT A W
CITY OF TUSTIN 0 1,000 2,000 PROJECT NO. FIGURE
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 2020 Feet 3011.003 9
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Lithology Interpreted Spontaneous Resistivity Well Design Profile
(Well Drillers Report) USCS Field Potential RSN/RLN
(Nearby Columbus Tustin Well) Classification (mV) (Ohm-m)
0 50 100 0 50 100
0Ground Surface 0
48"Diameter Borehole(0'-50')
Conductor Casing
36"Diameter x 3/8'Wall ASTM A139
Grade B Mild Steel(+0.5'-50')
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel SP, 50 Sanitary Seal Cement Grout(0'-50') 50
34"Diameter Borehole(50'-600')
7-177
CLAY:brawn clay
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel p 100
CLAY:tan clay,sand and gravel from 137-139
Estimated Static Water Level
150 (150'brp) ♦ 150
77777777 SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel
SANDY CLAY:tan sandy clay
200
Well Casing
GRAVELtone/CLAY:gravel,clay,trace red / 20"1.D.x 3/8"Wall ASTM A778
sanBOULDERS:boultlers with tan cla ou d®50 O 304E Stainless Steel Blank
y250 (+2'-520')
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel $P;-;-
—FT-FF—FT-FT —FT-FT—FT-FT
SANDY CLAY:tan sandy clay
CLAY:sticky clay
300
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel
BOULDERS W/GRAVEL hard boulders and M 10.3-Sack S
350 Annular Seal
BOUL
gravel / and-Cement Grout
(0'-500')
4
SANDY CLAY:sandy brown clay 400
450 Fine Transition Sand(#60) 4
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel,boulders
500'-503'
Gravel Fill Pipes(2x)
500 3"Nom.Sch.40 304L Stainless Steel ♦ 500
(+1'-510') 510
CLAY:tan clay 520
Well Casing
20"1.D.x 5/16"Wall ASTM A778
550 304L Stainless Steel Blank
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel with . . . . . .. . . (520'-600')
boultlers '$F :
Sounding Tube
CLAY:tan clay 2"Nom.Sch.40 304L Stainless Steel 598
SAND W/GRAVEL:santl antl gravel SP.... 600 (+1'-598';Connection Box 596'-598') 600
BOULDERS:boulders EP I�sCl
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel,streaks
of clay 30"Diameter Borehole(609-1,039) -----
SANDY CLAY:sandy clay -----
GRAVEL gravel and small boulders { •,•'•'•'•'•'•'•'• 650 Well Screen -----
CLAY W/GRAVEL:clay and gravel Ful-Flo Louvered =____
20"1.D.x 5/16"Wall ASTM A778
304L Stainless Steel w/0.080"Slot Size
CLAY:stiff brown clay 700 (600'-1,000') -----
GRAVEL AND BOULDERS:gravel and ,G•,P•,•,•,•,•••,•,•••,
boulders -----
CLAY:tan and gray clay,some streaks of I I I I I I I I 750 Gravel Envelope
gravelCEMEX Lapis Lustre 6x12
(503'-1,030') -----
800
SHALE:brown and gray shale ______-_
SAND W/CLAY ANDr GRAVEL:sand and
gravel with shale oclay mixetl -----
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel and SP:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. $SO
boulders 777-7-7777
-7777-7777
CLAY:tan and blue clay -----
900
SAND W/GRAVEL sand and gravel with
streaks of clay $p -----
GRAVEL(cemented):cemented gravel antl •;•;•;•;• •;• 950 -----
Itstone
Well Sump
20"I.D.x 5/16"Wall ASTM A778 '•'----- •'
CLAY:brown clay 304L Stainless Steel Blank w/End Cap
1000 (1,000'-1,010') _ ___ '• 000
SANDY CLAY:tan sandy clay Total Well Depth(1,010') :•:�•: 1,010
GRAVELLY CLAY:brown dry clay mixed with Total Borehole Depth(1,030') 1,030
"Predominantly clay 1,030-1,470 ft.Not shown.
PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN PROFILE
WELL SITE ASSESSMENT AND BOREHOLE DIAMETERS(in): 48:34:30 Nates:
PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN BOREHOLE DEPTHS(ft): 50:600:1,030 (to KYLECaroundtnrater
BENETA WELL REPLACEMENT
CITY OF TUSTIN SCREEN INTERVALS(ft bgs): 600-1,000
MAKAR K.
TUSTIN,CALIFORNIA CASING INTERVALS(ft bgs):+2-600:1.000-1.010 DRAWN BY: PROJECT NO. FIGURE
SEPTEMBER 2020 STEEL TYPE AND DIAMETER(in):304L SS,20 ID APPROVED BY: R.KYLE 3011.003 10
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Ir _
24-foot
Sound Walls
Estimated Aon Aoea I _ _—_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ t}�
Construc
-- 1
Dog House 1
Pi -011. Air -ornp 1
pe Trailer -0. 20'x8' '
Drill Rig 1 '
Mud T 45z1o' 1
ank go z8, 1
Mud an
_ ao ics' -
iCuttingso 1
eEd Wal, - �. ` 1
AV
45'x8'
Covered Holding Tanks
® Beneta Well(Proposed)
CONCEPTUAL WELL CONSTRUCTION SITE LAYOUT
WELL SITE ASSESSMENT AND N Notes:
PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN KYLE GrourKh alter
BENETA WELL REPLACEMENT
CITY OF TUSTIN
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 0 15 0 PROJECT NO. FIGURE
SEPTEMBER 2020 Feet 3011.003 11
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
� tea•
3 r
Point of Discharge 1
With Energy Dissipation Device x I o
,+, C
lul affic-Rated �
Ramp �p
'�• `•' 24-foot
Sound Walls
d. ® 1
genets Way ,� ,' 1
-gWEqW
-� 1
Covered Holdinglding Tanks
® Beneta Well(Proposed) '
r
(j) Proposed Water Source(Fire Hydrant)
---- Water Discharge Conveyance
_ A
WATER SOURCE AND DISCHARGE CONVEYANCE
WELL SITE ASSESSMENT AND N Notes:
PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN KYLEGroundwater
BENETA WELL REPLACEMENT
CITY OF TUSTIN
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 0�0 PROJECT NO. FIGURE
SEPTEMBER 2020 Feet 3011.003 12
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
r
t
50' 7 -
r r• � � 7
i
i 700'
1 -
41111
1 t
41
r
® Beneta Well(Proposed)
Sanitary Sewer Manhole
50-foot Control Zone
Sanitary Sewer Setback(100 feet from Manhole)
Drainage Channel Setback(50 feet)
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE MAP
WELL SITE ASSESSMENT AND N Notes:
PRELIMINARY WELL DESIGN KYLE Groundwater
BENETA WELL REPLACEMENT
CITY OF TUSTIN
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 0�0 PROJECT NO. FIGURE
SEPTEMBER 2020 Feet 3011.003 13
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
TABLES
41
KYLE C irKiwater
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Table 1
Summary of Well Construction and Operational Details
Historical Pumping Dynamics
Well Well Construction Well Casing Screen Screen Screen
Name Status Year Depth Diameter Interval(s) Type Opening Size Pumping Drawdown Specific Estimated Year
Capacity Transmissiviry
[feet bgs] [inches] f t bgs] [inches] [gpm] [feet] [gpm/ft] [gpd/ft]
17th Street Well 4 Active 2002 500 16 200-240; Louver 0.100 743 - - - 2010
270-310;400-480
Benet. Inactive 1976 620 14 290-590 Mill Slot 0.125 1,420 85 17 52,000 1976
Columbus Tustin Active 1985 1,180 16 560-670;708-728;815-865; Saw Cut 0.050 1,500 '4 20 61,000 1985
890-910;1020-1050;1090-1160
Edinger Avenue Active 2013 860 20 500-840 Louver 0.060 1,650 165 10 16,500 2013
Livingston Inactive 1954 617 14/12 300-617 - - 400 - 26 79,000 1954
Main Street Well 3 Active 1972 630 14 300-6630 Mills Knife 0.160 2,900 104 28 85,000 1972
Main Street Well 4 Active 1998 900 18/16 335-500;540-6660;725-765; Louver 0.310 2,000 143 14 43,000 2000
785-835;855-880
Newport Active 1926 275 16 234-267 Perforated - 700 - 26 79,000 1992
Pankey Inactive 1962 614 14/10 323-6614 - - 587 42 14 43,000 1992
Pasadena Avenue Active 2007 1,240 19 440-795;855-900; Louver 0.09375 3,000 111 27 82,000 2007
1060-1095;1195-1225
Prospect Active 1955 630 14/12 270-310;310-630 Mills Knife 0.310 676 32 21 69,000 2010
Tustin Avenue Active 1952 776 14/10 306-776 Mills Knife 0.310 498 15 33 100,000 2008
Vandenberg Active 1993 920 16 480-900 Louver 0.050 1,845 102 18 55,000 2008
Walnut Well 77 Active 1930 995 20/10 397-995 Mills Knife 0.380 500 - 16 49,000 -
Yorba Inactive 1962 859 14/10 355-850 - - 450 - 51 - 2008
IRW298-509;539-749;D 21 Active 1992 1,080 20/16 Louver 0.060 3,300 6' 49 93,000 2012
819-869;930-1060
IRWD 22 Active 1992 990 20/16 301-341;361-451; Louver 0.060 1,600 84 19 43,000 2012
471-770;810-970
Sources.
City of Tustin,2020.
CaSfornia Department of Water Resources,2020.
Orange County Water Distvct,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Table 2
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COST
Destruction of Existing Beneta Well
Item Description Qty Units p nit Total Item Price
No. ce
101 Mobilization,site preparation,demobilization,and site cleanup. 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000.00
102 Removal,Preservation,and Storage of Existing Pumping Equipment. 1 LS $8,000.00 $8,000.00
103 Provide Downhole Video Survey 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
104 Removal and Disposal of Fill and Debris from Well Sump,and Oil from Water Surface, 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
as Necessary
Remove and dispose of existing above-ground discharge steel piping,valves,
105 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
appurtenances,and all related equipment.
106 Remove field conductors from conduits between electrical panel and discharge pipe 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
and cap ends of conduits above ground.
107 Demolish,remove,and dispose of concrete foundation/slab,and pedestal,and all 1 LS $8,000.00 $8,000.00
related work.
108 Excavate around existing well casing to a depth of 6 ft bgs,cut off casing at 5 ft bgs and 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
flare,backfill and compact excavated area,and all related work.
109 Grout well through tremie using 10.3-sack sand-cement grout from 620 to 5 ft bgs, 615 FT $35.00 $21,525.00
including cement mushroom cap.
110 Backfill Excavation with Narive Materials and Compact to 90% 1 LS $1,200.00 $1,200.00
SUBTOTAL: $68,225.00
CONTINGENCY(10%): $6,822.50
TOTAL: $75,047.50
September 2020 Page 1 of 1 ��FIYLEG uncK,
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Table 3
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COST
Drilling, Construction, Development,and Testing of One New Well
Item Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Item Price
No.101 Mobilization,site preparation,demobilization,site cleanup,and restoration. 1 LS $125,000.00 $125,000.00
102 Provide Noise Mitigation 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00
103 Comply with Discharge Requirements,Including Discharge Pipeline,Monitoring,and 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00
Reporting
104 Testing and Disposal of Drill Cuttings 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
105 Drill 48-inch Borehole,Furnish and Install 36-inch OD x 3/8-inch Wall ASTM A139 50.5 FT $600.00 $30,300.00
Mild Steel Conductor Casing,Cement in Place
106 Drill 17.5-inch Pilot Borehole from 50 to 1,200 feet 1,150 FT $80.00 $92,000.00
107 Provide Geophysical Borehole Logs 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
108 Install Isolated Aquifer Zone Tool,Seals,and Gravel Envelope,and Provide for Initial 5 EA $12,500.00 $62,500.00
Development by Airlifting
109 Pump Isolated Aquifer Zones(estimate 8 hours per zone) 40 HR $400.00 $16,000.00
110 Provide Isolated Aquifer Zone Test Laboratory Analyses 5 LS $3,500.00 $17,500.00
111 Ream Pilot Borehole to 34-inch from 50 to 600 feet 600 FT $80.00 $48,000.00
112 Ream Pilot Borehole to 30-inch from 600 to 1,030 feet 430 FT $70.00 $30,100.00
113 Provide Caliper Survey of Reamed Borehole 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
114 Furnish and Install 20-inch ID x 3/8-inch Wall ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Blank 522 FT $587.00 $306,414.00
Well Casing(+2 to 520 feet)
115 Furnish and Install 20-inch ID x 5/16-inch Wall ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Blank 80 FT $491.00 $39,280.00
Well Casing(520 to 600 feet)
116 Furnish and Install 20-inch ID x 5/16-inch Wall ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Ful 400 FT $568.00 $227,200.00
Flo Louvered Well Screen with 0.080-inch Slots(600 to 1,000 feet)
117 Furnish and Install 20-inch ID x 5/16-inch Wall ASTM A778 304L Stainless Steel Blank 10 FT $491.00 $4,910.00
Well Casing and End Cap(1,000 to 1,010 feet)
118 Furnish and Install 2-inch SCH.40 304L Stainless Steel Sounding Tube and 599 FT $20.00 $11,980.00
2-foot Connection Box(+1 to 598 feet)
Furnish and Install two(2)3-inch SCH.40 304L Stainless Steel Gravel Feed Pipes(+1
119 1,022 FT $30.00 $30,660.00
to 510 feet)
120 Furnish and Install Engineered Gravel Envelope and#60 Fine Transition Sand(500 to 530 FT $75.00 $39,750.00
1,030 feet)
121 Furnish and Install 10.3-sack Sand-Cement Slurry Annular Seal(ground surface to 500 500 FT $85.00 $42,500.00
feet)
122 Provide Initial Development by Swabbing and Airlifting 120 HR $400.00 $48,000.00
123 Provide,Install,and Remove Development Test Pump 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00
124 Provide Final Development by Pumping and Surging 60 HR $400.00 $24,000.00
September 2020 Page 1 of 2 it,KYLJEGmuncKv�
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Table 3
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COST
Drilling, Construction, Development,and Testing of One New Well
Item Description Qty Units Unit price Total Item Price
No. Provide Aquifer Pumping Tests(8-hour step drawdown,24-hour constant rate
125 drawdown,and 4-hour recovery tests) 36 HR $400.00 $14,400.00
126 Provide Spinner Flowmeter Survey 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
127 Provide Title 22 Laboratory Analyses 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
128 Provide Downhole Video Survey 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
129 Provide Plumbness and Alignment Surveys 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
130 Provide Well Disinfection 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
131 Complete and Cap Well Head and Ancillary Tubing,as Specified 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
SUBTOTAL: $1,299,494.00
CONTINGENCY(10%): $129,949.40
TOTAL: $1,429,443.40
September 2020 Page 2 of 2 ��rcvLEGmu.ayvater
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
APPENDICES
41
KYLE Groundwater
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Appendix A
Historical TDS Concentrations
OCWD Monitoring Well SC-5
2,500
Screened Intervals(DWR)(feet bgs) -MP2 -MP3
MP1:122.6-132.6 MP6:804-814
t MP4 t MPS
M P2:196-206 MP7:932-942
MP3:290-300 MP8:1,020-1,030
MP6 MP7
2,000 MP4:468.4-478.4 MP9:1,234-1,244 — MP8 MP9
MP5:667-677 MP10:1,426-1,436 MP10 —MCL3
a
b1,500 Short-Term Secondary MCL=1, 00 mg/L
c
0
m
b
c
U
01,000 Upp r Seconda MCL=1,000 mg/L
A
F-
500 ----
Recominended Secondary MCL=500 mg/L
0
a, O .--I N M d' In ID 11 00 D+ O cy
O rl H H H .--1 r-1 H .--1 r-1 r-1 N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: Orange County Water District,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Appendix A
Historical Nitrate Concentrations
OCWD Monitoring Well SC-5
160
Screened Intervals(DWWR)(feet bgs -MP1 -MP2
150 MP1:122.6-132.6 MP6:804-814 -MP3 -MP4
140 MP2:196-206 MP7:932-942 -MP5 SMP
MP3:290-300 MPS:1,020-1,030
130MP7 -MP8
M P4:468.4-478.4 MP9:1,234-1,244
MP9 MP10
120 MP5:667-677 MP10:1,426-1,436
110
a
100
E
90
0
s° 80
c
70
0
U
°. 60
m
b
z 50
40
30
Primary MCL=10 mg/L
20
10
0
cy, O .--I N M d' Ln 10 11 00 0% O .--1
O rl H - r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: Orange County Water District,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Appendix A
Historical Color Concentrations
OCWD Monitoring Well SC-5
40
Screened Intervals(DWR)(feet bgsl —MP1 - MP2
M P1:122.6-132.6 MP6:804-814
—MP3 —MP4
35 MP2:196-206 MP7:932-942
—MPS MP6
M P3:290-300 MP8:1,020-1,030
M P4:468.4-478.4 MP9:1,234-1,244 —MP7 MP8
MPS:667-677 MP10:1,426-1,436 MP9 MP10
30
25
G
0
s° 20
c
U
G
O
Seconda MCL=15 Units
0 15
0
U
10
5
0
a, O .--i N M d' IA 11 00 cr, O
O - - - r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 - N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: Orange County Water District,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
AKM Consulting Engineers/City of Tustin Appendix A
Historical Perchlorate Concentrations
OCWD Monitoring Well SC-5
30
Screened Intervals(DWR)(feet bgs) -MP1 tMP2
M P1:122.6-132.6 MP6:804-814
-MP3 MP4
MP2:196-206 MP7:932-942
-MPS MP6
25 MP3:290-300 MPS:1,020-1,030
MP7 MP8
M P4:468.4-478.4 MP9:1,234-1,244
MP5:667-677 MP10:1,426-1,436 MP9 _MP10
20
a
ern
c
0
15
c
U
G
O
U
N
a+
O
° 10
U
U
N
a
Primary CL-6µg/L
----------------------- --- -------- --- ---------- ------ -------------- --------------
5
0
a, O .--I N co d' IA 10 11 00 cy, O
O - - - - r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 - N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: Orange County Water District,2020.
September 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
TUSTIN
ILIE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
,„x
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780
BUILDING OUR FUTURE (714) 573-3100
HONORING OUR PAST
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION ® Fee Exempt per Govt. Code Section 6103
Project Title: Conjunctive Use Well at Beneta Well Site Project (CIP No. 60151)
Project Location: The proposed project is in the City of Tustin located in central Orange County.
The project site is located at 18001 Beneta Way approximately 1 ,100 feet east of
the Beneta Avenue and Prospect Avenue intersection and encompasses
approximately 0.13 acre. There are two offsite areas encompassing
approximately 0.22 acres west and north of the site that would be used for
construction equipment and access to the project site.
Project Location - City: Tustin Project Location — County: Orange
Project Description: The proposed project includes the removal of an existing water well that was
originally drilled in 1977, and the construction of a new water well with a depth of
approximately 1 ,000 feet approximately 40 feet southwest of the existing well
within the existing fenced well facility. The Project construction activities will
include the removal of the existing 5-foot high wall along the western perimeter of
the existing well facility to provide access for the construction equipment. An area
of approximately 0.10-acre west of the western perimeter wall will be used for
construction access and equipment. In addition, an area of approximately 0.12-
acre north of the existing northern perimeter wall will be used during the placement
of the drain line that is proposed to extend from the proposed well to the existing
North Tustin Channel. The construction activities will include the placement of a
24-foot high construction fence along the northern, eastern and southern perimeter
walls to attenuate construction noise levels. Once construction activities are
completed, the western perimeter wall will be replaced.
The residents and businesses within the City of Tustin will be the beneficiaries of
the Project because the proposed well will increase the realiability of groundwater
supply.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Tustin
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: City of Tustin Public Works Department
Exempt Status: (Check One)
❑ Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268)
❑ Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a))
❑ Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c))
® Categorical Exemption (Class 3, Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures)
❑ Statutory Exemptions (State Code No.)
DocuSign Envelope ID:8917E824-42A2-4EC0-8375-BBDF36A72812
Notice of Exemption — Beneta Well (CIP No. 60151)
Page 2 of 2
Reason why project is exempt:
The proposed Beneta Well Replacement Project includes the placement of small structures
and equipment within the existing Beneta Well site. The use of the equipment and facilities
would be for the same purpose as the previously operated Beneta Well facility. The perimeter
of the site will not be changed. Based on the environmental evaluation conducted for the
Project, the construction and operational activities of the proposed Project would either result
in no impacts or less than significant impacts on the environment. Therefore, the use of the
Class 3 Categorical Exemption in accordance with Section 15303 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines would be appropriate.
Lead Agency Contact Person: Eric Johnson Telephone: (714) 573-3320
If filed by applicant:
1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.
2. Has a notice of exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Date
Justina L. Willkom
Director of Community Development