Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-07-05; Municipal Water District; 598; Mission Basin Study & Abandonment of WellshB# 598 MTG. 7/5/05 DEPT. PW/M&O RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution # 1251 Director to proceed with the abandonment of the remaining wells in the Mission Basin located in Oceanside. accepting the Mission Basin Well Field Study and directing the PW TITLE: - Acceptance of Mission Basin Study and CITY ATTY. tis Abandonment of Wells in Mission Basin MGR* ITEM EXPLANATION: The FY2003-04 budget for the Water Enterprise Fund included fimds to begin abandonment of the remaining wells located in the Mission Basin in the City of Oceanside. However, it was decided that prior to abandoning these wells that date back to the 194O’s, a study should be performed to ascertain the feasibility of utilizing these wells to produce supplemental water for Carlsbad. This first study, prepared by Gregg Drilling and Testing, Inc., was done in order to determine if the existing Mission Basin water wells could be rehabilitated. (This study is attached as Exhibit 2.) A summation of this study shows that the existing Mission Basin water wells are quite old, most in excess of 50 years. These wells exhibit signs of considerable degradation, which would limit the effectiveness of any rehabilitation efforts. The cost of rehabilitation and relining the existing wells would be approximately the same as it would be for installing new wells. A new well installation would allow greater water intake and would provide greater capacity than rehabbing and relining the existing wells. The resulting recommendation of this study is that new wells should be installed as opposed to rehabilitation and relining of the old wells. A second study was undertaken to determine the feasibility of utilizing the Mission Basin water wells to augment Carlsbad’s water supplies. This study was done by Tetra-Tech, Inc., a consulting firm that is very familiar with the Mission Basin. (This second study has been completed and is attached as Exhibit 3 .) This study reviewed the Gregg Drilling and Testing, Inc analysis and developed more detailed costs of installing new wells. As previously stated, this study also included a determination of the feasibility of utilizing this water as a supplemental water supply for Carlsbad. To utilize this water the following items were addressed: 1. A determination of costs to pump the groundwater from wells to a desalination facility to treat the water to reduce the salt content. These costs were included in this study. 2. Additional treatment may be required to remove 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP, a possible carcinogen. 1,2,3-TCP was detected in the groundwater sampled from the alluvial aquifer. Due to the unknown nature of TCP contamination, treatment costs are also unknown and were not included in this study. 3. Once this water receives the treatment required it would need to be pumped to Carlsbad. Therefore, the costs do include pumping costs and pipeline installation costs. 4. Because the desalination treatment process will produce a brine waste, costs for brine disposal was also included. However, ultimate disposal of the brine will involve an ocean outfall. Potential exists to share Oceanside’s outfall line. Any potential costs associated with the use of Oceanside’s ocean outfall are unknown at this time and are therefore was not included in this cost analysis. Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 598 The results of this second study show that the total capital costs to produce, treat and deliver the water to Carlsbad would be $18,540,000 and annual Operational Costs would be $1,000,000. These costs amount to an average costs of $1,023.30 per acre-foot. This compares to our present cost of $550 per acre-foot for imported water and a cost of about $800 per acre-foot for the proposed seawater desalination project. These costs do not include possible additional treatment for 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (lY2,3-TCP) and sharing in Oceanside’s outfall for the brine discharge. Assuming that a treatment process to treat the 1,2,3 Trichloropropane would include an activated carbon process and that an agreement could be reached to lease capacity in Oceanside’s outfall line, the total cost of this supplemental supply was estimated to range from $1300 to $1500 per acre foot. Therefore, it was concluded that utilizing this Mission Basin water, as supplement to the present Carlsbad supply, is not cost effective, at this time, but can be reevaluated in the future. The abandoning the Carlsbad wells in the Mission Basin will not affect Carlsbad’s pre -1914 appropriated rights. However, the additional rights permitted in 1938, up to 750 aflyr., will expire if Carlsbad does not continually update the State Water Resources Board as to the status of the plans for the future use of the groundwater basin. As a result of this second study and its recommendation, staff has determined that any future capital funds for local water development would be better designated for present seawater desalination or recycled water efforts rather than development of the Mission Basin Well Field. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $202,500 were previously budgeted in the Water Enterprise Capital Replacement Fund to cover the costs for abandonment of the Mission Basin Wells (Project ID 3903 1). To date, $142,696 has been spent to cover the costs for abandonment of two wells on the District’s property at Mission & Foussat. This leaves a balance of $59,804 in this capital account. There are six wells remaining to be abandoned. The pumps and piping for these six wells have already been removed. What remains is to cap off the wells and, if necessary, remove the internal casing. Staff estimates that the cost to complete the abandonment of the 6 remaining wells is $5,500 to $7,500 per well. The balance of funds in the project account is sufficient to cover final abandonment costs. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (EM 03-01) was issued for the proposed abandonment of the subject wells in August 2003. Should the City decide to revise the project to utilize the water from the wells, additional environmental review would be necessary for that action. However, if the City chooses to proceed with the abandonment of the wells, no further environmental review is necessary. EXHIBITS: 1. Resolution Of The Carlsbad Municipal Water District Board Of Directors Authorizing The Abandonment Of The Remaining Wells In The Mission Basin Well Field. 2. Mission Basin Water Wells Equipment Removal, Well Inspection and Preservation Project. 3. Mission Basin Well Field Study. DEPARTMENT CONTACT: R. Greaney, (760) 438-2722, bgrea@ci.carlsbad.ca.us 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Exhibit 1 RESOLUTION NO. 1251 A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AUTHORIZING THE ABANDONMENT OF THE REMAINING WELLS IN THE MISSION BASIN WELL FIELD WHEREAS, the FY2003-04 budget for the Water Enterprise Fund included fbnds to begin abandonment of the remaining wells located in the Mission Basin in the City of Oceanside; and, WHEREAS, it was decided that prior to abandoning these old wells that date back to the 1940’s, a studies should be performed to ascertain the feasibility of utilizing these wells to produce supplemental water for Carlsbad, and, WHEREAS, the studies have been completed and reviewed the condition of the existing wells to determine if they could be rehabilitated or if new wells should be installed; and, WHEREAS, these studies also included a determination of the feasibility of utilizing this water as a supplemental water supply for Carlsbad; and, WHEREAS, the results of these studies show that the total capital costs to produce, treat and deliver the water to Carlsbad would be $18,540,000 and annual Operational Costs would be E 1,000,000; and, WHEREAS, these costs amount to an average costs of $1,023.30per acre-foot.; and, WHEREAS, this compares to our present cost of $550 per acre-foot for imported water and a cost of about $800 per acre-foot for the proposed seawater desalination project; and, WHEREAS, these costs do not include possible additional treatment for 1,2,3- Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) and sharing in Oceanside’s outfall for the brine discharge; and, WHEREAS, assuming that a treatment process to treat the 1,2,3 Trichloropropane would include an activated carbon process and an agreement could be reached to lease capacity in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Oceanside’s outfall line, the cost of this supplemental supply would range from $1300 to $1500 per acre foot, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That utilizing this Mission Basin water, as supplement to the present Carlsbad supply, is not cost effective, at this time, and that the Public Works Director proceed with the abandonment of the remaining wells in the Mission basin Well Field. 3. That any future capital funds for local water development would be better designated for present seawater desalination or recycled water efforts rather than development of the Mission Basin Well Field. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the Board of Directors of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District held on the 5th day of JULY , 2005 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Board Members Lewis, Kulchin, Packard, Sigafoose P, ATTEST: MAi LORRAINE M. W&~OD, Secretary MISSION BASIN WATER WELLS EQUIPMENT REMOVAL, WELL INSPECTION AND PRESERVATION PROJECT CMWD CONTRACT NO. 3903-3 PREPARED BY GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC. 2726 WALNUT AVENUE SIGNAL HILL, CA 90755 Phone: 562-427-6899 May 2,2005 MISSION BASIN WATER WELLS: EQUIPMENT REMOVAL, WELL INSPECTION AND PRESERVATION PROJECT CMWD CONTRACT NO. 3903-3 1 .O - Introduction Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc. (Gregg), 2726 Walnut Avenue, Signal Hill, CA 90755 was retained by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District to remove well appurtenances from six wells, video loghspect the wells and preserve the wells by installing a steel well cover over the top of each well. On January 18,2005 Gregg commenced demolition activities at the site, these activities were completed on January 28,2005. Demolition activities consisted of removal of the pumps, pump shafts, related materials and oily water from the wells and removal of the surface structures surrounding the wells. Permanent caps were installed on the top of the wells. The wells were allowed to sit undisturbed for one month after the demolition work to allow the mineral scaling debris that was loosened from the well casing during pump removal to settle. On March 7,2005 the wells were video logged. The video logging was performed by Pacific Surveys of Claremont, CA using a Lava1 WOO0 down-hole video camera. In general terms, all six of the wells showed a high degree of corrosion and a large buildup of mineral scaling throughout the entire length of each of the wells and the well casings appeared to be dented andor collapsed at various depths. During pump removal activities large amounts of mineral scaling were dislodged from the well casing. This dislodged scaling went into suspension and did not settle completely. This, combined with the brackish content of the water in the wells, somewhat limited the optical clarity of the video camera during logging. It is apparent from the logging however that the steel well casings have deteriorated significantly due to corrosion and mineral scaling and have undergone deformation at various depths. 2.0 Summary of Well Conditions Well No. 3 Installed in 1948, a 14” diameter well with 0 gage casing, a total depth 2’, slotted with 3/8” Mills knife from 138’ to 196’ and five slots around the circumference spaced at one foot intervals. Static water level at 6.6’; 0’ to 6.6’ scalehoney comb, thin layer of honeycomb floating on water, 6.6’ to 157’ very cloudy (high TDS water, floating particles) and no major obstructions. Well silted up at 157’. 4 DESCRIPTION UNITS Well Rehabilitation - Retrofitting NUMBER UNIT COST TOTAL COST $ $ J f Remove Debris From Well Well Rehabilitation 8 518 Diameter, 0.25" wall ss316 blank casing 8 518" Diameter, 0.25" wall ss316 louvered casing Install casing, sand pack, well seal Develop New Well Install Pump, 6" Column, Base, 2 Sounding Tube 1 days 4 2,000.00 8,000.00 days 10 $2,500.00 $25,000.00 foot 140 $126.00 $1 7,640.00 foot 60 $1 74.00 $1 0,440.00 foot 200 $30.00 $6,000.00 days 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 each 1 $78,000.00 $78,000.00 I The well rehabilitation process entails re-development of the well by airliwairswab, bailing, chemical treatment and/or pumping to clean out sediments in the well casing and mineral scaling or biofouling from the well casing and screen. A pump test is then performed to evaluate the production of the well. Retrofitting of the well consists of installing a smaller diameter casing and well screen in the well, installing a sand pack between the two well casings and installing a pump in the well. This smaller casing will decrease the amount of water that can be pumped from the well. Due to the elevated salt content and high TDS of the water it is recommended that well liners, submersible pumps and pump columns be stainless steel 3 16. The estimated costs for rehabilitation and retrofitting the Mission Basin wells are presented below. Please note that the price of stainless steel has shown considerable fluctuation in the past 24 months, mainly increasing. Prices for well screen, casing and submersible pumps are based on current prices. Well No. 3 Well No. 4 Well No. 4 has surface debris in the well which would need to be removed prior to well rehabilitation. Well No. 5 DESCRIPTION Well Rehabilitation Install Pump, 6" Column, Base, 2" Sounding Tube Well No. 6 UNITS NUMBER UNIT COST TOTAL COST days 10 $2,500.00 $25,000.00 each 1 $68,000.00 $68,000.00 Well No. 6 is not a good candidate for relining due to the 10" inner liner present in the existing well. The existing inner liner will prevent the installation of a new inner liner of a size sufficient to allow for adequate flow. Due to the age and degraded condition of the well it may not be possible to produce significant amounts of water from the well. Total '$93,000.00 Well No. 7 Well No. 7 is not a good candidate for relining due to the 10" inner liner present in the existing well. The existing inner liner will prevent the installation of a new inner liner of a size sufficient to allow for adequate flow. Due to the age and degraded condition of the well it may not be possible to produce significant amounts of water from the well NUMBER UNIT COST TOTAL COST Well Rehabilitation days 10 $2,500.00 $25,000.00 Install Pump, 6" Column, Base, 2" Sounding Tube each 1 $68,000.00 $68,000.00 11 Total I I $93,000.00 11 Well No. 4 Installed in 1946, a 14’’ diameter well with 10 gage casing, a total depth of 212’, slotted with 318” Mills knife from 138’ to 196’ and five slots around circumference spaced at one foot intervals. Static water level at 5.5’; well obstructed at 1 1.2’. Obstruction appears to be pipe and wood. Well No. 5 Installed in 195 1, a 16” diameter well casing where the total depth was not recorded, 30’ of 10” perforated casing installed at bottom of well. Static water level at 4.7’; 7’ to 170’ very cloudy (high TDS water, floating particles); 170’ to 195’ heavy rust buildup on casing. Well No. 6 Installed in 1953 to a total depth 160’, a 16’’ diameter well casing to 128’, 32’ of 10” casing installed at bottom of well, 10” casing perforated from 128’ to 148’. Static water level at 9.9’; 9.9’ to 110’ very cloudy (high TDS water, floating particles); 135’ heavy rust buildup, unable to lower camera past 135’ due to corroded casing Well No. 7 Installed in 1953 to a total depth 170’, a 16” diameter well casing to 117’, 10” liner from 105 to 148’ -perforations (48 holes per foot) from 120’ to 148’, crushed rock 148’ - 170’. Static water level 10’’ 10’ - 105’ high amount of suspended solids, 105’ heavy rust buildup, casing overlap, unable to lower camera past 109’ due to rust buildup on lower casing. Well No. 8 Installed in 1956 to a total depth 143’, an 18” diameter well casing, perforated fiom 1 10’ to 140’. Static water level at 10’’ high amount of suspended solids through well column. At lOl’, a break was noted in the casing due to heavy corrosion of well casing, rock showing behind casing break. Unable to lower camera past 127. 3.0 Well Rehabilitation and Retrofitting The six wells examined in the Mission Basing were all installed between 1946 and 1956 making the wells between 48 and 58 years old. All six wells exhibited a high degree of mineral encrustation, scaling and corrosion. The wells were perforated with either a Mills knife or by drilling holes in the well casing. Perforating well casing in this manner was an acceptable practice and a typical well installation process at the time the wells were installed. However perforations of this type can allow a high amount of sand and finer particles to enter the well and make for higher entrance velocities of water entering the well. This in turn will increase wear on the pump shaft and pump. Due to the age and construction of these wells they are likely poor candidates for rehabilitation and retrofitting. Well No. 8 4.0 New Well Installation For comparison purposes a new well installed to a depth of 200’ and constructed using 10” diameter blank casing (140’) and 60’ of continuous wire wrap screen, 0.040 slot, installed in a 16” diameter borehole can allow for a flow of approximately 2000 gallons per minute with a 1 psi pressure drop through the slots. The estimated cost to install a new well is as follows: day 2 $3,500.00 I $7,000.00 I1 I Pump Install Testing Pump, 6” column, Base, Sounding I - 11 I 10 I Tube I each I 1 I $76,000.00 I $76,000.00 The cost to abandon the existing wells by tremmie grouting with a nine sac sandcement slurry would be between $5,500 to $7,500 per well. The costs presented for rehabilitation-relining and new well construction do not include: technical oversight of the work; permitting of the work, discharge/disposal of water generated during well rehabilitation and development and disposal of drill cuttings and drill mud generated during well construction. 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The existing Mission Basin water wells are quite old, most in excess of 50 years, and exhibit signs of considerable degradation which will likely limit the effectiveness of any rehabilitation efforts. Mechanical action inside the wells, i.e. bailing and surging, could cause damage to corroded well casing which could make it impossible to reline the wells. The existing wells were perforated with either a Mills knife or by drilling holes in the well casing. Both these methods were standard practice for well construction at the time the wells were installed; however, neither can provide the entrance capacity that a continuous wire wrap screen or a high flow louvered screen can. Therefore, the lined wells will be limited in the amount of water they can produce by the perforations in the old wells. Future rehabilitation of lined wells is also a consideration. The smaller diameter liner installed in the existing well does not allow the energy generated by bailing, swabbing and airlifting to effectively reach the gravel pack surrounding the outer casing. This will cause the wells to silt up faster and in turn reduce the life of the well. The cost for rehabilitating and relining the existing wells is approximately the same as it would be for installing new wells. A new well installation will allow greater water intake and can provide greater capacity than relining the existing wells. For these reasons, it is our recommendation that new wells be installed rather than trying to rehabilitate and install liners in the existing wells. Due to the high salt content of the water at the site it is recommended the new'well casing and screen be stainless steel 3 16 (SS3 16). This will inhibit corrosion and give the well casing and screen a longer life and will require less maintenance over the life of the well. Likewise, the submersible pump and riser pipe should also be made with SS3 16. EXHIBIT 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD MISSION BASIN WELL FIELD STUDY PREPARED BY: RANCHO BARNARDO, CALIFORNIA JUNE 2005 TETRA-TECH, INC. City of Carlsbad Mission Basin Well Field Study Introduction and Background The City of Carlsbad’s original water supplies were from the Mission Basin located to the north in the City of Oceanside. Until the 1950’s, local groundwater was the only source of water for the City of Carlsbad. The groundwater was pumped from wells drawing from the Mission Basin of the San Luis Rey River. Initially developed in 19 13, the City of Carlsbad has rights to 5 cubic feet per second (cfs) of pre-1914 appropriated rights and an additional 750 AF/yr, up to 5cfs that was permitted in 1938. Unfortunately, the additional permitted rights will expire if the City of Carlsbad does not continually update the State Water Resources Board as to the status of plans for the future use of the groundwater basin. However, the original 1913 rights are not subject to loss through non- use. Over the years, the Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) content of the groundwater in the Mission Basin increased to the point where the use was discontinued. The current conditions of the wells and piping system are beyond repair and will be abandoned. This study focuses on the conceptual feasibility and system requirements of establishing new wells within Mission Basin and the construction of transmission capacity to convey the water to the City of Carlsbad. In addition to the well and transmission costs, the appropriated groundwater will require treatment due to the degradation of the water quality within the basin. Water Quality To determine current water quality, data was used from the recently completed Mission Basin test well program by the San Diego County Water Authority. A test well is located approximately 300 feet south of the City of Oceanside’s Mission Basin Desalter Facility and approximately 3000 feet northeast from the Carlsbad Well Sites. Groundwater samples were collected at the end of a 24-hour constant rate pumping test and submitted to Del Mar Analytical for analysis of constituents listed under Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations on January 2 1,2004. Depth specific zone testing of the pilot borehole indicated that the groundwater quality of the bedrock aquifer (Zones 1 and 2) is enriched in sodium and chloride relative to the other cations and anions, whereas the water quality of the groundwater sampled from the alluvial aquifer (Zone 3) and from the completed well do not show any predominate water type. In addition, the groundwater in the bedrock aquifer has a lower TDS concentration (450 to 480 mg/L) than the groundwater in the alluvial aquifer (1,500 mg/L). The TDS value of the sample collected from the completed well was 1,500 mg/L, which matches closely with the TDS concentration from the alluvial aquifer zone test and supports the flowmeter findings that most of the water supply to the well is from the alluvial aquifer. Other unique characteristics to the area and of the groundwater sampled from the completed well include relatively high concentrations of iron (2,300 ug/L) and manganese (460 ug/L), which both exceed their specified Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). Furthermore, 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP), a possible carcinogen, was detected in the groundwater sampled from the alluvial aquifer at concentrations ranging from 190 to 230 ng/L. 1,2,3-TCP has been used as a solvent and as an intermediate in the formulation of other chemicals. The likely source of 1,2,3-TCP in Mission Basin groundwater is through the past use of soil fumigant pesticides that contained 1,2,3-TCP as a by-product. Trace levels of the inorganic pollutants have caused a great deal of concern in California in the past couple of years. 1,2,3-TCP will have to be closely monitored and possibly treated. Specific sampling on this site for TCP has not been undertaken and should be carefully considered before moving forward. Due to the unknown nature of TCP contamination, treatment costs are also unknown and have not been included in this study. Water Quantity To obtain the Scfs of water that the City of Carlsbad has rights to, an additional well or wells will need to be drilled. The test well previously mentioned was drilled using the Reverse Circulation Rotary drill rig. This method is recommended for the basin’s geologic makeup. Based on recently completed wells within the San Luis Ray Basin, a possible well design would be as follows: the bore hole will be 42 inches in diameter with a 50 foot 30” diameter conductor casing used to a total reamed depth of 250 feet. The completed well will be constructed of a stainless steel 16-inch ID casing to an overall depth of 240 feet. At a discharge rate of 2000 gpm or 4.5 cfs, the specific capacity of the well is approximately 47.4 gpdft with a well efficiency of 81 percent. To convey the required flow, two wells constructed similar in size and depth is recommended. The approximate cost for drilling and developing two similar wells would be approximately $1,500,000. From the Mission Basin Well Site the ultimate delivery to the City of Carlsbad would connect to the City’s 225 and 330 zones. These pressure zones have an ultimate usage of 3130 gpm and 556 gpm respectively with an ultimate usage total of 3687 gpm. Required Treatment Reverse osmosis desalination treatment for the well water will be required due to the high concentrations of iron, manganese, and total dissolved solids that are common to the groundwater in the basin. The cost of installing a reverse osmosis system with iron and manganese removal would be approximately $9,000,000. As a result of the reverse osmosis process, approximately 30% of the well water is expended as waste brine water. Therefore, the disposal of approximately 1.5 cfs of brine water needs to be considered. The brine water could be pumped and transmitted through an agreement to the City of Oceanside’s ocean outfall line. We have included the approximate cost of $2,880,000 to install a brine disposal line from the well site to the City of Oceanside’s ocean outfall. An agreement with the City to use their ocean outfall for brine disposal would be required. Any potential costs associated with the use of Oceanside’s ocean outfall are unknown at this time and are therefore not included in this cost analysis. Pumping Station The pumping station will need to be sized to pump the treated well water to a connection in Carlsbad’s 255 Pressure Zone at State Route 78 and El Camino Real. An approximate cost for the pump station would be $1,000,000. Pipeline Alignment Figure 1 shows the proposed pipeline alignment that will take the treated well water to the City of Carlsbad city limits at State Route 78 and El Camino Real. A 16-inch welded steel cement mortar lined and coated pipe should be installed to convey the 2.26 MGD flow. For 16,640 lineal feet the cost for the material installation of the pipeline would be approximately $4,160,000. Overall Cost At this conceptual level we are estimating the initial overall cost for the development and transmission of the Mission Basin Well Site water to be $1 8,540,000. To operate and maintain the wells, treatment facility and pumping stations we have estimated a beginning yearly cost of $1,000,000 with a cost of operating and inflation increase of 5% each year for the system’s 25 year life. This O&M cost is based on an informed survey of treatment plants similar in capacity. Including membrane replacements at the 10 and 20- year marks, the net present value of the yearly O&M cost over the 25-year life is $1,020,471. The amortized construction cost is $1,572,442 per year. Therefore, with a 2,534 acre-ft/year production rate, this gives an overall cost of $1,023.30 per acre-ft. MISSION WIN WELL FlaD BMY I FIGURE 1 PROPDBU) PIPELHE ALIGNMENT c \ MISSIOQ BASIN WELL FIELD STUDY PROPOSED WELL SITE LAYOUT 1 FIGURE 2