Aug 06, 2026 Utilities Commission Infrastructure Committee

[00:00:02]

OKAY, GOOD MORNING.

I'D LIKE TO

[CALL TO ORDER]

UH, CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL?

[ROLL CALL]

CHAIR AUSTIN HERE AND MEMBER MARK PARKIN PRESENT.

THANK YOU.

RIGHT.

ITEM NUMBER

[1. 26-55783 Recommendation to approve May 28, 2026 Infrastructure Committee meeting minutes.       Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

IS THERE MOTION? SO MOVE.

SECOND, MOVE THEN SECOND.

IT.

UH, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? HEARING NONE.

UM, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

MOTION PASSES.

UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO IS TO,

[2. 26-55784 Recommendation to receive and file an informational update on federal and state PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) regulatory developments, monitoring results and the potential implications for the Long Beach Public Utilities Department (LBPUD).       Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

UH, I'LL TURN THAT.

IS THERE A MOTION? IT'S MOVED AND SECONDED.

UM, WE'LL CALL ON YOUNG ZANG.

YOUNG MORNING CHAIR, AUSTIN.

GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONER PARKIN.

SO, UM, HERE I'M GONNA GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON PFAS AND WE'LL GET RIGHT INTO THAT.

SO, FIRST, A BRIEF OUTLINE OF THE PRESENTATION.

WE'LL FIRST LOOK AT THE DRINKING WATER REGULATION SETTING PROCESS, AND THEN HAVE AN OVERVIEW OF PFAS, AND WE'LL LOOK AT THE CURRENT STATE OF PFAS REGULATIONS AND HOW THAT IMPACTS LONG BEACH UTILITIES.

SO THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT GIVES THE EPAS AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH NATIONAL DRINKING WATER REGULATION AND STANDARDS.

AND EPA USUALLY FOLLOWS A STANDARD PROCESS, AND IT'S BASICALLY A THREE STEPS PROCESS.

FIRST, EPA HAS TO IDENTIFY THE CONTAMINANT OF CONCERN.

SO FOR, UM, UNREGULATED CONTAMINANT, IF EPA IS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT CONTAMINANT, THEY CAN PUBLISH THE CONTAMINANT ONTO THE CONTAMINANT CANDIDATE LIST.

SO THIS LIST IS REQUIRED TO BE PUBLISHED EVERY FIVE YEARS.

AND THEN THE NEXT STEP IS FOR EPA TO EVALUATE.

SO BASICALLY, THEY WANT TO EVALUATE THE CONTAMINANT TO MAKE A DECISION WHETHER THIS CONTAMINANT NEEDS TO BE REGULATED.

AND THE EVALUATION WOULD INCLUDE EVALUATING THE TO TOXICOLOGY OF THE CONTAMINANT AND ALSO THE OCCURRENCE DATA OF THE CONTAMINANT.

SO THAT'S BASICALLY TO FIND OUT HOW OFTEN AND HOW MUCH THE CONTAMINANT IS OCCURRED IN DRINKING WATER.

AND A LOT OF TIMES THIS CURRENT OCCURRENCE DATA MAY NOT EXIST.

SO EPA ALSO USE UNREGULATED CONTAMINANT MON MONITOR RULE, WHICH THEY WILL REQUIRE WATER SYSTEM TO MONITOR FOR THOSE UNREGULATED CONTAMINANT.

AND IF A POSITIVE REGULATORY DETERMINATION IS MADE, EPA EXAM WOULD PROCEED TO DEVELOP THE REGULATION.

SO THEY DO HAVE A TIMELINE THAT THEY HAVE TO, UH, DEVELOP THE REGULATION THAT'S WITHIN 24 HOUR, 24 MONTHS AFTER THEY MAKE THE POSITIVE DETERMINATION, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A DRAFT.

AND ONCE THE REGULATION IS FINALIZED AND SET, EPA IS ALSO REQUIRED TO REVIEW THE REGULATION EVERY SIX YEARS AND UPDATE THAT IF NEEDED.

SO THEY DO FOLLOW A VERY STANDARD PROCESS.

SO EPA SETS NATIONAL STANDARDS, AND IT'S INDIVIDUAL STATES THAT HAVE TO ENFORCE THOSE STANDARDS.

AND FOR CALIFORNIA, IT'S A CALIFORNIA, UH, WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD DIVISION OF DRINKING WATER THAT HAS A PRIMACY THAT, UH, REGULATE DRINKING WATER SYSTEMS. SO THE STATE CAN EITHER JUST ADOPT EPA REGULATIONS AS IS, OR THEY CAN MAKE IT MORE STRINGENT.

AND STATE CAN ALSO DEVELOP OUR OWN REGULATIONS.

FOR EXAMPLE, SOME REGULATIONS IN STATE DON'T HAVE THAT NATIONALLY LIKE CHROME SIX AND PERCOLATE.

THOSE WE HAVE STANDARDS, BUT NATIONALLY, THERE'S NO STANDARD YET.

AND USUALLY THOSE REGULATION SETTING PROCESSES PRETTY STANDARD.

AND, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, STATE ALSO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SET REGULATION FOLLOWING A NON-STANDARD PROCESS.

SO THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF THIS, THIS TYPE OF REGULATION SETTING PROCESS, EITHER POLICY HANDBOOK OR EMERGENCY REGULATIONS.

SO THE RECENT EXAMPLE OF POLICY HANDBOOK IS A CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL POLICY HANDBOOK, WHICH HAS A BIG IMPACT ON OUR OPERATION.

AND THAT WAS SET THROUGH A NON-STANDARD PROCESS.

AND THIS NON-STANDARD PROCESS DOES GIVE THE STATE, BASICALLY GIVE THEM THE AUTHORITY TO SET THE REGULATION AT A MUCH FASTER RATE.

AND ALSO THEY DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER ALL THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS LIKE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY IN THOSE NON-STANDARD PROCESS.

[00:05:01]

FOR EXAMPLE, A LOT OF THE DROUGHT AND THE CONSERVATION REGULATIONS ARE SET UNDER EMERGENCY REGULATIONS.

AND SO WE TALK ABOUT THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, EITHER STANDARD OR NON-STANDARD PROCESS.

AND FOR NON-REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, THOSE ARE FOR UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS.

STATE ALSO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO, UM, HAVE REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER SYSTEMS BY ESTABLISHING NOTIFICATION AND RESPONSE LEVELS AND ISSUING MONITORING ORDER FOR WATER SYSTEM TO COMPLY.

AND FOR PFAS, THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE BEEN DEAL WITH IN THE PAST DECADE.

SO THE NOTIFICATION RESPONSE LEVEL AND MONITORING ORDER FROM THE STATE.

SO WHAT ARE PFAS? I'M SURE YOU ARE ALL PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH PFAS, BUT JUST A QUICK RECAP.

PFAS ARE, IT'S A SHORT FOR PER AND POLYFLOR ALAI SUBSTANCES, PFAS.

AND THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF PFAS ACTUALLY MORE THAN 9,000 PFAS CHEMICALS.

THE MOST COMMON ONES ARE, UH, REGULATED ONES ARE POA AND PFAS.

THOSE ARE EIGHT CARBON CHAIN AND PFAS IS USED EVERYWHERE IN NON-STICK COOKWARE, CARPETS, CLOSING FOOD PACKAGING, AND FIRE RETARDANTS.

SO PEOPLE CAN BE EXPOSED TO PFAS IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS.

AND BECAUSE OF PFAS HAVE THE STRONG CARBON FLOORING BOUND, WHICH IS VERY STRONG, IT DOESN'T BREAK NATURALLY.

SO PFAS IS EXTREMELY STABLE AND IT DOES BIOACCUMULATE IN ANIMALS AND HUMAN BODY.

AND THAT'S WHY PFAS IS CALLED A FOREVER CHEMICAL.

AND THERE HAS BEEN, UM, DATA AND STUDY INDICATES THAT WHEN EXPOSED TO CERTAIN LEVEL OF PFAS OR CERTAIN TYPES OF PFAS, THERE COULD BE A HEALTH RISK.

SO THAT'S WHY PFAS IS BEING DEVELOPED FOR REGULATION IN DRINKING WATER.

SO THIS TABLE JUST WANT TO SUMMARIZE THE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY BY EPA AND THE STATE.

SO EPA IN RED COLOR OVER HERE, AND THE STATE IS IN BLUE.

SO IT ALL STARTED IN 2009.

THAT'S WHEN EPA STARTS THE REGULATORY ACTIVITIES FIRST P OA AND PFAS WERE PUT ON THE CONTAMINANT CANDIDATE LIST.

SO THAT JUST MEANS EPA IS CONCERNED ABOUT THOSE CHEMICALS.

AND THEN 20 13, 20 15 EPA USED U CMR THREE.

SO AGAIN, UCMR ALSO IS PUBLISHED EVERY FIVE YEARS.

SO THAT'S TO HELP COLLECT THE DATA FOR PEOPLE AT PAS.

AND THEN, BUT THIS INITIAL, UM, ROUND THE REG IN 2015, UNFORTUNATELY, REGULATORY DETERMINATION WAS NOT MADE FOR P FOUR OR PFAS BECAUSE THERE IS NOT SUFFICIENT DATA.

SO EPA WENT A SECOND ROUND AND P FOUR OR PFAS PUT ON THE CCL FOUR.

AND THEN EVENTUALLY IN 2021, THAT'S WHEN EPA MADE A POSITIVE REGULATORY DETERMINATION FOR P AND PFAS.

SO THAT MEANS BY 2023, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A DRAFT REGULATION FOR THOSE TWO.

SO IN 2023, THEY DID HAVE THE DRAFT REGULATION FOR P AND PFAS, AND THE FINAL REGULATION WAS PUBLISHED IN 2024.

SO WHILE THE REGULATION IS BEING PUBLISHED, AT THE SAME TIME, EPA ALSO ASK WATER SYSTEM TO COLLECT MORE DATA FOR PFAS.

SO, EPA REGULATION HAS BEEN FINALIZED CURRENTLY.

ACTUALLY, THERE HAS BEEN SOME PROPOSED CHANGES FOR THE PFAS REGULATION.

SO THOSE CHANGES ARE ALSO BEING DEVELOPED AND EXPECTED TO BE ADOPTED AND FOR THE STATE.

UM, THE STATE STARTED IN 2019 WITH MONITORING ORDER.

UM, STARTED WITH P AND PFAS AND THEN EXPANDED TO PFDS AND P-F-H-X-S.

AND, UH, LATELY EXPANDED TO P-F-H-X-A AND STATE HAVE A COUPLE ROUNDS OF MONITORING ORDER.

2019 IS THE FIRST ROUND IN 2022 SECOND ROUND, BASICALLY EXPANDING THE MONITOR TO A LOT MORE PFAS.

AND THE RECENT MONITORING ORDER IS 2025 IS 29 PFAS.

AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, AS THIS LATEST MONITORING ORDER, THE STATE ASK WATER SYSTEM TO MONITOR ALL OUR WATER SOURCES.

SO INITIALLY, THE MONITORING ORDER WERE LIMITED TO CERTAIN IDENTIFIED HIGH RISK SOURCES.

BUT NOW THE RECENT MONITORING ORDER, ALL OUR SOURCES ARE ASKED TO BE MONITORED.

SO IT DOES SHOW THAT THE STATE IS CONCERNED MORE WIDESPREAD PAS PRESENCE.

SO THIS SLIDE WILL SHOW YOU THE MONITOR RESULTS

[00:10:01]

SO OUR FIRST MONITORING WITH PFAS STARTED IN UCMR THREE FROM EPA.

SO ECMR THREE.

THEY REQUIRE US TO MONITOR FOR THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM POINT OF ENTRY INSTEAD OF THE SOURCE WATER WELLS, WE MONITOR THE POINT WHERE WE DELIVER WATER TO THE CUSTOMER.

AND THE SIX PFAS WERE ASKED TO BE MONITORED AT THE TIME AND NO DETECTION.

AND THEN IN 2019 WITH THE STATE MONITORING ORDER, STATE, ASK US TO MONITOR FOR P AND PFAS, AND THEY IDENTIFIED 14 WELLS TO BE MONITORED.

THOSE WERE THE WELLS THAT WERE CLOSE TO THE AIRPORT BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION.

THEY'RE CONCERNED.

AGAIN, WE DID NOT FIND P OR PFAS.

SO AT THE TIME, THE LAB DID SEE SOME P-F-H-X-A.

SO AT, UH, 2019, AT THE TIME, P-F-H-X-A HAS NO STANDARD OR NO REPORTING LIMIT.

SO THEY DID SEE THAT.

BUT BECAUSE THERE ARE NO STANDARDS THERE, THEY DIDN'T REALLY CONFIRM THE PRESENCE OF P-F-H-X-A.

BUT WITH THAT DETECTION IN 2022, UM, WHEN STATE IS ISSUING MORE MONITORING OTHER TO WATER SYSTEM, THEY ISSUE TWO US TO MONITOR FOR TWO WELLS.

AND ONE IS WELL WITH THE INITIAL, UH, P-F-H-X-A AND THE OTHER ONE IS ONE CLOSE TO IT.

SO WE DID MORE MONITORING THIS TIME, 25 PAS, AND WE DID NOT SEE ANY PAS AT ALL.

AND IN 2023 TO 2025 UCMR FIVE, THE STATE, UH, THE EPA ASKED US TO MONITOR FOUR MORE PFAS AND POINT OF ENTRY AGAIN, AND WE DID NOT FIND ANY PFAS.

SO LASTLY IS THE CURRENT ONGOING MONITORING FOR STATE MONITORING ORDER.

AND THIS TIME WE'RE ASKED TO MONITOR ALL OUR WELLS, AND THIS MONITORING IS STILL ONGOING.

CURRENTLY, WE HAVE NO DETECTION IN WELLS.

SO, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO MONITOR FOUR POINT OF ENTRY, WE ALWAYS DO THAT AS A BEST PRACTICE.

UM, BUT THIS TIME WE DID SEE THAT AT OUR JOHNSON RESERVOIR WHERE WE RECEIVED WATER FROM METROPOLITAN, WE SAW DETECTION OF PFVA.

AGAIN, THAT'S NOT A REGULATED PFAS.

AND WE, WE DID SEE THAT.

AND, UH, WE DID LET MW KNOW THAT THERE IS A DETECTION.

SO WHERE IS PFAS FOUND? PFAS EXISTS IN BOTH SURFACE WATER AND THE GROUNDWATER.

IT'S ACTUALLY, UM, WE'RE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT PFAS IN GROUNDWATER BECAUSE GROUNDWATER DOESN'T HAVE THE DILUTION LIKE SURFACE WATER DOES.

SO OUR GROUNDWATER COMES FROM THE CENTRAL BASIN, WHICH IS MANAGED BY WRD, AND HERE WE SHOW SOME CROSS-SECTION OF THE BASIN.

UM, SO GROUNDWATER COMES FROM THE AQUIFER.

IT'S BASICALLY WATER FILLED WITH ROCK AND GRAVELS.

THE AQUIFER CAN EITHER BE UNCONFINED AQUIFER, WHICH IS CONNECTED TO THE SURFACE.

ONE EXAMPLE IS, UH, WITH YOUR NARROW, UH, SPREADING GROUND.

SO THAT'S HOW WE GET TO GET THE WATER PERCOLATE TO, INTO THE AQUIFER TO RECHARGE.

AND THEN THERE IS ALSO THE CONFINED AQUIFER WHERE THE AQUIFER IS COVERED BY LIKE IMPERMEABLE LAYERS.

AND MOST OF OUR PRODUCTION WELLS ARE IN THE CONFINED LAYER.

AND ALSO WRD HAS THEIR MONITORING WELLS IN THOSE LAYERS AS WELL.

AND ON THIS GRAPH CROSS SECTION OVER HERE, WE SHOWED EXAMPLE OF PFAS MONITORING RESULTS.

SO BASICALLY, WRD SUMMARIZED THE EXAMPLE OF PFAS AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF AQUIFER AND THE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.

THERE'S REALLY NO CONSISTENT TREND AS FAR AS LIKE WHERE PFAS IS MOST CONCENTRATED OVERALL IS JUST PFAS IS FOUND EVERYWHERE.

AND HOW HOW HIGH OF A LEVEL FROM YOUR WELL IS REALLY DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU GET THE WATER.

SO THERE'S NO CONSISTENT TREND, BUT TFAS EXISTS IN SHALLOW OR ON DEEPER LEVELS, OR IT GOES FROM THE WEST BASIN AND THE CENTRAL BASIN.

THEY DID FIND THAT EVERYWHERE.

AND HERE, THIS GRAPH, WE WANT TO SHOW SOME SNAPSHOTS OF THE PFAS MONITOR RESULTS FROM THE STATE.

SO THE STATE DATABASE, BASICALLY WE HAVE TWO SNAPSHOTS.

THIS ONE IS IN 2023, AND THIS ONE IS IN 2026.

SO THE DROP LIST OVER HERE SHOWS WELLS WITH P OA ABOVE FOUR PARTS PER TRILLION.

SO THAT'S THE CURRENT REGULATION LEVEL, MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL THAT WE CANNOT EXCEED.

[00:15:01]

UH, ONE EXAMPLE CLOSE TO US OVER HERE, LIQUID IN 2023, THERE IS NO DETECTION, BUT IN 2026, WE DO SEE SOME WELLS THAT ARE ABOVE THE STANDARDS.

SO THAT NEEDS TO BE MANAGED.

AND WE AL ALSO NOTICE THAT IN OTHER AREAS, THERE ARE MORE DETECTIONS COMPARED TO THREE YEARS AGO AND HERE AS WELL.

SO THIS KIND OF LET US KNOW THAT PFAS IS MIGRATING, WE DON'T KNOW HOW FAST, BUT THERE IS A BELIEF IT EVENTUALLY WILL IMPACTING US.

AND IF WE DETECT PFAS AND WE CAN MANAGE IT BECAUSE FIRST IS THE BEST AVAILABLE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY FOR PFAS, IT'S WELL ESTABLISHED.

THERE IS GRANULAR ACTIVE CARBON IO EXCHANGE AND REVERSE OSMOSIS.

AND CURRENTLY, OR WELL WATER IS ESSENTIALLY TREATED AS A GROUNDWATER TREATMENT PLANT.

SO IF WE DETECT PFAS IN ONE WELL, AND THE WELL CAN BE BLENDED WITH OTHER WELLS, AND THEN IT GETS TREATED AS A TREATMENT PLAN EVEN FURTHER.

AND IF WE DO HAVE TO ADD ADDITIONAL, UM, TREATMENT PROCESS FOR PFAS AS A TREATMENT PLAN, WE DO HAVE THE SPACE OVER THERE.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS KEVIN IS TALKING ABOUT.

WHEN WE LOOK AT THE FEASIBILITY, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE SPACE FOR FUTURE EXPANSION IF WE NEED TO.

AND THEN, SO THE CURRENT TREATMENT PLAN, WE ARE MAINLY SERVING THE BLENDED ZONE AND THE EAST SIDE.

AND WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE LOOKING AT THE WEST SIDE, AND WE ARE WORKING ON THE GROUNDWATER RESILIENCE PROGRAM.

AND ONE MAJOR COMPONENT OF THAT PROGRAM IS TO HAVE A CENTRALIZED TREATMENT PLAN AT GENERAL JOHNSON, WHICH WILL GIVE US A CAPACITY TO TREAT FOR PS.

AND I THINK HERE, JUST WANT TO SAY LIKE PFAS IS A PROBLEM FOR EVERYONE.

SO IT'S, IT'S A PROBLEM THAT SHOULD BE DEALT WITH REGIONALLY AND NATIONALLY.

SO THERE ARE REGIONAL PROGRAMS. I'M GONNA HAND OVER TO DEAN TO TALK ABOUT THAT PROGRAM.

ALRIGHT, GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS.

SO, UH, A AS YEN MENTIONED, THIS IS, UH, NOT JUST, UH, LONG BEACH PROBLEM WHERE IT'S NOT A LONG BEACH PROBLEM YET, BUT IT IS A PROBLEM THAT IS BEING EXPERIENCED IN BOTH BASINS THAT WE HAVE RIGHTS IN.

AND SO A WATER REPLENISHMENT DISTRICT IS OUR WATER MASTER OVERSEEING BOTH CENTRAL AND WEST BASINS.

AND, UH, SEVERAL YEARS AGO, UH, UH, THE, THE PUMPERS, UH, PROVIDED INPUT TO WRD AS FAR AS HOW WE WOULD COLLECTIVELY LIKE THEM TO HELP US MANAGE, UH, PFAS.

AND AT THAT TIME, WRD DEVELOPED A-P-F-A-S REMEDIATION PROGRAM.

AND OUR REMEDIATION PROGRAM ESSENTIALLY, UH, WILL HELP TO PAY FOR THE TREATMENT SYSTEM OF ANY OF THE IMPACTED PUMPERS.

SO ON, ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE THAT IAN SHOWED, WHERE ALL THESE DIFFERENT WELLS HAVE BEEN IMPACTED, SEVERAL OF THOSE PUMPERS HAD TO TAKE THEIR WELLS OFFLINE, UM, AND, AND SERVE IMPORTED WATER OR THEIR OTHER WATER SUPPLIES INSTEAD.

AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, THEN THE REVENUE FOR WRD GOES DOWN AND, AND THE RATES GO UP FOR EVERYBODY ELSE THAT'S LEFT PUMPING.

AND SO THERE IS A BENEFIT TO MAKE SURE THAT IMPACT TO PAMPERS CONTINUE TO BE ABLE TO PUMP THEIR GROUNDWATER, UM, BECAUSE THAT HELPS TO KEEP, UH, THE REPLENISHMENT RATES LOWER FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, UH, THROUGHOUT THE BASIN.

AN ADDITIONAL BENEFIT OF THAT IS, UH, THOSE PUMPERS THAT ARE IMPACTED, UH, AGAIN, TO WHAT IAN WAS SHARING, THAT THE PFAS IS MIGRATING.

AND SO AS THOSE PUMPERS THAT ARE IMPACTED, STOP THEIR PUMPING, THAT ACTUALLY, UH, MAKES IT SO THAT, UH, OTHER PUMPERS DOWNSTREAM CONTINUE TO PULL THAT PFAS FURTHER DOWN VERSUS HAVING IT PULLED OUT WHERE IT CURRENTLY IS.

AND SO IT'S A BENEFIT TO THE BASIN FOR THOSE BUMPERS TO CONTINUE PUMPING AND TREAT THAT PFAS WHERE IT'S AT TO, UH, SLOW THE SPREAD.

AND SO, UH, THAT'S WHY, UH, WD AND THE BUMPERS AGREED TO FUND THE CAPITAL COSTS OF, UH, THE, THE PFOS IMPACTED WELLS.

AND TO FUND, UH, THE APPROXIMATELY 130, UH, IMPACTED WELLS WOULD COST APPROXIMATELY $240 MILLION.

AND IT WAS AGREED UPON THAT THIS WOULD BE SPREAD ACROSS THE, THE COST OF THE REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT THAT'S PAID BY ALL PUMPERS.

AGAIN, IT IS A BENEFIT TO ALL PUMPERS, UH, FOR THOSE IMPACTED WELLS AND PUMPERS TO, TO CONTINUE PUMPING.

AND SO WE, WE AGREED TO SHARE THOSE COSTS.

UH, NOW THOUGH THAT THERE'S BEEN, UH, SEVERAL YEARS UNDER THIS, UH, INITIAL EOS REMEDIATION PROGRAM, UH, THERE'S ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT, UH, JUST LIVING THROUGH THE, THE, UH, EXPERIENCE OF SOME OF THOSE PUMPERS.

WITH THAT, THAT FUNDING PROGRAM, A LOT OF, UH, CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM ARE BEING DISCUSSED.

UH, LONG BEACH IS INVOLVED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE PUMPERS ADVISORY COMMITTEE, UH, DISCUSSING THE, THE CHANGES THAT, UH, WE COLLECTIVELY WANNA SEE TO THE, THE PROGRAM.

UH, THE, THE BIGGEST CHANGE, UH, WOULD BE THAT, UH, CONSIDERATION OF THE PAYING OF THE ONGOING O AND M COSTS.

[00:20:01]

AND SO THAT ACTUALLY EXCEEDS THE COST OF, OF CAPITAL.

AND SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT, AGAIN, THE IMPACT OF PUMPERS.

UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE GOING TO STRUGGLE TO, UH, OPERATE THOSE WELLS EVEN IF THEY OPERATE THOSE TREATMENT SYSTEMS, EVEN IF THEY'RE CONSTRUCTED BECAUSE OF THE ONGOING O AND M COSTS, AGAIN, WHICH WOULD LEAD THEM TO POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, NOT TREAT THE GROUNDWATER AND, AND JUST SWITCH OVER TO, TO IMPORTED WATER.

SO THAT'S UNDER DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW.

THE EXACT DETAILS OF HOW THAT O AND M WOULD BE PAID FOR, UH, IS, IS BEING, UH, DISCUSSED.

UH, BUT THE ESTIMATE ON THAT $500 MILLION WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY A $200 PER ACRE FOOT, UH, ADDITION TO THE REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT.

AND, UH, TO PUT THAT INTO CONTEXT, THE CURRENT REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT IS AT $480.

SO IT'S QUITE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE.

UH, BUT, YOU KNOW, TO PUT THAT ALL IN CONTEXT, AGAIN, IS TO TO CONSIDER WHAT THE COST OF IMPORTED WATER IS.

AND THAT CURRENTLY SITS AT $1,500 ACRE FOOT.

AND SO, UH, IT WOULD STILL BE LESS EXPENSIVE THAN IMPORTED WATER.

UH, AND AS THE PUMPERS ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONTINUES TO DISCUSS AND, AND, UM, FORMULATE EXACTLY HOW, UH, COLLECTIVELY WE WANT TO ADDRESS, UH, THESE COSTS, UH, I'LL, I'LL PROVIDE UPDATES TO THE BOARD.

UH, BUT, YOU KNOW, PERSPECTIVE TO TAKE, EVEN THOUGH LONG BEACH WOULDN'T DIRECTLY BENEFIT FROM THAT FUNDING RIGHT NOW AND BE PAYING TOWARDS THIS, UH, AS YAN MENTIONED, THE, THE PFAS IS MIGRATING AND, UM, LONG BEACH IS THE BIGGEST, UH, PUMPER IN, IN, UH, WEST AND CENTRAL BASIN COLLECTIVELY.

AND SO WE'D BE CONTRIBUTING TO THIS QUITE A BIT.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, UH, IF, AND MAYBE WHEN THE PFAS MAKES IT TO OUR TREATMENT AND OUR WELLS AND OUR TREATMENT PLANTS, WE WOULD BE A BENEFICIARY, UH, OF THIS AS WELL.

SO, UH, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF MORE LONG TERM PERSPECTIVE THAT WE NEED TO TAKE ON THIS FUNDING AND DEAN AND, AND COMMISSIONERS.

I, I JUST WANNA, I GUESS, UM, MENTION THAT THE, THE, THE, THE COMMITTEE'S MEANT TO BE CONVERSATIONAL.

SO IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT ANY POINT, PLEASE DO, UM, INTERJECT AND ASK QUESTIONS.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

.

WELL, I CONCLUDE MY PRESENTATION, , NOW YOU CAN'T INTERJECT THE LAST LINE.

UM, SO IN, IN MONITORING WHAT'S HAPPENING AT WRD, ARE THE DISCUSSIONS RELATED TO O AND M? MAYBE TAKE A STEP BACK.

SO THE WAY ORANGE COUNTY IS HANDLING THE PFAS SITUATION, OCWD WENT OUT AND DID THE BID FOR O AND M AND THAT ALLOWED FOR ECONOMY OF SCALE, AND THEN THEY THEN APPLIED IT TO THE DIFFERENT AGENCIES THAT ARE DEALING WITH PFAS, UM, PFAS TREATMENT.

IS THAT DISCUSSION BEING HAD AT WRD? HAVE YOU, HAVE YOU NOTICED ANYTHING LIKE THAT? SO IT'S VERY EARLY ON IN THE DISCUSSION.

WRD IS ACTUALLY ISSUING A SURVEY TO ALL THE PUMPERS TO SOLICIT THEIR INPUT FEEDBACK AS, AS FAR AS WHAT DIFFERENT PUMPERS WANT TO SEE.

UH, BUT THAT RUNS THE GAMUT.

UM, UH, SO, SO TO YOUR POINT, UH, ORANGE COUNTY HAS BEEN RUNNING A PROGRAM FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

THEY FUND 50% OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.

UH, AND, AND TO TY'S POINT, UM, OCWD TAKES POINT ON PROCUREMENT.

AND SO THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL PUMPER WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO OUT AND PROCURE A, A TREATMENT SYSTEM, OC WD HANDLE THAT UNDER A A, A LARGE PROCUREMENT.

SO ALL THOSE ARE OPTIONS.

UM, THAT'S UNDER DISCUSSION WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO FOLLOW THEIR MODEL OR MAKE TWEAKS TO IT.

IF YOU WANNA, IF WE WANNA FUND A HUNDRED PERCENT OF OM 50%, 25%, 0%, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S ALL TO BE DISCUSSED.

YEAH, I'M, I GOTTA ASK BASIC QUESTIONS HERE.

UH, FOR THE, UM, POS, IF WE EXPERIENCE THAT IN OUR WELLS, AND I THINK YEN TALKED, THERE'S SPACE AT THE TREATMENT PLANT TO PUT A TREATMENT FACILITY AT THE TREATMENT PLANT, WOULD IT BE PAID BY WRD? THEY WOULD PAY FOR THE TREATMENT PLANT AND THE OPERATION MAINTENANCE OF IT? RIGHT NOW WITH THE EXISTING PROGRAM, IT'S CAPITAL COST, NOT THE OPERATION OF MAINTENANCE.

THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

RIGHT? AND, AND YEAH.

AND CURRENTLY, DO THEY, FOR THESE PUMPERS THAT ARE EXPERIENCING THE PFAS IN THEIR WELLS, DO THEY SEND THEIR WATER SOMEWHERE ELSE? OR IS THE TREATMENT INDIVIDUAL TO THEIR GATHERING SPOTS? I MEAN, HOW DO THEY DO THAT? SO, UH, SEVERAL OF THEM HAVE INDIVIDUAL WELLS THAT DON'T CENTRALIZE TO TREATMENT.

AND SO THEY HAVE TO FIND SPACE ONSITE AT THE WELL SITE TO TREAT THAT WELL INDIVIDUALLY.

SOME HAVE SEMI DECENTRALIZED TREATMENT WHERE THEY CAN ROUTE TWO OR THREE WELLS TO ONE TREATMENT FACILITY.

UH, BUT I DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM HAVE ANYTHING NEAR WHAT WE HAVE AS FAR AS THIS MANY WELLS TO ONE CENTRAL LOCATION.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE KEY BENEFITS OF HAVING A CENTRALIZED TREATMENT FACILITY IS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO CITE MULTIPLE SMALL TREATMENTS.

IT SEEMS CERTAINLY, I MEAN, VERY EXPENSIVE TO TREAT AT THE INDIVIDUAL WELL LEVEL.

I DON'T KNOW THE VOLUME OF WATER THEY'RE PUMPING, BUT THAT SEEMS EXPENSIVE.

AND THEN

[00:25:02]

CHEMISTRY, THAT'S DEFINITELY, UM, I GUESS A THEORY YOU ARE, WE ARE SPREADING FROM THE, LIKE RECYCLED WATER.

BUT RECENT STUDIES SHOW THAT, LIKE FROM THE WASTEWATER SIDE, THERE IS, IF US IS ALREADY TAKEN OUT, THEY'RE NOT SHOWING A LOT OF PFAS COMING OUT OF THE WASTEWATER PLAN, BUT HISTORICALLY WE CAN'T GO BACK ANYMORE.

BUT THERE IS THAT THEORY THAT IT'S COMING FROM THE SPREADED WATER.

SO, SO THE PROBLEM'S GONNA CONTINUE TO GET WORSE OR AT SOME POINT IT WILL GET BETTER.

AS WE CONTINUE TO CYCLE MORE WATER THROUGH THE, UH, BASED ON THE CURRENT DATA, WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S GONNA GET WORSE.

LIKE I SAID, THE WASTEWATER PLANT, FROM THEIR DATA, IT SHOWS THAT THE PFAS COMING OUTTA WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IS NOT THERE OR NOT, NOT AS HIGH AS WE SUSPECTED, BUT IT JUST ENTERS THE GROUND THROUGH CONTAMINATION IN THE GROUND, GROUND AND SLOWLY GROUND WORKS ITS WAY INTO THE BASIN FROM LIKE SURFACE WATER OR WHATEVER.

YEAH.

SO THERE'S DEFINITELY THAT, BECAUSE PFAS IS EVERYWHERE, RIGHT? YEAH.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

GREAT QUESTIONS.

UM, THIS IS, UH, THIS IS, THIS IS GREAT REPORT.

UM, A LOT OF GREAT INFORMATION.

I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS GOING BACK TO THE REGULATORY PROCESS.

UH, FIRST, SO THE FEDERAL STANDARDS ARE, I WOULD JUST SAY THE STATE STANDARDS ARE, ARE HIGHER THAN THE FEDERAL STANDARDS, CORRECT? YES.

SO STATE CAN MAKE IT EITHER THE SAME OR MORE STRINGENT, THEY CAN GO LESS.

SO WHAT AGENCY IS THE REGULATORY AGENCY? IS THAT RESOURCES FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA? SO STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD DIVISION OF DRINKING WATER.

OKAY.

AND WITH THOSE REGULATIONS, HAS THE STATE PROVIDED ANY FUNDING TO THE LOCAL AGENCIES? STATE DOES HAVE THE STATE REVOLVING FUND THAT AGENCIES CAN APPLY, AND PART OF THAT FUNDING COMES FROM FEDERAL.

SO THAT'S WHY A LOT OF THE ASSOCIATION BASICALLY LOBBY TO GET THAT FUND FOR FEDERAL TO APPROPRIATE MORE FUNDING TO SRF.

AND FOR, FOR OUR AGENCY.

WHAT DO WE, WHAT DOES IT COST US TO MONITOR PFAS ANNUALLY? KEVIN IS ACTUALLY HERE, I MEANT IF I GIVE YOU A ROUGH NUMBER, IT'S $500 PER SAMPLE.

AND THEN FOR EACH TIME WE MONITOR, THERE HAVE TO BE, UM, STANDARD AND THE QC QC SAMPLE, UH, QA QC SAMPLES ADDITIONALLY ADDED.

SO IF OS MONITORING IS VERY EXPENSIVE.

ALRIGHT, WELL MAYBE YOU CAN GET BACK TO US ON, ON THAT BECAUSE I, I'M KIND OF BALLPARKING TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE COST.

SO FOR THE CURRENT MONITORING ORDER FOR THE YEAR OF MONITORING, WE'RE GOING THROUGH, OUR ESTIMATED COST IS ABOUT 50 TO 60 GRAND.

OKAY.

AND, UH, YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE SLIDE, THE SUMMARY SLIDE, NOT THAT, YEAH, THAT ONE.

SO, UM, THE WRD, UM, MODIFICATIONS TO PROGRAM, UM, IT'S BEING DISCUSSED, IT HAS, IT'S NOT A PROGRAM, IT'S SOLIDIFIED YET 500 MILLION OVER 20 YEARS.

IS THAT DONE? SO THE, THE, THERE IS AN EXISTING PROGRAM, OKAY.

UH, THAT THE PAYS FOR JUST THE CAPITAL COSTS.

AND AS FAR AS HOW TO FUND THOSE CAPITAL COSTS, THAT IS ACTUALLY AN ANNUAL.

UM, AS THEIR BOARD EVALUATES THEIR BUDGET EACH YEAR, THEY DECIDE HOW TO START FUNDING THAT PROGRAM.

UH, BUT THE NEW, UH, O AND M COSTS, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED YET.

AND I'D SAY OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS THEY'LL START TO TAKE SHAPE AND ULTIMATELY, UM, AN ACTION, THE WRD STAFF WILL TAKE AN ACTION TO THEIR BOARD TO DECIDE WHAT THEY WANNA OFFER.

BUT IN A LOT OF WAYS, WD STAFF IS LISTENING TO THE BUMPERS BECAUSE ULTIMATELY IT'S US THAT, THAT ARE GONNA PAY INTO REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT.

AND SO WE SHOULD HAVE A SAY AS FAR AS WHAT WE WANT.

AND SO I'M GONNA THROW YOU A, A LOB HYPOTHETICAL.

WHAT WOULD IT COST TO, TO SET UP A TREATMENT FACILITY FOR PFAS AT OUR CURRENT GROUNDWATER TREATMENT PLANT? ESTIMATED , I CAN'T ESTIMATE THAT, BUT MAYBE TY, YOU GUYS JUST VISITED YOUR BLENDER.

I THINK THEY PROBABLY HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF LIKE THE COST OF, UH, THE PFAS TREATMENT.

WELL, I'M THROWING IT OUT THERE BECAUSE IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE 500 MILLION OVER 20 YEARS IS A WHOLE LOT OF

[00:30:01]

YEAH, RIGHT.

COMPARED TO WHAT IT COSTS.

WE WENT AND, AND A NUMBER OF US VISITED THE YORBA LINDA, UH, WATER AUTHORITY A FEW WEEKS AGO, A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, AND THE FACILITY THEY HAVE THERE IS, UH, WAS WHAT, 60 MILLION? OH, 25 MILLION.

SO, BUT OVER 500 MILLION OVER 20 YEARS DOESN'T BUILD YOU A LOT OF TREATMENT CAPACITY IN MY OPINION.

YOU'RE ASKING WHAT THE SIZE OF THE PLAN WAS OR HOW MUCH THE COST, THE COST OF THE PLAN, 60 MILLION.

RIGHT.

SO I JUST WANNA PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE.

AND THIS 500 MILLION IS NOT JUST FOR LONG BEACH OR THIS REGION, THIS IS FOR THE ENTIRE WRD REGION.

SO, SO THE 500 MILLION IS JUST FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE CAPITAL, IT'S THE 240.

THAT'S EVEN LESS.

THAT'S EVEN LESS.

YES.

THAT'S EVEN LESS.

UH, BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, LONG, LONG BEACH IS JUST, WE'RE WE'RE 30,000 ACRE FEET PLUS OF 200,000 ACRE, WE'RE SIX OF ALL THE PUMPING IN ENTIRE.

UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, YOU PUT ALL THE OTHER, UH, PUMPERS TOGETHER, THEY'RE, THEY'RE MUCH SMALLER.

THERE ARE A LOT OF WELLS, BUT THEY'RE MUCH, LIN WAS QUITE BIG.

YOU SAID IT WAS 25 MILLION GALLONS.

RIGHT.

SO, SO OUR, UH, HI, I'M GONNA COUNT ON YOU FOR THE MATH.

WHAT'S, WHAT'S OUR 30,000 ACRE FEET CONVERT? 10 MILLION.

OKAY.

SO, SO WE'RE AT 10 MILLION GALLONS OF, COMPARED TO MGD, 30,000.

SO YEAH, I LOVE THESE COMPLICATED MATH QUESTIONS.

, LEMME GET MY CALCULATOR OUT.

THE LARGE PORTION OF THIS OVERALL HAS, YEAH, WE'RE THE LARGEST PUMPER IN THE BASIN.

MM-HMM .

THE GROUNDWATER TREATMENT PLANT, EVEN AT DESIGN CAPACITY, I THINK IT HAS THE DISTINCTION OF BEING THE LARGEST GROUNDWATER TREATMENT PLANT IN THE NATION.

YES.

AT 62.5 MGD MILLION GALLONS PER DAY CAPACITY.

I DON'T, I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT YOU SAW AT YOUR BELINDA IN TERMS OF, WAS IT CENTRALIZED TREATMENT, LIKE SURFACE WATER TREATMENT RULE TREATMENT PLANT? THEY HAD A SEPARATE, SEPARATE SYSTEM FOR PFAS.

YEAH, I'M TRYING TO GIVE YOU SCOPE.

THEY'RE ABOUT, THEY, THEY'RE SIZE FOR 25 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY SURFACE WATER TREATMENT.

NO, IT'S ALL GROUNDWATER.

WE HAVE A SURFACE WATER TREATMENT, PLANT TREATMENT PLANT, AND YOU WOULD PUT PFAS SOMEHOW IN THAT TREATMENT TRAIN.

SO IT WOULD REPRESENT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT, IT'S NOT IMMEDIATELY COMPARABLE TO WHAT SOME OF THE SMALL PUMPERS IN CENTRAL BASIN ARE TRYING TO ATTACH TO THEIR WELLS.

RIGHT.

SO THE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT AND SO FORTH WOULD BE A LOT LARGER, AND YET AT THE SAME TIME, IT WOULD BE COMMENSURATE IN THE MONEY BECAUSE IT WOULD BE TO TREAT AN OVERWHELMINGLY LARGER AMOUNT OF WATER IN COMPARISON TO SOME OF THE OTHER .

SO AS WE DEAL WITH OUR SCALE, IT ALSO MEANS THAT WE WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD BE PAYING FOR MOST OF THOSE FUNDS, BUT WE ARE NOT ACTUALLY TREATING IT.

UH, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

I THINK THAT THAT HELPS CLARIFY.

DID, DOES A CLARIFY THINGS FOR YOU, CHARLIE? UM, THAT HELPS CLARIFY MY, MY QUESTIONS.

I, I, I'LL JUST MAKE MY STATEMENT AND SAY THIS.

I THINK WE, IF THERE IS A WAY TO GET IN FRONT OF THIS, UM, AND SECURE THOSE FUNDS FOR THIS VERY LARGE AGENCY THAT IMPACTS, WE'LL SEE A SIZABLE CHUNK, CHUNK OF THE REGION, UM, I THINK IT WOULD BEHOOVE US TO, TO PUT A PLAN IN PLACE TO DO THAT, RIGHT.

TO START ADVOCATING, TO START PUSHING, TO GET FUNDING IN PLACE, BUT ALSO PLANNING IN PLACE TO, TO TREAT, TREAT PFAS LOCALLY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

THAT'S JUST WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE.

YEAH, UNDERSTOOD.

AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S REALLY WHY I MADE THAT, UH, ONE OF THE LAST COMMENTS IS EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T, WE WON'T PARTAKE IN THESE FUNDS NOW, WHEN WE DO, WE WILL PROBABLY, WE WILL BE THE LARGEST BENEFICIARY OF THE PROGRAM.

I, I, I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S, IT'S WISE FOR US TO SAY, WELL, WE'LL JUST WAIT UNTIL WE, WE GET A POSITIVE SAMPLE BEFORE WE CAN HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE, UM, TO DO THAT.

I MEAN, SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UM, REALIGNMENT, UH, UM, CONSOLIDATION.

ALL OF THIS NEEDS TO BE, I, I WOULD SAY THIS NEEDS TO BE PART OF THAT DISCUSSION AS WELL.

SO THAT'S WHY, LIKE IN THE CAMP CAMPUS REALIGNMENT DISCUSSION, LIKE WE'RE

[00:35:01]

ONE MORE THING, AS WE TALK ABOUT, UH, CURRENT CITY BUDGET AND IMPACTS ON LONG BEACH UTILITIES, THIS NEEDS TO ALSO BE FORWARDED AND DISCUSSED EVEN WITH OUR CITY MANAGER AND MAYOR, THE, THE THREATS FACING, YOU KNOW, WATER, UM, NOT JUST IN LONG BEACH, BUT REGIONALLY, UH, AND, AND THE, THE FLEXIBILITY OF OUR RESOURCES TO BE ABLE TO, TO, TO INVEST QUICKLY IS I THINK VERY, VERY IMPORTANT THAT I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS PRESENTATION? THANK YOU SO MUCH.

UM, ALL IN FAVOR OF RECEIVING FILE.

AYE.

AYE.

SO NEXT UP ON THE AGENDA.

I LOST MY PLACE, MAN.

ITEM NUMBER THREE

[3. 26-55785 Recommendation to receive and file a presentation regarding the inspection of sewer laterals for potential cross bores involving gas service lines and the Long Beach Public Utilities Department’s (LBPUD’s) program designed to mitigate these associated risks.       Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

IS THIS OKAY? CROSS BOARDS INVOLVING GAS SERVICE LINES AND THE LONG BEACH UTILITIES DEPARTMENT PROGRAM DESIGNED TO MITIGATE THESE ASSOCIATED RISK.

I FEEL LIKE THIS IS DEJA VU.

IF I, IF I COULD, IF I CAN START, UM, IT IS A BIT OF, IS THERE A MOTION SECOND? SORRY.

UM, IT IS A BIT OF DEJAVU.

WHEN WE, UM, PLANNED THE INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM, IT WAS INDEPENDENT OF THE CONTRACTUAL ITEM THAT WAS BROUGHT TO YOU EARLIER TODAY.

UM, IT IS A COMPONENT OF CROSS BOARD, BUT I'VE ASKED THE, UH, THE GAS TEAM TO KIND OF GO OVER THE CROSS BOARD PROGRAM IN DETAIL SO THAT, UH, YOU CAN HAVE MORE BACKGROUND AND HAVE MORE OF A DIALOGUE RELATED TO THE CROSS BOARD PROGRAM.

UM, I KNOW COMMISSIONER PARKIN ALLUDED TO, I THINK HE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT THE FIVE YEARS WAS 11 MILLION AND IT'S GONNA BE ANOTHER FIVE YEARS.

THIS IS 20 MILLION.

SO I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF THOUGHT AND A LOT OF DISCUSSION.

SO I DO WANT TO, UM, REALLY ADVOCATE THAT THIS IS A SPACE FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND THE PROGRAM AND ASK ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT, UH, YOU MAY HAVE.

ALRIGHT.

PROCEED WITH THE PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU, DANIEL.

AND I WILL NOW BE DELIVERING A PRESENTATION ON AN OVERVIEW OF THE CROSSBAR PROGRAM.

TO BEGIN, LET'S COVER THE BASIC, WHAT IS A CROSS BORDER? CROSS BORDER IS THE INTERSECTION OF UNDERGROUND SUBSTRUCTURES.

THE CROSSBAR PROGRAM FOCUSES ON LOCATING AND REPAIRING GAS AND SEWER CROSS BORDERS.

HOWEVER, IN RARE OCCURRENCES, OTHER TYPES OF CROSS BORDERS ARE ALSO FOUND, WHICH ARE REPORTED TO THE APPROPRIATE PARTIES.

THIS ILLUSTRATION HIGHLIGHTS A ACROSS BOARD WHERE A GAS PIPE HAS BOARD DIRECTLY THROUGH A SEWER LINE.

WHEN PLUMBERS USE MECHANICAL SNAKES OR ROOT CUTTERS DEGRADE TOOL SHOWN HERE TO CLEAR BLOCKAGES THE RISK PUNCTURING THE GAS PIPE, AND CREATING A HIGHLY VOLATILE GAS LEAK INSIDE THE HOME.

UH, WHY DO CROSS BOARDS OCCUR? IT MOSTLY COMES DOWN TO HOW GAS PIPELINES ARE INSTALLED.

STARTING IN THE 1980S, THE INDUSTRY ADOPTED TRENCHLESS TECHNOLOGY, SPECIFICALLY HORIZONTAL DIRECTIONAL DRILLING, ALSO KNOWN AS HDD, AND IT QUICKLY BECAME THE PREFERRED METHOD BECAUSE IT IS HIGHLY COST-EFFECTIVE AND CAUSES MINIMAL SURFACE DISRUPTION.

HOWEVER, IT ALSO SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASES THE RISK OF CREATING A CROSS.

FOR THE IMAGE BELOW ILLUSTRATES HOW HORIZONTAL DIRECTIONAL DRILLING IS UTILIZED AS FOLLOWS, TO MINIMIZE SURFACE DISRUPTION, CREWS DIG STARTING AND ENDING PITS, UM, RATHER THAN A CONTINUOUS TRENCH, AN UNDERGROUND BORING TOOL IS THEN LAUNCHED TO TUNNEL BENEATH ROADS AND LANDSCAPING.

HOWEVER, BECAUSE THIS PROCESS IS EXECUTED WITHOUT REAL-TIME, VISUAL TRACKING OF THE BORE HEAD, UM, STEERING BLINDLY THROUGH THE SOIL DRAMATICALLY INCREASES THE RISK OF STRIKING AN UNMAPPED OR UNMARKED UTILITY AND CREATING A POTENTIAL DANGEROUS CROSS BORDER.

WHAT OTHER RISK OF A GAS AND SEWER CROSSBAR? WHEN GAS AND SEWER UTILITIES ARE INVOLVED, THERE'S INCREASED RISK FOR SEWER BLOCKAGE, DEPENDING ON THE POINT OF INTERSECTION, PROPERTY DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE SEWER BLOCKAGE OR POTENTIAL GAS LEAK, OR THE GREATEST RISK, A GAS EXPLOSION LEADING TO SERIOUS INJURIES OR FATALITIES.

WHILE THE PHOTOGRAPH ON A SLIDE DISPLAYS THE AFTERMATH OF A GAS EXPLOSION NOT CAUSED BY A CROSS BORDER, NOR FROM LONG BEACH, IT'S,

[00:40:01]

SO WHAT ARE THE GOALS OF THE CROSS BORDER PROGRAM? UH, TO, TO PROTECT PUBLIC SAFETY, TO IDENTIFY AND REPAIR EXISTING GAS AND SEWER CROSS BOARDS TO ENSURE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND M GUIDELINES TO EDUCATE CUSTOMERS AND CONTRACTORS VIA SOCIAL MEDIA AND PUBLIC OUTREACH EVENTS TO SUPPORT CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT OF THE PROGRAM, LIKE UTILIZING MODERN TECHNOLOGIES AND TO OPTIMIZE THE PROGRAM'S EFFICIENCY BY TRYING TO IDENTIFY IMPROVEMENTS IN WORKFLOW PROCESSES.

WHAT DOES THE CROSS BOARD PROGRAM DO BEFORE AN INSPECTION BEGINS? FIELD CREWS DISTRIBUTE DOOR HANGERS TO PROPERTIES WITHIN PRE-SELECTED AREAS.

THE DOOR HANGERS SHOWN HERE.

WERE DESIGNING COLLABORATION WITH OUR PUBLIC AFFAIRS TEAM AND ARE ACTIVELY BEING USED IN THE FIELD.

WE SERVE AS A VITAL COMMUNICATION TOOL PROVIDING RESIDENTS WITH ESSENTIAL DETAILS ABOUT THE INSPECTION PROCESS AND THE PROGRAM ITSELF.

EACH DOOR HANGER FEATURES A QR CODE GIVING PROPERTY OWNERS IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO THE CROSSBO PROGRAM WEBPAGE FOR MORE INFORMATION.

SO ONCE THOSE DOOR HANGERS HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED, UH, THE FIELD CREWS CAN BEGIN THE INSPECTION PROCESS, WHICH INCLUDES A FEW METHODS.

THE MOST COMMON TYPE OF INSPECTION METHOD IS CALLED LATERAL LAUNCH, AND IT UTILIZES A REMOTE CONTROL SEWER CRAWLER DEVICE SIMILAR TO THAT, WHICH IS SHOWN IN THE IMAGE ON THE LEFT THERE.

UH, AND THIS DEVICE TRAVELS THE SEWER MAIN AND CONNECTED SEWER LATERALS TO RECORD CCTV FOOTAGE AS THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT ILLUSTRATES.

AND, UH, WE LIKE TO PLAY A LITTLE VIDEO JUST TO ILLUSTRATE THAT FURTHER.

SO WE'RE, UH, LOOKING THROUGH THE EYES OF THE SEWER CRAWLER DEVICE.

IT'S TRAVERSING UP A SEWER LATERAL, AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE ARE THE SEGMENTS CONNECTING EACH, I THINK, THREE FOOT CLAY PIPE.

UM, IT'S REALLY DARK IN THERE.

SO, UH, THESE CRAWLERS ARE EQUIPPED WITH VERY BRIGHT LIGHTS.

THEY CAN ONLY SEE ABOUT A FEW FEET AHEAD, THREE OR FOUR FEET.

FEET.

AND THIS ONE ENCOUNTERED A CROSS BORDER, AS YOU CAN SEE WITH THAT YELLOW GAS PIPE.

AND THIS IS OUR FIRST CONTACT USUALLY IN THE FIELD.

THANK YOU.

SO GO.

THE NEXT TYPE OF A INSPECTION METHOD IS CALLED PUSH CAMERA, AND IS TYPICALLY USED WHEN THE LATERAL LAUNCH IS UNSUCCESSFUL, USUALLY CAUSED BY OBSTACLES LIKE TREE ROOTS, SHARP TURNS, OR EVEN A CROSS BOARD LIKE WE JUST SAW.

UM, THIS METHOD UTILIZES A SEWER CAMERA THAT IS MANUALLY FED INTO THE SEWER LATERAL VIA CLEAN OUT ROOF VENT OR OTHER ACCESS POINT TO ALSO RECORD CCT UH, FOOTAGE.

AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PICTURES BELOW, THIS METHOD STARTS FROM THE PROPERTY AND PROGRESSES TOWARD THE SEWER MAIN OR WHEREVER THE LATERAL LAUNCH INSPECTION FAILED.

UM, AND THE LAST TYPE OF INSPECTION METHOD IS INTERNALLY REFERRED TO AS NO CLEAR.

THIS IS TYPICALLY UTILIZED WHEN BOTH THE LATERAL LAUNCH AND PUSH CAMERA INSPECTIONS ARE UNSUCCESSFUL.

THIS METHOD IS USED AS A LAST RESORT SINCE IT OFTEN REQUIRES VERY EXPENSIVE EXCAVATIONS AND REPAIRS.

AND NEXT WE'LL SHOW YOU A COUPLE, UH, PHOTOS FROM THE CROSSWORD PROGRAM OVER THE YEARS.

UM, THIS PHOTO HERE IS A, AGAIN, A POINT OF VIEW OF THE SEWER CRAWLER DEVICE THAT HAS IDENTIFIED A CROSSBO.

UH, NOTICE THE YELLOW PIPE PIERCING THROUGH THE CLAY PIPE HERE OF THE SEWER LATERAL.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A CROSS BOARD THAT HAS BEEN LOCATED AND EXPOSED IN PREPARATION FOR REPAIRS.

AND HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF AN EXPOSED CROSS.

IN THIS PHOTO, A PLASTIC GAS SERVICE WAS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BY A TREE CUTTER SNAKE.

THE RESIDENT OR PLUMBER MOST LIKELY TRIED TO CLEAR A SEWER BLOCKAGE BEFORE IDENTIFYING THE SOURCE OF THE BLOCKAGE.

IN THIS CASE A CROSS BOARD.

THIS IS WHY CROSSWORDS ARE SO CONCERNING.

IF THE TREE ROOT CUTTER HAD MANAGED TO PUNCTURE THE PIPE AND CAUSE A GAS LEAK, THIS COULD HAVE LED TO A POTENTIALLY CATASTROPHIC EVENT IN THE HOME.

IN THIS PHOTO, THE SEWER LATERAL IS REPAIRED AND THE GAS PIPE IS, UH, REROUTED AROUND, OH, I WENT AHEAD, SORRY.

HERE A SECTION OF SEWER LATERAL HAS BEEN CUT AND REMOVED, FREEING THE GAS PIPE, ALLOWING FOR THE GAS PIPE TO RE TO BE REPAIRED.

[00:45:01]

THIS WAS A VERY UNIQUE CASE HERE IN THIS PHOTO WHERE THE GAS PIPE HAD BORE MULTIPLE TIMES THROUGH A COMPLEX SEWER LATERAL.

THE REPAIR WAS RATHER EXPENSIVE AND EXPENSIVE AS THE ENTIRE SEWER LATERAL VISIBLE IN THE PIT HAD TO BE RECONSTRUCTED.

SURPRISINGLY, THE GAS PIPES SUFFERED NO DAMAGE.

WHERE DOES THE INFORMATION GO? FIELD CREWS COLLECT AND STORE DATA ON THE CLOUD BASE DATABASE CALLED AIRTABLE.

THIS DATA IS THEN EXTRACTED QA AND IMPORT INTO OUR GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM OR GIS FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRACK TRACKING PROGRESS AND SCOPING OUT FUTURE WORK.

AS ILLUSTRATED IN THE GI S MAP SNAPSHOT, A DETAILED COLOR CODED PRIORITY MAP TRACKS THE CROSS BOARD PROGRAMS PROGRESS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

GREEN PARCELS REPRESENT AREAS WHERE INSPECTION HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED.

THINK PARCELS INDICATE HIGH PRIORITY AREAS THAT STILL NEED TO BE INSPECTED BASED ON A HIGH PROBABILITY OF SEWER, LATERAL AND GAS SERVICE LINE INTERSECTIONS.

YELLOW PARCELS INDICATE LOWER PRIORITY AREAS DUE TO A LOW PROBABILITY OF A GAS SERVICE LINE AND SEWER LINE INTERSECTING GRAY PARCELS INDICATE AREAS EXCLUDED FROM INSPECTION DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF STEEL SERVICE LINES.

DARK SHADED PARCELS INDICATE EXACTLY WHERE THE PROGRAM HAS PHYSICALLY COMPLETED.

FIELD OPERATIONS RED DOT THE RED DOTS INDICATE CROSS BOARDS THAT WERE REPORTED, REPORTED BY CUSTOMERS, RESIDENTS, OR PLUMBERS, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN REPAIRED BY THE PROGRAM.

BLUE DOTS INDICATE CROSS BOARDS THAT WERE LOCATED AND REPAIRED BY THE PROGRAM.

SO HERE WE'VE, UH, COMPILED SOME DATA FROM 2023 TO THE PRESENT TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW KEY TRENDS.

UH, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE NUMBER OF CROSS BOARDS FOUND WAS FAIRLY HIGH IN 2023, BUT HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS.

THIS IS LARGELY DUE TO THE VARYING CONFIGURATIONS OF THE SEWER AND GAS SYSTEMS IN THE SELECTED INSPECTION AREAS.

ULTIMATELY THOUGH CROSS BOARDS REMAIN INCREDIBLY RARE WITH THE HISTORICAL PROGRAM DISCOVERY RATE OF LESS THAN, UH, 2%.

TO PUT THAT INTO PERSPECTIVE, THE ODDS OF FINDING A CROSS THIS YEAR SO FAR, UH, IS ONE IN EVERY TWO INSPECTED.

AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.

ANY QUESTIONS? THAT WAS VERY, VERY INFORMATIVE.

THANK YOU.

I WISH I'D HAVE HAD THAT PRESENTATION BEFORE THE FIRST ONE, BUT WE TOO .

I I I WOULDN'T, WOULDN'T HAVE ASKED STUPID QUESTIONS.

UM, BUT, UM, CHARLIE, DO YOU HAVE ANY JUST, UH, KIND OF FOLLOW UP TO BOTH OF THE ITEMS WE'VE HAD TODAY.

YOU HAVE 25, YOU'VE DETERMINED YOU HAVE 25,000 LEFT TO INSPECT, AND YET THAT MAP HAD A LOT OF, I THINK YOU SAID THE HIGHER PRIORITY WERE PINK OR THE LIGHTER SHADE.

HOW ARE, OR HOW DO YOU DETERMINE IN BOTH SUFFICIENT WAY TO GET THROUGH THOSE 25 AND OF THE PINK ARE SOME, UH, HIGHER PRI I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S SUPER HIGH NUMBER TO HAVE AS THE HIGH PRIORITY.

I I GET THEY'RE ALL IMPORTANT, BUT HOW DO YOU PRIORITIZE THE HIGH PRIORITY? THE HIGH PRIORITY? UM, IT, IT'S BASED ON SOME OTHER LAYERS TOO, LIKE THE SEWER.

UM, WE HAVE A LAYER WITH SEWER UTILITY INFORMATION AND OUR GAS UTILITY INFORMATION, AND WE'RE ABLE TO RUN SOME ANALYSIS NJIS TO KIND OF FIGURE OUT THE HIGHEST PROBABILITY OF INTERSECTION WITH DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS.

IT GETS PRETTY, UM, TECHNICAL.

YEAH.

AND THEN ONCE YOU START IN AN AREA, IS IT MORE EFFICIENT TO STAY IN THAT AREA AND DO AS MANY OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, AND, AND KIND OF WORK YOUR WAY ACROSS THE CITY? YEAH, WE TRY TO STAY IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, YEAH, AROUND A HUNDRED TO 200 HOMES AND JUST KNOCK THAT OUT BEFORE MOVING TO THE NEXT AREA.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

THAT'S A LOT OF, I MEAN, IT'S, IT SEEMS RARE, BUT THOSE, YOU KNOW, THAT COULD BE VERY DANGEROUS.

SO YOU GOTTA DO IT.

YEAH.

YEAH.

THIS IS A, JUST A ZOOMED IN PART OF THE CITY.

RIGHT.

BUT IF WE ZOOMED OUT, YOU WOULD SEE QUITE A FEW MORE MARKERS.