Board Members present: Mike Dyer, Sandra Bishop, Dorothy Anderson, and Susie Smith. Commissioner Peter Bartel was excused.

Others present: Randy Berggren, JoAnn Andersen, Ken Beeson, Cathy Bloom, Deborrah Brewer, Terry Bequette, Jay Bozievich, Steve Blair, Tom Buckhouse, Marty Douglass, Mel Damewood, Cathy Hamilton, Garry Kunkel, Kris Kendall Dick Helgeson, Roseanna McArthur, Mitch Postle, Laurie Power, Brenda Sirois, and Krista Hince of the EWEB staff; various members of the public, and Kim Kunkel, Minutes Recorder.

President Dyer called the Work Session of the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) to order.

GROUNDWATER EXPLORATION STUDY

Water Engineering Manager Mel Damewood introduced those members of the Groundwater Exploration Study team who were present. He prefaced the presentation by reviewing EWEB's near-medium-, and long-term water supply action plan related to the study.

Referring to a series of overhead displays, copies of which were distributed to the Board, Mr. Damewood and other members of the study team presented an overview of the 1999 Groundwater Exploration Study, 2000 Groundwater Exploration Study, public information process, and groundwater development schedule.

With regard to the 1999 scope of work, Water Resource Planning Analyst Brenda Sirois explained that the purposes of the 1999 Groundwater Exploration Study were to:

1. identify fatal flaws;
2. assess water quality; and
3. assess water quantity.

She said the 1999 study utilized existing data, geographical surveys, test bores/monitoring well installation, water quality sampling, and preliminary groundwater modeling. Ms. Sirois presented a brief overview of the findings related to each of the above study components.

Ms. Sirois reviewed the following conclusions of the 1999 Groundwater Exploration Study:

1. 20 MGD can be developed in the confluence area
2. One or several well fields could be developed
3. Primary effect on McKenzie River -- not Willamette River
4. Little effect on SUB or Coburg wells
5. Water quality generally meets OHD requirements

--Aluminum, iron, and manganese slightly elevated

• Preliminary modeling indicates a maximum of 40 MGD could potentially be developed using a 3-well field configuration

With regard to the 2000 Groundwater Exploration Study, HDR representative Steve Gillette said the primary project objectives were to:

1. provide EWEB with clearly defined strategic options for using groundwater as emergency and/or supplemental supply;
2. develop water treatment and/or blending strategies that may be required to minimize impacts to customers;
3. continue compliance with State & Federal water quality regulations;
4. identify proposed locations for test and/or production well(s);
5. provide pre-design engineering for well field and infrastructure;
6. develop facilities construction cost estimates; and
7. review operation strategies for using groundwater.

With regard to the scope of the 2000 Study, Mr. Gillette said the study was divided into two phases: 1) Data collection, water sampling, and analysis (complete by mid-August 2000); and 2) engineering analysis and preliminary design (complete by December 31, 2000).

Mr. Gillette reviewed the "deliverables" of each phase, as follows:

Phase 1:

1. Assessment of EPA and DOH water quality regulations
   • Summaries of water quality results and details of corrosion scale morphology and treatability lab test results
2. Analysis of treatment and/or blending scenarios
3. Results of hydraulic analysis and well pumping protocol
4. Preliminary environmental, zoning and permitting reviews
5. Planning level facilities cost estimates

Phase 2:

1. Proposed well field layout and preliminary well design
2. Preliminary treatment and/or blending facilities plans
3. Pre-design level cost estimates of proposed facilities
4. Recommendations on operations or control strategies
5. Board and stakeholder presentation of findings (if required)

With regard to the public information process related to the Groundwater Exploration Study, EWEB's External Communications Coordinator Cathy Hamilton explained that EWEB's goal was to provide information that clarifies why an alternative source of water is important and, specifically, why groundwater best fits community needs. She said identified issues related to public information regarding the study include:

1. the extent to which public opinion may play a role in the decision-making process regarding use of groundwater; and
2. Whether groundwater was an operational approach necessary to meet EWEB's water supply commitments.

Ms. Hamilton said the recommended approach to providing Groundwater Exploration Study public information was that straight-forward information be provided in public information sessions and other media to educate the public as to why groundwater is an important strategy in EWEB's Water Supply Plan. She said EWEB would conclude the series of information sessions with a public hearing prior to Board action.

Ms. Hamilton said public information would take place in October. She said the Board will have been updated on the results of the 2000 work, and information regarding the study findings could then be released.

Commissioner Smith said she was prepared to review and assess the pending study results and issue a decision based upon technical data. She said that, given the previous public involvement and input on groundwater issues raised during the Water Resource Plan process, she recommended that additional public involvement be limited to the provision of information. The other Board members agreed with Commissioner Smith's recommendation.

Mr. Damewood presented an overview of EWEB's groundwater development schedule, noting that construction was scheduled to begin in 2006 and the system would likely be "on-line" in 2007.

Vice President Bishop inquired as to the likely duration of a land use challenge. Consultant Philip Farrington responded that such a challenge could take a year or more to resolve. Vice President Bishop suggested accelerating the land acquisition portion of the study in the event that such challenges take place.

The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.

_____________________________________ ______________________________________

Assistant Secretary President