News

Pleasanton presses pause on PFAS treatment and wells rehabilitation project

Faced with rising costs, council directs staff to evaluate other options such as regional or local water providers – while still leaving project on table

The Pleasanton City Council voted unanimously last week to pause the PFAS treatment and wells rehabilitation project, which was intended to address water quality and purification, because of rising costs and other factors.

City staff recommended halting the final design of the project in order to evaluate other alternatives to address the contaminated water wells in Pleasanton such as locating a new well that isn't contaminated or sourcing out to a regional water supplier.

They said that while the treatment and rehabilitation project could still be the best possible choice, its original price-tag of $46 million including design, construction and supporting services merits further evaluation into other options.

"The PFAS and rehabilitation project is still a viable option. It behooves us to compare it to other cost comparisons, reliability, things like that, to see if there's any options that might make it more attractive and less risky for the city," said Daniel Repp, managing director of utilities and environmental services for the city.

PFAS, technically known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, have been widely used and long-lasting chemicals, components of which break down very slowly over time, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In recent years, city officials have discovered PFAS in the city's groundwater supply facilities -- specifically in the city-maintained wells -- and have been working to address the problem.

Help sustain the local news you depend on.

Your contribution matters. Become a member today.

Join

Pleasanton owns and operates three well facilities that provide approximately 20% of the city's annual water supply. The remaining annual water supply is purchased from the Zone 7 Water Agency.

"These well facilities pump the city's yearly groundwater allotment of 3,500 acre-feet, which is about 20% of the city's water supply, with the remaining purchased from Zone 7," said Todd Yamello, utilities planning manager. "The three wells also helped meet peak summer demands."

Apart from finding PFAS chemicals, the city also found that the well facilities, which Yamello said were built in the 1960s, are reaching the end of their useful lives and require rehabilitation or replacement.

In June 2021, the council authorized staff to proceed with final design for the PFAS treatment and wells rehabilitation project. The scope of work for the project was to treat and rehabilitate wells 5, 6 and 8 in Pleasanton and to create a new centralized treatment facility for PFAS treatment, disinfection and fluoridation.

"Basically all the water from the three groundwater wells would be pumped over to the treatment facility which would be located at the city's operations service center," Yamello said.

Find out what's on the ballot in Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin.

Find out what's on the ballot in Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin.

Yamello said since the meeting last summer, staff have completed 50% of the final design with 100% completion anticipated in June 2023 but due to several reasons, primarily financial uncertainty, staff asked the council to suspend the project.

One of the main reasons for the suspension is the construction cost for two wells of $5.2 million and $2.4 million, respectively, might go up by 30% due to the impact of recent inflation trends on the bidding market.

Another reason is that the city does not own or operate a water treatment plant and the PFAS treatment facility will require additional staff and have significant annual operational costs.

"Right now we are currently primarily a distributor of water," Yamello said. "Although we do have wells and we do do treatment, it is mostly around typical distribution. The PFAS project will require higher levels of treatment, additional staffing, (and) additional staffing type of requirements."

Continuing with the project would mean that Pleasanton could enter into the water treatment world, similar to Zone 7 -- something that the council will have to consider later in the future.

That shift to water treatment is another reason why staff want to pause the project. They want to assess whether getting into the water treatment business, so to speak, is the best option with the drought and contamination issues the city is facing right now.

The main question at hand is -- does Pleasanton want to get into the water treatment world and maintain local control of at least some of its water supply, or does it want to branch out and look at other options of bringing in local or regional water from elsewhere?

"The importance of water in our community and the importance of getting resolution and moving forward with a project is on our radar, it's not lost on us," City Manager Gerry Beaudin said. "We want to make sure that we're being responsive to community needs and identifying an option that allows us to move forward with creating local water supply.

But one of the main issues with this pause, even though the council unanimously approved it on Sept. 6, was the timeline aspect and how staff were not able to give the council a specific deadline on the evaluation work.

"There are a couple of options that I think we would want to look at more carefully in terms of treatment. There are companies that do this for cities and so we would want to evaluate that kind of an option," Beaudin said.

"We have a general direction about where we want to go with this study and it's really just a matter of engaging with the folks who do this for a living. I can't tell you today whether it will take three months, six months or 12 months but it will be something that we would, with council direction, get out and get a scope of work done and the work underway as quickly as possible," he added.

Councilmember Kathy Narum, who serves on the water liaison committee alongside Mayor Karla Brown, said that while she supports the pause, she wants to emphasize that the issue should now be the top priority for staff.

"I'm not going to agree to pause unless all five of us say this is our No. 1 priority and everything else, unless it's health or safety for our residents, takes a backseat. I don't care what it is," Narum said.

She said that she wants to see an outlined plan with deadlines on tasks for the evaluation so no time is wasted.

Additionally, Narum said she wants to see if there is any possibility to look at other locations outside of the contaminated area of water wells to construct a new well that doesn't have contaminated water.

Staff have already drilled a test well near the Dolores Bengtson Aquatic Center and the Pleasanton Gingerbread Preschool to look at the viability of constructing a new one. While PFAS was found in that test well, Yamello said as the city dug further down there were less contaminants, which could be information the city could use in the future.

However, Brown said that the city should look further into Zone 7's recent Aug. 31 board meeting, which showed PFAS trends underground moving west and said that there wouldn't be a point in drilling a new well if it will inevitably be contaminated.

Another main point of discussion was having Zone 7 provide 100% of the city's water in the future due to the treatment project being on hold.

Councilmember Julie Testa asked staff about a possible partnership with the water agency to supplement that 20% if the city is required, or needs, to shut down its existing wells.

"We have heard that they believe they have the ability to do that and we're waiting for a formal response back from them," Repp said.

Repp added that if the wells do shut down, Zone 7 is required to provide water to its retailers, including Pleasanton. Beaudin added that with new state advisory levels for how much contaminants can be detected in the water coming in early next year, there is a strong possibility the city will have to seek other water suppliers.

"We will likely have an issue where we will not have our well situation, our treatment situation sorted in time ... we will need water from Zone 7 to meet our peak demands of 15% to 20% that we currently get from the groundwater. So we have to figure that part out, regardless of what we do with treatment in the near-term future."

Repp said that if the city purchases the 20% of water it typically gets from its wells, it could cost roughly $3.7 million per year, which would fall to the ratepayers.

"Ultimately, water is important and so the policy question and the reason that we're posing it at this time is really because we're at the cusp of being on a path to be in the water treatment business as an organization," Beaudin said. "That's the policy question that I really wanted to bring to you all this evening is, are we comfortable being in the treatment business with pumping local groundwater at this time or do we want to look at some of these other alternatives?"

For Pleasanton resident Jill Buck, losing local water control is something she is opposed to after remembering how rich Pleasanton's water used to be.

"I think one of the things that makes me a little bit sad, and there's not one thing we can do about it, but this town used to be water-wealthy," Buck said during public comment. "There was a time, a couple of lifetimes ago, when we could water a whole field with artesian wells, poke a hole in the ground and the water bubbled up."

A front row seat to local high school sports.

Check out our new newsletter, the Playbook.

Christian Trujano
 
Christian Trujano, a Bay Area native and San Jose State alum, joined Embarcadero Media in May 2022 following his graduation. He is an award-winning student journalist who has covered stories in San Jose ranging from crime to higher education. Read more >>

Follow PleasantonWeekly.com and the Pleasanton Weekly on Twitter @pleasantonnews, Facebook and on Instagram @pleasantonweekly for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Get uninterrupted access to important local city government news. Become a member today.

Pleasanton presses pause on PFAS treatment and wells rehabilitation project

Faced with rising costs, council directs staff to evaluate other options such as regional or local water providers – while still leaving project on table

by / Pleasanton Weekly

Uploaded: Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 1:29 pm

The Pleasanton City Council voted unanimously last week to pause the PFAS treatment and wells rehabilitation project, which was intended to address water quality and purification, because of rising costs and other factors.

City staff recommended halting the final design of the project in order to evaluate other alternatives to address the contaminated water wells in Pleasanton such as locating a new well that isn't contaminated or sourcing out to a regional water supplier.

They said that while the treatment and rehabilitation project could still be the best possible choice, its original price-tag of $46 million including design, construction and supporting services merits further evaluation into other options.

"The PFAS and rehabilitation project is still a viable option. It behooves us to compare it to other cost comparisons, reliability, things like that, to see if there's any options that might make it more attractive and less risky for the city," said Daniel Repp, managing director of utilities and environmental services for the city.

PFAS, technically known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, have been widely used and long-lasting chemicals, components of which break down very slowly over time, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In recent years, city officials have discovered PFAS in the city's groundwater supply facilities -- specifically in the city-maintained wells -- and have been working to address the problem.

Pleasanton owns and operates three well facilities that provide approximately 20% of the city's annual water supply. The remaining annual water supply is purchased from the Zone 7 Water Agency.

"These well facilities pump the city's yearly groundwater allotment of 3,500 acre-feet, which is about 20% of the city's water supply, with the remaining purchased from Zone 7," said Todd Yamello, utilities planning manager. "The three wells also helped meet peak summer demands."

Apart from finding PFAS chemicals, the city also found that the well facilities, which Yamello said were built in the 1960s, are reaching the end of their useful lives and require rehabilitation or replacement.

In June 2021, the council authorized staff to proceed with final design for the PFAS treatment and wells rehabilitation project. The scope of work for the project was to treat and rehabilitate wells 5, 6 and 8 in Pleasanton and to create a new centralized treatment facility for PFAS treatment, disinfection and fluoridation.

"Basically all the water from the three groundwater wells would be pumped over to the treatment facility which would be located at the city's operations service center," Yamello said.

Yamello said since the meeting last summer, staff have completed 50% of the final design with 100% completion anticipated in June 2023 but due to several reasons, primarily financial uncertainty, staff asked the council to suspend the project.

One of the main reasons for the suspension is the construction cost for two wells of $5.2 million and $2.4 million, respectively, might go up by 30% due to the impact of recent inflation trends on the bidding market.

Another reason is that the city does not own or operate a water treatment plant and the PFAS treatment facility will require additional staff and have significant annual operational costs.

"Right now we are currently primarily a distributor of water," Yamello said. "Although we do have wells and we do do treatment, it is mostly around typical distribution. The PFAS project will require higher levels of treatment, additional staffing, (and) additional staffing type of requirements."

Continuing with the project would mean that Pleasanton could enter into the water treatment world, similar to Zone 7 -- something that the council will have to consider later in the future.

That shift to water treatment is another reason why staff want to pause the project. They want to assess whether getting into the water treatment business, so to speak, is the best option with the drought and contamination issues the city is facing right now.

The main question at hand is -- does Pleasanton want to get into the water treatment world and maintain local control of at least some of its water supply, or does it want to branch out and look at other options of bringing in local or regional water from elsewhere?

"The importance of water in our community and the importance of getting resolution and moving forward with a project is on our radar, it's not lost on us," City Manager Gerry Beaudin said. "We want to make sure that we're being responsive to community needs and identifying an option that allows us to move forward with creating local water supply.

But one of the main issues with this pause, even though the council unanimously approved it on Sept. 6, was the timeline aspect and how staff were not able to give the council a specific deadline on the evaluation work.

"There are a couple of options that I think we would want to look at more carefully in terms of treatment. There are companies that do this for cities and so we would want to evaluate that kind of an option," Beaudin said.

"We have a general direction about where we want to go with this study and it's really just a matter of engaging with the folks who do this for a living. I can't tell you today whether it will take three months, six months or 12 months but it will be something that we would, with council direction, get out and get a scope of work done and the work underway as quickly as possible," he added.

Councilmember Kathy Narum, who serves on the water liaison committee alongside Mayor Karla Brown, said that while she supports the pause, she wants to emphasize that the issue should now be the top priority for staff.

"I'm not going to agree to pause unless all five of us say this is our No. 1 priority and everything else, unless it's health or safety for our residents, takes a backseat. I don't care what it is," Narum said.

She said that she wants to see an outlined plan with deadlines on tasks for the evaluation so no time is wasted.

Additionally, Narum said she wants to see if there is any possibility to look at other locations outside of the contaminated area of water wells to construct a new well that doesn't have contaminated water.

Staff have already drilled a test well near the Dolores Bengtson Aquatic Center and the Pleasanton Gingerbread Preschool to look at the viability of constructing a new one. While PFAS was found in that test well, Yamello said as the city dug further down there were less contaminants, which could be information the city could use in the future.

However, Brown said that the city should look further into Zone 7's recent Aug. 31 board meeting, which showed PFAS trends underground moving west and said that there wouldn't be a point in drilling a new well if it will inevitably be contaminated.

Another main point of discussion was having Zone 7 provide 100% of the city's water in the future due to the treatment project being on hold.

Councilmember Julie Testa asked staff about a possible partnership with the water agency to supplement that 20% if the city is required, or needs, to shut down its existing wells.

"We have heard that they believe they have the ability to do that and we're waiting for a formal response back from them," Repp said.

Repp added that if the wells do shut down, Zone 7 is required to provide water to its retailers, including Pleasanton. Beaudin added that with new state advisory levels for how much contaminants can be detected in the water coming in early next year, there is a strong possibility the city will have to seek other water suppliers.

"We will likely have an issue where we will not have our well situation, our treatment situation sorted in time ... we will need water from Zone 7 to meet our peak demands of 15% to 20% that we currently get from the groundwater. So we have to figure that part out, regardless of what we do with treatment in the near-term future."

Repp said that if the city purchases the 20% of water it typically gets from its wells, it could cost roughly $3.7 million per year, which would fall to the ratepayers.

"Ultimately, water is important and so the policy question and the reason that we're posing it at this time is really because we're at the cusp of being on a path to be in the water treatment business as an organization," Beaudin said. "That's the policy question that I really wanted to bring to you all this evening is, are we comfortable being in the treatment business with pumping local groundwater at this time or do we want to look at some of these other alternatives?"

For Pleasanton resident Jill Buck, losing local water control is something she is opposed to after remembering how rich Pleasanton's water used to be.

"I think one of the things that makes me a little bit sad, and there's not one thing we can do about it, but this town used to be water-wealthy," Buck said during public comment. "There was a time, a couple of lifetimes ago, when we could water a whole field with artesian wells, poke a hole in the ground and the water bubbled up."

Comments

Ptown Baseball Dad
Registered user
Birdland
on Sep 12, 2022 at 5:12 pm
Ptown Baseball Dad , Birdland
Registered user
on Sep 12, 2022 at 5:12 pm

This is absolutely the number one issue facing our city going forward. Without high quality, safe drinking water, we become another Jackson, Mississippi or Flint, Michigan. Our mayor, city council and city manager need to step up and lead. Enough already about $4.8 million ++ for the Century House, $6 million ++ for another skate park and $15 million ++ to reconfigure the bandstand at Delucci Park. Last I checked, we don’t print money in Pleasanton.


Pleasanton Parent
Registered user
Pleasanton Meadows
on Sep 12, 2022 at 9:37 pm
Pleasanton Parent, Pleasanton Meadows
Registered user
on Sep 12, 2022 at 9:37 pm

I agree government should always prioritize securing infrastructure before taking on more adventurous endeavors. Air / water / roads (uhhh hmmm west Los positas) / waste / education


Stephanie
Registered user
Pleasanton Valley
on Sep 13, 2022 at 9:49 am
Stephanie , Pleasanton Valley
Registered user
on Sep 13, 2022 at 9:49 am

PTown Baseball dad took the words right out of my mouth!

What We Know about Health Effects (from EPA website)
Current peer-reviewed scientific studies have shown that exposure to certain levels of PFAS may lead to:
-Developmental effects or delays in children
-Reproductive effects such as decreased fertility or increased high blood pressure in pregnant women.
-Developmental effects or delays in children, including low birth weight, accelerated puberty, bone variations, or behavioral changes.
-Increased risk of some cancers, including prostate, kidney, and testicular cancers.
-Thyroid problems
-Reduced ability of the body’s immune system to fight infections, including reduced vaccine response.
-Interference with the body’s natural hormones.
-Increased cholesterol levels and/or risk of obesity


Kathleen Hall
Registered user
Ruby Hill
on Sep 13, 2022 at 10:50 am
Kathleen Hall, Ruby Hill
Registered user
on Sep 13, 2022 at 10:50 am

I completely agree with everything Kathy Narum said:

"I'm not going to agree to pause unless all five of us say this is our No. 1 priority and everything else, unless it's health or safety for our residents, takes a backseat. I don't care what it is," Narum said.

She said that she wants to see an outlined plan with deadlines on tasks for the evaluation so no time is wasted.

Additionally, Narum said she wants to see if there is any possibility to look at other locations outside of the contaminated area of water wells to construct a new well that doesn't have contaminated water."

My concern is, who is going to continue to make this the high priority it needs to be once Kathy Narum's term on the council is up?


BobB
Registered user
Vintage Hills
on Sep 13, 2022 at 11:15 am
BobB, Vintage Hills
Registered user
on Sep 13, 2022 at 11:15 am

Everyone stop panicking. This is not Flint Michigan or Jackson Mississippi. We are not currently being supplied contaminated water. I hope now would be a good time to revisit recycling, which was brought up in an earlier meeting. I still don't understand the opposition to that, except for from the people who want to use it as an excuse to oppose new construction.


keeknlinda
Registered user
Vintage Hills
on Sep 13, 2022 at 12:30 pm
keeknlinda, Vintage Hills
Registered user
on Sep 13, 2022 at 12:30 pm

When the $46 million price tag was initially presented for the combined PFAS and well rehabilitation projects I practically begged for separating the two, reasoning that the well rehab is a more urgent need, to be addressed before one or more of the wells fails, leaving us with contamination or reduction of available water. PFAS is a moving target. State and Federal regulations are not yet known, so project design without knowing reduction requirements makes little sense.
Additionally, our groundwater basin is multiple-faceted,with upper and lower aquifers. This was brought to light when Zone 7 presented publically some results from a study commenced under the previous council with a unanimous vote to study alternative sources for Pleasanton's water. The current council, by majority vote, prematurely pulled its $250,000 from that agreement, leaving Zone 7 holding the bag. Because it was of utmost importance as the drought dragged on, they opted to continue. Luckily on,Aug. 31 the illustrative and important maps of the aquifer were presented to the general public.
As the discussion whether to pause the two-fold project ensues, I Zoomed in, encouraging Pleasanton to get back into Zone 7's good graces so city staff can be brought up to speed on their efforts to hold back the PFAS plume and stop its westward movement. Some of the staff's remarks indicated they were unaware of certain possibilities for mitigating infiltration and there are more options than council was being apprised of.
Jackson, MS is currently suffering at the hands of a private water supplier. We must flatly and firmly refuse that suggestion in order to not risk the same ever, ever happening here. As ratepayers, we need to view Zone 7's presentation of Aug. 31, and we must insist the city collaborate with Zone 7 et al in order to be certain the information is accurate, and current, and our safe water is protected and its future ensured.


Michael Austin
Registered user
Pleasanton Meadows
on Sep 13, 2022 at 5:00 pm
Michael Austin , Pleasanton Meadows
Registered user
on Sep 13, 2022 at 5:00 pm

Who is directing city staff with agenizing items for council meetings. Is it the mayor telling the city manager what to agenize?

If that is the case, city manager and city staff should have pushed back, and in some instances they did. It appears the mayor Brown is prioritizing the agenda for council.

With placing her expensive pet projects, Century House, Skate Park, Band stand ahead of the cities need to address and spend the money on water resources.

With the three-vote majority, Arkin, Testa Brown, mayor Brown knows she can get her priorities approved ahead of the citizen's needs. Water sustains life, Century house, skate park and band stand does not sustain life.

Pleasanton drinking water priorities far exceed the mayors wasteful spending. Water priorities should be the first item on every council meeting agenda.


Robertbush81
Registered user
Mohr Park
on Sep 14, 2022 at 10:48 am
Robertbush81, Mohr Park
Registered user
on Sep 14, 2022 at 10:48 am

It seems amazing we made it this far before the water table was deemed polluted. I interpret this as it is cheaper to buy water from out of the area than spend an infinite amount of money trying to achieve a miracle in somehow stopping the continued degradation of the ground beneath us. With close to 400,000 in the drainage basin I don't know how chemicals have stayed out of the water supply all this time. If the source of the specific chemicals mentioned can be traced they should forced to foot the bill if they exist anymore and have the resources to pay.


runningguy
Registered user
Mohr Park
on Sep 16, 2022 at 10:45 pm
runningguy, Mohr Park
Registered user
on Sep 16, 2022 at 10:45 pm

Why is Pleasanton doing its own water? Why can't Zone 7 just supply everything? It seems that if Zone 7 has the facilities to already do this. WHy not let them?


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.