Loading...
Item 4.1 - WQIP Preparation Cost-Share Agrmts for Los Penasquitos & San Dieguito WatershedsG`� { OF POlYr9r City of Poway �yF Ca '- T HE , C�Va COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT n' ..oIN T APPROVED APPROVED AS AMENDED O (SEE MINUTES) DENIED O REMOVED O CONTINUED RESOLUTION NO. DATE: January 21, 2014 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Penny Riley, City Manager,�Ml) INITIATED BY: Robert J. Manis, Director of Development Services Steve Crosby, City Engineer SL Steven E. Strapac, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Water Quality Improvement Plan Preparation Cost -Share Agreements for Los Penasquitos and San Dieguito Watersheds Summary: The latest National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (Board) requires municipalities and agencies to participate in the development of Water Quality Improvement Plans (WQIP) for each watershed in their jurisdiction. Staff is seeking approval to enter into cost -share agreements with other municipalities and agencies in the two watersheds that Poway lies within for the preparation of the WQIP's. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council: 1) Approve the WQIP Cost -Share Agreements for the Los Penasquitos (Attachment "A ") and San Dieguito (Attachment "B ") Watersheds; 2) Authorize the City Manager to execute both cost -share agreements; and 3) Appropriate $152,637 from the Unappropriated General Fund balance (100 -8912) to the Water Quality Improvement Plan multiyear program budget. Background: The Board adopted Order No. R9- 2013 -0001, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (Permit) at its May 8, 2013 meeting. This permit requires all municipalities and agencies to cooperatively develop WQIP's that identify specific water quality issues within their respective watersheds, and develop specific strategies for improving water quality. The City of Poway lies within the Los Penasquitos and San Dieguito watersheds. The other jurisdictions that are also located within these two watersheds include: 1 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 WQIP Cost -Share Agreements January 21, 2014 Page 2 Findings: The City of San Diego is the "lead" agency for both watersheds and will front the entire cost associated with the development of the WQIP's. The City of San Diego will then invoice the cost -share participants for reimbursement. The total cost for the preparation of the two WQIP's is $1,143,601. Of that, Poway's share is $152,637. It is anticipated that the majority of these funds will be expended in 2013 -14, with smaller amounts to be paid in 2014 -15 and 2015 -16. The share allotted to each co- permittee is based on a formula that divides the total cost as follows: 45% based on urbanized land area, 45% based on the population from the 2010 census, and 10% divided equally. The WQIP's will be the "overarching" documents over the Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Plan (JURMP), and will contain adaptive- management requirements, along with specific water quality improvement strategies. Fiscal Impact: Approval of staffs recommendation authorizes the appropriation of $152,637 from the Unappropriated General Fund balance (100 -8912) to the Water Quality Improvement Plan multiyear program budget. Environmental Review: This action is not subject to review under the 2014 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Public Notification: None. Attachments: A. Los Penasquitos Cost -Share Agreement B. San Dieguito Cost -Share Agreement WengserOAgenda Reports \14 Reports \WQIP Agreements \WQIP Agenda Report - Final (Strapac) 1 -21 -14 2 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 COST -SHARE AGREEMENT Pelnasgluitos Watershed Management Area San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. 119- 2012 -0033 and Order No. R9- 2013 -0001 COMPREHENSIVE LOAD REDUCTION PLAN AND WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN NOVEMBER 5, 2013 This Cost Share Agreement (AGREEMENT), entered into by and among the Cities of San Diego, Del Mar, and Poway, the County of San Diego, and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) (hereinafter collectively called PARTIES and individually called PARTY) establishes the responsibilities of each PARTY with respect to carrying out collaborative activities in the Penasquitos Watershed Management Area (WATERSHED) to support compliance with San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board ( SDRWQCB) Resolution No. R9- 2012 -0033, Amending the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9) to incorporate the Total Maximum Daily Load for Sedimentation in Los Penasquitos Lagoon (hereinafter called the SEDIMENT TMDL), and Resolution No. R9- 2013 -0001, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) Draining the Watersheds Within the San Diego Region (hereinafter called the MS4 PERMIT). WHEREAS, the SDRWQB adopted Resolution No. R9- 2012 -0033 approving an amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin to incorporate the SEDIMENT TMDL on June 13, 2012; and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that the State Water Resources Control Board will approve the SEDIMENT TMDL during the term of this AGREEMENT; and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that the SEDIMENT TMDL will be approved by the California State Office of Administrative Law and become effective during the term of this AGREEMENT; and WHEREAS, the SDRWQCB has determined that the responsible parties under the SEDIMENT TMDL are the PARTIES, as well as certain Phase 11 Small MS4 NPDES Penasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 1 of 12 3 of 99 Attachment A January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 permittees, general construction storm water NPDES permittees, and general industrial storm water NDPES permittees; and, WHEREAS, the SDRWQCB has determined that only the PARTIES, a subset of the responsible parties under the SEDIMENT TMDL, are required to submit a Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan (CLRP); and, WHEREAS, the PARTIES are required by the SEDIMENT TMDL to submit a CLRP within 18 months after the effective date of the SEDIMENT TMDL; and WHEREAS, the CLRP must outline a proposed program of sediment control actions to meet the PARTIES' share of the combined Waste Load Allocation in the SEDIMENT TMDL, and must include a coordinated monitoring plan; and WHEREAS, the SDRWQCB adopted Order No. R9- 2013 -0001 issuing the MS4 PERMIT to the Phase I MS4s in the San Diego Region on May 8, 2013; and WHEREAS, the SDRWQCB has determined that the responsible Copermittees for the WATERSHED under the MS4 PERMIT are the Cities of San Diego, Del Mar, and Poway, and the County of San Diego ( COPERMITTEES); and, WHEREAS, the MS4 PERMIT requires the COPERMITTEES to develop a Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) for the WATERSHED; and WHEREAS, the MS4 PERMIT requires the WQIP to assess priority receiving water quality conditions associated with MS4 discharges, develop. strategies to improve receiving water quality conditions associated with MS4 discharges, develop a monitoring and assessment program, and implement adaptive management; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES recognize that sediment is likely to be one of the priority receiving water conditions associated with MS4 discharges and thereby anticipate that the CLRP will be incorporated into the WQIP and that the CLRP and WQIP will substantially overlap, such that incorporating both planning efforts into this AGREEMENT is the most efficient and cost - effective approach; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed to work together to fulfill the CLRP requirements of the SEDIMENT TMDL and the COPERMITTEES have agreed to work together to fulfill the WQIP development requirements of the MS4 PERMIT; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES recognize that expenditures will be needed to develop the CLRP and WQIP for the WATERSHED over the term of the AGREEMENT. The cost will be shared equitably among the PARTIES as indicated in Section 4; and, Penasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 2 of 12 4 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed upon the cost estimates and scope of work as described in EXHIBITS 1, 2, 3, and 4; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed to recognize the City of San Diego as the PARTY LEAD under this AGREEMENT, and the City of San Diego agrees to provide project management and contract administration services for the PARTIES, including hiring mutually agreed upon consultants to perform the identified scopes of work in EXHIBITS 2, 3 and 4 per the cost estimate described in EXHIBIT 1; and WHEREAS, each of the PARTIES has an Americans With Disabilities Act compliance program that substantially complies with the PARTY LEAD's Americans With Disabilities Act Compliance /City Contracts requirements set forth in Council Policy 100 -04, adopted by San Diego Resolution R- 282153 and incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the PARTIES hereto mutually agree as follows: (1) PURPOSE: This AGREEMENT is entered into for the purpose of outlining the responsibilities of the PARTIES including funding for collaborative activities associated with the development of a CLRP that complies with the SEDIMENT TMDL and a WQIP that complies with the MS4 PERMIT in the WATERSHED. Activities are described in detail in EXHIBITS 2, 3 and 4. 2() TERM: The term of this AGREEMENT shall commence on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES, and shall continue until December 31, 2015. (3) PARTY RESPONSIBILITIES AND PARTICIPATION: A. RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTY LEAD: The City of San Diego incurs the responsibility of overall project management, solicitation and administration of consultant contracts, submittal of required work products to the SDRWQCB, and acting as a liaison to the SDRWQCB on behalf of the PARTIES. B. RESPONSIBILITIES OF ALL PARTIES: Each PARTY agrees to participate in collaborative efforts by assigning one (1) person to serve as the PARTY's representative to participate in meetings (at least 80% of all meetings), collaborate on developing strategies, participate in decision making, and review work products and submittals pursuant to the schedules in EXHIBITS 2, 3 and 4. Further, analyses performed as part of this AGREEMENT, and subsequent PeFiasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 . Page 3 of 12 5 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 conclusions, findings, and recommendations developed as a result of the analyses, will be completed using known relevant and acceptable water quality data. Each PARTY agrees to supply the PARTY LEAD with data associated with its jurisdiction (e.g., water quality data, rainfall data, land use data, etc.) within the deadlines indicated in EXHIBITS 3 and 4. C. CONSENSUS OF PARTIES: The PARTY LEAD agrees to make a good faith effort to facilitate consensus among the PARTIES before finalizing MANDATORY GROUP DELIVERABLES under this AGREEMENT. If consensus is not reached, the PARTY LEAD may make final decisions regarding MANDATORY GROUP DELIVERABLES, except for WQIP content that presents direct commitments to implement projects or studies that would require funding from a PARTY to implement, or information in the WQIP that directly presents costs for another PARTY, in which cases the impacted PARTY may make final decisions on those portions of the MANDATORY GROUP DELIVERABLES. MANDATORY GROUP DELIVERABLES are identified in the WQIP Table of Contents in EXHIBIT 2. D. OPTIONAL PARTY- SPECIFIC DELIVERABLES: Each PARTY that has elected to participate in the OPTIONAL PARTY- SPECIFIC DELIVERABLES assumes full authority to make decisions associated with their respective PARTY- SPECIFIC DELIVERABLES. OPTIONAL PARTY - SPECIFIC DELIVERABLES are identified in the WQIP Table of contents in EXHIBIT 2. If any PARTY is not satisfied with an OPTIONAL PARTY - SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE prepared under this AGREEMENT, then that PARTY may, at its own cost and expense, develop and submit separately that PARTY's own version of all or part of the OPTIONAL PARTY- SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE to the PARTY LEAD by 5:00 p.m. the day before the OPTIONAL PARTY- SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE is due to the SDRWQCB, for inclusion in the WQIP. Notwithstanding a PARTY's dissatisfaction with a deliverable prepared under this AGREEMENT or submission of a PARTY's own version of all or part of a deliverable, or both, each PARTY shall remain responsible for the payment of its share of costs for the development of the CLRP, the WQIP, and each PARTY - SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE applicable to the PARTY as set forth in Section 4. (4) PROGRAM BUDGET AND COSTS: The cost of developing the CLRP and WQIP will not exceed $571,015 for Fiscal Year 2014, $111,234 for Fiscal Year 2015, and $30,386 for Fiscal Year 2016. The costs will be shared as shown in EXHIBIT 1 and are based on a formula of 45% land area, 45% population (2010 Census data), and 10% Pehasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 4 of 12 6 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 equal division fee for each PARTY contributing storm water discharges to the WATERSHED. (5) PAYMENTS: Each PARTY shall pay its share of expenses within 90 days of receipt of an invoice from the PARTY LEAD. An invoice for the above TOTAL cost -share amount shall be sent to each PARTY no later than May 31 of each year the AGREEMENT is in effect. Funds collected and not expended at the end of the project shall be refunded to each PARTY. (6) NON - COMPLIANCE WITH AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS: Any PARTY that fails to comply with the conditions of this AGREEMENT shall be solely liable for any penalties lawfully assessed on that PARTY resulting from such non - compliance. Failure to comply with AGREEMENT conditions within specified timelines shall constitute non- compliance with the AGREEMENT. (7) AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT: This AGREEMENT may be amended only by consent of all the PARTIES. Any amendment shall be effective when authorized in writing and signed by the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. (8) GOVERNING LAW: This AGREEMENT shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. If any provision or provisions shall be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the validity, legality, and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. In addition, each PARTY agrees to comply with all federal, state and local laws and ordinances applicable to the work to be performed under the terms of this AGREEMENT. (9) CONSENT AND BREACH NOT WAIVER: No term or provision hereof shall .be deemed waived and no breach excused, unless such waiver or consent shall be in writing and signed by the PARTIES to have waived or consented. Any consent by any PARTY to, or waiver of, a breach by the other, whether expressed or implied, shall not constitute consent to, waiver of, or excuse for any other different or subsequent breach. (10) DISPUTES: The PARTIES agree to mediate any dispute prior to filing suit or prosecuting suit against the other parties. At least one mediation session of one day's duration with an agreed -upon mediator shall be held prior to any PARTY filing any suit or action with regard to this AGREEMENT; the mediation costs shall be shared equally by the PARTIES participating in the mediation. In the event suit is brought upon this AGREEMENT to enforce its terms, each PARTY shall be responsible for their own attorneys' fees and costs. Penasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 5 of 12 7 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 (11) LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY: Each PARTY to this AGREEMENT (1) shall retain its legal responsibility to comply with the SEDIMENT TMDL and MS4 PERMIT; and (2) shall pay all fines, penalties, and costs which may arise out of such PARTY's non- compliance with the SEDIMENT TMDL and/or MS4 PERMIT. The PARTIES acknowledge and agree that participation in this AGREEMENT does not admit or create any liability or responsibility as a discharger for any draft or potential future TMDLs. (12) APPLICATION OF PRIOR AGREEMENTS: This AGREEMENT constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter; all prior agreements, representations, statements, negotiations, and undertakings are superseded hereby. (13) TERMINATION: Any PARTY may terminate this AGREEMENT by giving written notice to the other parties no less than 30 days prior to the effective date of termination. Termination of this AGREEMENT does not release any PARTY for obligations of the SEDIMENT TMDL or MS4 PERMIT, nor does it release the PARTY from its financial responsibilities as outlined in Section 4 of this AGREEMENT. Upon termination, the terminating PARTY shall pay its cost share in full. (14) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: The obligation of each PARTY is limited to the funds appropriated for this AGREEMENT as set forth in Section 4 above. Entering into this AGREEMENT shall not be construed as obligating the PARTIES to future payment of money in excess of appropriations authorized by law. (5) EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT: This AGREEMENT may be executed in counterpart and the signed counterparts shall constitute a single instrument. (16) ENCUMBRANCE: By reason of constraints in California law and the California Constitution, Caltrans encumbers an amount not to exceed $21,063 as its portion of the shared cost and no further funding will be available to address the Caltrans obligations assumed under this AGREEMENT unless this Section is amended by Caltrans to reflect a new enhanced funding limit. Caltrans funds are to be invoiced once work is complete as required by California Law. Caltrans funds are subject to legislative appropriation and availability of funds. 07) RIGHT TO AUDIT: Each PARTY retains the right to review and audit, and the reasonable right of access to other PARTIES' respective premises to review and audit the PARTIES' compliance with the provisions of this AGREEMENT [PARTY's Right]. The PARTY's Right includes the right to inspect and photocopy same, and to retain Penasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 6 of 12 8 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 copies, outside of the PARTIES' premises, of any and all records, including any and all books, records, and documents, related to this AGREEMENT with appropriate safeguards, if such retention is deemed necessary by the auditing PARTY in its sole discretion. This information shall be kept by the auditing PARTY in the strictest confidence allowed by law. Penasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 7 of 12 9 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: Date: City of San Diego HEREBY APPROVE the form and legality of the foregoing Agreement this day of , 2013. Jan I. Goldsmith, City Attorney By: Deputy City Attorney DATE Penasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 8 of 12 10 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: For the County of San Diego Date: Approved as to Form County Counsel Date Signature, Printed Name: John M. Pellegrino Title: Director of Purchasing and Contracting Signature Printed Name: James O'Day Title: Senior Deputy County Counsel Pehasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 9 of 12 11 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: Date: STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation Bruce April Deputy District Director, Environmental Division Pehasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 10 of 12 12 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: Date: Approved as to Form City of Del Mar Counsel Date City of Del Mar Signature Pehasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 11 of 12 13 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: Date: Approved as to Form City of Poway Counsel Date City of Poway Signature Pehasquitos Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan and Water Quality improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 12 of 12 14 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Exhibit 1 Cost Share 15 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 M O 10 10 16 of 99 Q V d U7 d A 0 L !"1 � m �Q v: er m �e�om o ej r � e+i e•i M S omm °og M agM mg N H N �O pp .O 10 a8D o O m Cf . N co O m A p 2 w � m �Q v: er m �e�om $ a erg m M S omm °og O m p agM mg N H N �O pp .O 10 a8D O m Cf N O m A p Nog d Fl N O N N ey ^N$ D ¢ p V d� L� N O � a N akin e7aZ N � J � m �Q v: er m �e�om $ erg m M S omm °og O m p agM mg N H N �O pp .O 10 a8D O m Cf N O O O m N O U p Nog d Fl N N o ^N$ D ¢ p V O M i° vi akin 2f rn m M M 0 0 0 o� O 0 N p e N t4 O N A � w A N � Z rl � c� v O � m m �e�om $ m m e� .00 omm °og O m p agM mg N H N �O pp .O 10 a8D O m Cf N O O O m N O U p Nog O � � Fl N N ^N$ M �mr O M C � akin moo 7i ~ q rn $ 0 3 w voo 10 n eN. tl° .ID eN! a�ej p�p S' 2 m G °{ eemj po �e�yy $g O c� FL fV �' o QQQ o °o S Ln a a �oeogg � .c n a w� z u a w� ZZ .aa Q � zQeogeQo � o O N Q in G y N "affil eo o � January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 M C U1 rgj P6 O En I� W C) N �O O O e-+ N N iV ►y ,e e ae r y� yq Ln rN-,4 U a N 0 O Ul M M 0 c M M Q�� V H Cr C N Oq M EA EA ER in in 0 N C--1 p F° °o� n°ogF' 0 LA 0�0� pNppp ER Ki N Od+ EA ER a O O e-+ N N Cl) q Ln O O N 0 O 0 P7 °o co F 0 .a �r It N No cli COO � N O O a0 ppO[1 0 0 C0O a) a O O co W a 'o 0 Occoo0) a a) C6 0 0 0coo� aaoN .o M (O N G r r O CO N O C M N O O 0 CO� r N C b CO M C cp r a) N N _O O O O CP m O) N M Q O O fffVVV NCO W N O co N O CO ti a) 0 0 0400 W (d t C6 O O J O a�nny,� )`duo N 0 g g Q m o COO' COn r N m r M n 0 9W)ti N o o C:) 0 _ °o r°n n It Y 0 0 ° o 0d) V COO .V.r �CM- r-- r,- y O N d 0 to 0) O c0 CO c C r CID OO M co QC600 :.1 v CO 0O O ) o v Y OCnMM > iV a COO W W 17 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 iV ►y 0 t y� yq EA EA Ca 0 O Ul Ln Q 0 c M M Q�� V C1 Cr C N Oq M EA EA ER in in 0 Q o R� 0 Cl) q Ln O O N 0 O 0 P7 °o co F 0 .a �r It N No cli COO � N O O a0 ppO[1 0 0 C0O a) a O O co W a 'o 0 Occoo0) a a) C6 0 0 0coo� aaoN .o M (O N G r r O CO N O C M N O O 0 CO� r N C b CO M C cp r a) N N _O O O O CP m O) N M Q O O fffVVV NCO W N O co N O CO ti a) 0 0 0400 W (d t C6 O O J O a�nny,� )`duo N 0 g g Q m o COO' COn r N m r M n 0 9W)ti N o o C:) 0 _ °o r°n n It Y 0 0 ° o 0d) V COO .V.r �CM- r-- r,- y O N d 0 to 0) O c0 CO c C r CID OO M co QC600 :.1 v CO 0O O ) o v Y OCnMM > iV a COO W W 17 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 iV ►y 0 y� yq EA EA Ca 0 O u Q 0 H M Q�� V C O N Oq M o n 0 0 o R� 0 n Cl) q Ln O O N 0 O 0 P7 °o co F 0 .a �r It N No cli COO � N O O a0 ppO[1 0 0 C0O a) a O O co W a 'o 0 Occoo0) a a) C6 0 0 0coo� aaoN .o M (O N G r r O CO N O C M N O O 0 CO� r N C b CO M C cp r a) N N _O O O O CP m O) N M Q O O fffVVV NCO W N O co N O CO ti a) 0 0 0400 W (d t C6 O O J O a�nny,� )`duo N 0 g g Q m o COO' COn r N m r M n 0 9W)ti N o o C:) 0 _ °o r°n n It Y 0 0 ° o 0d) V COO .V.r �CM- r-- r,- y O N d 0 to 0) O c0 CO c C r CID OO M co QC600 :.1 v CO 0O O ) o v Y OCnMM > iV a COO W W 17 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 0 Ao Ca 0 O u Q 0 H M A V H M Oq M o n 0 0 o R� 0 n N Od+ a Cl) q Ln O O N 0 O 0 P7 °o co F 0 .a �r It N No cli COO � N O O a0 ppO[1 0 0 C0O a) a O O co W a 'o 0 Occoo0) a a) C6 0 0 0coo� aaoN .o M (O N G r r O CO N O C M N O O 0 CO� r N C b CO M C cp r a) N N _O O O O CP m O) N M Q O O fffVVV NCO W N O co N O CO ti a) 0 0 0400 W (d t C6 O O J O a�nny,� )`duo N 0 g g Q m o COO' COn r N m r M n 0 9W)ti N o o C:) 0 _ °o r°n n It Y 0 0 ° o 0d) V COO .V.r �CM- r-- r,- y O N d 0 to 0) O c0 CO c C r CID OO M co QC600 :.1 v CO 0O O ) o v Y OCnMM > iV a COO W W 17 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Ao Ca 0 O u Q U cn A V Cl) q Ln O O N 0 O 0 P7 °o co F 0 .a �r It N No cli COO � N O O a0 ppO[1 0 0 C0O a) a O O co W a 'o 0 Occoo0) a a) C6 0 0 0coo� aaoN .o M (O N G r r O CO N O C M N O O 0 CO� r N C b CO M C cp r a) N N _O O O O CP m O) N M Q O O fffVVV NCO W N O co N O CO ti a) 0 0 0400 W (d t C6 O O J O a�nny,� )`duo N 0 g g Q m o COO' COn r N m r M n 0 9W)ti N o o C:) 0 _ °o r°n n It Y 0 0 ° o 0d) V COO .V.r �CM- r-- r,- y O N d 0 to 0) O c0 CO c C r CID OO M co QC600 :.1 v CO 0O O ) o v Y OCnMM > iV a COO W W 17 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 �14D Rfll ��Wyr F�1 04 OaQ CYV l CYN 0) N •*d X67 0 Q4 W 0 (N N O 0�7 RI v �i 0 a 18 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 d v T U) M ',4 �° CD LO Fl -4 VO W (V f O '0 M app Q V s a 0 O H ��1�00 r ((D (31 O s� Q [� C L�np d (fl O Efl (y O 'M rn 00 18 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 d v T O w �° 00 LO N,° o f O C] ift app Q V s a 0 oD r ((D (31 O s� Q av o O 18 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 d v T O d W �° 00 LO N,° o d O C] ift cn Q V s a 0 oD r ((D (31 O s� av o O 0) rn 00 e o M o oQ CO w d N01, 00. [V N id o� o c: rn o 0 N (D - O R-, O aD N N � O C N O O I CD CD � 'a L r r v (n M 18 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 O v T O w �° 00 LO N,° O d O C] ift cn Q V a 0 oD r ((D (31 O s� av o O 0) _O(OD Y 00 e o ° o oQ w N ["1. 00. M O G►f1 o c: rn o 0 N (D - O R-, O aD N N � O C N O O � O (D n .NN� C T 0 0 (n M NC) [V M � rr (OD a° 00 00 h CA C-4 viv 18 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 v T O ac�ppi4 O O d C] C cn Q V 18 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 v T O ac�ppi4 O N .01 T C T Y O 0 oD r ((D (31 O av o O 0) _O(OD Y 00 Cl) m 0 v W 1 O O � O O 0 th p T a 00 N 8to co N (D - O O aD N N � O 0 0 N O O � O (D n .NN� C T 0 0 NC) N (OD 00 00 h CA C-4 viv � W O(OD T ( T 0 s ( O (QD N O f0 1+ T T Q O O m oto n T a; 00 0? O (0f1 h toD N � O n T C O '0 O Mou1n ((D O O O o t ato ti y o o QQ t°(1 n ca (^D °o X o O O O 0 0 0 100 N- 7 ((DD O o U o C 00 tit (On v T � ti a N D1 �NO C' d O O y 00 (p y 7 CO W :OO(D C UT00 CO (n C r 00 LO J �7 to " a C9�a0 p [¢r O �+ pawrn Z N Z N ar000 LO co 4M 0 O N- 0 0 U iV i : ' (0D O-i W 18 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Exhibit 2 Table of Contents 19 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Scope of Work: WOIP Table of Contents Los Peflasquitos Watershed Management Areas Section Content Consultant Consultant Task Deliverable Type Caltrans Included Section 1. Introduction 1.1 WQIP Purpose Discuss the purpose and goal of the WQIP based on the Permit, and WQIP development process including public AMEC Task 3 participation Mandatory 1.2 Watershed Provide the spatial context of the WQIP. Include a GIS Management Area map of the WMA, sub - watersheds, and jurisdictional Group Yes boundaries. This will include an overall description of the AMEC Task 3 Deliverable area including LU categories (percentages), vegetation cover, and other pertinent information. 1.3 WQIP Organization Describe the organization of the document identifying the AMEC Task 3 correspondia Permit requirements Section 2. Identification of Priority Water Quality Conditions 2.1 Assessment of Compile data from RPs and public. Summarize Clean Receiving Water Water Act 303(d) list, LTEA Section 2, CLRP Section 3, AMEC Task 2 Conditions (B.2.a) and WURMP, JURMP, and Monitoring Annual Reports. Address considerations given in B.2.a. 1 -9 . 2.2 Assessment of Compile data from RPs and public. Summarize LTEA Impacts from MS4 Section 2, CLRP Sections 4 and 5, and WURMP, JURMP, AMEC Task 2 Discharges (B.2.b) and Monitoring Annual Reports. Address considerations given in B.2.b. (1-6). Mandatory Group 2.3 Identification of Use information in 2.1 and 2.2 to develop a list of priority Priority Water water quality conditions by sub - watershed. Describe the Deliverable No Quality Conditions conditions including (B.2.c(1)(a -e)): (B.2.c) a Beneficial use(s) o Geographic extent AMEC Task 2 ® Temporal extent o Copermittees with MS4s discharges that may cause or contribute to the priority water quality condition • Assessment of the adequacy of monitoring data and highlight data gaps. Section 3. Identification of MS4 Sources of Pollutants and/or Stressors 3.1 Identification of Identify known and suspected sources of storm water and Known and non -storm water pollutants or other stressors associated Suspected Sources with MS4 discharges that cause or contribute to the (B.2.d) highest water quality conditions specified under B.2.c (Section 2.3). Identification will consider: • Pollutant generating facilities • Location of the MS4 AMEC Task 2 • Other know and suspected sources Mandatory • Review of available data Group • Adequacy of available data q y Deliverable Yes Section 3.1 will summarize and consolidate the existing source inventory in LTEA Section 3.3, CLRP, and other available references. 3.2 Prioritization of Describe the prioritization process and summarize and MS4 Sources and consolidate the priority sources and stressors from Section AMEC Task 2 Stressors (B.2.d) 3.1 according to the CLRP Section 3.4, et. al., the LTEA, and other available references. 3.3 Summary of MS4 Section 3.3 will summarize the priority sources and AMEC Task 2 Optional Page l of 4 20 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Scope of Work: WOIP Table of Contents Los Peflasguitos Watershed Management Areas Sources by stressors from Section 3.2 according to jurisdiction. Party- Jurisdiction Specific Deliverable Section 4. Water Quality Improvement Goals, Strategies, and Schedules 4.1 Watershed • Final numeric goals to be achieved in the MS4 Management Area discharges for the highest priority water quality Numeric Goals conditions. (B.3.a(1)) o Interim numeric goals capable of demonstrating Tetra -Tech Task 4 Mandatory Group incremental progress toward achieving the final Deliverable numeric goals in the MS4 discharges. a Schedule for measuring progress toward achieving the interim and final numeric goals. 4.2 Jurisdictional ■ Description of strategies and/or activities for each Water Quality jurisdictional runoff management program Improvement component. Strategies ■ Circumstances or conditions when and where the Optional (13.3.b(1)) strategies or /activities should be or will be Tetra -Tech Task 4 Party implemented. Specific • Monitoring, information collection, special studies, Deliverable and/or data analysis that is necessary to assess the effectiveness of the strategy and/or activity. 4.3 WMA Water • Description of strategies and/or activities for each Quality WMA runoff management program component. Improvement ■ Circumstances or conditions when and where the Strategies strategies or /activities should be or will be Mandatory (13.3.b.(2)) implemented. Tetra -Tech Task 4 Group yes ■ Monitoring, information collection, special studies, Deliverable and/or data analysis that is necessary to assess the effectiveness of the strategy and/or activity. 4.4 Assessment of ■ Identification of jurisdictional goals Reasonable • Modeling performed individually for each jurisdiction. Progress Toward s BMP strategy to meet existing water numeric goals in Achieving the receiving waters. Jurisdictional Goals • Alternative strategy (Los Pen Lagoon restoration vs. (13.3.a.(2)) watershed load reduction). Optional • Modeling and cost optimization results. Tetra -Tech Task 4 Party - a Discussion of need for lowest cost/highest impact Specific strategies early, with highest cost/lowest impacts Deliverable strategies later in schedule. ■ Additional Considerations for BMP implementation (e.g., green streets vs. more expensive centralized $MPs). 4.5 Jurisdictional ■ Jurisdictional schedule for implementing strategies Optional Water Quality and achieving numeric goals Party _ Improvement Tetra -Tech Task 4 Specific Schedules (B.3.a(2) Deliverable and B.3.b(3)} 4.6 WMA Water ■ WMA schedule for implementing strategies and Mandatory Quality achieving numeric goals Tetra -Tech Task 4 Group Improvement Deliverable Schedules B.3.a 2 Page 2of4 21 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Scope of Work: WOIP Table of Contents Los Penaspuitos Watershed Management Areas and B.3 b(3)) Section 5 Water Quality Improvement Monitoring and Assessment Program 5.0 Integrated The Integrated Monitoring and Assessment Program will Monitoring and be designed to incorporate the monitoring and assessment Assessment Program requirements of Provision D and Attachment E (TMDLs). (B.4) The program will assess: 1) Progress toward achieving the numeric goals and Mandatory schedules AMEC Task 3 Group Yes 2) Progress toward addressing the highest priority Deliverable water quality conditions 3) Each RP's overall effort to implement the WQIP. Section 5 will provide a brief summary of the Program. The complete Program will be included as an appendix to the WQIP. Section 6. Iterative Approach and Adaptive Management Process 6.1 Adaptation of WQIP Com onents 6.1.1 Re- Evaluation Provide a list of triggers to adapt the Priority receiving of Priority water quality conditions. The re- evaluation will consider: Water Quality o Progress toward improved water quality through Conditions implementation of the WQIP (B.5.a) • New information developed when the requirements of AMEC Task 3 B.2.a -c have been re- evaluated o Spatial and temporal accuracy of monitoring data o Other available data o Recommendations from the SDRWC B and public 6.1.2 Adaptation of Provide a list of triggers to adapt the strategies and Goals, schedules. The re- evaluation will consider: Strategies and o Priority conditions, numeric goals, and schedules Schedules modified per Section 6.1.1 (B.5.b) o Progress toward achieving numeric goals and outcomes according to schedules Mandatory o New policies or regulations AMEC Task 3 Group Yes o Measureable and demonstrable reductions of non- Deliverable storm water discharges and pollutants in stormwater o New information developed when the requirements of B.2.b and B.2.d have been re- evaluated o Efficiency in implementing the WQIPs o Recommendations from the SDRWCQB and public 6.1.3 Adaptation of Provide a list of triggers to adapt monitoring and Monitoring assessment program based on new and available data. and Assessment AMEC Task 3 Program (B.5.c) 6.2 WQIP Update Describe the process for modifying the WQIP based on Process (B.6.b and Section 6.1. AMEC Task 3 F.2.c) 6.3 JURMP Update Describe the process for modifying the JURMP based AMEC Task 3 Process (F.2.a) modifications to the WQIP. Section 7. References Page 3 of 4 22 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Scope of Work: W®IP Table of Contents Los Penaspuitos Watershed Management Areas Appendices (including complete Monitoring and Assessment Program) Page 4 of 4 23 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Exhibit 3 Scope of Work AMEC 24 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 1 of 17 SCOPE OF WORK: DEVELOPMENT OF THE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN: LOS PENASQUITOS WATERSHED 1.0 PURPOSE AND CONSULTANT TEAM The purpose of this Scope of Work (SOW) is to develop the WQIP for the Los Per3asquitos Watershed. Efforts will include the selection of Priority Water Quality Conditions and Potential Strategies required under Provision F.La and the development of the Initial Draft WQIP incorporating the remaining components of Provision B. Two additional drafts of the WQIP will be prepared along with the Final WQIP to be submitted in January 2015 (Fiscal Year (FY) 15). Additional support will be provided during FY 16, should the SDRWQCB have any comments after the May 2015 submittal of the Final WQIP. The WQIP will be based on the outline provided in Attachment A. The document will be organized jurisdictionally on a sub - watershed basis. The sub- watersheds in the Los Peilasquitos Watershed include Carmel Canyon Creek, Los Peflasquitos Creek/Los Pefiasquitos Lagoon, and Carroll Canyon Creek (Soledad Canyon). A description of this work is provided in Section 2.0 of this SOW, along with individual task deliverables based on the Permit approved on May 8, 2013. The Permit's effective date starts on June 27, 2013 (50 days after Permit approval). The anticipated SOW start date is August 1, 2013. Project schedules and a summary of deliverables are presented in Section 3.0. Costs are summarized in Section 4.0 and detailed in Attachment B. The Consultant Team will consist of the AMEC Team and the Tetra -Tech Team. The AMEC Team will include AMEC, Larry Walker and Associates, Tetra -Tech, Brock Bernstein, and Armand Ruby Consulting under City Contract Number H105099. The Tetra -Tech Team will consist of Tetra -Tech, Inc. and Katz and Associates under City Contract Number H104445. The AMEC Team will have the lead role in the development of the WQIP and will be responsible for all deliverables to the City of San Diego. The Tetra -Tech Team will prepare Section 4 of the WQIP, as described below, and will deliver those portions to the AMEC Team. The AMEC Team will prepare all deliverables to the City and RPs and will serve as the sole point -of- contact with the City and RPs for WQIP development. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Task I — Project Administration and Meetings The AMEC Project Manager will be responsible for the general project -level administration and management throughout the duration of this project. The AMEC Project Manager will be the single point - of- contact for the City, RPs, and the Tetra -Tech Team. Since this is a multi -year SOW, the cost and scope for the project management and internal project management meetings is estimated by FY. Internal project management meetings will allow the AMEC Team and the City to track project budget and schedules. A description of other types of project - related meetings is provided under this task, though the costs for the meetings are included in the budgets for Tasks 2 through 5. 25 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 2 of 17 Proiect Meetings Four categories of meetings, in addition to internal project management meetings, will be included in this SOW: 1. RP Workgroup Meeting_s,: RP workgroup meetings will provide a forum for the discussion of topics related to the development of the WQIP for all watershed RPs or sub - watershed groups, as appropriate. Each month, at a minimum, one 1 -hour RP workgroup meetings will be held. The AMEC Team will prepare for and attend up to 29 RP workgroup meetings (16 meetings in FY 14, 9 meetings in FY 15, and 4 meetings in FY16). The AMEC Team will prepare presentation and meeting materials as necessary. Some Consultant Team members will attend in person while others will attend via conference call. A tentative schedule of topics for discussion is provided in Section 3.0 (Table 1). Meeting topics may vary depending on priorities but the deadlines for required decision points will remain the same. The Tetra Tech Team will also attend up to 8 RP workgroup meetings to discuss Section 4. 2. Individual RP Meetings: Individual RP meetings will be held to discuss individual jurisdictional needs. The AMEC Team will prepare meeting materials for and attend up to ten meetings (two with each RP) for 1 hour each. After each meeting the AMEC Team will compile action items. Individual RP meetings may be held in person or via conference call. Selected Consultant Team members will participate. The Tetra Tech Team will also attend Individual RP meetings under their SOW. Water Quality Improvement Consultation Panel: Provision F.l.a(1)(b) requires the formation of a Water Quality Improvement Consultation Panel (Technical Advisory Committee- TAC) to provide recommendations during the development of the WQIP. The RPs will meet with the TAC to solicit their input in conjunction with the public workshops. The AMEC Team will prepare for and attend a total of up to 5 TAC meetings (2 in FY 14 and 3 in FY15). These meetings will be facilitated and recorded by the Tetra -Tech Team. Each meeting is expected to be 3 hours long (including prep time). Preparation by the AMEC Team will consist of developing meeting materials, including presentations, handouts, and agendas, as necessary. Draft and final meeting materials will be delivered to the RPs. The Tetra -Tech Team will prepare meeting minutes. 4. Public Workshops: Provision F.La(l)(a) requires the input of public stakeholders in the development of the WQIP. The RPs will hold public workshops to solicit public input in coordination with the Los Peflasquitos TAC to be convened by the City. The AMEC Team will prepare for and attend a total of 2 public workshops, which will be organized, facilitated, and recorded by the Tetra -Tech Team. Each workshop is expected to be up to 5 hours long. A tentative schedule of topics for discussion is provided in Section 3.0 (Table 1). It is anticipated that all public comments will be provided during the workshop given that the workshop schedule and topics will be made public to the RPs, TAC, and public stakeholders prior to the beginning of the WQIP development process. Preparation by the AMEC Team will consist of developing meeting materials, including presentations, handouts, and agendas, as necessary. Draft and final meeting materials will be delivered to the RPs. The Tetra -Tech Team will prepare meeting minutes. Public workshops for the Los Perlasquitos watershed (this Task Order) and the San Dieguito watershed (Task Order 44) will be held concurrently. Accordingly, the attached Cost Estimate 26 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105 099 Task Order 45 Page 3 of 17 reflects half the effort required for the AMEC team for these workshops. The remaining effort is included in Task Order 44. Sub -Task 1.1 — Project Administration and Meetings — FY 14 Project administration includes coordinating with the City and Consultant Team to achieve project goals, budgets, and schedules during FY 14. The following tasks will be performed by AMEC as part of the task: Coordination and communication with City and RPs. Coordination and communication with the Consultant Team; and Administration of the contract for this project, including monthly invoicing, deliverable coordination, and budget tracking; This sub -task also includes discussions with the City and Consultant Team, including preparation for and attendance at a kick -off meeting and internal meetings. Some team members will attend in person while others will attend via conference call. It is assumed there will be total of 12 internal project meetings per fiscal year with the City, AMEC Project Manager, and selected Consultant Team members. Sub -Task 1.2 — Project Administration and Meetings — FY 15 The project administration and meetings scope for FY 15 will be the same as the scope described in Sub - Task 1.1. Sub -Task 1.3 — Project Administration and Meetings — FY 16 The project administration and meetings scope for FY 16 will be the same as the scope described in Sub - Task 1.1. Task 2 — Identification of Priority Water Quality Conditions, MS4 Sources of Pollutants and Stressors, and Potential Water Quality Improvement Strategies Task 2 includes effort to identify priority water quality conditions and MS4 sources of pollutants and/or stressors that cause or contribute to the highest priority water quality conditions for the Los Penasquitos Watershed to meet the requirements of Provisions B.2.a -e. • B.2.a Assessment of Receiving Water Conditions • B.2.b Assessment of Impacts from MS4 Discharges • B.2.c Identification of Priority Water Quality Conditions • B.2.d Identify MS4 Sources of Pollutants and/or Stressors • B.2.e Potential Water Quality Improvement Strategies The AMEC Team (including Tetra -Tech) will prepare Sections 2 and 3 of the WQIP per the WQIP Table of Contents to meet the requirements of Provision F.I.a(2). The potential water quality improvement strategies will be submitted separately from the WQIP sections but will be delivered on the same schedule. 27 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 4 of 17 Sub -Task 2.1— Literature Search and Public Data Compilation The water quality priorities identified in the 2011 Long -Term Effectiveness Assessment (LTEA) and the Clean Water Act 303(d) list will provide the basis of the selection of priority water quality conditions. The 2011 LTEA and Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan (CLRP) will also be utilized to identify MS4 sources and stressors. This will include information on pollutant generating facilities, areas and/or activities, and the location of the RPs MS4s. Based on the findings of the 2011 LTEA and CLRP, additional data may be compiled from the San Diego County Copermittee Annual Monitoring Reports, the Los Penasquitos Watershed Urban Runoff Plan Annual Reports, and the related Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Plan Annual Reports for the previous permit cycle. AMEC will submit a data request to the RPs for special study data related to potential priority water quality conditions that may have been collected in the watershed. Requests for data will be provided at the first RP Workgroup meeting. Additionally, the City, with direction from AMEC, will solicit the public for any additional relevant and available water quality data for the selection of priority water quality conditions for the Los Peflasquitos Watershed. Public solicitation for data will be provided with the notice for the first Public Workshop. Data currently in AMEC's possession, and the format for additional data, will be discussed during RP Workgroup meetings. The deadline for data submittal is provided in Section 3.0. Task efforts will include a compilation of the data provided by the public and RPs. It is assumed that no more than three data sources will be available per sub - watershed. Sub -Task 2.2 — Development of Draft and Final Sections Results of the literature search and data analysis will be detailed in Section 2 of the Draft WQIP and the associated appendices. Section 2 will address the requirements of Provision B.2.a -c of the Permit, and will include a list of priority water quality conditions as pollutants, stressors, and/or receiving water conditions, as described in Provision B.2.c.(I), and the rationale (contained in Provision B.2.c.(2)) behind the identification of the highest priority water quality conditions. Priority water quality condition selection will be based on the 303(d) listings in the watershed. Priority selection will consider the spatial and temporal distribution of these listed constituents. A total of four iterations of Sections 2 and 3 will be provided, as detailed in the deliverable schedule below. A response -to- comment table will be developed for each iteration submitted to the City and the RPs. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Files will be provided electronically, including the draft that is intended for publication by the SDRWQCB for a 30 -day public comment period. The AMEC Team will work with the RPs to incorporate public comments per Provision F. l .a(1)(a). A response -to- comments table, including comments received from the public and the TAC (Provision F.La(2)), will be developed. Sub -Task 2.3 — MS4 Sources and Pollutants Literature Search and Public Data Compilation MS4 sources of pollutants and/or stressors that cause or contribute to the highest priority water quality conditions will be identified as required by Provision B.2.d of the Permit including the following: • Pollutant Generating Facilities, Areas and/or Activities • Location of RPs MS4 • Review of Available Data 28 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105 099 Task Order 45 Page 5 of 17 Per the requirements of Provision B.2.e, potential water quality improvement strategies will be identified. AMEC will utilize the 2011 Long -Term Effectiveness Assessment and the CLRP to identify MS4 sources and stressors. As with Task 2, additional data may be compiled from the San Diego County Copermittee Annual Monitoring Reports, the Los Peitasquitos Watershed Urban Runoff Plan Annual Reports, and the related Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Plan Annual Reports for the previous permit cycle. AMEC will submit a data request to all RPs for available MS4 GIS data and additional special studies monitoring data not included in the documents listed above. Requests for data will be provided at the first RP workgroup. Much of the data required for identification and analysis of Pollutant Generating Facilities, Areas and/or Activities were compiled and presented for the watershed in the CLRP (Sections 3.1 -3.4 with an emphasis on bacteria and sediment sources). The AMEC Team will revisit this information with the RPs to determine if additional information is available to evaluate these sources and how the CLRP results can be tailored for use in the WQIP. Sub -Task 2.4 — MS4 Sources and Pollutants Development of Draft and Final Section The AMEC Team will prepare Section 3 of the WQIP to meet the requirements of Provision B.2.d. The 37 priority source categories presented in the 2011 Long -Term Effectiveness Assessment will be compared with the highest priority water quality conditions selected in Section 2. Section 3 will provide information on the potential sources and stressors, including an assessment of the adequacy of the data available to characterize these sources on a jurisdictional basis. A total of four drafts of Section 3 will be provided, as detailed in the deliverable schedule below (note that Section 2 will be submitted on the same deliverable schedule). Files will be provided electronically, including the draft that intended for publication by the SDRWQCB for a 30 day public comment period. The AMEC Team will work with the RPs to incorporate public comments per Provision F.La(1)(a). A response -to- comments table, including comments received from the public, will be developed. Sub -Task 2.5 — List of Potential Strategies The AMEC Team, lead by Tetra Tech, will develop a list of potential strategies that may be included in the WQIP. The list of potential strategies will be included as part of the first deliverable to the SDRWQCB as required under Provision B.2.e. The public, as well as, the TAC will provide input on the potential strategies. The list may include broad categories of Best Management Practices (BMPs)based on the CLRP recently completed by the RPs. Sections 4.4, 4.5, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 of the Phase I CLRPs will be referenced. The Iist is not a section of the WQIP but separate deliverable that will guide the development of Section 4. A response -to- comment table will be developed for each iteration submitted to the City and the RPs. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Deliverables per the Schedule Provided in Section3.0: 0 Attend up to 8 RP Workgroup Meetings 0 RP Workgroup Meeting Summaries and Follow -up Actions 0 Attend up to 6 Individual RP Meetings ® Individuals Meeting Follow -up Actions 0 Attend up to 1 Public Workshop 0 1" QA /QC Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) for City 0 2 "d Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) for RPs 3`d Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) for TAC 29 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 6 of 17 • 4"' Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) based on TAC comments for RPs • Final Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) to City to deliver to SDRWQCB • Revised Draft Section 2, Section 3, and Response -to- Comments Table Based on Public Input Task 3 — Draft WQIP Task 3 will develop the Initial Draft WQIP to meet the requirements of Provision B. The Initial Draft WQIP will include work products developed under Task 2 (including revised draft Section 2 and Section 3), along with: • WQE? Introduction Development (Section 1); • Incorporation of Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies, and Schedules developed by the Tetra -Tech Team or RPs selecting to Opt -out (Section 4) 16 month deliverable; • Integrated Water Quality Improvement Monitoring and Assessment Program (Section 5); and • Iterative Approach and Adaptive Management Process (Section 6). Sub -Task 3.1— Draft WQIP Introduction— Section I Submittal The AMEC Team will develop a draft of Section 1 concurrently with the development of Section 2 and Section 3. This will provide a basis for the development of the full WQIP. Section 1 will be delivered on the same schedule as Section 2 and Section 3. Sub -Task 3.2 — Water Quality Improvement Monitoring and Assessment Program The Water Quality Improvement Monitoring and Assessment Program (MAP) will be developed to meet the requirements of Provision B.4.a -d to assess: 1) the progress toward achieving the numeric goals and schedules, 2) the progress toward addressing the highest priority water quality conditions for each Watershed Management Area, and 3) each RP's overall efforts to implement the WQIP. The program will be prepared according to Provision D of the Permit, and will include TMDL monitoring per Provision B.4.c -d, as well as a Sediment Monitoring Plan in accordance with Provision D. l .e(2). A brief summary of the program will be provided in Section 5 of the WQIP. The complete MAP, which will include a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) will be included as an appendix to the Draft WQIP. Ail appendices, including the MAP, will be delivered simultaneously with the relevant sections. Estimates of monitoring costs will be developed for planning purposes concurrently with MAP development. Sub -Task 3.3 — Iterative Approach and Adaptive Management Process Development Section 6 will describe the Iterative Approach and Adaptive Management Process according to Provision B.S. The section will outline the approach for the reevaluation of priority water quality conditions, adaptation of the strategies and schedules, and adaptation of the Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Program. Sub -Task 3.4 —Draft WQIP The AMEC Team will prepare the Draft WQIP based on the sections described above and Section 4 developed by the Tetra Tech Team, which will be delivered to the AMEC Team per the schedule provided in Section 3.0. Section 4 received from Tetra Tech Team will be assumed to meet the requirements of Provision B.2.e and B.3. 30 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 7 of 17 A total of two iterations of the Draft WQIP will be provided as detailed in the deliverable schedule below. The initial draft to the City will be provided electronically. Up to ten hardcopies (two for each RP), with CDs containing electronic versions, of the Draft WQIP will be provided to the RPs for comment. A response -to- comment template will be provided for the RPs to complete for each deliverable. Outstanding uses or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or a the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Comments will be addressed in FYI under Task 5. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Section 3.0: • Attend up to 8 RP Workgroup Meetings • RP Workgroup Meeting Summaries and Follow -up Actions • Attend up to 5 Individual RP Meetings • Individual RP Meeting Follow -up Actions • Attend up to 2 TAC Meetings • is` QA /QC Draft Section 1 for City • 2ad. Draft Section 1 for RPs • I' Draft WQIP for City Deliverable includes: • Revised Draft Section I • Revised Draft Sections 2 & 3 • l s' Draft Section 4 completed by Tetra Tech (16 Month Deliverable) • 1" Draft Sections 5, 6, 7 • 2nd Draft WQIP for RPs Deliverable includes: • Revised Draft Section 1 • Revised Draft Sections 2 & 3 • I' Draft Section 4 completed by Tetra Tech (16 Month Deliverable) • 1' Draft Sections 5, 6, 7 Task 4- Tetra Tech only Task 5 — Final WQIP (FY15) Task 5 will incorporate comments received by the RPs, SDRWQCB, and the public review process detailed in Provisions B and F. Two Revised Draft WQIPs and one Final WQIP will be prepared. The AMEC Team, in consultation with the RPs, will consider public input while developing the Final WQIP, but will not necessarily respond to specific comments from the public. Sub -Task 5.1 —Draft WQIP The deliverable will include an Initial Draft submitted to the City for review followed by a Revised Draft to be provided to all RPs. This sub -task assumes a maximum total of 300 hours of effort, including technical and support staff as required for budgeting purposes. A comment template will be provided for the RPs to complete. All drafts will be provided electronically. Sub -Task 5.2 —Draft WQIP and 16 Month Deliverable The deliverable will include an Initial Draft WQIP submitted to the City for review followed by a revised draft WQIP to be provided to all RPs. This task also includes effort to finalize the 16d' Month Deliverable (Section 4) with reviews by the TAC and all RPs. 31 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 8 of 17 This sub -task assumes a maximum total of 180 hours of effort including technical and support staff as required for budgeting purposes. A comment template will be provided for the RPs to complete. All drafts will be provided electronically. Sub -Task 5.3 —Final WQIP Comments from the RPs and the TAC will be used to develop the Final WQIP. This sub -task assumes a maximum total of 90 hours of effort including technical and support staff as required for budgeting purposes. The Final WQIP will include an initial draft submitted to the City electronically for review followed by a revised draft to be provided to all RPs. A response -to- comment table will be developed for each iteration submitted to the City and the RPs. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Up to ten hardcopies of the Final WQIP (two for each RP), with CDs containing electronic versions will be provided to the RPs. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Section 3.0: • Attend up to 9 RP Workgroup Meetings • RP Workgroup Meeting Summaries and Follow -up Actions • Attend up to 3 TAC Meetings • Attend up to I Public Workshop • 3rd QA /QC Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable) for City • 4d' Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable) for RPs • 5d Section 4 (16d' Month Deliverable) for TAC • 6d' Section 4 (16's Month Deliverable) based on TAC Comment for RPs • Final Draft Section 4(16'h Month Deliverable) to City to Deliver to SDRWQCB • 5"' Draft WQIP for RPs • 6d' Draft WQIP for TAC • Vh Final WQIP based on TAC comments for RPs • Final WQIP for City and RPs • Final WQIP to SDWQCB Task 6 WQIP Support (FY16) Task 6 will incorporate comments received from the SDRWQCB on the Final WQIP submitted after May 2015. This task will include revision of the document based on the SDRWQCB comments that will then be reviewed by RPs. It is assumed the City and other RPs will review the document at the same time. This sub -task assumes a maximum total of 60 hours of effort, including technical and support staff as required for budgeting purposes. A response -to- comment template will be provided for the City and the RPs to complete for each deliverable. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Up to twelve hardcopies of the Final WQIP (two for each RP), with CDs containing electronic versions, will be provided to the RPs Deliverables: • Attend up to 4 RP Workgroup Meetings • RP Workgroup Meeting Summaries and Follow -up Actions • I 't QA /QC Draft WQIP for City • 2nd Draft WQIP for RPs • Final WQIP for City and RPs 32 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AN EC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105 099 Task Order 45 Page 9 of 17 3.0 SCHEDULE This Task Order shall begin on or about August 1, 2013, contingent upon approval and execution of this SOW, and shall terminate on December 31, 2015. Note that all schedule dates are approximate based on an August 1, 2013 notice to proceed. If the approval of the SOW is delayed, the schedule will be adjusted appropriately through consultation with the City and other Consultant Team members. Table 1 provides a tentative meeting schedule, including decision points, where input will be required by the RPs to facilitate the submission of the project deliverables, and planned meeting topics. A MS Project Schedule will be provided before the beginning of project work to clarify the schedule. Note that RP Workgroup Meetings will be held the second Thursday of every month. 33 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 10 of 17 Table 1— Tentative Schedule for RP Workgroup Meetings, WQICP Meetings, and Public Workshops 34 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 RP Workgroup eetings W 1CP Meetings Public Workshops Montle Meeting Topic Decision Tentative Topics Tentative Topics Covered Point Date Covered Date Fiscal Year 2014 I. Kick -Off August Meeting Request 2013 Data/ Project — — — — — Process Kickoff Meeting and Solicit Input from Public and 6 Month Deliverable Public Comment Meeting o Share anticipated 2. Present Potential schedule of August Priorities/ WQIP process 2013 Discuss Priorities — Aug. 2013 and future Ranking opportunities for input • Solicit input on priorities and potential strategies. • Provide deadlines for submittal of data for development of priorities. 3. Present Potential Water September Strategies/ Select Quality 2013 Water Quality Priorities for Priorities October 2013 Deliverable 4. Select Potential Potential October Strategies/ Strategies for 2013 Present October 2013 — — — — Numerical Goals Deliverable 34 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 11 of 17 35 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 RP Wor up Meetin WQICP Meetings Public Workshops Meeting Topic Decision Tentative Topics Tentative Topics Covered Month Point Date Covered Date 5. Discuss Water Quality Priorities and Potential Strategies Priorities, Deliverable/ potential November Introduce Nov. 20, strategies, 2013 Assessment and 2013 and sources — — Monitoring of pollutants Approach/ and Present Numeric stmssors. Goals Development Process 6. Discuss Numeric Decision on Goals/ Tentative Introduction to Numeric December Strategy Goals for 2013 Development — Approach Quality Strategy Development 7. Introduction to Scheduling and January Update on 2014 Assessment/ — — — — Monitoring Approach Priorities, potential February 8. Update on Feb. 18, strategies, 2014 Strategies and 2014 and sources _ Schedules of pollutants and stressors. 9. Discuss Numeric Goals based on Strategies/ Provide Response -to- Finalize March Comments Monitoring 2014 Tables for Approach Sections 2 and 3/ Update on Assessment and Monitoring Approach 35 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105 099 Task Order 45 Page 12 of 17 36 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 RP Workgroup eetings W ICP Meetings Public Worksho Meeting Topic Decision Tentative Topics Tentative Topics Covered Month Point Date Covered Date 10. Discussion of Adaptive Management Receive RP Approach/ final input on Discuss Response -to- Response-to- April 2014 Comments Comments Tables for Tables for Sec tions 2 Sections 2 and 3/ and 3 Update on Water Quality Strategies May 2014 11. Discuss Draft WQIP — — — — Fiscal Year 2015 16 Month Deliverable 12. Discuss Public Meeting Comments on July 22, • Solicit input July 2014 Initial Draft _ — — 2014 on Numeric WQIP – Sections Goals and 2 and 3 Strategies 13. Discuss August Comments on 2014 Initial Draft — — — WQIP – Section 4 14. Discuss Numeric September Comments on Sept. 17, Goals and 2014 Initial Draft — 2014 Strategies — — WQIP – Sections /Schedules 5 and 6 15. Discuss October Comments on 2014 First Revised Draft WQIP Sections 24 16. Discuss November Comments on 2014 First Revised WQIP – Sections 5 and 6 17. Discuss Dec. 2, Numeric Comments on 2014 Goals and December Second Revised Strategies 2014 Draft WQIP – /Schedules — Sections 2 - 4 Dec. 5, 2014 Final WQIP 36 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 13 of 17 37 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 RP Workgroup ectings WQ1CP Meetings Public Workshops Month Meeting Topic Decision Tentative Topics Tentative Topics Covered Point Date Covered Date 18. Discuss Comments on January Second Revised 2015 Draft WQIP — — — — — Sections 5 and 6 February _ — 2015 — — — — March 2015 — — — — April 2015 Fiscal Year 2016 19. Discuss July 2015 Comments from — — — — — SDRW CB August 2015 — — — — — — September 20. Discuss Comments from 2015 — — — — SDRW CB October 21. RP Comments on Revised Final 2015 WQIP — — — — November 22. RP Comments on Revised Final 2015 WQIP — — — — — 37 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 14 of 17 Approximate due dates for the deliverables for the SOW are included in Table 2 below, and is based on an August 1, 2013 start date. Table 2 includes the Consultant Team members who will deliver and receive each deliverable. Table 2 -Task Order Deliverables Deliverable Submitti Receiving* I Due Date Task 1- Project Management NA NA I No Deliverables Task 2 - Identification of Priority Water Quality Conditions, MS4 Sources of Pollutants and Stressors, and Potential Water Quality Improvement Strategies 6 month deliverable Sub -Task 2.1 Literature Search and Public Data Co m ilation Received Data from Public and RPs for Analysis Public / RPs AMEC August 22, 2013 Workgroup Meeting Summaries AMEC City 7 working days after workgroup meetin s Sub -Task 2.2 Development o Drat and Final Sections I" QA/QC Draft Section 2, Section 3 & AMEC City October 25, 2013 Appendices (6 Month Deliverable) City Comments on I' Draft Section 2 and 3 (6 City AMEC October 30, 2013 Month Deliverable) 2" Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices (6 AMEC All RPs November 5, 2013 Month Deliverable RP Comments on 2 Draft Section 2, Section 3, & All RPs AMEC November 8, 2013 Appendices 6 Month Deliverable 3rd Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices (6 AMEC All RPs November 13, 2013 Month Deliverable) for TAC Review RP confirmation for TAC submittal RPs City November 14, 2013 3rd Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices (6 City TAC November 15, 2013 Month Deliverable) for TAC Review TAC Comments on 3` Draft Section 2, Section 3, TAC AMEC November 20, 2013 & Appendices 6 Month Deliverable) TAC Reviewed 4 Draft Section 2, Section 3, & AMEC All RPs December 6, 2013 Appendices 6 Month Deliverable) Comments on TAC Reviewed 4' Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices All RPs AMEC December 13, 2013 Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices for AMEC All RPs December 20, 2013 SDRW CB (6 Month Deliverable) RP confirmation for SDRWQCB submittal RPs city December 24, 2013 Submit Section 2,Section 3, & Appendices to City SDRWQCB January 10, 2014 SDRWQCB Comments from Public on Section 2 and 3 (6 Public AMEC February 15, 2014 Month Deliverable) Provide Response -to- Comments Table for Section AMEC Public March 13, 2014 2 and Section 3 based on Public Comments Receive Final Comments on Response -to- Comments Table for Section 2 and Section 3 based RPs AMEC April 10,2013 on Public Comments Revised Section 2 and Section 3 along with Response -to- Comments Table Based on Public AMEC RPs April 25, 2014 Input Sub -Task 2.3 - List of Potential Strategies Draft of Potential Strategies Tetra -Tech AMEC October 11, 2013 1 g` QA/QC Draft of Potential Strategies AMEC City October 18, 2013 Ci Comments on I' Draft of Potential Strategies city AMEC October 24, 2013 2" Draft of Potential Strategies AMEC All RPs October 30, 2013 38 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Pan 15 of 17 Deliverable Submitting Receivi * Due Date RP Comments on 2" Draft of Potential Strategies All RPs AMEC November 6, 2013 3rd Draft of Potential Strategies for TAC Review AMEC All RPs November 13, 2013 RP confirmation for TAC submittal RPs city November 14, 2013 3rd Draft of Potential Strategies for TAC Review city TAC November 15, 2013 TAC Comments on Potential Strategies TAC AMEC November 20, 2013 TAC Reviewed 4 Draft of Potential Strategies. AMEC All RPs December 6, 2013 Comments on 4th Draft TAC of Potential All RPs AMEC December 13, 2013 -Strategies Potential Strategies for SDRWQCB AMEC All RPs December 20, 2013 RP confirmation for SDRW CB submittal RPs city December 24, 2013 Submit Potential Strategies to SDRW CB City SDRW CB I January 10, 2013 Task 3 - Draft WQIP Sub -Task 3.4 - Drat WQIP 1 QA/QC Draft Section 1 AMEC city October 18, 2013 Ci Comments on V Draft Section 1 city AMEC October 24, 2013 2" Draft Section 1 AMEC All RPs October 30, 2013 RP Comments on 2 Draft Section I All RPs AMEC November 13, 2013 Draft Section 1 for SDRW CB AMEC city December 6, 2013 Section 4 Tetra -Tech AMEC May 2, 2014 1 QA/QC Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable AMEC City May 16, 2014 Opt -out RP versions of Sections 4.2 - 4.5 of Section 4 Opt -out RP AMEC May 21, 2014 City Comments on I" Draft WQIP(including 16 Month Deliverable City AMEC May 23, 2014 2 Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable AMEC All RPs June 6, 2014 Workgroup Meeting Summaries AME C City 7 working days after workgroup meetings Task 4 - Tetra Tech Team only Task 5 - Final WQIP - FY15 Sub -Task 5.1 -Draft WQIP RP Comments on Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable All RPs AMEC July 18, 2014 3r d Draft WQIP(including 16 Month Deliverable) AMEC city August 15, 2014 City Comments on 3` Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable) City AMEC August 29, 2014 4b Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable ) AMEC All RPs September 6, 2014 Workgroup Meeting Summaries AMEC City 7 working days after workgroup meetings Sub -Task 5.2 -Drat WQIP and 16 Month Deliverable RP Comments on 4` Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable) All RPs AMEC September 12, 2014 Section 4 (16 Month Deliverable) for TAC r eview review AMEC All RPs September 17, 2014 RP confirmation for TAC submittal RPs City September 18, 2014 75'-Section 4 (16 Month Deliverable) for TAC review City TAC September 19, 2014 Comments from TAG on5h Section 4 (16 Month Deliverable TAC AMEC September 24, 2014 6' Section 4 16 Month Deliverable)based on AMEC All RPs Se tember 30, 2014 39 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 45 Page 16 of 17 Deliverable Submitting Receivin * Due Date TAC Comments Comments from RPs on 6 Section 4 (16 Month Deliverable) All RPs AMEC October 8, 2014 Final Draft Section 4 (16' Month Deliverable) for Submittal to SDRWQCB AMEC All RPs October 15, 2014 RP confirmation for SDRWQCB submittal RPs city October 16, 2014 Submittal to SDRWQCB of Section 4 (16 Month Deliverable) City SDRWCB October 18, 2014 5` Draft WQIP AMEC RPs November 21, 2014 RP Comments on 5 Draft WQIP RPs AMEC December 1, 2014 6` Draft WQIP AMEC All RPs December 15, 2014 RP confirmation for TAC submittal RPs city December 16, 2014 Draft WQIP City TAC December 17, 2014 _0 Sub -Task 5.3 — Final W IP Comments from TAC on 6 Draft WQIP TAC AMEC December 22, 2014 7 Draft WQIP with TAC Comments AMEC All RPs January 9, 2015 RP Comments on 7 Draft WQIP with TAC Comments All RPs AMEC January 16, 2015 Final WQIP AMEC All RPs January 25, 2015 RP confirmation for SDRWQCB submittal RPs city January 26, 2015 Submit Final WQIP to SDWQCB city SDWQCB June 27, 2015 Task 6 — WQIP Support — FY 16 1st Draft WQIP for City AMEC City 20 days', from receipt of comments from SDWQCB City Comments on V Draft WQIP Ci AMEC 5 days from receipt of document 2nd Draft WQIP for RPs AMEC All RPs 5 days after submittal to the City RP Comments on 2nd Draft WQIP All RPs AMEC 10 days from submittal to the RPs Final WQIP for City and RPs AMEC All RPs 10 days from receipt of comments from RPs Workgroup Meeting Summaries AMEC City 7 working days after workgroup meetin s *RP specific deliverables will be provided to RPs directly. 4.0 COSTS The total of this Task Order for FY 14 will be $207,494, for FY 15 it will be $98,369, and for FY16 it will be $17,521. Labor rates and other charges will be billed per the requirements of Contract H105099. The Task Order amount may be modified by written amendment, if necessary. 40 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 8�It 0 fr vl N .'� O Y _Y+ �F U C .-1 N 1U� J•+ Cd C r�•y .r C t~ C W 41 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Lis vi lui vs I m f^ UI vl �i m w vl w Z W F v m C2 ro In H W fFn ry i° rl uNi u W N W w m v o fv ry 1W1... N to M �N�pa yvy tT V w KI )- N IA O T Iti N U v N iV ti us a fn ib a up O U m W t f• 0 M . T 11 r`0 G M N Ii1 yIf I/� tpr6/lI Vry � fv7A u�n Vz 1 l /J V N N K O VI N fjj c N u~'l us'i N u i V) O w U ry V ry ry cwt s l'i N !fvn4 V N M �A vi w M N m w In 5 to m `o IT n m c m Ul U ti l E m N G 4 t a R f1 m a fl m m ta � u ❑ yg m 'S V y� p LL }w IL >' LL l n LL m C m n 7 n N c tmp rn c Wig• m m m W ,C m 0 m J ❑ U ? L IL C n L7 Tj I��i m Vl m E < d n a i d n i�, a m m p io am o (ni11 m m !A I 11 a 3 O u F g 'M >m> n re n CL a •) •) 1 a u a a a �°c a n T o o c3 c 11Z A IL G a' a S ii p N N N ry N m K N N In N lfi N M N •{ Fj to sf N 17 It It Z •1( N .'1 V .a F� 41 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Exhibit 4 Scope of Work Tetra Tech 42 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 0 July 8, 2013 Contract H084445, Task Order No. XX DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK For WQIP Development Support for the Los Penasquitos Watershed Management Area This Draft Scope of Work (SOW) identifies the level of effort needed to support the Los Penasquitos Responsible Parties (RPs) with development of a Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) to meet requirements set by the NPDES Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). This SOW includes close coordination with a parallel effort led by AMEC for the City of San Diego and RPs to complete the complimentary sections of the WQIP and assemble the overall plan. The tasks in this SOW are not sequential, but instead are meant to be in line with the AMEC SOW and specific sections of the WQIP (outlined in the proposed table of contents attached to the AMEC SOW). The result is that the tasks in this SOW are meant to be viewed holistically with the tasks of the AMEC SOW to provide the full understanding of the level of effort to develop the WQIP. This SOW addresses the following components identified for the WQIP: • Section 4: Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies and Schedule • Facilitation of stakeholder workshops and WQICP meetings providing reporting and input on multiple key sections of WQIP In addition, this SOW takes advantage of several -efforts already invested in by the RPs when developing the Draft Comprehensive Load Reductions Plan (CLRP) for this watershed, including: • Identification of jurisdictional -based management strategies, including nonstructural and structural best management practices to achieve pollutant load reductions • Models developed to support the sediment TMDL for the Los Penasquitos Lagoon To specifically address new requirements in the permit, it will be necessary to revisit many of the assumptions for the Draft CLRP, tailor these assumptions for the WQIP, and perform an analysis to demonstrate reasonable progress toward achieving the numeric goals identified in the WQIP. This analysis will provide verification of BMP pollutant load reductions to meet TMDLs, which will be achieved through the use of a modeling system similar to those developed for previous CLRPs for Scripps, Tecolote, and Chollas watersheds. This modeling system will also provide capability for cost optimization of various BMPs to better inform the planning process, Based on optimization results, Tetra Tech will develop water quality improvement schedules and refine BMP costs for those strategies planned within each jurisdiction. In addition, the estimated BMP costs/scenarios can be evaluated in terms of their sensitivity to potential regulatory future actions (e,g., inclusion of lagoon restoration strategies). Results of these tasks will be summarized in Section 4 outlined above, which can serve as the basis for internal jurisdictional planning and reporting to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This SOW and associated schedule assumes a notice to proceed (NTP) of approximately August 1, 2013. Should this NTP change, a revision to the schedule may be required. 43 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 0 TASK 1: Project Management Tetra Tech will maintain communication with the City's Task Order Manager or other designee and the AMEC team to keep them apprised of progress, upcoming milestones, and any issues that could potentially affect project performance. For this Task Order, Mr. Stephen Carter will serve as the Project Manager and he will be responsible for all official communications with the City. Mr. Carter will be responsible for working with the Tetra Tech Contract Administrator to ensure monthly progress reports and invoices are submitted in an accurate and timely manner on or prior to the 5th day of each month during which the Task Order is active. Mr. Carter will work with the Task Order Manager to ensure all desired information is included in the monthly progress report. At a minimum the following information will be included: 1. Reporting period 2. Work completed in the reporting period (activities and accomplishments) 3. Work anticipated in the following reporting period 4. Expenditures in this progress report period and cumulative total 5. Any issues or problems encountered and how these were resolved Deliverables: o Monthly progress memos and meetings with the City to ensure that work completed address issues and objectives. TASK 4: Development of Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies and Schedule Tetra Tech will lead development a portion of Section 4 of the WQIP: Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies and Schedules. The following are subtasks that specifically address development of components of this Section. 4.1. Identirrcation of Numeric Goals and Schedules Tetra Tech will work with the RPs and AMEC to identify the following numeric goals for the WQIP, specific to the Los Penasquitos Watershed and inclusive of subwatersheds, • Final numeric goals to be achieved in the receiving waters for the highest priority water quality conditions • Interim numeric goals to be achieved in the receiving waters and capable of demonstrating incremental progress toward achieving the final numeric goals in the receiving waters • Schedule for measuring progress toward achieving the interim and final numeric goals The following tiers have been identified for the numeric receiving water goals, which are subject to change through coordination with the RPs and stakeholders during development of the WQIP. Tier 1: The first tier of numeric goals for the WQIP will be those for which TMDLs have already been established or are in draft. These TMDLs will include specific numeric targets that will be consistent with the WQIP. With bacteria TMDLs for impaired shorelines at the mouth of Los Penasquitos Lagoon, should the RPs choose to use recent monitoring data to provide justification for amendments to associated WQBELs in the MS4 permit or 303(d) de- listing, Tetra Tech will work with the RPs to incorporate this strategy within Section 4.1 of the WQIP. A draft sediment TMDL has been approved by the SDRWQCB and subject to final 2 44 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 a approval. It is anticipated that the TMDL will be included in the MS4 permit. The Tier 1 goals set for the sediment TMDL will anticipate final approval of the TMDL and provide recommendations for interpretation of TMDL targets into WQBELs. Final and interim goals for Tier 1 will be consistent with any final and interim targets established in the TMDLs, if applicable. Tier 2: For those 303(d) impairments for which TMDLs have not been established, but water quality objectives or WQBELs are applicable, a second tier of numeric goals for receiving waters will be identified. These impairments include bacteria (freshwater) and nutrients. However, more research will occur in Task 4.1 to determine if viable numeric targets can be established for nutrients, or if nutrients should instead be determined to be a Tier 3 goal. No interim goals will be established for Tier 2 goals. Tier 3: If water quality objectives are not available to address the impairment, and specific pollutants cannot be linked to the impairment (e.g., toxicity), a third tier of receiving water numeric goals will be identified based on literature or through determination of what is feasible through BMP implementation. Toxicity is one such impairment for the watershed, and it is important to stipulate that the true sources of toxicity in many cases have not been linked to a specific pollutant, which could be attributed to organics, metals, or ammonia, among others. Numeric goals for receiving waters cannot be determined without additional analyses to determine the potential sources of the toxicity, which is outside the scope of this project. No interim goals will be established for Tier 3 goals. Tier 4: A final tier will be established for those impairments that are low in priority, not linked to a specific pollutant, or are not linked to MS4 runoff. Total dissolved solids (TDS) and selenium are impairments that may be categorized as Tier 4, which is often attributed to groundwater baseflow or naturally occuring sources from geological formations and not attributed to MS4 runofft, Appropriate justification will be provided in the WQIP for listing TDS and selenium as a Tier 4 goals. No interim goals will be established for Tier 4 goals. The schedule for interim and final Tier 1 goals will be consistent with those schedules identified in TMDLs. The schedule for final Tier 2 -3 goals will be established through consultation with the RPs. However, once jurisdictional goals are determined in Task 4.3.2, each jurisdiction will have an opportunity to define their own schedules for achieving their independent goals for Tiers 2 -3. As a result, the final schedules for Tiers 2 -3 are subject to change once the independent jurisdictional schedules are established and combined in Task 43.2. No schedules will be established for Tier 4 goals. Tetra Tech will summarize these schedules relative to the WQIP framework, and prepare a subsection of Section 4 of the WQIP. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Table 2: • Tetra Tech attendance at two meetings of RP workgoup to discuss numeric goals • Draft Section 4.1 of the WQIP • Draft II Section 4.1 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from RPs) — FYI • Draft III Section 4.1 of the WQIP ( incoporating comments from Stakeholders) — FYI • Final Section 4.1 of the WQIP — FYI 4.2. Jurisdictional- SpeciFc Strategies and/or Activities Task 2 of the AMEC SOW includes development of a list of potential strategies that will be included as part of the first deliverable to the SDRWQCB required under Provision 13.3.15 of the NPDES Permit. Much work 45 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 a went into development of the CLRPs to identify specific nonstructural and structural BMPs for each RP necessary to address TMDLs and other impairments in the watershed. This task will build upon these previous efforts to develop jurisdictional- specific strategies to be included in the modeiing analysis and ultimate water qulaity improvement schedules. This task will result in development of Section 4.2 of the WQIP, which will include a summary of those structural and nonstructural BMPs identified for each RP during development of the CLRPs. No additional BMPs will be developed or reported beyond those previously identified in the CLRPs. The following outlines efforts anticipated for each category of BMP. 4.2.1. Identification of Nonstructural BMPs The nonstructural BMPs identified in the CLRP will be reviewed with the RPs to determine if any changes should be made. Should additional BMPs be identified, Tetra Tech will work closely with the RPs to develop details to be reported in the WQIP. For the modeling analysis to be performed in Task 4.3, additional assumptions will be needed for specific nonstructural BMPs to be included in in the model. Given previous experience modeling nonstructural BMPs, the categories of BMPs that can be defensively modeled include street sweeping, rain barrels, irrigation controls, and catch basin cleaning. If a RP chooses to include one of these BMPs within the WQIP for their jurisdiction, additional information will be required from that RP to develop an understanding of the level of BMP implementation and methods for modeling. Tetra Tech will work closely with RPs to develop this information for quantitative analysis of BMP performance. For other categories of nonstructural BMPs that will not include modeling analyses, qualitative analysis will be performed in Task 4.3 to demonstrate reasonable progress toward achieving goals. Such qualitative analyses typically include general and literature-based discussions of BMP performance, but do not include specific load reductions predictions. For this task, Tetra Tech will work with each RP to develop information necessary for qualitative analysis for all nonstructural BMPs not included in the quantitative analysis. All input from the RPs on the nonstructural BMPs to be included in the WQIP are expected by December 2013. 4.2.2. Identification of Structural BMPs Several structural BMPs were identified for each RP in development of the CLRP that can be used as a starting point for the WQIP. These included both distributed (e.g., green infrastructure) and centralized (e.g., regional detention facility) structural BMPs. The CLRPs presented maps of potential locations of structural BMPs, as well as more - detailed concepts developed for a select high priority BMPs, presented as "BMP Fact Sheets" in the CLRP. Tetra Tech will base all assumptions for structural BMPs on information compiled for the CLRP. However, some limited level of effort may be required to work with the RPs to develop modeling assumptions for these BMPs. Any additional regional or multi - jurisdictional strategies or projects will also be identified and summarized in the WQIP for discussion. An example may include any constructed or planned sedimentation basins implemented by the Lagoon Foundation at the bottom of the watershed. RP input will be sought on how to best represent such projects in the WQIP. All input from the RPs on the structural BMPs to be included in the WQIP are expected by December 2013. 4 46 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 4,2.3. Identification of Opportunities for Green Streets Should nonstructural and structural BMPs not be insufficient to provide necessary reductions of pollutants to meet Tier 1 goals, green streets is an additional BMP that prevents the need to acquire land to build larger centralized treatment facilities to ultimately meet the goals. To identify the potential for green streets within each RP jurisdiction, Tetra Tech will perform a GIS screening that considers such characteristics as land use, slope, infiltration potential, high priority subwatersheds with the potential for higher pollutant loading, etc. Based on the modeling analysis performed in Task 4.3, if additional load reductions are needed (above what is feasible with nonstructural BMPs and structural BMPs on public land), this information will be used to guide green street optimization and quantify the load reductions and costs needed for green streets to ultimately meet load reduction goals. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Table 2: • Tetra Tech attendance at four meetings of RP workgoup • Tetra Tech will participate in up to two meetings with each individual RP to discuss strategies and activities to be included in WQIP • Draft Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the WQIP • Draft 11 Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from RPs) — FY15 • Draft III Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) — FY15 • Final Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the WQIP — FY15 4.3. Assessment of Reasonable Progress Toward Achieving Jurisdictional Goals Provision B.3.a(2) of the NPDES Permit requires schedules in the WQIP that demonstrate reasonable progress toward achieving final numeric goals. For approved TMDLs, Attachment E of the NPDES Permit requires an analysis in the WQIP, utilizing a watershed model or other watershed analytical tools, to demonstrate that the implementation of the BMPs achieves compliance with the numeric goals. Similar requirements will be applicable to the sediment TMDL once it is approved. The goal of the modeling analysis is to provide scientifically defensible, quantitative analysis of the pollutant load reductions associated with the proposed management strategies to meet numeric goals established in Task 4.1. For this task, a modeleing analysis will be performed individually for each jurisdiction demonstrate that individual efforts will contribute to the overall goal of meeting the watershed and/or subwatershed based goals, as well as each RP's jurisdictional goals developed in Task 4.32 The overall benefit of performing the modeling analysis will be the precursor to a BMP -based compliance approach. In summary, once an acceptable modeling approach is established, the Regional Board, EPA, and other stakeholders will be assured that the proposed strategies in the WQIP will result in attainment of water quality numeric goals, thereby supporting a Permit "compliance path° based on BMP implementation instead of being solely based on collection of water quality samples. 4,31, Development of Watershed Model of Existing Conditions As part of development of the sediment TMDL for Los Penasquitos Lagoon, an LSPC model was developed for the Los Penasquitos Watershed that includes simulation of hydrology and sediment loads. In addition, for development of bacteria TMDLs for the beach, a similar watershed model was developed. These models will be updated, and will include additional considerations including; • Improved representation of sediment and bacteria. • Improved spatial resolution (smaller subwatersheds) for detailed evaluation of high - priority areas of pollutant loading and associated opportunities for BMP implementation. • Extended time period for meteorological input records (e.g., more recent conditions) 5 47 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 0 • Jurisdictional boundaries for jurisdictional -based loading analyses. 4.3.2. Development of Jurisdictional Goals Based on the Tier 1 numeric goals for receiving waters identified in Task 4.1, jurisdictional goals will be developed using the following approach. Sediment loads to Los Penasquitos Lagoon vary for different subwatersheds based on varying conditions within each drainage area. For this reason, the Los Penasquitos watershed will be divided into subwatersheds draining directly to the lagoon, and total sediment loads will be estimated separately for each subwatershed by the model. Each RP's contribution to sediment loads in each subwatershed will also be estimated by the model based on each jurisdiction's area, slope, local rainfall, land use, soil type, and imperviousness. If the RPs provide GIS data on the location and size of the Phase II areas within their jurisdiction, these areas can be subtracted from the modeled area. Finally, the TMDL wasteload allocation of 67% sediment load reduction will be applied to determine each RP's sediment reduction target relative to their loading in each subwatershed. Once jurisdictional goals are established for Tier 1 receiving water goals, Tetra Tech will coordinate with each RP to determine their schedule for meeting each goal. 4.3.3. Load Reduction and Feasibility Analysis Based on the watershed model, Tetra Tech will utilize BMP information obtained from Task 4.2 to represent the suite of BMPs for the RP jurisdictions, and model those BMPs using EPA's SUSTAIN for estimation of associated load reductions. The modeling system will select the most cost - effective combination and size of structural BMPs to meet interim and final jurisdictional goals identified in the previous task. This will be achieved through focusing modeling on those polilutants that are most critical and require the most load reduction, while subsequently quantifying the load reductions achieved for other pollutants and verifying that their respective goals will be met with the BMPs required to address the critical pollutants. Those pollutants that will be modeled include bacteria and sediment, consistent with Tier 1 goals. The modeling system will also be utilized to inform the sequence of phasing for BMP implementation to meet those targets, based on input received from each RP regarding preferences for their jurisdiction. This phasing of BMPs will provide the basis for establishing the implementaiton schedule determined in Task 4.4, To model BMPs, several BMPs assumptions have been developed through previous research performed in CLRP modeling efforts for Chollas Creek, San Diego River, Tecolote Creek, and Scripps, which are applicable to Los Penasquitos and reduce the need for duplicative investigations. Below are some key assumptions that will be used to model BMPs. However, it should be noted that based on input provided by the RPs in Task 4.2.1, each RP will have a choice which modeled nonstructural BMPs should be included for their jurisdiction. • Modeled nonstructural BMPs focusing on wet weather will include alternatives for each RP to select from, including street sweeping, catch basin cleaning, downspout disconnection, and rain barrel implementation programs. Pre -run scenarios have been developed in previous CLRP efforts that will be available for RPs to choose, representing alternate levels of implementation of each BMP. • Modeled nonstructural BMP focusing on dry weather will include an assumption of 25% reduction in irrigation, applied directly to over - irrigation and overspray on impervious areas contributing primarily to urban runoff contributions to dry weather flows in receiving waters. • Non - modeled nonstructural BMPs will assume a collective load reduction assumption of 5% for each pollutant. 6 48 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 • Green streets modeling parameters and optimization tecniques will be consistent with those used in previous CLRP modeling efforts. An important consideration for the modeling analysis is the ability to represent alternative scenarios that include different options for compliance, or other considerations for interpreting existing TMDLs or needs for TMDL re- openers. For the Los Penasquitos Watershed, such considerations includes potential lagoon restoration strategies that can offset watershed load reduction by increasing the lagoon's assimilative capacity of sediment. At the direction of the RPs, Tetra Tech will identify up to 2 alternative compliance options for the specific subwatersheds. The results of these analyses can be used to justify alternative BMP implementation strategies, or provide much - needed scientific research to justify TMDL re- openers or Basin Plan amendments in the future, which can significantly impact numeric goals and the associated costs of meeting those goals. Tetra Tech will summarize the development and results of the modeling analysis into a section of the WQIP, relying on an appendix for documentation of the majority of the technical approach. This documentation is critical to the WQIP to establish the defensibility of the modeling approach demonstrating that implementation of the BMPs achieves compliance with the numeric goals, and obtain the option for BMP -based compliance in the future. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Table 2: • Tetra Tech attendance at three meetings of the RP workgoup o Draft Section 4.4 of the WQIP • Draft II Section 4.4 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from RPs) — FY15 o Draft III Section 4.4 of the WQIP ( incoporating comments from Stakeholders) — FY15 • Final Section 4.4 of the WQIP— FY15 4.4. Jurisdictional Water Quality Improvement Schedules Based on results of the previous tasks and RP input, Tetra Tech will develop schedules for each RP outlining phased BMP implementation and associated costs throughout the period to meet interim and final jusdictional goals established in Task 4.3.2. The schedule of activities will be divided into two phases with different levels of detail within each phase, as presented below. AIII cost estimates (for all BMP types) will identify both personnel and non - personnel expenses. Phase I: Special emphasis will be placed on the current 5 -year permit cycle for detailing the specific BMPs to be implemented, including: • Expected load reduction achieved by the BMP. • Structural BMP locations (based on prioritization of public parcels) and costs for permitting, design, construction, and operation and maintenance (including personel and non- personel expenses). • Nonstructural BMP personel and non - personel expenses. • Reference to BMP Fact Sheets included in an appendix, including those used from the Draft CLRP. Costs for the BMPs will be estimated based on interviews with RPs, and additional engineering estimates for structural BMPs that include permitting, design, construction, and operation and maintenance. Phase II: For the period extending beyond the 5 -year permit cycle, the schedule will include information obtained from the Task 4.3 modeling analysis, including; 49 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 iQ • Amount (e.g., number of projects or total treatment volume required) of projects needed per year within each subwatershed for phased load reductions to meet interim and final goals throughout the entire schedule. • Estimated annual costs for categories of BMP activities, including, but not limited to: • Continued annual costs associated with implementation of BMPs within the first five years (e.g., nonstructural strategies or operation and maintenance of structural BMPs). • Level of activity and annual costs of new nonstructural BMPs beyond year five. • Total annual costs for categories of structural BMPs, including, but not limited to distributed structural BMPs (e.g., LID) on public land, centralized structural BMPs on public land, green streets, and centralized structural BMPs on private land. Howevever, the schedule above for the period beyond the first five years will not include specific locations for BMPs, other than potentially specifying the relative treatment volume expected for each subwatershed assessed in the modeling analysis. It is also likely that based on results of the analysis, the most expensive BMPs will be scheduled for later in the schedule. This will ensure that the most cost - effective BMPs are implemented early, while more expensive BMPs (e.g., centralized structural BMPs on private land) are delayed for later in the schedule, providing sufficient time for investigation of alternative strategies and update of the WQIP over time to possibly avoid these more expensive strategies in the future (e.g., 15 years). Inclusion of all costs in the schedule will provide demonstration of reasonable progress toward achieving numeric goals in the WQIP, information for RP funding and preparation, and information to regulators regarding the economic impacts of water quality regulations. However, it will be important to stipulate within the WQIP that the BMPs and associated decisions and costs beyond the Permit term are subject to funding availability, and should not be evaluated as an indicator of progress towards BMP -based compliance. Any additional regional or multi - jurisdictional strategies or projects will also be included in a optional schedule and associated section of the WQIP for discussion. RP input will be sought on how to best represent such projects in the WQIP. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Table 2: • Tetra Tech attendance at up to two meetings of the RP workgoup • Tetra Tech will participate in one meeting with each individual RP • Draft Section 4.5 and 4.6 of the WQIP • Draft II Section 4.5 and 4.6 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from RPs) -- FY15 • Draft III Section 4.5 and 4.6 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) — FY15 • Final Section 4.5 and 4.6 of the WQIP — FY15 TASK 7: Responsible Party and Stakeholder Workshop Facilitation Supported by Katz Associates, this task will include facilitation of up to 2 workshops with RPs and stakeholders: Table 1. Stakeholder Workshops Workshop # I Purpose I Anticipated Schedule 50 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 1St Workshop - Kickoff meeting Summer 2013 -Share anticipated schedule of WQIP process and future opportunities for input - Solicit data - Obtain input on water quality conditions and potential strategies 2nd Workshop - Obtain input on numeric goals and strategies Summer/Early Fall 201 For each of these workshops, Katz Associates will perform the following: Meet with Tetra Tech and AMEC for workshop preparation and developing workshop materials. o Facilitation of workshops. ® Developing summary material of workshop outcomes. In addition, Katz Associates will provide facilitation of up to 5 panel meetings with the WQICP to be determined by RPs, The timing of these panel meetings will be determined throughout the duration of the project. Deliverables: • 2 workshops ® Summary material of workshop outcomes ® 5 RP panel meetings Schedule The approximate schedule for deliverables for this SOW is shown in Table 2. This schedule assumes a NTP of July 1, 2013. All work will be completed by December 31, 2015. 0 51 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Q Table 2. Schedule of Deliverables Deliverable Submitting Receivin Due Date Task 1— Project Management Tetra Tech city Monthly invoices Task 4 — Jurisdictional- Specific Strategies and/or Activities that may be Implemented by the Responsible Parties Task 4.1 - Identification of Numeric Goals Tetra Tech attendance at one meeting of RP Tetra Tech All RPs TBD workgoup to discuss numeric goals Draft Section 4.1 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMC C and May 4, 2014 Draft II Section 4.1 of the WQIP (incoporating Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 comments from RPs ) city Draft III Section 4.1 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and FY 15 (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) City Final Section 4.1 of the WQIP — FYI 5 Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 Task 4.2 - Jurisdictional - Specific Strategies and/or Activities that may be Im lemented by the Responsible Parties Tetra Tech attendance at four meetings of RP Tetra Tech All RPs TBD work ou Tetra Tech have three meetings with each individual RP to discuss strategies and Tetra Tech All RPs TBD activities to be included in WQIP Draft Section 4.2 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and May 4, 2014 Ci Draft II Section 4.2 of the WQIP ( incoporating Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 comments from RPs ) City Draft III Section 4.2 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 (incoporating comments from Stakeholders ) city Final Section 4.2 of the WQIP — FY15 Tetra Tech AMEC and FY 15 Task 4.3 - Assessment of Reasonable Progress Toward Achieving Jurisdictional Goals Tetra Tech attendance at three meetings of the RP work ou Tetra Tech All RPs TBD Draft Section 4.3 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and May 4, 2014 Ci Draft II Section 4.3 of the WQIP (incoporating Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 comments from RPs) City Draft III Section 4.3 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) City Final Section 43 of the WQIP -- FYI 5 Tetra Tech AMEC and FY 15 I city Task 4.4 - Jurisdictional Water Quality Improvement Schedules Tetra Tech attendance at up to two meetings of Tetra Tech All RPs TBD the RP workgou Tetra Tech will have one meeting with each Tetra Tech. All RPs TBD individual RP to each jurisdiction's schedule Draft Section 4.4 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and May 4, 2014 Draft II Section 4.4 of the WQIP ( incoporating Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 comments from RPs City Draft III Section 4.4 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) Ci Final Section 4.4 of the WQIP — FY15 Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 Task 7 — Responsible Party and Stakeholder Workshop Facilitation 10 52 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN Deliverable Submitting Receiving Due Date 1st Workshop Katz All RPs Summer 2013 2nd Workshop Katz All RPs Summer/Early Fall 2013 Workshop summaries Katz All RPs, One week following workshops RP panel meetings Katz All RPs TBD 3.0 COST SUMMARY This section provides the data and information for pricing the technical support to be provided under this Task Order. The following table presents the overall cost summary and the estimated task - specific costs for providing the support outlined in the SOW. Tetra Tech proposes to perform this Delivery Order on a Time and Material basis using the rates included in our contract. Other direct costs (ODCs) will be billed at actual incurred amounts. Tetra Tech proposes to invoice in accordance with Tetra Tech's 12 accounting periods each year. 11 53 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 0 Table 3. Costs Task Description Cost FY14 Cost FY15 Cost FYI 1 Project Management and Reporting $19,821 $2,447 $2,447 4 Development of Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies and Schedule 4.1 Identification of Numeric Goals and Schedules $15,784 $0 $0 4.2 Jurisdictional- Specific Strategies and /or Activities 4.2.1 Identification of Nonstructural BMPs $40,034 $3,151 $3,151 4.2.2 Identification of Structural BMPs $16,273 $428 $428 4.2.3 Identification of Opportunities for Green Streets $13,153 $0 $0 4.3 Assessment of Reasonable Progress Toward Achieving Jurisdictional Goals 4.3.1 Development of Watershed Model of Existin Conditions $48,055 $0 $0 4.3.2 Development of Jurisdictional Goals $22,362 $1,884 $1,884 4.3.3 Load Reduction and Feasibility Analysis $159,305 $2,912 $2,912 4.4 Jurisdictional Water Quality Improvement Schedules $21,754 $2,043 $2,043 7 Responsible Party and Stakeholder Workshop Facilitation $6,980 $0 $0 Total $363,521 $12,865 $12,865 12 54 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 COST - SHARE AGREEMENT San Dieguito Watershed Management Area San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Hoard Order No. 119- 2013 -0001 WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN NOVEMBER 5, 2013 This Cost Share Agreement (AGREEMENT), entered into by and among the Cities of San Diego, Del Mar, Escondido, Solana Beach, and Poway, and the County of San Diego (hereinafter collectively called PARTIES and individually called PARTY) establishes the responsibilities of each PARTY with respect to carrying out collaborative activities in the San Dieguito Watershed Management Area (WATERSHED) to support compliance with San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) Order No. R9- 2013 -0001, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) Draining the Watersheds Within the San Diego Region (hereinafter called the MS4 PERMIT). WHEREAS, the SDRWQCB adopted Order No. R9- 2013 -0001 issuing the MS4 PERMIT to the Phase I MS4s in the San Diego Region on May 8, 2013; and WHEREAS, the SDRWQCB has determined that the PARTIES are responsible for developing a Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) for the WATERSHED under the MS4 PERMIT; and, WHEREAS, the MS4 PERMIT requires the WQIP to assess priority receiving water quality conditions associated with MS4 discharges, develop strategies to improve receiving water quality conditions associated with MS4 discharges, develop a monitoring and assessment program, and implement adaptive management; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed to work together to develop the WQIP to meet the requirements of the MS4 PERMIT; and San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 1 of 12 55 of 99 Attachment B January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 WHEREAS, the PARTIES recognize that expenditures will be needed to develop the WQIP for the WATERSHED over the term of the AGREEMENT. The cost will be shared equitably among the PARTIES as indicated in Section 4; and, WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed upon the cost estimates and scope of work as described in EXHIBITS 1, 2, 3 and 4; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed to recognize the City of San Diego as the PARTY LEAD under this AGREEMENT, and the City of San Diego agrees to provide project management and contract administration services for the PARTIES, including hiring a mutually agreed upon consultant to perform the identified scope of work in EXHIBITS 2, 3 and 4 per the cost estimate described in EXHIBIT 1; and WHEREAS, each of the PARTIES has an Americans With Disabilities Act compliance program that substantially complies with the PARTY LEAD's Americans With Disabilities Act Compliance /City Contracts requirements set forth in Council Policy 100 -04, adopted by San Diego Resolution R- 282153 and incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the PARTIES hereto mutually agree as follows: (1) PURPOSE: This AGREEMENT is entered into for the purpose of outlining the responsibilities of the PARTIES including funding for collaborative activities associated with the development of a WQIP that complies with the MS4 PERMIT in the WATERSHED. Activities associated with development of the WQIP are described in detail in EXHIBIT 2, 3 and 4. (2) TERM: The term of this AGREEMENT shall commence on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES, and shall continue until December 31, 2015. (3) PARTY RESPONSIBILITIES AND PARTICIPATION: A. RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTY LEAD: The City of San Diego incurs the responsibility of overall project management, solicitation and administration of consultant contracts, submittal of required work products to the SDRWQCB, and acting as a liaison to the SDRWQCB on behalf of the PARTIES. San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 2 of 12 56 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 B. RESPONSIBILITIES OF ALL PARTIES: Each PARTY agrees to participate in collaborative efforts by assigning one (1) person to serve as the PARTY's representative to participate in meetings (at least 80% of all meetings), collaborate on developing strategies, participate in decision making, and review work products and submittals pursuant to the schedules in EXHIBITS 2, 3, and 4 . Further, analyses performed as part of this AGREEMENT, and subsequent conclusions, findings, and recommendations developed as a result of the analyses, will be completed using known relevant and acceptable water quality data. Each PARTY agrees to supply the PARTY LEAD with data associated with its jurisdiction (e.g., water quality data, rainfall data, land use data, etc.) within the deadlines indicated in EXHIBITS 3 and 4. C. CONSENSUS OF PARTIES: The PARTY LEAD agrees make a good faith effort to facilitate consensus among the PARTIES before finalizing GROUP DELIVERABLES under this AGREEMENT. If consensus is not reached, the PARTY LEAD shall make final decisions regarding GROUP DELIVERABLES, except for WQIP content that presents direct commitments to implement projects or studies that would require funding from a PARTY to implement, or information in the WQIP that directly presents costs for another PARTY, in which cases the impacted PARTY may make final decisions on those portions of the MANDATORY GROUP DELIVERABLES. GROUP DELIVERABLES are identified in the WQIP Table of Contents, in EXHIBIT 2. D. PARTY - SPECIFIC DELIVERABLES: Each PARTY assumes full authority to make decisions associated with their PARTY - SPECIFIC DELIVERABLES. PARTY- SPECIFC DELIVERABLES are identified in WQIP Table of Contents, in EXHIBIT 2. If any PARTY is not satisfied with a PARTY - SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE prepared under this AGREEMENT, then that PARTY may, at its own cost and expense, develop and submit separately that PARTY's own version of all or part of the PARTY - SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE to the PARTY LEAD by 5:00 p.m. the day before the PARTY- SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE is due to the SDRWQCB for inclusion in the WQIP. Notwithstanding a PARTY's dissatisfaction with a deliverable prepared under this AGREEMENT, or a PARTY's development and submission of a its own version of all or part of a PARTY- SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE, or both, each PARTY shall remain responsible for the payment of its share of costs for the development of the WQIP and each PARTY - SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE applicable to the PARTY as set forth in Section 4. San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 3 of 12 57 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 (4) PROGRAM BUDGET AND COSTS: The cost of developing the WQIP will not exceed $293,435 for Fiscal Year 2014, $119,675 for Fiscal Year 2015, $17,856 for Fiscal Year 2016. The costs will be shared as shown in EXHIBIT 1 and are based on a formula of 45% land area, 45% population (2010 Census data), and 10% equal division fee for each PARTY contributing storm water discharges in the WATERSHED. (5) PAYMENTS: Each PARTY shall pay its share of expenses within 90 days of receipt of an invoice from the PARTY LEAD. An invoice for the above TOTAL cost -share amount shall be sent to each PARTY no later than May 31 of each year the AGREEMENT is in effect. Funds collected and not expended at the end of the project shall be refunded to each PARTY. (6) NON - COMPLIANCE WITH AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS: Any PARTY that fails to comply with the conditions of this AGREEMENT shall be solely liable for any penalties lawfully assessed on that PARTY resulting from such non - compliance. Failure to comply with AGREEMENT conditions within specified timelines shall constitute non- compliance with the AGREEMENT. (7) AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT: This AGREEMENT may be amended only by consent of all the PARTIES. Any amendment shall be effective when authorized in writing and signed by the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. (88) GOVERNING LAW: This AGREEMENT shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. If any provision or provisions shall be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the validity, legality, and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. In addition, each PARTY agrees to comply with all federal, state and local laws and ordinances applicable to the work to be performed under the terms of this AGREEMENT. (9) CONSENT AND BREACH NOT WAIVER: No term or provision hereof shall be deemed waived and no breach excused, unless such waiver or consent shall be in writing and signed by the PARTIES to have waived or consented. Any consent by any PARTY to, or waiver of, a breach by the other, whether expressed or implied, shall not constitute consent to, waiver of, or excuse for any other different or subsequent breach.. (10) DISPUTES: The PARTIES agree to mediate any dispute prior to filing suit or prosecuting suit against the other parties. At least one mediation session of one day's duration with an agreed -upon mediator shall be held prior to any PARTY filing any suit San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 4 of 12 58 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 or action with regard to this AGREEMENT; the mediation costs shall be shared equally by the PARTIES participating in the mediation. In the event suit is brought upon this AGREEMENT to enforce its terms, each PARTY shall be responsible for their own attorneys' fees and costs. (11) LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY: Each PARTY to this AGREEMENT (1) shall retain its legal responsibility to comply with the MS4 PERMIT; and (2) shall pay all fines, penalties, and costs which may arise out of such PARTY's non - compliance with the MS4 PERMIT. The PARTIES acknowledge and agree that participation in this AGREEMENT does not admit or create any liability or responsibility as a discharger for any draft or potential future TMDLs. (12) APPLICATION OF PRIOR AGREEMENTS: This AGREEMENT constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter; all prior agreements, representations, statements, negotiations, and undertakings are superseded hereby. (13) TERMINATION: Any PARTY may terminate this AGREEMENT by giving written notice to the other parties no less than 30 days prior to the effective date of termination. Termination of this AGREEMENT does not release any PARTY for obligations of the MS4 PERMIT, nor does it release the PARTY from its financial responsibilities as outlined in Section 4 of this AGREEMENT. Upon termination, the terminating PARTY shall pay its cost share in full. (14) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: The obligation of each PARTY is limited to the funds appropriated for this AGREEMENT as set forth in Section 4 above. Entering into this AGREEMENT shall not be construed as obligating the PARTIES to future payment of money in excess of appropriations authorized by law. (15) EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT: This AGREEMENT may be executed in counterpart and the signed counterparts shall constitute a single instrument. (18) RIGHT TO AUDIT: Each PARTY retains the right to review and audit, and the reasonable right of access to other PARTIES' respective premises to review and audit the PARTIES' compliance with the provisions of this AGREEMENT [PARTY's Right]. The PARTY's Right includes the right to inspect and photocopy same, and to retain copies, outside of the PARTIES' premises, of any and all records, including any and all San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 5 of 12 59 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 books, records, and documents, related to the AGREEMENT with appropriate safeguards, if such retention is deemed necessary by the auditing PARTY in its sole discretion. This information shall be kept by the auditing PARTY in the strictest confidence allowed by law. San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 6 of 12 60 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: Date: City of San Diego I HEREBY APPROVE the form and legality of the foregoing Agreement this day of 12013, Jan I. Goldsmith, City Attorney By: Deputy City Attorney DATE San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 7 of 12 61 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: For the County of San Diego Date: Approved as to Form County Counsel Date Signature Printed Name: John M. Pellegrino Title: Director of Purchasing and Contracting Signature Printed Name: James O'Day Title: Senior Deputy County Counsel San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 8 of 12 62 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: Date: City of Del Mar Approved as to Form City of Del Mar Counsel Date Signature San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 9 of 12 63 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: Date: City of Poway Approved as to Form City of Poway Counsel Date Signature San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 10 of 12 64 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: For the City of Escondido Date: Approved as to Form City of Escondido Counsel Date Signature Signature San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 11 of 12 65 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed and executed the day and year first above written. This AGREEMENT may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on the date of the last signature of the duly authorized representatives of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS THEREOF, this AGREEMENT is executed as follows: For the City of Solana Beach Date: Signature, Approved as to Form City of Solana Beach Counsel Date Signature San Dieguito Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan Cost Share Agreement November 5, 2013 Page 12 of 12 66 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Exhibit 1 Cost Share 67 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 W, 0 N CD N CD RR �/ CY Pre w 164 r® W VJ .F o*y !!1 a •Vr Id) CO O H W A �G to N O \0 V) 00 v) o V c�2 CJ ,: . M M L; O 000 Cd C3 W 'w C!i n CA O C,q c0+q7 :A �O fiN9 N � CA 00 Ln cf) N N n ii O ri vi Oft N O cV O 'p N 00 n �Q M dl C4 N 'O U1, rl O On+ A _ d r~ N Ln o�O M 00 o N Lq r� ai]d �G O W N O \0 V) 00 v) o V W q 0 o o q vi Zq d z Fado %0 M CA 00 Ln cf) ii O 'p N 00 n �Q M dl C4 N 'O U1, rl O On+ N C CO 0 O O O MR N ft? O N M rA 0 O 8 M rn O M of g O I" CT r. Q OO v r O O r Cm00) � r r O O e CM O L r ago 0 o m rn ado boo C) n a°o r (0OO o m m � gg gm coo N O O vi O CO t�0.p pp -9 O O O 'z r2 9 � - COO N g mr- N((p7� C O f00 N omrn 0 E cli r O CA ~ OW r; t^O Qi 0 00 of V0 LO r- CO^D e. O 0 O V N � J C-4 O C O O � ^ U.) N CO O r KJ try CO N N O S N 7 r v v Q o0y o c °ou°�n ri 6 o L N LO N C co O .066 _o p y Ovlh L C r p r- 0 p Cl) v O O N a a)j r d CS N m O � '00 COm C yR V GOCO 0)i N < W, o p y pvfDM vUi ¢`�°$g �ac00oo0i L6 C6 Cli o_ O N -0000 x iV : a m CA W 68 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 x o V W q 0 o o q vi Zq d z 0 O O O MR N ft? O N M rA 0 O 8 M rn O M of g O I" CT r. Q OO v r O O r Cm00) � r r O O e CM O L r ago 0 o m rn ado boo C) n a°o r (0OO o m m � gg gm coo N O O vi O CO t�0.p pp -9 O O O 'z r2 9 � - COO N g mr- N((p7� C O f00 N omrn 0 E cli r O CA ~ OW r; t^O Qi 0 00 of V0 LO r- CO^D e. O 0 O V N � J C-4 O C O O � ^ U.) N CO O r KJ try CO N N O S N 7 r v v Q o0y o c °ou°�n ri 6 o L N LO N C co O .066 _o p y Ovlh L C r p r- 0 p Cl) v O O N a a)j r d CS N m O � '00 COm C yR V GOCO 0)i N < W, o p y pvfDM vUi ¢`�°$g �ac00oo0i L6 C6 Cli o_ O N -0000 x iV : a m CA W 68 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 O N a N ao Ln I? iRl � 4�p !SV via J r rr�q �J "L3 V r_ � aP pO O H N 01 8o H Q 0 l7 O wl Fwv 115 W 11) ry O 41 dI O O QD O M � 3 a Q O (V 06 Lei M a� r. r--� F9 C, ( � M "0 d O -N O O 17 0, tV M A, M N Ln O N N n Cf) M 'D r- 4 t� O :7 m ,07y a ON N cq H 0 T N 2 r Ln di T OH+� M ¢ O F vi 0 s v CO u) cD r Cn v- N M C7 COO N cD 07 C4 NCOO to r CD Cb T {T 01 T r tO to T m to T N O O O N to c0 O r r C6 O O 000 V ci O - O O o_corn -t oo -: 000 co N LO NO O O O O CO N N 8 r O aa r O O OD N O O _Om co O N O O pp r r (p (p 00 a N O_ O O O Co ^ 0) N 0 O O p 0 co n 0 Ao l IM IM W C3, o r-- r- y=j r pi 0 C O T �j 0on n iv 1- co 0 C O LO f` n N C - m t- c+i > w tNp O O ^ 4 O O p O 0 � cnp � v a ° o°�4.m 0 ri v o a Oo� < .� 1 a O V N ;o LO I-- m a 0 r T N C'7 �N4 pLon C 3 O o� O iii O y a r- O to) O 0) Q Cp N Q y cp U OO t� p_ C o � V CaOOU `� N C91-00 p 4, oa orn L) Q��d LO p O CS r U ;v NTCD x r t v <D O� LLf 69 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 O wl v o U Qc°2uzz O� 00 Ca�� Ln O ¢ a O (V 06 Lei M a� O O 17 ao M A, M N Ln O N N n Cf) M 'D r- 4 t� O a T N 2 r Ln di T OH+� M ¢ O F vi 0 s v CO u) cD r Cn v- N M C7 COO N cD 07 C4 NCOO to r CD Cb T {T 01 T r tO to T m to T N O O O N to c0 O r r C6 O O 000 V ci O - O O o_corn -t oo -: 000 co N LO NO O O O O CO N N 8 r O aa r O O OD N O O _Om co O N O O pp r r (p (p 00 a N O_ O O O Co ^ 0) N 0 O O p 0 co n 0 Ao l IM IM W C3, o r-- r- y=j r pi 0 C O T �j 0on n iv 1- co 0 C O LO f` n N C - m t- c+i > w tNp O O ^ 4 O O p O 0 � cnp � v a ° o°�4.m 0 ri v o a Oo� < .� 1 a O V N ;o LO I-- m a 0 r T N C'7 �N4 pLon C 3 O o� O iii O y a r- O to) O 0) Q Cp N Q y cp U OO t� p_ C o � V CaOOU `� N C91-00 p 4, oa orn L) Q��d LO p O CS r U ;v NTCD x r t v <D O� LLf 69 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 V v o U Qc°2uzz Z 00 Ca�� Ln O ¢ T N 2 r Ln di T OH+� M ¢ O F vi 0 s v CO u) cD r Cn v- N M C7 COO N cD 07 C4 NCOO to r CD Cb T {T 01 T r tO to T m to T N O O O N to c0 O r r C6 O O 000 V ci O - O O o_corn -t oo -: 000 co N LO NO O O O O CO N N 8 r O aa r O O OD N O O _Om co O N O O pp r r (p (p 00 a N O_ O O O Co ^ 0) N 0 O O p 0 co n 0 Ao l IM IM W C3, o r-- r- y=j r pi 0 C O T �j 0on n iv 1- co 0 C O LO f` n N C - m t- c+i > w tNp O O ^ 4 O O p O 0 � cnp � v a ° o°�4.m 0 ri v o a Oo� < .� 1 a O V N ;o LO I-- m a 0 r T N C'7 �N4 pLon C 3 O o� O iii O y a r- O to) O 0) Q Cp N Q y cp U OO t� p_ C o � V CaOOU `� N C91-00 p 4, oa orn L) Q��d LO p O CS r U ;v NTCD x r t v <D O� LLf 69 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 O N O) N OD rl > 00000 CYF"s7 W o ped a� o� ® a R4 a I 00 00 00 00 00 00 w> Ow 4NA 6 Q w r+. oo n Q� M w O %w O 3° O0 �. O d' ID `p 0Hp O M fir` (� H D 0 ta O 0 N 14; ap O N 06 r, Ui Q5i o an C. O 'C% H 00 O� M (h eM N 1.0 M H a I 00 00 00 00 00 00 w> Ow 4NA 6 Q #O 0 0 U d Lq Q� M < WoRU 4J O0 �. O d' ID `p 0Hp O M fir` (� H 0 M �j N 14; ap O N 06 r, Ui Q5i M 4 C. O 'C% H 00 O� M (h eM N 1.0 M H O 0� N 0 C7 r Q" % n N t� � m O M 'C Kt in � LlV ►7 �cdl H #O 0 0 U o° O 0 O H ID 00 M O Z9 off° O 8 ON M M H n q�� V LO C t0 O CC o i O O M o� 0 H H O ri v 00 - 0 co rn O O vi r COO Q) ao9 N 0 X00 LO -too v�.i0 LO LO C6 LO o co rn jog T r O fD CA aoo oCD co N 0 0 T T O NO 0 O N � r CD co N M O 0 0 owco N00T N �Oy O fpID T T O (D N O to f, W ON C6 pUUi r M OfD N Ln t0 f� Gi Cq ono m n �i to 0 (0 M° o M8ti n n O M N 0 0 LO f-- 0 0 0 0 O h CO a L6 C O N N J w r O 0 0 O C Oton H3 to N CV C ¢ CV O O N O ON t� - N M a o 00". LO I- .. N O U m Nam r 8 5p� y "y O 0 N @D 13 7 D 06 ti Q C C7�oo p afOOO 00 U') N r 00p LO 70 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Lq Q� M < WoRU Q O W Z aWa C, 0 M �j N 14; ap O N 06 r, Ui cf� M 4 C. O 'C% H 00 O� M (h eM N 1.0 M H O 0� N 0 C7 r Q" % n o° O 0 O H ID 00 M O Z9 off° O 8 ON M M H n q�� V LO C t0 O CC o i O O M o� 0 H H O ri v 00 - 0 co rn O O vi r COO Q) ao9 N 0 X00 LO -too v�.i0 LO LO C6 LO o co rn jog T r O fD CA aoo oCD co N 0 0 T T O NO 0 O N � r CD co N M O 0 0 owco N00T N �Oy O fpID T T O (D N O to f, W ON C6 pUUi r M OfD N Ln t0 f� Gi Cq ono m n �i to 0 (0 M° o M8ti n n O M N 0 0 LO f-- 0 0 0 0 O h CO a L6 C O N N J w r O 0 0 O C Oton H3 to N CV C ¢ CV O O N O ON t� - N M a o 00". LO I- .. N O U m Nam r 8 5p� y "y O 0 N @D 13 7 D 06 ti Q C C7�oo p afOOO 00 U') N r 00p LO 70 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 U < WoRU Q O W Z aWa o° O 0 O H ID 00 M O Z9 off° O 8 ON M M H n q�� V LO C t0 O CC o i O O M o� 0 H H O ri v 00 - 0 co rn O O vi r COO Q) ao9 N 0 X00 LO -too v�.i0 LO LO C6 LO o co rn jog T r O fD CA aoo oCD co N 0 0 T T O NO 0 O N � r CD co N M O 0 0 owco N00T N �Oy O fpID T T O (D N O to f, W ON C6 pUUi r M OfD N Ln t0 f� Gi Cq ono m n �i to 0 (0 M° o M8ti n n O M N 0 0 LO f-- 0 0 0 0 O h CO a L6 C O N N J w r O 0 0 O C Oton H3 to N CV C ¢ CV O O N O ON t� - N M a o 00". LO I- .. N O U m Nam r 8 5p� y "y O 0 N @D 13 7 D 06 ti Q C C7�oo p afOOO 00 U') N r 00p LO 70 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Exhibit 2 Table of Contents 71 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Scope of Work: WQIP Table of Contents San Dieguito Watershed Management Areas Section Content Consultant Consultant Deliverable Type Task Section 1. Introduction 1.1 WQIP Purpose Discuss the purpose and goal of the WQIP based on the Permit, and WQIP development process including public AMEC Task 3 aRici ation 1.2 Watershed Provide the spatial context of the WQIP. Include a G1S Management Area map of the WMA, sub - watersheds, and jurisdictional Group boundaries. This will include an overall description of the AMEC Task 3 Deliverable area including LU categories (percentages), vegetation cover, and other pertinent information. 1.3 WQIP Describe the organization of the document identifying the AMEC Task 3 Organization corresponding Permit requirements Section 2. Identification of Priority Water Quality Conditions 2.1 Assessment of Compile data from RPs and public. Summarize Clean Receiving Water Water Act 303(d) list, LTEA Section 2, CLRP Section 3, AMEC Task 2 Conditions (B.2.a) and WURMP, JURMP, and Monitoring Annual Reports. Address considerations given in B.2.a.(1 -9). 2.2 Assessment of Compile data from RPs and public. Summarize LTEA Impacts from MS4 Section 2, CLRP Sections 4 and 5, and WURMP, AMEC Task 2 Discharges (B.2.b) JURMP, and Monitoring Annual Reports. Address considerations given in B.2.b. ] -6). Group 2.3 Identification of Use information in 2.1 and 2.2 to develop a list of priority Priority Water water quality conditions by sub - watershed. Describe the Deliverable Quality conditions including (13.2.c(i)(a -e)): Conditions (B.2.c) • Beneficial use(s) • Geographic extent AMEC Task 2 • Temporal extent • Copermittees with MS4s discharges that may cause or contribute to the priority water quality condition • Assessment of the adequacy of monitoring data and highlight data gaps. Section 3. Identification of MS4 Sources of Pollutants and/or Stressors 3.1 Identification of Identify known and suspected sources of storm water and Known and non -storm water pollutants or other stressors associated Suspected Sources with MS4 discharges that cause or contribute to the (B.2.d) highest water quality conditions specified under B.2.c (Section 2.3). Identification will consider: • Pollutant generating facilities • Location of the MS4 AMEC Task 2 • Other know and suspected sources Group • Review of available data Deliverable • Adequacy of available data Section 3.1 will summarize and consolidate the existing source inventory in LTEA Section 3.3, CLRP, and other available references. 3.2 Prioritization of Describe the prioritization process and summarize and MS4 Sources and consolidate the priority sources and stressors from AMEC Task 2 Stressors (B.2.d) Section 3.1 according to the CLRP Section 3.4, et. al., the Page 1 of 3 72 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Scope of Work: W®IP Table of Contents San Dieeuito Watershed Management Areas Page 2 of 3 73 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 LTEA, and other available references. 3.3 Summary of MS4 Section 3.3 will summarize the priority sources and Sources by stressors from Section 12 according to jurisdiction. AMEC Task 2 Party-Specific Jurisdiction Deliverable Section 4. Water Quality Improvement Goals, Strategies, and Schedules 4.1 Watershed o Final numeric goals to be achieved in the MS4 Management Area discharges for the highest priority water quality Numeric Goals conditions. (B.3.a(1)) o Interim numeric goals capable of demonstrating Tetra -Tech Task 4 Group incremental progress toward achieving the final Deliverable numeric goals in the MS4 discharges. o Schedule for measuring progress toward achieving the interim and final numeric goals. 4.2 Jurisdictional . Description of strategies and/or activities for each Water Quality jurisdictional runoff management program Improvement component. Strategies a Circumstances or conditions when and where the (B.3.b(1)) strategies or /activities should be or will be Tetra -Tech Task 4 Party-Specific implemented. Deliverable o Monitoring, information collection, special studies, and/or data analysis that is necessary to assess the effectiveness of the strategy and/or activity. 4.3 Jurisdictional a Jurisdictional schedule for implementing strategies Water Quality and achieving numeric goals Improvement Tetra -Tech Task 4 Pte'- Specific Schedules Deliverable (B.3.a(2) and B.3. 3 Section 5 Water Quality Improvement Monitoring and Assessment Program 5.0 Integrated The Integrated Monitoring and Assessment Program will Monitoring and be designed to incorporate the monitoring and assessment Assessment requirements of Provision D, Attachment E (TMDLs), Program (13.4) and Attachment A (ASBS). The program will assess: 1) Progress toward achieving the numeric goals and schedules Group 2) Progress toward addressing the highest priority AMEC Task 3 Deliverable water quality conditions 3) Each RP's overall effort to implement the WQIP. Section 5 will provide a brief summary of the Program. The complete Program will be included as an appendix to the WQIP. Section 6. Iterative Approach and Adaptive Management Process 6.1 Adaptation of W IP Components 6.1.1 Re- Provide a list of triggers to adapt the Priority receiving Evaluation of water quality conditions. The re- evaluation will consider: Group Priority Water Progress toward improved water quality through AEC Task 3 Deliverable Quality implementation of the WQIP Page 2 of 3 73 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Scone of Work: WO1P Table of Contents San Dieguito Watershed Manaeement Areas Conditions • New information developed when the requirements (B.S.a) ofB.2.a -c have been re- evaluated • Spatial and temporal accuracy of monitoring data • Other available data • Recommendations from the SDRWCQB and public 6.1.2 Adaptation of Provide a list of triggers to adapt the strategies and Goals, schedules. The re- evaluation will consider: Strategies and • Priority conditions, numeric goals, and schedules Schedules modified per Section 6. 1.1 (B.5.b) • Progress toward achieving numeric goals and outcomes according to schedules • New policies or regulations AMEC Task 3 • Measureable and demonstrable reductions of non - storm water discharges and pollutants in stormwater • New information developed when the requirements of B.2.b and B.2.d have been re- evaluated • Efficiency in implementing the WQIPs • Recommendations from the SDRWCQB and public 6.1.3 Adaptation of Provide a list of triggers to adapt monitoring and Monitoring assessment program based on new and available data. and Assessment AMEC Task 3 Program (B.S.c) 6.2 WQIP Update Describe the process for modifying the WQIP based on Process (B.6.b and Section 6.1. AMEC Task 3 F.2.c) 6.3 JURMP Update Describe the process for modifying the JURMP based AMEC Task 3 Process (F.2.a) modifications to the WQIP. Section 7. References Appendices (including complete Monitoring and Assessment Program) Page 3 of 3 74 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Exhibit 3 Scope of Work AM EC 75 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105099 Task Order 44 SCOPE OF WORK: DEVELOPMENT OF THE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN: SAN DIEGUITO WATERSHED 1.0 PURPOSE AND CONSULTANT TEAM The purpose of this multi -year Scope of Work (SOW) is to develop the WQIP for the San Dieguito Watershed. Efforts will include the selection of Priority Water Quality Conditions and Potential Strategies required under Provision F. La and the development of the Initial Draft WQIP incorporating the remaining components of Provision B. Two additional drafts of the WQIP will be prepared along with the Final WQIP to be submitted in January 2015 to the City during Fiscal Year (FY) 15. The Final WQIP will be submitted to the SDRWQCB in May 2015. Additional support will be provided during FY 16, should the SDRWQCB have any comments after the May 2015 submittal of the Final WQIP. The WQIP will be based on the outline provided in Attachment A. The document will be organized jurisdictionally on a sub - watershed basis. The sub - watersheds in the San Dieguito Watershed include San Dieguito River below Lake Hodges (beach, lagoon, and River), the watershed above Lake Hodges (Lake Hodges and all drainages below Sutherland Reservoir), and the watershed above Sutherland Reservoir (Sutherland Reservoir and drainages above to the headwaters). A description of this work is provided in Section 2.0 of this SOW, along with individual task deliverables based on the Permit approved on May 8, 2013. The Permit's effective date starts on June 27, 2013 (50 days after Permit approval). An anticipated SOW start date of August 1, 2013 is anticipated. Project schedules and a summary of deliverables are presented in Section 3.0. Costs are summarized in Section 4.0 and detailed in Attachment B. The Consultation Team will consist of the AMEC Team and the Tetra -Tech Team. The AMEC Environment and Infrastructure, Inc. (AMEC) Team will include AMEC, Larry Walker and Associates, Tetra -Tech, Inc. (Tetra- Tech), Brock Bernstein, and Armand Ruby Consulting under City Contract Number H105099. The Tetra -Tech Team will consist of Tetra -Tech, Inc. and Katz and Associates under City Contract Number H 104445. The AMEC Team will have the lead role in the development of the WQIP and will be responsible for all deliverables to the City of San Diego. The Tetra -Tech Team will prepare Section 4 of the WQIP, as described below, and will deliver those portions to the AMEC Team. Additionally, the Tetra -Tech Team will facilitate any scheduled workshops and meetings with the Water Quality Improvement Consultation Panel. The AMEC Team will prepare all deliverables to the City and RPs and will serve as the sole point - of- contact with the City and RPs for WQIP development. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Task 1— Project Administration and Meetings The AMEC Project Manager will be responsible for the general project -level administration and management throughout the duration of this project. The AMEC Project Manager will be the single point - of- contact for the City, RPs, and the Tetra -Tech Team. Since this is a multi -year SOW; the cost and scope for the project management and internal project management meetings is estimated by FY. Internal project management meetings will allow the AMEC Team and the City to track project budget and 76 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105 099 Task Order 44 schedules. A description of other types of project - related meetings is provided under this task, though the costs for the meetings are included in the budgets for Tasks 2 through 5. Project Meetings Four categories of meetings, in addition to internal project management meetings, will be included in this SOW: 1. RP Work group Meetings: RP workgroup meetings will provide a forum for the discussion topics related to the development of the WQIP for all watershed RPs or sub - watershed groups, as appropriate. Each month, at a minimum, one 1 -hour RP workgroup meetings will be held. The AMEC Team will prepare for and attend up to 29 RP workgroup meetings (16 meetings in FY 14, 9 meetings in FY 15, and 4 meetings in FY16). The AMEC Team will prepare presentation and meeting materials as necessary. Some Consultant Team members will attend in person while others will attend via conference call. A tentative schedule of topics for discussion is provided in Section 3.0 (Table 1). Meeting topics may vary depending on priorities but the deadlines for required decision points will remain the same. The Tetra Tech Team will also attend up to 8 RP workgroup meetings to discuss Section 4. 2. Individual RP Meetings: Individual RP meetings will be held to discuss individual jurisdictional needs. The AMEC Team will prepare meeting materials for and attend up to 12 meetings (two with each RP) for 1 hour each. After each meeting the AMEC Team will compile action items. Individual RP meetings may be held in person or via conference call. Selected Consultant Team members will participate. The Tetra Tech Team will also attend Individual RP meetings under their SOW. _Water Quality Improvement Consultation Panel: Provision F.l.a(1)(b) requires the formation of a Water Quality Improvement Consultation Panel (or Technical Advisory Committee -TAC) to provide recommendations during the development of the WQIP. The RPs will meet with the TAC to solicit their input in conjunction with public workshops. The AMEC Team will prepare for and attend a total of up to 5 TAC meetings (2 in FY 14 and 3 in FYI 5). These meetings will be facilitated and recorded by the Tetra -Tech Team. Each meeting is expected to be 3 hours.long (including prep time). Preparation by the AMEC Team will consist of developing meeting materials, including presentations, handouts, and agendas, as necessary. Draft and final meeting materials will be delivered to the RPs. The Tetra -Tech Team will prepare meeting minutes. 4. Public Workshops: Provision F. l .a(1)(a) requires the input of public stakeholders in the development of the WQIP. The RPs will hold public workshops to solicit public input in coordination with the San Dieguito TAC to be convened by the City. The AMEC Team will prepare for and attend a total of 2 public workshops, which will be organized, facilitated, and recorded by the Tetra -Tech Team. Each workshop is expected to be up to 5 hours long. A tentative schedule of topics for discussion is provided in Section 3.0. It is anticipated that all public comments will be provided during the workshop given that the workshop schedule and topics will be made public to the RPs, TAC, and public stakeholders prior to the beginning of the WQIP development process. 77 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 Preparation by the AMEC Team will consist of developing meeting materials, including presentations, handouts, and agendas, as necessary. Draft and final meeting materials will be delivered to the RPs. The Tetra -Tech Team will prepare meeting minutes. Public workshops for the San Dieguito Watershed (this Task Order) and the Los Periasquitos Watershed (Task Order 45) will be held concurrently. Accordingly, the attached Cost Estimate reflects half the effort required for the AMEC team for these workshops. The remaining effort is included in Task Order 45. Sub -Task 1.1— Project Administration and Meetings — FY 14 Project administration includes coordinating with the City and Consultant Team to achieve project goals, budgets, and schedules during FY 14. The following tasks will be performed by AMEC as part of the task: Coordination and communication with City and RPs. Coordination and communication with the Consultant Team; and Administration of the contract for this project, including monthly invoicing, deliverable coordination, and budget tracking; This sub -task also includes discussions with the City and Consultant Team, including preparation for and attendance at a kick -off meeting and internal project management meetings. Some team members will attend in person while others will attend via conference call. It is assumed there will be total of 12 internal project management meetings per fiscal year with the City, AMEC Project Manager, and selected Consultant Team members. Sub -Task 1.2 — Project Administration and Meetings — FY 15 The project administration and meetings scope for FY 15 will be the same as the scope described in Sub - Task l.1. Sub -Task 1.3 — Project Administration and Meetings — FY 16 The project administration and meetings scope for FY 16 will be the same as the scope described in Sub - Task 1.1. Task 2 — Identification of Priority Water Quality Conditions, MS4 Sources of Pollutants and Stressors, and Potential Water Quality Improvement Strategies Task 2 includes effort to identify priority water quality conditions and MS4 sources of pollutants and/or stressors that cause or contribute to the highest priority water quality conditions for the San Dieguito Watershed to meet the requirements of Provisions B.2.a -e. • B.2.a Assessment of Receiving Water Conditions • B.2.b Assessment of Impacts from MS4 Discharges • B.2.c Identification of Priority Water Quality Conditions • B.2.d Identify MS4 Sources of Pollutants and/or Stressors • B.2.e Potential Water Quality Improvement Strategies 78 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 The AMEC Team (including Tetra -Tech) will prepare Sections 2 and 3 of the WQIP to meet the requirements of Provision F. La(2). The potential water quality improvement strategies will be submitted separately from the WQIP sections but will be delivered on the same schedule. Sub -Task 2.1— Priority Water Quality Conditions Literature Search and Public Data Compilation The water quality priorities identified in the 2011 Long -Term Effectiveness Assessment (LTEA) and the Clean Water Act 303(d) list will provide the basis of the selection of priority water quality conditions. The 2011 LTEA and Comprehensive Load Reduction Plan (CLRP) will also be utilized to identify MS4 sources and stressors. This will include information on pollutant generating facilities, areas and/or activities, and the location of the RPs MS4s. Based on the findings of the 2011 LTEA and CLRP, additional data may be compiled from the San Diego County Copermittee Annual Monitoring Reports, the San Dieguito Watershed Urban Runoff Plan Annual Reports, and the related Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Plan Annual Reports for the previous permit cycle. AMEC will submit a data request to the RPs for special study data related to potential priority water quality conditions that may have been collected in the watershed. Requests for data will be provided at the first RP Workgroup meeting. Additionally, the City, with direction from AMEC, will solicit the public for any additional relevant and available water quality data for the selection of priority water quality conditions for the San Dieguito Watershed. Public solicitation for data will be provided with the notice for the first Public Workshop. The deadline for data submittal is provided in Section 3.0. Data currently in AMEC's possession, and the format for additional data, will be discussed during RP Workgroup meetings. Task efforts will include a compilation of the data provided by the public and RPs. It is assumed that no more than three data sources will be available per sub - watershed. Sub -Task 2.2 — Priority Water Quality Conditions Development of Draft and Final Sections Results of the literature search and data analysis will be detailed in Section 2 of the Draft WQIP and the associated appendices. Section 2 will address the requirements of Provision B.2.a -c of the Permit, and will include a list of priority water quality conditions as pollutants, stressors, and /or receiving water conditions, as described in Provision B.2.c.(1), and the rationale (contained in Provision B.2.c.(2)) behind the identification of the highest priority water quality conditions. Priority water quality condition selection will be based on the 303(d) listings in the watershed. Priority selection will consider the spatial and temporal distribution of these listed constituents. A total of four iterations of Section 2 will be provided, as detailed in the deliverable schedule below. A response -to comments table will be developed for each iteration submitted to the City and the RPs. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Files will be provided electronically, including the draft that is intended for publication by the SDRWQCB for a 30 -day public comment period. The AMEC Team will work with the RPs to incorporate public comments per Provision F.La(1)(a). A response -to- comments table, including comments received from the public and the TAC (Provision F. La(2)), will be developed. Sub -Task 2.3 — MS4 Sources and Pollutants Literature Search and Public Data Compilation MS4 sources of pollutants and/or stressors that cause or contribute to the highest priority water quality conditions will be identified as required by Provision B.2.d of the Permit including the following: • Pollutant Generating Facilities, Areas and /or Activities • Location of RPs MS4 79 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105 099 Task Order 44 0 Review of Available Data Per the requirements of Provision B.2.e, potential water quality improvement strategies will be identified. AMEC will utilize the 2011 Long -Term Effectiveness Assessment and the CLRP to identify MS4 sources and stressors. As with Task 2, additional data may be compiled from the San Diego County Copermittee Annual Monitoring Reports, the San Dieguito Watershed Urban Runoff Plan Annual Reports, and the related Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Plan Annual Reports for the previous permit cycle. AMEC will submit a data request to all RPs for available MS4 GIS data and additional special studies monitoring data not included in the documents listed above. Requests for data will be provided at the first RP workgroup. Much of the data required for identification and analysis of Pollutant Generating Facilities, Areas and/or Activities were compiled and presented for the watershed in the CLRP (Sections 3.1 -3.4 with an emphasis on bacteria and sediment sources). The AMEC Team will revisit this information with the RPs to determine if additional information is available to evaluate these sources and how the CLRP results can be tailored for use in the WQIP. Sub -Task 2.4 — MS4 Sources and Pollutants Development of Draft and Final Section The AMEC Team will prepare Section 3 of the WQIP to meet the requirements of Provision B.2.d. The 37 priority source categories presented in the 2011 Long -Term Effectiveness Assessment will be compared with the highest priority water quality conditions selected in Section 2. Section 3 will provide information on the potential sources and stressors, including an assessment of the adequacy of the data available to characterize these sources on a jurisdictional basis. A total of four drafts of Section 3 will be provided, as detailed in the deliverable schedule below (note that Section 2 will be submitted on the same deliverable schedule). Files will be provided electronically, including the draft that intended for publication by the SDRWQCB for a 30 day public comment period. The AMEC Team will work with the RPs to incorporate public comments per Provision F.La(1)(a). A response -to- comments table, including comments received from the public, will be developed. Sub -Task 2.5 — List of Potential Strategies The AMEC Team, led by Tetra Tech, will develop a list of potential strategies that may be included in the WQIP. The list of potential strategies will be included as part of the first deliverable to the SDRWQCB as required under Provision B.2.e. The public, as well as, the TAC will provide input on the potential strategies. The list may include broad categories of Best Management Practices (BMPs) based on the CLRP recently completed by the RPs. Sections 4.4, 4.5, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 of the Phase I CLRPs will be referenced. The list is not a section of the WQIP but separate deliverable that will guide the development of Section 4. A response -to- comments table will be developed for each iteration submitted to the City and the RPs. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Section 3.0: 0 Attend up to 8 RP Workgroup Meetings 0 RP Workgroup Meeting Summaries and Follow -up Actions 0 Attend up to 6 Individual RP Meetings 0 Individual Meeting Follow -up Actions 0 Attend up to 1 Public Workshop 3.0 0 1 st QA/QC Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies for City (6 month deliverable) 80 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 • 2 "d Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) for RPs • 3rd Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) for TAC • 4's Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) based on TAC Comment for RPs • Final Draft Section 2, Section 3, and list of Potential Strategies (6 month deliverable) to City to Deliver to SDRWQCB • Revised Draft Section 2, Section 3, and Response -to- Comments Table Based on Public Input — Task 3 — Draft WQIP Task 3 includes efforts to develop the Draft WQIP to meet the requirements of Provision B. The Draft WQIP will include work products developed under Task 2 (including Revised Draft Section 2 and Section 3), along with: • WQIP Introduction Development (Section 1); • Incorporation of Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies, and Schedules developed by the Tetra -Tech Team or RPs selecting to Opt -out (Section 4) 16 month deliverable; • Integrated Water Quality Improvement Monitoring and Assessment Program (Section 5); and • Iterative Approach and Adaptive Management Process (Section 6). Sub -Task 3.1 — Draft WQIP Introduction — Section 1 Submittal The AMEC Team will develop a draft of Section 1 concurrently with the development of Section 2 and Section 3. This will provide a basis for the development of the full WQIP. Section I will be delivered on the same schedule as Section 2 and Section 3. Sub -Task 3.2 — Water Quality Improvement Monitoring and Assessment Program The Water Quality Improvement Monitoring and Assessment Program (MAP) will be developed to meet the requirements of Provision B.4.a -d to assess: 1) the progress toward achieving the numeric goals and schedules, 2) the progress toward addressing the highest priority water quality conditions for each Watershed Management Area, and 3) each RP's overall efforts to implement the WQIP. The program will be prepared according to Provision D. of the Permit, and will include TMDL monitoring per Provision B.4.c -d, as well as a Sediment Monitoring Plan in accordance with Provision D.Le(2). A brief summary of the program will be provided in Section 5 of the WQIP. The complete MAP, which will include a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) will be included as an appendix to the Draft WQIP. All appendices, including the MAP, will be delivered simultaneously with the relevant sections. Estimates of monitoring costs will be developed for planning purposes concurrently with MAP development. Sub -Task 3.3 — Iterative Approach and Adaptive Management Process Development Section 6 will describe the Iterative Approach and Adaptive Management Process according to Provision B.5. The section will outline the approach for the reevaluation of priority water quality conditions, adaptation of the strategies and schedules, and adaptation of the Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Program. Sub -Task 3.4 —Draft WQIP The AMEC Team will prepare the Draft WQIP based on the sections described above and Section 4 developed by the Tetra Tech Team, which will be delivered to the AMEC Team per the schedule provided in Section 3.0. Section 4 received from Tetra Tech Team will be assumed to meet the requirements of Provision B.2.e and B.3. 81 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 A total of two iterations of the Draft WQIP will be provided as detailed in the deliverable schedule below. The 1" Draft to the City will be, provided electronically. Up to twelve hardcopies (two for each RP), with CDs containing electronic versions of the 2"d Draft WQIP will be provided to the RPs for comment. A response -to- comment template will be provided for the City and the RPs to complete for each deliverable. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Comments will be addressed in FY15 under Task 5. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Section 3.0: ® Attend up to 8 RP Workgroup Meetings • RP Workgroup Meeting Summaries and Follow -up Actions 0 Attend up to 6 Individual RP Meetings 0 Individual RP Meeting Follow -up Actions 0 Attend up to 2 TAC Meetings 0 1" QA /QC Draft Section 1 for City 0 2nd Draft Section 1 for RPs 0 1" QA /QC Draft WQIP for City Deliverable includes: • Revised Draft Section I • Revised Draft Sections 2 &3 • 1 s` Draft Section 4 created by Tetra Tech (16 Month Deliverable) • I" Draft Sections 5, 6, 7 0 2nd Draft WQIP for RPs Deliverable includes: • Revised Draft Section 1 • Revised Draft Sections 2 &3 • I" Draft Section 4 completed by Tetra Tech (16 Month Deliverable) • I" Draft Sections 5, 6, 7 Task 4 -- Tetra Tech Team only Task 5 — Final WQIP (FY15) Task 5 will incorporate comments received by the RPs, SDRWQCB, and the public review process detailed in Provisions B and F. Two Draft WQIPs and one Final WQIP will be prepared. The AMEC Team, in consultation with the RPs, will consider public input while developing the Final WQIP, but will not necessarily respond to specific comments from the public. Sub -Task 5.1 —Draft WQIP The deliverable will include a Draft submitted to the City for review followed by a Draft to be provided to all RPs. This sub -task assumes a maximum total of 350 hours of effort including technical and support staff as required for budgeting purposes. A comment template will be provided for the RPs to complete. All drafts will be provided electronically. Sub -Task 5.2 —Draft WQIP and 16 Month Deliverable The deliverable will include a Draft WQIP submitted to the City for review followed by a revised Draft WQIP to be provided to all RPs. This task also includes effort to finalize the 16"' Month Deliverable (Section 4) with reviews by the TAC and all RPs. This sub -task assumes a maximum total of 200 hours of 82 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 effort including technical and support staff as required for budgeting purposes. A comment template will be provided for the RPs to complete. All drafts will be provided electronically. Sub -Task 5.3 — Final WQIP Comments from the RPs and the TAC will be used to develop the Final WQIP. This sub -task assumes a maximum total of 130 hours of effort including technical and support staff as required for budgeting purposes. The Final WQIP will include an initial draft submitted to the City electronically for review followed by a revised draft to be provided to all RPs. A response -to- comment template will be provided for the City and the RPs to complete for each deliverable. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Up to twelve hardcopies of the Final WQIP (two for each RP), with CDs containing electronic versions, will be provided to the RPs. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Section 3.0: • Attend up to 9 RP Workgroup Meetings • RP Workgroup Meeting Summaries and Follow -up Actions • Attend up to 3 TAC Meetings • Attend up to l Public Workshop • 3`d QA /QC Draft WQIP (including 16"' Month Deliverable) for City • 46' Draft WQIP (including 16'h Month Deliverable) for RPs • 56' Section 4 (16'' Month Deliverable) for TAC • 6"' Section 4 (16`s Month Deliverable) based on TAC Comment for RPs • Final Section 4(16'' Month Deliverable) to City to deliver to SDRWQCB • 5`" Draft WQIP for RPs • 66' Draft WQIP for TAC • 7''' Draft WQIP based on TAC Comments for • Final WQIP for City of San Diego and RPs • Final WQIP to SDWQCB Task 6 WQIP Support (FY16) Task 6 will incorporate comments received from the SDRWQCB on the Final WQIP submitted after May 2015. This task will include revision of the document based on the SDRWQCB comments that will then be reviewed by the RPs. It is assumed the City and the other RPs will review the document at the same time. This sub -task assumes a maximum total of 65 hours of effort including technical and support staff as required for budgeting purposes. A response -to- comment template will be provided for the City and the RPs to complete for each deliverable. Outstanding issues or conflicting comments will be addressed via a conference call or at the next RP Workgroup Meeting. Up to twelve hardcopies of the Final WQIP (two for each RP), with CDs containing electronic versions, will be provided to the RPs. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Section 3.0: • Attend up to 4 RP Workgroup Meetings • RP Workgroup Meeting Summaries and Follow -up Actions • I' QA /QC Draft WQIP for City • 2nd Draft WQIP for RPs • Final WQIP for City and RPs 83 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 3.0 SCHEDULE This Task Order shall begin on or about August 1, 2013, contingent upon approval and execution of this SOW, and shall terminate on December 31, 2015. Note that all schedule dates are approximate and are based on an August 1, 2013 notice to proceed. If the approval of the SOW is delayed, the schedule will be adjusted appropriately through consultation with the City and other Consultant Team members. Table 1 provides a tentative meeting schedule, including decision points, where input will be required by the RPs to facilitate the submission of the project deliverables, and planned meeting topics. A MS Project Schedule will be provided before the beginning of project work to clarify the schedule. Note that RP Workgroup Meetings will be held the second Thursday of every month. 84 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105099 Task Order 44 Table 1– Tentative Schedule for RP Workgroup Meetings, WQICP Meetings, and Public Workshops 85 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 RP Worligroup eetings WQICP Meetings Public Workshops Month Meeting Topic Decision Tentative Topics Tentative Topics Covered Point Date Covered Date Fiscal Year 2014 1. Kick -Off August Meeting Request 2013 Data/ Project — — — — — Process Kickoff Meeting - and Solicit Input from Public and 6 Month Deliverable Public Comment Meeting • Share anticipated 2. Present Potential schedule of August Priorities/ WQIP process 2013 Discuss Priorities — — Aug. 2013 and future Ranking opportunities for input • Solicit input on priorities and potential strategies. • Provide deadlines for submittal of data for development of priorities. 3. Present Potential Water September Strategies/ Select Quality 2013 Water Quality Priorities for Priorities October 2013 Deliverable 4. Select Potential Potential October Strategies/ Strategies for 2013 Present October 2013 -- — — — Numerical Goals Deliverable 85 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 86 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 RP Workgroup Meetin gs W ICP Mcetin s Public Worksho Month Meeting Topic Decision Tentative Topics Tentative Topics Covered Point Date Covered Date 5. Discuss Water Quality Priorities and Potential Strategies Priorities, Deliverable/ potential November Introduce Nov. 20, strategies, 2013 Assessment and — 2013 and sources — — Monitoring of pollutants Approach/ and Present Numeric stressors. Goals Development Process 6. Discuss Numeric Decision on Goals/ Tentative Introduction to Numeric December Strategy Goals for 2013 Development Quality Approach Strategy Development 7. Introduction to Scheduling and January Update on 2014 Assessment/ — — — — — Monitoring Approach Priorities, potential February 8. Update on Feb. 18, strategies, 2014 Strategies and — 2014 and sources — — Schedules of pollutants and stressors. 9. Discuss Numeric Goals based on Strategies/ Provide Response -to- Finalize March Comments Monitoring 2014 Tables for Approach Sections 2 and 3/ Update on Assessment and Monitoring Approach 86 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment& Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H 105 099 Task Order 44 87 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 RP Worftkgrroup Meetin gs W ICP Meetings Public Workshops Month Meeting Topic Decision Tentative Topics Tentative Topics Covered Point Date Covered Date 10. Discussion of Adaptive Management Receive RP Approach/ final input on Discuss Response -to- Response-to- April 2014 Comments Comments Tables for Tables for Sections 2 and 3/ Sections 2 Update on Water an d 3 Quality Strategies May 2014 11. Discuss Draft WQIP — — — — Fiscal Year 2015 16 Month 12. Discuss Deliverable Comments on Public Meeting July 2014 Initial Draft July 22, July • Solicit input WQIP – Sections — — — on Numeric 2 and 3 Goals and Strategies 13. Discuss August Comments on 2014 Initial Draft — — — — WQIP – Section 4 14. Discuss Numeric September Comments on Sept. 17, Goals and 2014 Initial Draft — 2014 Strategies — — WQIP – Sections /Schedules 5 and 6 15. Discuss October Comments on 2014 First Revised — — Draft WQIP Sections 2 -4 16. Discuss November Comments on 2014 First Revised WQIP – Sections 5 and 6 17. Discuss Dec. 2, Numeric Comments on 2014 Goals and December Second Revised Strategies 2014 Draft WQIP – /Schedules — — Sections 2 - 4 Dec. 5, 2014 Final WQIP 87 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 88 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 RP Workgroup Meetin gs W ICP Meet' Meetiw Public Workshops Month Meeting Topic Decision Tentative Topics Tentative Topics Covered Point Date Covered Date 18. Discuss January Comments on 2015 Second Revised — — — — Draft WQIP — Sections 5 and 6 February — — 2015 — — — — March 2015 — — — April 2015 Fiscal Year 2016 19. Discuss July 2015 Comments from — — — — — SDRW CB August 2015 — — — — — September 20. Discuss 2015 Comments from — — — — — SDRWQCB October 21. RP Comments 20I5 on Revised Final - WQIP November 22• RP Comments 2015 on Revised Final — — — — — W IP 88 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract N105099 Task Order 44 Approximate due dates for the deliverables for the SOW are included in Table 2 below, and is based on an August 1, 2013 start date. Dates may be modified based on the actual start of the SOW. Table 2 includes the Consultant Team members who will deliver and receive each deliverable. Table 2 -Task Order Deliverables Deliverable Submitting Receiving* Due Date Task 1- Project Management NA NA I No Deliverables Task 2 - identification of Priority Water Quality Conditions, MS4 Sources of Pollutants and Stressors, and Potential Water Quality Improvement Strategies 6 month deliverable Sub -Task 2.1 Literature Search and Public Data Co m ilation Received Data from Public and RPs for Analysis Public / RPs AMEC August 22, 2013 Workgroup Meeting Summaries AMEC City 7 working days after workgroup meetings Sub -Task 2.2 Development of Dra and Final Sections V QA/QC Draft Section 2, Section 3 & Appendices (6 Month Deliverable AMEC City October 25, 2013 City Comments 1st Draft Section 2 and 3(6 Month Deliverable) City AMEC October 30, 2013 2 Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices (6 AMEC All RPs November 5, 2013 Month Deliverable RP Comments on 2 Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices 6 Month Deliverable All RPs AMEC November 8, 2013 3rd Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices (6 Month Deliverable )for TAC Review AMEC All RPs November 13, 2013 RP confirmation for TAC submittal RPs City . November 14, 2013 3rd Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices (6 Month Deliverable for TAC Review City TAC November 15, 2013 TAC Comments on 3rd Draft Section 2, Section 3, & A endices(6 Month Deliverable) TAC AMEC November 20, 2013 TAC Reviewed 4' Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices 6 Month Deliverable AMEC All RPs December 6, 2013 Comments on TAC Reviewed7 Draft Section 2, All RPs AMEC December 13, 2013 Section 3, & Appendices 6 Month Deliverable Draft Section 2, Section 3, & Appendices for SDRWQCB 6 Month Deliverable AMEC All RPs December 20, 2013 RP confirmation for SDRWQCB submittal RPs city December 24, 2013 Submit Section 2,Section 3, & Appendices to City SDRWQCB January 10, 2013 SDRWQCB 6 Month Deliverable Comments from Public on Section 2 and 3 (6 Public AMEC February 15, 2014 Month Deliverable) Provide Response -to- Comments Table for Section 2 and Section 3(6 Month Deliverable) based on AMEC Public March 13, 2014 Public Comments Receive Final Comments on Response -to- Comments Table for Section 2 and Section 3 based RPs AMEC April 10,2013 on Public Comments Revised Section 2 and Section 3 along with Response -to- Comments Table Based on Public AMEC RPs April 25, 2014 Input Sub -Task 2.3 - List of Potential Strategies Draft of Potential Strategies Tetra -Tech AMEC October 11, 2013 I' 2A/ QC Draft of Potential Strategies AMEC Ci October 18, 2013 89 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 Deliverable Submittin g ReceiviEg * Due Date Ci Comments on Ist Draft of Potential Strategies City AMEC October 24, 2013 2" Draft of Potential Strategies AMEC All RPs October 30, 2013 RP Comments on 2ndDraft of Potential Strategies All RPs AMEC November 6, 2013 3rd Draft of Potential Strategies for TAC Review AMEC All RPs November 13, 2013 RP confirmation for TAC submittal RPs city November 14, 2013 3rd Draft of Potential Strategies for TAC Review City TAC November 15, 2013 TAC Comments on Potential Strategies TAC AMEC November 20, 2013 TAC Reviewed 4` Draft of Potential Strategies AMEC All RPs December 6, 2013 Comments on 4th Draft TAC of Potential Strategies All RPs AMEC December 13, 2013 Potential Strategies for SDRWQCB AMEC All RPs December 20, 2013 RP confirmation for SDRWQCB submittal RPs city December 24, 2013 Submit Potential Strategies to SDRWQCB city SDRWQCB January 10, 2014 Task 3 - Draft WQIP Sub -Task 3.4 - Draft WQIP 1" QA/QC Draft Section 1 AMEC city October 18, 2013 Ci Comments on V Draft Section 1 city AMEC October 24, 2013 2" Draft Section 1 AMEC All RPs October 30, 2013 RP Comments on 2 Draft Section 1 All RPs AMEC November 13, 2013 Draft Section 1 for SDRWQCB AMEC city December 6, 2013 Section 4 Tetra -Tech AMEC May 2 2014 1" QA/QC Draft WQIP (including 16'h Month Deliverable) AMEC City May 16, 2014 Opt -out RP versions of Sections 4.2 - 4.5 of Section 4 Opt -out RP AMEC May 21, 2014 City Comments on 1 Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable City AMEC May 23, 2014 2 Draft WQIP (including 16th Month Deliverable) AMEC All RPs June 6, 2014 Workgroup Meeting Summaries AMEC City 7 working days after workgroup meetings Task 4- Tetra Tech Team only Task 5 - Final WQIP - FY15 Sub -Task 5.1 -Draft WQIP RP Comments on Draft W 1P All RPs AMEC July 18, 2014 3` Draft WQIP (including 16' Month Deliverable AMEC City August 15, 2014 City Comments on 3` Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable ) City AMEC August 29, 2014 4` Draft W IP (including l6th Month Deliverable) AMEC All RPs September 5, 2014 Workgroup Meeting Summaries AMEC City 7 working days after workgroup meetings Sub -Task 5.2 Z2L4 WQIP and 16 Month Deliverable RP Comments on 4 Draft WQIP (including 16 Month Deliverable) All RPs AMEC September 12, 2014 5 Section 4 (16'h Month Deliverable) for TAC review AMEC All RPs September 17, 2014 RP confirmation for TAC submittal RPs City September 18, 2014 51 Section 4 (16 Month Deliverable) for TAC review City TAC September 19, 2014 Comments from TAC on 5th Section 4(16'h Month TAC AMEC September 24, 2014 90 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Contract H105099 Task Order 44 Deliverable Submitting Receiving* Due Date Deliverable 6` Section 4 based on TAC Comments AMEC All RPs September 30, 2014 Comments from RPs on Updated 6 Draft Section 4 (Wh Month Deliverable All RPs AMEC October 8, 2014 Final Draft Section 4 (16 Month Deliverable) for Submittal to SDRWQCB AMEC All RPs October] 5, 2014 RP confirmation for SDRWQCB submittal RPs City October 16, 2014 Submittal to SDRWQCB of Section 4 (16 th Month Deliverable City SDRWCB October 18, 2014 5` Draft WQIP AMEC RPs November 21, 2014 RP Comments on 5th Draft WQIP RPs AMEC December 1, 2014 6 th Draft WQIP AMEC All RPs December 15, 2014 RP confirmation for TAC submittal RPs city December 16, 20I4 6'b Draft WQIP city TAC December 17 20I4 Sub -Task 5.3 — Final W IP Comments from TAC 6 Draft WQIP TAC AMEC December 22, 2014 7` Draft WQIP with TAC Comments AMEC All RPs January 9, 2015 RP Comments on ? Draft WQIP with TAC Comments All RPs AMEC January 16, 2015 Final WQIP AMEC All RPs January 25, 2015 RP confirmation for SDRWQCB submittal RPs City Janu ary 26, 2015 Submit Final WQIP to SDWQCB city SDWQCB I June 27, 2015 Task 6 — WQIP Support — FYI 1 st QA/QC Draft WQIP for City AMEC City 20 days from receipt of comments from SDWQCB City Comments on 1st Draft WQIP City AMEC 5 days from receipt of document 2nd Draft WQIP for RPs AMEC All RPs 5 days after submittal to the City RP Comments on 2nd Draft WQIP All RPs AMEC 10 days from submittal to the RPs Final WQIP for City and RPs AMEC All RPs 10 days from receipt of comments from RPs Workgroup Meeting Summaries AMEC City 7 working days after workgroup meetings *RP specific deliverables will be provided to RPs directly. 4.0 COSTS The total of this Task Order for FY 14 will be $190,824, for FY 15 it will be $112,829, and for FYI 6 it will be $17,856. Labor rates and other charges will be billed per the requirements of Contract H105099. The Task Order amount may be modified by written amendment, if necessary. 91 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 $; v 0 o Ox .+ cn U y F- E C C W 92 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 LU N r r• W V { In ._, p1 ai n n v u. V rynry N U N t, m N v � v N N HY•I.' H NN., � 61 U o ti •�-- W N � O O In � In V Cy1 In H LL9 nl R• I"' f]1 WNVp Yl M VI iN/1 VI VI N 1n VI V/ IA V(� N U a� V 0 N 10 p� H1 IJ N RI 3 m � c � 9 ,n N� y m r] U H LL v m m LL LL Q. P m n (71 c •.fit C• C ,� � C G� W N � s G IL n c a_ tt t7 t'1 a m m m w m m cL O `a F, n n' u == @ r0 Z a a N w w a 7 m - L � C C � U O U m 'l C � n •' O Or m m m Vl IA G _p m -• R? rc rri IA N ✓I Y ib m m 5 a eL R a Q. 0. O. - J d U C LL IL LL d O CV CV CV 6 lV .n A M Y N M 92 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 Exhibit 4 Scope of Work Tetra Tech 93 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 0 July 8, 2013 Contract H084445, Task Order No. XX DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK For WQIP Development Support for the San Dileguito Watershed Management Area This Draft Scope of Work (SOW) identifies the level of effort needed to support the San Dieguito Responsible Parties (RPs) with development of a Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) to meet requirements set by the NPDES Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). This SOW includes close coordination with a parallel effort led by AMEC for the City of San Diego and RPs to complete the complimentary sections of the WQIP and assemble the overall plan. The tasks in this SOW are not sequential, but instead are meant to be in line with the AMEC SOW and specific sections of the WQIP (outlined in the proposed table of contents attached to the AMEC SOW). The result is that the tasks in this SOW are meant to be viewed holistically with the tasks of the AMEC SOW to provide the full understanding of the level of effort to develop the WQIP. This SOW addresses the following components identified for the WQIP: • Section 4: Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies and Schedule • Facilitation of stakeholder workshops and WQICP meetings providing reporting and input on multiple key sections of WQIP In addition, this SOW takes advantage of several efforts already invested in by the RPs when developing the Draft Comprehensive Load Reductions Plan (CLRP) for this watershed, including identification of jurisdictional -based management strategies, including nonstructural and structural best management practices, to achieve pollutant load reductions. To specifically address new requirements in the permit, it will be necessary to revisit many of the assumptions for the Draft CLRP and tailor these assumptions for the WQIP. These results will be summarized in Section 4 outlined above, which can serve as the basis for internal jurisdictional planning and reporting to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This SOW and associated schedule assumes a notice to proceed (NTP) of July 1, 2013. Should this NTP change, a revision to the schedule may be required. TASK 1: Project Management Tetra Tech will maintain communication with the City's Task Order Manager or other designee and the AMEC team to keep them apprised of progress, upcoming milestones, and any issues that could potentially affect project performance. For this Task Order, Mr. Stephen Carter will serve as the Project Manager and he will be responsible for all official communications with the City. Mr. Carter will be responsible for working with the Tetra Tech Contract Administrator to ensure monthly progress reports and invoices are submitted in an accurate and timely manner on or prior to the 5th day of each month during which the Task Order is active. Mr. Carter will work with the Task Order Manager to ensure all desired information is included in the monthly progress report. At a minimum the following information will be included: 94 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 0 1. Reporting period 2. Work completed in the reporting period (activities and accomplishments) 3. Work anticipated in the following reporting period 4. Expenditures in this progress report period and cumulative total 5. Any issues or problems encountered and how these were resolved Deliverables: Monthly progress memos and meetings with the City to ensure that work completed address issues and objectives. TASK 4: Development of Numeriic Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies and Schedule Tetra Tech will lead development of portions of Section 4 of the WQIP: Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies and Schedules. The following are subtasks that specifically address development of components of this Section. 4.1. Identification of Numeric Goals and Schedules Tetra Tech will work with the RPs and AMEC to identify the following numeric goals for the WQIP, specific to the San Dieguito Watershed and inclusive of subwatersheds. • Final numeric goals to be achieved in the receiving waters for the highest priority water quality conditions • Interim numeric goals to be achieved in the receiving waters and capable of demonstrating incremental progress toward achieving the final numeric goals in the receiving waters • Schedule for measuring progress toward achieving the interim and final numeric goals The schedule for interim and final goals will be consistent with those schedules identified in approved TMDLs. The schedule for goals for other 303(d) pollutants will be established through consultation with the RPs. Tetra Tech will summarize these schedules relative to the WQIP framework, and prepare a subsection of Section 4 of the WQIP. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Table 2: • Tetra Tech attendance at one meeting of RP workgoup to discuss numeric goals • Draft Section 4.1 of the WQIP • Draft II Section 4.1 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from RPs) — FY15 • Draft III Section 4.1 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) — FY15 • Final Section 4.1 of the WQIP — FY15 4.2. Jurisdictional Strategies and /or Activities Task 2 of the AMEC SOW includes development of a list of potential strategies that will be included as part of the first deliverable to the SDRWQCB required under Provision B.3.b of the NPDES Permit. Much work went into development of the Draft CLRP to identify specific nonstructural and structural BMPs for each RP necessary to address TMDLs and other impairments in the watershed. This task will result in development of Section 4.2 of the WQIP, which will include a summary of those structural and nonstructural BMPs 2 95 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 1* identified for each RP during development of the CLRPs. No additional BMPs will be developed or reported beyond those previously identified in the CLRPs. The following outlines efforts anticipated for each category of BMP. Note that the tasks below assume that the WQIP will not address the need for modeling and quantification of BMP load reductions to meet TMDL -based bacteria WQBELs for impaired beaches at the mouth of San Dieguito Lagoon. Rather, a strategy willl be outlined in Section 4.1 for justification for amendments to associated WQBELs in the MS4 permit or 303(d) de- listing for those impairments. 421. Identification of Nonstructural BMPs The nonstructural BMPs identified in the CLRPs will be reviewed with the RPs to determine if any changes should be made, Should additional BMPs be identified, Tetra Tech will work closely with the RPs to develop details to be reported in the WQIP. All input from the RPs on the nonstructural BMPs to be included in the WQIP are expected by December 2013. 4.2.2. Identification of Structural BMPs Structural BMPs were identified for each RP in development of the CLRP. These included both distributed (e.g., green infrastructure) and centralized (e.g., regional detention facility) structural BMPs. The CLRPs presented maps of potential locations of structural BMPs, as well as more - detailed concepts developed for a select high priority BMPs, presented as 'BMP Fact Sheets° in the CLRP. Tetra Tech will base all assumptions for structural BMPs on information compiled for the CLRP. All input from the RPs on the structural BMPs to be included in the WQIP are expected by December 2013. Deliverables per Schedule Provided in Table 2: • Tetra Tech attendance at four meetings of RP workgoup • Tetra Tech will participate in one meeting with each individual RP to confirm strategies and activities to be included in WQIP • Draft Section 4.2 of the WQIP - May 4, 2014 • Draft I I Section 4.2 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from RPs) — FY15 • Draft III Section 4.2 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) — FY15 • Final Section 4.2 of the WQIP — FY15 4.3. Jurisdictional Water Quality Improvement Schedules Based on results of the previous tasks and RP input, Tetra Tech will develop schedules for each RP outlining phased BMP implementation and associated costs throughout the period to meet numeric goals established in Task 4.1. Inclusion of all costs in the schedule will provide demonstration of reasonable progress toward achieving numeric goals in the WQIP, information for RP funding and preparation, and information to regulators regarding the economic impacts of water quality regulations. However, it will be important to stipulate within the WQIP that the BMPs and associated decisions and costs beyond the Permit term are subject to funding opportunities, and should not be evaluated as an indicator of progress towards BMP -based compliance. Deliverables: • Tetra Tech attendance at up to two meetings of the RP workgoup • Tetra Tech will participate in one meeting with each individual RP 3 96 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 i • Draft Section 4.3 of the WQIP • Draft II Section 4.3 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from RPs) — FY15 • Draft III Section 4.3 of the WQIP (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) — FY15 • Final Section 4.3 of the WQIP — FY15 TASK 7, Responsible Party and Stakeholder Workshop Facilitation Supported by Katz Associates, this task will include facilitation of up to 2 workshops with RPs and stakeholders: Table 1. Stakeholder Workshops Workshop # Purpose Anticipated Schedule 1 I Workshop - Kickoff meeting Summer 2013 -Share anticipated schedule of WQIP process and future opportunities for input - Solicit data - Obtain input on priority water quality conditions and potenfial strategies 2nd Workshop - Obtain input on goals and strategies Summer /Early Fall 2013 For each of these workshops, Katz Associates will perform the following: © Meet with Tetra Tech and AMEC for workshop preparation and developing workshop materials. • Facilitation of workshops. • Developing summary material of workshop outcomes. In addition, Katz Associates will provide facilitation of up to 5 panel meetings with the WQICP to be determined by RPs. The timing of these panel meetings will be determined throughout the duration of the project. Deliverables: 0 2 workshops • Summary material of workshop outcomes • 5 RP panel meetings Schedule The approximate schedule for deliverables for this SOW is shown in Table 2. This schedule assumes a NTP of July 1, 2013. All work will be completed by December 31, 2015. 4 97 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 O Table 2. Schedule of Deliverables (Deliverable I Submitting Receiving (Due Date Task 1— Project Management I Tetra Tech city Monthly invoices Task 4 — Jurisdictional- Specific Strategies and/or Activities that may be Implemented by the Responsible Parties Task 4.1 - Identification of Numeric Goals Tetra Tech attendance at one meeting of RP Tetra Tech All RPs TBD work group to discuss numeric goals Draft Section 4.1 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and May 2, 2014 Ci Draft I] Section 4.1 of the WQIP (incoporating Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 comments from RPs ) City Draft III Section 4.1 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 ( incoporating comments from Stakeholders) City Final. Section 4.1 of the WQIP — FY 15 Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 City Task 4.2 - Jurisdictional- Specific Strategies and /or Activities that may be Im lemented by the Responsible Parties Tetra Tech attendance at four meetings of RP Tetra Tech All RPs TBD workgou Tetra Tech have one meeting with each individual RP to discuss strategies and Tetra Tech All RPs TBD activities to be included in WQIP Draft Section 4.2 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and May 2, 2014 City Draft II Section 4.2 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 (incorporating comments from RPs) city Draft III Section 4.2 of the WQIP AMEC and (incoporating comments from Stakeholders Tetra Tech City FY15 Final Section 4.2 of the WQIP — FY15 Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 Task 4.3 - Jurisdictional Water Quality Improvement Schedules Tetra Tech attendance at up to two meetings of Tetra Tech All RPs TBD the RP work ou Tetra Tech will have one meeting with each jurisdiction's Tetra Tech All RPs TBD individual RP to each schedule Draft Section 4.3 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and May 2, 2014 Ci Draft 11 Section 4.3 of the WQIP (incoporating Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 comments from RPs ) city Draft III Section 4.3 of the WQIP Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 (incoporating comments from Stakeholders) city Final Section 4.3 of the WQIP — FY15 Tetra Tech AMEC and FY15 Cit Task 7 — Responsible Party and Stakeholder orkshop Facilitation i st Workshop Katz All RPs Summer 2013 2nd Workshop Katz All RPs Summer/Early Fall 2013 Workshop summaries Katz All RPs One week following workshops 5 RP panel meetings Katz All RPs TBD 98 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1 3.0 COST SUMMARY This section provides the data and information for pricing the technical support to be provided under this Task Order. The following table presents the overall cost summary and the estimated task - specific costs for providing the support outlined in the SOW. Tetra Tech proposes to perform this Delivery Order on a Time and Material basis using the rates included in our contract. Other direct costs (ODCs) will be billed at actual incurred amounts. Tetra Tech proposes to invoice in accordance with Tetra Tech's 12 accounting periods each year. Table 3. Costs Task Description Cost FY14 Cost FY15 Cost FYI 1 Project Management and Reporting $19,821 $1,224 $0 4 Development of Numeric Goals, Water Quality Improvement Strategies and Schedule 4.1 Identification of Numeric Goals and Schedules $15,784 $0 $0 4.2 Jurisdictional Strategies and /or Activities 4.2.1 Identification of Nonstructural BMPs $21,999 $3,151 $0 4.2.2 Identification of Structural BMPs $16,273 $428 $0 4.3 Jurisdictional Water Quality Improvement Schedules $21,754 $2,043 $0 7 Responsible Party and Stakeholder Workshop Facilitation $6,980 $0 $0 Total $102,611 $6,846 $0 0 99 of 99 January 21, 2014 Item # 4.1