CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
With
JACOBS PROJECT MANAGEMENT CO.
For
WATER RECLAMATION PLANT UPGRADES – PROJECT NO. SS-5119
OWNER’S ADVISOR/PROGRAM MANAGER SERVICES
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Section 1. Term of Agreement. .............................................................................................. 1 Section 2. Scope and Performance of Services. .................................................................... 1 Section 3. Additional Services and Changes in Services. ...................................................... 2 Section 4. Familiarity with Services and Site. ......................................................................... 2 Section 5. Compensation and Payment. ................................................................................ 2 Section 6. Required Documentation Prior to Performance. .................................................... 3 Section 7. Time of Performance; Excusable Delays; Extensions. .......................................... 3 Section 8. Cooperation by District. ......................................................................................... 4 Section 9. Project Documents. ............................................................................................... 4 Section 10. Confidential Information; Release of Information. ................................................. 4 Section 11. Consultant’s Books and Records. ......................................................................... 5 Section 12. Status of Consultant. ............................................................................................. 5 Section 13. Compliance with Applicable Laws. ........................................................................ 6 Section 14. Unauthorized Aliens. ............................................................................................. 6 Section 15. Conflicts of Interest. ............................................................................................ ... 6 Section 16. Indemnification. .................................................................................................. ... 7 Section 17. Insurance. ........................................................................................................ ...... 8 Section 18. Assignment. ....................................................................................................... .... 8 Section 19. Default; Limitations on Liability. ............................................................................. 9 Section 20. Termination of Agreement. .................................................................................... 9 Section 21. Notices. .......................................................................................................... ....... 9 Section 22. General Provisions. ............................................................................................. 1 0
Exhibit A – Scope Of Services .................................................................................................. A-1 Exhibit B – Key Personnel & Compensation ............................................................................ B-1 Exhibit C – Insurance ................................................................................................................ C-1 CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 1
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is effective as of April 8, 2026 (“Effective Date”), and is between the Camarillo Sanitary District, a Sanitary District organized pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code (“District”) and Jacobs Project Management Co., a Delaware corporation (“Consultant”).
Section 1. Term of Agreement .
Subject to the provisions of Section 20 (Termination of Agreement), the term of this Agreement will be for a period commencing on the Effective Date and will terminate upon the completion of Consultant’s services.
Section 2. Scope and Performance of Services .
2.1 Consultant agrees to perform the services set forth in Exhibit A (Scope of Services), which is made a part of this Agreement.
2.2 Consultant will furnish all of the labor, technical, administrative, professional and other personnel, all supplies and materials, equipment, printing, vehicles, transportation, office space and facilities, and all tests, testing and analyses, calculations, and all other means whatsoever, except as otherwise expressly specified in this Agreement, necessary to perform the services required of Consultant under this Agreement.
2.3 Consultant’s designated representative(s) who are authorized to act on its behalf and to make all decisions in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement are listed in Exhibit B (Key Personnel & Compensation), which is made a part of this Agreement.
2.4 Consultant must make every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant’s key personnel and subcontractors, if any, listed in Exhibit B to perform the services required under this Agreement. Consultant must notify District and obtain District’s written approval with respect of any changes in key personnel prior to the performance of any services by replacement personnel.
2.5 Consultant must obtain District’s prior written approval before utilizing any subconsultants to perform any services under this Agreement. This written approval must include the identity of the subcontractor and the terms of compensation.
2.6 Consultant represents that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities necessary to properly perform the services required under this Agreement in a thorough, competent and professional manner. Consultant will at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of its ability, experience and talent, perform all services described in this Agreement. In meeting its obligations under this Agreement, Consultant must employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing services similar to those required of Consultant under this Agreement.
2.7 District may inspect and accept or reject any of Consultant’s work under this Agreement, either during performance or when completed. Acceptance of any of Consultant’s work by District will not constitute a waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement.
2.8 The Consultant must maintain any work site in the District in a safe condition, free of hazards to persons and property resulting from its operations.
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 2
Section 3. Additional Services and Changes in Services .
3.1 Consultant will not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement that are in addition to or outside of those set forth in the Scope of Services or otherwise required by this Agreement, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by District.
3.2 If Consultant believes that additional services are needed to complete the Scope of Services, Consultant will provide the District Manager with written notification describing the proposed additional services, the reasons for such services, and a detailed proposal regarding cost.
3.3 District may order changes to the Scope of Services, consisting of additions, deletions, or other revisions, and the compensation to be paid Consultant will be adjusted accordingly.
All such changes must be authorized in writing, and executed by Consultant and District.
The cost or credit to District resulting from changes in the services will be determined by the written agreement between the parties.
Section 4. Familiarity with Services and Site .
4.1 By executing this Agreement, Consultant represents that Consultant:
(a) has thoroughly investigated and considered the Scope of Services to be performed;
(b) has carefully considered how the services should be performed; (c) understands the facilities, difficulties, and restrictions attending performance of the services under this Agreement; and
(d) possesses all licenses required under local, state or federal law to perform the services contemplated by this Agreement, and will maintain all required licenses during the performance of this Agreement.
4.2 If services involve work upon any site, Consultant has or will investigate the site and is or will be fully acquainted with the conditions there existing, before commencing its services.
Should Consultant discover any latent or unknown conditions that may materially affect the performance of services, Consultant will imm ediately inform District of such fact and will not proceed except at Consultant’s own risk until written instructions are received from District.
Section 5. Compensation and Payment .
5.1 Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, District agrees to pay Consultant the amounts specified in Exhibit B (Key Personnel & Compensation). The total compensation, including reimbursement for actual expenses, may not exceed the amount set forth in Exhibit B, unless additional compensation is approved in writing by District.
5.2 The use of subconsultants will not be considered a reimbursable expense, and such costs must be applied towards the approved budgeted amount.
5.3 Each month during the term of this Agreement, Consultant must furnish District with an original invoice for all services performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B. The invoice must detail charges by the following categories: labor (by subcategory), reimbursable costs, CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 3
subcontractor contracts and miscellaneous expenses. The invoice must list, as applicable, the hours worked and hourly rates for each personnel category, the tasks performed, the percentage of the task completed during the billing period, the cumulative percentage completed for each task, and the total cost of the services. If applicable, the invoice must also provide a budget summary including the total amounts previously invoiced and paid, the current invoice amount and the budget remaining.
5.4 District will review each invoice submitted by Consultant to determine whether the work performed and expenses incurred are in compliance with this Agreement. In the event that no charges or expenses are disputed, the invoice will be approved and paid. In the event any charges or expenses are disputed by District, the invoice will be returned by District to Consultant for correction and resubmission.
5.5 Except as to any charges for work performed or expenses incurred by Consultant that are disputed by District, District will cause Consultant to be paid within 30 days of receipt of Consultant’s invoice.
5.6 Payment to Consultant for services performed under this Agreement may not be deemed to waive any defects in the services performed by Consultant, even if such defects were known to District at the time of payment.
5.7 District reserves the right to withhold future payment to Consultant if any aspect of the Consultant’s work is found substantially inadequate. In the event District withholds amounts due to Consultant for non-conforming services under this Agreement, District may withhold from payment those specific amounts until correction of the non-conforming services.
Section 6. Required Documentation Prior to Performance .
6.1 Consultant may not perform any services under this Agreement until:
(a) Consultant furnishes proof of insurance as required under Exhibit C; (b) Consultant provides District with a Taxpayer Identification Number; (c) Consultant obtains a business tax certificate and license, if applicable, and provides proof of compliance; and
(d) District gives Consultant a written notice to proceed.
6.2 The District will have no obligation to pay for any services rendered by Consultant in advance of receiving written authorization to proceed, and Consultant acknowledges that any such services are at Consultant’s own risk.
Section 7. Time of Performance; Excusable Delays; Extensions .
7.1 Consultant must adhere to all schedules and deadlines set forth in this Agreement.
7.2 Consultant will not be liable for damages, including liquidated damages, if any, caused by delay in performance or failure to perform due to causes beyond the control of Consultant.
Such causes include, but are not limited to, acts of God, acts of terrorism, acts of federal, state or local governments, acts of District, court orders, fires, floods, epidemics, strikes, embargoes, and unusually severe weather.
7.3 If Consultant is delayed by any cause beyond Consultant’s control, District may grant, but CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 4
is not required to, a time extension for the completion of services. If delay occurs, Consultant must notify District within 48 hours, in writing, of the cause and the extent of the delay and how such delay interferes with Consultant’s performance of services. The District will not unreasonably deny time extensions.
Section 8. Cooperation by District .
All public information, data, reports, records, and maps as are existing and available to District as public records, and which are necessary for carrying out the Scope of Services will be furnished to Consultant in every reasonable way to facilitate, without undue delay, the services to be performed under this Agreement.
Section 9. Project Documents.
9.1 All original computer programs, data, designs, drawings, files, maps, memoranda, models, notes, photographs, reports, studies, surveys and other documents (collectively, “Project Documents”) prepared, developed or discovered by Consultant in the course of providing services under this Agreement will become the sole property of District and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by District without the permission of Consultant.
Consultant will take such steps as are necessary to perfect or protect the ownership interest of District in such Project Documents. Upon completion, expiration or termination of this Agreement or upon request by District, Consultant must turn over to District all such original Project Documents in its possession; provided, however, that Consultant may retain copies of Project Documents. District acknowledges and agrees that use of Consultant’s completed work product, for purposes other than identified in this Agreement, or use of incomplete work product, is at District’s own risk. If necessary, Consultant agrees to execute all appropriate documents to assign to District the copyright or intellectual property rights to the Project Documents created pursuant to this Agreement.
9.2 Except as necessary for the performance of services under this Agreement, no Project Documents prepared under this Agreement, will be released by Consultant to any other person or entity without district’s prior written approval.
Section 10. Confidential Information; Release of Information .
10.1 All information gained or work product produced by Consultant in performance of this Agreement will be considered confidential, unless such information is in the public domain or already known to Consultant. Consultant may not release or disclose any such information or work product to persons or entities other than District without prior written authorization from the District Manager, except as may be required by law.
10.2 Consultant, its officers, employees, or agents, may not, without prior written authorization from the District Manager or unless requested by the District Counsel, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the services performed under this Agreement. Response to a subpoena or court order will not be considered “voluntary” provided Consultant gives District notice of such court order or subpoena.
10.3 If Consultant, or any officer, employee, or agent of Consultant, provides any information or work product (including Project Documents) in violation of this Agreement, then District will have the right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages, costs and fees, including attorneys fees, caused by or incurred as a result of Consultant’s conduct.
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 5
10.4 Consultant must promptly notify District s hould Consultant, its officers, employees, or agents be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the services performed under this Agreement. District retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with District and to provide District with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, this right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by District to control, direct, or rewrite such response.
10.5 All media and press releases, including graphic display information, must be approved and distributed solely by District, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by District. All media interviews regarding the performance of services under this Agreement are prohibited unless expressly authorized by District.
Section 11. Consultant’s Books and Records.
11.1 Consultant must maintain all documents and records demonstrating or relating to Consultant’s performance of services under this Agreement, including ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, or other documents or records evidencing or relating to work, services, expenditures and disbursements charged to District under this Agreement. All financial documents or records must be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and all other documents must be sufficiently complete and detailed so as to permit an accurate evaluation of the services provided by Consultant under this Agreement. All such documents or records must be maintained for at least three years following the final payment under this Agreement.
11.2 Any and all records or documents required to be maintained by this section must be made available for inspection, audit and copying, at any time during regular business hours, upon written request by District or its designated representative. Copies of such documents or records must be provided directly to District for inspection, audit and copying when it is practical to do so; otherwise, unless an alternative is mutually agreed upon, such documents and records must be made available at Consultant’s address indicated for receipt of notices in this Agreement.
11.3 Where District has reason to believe that any of the documents or records required to be maintained by this section may be lost or discarded due to dissolution or termination of Consultant’s business, District may, by written request, require that custody of such documents or records be given to a person or entity mutually agreed upon and that such documents and records thereafter be maintained by such person or entity at Consultant’s expense. Access to such documents and records must be granted to District, as well as to its successors-in-interest and authorized representatives.
Section 12. Status of Consultant .
12.1 Consultant is and will at all times remain a wholly independent contractor and not an officer or employee of District. Consultant has no authority to bind District in any manner, or to incur any obligation, debt or liability of any kind on behalf of or against District, whether by contract or otherwise, unless such authority is expressly conferred under this Agreement or is otherwise expressly conferred in writing by District.
12.2 The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant will at all times be under Consultant’s exclusive direction and control. Neither District, nor any CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 6
elected or appointed boards, officers, officials, employees or agents of District, will have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s officers, employees or agents, except as provided in this Agreement. Consultant agrees that it will not at any time or in any manner represent that Consultant or any of Consultant’s officers, employees or agents are in any manner officials, officers, or employees of District.
12.3 Neither Consultant, nor any of Consultant’s officers, employees or agents, will obtain any rights to retirement, health care or any other benefits which may otherwise accrue to District’s employees. Consultant expressly waives any claim to any such rights or benefits.
Section 13. Compliance with Applicable Laws .
13.1 In General. Consultant must use the standard of care in its profession to keep itself informed of and comply with all federal, state and local laws, statutes, codes, ordinances, regulations and rules in effect during the term of this Agreement that apply to the services performed by Consultant.
13.2 Professional Licenses and Approvals. Consultant agrees that it will, at its sole cost and expense, obtain and maintain in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, insurance and approvals that are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession.
13.3 Employment Laws. Consultant agrees to comply with all applicable federal and state employment laws including those that relate to minimum hours and wages, occupational health and safety, and workers compensation insurance. Consultant further represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and in performing services under this Agreement agrees to comply with all applicable federal and state laws governing equal opportunity employment, and further agrees that it will not discriminate in the employment of persons to perform services under this Agreement on the basis of the race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, or sexual orientation of any such person, except as may be permitted by California Government Code section 12940.
Section 14. Unauthorized Aliens .
Consultant agrees to comply with all of the applicable provisions of the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. § 1101 and following), as it may be amended, and further agrees not to employ unauthorized aliens as defined under the Act. Should Consultant employ any unauthorized aliens for the performance of any work or services covered by this Agreement, and should any liability or sanctions be imposed against District for the use of unauthorized aliens, Consultant agrees to reimburse District for the amount of all such liabilities or sanctions imposed, together with any and all related costs, including attorneys’ fees, incurred by District.
Section 15. Conflicts of Interest .
15.1 Consultant covenants that neither Consultant, nor any officer, principal or employee of its firm, has or will acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, that would conflict in any manner with the interests of District or that would in any way hinder Consultant’s performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant’s attention is directed to the conflict of interest rules applicable to governmental decision-making contained in the Political Reform Act (California Government Code Section 87100 and following) and its implementing regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 18700 and following), and CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 7
California Government Code section 1090.
15.2 Consultant covenants that neither Consultant, nor any officer, principal or employee of its firm will make, participate in the making, or in any way attempt to use the position of Consultant to influence any decision of the District in which Consultant knows or has reason to know that Consultant, or any office r, principal or employee of Consultant has any of the financial interests listed in Government Code section 87103.
15.3 If Consultant discovers that it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant must promptly disclose the relationship to District and take such action as District may direct to remedy the conflict.
15.4 District understands and acknowledges that Consultant is, as of the Effective Date, independently involved in the performance of non-related services for other governmental agencies and private parties. Consultant represents that, except as otherwise disclosed to District, it is unaware of any stated position of District relative to these projects. Any future position of District on these projects will not be considered a conflict of interest for purposes of this section.
Section 16. Indemnification.
16.1 Consultant agrees that, to the fullest extent permitted by law, including Civil Code Section 2782.8, it will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless District from all Services Claims and Operations Claims (each defined below) related to the performance by Consultant of this Agreement as provided in this section. Consultant acknowledges that District would not enter into this Agreement in the absence of Consultant’s commitment to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless District as set forth in this section.
16.2 For the purposes of this section, “District” includes District’s officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, and “Consultant” includes Consultant’s officers, officials, employees, agents and subcontractors and any other persons for whom Consultant is legally responsible.
16.3 With respect to the performance of professional services under this Agreement where the law establishes a professional standard of care for such services, Consultant agrees to indemnify, and hold harmless District from and against all liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, including but not limited to reimbursement of reasonable attorney's fees and all other costs of defense, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant (collectively, “Services Claims”).
16.4 With respect to the acts and operations of Consultant under this Agreement other than the performance of professional services, Consul tant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless District from and against any and all claims, liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorney's fees and all other costs of defense, to the extent caused, in whole or in part, by the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, and excepting only those claims, damages, liabilities, losses, and costs caused by District’s sole negligence or willful misconduct (collectively, “Operations Claims”).
16.5 Consultant must notify District within five days of receipt of notice of any Operations Claims or Services Claims made or legal action initiated that arises out of or pertains to Consultant’s performance of services under this Agreement.
16.6 Consultant’s duty to defend Operations Claims is a separate and distinct obligation from CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 8
Consultant’s duty to indemnify District for any Operations Claims. With respect to Operations Claims, Consultant is obligated to defend District in all legal, equitable, administrative, or special proceedings, wi th counsel reasonably approved by District, immediately upon tender to Consultant of an Operations Claim in any form or at any stage of an action or proceeding, whether or not liability is established. An allegation or determination that persons other than Consultant are responsible for the Operations Claim does not relieve Consultant from its separate and distinct obligation to defend under this section. The obligation to defend extends through final judgment, including exhaustion of any appeals.
16.7 Consultant agrees that settlement of any Operations or Services Claim against District requires the consent of District. District agrees that its consent will not be unreasonably withheld provided that Consultant is financially able (based on demonstrated assets including insurance) to fulfill its obligation to indemnify District for the costs of any such settlement as required under this Agreement.
16.8 The insurance required to be maintained by Consultant under this Agreement is intended to ensure Consultant’s obligations under this section, but the limits of such insurance do not limit the liability of Consultant.
16.9 Consultant agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth in this section from each subcontractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. If Consultant fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from others as required, Consultant will be fully responsible for all obligations under this section. District’s failure to monitor compliance with this requirement imposes no additional obligations on District and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights under this Agreement.
16.10 The parties acknowledge and agree that design professionals are required to defend and indemnify the District only to the extent permitted by Civil Code section 2782.8, which allows for claims only to the extent that they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the design professional, and also places limitations on the costs of defense that may be charged to a design professional. The term "design professional,” is defined in Section 2782.8, and includes licensed architects, licensed landscape architects, registered professional engineers, professional land surveyors and the business entities that offer such services in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Business and Professions Code. The parties further acknowledge and agree that the provisions of this Section 16 are to be interpreted and applied to the fullest extent permitted by Civil Code section 2782.8.
16.11 The provisions of this section will survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement in accordance with the applicable provisions of Exhibit C (Insurance).
Section 17. Insurance.
Consultant agrees to obtain and maintain in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement the insurance coverages listed in Exhibit C (Insurance), which is made a part of this Agreement. These requirements are subject to amendment or waiver if so approved in writing by the District Manager or District Counsel.
Section 18. Assignment .
The expertise and experience of Consultant are material considerations for this Agreement. District has an interest in the qualifications of and capability of the persons CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 9
and entities that will fulfill the duties and obligations imposed upon Consultant under this Agreement. In recognition of that interest, Consultant may not assign or transfer this Agreement or any portion of this Agreement or the performance of any of Consultant’s duties or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of District, which may be withheld in the District’s sole discretion. Any attempted assignment will be null and void, and will constitute a material breach of this Agreement entitling District to any and all remedies at law or in equity, including summary termination of this Agreement.
Section 19. Default; Limitations on Liability .
19.1 In the event that Consultant is in default under the terms of this Agreement, District will have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any services performed after District provides written notice to Consultant of such default.
19.2 Consultant agrees that no District official, officer, employee or agent will be personally liable to Consultant in the event of any default or breach of District, or for any amount which may become due to Consultant, or for any obligations directly or indirectly incurred under this Agreement.
19.3 District’s liability under this Agreement is limited to payment of Consultant in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and excludes any liability whatsoever for consequential or indirect damages even if such damages are foreseeable.
Section 20. Termination of Agreement .
20.1 District may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time by written notice of termination to Consultant. In the event such notice is given, Consultant must cease immediately all work and services in progress.
20.2 Consultant may terminate this Agreement at any time upon 30 days’ prior written notice of termination to District.
20.3 Upon termination of this Agreement by either Consultant or District, all property belonging to District that is in Consultant’s possession must be returned to District. Consultant must promptly deliver to District a final invoice for all outstanding services performed and expenses incurred by Consultant as of the date of termination. Compensation for work in progress not based on an hourly rate will be prorated based on the percentage of work completed as of the date of termination.
20.4 Consultant acknowledges District’s rights to terminate this Agreement as provided in this section, and hereby waives any and all claims for damages that might otherwise arise from District’s termination of this Agreement.
Section 21. Notices .
21.1 All written notices required or permitted to be given under this Agreement will be deemed made when received by the other party at its respective address as follows:
To District: Camarillo Sanitary District
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
Attention: James Campero
(Tel.) (805) 388-5340
(Fax) (805) 388-5387
E-Mail [email protected]
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 10
To Consultant: Jacobs Project Management Co.
515 South Flower Street, Suite 4800
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Attention: Zita Yu
(Tel.) (747) 348-4997
(Fax) n/a
E-mail [email protected]
21.2 Notice will be deemed effective on the date personally delivered or electronically transmitted by facsimile. If the notice is mailed, notice will be deemed given three days after deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, for first class delivery, or upon delivery if using a major courier service with tracking capabilities.
21.3 Any party may change its notice information by giving notice to the other party in compliance with this section.
Section 22. General Provisions .
22.1 Authority to Execute; Counterparts. Each party represents and warrants that all necessary action has been taken by such party to authorize the undersigned to execute this Agreement and to bind it to the performance of its obligations hereunder. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which will constitute one and the same instrument and will become binding upon the parties when at least one copy has been signed by both parties.
22.2 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the attached Exhibits A through C, is the entire, complete, final and exclusive expression of the parties with respect to the matters addressed in this Agreement and supersedes all other agreements or understandings, whether oral or written, between Consultant and District prior to the execution of this Agreement.
22.3 Binding Effect. This Agreement is binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties.
22.4 Modification of Agreement. No amendment to or modification of this Agreement will be valid unless made in writing and approved by Consultant and by the District Board or District Manager, as applicable. The parties agree that this requirement for written modifications cannot be waived and that any attempted waiver will be void.
22.5 Electronic Signatures; Counterparts. This Agreement and any amendment will be considered executed when the signature page of a party is delivered by electronic transmission. Such electronic signatures will have the same effect as an original signature.
This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts.
22.6 Waiver. Waiver by any party to this Agreement of any term, condition, or covenant of this Agreement will not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant. Waiver by any party of any breach of the provisions of this Agreement will not constitute a waiver of any other provision, or a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this Agreement. Acceptance by District of any services by Consultant will not constitute a waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement.
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 11
22.7 Interpretation. This Agreement will be interpreted, construed and governed according to the laws of the State of California. Each party has had the opportunity to review this Agreement with legal counsel. The Agreement will be construed simply, as a whole, and in accordance with its fair meaning. It will not be interpreted strictly for or against either party.
22.8 Severability. If any term, condition or covenant of this Agreement is declared or determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement will not be affected and the Agreement will be read and construed without the invalid, void or unenforceable provision.
22.9 Venue. In the event of litigation between the parties, venue in will be exclusively in a state court in the County of Ventura.
THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF the parties hereby execute this Agreement as follows:
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT
_________________________________
Greg Ramirez, District Manager
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Carrie Weal, Assistant Secretary
JACOBS PROJECT MANAGEMENT CO., a Delaware Corporation
_________________________________
Richard Strun, Manager of Projects
_________________________________
Andrew Mittleman, Executive Director of Operations
Camarillo Business Tax Certificated No. __OBT-1214___ / Expiration Date _ 03/31/2027__
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 A-1
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
[Attached]
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
Jacobs Engineering Group
515 South Flower Street
Suite 4800
Los Angeles, CA 90071
United States
T +1.213.228.8255
www.jacobs.com
March 26, 2026
Attn: City Manager Ramirez, City Manager
Cc: Assistant City Manager Nichols; Alonso Ramirez, Principal Management Analyst City of Camarillo
Cc: Assistant City Manager
Camarillo Sanitary District
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
Project name: Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant Upgrade Owner's Advisor/Program Manager Subject: Owner’s Advisor & Program Management Services—Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) Improvements Program, Phase 1a (Revised Scope of Work and Fees enclosed) Dear City Manager Ramirez:
On behalf of Jacobs, we are pleased to transmit the enclosed Phase 1a Scope of Work for the Camarillo WRP Improvements Program. The work plan translates the City and District’s program drivers —final effluent management & compliance, affordability and cost recovery, water‑supply reliability and local control, operational and climate resilience, and asset stewardship with phased delivery —into a clear, actionable roadmap.
Recent work examined two paths—partial in‑plant upgrades or a new WRP—and both carry high costs, a challenge also seen in peer communities with aging assets and tighter permits. These are generation‑scale investments: they benefit residents for decades, while most near‑term costs fall on today’s ratepayers. In that context, the WRP Improvements Program is framed as a One Water affordability and reliability initiative, not just a plant fix. The approach applies a lifecycle lens: (1) what enters the plant, (2 ) how the plant treats it, and (3) how treated water is managed to create value.
As Owner’s Advisor and Program Manager, Jacobs will establish program governance and controls, apply structured decision‑making (MODA) to compare alternatives, and support the City and Board in selecting a preferred effluent management and reuse strategy that leverages existing City assets and regional infrastructure.
At the Phase 1a planning level, we will evaluate the One Water cycle —screening dry‑ and wet‑weather influent diversion sources for reuse (to reduce discharges), identifying lower‑cost operational upgrades and influent flow equalization opportunities, and defining how treated water can create value through reuse, exchanges, and seasonal storage (including percolation to the groundwater basin) and use of the Calleguas MWD Salinity Management Pipeline (SMP). We will also assess coordination with the City’s desalter to understand how more local groundwater could be produced and reliance on imported water
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Date: 26 March 2026
Subject: Owner’s Advisor & Program Management Services—Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) Improvements Program, Phase 1a (Revised Scope of Work and Fees enclosed) Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 2
reduced. Where warranted, we will field‑test percolation feasibility and quantify climate‑resilience and potable‑reuse benefits to strengthen the funding case.
As part of our Owner’s Advisor role, we will also explore affordability pathways—tested with Project Select and Jacobs financial model (TACT Model)—and bring forward options for the City’s consideration that fit within the City Council–authorized rate structure, in coordination with the City’s Finance team and Municipal Advisor.
This One Water framework reflects approaches already being used by other regional agencies, including Las Virgenes and the City of Los Angeles.
Phase 1a culminates in a decision‑ready, fundable, and deliverable WRP Improvement Program that strengthens regulatory compliance, protects ratepayer affordability, and measurably improves local water‑supply resilience. We will deliver this work in stages: Phase 1b will be collaboratively defined and scoped after the Board selects a preferred alternative to advance the project efficiently and for best value; Phase 2 will provide full implementation support—contract administration; technical oversight; schedule, budget, and risk management; permitting and construction oversight; and grant compliance —aligned with the City’s goals and informed by Phases 1a and 1b.
As Owner’s Advisor and Program Manager, Jacobs will establish program governance and controls, apply decision science (MODA to compare alternatives, and support the City and Board in selecting a preferred effluent management/reuse strategy that leverages existing City assets and regional infrastructure. Phase 1a culminates in a decision‑ready, fundable, and deliverable WRP Improvement Program that strengthens regulatory compliance, protects affordability, and measurably improves local water‑supply resilience.
Phase 1a scope at a glance (≈20 months)
▪ Task 1 – Program Management: Program chartering and execution plan; master schedule; risk/change framework; monthly reporting and decision gates, including an initial Board workshop. ▪ Task 2 – Technical Studies & Program Definition: Validate design criteria; evaluate effluent management & reuse pathways (e.g., storage, exchanges, IPR/DPR, SMP, expanded reuse); integrate solids/secondary treatment and flood protection into a cohesive rec ommendation with conceptual visuals and a Basis of Cost Estimating.
▪ Task 3 – Environmental & Regulatory: Desktop constraints/GIS mapping and a Permitting Matrix to define the environmental review and permitting strategy for Phase 1b. ▪ Task 4 – Financial & Economic Support: Decision‑quality economics via Project Select (NPV/benefit‑cost) and Jacobs’ TACT model for sequencing, cash‑flows, and rate impacts; a Funding Strategy Action Plan targeting SRF, WIFIA, BOR, FEMA.
▪ Task 5 – Project Delivery Methodology: Workshop and analysis to select a market‑aligned delivery method (DBB/CMAR/PDB/FPDB) to manage cost, schedule, and risk. ▪ Task 6 – Targeted Technical Studies: Operations optimization, influent equalization, headworks upgrades, disinfection alternatives, odor control, SCADA/automation, flood‑impacts evaluation, and an energy/microgrid assessment to reduce O&M cost and enhance resilience.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Date: 26 March 2026
Subject: Owner’s Advisor & Program Management Services—Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) Improvements Program, Phase 1a (Revised Scope of Work and Fees enclosed) Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 3
The scope includes an RFP crosswalk demonstrating coverage of program management, technical studies, environmental/permitting, financial modeling and funding support, scheduling/controls, and delivery methodology—sequenced to reduce risk while maintaining affordability.
We appreciate your leadership and the Board’s stewardship of this critical program and look forward to partnering to deliver a resilient, affordable, and locally controlled water future for the Camarillo community.
Jacobs Engineering Group,
Dr. Zita Yu, PE
Program Manager
747-348-4997
[email protected]
Rich Nagel, PE
Principal-In-Charge
213-500-2333
[email protected]
Attachments
1. Revised Scope of Work
2. Revised Level of Effort Estimates by Subtasks and Hourly Bill Rates
3. Revised Phase 1a Schedule
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 1
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Executive Summary
This document provides an Executive Summary of the proposed scope of work for Phase 1a and highlights how the approach supports overall program development and successful implementation. A detailed scope of work is provided in Appendix A, supported by an RFP Scope crosswalk (Appendix B) and List of General Terms, Assumptions and Exclusions (Appendix C).
Owner’s Advisor and Program Management Services - Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) Improvements Program | Phase 1a Scope of Work
Camarillo’s Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) Improvements Program is at a pivotal decision point. The City must address aging wastewater infrastructure and tightening regulatory requirements while making choices that materially improve long‑term water‑supply reliability and protect community affordability. Prior studies largely evaluated two paths—partial in‑ plant upgrades and a new WRP—and th e takeaway is clear: both approaches can be very expensive.
This cost challenge is not unique to Camarillo; many agencies facing similar regulatory and aging‑asset pressures are encountering comparable price tags. Importantly, these are generation-scale investments: they benefit the community for decades, but much of the near-term cost is typically borne by current ratepayers.
For that reason, Phase 1a is intentionally framed not as a traditional “wastewater plant fix” effort, but as a One Water affordability and reliability initiative. As part of Jacobs’ Owner’s Advisor role, we will actively identify and evaluate affordability pathways and recommend implementable options for the City’s consideration that align with the Council-authorized rate structure.
Using a lifecycle lens — covering (1) what enters the plant, (2) how the plant treats it, and (3) how the treated water is managed and creates value — we will evaluate the full water and wastewater cycle to identify an implementable, funding-ready pathway that:
Reduces compliance exposure,
Improves lifecycle cost performance,
Improves cost recovery and value creation from recycled water, and Strengthens local, drought-resilient supply.
We will deliver this work through a staged approach (Phases 1a, 1b, and 2) described in Program Phasing below.
Program Drivers:
1. Final Effluent Management and Compliance
Select a year‑round strategy for storing, reusing, and managing recycled water that reduces discharges to Conejo Creek, mitigates National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) compliance risk as permits tighten, and improves operational robustness.
2. Affordability and Cost Recovery (One Water Pathway)
Move from largely low/no‑revenue reuse toward approaches that capture the value of recycled water—especially as imported water costs continue to rise—and improve lifecycle cost performance. This includes evaluating affordability across the entire One Water system:
Water coming to the plant (flows and diversion concepts), Treatment and operations (in‑plant optimization), and Value creation from treated water (reuse, exchange, storage)
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 2
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
3. Water‑Supply Reliability and Local Control
Hedge against water‑rights/desalter uncertainty and regional supply volatility by advancing a dependable, locally controlled reuse strategy that can offset more expensive imported water and strengthen resilience in drought conditions.
4. Operational and Climate Resilience
Support reliable operations under wet‑weather and low‑demand conditions through storage/equalization concepts and flood‑aware configuration planning, improving long‑term climate resilience.
5. Asset Stewardship and Phased Delivery
Maximize City assets (including the desalter) and leverage regional infrastructure (e.g., the Salinity Management Pipeline) while sequencing improvements to manage delivery risk, schedule, and cash flow.
Accordingly, this program should be evaluated first and foremost as a water‑supply reliability and resilience initiative — not solely as a capital rehabili tation of a treatment facility.
Role and Scope of Jacobs (Owner’s Advisor and Program Manager) Jacobs will translate these drivers into an implementable, fundable, and affordable path forward by:
1. Board‑ready decision support
Converting technical alternatives into Board‑ready decision points, with transparent comparisons of benefits, costs, risks, and tradeoffs.
Applying a structured decision framework to support a defensible preferred strategy and record.
2. Program governance and controls
Establishing program controls for disciplined governance, decision tracking, schedule and cost management, and risk oversight.
Supporting internal alignment through an initial Board workshop and program charter.
3. One water affordability analysis (system-wide value creation) Evaluating the One Water cycle to identify ratepayer affordability pathways, including opportunities to:
- Increase the value of recycled water through improved reuse, exchange, and/or storage strategies, - Offset expensive imported water with locally controlled supplies; and - Improve resilience during future drought conditions
4. Operational optimization and lower-cost in‑plant opportunities Identifying in‑plan
t operational and targeted upgrade opportunities that improve performance and flexibility at potentially lower cost than major rebuild/new-plant concepts. Screening flow management and groundwater storage concepts (where feasible) to understand whether, and under what constraints, concepts such as increased diversions and recharge/storage could help lower unit treatment costs and expand water-supply benefits. These assessments will be concept-level and coordinated with legal/regulatory considerations; detailed modeling, permitting, and agreement negotiation would be addressed in subsequent phases as appropriate.
5. Implementation readiness: delivery + funding/financing Supporting selection of a preferred effluent management and reuse strategy—including exchange opportunities—then using that strategy to shape an adaptive improvement plan for the WRP that leverages
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 3
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
existing City‑owned assets (including the desalter) and regional infrastructure (such as the Salinity Management Pipeline).
Connecting the preferred strategy to a practical delivery method and a funding/financing roadmap to position the City for implementation.
This approach aligns with proven affordability pathways pursued by other regional agencies—such as Las Virgenes and the City of Los Angeles—where a One Water framing has helped connect wastewater investments to measurable water-supply value and improved resilience.
Expected Outcome
A defensible program that is buildable, operable, and financially sustainable—delivering regulatory compliance, ratepayer affordability, and measurable improvements in local water‑supply resilience for the Camarillo community.
Program Phasing
We will deliver the program in three stages. Phase 1a produces a decision‑ready, fundable WRP improvements plan that strengthens regulatory compliance, protects ratepayer affordability, and measurably improves local water‑supply reliability and resilience. After the Board selects a preferred alternative, we will jointly scope Phase 1b to advance the project efficiently and for best value. Phase 2 then provides full implementation support—contract administration; technical oversight; schedule, budget, and risk management; permitting and construction oversight; and grant compliance—aligned with City goals and informed by Phases 1a and 1b. 9 Phase 1a (This Action) - Delivers governance, controls, studies, ratepayer affordability, and an integrated recommended WRP Improvement Program for Board consideration. 9 Phase 1b (Future Amendment) - Identified in the RFP but not fully scoped/budgeted at this stage; expected to include items such as preliminary design drawings/specifications, procurement/bridging documents, and expanded environmental documentation/permitting plan.
9 Phase 2 (Future Amendment)- Anticipated to include comprehensive implementation support (contract administration, technical reviews, schedule/budget oversight, permitting coordination, construction management, grant compliance).
Phase 1a Scope Summary
This section summarizes the benefits of each task, what will be done, and opportunities for board policy direction.
Task 1: Program Management
Direct tie to program drivers: Establishes governance, controls, and decision criteria that keep the focus on compliance, long‑term water‑supply reliability, and ratepayer affordability, with a special emphasis on selecting and phasing the effluent management/reuse strategy.
Benefits to the City and Ratepayers
Clear, timely decisions via a structured “One Team” and decision‑science approach On‑time, on‑budget delivery through embedded schedule/cost/risk controls Lower program risk and stronger funding position via disciplined governance and documentation What Will Be Done (Scope Highlights)
Board Kickoff Workshop – Cadence of board policy direction will be further developed. Mobilize with Program Charter, Readiness Assessment, and Program Execution Plan (PEP) Stand up Master Program Schedule, cost/cash‑flow controls, risk/change framework
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 4
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Apply decision‑science to alternatives; monthly reporting and decision gates Board Policy Direction
Monthly progress briefings; decision gates at key milestones Task 2: Technical Studies and Program Definition
Direct tie to program drivers: Targets the core lever—final effluent mana gement—to reduce or eliminate discharges to Conejo Creek, improve cost recovery and reuse value, and hedge against desalter‑related supply/cost uncertainty; integrates solids and secondary treatment selections and 100‑year flood protection to support reliable operations.
Benefits
Decision‑ready Recommended WRP Improvement Program by end of Phase 1a Risk reduction and compliance assurance (criteria validation, flood mitigation, recharge fatal‑flaw) Cost/rate discipline via consistent estimating basis and parametric tools What Will Be Done
Validate design criteria (flows, loads, characterization, redundancy, operations and maintenance (O&M)) Evaluate effluent management and reuse strategies (storage, exchanges, potable reuse, regional brine line, expanded reuse) with revenue, regulatory compliance, and lifecycle implications; include groundwater recharge and supply evaluation; legal coordination on adjudication Assess solids and secondary treatment (membrane bioreactor (MBR) vs biological nutrient removal (BNR)); develop flood protection measures
Integrate into a cohesive recommended program with 3D (three-dimensional) visuals and conceptual specs; establish Basis of Cost Estimating
Board Policy Direction
Check‑ins at key deliverable milestones (criteria, effluent alternatives, solids/secondary shortlists, flood mitigation)
Direction on the Recommended WRP Improvements (selection and phasing) Task 3: Environmental Studies and Regulatory Compliance Direct tie to program drivers: Confirms that the preferred effluent management and reuse path is permit‑feasible and consistent with environmental justice (EJ), habitat, and floodplain constraints—min imizing surprises that could impact compliance, schedule, or ratepayer affordability.
Benefits
De‑risked alternatives and schedule through early constraints and permitting pathfinding Faster California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)/ National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) start in Phase 1b with a clear Review and Permitting Strategy
What Will Be Done
Desktop constraints validation and geographical information system (GIS) mapping (habitat, hydrology/floodplains, EJ, utilities, hazards)
Permitting Matrix and Environmental Review and Permitting Strategy (to guide Phase 1b) Board Policy Direction
Briefing on constraints/permitting pathways; confirm assumptions for Phase 1b scope
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 5
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Task 4: Financial and Economic Support
Direct tie to program drivers: Aligns the preferred effluent/reuse strategy with ratepayer affordability and funding, reducing exposure to imported‑water cost volatility and supporting a stable, defensible rate path.
Benefits
Decision‑quality economics for best‑value selection within ratepayer affordability targets Rate stability and funding readiness via sequencing and cash‑flow optimization What Will Be Done
Project Select (net present value (NPV)/benefit‑cost comparisons) and financial modeling (sequencing feasibility, revenue impacts, risk/change support, cash‑flows, and optimized timing of bonds/State Revolving Funds (SRF)/Proposition 4 (Prop 4)/Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA)/contingency/rate actions)
Funding Strategy Action Plan targeting SRF, Prop 4, WIFIA, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); align funding timing with schedule and permitting readiness Board Policy Direction
Finance workshop to confirm assumptions and review the Funding Strategy Action Plan Task 5: Project Delivery Methodology
Direct tie to program drivers: Selects a procurement approach (design-bid-build (DBB)/construction manager at risk (CMAR)/Progressive design build (PDB)/fixed-price-design-build (FPDB)) that best controls cost, schedule, and risk for the effluent management and WRP upgrades, accelerating implementation once the Board selects the recommended program.
Benefits
Clear, market‑aligned procurement strategy
Earlier cost/schedule certainty for Phase 1b/2
What Will Be Done
Analyze DBB/CMAR/PDB/FPDB tradeoffs and risk allocation; conduct a delivery‑method workshop Align chosen method with the selected WRP Improvement to set the right design level for procurement Board Policy Direction
Delivery‑method workshop and confirmation of the preferred approach Task 6: Targeted Technical Studies – Program Definition and Retrofit Cost Certainty Direct tie to program drivers: Provides the additional definition and data needed to select and deliver the preferred effluent/reuse pathway with confidence—tightening planning ‑grade costs (especially for retrofit), strengthening compliance and operability during construction, and improving resilience to floods and grid outages. The work reduces unknowns that materially affect capital budget, schedule, risk allowances, and rate impacts, and it strengthens the business case for funding.
Benefits
Higher cost certainty (retrofit-focused): Site-specific data and targeted analyses (including percolation field testing) clarify tie-ins, staging, temporary works, and constructability, so estimates reflect real conditions—not assumptions.
Lower delivery risk: Resolves key unknowns (hydraulics, flood interactions, controls cutovers, odor/air handling)
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 6
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
before procurement, reducing exposure to change orders, claims, and schedule slips. Sharper sequencing & operability during construction: Defines how to keep the WRP compliant and reliable through bypassing, cutovers, and staged work.
Funding competitiveness: Produces defensible planning-grade costs and narratives that align with the cost-loaded master schedule and support SRF/Prop 4/ WIFIA/other funding applications. Resilience & co-benefits: Evaluates energy/microgrid options and quantifies climate and potable-reuse benefits, enabling a broader value case beyond basic compliance cost.
What Will Be Done (Scope Summary)
Operational optimization and cost–saving assessment: Validate baseline O&M drivers; recommend no‑regrets improvements with savings/payback
Influent flow equalization sizing: Establish the hydraulic envelope governing retrofit tie‑ins and temporary bypassing; define automation needs and rough order magnitude (ROM) costs Preliminary treatment (screening and grit) upgrades: Alternatives with conceptual layouts, tie‑in constraints, staging; protect downstream units and avoid scope creep Disinfection alternatives (free chlorine, chloramine, ultra-violet (UV) light): Select a permittable, operable basis that fits footprint/safety/cutovers; conceptual layouts and ROM costs Odor control options: Up to three locations, two alternatives each; prioritize construction‑phase mitigation; ROM costs
SCADA/automation assessment: Document as‑is controls and plan phased cutovers; assign criticality ratings; recommend cyber/telemetry upgrades
Flood impacts evaluation: Model how new/modified infrastructure (e.g., percolation ponds) affects WRP flood defenses and adjacent parcels; document elevation and cost implications Energy/microgrid assessment: Screen up to four technologies; develop up to four microgrid alternatives; compare total cost of ownership (TCO), islanding restart performance, emissions, and tariff/revenue opportunities
Percolation Pond Field Testing: Test one onsite and one offsite location to confirm soil permeability and potential groundwater mounding. Results will validate percolation capacity and inform basin sizing and siting. Climate Resilience & Potable Reuse Benefits:
1. Identify key hazards (flood, heat, wildfire, drought), map high/medium/low impacts, define practical adaptation measures, and provide concept‑level cost estimates for likely design actions.
2. Build a potable‑reuse benefits inventory, quantify and monetize direct benefits, and prepare a benefit–cost analysis using two discount‑rate scenarios.
Dry- and Wet-Weather Diversion Strategy (Influent): conceptual-level opportunities to increase influent routed to the WRP during dry and wet weather to increase treated water available for potable reuse.
Board Policy Direction
Brief updates at key findings (no action required unless reprioritization is needed). Brief updates at key findings (no action required unless reprioritization is needed)
Phase 1a Outcome
A decision‑ready, fundable, and deliverable WRP Improvement Program centered on a preferred effluent management/reuse strategy—with go vernance, controls, procurement pathway, ratepayer affordability plan, and
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 7
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
environmental/permitting roadmap in place—so the City can proceed into Phase 1b with fewer unknowns, better cost certainty, and a clear line of sight to regulatory compliance, ratepayer affordability, and measurable water‑supply resilience.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 8
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Appendix A: Detailed Scope of Work
Task 1: Program Management
Task 1.1 Program Management and Administration
The objective of this task is to provide leadership, management, and direction on all aspects of delivery to achieve Camarillo Sanitary District (CSD)’s objectives throughout the life of the program. Program management and administration activities include the following:
x Program Oversight: Oversee management and coordination of the Program including monitoring progress of work as compared to scope, budget, and schedule.
x Issue Resolution and Support: Respond to project-related questions, as well as provide other services as reasonably assigned by the District in support of the Program. x Reporting:
- Prepare monthly status reports and invoices, summarizing progress, budget status, upcoming milestones, and issues requiring CSD attention.
- Prepare quarterly progress reports with a summary of activities. x Contract Management: Administer and manage program-related contracts. x Performance Evaluation: Conduct periodic evaluations of program performance and recommend corrective actions as needed.
x Resource Management: Manage program resources, staffing, and subconsultant availability across all disciplines, including regulatory compliance, wastewater treatment operations, construction management, scheduling, specialty inspection, and cost estimating, to provide technical support as needed. x Meeting Coordination: Provide management, scheduling, and documentation support for regular coordination meetings that serve as the primary vehicle for progress tracking and decision-making. Information from these meetings will form the basis for monthly reports, creating a continuous communication cycle between Jacobs, CSD staff, and the Board.
Task focused Meetings and Workshops:
Jacobs will facilitate the following meetings and workshops. x Board Kickoff Meeting: Conduct a meeting (3 hours) to receive Board input and direction and to establish milestones for Board policy direction.
x Internal Coordination Meetings: Conduct 12 meetings (1 hour each) with staff and the District’s consultants to discuss topics appropriate for the development of the program and technical studies. x Monthly Progress Meetings: Conduct 18 meetings (1-hour each) with the GovTeam to review progress, discuss risk, schedule, and budget status.
x City Staff Meetings: Support up to 10 meetings as requested, with GovTeam, CSD operations team or other department staff to discuss technical issues and facilitate decisions. x Weekly Check-in Meetings: Conduct 48 virtual meetings (30 minutes each) with CSD staff to address near-term actions, including 3-weeks look ahead schedule and maintain day-to-day momentum.
Deliverables:
x 18 monthly status reports and invoices (PDF)
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 9
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x 6 quarterly progress reports (PDF)
x Agendas, materials, minutes, summaries, and action items at an appropriate level of detail for each meeting and workshop
x Meeting presentations (draft and final)
x Action item log (Excel)
Assumptions:
x Additional meetings related to Tasks 2, 3, 4, and 5 will be budgeted under the respective tasks. x The District will work with the OA/PM team to schedule and facilitate logistics for workshops and meetings. x District review time:
- Internal and City staff meetings: 3 business days
- Board meetings: 5 business days.
- Workshop materials: 5 business days
Task 1.2 Program Initiation
Program initiation will start with defining program priorities, drivers and risk and include four (4) focused workshops during the Program Initiation period. These workshops will create alignment, establish strategies, identify processes, and prepare the District for informed for decision-making. x Mobilization: Jacobs will develop and implement initial ways of working and interim collaboration tools to initiate Program activities. This includes setting up the program SharePoint site, putting team communication protocols in place (email address table, style guide, etc.), and setting up team logistical and corporate administration.
x Outcome Identification and Governance: The Jacobs team will conduct up to two 4-hour in-person workshops, also known as program team chartering. These will be an in-person session(s) with the GovTeam and Board to confirm program vision, guiding principles, and success factors; review existing objectives; and define how decisions will be made and communicated. The workshop will also include confirmation of existing governance guidelines including project delivery process flow, stage gates, program organizational structure, roles and responsibilities, delegation of authority, meeting structure and cadence, and reporting requirements and cadence. Key Performance Indicators will be developed as a result of the goals and objectives and the reporting requirements.
x Readiness Assessment: Review existing data (e.g., existing treatment lab data, recycled water and energy usage data, solids treatment and disposal data, operational costs) and conduct a peer review of the technical studies conducted to date. The Readiness Assessment is to summarize the approach and main considerations as the Program continues into the next phase of implementation. The Readiness Assessment will provide an objective perspective of the status of the program, including potential roadblocks that could impede progress, gaps in the program plan and structure; and validate the near-term priorities for consideration. The Jacobs team will conduct a 4-hour in-person workshop to cover the readiness assessment.
In addition to the review of the technical studies, the Jacobs team will review the other functional areas associated with program delivery including:
x Health, Safety, Security and the Environment
x Quality
x Funding
x Stakeholder and Public Engagement
x Permitting and Right-of-Way
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 10
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x Project Planning
x Engineering and Design Management (including lifecycle cost analysis, value engineering and means, methods, and materials approaches)
x Procurement
x Contract Management
x Construction Management
x Asset Management
x Program Controls (schedule, cost, estimating, risk, change) x Information Management
x Performance Management and Reporting
x Commissioning, Training and Closeout
Each functional area will be assessed, and recommendations will be documented in the Readiness Assessment. Each functional area will be scored relative to a 5-point scale regarding program readiness. Identification of Program functional areas will help to identify existing District policies, procedures and tools that would support the program as well as those that need to be developed or modified for the program. The Readiness Assessment will include an analysis of the gaps, overlaps, constraints and mitigations roadmap. x Functional Strategies Development: Prepare a Program Execution Plan (PEP) that appropriately recognizes the foundational Program priorities, drivers, and risks that guide Phase 1a, 1b, and 2 activities. The PEP will include the confirmation of the program vision, mission, goals, critical success factors, and high-level strategies for implementation. These strategies will provide a framework for delivery and will incorporate the initial internal and external stakeholder opinions and concerns so that execution will maintain a stakeholder-sensitive focus during program delivery. The PEP will include the following strategies:
- Program Chartering Results
- Program Organization and Resource Mobilization Strategy - Risk and Change Management Strategy
- Communication and Reporting Strategy
- Quality Assurance Strategy
- Public and Stakeholder Outreach Strategy
- Budget and Schedule Control Strategy
- Funding Support and Alternative Funding Sources Strategy - Permits and Regulatory Strategy
- Project Delivery and Procurement Strategy
The PEP will develop and define the program with definition of all studies and projects needed to be completed by Jacobs, including anticipated dates of start and end for each program component. Feedback from the Board and GovTeam will be integrated into the Program Execution Plan Task Focused Meetings and Workshops:
x Four (4) workshops will be conducted as part of program mobilization: focused on (1) chartering (2) program governance, (3) readiness assessment, and (4) program controls. x Additional task focused meetings will be conducted as part of the coordination and progress meetings in Task 1.1 Deliverables:
x Chartering agreement for signature by all team members. x Governance workshop outcomes and Key Performance Indicators (ppt) x Draft and Final Readiness Assessment Report
x Draft and Final Program Execution Plan (PEP)
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 11
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Assumptions:
x To facilitate a fast start, District review period for deliverables during initiation: 5 business days.
Task 1.3 Decision Science
Jacobs will apply a structured decision-making method to assist the City in selecting the preferred program alternative and delivery approach. Building on the findings from the Readiness Assessment completed during the Program Initiation phase, Jacobs will facilitate workshops with CSD staff and the GovTeam using Multi-Objective Decision Analysis (MODA) for transparent, data-driven outcomes aligned with program priorities.
Key Activities:
x Define Decision Framework: Identify key Program priorities, drivers, and risks/rewards that are foundational for future decision-making Define decision objectives, evaluation criteria, and performance measures. x Develop Scoring Methodology: Develop and document weighting and scoring methodology with GovTeam input to achieve alignment and maintain transparency.
x Apply MODA Tool: Use MODA to evaluate alternatives for effluent management, liquids treatment, solids handling, flood mitigation measures options.
x Visualize Results: Prepare clear, visual summaries comparing alternatives based on life-cycle cost, non- monetary value, and regulatory compliance risk.
x Recommendation Support: Assist City in aligning on the recommended design option(s) that balance financial capacity, constructability, operational efficiency, and flood and regulatory compliance risk.
Task Focused Workshops:
x Two 3-hour science workshops will be conducted to define framework and conduct for MODA evaluations (6 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final Decision Framework tables
x Draft and Final Decision evaluation outcome tables and graphics for task specific evaluation will be included as an appendix of the respective task deliverable.
Task 1.4 Board and Communications Support
This task provides communications support for Board policy direction and coordination with the District’s public outreach team and consultant, legal team, financial advisor (Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates), and rate consultant (Raftelis) to maintain consistent messaging and stakeholder alignment throughout the Program.
Board Engagement Activities:
x Prepare Board workshop agendas and presentation materials. x PM/DPM and up to 3 OA/PM team members will attend and present at up to 3 Board meetings. x Post-workshop follows up to document feedback and integrate Board direction. x Document Board workshop summaries, capturing feedback, direction, and decisions.
Public Outreach and Stakeholder Coordination
Jacobs will collaborate with the District’s outreach consultant and staff to provide technical and strategic support, including:
x Develop content and messaging for Program communications. x Prepare data summaries, tables, maps, and infographics to support outreach materials and presentations. x Maintain and periodically update the stakeholder contact list.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 12
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x Provide technical content for funding applications, fact sheets, or public-facing updates prepared by others.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Effort includes participation in 3 board meetings, in person with 3 Jacobs staff in attendance.
Deliverables:
x Board workshop agendas, materials and summaries capturing feedback, direction, and decisions. x Stakeholder contact list (initial and updated)
x Technical content for outreach materials (tables, figures, or text sections) Assumptions:
x Jacobs will provide up to 40 hours of coordination and content for outreach support. x All public communications will be issued by the City or its outreach consultant.
Task 1.5 Program Controls
The Jacobs team will implement a Program Controls System to manage and monitor all aspects of program delivery, including cash flow projections, master scheduling, budgeting, expenditure tracking, and document management.
The following will be the components of this task:
x Master Program Schedule: Jacobs will develop a Master Program Schedule based on a selected program developed under Task 2.7 and the output from the TACT Model to be performed under Task 4. Jacobs will work with CSD to identify milestones related to project priorities, funding, and other drivers. The master program schedule will address immediate/short-term and long-term improvements necessary; include logic ties to establish critical path and cost loading to identify overall program budget needs and planned expenditures. The Jacobs team will review project budgets to determine budgeting needs for all Program and project delivery elements. The Jacobs team will also evaluate allocated contingencies for each project. The Master Program Schedule will be cost-loaded to identify the timing of expenditures for use by CSD and its financial analyst to secure funding/financing. The program schedule software shall be selected in consultation with the District.
Once the master schedule is established at the end of Phase 1a, Jacobs will manage the schedule to assess and manage to inform input on constraints, considerations, and forecasting. This will include the critical path schedule analysis, float analysis, resource leveling, cash flow, and alternatives analysis. The Program Master Schedule is expected to be updated quarterly starting in Phase 1b. x Budget: Jacobs will conduct estimates and validation under Task 2.8 and the output of the TACT Model performed under Task 4 which will form as the primary input to develop a cost-loaded program schedule. x Risk and Change Management: Jacobs will establish the procedures, tools, and reporting methods required to identify, assess, and manage risks and changes in scope, schedule, or budget across the program. This will be the continuous identification, analysis and proactive management and resolution of risk and opportunities. Risk register and change log will be managed in coordination with CSD using Excel or a mutually agreed digital tool. x Document Control: Jacobs will implement a SharePoint- based contract management and document control system to manage all contract- and project-related documentation. Jacobs will work with CSD’s document control processes and available tools to develop program specific procedures to maintain document version control, streamline review processes, and meet CSD’s records retention requirements. Jacobs team will review CSD’s existing document control standards and retention policies for full alignment of CSD’s requirements and evaluate the available document control systems to determine the best approach for integrating our processes with CSD’s established practices. It is expected that this process will be collaborative and iterative, and as the program progresses. Document management processes will be refined to keep pace with changing program requirements.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 13
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x Performance Portal: Jacobs will work with GovTeam to evaluate the need for a Program Performance Portal that will include a performance environment where internal and external stakeholders can review the program and project status with the potential to integrate document management, project tracking, permit lists, GIS, financials, and program tools all in one portal for easy access and monitoring. At the end of the evaluation, if GovTeam elects to proceeds, Jacobs will develop a scope and fees based on the selected features.
Task Focused Workshops:
x The Jacobs team will conduct a 4-hour in-person workshop to cover the project controls, to define the controls framework—cost, schedule, estimating standards, risk, change, and scope. Identify tools (dashboards, portal) for reporting and progress tracking. (6 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) Deliverables:
x Change Control Procedure, Form, Log and Monthly Change Control Meetings. x Initial Risk Register and quarterly updates
x Risk and change summaries in monthly and quarterly reports. x Change Management Log with monthly updates.
x Master Program Schedule for recommended WRP improvements Assumptions:
x The Master Program Schedule will be prepared electronically in a format compatible with the District’s selected software (e.g., Primavera P6 or MS Project) at the end of Phase 1a. x Updates on program controls will be reviewed with CSD staff during monthly progress meetings.
Task 2: Technical Studies
Task 2 includes preparation of the following Technical Memorandum (TM), as listed below and detailed in the following subtasks. This work will be built on TM 1 through 8 (by Hazen) and other studies provided by the District.
The proposed TMs to be completed as part of Phase 1a are. x TM– Design Criteria Validation
x TM – Effluent Management Evaluation
x TM – Solids Treatment Economic Study
x TM – Membrane Bioreactor vs. Conventional BNR Study
x TM – Flood Protection Mitigation Measures
x TM – Recommended WRP Improvements
x TM – Basis of Cost Estimating
At the conclusion of Phase 1a, a WRP Improvement Program will be selected and defined. Conceptual design plans and specifications will be developed to an appropriate level based on the preferred delivery options selected by the District for procurement during Phase 1b.
Task 2.1 Design Criteria Validation
Prior to conducting detailed alternatives analyses in subsequent sub-tasks, Jacobs will validate design criteria used for sizing, costing and overall recommendations.
While overall project drivers will be defined in Task 1, this subtask will focus on technical criteria. Jacobs will review and validate information provided in the 2022 Master Plan and 2025 Evaluation and Prioritization documents to establish the following:
x Planning horizon for the WRP Improvements project, including the final year for which upgrades will remain valid and provide adequate capacity.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 14
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x Population projections and influent flow rate projections, including required peaking factors based on hourly influent concentration data.
x Influent concentrations and influent loads, including required peaking factors. x Influent wastewater characterization.
x Assumed condition of existing WRP equipment and processes. x Criteria for redundancy.
x Operational and maintenance requirements provided by District staff.
CSD will provide 3-years of all necessary data sufficient to develop population projections, flows, loads and characterization. A site visit will be conducted to augment existing condition assessment data.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (4 Jacobs attendees, virtual)
x Mtg #1 (3 hours): Focused on population, flows, loads, and wastewater characterization (4 Jacobs attendees:
hybrid).
x Mtg #2 (4 hours): Focused on condition assumptions, redundancy criteria, and O&M criteria (4 Jacobs attendees:
hybrid).
x Mtg #3 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees: virtual).
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Design Criteria Validation
Assumptions:
x No supplemental sampling is included.
x The assumed design criteria do not currently incorporate design levels that enhance climate resilience for the WRP improvements. If climate resiliency is identified as a desired design criterion, Jacobs can define the level of effort and develop a scope of work to assess climate risks and use those findings to inform design criteria for subsequent analyses.
Task 2.2 Operations Optimization, Capital Investment Efficiency and Final Effluent Use Study Effluent Management Evaluation:
Jacobs will compile relevant materials associated with the preliminary effluent management alternatives and prepare an initial request for relevant infrastructure, operating and stakeholder data.
Effluent Management Alternatives Development and Selection Jacobs will develop conceptual effluent management alternatives for the following effluent management strategies:
x Percolation Ponds: Disposal of effluent through percolation pond system. x Regional Consolidation: Divert influent or effluent to another agency or municipality for treatment and disposal. x Calleguas MWD Salinity Management Pipeline (SMP): Disposal of effluent through connection to Calleguas MWD SMP.
x Expanded Recycled Water Use: Increased recycled water deliveries to Camrosa Water District, Mary Smith Farms, and/or new recycled water deliveries to sites consistent with the 2024 Final Recycled Water Planning Study. x Equalization/Recycled Water Storage: Flow equalization and/or recycled water storage to support expanded recycled water deliveries.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 15
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR): New IPR treatment process at the WRP or modifications to the NPV Desalter to produce purified recycled water suitable for groundwater injection. x Expanded Recycled Water Use + SMP Discharge (hybrid alternative): Recycled water storage to expand recycled water deliveries and connection to Calleguas SMP for effluent disposal during periods of reduced recycled water demand.
x Direct Potable Reuse (DPR): New DPR treatment process at the WRP or modifications to the NPV Desalter to produce purified recycled water suitable for introduction directly into the City’s existing potable water distribution system.
x Conejo Creek Discharge (status quo): Continued discharge to Conejo Creek with treatment process improvements as required to satisfy discharge permit requirements. x In-Lieu Exchanges: Distribution of recycled water to agricultural properties in exchange for groundwater pumping rights. In-lieu exchange alternative development will include identification of potential agricultural properties and agencies with groundwater pumping rights in the Pleasant Valley Groundwater Basin. Negotiations and development of agreements not included.
x Shallow Aquifer Production: Construction of new wells in the shallow, unconfined aquifer to provide a water supply for existing recycled water users and allow the City/CSD to divert effluent for recharge.
In addition to conceptual alternative development, Jacobs will review the existing recycled water agreement with Mary Smith Farms and evaluate partnership opportunities and constraints with Camrosa Water District.
For each conceptual alternative, a narrative description will be developed with an illustrative process flow diagram.
The evaluation will summarize effluent water quality requirements, infrastructure requirements, estimates of recycled water use and recycled water sales revenue, permitting requirements, order of magnitude implementation schedule, and preliminary facility needs.
Jacobs will also prepare a regulatory feasibility assessment identifying the principal permitting pathway, responsible agencies, key approvals, likely environmental review requirements, major compliance obligations, third-party agreements, fatal flaws, and implementation schedule risk. Because recycled water projects may be subject to different approval pathways depending on whether the alternative involves nonpotable recycled water use, groundwater replenishment, potable reuse, or discharge to surface waters, the regulatory feasibility assessment will be used to distinguish the relative implementation complexibity and risk of each alternative.
A cost-benefit and lifecycle cost evaluation will be prepared to support District decision-making and selection of a preferred alternative. Regulatory considerations will be incorporated into the alternatives screening process through a regulatory feasibility matrix. This task will also include a present worth evaluation of effluent equalization/ storage options. For alternatives involving Calleguas MWD SMP, the evaluation will also consider discharge access, connection requirements, and consistency with applicable Calleguas d ischarge rules and outfall permit requirements.
Projected wastewater inflow to the WRP will be evaluated under Task 2.1. Options for inflow equalization will be further conducted under Task 6.2, and additional inflow associated with dry- and wet- weather diversion will be evaluated under Task 6.11. The potential volume of source water available reuse wil be estimated based on the outputs from Tasks 2.1 and 6.11. The cost-benefit evaluation of WRP effluent reuse will be further informed by the analysis completed under Task 6.10.
Findings from this task will be summarized in the TM deliverable. Development of conceptual effluent management alternatives, or combinations of alternatives, not described above will require authorization of additional scope and budget.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 16
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Groundwater Recharge and Supply Evaluations
To support the analysis of groundwater recharge and supply options and decision making for the Effluent Use Study, Jacobs will perform the following activities.
Analysis of Recharge Options
Jacobs will conduct a high-level analysis of the following recharge options, focusing on the hydrogeologic conditions and rough order of magnitude costs.
Percolation Ponds at the WRP Site
x Review the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Pleasant Valley Subbasin (GSP), USDA soil survey data, and other information provided by the District regarding the surficial soil permeability, infiltration rates, depth to groundwater, and aquifer properties of the shallow semi-perched aquifer. x Expanding on this data review, conduct site-specific investigations to evaluate subsurface conditions and percolation rates at the WRP site (refer to Task 6.9 for details). x Using estimates of key hydrogeologic parameters for the site based on the data review and site-specific investigations, establish the approximate size of the percolation basin needed based on the parameter estimates and effluent discharge rates.
x Prepare a rough order of magnitude parametric cost estimate for the construction of the basins, focusing on the cost of basin grading.
x If the site appears suitable, evaluate the degree of groundwater mounding that may occur for the conceptual basin configuration and operational scenarios, using standard analytic solutions.
Percolation Ponds on Other Property
x Identify areas within the District’s service area that are designated as potential recharge areas in the GSP based on favorable surface soil conditions, focusing on areas that area closest to the WRP. x Review the GSP, USDA soil survey data, and other information provided by the District regarding the surficial soil permeability, infiltration rates, depth to groundwater, and aquifer properties of the shallow semi-perched aquifer in these areas.
x Using this information, identify up to three undeveloped areas for potential construction of the recharge basins using publicly available aerial imagery.
x Screen these properties for further evaluation based on recharge characteristics, property size, existing land uses, and proximity to the WRP.
x For the most favorable site, conduct site-specific investigations to evaluate subsurface conditions and percolation rates at the target site (refer to Task 6.9 for details). x Using estimates of key hydrogeologic parameters for the site based on the data review and site-specific investigations, establish the approximate size of the percolation basin needed based on the parameter estimates and effluent discharge rates.
x Prepare a rough order of magnitude parametric cost estimate for the construction of the basins, focusing on the cost of basin grading.
x If the site appears suitable, evaluate the degree of groundwater mounding that may occur for the conceptual basin configuration and operational scenarios, us ing standard analytic solutions.
Injection Wells
x Review information provided by the District regarding the capacity of the desalter wells and other supply wells, their performance, construction details, and testing results.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 17
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x Using this information and estimates of the relative performance of injection vs. extraction wells, estimate the maximum capacity of the injection wells and the number of wells required to meet project goals. x Prepare a rough order of magnitude parametric cost estimate for the construction of the injection wells. x At this time, site-specific field investigations for the injection wells are not proposed because of the costs required to conduct these investigations (e.g., retrofitting an existing supply well for injection testing or constructing a new test injection well).
Groundwater recharge options will be described, and conceptual layouts and cost estimates will be developed as appropriate to support the effluent management alternatives analysis and documented in the TM deliverable. Cost estimates will be based on existing Jacobs parametric cost data for grading and well installation and will exclude operations and maintenance, and land acquisition costs.
Numerical groundwater modeling will not be conducted. In addition, formal analysis of compliance with basin plan objectives or GSP sustainability goals, formal siting analyses for the basins or wells, and formal analysis of compliance with recycled water travel time estimates are excluded.
Additional Supply Concepts
Jacobs understands that the City is interested in developing additional supply concepts to achieve their supply objectives. To support this goal, Jacobs will coordinate with the City to develop up to three (3) additional concepts for groundwater supply. The potential supply concepts would likely involve reuse of treated effluent, recovery of shallow brackish groundwater and/or supply exchanges. This task will include:
x Coordinating with the City to develop potential supply concepts x Compiling and analyzing data and other information related to the potential supply concepts x Identifying potential supply concepts for further evaluation x Developing up to three (3) supply concepts at high-level, including compilation of risks and opportunities x Preparing conceptual cost estimates the supply concepts x Documenting the supply concept development in draft technical memorandum x Preparing a final version of the technical memorandum that addresses the City’s comments.
Coordination with Legal Counsel Regarding Water Rights and Adjudication Jacobs is aware of the potential groundwater supply challenges that the City is navigating related to the ongoing adjudication action in the basin. Therefore, we propose to coordinate closely with the City’s adjudication team so that the proposed analysis for the groundwater technical studies align with the City’s objectives and overall strategy. This task will include as-needed coordination with the City’s legal counsel related to this issue.
Operations Optimization
A kickoff meeting and site visit will be conducted with the District’s operations staff to review and discuss current operations, planned and completed improvements, and operational challenges. Based on discussions with operations staff and previous work performed at the WRP, projects that could optimize or improve operation of the existing liquids treatment process will be identified and defined.
Descriptions will include a problem statement, proposed improvement or study, potential benefits, and considerations for other unit processes.
The operation optimization scope is intended to reflect a high-level review of existing plant operations and a summary of planned improvements, recently completed improvements, and opportunities for additional study. The scope does not include a comprehensive evaluation of the existing treatment process or implementation of any of the identified optimization opportunities. Evaluation of solids treatment process is covered under Task 2.3. Task 6 offers additional evaluation of cost-saving activities (e.g., chemical and energy) to improve operations. Documentation of the operational optimization concepts will be included in a TM deliverable for Task 2.6.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 18
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Task Focused Meetings and Workshops:
Kickoff (6 hours): Focused on preliminary suite of effluent management alternatives and data needs with site visit to follow (6 Jacobs team attendees, hybrid)
Stakeholder Mtgs: Assume up to 7, 1-hour calls with stakeholders with Camrosa Water District, Calleguas Municipal Water District (MWD), and Mary Smith Farm properties (3 Jacobs team attendees, virtual) Mtg #1 (2 hours): Focused on groundwater recharge fatal flaw analysis (1 WSC and 4 Jacobs attendees: 2 in person, 2 virtual).
Mtg #2 (3 hours): Focused on updated analysis and description effluent management and groundwater recharge options comment resolutions (4 Jacobs team attendees, hybrid).
Mtg #3 (2 hours): Focused on alternative supply concepts s (1 WSC and 2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
Workshop (4 hours): Application of MODA to compare and select a preferred effluent management strategy and project(s) (6 Jacobs team attendees, hybrid)
Mtg #3 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (4 Jacobs team attendees, virtual).
Deliverables:
Draft and Final TM – Effluent Management Evaluation
Task 2.3 Solids Treatment Economic Study
The purpose of this task is to determine a cost-effective option for managing solids treatment and disposal or beneficial reuse of biosolids.
Final Biosolids Quality Determination
Building off the Biosolids Market Assessment by El Dorado Engineering Associates, and TM 5 – Biosolids Management from Hazen, Jacobs will determine the Class(es) of biosolids that the WRP will produce after the WRP Improvements Project. Classes can be Class A Exceptional Quality, Class A, Class B or unclassified. This determination will inform downstream alternatives analysis in this task.
Anaerobic Digestion, and Non-Anaerobic Digestion Alternatives Evaluation Jacobs will develop and cost a preferred Anaerobic digestion (AD) and non-AD alternative, to aid in the evaluation and selection of a preferred secondary treatment alternative in Task 2.4. Jacobs will use Replica Process to size and cost the alternatives.
Three (3) shortlisted alternatives will be developed for both AD and non-AD based on:
x Size (footprint) and location, including flood protection requirements. x Construction materials
x Utility Connections
x Equipment and structures
x Capital costs
x Operations and Maintenance Costs, including labor, electricity, water, chemicals, parts, and equipment.
Confirm Digestion or Storage Alternative
Jacobs will confirm the previously selected AD or non-AD alternative incorporating considerations from the selected secondary treatment process in Task 2.4. Technical and lifecycle cost estimates will be updated, as appropriate.
Minimal variation in sludge production and quality is expected between alternatives with primary treatment and those with only secondary treatment, allowing accurate lifecycle cost development.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 19
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Residuals Management Alternatives Analysis
Using the sludge volume and quality from the preferred digestion alternative, Jacobs will determine a preferred residual solids management alternative via a combination of dewatering and drying. Three (3) shortlisted alternatives will be developed based on:
x Size (footprint) and location (including flood protection requirements). x Construction materials
x Utility Connections
x Equipment and structures
x Operations and Maintenance Costs, including labor, electricity, water, chemicals, parts, and equipment. x Capital costs.
Future upgrades required to remove PFAS from WRP biosolids will be considered. As state and federal regulations for PFAS in biosolids are not defined, PFAS removal will not be a criterion for immediate solids upgrades to the WRP. This task will provide a defined option to address PFAS removal in a future phase, if required, such as thermal drying, biodrying, pyrolysis or gasification.
Task Focused Meetings and Workshops:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
x Mtg #1 (2 hours): Focused on AD/non-AD shortlisting meeting (4 Jacobs attendees, virtual) x Mtg #2 (2 hours): Decision Science for AD/non-AD selection (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #3 (2 hours): Focused on residuals management shortlisting (4 Jacobs attendees, virtual) x Workshop (4 hours): Decision Science for aligned treatment and residuals management selection (6 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
x Mtg #4 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM – Solids Treatment Economic Study
Task 2.4 Compare Membrane Bioreactor Cost vs Conventional BNR:
Building off the 2025 Evaluation and Prioritization (Hazen) Jacobs will conduct an alternatives analysis to determine a recommended secondary treatment process upgrade for the WRP. The five (5) alternatives developed by Hazen will be evaluated along with additional secondary treatment alternatives that may better achieve CSD’s ultimate goals.
Four (4) shortlisted alternatives will be sized and costed via Replica. The analysis will include:
x Size (footprint)and location, including flood protection requirements. x Construction materials
x Utility Connections
x Equipment and structures
x Operations and Maintenance Costs, including labor, electricity, water, chemicals, parts, and equipment. x Capital costs.
Each shortlisted alternative will contain lifecycle costs for all unique, required components for that alternative that may differentiate it from another, but will otherwise only focus on the costs for associated with that unit process. For example, MBR requires fine screening, downstream of coarse screening in Headworks, to protect the membranes.
Therefore, costs for fine screening will be included, but other costs for potential Headworks upgrades will not be included.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 20
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Cost estimates for a preferred AD or non-AD process will be developed in Task 2.3 and included in associated final alternatives for accurate cost comparisons. CSD will provide background data and process models from Hazen, as available. Effluent quality criteria will be confirmed during Task 2.2 and is anticipated to include current and known NPDES permit, and Title 22 tertiary recycled water requirements. Each shortlisted alternative will be part of a WRP that support CSD’s ability to meet future, stringent permit limitations, (currently defined by Table 3 in TM 2 – Goals and Objectives (Hazen 2025) but will not include immediate provisions to achieve these limitations.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
x Mtg #1 (3 hours): To shortlist alternatives (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #2 (2 hours): Decision Science for final selection (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) – this could be included in the workshop in Task 2.3
x Mtg #3 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Membrane Bioreactor vs. Conventional BNR Study Task 2.5 Flood Protection Mitigation Alternative Development Jacobs will evaluate the following aspects related to flood protection for the selected WRP configuration(s) as recommended by Tasks 2.1-2.4 and 2.7. The evaluation will address the following:
x Flood Wall and Gate Types: Assess flood wall and gate options to recommend the most cost-effective solution aligned with District goals and objectives.
x Utility Crossings: Evaluate methods to avoid costly utility relocations during flood wall construction, including potential use of underground steel sheet pile walls for seepage cutoff. x Roadway Access: Identify and select mitigation measures to maintain roadway access during major flood events. x In-plant flood Mitigation: Develop strategies for in-plant flood protection based on the selected WRP configuration.
Jacobs will work with the District to establish project priorities, anticipated to include cost, FEMA compliance, flood protection impacts on plant footprint, constructability, WRP access, and O&M considerations. Using these priorities, Jacobs will develop, compare, and rank alternatives, and apply Decision Science to select the preferred option.
Data Collection
x The District will provide:
x Digital Evaluation Model (DEM) covering the area of interest all the way out to the outer limits of flooding. x Detailed as-built drawings in digital format showing details (footprint and elevations) for the perimeter berm, details about the percolation pond, etc.
x Flow and water levels used in the prior simulation, or reports containing the information to Jacobs. x Existing HEC-RAS model for reference
Work Structure
The evaluation will follow these steps: 1) review existing information and flood model; 2) develop project priorities with input from CSD; 3) identify gaps and develop alternatives not yet considered; 3) develop comparison matrix of alternatives and rank per project priorities using Decision Science/MODA to select options for the four technical areas identified above.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 21
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Modeling Considerations
No modeling will be conducted. Modeling is recommended for more accurate conceptual design of the selected program alternative which can be conducted as part of Task 6.7 or in Phase 1b. Jacobs assumes the modeling inputs are accurate. Current scope does not include effort to address any identified major deficiencies in the existing flood model and perform additional flood modeling work. If needed, Jacobs can develop a scope and level of effort to update the model and perform additional flood modeling work for validation.
Task Focused Meetings and Workshops:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
x Mtg #1 (3 hours): To shortlist alternatives (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #2 (2 hours): Decision Science for selection of mitigation measures selection (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #3 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
Deliverable:
x Draft and Final TM - Flood Protection Mitigation Measures Assumptions:
x Flood mitigation recommendations will be for a 100-year flood event only. Additional analysis to enhance climate resiliency of the WRP under extreme weather events can be provided as additional services. x The level of effort excludes preparation of FEMA submittals (e.g., Letter of Map Revision). Jacobs can provide a separate estimate for these services if requested.
Task 2.6 Final WRP Improvements Recommendation
Jacobs will aggregate recommendations from the studies completed under Tasks 2.1-2.5 and 2.7 and define a Final WRP Improvement Program. This definition will include:
x Scopes of work for recommended upgrades
x Work packaging strategy
x Prioritization of upgrades
x Updated cost estimate
x Program phasing approaches informed by financial modeling, described in Task 4.1 x Program schedule
This effort will consider the final desired land-use of the WRP site, after recommended upgrades will be complete, and whether to allocate budget for full demolition and restoration of discontinued treatment components or leave them on-site but abandoned. Recommendations will be supported by the Decision Science process established in Task 1.3.
Jacobs will summarize the recommended WRP configuration, considering operational efficiency, capital investment optimization, reliability, and redundancy to meet the program objective. Cost estimates will be updated and the financial modeling effort in Task 4.1 will be used to quantify the financial benefits, including operational savings, reliability and redundancy improvements, extended facility useful life and regulatory compliance and to inform program phasing and program sequencing. 3D renderings will be developed for the recommended project(s) and will be conceptual and intended for visualization purposes only not for construction. An executive summary will be prepared to consolidate Phase 1a TMs and present final recommendations based on the District selection.
Task Focused Meetings and Workshops:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (4 Jacobs attendees, virtual)
x Mtg #1 (3 hours): WRP configuration and visualization (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #2 (2 hours): Focused on shortlisting (4 Jacobs attendees, virtual) x Workshop (4 hours): Decision Science for selection and phasing (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #3 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 22
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM – Recommended WRP Improvements
x Draft and Final 3D Renderings, using Replica Parametric Design (Replica) Task 2.7 Cost Estimating
Jacobs will collaborate with the District to develop a Basis of Cost Estimating Guidance that will be applied to cost estimating activities throughout the technical studies. The guidance will:
x Document key assumptions regarding level of service, redundancy, and cost development methodology. x Align with the District’s preferences and general practices while incorporating industry’s best practices and latest developments in capital project cost estimating (e.g., markups, indirect costs, and contingency allowances). x Provide the District with a clear understanding of the assumptions and methodologies behind the cost estimates developed under this program.
Additionally, Jacobs will conduct conceptual cost estimates supported by using Replica to inform life cycle costs for Tasks 2.2-2.6. The objective of this task is to validate costs and to provide early conceptual-level estimates for program component alternatives to support program definition and selection. The Jacobs Team will prepare independent construction cost estimates for program.
Jacobs will also prepare independent construction cost estimates using 1) typical soft cost allowances from similar programs and Jacobs’ Parametric Cost Estimating System, Replica. This information will feed into the cost-loaded master schedule under Task 1.5.
Cost estimates for Tasks 2.2 and 2.6 will be presented in those respective tasks using the Basis of Cost Estimating Guidance Document. Estimates will be conceptual-level only, intended for planning and decision-making; detailed design- level estimates are excluded.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (4 Jacobs attendees, virtual)
x Mtg #1 (2 hours): Define cost estimating assumptions (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #2 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Basis of Cost Estimating
Task 3: Environmental Studies and Regulatory Compliance Task 3.1 Environmental Constraints Evaluation and Permitting Matrix Development Jacobs, in collaboration with Rincon, will conduct an Environmental Constraints Analysis to identify potential environmental impacts and inform alternative planning. This effort will leverage existing documentation, including the Environmental Considerations and Constraints Analysis Memorandum and Historic Resources Evaluation (April 2024), to minimize duplication, reduce costs, and accelerate progress. Key activities include:
Desktop Review and GIS Mapping
x Validate prior studies for biological, cultural, agricultural resources, and hazardous materials. x Prepare a Key Environmental Resources Map highlighting habitat types, hydrologic features, and visible constraints.
Resource Studies
Baseline conditions will be established through high-level desktop reviews and mapping for:
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 23
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x Biological Resources: Update findings from 2024 analysis; prepare memo and maps for special-status species (CDFW CNDDB) and waters (NWI Wetlands Mapper, National Hydrography Dataset). x Cultural and Historical Resources: Incorporate 2024 study findings. x Agricultural Resources: Prepare Agricultural Resources Map using California Department of Conservation data. x Land Use and Planning: Review General Plan and zoning designations. x Hydrology, Flooding and Geohazards: Identify FEMA floodplains, liquefaction zones, landslides, fault zones, watershed context, and drainage patterns.
x Air Quality and Environmental Justice: Describe air basin status; use CalEnviroScreen to identify environmental justice (EJ) communities.
x Noise and Vibration: Map noise-sensitive receptors and sources. x Hazardous Materials: Review DTSC database for contaminated sites. x Utilities and Infrastructure: Summarize major utility corridors.
As part of this task, Jacobs will identify permitting requirements and develop a Permitting Matrix to inform alternative selection. Based on the selected alternative, our team will prepare an Environmental Review and Permitting Strategy to support the program as it advances into Phase 1b, where environmental documentation will be developed.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
x Mtg #1 (3 hours): Focused on initial findings (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #2 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Environmental Review and Permitting Strategy Assumptions:
The Phase1a effort does not include:
x Protocol or focused level biological surveys
x Data modelling or forecasting (i.e., noise measurements, AQ/GHG modelling) x Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) model for Agricultural Resources x CEQA/NEPA documentation
Task 4: Financial and Economic Support
Jacobs will support the CSD’s financial advisor (Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates) and rate consultant (Raftelis) by providing proven programmatic processes, models, staffing, and tools to evaluate the effective and affordable funding strategy for the Camarillo WRP Program.
Task 4.1 Financial Modeling
Jacobs will provide two (2) types of financial modeling to support the decision-making as well as cash flow planning, respectively, aligning program needs with affordability.
1. Project Select Tool:
Used to calculate options with the lowest Net Present Value (NPV) and highest benefit-cost ratio for different technologies, supporting the decision science process for selecting the best value components under Tasks 2.2 through 2.6.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 24
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
2. TACT Model:
Once the selected alternative for each process is identified, we will use Jacobs’ Tailored Analytics and Comparative Techniques (TACT) Model to:
x Evaluate the cost-benefit of sequencing options.
x Assess feasibility of compressed or extended delivery timelines. x Calculate revenue shortfalls and impacts.
x Support risk and change management.
x Provide the justification for pursuing municipal bonds, SRF, Proposition 4, WIFIA, grants, and other funding sources.
Jacobs will also develop cash flow projections and use TACT to determine optimal timing for bond sales, drawdowns, contingency management, and rate adjustments after a program has been selected. The findings from the TACT will inform the Program Schedule to be developed under Task 1.6. The TACT Model will be updated and refined throughout the program in Phase 1b and Phase 2.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
x Mtg #1 (3 hours): with the District’s Finance Department, Financial Advisor (Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates), and Rate Consultant (Raftelis) focused on financial assumptions (4 Jacobs attendees, virtual) x Workshop (4 hours): cash flow projection and phasing options (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid) x Mtg #4 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM – Financial Modeling and Program Affordability Analysis Assumptions:
x TACT Model remains Jacobs proprietary tool and there is no transfer of ownership. x Jacobs provides economic and financial consulting services related to project selection and preliminary financial modeling in its role as consultant to the District. Jacobs is not a registered Municipal Advisory as defined in Section 15B of the Exchange Act1. It is recommended that the City engage its Municipal Advisor as an additional partner in defining the financial strategy for this project related to advice on issuance of any municipal securities and financial products.
Task 4.2 Funding Strategies
Jacobs will assist the CSD’s funding advisor in developing a funding strategy for the WRP program. The strategy will outline the outline the process, approach, schedule, and information needed to apply and receive funds through State Revolving Funds (SRF); Proposition 4; Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) loan program administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); Bureau of Reclamation (BOR); Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and other federal, state, or local funding sources that may be available to the CSD.
Jacobs will also coordinate efforts to integrate funding amounts and schedules into the TACT Model to support financial planning and program delivery.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual)
x Mtg #1 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 25
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final Funding Strategy Action Plan.
Assumptions:
x All application fees will be paid by CSD.
x Regulatory approvals and completed Environmental Studies will precede funding applications for construction. x The level of effort required to assist with Letters of Interest and Completed Application Packages for funding will not be known until recommendations regarding potential funding sources and strategies are completed and the list of projects and project sequencing are established. Actual level of effort applied to obtain funding will be determined once the grants or programs are identified and are outside of this scope and fee.
Task 5: Project Delivery Methodology
Project delivery support for Phase 1a will focus on analyzing project delivery methods, conducting staff and board workshops on delivery method selection to achieve alignment from the GovTeam and the Board on a preferred procurement method for implementing the recommended WRP Improvement.
Task 5.1 Delivery Methods Analysis
The Jacobs team will provide an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of various project delivery methods that can be applied to the design and construction of projects under the overall Program. Delivery Methods that will be evaluated include traditional Design-Bid-Build (DBB), Construction Management At Risk (CMAR), Progressive Design-Build (PDB), and Fixed Price Design Build (FPDB). One workshop will be conducted with the GovTeam and CSD Board to present alternative delivery options, advantages and disadvantages, and recommended strategy. An independent speaker from the Design Build Council could be invited to participate, if desired.
Once a recommended WRP Improvement option is selected at the end of Phase 1a, the preferred delivery options selected by the City will guide the appropriate level of design development in Phase 1b.
Task Focused Meetings and Workshops:
x Kickoff (2 hours): (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual)
x Workshop (4 hours): project delivery method workshop with CSD Staff, GovTeam and Board (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
x Mtg #1 (3 hours): findings discussion based on preliminary outcomes of recommended WRP project (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
x Mtg #2 (2 hours): focused on comment resolutions (2 Jacobs attendees, virtual).
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Project Delivery Method Analysis and Selection Assumptions:
x The preferred delivery method will be determined as part of the selection and phasing workshop in Task 2.6 and may need to be confirmed by the Board (to be determined).
Task 6: Targeted Technical Studies
Inclusion of the following technical studies to support additional comprehensive technical analyses, cost estimating, and identification of alternative recommendations for the WRP.
Task 6.1 Operational Optimization and Cost-Saving Assessment
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 26
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
This task provides a targeted evaluation of facility operations to identify practical improvements and cost- saving opportunities aimed at maximizing efficiency and reducing long-term operating expenses.
Kickoff Meeting and Data Request
Jacobs will hold a project kickoff with the District’s staff. At this kickoff meeting, the District staff, including WTP superintendents, operators, maintenance personnel, engineering staff, and operations managers, will meet with the Jacobs project team to identify the goals and critical success factors for this project and to discuss the existing infrastructure and operation at the Facility. It is assumed that this workshop will last 4 hours. Prior to the meeting Jacobs will provide a data request required to
complete the evaluation and discuss the validity of the data and areas of concern.
Site Visits
Jacobs will conduct an on-site evaluation of the Facility. It is anticipated that the site visits will be conducted over a 4– 5- day period. During the on-site plant evaluations, the following tasks will be performed:
x Interview plant operators, superintendent(s), and maintenance personnel to better understand the existing operating procedures.
x Verify data and compare actual daily operations and practices with design data and plant capacities. x Verify nameplate data on large motors within each plant, determine the type of lighting fixtures being used, and review energy-intensive processes, such as high-service pumping and raw water pumping. x Review and analyze all major components of the plant process, operation, and management practices as they relate to this evaluation, which may include headworks, sedimentation, aerations, digestion, chemical usage, disinfection, and solids disposal.
x Identify areas where factors can be controlled and reduced. x Identify the single biggest power users (>10 horsepower) and determine whether the efficiency of these units can be increased.
x Review standard operating and management practices currently in place.
Data Analysis
Jacobs will review specific documentation and information for the Facility. The documentation and pertinent information to be reviewed will be requested by Jacobs at the beginning of the project, incorporating input from the District to confirm completeness and relevance.
Jacobs will review operational information and data received as part of the on-site evaluations at the Facility in order to investigate treatment and pumping modifications that will result in reduced chemical, solids disposal and energy usage.
Outcomes
Jacobs will develop a TM that will include recommendations and define capital costs (if required) and potential annual cost savings by process. The TM will also present a business case evaluation that identifies specific opportunities for chemical and energy conservation measures. This business case evaluation will also demonstrate the payback period for implementing capital improvement projects at the Facility. The TM will outline non-monetary benefits, such as quality-of-life benefits, associated with the recommendations presented. Specific recommendations for each treatment process will be summarized as immediate, short-term, and long-term. Within each of these recommendations, additional subcategories based on payback period, which will be provided to further prioritize the recommended improvements.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 27
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Task Focused Meetings and Site Visit:
x Site visit (5 days max) (3 Jacobs attendees, in person) x Kickoff, recommendations and comment resolutions meetings, 2 hours each (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual) Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM – Operational Optimization and Cost-Saving Assessment Assumptions:
x Existing drawings of the Facility and other requested information will be provided to Jacobs in electronic format. x No design work will be performed.
Task 6.2 Influent Flow Equalization Assessment
This task identifies flow equalization strategies to stabilize plant hydraulics, streamline downstream process design, improve process reliability, and enhance operational flexibility.
Jacobs will consider options for influent flow equalization that may optimally achieve CSD’s overall project goals.
Jacobs will determine the system flow equalization capacity, footprint, and operational consideration. Jacobs will use a hydrograph of plant influent flow, and information developed in Task 2.1, to determine the maximum flow equalization capacity, and subsequent plant hydraulic capacity. Cost estimates and a conceptual layout will be developed for additional components required to automate the flow equalization system. The results of this task will inform the design flow rates used in additional analyses and final recommendations as appropriate.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff, recommendations and comment resolutions meetings, 2 hours each (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual) Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM – Influent Flow Equalization Assessment Assumptions:
x This task would be conducted after Task 2.1, but before Task 2.2 x CSD will provide Jacobs with hourly influent flow rate data from the previous 3 years.
Task 6.3 Preliminary Treatment Evaluation
This task recommends upgrades to screening and grit removal systems, to protect downstream processes and extend asset life to reduce maintenance costs and improve overall plant performance.
Building off the recent interim improvements analysis, Jacobs will develop recommendations to upgrade the screening and grit removal systems at the WRP. Analysis will consider downstream process recommendations, and the criticality of optimized screening and grit removal for successful performance of those systems. Cost estimates and conceptual layouts will be developed, as appropriate.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff, recommendations and comment resolutions meetings, 2 hours each (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual) Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Preliminary Treatment Evaluation Assumptions:
x If selected, this task would be conducted after Task 2.4 x Up to three (3) alternatives will be developed for screening, and grit removal, each.
Task 6.4 Disinfection Alternatives Analysis
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 28
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
This task evaluates disinfection options to maintain regulatory compliance, minimize chemical costs, and enhance water quality, proactively preparing for future discharge permit requirements.
Jacobs will develop an alternative analysis for upgrade of the existing chloramination system using free chlorine, chloramine, and UV at the WRP. CSD will provide current chemical costs for gaseous chlorine and sulfur dioxide, UV transmittance data (if available), and three years of WRP data including monthly chemical usage, average daily dose, secondary effluent flow rate, ammonia concentration, and total suspended solids concentration. This task will use the projected tertiary effluent water quality established by the liquids stream process under Task 2.4 for the analysis. Cost estimates and conceptual layouts will be developed, as appropriate.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff, recommendations and comment resolutions meetings, 2 hours each (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual) Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Disinfection Alternatives Analysis Assumptions:
x This task would be conducted after Task 2.4
x Up to three (3) alternatives will be developed for comparison. x Effort includes kickoff and recommendation meetings, conducted virtually, with 3 Jacobs staff in attendance.
Task 6.5 Odor Control Alternatives Analysis
This task assesses odor sources and mitigation strategies to improve community relations and workplace conditions, by supporting a healthier environment and reducing nuisance complaints.
Jacobs will develop recommendations to mitigate odors at the upgraded WRP. Recommendations will consider the entire current and future WRP site, and any existing H2S or odor complaint data.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff, recommendations and comment resolutions meetings, 2 hours each (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual) Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Odor Control Alternatives Analysis Assumptions:
x This task would be conducted after Task 2.4, and the previously listed studies in Task 6 . x Up to three (3) locations will be considered for odor control, and up to two (2) odor control system alternatives will be developed for each location considered.
x No supplemental sampling is included, but a sampling plan can be developed with CSD authorization if needed.
Task 6.6 SCADA / Automation Assessment
This task reviews and recommends enhancements to the plant’s automation and control systems to increase operational resilience, data integrity, and readiness for future technology upgrades.
Jacobs will assess the District’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system for the WRP and make recommendations for improved control, network security, and to avoid obsolescence in technology. Jacobs will work with CSD to determine the preferred hardware, software, and configuration for communicating and sharing data from the WRP and its related facilities. This SCADA system evaluation includes review, assessment, evaluation, and recommendations corresponding to the following four functional areas: supervisory control network, SCADA software, site controllers, and remote site communications.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 29
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Thes effort will document the condition and deficiencies of WRP’s SCADA system components and recommend potential modifications or upgrades to support the current WRP and to plan for future upgrades or new facilities.
System needs will be categorized according to their function (Supervisory Control Network, SCADA Software, Site Controllers, Remote Site Communications) and assigned a criticality rating. Jacobs will also work with CSD to review the control philosophy and automation of each plant process and determine if changes are warranted or desired to support the current WRP and to plan for future upgrades or new facilities. Jacobs will work with CSD to define communications protocols for WRP alarms, reports, and other operational data, as appropriate. This scope does not include procurement of SCADA hardware and software.
Potential recommendations will be provided in a TM to address the system deficiencies identified, improve efficiency, and/or provide better stewardship of the CSD operations.
Existing or new SCADA features not currently utilized will be identified to bring value to CSD operations.
WRP Process Control Strategies
CSD will provide Consultant with copies of current WRP control strategies and/or loop descriptions and SCADA screens. Consultant will review to gain a general understanding of the intended operation of each plant process.
Consultant will prepare a consolidated description of WRP unit process control strategies for review/discussion with CSD operations.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff, recommendations, process controls strategies, and comment resolutions meetings, 2 hours each (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual)
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - SCADA/Automation Assessment
Assumptions:
x No design will be conducted.
x 1, 2-day site visit will be conducted with 2 Jacobs staff in attendance Task 6.7 Flood Impacts Evaluation
This task analyzes the effects of new infrastructure on flood risk to proactively address vulnerabilities and safeguard critical assets against extreme weather events.
As new infrastructure, such as percolation ponds, are being considered, Jacobs will conduct flood modeling to assess impacts on WRP flood defenses and adjacent land use.
An analysis of the potential wet weather impacts from the development of a new percolation pond located immediately to the west of the existing WRP facility would require conducting flood modeling analysis to assess the impact on flood defense elevation around the WRP. This evaluation would assess if the WRP flood defense needs to be elevated, by how much, and what is the increase in cost. Additional flood modeling work would also help inform any changes of land use change of the parcels adjacent to the WRP, such as the change of the perimeters of the green field concept compared to the one evaluated in existing studies.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff, recommendations and comment resolutions meetings, 2 hours each (3 Jacobs attendees, virtual) Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM – Flood Impacts Evaluation
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 30
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Assumptions:
x The District to provide a DEM covering the area of interest all the way out to the outer limits of flooding. x The District to provide Detailed as-built drawings in digital format showing details (footprint and elevations) for the perimeter berm, details about the percolation pond, etc. x The District to provide to the flow and water levels to be used in the simulation, or reports containing the information to Jacobs.
x Assume the existing HEC-RAS model will be provided and can be used. x We assume that the existing model provided by the District is accurate. If flood model updates and modifications are required, Jacobs can provide a scope of work and level of effort for implementing the changes to the existing flood model.
Task 6.8 Energy Assessment
This task explores energy-saving and microgrid solutions to lower utility costs, boost sustainability, and support reliable operations during grid outages, providing a recommendation for long-term financial and environmental benefits.
Building off TM 8 – Energy Use and Sustainability (Hazen), Jacobs will conduct an energy assessment to explore options to lower the energy cost for the plant, as well as enhance resilience and sustainability via a microgrid. This analysis will be based on up to 2 years of recent utility bills and outage reports.
Energy supply technologies will be screened to determine which technologies should be considered to include in a microgrid. As part of the screening, Jacobs will model annual hourly electricity consumption at the WRP to size equipment capacities for each technology. Demand profiles for both the near and long-term futures of the WRP will be modeled to capture the range of magnitude for implementing a microgrid at the WRP. Utility tariffs and programs will also be reviewed to identify cost saving and revenue opportunities for utilizing each technology. Up to four (4) technologies will be considered, including PV solar, existing, or expanded battery energy storage systems, natural gas generation, diesel generation and biogas generation.
Energy supply technologies deemed to be potentially viable in the screening in Task 1 will be used to construct varying alternatives for configuring a microgrid. Up to four (4) final microgrid alternatives will be developed.
Microgrid alternatives will be modeled and compared based on total cost ownership and financial return, performance in the event of a grid outage, and emissions reductions and additionality of renewable energy generation. Microgrid alternatives will be modeled for both the near and long-term states of the WRP to develop an implementation roadmap for each alternative.
The energy assessment assumptions, analysis and recommendations will be memorialized in a succinct TM, including cost estimates and conceptual layouts where appropriate.
Task Focused Meetings:
x Kickoff, screening and recommendations, comment resolutions meetings, 2 hours each (4 Jacobs attendees, hybrid)
Deliverables:
x Draft and Final TM - Energy Assessment
Assumptions:
x Alternatives will be developed to enable the plant to re- start in islanded mode, after a loss of grid power. x No detailed design will be conducted.
Task 6.9. Percolation Pond Field Testing
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 31
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Jacobs recognizes that confirming the feasibility of effluent discharge using percolation basins is a critical aspect of the effluent management program. As a follow up from our screening evaluation of potential percolation pond sites, Jacobs proposes to conduct field investigations to evaluate the feasibility of percolation in more detail, with a goal of estimating the percolation capacity at each of the target properties (one onsite and one offsite).
To provide defensible estimates of percolation capacity, Jacobs proposes to conduct a comprehensive investigation program at each target property.
x Conduct a geophysical survey using electromagnetic (EM) and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) methods to infer the distribution of coarse-grained vs. fine-grained soil conditions in the subsurface. This information will be used to assess area(s) of each site that are most suitable for percolation. x Building on the results of the geophysical survey, two shallow soil borings and will be advanced and one monitoring well will be installed to characterize subsurface conditions and the depth to groundwater. x A test basin will be constructed, and a long-term (two week) percolation test will be conducted to assess percolation rates, using water from a nearby City potable water source (hydrant). Groundwater levels in the newly-installed well will be monitored to assess if percolation causes change to groundwater levels near the test basin.
Related work activities for this task will include:
x Procurement of a geophysical contractor, drilling contractor, general contractor for construction of the test basins, land surveyor, and geotechnical laboratory for materials testing. x Coordination with the City regarding the testing program, land access, and the water source for testing. x Oversight of the contractors and field data collection by Jacobs hydrogeologists and engineers.
Deliverables
The results of the investigations will be documented in a report that includes a summary of the field activities, the data collected, and the study findings. The report will also include estimates of the percolation potential at the sites considering estimates of the land available, basin size, percolation rates, and other constraints (e.g., groundwater level mounding).
Assumptions
Key assumptions are as follows:
x The size of the properties considered for testing is assumed be 5 AC, similar to the property available at the WRP. x The geophysical survey methods will consist of EM to infer conditions in shallow soils and an ERT transect to infer conditions deeper in the subsurface. The following assumptions are made for planning purposes:
o One, 600-foot long ERT transect will be installed at each testing site. o Jacobs will provide full-time oversight of the geophysical surveys. x The exploratory borings will be advanced using sonic drilling methods to collect continuous core and provide detailed lithologic characterization of the subsurface. The following assumptions are made for planning purposes:
o The soil borings will be advanced to a maximum depth of 40 feet below ground surface (bgs). o The borings for the monitoring wells will be advanced to maximum depth of 100 feet bgs . o The monitoring wells will be constructed of 3-inch diameter PVC and completed with an above grade surface completion.
o Soil cuttings and groundwater produced from drilling soil borings and constructing monitoring wells will be disposed to ground surface at the well site.
o Twelve (12) soil samples per site will be collected and submitted to a geotechnical laboratory for grainsize analysis.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 32
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
o Jacobs will provide full-time oversight of drilling and well construction activities. x One test basin will be excavated at each site. The following assumptions are made for planning purposes:
o The size of the test basins is assumed to be 40-feet by 40-feet by 2-feet deep. o Up to 500 linear feet of temporary discharge piping from the water source to the test basin. o Appurtenances for testing will include a flow meter, float-controlled valve, stilling well, pressure transducers/data loggers, and related instrumentation.
o The test duration will be approximately two weeks at each site, and Jacobs will budget two weekly site visits for each percolation test.
o After testing is complete, the testing equipment will be removed, and the test basin backfilled with soil from the excavation.
x The total duration of Jacobs field oversight is estimated to be 31 days for the testing program. x At this time, the subcontractor costs provided in our cost proposal are budgetary estimates. These estimates will be refined during procurement of the subcontracted services.
Task 6.10. Climate Resilience and Potable-Reuse Benefits Jacobs understands the District’s interest in incorporating climate resilience into the WRP Improvements Program as a core planning consideration. We have developed a scope of work designed to support implementation decisions in two primary ways:
x Resilience-informed alternative selection: The resilience task will provide objective information on climate hazard exposure, vulnerability, and risk for the WRP alternatives. This information can be incorporated as additional decision criteria when selecting the preferred WRP alternative and associated projects, with the goal of improving resilience of both physical assets and operational continuity. The technical evaluations of WRP alternatives will be informed by the resilience task findings.
x Documenting broader benefits of potable reuse: The resilience task will also quantify resilience and sustainability benefits to strengthen the case for potable reuse. This enables decision-makers to move beyond a narrow comparison focused only on compliance cost, toward a more comprehensive evaluation of co-benefits such as reliability, resilience, sustainability, equity, and environmental stewardship.
These objectives will be achieved through two targeted subtasks presented below.
Improving WRP Long-Term Resilience
Jacobs will follow a proven approach that includes multiple steps to identify relevant hazards, characterize those hazards (including projections), overlay hazards on the WRP systems and critical assets, identify risks, evaluate alternatives to mitigate risks and provide cost-benefit assessments on resilience actions.
The resilience task to identify require actions to improve WRP resilience long-term will include the following scope elements:
Identify Relevant Hazards: Jacobs will hold a meeting to present the list of relevant hazards based on our experience working with other utilities in the western United States. The relevance of different hazards and stressors to the WRP will be discussed during the meeting. A final list of hazards will be defined for the project.
The preliminary list of hazards based on historical and projected conditions could include:
x Flood
o Pluvial flooding, fluvial flooding and relationship of sea level rise (SLR) to fluvial conditions. This will require SLR and extreme precipitation projections. x Extreme Heat
x Wildfire and seasonal sequence of wildfires followed by extreme precipitation
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 33
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x Drought and associated drought management measures in the region x SLR for tail water and water quality conditions of Conejo Creek is unlikely to have a significant effect. This will be confirmed at project onset.
The outcome of this step is an agreed upon lists of hazards and stressors that can impact the facility and its operations.
The meeting summary will be provided no later than one week after the meeting to obtain final agreement from CSD on the final list of hazards.
Characterize Hazards: – Once the list of hazards has been agreed upon, Jacobs will obtain data and information on historical data and evidence of impacts for the district and the facility. Projections for the hazards for mid-century and late century will be obtained from Cal Adapt and other readily available sources.
Define Potential Impacts: Jacobs will develop a “conceptual model” or impact paths for each hazard to facilities and functions of CSD. The conceptual model will consist of a flow chart, with accompanying narrative, showing the paths by which the different hazards impact the facility and the district, as well as the areas of impact (what assets or processes or business functions).
Considerations of consequence of impact (how disruptive the impacts are) will be included in the analysis in a qualitative manner with “High”, “Medium” and “Low” impact scores. The summary of impacts will be presented in a table or matrix format.
Jacobs will prepare a technical memorandum with:
x The final list of hazards included on the project
x Hazard historical relevance plus projections for mid- and late century x Impact paths
x Matrices with consequences of impact
x Categories of typical actions (types of projects, programs and policies, operational modifications) taken and considered by other utilities to increase resilience specifically to the hazards and impacts identified for CSD WRP Alternatives Resilience Evaluation: Jacobs will use the outcome of the hazards and vulnerabilities tasks described above to inform the analysis of the alternatives for WRP implementation. The resilience task will provide specific objectives and metrics to consider in the analysis of alternatives, with scores for the decision analysis.
Climate hazards are likely to impact some of the alternatives differently since alternatives may be more or less sensitive to (for example):
x extreme precipitation and resulting flood exposure
x drought and associated water influent water quality variability x extreme heat impacting equipment, treatment processes and operational health and safety x wildfires directly threatening facilities, energy reliability, accessibility and operational requirements during events
x Wi
ldfire subsequent ash and debris loading during winter
Each alternative will be evaluated under the resilience lens, with considerations for the hazard impacts identified in previous tasks. This task will be conducted in close coordination with the teams conducting the technical studies associated with the WRP.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 34
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Flood exposure will be analyzed in more detail than other hazards, give its relevance to the facility. While no flood modeling will be conducted, terrain and flow path analysis will be conducted with GIS or a rain-on-surface application for three (3) precipitation scenarios.
Identify Adaptation Measures for Critical Risks at WRP: Jacobs will identify critical risks associated with climate hazards to make sure they are included in the development of alternatives for the WRP and, eventually, final design.
Examples of adaptation measures can include: protecting a specific building or process area with deployable flood gates; elevating a flood sensitive assets such as a transformer or electrical panel; other dry-proof and wet-proof measures for assets and buildings or process areas; upgrade mechanical equipment to higher temperature ratings, providing shading and cooling options for transformers and other critical equipment; providing cooling stations for operators; etc.
Adaptation measures will be developed at conceptual level, with level of detail consistent to conceptual cost estimates (described below).
This task will be conducted in close coordination with the teams conducting the technical studies associated with the WRP to include the recommended adaptation measures in subsequent tasks.
Identify Additional Adaptation Actions: Jacobs will identify additional categories of actions related to resilience.
Actions to increase resilience will include more than capital projects, and could include policies and programs, operational changes, and collaboration and coordination with other agencies (governance options). Jacobs will present the list of actions that are common for water utilities facing similar threats and describe the types of benefits that can be expected.
Quantify costs of Mitigation Solutions and Quantification of Benefits: For adaptation measures that are likely to be included as part of facility design, a conceptual cost estimate will be prepared. The information will be provided to the technical analysis teams conducting alternative development and conceptual development of alternatives.
Benefits associated with avoided facility monetary impacts (avoided repair and replacement costs after physical damage, as well as costs of post-event activities) will be quantified (only for adaptation measures for which cost estimates are developed).
No formal benefit-cost analysis will be included in this task.
Benefits beyond avoided cost of physical damage will be listed and explained in the technical memorandum but will not be quantified. Resilience benefits of the WRP potable supply will be quantified under a separate sub-task.
Deliverables:
x Hazards meeting summary with list of hazards to be included in the analysis x TM on climate vulnerability for WRP
Assumptions:
x The list of hazards will be agreed upon at the task onset, and no additional hazards will be included once the analysis is initiated
x No flood or heat modeling (or modeling of other hazards) will be conducted. x Climate projections will be based on Cal Adapt and other readily available sources. x No deliverable will be provided for climate resilience performance of alternatives. The technical memo on alternatives analysis and decision support (outside this resilience task) will include sub-sections related to climate resilience.
x Pro
jections will be included for mid-century and late century only, as available in projection sources. x One meeting will be held to discuss the climate resilience approach and define the list of relevant hazards as well as critical WRP elements to include.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 35
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
x A meeting will be held to present results of resilience analysis. x It is assumed that only operations and facilities will be included in the resilience analysis. Impacts on operating costs and finances will be included as considerations with no quantitative analysis. Impacts on health and safety will be included as considerations with no quantitative analysis. x Concepts for adaptation measures will be provided for the WRP only (not CSD at large). x Cost estimates and avoided costs of impact will only be prepared for adaptation measures that become part of the recommended facility design and improvements. No cost estimates will be developed for generic category of actions to mitigate the total hazard impacts included in the analysis. x No formal benefit-cost analysis will be included in this task. The benefits of WRP’s potable reuse will be quantified in a separate sub-task
Quantifying the Benefits of WRP Reuse
Jacobs will follow a proven approach that includes multiple steps to identify resilience and sustainability benefits of projects, beyond the immediate objectives of that project, to provide decision-makers with objective information to support project implementation.
The subtask to quantify resilience benefits will include the following scope elements:
Identify Relevant Benefits: Jacobs will use a framework of analysis that includes categories related to core mission, resilience, sustainability and governance. Under each of those categories, specific benefits from the WRP potable reuse will be identified. Examples of benefits include:
x Core Function:
o Treatment
o Effluent management
Supply of fit-for-purpose effluent
Compliant discharge
x Resilience
o Climate and natural hazard resilience
Drought resilient supply
Seismic resilience (related to imported water use)
Local source
o Regulatory and administrative resilience
Avoided risk of groundwater use restrictions
o Operational resilience
x Sustainability
o Supply diversification
o Financial sustainability
Additional revenue (potable vs. non potable agricultural) o Environmental & Resource Stewardship
Use of local sources
Reduced pumping
Groundwater recharge
Reduced use of imported water
Reduced carbon footprint (imported supply)
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 36
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
o Social Equity & Community Outcomes
Local jobs creation during construction
Workforce development
In addition to benefits, Jacobs will prepare the cost inventory for the project including capital costs, operation and maintenance, decommissioning of existing non-potable infrastructure (if any), loss of non-potable effluent sales.
These costs, on a project life-cycle basis, will be used in benefit-cost analysis (described later).
Jacobs will hold a meeting to present the list of benefits under the comprehensive framework. The list of benefits (and cost categories) will be finalized during the meeting to be quantified in subsequent tasks.
Quantification of Benefits: Jacobs will develop quantification metrics for each of the benefits identified for WRP potable reuse. Metrics will account for average vs. seasonal conditions, as well as long-term vs. event-based conditions (such as wildfire or other temporary system disruptions). Benefits will be quantified on a project life-cycle basis, accounting for long-term trends.
A matrix with benefit categories, benefits under each category, metrics, and numerical value of metrics, will be completed and presented to CSD.
Monetization of direct benefits and Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA): a subset of benefits will be identified to be monetized to include in a benefit cost analysis (BCA). Direct revenue and avoided costs will be included in the analysis. These may include avoided cost of pumping and desalting, avoided costs of imported water purchase, direct revenue from sales, avoided costs of wastewater treatment upgrades that may not be required due to WRP implementation and would have been required otherwise for compliance.
Other benefits with indirect monetary metrics may be monetized to be included in the BCA. Examples may include job creation for construction phase, avoided economic impact of water shortages, avoided carbon taxes and potential revenue from carbon markets.
A BCA will be prepared using long-term cost and benefit streams, using an approved method (and typical discount rates) such as FEMA’s BCA methodology.
Deliverables:
x TM on resilience benefits of potable reuse and BCA results Assumptions:
x Not all benefits of potable reuse of WRP effluent will be monetized. While all benefits will be quantified, only benefits linked to direct financial metrics will be monetized x Two discount rate scenarios will be included in the BCA Task 6.11: Dry- and Wet-Weather Diversion Strategy (Influent) Jacobs will evaluate planning-level opportunities to increase influent conveyed to the Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) during both dry- and wet-weather conditions to expand the volume of water available for treatment and reuse.
This work will identify and quantify feasible options to increase plant influent and recycled water production, and will inform Phase 1a planning regarding:
x Potential influent flow increases and associated equalization and treatment capacity needs at the WRP x Required diversion infrastructure and conveyance
x Planning-level costs and regulatory considerations
x Phasing strategies based on implementation cost, revenue generation, and overall affordability
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 37
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
In this task, Jacobs will:
- Data Review & Source Identification:
x Collaborate with the City to identify potential alternative water sources that could be diverted to the sanitary sewer, including stormwater and dry‑weather (nuisance) runoff. x The City will provide available data (e.g., as-built drawings, GIS and maps, flow and level records, storm drain information, prior studies) to support the evaluation. - Concept Development & Screening:
x Develop an inventory of potential diversion sources and estimate flow magnitude and seasonality (where feasible).
x In coordination with the City, screen and select up to three sources with the highest diversion potential. x For selected sources, prepare conceptual-level diversion concepts identifying required infrastructure (tie-in locations, conveyance, controls, metering, and equalization needs). x Provide flow scenarios to Task 6.2 (Influent Flow Equalization) for sensitivity analysis to support conceptual equalization sizing and to assess implications for treatment process reliability and flood protection. - Regulatory/Legal Coordination:
x Document permitting pathways, NPDES implications, and water-rights/adjudication coordination needs. x Provide inputs to Task 3.1 (Environmental Review & Permitting Strategy).
Jacobs will document permitting, NPDES implications, and water-rights/adjudication coordination needs and inform Task 3.1 Environmental Review & Permitting Strategy.
- Cost and Benefits:
x Prepare conceptual (planning-level) cost estimates for diversion and conveyance infrastructure. x Estimate changes in recycled water production, imported‑water offsets, and O&M implications. x Provide inputs to Task 4 (Financial Modeling) based on established estimating assumptions.
Prepare conceptual level cost estimates for conveyance and estimate changes in reuse volumes, imported‑water offsets, and O&M; summarize rate/affordability implications using established estimating bases (feeds Task 4 financial modeling).
Deliverables:
x Technical memorandum (Draft/Final) – Dry‑ and Wet‑Weather Diversion Strategy (Influent) Assumptions:
x Analyses ar e at a conceptual level; no detailed hydraulic modeling, survey, or design is included. Field verification, where needed, will be addressed under subsequent tasks. x The City will furnish available datasets (as-builts, GIS, flow data, storm-drain maps, and related documentation) in a timely manner
Phase 1b
Tasks indicated as Phase 1b are not scoped in detail at this stage, and no fee is included for those items in this proposal. As previously described, this approach allows us to focus resources on Phase 1a, rapidly launching the
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 38
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
project and establishing the decision framework. Once a preferred alternative is identified, we will work collaboratively with the District to define the scope and level of effort for Phase 1b, so that the next phase is tailored to actual project needs and delivers the best value.
Phase 2
Phase 2 will involve comprehensive support to the City in administering the selected project contract, including technical reviews, schedule, and budget oversight, permitting coordination, construction management, and grant compliance. Our team is committed to working closely with the City to refine and tailor the Phase 2 scope and fee based on the evolving needs and insights gained during Phase 1a and 1b. We look forward to a collaborative scoping and negotiation process to confirm that Phase 2 is aligned with the City’s goals, project delivery requirements, and long-term success.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 39
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Appendix B: RFP Scope Crosswalk
Aligning City Needs with Our Program Management Approach The following crosswalk demonstrates how each scope element from the City’s RFP is addressed within our proposed tasks. This structure not only confirms full coverage of the City’s requirements but also reflects our proven program management methodology—organizing tasks to build efficiency, clarity, and lasting value for the District.
Tasks indicated as Phase 1b are not scoped in detail at this stage, and no fee is included for those items in this proposal. As previously described, this approach allows us to focus resources on Phase 1a, rapidly launching your project and establishing the decision framework. Once a preferred alternative is identified, we will work collaboratively with the District to define the scope and level of effort for Phase 1b, ensuring the next phase is tailored to define project needs and delivers the best value.
RFP Required Topic Scope of Work Task #(s)
Program Management
Workshops Tasks 1.1-1.4, 1.6
Assist in Developing Recommendation Design Options Task 2.6 Local Construction Cost Estimates Tasks 2.1-2.7
Management and Coordination of the Program Tasks 1.1-1.5 Staff Management Task 1.1
Staff Meetings and Decision Making Task 1.1
Managing RFIs Task 5 – Phase 1b
Public Outreach Support Task 1.4
Funding Support Task 4.2
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) Letter of Interest Task 4.2, Phase 1b State Revolving Fund Loan (SRF) Task 4.2, Phase 1b
Program schedule Task 1.5
Change Log Task 1.5
Reoccurring Progress Reports Task 1.1
Reoccurring Project Meetings Task 1.1
Program Execution Plan Task 1.2
Stakeholder Communication Task 1.4
Dissemination Of Data and Studies to Other Agency Consultants Task 1.4 Construction Cost Model Task 4.1
Program Priorities, Drivers, and Risks
Review Existing Data Pertaini ng to the Program Task 1.2 Identify and Document the Following for Decision Making:
WRP Existing Operations and Facility Conditions
Key Program Priorities, Drivers, and Risks/Rewards
Determine Future Operational Scenarios for Recycled Water Usage Tasks 1.2-1.4, 2.1-2.2
Quantify the Benefits of the Following:
Regulatory Compliance
Operational Savings
Tasks 2.2- 2.7
Tasks 6.1-6.8
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 40
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
RFP Required Topic Scope of Work Task #(s)
Reliability Improvements
Extended Facility Useful Life
Develop Program Implementation Plan Identifying Program Priorities, Drivers, and Risks Tasks 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 2.1 Final Program Scope with Definition of All Studies and Projects Needed Including Start and End Dates
Tasks 1.5, 2.6
Conceptual Designs and Sequencing for Phase 1 Task 2 – Phase 1b Master Program Schedule with Milestones and Id entify Program Budget Needs Task 1.5 Identify Risks/Opportunities – Risk Register Task 1.5
Technical Studies, Drawings and Specifications
Prepare Operations Optimization, Capital Investment Efficiency and Final Effluent Use Study
Task 2.2
Prepare Solids Treatment Economic Study Task 2.3
Compare Membrane Bioreactor Cost vs Conventional BNR Task 2.4 Conduct an energy a ssessment Task 6.8
Develop recommended design options for flooding Task 2.5, Phase 1b and Task
6.7 Provide a Final Report that Includes Options for Proposed WRP Improvement Configurations and a Recommendation
Task 2.6
Environmental Studies and Regulatory Compliance
Prepare and implement a strategy to efficiently complete the environmental review of the Program in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Task 3.1
Environmental Constraints Analysis Task 3.1
Initial Study and the Appropria te Environmental Document for the Program Task 3 – Phase 1b Administer the Statutory Process for CEQA on Behalf of the CSD Task 3 – Phase 1b Support Staff in Recommending Adoption of the CEQA Document by the CSD Board Task 3 – Phase 1b Permits – Permit Matrix Task 3.1
Evaluate the CSD’s Current Recycled Water Chlorination Practice(s) Task 3 – Phase 1b Identify Any Potential Changes to Improve Chemical Usage Efficiency While Ensuring a Consistent Supply and Maintaining Compliance with Existing Regulatory Requirements Task 3 – Phase 1b
Revise and update the Title 22 En gineering Report Task 3 – Phase 2 Program Scheduling
Master Program Schedule Task 1.5
Monthly Updates Task 1.5
Project Delivery Methodology and Procurement
Analysis Of the Advantages and Disadvantages of Various Project Delivery Methods Task 5.1 Workshop with the District Board Task 5.1
Design Criteria Package Task 5 – Phase 1b
Outline a Process to Select and Contract with a Design-Build (DB) Firm Task 5 – Phase 1b Assist RFQ Development Task 5 – Phase 1b
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 41
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
RFP Required Topic Scope of Work Task #(s)
Assist RFP Development Task 5 – Phase 1b
Selection Support Task 5 – Phase 1b
Negotiation Support Task 5 – Phase 1b
Cost Estimating
Prepare a Construction Cost Estimate for Each Element of the Program Based on the Schematic Design Developed to 30%
Task 2 – Phase 1b
Phase 1 Tasks
Our scope of work is consistent with the information provided in the RFP, organized to provide a seamless transition from the initial evaluations in Phase 1 through implementation in Phase 2. As discussed in the approach section, the scope of work is focused on Phase 1a activities, as illustrated in Table 1 below. This targeted Phase 1a approach enables us to collaborate with your team to better define the scope and level of effort for Phase 1b activities based on actual project needs. If the District prefers to include a fee for Phase 1b upfront, we are ready to partner during contracting to set clear assumptions and expectations for a comprehensive total Phase 1 budget. As outlined in the RFP, Phase 2 scope and fee will likewise be developed at the conclusion of Phase 1, allowing each phase to be tailored to the outcomes and needs identified, and delivering the best value for Camarillo.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 42
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Appendix C: General Terms, Assumptions, and Exclusions
x The term PM/DPM refers to the OA/PM Team Program Manager or Deputy Program Manager x City PM refers to the City’s primary point of contact. x City PM will be responsible for identifying City participants and coordinating schedules for meeting attendees. x Phase 1a activities are assumed to be performed over a 18-month duration, from Notice to Proceed. Phase 1b activities from the RFP are identified but a detailed scope of work and level of effort are not provided herein. An updated scope of work for Phase 1b will be developed in collaboration with the District near the end of Phase 1a.
Scope and budget adjustments will be prepared and submitted for District approval at the end of Phase 1a as a contract amendment. Authorization for Phase 1b will be based on mutual agreement following completion of Phase 1a deliverables.
x Scope and budget for other services outside of the current scope assigned by the District will be submitted for approvals as amendments.
x Supporting studies and reports listed in the RFP will be reviewed. x Additional requests for data or information will be submitted as needed, with an anticipated response time of 3 weeks and information provided in a digital form if available. x Meetings and Workshops
- Workshops are assumed to be in person, with hybrid options for virtual engagement. - Coordination, progress, and technical meetings are assumed to be virtual in the MSO Teams environment, unless noted in person.
- In-person workshops and meetings will be grouped on the same day where possible to minimize travel and optimize productivity.
- Agendas, materials, and succinct minutes focused on actions will be provided for all meetings/ workshops, at an appropriate level of detail, in electronic format.
x Travel time and all associated expenses for in-person meetings will be billable. x Alternatives analyses will be conducting using Multi-Objective Decision Analysis (MODA), unless otherwise noted. x Cost estimates will be developed to an AACE Class 4 level, unless otherwise noted. x Deliverables
- All deliverables to be provided in an electronic format for ease of review and comments. - The District will provide Jacobs with a single set of consolidated, unconflicted comments by the end of the review period.
- Ou
tcomes of technical tasks will be delivered as succinct Technical Memoranda (TM), Draft and Final versions.
- After the District reviews the Draft TM, a review meeting will be held to discuss feedback. - All District comments will be addressed in a comment log or within the document. - The Final TM will incorporate these responses and be submitted electronically. x The District will provide one consolidated, unconflicted set of comments at the end of the review period. x District review period for most deliverables: 10 business days.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 43
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
Table 1. Phase 1a Tasks and Key Deliverables
Task 1. Program Management
1.1 Program Management & Admin Monthly status reports, quarterly progress reports, action item log
1.2 Program Initiation Chartering agreement, governance workshop outcomes, Readiness Assessment Report, Program Execution Plan
1.3 Decision Science Decision framework tables, decision evaluation outcome tables, and graphics
1.4 Board and Communications
Support
Board workshop materials, stakeholder contact list, technical content for outreach materials
1.5 Program Controls Master Program Schedule development, change log, risk register, document control system establishment
Phase 1B: Program Management Continued program schedule updates, progress reports, stakeholder engagement Task 2. Technical Studies
2.1 Design Criteria Validation TM– Design Criteria Validation
2.2 Operations Optimization, Cap Inv.
& Effluent Use
TM – Effluent Management Evaluation
2.3 Solids Treatment Economic Study TM – Solids Treatment Economic Study
2.4 Compare MBR vs. Conventional
BNR
TM – Membrane Bioreactor vs. Conventional BNR Study
2.5 Flood Protection Mitigation
Alternatives
TM – Flood Protection Mitigation Measures
2.6 Final WRP Improvements
Recommendation
TM – Recommended WRP Improvements, 3D renderings
2.7 Cost Estimating TM – Basis of Cost Estimating
Phase 1B: Technical Studies Preliminary design drawings/specifications Task 3. Environmental and Regulatory
3.1 Environmental Constraints
Evaluation
TM - Environmental Review and Permitting Strategy
Phase 1B: Environmental a nd
Regulatory
Full CEQA/NEPA documentation and necessary filings and notifications, develop a permitting plan with implementation schedule
Task 4. Financial & Economic Support
4.1 Financial Modeling TM – Financial Modeling & Program Affordability Analysis
4.2 Funding Strategies TM - Funding Strategy Action Plan Phase 1B: Financial & Economic
Support
Ongoing financial modeling update and conduct quarterly Economic Submits, grant/loan application development and management
Task 5. Project Delivery and Procurement
5.1 Delivery Method Analysis TM - Project Delivery Method Analysis and Selection Phase 1B: Project Delivery &
Procurement
Procurement process planning, preparation of bridging documents, RFQ/RFP and evaluation criteria, contract negotiation support
Task 6. Targeted Technical Studies
6.1 Operational Optimization & Cost-
Saving Assessment
TM - Operational Optimization & Cost-Saving Assessment
6.2 Influent Flow Equalization
Assessment
TM - Influent Flow Equalization Assessment
6.3 Preliminary Treatment Evaluation TM - Preliminary Treatment Evaluation
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) 44
JACOBS | SECTION E: SCOPE OF WORK
6.4 Disinfection Alternatives Analysis TM - Disinfection Alternatives Analysis
6.5 Odor Control Alternatives Analysis TM - Odor Control Alternatives Analysis
6.6 SCADA/Automation Assessment TM - SCADA/Automation Assessment
6.7 Flood Impacts Evaluation TM – Flood Impacts Evaluation
6.8 Energy Assessment TM - Energy Assessment
6.9 Percolation Pond Field Testing Report – Percolation Pond Field Testing
6.10. Climate Resilience and Potable
Reuse Resilience Benefits
TM-Climate Vulnerability
TM-Resilience Benefits of potable reuse
6.11 Dry- and Wet-Weather Diversion
Strategy
TM- Dry‑ and Wet‑Weather Diversion Strategy
Phase 1B: Digital Twin
Development
Combines plant data, hydraulic and process models, and predictive analytics to optimize sizing prior to detailed design
Notes:
Phase 1a: Included in current scope and fee.
Phase 1b: To be scoped and budgeted after Phase 1a completion, grouped under each main task.
Agendas, materials, and succinct minutes focused on actions will be provided for all meetings/workshops, at an appropriate level of detail.
TMs will be submitted as Draft and Final, in electronic format, incorporating responses to District comments.
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Date: 26 March 2026
Subject: Owner’s Advisor & Program Management Services—Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) Improvements Program, Phase 1a (Revised Scope of Work and Fees enclosed) Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 1
LEVEL OF EFFORT BY SUBTASKS
TOTAL
HOUR LABOR FEE TOTAL SUB w/
5% MARKUP
ODCs (no
markup) TOTAL FEE
1. Program Management
1.1 Program Administration 818 $241,838.00 $0.00 $42,200.00 38.00
1.2 Project Initiation 632 $184,758.00 $0.00 58.00
1.3 Decision Science 176 $50,890.00 $0.00 $50,890.00
1.4 Board and Communication Support 355 $104,074.00 $0.00 $104,074.00
1.5 Program Controls 408 $104,428.00 $0.00 $104,428.00
Subtotal Task 1 2,389 $685,988.00 $0.00 $42,200.00 $728,188.00
2. Technical Studies
2.1 Design Criteria Validation 410 $101,492.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $106,492.00
2.2 Operations Optimization, Capital Investment Efficiency and Final Effluent Use Study2,284 $496,222.00 $31,500.00 $8,000.00 $535,722.00
2.3 Solids Treatment Economic Study 702 $167,228.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $170,228.00
2.4 Compare Membrane Bioreactor Cost vs Conventional BNR 696 $164,958.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $169,958.00
2.5 Flood Protection Mitigation Alternative Analysis 379 $96,540.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $98,540.00
2.6 Final WRP Improvements Recommendation 676 $150,240.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $153,240.00
2.7 Cost Estimating 474 $101,675.00 $0.00 $0.00 $101,675.00 Subtotal Task 2 5,621 $1,278,355.00 $31,500.00 $26,000.00 $1,335,855.00
3. Environmental Studies and Regulatory Compliance
Subtotal Task 3 529 $96,138.00 $8,295.00 $500.00 $104,933.00
4. Financial and Economic Support
Subtotal Task 4 372 $76,696.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $78,696.00
5. Project Delivery Methodology
Subtotal Task 5 176 $49,284.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 $50,784.00
6. Targeted Technical Studies Tasks
6.1 Treatment Process Evaluation 442 $118,155.00 $0.00 $4,000.00 $122,155.00
6.2 Influent Equalization 340 $80,890.00 $0.00 $500.00 $81,390.00
6.3 Preliminary Treatment 355 $82,925.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $83,925.00
6.4 Disinfection 328 $77,814.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $78,814.00
6.5 Odor Control 342 $78,304.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $79,304.00
6.6 SCADA / Automation 606 $141,281.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $146,281.00
6.7 Evaluate Potential Flood Impacts on the Selected Program Alternative298 $76,056.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $77,056.00
6.8 Energy Assessment 728 $132,842.00 $0.00 $500.00 $133,342.00
6.9 Percolation Testing 848 $150,058.00 $276,150.00 $29,250.00 $455,458.00
6.10 Climate Resilience and Potable Reuse Benefits 704 $150,633.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $152,633.00
6.11 Dry and Wet Weather Diversion Strategy 712 $144,739.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $145,739.00 Subtotal Task 6 5,703 $1,233,697.00 $276,150.00 $46,250.00 $1,556,097.00
7. WSC As-Needed Services -
Subtotal Task 7 $0.00 $105,000.00 $0.00 $105,000.00
Grand Total for Base Scope + Optional Tasks 14,790 $3,420,158.00 $315,945.00 $118,450.00 $3,959,553.00
TASK DESCRIPTION
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
EXHIBIT A
$284,0
$184,7
Date: 26 March 2026
Subject: Owner’s Advisor & Program Management Services—Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) Improvements Program, Phase 1a (Revised Scope of Work and Fees enclosed) JJacobs Engineering Group Inc. 2
HOURS BY FUNCTIONAL CATEGORY
Functional Category Total Hours
Principal in charge 988
Principal Professional 1 801
Principal Professional 2 302
Principal Professional 3 372
Principal professional 4 2599
Project Professional 1 2453
Project Professional 2 550
Project Professional 3 108
Sr Professional 3 2095
Sr. Professional 1 520
Sr. Professional 2 553
Staff Professional 1 2455
Staff Professional 2 555
Staff Professional 3 201
Technician 2 238
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Date: 26 March 2026
Subject: Owner’s Advisor & Program Management Services—Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) Improvements Program, Phase 1a (Revised Scope of Work and Fees enclosed) JJacobs Engineering Group Inc. 3
STAFF > 90 HOURS
Employee Names Functional Category Category Total Hours 2026 Billing
Rates
2027 Billing
Rates
2028 Billing
Rates
Yu, Zita Lai Ting Principal professional 4 1590 $315.00 $328.00 $341.00 Hollo De Andrade, Barbara Sr Professional 3 1219 $245.00 $255.00 $265.00 Roxburgh, Ruth Project Professional 1 1212 $179.00 $186.00 $193.00 Ramirez, Sarah Staff Professional 1 936 $136.00 $141.00 $147.00 Butcher, Kevin L Project Professional 1 666 $179.00 $186.00 $193.00 Yu, Ruoren Sr Professional 3 576 $245.00 $255.00 $265.00 Tsuchihashi, Ryujiro Principal professional 4 456 $315.00 $328.00 $341.00 Huaman Garibay, Jose Eduardo Staff Professional 1 420 $136.00 $141.00 $147.00 Daly, Kensey Project Professional 2 364 $194.00 $202.00 $210.00 Couch, Edward Principal Professional 1 361 $261.00 $271.00 $282.00 Archer, Christopher Reed Project Professional 1 356 $179.00 $186.00 $193.00 Rubright, Felicia A Staff Professional 2 335 $146.00 $152.00 $158.00 Playstead, Kurt C Sr. Professional 1 332 $219.00 $228.00 $237.00 Covarrubias, Julian Staff Professional 1 332 $136.00 $141.00 $147.00 Lechler, Benjamin James Principal Professional 1 310 $261.00 $271.00 $282.00 Speicher, Daniel K Principal in charge 286 $343.00 $357.00 $371.00 Sturn, Richard Principal professional 4 272 $315.00 $328.00 $341.00 Stewart, Annie E Staff Professional 1 240 $136.00 $141.00 $147.00 Hoagland, Kathryn A Staff Professional 1 225 $136.00 $141.00 $147.00 Zyserman, Julio Alejandro Sr. Professional 2 215 $232.00 $241.00 $251.00 Van Dyk, Kyle Project Professional 2 182 $194.00 $202.00 $210.00 Taylor, Jordan Principal Professional 2 168 $289.00 $301.00 $313.00 Bolio, Paula A Principal in charge 160 $343.00 $357.00 $371.00 Wiesner-Friedman, Corinne Staff Professional 3 155 $164.00 $171.00 $178.00 Gebman , Michael Principal Professional 3 150 $301.00 $313.00 $326.00 Matichich, Michael J Principal professional 4 148 $315.00 $328.00 $341.00 Porter, David D Sr Professional 3 148 $245.00 $255.00 $265.00 MendezLozano, Anahi Staff Professional 1 146 $136.00 $141.00 $147.00 Romano, Massimo Aldo Staff Professional 1 144 $136.00 $141.00 $147.00 Sarvian, Yassaman Project Professional 1 131 $179.00 $186.00 $193.00 Phillips, Jennifer Principal in charge 128 $343.00 $357.00 $371.00 Bollmer, Kathleen Sr Professional 3 124 $245.00 $255.00 $265.00 Robillard, Daniel Principal professional 4 122 $315.00 $328.00 $341.00 Ruffini, Elenora Staff Professional 2 120 $146.00 $152.00 $158.00 Johnson, Derek S Sr. Professional 1 120 $219.00 $228.00 $237.00 Miller, Katherine A Technician 2 112 $124.00 $129.00 $134.00 Lennon, Brendan Sr. Professional 2 110 $232.00 $241.00 $251.00 Nagel, Richard Anthony Principal in charge 96 $343.00 $357.00 $371.00
EXHIBIT A
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
ID Task Name Duration Start
1 Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant Improvement Program Phase 1a
393 days? Mon 4/13/26
2 Notice to Proceed 0 days Mon 4/13/26
3 Task 1 Program Management 393 days Mon 4/13/26
4 Program Administration (Monthly Standing Meetings) 365 days Tue 5/19/26 5 Communications Support 369 days Fri 5/15/26
6 Board Program Initiation Workshop 9 days Fri 5/15/26
7 Board Update (Schedule and Frequency to be
Developed with the Board)
350 days Fri 6/12/26
8 Project Initiation 122 days Mon 4/13/26
30 Decision Science 70 days Tue 6/2/26
36 Program Management Workshops 95 days Wed 5/6/26
42 Task 2 Technical Studies 365 days? Mon 4/13/26
91 Task 3 Environmental and Regulatory Compliance 215 days Mon 7/20/26 101 Task 4 Financial and Economic Support 317 days Fri 5/8/26 121 Task 5 Delivery Methodology 66 days? Fri 7/2/27
131 Task 6 Targeted Technical Studies 342 days? Mon 4/13/26 4/13
5 121926 3 10172431 7 142128 5 121926 2 9 162330 6 132027 4 111825 1 8 152229 6 132027 3 10172431 7 142128 7 142128 4 111825 2 9 162330 6 132027 4 111825 1 8 152229 5 121926 3 10172431 7 Apr '26 May '26 Jun '26 Jul '26 Aug '26 Sep '26 Oct '26 Nov '26 Dec '26 Jan '27 Feb '27 Mar '27 Apr '27 May '27 Jun '27 Jul '27 Aug '27 Sep '27 Oct '27 Nov Task
Split
Milestone
Summary
Project Summary
Inactive Task
Inactive Milestone
Inactive Summary
Manual Task
Duration-only
Manual Summary Rollup
Manual Summary
Start-only
Finish-only
External Tasks
External Milestone
Deadline
Progress
Manual Progress
Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant Improvement Program Phase 1a Schedule
Date: Thu 3/26/26
EXHIBIT A
Anticipated Phase 1a
completion date
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 B-1
EXHIBIT B
KEY PERSONNEL & COMPENSATION
1. Consultant’s designated representative(s) who are authorized to act on its behalf and to mak
e all decisions in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement are Richard Sturn, Manager of Projects and Richard Nagel, Principal-in-Charge.
2. Total compensation under this Agreement, including re imbursement for actual expenses,
may not exceed: $3,959,553.
FEE SCHEDULE
KEY PERSONNEL:
Name T
itle/Position
Zita Yu Director of Integrated Water Resources
Richard Nagel Principal-in-Charge
SUBCONSULTANTS:
N a m e
Water Systems Consulting, Inc.
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Bernados Water Engineering
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) JACOBS | FEE SCHEDULE Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
Professionals and Technicians
2026 Hourly Bill Rates
Classification Billing Rate
Principal Professional 5 $343
Principal Professional 4 $315
Principal Professional 3 $301
Principal Professional 2 $289
Principal Professional 1 $261
Sr Professional 3 $245
Sr. Professional 2 $232
Sr. Professional 1 $219
Project Professional 3 $204
Project Professional 2 $194
Project Professional 1 $179
Staff Professional 3 $164
Staff Professional 2 $146
Staff Professional 1 $136
Engineering Technician 3 $207
Engineering Technician 2 $172
Engineering Technician 1 $141
Sr. Admin, Technical Editor Graphics $145
Technician 2 $124
Technician 1 $105
Admin/Clerical $1 20
Expense
Expense Type Estimating Method Rate
Auto Mileage Travel GSA Rate
Auto Rental Travel Actual
Other Travel Travel Actual
Equipment Rental Operating Expenses Actual
Postage/Freight Operating Expenses Actual
Reprographics Outside Services Actual
Subcontractors Outside Services Actual + 5%
EXHIBIT B
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) JACOBS | FEE SCHEDULE Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
Professionals and Technicians
2027 Hourly Bill Rates
Classification
Billing Rate
Principal Professional 5 $357
Principal Professional 4 $328
Principal Professional 3 $313
Principal Professional 2 $301
Principal Professional 1 $271
Sr Professional 3 $255
Sr. Professional 2 $241
Sr. Professional 1 $228
Project Professional 3 $212
Project Professional 2 $202
Project Professional 1 $186
Staff Professional 3 $171
Staff Professional 2 $152
Staff Professional 1 $141
Engineering Technician 3 $215
Engineering Technician 2 $179
Engineering Technician 1 $147
Sr. Admin, Technical Editor Graphics $151
Technician 2 $129
Technician 1 $109
Admin/Clerical $ 125
Expense
Expense Type Estimating Method Rate
Auto Mileage Travel GSA Rate
Auto Rental Travel Actual
Other Travel Travel Actual
Equipment Rental Operating Expenses Actual
Postage/Freight Operating Expenses Actual
Reprographics Outside Services Actual
Subcontractors Outside Services Actual + 5%
EXHIBIT B
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) JACOBS | FEE SCHEDULE Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
Professionals and Technicians
2028 Hourly Bill Rates
Classification
Billing Rate
Principal Professional 5 $371
Principal Professional 4 $341
Principal Professional 3 $326
Principal Professional 2 $313
Principal Professional 1 $282
Sr Professional 3 $265
Sr. Professional 2 $251
Sr. Professional 1 $237
Project Professional 3 $221
Project Professional 2 $210
Project Professional 1 $194
Staff Professional 3 $177
Staff Professional 2 $158
Staff Professional 1 $147
Engineering Technician 3 $224
Engineering Technician 2 $186
Engineering Technician 1 $153
Sr. Admin, Technical Editor Graphics $157
Technician 2 $134
Technician 1 $114
Admin/Clerical $ 130
Expense
Expense Type Estimating Method Rate
Auto Mileage Travel GSA Rate
Auto Rental Travel Actual
Other Travel Travel Actual
Equipment Rental Operating Expenses Actual
Postage/Freight Operating Expenses Actual
Reprographics Outside Services Actual
Subcontractors Outside Services Actual + 5%
EXHIBIT B
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) JACOBS | FEE SCHEDULE Hourly Bill Rates for Key Personnel
Key Personnel Classification CY 2026 CY 2027 CY 2028
Zita Yu Principal Professional 4 $315 $328 $341
Richard Nagel Principal Professional 5 $343 $357 $371
EXHIBIT B
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) JACOBS | FEE SCHEDULE
EXHIBIT B
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) JACOBS | FEE SCHEDULE
EXHIBIT B
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
CAMARILLO SANITARY DISTRICT (CSD) JACOBS | FEE SCHEDULE
Bernados Water Engineering
Hourly Bill Rate
Classification Bill Rate
Principal $300
EXHIBIT B
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 C-1
EXHIBIT C
INSURANCE
1. Required Insurance . Before commencing any services, Consultant must procure and maintain in full force and effect during the term of this Ag reement the following types of insurance with the coverage listed and subject to the applicable additional requirements set forth below:
Type of Insurance Limits
Commercial General Liability $2,000,000 / $4,000,000 (occurrence/general aggregate) Automobile Liability $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident Workers’ Compensation Statutory Requirements
Professional Liability $2,000,000 per claim and aggregate
2. Insurance Rating. All insurance required to be maintained by Consultant must be issued by companies licensed by or admitted to conduct insura nce business in the State of California by the California Department of Insurance and must have a rating of A- or better and Financial Size Category Class VII or better by the latest edition of A.M. Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by District’s legal counsel.
3. Commercial General Liability Insurance. The commercial general liability insurance must meet the requirements of Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CG 00 01, and must be provided on a per occurrence basis for bodily injury, personal injury , and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. The insurance must be on an “occurrence” not a “claims made” basis. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There must be no cross-liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another. The insurance must include a waiver of subrogation applicable to the insurance or se lf-insurance, a primary and non-contributory endorsement, and an additional insured endorsement, all in favor of the City of Camarillo/Camarillo Sanitary District, its officers, employees and agents, and volunteers; blanket endorsements are acceptable. Any endorsement, outside of the standar d ISO policy form, restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.
4. Automobile Insurance. The automobile insurance coverage must be at least as broad as ISO Auto Coverage form CA 00 01, covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with the services to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount stated above per combined single limit for each accident. Such insurance must include a waiver of subrogation applicable to the insurance or self-insurance, and a primary and non-contributory endorsement, and an additional insured endorsement, all in favor of the City of Camarillo/Camarillo Sanitary District, its officers, employees and agents, and volunteers; blanket endorsements are acceptable.
5. Workers’ Compensation. If Consultant has any employees, C onsultant must maintain workers’ compensation insurance (statutory limits) and employer’s liability insurance (with limits of $1,000,000 each accident). Such insurance must include a waiver of subrogation endorsement in favor of the City of Camarillo/Camarillo Sanitary District, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers; a blanket endorsement is acceptable.
6. Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance. The professional lia bility insurance must cover the services to be performed under this Agreement. The coverage must be provided on a “claims made” basis. Consultant must maintain continuous coverage through a period not less than three years after the completion of the services required under this Agreement.
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 C-2
7. Umbrella or Excess Liability Insurance. If an excess or umbrella liab ility policy is used to meet limit requirements, the insurance must provide co verage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage provided under an umbrella or excess liability policy must include a “drop-down provision” requiring the policy to respond in the event that any primary insurance that would otherwise have applied proves to be uncollectable in whole or in part for any reason.
There may be no cross-liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another. The policy must “follow form” to the underlying primary policy. Coverage must be applicable to all insureds under the primary policie s. The insurance must contain or be endorsed to contain a waiver of subrogation applicable to the insurance or self-insurance, and a primary and non- contributory endorsement for the bene fit of District. The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of District following receipt of the required proof of insurance.
8. Contractor’s Limitations and Endorsements. The Consultant’s General Liability and Automobile insurance must not include any endorsements or provisions that limit coverage for the following risks:
explosion, collapse, or underground hazards (X CU); products and completed operations; pollution liability; and contractual liability. These cover ages must be specifically included without any exclusions, modifications, or restrictions that woul d limit the scope of protection otherwise afforded by the basic policies. Any endorsement or exclusio n that reduces or eliminates coverage for the above-listed risks is unacceptable.
9. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retention . Any deductibles or self-insured retentions applicable to the insurance policies required under this Agreement must be declared to and approved by District.
In no event may any required insurance policy have a deductible, self-insured retention or other similar policy provision in excess of $50,000 without prior written approval by District in its sole discretion. At the option of District, either the insurer will reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self- insured retentions with respect to the District’s additional insureds or Consultant will procure a bond guaranteeing payment of any losses, damages, expenses, costs or settlements up to the amount of such deductibles or self-insured retentions.
10. Certificates of Insurance and the Required Endorsements; Notice of Termination or Changes to Policies. Prior to commencing any services under this Agreement, Consultant must file with the District certificates of insurance and required endorsements evidencing the existence of all insurance required by this Agreement. These certificates of insurance and endorsements must be in a form approved by the District’s legal counsel. Consultant must maintain current certificates and endorsements on file with District during the term of this Agreement reflecting the existence of all required insurance. Each of the ce rtificates must expre ssly provide that no material change in the policy that would cause non-compliance with the specific provisions required herein, or termination or cancellation of the required coverage, will be effective except upon 30 days’ prior written notice to District by mail, return receipt requested (e xcept for nonpayment for which a 10-day notice is required). The delivery to District of any certificates of insurance or endorsements that do not comply with the requirements of this Agreement will not waive the Districts right to require compliance. In the event that Consultant’s policies are materially changed that would cause non-compliance with the specific provisions required herein, Consultant must provide the District with at least 30 days’ prior written notice of the applicable changes.
11. Failure to Maintain Required Insurance . If Consultant, for any reason, fails to have in place at all times during the term of this Agreement all of the required insurance coverage, the District may, but is not obligated to, obtain such coverage at Consultant’s expense and deduct the cost from the sums due Consultant. Alternatively, District may terminate the Agreement.
12. Effect of Coverage . The existence of the required insurance coverage under this Agreement will not be deemed to satisfy or limit Consultant’s indemnity obligations under this Agreement.
13. Required Insurance for Subconsultants/Subcontractors. Consultant agrees to ensure that any subconsultants/subcontractors providing services und
er this Agreement provide the same insurance
coverage and endorsements required of Consultant . Consultant agrees to review and monitor all CSD Agreement No. 2026-3
Form Approved January 2018 C-3
such coverage and assumes responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this Agreement.
14. Right to Revise Insurance Specifications . District reserves the ri ght to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving Consultant at least 90 days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial add itional cost to Consultant, the parties may renegotiate Consultant’s compensation.
15. Timely Notice of Claims . Consultant must give District prom pt notice of claims made of lawsuits initiated that arise out of or result from Cons ultant’s performance under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability insurance policies.
CSD Agreement No. 2026-3