Agenda packet — 1 - Town Council, May 27, 2026 (part 1 of 2)

TOWN OF MORAGA

TOWN COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 2026
Kerry Hillis, Mayor
Brian Dolan, Vice Mayor
Lisa Maglio, Councilmember
Graham Thiel, Councilmember
Steve Woehleke, Councilmember
Scott Mitnick, Town Manager
Katie Bruner, Admin. Services Director
Sonia Urzua, Planning Director
Amy Heavener, Town Clerk
Denise Bazzano, Assistant Town Attorney
Jon King, Police Chief
Nate Levine, Public Works Director
Mackenzie Brady, Parks & Recreation Director
Executive Team
Town of Moraga Mission Statement
The Town of Moraga is dedicated to preserving our semi-rural character, conserving open spaces, providing exceptional municipal services, fostering safety and resiliency, providing opportunities for development, and creating a vibrant, innovative, and sustainable community for all.

AGENDA ACCESS: The meeting agenda is posted on the following notice board locations: 329 Rheem Blvd.; Moraga Library located at 1500 St. Marys Rd.; The Hacienda located at 2100 Donald Drive; and Online at:
https://www.moraga.ca.us/AgendaCenter
VIEWING OPTIONS: The Moraga Town Council meeting is scheduled to take place on the 2nd and 4th Wednesday of each month. The meeting may be attended in person at 335 Rheem Blvd, Moraga, on Community Access Television (CATV) Comcast Channel 1076; or by viewing the Town's YouTube Live channel at: https://www.youtube.com/@TownofMoraga335
PUBLIC INPUT: To provide input to the Town Council please submit comments via the following email address: [email protected] up to two hours prior to the start of the meeting. Written comment cards will also be available for submission at the meeting. Individuals addressing the Town Council are requested to state their name and community of residence for the record. If further assistance is needed, please email the Town Clerk at [email protected] or call (925) 888-7021.

It is the policy of the Town of Moraga that Councilmembers, Town employees and meeting participants are to be treated with respect and dignity. Actual or perceived discrimination and/or harassment of a Councilmember, Town employee or others on the basis of age, ancestry, color, disability, gender identity, marital status, medical condition, national origin, race, religious creed, sex or sexual orientation will not be tolerated.

CEQA STATEMENT: Unless stated otherwise on the agenda, every item on the agenda is exempt from CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(C), 15061(B)(3), 15273, 15378, 15301, 15323 and/or Public Resources Code Section 21065.

NOTICE: If you challenge a Town's zoning, planning, or other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Judging review of any Town administrative decision may be had only if petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final. Judicial review of environment determination may be subject to a shorter time period for litigation, in certain cases 30 days following the date of final decision. The Town of Moraga will provide special assistance for disabled citizens upon at least 72 hours advance notice to the Town Manager's office (925- 888-7021). If sign assistance is needed or written material printed in a larger font or taped, advance notice is necessary. All meeting rooms are accessible to the disabled.

May 27, 2026
Town Council Regular Meeting
1 TOWN OF MORAGA

TOWN COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 2026
5:30 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. PRESENTATIONS
3A. Proclamation - Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month Heritage Month
3B. Presentation - MCE Overview & General Updates

4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION

5. ADOPTION OF MEETING AGENDA

6. CONSENT CALENDAR

6.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes for the May 13, 2026 Regular meeting of the Moraga Town Council.

Staff Report

TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBER
335 RHEEM BOULEVARD

MORAGA, CA

ROLL CALL
AANHPI Heritage Month for MAY 27 2026
Time reserved for those in the audience who wish to address the Town Council on items which are not on the agenda. The Council cannot discuss details or vote on items not on the agenda. Your concerns may be referred to the Town Manager for a brief comment or for further review. Note: Public input pertaining to a specific item on the agenda may be made during consideration of that item.

A. Consideration of Consent Items Removed for Discussion B. Acceptance of Consent Items
Attachment A - Draft MAY 13 2026 - TC Meeting Minutes - REG May 27, 2026
Town Council Regular Meeting
2 6.2 Adopt a Resolution calling and giving notice of a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, for the election of two (2) Town Councilmembers for a full four-year term; requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa to consolidate the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election and provide election services; and setting specifications of the Election and Voluntary Candidate’s Statement of Qualifications and other related actions.

Staff Report

6.3 Adopt a Resolution approving the Employee Salary Schedule dated and effective June 28, 2026.

Staff Report

6.4 Adopt a Resolution:

1. Approving participation in the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance (RAC) Joint Powers Authority (JPA), approving the proposed Joint Powers Agreement, and authorizing the Town Manager to execute the Joint Powers Agreement;

2. Appointing the Public Works Director/City Engineer as the JPA Board Representative and the Senior Engineer as the Alternate;

3. Directing staff to take such actions as necessary to participate in the RAC System, including preparation of an ordinance to revise the Town’s stormwater ordinance to incorporate participation in the RAC System as an approved alternative compliance for meeting applicable stormwater treatment requirements;

4. Authorizing staff to collaborate with the RAC JPA Administrator to support RAC System implementation; and

5. Authorizing the JPA to establish one or more community facilities districts (CFD), accepting applications from property owners, annexing properties to the CFD, and levying special taxes to finance on-going maintenance costs for Off-Site GSI Projects; and approving a joint community facilities agreement.

Staff Report
Attachment A - Draft Resolution Consolidating the 2026 General Election.docx Attachment B - Resolution 57-2022 Policy for Voter Pamphlet Candidate Statements Attachment A - Draft Resolution - June 28 2026 Salary Schedule Attachment B - Salary Schedule FY 27 - Effective June 28 2026 Attachment A - Draft Resolution - RAC JPA
Attachment B - RAC Summary Report
Attachment C - RAC System Fact Sheet
May 27, 2026
Town Council Regular Meeting
3 6.5 Adopt a Resolution:

1. Approving the combination of the 2025 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25- 401) and the 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 26-401) into a single project titled the 2025 & 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401), and authorizing the transfer of remaining appropriations and associated funding from CIP 26-401 to CIP 25-401;

2. Awarding a construction contract to Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. (Bay Cities) of Concord, California, for the 2025 & 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401) in the amount of $1,609,007;

3. Authorizing the Town Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract with Bay Cities, including minor non-substantive revisions as approved by the Town Manager and Town Attorney;

4. Authorizing the Town Engineer to issue construction contract change orders in an amount not to exceed $160,901, for a total authorized construction amount not to exceed $1,769,908; and

5. Finding that the project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15301, Class 1 — Existing Facilities, and directing staff to file a Notice of Exemption.

Staff Report

6.6 Adopt a Resolution approving the Employee Recreation and Wellness Discount Pilot Program through June 30, 2027 and authorizing administrative implementation and continuation by the Town Manager, or designee.

Staff Report

7. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS ON ACTIVITIES

8. PUBLIC HEARING

9. DEPARTMENT REPORTS
Attachment A - Draft Resolution - Award of Contract - Bay Cities Attachment B - Project Vicinity Map
Attachment C - Bid Tabulation
Attachment D - Project Funding Sheets
Attachment E - 25-26 Pavement Project Construction Contract Attachment A - Draft Resolution - Employee Wellness Discount Exhibit A - Pilot Program
A. Councilmember Reports on AB1234 Activities, Councilmember Announcements B. Town Manager
May 27, 2026
Town Council Regular Meeting
4 9A. Adopt a Resolution:

1. Authorizing the Town Manager to execute a construction contract with D7 Roofing Services, Inc., Rancho Cordova, CA, for the 329 Rheem Boulevard Roof Replacement Project in the amount of $102,161;

2. Authorizing a 15% contingency of $15,324, for a total project authorization not to exceed $117,485 and authorizing the Public Works Director to execute contract change orders within the approved contingency; and

3. Finding the project categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Class 1 - Existing Facilities).

Staff Report
9B. Adopt two Resolutions:

1. Approving the Assessment District No. 1979-1, Town of Moraga Street Lighting Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2026-27.

2. Declaring the Town of Moraga’s intention to levy and collect Assessment District No. 1979-1, Town of Moraga Street Lighting assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-27, and setting a Public Hearing date for June 24, 2026.

Staff Report

10. COUNCILMEMBER REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

12. TOWN MANAGER FOLLOW-UP AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

13. ADJOURNMENT
Attachment A - Draft Resolution - Roof Replacement
Attachment B - DRAFT Contract - Roofing
Attachment C - Town Hall Solar Site Plan - 329 Rheem Roof Attachment A - Draft Resolution - Approve Report
Attachment B - Draft Resolution - Intent to Levy
Attachment C - Street Lighting District No 1979-1
Attachment D - Moraga Assessment Diagram
May 27, 2026
Town Council Regular Meeting
5 A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING

May 2026 as Asian American Native Hawaiian
Pacific Islander Heritage Month

WHEREAS, nearly one in every five county residents belongs to an Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) community, we pay tribute to the many diverse cultures of the AANHPI community, recognizing their roles as educators, public officials, entrepreneurs, community builders and activists, and leaders shaping all facets of our society, culture, and daily lives; and
WHEREAS with more than 6 million Californians of Asian or Pacific Islander descent, California is home to dynamic AAPI communities that are an invaluable part of the state and nation. May 2026 is proclaimed as California’s Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, recognizing and celebrating California’s diverse heritage with all the ways that AAPI Californians enrich and strengthen our society; and WHEREAS, May 2026 is recognized as the national Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, and we celebrate the diversity of cultures, breadth of achievement, and remarkable contributions of these communities; and WHEREAS, we recognize that throughout our history, AANHPI communities have been the target of discrimination, exclusion, and violence. It is imperative that we, together with state and federal partners, confront and condemn past and present racism and fight for the safety and inclusion of our AANHPI friends and neighbors; and WHEREAS, by proclaiming May 2026 as Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, we honor and stand with pride alongside our community to celebrate without shame or fear of exclusion and violence based on food, features, language and customs; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town of Moraga hereby proclaims May 2026, as Asian American Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Heritage Month. We are dedicated to creating an inclusive community where all AANHPI community members can thrive and prosper through substantive actions and equitable policies, procedures, and practices protecting their wellbeing.
_________________________________
Kerry Hillis, Mayor of Moraga
6 CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.1
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Amy Heavener, Town Clerk
Subject: Approval of Meeting Minutes for the May 13, 2026 Regular meeting of the Moraga Town Council.

Meeting Date: May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA STAFF REPORT

RECOMMENDATION
Approval of Meeting Minutes for the May 13, 2026 Regular meeting of the Moraga Town Council.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Draft MAY 13 2026 - TC Meeting Minutes - REG 7 Attachment A
________________________________________________________________________________ Town Council, Regular Meeting 1 May 13, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA

TOWN COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MAY 13, 2026
DRAFT

MINUTES
5:30 PM
The following are minutes of the actions taken by the Town of Moraga Town Council. A full video recording of the meeting is available on the Town's website at:
https://livestream.com/moraga

TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBER
335 RHEEM BOULEVARD

MORAGA, CA

1. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting was called to order at 5:30 PM by Mayor, Kerry Hillis.

ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Present: Mayor Kerry Hillis, Vice Mayor Brian Dolan Councilmembers Graham Thiel, Steve Woehleke
Councilmembers Absent: Lisa Maglio
Staff Present: Asst Town Attorney, Denise Bazzano; Town Clerk, Amy Heavener; Administrative Services Director, Katie Bruner; Parks and Recreation Director, Mackenzie Brady; Public Works Director, Nate Levine, Planning Director, Sonia Urzua; Police Chief, Jon King

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Hillis re-ordered the Presentation schedule in order to move Item 3C to be read aloud first. 3C. Proclamation - Jewish American Heritage Month
Councilmembers read the proclamation aloud.

Councilmembers provided their comments.

Renee Zeimer provided public comment.

Johnathan Engleman and Rabbi Perlman received the Proclamation. 8 Attachment A
________________________________________________________________________________ Town Council, Regular Meeting 2 May 13, 2026
3A. Proclamation - National Police Week (May 11 - May 17 2026) Councilmembers read the proclamation aloud.

Police Chief, Jon King provided comments regarding the candlelight vigil in honor of fallen officers nationally. Police Chief King received the Proclamation.

There were no public comments.

Councilmembers provided their comments.
3B. Proclamation - National Public Works Week (May 17 - May 23 2026) Councilmembers read the proclamation aloud.

Public Works Director, Nate Levine provided comments and received the Proclamation.

There were no public comments.

Councilmembers provided their comments.
3D. Presentation – Moraga Community Foundation Donation Parks and Recreation Director, Mackenzie Brady introduced Dave Trotter who presented a monetary donation to the Town of Moraga for the Moraga Commons Enhancement Project.

There were no public comments.

Councilmembers provided their comments.

4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION
Lisa Tucker, Alex P. and Clayton Hoover provided public comments.

5. ADOPTION OF MEETING AGENDA
ACTION:

Motion: Woehleke / Second: Dolan
The meeting agenda was adopted as presented.

Vote: (4-0-1; Maglio absent)
There were no public comments.

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Consideration of Consent Items Removed for Discussion Councilmember Woehleke pulled Consent Calendar Items 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 for clarification and comments.
9 Attachment A
________________________________________________________________________________ Town Council, Regular Meeting 3 May 13, 2026
Councilmember Woehleke gave comments on Item 6.3.

There were no public comments.

Councilmember Woehleke asked clarifying questions on Item 6.4.

Parks and Recreation Director, Mackenzie Brady provided clarification on Item 6.4.

There were no public comments.

Councilmember Woehleke gave comments and asked clarifying questions on Item 6.5.

Public Works Director, Nate Levine provided clarification on Item 6.5.

There were no public comments.

ACTION:

Motion: Woehleke / Second: Thiel
Consent Calendar Items 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5 were approved as presented.

Vote: (4-0-1; Maglio absent)
B. Acceptance of Consent Items
ACTION:

Motion: Woehleke / Second: Dolan
Approved Consent Calendar Items 6.1 and 6.2 as presented.

Vote: (4-0-1; Maglio absent)
There were no public comments.

6.1 Receive Accounts Payable Claims for: April 2, 2026 - April 30, 2026 ($1,224,608.12). Staff Report.

6.2 Approval of Meeting Minutes for the April 22, 2026 Special meeting and the April 22, 2026 Regular meeting of the Moraga Town Council.

6.3 Appoint candidate, Susan Wright to the Moraga Local Sales Tax Oversight Committee for a term of 3 years.

6.4 Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Town Manager, or their designee, to execute applicable Agreements associated with the placement in a form approved by the Town Attorney.

6.5 Adopt a Resolution establishing the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-27 list of streets to be funded by FY 2026-27 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account Revenues per Senate Bill 1: The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017.

7. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS ON ACTIVITIES
A. Councilmember Reports on AB1234 Activities, Councilmember Announcements Councilmember Woehleke On April 23rd, Councilmember Woehleke attended a RecyleSmart Board meeting as well as attending a RecycleSmart Finance 10 Attachment A
________________________________________________________________________________ Town Council, Regular Meeting 4 May 13, 2026
Committee meeting on May 1st. On April 29th, Councilmember Woehleke attended the EBMUD annual briefing as well as the Park Social at Moraga Commons. On May 3rd Council member Woehleke attended the Art Stroll at the Rheem Shopping Center hosted by the Moraga Chamber of Commerce.

Councilmember Maglio Absent.

Councilmember Thiel Nothing to report.

Vice Mayor Dolan Attended the Citizen of the Year event on behalf of the Mayor. Vice Mayor Dolan attended the SWAT meeting as well as the EBMUD annual briefing. Vice Mayor Dolan attended the Mayor’s conference in Orinda where the speaker was the Contra Costa Library Foundation.

On May 13th, Vice Mayor Dolan attended an event at SMC where he received the Community Partner Award on behalf of the Town of Moraga.

Mayor Hillis Attended the Cal Cities East Bay gathering in Fremont where there was a presentation regarding e-bikes. Mayor Hillis also attended the Girl Scout High Awards as well as the monthly meeting at the Chamber of Commerce.

B. Town Manager
Acting Town Manager
Bruner
Reported there is a survey at MoragaPlays.com pertaining to the Master Plan for those unable to attend the May 1st Master Plan event.

Acting Town Manager, Bruner also reported that Hacienda Nights begins on June 2nd.

8. PUBLIC HEARING
8A. Hold a public hearing to receive a report on the Town’s vacancies, recruitment, and retention efforts.

Administrative Services Director, Katie Bruner presented the item.

There were no public comments.

Councilmembers provided comments.

NO ACTION:

There was no action required, Councilmembers received the report.

Mayor opened then closed the public hearing.

9. DEPARTMENT REPORTS
11 Attachment A
________________________________________________________________________________ Town Council, Regular Meeting 5 May 13, 2026
9A. Receive a presentation on potential participation in the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance (RAC) System Joint Powers Authority (JPA) and direct staff to return at a future meeting with formal participation documents for Town Council consideration.

Public Works Director, Nate Levine introduced Sr. Engineer, Deirdre Castillo and Contra Costa County Interim Program Manager, Rinta Perkins who presented the item.

Councilmembers asked clarifying questions.

There were no public comments.

Councilmembers provided final comments and deliberation.

ACTION:

Motion: Dolan / Second: Hillis
Direct staff to return to a future meeting with formal participation documents for Town Council consideration.

Vote: (4-0-1; Maglio absent)
9B. Adopt Resolution establishing a "Ceremonial Flag Display Policy” for Governmental and Ceremonial Flags at Town Facilities.

Assistant Town Attorney Denise Bazzano presented the item.

Councilmembers asked clarifying questions.

There were no public comments.

Councilmembers provided final comments and deliberation.

ACTION:

Motion: Woehleke / Second: Hillis
Approved Item 9B as presented with correction to display hours to 8AM to 5PM.

Vote: (4-0-1; Maglio absent)
9C. Approve, by minute order, the Proposed 2026 Moraga Legislative Platform.

Acting Town Manager, Katie Bruner presented the item.

Councilmembers asked clarifying questions.

There were no public comments.

Councilmembers provided final comments and deliberation.

ACTION:

Motion: Thiel / Second: Dolan
Approved Item 9C as presented with correction to typo on item 2.3.

Vote: (4-0-1; Maglio absent)
12 Attachment A
________________________________________________________________________________ Town Council, Regular Meeting 6 May 13, 2026

10. COUNCILMEMBER REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
None.

11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
None.

12. TOWN MANAGER FOLLOW-UP AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Acting Town Manager Bruner had nothing to report.

13. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hillis adjourned the Town Council Regular meeting at 7:57 PM.

Respectfully submitted by:
__________________________________
Amy Heavener, CMC
Town Clerk
Approved by the Town Council:
__________________________
Kerry Hillis, Mayor
13 CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.2
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Amy Heavener, Town Clerk
Subject: Consolidation of the November 3, 2026 General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election; and Setting Specifications of the Election Order
Meeting Date: May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA STAFF REPORT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution calling and giving notice of a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, for the election of two (2) Town Councilmembers for a full four-year term; requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa to consolidate the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election and provide election services; and setting specifications of the Election and Voluntary Candidate’s Statement of Qualifications and other related actions.

BACKGROUND
The Town of Moraga will conduct a General Municipal Election on November 3, 2026 for the purpose of electing two (2) Councilmembers for a full term of four years each. The Town of Moraga in the past has requested that Contra Costa County conduct Municipal Elections for the Town. A resolution calling the election and requesting these services is required in order for the County to provide those services.

Pursuant to Elections Code section 13307 the governing body of any local agency must adopt regulations pertaining to materials prepared by any candidate for a municipal election, including costs of the Candidates’ Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) and that those regulations be provided to candidates. The proposed Resolution adopts such regulations in compliance with Elections Code section 13307.

The Town Council also has the authority to regulate how many words will be allowed in the Candidate Statement, and how payment for the voluntary Candidate Statement will be handled. In 2014, the Town Council amended its resolution and determined that the Candidate Statement may contain a maximum of 250 words, as recommended by the Contra Costa County Elections Division requiring candidates to pay the Candidate Statement cost 14 would allow funds to be available to pay the County when a bill is submitted. For the 2026 election, the County has determined the estimated cost will be $392 for Moraga candidates payable to the Town of Moraga.

Although a Town/City may charge a $25.00 “filing fee” to each candidate to recapture their administrative expenses, the Town Council has not imposed the filing fee in the past in the interest of enhancing the openness of the democratic process.

The nomination period opens Monday, July 13, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. and closes at 1:30 p.m., on Friday, August 7, 2026. In the event an incumbent does not file by 1:30 p.m. on August 7, the filing period will be extended to 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 12, 2026 for non-incumbents only. During the nomination period, any registered voter in Moraga, who is a U.S. Citizen and has not been convicted of a felony, may make an appointment with the Town Clerk to file nomination papers.

DISCUSSION
The Town Council terms of office for Mayor Hillis and Councilmember Woehleke expire in December 2026.

The Draft Resolution (Attachment A) calls for, among other things, the election for two (2) Town Council seats (four-year terms of office), requests the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to permit consolidation with other elections, requests the Contra Costa County Registrar of Voters to conduct the election, authorizes the Town to reimburse the County for all election services rendered and establishes the cost of the candidates’ statements to be borne by the candidates. The Registrar of Voters’ office will conduct services related to the election, such as preparing, printing and mailing ballots and voter information pamphlets, appointing precinct boards and designating polling places, conducting and canvassing the returns of the election and certifying the votes cast.

Resolution 57-2022 (Attachment B) confirms the Town’s policy regarding candidates’ statements, establishing the 250-word limit, determines the form of the candidates’ statements and foregoes the $25 local filing fee to help offset the Town’s administrative costs.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Town is responsible for reimbursing the County for actual costs incurred in conducting the consolidated election on the Town’s behalf. Costs vary depending on many factors including the type of election, how many jurisdictions are involved, how many items and candidates are on the ballot, how many voters are registered and what costs the County passes through to the Town. These factors make it difficult to precisely estimate the final cost prior to the election.

The County Registrar of Voters has determined the cost of the election to be approximately $2.50 - $4.00 per registered voter. Per the Contra Costa County Elections Division, the Town of Moraga currently has 11,588 registered voters and the cost of the election is estimated to be $37,661

1. Should additional budget appropriation be required, a budget adjustment will be brought forward upon final billing from the County.

Funding of $45,000 for the 2026 election is included in the Adopted FY 2026-27 General Fund 15 Budget.
1The cost estimation is based on an average of the low ($2.50) and high ($4.00) election cost per voter multiplied by the estimated number of registered voters received on April 3, 2026 from Contra Costa County Registrar of Voters. The actual cost will vary depending on the outcome of the election.

CEQA COMPLIANCE
Approval of the Resolution and underlying action is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.), because it constitutes an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Approve the resolution calling the election. This resolution must be adopted by July 1, 2026; or

2. The Town may choose to run a stand-alone election which would cost the Town approximately $8.00 - $12.00 (2022 cost estimations) per registered voter, plus the cost of hiring temporary staff to conduct the election.

NEXT STEPS
Upon adoption of the Resolution calling and giving notice of a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2026 (Attachment A), the Town Clerk will provide public notice of the election and open the election nomination period. The nomination period for this election runs from Monday, July 13 through Friday, August 07, 2026. If an incumbent does not file for election or files but then withdraws, the nomination period is automatically extended to Wednesday, August 12, 2026.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Draft Resolution Consolidating the 2026 General Election.docx Attachment B - Resolution 57-2022 Policy for Voter Pamphlet Candidate Statements 16 Attachment A
Resolution No. xx-2026 1 May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA

TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. xx-2026

REQUESTING AND CONSENTING TO CONSOLIDATION OF ELECTIONS AND SETTING SPECIFICATIONS OF THE ELECTION ORDER FOR NOVEMBER 3, 2026 WHEREAS, the Town Council a Municipal Election is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, to fill certain municipal offices; WHEREAS, other elections may be held in whole or in part of the territory of the Town and it is to the advantage of the Town to consolidate pursuant to Elections Code Section 10002;
WHEREAS, Elections Code Section 10242 provides that the governing board shall determine the hours of opening and closing the polls or hours shall otherwise be the same as provided for general elections;
WHEREAS, Elections Code Section 10002 requires the Town to reimburse the County in full for the services performed upon presentation of a bill to the Town by the County Elections Official;
WHEREAS, Elections Code Section 13307 requires that before the nominating period opens the governing body must determine whether a charge shall be levied against each candidate submitting a candidate’s statement to be sent to the voters; and may estimate the cost; and determine whether the estimate must be paid in advance; WHEREAS, Elections Code Section 12101 requires the publication of a notice of the election once in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town; and WHEREAS, tie votes shall be determined by lot unless the Town Council adopts the provisions of Elections Code 15651(b) prior to the conduct of the election resulting in the tie vote.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that an election be held in accordance with the following specifications:

1. The General Municipal Election shall be held on Tuesday, the 3rd day of November 2026. The purpose of the election is to choose successors for two (2) Town Councilmembers with terms to end in 2030.

2. The Town Council of Moraga hereby requests and consents to the consolidation of this election with other elections which may be held in whole or in part of the territory of the Town, as provided in Elections Code 10002. 17 Attachment A
Resolution No. xx-2026 2 May 27, 2026

3. The hours the polls shall be kept open shall be as designated for the general election.

4. The Town Council hereby authorizes the Town Manager to reimburse the County for the actual cost incurred in conducting the election upon receipt of a bill stating the amount due as determined by the elections official.

5. The Town Council has determined that each candidate will pay for the voluntary Candidate’s Statement. The Candidate’s Statement will be limited to 250 words.

As a condition of having the Candidate’s Statement published, the candidate shall pay the cost at the time of filing. The Contra Costa County Elections Division has provided an estimated candidate statement cost of $392.00 and will provide a final cost before the Candidate Filing Period begins.

6. The Town Council of Moraga directs the Town Clerk to publish the Notice of Election in the East Bay Times, which is a newspaper of general circulation that is published daily in the Town of Moraga.

7. The Town Council has determined that in the event of a tie, tie votes shall be determined by lot unless the Town Council adopts the provisions of Elections Code 15651 (a) prior to the conduct of the election resulting in the tie vote.

8. The Town Council of Moraga directs the Town Clerk to send a certified copy of this Resolution to the Registrar of Voters and the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County.
18 Attachment B
19 20
CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.3
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Katie Bruner, Administrative Services Director
Subject: Updated Employee Salary Schedule (Effective June 28, 2026) Meeting Date: May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA STAFF REPORT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the Employee Salary Schedule dated and effective June 28, 2026.

BACKGROUND
The Town maintains a master pay schedule, salary schedule, which includes the pay rates for all positions in the Town’s classification plan, including permanent and hourly and temporary employee classes. The salary schedule is revised and updated periodically based upon various Town Council actions and modifications of classes in the Town’s classification plan and posted for public review on the Town’s website. The Town’s most recent salary schedule was dated and effective January 1, 2026 pursuant to Resolution 56-2025.

DISCUSSION
The draft Salary Schedule (Attachment B), which is dated and would be effective as of June 28, 2026, incorporates previously approved salary increases and a modification to the Town’s classification plan.

Effective with the pay period beginning on June 26, 2026, there are previously approved and scheduled increases of three percent (3.5%) to the salary ranges for classifications included in the Department Directors, Mid-Management and Professional Employees, Moraga Employee Association, Moraga Police Officers Association, and the Town Manager. These salary increases were previously approved by Town Council on June 25 and July 9, 2025.

FISCAL IMPACT
There are no direct fiscal impacts associated with this action. The proposed salary range 21 adjustments have been incorporated into the adopted Fiscal Year 2026-27 budget.

CEQA COMPLIANCE
Approval of the proposed Salary Schedule effective June 28, 2026 is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.), because it constitutes an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Adopt the proposed resolution with changes; or

2. Do not adopt the proposed resolution and provide direction to staff.

NEXT STEPS
If approved, the new salary ranges will go into effect on June 28, 2026.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Draft Resolution - June 28 2026 Salary Schedule Attachment B - Salary Schedule FY 27 - Effective June 28 2026 22 Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 1 May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA

TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. xx-2026
APPROVING THE SALARY SCHEDULE DATED AND EFFECTIVE AS OF JUNE 28, 2026
WHEREAS, the salary schedule establishes the salary ranges and steps for each classification within the Town’s classification plan;
WHEREAS, the Town Council approves the salary schedule for Town of Moraga employees;
WHEREAS, the Salary Schedule is immediately accessible and available for public review and is posted on the Town of Moraga’s website;
WHEREAS, staff is recommending that the Town Council consider and approve the updated Salary Schedule data and effective as of June 28, 2026; and WHEREAS, adoption of the updated salary schedule does not require additional allocation of funds for Fiscal Year 2026-27.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Moraga does hereby approve the Town of Moraga Salary Schedule dated and effective as of June 28, 2026, included herein by reference.
23 Classification Employee
Group Step A Step B Step C Step D Step E
Hourly 47.73 50.13 52.64 55.27 58.02
Monthly 8,275 8,689 9,124 9,579 10,058
Annual 99,297 104,265 109,483 114,951 120,696
Hourly 37.24 39.10 41.05 43.11 45.26
Monthly 6,455 6,778 7,116 7,473 7,846
Annual 77,463 81,333 85,388 89,674 94,146
Hourly 32.24 33.85 35.55 37.32 39.20
Monthly 5,589 5,869 6,162 6,470 6,793
Annual 67,067 70,425 73,944 77,638 81,520
Hourly 23.98 25.17 26.43 27.76 29.15
Monthly 4,156 4,364 4,582 4,811 5,052
Annual 49,877 52,364 54,984 57,738 60,625
Hourly 90.78 100.07 95.31 105.08 110.34
Monthly 15,735 16,522 17,347 18,215 19,125
Annual 188,816 198,260 208,165 218,584 229,505
Hourly 41.76 43.85 46.05 48.34 50.76
Monthly 7,239 7,601 7,981 8,380 8,799
Annual 86,867 91,212 95,770 100,556 105,583
Hourly 52.74 55.38 58.16 61.05 64.12
Monthly 9,143 9,600 10,080 10,583 11,113
Annual 109,713 115,194 120,956 126,999 133,362
Hourly 44.89 47.13 49.49 51.97 54.57
Monthly 7,781 8,170 8,579 9,008 9,458
Annual 93,377 98,043 102,949 108,096 113,497
Hourly 57.17 60.03 63.04 66.19 69.50
Monthly 9,911 10,406 10,927 11,473 12,047
Annual 118,930 124,873 131,118 137,680 144,558
Hourly 51.43 54.01 56.70 59.53 62.51
Monthly 8,915 9,360 9,828 10,319 10,835
Annual 106,974 112,323 117,936 123,826 130,022
Hourly 34.43 36.15 37.95 39.86 41.86
Monthly 5,968 6,266 6,579 6,909 7,255
Annual 71,614 75,197 78,953 82,910 87,054
Hourly 45.22 47.49 49.86 52.35 54.97
Monthly 7,839 8,231 8,642 9,074 9,528
Annual 94,063 98,770 103,700 108,883 114,332
Hourly 43.01 45.17 47.42 49.79 52.29
Monthly 7,456 7,829 8,220 8,631 9,064
Annual 89,474 93,952 98,644 103,577 108,764
Hourly 32.10 33.70 35.39 37.16 39.01
Monthly 5,563 5,842 6,134 6,440 6,762
Annual 66,761 70,103 73,606 77,282 81,145

TOWN OF MORAGA
SALARY SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JUNE 28, 2026
Accountant (Confidential) MidMgmt/Prof
Administrative Assistant MEA
Assistant Engineer MEA
Assistant Planner MEA
Associate Engineer MidMgmt/Prof
Administrative Clerk MEA
Administrative Services Director
(Confidential) Dept Dir
Administrative Services
Technician MEA
Lead Maintenance Worker MEA
Maintenance Worker MEA
Associate Planner MidMgmt/Prof
Community Services Officer MEA
Engineering Technician/Inspector MEA
Accounting Technician
(Confidential) MEA
1 Attachment B
24 Classification Employee
Group Step A Step B Step C Step D Step E

TOWN OF MORAGA
SALARY SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JUNE 28, 2026
Hourly 82.16 86.27 90.58 95.11 99.87
Monthly 14,242 14,953 15,701 16,486 17,310
Annual 170,898 179,441 188,414 197,830 207,716
Hourly 88.61 93.04 97.69 102.58 107.70
Monthly 15,359 16,127 16,933 17,781 18,669
Annual 184,306 193,521 203,200 213,368 224,027
Hourly 109.15 114.61 120.34 126.36 132.68
Monthly 18,920 19,866 20,859 21,902 22,998
Annual 227,043 238,389 250,308 262,826 275,970
Hourly 56.98 59.82 62.81 65.96 69.25
Monthly 10,370 10,888 11,432 12,004 12,604
Annual 124,434 130,650 137,184 144,050 151,249
Hourly 59.81 62.80 65.94 69.25 72.71
Monthly 10,886 11,431 12,002 12,603 13,233
Annual 130,636 137,170 144,022 151,235 158,795
Hourly 58.85 61.79 64.88 68.12 71.54
Monthly 10,710 11,246 11,809 12,399 13,020
Annual 128,525 134,958 141,709 148,792 156,237
Hourly 85.60 89.88 94.38 99.09 104.05
Monthly 14,837 15,579 16,359 17,177 18,035
Annual 178,050 186,954 196,306 206,119 216,421
Hourly 53.70 56.38 59.19 62.15 65.27
Monthly 9,772 10,260 10,773 11,312 11,878
Annual 117,264 123,119 129,277 135,738 142,533
Hourly 56.38 59.18 62.14 65.26 68.52
Monthly 10,260 10,772 11,310 11,877 12,470
Annual 123,119 129,262 135,724 142,518 149,645
Hourly 55.46 58.23 61.14 64.20 67.41
Monthly 10,094 10,598 11,127 11,684 12,268
Annual 121,124 127,181 133,527 140,205 147,216
Hourly 61.75 64.83 68.07 71.48 75.04
Monthly 11,238 11,799 12,390 13,009 13,659
Annual 134,857 141,593 148,676 156,106 163,912
Hourly 64.82 68.06 71.47 75.04 78.79
Monthly 11,798 12,387 13,006 13,657 14,340
Annual 141,579 148,647 156,078 163,884 172,080
Hourly 63.60 66.78 70.12 73.63 77.30
Monthly 11,575 12,154 12,762 13,400 14,070
Annual 138,904 145,843 153,143 160,805 168,842
Hourly 32.95 34.61 36.34 38.15 40.05
Monthly 5,712 5,998 6,298 6,613 6,943
Annual 68,550 71,982 75,578 79,353 83,320
Parks & Recreation Director Dept Dir
Police Corporal, Advanced MPOA
Police Corporal, Intermediate MPOA
Police Lieutenant MidMgmt/Prof
Planning Director Dept Dir
Police Chief Dept Dir
Police Corporal MPOA
Police Patrol Officer MPOA
Police Patrol Officer, Advanced MPOA
Police Patrol Officer,
Intermediate MPOA
Police Sergeant MPOA
Police Sergeant, Advanced MPOA
Police Sergeant, Intermediate MPOA
Police Services Technician MEA
2 25
Classification Employee
Group Step A Step B Step C Step D Step E

TOWN OF MORAGA
SALARY SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JUNE 28, 2026
Hourly 67.83 71.23 74.80 78.53 82.46
Monthly 11,758 12,347 12,964 13,612 14,293
Annual 141,100 148,164 155,573 163,342 171,521
Hourly 93.77 98.45 103.38 108.55 113.97
Monthly 16,254 17,065 17,919 18,815 19,756
Annual 195,043 204,783 215,023 225,776 237,069
Hourly 54.11 56.81 59.65 62.63 65.76
Monthly 9,378 9,847 10,339 10,856 11,399
Annual 112,539 118,166 124,069 130,275 136,784
Hourly 37.24 39.11 41.06 43.11 45.27
Monthly 6,456 6,779 7,117 7,473 7,847
Annual 77,469 81,346 85,410 89,674 94,166
Hourly 60.61 63.64 66.82 70.16 73.67
Monthly 10,506 11,031 11,583 12,162 12,770
Annual 126,071 132,375 138,993 145,943 153,240
Hourly 45.62 47.90 50.30 52.82 55.46
Monthly 7,908 8,304 8,719 9,155 9,612
Annual 94,897 99,642 104,624 109,855 115,348
Hourly 57.29 60.15 63.16 66.32 69.63
Monthly 9,929 10,427 10,947 11,495 12,070
Annual 119,154 125,123 131,368 137,944 144,835
Hourly 40.95 43.01 45.17 47.42 49.79
Monthly 7,100 7,455 7,828 8,219 8,630
Annual 85,196 89,460 93,939 98,631 103,564
Hourly 69.28 72.75 76.39 80.21 84.22
Monthly 12,009 12,610 13,241 13,903 14,598
Annual 144,112 151,323 158,893 166,836 175,178
Hourly 52.37 54.99 57.74 60.63 63.65
Monthly 9,077 9,532 10,008 10,509 11,033
Annual 108,925 114,379 120,101 126,103 132,399
Hourly 37.16 39.02 40.98 43.01 45.17
Monthly 6,441 6,763 7,102 7,456 7,829
Annual 77,295 81,159 85,223 89,474 93,952
Hourly 56.10 58.90 61.84 64.94 68.19
Monthly 9,723 10,209 10,719 11,256 11,818
Annual 116,677 122,514 128,628 135,071 141,817
Hourly 56.10 58.90 61.84 64.94 68.19
Monthly 9,723 10,209 10,719 11,256 11,818
Annual 116,677 122,514 128,628 135,071 141,817
Hourly 44.75 47.00 49.35 51.81 54.41
Monthly 7,758 8,146 8,553 8,981 9,430
Annual 93,097 97,749 102,642 107,775 113,162
Public Works Director/Town
Engineer Dept Dir
Senior Planner/Econ Dev Coord MidMgmt/Prof
Support Services Coordinator MEA
Recreation Coordinator MEA
Recreation Supervisor MidMgmt/Prof
Principal Planner MidMgmt/Prof
Senior Engineer MidMgmt/Prof
Senior Construction Inspector MEA
Senior Maintenance Worker MEA
Senior Planner MidMgmt/Prof
PW/Parks Maint Supervisor MidMgmt/Prof
Senior Accountant (Confidential) MidMgmt/Prof
Senior Administrative Assistant MEA
Recreation Manager MidMgmt/Prof
3 26
Classification Employee
Group Step A Step B Step C Step D Step E

TOWN OF MORAGA
SALARY SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JUNE 28, 2026
Hourly 73.79 77.47 81.34 85.41 89.68
Monthly 12,789 13,428 14,099 14,805 15,545
Annual 153,464 161,136 169,190 177,658 186,540
Hourly - - - - 158.88
Monthly - - - - 27,539
Annual - - - - 330,471
Facilities Attendant (PT) Unrepresented Hourly 16.90 17.75 18.63 19.56 20.54 Intern (PT) Unrepresented Hourly 16.90 17.75 18.63 19.56 20.54 Maintenance Worker (PT) Unrepresented Hourly 32.10 33.70 35.39 37.16 39.01 Recreation Leader I (PT) Unrepresented Hourly 16.90 17.75 18.63 19.56 20.54 Recreation Leader II (PT) Unrepresented Hourly 21.46 22.53 23.66 24.84 26.08 Town Manager Contractual
Town Clerk Dept Dir
4 27
CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.4
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Nate Levine, Public Works Director / Town Engineer Deirdre Castillo, Senior Engineer
Subject: Participation in the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance System Joint Powers Authority
Meeting Date: May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA STAFF REPORT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution:

2. Appointing the Public Works Director/City Engineer as the JPA Board Representative and the Senior Engineer as the Alternate;

4. Authorizing staff to collaborate with the RAC JPA Administrator to support RAC System implementation; and

BACKGROUND
The Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP) is a regional collaboration of Contra Costa municipalities, Contra Costa County, and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water 28 Conservation District formed to jointly implement National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit requirements.

The Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) requires local agencies to implement stormwater treatment requirements for regulated new development and redevelopment projects, retrofit existing impervious surface with Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI), and comply with pollutant load reduction requirements, including for PCBs. These obligations can be difficult and costly to meet on constrained project sites or through numerous small, distributed GSI projects.

To provide a regional alternative compliance pathway, Contra Costa County, the Cities of San Pablo and Walnut Creek, and the County Flood Control District partnered with the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to pilot the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance System (RAC System). The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board reviewed and approved the RAC System under MRP Provision C.3.e, which authorizes alternative compliance.

On May 13, 2026, the Town Council received a presentation on potential participation in the RAC System and directed staff to return with formal participation documents. Participating agencies are now forming a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) to administer the RAC System, including off-site GSI certification, compliance unit accounting, project verification, long-term maintenance funding, and annual reporting to the Water Board (Section 2.1.1). Moreover, cities must comply with pollutant load reduction targets under the PCBs TMDL (Provision C.12.c), which require stormwater treatment facilities to be located in areas with historically high pollutant loads.

Following the presentation and Council discussion, staff was directed to return with the formal documents necessary for Town Council consideration of participation in the RAC System.

DISCUSSION
The RAC System provides a regional alternative compliance mechanism for Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) that would otherwise be required on-site. Through the RAC System, public agencies and private developers may purchase compliance units generated by certified Off-Site GSI projects constructed elsewhere in Contra Costa County. These units represent an equivalent amount of stormwater treatment required for regulatory compliance.

Participation in the RAC System would occur through the proposed Joint Powers Authority (JPA). The JPA would provide the administrative, financial, and governance structure necessary to manage Off-Site GSI certification, compliance unit tracking, project verification, long-term maintenance funding, and annual reporting to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board.

A key component of the RAC System is the ability to fund long-term maintenance of Off-Site GSI projects. To do so, the JPA may establish one or more community facilities districts (CFDs) under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. Properties that voluntarily elect to participate in the RAC System may be annexed into a CFD and subject to a special tax to fund the long-term maintenance of the Off-Site GSI projects used for compliance.

Staff recommends that the Town Council approve participation in the RAC JPA, approve the 29 Joint Powers Agreement, authorize the Town Manager to execute the agreement, appoint a Town representative and alternate to the JPA Board, authorize the related CFD actions, and direct staff to return with any necessary stormwater ordinance amendments to implement the RAC System locally.

Benefits of RAC Participation in the Town of Moraga
The RAC System offers several benefits that are particularly important for agencies seeking flexible, affordable ways to meet stormwater regulation.

Provides flexibility for constrained project sites:

RAC participation would provide a consistent, regionally approved alternative compliance mechanism for public and private project sites where on-site GSI is impractical, infeasible, or cost-prohibitive.

Supports more cost-effective stormwater treatment:

Larger regional GSI facilities can achieve economies of scale, reducing upfront construction and ongoing maintenance costs per acre treated compared to multiple smaller installations dispersed across the Town.

Aligns with regional water quality goals:

Off-Site GSI facilities can be strategically located in areas with higher legacy pollutant loads, helping the Town make measurable progress toward PCBs and other TMDL targets.

Reduces local administrative burden:

The RAC Tracking Tool, maintained through the JPA, stores compliance unit records, tracks buyer and seller transactions, supports verification and maintenance documentation, and houses regulatory reporting materials that would otherwise require additional local staff administration.

FISCAL IMPACT
Participation in the RAC JPA will require the Town to contribute to the JPA’s annual operating cost, which is expected to be approximately $2,000 to $3,000 for each participating agency.

Staff anticipates that JPA membership costs can be absorbed within the Town’s existing stormwater program or NPDES budget. No appropriation is requested as part of this informational item.

CEQA COMPLIANCE
Participation in the RAC JPA is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080 (a) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15378 et seq.) as it consists only of forming an agency, sharing administrative costs, and creating a funding mechanism with no commitment to specific future development; thus is not a “project” that may cause a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Direct staff not to proceed with further consideration of participation in the RAC System 30 and provide further direction to staff; or

2. Make revisions to the recommended approach and provide direction to staff.

NEXT STEPS
If approved, the next steps for staff are as follows:

1. Provide the RAC JPA with the executed agreement.

2. Review development and stormwater ordinances and determine if revisions are needed to incorporate participation in the RAC System as an approved alternative compliance for meeting applicable stormwater treatment requirements.

3. Participate as a JPA Board Representative, collaborate with the RAC JPA Administrator to support RAC System implementation.

4. Consider RAC possibilities for Town CIP projects and provide RAC information to private developers as requested.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Draft Resolution - RAC JPA
Attachment B - RAC Summary Report
Attachment C - RAC System Fact Sheet
31 Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA

TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. xx-2026

A RESOLUTION OF TOWN OF MORAGA APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN THE

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REGIONAL ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE (RAC) JOINT

POWERS AUTHORITY AND APPROVING THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (JPA) AND AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT; APPOINTING A BOARD MEMBER AND ALTERNATE; AUTHORIZING STAFF TO

TAKE SUCH ACTIONS AS NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE RAC SYSTEM

AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO COLLABORATE WITH THE RAC JPA
ADMINISTRATOR TO IMPLEMENT THE RAC JPA; AND AUTHORIZE THE JPA TO

ESTABLISH ONE OR MORE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS, ACCEPT

APPLICATIONS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS, ANNEX PROPERTIES TO THE CFD,

AND LEVY SPECIAL TAXES TO FINANCE ON-GOING MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR

OFF-SITE GSI PROJECTS CONSTRUCTED PURSUANT TO THE RAC SYSTEM

WITHIN OR OUTSIDE THE TERRITORY OF THE TOWN OF MORAGA AND

APPROVING A JOINT COMMUNITY FACILITIES AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Town of Moraga (“Town”) is a “public agency,” as defined in the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, California Government Code Section 6500, et seq., and is authorized to enter into an agreement to exercise powers common to the member public agencies;
WHEREAS, the Town desires to participate in the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance (“RAC”) System, which is a program designed to offer a flexible, cost-effective, and scientifically defensible compliance option for the Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, Permit No. CAS612008; WHEREAS, the proposed joint powers authority (“JPA”) is being be formed to (i) establish a community facilities district (“CFD”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (“Mello-Roos Act”) in order to finance on-going maintenance costs for “Off-Site GSI Projects” constructed pursuant to the RAC System, and (ii) take other actions in furtherance of the RAC System; WHEREAS, a joint exercise of powers agreement between participating cities, Contra Costa County, and the Contra Costa Flood Control and Water Conservation District has been prepared to establish the proposed JPA that will implement the RAC System;
WHEREAS, the proposed agreement will take effect on the earlier of July 1, 2026, provided that two proposed member agencies have executed the agreement by such date, or when all proposed member agencies have executed the agreement; 32 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
WHEREAS, each member of the proposed JPA may appoint a representative to serve on the JPA’s Board and an alternative member to serve in the absence of the appointed representative;
WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to participate in the RAC System and to adopt the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, with respect to the CFD:
(1) the JPA may establish the CFD to finance the maintenance of OffSite GSI Projects pursuant to Section 53313.5(f) of the Mello-Roos Act, which authorizes community facilities districts to finance the acquisition, improvement, rehabilitation, or maintenance of any real or other tangible property, whether privately or publicly owned, for flood and storm protection services, including, but not limited to, storm drainage and treatment systems;
(2) the Town desires to allow the owners (“Participating Owners”) of property being developed within its jurisdiction (“Participating Properties”) to participate in the CFD in order to finance on-going maintenance costs for Off-Site GSI Projects constructed pursuant to the RAC System, whether those Off-Site GSI Projects are located within the boundaries of the Town of Moraga or not, and to allow the JPA to conduct proceedings to form the CFD, annex Participating Properties to the CFD and levy special taxes on such Participating Properties; (3) both the JPA and the Town are “local agencies” under the MelloRoos Act; (4) the Mello-Roos Act permits two or more local agencies to enter into a joint community facilities agreement or joint exercise of powers agreement to exercise any power authorized by the Mello-Roos Act;
(5) the Town desires to enter into such an agreement with the JPA to authorize the JPA to form the CFD and annex to the CFD Participating Properties located within the territorial limits of the Town for the purpose of financing the maintenance of Off-Site GSI Projects, whether those Off-Site GSI Projects are located within the boundaries of the Town or not; and
(6) the Town will not be responsible for the conduct of any proceedings to form the CFD, annex Participating Properties to the CFD, levy or collect special taxes, or any required remedial action in the case of delinquencies in such special tax payments.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MORAGA DOES HEREBY DETERMINE, FIND AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

The Town hereby approves the “Joint Powers Agreement Between Participating Cities, Contra Costa County, and the Contra Costa Flood Control and Water Conservation 33 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
District for Implementation of the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance System,” attached hereto as Exhibit “A” to this Resolution.

SECTION 1. Prior to the effective date of the Agreement, the Town hereby authorizes minor and technical revisions to the Agreement approved in Section 1 that do not change the overall intent of the Agreement or increase liability or cost exposure.

SECTION 2. The Town appoints the Public Works Director/City Engineer as the representative on the JPA’s Board and the Senior Engineer as the alternative representative on the JPA’s Board.

SECTION 3. The Town Council hereby authorizes the Town Manager to execute the Agreement.

SECTION 4. Direct staff to take such actions as necessary to participate in the RAC System, including preparation of an ordinance to revise the City’s stormwater ordinance to incorporate participation in the RAC System as an approved alternative compliance for meeting applicable stormwater treatment requirements.

SECTION 5. Authorize staff to collaborate with the RAC JPA Administrator to support RAC System implementation.

SECTION 6. The Agreement, together with the terms and provisions of this Resolution, shall together constitute a separate joint community facilities agreement between the Town and the JPA under the Mello-Roos Act for the CFD. The Town Council hereby authorizes the JPA to form one or more community facilities districts to accomplish the purposes of this Resolution, and each such community facilities district shall constitute a CFD as that term is used in this Resolution.

The adoption by the JPA of a resolution of intention to form the CFD under the MelloRoos Act to finance ongoing maintenance costs for Off-Site GSI Projects constructed pursuant to the RAC System shall constitute acceptance by the JPA of the terms of this Resolution with respect to such CFD.

This Resolution shall constitute full approval under Section 8.2 of the Agreement for the JPA to undertake and conduct proceedings under the Mello Roos Act to form the CFD with boundaries that include Participating Properties within the Town’s jurisdiction, to annex Participating Properties within the Town’s jurisdiction to the CFD, and to levy a special tax on such Participating Properties; provided that the Participating Owners, who shall be the legal owners of such property at the time of formation of the CFD or annexation to the CFD, as applicable, execute a ballot or unanimous approval in favor of the levy of the special tax in accordance with the Mello-Roos Act.

The Town Council hereby determines that the Agreement, together with the terms and provisions of this Resolution, are beneficial to the residents/customers of the Town and of the future residents of the area within the CFD.

The Town Council hereby determines that all of the Off-Site GSI Projects constructed pursuant to the RAC System that will be maintained by Participating 34 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
Properties within the Town’s jurisdiction are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the Town as a result of development occurring or expected to occur within the Town.

The Town hereby consents to the formation of, and annexation of Participating Properties to, the CFD in accordance with this Resolution, and consents to the assumption of jurisdiction by the JPA for the proceedings respecting the CFD with the understanding that the JPA will hereafter take each and every step required for or suitable for consummation of the proceedings to form the CFD or annex Participating Properties to the CFD, and the levy, collection and enforcement of the special tax, all at no cost to the Town and without binding or obligating the Town’s general fund or taxing authority.

The Town hereby authorizes and directs appropriate officials and staff of the Town to execute and deliver such certificates, agreements and documents, and to take all such other lawful actions, as are reasonably required by the JPA in accordance with the formation of the CFD, the annexation of Participating Properties to the CFD, the levy of special taxes and the financing of on-going maintenance costs for Off-Site GSI Projects constructed pursuant to the RAC System.

SECTION 7. The Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and shall forward a copy of it to the Contra Costa Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 35 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
Exhibit A

JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
Between Participating Cities, Contra Costa County, and the Contra Costa Flood Control and Water Conservation District to Establish the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance Joint Powers Authority for
Implementation of the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance System This Joint Powers Agreement (“Agreement”) dated July 1, 2026, is made and entered into pursuant to the provisions of Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 1 (Section 6500 et seq.) of the California Government Code relating to the joint exercise of powers among [INSERT FINAL LIST OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES] (collectively, “Member Agencies” and each, individually, a “Member Agency”). The term “Member Agencies” shall also include a public agency added to this Agreement in accordance with Section 14.

RECITALS
A. The joint powers authority (“JPA”) formed pursuant to this Agreement to administer the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance (“RAC”) System is authorized to (i) establish a community facilities district pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Mello-Roos Act”) in order to finance on-going maintenance costs for “Off-Site GSI Projects” constructed pursuant to the RAC System, and (ii) take other actions in furtherance of the RAC System.

B. The RAC System is a program designed to offer a flexible, cost-effective, and scientifically defensible compliance option for the Municipal Regional Permit’s development provisions requiring post-construction stormwater treatment. The Municipal Regional Permit is a Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, Permit No. CAS612008.

C. The RAC System allows the owners of regulated developments and certain public agencies (buyers) to purchase “compliance units” in green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) treatment facilities or “Off-Site GSI Projects” constructed elsewhere within the County.

D. The developers of the Off-Site GSI Projects, which may be public agencies or private entities, generate the “compliance units” that can be exchanged through the RAC System and purchased by the buyers (owners of the regulated developments and public agencies that cannot treat stormwater on their own sites). Private buyers will contribute to the cost of operating and maintaining the Off-Site GSI Projects by annexing their development sites into the proposed community facilities district formed by the JPA. Public agencies that are buyers will pay fees directly to the JPA as an alternative funding mechanism because such public agencies cannot be levied a special tax under the proposed community facilities district. 36 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and among the Member Agencies as follows:

1. DEFINITIONS
Capitalized terms used in the Agreement shall have the meanings specified below, unless the context requires otherwise.

1.1 Act” means the Joint Exercise of Powers Act of the State of California (Government Code Section 6500 et seq.).

1.2 “Agreement” means this Joint Powers Agreement.

1.3 “Board” means the Board of Directors for the Joint Powers Authority.

1.4 “Effective Date” means the date on which this Agreement shall become effective and the JPA shall exist as a separate public agency, as further described in Section 5.

1.5 “JPA” means the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance Joint Powers Authority.

1.6 “Off-Site GSI Project” means a green stormwater infrastructure project eligible to exchange compliance credits under the RAC System.

1.7 “RACE System” means the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance System

2. NAME OF THE JPA
The JPA shall be known as the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance Joint Powers Authority.

3. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Agreement is to establish an independent public agency in order to exercise powers common to each Member Agency and any other powers granted to the JPA under applicable law, including the Act and the Mello-Roos Act. The JPA shall administer the RAC System.

4. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE JPA

4.1 Separate Legal Entity. The JPA, as a joint powers authority, is a separate entity from the Member Agencies and is responsible for the administration of this Agreement.

4.2 Filing of Notices with Secretary of State and County Clerk. Within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the JPA shall cause a notice of this Agreement to be prepared and filed with the office of the California Secretary of State and the 37 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
State Controller containing the information required by California Government Code Section 6503.5.

4.3 Filing of Notices with County and LAFCO. Within seventy (70) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the JPA shall cause a statement of the information concerning the JPA, required by California Government Code Section 53051, to be filed with the office of the California Secretary of State, the Contra Costa County Clerk, and the Contra Costa County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) stating the facts required to be stated pursuant to subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 53051.

5. TERM
The Agreement shall become effective upon the earlier date of July 1, 2026, provided that two Member Agencies have executed the Agreement by such date, or when all Member Agencies have executed the Agreement (“Effective Date”). The Agreement will remain effective until the JPA is dissolved through procedures outlined in Section 18 of this Agreement.

6. POWERS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE JPA

6.1 General Powers. The JPA shall have the power in its own name to exercise any and all common powers of its Member Agencies and such additional powers accorded to it by law reasonably related to the purposes of the JPA, including, but not limited to, the powers to:
a. Acquire, lease, construct, own, manage, maintain, dispose of or operate (subject to the limitations herein) any buildings, works or improvements within the boundaries of the Member Agencies deemed necessary by the Board to implement the RAC System; b. Acquire, hold, manage, maintain, or dispose of any other property within the boundaries of the Member Agencies by any lawful means, including without limitation gift, purchase, lease, lease-purchase, license, eminent domain or sale to support the RAC System; c. Seek, receive, and administer funding from any available public, nonprofit, foundation or private source, including grants or loans under any available Federal, State and local programs to support the RAC System;
d. Make and enter into other contracts;
e. Form and implement one or more community facilities districts pursuant to the Mello-Roos Act;
f. Incur all authorized debts, liabilities, and obligations, subject to the limitations herein to accomplish the stated purposes and objectives of the JPA; g. Receive gifts, contributions and donations of property, funds, services and other forms of financial or other assistance from any persons, firms, corporations or governmental entities;
h. Sue and be sued in its own name;
38 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
i. Seek the adoption or defeat of any Federal, State or local legislation or regulation necessary or desirable to accomplish the stated purposes and objectives of the JPA; j. Adopt rules, regulations, policies, bylaws and procedures governing the operation of the JPA;
k. Invest money pursuant to California Government Code Section 6505.5 that is not required for the immediate necessities of the JPA, as the JPA determines is advisable, in the same manner and upon the same conditions as local agencies, pursuant to Section 53601 of the California Government Code as it now exists or may hereafter be amended; l. Carry out and enforce all the provisions of this Agreement; and m. Exercise all other powers not specifically mentioned herein, but common to Member Agencies, and authorized by California Government Code Section 6508 as it now exists or may hereafter be amended.

6.2 Specific Powers and Obligations. The JPA shall have the power in its own name to exercise the following specific powers and obligations to:
a. Conduct an audit of the records and accounts of the JPA annually by an independent certified public accountant and ensure that copies of such audit report shall be filed with the State Controller and the County Auditor, and shall be provided to the Member Agencies no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of such audit reports by the JPA; b. Use any statutory power available to it necessary or desirable to finance the exercise of any power of the JPA; and
c. Defend, hold harmless and indemnify, to the fullest extent permitted by law, each Member Agency from any liability, claims, suits or other actions.

7. BOARD OF DIRECTORS

7.1 JPA Governing Board. The JPA shall be governed by a Board of Directors. Each director shall have a single vote on matters coming before the Board.

7.2 Board Members and Alternates. Within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, each Member Agency shall designate and appoint one its officers, officials, or employees to serve as its representative on the Board. Within thirty (30) days after a new Member Agency becomes a party to this Agreement, the Member Agency shall designate and appoint one of its officers, officials, or employees to serve as its representative on the Board.

Each Member Agency may appoint an alternate representative who is authorized to serve on the Board only in the absence of the Member Agency’s primary representative, with the same authority as the primary representative. All primary representatives and alternates shall serve until they are replaced by the appointing Member Agency, or until the withdrawal of the Member Agency from this Agreement, or until such time as they are no longer an officer, official, or employee of the Member Agency. Board members and their alternates shall serve without compensation, but they shall be entitled to reimbursement of expenses they actually incur in 39 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
connection with their service on the Board, provided such expense is authorized in advance by the Board.

7.3 Qualifications. Each Member Agency shall determine the officers, officials, or employees that will serve as the Member Agency’s primary representative, and their alternate, on the Board of Directors.

7.4 Board Officers. The Board shall annually select one of its members to serve as Chair and another member to serve as Vice Chair.
a. If the Chair is unable to continue serving on the Board, then the ViceChair shall become Chair. The Board shall then select a new Vice Chair from among the remaining members of the Board.
b. If the Vice Chair is unable to continue serving on the Board, the Board shall select a new Vice Chair from among the remaining members of the Board. c. The Chair shall preside over all meetings of the Board and perform such other duties as may be imposed by the Board in accordance with applicable law and this Agreement.
d. The Vice-Chair shall preside over all meetings of the Board in the Chair’s absence and perform such other duties as may be imposed by the Board in accordance with applicable law and this Agreement when the Chair is absent.

7.5 Additional Officers and Consultants. The Board may appoint any additional officers deemed necessary or desirable. The Board may also retain such consultants or independent contractors as may be deemed necessary.

7.6 Bonding Requirements. The officers or persons designated to have charge of, handle, or have access to any funds or property of the JPA shall be so designated and empowered by the Board. Each such officer or person may be required to file an official bond with the JPA in an amount established by the Board.

7.7 Subcommittees. The Board may create permanent or ad hoc subcommittees to give advice to the Board on such matters as may be referred to such subcommittee by the Board.

7.8 Meetings. The Board shall hold publicly noticed meetings in accordance with a schedule established by the Board. The Board shall meet no less than once per year. Meetings shall be conducted and noticed in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act.

7.9 Voting. All voting powers of the JPA shall reside in the Board.

7.10 Quorum; Votes for Board Actions. A majority of the members of the Board, or their alternates, shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, except that less than a quorum of the Board may adjourn a meeting for lack of quorum. Except as provided in Section 14 or where a larger affirmative vote is required by law, any action of the Board shall require an 40 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
affirmative vote of a majority of the Directors present at a meeting, provided that a quorum of the Board is present.

7.11 Approval of Annual Budget. The JPA’s fiscal year shall begin July 1 of each calendar year, and it shall end on June 30 of the next calendar year; provided, however, that the JPA’s first fiscal year shall begin the date this Agreement becomes effective, and it shall end on the June 30 occurring thereafter. In each fiscal year after the first fiscal year, prior to April 1 of each year, the Manager shall prepare and present a proposed budget for the following fiscal year to the Board for its review and consideration; and prior to July 1 of each year, the Board shall consider approving the final budget for the following fiscal year.

7.12 Minutes. The Secretary shall cause minutes of all meetings of the Board to be drafted. Upon approval by the Board, such minutes shall become a part of the official records of the JPA.

7.13 Conflicts of Interest.
a. California Political Reform Act. Board members shall be considered “public officials” within the meaning of the California Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended, and its regulations, for purposes of financial disclosure, conflict of interest and other requirements of such Act.
b. Levine Act. Board members are “officials” within the meaning of California Government Code Section 84308 (the “Levine Act”) and subject to the restrictions of such act on the acceptance, solicitation or direction of contributions.

8. POWERS AND DUTIES OF GOVERNING BOARD

8.1 Powers and Duties. In addition to exercising the powers and obligations of the JPA set forth in Section 6, or as otherwise provided by law, the JPA Board of Directors shall have the following powers:
a. Perform the activities described in Section 8.2 with respect to the community facilities district described therein;
b. Perform activities necessary and convenient to assist Member Agencies comply with the Municipal Regional Permit and to implement the RAC System, including filing required documentation with the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board; c. Review and recommend an annual budget to the Member Agencies, which shall include the proposed contribution from each Member Agency; d. Make and enter into contracts or sub-contracts, and authorize by resolution officers or agents to execute such contracts;
e. Incur debt, liabilities and obligations on behalf of the JPA as authorized by law;
41 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
f. Invest JPA funds pursuant to an investment policy of the JPA adopted by the Board of Directors;
g. Receive contributions, donations or grants of property, funds, services, or other forms of assistance from any source;
h. Coordinate JPA activities with other Joint Powers Authorities or public agencies established for similar purposes in pursuing the common purposes set forth above; i. Appoint a Legal Advisor for the JPA;
j. Appoint, suspend and or terminate the Manager or enter into and terminate agreements for Management Services;
k. Appoint a Secretary;
l. Adopt, and amend from time to time, bylaws, rules, and regulations for the conduct of meetings of the Board and of the affairs of the JPA consistent with this Agreement; and
m. Adopt, and amend from time to time, a conflict of interest code.

8.2 Community Facilities District. The Board of Directors will consider forming one or more community facilities districts (each, a “CFD”) in accordance with the Mello-Roos Act to finance maintenance of Off-Site GSI Projects. If a CFD is formed by the Board, the following will apply:
a. The CFD will levy special taxes on development sites owned by private buyers to finance maintenance of Off-Site GSI Projects. Off-Site GSI Projects may be publiclyowned or privately-owned. The JPA is authorized and empowered to enter into agreements with owners of Off-Site GSI Projects to provide for CFD funding of maintenance. b. The CFD will initially be formed to include (i) original CFD boundaries that consist of a single property within the jurisdiction of one of the Member Agencies, and (ii) a future annexation area that includes the remaining territory of the initial Member Agencies. As a result of such agencies executing this Agreement, no further approval shall be required from such Member Agencies for the Board of Directors to include such Member Agencies’ territory in the original CFD boundaries or the CFD’s future annexation area or to annex properties in such Member Agencies’ territory to a CFD.
c. As additional public agencies join the CFD, the Board of Directors will consider adding such agencies’ territory to the CFD’s future annexation area. As a result of such agencies executing this Agreement, no further approval shall be required from such agencies for the Board of Directors to add such agencies’ territory to the CFD’s future annexation area or to annex properties in such Member Agencies’ territory to a CFD. d. Each Member Agency shall approve this Agreement by adopting a resolution in the form determined by the JPA. The terms and provisions of such resolution along 42 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
with this Agreement shall constitute a joint exercise of powers agreement as defined in Section 53316.2 of the Mello-Roos Act between the JPA and a Member Agency. e. The Board of Directors will be responsible for considering the levy of special taxes to fund maintenance of Off-Site GSI Projects and administering the CFD. The Board of Directors may engage necessary consultants to assist with the formation and administration of a CFD.
f. The Board of Directors shall be responsible for preparing and approving all reports and notices required by the Mello-Roos Act. The Board of Directors may delegate to the Manager, or contract with another person or entity, the preparation of reports and notices required by the Mello-Roos Act, provided that the Board of Directors retains discretion to approve the reports and notices prior to submission, circulation, or publication.

9. OPERATIONS AND FACILITIES

9.1 Principal Office. The principal physical office of the JPA shall be established by Board resolution at one of the Member Agencies’ offices or at another suitable location within a Member Agency’s jurisdiction.

9.2 Assumption of Responsibilities by the JPA. As soon as practicable after the Effective Date of this Agreement, a notice of an organizational meeting of the Board shall be published. During the first meeting, the Board shall designate a Manager, or engage a contractor to perform Management Services, who shall have the authority described in Section 11 and as otherwise delegated by the Board.

9.3 Delegation of Authority; Transfer of Records, Accounts, Funds and Property.

The JPA shall establish procedures by which it may receive the transfer of records, accounts, funds or property from Member Agencies or other entities.

10. NO EMPLOYEES

10.1 The JPA shall not hire employees or retain consultants that could otherwise be classified as common law employees.

11. MANAGER OF THE JPA

11.1 Powers and Duties. The Manager contracted by the Agency may be a staff person of one of the Member Agencies, a consultant, an independent contractor, or an employee of another entity who can perform the responsibilities and duties described in this section JPA, as determined by the Board in its sole discretion. The Manager shall have the following powers, responsibilities and duties:
a. Plan, coordinate and supervise the operation of the JPA on a day-to-day basis to ensure that the policies and direction of the Board are implemented operationally and administratively;
43 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
b. Make recommendations to the Board regarding the operations of the JPA and, if formed, the CFD;
c. Supervise and manage JPA contractors;
d. Establish administrative policies and procedures for the JPA consistent with and in order to implement directives from the Board; e. Prepare the annual budget for submission to the Board; f. Support compliance activities for the Member Agencies’ compliance with the Municipal Regional Permit through the RAC System; and g. Such other powers and authority delegated by the Board.

12. TREASURER AND AUDITOR

12.1 The Board shall appoint one of its officers to be the Auditor of the JPA. The Auditor shall draw warrants or check-warrants against funds of the JPA held by the Treasurer when the demands are approved by the Board of Directors or other person designated for that purpose and delegated that authority. The Board may transfer the responsibilities of Auditor to any person or entity authorized by Government Code Sections 6505.5 or 6505.6.

12.2 The Treasurer of the JPA shall be a certified public accountant. The Treasurer shall receive, have custody of, and disburse all monies of the JPA. The Board may transfer the responsibilities of Treasurer to any person or entity authorized by Government Code Sections 6505.5 or 6505.6.

13. INSURANCE AND LIABILITY

13.1 Insurance Coverage. The JPA shall be responsible for obtaining insurance coverage for its activities, as the Board deems appropriate.

13.2 Limitation on Liability. No debt, liability, or obligation of the JPA shall constitute a debt, liability, or obligation of any Member Agency. Except as expressly authorized by the Member Agencies, no Member Agency shall be responsible for the acts and omissions of another Member Agency’s officers or employees nor shall a Member Agency incur any liabilities arising out of the services and activities of another Member Agency’s officers or employees.

14. ADDITION OF MEMBER AGENCIES
The addition of any other agency as a Member Agency to the JPA shall require the approval of three-quarters of the entire Board. Upon approval by the Board, the new Member Agency shall execute a copy of this Agreement and return it to the JPA to be appended to the official version of this Agreement. Recognizing the effort of the original Member Agencies to establish the JPA, the Board may require a financial contribution to become a member of the JPA. 44 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026

15. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COSTS: COST ALLOCATION

15.1 Records and Accounts. The JPA shall cause to be kept accurate and correct books of account, showing capital costs (if any), and maintenance and operation costs of the JPA. The aforementioned described books and records shall be open to inspection at all times during normal business hours by Member Agencies. The Treasurer shall cause all financial records of the JPA to be audited by an independent public accountant or certified public accountant at least once a fiscal year and a copy of the audit to be delivered promptly to each Member Agency.

15.2 Allocation of Operating Expenses. Unless changed by mutual agreement of the Member Agencies, the operating costs and expenses in the budget shall be shared equally by the Member Agencies. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any remaining operating costs and expenses associated with the operation and maintenance of the Off-Site GSI Projects and the administration of the CFD, which are not fully paid for by special taxes collected by the CFD, shall be apportioned to the Member Agencies based upon the maximum special taxes levied in each Member Agency’s jurisdiction.

16. WITHDRAWAL OF A MEMBER AGENCY FROM THE JOINT POWERS

AUTHORITY
A Member Agency may withdraw from this Agreement by filing written notice of intention to do so with the Manager and Chair no later than 5:00 p.m. of the December 31st immediately preceding the commencement of the following fiscal year (July 1 - June 30). The Member Agency’s withdrawal shall be effective at 11:59 p.m. on June 30th of the fiscal year in which the notice of intention was received. Withdrawal shall not relieve the Member Agency from any financial commitments associated with projects or programs that the withdrawing Member agreed to participate in prior to the effective date of the withdrawal. The withdrawal of any Member Agency shall not terminate this Agreement provided at least two (2) Member Agencies remain parties to the Agreement.

Withdrawal by a Member Agency shall not have any effect on the obligation to pay special taxes of any property in the jurisdiction of such Member Agency that has annexed into a CFD.

17. DISPOSITION OF ASSETS UPON WITHDRAWAL OF A MEMBER AGENCY No Member Agency, by withdrawing, shall, except as may be agreed to by the Board, be entitled to payment or return of funds paid or property donated, if any, by the withdrawing Member Agency to the JPA or to any distribution of its assets.

18. TERMINATION; DISSOLUTION AND DISPOSITION OF ASSETS
This Agreement may be terminated and the JPA dissolved upon the consent of all Member Agencies then party to the JPA. Upon termination of this Agreement and dissolution of the JPA, JPA funds shall first be used to pay expenses, debts, liabilities and obligations of the JPA; and any remaining JPA funds shall be distributed to the Member Agencies in proportion to contributions made by the Member Agencies. The Board shall reasonably value any remaining property in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. This JPA shall not dissolve as long as there are properties within the boundaries of a CFD that are obligated to pay 45 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
special taxes to maintain Off-Site GSI Projects unless the authority for governance of the CFD has been transferred by the JPA to another jurisdiction in accordance with the Mello-Roos Act.

19. CAPITAL ASSETS
Capital assets of Member Agencies may be transferred to the JPA according to the disposition rules of the Member Agencies.

20. CONTRIBUTIONS AND ADVANCES
Pursuant to Government Code Section 6504, the Member Agencies may in their discretion make financial contributions, loans or advances to the JPA for the purposes of the JPA set forth in this Agreement. The repayment of such contribution, loans or advances will be on the written terms agreed to by the Member Agency making the contribution, loan or advance and the JPA.

21. LIMITATIONS ON POWERS
As required by Government Code Section 6509, the power of the JPA is subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising power possessed by the City of San Pablo.

22. AMENDMENT
Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and approved by the governing bodies of all Member Agencies, provided, however, that no such amendment shall be entered into if the amendment would conflict with the provisions of any bonds (as defined in Government Code section 6585(c)), indenture, trust agreement, contract or other agreement securing or relating to any outstanding bonds of the JPA issued pursuant to state or federal laws. In addition, no amendment shall have any effect on the JPA’s authority to levy or collect special taxes or pay such special taxes to maintain Off-Site GSI Projects unless the authority for governance of the CFD has been transferred by the JPA to another jurisdiction in accordance with the Mello-Roos Act.

23. NOTICE
Any notice required to be given or delivered by any provision of this Agreement shall be personally delivered or deposited in the U.S. Mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed to the Member Agencies at their addresses as reflected in the records of the JPA, and shall be deemed to have been received by the Member Agencies to which the same is addressed upon the earlier of receipt or seventy-two (72) hours after mailing.

24. SEVERABILITY
If a provision of the Agreement is found to be illegal or unenforceable, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected.

25. SUCCESSORS
This Agreement shall be binding upon and accrue to the benefit of any successor of a Member Agency.
46 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026

26. ASSIGNMENT AND DELEGATION
No Member Agency may assign any rights or delegate any duties under this Agreement without the written consent of all other Member Agencies.

27. COUNTERPARTS
This Agreement may be executed in one (1) or more counterparts.

28. DISPUTE RESOLUTION.

The Member Agencies and the JPA shall make reasonable efforts to settle all disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement. Should any dispute among the Member Agencies arise out of this Agreement and should the Member Agencies be unable to resolve the dispute, the Member Agencies shall, at the written request of any Member Agency, meet in mediation and attempt in good faith to reach a resolution with the assistance of a mutually acceptable mediator.

In the event that mediation does not result in the settlement of a dispute within 120 days after the demand for mediation is made, any Member Agency and the JPA may pursue any remedies provided by law.

29. INTEGRATION
47 ` Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 May 27, 2026
This Agreement represents the full and entire Agreement among the Members.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Joint Powers Agreement establishing the Joint Powers Authority set forth above. [PARTY]
By: _______________________________
Name: _______________________________
Title: _______________________________
Date: _______________________________
Party: _____________________________
[PARTY]
By: _______________________________
Name: _______________________________
Title: _______________________________
Date: _______________________________
Party: _____________________________
48 REGIONAL ALTERNATIVE

COMPLIANCE SYSTEM SUMMARY
REPORT

REGIONAL COMPLIANCE FOR A

SUSTAINABLE BAY
Prepared for:

City of San Pablo
1000 Gateway Avenue
San Pablo, California 94806
Prepared by: and
Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. Kieser & Associates, LLC
1111 Broadway, 6th Floor 536 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 300 Oakland, California 94607 Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007
with assistance from:

Project Number: LA0594
March 14, 2023
FINAL
Attachment B
49 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ii March 14, 2023 FINAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................ES-1

1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1

2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION .........................................................................................3

2.1 RAC System Drivers.......................................................................................................3

2.1.1 Municipal Regional Permit .................................................................................3

2.1.2 Additional System Drivers..................................................................................7

2.2 Contra Costa County RAC System Objectives...............................................................8

2.3 Environmental Review Approach ...................................................................................8

2.3.1 Water Board Approval of the Contra Costa County System...............................8

2.3.2 CEQA Considerations for Adoption of Local Ordinance ...................................9

2.3.3 CEQA Considerations for Mitigation..................................................................9

2.3.4 CEQA Considerations for Off-Site Mitigation Projects that Generate Compliance Units..............................................................................................10

3. PROPOSED CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM OVERVIEW ..........................11

3.1 Proposed Contra Costa County RAC System ...............................................................11

3.2 Rationale for Selection ..................................................................................................12

3.2.1 Compliance Purchases.......................................................................................12

3.2.2 Integration into Existing Compliance Programs...............................................13

3.2.3 Considerations for System Metric.....................................................................13

3.2.4 Hydromodification Management ......................................................................14

3.3 Contra Costa County RAC System Components..........................................................15

3.3.1 RAC System “Buyers” ......................................................................................15

3.3.2 Off-Site GSI Projects.........................................................................................16

3.3.3 Net Environmental Benefit................................................................................17

3.3.4 Compliance Purchases.......................................................................................17

3.3.5 Ongoing O&M Fee............................................................................................18

3.4 Summary of Preliminary Administrative Structure.......................................................18

3.5 RAC System Next Steps................................................................................................21

4. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM COMPLIANCE UNIT DEFINITION AND CONTROL MEASURES .......................................................................................................22

4.1 Compliance Unit Definition ..........................................................................................22

4.2 Equivalent Acres Greened.............................................................................................22

4.2.1 Treatment (“Greened”) Requirements and Allowable Control Measures.........23

4.2.2 Runoff Generating Acres...................................................................................25 50 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report iii March 14, 2023 FINAL

4.2.3 Equivalent Volume and Pollutant Loading .......................................................26

4.2.4 Equivalent Acres Greened Summary ................................................................32

4.3 Net Environmental Benefit............................................................................................33

4.4 Required Baseline(s) .....................................................................................................33

4.5 Compliance Purchase Calculation Methods..................................................................34

4.6 Ongoing O&M Fee........................................................................................................35

4.6.1 O&M Fee Mechanism.......................................................................................35

5. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS ......................................37

5.1 Eligible Participants ......................................................................................................37

5.2 Eligible Regulated Projects and Other “Buyers” ..........................................................37

5.3 Eligible Off-Site GSI Projects.......................................................................................38

5.4 Exchanges......................................................................................................................39

5.5 System Restrictions.......................................................................................................39

5.5.1 Land Use Restrictions .......................................................................................39

5.5.2 Watershed and Jurisdictional Restrictions ........................................................40

5.6 Certification Requirements............................................................................................40

5.7 Verification Requirements ............................................................................................43

6. COMPLIANCE PURCHASE AND O&M ASSESSMENT COST BASES.........................44

6.1 Cost Basis Considerations.............................................................................................44

6.2 Compliance Unit Demand Considerations....................................................................45

6.2.1 Permittee Demand .............................................................................................45

6.2.2 Regulated Project Demand................................................................................46

6.3 Off-Site GSI Project Implementation Considerations...................................................48

6.3.1 Upfront Financing of RAC System Off-Site GSI Projects................................48

6.3.2 Alternative Delivery Approaches......................................................................48

6.3.3 Pay-for-Performance or CBP3 Model for Compliance Unit Providers ............49

6.3.4 Private Financing...............................................................................................49

6.4 Cost Setting ...................................................................................................................50

6.4.1 Other Compliance Purchase Considerations.....................................................50

6.4.2 Administrative Payment....................................................................................50

6.4.3 Ongoing O&M Fees..........................................................................................51

6.5 System Fund Management ............................................................................................52

6.5.1 Contra Costa County RAC System Fund..........................................................52

6.5.2 Ongoing O&M Fund .........................................................................................52

6.5.3 Harmonized and Pooled Funding ......................................................................52

7. RISK AND UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT ..................................................................54 51 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report iv March 14, 2023 FINAL

7.1 Sources of Uncertainty ..................................................................................................54

7.1.1 Capture of Equivalent Quantity of Stormwater Runoff and Pollutant Loading54

7.1.2 Risk of Noncompliance due to Project Failure .................................................54

7.1.3 Cost and Demand Uncertainty ..........................................................................54

7.2 Managing Uncertainty...................................................................................................55

7.2.1 Runoff Equivalency – Rainfall Ratio ................................................................55

7.2.2 Pollutant Load Equivalency – Pollutant Ratio ..................................................55

7.2.3 Contractual Mechanisms...................................................................................55

7.2.4 Cost and Demand Uncertainty ..........................................................................56

8. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT ..............................................................................................58

8.1 Scaling the Contra Costa County RAC System ............................................................58

8.1.1 Scaling for Additional Compliance Units and Control Measures.....................58

8.1.2 Tracking and Incentivizing Ancillary Benefits.................................................59

8.1.3 Scaling for Additional Participation..................................................................59

8.1.4 Scaling for a Regional Inter-County Program...................................................60

8.1.5 Scaling for Other Considerations......................................................................61

8.2 Ongoing System Decision Points..................................................................................61

8.2.1 Selection Criteria for Off-Site GSI Projects......................................................61

8.2.2 Technical Review..............................................................................................61

8.3 Procedures for System Changes....................................................................................62

8.3.1 Process for RAC System Changes ....................................................................62

8.3.2 Changes to Preapproved List of Control Measures...........................................63

8.4 Funding and Financing Considerations.........................................................................63

8.4.1 Financing of Off-Site GSI Projects...................................................................63

8.4.2 Compliance Purchase Amount Review and Adjustment ..................................64

9. OVERVIEW OF TRACKING TOOL....................................................................................65

9.1 Contra Costa County RAC System Components Tracked............................................65

9.2 Accounting System........................................................................................................66

9.3 Reporting System ..........................................................................................................66

10. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM TEMPLATE DOCUMENTS ......................67

10.1 Approach to Development of RAC System Templates.................................................67

10.2 Regulated Project Documentation.................................................................................67

10.2.1 Stormwater Control Plan...................................................................................67

10.2.2 Regulated Project Tracking in AGOL...............................................................68

10.3 Off-Site GSI Project Forms...........................................................................................68

10.3.1 Pre-Construction Off-Site GSI Project Data and Design Certification Form ...68 52 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report v March 14, 2023 FINAL

10.3.2 Off-Site GSI Project Data Form........................................................................69

10.3.3 Off-Site GSI Project Post-Construction Certification Form .............................69

10.3.4 Off-Site GSI Project O&M Verification Form..................................................69

10.4 Exchange Documentation..............................................................................................70

10.5 Participant MOU and Stormwater Ordinance Language and Participant MOU...........70

11. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM NEXT STEPS..............................................71

12. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................73 GLOSSARY ..................................................................................................................................75 53 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report vi March 14, 2023 FINAL

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Summary of Proposed Program Submittal Requirements................................................ 6 Table 2: Summary of System Administrative Entities, Roles, and Responsibilities.................... 19 Table 3: Rainfall Ratio Matrix for Rainfall Zones Across the County......................................... 28 Table 4: PCBs Land Use-Based Concentrations .......................................................................... 30 Table 5: TSS EMCs by Land Use................................................................................................. 31 Table 6: Resulting Average Concentration and Proposed Pollutant Ratios ................................. 31 Table 7: Pollutant Ratios for Identified Land Use Categories...................................................... 32 Table 8: Summary of UrbanSim Development Projections ......................................................... 47 Table 9: Contra Costa County RAC System Implementation Phases Schedule........................... 71

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Contra Costa County Urban Limit Line and Hydromodification Management Plan Applicable Areas
Figure 2: Proposed Contra Costa County RAC System
Figure 3: Contra Costa County RAC System with Potential Hydromodification Track Figure 4: Contra Costa County RAC System with Potential Other Buyer Participation Figure 5: Contra Costa County RAC System Administrating Entities Figure 6: Equivalent Acres Greened Equivalency Demonstration Figure 7: Contra Costa County Annual Average Precipitation Figure 8: Natural Log Distribution of NSQD TSS Data by Land Use Figure 9a-f: Contra Costa County RAC System Exchange Schematics

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS AND APPENDICES
Appendix A: Contra Costa County RAC System Tracking Tool Overview and Instructions (to be provided by SFEI)
Appendix B: Contra Costa County RAC System Technical Analyses Details Appendix C: Contra Costa County RAC System Template Documents 54 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report vii March 14, 2023 FINAL

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This Summary Report was developed as part of the Regional Compliance for a Sustainable Bay project (Project), funded by a United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 9 Water Quality Improvement Fund Grant, led by the City of San Pablo.

This Summary Report was developed by the Project Consultant Team in coordination with the Project Steering Committee, listed below:

Steering Committee Members
Amanda Booth and Sarah Kolarik, City of San Pablo; Joanne Le, City of Richmond; Michele Mancuso, Contra Costa County; and Lucile Paquette and Steve Waymire, City of Walnut Creek.

Project Consultant Team
Kelly Havens, Lisa Austin, and Ken Susilo, Geosyntec Consultants; Mark Kieser and David Chen, Kieser & Associates, LLC; Jill Bicknell and Lisa Sabin, EOA, Inc.; Susanne Heim, Panorama Environmental; George Kelly, Bespoke Mitigation Partners; with consultation from Legal Advisor Brooks Smith of Troutman Pepper.

Acknowledgments also to members of the Project Technical Advisory Committee and the Project Advisory Committee, who provided input for this Summary Report:

Technical Advisory Committee
Luisa Valiela and Jacques Landy, EPA Region 9; Keith Lichten, Derek Beauduy, Zach Rokeach, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board; Cathleen Terentieff, City of Walnut Creek; Tony Hale and Gemma Shusterman, San Francisco Estuary Institute; and Greg Cannito, Corvias.

Advisory Committee
Shannan Young, City of Dublin; Kristin Hathaway, City of Oakland; Karin Graves, Contra Costa Clean Water Program; Frank Kennedy, Kennedy & Associates; Matt Fabry, San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Program; James O’Connell, City of Redwood City; Rinta Perkins, City of Santa Clara; Pam Boyle Rodriguez, City of Palo Alto; Kevin Cullen, Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District; Rob Carson, Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program; Jamison Crosby, Napa County Stormwater Management Program; Sarah Minick, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission; Oriana Hart, County of Sonoma; Angela Clapp, Port of Oakland; and Hardeep Takhar and Wilfung Martono, Caltrans.

Assistance provided by Mitch Avalon, Contra Costa County Public Works, was also greatly appreciated.
55 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report viii March 14, 2023 FINAL

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Please refer to Glossary after Report sections for definitions of key terms.

AB Assembly Bill
AGOL ArcGIS Online
Bay Area San Francisco Bay Area
BMP best management practice
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CBP3 Community-Based Public Private Partnership
CCCWP Contra Costa Clean Water Program
CE Categorical Exemption
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
County Contra Costa County
CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund
DBF Design-Build-Finance
DBFOM-AP Design-Build-Operate-Maintain-Availability Payment East County Permittees Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley, and the eastern portions of unincorporated Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District
EMC Event Mean Concentrations
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
Flood Control District Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Geosyntec Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.

GI green infrastructure
GSI green stormwater infrastructure
HMP hydromodification management
IGP Industrial General Permit
LID Low Impact Development
mg/L milligrams per liter
MOU Memoranda Of Understanding
MRP Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
56 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ix March 14, 2023 FINAL
ng/L nanograms per liter
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O&M Operations and Maintenance
PBCs performance-based contracts
PCBS polychlorinated biphenyls
POTWs publicly operated treatment works
Project Regional Compliance For A Sustainable Bay project RAA Reasonable Assurance Analysis
RAC regional alternative compliance
RFPs Request For Proposals
RWSM Regional Watershed Spreadsheet Model
SFEI San Francisco Estuary Institute
SFPUC San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
System Summary Report Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TMDLs Total Maximum Daily Loads
TSS total suspended solids
Water Board San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board WDRs Waste Discharge Requirements
WIFIA Water Infrastructure Finance And Innovation Act
WQIF Water Quality Improvement Fund
57 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-1 March 14, 2023 FINAL

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
E.1 Introduction
This Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report (System Summary Report) describes the efforts and outcomes of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Quality Improvement Fund (WQIF) grant-funded Regional Compliance for a Sustainable Bay project (Project). The purpose of this Project is to develop and pilot a regional alternative compliance (RAC) system (referred to as the Contra Costa County RAC System) to achieve the water quality objectives of the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (MRP; Order No. R2-2022-0018 and future related orders). The MRP incorporates performance standards for new development and redevelopment, as well as requiring control measures to implement the San Francisco Bay Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury. The Contra Costa County RAC System is intended to provide a flexible, cost-effective, and scientifically defensible compliance option for addressing the green stormwater infrastructure (GSI)1 and mercury/PCBs control requirements outlined in the MRP (Provisions C.3, C.11, and C.12, respectively). The Contra Costa County RAC System framework is intended to be easily adaptable by the other San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area) countywide programs.

E.2 Background Information and System Drivers
The key regulatory driver for regional alternative compliance in Contra Costa County (the County) is the MRP. County Permittees covered under the 2022 MRP include the cities of Clayton, Concord, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek, the towns of Danville and Moraga, unincorporated Contra Costa County, the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, along with the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley, and the eastern portions of unincorporated Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (referred to as the East County Permittees). The East County Permittees are not subject to the San Francisco Bay TMDLs for PCBs and mercury, though they are subject to the Delta Methylmercury TMDL.

The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) reissued the MRP on May 11, 2022 and it became effective on July 1, 2022 (called “MRP 3”). MRP 3 includes new requirements relating to GSI in Provision C.3 as well as revised requirements for meeting TMDL load reductions in Provisions C.11 and C.12. Provision C.3.e allows for Regulated Projects, which must implement low impact development/GSI facilities to treat stormwater runoff generated from the project, the option to treat stormwater runoff off-site. Provision C.3.e includes two options for alternative compliance, and the MRP 3 Fact Sheet2 (Attachment A, p A124), also states:
1 The 2015 MRP refers to GSI as “green infrastructure.” MRP 3 uses “green stormwater infrastructure.” 2 The Fact Sheet for the MRP 3 includes cited regulatory and legal references and additional explanatory information in support of the requirements of the MRP.
58 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-2 March 14, 2023 FINAL
“…the Permittees [may] submit new information for an alternative compliance program for exchanges of impervious surface treatment credits at the regional, county, and/or municipal level…”
Consistent with the above, this RAC System Summary Report will be submitted to the Water Board to seek approval of the Contra Costa County RAC System (Contra Costa County RAC System) as another alternative compliance option under MRP Provision C.3.e.

The following key objectives for the Contra Costa County RAC System were developed with input from the Project Steering Committee (comprised of municipal representatives guiding development of the Contra Costa County RAC System) and Advisory Committee (composed of advisory stakeholders that have an interest in future alternative compliance projects):

1. Flexible compliance with the MRP, particularly Provision C.3.b (Regulated Projects), using the Alternative Compliance Provision C.3.e, but potentially also Provision C.3.j (Green Infrastructure Planning and Implementation);

2. Cost efficiencies through implementation of larger stormwater capture projects that provide treatment at a lower cost per acre as well as lower maintenance and inspection costs;

3. Targeted implementation of facilities that can provide higher load reduction benefits toward compliance with the San Francisco Bay PCBs and mercury TMDLs to achieve reductions in MRP Provisions C.11 and C.12;

4. Implementation (i.e., funding, construction, and maintenance) of stormwater capture and water quality improvement projects that provide multiple benefits, including benefits ancillary to those relating to MRP Provisions C.3, C.11, and C.12; and

5. Flexibility to adapt the system to meet future water quality needs.

The proposed Contra Costa County RAC System is expected to qualify as a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliant document prepared in lieu of an environmental impact report (14 California Code of Regulations § 21080.5[b][2]). Water Board adoption of the Contra Costa RAC System and amendment to the MRP is therefore not anticipated to require additional CEQA review. Implementation of the Contra Costa County RAC System by individual Permittees will require adoption of implementing procedures, such as an ordinance, which is a discretionary action that meets the definition of a project under the CEQA. Because the Contra Costa County RAC System will provide a net environmental benefit for development projects, adoption of an ordinance to implement the RAC System is expected to meet the criteria for a CEQA Categorical Exemption. To address project-specific requirements for CEQA mitigation, the Contra Costa County RAC System includes a certification system that would provide substantial evidence that the mitigation is not deferred, is enforceable, is proportional to the impact being addressed, and have a clear nexus to the impact. Projects implemented as part of the RAC System would be subject to CEQA review, which would need to be completed prior to construction.
59 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-3 March 14, 2023 FINAL
E.3 Proposed Contra Costa County RAC System Overview
The proposed Contra Costa County RAC System combines elements from in-lieu payment and (preliminarily) pay-for-performance/Community-Based Public Private Partnership (CBP3) programs. In accordance with MRP Provision C.3.e, participation in the Contra Costa County RAC System would provide Permittees and Regulated Project developers alternative compliance to MRP Provision C.3.b and benefits relating to Provisions C.11 (Mercury controls), C.12 (PCBs Controls), and, as opportunities arise, C.10 (Trash Load Reduction). The Contra Costa County RAC System is intended to be primarily established under MRP 3 Provision C.3.e. These RAC System documents are submitted to the Water Board for a permit amendment, an option identified in the MRP 3 Fact Sheet, and/or confirmation that they are consistent with current MRP 3 C.3.e language. If approved by the Water Board, the Contra Costa County RAC System would be formally recognized under or as compliant with MRP 3 Provision C.3.e.

The Contra Costa County RAC System creates an alternative pathway for C.3.b Regulated Projects to achieve compliance in accordance with MRP Section C.3.e. Instead of constructing Low Impact Development (LID)/GSI facilities on-site, the Regulated Project (i.e., RAC System “buyer”) would make a compliance purchase that would cover capital costs for “Off-Site GSI Projects” that achieve C.3 compliance, and pay an annual ongoing Operations and Maintenance (O&M) fee for the long-term maintenance of the Off-Site GSI Projects. The O&M fee would be levied on the Regulated Project’s onsite parcel. Although the Contra Costa County RAC System has been designed to achieve alternative compliance for Regulated Projects, Permittees seeking purchase of GSI retrofits could also participate as RAC System buyers.

The collected compliance purchase payments (i.e., for capital costs) would be pooled to fund Off-Site GSI Projects located on public or private land in urban areas within Contra Costa County that are certified and maintained through the Contra Costa County RAC System.

Collected O&M fees would fund Off-Site GSI Project maintenance. Implementation of the Contra Costa County RAC System is expected to produce TMDL pollutant load reduction benefits through these Off-Site GSI Projects, which are anticipated to be primarily located in older urban and industrial areas demonstrated to have higher levels of PCBs (San Francisco Estuary Institute [SFEI], 2018; Contra Costa Clean Water Program [CCCWP], 2020). The proposed Contra Costa County RAC System is expected to provide:
• Flexible compliance for Permittees and Regulated Project owners; • Cost savings through economies of scale, realized through implementation of larger regional Off-Site GSI Projects as well as potential cost savings through pay-forperformance or CBP3 contracting mechanisms rather than traditional procurement; and • Additional water quality and environmental benefits and related TMDL compliance benefits through retrofit of untreated older urban and industrial areas with higher pollutant loading, in addition to the equivalent or increased water quality benefit requirement for Regulated Projects. Due to past development patterns in Contra Costa County, state-identified “Disadvantaged Communities” (DACs) generally overlap with older urban and industrial areas; therefore, retrofits in these areas could provide additional environmental justice benefits.
60 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-4 March 14, 2023 FINAL
The Contra Costa County RAC System would be implemented in multiple phases:

1. Phase 1, Initial Pilot Exchanges, occurring concurrently with this Project. This phase entails piloting the RAC System through one or two exchanges and will result in reporting any issues and/or adjustments needed to streamline the System.

2. Phase 2 is anticipated to be a five-year initial roll-out of the RAC System. The objective of Phase 2 is wider acceptance and implementation of the RAC System across Contra Costa County. This phase may include additional studies, agreements, and mechanisms for contracting within Contra Costa County.

3. Phase 3 and beyond would begin after Phase 2 lessons learned have been addressed through RAC System amendments. In this phase, the RAC System would be established and fully operating, with adaptive management procedures in place.

The Contra Costa County RAC System would be primarily administered by the CCCWP, with additional aspects managed by County Permittees and certain fiduciary elements managed by the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (Flood Control District). The CCCWP administrators are expected to include at least two specific entities:

1. The RAC Subcommittee, which is expected to be made up of volunteer Permittee stormwater program representatives that will make decisions regarding the Contra Costa County RAC System.

2. The RAC System Administrator, who will be responsible for management, financial administration, and reporting requirements for the Contra Costa County RAC System.

Other Contra Costa County RAC System administrators include:

1. County Permittees, which would manage Regulated Project applicants and compliance unit providers that construct Off-Site GSI Projects within their jurisdictional boundaries, facilitate exchanges, and facilitate and/or perform Off-Site GSI Project implementation, certification, O&M, and verification, and

2. The Flood Control District, which is anticipated to act as the fiduciary agent for the ongoing O&M fee.

E.4 Contra Costa County RAC System Compliance Unit and Control Measures
For the purposes of this report, the Contra Costa County RAC System metric is referred to as a “compliance unit.” This is a unit of exchange that can be purchased by buyers seeking alternative compliance with the MRP.

With the use of the compliance purchase approach modeled on the MRP Provision C.3.e in-lieu fee option, the Contra Costa County RAC System compliance unit can be defined using language in subdivision (2) of MRP Provision C.3.e.i as requiring three elements:
61 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-5 March 14, 2023 FINAL

1. Hydraulically-sized treatment in accordance with Provision C.3.d with LID/GSI treatment measures of an equivalent quantity of both stormwater runoff and pollutant loading, which is referred to as “Equivalent Acres Greened;”

2. A net environmental benefit; and

3. A proportional share of the O&M costs of the Off-Site GSI Project, which is referred to as an “Ongoing O&M fee.”
Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units generated by Off-Site GSI Projects are calculated based on the Runoff Generating Acres captured and treated by (i.e., tributary to) the Off-Site GSI Projects. Runoff Generating Acres are defined as directly connected impervious areas and 10% of directly connected pervious areas. Each Equivalent Acre Greened compliance unit will have associated compliance unit attributes for rainfall zone and land use (or land use mix), along with impervious area, based on the drainage area(s) of the Off-Site GSI Project.

Allowable treatment types for Off-Site GSI Projects are the systems considered “LID” per the MRP and allowable in in the Contra Costa County Stormwater C.3 Guidebook 7th Edition (CCCWP, 2017), namely bioretention facilities, infiltration facilities, and stormwater capture and use.

For Regulated Projects requiring demonstration of equivalent volume and pollutant loading capture, the required Equivalent Acres Greened to be purchased are calculated as the Runoff Generating Acres for which the owner is seeking alternative compliance, multiplied by a Rainfall Ratio and a Pollutant Ratio. For non-Regulated project buyers (e.g., Permittees seeking Equivalent Acres Greened to meet GSI retrofit needs), the equivalency demonstration is not required and the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units for purchase are calculated based on the Runoff Generating Acres (or impervious acres) the buyer wishes to purchase.

When Regulated Projects choose to use the Contra Costa County RAC System alternative compliance approach, a net environmental benefit will be provided through a “NEB Ratio” applied to the compliance purchase. The capital compliance purchase is calculated as follows:

𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 = (𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 × 𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅) × 𝐶𝐶 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 + 𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴 Where:

Equivalent Acres Greened = Required compliance units for equivalency (for Regulated Projects) or desired for purchase (for non-Regulated project buyers)
NEB Ratio = 1.1 for Regulated Projects and 1.0 for non-Regulated Project purchases.

CostEAG = Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost
PaymentAdministrative = Administrative payment
Discounts may be applied to the NEB Ratio for certain exchanges that provide an increased net environmental benefit through location or project features. 62 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-6 March 14, 2023 FINAL
E.5 System Requirements
Eligible Contra Costa County RAC System buyers are primarily expected to include private and public entity Regulated Project owners/developers seeking compliance with MRP Provisions C.3.c (LID). Contra Costa County RAC System buyers could also include Permittees seeking a means to purchase GSI retrofit acres for C.3.j. Other NPDES-regulated entities could be included as Contra Costa County RAC System buyer participants if opportunities arise as part of Phase 2, or during Phase 3 of the System.

Off-Site GSI Projects would be constructed to generate Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units for sale to the buyers. Off-Site GSI Projects are anticipated to be implemented in multiple phases: (1) design, (2) preliminary approval of appropriate sizing and design to generate compliance units available for exchange (optional), (3) construction, (4) certification, and (5) compliance unit calculation and confirmation. Any public or private entity that can operate within the constraints of the Contra Costa County RAC System and take actions that result in a demonstrable generation of Equivalent Acres Greened may participate in the implementation of Off-Site GSI Projects as compliance unit providers.

The design, implementation, and quantification of benefits3 of Off-Site GSI Projects must be certified upon project completion by the jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located.

The Off-Site GSI Project certification process is proposed to follow current Countywide processes, which are consistent with MRP requirements. In certain cases, Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units may be sold up to three years in advance Off-Site GSI Project construction as allowed by the MRP. Once the compliance units generated by an Off-Site GSI Project are approved or certified, they will be available within the Contra Costa County RAC System for exchange, and a buyer can purchase them.

Ongoing O&M of constructed Off-Site GSI Projects is expected to be managed and performed either by the jurisdiction (e.g., City or unincorporated County) in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located or by a contracted compliance unit provider as part of a pay-for-performance or CBP3 process. Ongoing O&M verification of the Off-Site GSI Project’s performance, including required site inspections, will also be conducted by the jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located. The Off-Site GSI Project verification process is consistent with current Countywide processes, which follows current MRP requirements.

E.6 Compliance Purchase and O&M Assessment Cost Bases
The Contra Costa County RAC System will be primarily funded on an ongoing basis through compliance purchases. While some “Equivalent Acres Greened” compliance units may be exchanged in advance of Off-Site GSI Project construction, allowing for advance funding, this would only be allowed when there is high certainty that the Off-Site GSI Project would be constructed. Given uncertainty around implementation timelines and the potential for Off-Site GSI Projects to change for a variety of reasons, however, most Off-Site GSI Projects would likely need to be funded or financed upfront to avoid compliance unit risks in the RAC System. 3 It is expected that preliminary quantification of benefits (including Equivalent Acres Greened compliance metrics generated) would occur as part of preliminary review processes and would be confirmed through certification. 63 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-7 March 14, 2023 FINAL
A source of upfront funding or financing will be needed to allow for compliance unit generating Off-Site GSI Projects to be implemented.

Compliance purchases made by buyers are calculated using a unit cost for Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units and an administrative payment. It is assumed that the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost (CostEAG) would be the same for all Contra Costa County RAC System buyers and would represent the average cost to generate an Equivalent Acre Greened compliance unit from Off-Site GSI Projects implemented through the Contra Costa County RAC System. The Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost would be revisited and potentially adjusted on a regular basis.

Administrative payments would be developed through fee studies when fee schedules are updated by Permittees and the CCCWP and would cover all staff and/or consultant hours needed to perform the administrative functions. The payment amounts are anticipated to be informed by findings of Phase 1 of the Contra Costa County RAC System.

Participating buyers would voluntarily agree to pay an annual ongoing O&M fee per Equivalent Acres Greened compliance unit at a fixed rate with escalation for inflation. The ongoing O&M fee would cover O&M tasks along with the Flood Control District’s administrative costs for maintaining the O&M needs of the Contra Costa County RAC System. The annual ongoing O&M fee would be captured through the property tax associated with the Regulated Project parcel.

E.7 Risk and Uncertainty Management
Identified sources of uncertainty for the Contra Costa County RAC System include: the compliance unit equivalency, through variability of precipitation, pollutant concentration, control measure effectiveness and performance; the costs of constructing and maintaining Off-Site GSI Projects; and market demand for purchasing Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units.

The Contra Costa County RAC System utilizes several mechanisms to manage identified risk and uncertainty that may affect Permittees, compliance unit providers, and environmental outcomes. The Contra Costa County RAC System includes factors in the compliance purchase calculation to provide equivalency, including a rainfall equivalency factor and a pollutant loading equivalency factor. While treatment through control measures could be expected to be variable, any variability in the outcomes of the treatment control measures used for Off-Site GSI Projects is expected to occur at the same rate as those used for on-site Regulated Project treatment. Off-Site GSI certification and ongoing verification processes are intended to provide some certainty that the facility is designed and installed consistent with RAC System requirements and is performing correctly on an ongoing basis.

Off-Site GSI Project construction and maintenance costs are used to set compliance purchase prices and ongoing O&M fees. As these costs can vary widely and change from year to year, the RAC System would average Off-Site GSI Project implementation costs across the RAC System to mitigate design and construction cost variability and allow equitable sale of compliance units.

Additionally, increases in Equivalent Acre Greened unit costs would be allowed on an ongoing basis. Similarly, the RAC Administrator will conduct regular examination of the sufficiency of O&M fees and may increase these fees as needed to cover costs. 64 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-8 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Market demand is subject to many factors. The RAC System has been designed such that largerscale regional stormwater capture facilities could be implemented and generate compliance units for exchange. As larger scale facilities have been demonstrated to be more cost effective than smaller scale facilities, it is expected that RAC System participants would realize cost savings for their compliance needs. Compliance cost savings are likely to encourage demand.

E.8 Adaptive Management
Although Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System has a defined scope for its participants, compliance units, and jurisdiction, the RAC System is envisioned to provide a framework for entities across the San Francisco Bay area to meet water quality goals while generating economic opportunities. Key considerations for scaling up the Contra Costa County RAC System would be identified during regular RAC System evaluation.

It is anticipated that the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee and System Administrator would regularly review, approve, and, if needed, revise aspects of the Contra Costa County RAC System.

Preliminarily, it is expected that minor programmatic changes to the Contra Costa County RAC System would be updated in internal RAC System Documents but would not require policy related changes. However, any changes to the RAC System that could affect water quality outcomes would require updates to permit language during the normal permit reissuance processes or an amendment to the MRP.

Adaptive management of the implementation of the Off-Site GSI Projects would be required at both the project level and programmatically as more Projects are constructed. At the programmatic level, the Contra Costa County RAC System Fund may be evaluated regularly by the CCCWP RAC System Administrator to address issues including, but not limited to, Contra Costa County RAC System costs exceeding compliance purchase revenue. The Contra Costa County RAC System must include a process to regularly evaluate the sufficiency of the compliance purchase amount—particularly the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost and the administrative payment—and to adjust the compliance purchase amounts as needed.

E.9 Overview of Contra Costa County RAC System Tracking Tool Tracking of Off-Site GSI Projects, including certification, Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units generated, compliance units exchanged, and ongoing verification of Off-Site GSI Projects will be tracked using the Contra Costa County RAC System Tracking Tool. Regulated Project participants will also be tracked in the County’s current ArcGIS Online (AGOL) stormwater tracking tool, which is used for all C.3 projects.

A RAC System Tracking Tool is being developed for the Contra Costa County RAC System by the SFEI. The RAC System Tracking Tool will include a comprehensive database to track components of the RAC System and relate RAC System components to existing tracking tools.

The components tracked will include:
• Information about Off-Site GSI Projects, including certification, verification, and compliance unit tracking. Project drainage area size and characteristics would also be tracked.
65 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-9 March 14, 2023 FINAL
• Regulated Project information from the County’s existing AGOL database. Project drainage area size and characteristics would also be tracked. • Exchange Information, including compliance units exchanged and compliance purchase amounts.
• O&M fee tracking, potentially linked to Flood Control District tracking systems.

The System Tracking Tool will include an accounting system that provides tracking of generated compliance units, compliance purchase amounts, and whether and when payments were made.

Reporting will be completed by the System Administrator in accordance with the requirements of the Water Board and MRP 3. Information regarding implemented Off-Site GSI Projects, certification, verification, exchanges, and ongoing O&M will be readily available in the System Tracking Tool. It is anticipated that this data would be extracted for annual reports using a defined process based on established reporting requirements.

E.10 Contra Costa County RAC System Template Documents
The Contra Costa County RAC System templates and forms were designed to build on existing processes, forms, and tracking systems where possible. The CCCWP has developed several standard templates and forms for Regulated Project design review, construction inspection, and O&M verification that have been incorporated into the documents required for RAC System certification, verification, and tracking.

The Contra Costa County RAC System templates/forms document all aspects of the RAC System, including:
• The Regulated Project’s use of the alternative (off-site) compliance option; • The Off-Site GSI Project, including:
 Facility attributes;
 Design review, construction inspection, and certification;  Ongoing O&M and O&M verification;
• Exchange details, including total compliance units and equivalency; and • Necessary agreements and/or resolutions among participants in the System.

E.11 Contra Costa County RAC System Next Steps
This RAC System Summary Report describes the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System structure that is envisioned to be implemented during Phase 2 (i.e., initial System roll-out).

Following completion of this RAC System Summary Report and prior to initiating Phase 2, one to two Phase 1 pilot exchanges will be conducted to test key components of the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System structure. Any lessons learned during the Phase 1 pilot exchanges will be integrated into the Final Program Documents used to guide Phase 2, anticipated to begin in 2023. Phase 2 will be launched after submittal of a formal package to include or approve the RAC System as an option under Provision C.3.e.
66 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report ES-10 March 14, 2023 FINAL
It is envisioned that Phase 2 will include required studies, approvals, and agreements and will result in RAC System exchanges by 2026. After the Phase 2 establishment period and implementation of required RAC System adjustments and amendments, the RAC System will shift into Phase 3, during which the RAC System will be fully operational. Based on the anticipated schedule, the Contra Costa County RAC System will be in Phase 3, fully established and operational, by 2029 to 2030.
67 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 1 March 14, 2023 FINAL

1. INTRODUCTION
This Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report (System Summary Report) describes the efforts and outcomes of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Quality Improvement Fund (WQIF) grant-funded Regional Compliance for a Sustainable Bay project (Project). The purpose of this Project is to develop and pilot a regional alterative compliance (RAC) system (referred to as the Contra Costa County RAC System) to achieve the water quality objectives of the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (MRP; Order No. R2-2018-0022 and future related orders). The MRP incorporates performance standards for new development and redevelopment, as well as requiring control measures to implement the San Francisco Bay Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury. The Contra Costa County RAC System is intended to provide a flexible, cost-effective, and scientifically defensible compliance option for addressing the green stormwater infrastructure4 (GSI) and mercury/PCBs control requirements outlined in the MRP (Provisions C.3, C.11, and C.12, respectively). The Contra Costa County RAC System framework is intended to be easily adaptable by the other San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area) countywide programs.

This RAC System Summary Report has been developed through technical and legal analyses and discussions with technical, regulatory, legal, and stakeholder advisors and a Permittee steering committee. The Steering Committee and the Consultant Team comprise the Project Team.

Project advisory committees engaged in the development of this Summary Report include:
• Steering Committee—The Steering Committee is comprised of representatives from the Cities of San Pablo, Walnut Creek, and Richmond, and Contra Costa County, who are guiding development of the Contra Costa County RAC System. • Advisory Committee—The Advisory Committee is comprised of advisory stakeholders that have an interest in (regional) alternative compliance projects. The Advisory Committee includes representatives from Alameda County, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, Solano County (Fairfield-Suisun and Vallejo), Marin County, Sonoma County, and Napa County stormwater programs, along with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Port of Oakland, and San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) stormwater staff.
• Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)—The TAC is comprised of technical, regulatory, and legal experts that advise on specific issues or questions that arise as part of the Project.
4 Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) is infrastructure that uses vegetation, soils, and natural processes to manage water and create healthier urban environments. At the scale of a city or county, GSI refers to the patchwork of natural areas that provides habitat, localized flood protection, cleaner air, and cleaner water. At the scale of a neighborhood or site, GSI refers to stormwater management systems that mimic nature by capturing and storing water. When used for Regulated Project compliance under MRP Provision C.3, GSI must be engineered and sized to meet permit specifications.
68 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 2 March 14, 2023 FINAL
This RAC System Summary Report describes the key Contra Costa County RAC System drivers and objectives, the proposed RAC System approach and rationale, and key definitions and considerations for RAC System components. This Summary Report includes the following sections:
• Section 2 describes Contra Costa County RAC System drivers and regulatory background.
• Section 3 provides an overview of the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System, including the rationale for the alternative compliance approach, System components, and administrative roles.
• Section 4 includes a description of the Contra Costa County RAC System metric and allowable control measures.
• Section 5 provides details regarding Contra Costa County RAC System requirements, including eligibility rules and certification and verification processes. • Section 6 describes the proposed compliance purchase cost setting approach. • Section 7 discusses Contra Costa County RAC System risk and uncertainty considerations and management.
• Section 8 introduces Contra Costa County RAC System adaptive management. • Section 9 provides an overview of the Contra Costa County RAC System Tracking Tool. • Section 10 describes key Contra Costa County RAC System templates. 69 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 3 March 14, 2023 FINAL

2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

2.1 RAC System Drivers
The key regulatory driver for regional alternative compliance in Contra Costa County (the County) is the MRP. The MRP and other Contra Costa County RAC System drivers are described in the following sections.

2.1.1 Municipal Regional Permit
NPDES permit requirements associated with Phase I municipal stormwater programs and Permittees in the Bay Area are included in the MRP, which was issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) to 76 entities, including cities, counties, and flood control districts, in 2009 (MRP 1.0), reissued in 2015 (MRP 2.0), revised in 2019, and most recently reissued in 2022 (MRP 3). Contra Costa County Permittees covered under the 2022 MRP reissuance include the cities of Clayton, Concord, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek, the towns of Danville and Moraga, unincorporated Contra Costa County, the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (Flood Control District), and the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley. The 2019 MRP revision added the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley, and the eastern portions of unincorporated Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (referred to as “the East County Permittees”). The East County Permittees are located within the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region 5) and were previously covered under a separate Joint Municipal NPDES Permit titled “East Contra Costa County Municipal NPDES Permit.” See Figure 1 for the County, Permittee, and Regional Board jurisdictional boundaries. The East County Permittees are not subject to the San Francisco Bay TMDLs for PCBs and mercury, though they are subject to the Delta Methylmercury TMDL.

MRP Provision C.3 requires specifies categories of new development and redevelopment projects (i.e., Regulated Projects) that must include low impact development (LID) source control, site design, on-site stormwater treatment (Provisions C.3.c-d), and hydromodification management measures (Provision C.3.g). Provision C.3 also specifies the certification and operation and maintenance (O&M) requirements for these measures (Provision C.3.f and C.3.h).

Allowable LID stormwater treatment measures (also known as green infrastructure [GI] or GSI) for Regulated Projects are stormwater treatment facilities that capture stormwater for harvesting and use, infiltration, evapotranspiration, and/or biotreatment, and must be sized per numeric sizing criteria specified in the MRP. MRP Provision C.3.e allows Regulated Projects the option to treat stormwater runoff off-site. Provision C.3.e includes two options for alternative compliance:
“The Permittees may allow a Regulated Project to provide alternative compliance with Provision C.3.b in accordance with one of the two options listed below:
(1) Option 1: LID Treatment at an Offsite Location
70 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 4 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Treat a portion (this portion may be zero; Permittees should treat as much onsite as possible) of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures onsite or with LID treatment measures at a joint stormwater treatment facility and treat the remaining portion of the Provision C.3.d runoff with LID treatment measures at an Offsite Project5 in the same watershed6. The offsite LID treatment measures must provide hydraulically-sized treatment (in accordance with Provisions C.3.d and C.3.g, as appropriate) of an equivalent quantity of both stormwater runoff and pollutant loading and achieve a net environmental benefit.
(2) Option 2: Payment of In-Lieu Fees
Treat a portion (this portion may be zero; Permittees should treat as much onsite as possible) of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures onsite or with LID treatment measures at a joint stormwater treatment facility and pay equivalent in-lieu fees7 to treat the remaining portion of the Provision C.3.d runoff (and comply with Provision C.3.g, as appropriate) with LID treatment measures at a Regional Project8 or Offsite Project. The Regional Project must achieve a net environmental benefit, through a net increase in impervious surface treated, and/or a net reduction in flow and/or pollutant load.
(3) For the alternative compliance options described in Provision C.3.e.i.(1) and (2) above (Options 1 and 2), all Offsite Projects and Regional Projects must be completed within three years after the end of construction of the Regulated Project. However, the timeline for completion of an Offsite Project or Regional Project may be extended, up to five years after the completion of the Regulated Project, with prior Executive Officer approval.”
The MRP 3 Attachment A, Fact Sheet9 (p A-124), also states:
5 MRP 3 includes the following definition: “Offsite Project – A stormwater treatment facility that discharges into the same watershed as the Regulated Project and is located at a different public or private parcel or property (e.g., right-of-way) from the Regulated Project.” 6 “The same watershed” is assumed for the purposes of this System Summary Report to be the San Francisco Bay watershed.
7 MRP 3 includes the following definition: “In-lieu fees – Monetary amount necessary to provide both hydraulically-sized treatment (in accordance with Provision C.3.d) with LID treatment measures of an equivalent quantity of stormwater runoff and pollutant loading, and a proportional share of the operation and maintenance costs of the Offsite Project or Regional Project.” 8 MRP 3 includes the following definition: “Regional Project – A regional or municipal stormwater treatment facility that captures runoff from a drainage area larger than the parcel on which it is located and discharges into the same watershed as the Regulated Project.” 9 The MRP 3 Fact Sheet includes cited regulatory and legal references and additional explanatory information in support of the requirements of the MRP.
71 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 5 March 14, 2023 FINAL
“During the Permit term, the Permittees may submit new information for an alternative compliance program for exchanges of impervious surface treatment credits at the regional, county, and/or municipal level, resulting in offsite treatment or payment for equivalent offsite compliance for 100 percent of the required Provision C.3.c-d stormwater runoff (and Provision C.3.g, as appropriate).

Any such program should include at least the following: a clear organizational framework; demonstration of the treatment of an equivalent quantity of both stormwater runoff and pollutant loading (e.g., through the equivalent or net increase in impervious surface treated, and the equivalent or net reduction in flow and/or pollutant load, but not necessarily in the same watershed) and the achievement of net environmental benefit; an accounting and reporting system; a process for collection and timely use of funds; compliance with Provisions C.3.c-d and C.3.f-h; program oversight by an entity or entities; and expectations for timing and location. If or when such a program proposal is submitted, the Water Board will consider the new information and may consider amending the Permit to include a third option in Provision C.3.e.i that formally recognizes and allows the program specified in the proposal. This is in part a response to the City of San Pablo-led U.S. EPA Water Quality Improvement Fund (WQIF)-funded Regional Compliance for a Sustainable Bay project, which is investigating such a program that would facilitate alternative compliance exchanges between Permittees within Contra Costa County, but may be of interest in other counties and regionally.”
Consistent with the above, this RAC System Summary Report is submitted to the Water Board as part of a formal process seeking approval of the Contra Costa County RAC System as another alternative compliance option under Provision C.3.e.

The program components that fulfill the required elements listed in the MRP 3 Fact Sheet are highlighted throughout this RAC System Summary Report and are summarized in Table 1. 72 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 6 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Table 1: Summary of Proposed Program Submittal Requirements MRP 3 Fact Sheet Requirement for Proposed Program Submittal Location(s) in System Summary Report
A clear organizational framework • Section 3.1 and 3.3
Demonstration of the treatment of an equivalent quantity of both stormwater runoff and pollutant loading (e.g., through the equivalent or net increase in impervious surface treated, and the equivalent or net reduction in flow and/or pollutant load, but not necessarily in the same watershed) and the achievement of net environmental benefit • Section 4
An accounting and reporting system
• Section 5.6
• Section 5.7
• Section 9
A process for collection and timely use of funds
• Section 5.4
• Section 6.3
• Section 6.5
Compliance with Provisions C.3.c-d and C.3.f-h
• Section 3.2.4
• Section 4.2
• Section 5.6
• Section 5.7
Program oversight by an entity or entities
• Section 3.4
• Section 8.2
• Section 8.3
Expectations for timing and location • Section 3.3
• Section 11
In addition to LID/GSI requirements for Regulated Projects, MRP 3 includes specific numeric goals for acres to be retrofit with GSI for each Permittee. Permittees may meet their total individual retrofit requirements on a Countywide basis, although each Permittee must implement a GSI project treating no less than 0.2 acres of impervious surface. The Countywide GSI retrofit requirement is 57.32 acres. Non-Regulated projects and green infrastructure beyond the minimum required by Provision C.3.d for a Regulated Project may be counted towards the numeric GSI retrofit requirements. If a non-Regulated Project or Regulated Project (beyond the minimum required by Provision C.3.d) GSI/LID is later used as part of an Alternative Compliance exchange to offset the treatment required by a Regulated Project, then it may no longer be counted towards the Provision C.3.j.GSI retrofit requirements.

MRP Provisions C.11 and C.12 require implementation of control programs for mercury and PCBs, respectively, consistent with the San Francisco Bay mercury and PCBs TMDLs. The required control programs include load reduction assessment, source control measures, treatment control measures, measures to reduce risk to consumers of Bay Area fish, and reporting on all these measures. Challenges with cost-efficient compliance with Provisions C.11 and C.12 treatment control requirements on an individual Permittee basis is another driver for the Contra Costa County RAC System, as described in Section 2.1.2.

The MRP 3 Provisions C.11.c and C.12.c require the Permittees to implement treatment control measures, diversion to wastewater treatment facilities, GSI associated with redevelopment, or 73 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 7 March 14, 2023 FINAL
other control measures to achieve mercury and PCBs load reductions. Contra Costa County Permittees must comply with this provision through implementation of control measures treating 664 acres of old industrial land use area (Countywide) using 70 percent efficient treatment control measures, or a larger area using less effective control measures.

The East County Permittees are not subject to the PCBs and mercury TMDLs, although they have been implementing PCBs and mercury control measures in collaboration with the Contra Costa County Permittees located within the Water Board Region 2 jurisdiction. MRP 3 Provision C.19 incorporates requirements for the East County Permittees related to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary Methylmercury TMDL. The East Contra Costa Methylmercury Control Measure Plan and Reasonable Assurance Analysis report describes a plan and schedule for reducing East County Permittee methylmercury loads (Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. [Geosyntec], 2022). The East County Permittees need to implement GSI projects and other control measures within the Marsh Creek watershed to make progress towards the Delta methylmercury TMDL waste load allocation.

In addition to Provisions C.3, C.11, C.12, and C.19 discussed above, the Contra Costa County RAC System could provide localized benefits relating to Provision C.10, Trash Load Reduction requirements, though these benefits would not be exchanged through the RAC System.

2.1.2 Additional System Drivers
Additional Contra Costa County RAC System drivers include the limited resources available to manage stormwater across the County and the high cost to achieve compliance with MRP requirements. The estimated costs for Permittees to comply with MRP 3 are significant. The estimated cost to treat the public GSI project area identified in the Contra Costa TMDL Control Measure Plan ranges from $915 million to $1.884 billion (Contra Costa Clean Water Program [CCCWP], 2020). The Permittees are faced with these compliance costs even while municipal stormwater program funding is typically inadequate to cover existing storm drain infrastructure maintenance. A system that could provide compliance cost savings and additional benefits would be helpful for Countywide stormwater water quality and infrastructure management.

In addition to limited financial resources, the PCBs TMDL presents unique challenges when considering compliance at an individual Permittee level. Although the Permittees are allocated a PCBs waste load by the TMDL on a population basis, according to monitoring and regional modeling conducted by the San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) and modeling conducted for the County Reasonable Assurance Analysis (RAA), the PCBs load is not distributed evenly across the County (Geosyntec, 2019; CCCWP, 2020). As a result, targeted management of PCBs is a more efficient and effective means of meeting compliance requirements, rather than investing in control measures based on jurisdictional population. Targeted management would entail Countywide investment of PCBs control measures in specific locations that achieve the highest load reductions. A regional alternative compliance approach (e.g., the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System) that can provide economies of scale while supporting targeted treatment in areas of higher PCBs loading would enable a more regionally efficient means of addressing the TMDL compliance targets.
74 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 8 March 14, 2023 FINAL

2.2 Contra Costa County RAC System Objectives
The following key objectives for the Contra Costa County RAC System were developed with input from the Steering Committee and Advisory Committee:

2. Cost efficiencies through implementation of larger stormwater capture projects that provide treatment at a lower cost per acre as well as lower maintenance and inspection costs;

5. Flexibility to adapt the system to meet future water quality needs.

2.3 Environmental Review Approach
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires state and local government agencies to inform decision makers and the public about potential environmental impacts of proposed projects, and to mitigate any significant environmental effects to the extent feasible. CEQA defines a “project” as an activity that: (1) is a discretionary action by a governmental agency, and (2) will either have a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect impact on the environment (Pub.

Res. Code, § 21065). This section discusses the approach to CEQA compliance for each of the following stages of the Contra Costa County RAC System:

1. Water Board approval of the Contra Costa County RAC System (i.e., through a permit amendment or letter recognizing the RAC System is consistent with current MRP Provision C.3.e).

2. Adoption of local ordinances or other regulatory mechanism that allows implementation of the Contra Costa County RAC System.

3. Using the Contra Costa County RAC System as CEQA mitigation for development projects.

4. Approval of projects that will generate “compliance units” for exchange under the Contra Costa County RAC System.

2.3.1 Water Board Approval of the Contra Costa County System In order to implement the Contra Costa County RAC System, the Water Board would need to amend the MRP to approve the Contra Costa County System as an alternative compliance option under Provision C.3.e. The Water Board amendment to the MRP would require compliance with 75 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 9 March 14, 2023 FINAL
CEQA. The proposed Contra Costa County RAC System could be used as a CEQA compliant document in lieu of an environmental impact report, which would satisfy Water Board CEQA compliance (14 California Code of Regulations § 21080.5[b][2]). Water Board adoption of the Contra Costa RAC System is therefore not anticipated to require additional CEQA review.

2.3.2 CEQA Considerations for Adoption of Local Ordinance Regulated development projects must comply with MRP Provision C.3 by implementing on-site mitigation (i.e., LID/GSI stormwater control measures) or approved off-site mitigation on a caseby-case basis. Implementation of the Contra Costa County RAC System would require adoption of implementing procedures by the MRP Permittees (i.e., the towns and cities within Contra Costa County, County Costa County, and the Flood Control District), such as an ordinance, that would allow use of the Contra Costa County RAC System for MRP compliance. The adoption of an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism to implement the Contra Costa County RAC System is a discretionary action that meets the definition of a project under CEQA because the activity is capable of causing a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
10 MRP Provision C.3.e specifically requires that alternative compliance for regulated projects “achieve a net environmental benefit.” The Contra Costa County RAC System has been designed to provide a net environmental benefit for development projects, as discussed further in Sections 3.3 and 4.3 of this report. Because the Contra Costa County RAC System by design would provide a net environmental benefit for development projects, adoption of an ordinance to implement the RAC System is expected to meet the criteria for a CEQA Categorical Exemption (CE). The following categorical exemptions may apply: Class 7 CE Actions Taken by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources or Class 8 CE Actions Taken by Regulatory Agencies for the Protection of the Environment.

2.3.3 CEQA Considerations for Mitigation
The Contra Costa County RAC System would allow for development of projects that would require mitigation in one jurisdiction, such as a municipality and projects that would generate credits and serve as mitigation in other jurisdictions. Where the Contra Costa County RAC System is applied as mitigation to address project impacts, the mitigation must meet the requirements of CEQA Guidelines 15126.4, which requires mitigation to be enforceable, 11 not
deferred,
12 roughly proportional to the impact, and have a clear nexus to the impact. To address these requirements for CEQA mitigation, the Contra Costa System, as defined herein, includes a 10 Union of Medical Marijuana Patients, Inc. v. City of San Diego, S238563, p. 32 11 Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally-binding instruments. In the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other public project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design. 12 The specific details of a mitigation measure, however, may be developed after project approval when it is impractical or infeasible to include those details during the project's environmental review, provided that the agency (1) commits itself to the mitigation, (2) adopts specific performance standards the mitigation will achieve, and (3) identifies the type(s) of potential action(s) that can feasibly achieve that performance standard and that will be considered, analyzed, and potentially incorporated in the mitigation measure. Compliance with a regulatory permit or other similar process may be identified as mitigation if compliance would result in implementation of measures that would be reasonably expected, based on substantial evidence in the record, to reduce the significant impact to the specified performance standards.
76 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 10 March 14, 2023 FINAL
certification system that would provide substantial evidence that the mitigation is not deferred, is enforceable, and is proportional to the impact being addressed. The Contra Costa County RAC System certification process incorporates these requirements by ensuring that the compliance unit-generating projects exist in order to avoid deferral of mitigation and provide equivalent (proportional) pollution reduction to offset the impact. The Contra Costa County RAC System design also includes adequate enforcement mechanisms to meet the requirements of CEQA and avoid the need for separate pollution reduction mitigation where the Contra Costa County RAC System is used.

2.3.4 CEQA Considerations for Off-Site Mitigation Projects that Generate Compliance Units
Projects that are implemented to generate compliance units (i.e., Off-Site GSI Projects) would be subject to CEQA review because the projects would have a physical environmental effect. The lead agency for review of the Off-Site GSI Projects would be the agency with jurisdiction over the project, based on its location or funding, and is typically the same agency responsible for approving the project. Where multiple agencies would be required to issue approvals for a project, the agency with the greatest responsibility for supervising or approving the project as a whole should be the lead agency (CEQA Guidelines Section 15051[b]). The lead agency is usually the agency with general governmental powers, such as a city or county, rather than a single-purpose agency, such as a water district. The CEQA review for Off-Site GSI Projects would need to be completed prior to Off-Site GSI Project construction and certification. 77 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 11 March 14, 2023 FINAL

3. PROPOSED CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM OVERVIEW
The clear organizational framework for the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System (as identified for proposed program submittal per MRP 3 Fact Sheet) is described in Section 3.1 –

3.3. Section 3.4 describes program oversight by administrative entities. Section 3.2.4. describes how the System may provide compliance with MRP Provision C.3.g.

3.1 Proposed Contra Costa County RAC System
The proposed Contra Costa County RAC System combines elements from in-lieu payment and (preliminarily) pay-for-performance/Community-Based Public Private Partnership (CBP3) programs. In accordance with MRP Provision C.3.e, participation in the Contra Costa County RAC System would provide Permittees and Regulated Project developers alternative compliance to MRP Provision C.3.b, and benefits relating to Provisions C.11 (Mercury controls), C.12 (PCBs Controls), and, as opportunities arise, C.10 (Trash Load Reduction). The proposed Contra Costa County RAC System is intended to be primarily established under MRP 3 Provision C.3.e, and RAC System documents are submitted to the Water Board as part of a permit amendment process, an option identified in the MRP 3 Fact Sheet, and/or confirmation that the RAC System is consistent with the current MRP 3 Provision C.3.e. If approved by the Water Board through the formal permit amendment process, the Contra Costa County RAC System would be formally recognized under MRP 3 Provision C.3.e.

The proposed RAC System approach was selected through input from the Steering Committee, the TAC, the Advisory Committee, and preliminary legal review, as described in Section 3.2.

The proposed Contra Costa County RAC System is illustrated in Figure 2. A Regulated Project typically proceeds with the treat on-site track (“A” in Figure 2) and includes planning review, construction of on-site LID/GSI facilities, certification of on-site facilities, and ongoing O&M by the Regulated Project owner. The Contra Costa County RAC System creates a second optional pathway for C.3 compliance for Regulated Projects (“B” in Figure 2). Instead of constructing LID/GSI facilities on-site, the Regulated Project owner would make a “compliance purchase” and agree to annual ongoing O&M fees levied on the Regulated Project parcel, for a specified number of “compliance units.”
The compliance purchase would cover capital costs for “Off-Site GSI Projects” that generate compliance units and are located on public or private land in urban areas within Contra Costa County. The collected funds from compliance purchases (i.e., to fund Off-Site GSI Project capital costs) would be pooled by the Contra Costa County RAC System, and would cover implementation and certification of Off-Site GSI Projects, along with RAC System administrative functions. The annual ongoing O&M fees would cover ongoing O&M and verification of Off-Site GSI Projects.

The Contra Costa County RAC System is expected to achieve TMDL load reduction benefits through the construction of Off-Site GSI Projects, which are anticipated to be primarily located in older urban and industrial areas known to have higher levels of PCBs (SFEI, 2018; CCCWP, 2020).

The proposed Contra Costa County RAC System is expected to provide:
78 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 12 March 14, 2023 FINAL
• Flexible compliance for Permittees and Regulated Project owners; • Cost savings through economies of scale realized through implementation of larger regional Off-Site GSI Projects as well as potential cost savings through using pay-forperformance or CBP3 contracting mechanisms rather than traditional procurement; and • Additional water quality and environmental benefits and related TMDL compliance benefits through retrofit of untreated older urban and industrial areas with higher pollutant loading and application of equivalent or increased water quality benefit requirements for Regulated Projects.

The Contra Costa County RAC System would be implemented in at least three phases:

1. Phase 1, Initial Pilot Exchanges, occurring concurrently with this Project. This phase entails piloting the RAC System through a small number (1-2) of compliance unit exchanges, and will result in reporting any issues and/or adjustments that are needed to streamline the System.

2. Phase 2 is anticipated to be a five-year initial roll-out of the RAC System. The objective of Phase 2 is the wider acceptance and implementation of the RAC System across Contra Costa County. This phase may include additional studies, agreements, and mechanisms for contracting within the County.

3.2 Rationale for Selection

3.2.1 Compliance Purchases
The Contra Costa County RAC System is envisioned to meet compliance needs for MRP Permittees and private developers subject to Provision C.3 development and redevelopment requirements. Offset crediting approaches, such as those documented in the Regional Alternative Compliance System Literature Review (City of San Pablo, 2020), were considered early in the Contra Costa County RAC System development. It was determined, however, that although offset crediting would be plausible for addressing GSI requirements and is allowed through MRP Provision C.3.e.i(1), a market-based approach would not be appropriate for addressing mercury and PCBs TMDL due to limited buyer demand for stand-alone load reduction metrics.

The Contra Costa County RAC System will operate with a “compliance purchase” approach. The compliance purchase approach was developed in the model of an in-lieu payment (i.e., fee) approach, currently allowed per MRP Provision C.3.e.i(2), and utilizes language from this option for program definitions13. Compliance purchases would be pooled to administer and fund the implementation of Off-Site GSI Projects to provide compliance with the LID/GSI requirements 13 Though language from C.3.e.i(2) is used, following successful completion of the proposed permit amendment process described, the Contra Costa County RAC System would be formally recognized as a separate option in MRP 3 Provision C.3.e.
79 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 13 March 14, 2023 FINAL
of Provision C.3 and provide a “net environmental benefit.” In the future, non-GSI projects addressing other benefits could be incorporated into the Contra Costa County RAC System as it continues to evolve and additional buyers are identified (Section 3.3.1).

The recommended compliance purchase approach, modeled from an in-lieu payment approach, was defined consistent with input from the Project technical advisors, Steering Committee, TAC, and the Advisory Committee, who voiced the need for the Contra Costa County RAC System to be simple and to provide a means for flexible compliance, increased multiple benefits, and cost efficiencies. The compliance purchase approach, and the resulting Off-Site GSI Projects, managed through the Contra Costa County RAC System, allows for a simplified process for certification, verification, and tracking. A pay-for-performance or CBP3 contracting approach could be utilized to incentivize cost-effective project implementation.

Per MRP Provision C.3.e, Off-Site (GSI) Projects may be completed within three years after the end of construction of the Regulated Project. The RAC System may allow for sale of Equivalent Acres Greened units up to three years in advance of completion of the Off-Site GSI Project if there is a high level of certainty that project will be installed and would address the water quality impact caused by the Regulated Project. For advance sale of compliance units, tracking will be implemented as part of the program to ensure that the compliance units meet all legal and CEQA requirements for mitigation.

3.2.2 Integration into Existing Compliance Programs
The launch and ongoing administration of water quality programs may require substantial resources for program costs and infrastructure. Technical advisors cautioned the Project Team early in the Contra Costa County RAC System development that these program costs have undermined the cost-saving objectives of several early water quality programs and that reducing program costs would be essential for the RAC System’s success. In response, the Contra Costa County RAC System has been developed in a manner that minimizes these program costs through integration with existing Permittee MRP C.3 LID/GSI compliance programs and existing administrative infrastructure and resources. This is expected to not only reduce program costs for the Contra Costa County RAC System, but would also reduce barriers to entry for Permittees familiar with the existing compliance programs and resources. The Contra Costa County RAC System is proposed to utilize existing staff and tools by aligning resource-intensive System processes, such as certification, verification, and tracking, with requirements in the existing MRP. See Sections 3.3.2.1, 5.6, and 5.7 for an overview of these processes.

3.2.3 Considerations for System Metric
For the purposes of this report, the Contra Costa County RAC System metric is referred to as a “compliance unit.” This is a unit of exchange that can be purchased by buyers seeking alternative compliance with the MRP (or, potentially, other NPDES permits). With the use of the compliance purchase approach modeled on the MRP Provision C.3.e in-lieu fee option, the Contra Costa County RAC System compliance unit can be defined using language in MRP Provision C.3.e.i and the MRP 3 Fact Sheet (Section 2.1) as requiring three elements:
80 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 14 March 14, 2023 FINAL

2. A net environmental benefit; and

3. A proportional share of the O&M costs of the Off-Site GSI Project, which is referred to as an “Ongoing O&M fee.”
In order to demonstrate equivalent or better treatment of runoff and pollutant loading, analyses were conducted to define ratios and RAC System rules that must be applied when “Equivalent Acres Greened” compliance units are purchased via a compliance purchase. The Contra Costa County RAC System ratios and rules are expected to result in implementation of GSI primarily in older urban and industrial areas that, for the most part, currently discharge untreated stormwater to receiving waters, and additionally to result in a net increase in impervious surface treated. Implementation of GSI in higher polluting areas has been demonstrated to result in overall improvements to water quality.

In addition to the Contra Costa County RAC System compliance unit stormwater runoff and pollutant loading equivalency demonstration, the Off-Site GSI Projects generating compliance units must be maintained on a regular basis. The Contra Costa County RAC System compliance unit is further described in Section 4 of this document.

3.2.4 Hydromodification Management
At this time, it is not expected that Regulated Projects subject to hydromodification management requirements (Provision C.3.g) would participate in the first phase of the Contra Costa County RAC System. See Figure 1 for a map of areas in the County where hydromodification management requirements apply for Regulated Projects that meet the acreage threshold (i.e., one acre impervious surface added or replaced). Provision C.3.g.ii (HM Standard) specifically requires:
“Stormwater discharges from HM Projects shall not cause an increase in the erosion potential of the receiving stream over the pre-project (existing) condition. Increases in runoff flow and volume shall be managed so that post- project runoff shall not exceed estimated pre-project rates and durations, where such increased flow and/or volume is likely to cause increased potential for erosion of creek beds and banks, silt pollutant generation, or other adverse impacts on beneficial uses due to increased erosive force.” Hydromodification management requirements focus specifically on limiting the impacts to the receiving stream of the Regulated Project. Therefore, any Off-Site GSI Project or other off-site project implemented to address hydromodification would need to be built within a constrained geographic area, such that it addresses impacts to the same receiving stream.

While there could be some unique situations where implementation of off-site hydromodification management measures could serve multiple Regulated Projects in an innovative fashion (e.g., where an in-stream measure could be used for a currently impacted and unstable channel, in partnership with a local non-profit), these situations are highly site specific. If these projects are 81 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 15 March 14, 2023 FINAL
constructed as part of the Contra Costa County RAC System, there may be a need for a projectspecific compliance purchase amount (i.e., capital cost) and ongoing O&M fee. Additionally, if water quality is not incorporated into the hydromodification management focused off-site project, a Regulated Project purchasing hydromodification management units would need to make a separate compliance purchase and pay an ongoing O&M fee for water quality compliance. The potential future hydromodification “track” is included in the Contra Costa County RAC System schematic diagram in Figure 3 to demonstrate how this track would integrate with the rest of the RAC System.

Alternatively, Regulated Projects subject to hydromodification management requirements that are meeting Provision C.3.g could participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System solely for water quality compliance needs. For example, the Regulated Project would install hydromodification management control measures on-site (i.e., that do not also comply with the GSI/LID and sizing requirements of MRP Provisions C.3.c and C.3.d) and purchase RAC System compliance units for water quality.

3.3 Contra Costa County RAC System Components
The main components of the Contra Costa County RAC System are described in this section.

The hydromodification track, introduced in Figure 3 as a potential future addition to the Contra Costa County RAC System, is not included in this section and would be developed in System Phase 3 or later.

3.3.1 RAC System “Buyers”
Contra Costa County RAC System “buyers” are primarily expected to include Regulated Project owners/developers located within Contra Costa County seeking compliance with MRP Provisions C.3.c-d, f, and h (LID/GSI). Contra Costa County RAC System buyers could also include Permittees seeking Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units for Regulated Projects or to meet GSI retrofit acres required by MRP 3, or other non-Regulated project buyers located within Contra Costa County.

While Off-Site GSI Projects are expected to be located such that they provide enhanced TMDL load reduction benefits (as compared to on-site stormwater treatment), because there are other control measures for TMDL load reductions that may cost less, there is not expected to be substantial demand for Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units purchased solely for TMDL compliance purposes. Consequently, other entities subject to the TMDLs, such as publicly operated treatment works (POTWs) or industrial facilities, are also not expected to be interested in purchasing the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units solely to meet their TMDL compliance requirements.

The amount of future development that would ultimately participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System is difficult to predict, not least because the level of participation is dependent on the implementation and roll-out of the RAC System. Because uncertain demand can impede a program’s launch and success, one approach to provide Equivalent Acres Greened compliance unit demand in the early implementation phase is to launch the Contra Costa County RAC System with a Programmatic Demand (i.e., a minimum amount of compliance units guaranteed to be purchased, and recommended to be purchased by Permittees during the RAC System Phase 82 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 16 March 14, 2023 FINAL
2). Additional information regarding this potential approach, along with development projection information, is provided in Section 6.2. There is potential for the Contra Costa County RAC System to be expanded to other interested buyers in the future (Figure 4). See Section 5.2 for additional details regarding other potential future buyers.

3.3.2 Off-Site GSI Projects
Off-Site GSI Projects would be constructed and certified within Contra Costa County to generate Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units for sale to the RAC System buyers. See Section

4.2.1 for details regarding allowable control measures for Off-Site GSI Projects. Off-Site GSI Projects are expected to be implemented through public and/or private “compliance unit providers” or “sellers.” The RAC System would include a pre-screening application process to allow for preliminary approval of compliance units generated, which compliance unit providers may complete for this assurance prior to conducting design, construction, and certification of Off-Site GSI Projects. Unit providers who do not complete the pre-screening application process would still be eligible to request certification of compliance units generated from Off-Site GSI Projects they have constructed, though they run the risk that the constructed project has not addressed an issue required for certification that could have been identified through prescreening.

Following preliminary review (if the pre-screening application process is conducted), and approval from the private property owner (if located on private land), Off-Site GSI Projects would undergo typical construction approval processes by the jurisdiction in which the proposed facility is to be located, including required CEQA review and plan review, and begin construction. The jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located would certify the project following installation, and the compliance units generated would be available for exchange through the RAC System. See additional details for certification in Section 5.2.

In some cases, compliance units may be exchanged prior to full construction of the Off-Site GSI Project. The RAC System Administrator would likely only allow this when there is high certainty that the Off-Site GSI Project would be implemented, for example, the Project has been fully designed, approved, has completed the pre-screening process, and is funded or has a clear plan for funding. In these instances, compliance units would be exchanged up to three years in advance and would be fully certified after the Off-Site GSI Project has been constructed.

3.3.2.1 Off-Site GSI Project Certification, Verification, and Tracking The jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located would certify the Off-Site GSI Project and quantification of benefits14 to make the compliance units available within the Contra Costa County RAC System for exchange. In some cases, compliance units could be available for exchange in advance of Off-Site GSI Project implementation, after review and approval of the design and quantification of benefits. If compliance units are available in advance of Off-Site GSI Project certification, the same jurisdiction would be responsible for certifying implementation upon project completion. The Off-Site GSI Project certification process is 14 It is expected that preliminary quantification of benefits (including Equivalent Acres Greened compliance metrics generated) would occur as part of preliminary review processes and would be confirmed through certification. 83 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 17 March 14, 2023 FINAL
proposed to follow current County processes, which are consistent with MRP requirements, and is described in further detail in Section 5.4 and Attachment B.

The jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located would conduct ongoing O&M verification of the Off-Site GSI Project’s performance, including required site inspections. The Off-Site GSI Project verification process has also been developed to be consistent with current County processes, which are compliant with MRP requirements, and is described in Section 5.5.

Tracking of Off-Site GSI Projects is expected to primarily be conducted by the jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located. Information tracked would include certification, total Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units generated, compliance units exchanged, and ongoing verification of Off-Site GSI Projects and their associated compliance units. The Contra Costa County RAC System Tracking Tool is described in Section 9 and Appendix A. The RAC System Tracking Tool would also be used to track documentation from the certification and verification processes, as well as provide transparency and accountability to the public.

Regulated Project participants would also be tracked in the County’s current ArcGIS Online (AGOL) tracking tool, as described in Sections 5.5 and 5.6.

3.3.2.2 Ongoing Off-Site GSI Project Operation and Maintenance Ongoing O&M of constructed Off-Site GSI Projects is expected to be managed and performed either by the jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located and/or by a contracted compliance unit provider as part of a pay-for-performance or CBP3 contracting process (Section

6.3.3). In either case, funds for ongoing O&M are proposed to be collected through an ongoing O&M fee (Sections 4.6 and 6.7).

3.3.3 Net Environmental Benefit
MRP Provision C.3.e requires a Net Environmental Benefit to be provided when Regulated Projects use the alternative compliance approach. Net Environmental Benefit has been incorporated into the compliance metrics, as described in Section 4. To ensure a Net Environmental Benefit, an “NEB Ratio” is applied to the in-lieu fee (see Sections 3.3.4 and 4.3).

Collected funds associated with the NEB Ratio would, for the initial roll-out of the program (i.e., Phase 2), be directed towards generating additional Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units through Off-Site GSI Projects. The additional Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units associated with the NEB Ratio for each exchange would provide a net increase in impervious surface treated and a net reduction in pollutant load.

Following Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County System, the NEB Ratio may also be directed towards an expanded list of projects and programs beyond additional Equivalent Acres Greened compliance metrics generated through Off-Site GSI Projects to address future water quality objectives.

3.3.4 Compliance Purchases

3.3.4.1 One-Time Compliance Purchase
The one-time compliance purchase (in contrast to the ongoing O&M fee) is calculated based on the amount of Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units that are exchanged, plus an Administrative Payment. The amount of Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units needed for each exchange is calculated based on the Regulated Project area and land use type, as described 84 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 18 March 14, 2023 FINAL
in Section 4. This amount of Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units is then multiplied by the NEB Ratio, to demonstrate “net environmental benefit,” before being multiplied by the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost (CostEAG). The resulting compliance purchase is calculated as:

𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
= (𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 × 𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅) × 𝐶𝐶 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 + 𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴 The Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost is envisioned to be developed through a cost study led and/or commissioned by the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee, and would be consistent for all participants in the Contra Costa County RAC System. While participation in the Contra Costa County RAC System and payment for a corresponding compliance purchase is optional, and therefore not subject to the requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 1600, the cost study would be developed using similar methods to those required by AB 1600 to allow for transparency in how the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost is developed.

The administrative payment would include monetary charges for CCCWP System Administrator, along with charges by the jurisdiction in which the Regulated Project is located. Administrative payment amounts would be developed through studies when fee schedules are updated by Permittees and will cover all staff and/or consultant hours, along with materials and overhead, to perform administrative functions needed for the Contra Costa County RAC System. This process is anticipated to be informed by Phase 1 and is further described in Section 6.4.2.

Compliance purchases would be collected by the jurisdiction in which Regulated Project participant(s) are located. After deducting the administrative payment for the jurisdiction in which the Regulated Project is located, the remaining compliance purchase payment would be transferred to and pooled by the CCCWP System Administrators. See Sections 3.4 and 6.5 for further detail on fund administration and management.

3.3.5 Ongoing O&M Fee
Participating buyers would pay an annual ongoing O&M fee to pay for long-term maintenance of the Off-site GSI Projects that generate compliance units. Based on an analysis of possible mechanisms for the ongoing O&M fee, it is preliminarily proposed that these fees would be levied through a Community Facilities District. The ongoing O&M fee would be set to include the costs of LID/GSI facility O&M and associated administrative costs. The Community Facilities District would disburse pooled O&M funds to entities when proof of completed O&M is received. O&M activities and payments would be documented through the RAC System Tracking Tool. See Section 4.6 for further detail regarding the ongoing O&M fee and potential Community Facilities District structure.

3.4 Summary of Preliminary Administrative Structure
As the Contra Costa County RAC System encompasses many participants and cities across the County, the administration of the RAC System would involve many public entities and additional coordination with private participants. The Contra Costa County RAC System is envisioned to be primarily administered by the CCCWP, with additional aspects managed by County Permittees and the Flood Control District. All entities involved are expected to engage in agreements relating to their participation in the RAC System. Additionally, Permittees 85 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 19 March 14, 2023 FINAL
implementing the Contra Costa County RAC System within their jurisdiction would be expected to update their stormwater ordinances to include the RAC System (Model Stormwater Ordinance language for the Contra Costa County RAC System is provided in Appendix C-1) and complete a Participant Memorandum of Understanding (MOU, see Appendix C-2).

The CCCWP administrators are expected to include at least two specific entities:

1. The RAC Subcommittee, which is expected to be made up of volunteer Permittee stormwater program representatives that would make decisions regarding the Contra Costa County RAC System.

2. The RAC System Administrator, who would perform management, financial administration of the Contra Costa County RAC System, RAC System Tracking Tool management, and complete reporting.

Other Contra Costa County RAC System administrators include:

2. The Flood Control District, which is anticipated to act as the fiduciary agent for the ongoing O&M fee.

Table 2: Summary of System Administrative Entities, Roles, and Responsibilities System Entity System Role System Responsibility
Clean Water
Program
RAC
Subcommittee
• Create and update Off-Site GSI Project prioritization criteria for RAC System.
• Review and approve Off-Site GSI Project applications from compliance unit providers.
• Review and approve contractors hired to implement Off-Site GSI Projects and/or serve as a pay-for-performance or CBP3 contractor. • Determine administrating agency for contractors.
• Solicit and/or review applicable cost studies for the RAC System. • RAC System adaptive management including (see Section 8):
o Participating in RAC System Strategy Meetings,
o Making recommendations on RAC System priorities and
technical needs,
o Reviewing and recommending regular cost updates, and
o Developing an as-needed list of RAC System amendments on a regular basis.
86 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 20 March 14, 2023 FINAL
System Entity System Role System Responsibility
Clean Water
Program
System
Administrator
• Pool compliance purchase payments and disburse to compliance unit provider(s) for Off-Site GSI Project implementation. • Manage and complete reporting for the RAC System.
• Manage RAC System Tracking Tool (e.g., managing Tracking Tool operator, quality assurance/quality control).
• Enter data into RAC System Tracking Tool for non-Regulated project buyers and exchanges.
• Perform functions to be determined for the RAC System Community Facilities District (potentially including O&M fee pooling, disbursement, cost adjustments, and/or reporting). • Perform required annual reporting in compliance with the MRP. • Conduct recommended adaptive management including:
o Amend RAC System in response to future permit
reissuances, and/or
o Enact other identified RAC System revisions
recommended by RAC Subcommittee.

Flood Control
District
Community
Facilities District
Fiduciary Agent
and/or
Administrator
TBD
• Levy and collect the ongoing O&M fee.
• Perform other functions to be determined for the RAC System Community Facilities District (potentially including O&M fee pooling, disbursement, cost adjustments, and/or reporting).

Permittees Exchange
Facilitator;
Certifying Entity;
Verifying Entity
• For Regulated Projects:
o Application review and approval of Regulated Project
owners interested in participating in the Contra Costa
County RAC System.
o Calculation and/or confirmation of compliance purchase amounts.
o Collection of compliance purchase payments and transfer of compliance purchase payments (deducting jurisdictionspecific administrative payments) to the CCCWP RAC System Administrator.
o Enter Regulated Project participant data into RAC System Tracking Tool.
• For Off-Site GSI Projects:
o Approve applications.
o Perform plan checks.
o Conduct certification and verification processes.
o Perform ongoing O&M.
o Enter Off-Site GSI Projects in RAC System Tracking
Tool.
• Notify participants and public of amendments to the RAC System Framework or preapproved list of control measures.

These administrative roles are also shown visually in Figure 5. Additional information about certification and verification processes are provided in Sections 5.4 and 5.5. 87 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 21 March 14, 2023 FINAL

3.5 RAC System Next Steps
Next steps for the Contra Costa County RAC System will include successful completion of initial pilot exchanges, and lessons learned applied to the launch of RAC System Phase 1. Prior to launching Phase 2, the RAC System will be submitted to the Water Board as part of a formal amendment process. The intent of this process would be to formally adopt the RAC System as an alternative compliance option under MRP 3. During RAC System Phase 2, which is intended to be a fully operating program, adaptive management practices will be conducted on an ongoing basis as described in Section 8. Additional details regarding the submittal for permit amendment or approval under the current MRP 3 Provision C.3.e language, along with other next steps for Contra Costa County RAC System Phase 2, are provided in Section 11. 88 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 22 March 14, 2023 FINAL

4. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM COMPLIANCE UNIT

DEFINITION AND CONTROL MEASURES
The demonstration of the treatment of an equivalent quantity of both stormwater runoff and pollutant loading and achievement of net environmental benefit for the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System (as required for proposed program submittal per MRP 3 Fact Sheet), provided by clear definitions of the Contra Costa County RAC System metric (i.e., compliance unit) and allowable control measures, is described in this section. Additionally, descriptions of how the compliance unit is defined to provide compliance with MRP Provisions C.3.c-d are also included in this section.

4.1 Compliance Unit Definition
Using MRP Provision C.3.e language, the Contra Costa County RAC System compliance unit includes three parts:

1. Equivalent Acres Greened;

2. A Net Environmental Benefit; and

3. An ongoing O&M fee.

This section describes how the three parts of the compliance unit are defined for the Contra Costa County RAC System.

4.2 Equivalent Acres Greened
Equivalent Acres Greened is the portion of the Contra Costa County RAC System compliance unit that would be generated through Off-Site GSI Projects. For Regulated Projects, Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units purchased must meet the Provision C.3.e requirement of “hydraulically sized treatment in accordance with Provision C.3.d with LID/GSI treatment measures of an equivalent quantity of both stormwater runoff and pollutant loading.” The Provision C.3.d sizing and LID/GSI treatment measure requirements would also apply to compliance units purchased by non-Regulated projects through the Contra Costa System. See Section 4.2.1 for the facility-specific RAC System compliance unit requirements.

Regulated Project owners participating in the Contra Costa County RAC System must purchase compliance units that meet the Provision C.3.e requirement of providing “equivalent quantity of both stormwater runoff and pollutant loading” to an on-site facility (Section 4.2.3). However, non-Regulated project buyers that choose to participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System do not need to purchase compliance units that meet equivalent volume and equivalent pollutant loading requirements and would instead purchase compliance units on the basis of runoffgenerating area (Section 4.2.2).

Compliance units are defined on an area basis to allow for easier calculation of compliance units (i.e., so that volume modeling is not required for each buyer) and to provide more equity between different buyers relating to the quantity of compliance units they need to purchase. Volume differences across the County are addressed at a coarser level using a Rainfall Ratio (see Section 4.2.3). The RAC System compliance unit calculation is intended provide 89 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 23 March 14, 2023 FINAL
conservatism in the amount of total runoff volume that is exchanged (consistent with MRP C.3.e equivalence requirements). As the RAC System is launched and implemented, periodic “volume audits” will be conducted using more detailed hydrologic modeling to ensure that the ratios are working as intended and sufficient volume is exchanged through the RAC System.

The Equivalent Acres Greened calculation for all buyers, along with a summary of the Equivalent Acres Greened calculation, is described in Section 4.2.4.

4.2.1 Treatment (“Greened”) Requirements and Allowable Control Measures

4.2.1.1 Off-Site GSI Project Sizing Requirements
Equivalent Acres Greened are generated through treatment by Off-Site GSI Projects sized to capture the MRP-defined volume hydraulic design basis or the MRP-defined flow hydraulic design basis. MRP Provision C.3.d. Numeric Sizing Criteria for Stormwater Treatment Systems includes:
(1) Volume Hydraulic Design Basis – Treatment systems whose primary mode of action depends on volume capacity shall be designed to treat stormwater runoff equal to:
(a) The maximized stormwater capture volume for the area, on the basis of historical rainfall records, determined using the formula and volume capture coefficients set forth in Urban Runoff Quality Management, WEF Manual of Practice No. 23/ASCE Manual of Practice No. 87, (1998), pages 175–178 (e.g., approximately the 85th percentile 24-hour storm runoff event); or
(b) The volume of annual runoff required to achieve 80 percent or more capture, determined in accordance with the methodology set forth in Section 5 of CASQA’s Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook, New Development and Redevelopment (2003), using local rainfall data.
(2) Flow Hydraulic Design Basis – Treatment systems whose primary mode of action depends on flow capacity shall be sized to treat:
(a) 10 percent of the 50-year peak flow rate;
(b) The flow of runoff produced by a rain event equal to at least two times the 85th percentile hourly rainfall intensity for the applicable area, based on historical records of hourly rainfall depths; or
(c) The flow of runoff resulting from a rain event equal to at least 0.2 inches per hour intensity.
(3) Combination Flow and Volume Design Basis – Treatment systems that use a combination of flow and volume capacity shall be sized to treat at least 80 percent of the total runoff over the life of the project, using local rainfall data.
90 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 24 March 14, 2023 FINAL
In order for the generated Equivalent Acres Greened to be to be available for exchange, the review and approval process must include verification that the Off-Site GSI Projects are sized in accordance with the C.3.d requirements. This must be confirmed through certification processes.

4.2.1.2 Allowable Control Measures for Off-Site GSI Projects Properly-sized control measure types allowable for Off-Site GSI Projects generating Equivalent Acres Greened are those included in the Contra Costa County Stormwater C.3 Guidebook 7th Edition (CCCWP, 2017) and considered low impact development or LID per the MRP.

Allowable treatment facilities include:
• Bioretention facilities—Bioretention captures runoff in a shallow vegetated reservoir on a mulched biotreatment soil media surface, then filters the runoff through plant roots and biologically active soil mix (which removes pollutants), into a gravel layer. From the gravel layer, runoff ultimately infiltrates to the subsurface or is conveyed through an underdrain to the storm drain system.
• Flow-through planters—Flow through planters include vegetation and soil media similar to bioretention but are contained within a concrete box and are designed to discharge all treated runoff.
• Dry wells and infiltration basins—Infiltration-based facilities take advantage of rapidlydraining soils to capture and infiltrate large amounts of stormwater runoff to the subsurface. Infiltration facilities are only feasible where soils with sufficiently high infiltration rates are present and where there are no subsurface hazards that could be impacted by infiltration (i.e., adequate depth to groundwater, and no geotechnical hazards or subsurface contamination).

Other allowable facility types not specifically included in the C.3 Guidebook include properly sized tree well facilities and suspended pavement systems, which filter runoff vertically at a 5 inch-per-hour loading rate, contain vegetation, and perform similarly to bioretention, as well as stormwater capture and use. In addition to the control measures listed, the C.3 Guidebook also includes a “Cistern + Bioretention Facility” and “Bioretention + Vault Facility;” these facility combinations are intended to manage both hydromodification and water quality (CCCWP, 2017). While allowable, it is expected that these types of facilities would not be used in Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System because of the additional cost required for sizing to hydromodification standards. Self-treating and self-retaining control measures may be eligible to generate Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units with justification from compliance unit providers.

Control measures other than those listed could be used to generate Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units if compliance unit generators can demonstrate that the facilities are designed consistent with the C.3 Guidebook requirements (CCCWP, 2017) and provide equivalent volume capture and pollutant load reduction performance as the listed control measures. It is expected that Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System would limit allowable control measures to LID/GSI facilities only. Non-LID/GSI facility types could be considered in the future through Contra Costa County RAC System adaptive management protocol to address future water quality objectives (Section 8).
91 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 25 March 14, 2023 FINAL

4.2.2 Runoff Generating Acres
Runoff Generating Acres form the base unit of the Equivalent Acres Greened calculation. For the RAC System, “Runoff Generating Acres” are calculated based on the impervious and pervious surfaces that generate runoff, and may be different than the effective impervious area. In some cases, runoff coefficients may be different for different impervious surfaces throughout the County. Runoff Generating Acres include 100% of directly-connected impervious surfaces and 10% of pervious surfaces within a given drainage area. The assumption that impervious acres and 10% of pervious surfaces generate runoff is consistent with the “Treatment Only” (i.e., GSI) runoff factors for pervious surfaces in the Contra Costa C.3 Technical Manual Table 3-2 (CCCWP, 2017). The runoff coefficient of 10% of pervious surfaces is also validated through the hydrology model developed for the County’s RAA for mercury and PCBs, developed in compliance with MRP Provisions C.11 and C.12 (CCCWP, 2020). Details regarding the RAA validation of the 10% runoff coefficient for pervious surfaces are provided in Appendix B.

For Regulated Projects (i.e., to calculate Equivalent Acres Greened required to be purchased), this calculation would be conducted for the untreated proposed development footprint. For Off-Site GSI Projects (i.e., to calculate the amount of Equivalent Acres Greened generated), this calculation would be performed for the portion(s) of the delineated Drainage Area(s) tributary to the Off-Site GSI Project that is not treated by upstream facilities. The total Runoff Generating Acres are calculated as:

𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 𝐴𝐴 = 𝐴𝐴 𝐼𝐼 𝐼𝐼 + (0.1 × 𝐴𝐴 𝑃𝑃 ) Eq. 4-1
For Off-Site GSI Projects, Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units generated are calculated as included in Equation 4-2, providing that the Off-Site GSI Project is sized per MRP Provision C.3.e.

𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 = 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 𝐴𝐴 𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂−𝑆𝑆 𝐹𝐹 𝐹𝐹 Eq. 4-2 Each Equivalent Acre Greened compliance unit (or portion of a unit) generated by an Off-Site GSI Project would have a rainfall zone, land use, and imperviousness associated with it (i.e., as compliance unit attributes) based on the geospatial location of the Drainage Area generating the compliance units. An Off-Site GSI Project may have multiple different Drainage Areas that are tributary to different control measures or facilities that make up the overall Off-Site GSI Project.

In the current Contra Costa County C.3 Manual, these different areas are called “drainage management areas” or DMAs (CCCWP, 2017). As a result, different compliance units generated by an Off-Site GSI Project may have different attributes associated with them. These attributes would be associated with each generated Equivalent Acre Greened compliance unit and tracked in the RAC System Tracking Tool.

For Regulated Projects, the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units required to be purchased is calculated based on the Regulated Project’s Runoff Generating Acres along with a Rainfall Ratio and Pollutant Ratio, described in Section 4.2.3. For non-Regulated Project buyers, Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units do not require a Rainfall Ratio and Pollutant Ratio and may be purchased based on the desired number of Runoff Generating Acres or impervious acres desired for purchase.
92 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 26 March 14, 2023 FINAL

4.2.3 Equivalent Volume and Pollutant Loading
The Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units purchased by Regulated Projects must meet the equivalent volume and pollutant loading requirements when comparing the Regulated Project drainage area to the (previously untreated) drainage area(s) of the compliance unit-generating Off-Site GSI Project(s). These elements are defined as follows:

1. Equivalent Volume – Achieved when equivalent Runoff Generating Acres are exchanged and there is equivalent or higher rainfall associated with the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units as compared to rainfall at the Regulated Project. If equivalent or higher rainfall is not associated with the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units as compared to the Regulated Project purchasing those compliance units, a Rainfall Ratio is applied to demonstrate equivalent volume (Section 4.2.3.1).

2. Equivalent Pollutant Loading – Achieved when equivalent volume is demonstrated and there are equivalent or higher pollutant concentrations (based on land use) associated with the Equivalent Acres Greened, as compared to land uses within the Regulated Project drainage area. If equivalent or higher pollutant loading is not associated with the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units as compared to the Regulated Project, a Pollutant Ratio is applied to demonstrate equivalent pollutant loading (Section 4.2.3.2).

Equivalent volume and equivalent pollutant loading are summarized in Figure 6. The calculations to determine equivalent volume and equivalent pollutant loading are described in further detail in the following sections.

4.2.3.1 Equivalent Rainfall
Rainfall varies widely throughout the County. Providing that equivalent Runoff Generating Acres are purchased by the Regulated Project, there must be equivalent rainfall associated with the compliance units purchased to meet the equivalent volume demonstration. Using PRISM 30-year annual normal precipitation values, average annual rainfall zones have been identified across the County (Figure 7) (PRISM Climate Group, 2023).

If the rainfall zone associated with the Equivalent Acre Greened compliance units generated within a Drainage Area tributary to an Off-Site GSI Project is different than the rainfall zone associated with the Regulated Project purchasing the compliance units, a rainfall ratio (i.e., exchange ratio15 that includes rainfall considerations) must be applied to the Runoff Generating Acres of the Regulated Project as part of the compliance unit calculation to achieve the equivalent volume demonstration for the exchange.

The Rainfall Ratio is calculated based on the proportional difference in rainfall between the Regulated Project and the location of the Off-Site GSI Project generating the Equivalent Acre(s) Greened, rounded to the nearest 10%. The Rainfall Ratio is used to demonstrate equivalent 15 Exchange ratios are numeric values that adjust generated compliance units from an Off-Site GSI Project to account for environmental and programmatic needs to reduce compliance liability for participants in the RAC System. These are adapted from market-based programs where ratios are used to address calculation uncertainty, exchange equivalence, and net water quality benefit.
93 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 27 March 14, 2023 FINAL
volume is captured at the Off-Site GSI Project as would have been captured by an on-site GSI facility at the Regulated Project. The minimum Rainfall Ratio allowable by the Contra Costa County RAC System is 1.0.
16 The Rainfall Ratio is calculated as:

𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 = 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃 /𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴 𝑈𝑈 Eq. 4-3 A matrix of Rainfall Ratios for all combinations of compliance unit exchanges in Contra Costa County is provided in Table 3.

Once identified, the Rainfall Ratio is applied to Regulated Project Runoff Generating Acres to calculate Equivalent Volume Acres required for purchase, as follows:

𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑉𝑉 𝐴𝐴 = 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 𝐴𝐴 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃 × 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 Eq. 4-4 16 The 1.0 minimum Rainfall Ratio allows more Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units to be available for purchase at the minimum cost and limits the potential for bias towards purchasing Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units generated in higher rainfall zones.
94 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 28 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Table 3: Rainfall Ratio Matrix for Rainfall Zones Across the County Exchange
Ratio Matrix
Equivalent Acres Greened Annual Average Rainfall Zone1 (inches) ≤13 ≤14 ≤15 ≤16 ≤17 ≤18 ≤19 ≤20 ≤21 ≤22 ≤23 ≤24 ≤25 ≤26 ≤27 ≤28 ≤29 ≤30 ≤31 ≤32 ≤33 Regulated Project Annual Average Rainfall Zone (inches) ≤13 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤14 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤15 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤16 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤17 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤18 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤19 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤20 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤21 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤22 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤23 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤24 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤25 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤26 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤27 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤28 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤29 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤30 2.3 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤31 2.4 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤32 2.5 2.3 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 ≤33 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1 Determined based on location of compliance unit-generating Off-site GSI Project drainage area. 95 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 29 March 14, 2023 FINAL

4.2.3.2 Equivalent Pollutant Loading
In addition to the equivalent volume requirement for Regulated Project participants, as covered in Section 4.2.3.1, the Off-Site GSI Project (i.e., which is generating Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units) must also provide capture and treatment of equivalent pollutant load for compliance with MRP C.3.e. Pollutant load reduction achieved through a GSI facility can be calculated as the difference between the influent load and the effluent load.

It is anticipated that the control measures implemented as Off-Site GSI Projects would primarily include bioretention facilities, other facilities that use filtration media such as planter boxes, and, where feasible, infiltration-based facilities. Facilities that are designed to infiltrate the MRP Provision C.3.d required volume remove stormwater runoff and any entrained pollutants and therefore consistently do not produce treated effluent for the design runoff volume.

Filtration-based facilities have been demonstrated to exhibit a relatively consistent effluent concentration with little to no dependence on influent concentration, especially for sedimentbound pollutants. For example, media filters tend to produce relatively consistent effluent concentrations that are independent of influent concentration because sediment is typically removed within the first few inches of media (Barrett, 2005). These effluent outcomes have also been observed from analyzing International Stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) Database data; as a result, Leisenring et al. (2013) recommended using a constant effluent concentration when modeling the removal of total suspended solids (TSS) and particulate-bound pollutants for sand filters and bioretention cells.

Given that the anticipated control measures are likely to achieve similar effluent concentrations for a wide range of influent concentrations typical of urban runoff, similar influent load must be treated by the Off-Site GSI Project to achieve equivalent or increased reduction in pollutant load as compared to what would have been achieved by an on-site GSI facility located at the Regulated Project. For the Contra Costa County RAC System, equivalent influent pollutant loading between the Regulated Project and the Drainage Area(s) of the Off-Site GSI Project generating the compliance units exchanged is demonstrated based on PCBs and TSS land use-based loading.
17 Mercury is not included as one of the pollutants to demonstrate equivalency as one of the main sources of mercury is atmospheric deposition and is therefore more distributed across different land use types. This was demonstrated in SFEI’s calibration of the Regional Watershed Spreadsheet Model (RWSM), where a relatively even distribution of mercury concentrations over different land uses was found, consistent with the “conceptual understanding of the diffuse nature of [mercury] sources in the landscape and the influence of atmospheric deposition” (Wu et al., 2016). Additionally, mercury, which is typically sedimentbound, is assumed to be reduced when TSS has been reduced in stormwater control measures.

If the PCBs loading and the TSS loading associated with the compliance units to be purchased are greater than or equal to that of the Regulated Project, equivalent pollutant loading is demonstrated. The PCBs loading and TSS loading associated with the compliance units purchased is proposed to be estimated on the basis of the land uses within the unit generating 17 TSS is used to represent pollutant loading strength of typical urban pollutants of concern, many of which are sediment-bound.
96 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 30 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Off-Site GSI Project drainage area(s). The Regulated Project loading would be based on the land uses within the development boundary.

PCBs Loading
PCBs land use-based loading is obtained from the RWSM Toolbox v1.0 Pollutant Model, “Pollutant Spreadsheet Model Calculations – Region” results (from SFEI, 2018 as summarized in Geosyntec, 2019). The division between “old” and “new” land uses is approximately 1968 (i.e., Old Industrial land use areas that have been industrial since at least 1968). This cutoff was selected to represent areas that may have been exposed to PCBs prior to regulatory changes to phase out the use of PCBs in the United States.

Table 4: PCBs Land Use-Based Concentrations
Land Use Category Total PCBs (ng/L)
Old Industrial and Source Areas 204
Old Commercial and Old Transportation 40
Old Residential 4
New Urban 0.2
Note: ng/L - nanograms per liter
TSS Loading
TSS land use-based Event Mean Concentrations (EMC) were developed using data from the National Stormwater Quality Database (Pitt, 2015). The database was queried to obtain all TSS stormwater runoff samples collected within EPA Rain Zone 6 in California, in Spring, Fall, or Winter seasons. This query returned 650 stormwater runoff sample results from 647 rain events at 40 sites for “Residential,” “Commercial,” “Institutional,” “Freeway,” “Industrial,” and “Open Space” land uses.

The data for each land use category were analyzed for outliers prior to developing EMCs.

Following removal of outliers, the data were examined for normality. Open Space land use data was concluded to not come from a normally distributed population. Given this finding, and that Open Space land use is not expected to make up a large part of GSI drainage areas, Open Space data were not examined further for EMC development.

Land uses were compared to each other to understand if significant differences in the distribution of TSS concentrations exist. The distributions for each land use are shown in Appendix B. Initial box plot results demonstrate that confidence intervals of the median TSS concentration for Industrial land use do not overlap with those of residential, commercial, and institutional, which are more similar to each other throughout their distributions, and Freeway TSS concentrations are almost always higher than residential, commercial, and institutional throughout the distribution. To investigate this further, a series of Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests were conducted to compare each land use pair. For all potential land use comparisons, data associated with Industrial land use were found to be derived from different data populations than Residential, Commercial, and Institutional land uses, and Freeway land use was found to be derived from a different population than Commercial and Residential. Based on the tests performed, the central tendencies of the data associated with Commercial, Institutional, and 97 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 31 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Residential land uses do not appear to be statistically different and were combined for the pollutant ratio development (Appendix B and Figure 8).

TSS EMCs were developed for the three land use categories by taking the arithmetic mean of the natural log-transformed distributions, using the natural logs of the mean and the standard deviation as shown in the Equation 4-5 below (from Geosyntec and Wright Water Engineers, 2009).

𝑆𝑆 𝑆𝑆 𝑀𝑀 = exp (𝜇𝜇 + 0.5𝜎𝜎2 ) Eq. 4-5
Where:
exp = e to the power of
𝜇𝜇 = the mean of the natural log-transformed distribution 𝜎𝜎 = the standard deviation of the natural log-transformed distribution Table 5: TSS EMCs by Land Use
Land Use 𝝁𝝁𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 𝝈𝝈𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍

TSS EMC
(mg/L) Notes
Residential/
Commercial/
Institutional

4.07 0.95 92
Concentration data are not statistically
different between these land use classes and
the combined EMC is shown
Freeway 4.39 0.86 117 Concentration data are statistically different from the other land use classes
Industrial 4.79 0.79 166 Concentration data are statistically different from the other land use classes
Note: mg/L - milligrams per liter
Combined Pollutant Loading
The PCBs and TSS concentrations are summarized in Table 6 for eight distinct land use categories. All “new” land uses are assumed to have the same PCBs concentration, consistent with the RWSM findings. “Old” and “New” land use-based TSS concentrations were assumed to be the same for the same land use categories as information to categorize available TSS data into “Old” and “New” land uses was not available.

Table 6: Resulting Average Concentration and Proposed Pollutant Ratios Land Use Category PCBs Average
Concentration (ng/L)
TSS Event Mean
Concentration (mg/L)
New Residential/ Commercial/ Institutional 0.2 92
New Freeway 0.2 117
New Industrial 0.2 166
Old Residential 4
92 Old Commercial/Institutional 40
Old Transportation 40 117
Old Industrial and Source Areas 204 166
98 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 32 March 14, 2023 FINAL
It is not expected that Regulated Projects would have “Old” designated land uses within their on-site drainage area required to be treated for C.3 compliance, since redeveloped areas triggering C.3 would be considered “New” land uses following redevelopment (i.e., which would result in resurfacing and material replacement of those building materials that may contain PCBs). For any instances where “Old” land uses are part of the Regulated Project that the owner is seeking alternative compliance for, the “Old” portion of the area would need to be treated onsite or, if that is infeasible, be subject to limitations on the compliance units eligible for purchase on the basis of the land use associated with the compliance unit. See Table 7 for a matrix of Pollutant Ratios that would be applied for different Regulated Project land use to compliance unit land use exchanges.

Table 7: Pollutant Ratios for Identified Land Use Categories Exchange Ratio Matrix
Off-Site Project Land Use Category
Residential,
Commercial, or
Institutional 1
Transportation 2 New
Industrial
Old Industrial
and Source Areas
Regulated
Project Land
Use Category
Residential,
Commercial, or
Institutional 1

1.0 1.0 1.0 1.03
Transportation 2 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.03
Industrial 1.8 1.4 1.0 1.03
Notes: 1 Includes adjacent collector and local roadways. 2 Transportation includes interstate highways, freeways, multilane highways, and principal arterials consistent with findings of the American Associate of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2015). 3 Net environmental benefit discount applied to purchase (Section 4.3).

4.2.4 Equivalent Acres Greened Summary
For Regulated Projects, the required Equivalent Acres Greened is calculated as summarized in Equation 4-6, based on the attributes of the Regulated Project and the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units purchased.

𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺𝑅𝑅 = 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 𝐴𝐴 𝑅𝑅 × 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 × 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑃𝑃 Eq. 4-6 Where:

Runoff Generating AcresRP = The runoff generating acres for which the Regulated Project owner is seeking alternative compliance (100% of impervious surfaces and 10% of pervious surfaces).

RatioRainfall = Calculated using Table 3 and Figure 7 (minimum value of

1.0).

RatioPollutant = Determined as described in Table 7.
99 Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 33 March 14, 2023 FINAL
For non-Regulated project buyers (e.g., Permittees purchasing Equivalent Acres Greened for retrofit GSI needs and other non-regulated projects), the equivalency demonstration is not required; Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units for purchase are calculated as:

𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 = 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 𝐴𝐴 −𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅 𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃 ℎ Eq. 4-7 Some non-Regulated project buyers may want to purchase Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units on the basis of impervious acres treated rather than Runoff Generating Acres.

The impervious acres treated per compliance unit will range and may be slightly lower than the Runoff Generating Acres depending on the land area treated by the Off-Site GSI Project generating the compliance units.
18 This information would be provided in the RAC System Tracking Tool for each compliance unit.

4.3 Net Environmental Benefit
Provision C.3.e requires a net environmental benefit through the alternative compliance approach. To provide a net environmental benefit for the Contra Costa County RAC System, a “NEB Ratio” is applied to Equivalent Acres Greened units when calculating participant compliance purchase amounts. The baseline NEB Ratio is proposed at 1.1 for Regulated Projects participating in the Contra Costa County RAC System, such that the additional 0.1 Equivalent Acre Greened for each acre of impact will provide a net increase in impervious surface treated and resulting net reduction in flow and/or pollutant load. For buyers not subject to MRP Provision C.3.e alternative compliance requirements (e.g., Permittees seeking Equivalent Acres Greened to meet GSI retrofit needs and other non-Regulated projects), the NEB Ratio is 1.0, providing equivalent impervious surface treatment.

Equivalent Acres Greened units generated by Off-Site GSI Projects that treat “Old Industrial” land uses are proposed to be exchanged to Regulated Projects associated with “New Residential,” “New Commercial,” “New Institutional” or “New Transportation” at a discounted WQB Ratio of 1.0 to encourage their exchange. Only Equivalent Acres Greened units treating “Old Industrial” land use would be allowed to be sold at the discount. For these compliance units, the Off-Site GSI Facility would be treating additional pollutant load beyond that required to meet equivalent pollutant loading due to the much higher PCBs loading from “Old Industrial” land uses. For these exchanges, equivalent impervious surface treated and equivalent reduction in flow will also be provided through the 1.0 NEB ratio.

4.4 Required Baseline(s)
Off-Site GSI Projects used to generate Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units must meet the baselines described below:
18 The difference between Runoff Generating Acres (equal to Equivalent Acres Greened for non-Regulated buyers) and impervious acres is not expected to be large in most cases as only 10% of the treated pervious area is included in the Equivalent Acres Greened calculation. For example, for a 10-acre 65% impervious drainage area treated by an Off-Site GSI Project, there are 6.5 impervious acres and a total of 6.85 Runoff Generating Acres per the RAC System calculation. Non-Regulated project buyers who must purchase on the basis of impervious acres may therefore need to purchase slightly more Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units to meet their needs. 100
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 34 March 14, 2023 FINAL

1. Off-Site GSI Projects must treat drainage area(s) that are currently untreated by GSI facilities – If a portion of a drainage area tributary to a proposed Off-Site GSI Project is already treated with GSI, that portion of the drainage area cannot be exchanged as Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units.

2. Any acres required to be treated for compliance with an NPDES permit are not eligible to be certified as Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units – Runoff Generating Acres captured and treated by Off-Site GSI Projects are not eligible if they are required to be treated to meet compliance with the MRP; the Phase II General Permit; the Industrial General Permit (Order No. 2014-0057-DWQ, IGP); an individual NPDES Permit; or any other NPDES permit. If an Off-Site GSI Project is constructed such that only a portion of its drainage area(s) require(s) NPDES compliant treatment, the nonRegulated portion of the drainage area(s) only may be eligible to generate Equivalent Acres Greened.

Additional information regarding eligibility is provided in Section 5.

4.5 Compliance Purchase Calculation Methods
The number of Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units purchased by a buyer and the Net Environmental Benefit are incorporated into the capital compliance purchase and calculated as follows:

𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
= (𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 × 𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅) × 𝐶𝐶 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 + 𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴 𝐴𝐴 Eq. 4-8 Where:

Equivalent Acres Greened = Required compliance units for equivalency; calculated as described in Section 4.2.4.

NEB Ratio = 1.1 for Regulated Projects and 1.0 for other non-Regulated Project purchases. A discount ratio of 1.0 is applied for purchases of Equivalent Acres Greened units associated with Old Industrial land use.

CostEAG = Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost, developed as described in Section 6.

PaymentAdministrative = Administrative payment, developed as described in Section 6.

For each exchange, the number of Equivalent Acres Greened units exchanged are tracked and marked as “sold” in the Contra Costa County RAC System Tracking Tool. For Regulated Project exchanges, the number of Equivalent Acres Greened exchanged is calculated as (𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐴𝐴 𝐺𝐺 𝐺𝐺 × 𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁 𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅); this is the value included in the exchange ledger in the System Tracking Tool.
101
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 35 March 14, 2023 FINAL

4.6 Ongoing O&M Fee
As indicated by MRP Provision C.3.e.i(2), and included as part of the basis to define compliance units, Regulated Projects participating in the Contra Costa County RAC System must provide a proportional share of the O&M costs for the Off-Site GSI Project. This is proposed to be accomplished through an ongoing O&M fee levied on Contra Costa County RAC System participants on a per “Equivalent Acre Greened” basis.

4.6.1 O&M Fee Mechanism
Through the development of this Summary Report, the Project Team explored a number of potential mechanisms for O&M. As these facilities are required to be maintained on a long-term basis, an upfront payment is not considered a viable solution. An upfront payment would likely not cover all potential future facility costs and could be prohibitively expensive for some participants. An ongoing O&M fee was identified as a sustainable approach to O&M that would minimize future risk of noncompliance.

The Project Team examined several different potential approaches for an ongoing O&M fee.

Contra Costa County pursued a stormwater fee ballot measure in 2012, which failed, and other agencies throughout the state have had similar failures or have not wanted to pursue such a measure given the level of effort and potential for failure. Any solution that would require voter approval was therefore not considered a reasonable pathway. An assessment district was considered, but has limitations as the assessment must be associated with a “special benefit” that could be difficult to demonstrate when funds are pooled for Off-site GSI Projects located in different jurisdictions than where the assessment is paid. The Project Team has therefore identified and recommended a Countywide Community Facilities District as the approach for the ongoing O&M fee. The Community Facilities District fee would be levied on participating Regulated Project parcels on a cost per “Equivalent Acre Greened” basis.

There are some limitations with Community Facilities Districts, as this approach may limit participation from public agency buyers and additionally may limit payments for maintenance of Off-site GSI Projects located on private property. The Administrator of the Community Facilities District must still be identified, though it is anticipated that the Flood Control District would act as the fiduciary agent. These and other critical considerations will be explored during the next phase of the Contra Costa County RAC System development.

Given this, it is anticipated that participants who have opted to participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System would be charged annual, recurring O&M fees on a cost per “Equivalent Acre Greened” basis via two pathways:

1. Parcel-based participants (i.e., private or public Regulated Project participants) would ballot into the new Community Facilities District as part of their RAC System participation and be charged annually per an established rate schedule. A fee will continue to be levied on the parcel as long as the parcel participates in the Contra Costa County RAC System.

2. Non-parcel-based participants, including cities or other agencies purchasing compliance units for GSI retrofit needs and other purposes, would enter into a long-term agreement (duration to be determined) with the O&M fee Administrator and/or the Flood Control 102
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 36 March 14, 2023 FINAL
District (acting as fiduciary agent), allowing them to be invoiced annually per an established rate schedule.

For both pathways, long-term participation in the Contra Costa County RAC System and subsequent recurring payment of O&M fee for long-term compliance with the MRP would be dependent on the RAC System continuing to be a compliance option under the MRP. See Section

6.4 for more information about ongoing O&M fee development. 103
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 37 March 14, 2023 FINAL

5. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
The Contra Costa County RAC System is structured to support Regulated Project owners within Contra Costa County with achieving alternative compliance as defined by MRP Provision C.3.e.

The primary objective of the Contra Costa County RAC System is to enable Equivalent Acres Greened units generated from Off-Site GSI Projects treating nonpoint source urban stormwater runoff to be exchanged with nonpoint source Regulated Projects and other non-Regulated project buyers. Eligibility and restrictions for the Contra Costa County RAC System were developed to support alternative compliance as defined by the MRP. Requirements described in this Section will pertain to Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System and are subject to amendment in the future as the System expands (Section 8).

The process for collection of funds is described in Section 5.4. Compliance with Provision C.3.d/C.3.f (i.e., certification) and C.3.h (verification) for the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System are described in Section 5.6 and 5.7, respectively. Sections 5.6 and 5.7 also provide details about the accounting and reporting system (i.e., System Tracking Tool).

5.1 Eligible Participants
Eligible participants may include entities within West Contra Costa County or East County interested in exchanging Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units. These may include developers with Regulated Projects within the jurisdictions of Contra Costa County and Permittees with Regulated Projects fitting the category descriptions listed in MRP Provision C.3.b.ii. This may also include other non-Regulated entities. Any public or private entity that is able to operate within the constraints of the Contra Costa County RAC System and able to take actions that result in a demonstrable generation of Equivalent Acres Greened may implement Off-Site GSI Projects as potential compliance unit providers. This may also include third-party aggregators. CCCWP permittees must complete a Participant MOU (see Appendix C-2) for Regulated Projects within their boundaries and their jurisdictions to participate in the RAC System.

5.2 Eligible Regulated Projects and Other “Buyers”
For Regulated Project owners participating as buyers, the jurisdiction in which the Regulated Project is located may decide whether the Regulated Project is eligible to participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System. The decision by the jurisdiction may be based on the Regulated Project’s location, density, land use type, or other factors. It is expected that highdensity Regulated Projects that are not subject to hydromodification management requirements would be eligible to participate. Non-regulated project buyers are expected to be limited to MRP Permittees within the County as part of Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System.

There is potential for the Contra Costa County RAC System to be expanded more broadly to other interested non-Regulated project buyers if opportunities arise as part of Phase 2, or during Phase 3. These additional entities may include those subject to the NPDES General Permit For 104
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 38 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for Storm Water Discharges From Small MS4s19 (Phase II General Permit) issued in 2013 and revised in 2015, 2016, and 2018 (California State Water Resources Control Board, 2013), Caltrans, or potentially other entities with TMDL compliance requirements, particularly if there are TMDL requirements for other pollutants of concern in the future. Projects that are under the jurisdiction of the Industrial General Permit (IGP; Order No. 2014-0057-DWQ as amended by Order No. 2015-0122-DWQ) or an individual NPDES permit, if interested in participating, are likely be considered on a case-by-case basis during Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System and beyond.

The Contra Costa County RAC System may additionally promote partnership opportunities for implementation of other water quality management practices in Phase 2 or beyond as part of future water quality goals. Other buyers would participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System as shown in Figure 4.

5.3 Eligible Off-Site GSI Projects
Off-Site GSI Projects, on public or private land in urban areas within Contra Costa County, that meet the baseline eligibility requirements outlined in Section 4.4 may be eligible to generate compliance units. All proposed Off-Site GSI Projects must meet the criteria set out by the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee and be certified by the jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located before the compliance units generated at the Off-Site GSI Project are available for exchange. The RAC Administrator and/or jurisdiction may review and approve compliance units and allow for them to be exchanged prior to the Off-Site GSI Facility being constructed.

The RAC Administrator and/or local jurisdiction will likely only allow this in specific cases where there is a high level of certainty that the Off-Site GSI Facility will be constructed. In this case, construction must be completed within three years of initial exchange, after which Off-Site GSI Projects must be certified and compliance units confirmed (see Section 5.6). All Off-Site GSI Projects are subject to ongoing verification processes (see Section 5.7).

It is envisioned there would be an application process to allow for approval that proposed compliance units preliminarily meet RAC System requirements, which compliance unit providers may complete for this assurance prior to conducting design and construction of OffSite GSI Projects. Unit providers who do not complete the pre-screening application process would still be eligible to request certification of compliance units generated from Off-Site GSI Projects they have constructed, though they run the risk that the constructed project has not addressed a requirement for certification that could have been identified through pre-screening.

If the RAC System Off-Site GSI Projects are implemented through a pay-for-performance or CBP3 contracting process, an optimized suite of Off-Site GSI Projects located on both public and private land may be sought through a request for proposals. More information about what a pay-for-performance or CBP3 process would entail is provided in Section 6.6.

Interested compliance unit providers must demonstrate control of the property where the Off-Site GSI Project would be or has been implemented. Off-Site GSI Projects are expected to utilize the 19 Water Quality (WQ) Order 2013-0001-DWQ NPDES No. Cas000004 as amended by Order WQ 2015-0133- Exec, Order WQ 2016-0069-Exec, WQ Order 2017-XXXX-DWQ, Order WQ 2018-0001-Exec, And Order WQ 2018-0007-Exec.
105
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 39 March 14, 2023 FINAL
pre-approved control measures (Section 4.2.1.2) and must be maintained and operated on a long-term, ongoing basis. These Off-Site GSI Projects would be managed following an O&M plan and/or agreement that is consistent with any relevant land use restrictions, such as easements or deed restrictions; the O&M plan would be required to be recorded to the parcel record(s) to ensure the property is managed consistent with that plan. Any entity seeking to construct non-preapproved control measures, with the intent of generating compliance units, must meet all guidelines established through the processes described in Section 8.2.

Pre-constructed facilities may be eligible for inclusion in the Contra Costa County RAC System as Off-Site GSI Projects. At this time, it is envisioned that pre-constructed facilities built in year 2020 or later may be eligible providing they meet the required baselines (see Section 4.4).

5.4 Exchanges
Generated compliance units from approved Off-Site GSI Projects would be entered into the Contra Costa County RAC System Tracking Tool by the approving entity (Section 5.6). Each compliance unit would have attributes indicating the associated rainfall zone and land use(s).

Once entered into the RAC System Tracking Tool, these compliance units could be exchanged with participating buyers using the compliance purchase equations. If compliance units are approved for exchange prior to construction, the compliance units must be certified within three years of initial exchange when the Off-Site GSI Facility generating the compliance units is fully constructed. Visual schematics of exchanges between different entities and associated roles are provided as Figures 9a through 9f.

It is envisioned that exchanges would be facilitated by Permittees during Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System. The required Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units would be identified and calculated using the RAC System Tool based on the rainfall zones and land uses associated with the Regulated Project and compliance units, respectively, as applicable. The calculation would also include the appropriate NEB Ratio.

Following calculation of needed compliance units, the Permittees would reserve available compliance units in the RAC System Tracking Tool and initiate the exchange. The exchange would be completed and the purchased compliance units would be identified as “sold” in the RAC System Tracking Tool following payment for the required compliance purchase to the Permittee. Non-Regulated project buyer exchanges are envisioned to be facilitated by the CCCWP RAC System Administrator. In this case, all of the actions listed would be performed by the RAC System Administrator to facilitate the exchange.

5.5 System Restrictions

5.5.1 Land Use Restrictions
The Contra Costa County RAC System does not prohibit the participation of either Regulated Projects or Off-Site GSI Projects based on their land use type. Any land use that would require coverage under the IGP or an individual NPDES Permit would not be expected to participate in the Phase 2 of the System. Jurisdictions may choose to disallow certain Regulated Projects from participating with reasonable cause, such as projects that have adequate space within their 106
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 40 March 14, 2023 FINAL
development footprint to implement on-site treatment or development that occurs on a known source property site.

5.5.2 Watershed and Jurisdictional Restrictions
The Contra Costa County RAC System would require all Regulated Projects and Off-Site GSI Projects be located within Contra Costa County. All exchanges would occur between entities draining to the San Francisco Bay watershed within Contra Costa County. During Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System implementation, Regulated Projects subject to Provision C.3.g. are not expected to seek participation in the Contra Costa County RAC System to cover hydromodification management requirements off-site through the RAC System due to the need to address impacts to downstream San Francisco Bay tributaries (i.e., which would require exchanges at a smaller watershed scale). However, Regulated Projects subject to Provision C.3.g. may still utilize the RAC System to meet their Provision C.3.e requirements (i.e., LID/GSI requirements) off-site.

During Phase 2 of RAC System implementation, exchanges may occur between West Contra Costa County (i.e., within the Water Board Region 2 boundary) and East Contra Costa County.

While both County areas are covered under the MRP, each Region has different TMDLs, so any party participating in an exchange between West County and East County would need to consider potential water quality compliance outcomes of such an exchange.

It is possible that future expansion of the RAC System would allow for inter-county exchanges with other areas that that drain to the San Francisco Bay.

5.6 Certification Requirements
The design, quantification of compliance units, and implementation of an Off-Site GSI Project must be certified upon project completion, by the Permittee in which jurisdiction the Off-Site GSI Project is located. Certification of the Off-Site GSI Project verifies that the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units were implemented consistent with the Off-Site GSI Project review and approval process, if it takes place prior to certification. The review and approval process confirms that the compliance units proposed to be generated by the Off-Site GSI Project are calculated correctly and identifies the compliance units as available for exchange.

In most cases, it is expected that the Off-Site GSI Project would be an LID/GSI treatment facility with tributary drainage area(s) that is not associated with or include a Regulated Project. There may be situations where an LID/GSI treatment facility is built as part of a Regulated Project but is designed to treat a drainage area not associated with that of the Regulated Project (e.g., when a private Regulated Project elects to construct LID/GSI in the public right-of-way along the project frontage); in this case, the private Regulated Project developer may also be eligible to exchange generated Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units. In this case, the Certifying Entity (i.e., local Permittee) would be responsible for confirming the total compliance units generated by the project, calculating the quantity of compliance units needed by the Regulated Project for C.3 compliance, and the excess quantity of compliance units available for exchange. In the case where the certifying entity could be the same entity as the seller, an independent 3rd party could be tasked with certification.
107
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 41 March 14, 2023 FINAL
In some cases where there is high certainty that an Off-Site GSI Project will be constructed, a pre-construction certification process may be conducted to allow compliance units to be available for exchange up to three years prior to final construction. In all cases, the final certification process for the Off-Site GSI Project and associated compliance units would take place after the Off-Site GSI Project is fully constructed and the O&M responsibility has been assigned. The certification process consists of the following steps:

1. Entry of the Completed Off-Site GSI Project into the System Tracking Tool: Upon completion of Off-Site GSI Project design and/or construction certification processes, the Certifying Entity will provide Off-Site GSI Project attribute information, which will be uploaded to the RAC System Tracking Tool (in a manner to be determined). If compliance units will be made available prior to Off-Site GSI Project construction, the Pre-Construction Off-Site GSI Project Data and Design Certification Form (Appendix C-3) would be completed as part of pre-construction review and design approval. For all Off-Site GSI Projects, once the Project is constructed, the Off-Site GSI Project Data Form (Appendix C-2) would be completed or updated with final Project information. If Off-Site GSI Project compliance units will not be made available until after construction, only the Off-Site GSI Project Data Form (Appendix C-4) is needed.

Attributes include: facility ID number; facility type and location; drainage area size(s), location(s), and land use(s); total impervious and pervious surface area within the drainage area(s); total Equivalent Acres Greened; facility owner; project cost; and associated multiple benefits. In some cases, the RAC System Administrator and local jurisdiction may allow the Compliance Units to be available for exchange after this step.

If the Off-Site GSI Project is entered into the RAC System prior to completion of construction, post-construction certification information would be input at a later date.

The other documents related to the certification process (e.g., the construction inspection checklists, O&M Plan and Agreement, and Post-Construction Certification Form, described in Steps 2-6 below) will also be uploaded to the RAC System Tracking Tool when completed. All of the data and documentation for the certified Off-Site GSI Project must be completed and uploaded within three years of initial exchange of compliance units. For most Off-Site GSI Projects, the compliance units become available for exchange(s) with Regulated Project(s) following upload of all certification information.

2. Design Review by the Certifying Entity: The Certifying Entity would review the design documents for the Off-Site GSI Project, including calculations, plans, details, and specifications, and would determine whether the LID/GSI treatment facility meets the design requirements established in MRP Provision C.3 and is consistent with standard design practice described in the CCCWP’s Stormwater C.3 Guidebook (CCCWP, 2017).

The design review would follow the Certifying Entity’s typical development application or capital project review process, leading to issuance of a building permit (for a private project) or commencement of a bid procurement and award (for a public project). If an alternative delivery approach (e.g., design-build or progressive design-build) is used for public projects, the certification could occur concurrently with design and construction. If compliance units will be made available prior to Off-Site GSI Project construction, the Certifying Entity would complete design review in the Pre-Construction Off-Site GSI 108
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 42 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Project Data and Design Certification Form (Appendix C-3). After the Off-Site GSI Project is constructed, the Certifying Entity will complete Section 1 (Design Review) of the Off-Site GSI Project Post-Construction Certification Form (Appendix C-5) to certify that the design review was completed and that the design meets the C.3 requirements and standard practices. If Off-Site GSI Project compliance units will not be made available until after construction, only the Off-Site GSI Project Post-Construction Certification Form (Appendix C-5) is needed.

3. Construction Inspection by the Certifying Entity: The Certifying Entity would conduct inspections of the Off-Site GSI Project, at appropriate stages during and at completion of construction, to ensure that the Off-Site GSI Project is constructed in accordance with approved plans. The Certifying Entity would complete the CCCWP Stormwater Treatment Facilities Construction Inspection Checklist (see Appendix C-6) for each inspection. If the Certifying Entity approves making the compliance units available for sale prior to construction, the Construction Inspection would take place following Step 4.

4. Entry of the Completed Off-Site GSI Project into AGOL Tool: Following the upload of Off-Site GSI Project data to the System Tracking Tool, the Certifying Entity would also upload data to CCCWP’s current “C3 Project Tracking and Load Reduction AGOL Application” to track installed stormwater treatment facilities and estimate pollutant loads reduced. The data in AGOL would be used to generate reports required by the MRP, including to demonstrate compliance of any Regulated Project(s) that purchase compliance units from the Contra Costa County RAC System, per Provision C.3 requirements.20

5. Operation and Maintenance Assurance: The Certifying Entity would ensure that an O&M Plan is prepared for the Off-Site GSI Project and would review the Plan for consistency with the CCCWP Stormwater C.3 Guidebook and Stormwater Facilities O&M Plan Template (Appendix C-6). The Certifying Entity would also ensure that an O&M Agreement, with the entity responsible for maintenance of the Off-Site GSI Project, is prepared, signed, and recorded to the parcel, if appropriate. The O&M Agreement would be prepared consistent with the CCCWP Stormwater Management Facilities O&M Agreement Template (Appendix C-7) and include the O&M Plan.

6. Post-Construction Certification: The Certifying Entity will complete Sections 2 and 3 of the Off-Site GSI Project Post-Construction Certification Form (Appendix C-5) to certify that construction inspections were conducted, and the facility was constructed consistent with the final plans (i.e., completion of Step 2), and that the O&M Plan and Agreement for the Off-Site GSI Project were prepared and signed (i.e., completion of Step 3).

More information about the specific forms and templates used to document the certification process is provided in Section 10.
20 There are currently no regulatory requirements to report data on Off-Site GSI Projects, compliance metrics, and exchanges from the System Tracking Tool. However, this is subject to change with the upcoming MRP reissuance. 109
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 43 March 14, 2023 FINAL

5.7 Verification Requirements
Ongoing verification of the Off-Site GSI Project’s performance is important for ensuring that the project is regularly maintained and continues to adequately treat the Equivalent Acres Greened associated with the Regulated Project(s). Verification will be performed via the municipal O&M verification inspection programs currently required by the MRP for all installed treatment facilities. In most cases, the O&M verification inspections of the Off-Site GSI Project will be conducted by the jurisdiction in which the Off-Site GSI Project is located (i.e., the “Verifying Entity” is the same as the Certifying Entity). However, there may be situations in which the Certifying Entity delegates the responsibility for O&M verification inspections to another entity.

This is acceptable as long as the Verifying Entity is not the same entity designated in the O&M Agreement as responsible for routine maintenance of the project, if the project is privatelyowned.

The verification process for the Off-Site GSI Project and associated compliance units takes place following completion of construction and throughout the life of the Off-Site GSI Project. The verification process consists of the following steps:

1. O&M Verification Inspection by the Verifying Entity: The Verifying Entity would conduct inspections of the Off-Site GSI Project at such intervals the Permittee deems appropriate to ensure that the LID/GSI treatment facility is adequately maintained for optimal performance. The Verifying Entity would complete the CCCWP Stormwater Facility O&M Inspection Report form (Appendix C-9) for each inspection. If any deficiencies are found, they would be documented on the form and discussed with the responsible party. Follow-up inspections would be conducted until the deficiencies are corrected and documented on the inspection form. Information from these inspection forms would be stored in the Verifying Entity’s local database for O&M verification inspection data, as required by the MRP.

2. Summary of Off-Site GSI Project Verification: On an annual basis, the Verifying Entity would complete the Off-Site GSI Project O&M Verification Form (Appendix C-10) that summarizes verification actions, including documenting that O&M was performed, the project was inspected (by whom and when), and any deficiencies were corrected. The Verifying Entity would upload this completed document to the System Tracking Tool to demonstrate ongoing verification of the project.

More information about the specific forms used to document the verification process is provided in Section 10.
110
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 44 March 14, 2023 FINAL

6. COMPLIANCE PURCHASE AND O&M ASSESSMENT COST BASES
Section 6 covers financial aspects of the Contra Costa County RAC System, and Sections 6.3 and 6.5 describe aspects of the processes for collection and timely use of funds, required for proposed program submittal per MRP 3 Fact Sheet.

6.1 Cost Basis Considerations
The Contra Costa County RAC System is expected to be primarily funded through compliance purchases, similar to most in-lieu payment (or fee) programs, which are typically receipt-based.

Financial solvency is essential to the ability of these types of programs to operate. Undercollection of payments is a threat to the sustainability of an in-lieu payment program. The typical program portfolio includes the program’s net assets (e.g., credits, cash), based on payment collection, and liabilities (e.g., existing and future contracts, administrative costs necessary to complete program requirements). Accordingly, it is essential that the payments are sufficient to cover the actual program project and administrative costs and risk factors. Given key regulatory and facility cost factors that apply to the Contra Costa County RAC System, there are some challenges to predicting program project and administrative costs, and additional considerations are needed for the RAC System’s compliance purchase cost basis.

While some “Equivalent Acres Greened” compliance units may be exchanged in advance of OffSite GSI Project construction, this would only be allowed when there is high certainty that the Off-Site GSI Project would be constructed. This approach could allow for advance funding of Off-Site GSI Projects through exchange of their compliance units, while also ensuring that the compliance units generated are tied to specific project benefits. Given uncertainty around implementation timelines and the potential for Off-Site GSI Projects to change for a variety of reasons, however, most Off-Site GSI Projects would likely need to be funded upfront through other means to avoid compliance unit risks in the RAC System. A source of upfront funding or financing will be needed to allow for compliance unit generating Off-Site GSI Projects to be implemented.

Additionally, the use of standard municipal procurement processes to build these projects could cause the generated Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units to be prohibitively expensive, based on existing GSI design and construction cost data compiled from Contra Costa County Permittees.

Regulated Project owners may choose to act as the compliance unit provider and construct an Off-Site GSI Project in a location other than their Regulated Project(s) to generate compliance units to apply toward future Regulated Projects. Other private entities could be relied upon to construct Off-Site GSI Projects at a lower cost than standard public procurement processes, through a pay-for-performance or CBP3 approach. However, these entities often achieve cost savings through large volumes of Off-Site GSI Project implementation (and resulting compliance unit generation) and may not be interested in participating in a program with low or unknown demand, due to the potential risk of not selling compliance units associated with Off-Site GSI Projects they build. In addition to the upfront construction requirements, demand uncertainties, and high potential cost for traditional procurement, there is also a desire for transparency in setting the compliance purchase price. All of these challenges require an innovative approach to 111
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 45 March 14, 2023 FINAL
cost setting and program implementation. The proposed approach to address these uncertainties is discussed below.

6.2 Compliance Unit Demand Considerations

6.2.1 Permittee Demand
The Contra Costa Permittees may want to purchase Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units to fulfill their water quality compliance or planning needs, including:
• Requirements to construct LID/GSI facilities for Regulated Projects, including public parcel and new roadway projects;
• GSI public retrofit projects; and
• TMDL compliance.

Based on LID/GSI cost data collected from Contra Costa County Permittees, the cost to construct LID/GSI projects to meet these project needs using traditional procurement processes are very high. For example, the approximate cost to build the public GSI projects identified in the Permittees’ Green Infrastructure Plans by 2040 to address the PCBs and mercury TMDLs in Contra Costa County is estimated to exceed $1 billion (CCCWP, 2020). Based on a recent examination of costs for seven GSI projects implemented by Contra Costa County jurisdictions, treating an acre of stormwater runoff can cost over $300,000 (in 2020 dollars). This is consistent with average per-acre treated green streets costs documented in San Mateo County in 2021.

6.2.1.1 Programmatic Demand Option
With sufficient compliance unit demand, there is more certainty that compliance units would be sold; thus, there would be more interest from entities to build Off-Site GSI Projects as a result of the lower financial risk to participating in the program. One way to provide demand certainty is to establish a minimum program purchase guarantee (“Programmatic Demand”). This initial “Programmatic Demand” could be purchased by Permittees to allow for sufficient exchange activity during Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System. Guaranteed exchange activity would better enable the Contra Costa County RAC System to achieve economies of scale, demonstrate proof of concept, garner interest, and grow the System. If Regulated Project owners or other entities can provide guarantees of compliance unit purchase at the initiation of Phase 2, they could also be included in the initial Programmatic Demand.

Permittees interested in participating in the Programmatic Demand purchases would identify the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units they may purchase over Phase 2 of RAC System operation to meet their C.3 (and potentially, C.11/C.12) compliance requirements. In addition to providing economies of scale for the Contra Costa County RAC System launch, it is expected that this approach would allow for a lower compliance cost for Permittees. Furthermore, financing (or funding) and constructing Off-Site GSI Projects to meet an initial upfront Programmatic Demand (Section 6.3) would allow for completing CEQA and generating compliance units prior to exchange.

In the Programmatic Demand scenario, Permittees could identify the cost to construct LID/GSI facilities to meet their compliance requirements through traditional procurement and consider 112
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 46 March 14, 2023 FINAL
what (lower) price they would be willing to pay instead through the Contra Costa County RAC System. Permittees could then identify the quantity of compliance units they would want to purchase, if Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units were available at their suggested price.

This combined quantity of Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units identified by County Permittees would serve as the “Programmatic Demand” for Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units. Permittees could anticipate cost savings in meeting their GSI permit requirements through this approach.

With the knowledge that the Contra Costa County RAC System has a guaranteed baseline demand for compliance units, private compliance unit providers would have increased interest in participating in the Contra Costa County RAC System.

6.2.2 Regulated Project Demand
Currently, the compliance unit demand from Regulated Projects is difficult to determine.

Challenges to estimating the amount of Regulated Project demand include fluctuations in the development market, difficulty in identifying potential developers over the next five to twentyplus years, and the potential for developers to be reticent to provide their suggested demand without knowing more about the Contra Costa County RAC System. A number of developers have applied for MRP Provision C.3.e.ii, “Special Project”21 status within the County, and likely more could be interested in making a compliance purchase to not have to construct stormwater treatment facilities on-site, especially for higher value or higher density redevelopment projects.

Development projections can be used to inform estimates of potential Regulated Project demand.

As part of the RAA prepared for Contra Costa County (CCCWP, 2020), private development that occurred between 2003 and 2019 was compiled geospatially, and future private development was projected for 2020, 2030, and 2040. To forecast future private development area, CCCWP used the output of UrbanSim, a model developed by the Urban Analytics Lab at the University of California under contract to the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) (MTC, 2021; Waddell, 2013). The UrbanSim modeling system was developed to support the need for analyzing the potential effects of land use policies and infrastructure investments on the development and character of cities and regions. The Bay Area’s application of UrbanSim was developed specifically to support the development of Plan Bay Area, the Bay Area’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy-equivalent planning effort (CCCWP, 2020).

MTC forecasts growth in households and jobs and uses the UrbanSim model to identify new development and redevelopment sites to satisfy future demand. Model inputs include parcelspecific zoning and real estate data; model outputs show increases in households or jobs attributable to specific parcels. The methods and results of the Bay Area UrbanSim model have 21 Per the MRP 3 Provision C.3.e.ii: “Certain land development projects characterized as smart growth, high density, or transit-oriented development can either reduce existing impervious surfaces or create less “accessory” impervious areas and automobile-related pollutant impacts. Incentive LID Treatment Reduction Credits approved by the Water Board may be applied to these Special Projects, which are Regulated Projects that meet the specific criteria listed … in Provision C.3.e.ii.(2).”
113
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 47 March 14, 2023 FINAL
been approved by both MTC and Association of Bay Area Governments’ Committees for use in transportation projections and the regional Plan Bay Area development process.

The CCCWP RAA process used outputs from the Bay Area UrbanSim model to map parcels predicted to undergo new development or redevelopment in each Contra Costa jurisdiction at the time increments specified in the MRP (i.e., 2020, 2030, and 2040). The resulting maps were reviewed by Permittee staff for consistency with local knowledge and local planning and economic development initiatives and were revised as needed. Notably, the specific parcels identified by UrbanSim may or may not be realistically developed; however, the quantity of acres developed and approximate locations of, and zoning associated with, the parcels is considered representative of potential development in the County.

A summary of UrbanSim projections for 2021 – 2030 and 2031 – 2040 for the County are provided in Table 7. Development estimates for the County are separated out by Water Board region and estimated hydromodification management (HMP) requirements. Development projected as high density, with an assumed imperviousness of 85%, has been further separated out since these types of Regulated Projects may be most likely to seek alternative compliance for stormwater.

Table 8: Summary of UrbanSim Development Projections
Region HMP Status
2020 – 2030
Equivalent Acres1 by
Development Density
2030 – 2040
Equivalent Acres1 by
Development Density
2020 - 2040 Equivalent Acres1
by Development Density
Low/Med High Low/Med High Low/Med High All
Region
2 HMP
Applicable 145 172 207 129 352 301 653
HMP Exempt 59 249 77 271 136 520 656
HMP
Undetermined 7 9 75 1 82 10 92
Region 2
Total 211 430 359 401 570 831 1,401
Region
5 HMP
Applicable 279 21 562 50 841 71 912
HMP Exempt 1,248 15 158 43 1,406 58 1,464
HMP
Undetermined 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region 5
Total 1,527 36 720 93 2,247 129 2,376
Countywide Total 1,737 466 1,081 493 2,818 959 3,777
1 Defined as 100% of directly connected impervious areas and 10% of directly connected pervious areas.

The UrbanSim development projections estimate approximately 520 acres of high-density, HMP exempt development in Region 2 that is expected to be constructed over the next 20 years (i.e., 249 acres from 2020 – 2030 and 271 acres from 2030 – 2040, see bolded values in Table 8).

However, the amount of this development that may ultimately take place in the Contra Costa County RAC System is unknown.
114
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 48 March 14, 2023 FINAL

6.3 Off-Site GSI Project Implementation Considerations
While some Off-Site GSI Projects could be partially funded or financed through sale of compliance units in advance of final construction, this would only be allowable for select Projects. A source of funding or financing would be needed to construct most Off-Site GSI Projects prior to collection of compliance purchase payments. The project delivery approaches used to implement Off-Site GSI Projects under the Contra Costa County RAC System would determine the ability to leverage private financing and the overall administrative structure of the program.

6.3.1 Upfront Financing of RAC System Off-Site GSI Projects One option to implement RAC System Off-Site GSI Projects is to finance a suite of Off-Site GSI Projects to satisfy the initial projected demand or Programmatic Demand, if implemented.

Financing could be obtained through public programs, such as the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) or Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) loans.

There is the potential that Permittee loans for compliance units purchased specifically for TMDL compliance that are not ultimately purchased by private developers could be forgiven through a public finance pathway. If the compliance unit-generating Off-Site GSI Projects are financed through CWSRF or WIFIA, the TMDL compliance unit portion could potentially be part of the loan that is ultimately “forgiven” because LID/GSI facilities in older urban or industrial areas provide water quality improvements that meet the intent of the CWSRF and WIFIA programs.

Other compliance purchases by permittees (e.g., GSI retrofit requirements) are current or expected permit compliance requirements and are consequently less likely to be forgiven under this financing structure.

6.3.2 Alternative Delivery Approaches
There are three principal approaches for delivery of Off-Site GSI Projects to generate Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units: (1) traditional design-bid-build procured by the program administrator using the loan funds (or after compliance purchase payments are collected); (2) performance-based contracting for turn-key and fixed-price solutions; and (3) public-private partnership (P3), where a private enterprise engages with the program administrator and plays a larger role in administering the program and delivering the off-site projects.

6.3.2.1 Traditional Design-Bid-Build
Traditional public project funding involves a funder that pays a private entity (engineer/contractor) for a pre-defined scope of work. The payment schedule is typically linked to direct cost reimbursement and may include mark-up for overhead costs and an acceptable profit. If profit is allowed, it is linked to the project cost, providing an incentive for the private entity to increase costs in both the proposal phase and through change orders. Since the private entity is paid for work completed, and payments are not linked to outcomes, the funder bears all project risks. The funder may need to issue multiple Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for a given project for project design, construction management, and construction.

6.3.2.2 Performance-Based Contracts
Performance-based contracts (or simply performance contracts) (PBCs) condition payments based on defined performance outcomes that reflect the quality of the project delivered. This 115
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 49 March 14, 2023 FINAL
strategy typically requires private capital to finance project implementation. Funders pay implementers an agreed-upon price per compliance unit after pollutant load or volumetric reductions are verified and all requirements are met for certified compliance units. Since the Contra Costa County RAC System compliance purchases would not include O&M costs, those costs would be levied separately on the property on an annual basis (Section 6.4.4).

6.3.2.3 Public-Private Partnerships (P3s)
P3s are a relatively common way for the public and private sector to collaboratively deliver and maintain GSI projects. A CBP3 is a form of alternative delivery in which a government agency and private partner seek to improve both water quality and quality of life for a community through LID/GSI projects that meet multiple environmental and social metrics (e.g., metrics tied to workforce and equity benefits).

As noted above, there are less administrative burdens under the performance-based or P3 delivery models, often leading to cost savings. Traditional procurement requires significant management and oversight of every facet of a project, while PBCs and P3s require more limited oversight and fewer RFPs.

6.3.3 Pay-for-Performance or CBP3 Model for Compliance Unit Providers Depending on the entity responsible for control measure O&M, the Contra Costa County RAC System could utilize one of two models for a pay-for-performance or CBP3 contract with compliance unit providers. A Design-Build-Finance (DBF) model could be utilized if Permittees and/or the Countywide Maintenance District perform ongoing maintenance, and a Design-BuildFinance-Operate-Maintain-Availability Payment (DBFOM-AP) model could be used if the compliance unit provider is required to perform ongoing maintenance.

A DBF model only obligates the compliance unit provider to finance and deliver an Off-Site GSI Project that generates the Equivalent Acres Greened. Payment for capital expenditure would be released by the CCCWP System Administrator upon successful certification of the Off-Site GSI Project and generated compliance units.

A DMFOM-AP model requires the compliance unit providers to be responsible for financing, while the Contra Costa County RAC System maintains control over payments and revenue collection and makes pre-established payments to the private entity for project delivery and performance commitments. This model would completely shift the financial risk for performance to the private sector. The contract would require provisions that allocate pooled Countywide Maintenance District O&M assessments to the compliance unit providers, contingent on successful verification of O&M, delivery on additional performance standards, and timely responses to maintenance requests.

6.3.4 Private Financing
Private capital’s primary role in the project financing process is to assume risk, accelerate implementation, and achieve project implementation in the most efficient and cost-effective manner possible. There is a limited role for private capital unless there are elements of risk, outcome-based approaches, and payment schedules that may require upfront private capital. In the context of the envisioned Contra Costa County RAC System project delivery, the opportunity 116
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 50 March 14, 2023 FINAL
to leverage private capital participation would primarily be through the performance-based contracting and P3 delivery models, not under traditional public project funding.

6.4 Cost Setting
It is assumed that the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost (CostEAG) would be the same for all System buyers and would represent the average cost to generate an Equivalent Acre Greened compliance unit from Off-Site GSI Projects implemented through the Contra Costa County RAC System. As described in Section 8.4.2, the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost would need to be revisited and potentially adjusted on a regular basis.

6.4.1 Other Compliance Purchase Considerations
The costs used to establish the compliance purchase cost basis would be based on full cost accounting, including expenses such as project planning, design, permitting, and construction costs, as well as administration of the Contra Costa County RAC System. Accordingly, the overall compliance purchase amounts would be determined by project costs, administrative costs, overhead inventory, and risk. Since O&M costs would be covered separately through payments to a separate fund, these costs would not be included.

Once the amounts of the compliance purchase cost components are established, it is crucial that the Contra Costa County RAC System has a process in place to regularly evaluate the sufficiency of the compliance purchase amounts and to adjust the amounts as needed. See Section 8.4 for additional considerations for compliance purchase component adjustments.

The compliance purchase approach offers developers the option to navigate the C.3.e payment obligations in a limited time frame and avoid the technical, complex, and evolving regulations that govern the implementation of these GSI projects. These two benefits save considerable time and money, and lower the risk to the developer, which may make it more likely that the developer participates. Conversely, if the developer has to undertake many on-site commitments and the marginal costs of LID/GSI compliance is nominal, then it could lessen the benefits of using the Contra Costa County RAC System.

6.4.2 Administrative Payment
An administrative payment is proposed to be incorporated into the compliance purchase amount.

The administrative payment would include costs for CCCWP System Administrator, along with costs charged by the jurisdiction in which the Regulated Project is located. Administrative payment amounts would be developed through cost studies when fee schedules are updated by Permittees and will cover all staff and/or consultant hours, along with materials and overhead, to perform administrative functions needed for the Contra Costa County RAC System. CCCWP cost amounts will similarly be developed through fee schedule updates. This process is anticipated to be informed by Phase 1 of the System. Administrative functions that may be incorporated into the payment are anticipated to include, but may not be limited to:
• Review preliminary applications to the Contra Costa County RAC System; • Conduct Regulated Project review, as needed;
• Identify compliance units for sale for interested buyers; 117
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 51 March 14, 2023 FINAL
• Perform or confirm exchange calculations;
• Conduct plan review and oversight processes for Off-Site GSI Projects; • Enter data into the System Tracking Tool;
• Conduct certification and verification processes; and/or • Other System administrative tasks.

The administrative payment may include costs from multiple entities that are involved in any given exchange and could vary depending on the jurisdictions involved in the exchange. For example, for a given exchange, the payment could include administrative costs associated with (but not limited to):

1. Cost for processing the Regulated Project buyer, identifying compliance units for exchange, and tracking, by the jurisdiction in which the Regulated Project is located;

2. Cost for design and construction phase review and certification of the Off-Site GSI Project associated with compliance units purchased, by the jurisdiction in which the OffSite GSI Project is located; and

3. System administrator costs for overall System administration.

Many programs collect an administrative fee between 5% and 20% on top of other program costs. The method of procurement delivery determines the scope and costs of administration. If the Contra Costa County RAC System adopts a traditional design/bid/build delivery method for procuring the Off-Site GSI Projects, it would require more staff to oversee the program than a performance-based contracting or CBP3 approach.

6.4.3 Ongoing O&M Fees
To meet the requirements of MRP Provision C.3.e, a proportional share of the O&M cost for the Off-Site GSI Project shall be obtained from the buyer through an ongoing O&M fee.

Participating buyers would pay an annual ongoing O&M fee per Equivalent Acres Greened compliance unit at a fixed rate with escalation for inflation and other costs.

At this time, it is envisioned that the ongoing O&M fee would be levied through a Community Facilities District and/or through specific long-term agreements. In either case, the rate schedule would reflect the cost of conducting O&M activities for all of the Off-site GSI Projects in the System. It is anticipated that the rate schedule may be initially established through detailed O&M cost estimates for Off-Site GSI Projects expected to generate compliance units for the System, along with an estimated O&M reserve (if permitted, for Off-Site GSI Projects that have compliance units still un-sold), and administrative costs. Though individual participants may be purchasing compliance units associated with specific Off-site GSI Projects, the fee rate schedule would consider O&M costs for all the Off-Site GSI Projects included in the System. This approach would allow for equity and consistency across the program. It is envisioned that the O&M fee would be adjusted as needed over time as O&M cost data are collected for Off-Site GSI Projects implemented for the Contra Costa County RAC System to adequately cover the actual cost of O&M. The cost of O&M activities will be developed through a detailed engineer’s 118
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 52 March 14, 2023 FINAL
report prepared by a registered professional engineer certified by the State of California commissioned by the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee.

The ongoing O&M fee will also cover the costs for administering the O&M funding for the Contra Costa County RAC System. This portion of the fee will cover activities including, but not limited to: collecting (and potentially pooling) O&M fees, validating successful O&M verification, distributing O&M funds to entities performing O&M, managing the O&M reserve as applicable, and completing RAC System reporting, as needed.

6.5 System Fund Management

6.5.1 Contra Costa County RAC System Fund
Funds collected through the compliance purchase payments will be managed in a fund that is administered by the CCCWP RAC System Administrator. Fund management may entail, but is not limited to:

1. Mechanisms for transferring payments between the System Administrator and Permittees;

2. Tracking payments collected and confirming appropriate payment amounts;

3. Pooling collected compliance purchase payments into combined fund;

4. Paying back public financing loans;

5. Managing loans with Permittees;

6. Payments to compliance unit providers and/or pay-for-performance or CBP3 contractor(s);

7. Investments into additional compliance unit-generating Off-Site GSI Projects;

8. Tracking and managing administrative program costs; and/or

6.5.2 Ongoing O&M Fund
The O&M fee administrator and/or the Flood Control District (acting as fiduciary agent) would pool ongoing O&M fee funds and disburse funds as appropriate to the O&M effort spent by Permittees and/or private contractors performing O&M work with proof of completed O&M, as documented through the RAC System Tracking Tool. If O&M is conducted by a pay-forperformance or CBP3 contract, O&M efforts will be described in the contracting documents. The O&M Fund will also be required to conduct adequate tracking and perform financial reporting.

6.5.3 Harmonized and Pooled Funding
The Contra Costa County RAC System would provide authority to the CCCWP RAC System Administrator to pool funding resources as allowable. Pooling, if conducted, could include the Equivalent Acres Greened portion of the compliance purchases, multiplied by the NEB ratio as applicable (i.e., capital costs), and could include funds from other sources into the RAC System Fund. Pooling funds could enable the Contra Costa County RAC System to implement largerscale projects and solutions. The unit cost of implementing small LID/GSI facilities (from any provider type) is typically higher than regional projects. Costs for design, mobilization, 119
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 53 March 14, 2023 FINAL
construction, monitoring, and maintenance often become less expensive per unit on larger projects.

In addition, pooling of funds could facilitate leveraging low-cost financing sources, such as SRF funds; the capacity to link water quality financing with economic development and diversification funding sources; and the ability to work in partnership with private investors in the delivery of cost-effective GSI projects more quickly and with less risk to RAC System member agencies.
120
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 54 March 14, 2023 FINAL

7. RISK AND UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT
Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System is anticipated to manage a variety of buyers, Off-Site GSI Projects, and participants across Contra Costa County’s diverse landscape. With a multitude of elements to manage, there are likely to be risks and uncertainty that would need to be addressed to ensure that Permittees participating in the Contra Costa County RAC System would not face compliance liability. This section describes sources of uncertainty, followed by recommended management actions.

7.1 Sources of Uncertainty
Identified sources of uncertainty for the Contra Costa County RAC System are related to the variability of precipitation, pollutant concentration, control measure implementation, effectiveness and performance, and costs of constructing and maintaining Off-Site GSI Projects.

Additionally, market demand for purchasing Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units is uncertain.

7.1.1 Capture of Equivalent Quantity of Stormwater Runoff and Pollutant Loading The Equivalent Acres Greened compliance unit is designed to provide off-site equivalent quantity of stormwater runoff and pollutant loading in accordance with Provision C.3.e requirements for Regulated Projects. Precipitation and land use are the primary, nonmanagement related factors that would influence the quantity of stormwater runoff and pollutant loading captured by Off-Site GSI Projects, respectively. As Contra Costa County contains a wide range of precipitation rates and historic land use, equating stormwater runoff and pollutant loading from a Regulated Project to an Off-Site GSI Project in different locations can be challenging. In addition, site-specific conditions may affect pollutant concentrations and control measure effectiveness and introduce a degree of uncertainty in environmental outcomes.

7.1.2 Risk of Noncompliance due to Project Failure
The failure in the implementation, operation, or maintenance of Off-Site GSI Projects can result in noncompliance for the Contra Costa County RAC System or System participants. As some compliance units may be exchanged up to three years before the Off-Site GSI Project generating the units is operational, a delay or failure to ultimately construct the compliance unit-generating Off-Site GSI Project could lead to noncompliance. Ongoing O&M is of particular concern for the System, as many of the anticipated compliance unit-generating projects are required to be operated and maintained on a long-term, ongoing basis.

7.1.3 Cost and Demand Uncertainty
Off-Site GSI Project construction and maintenance costs are used to set compliance purchase prices and ongoing O&M fees. These costs can vary widely and change from year to year, and there is risk of buyer shock if compliance purchase costs or O&M fees change drastically in a short time period. The number of participants in the RAC System and the magnitude of compliance units exchanged is difficult to predict as described in Section 6.2. 121
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 55 March 14, 2023 FINAL

7.2 Managing Uncertainty
The Contra Costa County RAC System utilizes several mechanisms to manage identified risk and uncertainty that may affect Permittees, compliance unit providers, and environmental outcomes.

7.2.1 Runoff Equivalency – Rainfall Ratio
The Contra Costa County RAC System would require a rainfall equivalency factor (i.e., Rainfall Ratio) to be applied to the Regulated Project Runoff Generating Acres for exchanges of Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units generated in other Rainfall bands across the County (see Section 4.2.3.1). The Rainfall Ratio would account for variability in precipitation across Contra Costa County and provide the demonstration of “equivalent volume” required under Provision C.3.e.(2).

7.2.2 Pollutant Load Equivalency – Pollutant Ratio
A portion of the uncertainty surrounding the equivalency of pollutant loading between a Regulated Project and an Off-Site GSI Project is anticipated to be addressed through the RAC System’s Rainfall Ratio, which accounts for runoff volume generation differences. To account for pollutant loading differences between land use types, a comparison of average concentrations of PCBs and TSS (as surrogate for urban pollutants of concern) was conducted as described in Section 4.2.3.2. As PCBs are a legacy pollutant, new and re-development projects are anticipated to always produce lower concentrations than older urban areas. Based on the TSS analysis, there was no statistical difference in loading between commercial, residential, and institutional land use classifications; however, transportation and industrial land uses would be expected to produce higher levels of TSS and potentially other adsorbed pollutants. Therefore, any new or redevelopment projects that are proposed to have these land use types would require a higher Pollutant Ratio to apply to the Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units exchanged to provide the pollutant load capture equivalency demonstration required by MRP Provision C.3.e.i.

While treatment through control measures could be expected to be variable, any variability in the outcomes of the treatment control measures used for Off-Site GSI Projects is expected to occur at the same rate as those used for on-site Regulated projects.

7.2.3 Contractual Mechanisms
Traditional contracting mechanisms obligate payment based on the completion of a scope of work that is intended to provide desired outcomes. However, this approach still burdens buyers with the risk of underperformance of the desired outcomes. The mechanism used to contract the compliance unit providers, whether a pay-for-performance or CBP3 approach, is intended to reduce the occurrence of underperformance (e.g., project failure, inadequate LID/GSI implementation) by shifting the financial burden of underperformance from buyer to the provider of the service (in this case, the compliance unit provider).

7.2.3.1 Project Failure
Participants in the Contra Costa County RAC System would be required to agree to contractual provisions intended to provide assurances for performance of control measures, account for unseen conditions, and provide remedies for deficiencies. This may include financial assurances, 122
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 56 March 14, 2023 FINAL
such as performance bonds. The contracts for compliance unit providers participating in the RAC System can be structured on pay-for-performance or CBP3 principles for larger-scale implementation. These contracts would require financial compensation to be tied to performance outcomes, such as the design, implementation, and O&M (if conducted by a private entity) of Off-Site GSI Projects. A pay-for-performance or CBP3 approach for the Contra Costa County RAC System may mitigate Off-Site GSI Project implementation or performance risk, while providing an incentive for compliance unit providers to provide cost-effective compliance units.

Payments from CCCWP would be tied to milestones, including the successful certification of a properly-designed and implemented project. In addition, contracts would be expected to obligate compliance unit providers with the financial responsibility of addressing project failures.

Compliance unit providers would be responsible for addressing failures revealed during certification and ongoing verification of O&M within a specified grace period. Some compliance units may be exchanged before the compliance unit-generating Off-Site GSI Project is constructed; however, the RAC System Administrator or local jurisdiction would only approve such pre-construction exchanges when there is high certainty that the Off-Site GSI Project would be constructed.

If private entities are identified as responsible for ongoing O&M and/or verification under a payfor-performance or CBP3 approach, they would be similarly required to demonstrate proof of O&M conducted and adequate performance of Off-Site GSI Projects prior to receiving payment through the Countywide Maintenance District. Jurisdictions who conduct O&M for Off-Site GSI Projects would similarly need to demonstrate proof of O&M prior to receiving funds from the Countywide Maintenance District.

7.2.3.2 Unaddressed Catastrophic Project Failure
In the rare instance that a project failure is not addressed by a compliance unit provider within the specified grace period, contract provisions are expected to require financial compensation from the compliance unit provider for the Contra Costa County RAC System to provide MRP Permittees compliance units from another source. During Phases 1 and 2, the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee and/or Administrator would be responsible for locating and attaining Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units to replace defaulted compliance units. In future iterations of the RAC System, a supply of reserve compliance units may be obtained through a reserve pool of compliance units set aside and pooled from MRP Permittees.

7.2.3.3 Assurances for Compliance Unit Providers
Contractual provisions are also expected to provide assurances to compliance unit providers that certified Off-Site GSI Projects would not be subject to modifications to the Contra Costa County RAC System that occur after the establishment of the contract. This would pertain directly to changes to exchange ratios and/or calculation methods for compliance units and certification requirements. These types of contractual provisions are intended to reduce uncertainty and risk for compliance unit providers during their financial planning and decision-making process for Off-Site GSI Projects.

7.2.4 Cost and Demand Uncertainty
The RAC System would average Off-Site GSI Project implementation costs across the RAC System to mitigate design and construction cost variability and allow equitable sale of 123
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 57 March 14, 2023 FINAL
compliance units. Additionally, increases in Equivalent Acre Greened unit costs would be allowed on an ongoing basis. Similarly, the RAC Administrator will conduct regular examination of the sufficiency of O&M fees and may increase these fees as needed to cover costs.

Market demand is subject to many factors. The RAC System has been designed such that largerscale regional stormwater capture facilities could be implemented and generate compliance units for exchange. As larger scale facilities have been demonstrated to be more cost effective than smaller scale facilities, it is expected that RAC System participants would realize cost savings for their compliance needs. Compliance cost savings are likely to encourage demand. 124
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 58 March 14, 2023 FINAL

8. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
Section 8 describes adaptive management procedures for the Contra Costa County RAC System, and Sections 8.2 and 8.3 describe the responsibilities for adaptive management for timing and oversight by entities. This section refers to adaptive management processes that would occur following approval of the Contra Costa County RAC System through a permit amendment or other process, which would allow for the initiation of Phase 2 of the RAC System under MRP 3.

8.1 Scaling the Contra Costa County RAC System
Although Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System has a defined scope for its participants, compliance units, and jurisdiction, the RAC System was envisioned to provide a framework that would allow entities across the Bay Area to meet water quality goals while generating economic opportunities. Scaling the Contra Costa County RAC System to encompass more objectives and participation, or to allow for exchanges with other Countywide regional alternative compliance systems, could create opportunities for economies of scales and incentivize nonregulatory-based interests, such as environmental justice. This section provides considerations for scaling the Contra Costa County RAC System beyond Phase 2.

8.1.1 Scaling for Additional Compliance Units and Control Measures It is anticipated that, after Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System, more control measures and associated compliance units could be integrated to address MRP provisions and other community needs.

8.1.1.1 Provision C.3.g. Hydromodification Management
Permittees with Regulated Projects subject to MRP Provision C.3.g. hydromodification management requirements may participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System to address Provision C.3.b. (LID/GSI requirements) for their Regulated Project off-site provided that their hydromodification control requirements are met on-site. As addressing water quality treatment and hydromodification control in the same on-site facility would be expected to be more costeffective, it is not expected that many Regulated Projects would use this option. The Contra Costa County RAC System could be updated in the future to incorporate a separate Permittee hydromodification management track for a new hydromodification management compliance unit, if there is substantial interest.

The Permittee hydromodification management track would include a separate suite of hydromodification management facilities developed to ensure that impacts to soft-bottomed receiving waters directly downstream of Regulated Projects are adequately mitigated. These projects could potentially include regional hydromodification controls and/or in-stream measures as defined in MRP Provision C.3.g.iv. The impact to the direct receiving waters of Regulated Projects would necessitate a compliance unit that takes into account flow control mitigation that is based on the amount of impervious surface mitigated and geographically-specific to address the direct receiving waters. This hydromodification compliance unit would have to consider the relative location of Regulated Projects and Off-Site GSI Projects and would involve specific boundary restrictions on exchanges based on sub-watersheds. 125
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 59 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Participating Regulated Projects seeking C.3.g hydromodification management compliance would participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System through payment of an exchangespecific hydromodification management compliance payment that would be added to the overall compliance purchase, along with a parcel-specific hydromodification management ongoing O&M fee, which would be added to the ongoing O&M fee.

8.1.1.2 Net Environmental Benefit
As described, during Phases 1 and 2, the funds collected for the NEB Ratio would be directed towards additional Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units. The additional Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units associated with the NEB Ratio for each exchange would provide a net increase in impervious surface treated and/or a net reduction in pollutant load.

Following the Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System, the NEB Ratio could be directed towards an expanded list of water quality projects and programs beyond additional Equivalent Acres Greened, in response to changing water quality objectives. These would be considered as part of the Contra Costa County RAC System adaptive management procedures described in Section 8.3.

8.1.2 Tracking and Incentivizing Ancillary Benefits
The LID/GSI and pollutant control measures implemented through the Contra Costa County RAC System may generate valuable co-benefits for Contra Costa County communities that are unrelated to provisions of the MRP, such as climate resiliency, localized flooding reduction, and environmental justice for disadvantaged communities. The objectives of the Contra Costa County RAC System could be expanded in the future beyond alternative compliance and include the incentivization of these types of ecosystem services and social benefits for Contra Costa County communities.

Incentivization of co-benefits could be accomplished by creating compliance units for each ancillary benefit and/or identifying disadvantaged communities and incorporating discounting factors into the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee’s selection criteria for Off-Site GSI Projects.

Compliance unit providers could be incentivized to generate ancillary benefits through discount factors applied to Equivalent Acres Greened compliance unit-generating projects (e.g., through the WQB Ratio) that meet a minimum threshold for ancillary benefits and/or are located in designated disadvantaged communities. There may also be opportunities to maximize ancillary benefits through use of a CBP3 approach, see Section 6.6.

8.1.3 Scaling for Additional Participation
Although the Contra Costa County RAC System is envisioned to provide alternative compliance for Regulated Projects, there are several public and private entities in the Bay Area with overlapping interests and water quality goals that would benefit from participation in the RAC System.

8.1.3.1 Additional Buyers
During Phase 2, the primary source of funding for the Contra Costa County RAC System OffSite GSI Projects would be compliance purchase payments collected from Permittees and private developers of Regulated Projects participating in the RAC System. The RAC System could incorporate ancillary funding from sources invested in water quality improvements in the Bay 126
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 60 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Area, including Caltrans, Phase II MS4 permitted entities, IGP or individual NPDES Permittees, POTWs interested in TMDL reductions, or conservation groups interested in “retiring” (i.e., purchasing for non-compliance related water quality benefit) compliance units.

After or during Phase 2, it is recommended that the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee conduct a preliminary investigation into the interest and demand from other NDPES-regulated entities. If demand exists from other entities to participate in the Contra Costa County RAC System, the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee could identify amendments to the Contra Costa County RAC System framework and Off-Site GSI Project selection criteria that could widen the scope of potential buyers of compliance units generated from Off-Site GSI Projects.

For example, if demand exists from IGP Permittees, the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee could identify revisions to the certification process such that compliance units generated in the system could be used by both developers and IGP Permittees. An expansion of System buyers to other NPDES-permitted entities may require review and approval by the Water Board, the State Water Resources Control Board, EPA, and/or other regulators.

The Subcommittee could also consider creating a simple cost structure for other entities, as streamlining the funding process has been a heavily echoed sentiment from current MRP Permittees and a likely request from other entities.

8.1.3.2 Additional Compliance Unit Generators
The anticipated compliance unit providers during the Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System are municipalities and private entrepreneurial entities with experience developing LID/GSI in the urban landscape. As the Contra Costa County RAC System expands, it is anticipated that other public entities or non-governmental organization with similar water quality objectives could participate in generating cost-effective compliance units through economies of scale with large mitigation projects. In the Bay Area, this could potentially include Caltrans Trash/POC mitigation projects, source control programs, stream restoration projects led by nongovernmental organizations, or other similar water quality improvement projects or programs.

8.1.4 Scaling for a Regional Inter-County Program
One of the priorities envisioned for the Contra Costa County RAC System following Phase 2 is exploring how to expand the RAC System to include additional Permittees, outside of Contra Costa County, subject to the MRP requirements and the PCBs and mercury TMDLs, across the Bay Area. Scaling the Contra Costa County RAC System to a larger regional inter-county program may require:
• Coordination and agreement between counties to ensure uniform adoption of the Contra Costa County RAC System framework;
• Approval from regulators;
• Clear roles for collecting and dispersing compliance purchase payments and ongoing O&M fees; certification, verification, and tracking of compliance units; and, if possible, identification of centralized entities that may be able provide these services across jurisdictions;
127
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 61 March 14, 2023 FINAL
• Inclusion of inter-county stakeholders in Contra Costa County RAC System RAC Subcommittee;
• Consensus on how Permittees may claim pollutant load reductions generated by Off-Site GSI Projects in other jurisdictions for Regulated Projects within their jurisdiction and vice versa;
• Refinement or expansion of Rainfall Ratio to account for precipitation rainfall across the Bay Area;
• Considerations for pollutants of concern hot spots in an inter-county context; and/or • Updates to the tracking system to incorporate new counties and avoidance of issues such as double-counting.

8.1.5 Scaling for Other Considerations
As participation grows, the Contra Costa County RAC System may consider leveraging a larger number of Off-Site GSI Projects across the System to mitigate the risk of catastrophic project failure. This could be accomplished in future iterations with a reserve pool of compliance units, which is often implemented through a reserve ratio applied to the buyer. For example, a reserve ratio of 1.1:1 would require 10% of purchased Equivalent Acres Greened to be set aside for a reserve pool that would be used to mitigate any catastrophic project failures in the System.

8.2 Ongoing System Decision Points
Regular review and revision of the Contra Costa County RAC System Off-Site GSI Projects and the technical aspects of the Contra Costa County RAC System is anticipated. These ongoing decision points would be the responsibility of the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee and System Administrator.

8.2.1 Selection Criteria for Off-Site GSI Projects
Off-Site GSI Projects generating the compliance units to meet the initial projected demand could be constructed as part of the same contract through a pay-for-performance or CBP3 contracting model. If a larger regional contract to implement Off-Site GSI Projects is pursued, one primary function of the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee would include developing criteria for Off-Site GSI Project selection, reviewing applications, and approving Off-Site GSI Project for compliance unit generation for the contract. Criteria for selection may include but not be limited to:
confirmation the Off-Site GSI Project meets baseline requirements, TMDL load reduction potential, multi-benefits provided, geographic location, and/or costs.

8.2.2 Technical Review
The CCCWP RAC Subcommittee and/or their appointed technical reviewers would be responsible for providing regular review on the technical aspects of the Contra Costa County RAC System and proposing updates to the RAC System framework, as necessary. This may include, but not be limited to, regular review and revision of:
• Approved control measures and quantification methodologies for associated generated compliance units;
128
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 62 March 14, 2023 FINAL
• Precipitation and land use classification data;
• System Ratios, including the Rainfall Ratio, Pollutant Ratio, WQB Ratio, or other ratios that may be incorporated;
• Equivalent Acres Greened compliance unit calculation; and/or • Key System Tracking Tool capabilities.

Other control measures not included in section 5.3 could be used to generate Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units, if compliance unit providers wishing to use them can demonstrate that the facilities are designed consistent with the C.3 Guidebook requirements (CCCWP, 2017) and provide equivalent volume capture and pollutant load reduction performance as the facility types listed. It is envisioned that Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System would limit allowable control measures to LID/GSI facilities only. Non-LID/GSI facility types could potentially be considered in the future, through the Contra Costa County RAC System adaptive management protocol outlined in Section 8.3.2.

8.3 Procedures for System Changes
As the Contra Costa County RAC System evolves and expands, there could be interest in incorporating new pollutants of concern, benefits, participants, and jurisdictions into the System framework. Changes related to the System framework would involve the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee, identified technical advisors, the Flood Control District, contracted entities, and/or others involved in System administration, and incorporate stakeholder recommendations.

Preliminarily, it is expected that minor programmatic changes to the Contra Costa County RAC System would be updated in RAC System Documents but would not require policy related changes. However, any changes to the RAC System that could affect water quality outcomes would require an amendment to the MRP. These major changes would entail completion of the formal permit amendment process required by the Water Board. RAC System changes would be expected to be reported through the required RAC System reporting processes.

8.3.1 Process for RAC System Changes
The Contra Costa County RAC System is expected to be reviewed regularly. RAC System changes would be completed on an as-needed basis and would involve the following process:
• Draft RAC System Priorities - The CCCWP RAC Subcommittee would be responsible for identifying areas for change in the Contra Costa County RAC System framework. The RAC System Priorities process would summarize the status of the RAC System, identify changes, and whether proposed changes would require completion of a formal permit amendment process.
• Stakeholder Feedback– The CCCWP RAC Subcommittee would be responsible for sharing the RAC System priorities, with any identified technical advisors as well as the public to collect feedback. This process is envisioned to be separate from a formal public input process that may occur as part of a permit amendment. • Technical Recommendations - Technical aspects of the Contra Costa County RAC System framework would be reviewed on an as-needed basis by the CCCWP RAC 129
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 63 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Subcommittee and/or technical advisors. These components may be reviewed based on outcomes observed by the RAC System Administrator and CCCWP RAC Subcommittee, or may be reviewed per a request from the Water Board following formal reporting procedures. Recommendations for changes would be developed prior to a regularly scheduled RAC System Strategy Meeting. Technical recommendations would only be applied to future exchanges; they would not affect exchanges already completed or in progress (i.e., it is anticipated that all completed exchanges would be “grandfathered” under the RAC System). Technical aspects that may be reviewed include:
 Precipitation and equivalent stormwater runoff across locations  Land use classification and equivalent pollutant loading across locations  Ratios pertaining to equivalency, uncertainty, and (potentially) reserve ratios  Compliance purchase compliance unit calculation
 Allowable control measures
 Integrating a market-based approach to determine cost per Equivalent Acres Greened
• RAC System Strategy Meeting – The CCCWP RAC Subcommittee and technical advisors would convene on a regular basis to share stakeholder feedback and recommendations pertaining to the RAC System framework and draft system priorities prior to completing RAC System changes.
• RAC System Changes and Public Notification - The CCCWP System Administrator would amend the RAC System Framework with the approved list of recommended RAC System amendments. The RAC System Administrator will publish notices of any substantial amendments made to the RAC System to participants and the general public. • Permit Reissuance Cycles and Permit Amendments – Substantial structural changes to the RAC System may require changes to permit language for the RAC System option.

Permit language changes, if identified, are anticipated to occur during permit reissuance cycles; however, there is a possibility that future permit amendments may be needed.

8.3.2 Changes to Preapproved List of Control Measures
Potential compliance unit providers interested in generating Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units would be encouraged to design projects using control measures from the preapproved list of control measures (Section 4.2.1.2). Changes to allowable control measure types that are not accepted in the current MRP and/or future issuances would be expected to result in a formal permit amendment process.

8.4 Funding and Financing Considerations

8.4.1 Financing of Off-Site GSI Projects
Adaptive management of the implementation of the Off-Site GSI Projects would be required at the project level and programmatically. For each Off-Site GSI Project, the project design and implementation plan would be required to address elements of risk, uncertainty, and the dynamic 130
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 64 March 14, 2023 FINAL
nature of these GSI projects to optimize performance. This also may include financial assurances (e.g., performance bonds) and adaptive management criteria. Adaptive management is likely to be particularly important for Off-Site GSI Projects implemented through a pay-for-performance or CBP3 contracting model with compliance unit providers, financed upfront through public or private financing opportunities.

8.4.2 Compliance Purchase Amount Review and Adjustment
At the programmatic level, the RAC System Fund may be evaluated regularly by the CCCWP System Administrator to address the annual inflation rate, market conditions, changes in the regulatory environment, new procurement strategies, and construction and project stewardship costs. If the implementation costs for the Contra Costa County RAC System exceed compliance purchase revenue, then the CCCWP System Administrator may adjust the compliance purchase components upward to address the documented deficiencies. Following Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System, the funding and financing for the RAC System would be expected to change as the RAC System evolves.

The Contra Costa County RAC System would include a process to regularly evaluate the sufficiency of the compliance purchase amounts, particularly the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost and the administrative payment, and to adjust the compliance purchase components as needed. The CCCWP System Administrator would regularly evaluate how Off-Site GSI Project implementation costs align with the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost (CostEAG) and could make associated needed adjustments. This could be based on the RAC System regular reporting process.

Adaptive management procedures for the ongoing O&M fees would be defined in updates to the Flood Control District Expenditure Policy, the O&M fee Operational Procedures; and the O&M fee Operational Plan, developed as part of the establishment and approval of the ongoing O&M fee.

Some programs note that cumbersome processes discourage them from adjusting prices as frequently as may be desirable. Others have reported that they have standard practices in place for regular—often annual—evaluation of whether the payments collected are enough to cover project and administrative costs. Programs that have flexibility to update their required payment amounts without lengthy approval or amendment processes may be better equipped to update the payment amounts as needed.
131
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 65 March 14, 2023 FINAL

9. OVERVIEW OF TRACKING TOOL
Section 9 describes the accounting and reporting system, required for proposed program submittal per MRP 3 Fact Sheet.

9.1 Contra Costa County RAC System Components Tracked
A RAC System Tracking Tool is being developed for the Contra Costa County RAC System by SFEI. The RAC System Tracking Tool will include a comprehensive database to track components of the RAC System and relate RAC System components to existing tracking tools.

The components tracked will include:
• Off-Site GSI Project identification; location (i.e., geospatial information); drainage area and imperviousness; rainfall zone; tributary land uses; control measure type; and calculated compliance units.
 Off-Site GSI Project certification, including confirmation of appropriate control measure type and sizing; and links to relevant forms completed by certifying entities.
 On-going GSI Project verification, including the results of regular inspections and links to relevant forms completed by certifying entities.  Compliance units, including: Off-Site GSI Project generating units; rainfall zone; and tributary land use.
 Off-Site GSI Project ledger, tracking the number of compliance units sold and associated exchange identification numbers (see below); and the remaining compliance units available for purchase.
• Regulated Project information, linked from the County’s existing AGOL tool. • Exchange Information, including: an exchange identification number; the number of compliance units required for purchase by a Regulated Project, calculated using Equation 4-8 in Section 4 of this document; or the number of compliance units desired for purchase by another buyer; the identified compliance units for purchase with associated attributes; the compliance purchase payment amount, including applicable administrative payments associated with the jurisdictions in which the Off-Site Project and/or buyer are located in, along with the System administrator; the ongoing O&M fee identification; links to relevant agreements signed by the Regulated Project and/or other buyer, and confirmation that the compliance purchase has been paid.
• O&M fee tracking, potentially linked to the Flood Control District’s tax tracking system.

Other Contra Costa County RAC System information that will be tracked at the administrative level include signed agreements from participants, contracts with CBP3 developers or others implementing Off-Site GSI Projects, System rules and requirements, and summaries of regular meetings and resulting amendments/addendums to System rules and requirements. 132
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 66 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Section 10 and Appendix C include additional information on templates that will be completed for the Contra Costa County RAC System and include details of the data collected and tracked in the System Tracking Tool.

9.2 Accounting System
The RAC System Tracking Tool will include an accounting system that provides tracking of generated compliance units, compliance purchase amounts, and whether and when payments were made. Generated compliance units will be populated in the RAC System Tracking Tool associated with the Off-Site GSI Projects, and a linked ledger will track “sold” compliance units and available compliance units. It is expected that financial tracking will be conducted by individual jurisdictions collecting and/or transferring compliance purchase payments, but the System Tracking Tool will include tracking of whether and when the payment was made. It is expected that O&M fee financial tracking will be managed by the O&M fee Administrator and/or the Flood Control District.

9.3 Reporting System
Template documents will be used to document Off-Site GSI Project certification, verification, and individual exchanges. This information will be available as completed forms linked within the System Tracking Tool, as well as in the System Tracking Tool database, as described in Section 9.1. Reporting will be completed by the System Administrator in accordance with the requirements of the Water Board and MRP 3. Information regarding implemented Off-Site GSI Projects, certification, verification, exchanges, and ongoing O&M will be readily available in the System Tracking Tool. It is anticipated that this data would be extracted for annual reports using a defined process based on the established reporting requirements. 133
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 67 March 14, 2023 FINAL

10. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM TEMPLATE

DOCUMENTS

10.1 Approach to Development of RAC System Templates
The System templates and forms were designed to build on existing processes, forms, and tracking systems where possible. The CCCWP has developed a number of standard templates and forms for Regulated Project design review, construction inspection, and O&M verification that were incorporated into the documents for RAC System certification, verification, and tracking.

System templates/forms need to document all aspects of the RAC System, including:
• The Regulated Project’s use of the alternative (off-site) compliance option; • The Off-Site GSI Project, including:
 Facility attributes;
 Design review, construction inspection, and certification;  Ongoing O&M (including O&M Plan and Agreement) and O&M verification; • Exchange details, including total compliance units and equivalency; and • Necessary agreements and/or resolutions among participants in the RAC System.

The RAC System templates/forms need to interface with the RAC System Tracking Tool, described in Section 9. Some of the forms will be used to input data directly into the Tracking Tool, and some of the templates/forms will be uploaded as documents for storage in the Tracking Tool. Development of the RAC System templates/forms requires close coordination with the design and development of the Tracking Tool to ensure an integrated approach.

The following sections describe the existing and newly developed forms to be used to document the various aspects of the System.

10.2 Regulated Project Documentation

10.2.1 Stormwater Control Plan
CCCWP Permittees currently require that a Regulated Project applicant submit a Stormwater Control Plan describing the project and site characteristics, the selection and sizing of required site design, source control, stormwater treatment measures, and operation and maintenance of treatment measures. For this purpose, Permittees have used or adapted the existing CCCWP Stormwater Control Plan template.22
As part of development of RAC System templates, the existing Stormwater Control Plan template has been modified to include sections to document the applicant’s choice of alternative 22 Existing CCCWP templates and forms can be found on the CCCWP website:
https://www.cccleanwater.org/development-infrastructure/development 134
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 68 March 14, 2023 FINAL
compliance (in lieu of some or all onsite treatment) and to require submittal of the Off-Site GSI Project Data Form (Section 10.3.1) and the Alternative Compliance Exchange Documentation Form (see Section 10.4). These two forms, available from the System Tracking Tool, will document an authorized exchange and payment of compliance purchases and will allow the reviewing agency to confirm compliance with MRP Provision C.3. The modified Stormwater Control Plan is provided in Appendix C-11.

For Regulated Projects selecting alternative compliance, applicants would use the revised Stormwater Control Plan to provide project data, identify required source controls, and incorporate site design measures where feasible.

10.2.2 Regulated Project Tracking in AGOL
Contra Costa Permittees currently use the AGOL Application, “C3 Project Tracking and Load Reduction Tool” to track completed Regulated Projects and associated stormwater treatment measures in order to calculate estimated PCBs and mercury load reductions resulting from these projects. For Regulated Projects selecting alternative compliance, project attributes would continue to be entered into AGOL per the current procedure. The use of the System would be entered under the “Alternative Compliance Measures” field in AGOL, which would link to information about the Off-Site GSI Project, which would have also been entered into AGOL when completed and certified via the Off-Site GSI Project ID.

10.3 Off-Site GSI Project Forms
This section reviews the forms required to describe, certify, and verify the Off-Site GSI Project/s and provide documentation in the RAC System Tracking Tool. These forms include a number of existing forms currently used by Contra Costa Permittees as well as three new forms specific to implementing the System.

10.3.1 Pre-Construction Off-Site GSI Project Data and Design Certification Form The Pre-Construction Off-Site GSI Project Data and Design Certification Form (Appendix C-3) is a new form that will only be used for Off-Site GSI Projects that are approved by the RAC System Administrator and/or local jurisdiction to exchange compliance units prior to final construction. This form contains the attributes of the Off-Site GSI Project that will be entered into the Tracking Tool. This form will be completed after review and approval of the Off-Site GSI Project to generate compliance units. It will also be used to summarize the design review and approval processes completed by the Certifying Entity. It includes sign-offs by Certifying Entity staff on design review. For these Off-Site GSI Projects, the Off-Site GSI Project Data Form (Appendix C-4) and the Off-Site GSI Project Post-Construction Certification Form (Appendix C-5) must be updated and submitted once construction is completed, no later than three years after initial exchange of compliance units.

Off-Site GSI Projects that are not approved for compliance unit exchange prior to construction do not need to complete the Pre-Construction Off-Site GSI Project Data and Design Certification Form (Appendix C-3), and will instead just complete the Off-Site GSI Project Data Form (Appendix C-4) and the Off-Site GSI Project Post-Construction Certification Form (Appendix C-5).
135
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 69 March 14, 2023 FINAL

10.3.2 Off-Site GSI Project Data Form
The Off-Site GSI Project Data Form (Appendix C-4) is a new form containing the attributes of the Off-Site GSI Project that will be entered into the Tracking Tool. This form will be completed after review and approval of the Off-Site GSI Project to generate compliance units. If review and approval occurs prior to certification, the form will be updated when certification occurs postconstruction. Attributes to be entered into the form (and subsequently the Tracking Tool) include: facility ID number; facility type and location; Drainage Area size(s), location(s), and land use(s); total impervious and pervious surface within the Drainage Area(s); total greened acres; facility owner; and optionally, project cost; and associated multiple benefits.

10.3.3 Off-Site GSI Project Post-Construction Certification Form The Off-Site GSI Project Post-Construction Certification Form (Appendix C-5) is a new form that will be used to summarize the design and construction review and approval processes completed by the Certifying Entity. It includes sign-offs by Certifying Entity staff on design review and construction inspections, as well as verification of a complete and acceptable O&M Plan and, as appropriate, an O&M Agreement. It also helps organize the multiple documents that are currently used by Contra Costa Permittees to (1) conduct inspections of stormwater treatment facilities during and at completion of construction, and (2) fulfill MRP requirements for ensuring facilities will be properly maintained for the life of the project by a responsible party. These existing documents include:
• Stormwater Treatment Facilities Construction Inspection Checklist (Appendix C-6) • Stormwater Facilities O&M Plan Template (Appendix C-7) • Stormwater Management Facilities O&M Agreement Template (Appendix C-8) These three documents also need to be prepared for the Off-Site GSI Project and uploaded to the Tracking Tool to complete the certification process. There will likely be multiple Construction Inspection Checklists, since inspections are conducted during different phases of construction of the Off-Site GSI Project, as well as at completion of construction.

10.3.4 Off-Site GSI Project O&M Verification Form
The Off-Site GSI Project O&M Verification Form (Appendix C-10) is another new summary form that documents that: 1) O&M of the Off-Site GSI Project was performed; 2) O&M verification inspections were conducted (by whom and when); and 3) any maintenance deficiencies found were corrected. It relies on the use of the existing Stormwater Facility O&M Inspection Report (Appendix C-9) for documentation of the O&M verification inspections. The O&M Verification Form is intended to be completed once the O&M verification inspection(s) have been completed by the Verifying Entity. If deficiencies in maintenance are found, there may need to be one or more additional inspections performed to ensure that deficiencies have been corrected before the O&M Verification Form can be completed and uploaded into the Tracking Tool.

Note that the O&M Verification Form is required to be uploaded to the Tracking Tool as proof of ongoing Off-Site GSI Project verification. However, the Stormwater Facility O&M Inspection 136
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 70 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Report forms are to be retained by the Verifying Entity and the inspection data from the forms entered into the Verifying Entity’s local O&M inspection database.

10.4 Exchange Documentation
An “Alternative Compliance Exchange Documentation Form” (Appendix C-10) was developed to document each individual exchange transaction that takes place in the Contra Costa County RAC System and confirm that: (1) the required compliance purchases were paid; and (2) the exchange was reported to the O&M fee Administrator so that the required annual O&M fees can be added to the regulated parcel’s property tax fees. An individual exchange transaction is defined as the payment of compliance purchases and annual O&M fees by the owner of the Regulated Project (i.e., the buyer) in exchange for a specified quantity of Equivalent Acres Greened produced by one Off-Site GSI Project (i.e., the seller). Each individual exchange transaction is assigned a unique Exchange ID.

The Alternative Compliance Exchange Documentation Form provides the details of the exchange, including calculation of the quantity of Equivalent Acres Greened that a Regulated Project needs to purchase for compliance purposes, the amount of Equivalent Acres Greened that the Regulated Project is purchasing from a specific Off-Site GSI Project with this exchange, and calculation of the compliance purchase amounts and annual O&M fees associated with the amount of Equivalent Acres Greened purchased via this exchange. The Form also provides confirmation that the compliance purchase was paid in full and that the information on annual O&M fees was provided to the O&M fee Administrator to allow for ongoing fees for the Regulated Project’s parcel. If a Regulated Project is purchasing Equivalent Acres Greened from more than one Off-Site GSI Project, a separate Form is completed for each exchange. Each Form is uploaded to the Tracking Tool and linked to the appropriate Off-Site GSI Project via the Facility ID. The Regulated Project associated with each Exchange ID is identified with the same Regulated Project ID that is used in the County’s AGOL system.

10.5 Participant MOU and Stormwater Ordinance Language and Participant MOU
Example stormwater ordinance language and an example agreement or MOU are provided in Appendix C. Jurisdictions would be expected to update their Stormwater Ordinances to include the Contra Costa County RAC System as a compliance option for Regulated Projects. Model Stormwater Ordinance language to include the RAC System is provided in Appendix C-1. Note that this is expected to be updated following Water Board approval of the final Contra Costa County RAC System . In addition to updating their Stormwater Ordinances, Permittees would be required to complete the agreement to participate in the RAC System, to allow Off-Site GSI Projects to be located within their jurisdictions, and to allow Regulated Projects within their jurisdictions to participate in the RAC System. It is expected that the example MOU provided in Appendix C-2 may be updated for consistency with the Contra Costa County RAC System permit amendment or other Water Board approval documentation and will be further reviewed by City attorneys before being finalized for Phase 2 of the RAC System. 137
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 71 March 14, 2023 FINAL

11. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RAC SYSTEM NEXT STEPS
Section 11 describes Contra Costa County RAC System expectations for timing.

This RAC System Summary Report primarily describes the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System structure that is envisioned to be implemented during Phase 2 (i.e., initial System rollout). Prior to initiating Phase 2 and following completion of this System Summary Report, one to two Phase 1 pilot exchanges will be conducted to test key components of the proposed Contra Costa County RAC System structure. Any lessons learned during the Phase 1 pilot exchanges will be applied to this System Summary Report to create the Final Program Documents used to guide Phase 2 of the Contra Costa County RAC System. Phase 2 will be launched after Water Board approval of the RAC System as an option under Provision C.3.e through a permit amendment or other mechanism.

During the Contra Costa County RAC System launch and initial implementation as part of Phase 2, the CCCWP RAC Subcommittee and System Administrator will use the adaptive management procedures described in Section 8 to amend the Final Program Documents to address lessons learned. After this Contra Costa County RAC System establishment period and implementation of required System adjustments and amendments, the System will shift into Phase 3, during which the System will be fully operational. At this phase, it is expected that adaptive management adjustments will be minimal and based primarily on forces external to the RAC System, such as market and regulatory changes.

A proposed schedule for Contra Costa County RAC System implementation and launch following completion of this RAC System Summary Report is provided in Table 9. Key administrative entities responsible for the next steps listed are identified. The time frames included in the table are subject to change depending on lessons learned during Phase 1 or Phase

2. Based on this anticipated schedule, the Contra Costa County RAC System will be fully established and operational (i.e., in Phase 3 of development) by 2029 to 2030.

Table 9: Contra Costa County RAC System Implementation Phases Schedule Stage Who Steps Anticipated
Time Period
Phase 1
(Pilot
Exchanges)
Project
Steering
Committee
and Project
Consultant
Team

1. Identify Equivalent Acres Greened compliance units.

2. Identify buyer(s).

3. Calculate compliance units and compliance purchase
amount for pilot exchange.

4. Develop MOUs.

5. Perform Certification and Tracking.

6. Pilot Template Documents.

7. Report Lessons Learned.
2022–2023
138
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 72 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Stage Who Steps Anticipated
Time Period
Phase 2
(Initial
System
Roll-Out)
CCCWP
System
Administrator

1. Prepare MRP amendment submittal.

2. Update CCCWP MOU or establish other agreement for
permittee participants.

3. Establish CCCWP administrator, subcommittee(s),
meeting scheduling, and other administrative structural needs.

4. Establish financial transaction processes.

5. Identify project implementation strategy (e.g., financing for larger-scale implementation through CBP3 or other
process).

6. Conduct cost study to set the Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost portion of the Phase 2 compliance purchase.

7. (As applicable) Identify compliance unit generator
contractor(s).
2022-2026
O&M Fee
Administrator

1. Establish O&M fee mechanism (proposed to be a
Community Facilities District).

2. Establish O&M Fund.

3. Develop and implement Operational Procedures that
describe how the O&M fees are levied, managed, and
distributed through the identified mechanism and/or
other administrative funds and processes.

4. Conduct cost study to set Phase 2 ongoing O&M fee rate schedule or per unit amount.
2023-2026
Permittees 1. Perform CEQA evaluation.

2. Update Stormwater Ordinance (see Appendix C)

3. Develop administrative payment and payment transfer. processes and other financial processes.

4. Sign agreement with CCCWP Administrator.

5. Receive training and/or instructions for RAC System
implementation.
2023-2025
All entities 1. Launch System (including outreach).

2. Conduct minor ongoing adaptive management.
2025-2027
Phase 3 and
beyond
(Established
and Fully
Operational
System)
CCCWP
Regional
Alternative
Compliance
Subcommittee

1. Evaluate Phase 2 of System (see Section 8).

2. Submit supplemental information as part of MRP 3
Report of Waste Discharge or MRP 4 permit reissuance
process.

3. Identify needed internal RAC System changes based on results of evaluation.

4. Adjust Equivalent Acre Greened unit cost portion of the compliance purchase as needed.

5. Consider outreach or other expansion needs.

6. Conduct ongoing adaptive management processes.
2028-2029
CCCWP
Administrator

1. Amend System as needed (see Section 8).

2. Conduct outreach relating to System expansion needs.

3. Implement ongoing adaptive management needs.
2028-2030
O&M Fee
Administrator

1. Adjust ongoing O&M fee amount as needed. 2028-2029
139
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 73 March 14, 2023 FINAL

12. REFERENCES
American Associate of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2015.

Transferability of Post-Construction Stormwater Quality BMP Effectiveness Studies.

Standing Committee on the Environment. July.

Barrett, M.E. 2005. “Performance comparison of structural stormwater best management practices.” Water Environ. Res., 77(1): 78-86.

California State Water Resources Control Board. 2013. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/docs/phase_ii_municipa m/provisions_phaseii_smallms4permit.pdf
City of San Pablo. 2020. Regional Alternative Compliance System Literature Review. Prepared by Kieser & Associates and Geosyntec Consultants.

Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP). 2017. Stormwater C.3. Guidebook: Stormwater Quality Requirements for Development Applications. 7th Edition. May.

CCCWP. 2020. Contra Costa PCBs and Mercury TMDL Control Measure Plan and Reasonable Assurance Analysis. September.

Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. (Geosyntec) and Wright Water Engineers, Inc. 2009. Urban Stormwater BMP Performance Monitoring. October.

Geosyntec. 2019. Regional Watershed Spreadsheet Model Version 1.0 Results Summary Memorandum. April.

Geosyntec. 2022. East Contra Costa Methylmercury Control Measure Plan and Reasonable Assurance Analysis. Prepared by Geosyntec Consultants for the Contra Costa Clean Water Program. November.

Leisenring, M., M. Barrett, C.A. Pomeroy, A. Poresky, L.A. Roesner, A.C. Rowney, and E.

Strecker. 2013. Linking BMP Systems Performance to Receiving Water Protection - BMP Performance Algorithms. Final report to the Water Environment Research Foundation, Alexandria, VA. WERF SWC1R06bmp.

Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). 2021. Bay Area UrbanSim. http://bayareametro.github.io/bayarea_urbansim/model_overview/ .

Pitt, R. 2015. National Stormwater Quality Database (NSQD) v 4.02. Downloaded January 28, 2021. bmpdatabase.org/nsqdstat.html
PRISM Climate Group. 2023. Oregon State University, http://prism.oregonstate.edu. Accessed March 2023.
140
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 74 March 14, 2023 FINAL
San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI). 2018. Regional Watershed Spreadsheet Model (RWSM) Toolbox v1.0 User Manual and Pollutant Model. Available here:
https://www.sfei.org/projects/regional-watershed-spreadsheetmodel#sthash.kOKnKvF2.dpbs.

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board). 2015. Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. Order No. R2-2015-0049. NPDES Permit No.

CAS612008. San Francisco Bay California Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Water Board, 2022. Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. Order No. R2-2022-0018.

NPDES Permit No. CAS612008. San Francisco Bay California Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Waddell, Paul. 2013. Draft Technical Documentation: San Francisco Bay Area UrbanSim Application. Prepared for Metropolitan Transportation Commission in collaboration with Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).

Wu, J., A.N. Gilbreath, and L.J. McKee. 2016. Regional Watershed Spreadsheet Model (RWSM):

Year 5 Progress Report. A technical report prepared for the Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in San Francisco Bay (RMP), Sources, Pathways and Loadings Workgroup (SPLWG), Small Tributaries Loading Strategy (STLS). Contribution No. 788. San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, California.
141
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 75 March 14, 2023 FINAL

GLOSSARY
Alternative Compliance Systems: Flexible compliance programs that allow regulated dischargers with costly or infeasible pollution control requirements to meet equivalent discharge reductions by investing in the implementation of cost-effective and feasible controls at other source locations, thereby achieving an overall environmental benefit at a reduced overall cost.

Baseline: Requirements that must be achieved by a source before generating a unit of metric.

This may include meeting specific load reduction requirements before surplus load reductions may be exchanged or other requirements in the alternative compliance system.

Buyer: The regulated entity that purchases or provides funding for surplus compliance units generated by another entity to meet their own water quality compliance requirements.

Certification: Process that involves the formal inspection, documentation and tracking of implemented actions necessary to ensure the benefits being exchanged as compliance units are being achieved throughout time. Certification is a demonstration to all stakeholders that the project that is generating compliance units will meet expectations. Certification often involves third-party project reviews and physical inspections of implemented practices to ensure actions are appropriately designed, implemented and maintained to achieve intended outcomes as defined by the alternative compliance system framework, guidelines and/or requirements.

Compliance and Enforcement: Entity that ensures that criteria for participants in an alternative compliance system are being met. In the event of non-compliance, the entity can either report to, or is, a delegated authority able to enforce water quality non-compliance provisions as necessary.

Control Measure: Structural or non-structural practices, management changes, or activities that can be implemented to generate measurable or estimated compliance units in an alternative compliance system.

Community-Based Public-Private-Partnership: A form of alternative delivery in which a government agency and private entity partner to improve both water quality and quality of life for a community in a cost-effective way. CBP3s are typically focused on implementing green infrastructure approaches that provide for local economic growth in urban and underserved community.

Compliance Unit: A common measurement unit of equivalent pollutant discharge reduction that reflects both the regulatory pollution control requirement and the measurable or estimated outcome at the alternative source of control. This metric is often expressed as mass pollutant load reduction per time (e.g., pounds/year) or as a scientifically-defensible measure of equivalency between the regulatory requirement and the benefits metric from the alternative control (e.g., “acres greened”, “acres treated”, or “volume managed/treated”). The compliance unit in an alternative compliance system is the unit of water quality benefit, such as a pollution reduction credit or offset, that can be generated and utilized in the alternative compliance system.

Compliance Unit Providers: Entities or individuals that construct or otherwise implement OffSite GSI Projects that are certified through the Contra Costa County RAC System. Compliance 142
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 76 March 14, 2023 FINAL
unit providers are eligible to receive payment when compliance units generated by the Off-Site Projects they have implemented are exchanged.

Compliance Unit-Generating Project: See Off-Site GSI Project.

Current Conditions: An exchange baseline defined as the onsite performance, based on the selected metric(s), of an area prior to the implementation of a control measure or project. This type of exchange baseline allows for all units of water quality benefit generated from a control measure or project to be exchanged as surplus.

Design-Build-Finance (DBF): An approach that combines innovation of design-build with some amount of private sector capital (such as debt or equity). This model often combines private sector funds with existing public sources and allows private capital to fill any gaps in funding.

Design-Build-Finance-Maintain (DBFM): Similar to the DBF approach, DBFM also includes short to medium term financial and maintenance responsibility for the private partner and requires the public partner to retain the responsibility for operation.

Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain-Availability Payment (DBFOM-AP): Similar to DBOM, DBFOM-AP requires the private partner to be responsible for financing while the public partner maintains control over fees and revenue collection (if applicable) and makes preestablished payments to the private entity for project delivery and performance commitments.

Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM): Similar to the DBF approach, DBOM also includes a short to medium-term operational and maintenance responsibility for the private partner.

Eligible Entities: The types of entities that are allowed to participate as either a buyer or seller in an alternative compliance system.

Eligible Exchanges: The types of purchases, trades, and/or sales of compliance units that are allowable in the system.

Exchange: In authorized alternative compliance systems, “exchange” refers to compliance units that can be transacted between entities to mutually achieve required pollutant reductions. Surplus cost-effective pollutant reductions (compliance units) achieved for one pollutant source can be exchanged with another regulated entity for their alternative compliance.

Exchange Ratio: A numerical value used to convert an estimated load reduction into a tradable compliance unit. An exchange (or trade) ratio may include considerations for: 1) lack of information and risk associated with control measures, implementation and performance (uncertainty); 2) trading of different pollutants or different forms of the same pollutant (equivalency); 3) the distance and unique watershed features that will affect pollutant fate and transport between exchanging entities (delivery); and, 4) compliance risk reduction mechanisms (reserve and retirement).

Grants and Reserve Accounts: A fund set aside by an entity to meet future costs of green infrastructure upkeep and any unexpected future costs.

Green Stormwater Infrastructure: Infrastructure that uses vegetation, soils, and natural processes to manage water and create healthier urban environments. At the scale of a city or 143
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 77 March 14, 2023 FINAL
county, green stormwater infrastructure refers to the patchwork of natural areas that provides habitat, localized flood protection, cleaner air, and cleaner water. At the scale of a neighborhood or site, green stormwater infrastructure refers to stormwater management systems that mimic nature by capturing and storing water.

Guidance: In the context of a legal basis for alternative compliance systems, guidance refers to standards or frameworks provided or approved by a Clean Water Act-delegated agency to provide advice on how best to comply with specific rules.

In-Lieu Fee: An approach to compensatory mitigation for losses of aquatic resources that allows Permittees to provide funds in the form of a payment to an administering government or nonprofit conservation organization. Such payments are then pooled to build and maintain off-site mitigation sites.

Legal Basis for Alternative Compliance: Mechanism necessary for implementing an alternative compliance system. This may include, but is not limited to rules, guidance, or plans.

Nonpoint Source: Source of water impairment that does not come from any discernable, confined, and discrete conveyance including, but not limited to, land runoff, precipitation, atmospheric deposition, drainage, seepage, or hydrologic modification.

Off-Site GSI Project: A stormwater capture facility that is designed consistent with MRP C.3.c and C.3.d and captures and treats tributary drainage area that is not associated with a Regulated Project.

Offset Program: Similar to water quality trading, an offset program is a market-based alternative compliance approach in which a source can purchase pollutant reduction credits from another source to achieve a pollutant discharge requirement. Unlike water quality trading, an offset program is often utilized in contexts where regulated dischargers are interested in meeting a water quality pollutant reduction requirement, such as new development or urban growth, but may not have to meet a collective cap on water pollutant discharges.

Performance-based Contracting (PBC): Unlike traditional contracting where payment is based on control measure implementation, performance-based contracting (or “Pay-for-Performance”) is an approach to alternative compliance where payment is contingent on the delivery of an outcome. Performance-based contracting can be utilized in several combinations to tie payment to different outcomes.

Plan: In the context of a legal basis for alternative compliance systems, a plan refers to a Clean Water Act-delegated agency approved course of action, such as a TMDL implementation plan, designed to meet water quality standards.

Point Source: Sources of water impairment that come from any discernable, confined, and discrete conveyance.

Public-Private-Partnership: Partnerships involving collaboration between a government agency and a private entity. P3 models may provide communities with an alternative for the finance, design, construction, and operation and maintenance of green stormwater infrastructure, such as green streets.
144
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report 78 March 14, 2023 FINAL
Regulatory Requirements/TMDL Allocations: An exchange baseline based on regulatory requirements in the region, such as a TMDL allocation. Compliance unit generators must meet these regulatory requirements first, before generating surplus compliance units. Any additional compliance units generated beyond the regulatory requirement by the control measure or project is considered surplus and can be exchanged.

Reserve Pool: A pool of compliance units obtained by the administrator of the alternative compliance system to insure against unforeseen compliance unit losses due to project failure.

These compliance units may be set aside from an applied trade ratio.

Rule: In the context of a legal basis for alternative compliance systems, a rule is formal legislation approved by a state’s legislative body.

Seller: Entity that generates surplus compliance unit by implementing an approved control measure in order to exchange the generated compliance unit(s) with a buyer in an alternative compliance system. Sellers are also referred to as generators.

System Restrictions/Restricted Waters: Potential limitations placed on the generation or utilization of a compliance unit.

Verification: The part of the certification process that involves the physical inspection of control measures for proper implementation, operation, and maintenance to ensure adherence to the requirements of the alternative compliance system. Verification may be performed by the entity responsible for the certification process or by a verification entity approved by the entity responsible for certification.

Water Quality Monitoring and Evaluation: Protocols within an alternative compliance system implemented to measure and/or track program success and shortcomings. This may include sitespecific monitoring of control measures and practices, ambient monitoring of the watershed, or a periodic program evaluation to identify deficiencies in the system design and ensure environmental benefits are being delivered.
145
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report

FIGURES
146
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report

APPENDIX A
Contra Costa County RAC System Tracking Tool
Overview and Instructions
[To Be Provided by SFEI]
147
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report

APPENDIX B
Contra Costa County RAC System Technical
Analyses Details
148
Regional Alternative Compliance System Summary Report

APPENDIX C
Contra Costa County RAC System
Template Documents
149
Project Background
The Cities of San Pablo, and Walnut Creek, and unincorporated Contra Costa County have partnered with USEPA through a San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement Fund grant to develop and pilot a Regional Alternative Compliance (RAC) System within Contra Costa County (the “Contra Costa County RAC System”). Entities in Contra Costa County must comply with the substantial post-construction stormwater treatment (i.e., Provision C.3) requirements of the San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP). Alternative Compliance Systems have been used in other areas of the United States to help municipalities, developers, and industry meet rigorous stormwater compliance requirements. The Water Board and legal reviewers were involved in developing the Contra Costa County RAC System.

What is the Contra Costa County Regional Alternative Compliance (RAC) System? The Contra Costa County RAC System is a program designed to provide a flexible, cost-effective, and scientifically defensible MRP C.3 compliance option to implement required post-construction stormwater treatment off-site.

How does the Contra Costa County RAC System work?
The Contra Costa County RAC System allows green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) treatment facilities or “Off-Site GSI Projects” to be constructed within the County to generate “compliance units” that can be exchanged through the System.

Compliance units can be sold to an interested party (i.e., a developer or municipality) in need of off-site stormwater treatment for MRP compliance.

A seller would design and
construct the Off-Site GSI
Projects that generate Contra
Costa County RAC System
compliance units. Off-Site GSI
Projects require certification
through the Contra Costa
County RAC System before
compliance units can be sold.

A buyer would pay for Contra
Costa County RAC System
compliance units to satisify
their project’s stormwater
compliance needs by
completing a “compliance
purchase”. Buyers would pay
an additional annual fee to
cover the ongoing operations
and maintenance (O&M) of
the Off-Site GSI Projects that
generate compliance units.

What does it mean
to be a “buyer”?
What does it mean
to be a “seller”?
Regional Alternative
Compliance System

PUBLIC FACT SHEET
Contra Costa County Attachment C
150
The Contra Costa County RAC System provides equivalency calculations, template agreements, and an online RAC System Tracking Tool to help interested parties
determine their treatment requirements and complete
transactions through the buying and selling of compliance units.

Why is this important? What is the benefit of a
RAC System?
The Contra Costa County RAC System provides an
opportunity for the strategic development, siting, and
funding of larger regional stormwater treatment facilities (regional Off-Site GSI Projects) in areas with greater
legacy pollutant concerns. Regional stormwater treatment facilities are sited and designed to treat large drainage areas ranging from tens to hundreds of acres.

The Contra Costa County RAC System is also expected
to achieve cost savings for participants as larger stormwater treatment facilities typically have reduced capital and O&M costs per treated acre.

Who might be interested in participating?
Developers - Some development
and redevelopment sites may have
constraints (size, steep grades, etc.) that
make it difficult to build on-site stormwater
treatment. When a project has difficulty
building MRP-required stormwater
treatment on-site, it can use the Contra
Costa County RAC System to comply
with the MRP.

Municipalities - Municipalities may
purchase compliance units to comply
with MRP Provision C.3.j impervious
surface retrofit requirements.

Additionally, municipalities with
Regulated Projects such as large road
reconstruction projects could use the
Contra Costa County RAC System to
comply with the MRP. Municipalities may
also act as “sellers” through the Contra
Costa County RAC System.

Non-profits - Non-profits or other
environmental organizations may be
interested in building GSI facilities
that can be partially funded by selling
compliance units through the Contra
Costa County RAC System.

Contractors - Developers or contractors
may be interested in building Off-Site GSI
Projects to generate compliance units
that can be sold through the Contra Costa
County RAC System.

Next Steps
In 2023 and 2024, the first Contra Costa County
RAC System exchange will be conducted as a pilot,
and System administration processes will be further
developed. The Contra Costa County RAC System is
anticipated to be operational for additional exchanges
by the end of 2024.

More Details on Off-Site GSI
Projects:

Off-Site GSI Projects must be non-regulated, that is,
not required as part of any development project or
“Regulated Project” as defined by the MRP.

The compliance units generated by an Off-Site GSI
Project are calculated based on the acres and land
use that it treats.

Off-Site GSI Projects require ongoing verification,
consistent with processes used for existing GSI
facilities, and are eligible to receive annual operation and maintenance payments so they are properly
maintained.

Regional Alternative
Compliance System

PUBLIC FACT SHEET
Contra Costa County
For more information, please visit the Contra Costa County RAC System Project Website:
www.sanpabloca.gov/2685/Regional-Alternative-Compliance 151
CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.5
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Nate Levine, Public Works Director/Town Engineer Yao Miao, Assistant Engineer Jared Kerr, Engineering Technician
Subject: Street Rehabilitation Construction Contract Award to Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. (CIP 25-401 & 26-401)
Meeting Date: May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA STAFF REPORT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution:

1. Approving the combination of the 2025 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401) and the 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 26-401) into a single project titled the 2025 & 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401), and authorizing the transfer of remaining appropriations and associated funding from CIP 26-401 to CIP 25-401;

3. Authorizing the Town Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract with Bay Cities, including minor non-substantive revisions as approved by the Town Manager and Town Attorney;

4. Authorizing the Town Engineer to issue construction contract change orders in an amount not to exceed $160,901, for a total authorized construction amount not to exceed $1,769,908; and

BACKGROUND
On April 9, 2025, the Town Council approved the 2025 Street Management Program Report 152
and directed staff to implement a “balanced approach” to maintaining Town streets. This approach identified streets for rehabilitation in 2025 and 2026 based on pavement condition, available funding, treatment timing, and the Town’s overall pavement management priorities.

Following that direction, staff prepared one combined bid package for the 2025 and 2026 street rehabilitation work. Combining the two years of construction work into a single construction contract was intended to reduce mobilization costs, improve unit pricing through larger bid quantities, coordinate construction more efficiently, and deliver the planned street rehabilitation work during the 2026 construction season.

The rehabilitation work includes pavement improvements on the street segments listed below, along with related storm drain, utility, and roadway improvements within the paving limits, as needed to support the new pavement and extend its service life.

The street segments recommended for rehabilitation are listed below and shown on the Project Vicinity Map included as Attachment B
Street/Segment Project Limits Planned Treatment/Work
Augusta Drive St Andrews Dr to Spyglass Dr 3” *PDR with 1.5” *M&O Rheem Blvd
264 Rheem Blvd to 276
Rheem Blvd
Shoulder Stabilization
Moraga Road St Mary’s Rd to Moraga Wy 3” *PDR with 1.5” *M&O Canyon Road Moraga Wy to Country Club Dr 3” *PDR with 1.5” *M&O Wakefield Drive 22 Wakefield Dr to Corliss Dr 1.5” *M&O *M&O Mill & Overlay - *PDR Partial Depth Recycling

DISCUSSION
Project Combination and CIP Budget Update
The 2025 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401) and the 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 26-401) were originally budgeted as separate projects in the Town’s adopted Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget. Because the 2025 and 2026 work was packaged and bid as one construction contract, staff recommends combining the two CIP projects into a single project titled the 25/26 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401).

This approach will simplify project accounting, align the CIP budget with the construction contract, and allow the Town to manage the work under one project number. If approved, the remaining appropriations and associated funding from CIP 26-401 will be transferred to CIP 25-401 and reflected in the updated combined CIP sheet included as Attachment C.

Construction Bid Process
The project bid documents were advertised on April 1, 2026, pursuant to Moraga Municipal Code Chapter 3.06 and Public Contract Code Section 22037. Bid documents were posted on the Town’s website, in the East Bay Times newspaper, and in numerous builders’ exchanges.

Per the contract bid proposal instructions, the low bidder was determined based on the base bid amount. The Engineer’s Estimate included in the bidding documents was $2,138,062. 153
The public bid opening was held on Wednesday, May 6, 2026, and five bids were received.

Bay Cities was the apparent lowest bidder based on the base bid price at the bid opening.

Staff reviewed the Bay Cities bid proposal and determined that Bay Cities is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Bay Cities’ bid proposal amount is $1,609,006.36, which is lower than the Engineer’s Estimate of $2,138,062 and within the available construction budget for the 25/26 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401).

Bay Cities has been in business since 1946 and is a family-owned company headquartered in Concord, California. The company has completed similar public works projects for several Bay Area agencies, including Oakland, Berkeley, Hayward, Orinda, Martinez, and Pittsburg. Based on staff’s review of the bid proposal and Bay Cities’ qualifications, staff recommends finding Bay Cities to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.

For more information regarding the received bids, see the bid tabulation in Attachment C.

Construction Contract Award Recommendation
Staff recommends awarding the construction contract (Attachment D) to Bay Cities in the rounded amount of $1,609,007. Staff also recommends authorizing a 10% construction contingency of $160,901 for change orders that may be necessary during construction, for a total construction authorization not to exceed $1,769,908.

FISCAL IMPACT
The recommended construction budget for the 25/26 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25- 401)is $2,470,000. See Attachment E for the complete project funding. The recommended contract award is $1,609,007, with a 10% construction contingency of $160,901, for a total authorized construction amount not to exceed $1,769,908.

CEQA COMPLIANCE
The project consists of the rehabilitation and repair of existing public streets, drainage, and related infrastructure. The project is categorically exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 Cal. Code Regs. 15301 (Class 1-Existing Facilities). Staff recommends that the Town Council find the project exempt and direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Adopt the attached Resolution with modifications; or

2. Do not adopt the attached Resolution and provide direction to staff. Not adopting the Resolution would delay award of the construction contract and could delay the planned 2026 construction schedule.

NEXT STEPS
Upon approval, staff will:

Execute the construction contract after the required contract documents, bonds, and 154
insurance are submitted and approved;
Hold a pre-construction meeting and coordinate final construction sequencing with Bay Cities and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, as needed, for the Moraga and Canyon Road Complete Streets Project; and
Notify affected residents and property owners before construction begins.

Construction is planned to begin in June or July 2026, pending contract execution, contractor scheduling, submittal review, and coordination with related work.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Draft Resolution - Award of Contract - Bay Cities Attachment B - Project Vicinity Map
Attachment C - Bid Tabulation
Attachment D - Project Funding Sheets
Attachment E - 25-26 Pavement Project Construction Contract 155
Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 1 May 27, 2026

TOWN OF MORAGA

TOWN COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. xx-2026

AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT TO BAY CITIES PAVING AND GRADING, INC. OF CONCORD, CA FOR THE 25/26 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT (CIP 25-401) IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,609,007 AND AUTHORIZING A 10% CONTINGENCY ($160,901) FOR A TOTAL

NOT TO EXCEED CONTRACT AMOUNT OF FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,769,908; APPROVING THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMBINATION OF THE 2025 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT (CIP 25-401) AND THE 2026 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT (CIP 26-401) INTO A SINGLE PROJECT TITLED THE 25/26 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT (CIP 25-401), AND AUTHORIZING THE

TRANSFER OF REMAINING APPROPRIATIONS AND ASSOCIATED FUNDING FROM CIP 26-401 to CIP 25-401, AND FINDING PROJECT CATEGORICALLY

EXEMPT FROM CEQA (CLASS I)
WHEREAS, the 2025 and 2026 Street Rehabilitation Projects (CIP 25-401 & 26- 401) are fully funded in the adopted Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 and 2026-27 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget;
WHEREAS, on April 1, 2026, the approved project bid documents for the 2025 and 2026 Street Rehabilitation Projects went out to bid pursuant to Moraga Municipal Code Chapter 3.06 and Public Contract Code Section 22037. A Notice Inviting Bid was advertised on the Town’s website, in the East Bay Times newspaper, and in numerous builders’ exchanges;
WHEREAS, on May 6, 2026, five (5) bid proposal packages were received, and a public bid opening was held;
WHEREAS, Bay Cities Paving and Grading Inc. (Concord, CA) bid proposal was the apparent lowest bid;
WHEREAS, the Town Engineer recommends finding Bay Cities Paving and Grading Inc (Concord, CA) as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder with a Bid amount of $1,609,006.36;
WHEREAS, the Town Engineer recommends awarding Bay Cities Paving and Grading Inc (Concord, CA) a Construction Contract for the Bid price of $1,609,007 per Contract Bid Proposal rules;
WHEREAS, the Town Engineer recommends authorizing a Construction Contingency amount for future contract change orders up to 10% of the contract amount in the amount of $160,901, as needed during construction; and WHEREAS, the Town Engineer recommends the administrative combination of the 2025 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401) and the 2026 Street Rehabilitation 156
Attachment A
Resolution No. XX-2026 2 May 27, 2026
Project (CIP 26-401) into a single project titled the 25/26 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401), and authorizing the transfer of remaining appropriations and associated funding from CIP 26-401 to CIP 25-401.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Moraga hereby determines that:

1. Bay Cities Paving and Grading, Inc (Concord, CA) is determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder with a bid amount of $1,609,006.36.

2. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Construction Contract in the amount of $1,609,007 may be approved by the Town Manager and Town Attorney, and to execute any other necessary documents to effectuate the terms of the Construction Contract.

3. The Town Engineer is hereby authorized to issue Contract Change Orders for up to $160,901 (10% of the contract amount) for a total amount not to exceed $1,769,908.

4. Approving the administrative combination of the 2025 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401) and the 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 26- 401) into a single project titled the 25/26 Street Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25-401), and authorizing the transfer of remaining appropriations and associated funding from CIP 26-401 to CIP 25-401

5. This project is not subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. 15000 et. seq.), as this project is categorically exempt pursuant to 14 Cal.

Code Regs. 15301 (Class 1-Existing Facilities).
157
Attachment B
158

BID ITEM ITEM DESCRIPTION UOM QTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 Mobilization (Not to Exceed 5% Contract Value) LS 1 101,913.45 $ $ 101,913.45 $ 80,000.00 $ 80,000.00 $ 82,080.00 $ 82,080.00 $ 74,000.00 $ 74,000.00 $ 85,000.00 $ 85,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 2 Demobilization (Not to Exceed 1% Contract Value) LS 1 $ 20,382.69 $ 20,382.69 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 10,800.00 $ 10,800.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 3 Traffic Control & Construction Area Signs LS 1 $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 209,816.00 $ 209,816.00 $ 151,227.00 $ 151,227.00 $ 88,000.00 $ 88,000.00 $ 287,775.00 $ 287,775.00 $ 211,900.00 $ 211,900.00 4 Portable Changeable Message Signs (PCMS) EA 6 $ 5,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 1,349.94 $ 8,099.64 $ 1,620.00 $ 9,720.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 9,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 30,000.00 5 Water Pollution Control LS 1 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 16,734.03 $ 16,734.03 $ 5,400.00 $ 5,400.00 $ 9,750.00 $ 9,750.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 6 3" Partial Depth Recycling SF 227274 $ 3.00 $ 681,822.00 $ 1.40 $ 318,183.60 $ 1.84 $ 418,184.16 $ 2.50 $ 568,185.00 $ 2.50 $ 568,185.00 $ 4.00 $ 909,096.00 7 Milling 1.5" AC Pavement SY 27856 $ 6.50 $ 181,064.00 $ 4.01 $ 111,702.56 $ 6.02 $ 167,693.12 $ 5.00 $ 139,280.00 $ 5.00 $ 139,280.00 $ 5.50 $ 153,208.00 8 Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) TON 2360 $ 170.00 $ 401,200.00 $ 188.93 $ 445,874.80 $ 172.29 $ 406,604.40 $ 191.00 $ 450,760.00 $ 125.00 $ 295,000.00 $ 140.00 $ 330,400.00 9 Shoulder Stabilization (Rheem Blvd) SY 450 $ 170.00 $ 76,500.00 $ 257.48 $ 115,866.00 $ 324.00 $ 145,800.00 $ 275.00 $ 123,750.00 $ 250.00 $ 112,500.00 $ 350.00 $ 157,500.00 10 Lower and Raise Monument to Grade EA 10 $ 1,200.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 1,975.00 $ 19,750.00 $ 1,998.00 $ 19,980.00 $ 1,025.00 $ 10,250.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 19,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 25,000.00 11 Lower and Raise Sanitary Sewer Manhole to Grade (Revocable if not used) EA 7 $ 1,500.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 9,100.00 $ 1,296.00 $ 9,072.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 9,100.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 9,100.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 14,000.00 12 Lower and Raise Storm Drain Manhole to Grade (Revocable if not used) EA 8 $ 1,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 10,400.00 $ 1,620.00 $ 12,960.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 10,400.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 10,400.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 16,000.00 13 Lower and Raise Water Valve to Grade (Revocable if not used) EA 27 $ 1,000.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 1,025.00 $ 27,675.00 $ 1,080.00 $ 29,160.00 $ 1,025.00 $ 27,675.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 40,500.00 14 Demo Ex. Concrete Curb and Gutter LF 299 $ 65.00 $ 19,435.00 $ 33.08 $ 9,890.92 $ 8.40 $ 2,511.60 $ 20.00 $ 5,980.00 $ 30.00 $ 8,970.00 $ 50.00 $ 14,950.00 15 Demo Ex. Concrete Sidewalk/ADA Ramp SF 2149 $ 50.00 $ 107,450.00 $ 11.03 $ 23,703.47 $ 8.40 $ 18,051.60 $ 13.00 $ 27,937.00 $ 10.00 $ 21,490.00 $ 12.00 $ 25,788.00 16 Demo Ex. Asphalt Pavement SF 387 $ 50.00 $ 19,350.00 $ 11.03 $ 4,268.61 $ 8.40 $ 3,250.80 $ 12.00 $ 4,644.00 $ 10.00 $ 3,870.00 $ 20.00 $ 7,740.00 17 Demo Concrete Valley Gutter SF 86 $ 65.00 $ 5,590.00 $ 16.54 $ 1,422.44 $ 8.40 $ 722.40 $ 20.00 $ 1,720.00 $ 15.00 $ 1,290.00 $ 35.00 $ 3,010.00 18 Curb and Gutter (Type S1-6) LF 276 $ 175.00 $ 48,300.00 $ 109.43 $ 30,202.68 $ 126.00 $ 34,776.00 $ 120.00 $ 33,120.00 $ 90.00 $ 24,840.00 $ 155.00 $ 42,780.00 19 Concrete Sidewalk (4" Depth) SF 1917 $ 50.00 $ 95,850.00 $ 21.04 $ 40,333.68 $ 21.00 $ 40,257.00 $ 20.00 $ 38,340.00 $ 15.00 $ 28,755.00 $ 35.00 $ 67,095.00 20 Concrete ADA Ramp (4" Depth) SF 468 $ 55.00 $ 25,740.00 $ 41.16 $ 19,262.88 $ 33.60 $ 15,724.80 $ 45.00 $ 21,060.00 $ 35.00 $ 16,380.00 $ 50.00 $ 23,400.00 21 Concrete Driveway Apron (6" Depth) SF 50 $ 65.00 $ 3,250.00 $ 62.83 $ 3,141.50 $ 26.25 $ 1,312.50 $ 30.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 35.00 $ 1,750.00 $ 70.00 $ 3,500.00 22 Remove and Replace PVC Sidewalk Cross Drain EA 7 $ 1,800.00 $ 12,600.00 $ 300.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 420.00 $ 2,940.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 8,400.00 $ 300.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 10,500.00 23 Concrete Valley Gutter (8" Depth) SF 67 $ 75.00 $ 5,025.00 $ 88.72 $ 5,944.24 $ 36.75 $ 2,462.25 $ 42.00 $ 2,814.00 $ 50.00 $ 3,350.00 $ 60.00 $ 4,020.00 24 Remove Tree (2' Diameter) EA 3 $ 3,000.00 $ 9,000.00 $ 1,106.36 $ 3,319.08 $ 8,100.00 $ 24,300.00 $ 1,850.00 $ 5,550.00 $ 3,200.00 $ 9,600.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 12,000.00 25 Detectable Warning Surface SF 63 $ 250.00 $ 15,750.00 $ 65.00 $ 4,095.00 $ 42.00 $ 2,646.00 $ 35.00 $ 2,205.00 $ 65.00 $ 4,095.00 $ 130.00 $ 8,190.00 26 Relocate Sign and Post EA 1 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 350.00 $ 350.00 $ 451.50 $ 451.50 $ 350.00 $ 350.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 750.00 $ 750.00 27 Install "STOP" Pavement Marking (Thermoplastic) SF 44 $ 15.00 $ 660.00 $ 18.00 $ 792.00 $ 18.90 $ 831.60 $ 25.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 18.00 $ 792.00 $ 22.00 $ 968.00 28 Install 12" Stripe for Crosswalk (W) (Thermoplastic) LF 470 $ 12.00 $ 5,640.00 $ 12.00 $ 5,640.00 $ 17.33 $ 8,145.10 $ 12.00 $ 5,640.00 $ 16.00 $ 7,520.00 $ 22.00 $ 10,340.00 29 Install Caltrans Striping Detail 2 (Thermoplastic) LF 1275 $ 15.00 $ 19,125.00 $ 2.70 $ 3,442.50 $ 4.46 $ 5,686.50 $ 8.00 $ 10,200.00 $ 4.00 $ 5,100.00 $ 5.00 $ 6,375.00 30 Install Caltrans Striping Detail 22 (Thermoplastic) LF 162 $ 17.50 $ 2,835.00 $ 5.40 $ 874.80 $ 9.45 $ 1,530.90 $ 15.00 $ 2,430.00 $ 9.00 $ 1,458.00 $ 11.00 $ 1,782.00 31 Install Blue RPM Fire Hydrant Markers EA 4 $ 30.00 $ 120.00 $ 20.00 $ 80.00 $ 26.25 $ 105.00 $ 35.00 $ 140.00 $ 25.00 $ 100.00 $ 50.00 $ 200.00 32 Temporary Pavement Delineation Caltrans Striping Detail 8 Traffic Tape" LF 3984 $ 10.00 $ 39,840.00 $ 4.00 $ 15,936.00 $ 3.15 $ 12,549.60 $ 4.00 $ 15,936.00 $ 3.00 $ 11,952.00 $ 3.25 $ 12,948.00 33 Temporary Pavement Delineation "6" Traffic Tape"
(Revocable if not used) LF 5600 $ 4.00 $ 22,400.00 $ 4.00 $ 22,400.00 $ 2.42 $ 13,552.00 $ 4.00 $ 22,400.00 $ 2.00 $ 11,200.00 $ 2.50 $ 14,000.00 34 Temporary Pavement Delineation "12" Traffic Tape"
(Revocable if not used) LF 317 $ 10.00 $ 3,170.00 $ 4.00 $ 1,268.00 $ 8.40 $ 2,662.80 $ 6.00 $ 1,902.00 $ 8.00 $ 2,536.00 $ 8.50 $ 2,694.50 35 Temporary Pavement Delineation Pavement Legend "Tape" (Revocable if not used) SF 60 $ 15.00 $ 900.00 $ 5.00 $ 300.00 $ 12.60 $ 756.00 $ 8.00 $ 480.00 $ 12.00 $ 720.00 $ 12.50 $ 750.00 36 Open Cut Point Repair Dia 15" RCP with Flexible Pipe (L-0072) LF 22 $ 1,200.00 $ 26,400.00 $ 1,143.74 $ 25,162.28 $ 648.00 $ 14,256.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 26,400.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 46,200.00 $ 2,200.00 $ 48,400.00 37 Potholing (Rheem Blvd Utilities)-Revocable if not used EA 5 $ 750.00 $ 3,750.00 $ 1,374.93 $ 6,874.65 $ 1,620.00 $ 8,100.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 800.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Base Bid $ 2,138,062.14 $ 1,609,006.36 $ 1,686,262.63 $ 1,781,398.00 $ 1,807,708.00 $ 2,337,784.50 Project Name ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Bay Cities Paving & Grading Radius Earthwork Inc Ghilotti Construction Desilva Gates Construction Interstate Grading & Paving Attachment C
159
2025-26 Street Rehabilitation
Category
Project Townwide
Transportation
Project No: 25-401
Public Works
Location:

Responsible
Department:
2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2029-30

PROJECT
TOTAL

EXPENDITURES
(Thousands of Dollars)
2028-29
FY 24/25
Carryover
Prior FY
Actuals
FY2024 -
FY2025
Expenses
071 - Administration 8 133 143 80 19 383
072 - Construction 1,430 1,040 377 2,847
073 - Const Mgmt/Inspection 40 31 57 128
074 - Contingency 143 104 38 285
075 - Design 50 233 50 333
EXPENDITURE TOTALS 58 366 1,806 1,255 491 3,976
FUNDING SOURCES
-Utility Reimbursements 91 91
205-RMRA (Gas Tax) 250 420 670
210-Measure J 320 320
212-Garbage Vehicle Impact Fees 765 835 427 2,027
213-Measure K 58 366 380 64 868
FUNDING TOTALS 58 366 1,806 1,255 491 3,976
Account Number & Status: 700-724-XXX-24 - Funded
Project Objective: Annually review the Street Management System analysis, assess current needs, and allocate appropriate funds to provide cost-effective pavement maintenance. This project addresses FY 25-26 and FY 26-27 Town Goal #3 and Priority #3.

Project Description: 2025-26 Street Rehabilitation Projects will use StreetSaver to identify the streets list and appropriate treatment based on budget.

Basis for Schedule: The Town utilizes StreetSaver, an industry-standard pavement asset management software, to preliminarily select candidate street segments to repair. Because of the StreetSaver's objectiveness, it is a valuable tool to guide the Town on how to invest the Town’s limited pavement funds to maintain the Town’s entire pavement network in the best possible condition.

Basis for Cost: The budgeted costs are based on available revenue sources.

Project Balance Note:

Attachment D
160
Attachment E

CONTRACT

Page 1 of 5 ends

1 - Town CouncilMay 27, 2026

1 - Town Council
May 27, 2026