Pismo Beach City Council
May 3, 2022

PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #9.F
SUBJECT/TITLE:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
WATERSMART: TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJECTS GRANT APPLICATION IN FY 2022 FOR CENTRAL COAST BLUE
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution approving the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant application in FY 2022 for Central Coast Blue.

BACKGROUND:

Central Coast Blue (the Project) is a regional, indirect potable reuse project that will provide a drought resistant, sustainable local water supply for south county cities, improve and protect water quality in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, and enhance the health of our critical water basin. Project stakeholders include the cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach, and the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District.

As the cost for the Central Coast Blue is significant, (currently estimated at $92 million for both phases, or $56 million for phase 1 and $36 million for phase 2), staff is actively seeking various grants to offset the project’s costs. The City has been successful in these efforts and received $2,000,000 in California State Water Resources Control Board Proposition 1 Groundwater Grant Program (GWGP) funding and $2,496,000 from the WaterSMART Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant (FY 2018 & FY 2021).

WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant On March 15, 2022, staff applied for a U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant based on Funding Opportunity No. R22AS00115. This grant provides up to 25% of the total cost of planning, design, and/or construction that will be conducted before September 30, 2025. The City submitted this funding application on behalf of the Project partners.

Project costs that are eligible for funding under this funding opportunity begin July 26, 2018 when Central Coast Blue’s Title XVI Feasibility Study Approval Memo was signed by the Policy and Administration Director through September 30, 2025. These costs are estimated to total $56,495,408. As the grant would support 25% of these costs, the City requested $11,627,758 (not including the previously awarded $2,496,000) and plans to initially support the remaining 75%, with additional funding from the state of California along with funds from the Cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach stakeholders.

The three Cities recently developed and approved a cost sharing agreement to split the cost share based on the benefit to each agency which is currently calculated based on

9.F-1Council Agenda 5-3-2022

their groundwater entitlement. The current allocation is 39% Pismo Beach, 25% Arroyo Grande, and 36% Grover Beach. For the City’s portion of the costs not funded by state and federal grants, the City has enacted recycled water development impact fees, has planned net revenues from the Water and Wastewater Enterprise Funds, and in-kind work from staff to support its share of the project.

Additionally, the City plans to pursue funding through Round 3 of the Proposition 1 GWGP totaling $27,234,500, or 50% of eligible costs, which would help fund implementation efforts related to protecting the groundwater basin. If the City is unable to secure funding through the GWGP, then project costs will need to be covered by the partner agencies.

Under the cost sharing agreement, the total estimated cost to the City ranges from $2,911,324 to $16,175,124 depending on grants received. The following table outlines the Project costs from July 26, 2018 through September 30, 2025 and the various funding sources and fiscal impact to the City of Pismo Beach.

Table 1: Title XVI Water Reclamation & Reuse Project Grant Request and Matching Funds
Funding Sources
Amount With
All Grant
Funding Award
Amount Without
Grant Funding
Awarded
Non-Federal Entities
1 SWRCB Prop 1 GWGP - Round 32 $27,234,500 $-
2 DWR Prop 1 IRWM Program Round 22 $1,000,000 $-
3 SWRCB CWSRF Loan2 $5,775,242 $-
4 Pismo Beach $2,911,324 $16,175,124
5 Grover Beach $2,687,376 $14,930,883
6 Arroyo Grande $1,866,234 $10,368,669
7 In Kind Contributions $896,880 $896,880
Non-Federal Subtotal $42,371,556 $42,371,556
Other Federal Entities
1 Grant Under the WIIN Act FY20181 $796,000 $796,000
2 Grant Under the WIIN Act FY20211 $1,700,000 $1,700,000 Requested Funding Under WIIN Act FY2022 $11,627,758 $11,627,758 1 Funding has been awarded
2 Funding is being pursued and has not been awarded at the time of this application Grant Requirement
The grant requires submission, no later than 60 days after the application is submitted, of an official resolution adopted by the applicant’s governing body verifying:
The identity of the official with legal authority to enter into an agreement The board of directors, governing body, or appropriate official who has reviewed and supports the application submitted
The capability of the applicant to provide the amount of funding and/or in-kind contributions specified in the funding plan

9.F-2Council Agenda 5-3-2022

 That the applicant will work with the Bureau of Reclamation to meet established deadlines for entering into a grant or cooperative agreement.

As such, staff has prepared a Resolution confirming these items:
 The City Manager, Public Works Director, and Administrative Services Director, or their designee(s), are authorized to enter into an agreement.  The City Manager, Public Works Director, and Administrative Services Director have reviewed and support the application (Attachment 2).  The City has the capability to provide the amount of funding and/or in-kind contributions specified in the funding plan as described in the “City Capacity to Provide Matching Funds” section.
 City staff will work with the Bureau of Reclamation to meet established deadlines for entering into a grant or cooperative agreement.

Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) supporting the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant in FY 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact of approving the attached Resolution is a total grant request amount of $11,627,7528, including a $42,371,556 matching requirement. This amount is for Phase 1 of the Central Coast Blue project, to be allocated to each City based on the cost sharing agreement.

Additionally, the City plans to pursue funding through Round 3 of the Proposition 1 GWGP totaling $27,234,500, or 50% of eligible costs, which would help fund implementation efforts related to protecting the groundwater basin. If the City is unable to secure funding through the GWGP, then project costs will need to be covered by the partner agencies.

The City has approved a cost sharing agreement with the Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach to split the cost share based on the benefit to each agency. The current allocation is 39% Pismo Beach, 25% Arroyo Grande, and 36% Grover Beach. The total cost to the City of Pismo Beach ranges from $2,911,324 to $16,175,124, depending on whether or not funding which is being pursued is awarded.

ALTERNATIVES:

1. Do not approve the resolution. The City would need to withdraw its application in this case.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse project grant application (FY2022)

9.F-3Council Agenda 5-3-2022

Submitted by: Meeting Date: May 3, 2022
Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director
City Manager Approval:

9.F-4Council Agenda 5-3-2022

RESOLUTION NO. R-2022-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION WATERSMART: TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJECTS GRANT APPLICATION IN FY 2022
WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach is moving forward with the Central Coast Blue project, which is a regional, indirect potable water reuse project that will provide a drought resistant, sustainable local water supply for Central Coast Blue stakeholders while also improving and protecting the water quality in the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin, and enhances the health of the larger watershed on the Central Coast of California; and WHEREAS, the cost for Central Coast Blue is considerable and as such, staff is actively seeking various grants, financing sources, and partnering with the project’s stakeholders to offset the City’s costs; and
WHEREAS, the Central Coast Blue stakeholders include the City of Pismo Beach, City of Arroyo Grande, City of Grover Beach, Oceano Community Services District, and South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District; and
WHEREAS, on March 15, 2022, City of Pismo Beach staff, working with Water Systems Consultants (WSC), applied for a U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects grant based on Funding Opportunity No. R22AS00115 for the Federal fiscal year 2022 program, which provides up to 25%, or $11,627,758 (not including the previously awarded $796,000 and preliminary awarded $1,700,000), of the total cost ($56,495,408) of planning, design, and/or construction that will be conducted between July 26, 2018 through September 30, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pismo Beach, City of Arroyo Grande, and City of Grover Beach plan to support the matching requirement of 75%, or $42,371,556, by pursuing funding through Round 3 of the Proposition 1 Groundwater Grant Program totaling $27,234,500, or 50% of eligible costs, which would help fund implementation efforts related to protecting the groundwater basin. The total cost to the City of Pismo Beach assuming the cost is based on the benefit to each agency per the Cost-Sharing Agreement ranges from $2,911,324 to $16,175,124 over three fiscal years, depending on grants received; The City of Pismo Beach has recycled water development impact fees, net revenues from the Water and Wastewater Enterprise Funds, and in-kind work from the Public Works Director, Senior Engineer, and Administrative Secretary to support its share of the project.

The Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach plan to support their share of the project with Water Enterprise Funds.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach as follows:

Attachment 1

9.F-5Council Agenda 5-3-2022

That the City Manager, Public Works Director, and/or Administrative Services Director, or their designee(s), are hereby authorized to enter into a grant agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation for the WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse project grant;
That the City Council, City Manager, Public Works Director, and/or Administrative Services Director have reviewed and support the application submitted, which by this reference is made a part hereof;
That the City of Pismo Beach is capable of providing the amount of funding and/or in-kind contributions specified in the funding plan; and That the applicant will work with the Bureau of Reclamation to meet established deadlines for entering into a grant or cooperative agreement.

UPON MOTION OF Council Member , seconded by Council Member , the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Pismo Beach this 3rd day of May 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:

Approved: Attest:
________________________ ________________________
Ed Waage, Mayor Erica Inderlied, City Clerk
Attachment 1

9.F-6Council Agenda 5-3-2022

WaterSMART
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects
Under the WIIN Act, FY 2022
R22AS00115
Central Coast Blue
City of Pismo Beach
760 Mattie Road
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
Project Manager:

Benjamin A. Fine
760 Mattie Road
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
[email protected]
(805) 773-7037
Submitted to:

Bureau of Reclamation
Financial Assistance Operations
Attn: Title XVI WIIN NOFO
P.O. Box 25007, MS 84-27133
Denver, Colorado 80225
3/15/2022
Attachment 2

9.F-7Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Table of Contents
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ....................................................................................................................................ii List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................ii List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................................. iii Technical Proposal .......................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 1 Technical Project Description ...................................................................................................... 2 Evaluation Criteria ..................................................................................................................... 12 Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance ........................................................................ 47 Required Permits or Approvals ..................................................................................................... 56 Permits and Approvals Obtained .............................................................................................. 5 6 Infrastructure Permits That Will Be Obtained .......................................................................... 56 Project Budget .............................................................................................................................. 58 Funding Plan & Letters of Commitment ................................................................................... 58 Budget Proposal ........................................................................................................................ 62 Budget Narrative ....................................................................................................................... 63 References .................................................................................................................................... 66 Letters of Project Support ............................................................................................................... A Official Resolution ........................................................................................................................... B Unique Entity Identifier .................................................................................................................. C Mandatory Federal Forms .............................................................................................................. D

Attachment 2

9.F-8Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach List of Tables
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act ii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Central Coast Blue Objectives and Benefits .................................................................... 10 Table 2. Estimated Construction Costs by Year ............................................................................ 23 Table 3. Total Estimated Eligible Costs for Planning and Design Activities .................................. 23 Table 4. Annual O&M for Project .................................................................................................. 23 Table 5. Replacement Costs by Year ............................................................................................. 24 Table 6. NCMA Agency Water Entitlements ................................................................................. 25 Table 7. Unit Cost Comparison – Regional Water Supply Alternatives ........................................ 30 Table 8. Central Coast Blue Qualitative Benefits .......................................................................... 34 Table 9. Central Coast Blue Unit Costs.......................................................................................... 36 Table 10. Annual Crop Value per Acre-Foot of Produced Water ................................................. 37 Table 11. Estimated Monetized Project Benefits ......................................................................... 38 Table 12. Quantified and Monetized Project Costs ...................................................................... 38 Table 13. Central Coast Blue Local, Regional, and State Benefits ................................................ 39 Table 14. Central Coast Blue Partner Population ......................................................................... 40 Table 15. Central Coast Blue Collaboration and Outreach ........................................................... 44 Table 16. Mitigation Measures Required for Central Coast Blue in Final EIR .............................. 47 Table 17. Assumed Install Decade Based on Pipe Material .......................................................... 52 Table 18. Summary of Tasks through FY2025 ............................................................................... 58 Table 19. Summary of Eligible Costs through FY2025 .................................................................. 60 Table 20. Summary of Non-Federal Funding Sources through FY2025 ........................................ 60 Table 21. Summary of Non-Federal Funding Sources for Entire Project ...................................... 61 Table 22. Total Project Budget Proposal ...................................................................................... 62 Table 23. Cost Estimates for Full Scale Project ............................................................................. 65

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Location ............................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Santa Maria Groundwater Basin Boundaries .................................................................. 3 Figure 3. Seawater Intrusion Detection Locations .......................................................................... 5 Figure 4. NCMA Hydrograph of Deep Well Index Level (4) ............................................................ 6 Figure 5. Conceptual Layout for Central Coast Blue ....................................................................... 8 Figure 6. Phase 1 Project Schedule ............................................................................................... 11 Figure 7. Water Supplies with Project – Phase 1 (Left) & Phase 2 (Right) (Volumes in AFY) ....... 12 Figure 8. Total NCMA Water Use (Urban, Rural, Agricultural) By Source (4) ............................... 14 Figure 9. San Luis Obispo County Drought Status 2000 - 2022 .................................................... 18 Figure 10. Drought Status Map 2015-2022 .................................................................................. 19 Figure 11. NCMA Production Wells .............................................................................................. 27 Figure 12. Projected Supply vs. Demand for NCMA Agencies without Recycled Water .............. 28 Figure 13. Projected Supply vs. Demand for NCMA Agencies with Recycled Water ................... 29 Figure 14. Disadvantaged Community Map – 80% & 60% MHI ................................................... 42 Figure 15. Disadvantaged Community Map – 85% MHI ............................................................... 42 Attachment 2

9.F-9Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach List of Acronyms
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS
AF Acre Foot
AFY Acre Feet Per Year
APE Area of Potential Effect
ATF Advanced Treatment Facility
Basin Santa Maria Groundwater Basin
Bay Delta Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Central Coast Blue
Partners
SSLOCSD, and Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CRA Cultural Resources Assessment
CRLF California Red-Legged Frog
CVP Central Valley Project
CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund
DAC Disadvantaged Community
DWR Department of Water Resources
EIR Environmental Impact Report
FOA Funding Opportunity Announcement
FY Fiscal Year
GHG Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GWGP Groundwater Grant Program
IDE IDE Technologies
IRWM Integrated Regional Water Management
LF Linear Foot
LRRP Low Reservoir Response Plan
MGD Million Gallons per Day
mg/L Milligrams Per Liter
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NCMA Northern Cities Management Area
NCMA Agencies Oceano CSD and Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NMMA Nipomo Mesa Management Area
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
Oceano CSD Oceano Community Services District
O&M Operations and Maintenance
Pismo Beach City of Pismo Beach
Project Central Coast Blue
RFI Request for Information
RO Reverse Osmosis
SDAC Severely Disadvantaged Community
Attachment 2

9.F-10Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach List of Acronyms
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act iv

SLOCFC&WCD San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District SMVMA Santa Maria Valley Management Area
SSLOCSD South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District SWP State Water Project
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
SWRRF Satellite Water Resource Recovery Facility
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
U.S. United States
UF Ultrafiltration
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
UV Ultraviolet
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
Attachment 2

9.F-11Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 1 Technical Proposal
This funding application for Central Coast Blue prepared by the City of Pismo Beach (Pismo Beach), is submitted to the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR or Reclamation) under the Department of Interior in response to the WaterSMART Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) No. R22AS00115 for FY2022 for Projects Eligible Under the WIIN Act. Pismo Beach is submitting this funding application on behalf of the Central Cost Blue Partners, which includes the South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD), City of Pismo Beach, City of Arroyo Grande, and City of Grover Beach.

Date: 03/15/2022
Applicant: City of Pismo Beach
City, County, State: Pismo Beach, San Luis Obispo County, California Executive Summary
Central Coast Blue is a regional, indirect potable reuse project developed in response to recent droughts that highlighted vulnerabilities in the Central Cost Blue stakeholders’ water supply portfolios and the seawater intrusion risks faced by the groundwater basin. The Project will improve the reliability of the community’s water supply portfolios by capturing wastewater flows from two local Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs), purifying the water, and injecting it into the Northern Cities Management Area (NCMA) of the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin (Basin) that is an important component of the water supply portfolios for the Central Coast Blue Partners. The project is divided into two phases - Phase 1 will treat and inject flows from the Pismo Beach WWTP and Phase 2 will treat and inject flows from the SSLOCD WWTP. Central Coast Blue will provide a drought-resistant, sustainable local water supply for Central Coast Blue Partners while also improving and protecting the water quality in the Basin, therefore enhancing the health of the larger watershed.

Pismo Beach respectfully requests $11,627,758 from USBR to support roughly $56.5 million in project activities through September 2025 that include: permitting, preliminary design, final design, program management, value engineering, construction management, engineering during construction, and construction for Phase 1 of Central Coast Blue, which will be completed within the grant eligible cost period.

Pr
o
b
e
l
m
:

Lo
s
s

o
f

a

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
Seawater intrusion
impacts
groundwater
supplies of
Central Coast Blue
Partners
Ne
e
d
:

Pr
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
Recycled water
injection into the
basin will protect
and bolster regional
groundwater
supplies
So
l
u
t
i
o
n

:

Ce
n
t
r
a
l

C
o
a
s
t

B
l
u
e
Central Coast Blue
will ensure long-
term water
sustainability in the
Basin
Attachment 2

9.F-12Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 2 Technical Project Description
In an effort to protect local groundwater supplies, Central Coast Blue Partners and regional stakeholders are advancing Central Coast Blue—a regional recycled water project that will utilize a resource currently discharged into the ocean— to increase groundwater supplies, and secure a sustainable, drought-resistant local water supply. Central Coast Blue will be a critical component of the future drinking water supply portfolio for the Central Coast Blue Partners and will help protect against the threat of seawater intrusion into their groundwater supplies and future droughts. Central Coast Blue is an integral element of the regional water supply solutions to manage and protect water in the Basin for urban and agricultural users.

Location
Central Coast Blue (also referred to as the Project) is located within San Luis Obispo County, California, and is situated along the coast of California halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. The Project is located in southern San Luis Obispo County and includes the cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach, as shown in Figure 1. The Project overlies the NCMA portion of the Basin, which covers 288 square miles and provides water for 200,000 local residents, millions of visitors annually, and supports 57,000 acres of irrigated agriculture.

Figure 1. Project Location

Central Coast Blue is a regional
recycled water project that
will recover a resource that is
currently discharged into the
ocean, increase groundwater
supplies in the Basin, protect
against seawater intrusion,
and secure a sustainable,
drought-resistant local water
supply.

Attachment 2

9.F-13Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 3 The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) identifies the Basin as Basin Number 3-12 in DWR Bulletin No. 118 and defines its boundaries to include Santa Maria Valley, the Nipomo Mesa, Tri-Cities Mesas, Arroyo Grande Plain, and the Arroyo Grande and Pismo Creek Valleys.

According to the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Groundwater Basin Prioritization, the Basin is a high-priority basin. The Basin is an adjudicated basin and, through the adjudication, was separated into three Management Areas: the NCMA; the Nipomo Mesa Management Area (NMMA); and the Santa Maria Valley Management Area (SMVMA). The Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach along with the Oceano Community Services District Oceano CSD overlie the urban portion of the NCMA in the Basin and are collectively referred to as the “NCMA agencies.” The physical/legal/jurisdictional boundaries of the Basin, the Management Areas, and the NCMA agency service areas are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Santa Maria Groundwater Basin Boundaries
Population
The total population of the NCMA is approximately 46,000. The total population that relies on groundwater from the Basin is over 200,000 and expected to increase to 250,000 by 2030 (1).

Economy
The local economy is primarily a mix of agriculture and tourism along with significant defense/space and energy sectors; these industries rely heavily on a sustainable water supply. A failure to sustain the water supply would have a devastating impact on the Central Coast Blue Partners, the region’s economy, and residents’ way of life. This is discussed further in Evaluation Criterion 3.

Attachment 2

9.F-14Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 4 Project Background and Development
The water supply portfolio for the NCMA agencies Partners, consists of groundwater and Lopez Reservoir (also referred to as Lopez Lake), a local surface water supply reservoir. The City of Pismo Beach’s supplies also include imported water from the State Water Project (SWP). Groundwater entitlements account for approximately 41% of the agencies’ water supply. However, due to the threat of seawater intrusion during the most recent drought, the NCMA agencies relied heavily on conservation and use of their surface water supplies to reduce groundwater pumping by over 80%. While this strategy was successful at avoiding seawater intrusion, Lopez Reservoir came within one year of reaching minimum pool, and many of the agencies came close to utilizing all their remaining entitlements.

Historically, elevated freshwater levels along the coastline and natural outflow to the ocean have prevented seawater from intruding into the Basin. However, with increased
demand in the NCMA, reduced underflow from the NMMA,
and changing climatic conditions, groundwater elevations along the coastline have been observed to drop during
periods of extended drought. These lower levels reduce the flow of freshwater to the ocean, which serves as a barrier to seawater intrusion. If conditions worsen, seawater will draw toward the freshwater zone of the aquifer,
contaminating it with elevated salt concentrations. The result is reduced freshwater storage and could potentially lead to the abandonment of supply wells.

If groundwater becomes contaminated by seawater, the
NCMA agencies would need to develop new water supplies, such as desalination. Climate change and ongoing drought conditions in San Luis Obispo County and throughout California have stressed available water supplies and forced agencies to identify additional creative solutions for developing more reliable and locally-controlled water resource portfolios. Without taking proactive efforts to protect groundwater supplies, it is anticipated that the NCMA will face the following problems:

1. Degradation of groundwater quality within the Basin from seawater intrusion.

2. Increased dependence on local surface water supplies that are susceptible to variable precipitation and drought.

3. Increased dependence on imported SWP water supplies, which make the NCMA vulnerable to SWP availability, reliability, catastrophic conveyance interruption, and increased costs of SWP supplies.

In addition, groundwater contamination from seawater intrusion has the potential to expand beyond the NCMA portion of the basin and impact greater areas within the Basin (e.g. NMMA, SMVMA). There are no known hydraulic barriers between the NCMA and the other management areas within the Basin to keep this from occurring. Additional information regarding the NCMA’s history of monitoring threats to groundwater supplies and the need for the Project is detailed below.

Increased demand and
extended drought have
decreased groundwater
elevations along the
coastline and led to the
potential for groundwater
contamination from
seawater intrusion. Central
Coast Blue is designed to
address these vulnerabilities
within the Basin.

Attachment 2

9.F-15Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 5 Seawater Intrusion
In the 1960s, evidence of seawater intrusion was detected and documented by DWR in Bulletin No. 63-3 Seawater Intrusion: Pismo-Guadalupe Area, Feb 1970. This report identified evidence of elevated chloride concentrations and a hydraulic potential for seawater encroachment to occur in the primary aquifers that the NCMA agencies rely upon for their groundwater supply (2).

The report recommended that the local water agencies establish a monitoring program to provide early warning of advancing seawater intrusion, but also recognized that the pending completion of the Lopez Project, a local surface water reservoir, would provide a supplemental water supply source that would offset much of the municipal pumping in the area. Prior to the construction of the Lopez Project, groundwater was the only significant source of water for the urban and agricultural users in the area. The threat of water quality contamination from seawater intrusion and nitrates were the drivers for the construction of the Lopez Dam, which was completed in 1969.

From 1970 to 2009, the NCMA agencies did not observe further evidence of seawater intrusion.

However, beginning in May 2009, elevated concentrations of total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride, and sodium were detected in the Oceano area in monitoring wells 30N03 and 30N02, while elevated TDS and chloride levels were also detected in the MW-Blue well, indicating potential seawater intrusion, shown in Figure 3. In response to this detection, the NCMA member agencies began an aggressive campaign to reduce groundwater pumping through water conservation and the preferential use of surface water supplies over groundwater supplies. As a result of the groundwater conservation activities and higher use of surface water supplies, the NCMA agencies were able to decrease their total groundwater pumping by 80%. Conservation measures, coupled with increased rainfall, improved the groundwater gradient and reduced TDS and chloride to historical levels in the impacted wells by July 2010 (3).

Figure 3. Seawater Intrusion Detection Locations
Attachment 2

9.F-16Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 6 The NCMA regularly monitors for seawater intrusion by monitoring water elevations in clustered sentry wells along the coast. The average water level in three of the deep sentry wells (24B03, 30F03, and 30N02) comprises the Deep Well Index. The Deep Well Index is used for monitoring the threat of seawater intrusion as it reflects the net effect of the changing groundwater recharge and discharge conditions within the primary production aquifer. From previous studies, the NCMA Technical Group determined that a minimum Deep Well Index of 7.5 feet NAVD88 is required to protect against seawater intrusion. When the Deep Well Index drops below this threshold, the Basin is at risk for eastward migration of seawater. The Deep Well Index level from 1966 to the present is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. NCMA Hydrograph of Deep Well Index Level (4)
Since 2009, the NCMA member agencies have continued to utilize conservation and increased surface water supplies to reduce municipal groundwater pumping levels to approximately 20% of their safe annual yield, as determined in the 2002 Groundwater Management Agreement as part of the basin adjudication process. However, despite pumping far below their entitlements, the NCMA agencies have continued to observe declining groundwater levels, specifically along the coastline. Currently, reducing groundwater pumping is the only option available to the agencies to protect the basin from seawater intrusion. The recent drought indicates that this mitigation strategy is not effective at maintaining the required groundwater levels along the coastline to protect against seawater intrusion.

Detection of seawater intrusion
Attachment 2

9.F-17Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 7 Project Elements
Central Coast Blue will increase groundwater recharge and improve groundwater quality through the design, permitting, and construction of an Advanced Water Purification Facility (AWPF), conveyance infrastructure, monitoring wells, and injection wells to inject advanced purified water into the Basin to prevent groundwater contamination caused by seawater intrusion. The Project will provide communities with a new, locally-controlled and drought-resistant water supply by using a resource that is currently discharged into the ocean. Central Coast Blue was developed to achieve the Project stakeholder objectives detailed later in this section.

The Project will construct an AWPF that utilizes a process train consisting of ultrafiltration, reverse osmosis (RO), and ultraviolet advanced oxidation process to treat wastewater to the required level of quality for groundwater injection. The AWPF will be located in Grover Beach at the south end of Huber Street as shown in Figure 5 on page 8. This site is located between the Pismo Beach WWTP and the SSLOCSD WWTP, along the Pismo Beach outfall pipeline. Brine and other residuals generated during Project operations will be discharged to the existing ocean outfall.

A recycled water production potential for Central Coast Blue of 4,390 acre feet per year (AFY) was estimated by taking the average of the monthly flows and the estimated recovery rates through advanced treatment. Groundwater modeling indicates that the yield for this Project will have a 100–144% benefit from each acre feet (AF) of water injected into the Basin. The estimated annual recycled water yield for Central Coast Blue will be twice as much as the Central Coast Blue Partners’ existing groundwater entitlement. Additional groundwater modeling is being performed to update and improve estimates of water yield from the Project after injection.

Central Coast Blue Phase 1 requires up to five injection wells and Phase 2 will require up to an additional two injection wells for a total of up to seven wells. Groundwater will continue to be extracted by the NCMA agencies using their existing production wells.

Agricultural Irrigation
Project Partners are investigating the opportunity to use some of the Phase 2 flows to deliver recycled water for agricultural irrigation use.

Recycled water produced for irrigation would have
lower operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.

Alternative Treatment Technologies
The Project is considering an alternative RO
technology. Pismo Beach collaborated with
international partner IDE Technologies (IDE) to
provide a Pilot AWPF that assisted with process
optimization, regulatory compliance, public
outreach, and training. IDE’s Sustainable Advanced
Reuse Process is a new proprietary technology and
the first of its kind to be tested in the United
States. The pilot provided valuable information
that will be used to optimize the final design.

A Pilot Study was done using both
conventional advanced treatment
methods, and a new proprietary
technology that assisted with process
optimization, regulatory compliance,
public outreach, and training. Should
the technology be included in the
final design, the pilot study may
provide regulatory agencies with
sufficient documentation to permit
the technology.

Attachment 2

9.F-18Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 8 Figure 5. Conceptual Layout for Central Coast Blue

Attachment 2

9.F-19Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 9 Regional Collaboration
Historical and recent drought conditions in San Luis Obispo County have impacted the availability of local water supplies and forced agencies to develop solutions that provide a more reliable and locally controlled water resource. Collaboration efforts were first formalized in 1983, with a “Gentlemen’s Agreement” that was developed to cooperatively manage groundwater pumping in the NCMA. On June 30, 2005, the NCMA agencies and numerous other agencies agreed upon the Stipulation for the Santa Maria Groundwater Basin Adjudication (Stipulation), which incorporated the 2002 Groundwater Management Agreement (made between the NCMA agencies, Northern Landowners, and other parties). On January 25, 2008, the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara adopted the approach of the Stipulation in its Judgement After Trial. The Sixth Appellate District upheld this decision on November 21, 2012. The history of regional collaboration involving the Central Coast Blue Partners is summarized below. x 1983 Gentlemen’s Agreement
x 2002 Groundwater Management Agreement
x 2005 Stipulation for the Santa Maria Groundwater
Basin Adjudication
x 2007 San Luis Obispo County Integrated Regional
Water Management (IRWM) Plan
x 2008 Judgement After Trial Support of Stipulation
x 2009 Formation of the NCMA Technical Group
x 2009 Santa Maria Groundwater Basin Management
Area Technical Subcommittee Forms
x 2014 NCMA Strategic Plan
x 2014 San Luis Obispo County Regional Recycled
Water Strategic Plan
x 2014 Update of the County IRWM Plan
x 2015 Pismo Beach Recycled Water Facility Planning Study x 2017 SSLOCSD Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study x 2017 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) Between Pismo Beach and SSLOCSD to Provide Cost Sharing for Environmental Review for Central Coast Blue x 2020 Update of the County IRWM Plan
x 2021 Operating Agreement Between the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach
x 2022 Cost Share Agreement Between the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach
The Project Partners recently took a Cost Share Agreement to their respective City Councils for approval in January, February, and March 2022. The agreement was unanimously approved by all three city councils. The Cost Share Agreement establishes a united approach to reduce their groundwater pumping and describes the cost sharing framework for design, construction, and operation of Central Coast Blue. Costs will be shared between Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande based on the proportion to their share of the benefits. As part of this agreement, the cities will eventually form a Joint Powers Authority to own and operate the Project.

Groundwater management
collaboration between the
partner agencies began with
a Gentlemen’s Agreement
to cooperatively manage
groundwater in 1983 and
continues in a legally
adopted management
agreement to this day.

Attachment 2

9.F-20Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 10 Central Coast Blue Objectives and Benefits
Central Coast Blue Partners seek to implement a project that meets the specific regional objectives shown in Table 1. The table shows how Central Coast Blue will fulfill the objectives created by stakeholders, which align with USBR’s priority missions.

Table 1. Central Coast Blue Objectives and Benefits

PROJECT

OBJECTIVE

PROJECT

BENEFIT
Create a sustainable,
drought-resistant, and
local water supply and
improve water supply
reliability for southern
San Luis Obispo County

x Promotes water independence and create a local and
sustainable drought-resistant water supply to support the communities, agriculture, and tourism.
x Expands the water portfolio for the region and reduces vulnerability to drought, climate change, disruptions from imported water, and potential groundwater contamination from seawater intrusion.
x Protects the community of Oceano, a severely disadvantaged community (SDAC), and Oceano CSD’s five production wells by allowing the agency to continue providing clean water to its 7,000 residents. Without Central Coast Blue, Oceano CSD’s wells would be contaminated by seawater intrusion before the other NCMA agencies due to their location and proximity to the ocean.

Provide a new source of
recharge to the Basin to
protect it from
degradation due to
seawater intrusion

x Recycles up to 3.9 MGD of water that is not currently utilized and discharged into the ocean.
x Provides NCMA agencies the ability to increase groundwater pumping and more fully utilize existing entitlements.
x Avoids remediation costs since the cost of preventing seawater intrusion with Central Coast Blue is less than the cost to mitigate groundwater contamination from salts once intrusion has occurred. Central Coast Blue eliminates the need to develop additional production facilities and
infrastructure to replace contaminated supplies.

Reduce wastewater
discharges to the ocean
and maximize utilization
of local water supplies
x Reduces ocean discharges by Central Coast Blue Partners by 74% and reroutes flows to an AWPF and injects purified
water into the groundwater basin.

Facilitate continued
water resources
collaboration in the
NCMA
x Sets framework for future sustainable management of the shared groundwater basin.
x Unites five agencies as they manage water collaboratively and holistically.

Attachment 2

9.F-21Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 11 PROJECT

OBJECTIVE

PROJECT

BENEFIT
Improve groundwater
quality through nitrate
removal and dilution
x Increased nitrate removal and reduction with increased groundwater extraction. Any nitrates that make it back to the City’s or the SSLOCD’s WWTP will be removed through
biological denitrification or through the AWPF and discharged to the ocean with the brine stream, removing them from the Basin. Dilution will be achieved through the injection of advanced purified water, which is higher quality than the water that is currently found in the Basin.

Reduce local and state
surface water diversions
to help benefit critical
environmental habitat
x Recharge the groundwater basin so Central Coast Blue
Partners can rely on more groundwater and reduce reliance on SWP and Lopez Lake.

Establish community
involvement and
education of recycled
water production
x Involve the public through council meetings, board meetings, pilot AWPF tours, press releases, and the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process to educate and engage the public in building a sustainable and reliable water supply portfolio for themselves and future generations.

Improved energy
efficiency and use of
renewable energy for
potable water production
x Lowers energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG)
associated with importing SWP water to the region.

Schedule
Key past and future schedule milestones for Phase 1 of the Project are shown in Figure 6. 2022 2023 2024 2025
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3
Preliminary
Engineering
Permitting
Final Design
Construction
Startup &
Closeout
Figure 6. Phase 1 Project Schedule
Attachment 2

9.F-22Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 12 Evaluation Criteria
Examination of the five evaluation criteria is provided below. Each criterion is fully addressed, and the analysis of the narrative indicates the Project meets all objectives of the Title XVI funding program.

Evaluation Criterion 1 – Water Supply
Subcriterion No. 1a – Stretching Water Supplies

1. How many acre-feet of water are expected to be made available each year upon completion of the Project? What percentage of the present and/or future annual demand in the project sponsor’s service area will the Project's reclaimed water provide upon Project completion? The percentage should be based on the total service area demand, not just recycled water demand. Use the total capacity of the entire Project upon completion, not just the water that will be produced by the activities that will be completed over the next 2 years.

Central Coast Blue Phase 1 will inject approximately 1,120 AFY of purified water and yield approximately 1,613 AFY of groundwater.Groundwater modeling demonstrated that creation of a seawater barrier with Phase 1 injection volumes (1,120 AFY) that would allow Central Coast Blue Partners to increase pumping by of 1,613 AFY. Phase 2 (which includes Phase 1) will inject approximately 4,390 AFY of purified water and yield approximately 4,390 AFY of groundwater.

Average historical groundwater pumping from 2011–2020 was 943 AFY, which is a more representative amount of available groundwater instead of the NCMA agencies’ groundwater entitlement under the Stipulation because of the threat of seawater intrusion. The NCMA agencies projected demand is 6,750AFY in 2035.Central Coast Blue Phase 1 will meet 24% of the projected demand and Phase 2 will meet 65% of projected demand. The Project will represent 44%of the Central Coast Blue Partners’ future water supply as shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Water Supplies with Project – Phase 1 (Left) & Phase 2 (Right) (Volumes in AFY) Attachment 2

9.F-23Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 13 2. Will the Project reduce, postpone, or eliminate the development of new or expanded non-recycled water supplies? Explain.

Central Coast Blue provides the first new source of water for the region in over 30 years. By capturing up to 3.9 MGD of wastewater that is currently being discharged into the ocean, the Project should eliminate the need to develop new or expanded non-recycled water supplies.

Utilizing this existing unused resource will provide the Project Partners with a reliable water supply portfolio and remove the need to implement supply alternatives, such as purchasing more SWP capacity, raising the Lopez Lake spillway to increase storage, or desalination.

As described in the Description of Current and Projected Water Demands section, on page 27, future water demands will be met with existing water supplies provided that the NCMA agencies are able to pump their full groundwater entitlements. Central Coast Blue enables the NCMA agencies to utilize existing groundwater entitlements and better manage their water supply portfolios to meet both near-term and future demands from urban and agricultural users in the area. Central Coast Blue will also protect existing production wells in the basin from seawater intrusion, low groundwater levels, and nitrates, eliminating the need to drill new wells.

3. Will the Project alleviate pressure on existing water supplies and/or facilities? If so, please describe the existing water supplies, identify the supplies and/or facilities that will be impacted and explain how they will be impacted by the Project, including quantifications where applicable.

Central Coast Blue will allow the NCMA agencies to
continue utilizing groundwater, which will alleviate
pressure on existing surface water supplies. Ongoing
drought conditions in San Luis Obispo County and
throughout California have stressed available water
supplies and forced agencies to identify additional
creative solutions for developing more reliable, locally controlled water resource portfolios.

Without taking proactive efforts to protect groundwater supplies and alleviate pressure on existing water sources, it is anticipated that the NCMA will face the following problems:

1. Degradation of groundwater quality within the Basin from seawater intrusion and nitrates from agricultural fertilizer application.

2. Increased dependence on local surface water supplies that are susceptible to variable precipitation and drought.

3. Increased dependence on imported SWP water supplies, which make the NCMA vulnerable to SWP availability, reliability, catastrophic conveyance interruption, and increased costs of SWP supplies.

Based on current entitlements, the projected supply of the NCMA agencies would be able to meet projected future water demands if NCMA agencies are able to pump their full groundwater entitlements. However, ongoing droughts that result in reduced recharge to the Basin, and concerns of lowering groundwater elevations to levels that put the Basin at risk from seawater Central Coast Blue would
maintain a barrier to
seawater intrusion, allowing
NCMA agencies to
sustainably use groundwater
and alleviate pressure on the
existing surface water supply.

Attachment 2

9.F-24Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 14 intrusion, restrict the NCMA agencies from pumping their full entitlements. Since there are no hydraulic boundaries in the Basin, if seawater intrusion occurs in the NCMA portion, it would impact the municipal and agricultural groundwater supplies of the entire Basin. As shown in Figure 8, the lowest volume of groundwater production from the NCMA portion of the Basin in at least the past 20 years was 3,511 AF in 2016, which represents about 37% of the entitlement yield of 9,500 AFY for the NCMA. Even with the relatively low volume of pumping, groundwater elevations throughout the area declined by several feet, with some areas exhibiting elevations below sea level. If groundwater becomes contaminated by seawater intrusion, there is a real possibility that the NCMA agencies could run out of water during the next extended drought.

Central Coast Blue will increase groundwater recharge and protect the Basin from seawater intrusion during these extended drought periods by utilizing a resource that is currently wasted to the ocean.

Figure 8. Total NCMA Water Use (Urban, Rural, Agricultural) By Source (4) Central Coast Blue will inject up to 4,390 AFY of recycled water into the Basin to maintain a barrier to seawater intrusion. Central Coast Blue enables the NCMA agencies to utilize existing groundwater entitlements and better manage their water supply portfolios to meet both current and future demands, while also reducing stresses on existing production wells in the Basin from seawater intrusion, low groundwater levels, and nitrates.

Central Coast Blue also has the potential to reduce imported water demand by 1,850 AFY, which would directly benefit the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Bay-Delta) system flows, habitat, and Attachment 2

9.F-25Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 15 ecosystems. In the Bay-Delta, 300% more water is allocated to various uses than is actually available for use each year. There is no solution for correcting these allocation issues; however, every effort to reduce demand from these systems will have a beneficial impact and reduce pressure on these supplies. Because the Project will reduce imports from the Bay-Delta, it in turn will positively affect Federal Water Projects such as the Central Valley Project (CVP). Overseen by the USBR, the CVP has long-term agreements to supply water to more than 250 contractors in 29 California counties. CVP deliveries provide an average of 5 million AF of water for farms, 600,000 AF of water for municipal and industrial uses, and water for wildlife refuges and maintaining water quality in the Bay-Delta (5).

4. What performance measures will be used to quantify actual benefits upon completion of the Project?
There are multiple performance measures that will be used to quantify Central Coast Blue benefits. These measures are described below:

1. NCMA groundwater monitoring to track water level, water quality, subsidence, and signs of seawater intrusion. The data collected will be detailed in a Groundwater Monitoring Plan that will be developed with Phase 1.

2. Central Coast Blue Partners’ annual water supply by source to show a reduced volume of imported water while still meeting water demands.

3. Central Coast Blue Partners’ annual groundwater quality.

4. The quality and quantity of water produced at the AWPF.

Subcriterion No. 1b – Contributions to Water Supply Sustainability Points will be awarded for Projects that contribute to a more reliable water supply.

1. Will the Project make water available to address a specific concern? Consider the number of acre-feet of water and/or the percentage of overall water supply to be made available by the Project. Explain the specific concern and its severity. Also explain the role of the Project in addressing that concern and the extent to which the Project will address it.

Water Supply Shortages and Water Supply Reliability
Central Coast Blue will increase water supply reliability through recharging the groundwater basin and preventing seawater intrusion by injecting up to 4,390 AFY of purified water into the Basin. By providing a local, drought-resistant water supply, Central Coast Blue Partners will be able to reduce dependence on imported SWP water and local
surface water from Lopez Reservoir, which are subject to climate change and drought.

Groundwater Depletion
Currently, the Central Coast Blue Partners cannot pump
their full groundwater entitlements without the risk of depleting the groundwater supply and Central Coast Blue will
reliably recharge the
groundwater basin even
during droughts because
the wastewater supply is
minimally impacted by
drought or by local,
regional, and state-wide
hydrology.

Attachment 2

9.F-26Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 16 leaving the basin vulnerable to seawater intrusion. The Project will be able to consistently recharge the groundwater basin even during droughts, as the wastewater supply is not impacted by drought conditions. This will prevent groundwater depletion when the basin is not being recharged through seasonal rainfall.

Water Quality Issues
The Project protects water quality by preventing seawater intrusion. Furthermore, injection of advanced purified water will improve groundwater quality through nitrate removal and dilution.

Nitrates will be extracted through increased groundwater production and treatment, and dilution will occur with injection of higher-quality water than is currently found in the Basin.

Natural Disasters That May Impact Water Supply Infrastructure A catastrophic interruption to SWP and/or the Lopez Project conveyance infrastructure, such as an earthquake, could have serious impacts on the availability of imported and local surface water.

SWP water makes up 17% of the existing water supply, and Lopez Project water makes up 68% of the existing water supply portfolio for the Central Coast Blue Partners. A catastrophic interruption could cause the complete and sudden failure of the facilities used to import water into and within the region. Central Coast Blue could reliably supply 4,390 AFY—which represents over 55 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) for the participating agencies—as a local resource for each agency to produce water from while other sources are not available during an emergency.

A supply of 55 gpcd exceeds the California DWR indoor water use standard of 50 gpcd.

Heightened Competition for Water Supplies
There is a concern that SWP imported supplies could become scarce as reliability decreases due to multiple factors including increased demands for environmental uses and municipal demand increases with growing populations. The source wastewater for the Project is constantly being produced, even during droughts, as opposed to alternatives such as groundwater, imported SWP water, and local Lopez Project water that rely on local, regional, and state-wide hydrology.

Availability of Alternative Supplies
Without Central Coast Blue, the NCMA agencies will continue using local surface water, groundwater, and SWP water in accordance with existing entitlements and may have to develop additional supplies to ensure a reliable water supply. Current supply entitlements available to the NCMA agencies are sufficient to meet projected demands if full entitlements are assumed.

However, if Central Coast Blue Partners extract their full groundwater entitlement under drought conditions without increased recharge, it is expected that seawater intrusion will occur. Seawater intrusion could require drilling additional wells along with distribution piping in locations not impacted by seawater intrusion or constructing desalter facilities to produce potable water.

Even with recent reduced groundwater pumping, groundwater elevations throughout the area have declined by several feet due to drought conditions and reduced groundwater recharge.

Lower groundwater levels will eventually allow salts to contaminate the Basin when groundwater levels drop below the threshold of the Deep Well Index. Proactive measures to protect the existing groundwater basin are anticipated to be more feasible than required measures after the basin has been degraded.

Attachment 2

9.F-27Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 17 Without the Project, Central Coast Blue Partners will continue to manage resources in reaction to drought and unstable supply conditions. As the NCMA has experienced in the past, increased reliance on surface water supplies to reduce impacts to the groundwater basin has resulted in Lopez Reservoir coming within one year of reaching minimum pool, and many of the agencies came close to utilizing all their remaining entitlements. Implementation of Central Coast Blue will reduce existing and anticipated pressures on the NCMA water supply portfolios.

Increasing Cost of Water Supplies
The Central Coast Blue Partner agencies rely upon surface water from Lopez Reservoir as a key portion of their supply. In addition, the City of Pismo Beach relies on imported surface water from the SWP. Costs associated with the Lopez Project and SWP are anticipated to increase in future years and additional infrastructure (e.g. Delta Conveyance Project, etc.) and infrastructure repair and maintenance (e.g. improvements to Lopez Dam spillway, etc.) will further increase costs.

Central Coast Blue will provide local control over water costs and help alleviate the participating agencies reliance upon increasingly more expensive and less reliable water supplies.

2. Will the project address climate change? E.O. 14008: Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad focuses on increasing resilience to climate change and supporting climate resilient development. E.O. 14008 emphasizes the need to prioritize and take robust actions to reduce climate pollution; increase resilience to the impacts of climate change; protect public health; and conserve our lands, waters, oceans, and biodiversity. Please describe how the project will address climate change.

Pismo Beach’s Climate Action Plan (6) and the Project EIR (7) lists several effects of climate change that could occur near the Project. These effects include increased temperatures, changed precipitation, sea level rise, and storm surges. As sea levels rise, there is a risk of seawater intrusion into the Basin with drought conditions. By injecting advanced purified water into the Basin, Central Coast Blue will help prevent groundwater contamination by seawater intrusion.

This Project also expands the regions water portfolio and reduces vulnerability to droughts, by storing advance purified water in the Basin.

The project is consistent with the State’s long-term climate goals and strategies outlined in the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (8). The following goals from the 2017 Scoping Plan would be applicable to the proposed project:
x Develop and support more reliable water supplies for people, agriculture, and the environment, provided by a more resilient, diversified, sustainably managed water resources system with a focus on actions that provide direct GHG reductions. x Make conservation a California way of life by using and reusing water more efficiently through greater water conservation, drought tolerant landscaping, stormwater capture, water recycling, and reuse to help meet future water demands and adapt to climate change
x Reduce the carbon footprint of water systems and water uses for both surface and groundwater supplies through integrated strategies that reduce GHG emissions while meeting the needs of a growing population, improving public safety, fostering environmental stewardship, aiding in adaptation to climate change, and supporting a stable economy.

Attachment 2

9.F-28Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 18 In addition, the primary alternative to the Project is increased use of SWP, which would increase impacts related to energy and GHG emissions because the energy intensity of SWP water is greater than that of Project water and use of additional SWP water is not consistent with the goals of the 2017 Scoping Plan.

Finally, the Project EIR includes the following climate change mitigation measures: 1) the AWPF shall include a solar photovoltaic system; and 2) the AWPF shall include recycling receptacles.

3. Will the project help create additional flexibility to address drought? Will water made available by this Project continue to be available during periods of drought? To what extent is the water made available by this Project more drought resistant than alternative water supply options? Explain.

As mentioned in USBR’s 2021 Secure Water Act Report, the duration, severity, and frequency of droughts are projected to increase in the future compared to droughts of the distant past (9).

Central Coast Blue will produce adrought-resistantsupplyof4,390AFYfor groundwater injection using 5.4 MGD of flow that is currently discharged into the ocean. This will comprise up to 40% of the Central Coast Blue Partners’ available water supply. Unlike surface water or groundwater, the source wastewater for the Project is constantly being produced, even during droughts. The alternatives—groundwater, imported SWP water, and local Lopez Project water—rely upon local, regional, and state-wide hydrologyand are subject to drought impacts.In addition, the water will be stored underground for use as needed, which allows for flexible use of supplies by each agency based on supply availability. A drought-resistant supply is needed to deal with the severity and frequency of drought within the Project’s service area as shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9. San Luis Obispo County Drought Status 2000 - 2022

4. Has the area served by the Project been identified by the United States Drought Monitor as experiencing severe, extreme, or exceptional drought at any time in the last four years?
Yes, Figure 10 on page 19 shows that San Luis Obispo County has been in a state of “abnormally dry” to “exceptional drought” since 2015. In fact, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) declared San Luis Obispo County as a primary natural disaster area in February 2017 and in March Attachment 2

9.F-29Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 19 2021 due to losses and damages caused by drought. Governor Newsom most recently proclaimed a state of emergency for drought in San Luis Obispo County on July 8, 2021. Based on recent hydrology, it is likely the region is entering another severe drought.

Figure 10. Drought Status Map 2015-2022
As of March 8, 2022, the Project area is classified as D1 (moderate drought). However, the drought monitor does not capture the bleak status of available water supplies as the wet season concludes: 1) Groundwater levels are well below normal and have not recovered from the previous drought; 2) Lopez Lake is at 30% of capacity, is projected to fall below 20% by September 2022; and 3) SWP allocation is at 15%. The Central coast Blue Partners would be in a much better water supply position today if the Project had been implemented already.

Attachment 2

9.F-30Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 20 5. Has the area served by the Project been designated as a drought disaster area by the State in the last four years?
Yes, the USDA declared San Luis Obispo County as a primary natural disaster area in March 2019 and in March 2021 due to losses and damages caused by drought (10) (11). Governor Newsom most recently proclaimed a state of emergency for drought in San Luis Obispo County on July 8, 2021.

Evaluation Criterion 2 – Environment and Water Quality

1. Will the Project improve the quality of surface water or groundwater? If so, how?

2. Will the Project improve effluent quality beyond levels necessary to meet State or Federal discharge requirements?
Protecting water quality in the Basin is a primary objective of Central Coast Blue. Existing water quality concerns from seawater intrusion and nitrate contamination in the basin, along with the anticipated benefits of implementing Central Coast Blue, are discussed in prior sections of this application; however, they are restated here to address the evaluation criterion questions and reiterate this critical Project benefit.

Historically, elevated freshwater levels along the coastline and natural outflow to the ocean have prevented seawater from intruding onshore. However, with increased demand in the NCMA and changing climatic conditions, groundwater elevations along the coastline have been observed to drop during periods of extended drought. These lower levels reduce the flow of freshwater out toward the ocean, which serves as a barrier to seawater.

Elevated chloride concentrations and the hydraulic potential for seawater intrusion in the Basin has been documented since the 1960s. Based on these findings, monitoring efforts were initiated to provide an early warning of advancing seawater intrusion. From 1970 to 2009, the NCMA agencies did not observe further evidence of seawater intrusion, which is believed to be the result of constructing the Lopez Dam and increased use of local surface water supplies. However, beginning in May 2009, elevated concentrations of TDS, chloride, and sodium were detected in two Oceano-area monitoring wells, and elevated TDS and chloride levels were detected in another well, indicating potential seawater intrusion into the Basin. In response to this detection, the NCMA member agencies began an aggressive campaign
to reduce their groundwater pumping through water
conservation and the preferential utilization of surface water supplies over groundwater supplies. Despite reducing municipal groundwater pumping levels to approximately
20% of their safe annual yield, the NCMA agencies have
continued to observe declining groundwater levels,
specifically along the coastline. Since 2013, the water level signature of sentry well 30N02 looks similar to the signature the well had in 2007–2010, immediately before and during the time when the well experienced elevated TDS and
chloride levels. Thus, the NCMA agencies are concerned that after already reducing municipal pumping by 80%, the
Central Coast Blue will
adhere to all recycled water
regulations and achieve
standards established by
the SWRCB Division of
Drinking Water. The high-
quality recycled water
produced by the project will
improve the quality of
groundwater in the basin.

Attachment 2

9.F-31Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 21 threat of seawater intrusion is very present, and there are limited to no additional immediate measures (e.g. pumping reductions) that the agencies can take to reduce the risk. Currently, reducing groundwater pumping is the only option available to the agencies to protect the Basin from seawater intrusion. The recent drought has shown that this mitigation strategy is not effective at maintaining the required groundwater levels along the coastline to protect against seawater intrusion.

Groundwater modeling indicates that only 27% of NCMA groundwater entitlement can be pumped by municipal agencies without potentially inducing seawater intrusion (12). Central Coast Blue will inject up to 4,390 AFY of advanced treated recycled water from the Pismo Beach WWTP and the SSLOCSD WWTP into the NCMA portion of the Basin each year. Groundwater modeling indicates that the injection of recycled water from the Pismo Beach WWTP alone (Phase 1) will be sufficient to develop a seawater intrusion barrier and protect the Basin from this occurrence. The injection of advanced treated recycled water from the SSLOCSD WWTP (Phase 2) will provide additional protection from seawater intrusion and allow the agencies to store the resource for extraction at a later time.

The injection of recycled water into the ground is anticipated to benefit not only the NCMA agencies, but all groundwater users in the Basin. Regional benefits are anticipated because there are no known hydraulic barriers between the NCMA and the other management areas within the Basin to limit seawater intrusion from advancing to the entire basin if left unaddressed.

Finally, recycled water produced by Central Coast Blue and extracted from the ground to meet NCMA demands will offset the use of local surface water from Lopez Lake and imported SWP water from the Bay-Delta, thus helping to protect surface water quality. Maintaining adequate surface water flows is important because habitats, species, and water quality suffer when flows are altered greatly from natural conditions (13). Reduced surface water demand will allow more water to remain in these natural surface water systems and protect water quality.

3. Will the Project improve flow conditions in a natural stream channel? Is so, how?

4. Will the Project restore or enhance habitat for non-listed species? If so, how? The NCMA agencies are entitled to a total of 4,530 AFY of surface water from Lopez Lake. Pismo Beach and Oceano CSD also have a total allotment of 1,850 AFY of imported SWP water from the Bay-Delta to meet
customer demands. Central Coast Blue will reduce
dependence on both local and imported surface water
supplies, which could allow more water to be kept in
streams. Reductions in surface water used by the NCMA will directly benefit in-stream flows and enhance habitat in Arroyo Grande Creek and the Bay-Delta ecosystems for non- listed species. The reduction in imported water also has the potential to reduce impacts to species and critical habitat impacts associated with Federal Water Projects, including the CVP, the Delta Conveyance Project, and CALFED.

The reduced dependence
on both local and imported
surface water supplies will
allow more water to be
kept in streams. The
reductions will directly
benefit in-stream flows and
enhance habitat for non-
listed species in Arroyo
Grande Creek and the Bay-
Delta ecosystems.

Attachment 2

9.F-32Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 22 In addition, Lopez Lake has an identified safe yield of 8,730 AFY, of which 4,200 AFY is allocated for downstream releases for groundwater recharge, environmental habitat, and agricultural irrigation. Due to successive dry years, a Low Reservoir Response Plan (LRRP) was adopted that results in a 10% decrease in municipal deliveries when the reservoir storage drops below 20,000 AF and 20% reduction when the reservoir drops below 10,000 AF (which is projected to occur in September 2022). Reduced surface water demand from the NCMA agencies will reduce the likelihood of the LRRP being implemented and impacting stream flows in Arroyo Grande Creek.

Finally, the Project will increase groundwater recharge through direct injection and by maintaining releases from Lopez Lake, which will also increase groundwater levels within the Basin. Higher groundwater levels will increase water levels in groundwater dependent ecosystems and ultimately improve flow conditions.

5. Will the Project provide water or habitat for federally listed threatened or endangered species? If so, how?
As discussed above, Central Coast Blue will provide 4,390 AFY of local groundwater that will be used to offset demands from imported SWP water supplies. Reduced water demand from the Bay-Delta will make this water available to support federally endangered and protected fish species in the Bay-Delta (Delta Smelt, Chinook Salmon). In the Bay-Delta, 300% more water is allocated to various uses than is actually available for use each year. Even small reductions in the amount of water withdrawn will have positive benefits to species in this system.

Additionally, Arroyo Grande Creek is designated as habitat for threatened South Central California Steelhead, Red-Legged Frogs, Tidewater Goby, and potentially other threatened/endangered species. Reduced demand for Lopez Reservoir water supplies will make additional water available for downstream releases, which will improve and enhance habitat for these species. Reducing pressure on existing water supplies and improving flexibility to return streams and rivers to their more natural patterns will more closely mimic natural conditions which will provide threatened native species a better chance of outcompeting invasive species.

Evaluation Criterion 3 – Economic Benefits
Subcriterion No. 3a – Cost Effectiveness

1. Reclamation will calculate the cost per acre-foot of water produced by the Project using information provided by Project sponsors. Please provide the following information for this calculation:
a. The total estimated construction costs, by year, for the Project (include all previous and planned work).

Responses to Evaluation Criterion 3 reflect the entire Project as described in the Technical Project Description. Central Coast Blue Phase 1 will include construction of an AWPF, treatment of secondary treated flows from the Pismo Beach WWTP, construction of up to five injection wells and associated transmission lines, and injection of treated flows to the Basin. Phase 2 will include expansion of the AWPF, treatment of secondary flows from the SSLOCSD WWTP, and construction of up to two additional injection wells and associated transmission lines.

Attachment 2

9.F-33Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 23 Table 2. Estimated Construction Costs by Year
Federal Fiscal Year CONSTRUCTION COST
FY 2024 $20,474,500
FY 2025 $20,474,500
FY 2026 $0
FY 2027 $13,278,500
FY 2028 $13,278,500
Total $67,506,000
Note: Construction costs are escalated to 2024
b. The total estimated or actual costs to plan and design the Project. Note: This should not include the cost to complete a feasibility study that meets the requirements of Reclamation’s Directives and Standards WTR 11-01, Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Feasibility Study Review Process, at www.usbr.gov/recman/wtr/wtr11-

01.pdf.

Table 3. Total Estimated Eligible Costs for Planning and Design Activities

PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Planning $1,129,528 $-
Program Management $3,065,000 $1,914,000
Permitting $810,000 $533,000
Final Design $4,550,000 $3,043,000
Value Engineering $239,000 $160,000
Office Engineering During Construction $1,134,000 $736,000 Construction Management $3,722,000 $2,415,000
Total $14,649,528 $8,801,000
Note: Excludes cost to prepare USBR Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Feasibility Study, costs to prepare USBR Title XVI grant application, and costs incurred prior to USBR approval of the Project Feasibility Study. All values in 2022 dollars. c. The average annual operation and maintenance costs for the life of the Project. Please do not include periodic replacement costs in the operation and maintenance costs. Periodic replacement costs should be provided separately in response to (f) below. Note: This is an annual cost—not total cost.

O&M cost estimates include maintenance and power for the AWPF, pump stations, pipelines, wells, and equalization as well as the cost of staffing the facility.

Table 4. Annual O&M for Project
PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Annual O&M $1,919,200 $4,805,000
Note: All values in 2022 dollars.
d. The year the Project will begin to deliver reclaimed water.

Attachment 2

9.F-34Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 24 Central Coast Blue will begin to deliver recycled water in 2025. e. The Projected life (in years) that the Project is expected to last. Note: this should be measured from the time the Project starts delivering water.

The facilities associated with Central Coast Blue have a projected life of 30 years (2025–2055). f. All estimated replacement costs by year. If there are multiple replacement costs in one (1) year, or at the same interval, please total them and put them on one line with the year or interval.

Table 5. Replacement Costs by Year

DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT

REQUIREMENT YEAR COST

TOTAL EACH

REPLACEMENT

INTERVAL
Cartridge Filter Replacement
Lamp Replacement
Annual
Annual
$15,900
$12,500 $28,400
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
5 5
5 $291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$456,300
UV Sensor Replacement
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
10 10
10 10
$10,200
$291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$466,500
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
15 15
15 $291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$456,300
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
UV Sensor Replacement
20 20
20 20
$291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$10,200
$466,500
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
25 25
25 $291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$456,300
UF Module Replacement
RO Membrane Replacement
Ballast Replacement
UV Sensor Replacement
30 30
30 30
$291,700
$145,300
$19,300
$10,200
$466,500
Note: All values in 2022 dollars.
g. The maximum volume of water (in acre-feet) that will be produced upon completion of the Project. This volume of water must correspond to the costs provided above. If costs are only provided for a portion or phase of the project, then only the water produced by that same portion or phase of the project will be considered under this criterion.

The Project will produce a total of 48,390 AF in Phase 1 and an additional 88,350 AF in Phase 2 for a total of 131,740 AF.

Attachment 2

9.F-35Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 25 2. Reclamation will calculate the cost per acre-foot for the Title XVI Project using the information requested in question No. 1 and compare it to the non-reclaimed water alternative, and other water supply options that applicant identifies to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the Project. Please provide the following information for this comparison:
a. A description of the conditions that exist in the area and projections of the future with, and without, the Project.

Description of Current and Projected Water Supplies
A “No Project” scenario for the NCMA agencies results in the continued use of existing potable water supplies which are made up of groundwater and surface water from both local and imported supplies. Each of the water purveyors rely upon their own specific combination of these water sources. The supply for each NCMA agency and their baseline (full entitlement) amounts are summarized in Table 6. Note that “Other Supplies” include groundwater pumped from outside the NCMA boundaries (outside the Basin) and groundwater entitlement differs from estimates of actual available groundwater supply described above. Groundwater modeling indicates that only 27% of groundwater entitlement can be pumped by municipal agencies without potentially inducing seawater intrusion. Without the Project, the Central Coast Blue Partners will likely pursue additional SWP water or desalination.

Table 6. NCMA Agency Water Entitlements

URBAN AREA LOPEZ
LAKE
SWP

ALLOCATION

GROUNDWATER

ENTITLEMENT
OTHER

SUPPLIES TOTAL
Arroyo Grande 2,290 0 1,323 160 3,773
Grover Beach 800 0 1,407 0 2,207
Pismo Beach 892 1,140 700 0 2,732
Oceano CSD 303 750 900 0 1,953
Total 4,285 1,890 4,330 160 10,665
Note: All values in AFY.

Water sources that the NCMA agencies utilize are discussed in detail below, along with a summary of the concerns that exist with continuing to rely upon these resources in the absence of implementing Central Coast Blue.

Surface Water
The NCMA agencies have water supply contracts with the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (SLOCFC&WCD) for Lopez Project and SWP surface water supplies.

Lopez Project
The Lopez Reservoir total capacity is 51,990 AF and has an identified safe yield of 8,730 AFY. Of this safe yield, 4,530 AFY is allocated for diversion to municipal users (note 245 AFY is allocated outside the NCMA) and 4,200 AFY is allocated for downstream release to Arroyo Grande Creek for agricultural irrigation, groundwater recharge, and environmental habitat. Due to successive Attachment 2

9.F-36Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 26 dry years, a LRRP was enacted in April 2015 when the storage dropped below 20,000 AF. The enactment of the LRRP resulted in a 10% decrease in municipal diversions and downstream releases and 20% reduction when the reservoir drops below 10,000 AF (which is projected to occur in September 2022) (14). As of February 2022, the current storage volume in Lopez Reservoir is 14,700 AF (15) and it is likely that the LRRP will be considered as a tool to preserve water supplies which could again decrease downstream releases. Should the current dry weather continue it is likely that additional stages of the LRRP could be considered which could completely eliminate downstream releases.

During the most recent drought, the NCMA agencies relied heavily on their surface water supplies to reduce groundwater pumping to the lowest amount possible. During this time, Lopez Reservoir came within one year of reaching minimum pool and one agency came within one year of potentially not having enough water to serve its population. Ongoing drought conditions have triggered Lopez reductions through the LRRP, which have impacted the ability of the NCMA agencies to utilize surface water supplies to offset their groundwater pumping. Since 2014, storage levels in Lopez Reservoir have dropped to historically low levels and, if the drought continues, Lopez Water will likely be unavailable to the NCMA agencies, forcing them to further rely upon groundwater supplies.

State Water Project
Oceano CSD and Pismo Beach are the only NCMA agencies with SWP subcontracts with the SLOCFC&WCD. Pismo Beach’s current contract entitlement amount of SWP is 1,240 AFY; however, 100 AFY is allocated to specific entities so the supply available to Pismo Beach is 1,140 AFY. Oceano CSD’s SWP allocation is 750 AFY.

SWP allocation water deliveries have the potential to be impacted from year to year depending on available supply from rainfall, snowpack, runoff, reservoir storage, pumping capacity from the Delta, anthropogenic activities, and environmental constraints. In fact, two of the past eight years have had only 5% allocations. Furthermore, catastrophic interruption to supply conveyance infrastructure, such as an earthquake, could have serious impacts on the availability of imported water. A catastrophic interruption, such as the Oroville Dam spillway emergency in February 2017, could cause the complete and sudden failure of the facilities used to store and import water into the region.

Groundwater
The NCMA agencies extract groundwater based on the safe yield identified in the Management Agreement, which is 9,500 AFY. This safe yield is currently subdivided into 3 allotments as follows:

1. Applied irrigation (4,970 AFY)

2. Subsurface outflow to the ocean (200 AFY)

3. Urban Use (4,330 AFY)
Urban use entitlements are further allotted as follows: City of Arroyo Grande (1,323 AFY), City of Grover Beach (1,407 AFY), City of Pismo Beach (700 AFY), and Oceano CSD (900 AFY).

As previously noted, in response to monitoring results in 2009 that detected water quality constituents consistent with seawater intrusion in NCMA monitoring wells, NCMA agencies limited water consumption, increased surface water imports, and reduced groundwater Attachment 2

9.F-37Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 27 pumping. As a result, total groundwater pumping in the NCMA decreased from 8,982 AFY in 2007 to 6,126 AFY in 2020, a reduction of approximately 32% (4).

The primary groundwater production zone for the NCMA agencies is in the northern central portion of the NCMA. Currently, the NCMA agencies own and operate 21 individual municipal production wells that pump groundwater from the Basin. The locations of the existing production wells are shown in Figure 11. Pismo Beach and Oceano CSD production wells are the furthest west and likely at the highest risk for seawater intrusion due to their proximity to the ocean.

Figure 11. NCMA Production Wells
Description of Current and Projected Water Demands
Total estimated Basin pumpage (municipal and agricultural) in the NCMA in 2020 was 3,064 AF, which represents the lowest volume of groundwater production from the NCMA portion of the basin in at least the past 20 years. The estimated groundwater pumpage of 3,064 AFY represents about 32% of the calculated yield of 9,500 AFY for the NCMA portion of the Basin. However, even with the relatively low volume of pumping and a relatively wet rainfall year in 2019, the aquifer health is still fragile as illustrated by water elevations at just a few feet above sea level, coupled with the formation of a pumping depression in the alluvial aquifer within the Cienega Valley just west of the NCMA/NMMA boundary. The data indicate that the aquifer has very little ability to withstand any future droughts (4).

The 2020 water demand for the NCMA area of 8,577 AF is lower than the total available supply for all uses in 2020, which totaled 12,470 AF. However, the Central Coast Blue Partners pumped Attachment 2

9.F-38Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 28 only 14% of their groundwater entitlement, yet the change in groundwater storage in the basin was minimal since last year. It is clear that the NCMA agencies could not have used their entire groundwater entitlement in 2020 without significantly lowering water elevations below current conditions and potentially providing conditions conducive to seawater intrusion (4).

The supply scenarios and projected demand for the NCMA agencies is shown in Figure 12. The supply scenarios for the NCMA agencies include reduced availability that would be the result of dry years with little to no precipitation and critical drought. The actual pumping in 2020 is also included. As discussed earlier, the NCMA agencies cannot use their entire groundwater entitlement without the potential of lowering water elevations, which puts the groundwater basin at risk of seawater intrusion (4). Based on these scenarios, the agencies would require severe conservation and/or acquisition of expensive imported water on the open market if there are multiple dry years or a critical drought.

Figure 12. Projected Supply vs. Demand for NCMA Agencies without Recycled Water Future Conditions with the Project
Implementation of Central Coast Blue allows the NCMA agencies to realize all the established Project objectives. Multiple Project benefits are discussed throughout this application; however, the impact the Project has on protecting and improving water quality in the Basin, reducing pressure on existing water supplies, and creating a sustainable, drought-resistant local water supply cannot be understated. By utilizing WWTP effluent that is currently underutilized and discharged to the ocean, Central Coast Blue will provide the NCMA agencies with a reliable water supply portfolio well into the future. Water supply and demand projections after implementation of Central Coast Blue are provided in Figure 13 on page 29. Without Central Coast Blue, NCMA agencies will continue to struggle to manage resources in reaction to drought, unstable supply conditions, and deteriorating water quality.

0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Ac
r
e
-
f
e
e
t

p
e
r

y
e
a
r

(
A
F
Y
)
Supply - SWP
Supply - Lopez Water
Supply - Groundwater
Demand - 2020
Demand - 2035
Attachment 2

9.F-39Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 29 Figure 13. Projected Supply vs. Demand for NCMA Agencies with Recycled Water

b. Provide the cost per acre-foot of other water supply alternatives that could be implemented by the non-Federal Project sponsor in lieu of the Project. This must include, but is not limited to, one non-reclaimed water alternative that would satisfy the same demand as the Project. Other water supply alternatives beyond one non-reclaimed water alternative are not required, but may be provided where available to demonstrate the cost effectiveness of the Project.

Central Coast Blue Partners have extensively investigated opportunities to improve the reliability of local water supplies and protect existing resources. Both non-recycled and recycled water projects have been analyzed. Non-recycled water alternatives include the Lopez Reservoir Spillway Raising, Supplemental SWP via the Coastal Branch and Lopez Pipelines, and desalination.

A discussion of the alternatives, along with an explanation regarding the feasibility of each alternative is provided in Table 7 on page 30.
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Ac
r
e
-
f
e
e
t

p
e
r

y
e
a
r

(
A
F
Y
)
Recycled Water
Supply - SWP
Supply - Lopez Water
Supply - Groundwater
Demand - 2020
Demand - 2035
Attachment 2

9.F-40Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 30 Table 7. Unit Cost Comparison – Regional Water Supply Alternatives

ALTERNATIVE
UNIT
COST
($/AF)
YIELD
(AFY) COMMENTS

RECYCLED WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES
Central Coast
Blue
(Phase 1 & 2)1
$1,910 4,390
The estimated unit cost of Central Coast Blue is in-line or superior to supply alternatives that satisfy the same
demand. This Project provides a new sustainable,
drought-resistant local water supply that protects water quality in the Basin. The Project provides a 60% increase in municipal groundwater supplies and will reduce ocean
discharge by 74%.

Satellite
Water
Resource
Recovery
Facility (16)
$6,900 1,006 The high unit cost and low yield associated with this project makes this alternative infeasible.

NON-RECYCLED WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES
Lopez Lake
Spillway
Raise Project
(17)
$1,700 565
The estimated unit cost of this project is low; however, the estimated yield of 565 AFY does not satisfy the same demand as Central Coast Blue. Also, the timeline
associated with the planning, permitting, design, and
implementation phases of the project do not address the Central Coast Blue Partner’s immediate needs. This
resource will remain impacted by local drought
conditions. At its current height, the spillway has not overflowed since 1997, meaning that no additional water would have been made available from this option.

Nacimiento
Pipeline
Extension
$3,000
to
$3,800
2,300
The lower unit cost is dependent on reusing a pipeline
currently associated oil and gas production. In addition, Nacimiento supplies have been fully allocated since the preparation of the original study in 2006.

Desalination
(18) $3,800 2,300
The high estimated unit cost, permitting concerns, and
estimated time to complete a desalination project makes this alternative currently infeasible.

SWP (19) $3,000 NA2
SWP is a viable alternative to Central Coast Blue; however, this supply is vulnerable to availability, reliability, catastrophic conveyance interruption s, and increased
costs.
1Central Coast Blue annual unit cost in 2022 dollars and include annual yield after injection 2SWP annual yields would be subject to obtaining new contracts or excess entitlements Note: All values are in 2022 dollars.

Attachment 2

9.F-41Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 31 Non-Recycled Water Project Alternatives
Lopez Reservoir Spillway Raising
In 2013, the Lopez Lake Spillway Raise Project Report was conducted to evaluate raising the spillway elevation of Lopez Reservoir as a means of increasing safe yield in the reservoir and thus increasing water supply entitlements to the contract agencies. The additional annual yield of the project was evaluated for a range of spillway gate heights ranging from 2 feet to 12 feet, which would increase lake storage capacity by 1,900 AF and 11,400 AF, respectively. Estimated costs were prepared for a 6-foot-high spillway gate to yield 600 AFY. The project unit cost was estimated at $1,255/AF (2013 dollars) (17). Using the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index, the unit cost escalated to January 2022 dollars is $1,700/AF.

The unit cost of water associated with the Lopez Reservoir Spillway Raising Project is lower than estimates for Central Coast Blue; however, the project does not satisfy the same demand as the Project. In addition, the timeline associated with the planning, permitting, design, and implementation phases of the project do not address the Central Coast Blue Partners’ immediate needs. This supply will also continue to be subject to climate change, local precipitation amounts and future droughts. The additional storage associated with raising the spillway would only be available if there was enough precipitation to fill the reservoir. At its current elevation, the spillway has not overflowed since 1997, meaning no additional water would have been made available by this project over that time, and it is likely based on current weather patterns that no additional water would be made available for the foreseeable future. Finally, this project does not protect the Basin and existing groundwater entitlements from seawater intrusion. Further evaluation of this project has been put on hold while the SLOCFC&WCD develops a Habit Conservation Plan for the Arroyo Grande Creek, which feeds Lopez Reservoir. Currently there is not a timeline for completion of the Habit Conservation Plan, which was initiated in 2004.

Supplemental SWP via the Coastal Branch and Lopez Pipelines SLOCFC&WCD completed a technical memorandum update in 2016 (19) to calculate potential costs of obtaining additional capacity in the Coastal Branch Pipeline and delivering the SLOCFC&WCD’s “Excess Allocation” Table A water to the Paso Basin. Expanding delivery options for the SLOCFC&WCD’s excess entitlement could provide an opportunity for the Central Coast Blue Partner agencies that are SWP subcontractors (i.e. Pismo Beach and Oceano CSD) to obtain supplemental SWP water. Estimated costs for treated water delivery scenarios for a new SWP subcontractor ranged from $2,292/AF to $2,503/AF (2016 dollars) to deliver water to the Paso Basin. Delivery of water to the Lopez Pipeline would require purchase of additional capacity in additional downstream portions of the Coastal Branch Pipeline. Additionally, these cost estimates for SWP water do not account for potential increases in SWP costs associated with the Delta Conveyance Project. Using the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index, the unit cost escalated to January 2022 dollars is $3,000/AF.

Attachment 2

9.F-42Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 32 The NCMA agencies could potentially obtain new SWP
contracts or obtain excess entitlements; however, the path and timeline for negotiating and securing any additional supply remains uncertain. In addition, this non-local supply source is still affected by multiple factors that impact reliability. Water supply imported from other areas of the state may be threatened by state-wide drought, effects of climate change in the SWP source area, management and
environmental protection issues in the Bay-Delta that affect the amount and reliability of SWP deliveries, and risk of seismic and other damage to the SWP system, such as the failure of the Oroville Dam Spillway. SWP does not have the ability to reliably satisfy the same demand as the Project.

Furthermore, this alternative does not protect the Basin and existing groundwater entitlements from seawater intrusion.

Despite the shortcomings associated with increasing or obtaining new SWP allocations, SWP water is likely the project alternative that would be pursued with the absence of the Project.

Nacimiento Pipeline Extension
The Nacimiento Water Supply Project delivers raw water from Nacimiento Reservoir to agencies in northern San Luis Obispo County, terminating at the City of San Luis Obispo’s Water Treatment Plant. The 2006 Supplemental Water Supply Study: Nacimiento Pipeline Extension prepared by the Wallace Group evaluated the viability of the Nacimiento Pipeline Project to supply approximately 2,300 AFY of potable water to meet future demands. The study evaluated two pipeline alignments and the project required improvements to the Lopez WTP for treatment of raw water such as the installation of chemical pretreatment, new membrane filtration system, and disinfection to meet state and federal water quality standards. The existing Lopez Project pipeline also would require pumping improvements to increase capacity and maintain adequate delivery rates and pressure to all users. Agencies would be required to sign the Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract, which defines the operation and maintenance, delivery entitlement, and regulatory requirements for each agency. The estimated capital cost of the Orcutt Road alignment was $30,100,000 with estimated annual O&M cost of $5,960,000 and 20-year life cycle cost of $3,830/AF. The estimated capital cost of the Plains Pipeline alignment was $11,860,000 with an estimated $5,800,000 annual O&M cost and 20-year life cycle cost of approximately $3,010/AF. The cost for this alignment was lower since a water discharge pipeline constructed by Plains Exploration (PXP) would be reused for part of the project. The report concluded the project would require a minimum of 5 years to complete planning, permitting, design, and construction if the Orcutt Road alignment was selected. However, if the recommended Plains Pipeline alignment was selected, the timeline could increase by 10 years since the pipeline would be necessary for oil water production during that period. The report Water supply imported
from other areas of the
state may be threatened by
state-wide drought, effects
of climate change in the
SWP resource area,
management and
environmental protection
issues, and risk of seismic
damage to the delivery SWP
system.

Attachment 2

9.F-43Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 33 concluded that more information was required regarding the timeline for the Plains Pipeline due to the high uncertainty before a feasibility study is conducted.

Desalination
In 2008, the Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach and the Oceano CSD completed a feasibility and funding study for desalination as an additional water supply option. Each agency identified their desired allocations from desalination, and the total capacity of the facility was selected at 2,300 AFY (18). The cities’ water supply needs were not considered during this analysis; however, estimated desalination production quantities align with the Project.

The study focused on utilizing the existing SSLOCSD WWTP site for construction of a desalination facility. It was determined that a series of 20 or more beach wells could be required to meet the seawater intake quantities needed (3,830 AFY of seawater) to produce 2,300 AFY of potable water. Brine generated from the RO process would be discharged through the existing ocean outfall; however, there is not sufficient capacity during periods of high flow from the Pismo Beach and SSLOCSD WWTPs. Therefore, brine storage would be required. Based on the study, the desalination project would require a minimum of 7 to 8 years to complete and possibly longer due to permitting and environmental variability. Cost for desalination was estimated to $2,450/AF in 2008 dollars. In 2022 dollars, the estimated cost associated with water produced from desalination is $3,800/AF. Desalination provides a reliable, drought-proof local water supply; however, due to estimated costs, permitting concerns, and estimated time to complete, the project was not considered to be a viable option (18).

The City of Pismo Beach also evaluated desalination in the 2015 Pismo Beach Recycled Water Facility Planning Study (16), estimating similar desalination costs as the 2008 study described above and ultimately recommending proceeding with Central Coast Blue due to the higher costs, environmental impacts, and permitting concerns associated with desalination.

Recycled Water Alternatives
Multiple recycled water alternatives were considered prior to advancing the Project. Alternative recycled water projects considered include “Secondary-23” recycled water for irrigation, disinfected tertiary for irrigation, groundwater recharge via surface spreading, and groundwater recharge using recycled water produced from a satellite facility. Initial cost estimates for these alternatives ranged from $5,700 to $15,900/AF (2015 dollars) of water produced (16). Secondary- 23 irrigation and tertiary irrigation alternatives had low annual yield and high estimated unit costs so they were not recommended.

The recycled water alternative that provided benefits closest to those achieved through the Project is the Satellite Water Resource Recovery Facility project (SWRRF). This was the original proposed concept for evaluation in the SSLOCSD Recycled Water Facility Planning Study (20). The SWRRF would be located along one of the trunk mains leading to the WWTP—outside of the flood plain and near potential recharge locations. However, after review of the initial financial analysis, the Project Partners determined that a SWRRF was not an effective option for developing a recycled water system in the region. This is due to the expected costs associated with developing the satellite facility, including new infrastructure for primary, secondary, tertiary, and advanced treatment. In addition, the SWRRF project would not yield quantities of water comparable to Central Coast Blue.

Attachment 2

9.F-44Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 34 c. If available, provide the cost per acre foot of one water supply project with similar characteristics to the Project. This information does not have to be provided if it is not available. It is intended to provide another possible comparison to demonstrate the cost effectiveness of the Project.

Three groundwater replenishment project that will use advanced water treatment to purify recycled water for recharging the groundwater basin via injection wells are similar to the project – two are in design phase and one is in operation. The Carpinteria Advanced Purification Project completed 50% design documents in 2019. The project will recharge roughly 1,120 AFY with construction costs of roughly $28 million and O&M estimates of $1.4 million per year. The latest cost estimates result in a unit cost of $2,300/AF (21). The Pure Water Soquel project is currently in the design-build phase with capital cost estimates of $208 million and O&M estimates of $4.8 million per year. The 3,340 AFY yield results in a unit cost of roughly $2,900/AF (22). The Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project by Monterey One Water started operations in 2020. The total project costs were not readily available; however, Monterey One Water is currently proposing to expand the project from 5 MGD to 7 MGD at a cost of roughly $2,300/AF (23).

Each of these project costs are in line with Project cost estimates. d. Discussion of the degree to which the Project is cost-effective. Where applicable, include a discussion of why the Project may be cost effective even if the overall Project cost appears to be high.

The unit cost for Central Coast Blue is in-line with the unit costs for alternative supplemental water supply projects but Central Coast Blue is clearly the superior alternative when considering the qualitative benefits. Central Coast Blue is the only alternative that achieves all of the objectives identified in Central Coast Blue Objectives and Benefits section on page 10, and detailed in Table 8.

Table 8. Central Coast Blue Qualitative Benefits

WATER SUPPLY
Increased
Resiliency
Expands the water portfolio for the region and reduces vulnerability to drought, climate change, disruptions from imported water, and potential worsening quality of groundwater from seawater intrusion.

Increased
Reliability
NCMA agencies will have the ability to increase groundwater pumping and more fully utilize existing entitlements. Wastewater being discharged into the ocean will be put to beneficial use. Wastewater will remain available through the life of the Project.

Increased
Recharge
Provide a new source of recharge to the Basin to protect the basin from degradation due to seawater intrusion and increase available water for extraction.

WATER QUALITY
Attachment 2

9.F-45Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 35 Seawater
Intrusion
The injection of recycled water will protect the Basin from seawater intrusion by maintaining offshore groundwater flows. The cost of preventing seawater intrusion into the Basin is less than costs to mitigate groundwater contamination from salts once it has occurred. Central Coast Blue eliminates the need to develop additional production facilities and infrastructure to replace contaminated supplies.

Nitrate
Removal and
Dilution
Improve groundwater quality through nitrate removal and dilution. Removal of nitrates will be increased with expanded groundwater extraction. Any nitrates that make it back to the Pismo Beach or SSLOCSD WWTP will be removed through biological denitrification or through the AWPF and discharged to the ocean with the brine stream, thus removing them from the basin. Dilution will be achieved through the injection of advanced purified water, which is of significantly higher quality than the water that is currently found in the basin.

ENVIRONMENT / OTHER
Watersheds
Reduce local and state surface water diversions to help benefit critical environmental habitat. Reducing SWP usage also reduces diversions from the upstream Bay-Delta.

GHG
Emissions
Lower energy demand and GHG emissions associated with reduced imported state water to the region.

Regional
Collaboration Facilitate continued water resource collaboration in the NCMA.

DAC Benefits
Oceano is a SDAC census designated place, and both the Cities of Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande contain DAC census designated block groups that will benefit from the Project (Figure 14 on page 42). Oceano CSD has five production wells that extract up to 900 AFY of groundwater from the Basin.

Protection of Oceano CSD’s five production wells will allow the agency to continue providing clean water to its 7,000 residents. Without Central Coast Blue, Oceano CSD’s wells could be contaminated by seawater intrusion before the other NCMA agencies due to their location and proximity to the ocean.

Public
Knowledge
Establishes community involvement and education of recycled water production through Project planning, design, construction, and operation.

As mentioned in the previous sections, the only other similar alternative is increasing SWP supply.

However, this was not pursued further due to state water supply vulnerability, reliability, potential catastrophic conveyance interruptions, and increased costs. This supply alternative also does not address the concern of seawater intrusion and potential contamination of the entire Basin from this occurrence.

Attachment 2

9.F-46Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 36 Subcriterion No. 3b – Economic Analysis and Project Benefits

1. Summarize the economic analysis performed for the Project including information on the Project’s estimated benefits and costs. Describe the methodologies used for the analysis that has been conducted. Points will be awarded based on a comparison of the benefits and costs of the Project. The information provided should include:
a. Quantified and monetized Project costs, including capital costs and operations and maintenance costs.

Capital and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs associated with the design, construction, and operation of Central Coast Blue Phase 1 and Phase 2 are provided in Table 9. The annualized capital estimates were based on borrowing 100% of the Project cost at a loan term of 30 years and a 1% interest rate. The loan terms are based on recent loans from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) loan program. The total annual cost was divided by the annual yield after injection to calculate the unit cost for Phase 1 and Phase 2, which is included in Table 9.

Table 9. Central Coast Blue Unit Costs
PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Total Capital $56,495,408 $91,853,408
Annualized Capital $2,189,000 $3,559,000
Annualized O&M $1,919,200 $4,805,000
Total Annualized Cost $4,108,200 $8,464,000
Groundwater Yield (After Injection) 1,613 AFY 4,390 AFY Unit Cost (After Injection) $2,550/AF $1,910/AF

b. Quantified and monetized Project benefits. This includes benefits that can be quantified and expressed as a monetized benefit per acre-foot. These may include, but are not limited to, benefits related to water supply quantity and water supply reliability, recreational benefits, ecosystem benefits, water quality, energy efficiency, and environmental compliance and permitting. Benefits may also include the avoided costs of no action (i.e., the costs that would be incurred if the Project were not implemented), and the willingness of users or customers to pay for a benefit or to avoid a negative outcome (e.g., the willingness of households to pay for a water supply system that would reduce groundwater overdraft). If quantified and/or monetized information for these benefits is not available, they may be addressed in response to question two below.

A sustainable water supply will allow the Central Coast Blue Partners to support their tourism industry and local businesses. Local businesses in Pismo Beach brought in an overall revenue of $302 million in 2020 which includes income from hotels, RV parks, vacation rentals and other tourism services. Additionally, $243 million is generated by the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area. Central Coast Blue will produce an equivalent of 68% of the historical demand and based on this percentage will support approximately $233 million of local tourism by maintaining a sustainable water supply.

The agriculture industry in the NCMA portion of the Basin is a mix of rotational crops, strawberries, avocados, lemons, and potatoes that equate to approximately 1,447 acres of Attachment 2

9.F-47Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 37 agricultural land (24). These crops are rated sensitive to moderately sensitive to salt (measured by TDS) and boron (24). Most sensitive crops require a TDS concentration of 500 mg/L or less to maximize potential yield (24). As shown in Table 10, the potential yield of some of the dominant crops grown in the NCMA could already be subject to yield reduction based on location within the Basin. Although avocados do not have a specific yield number tied to salt concentrations, the study classifies avocados as a crop sensitive to soil salinity (24). Without the Project, the study area is at risk for seawater intrusion, therefore the agricultural industry is likely to be significantly impacted by high salt concentrations. The yield values at 100% yield represent the poorest quality water that, if used continuously, will produce maximum average soil salinity levels equal to the salinity thresholds. A monetized value per AF of irrigation water for key crops is listed in Table 10 and has the potential to significantly impact agriculture revenue if wells in the agricultural industry were to be impacted by seawater intrusion to the point where the produced groundwater would be unusable.

Because the water produced from Central Coast Blue will be of higher quality than groundwater, the Project will improve the existing groundwater quality as well as protect the agricultural growers from seawater intrusion. Improved water quality for agricultural growers would benefit crop productions, which represent a $446,205,000 industry in the Basin, of which $11,335,000 is revenue from the NCMA portion of the Basin (24). Based on the proportion of land used for agriculture in the NCMA portion of the Basin, there is approximately $8,000 of revenue produced per acre of cropland.

Table 10. Annual Crop Value per Acre-Foot of Produced Water

EXISTING

GROUNDWATER

TDS (MG/L)
NCMA
CROPS

TDS (MG/L) AGRICULTURE

REVENUE

PRODUCED/AF OF

IRRIGATION
WATER2
100%
Potential
Yield(1)
90%
Potential
Yield(1)
50%
Potential
Yield(1)
Range From 350
– 1,000 mg/L
Strawberries 448 576 1,088 $29,436
Lemons 640 960 2,304 $4,439
Avocados NA NA NA $3,458
1 Estimates based on the Irrigation Water Salinity and Crop Production Report (24). The yield values at 100% yield represent the poorest quality water that, if used continuously, will produce maximum average soil salinity levels equal to the salinity thresholds. 2 Estimates based on acre-inches per acre of crop produced from the University of California Davis Cost and Return Studies done on strawberries, lemons, celery, raspberries, and avocados (25).

Table 11 on page 38 compares the cost of the water produced by Central Coast Blue against an estimate of anticipated revenue that a reliable source of supply will provide. To quantify the estimates of revenue that Central Coast Blue would preserve, each category was multiplied by 68%, which corresponds to the percentage of the NCMA agencies water demand that will be provided by Central Coast Blue.

Attachment 2

9.F-48Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 38 Table 11. Estimated Monetized Project Benefits

PROJECT COSTS ESTIMATED BENEFITS
$1,910/AF
Local Businesses within City $205,360,000
Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area $165,240,000 1,447 acres of agricultural land in the NCMA $12,294,000 Total $382,894,000
Central Coast Blue Yield (AFY) 4,390
Central Coast Blue Yield Revenue $87,180/AF

Central Coast Blue will allow the NCMA agencies to rely more on the groundwater basin so they will be less dependent on water from Lopez Lake , which is a local surface water source. By diverting less flow from Lopez Lake, the Project will better support recreational activities associated with the lake and surrounding area. Lopez Lake Recreation Area has campsites, hiking trails, and boat ramps and generates over $2 million in revenue each year. c. A comparison of the Project’s quantified and monetized benefits and costs.

The quantified and monetized benefits of Central Coast Blue are summarized in Table 12. These estimates were developed by multiplying the revenue associated with each category by 68%, which corresponds to the percentage of the NCMA agencies’ water demand that will be provided by Central Coast Blue.

Table 12. Quantified and Monetized Project Costs

CENTRAL COAST

BLUE COSTS MONETARY BENEFIT FROM CENTRAL COAST BLUE
Capital
$93,811,900
Unit Cost
$1,910/AF
Tourism Local Businesses within City $205,360,000
Tourism Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area $165,240,000 Tourism Lopez Lake Recreation Area $1,360,000
Agriculture 1,447 Acres of Agricultural Land in the NCMA $12,294,000 Total: $384,254,000

2. Some Project benefits may be difficult to quantify and/or monetize. Describe any economic benefits of the Project that are difficult to quantify and/or monetize. Provide a qualitative discussion of the economic impact of these benefits. Points will be awarded based on the potential economic impact of the Project-related benefits. Some examples of benefits may include, but are not limited to, acres of land or stream miles that may be benefitted or not harmed, benefits to habitat or species, flood risk mitigation, local impacts on residents and/or businesses, job creation, and regional impacts. This may also include benefits listed in question one, if they have not been monetized.

Central Coast Blue will increase water supply reliability, benefit rural and disadvantaged communities, reduce reliance on imported water, improve groundwater quality, and engage the public, which will provide support for local economies, namely tourism and agriculture. Table 13 on page 39 includes a description of each benefit and its value to the local NCMA, regional Basin, and the state of California.

Attachment 2

9.F-49Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 39 Table 13. Central Coast Blue Local, Regional, and State Benefits Economic
Benefit Description Beneficiaries
Local Regional State
Increase
Water
Supply
Reliability
Central Coast Blue will inject up to 4,390 AFY of
recycled water into the Basin to maintain a barrier to
seawater intrusion and recharge the groundwater
basin. Since there are no hydraulic boundaries in the
basin, should seawater intrusion occur in the NCMA
portion, it would affect the Basin as a whole and have
significant economic impacts for the region.
x x
Benefits
DACs
Approximately 32% of the Basin area is categorized as a Disadvantaged Community, and 25% of the Basin area is
a Severely Disadvantaged Community. By benefiting
Disadvantaged communities, the Project will support
the local communities and help meet regional and state
goals.
x x x
Reduce
Imported
Water
Reliance
In addition, Central Coast Blue has the potential to
reduce imported water demand by 1,850 AFY, which
will directly benefit the Bay-Delta system flows, habitat, and ecosystems. Because the Project will reduce
imports from the Bay-Delta, it in turn will positively
affect Federal Water Projects, such as the CVP.

Overseen by the USBR, the CVP has long-term
agreements to supply water to more than 250
contractors in 29 California counties. CVP deliveries
provide an average of 5 million AF of water for farms,
600,000 AF of water for municipal and industrial uses,
and water for wildlife refuges and maintaining water
quality in the Bay-Delta (5).
x x
Improve
Groundwater
Quality
Since 2007, the nitrate level in the NCMA portion of the groundwater basin has been at the maximum
contaminant level limit, prompting concern from the
Division of Drinking Water. Central Coast Blue has the
potential to reduce the nitrate levels in the basin
through groundwater recharge.
x x
Public
Outreach
and
Engagement
Public outreach is an important component of the
Project. The Project Partners keep the public involved
through council meetings, board meetings, pilot tours,
press releases, and the CEQA process. This educates the public and engages them in building a sustainable and
reliable water supply portfolio for themselves and
future generations. Central Coast Blue received two
prominent awards for exemplary education and
outreach efforts, the first at the 2019 WateReuse
California Annual Conference, and the second at the
2019 National WateReuse Symposium.
x x
Attachment 2

9.F-50Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 40 Evaluation Criterion 4 – Reclamation’s Obligations and Benefits to Rural or Economically Disadvantaged Communities
Subcriterion No. 4a – Legal and Contractual Water Supply Obligations Explain how the Project relates to Reclamation’s mission and/or serves a Federal interest. Does the Project help fulfill any of Reclamation’s legal or contractual obligations such as providing water for Indian Tribes, water right settlements, river restoration, minimum flows, legal court orders, or other obligations? If so, explain.

The Project directly aligns with the Department of Interior’s mission to protect natural resources, and USBR’s mission to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Previous sections of this application detail how the Project objectives align with both mission statements and how those objectives will be achieved. Additional information is provided here to specifically comment on how Central Coast Blue will help USBR fulfill its legal obligations regarding minimum flows. Central Coast Blue has the potential to reduce imported water demand by 1,850 AFY, which will directly benefit the Bay-Delta system flows, habitat, and ecosystems. Because the Project will reduce imports from the Bay-Delta, it in turn will positively affect Federal Water Projects such as the CVP. Overseen by the USBR, the CVP has long-term agreements to supply water to more than 250 contractors in 29 California counties. CVP deliveries provide an average of 5 million AF of water for farms, 600,000 AF of water for municipal and industrial uses, and water for wildlife refuge and maintaining water quality in the Bay Delta (5).

Subcriterion No. 4b – Benefits to Rural or Economically Disadvantaged Communities Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the Project serves rural communities or economically disadvantaged communities in rural or urban areas.

1. Does the Project serve a rural community, or are there any rural communities within the Project sponsor’s service area? If so, provide supporting information. A rural community is defined as a community with fewer than 50,000 people.

The Project will directly benefit the Central Coast Blue Partners’ rural communities, which have a combined population of approximately 39,200, based on the 2020 Census. Table 14 summarizes the 2020 population for the Central Coast Blue Partners.

Table 14. Central Coast Blue Partner Population
2020 Population
Pismo Beach 8,072
Grover Beach 12,701
Arroyo Grande 18,441
Total 39,214

2. E.O. 14008 and E.O. 13985 affirm the advancement of environmental justice and equity for all through the development and funding of programs to invest in disadvantaged or underserved communities. Does the Project serve an economically disadvantaged community, or are there any economically disadvantaged communities within the Attachment 2

9.F-51Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 41 Project sponsor’s service area? If so, provide supporting information. This may include neighborhoods or census tracts within a larger service area that are economically disadvantaged.

A community may be considered disadvantaged based on a combination of variables that may include:
x Low income, high and/or persistent
poverty
x High unemployment and
underemployment
x Racial and ethnic residential
segregation, particularly where the
segregation stems from discrimination
by government entities
x Linguistic isolation
x High housing cost burden and
substandard housing
x Distressed neighborhoods
x High transportation cost burden and/or
low transportation access
x Disproportionate environmental
stressor burden and high cumulative
impacts
x Limited water and sanitation access
and affordability
x Disproportionate impacts from climate
change
x High energy cost burden and low
energy access
x Jobs lost through energy transition
x Access to healthcare
As shown in Figure 14 on page 42, there are three census block groups in the Project area designated as DAC (80% of state MHI) and one census block group designated as SDAC (60% of state MHI) – with a total population of 5,550 (14% of population). In addition, as shown in Figure 15 on page 42, three census tracts and four census block groups outside the tracts – with a population of 21,571 or over half the Project area – have an MHI less than 85% of the state.

The Project will indirectly provide a benefit to the overall Basin users, many of whom are classified as economically disadvantaged. In 2017, the Rural Community Assistance Corporation performed a Median Household Income Survey for Oceano CSD, an NCMA agency that will benefit from the Project by protecting their groundwater wells from seawater intrusion, that determined the area qualifies as an SDAC. The results of this survey indicate a median household income of $39,000. DWR criteria for a DAC/SDAC community utilizes the Census American Community Survey dataset for 2014–2018 and identifies a community where the Median Household Income is less than $56,982 as a DAC and less than $42,737 as a SDAC. Central Coast Blue will serve these communities by providing a sustainable and drought-resistant local water supply that is more cost effective than the alternatives.

Attachment 2

9.F-52Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 42 Source: https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/dacs/
Figure 14. Disadvantaged Community Map – 80% & 60% MHI

Source: https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/edas/
Figure 15. Disadvantaged Community Map – 85% MHI

Attachment 2

9.F-53Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 43 In addition, the California Public Utilities Commission issued a decision in 2018 approving Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s proposal to close the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant by 2025.

The plant is located immediately north of Pismo Beach. Based on an Economic Impact Assessment, the closure of the power plant will cause a decrease in economic output of $801 million annually, with a decrease of 2,908 jobs. Most losses occur as direct effects within the nuclear sector, with a $600 million reduction in output (26). Given that energy is the 5th largest industry cluster in San Luis Obispo County, the closure of Diablo will have a significant negative impact on the regional economy and is another factor causing the region to be a disadvantaged community due to jobs lost due to an energy transition.

Evaluation Criterion 5 – Watershed Perspective

1. Does the Project implement a regional or state water plan or an integrated resource management plan? Explain.

Central Coast Blue was selected as a High-Priority Project in the San Luis Obispo IRWM Plan, meaning it satisfies the criteria of a regionally beneficial project as defined in the IRWM Plan.

Being selected for this list allows the Project to be available for future rounds of IRWM funding.

The Project is included in the Central Coast Blue Partners’ 2020 Urban Water Management Plans as a potential recycled water project.

Finalized in July 2020, California’s Water Resilience Portfolio is a blueprint for equipping California to cope with more extreme droughts, floods, and rising temperatures, while addressing long- standing challenges that include declining fish populations, over-reliance on groundwater and lack of safe drinking water in many communities. State goals and actions are organized into four categories: 1) Maintain and diversify water supplies, 2) Protect and enhance natural ecosystems, 3) build connections, and 4) be prepared. Central Coast Blue aligns with these goals and actions and will help create a local resilience portfolio.

Central Coast Blue is also in line with the California Water Code Section 85021—a state-wide policy to reduce reliance on the Bay-Delta to meet California’s future water supply needs through a state-wide strategy of investing in improved regional supplies, conservation, and water use efficiency. Each region that depends on water from the Bay-Delta watershed shall improve its regional self-reliance for water through investment in water-use efficiency, water recycling, advanced water technologies, local and regional water supply projects, and improved regional coordination of local and regional water supply efforts.

2. Does the Project help meet the water supply needs of a large geographic area, region, or watershed? Explain.

Central Coast Blue will inject up to 4,390 AFY of advanced purified water into the Basin to maintain a barrier to seawater intrusion and recharge the groundwater basin. The Basin covers 288 square miles and provides drinking water for over 200,000 people, 57,000 acres of farmland, and is relied upon to produce 111,920 AFY of groundwater. Additionally, Central Coast Blue was selected as a High Priority Project in the San Luis Obispo Integrated IRWM Plan. The geographic area benefited by the Project is described in more detail in the Location section on page 2.

Attachment 2

9.F-54Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 44 3. Does the Project promote collaborative partnerships to address water-related issues? Explain.

Through collaboration and dedication to protecting the Basin, the Central Coast Blue Partners have selected a project that will bolster local water supplies in the face of climate change to feasibly meet future demands. After electing to pursue the Project, the Project Partners entered into a series of agreements to share costs associated with planning, design, and construction of the project. In 2021, the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach approved an Operating Agreement that allocated shares of the project between the three cities - Arroyo Grande at 25%, Grover Beach at 36%, and Pismo Beach at 39%.

In early 2022, the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach approved a Cost Sharing Agreement for the remaining planning, design and construction phases with a cost based on the project shares agreed to in 2021. An outcome of the 2022 Cost Sharing Agreement is plans for the cities to form a Joint Powers Authority that will ultimately own and operate the Project, as well as obtain financing for construction of the Project.

For more detail on regional collaboration promoted by Central Coast Blue, see the Regional Collaboration section on page 9.

Central Coast Blue is also promoting collaborative partnerships with international partnerships to address water related issues. Pismo Beach and IDE operated a pilot study to advance recycled water process optimization, regulatory compliance, public outreach, and training. Results from the Pilot Plant have the potential to benefit future recycled water production in the state of California, across the Country, and throughout the world. The Pilot AWPF became operational in February of 2018 and was operational until the end of 2020. The partnership with IDE will provide invaluable operation data to assist in determining the best technology for inclusion of the final Project design. Additionally, the pilot study will provide performance information for regulatory agencies to permit the use of this new technology for future projects throughout the state.

Coordination with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and Division of Drinking Water is a key component to potentially advancing the widespread use of this technology for the benefit of all future reuse projects.

A comprehensive summary of Central Coast Blue collaboration is included in Table 15.

Table 15. Central Coast Blue Collaboration and Outreach

HISTORY OF COLLABORATION AND OUTREACH
Planning Preparation of planning documents helped initiate coordination with regional stakeholders and ultimately identify and select Central Coast Blue as the best solution for advancing regional recycled water efforts. Regional planning efforts include the San Luis Obispo County Regional Recycled Water Strategic Plan, Pismo Beach Recycled Water Facility Planning Study, SSLOCSD Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study, and the 2007, 2014, and 2019 San Luis Obispo County IRWM Plan.

NCMA The NCMA stakeholders entered a MOA to share costs associated with preparing the environmental documents, groundwater modeling, and preliminary engineering. Central Coast Blue Partners approved the Operating Agreement in 2021 to define project cost/benefit allocations and approved the Attachment 2

9.F-55Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 45 HISTORY OF COLLABORATION AND OUTREACH
Cost Sharing Agreement in 2022 for the remaining planning, design and construction phases.

Public Central Coast Blue has been presented and discussed during numerous City Council and Board meetings regularly held by the stakeholder agencies and at various watershed meetings, which are open to the public. Stakeholders are fully committed to public engagement to ensure transparency and keep community members informed. Future opportunities for public engagement include WateReuse and California Water Environment Association Conferences, regular City Council meetings, and the public website, which will provide information and updates about events.

Pilot Study In 2018, the Pilot Plant became operational and served as a public outreach facility to demonstrate water reuse technology.

Agricultural
Industry
Agricultural landowners are important groundwater stakeholders within the Basin. Collaboration with agricultural landowners has been key to developing this regional strategy to protect beneficial uses in the basin. Central Cost Blue Phase 2 will also consider delivery of recycled water to 61 potential agricultural users. Dialogue has been established with potential users, and stakeholders continue to strengthen these relationships as the Project advances.

Tribes Communication with local and regional tribes has been initiated as part of CEQA AB 52 Consultation. Tribe contacts include: Chumash (northern, yak tityu tityu, and coastal), Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians, Barbareno/Ventureno Band of Mission Indians, Salinan Tribe (Monterey and Xolon)).

Non-Profits Surfrider Foundation has been an active supporter of the Project and have been invited to attend many of the public meetings and tours.

California
Natural
Resource
Offices
Lines of communication with the California SWRCB and USBR have been expanded. The Project received funding through the SWRCB Prop 1 Groundwater Grant Program to fund preliminary planning and groundwater analysis efforts. Through the USBR Feasibility Study approval process, the Project details and benefits have been discussed with USBR.

State
Officials
Representatives from Congressman Salud Carbajal’s Office and Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham’s Office were included in Project milestones such as tours, ribbon cuttings, and meetings at the State Capital.

4. Does the project include public outreach and opportunities for the public to learn about the project? Explain.

Central Coast Blue has been presented and discussed during numerous city council and board meetings regularly held by the Central Coast Blue Partners and at various watershed meetings that are open to the public. Most recently, the public was engaged in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) certification for the CEQA process in early 2021. Stakeholders are fully committed to public engagement to ensure transparency and keep community members informed. Future opportunities for public engagement include WateReuse and California Water Environment Attachment 2

9.F-56Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Technical Proposal
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 46 Association conferences, city council meetings, and the public website, which will provide information, updates, and updates regarding events.

The Project also includes a Communications and Outreach Plan to allow Pismo Beach and the Central Coast Blue Partners to develop a comprehensive, proactive, and successful outreach and communication strategy to inform the public, regulators, and stakeholders about the Project and create a lasting partnership between the community and the Project.

In addition, the Pilot Plant became operational in February 2018 and served as a public outreach facility to demonstrate water reuse technology. The Pilot Plant was a partnership between Pismo Beach, Water Systems Consulting, IDE, Carollo Engineers, Evoqua Water Technologies, and Pall Water. The Pilot Plant hosted tours for over 100 community members, city council members, politicians, regulators, and water reuse professionals. The educational materials developed for the pilot will be used as a public outreach tool throughout the design, construction, and implementation of Central Coast Blue. See Table 15 on page 44 in response above for a summary of Project outreach to date.

Central Coast Blue received two prominent awards for exemplary education and outreach efforts—the first at the 2019 WateReuse California Annual Conference, and the second at the 2019 National WateReuse Symposium. Both awards recognize Central Coast Blue’s significant success in advancing public acceptance of recycled water and building support of the project years ahead of implementation.

Attachment 2

9.F-57Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 47 Environmental & Cultural
Resources Compliance
The environmental impacts of the project (including impacts to soil, air, water, and animal habitat) were evaluated in the Final EIR (7), which was certified in March 2021, prepared for the project pursuant to the CEQA. Since funding is being pursued through USBR’s Title XVI WIIN Act Program and the SWRCB’s CWSRF, a CEQA-Plus document was prepared to help facilitate NEPA compliance. Pismo Beach initiated NEPA compliance efforts with USBR in January 2022. Project representatives are working with USBR representatives to meet NEPA documentation requirements.

Surrounding Environment
Will the proposed Project impact the surrounding environment (e.g., soil [dust], air, water [quality and quantity], animal habitat)? Please briefly describe all earth-disturbing work and any work that will affect the air, water, or animal habitat in the Project area. Please also explain the impacts of such work on the surrounding environment and any steps that could be taken to minimize the impacts.

Injection wells would be drilled up to a depth of approximately 600 feet. Construction methods for the proposed pipelines would predominantly involve open trenching, with augur boring or horizontal directional drilling methods used as needed. Trenches would be excavated to approximately six feet in depth and would be backfilled after pipeline installation. The location of the AWPF complex would likely need to be graded to provide a level base for the AWPF and appurtenant structures, to provide site access, and to provide appropriate stormwater drainage.

It is assumed a moderate amount of existing soil would be excavated and exported and a moderate amount of clean engineered fill or another suitable substrate would be imported to provide geotechnical stability for the AWPF complex. Soil export would also be required to accommodate the underground advanced purified water storage tank; the excavation depth for this project component is not anticipated to exceed 26 feet.

During construction, the Project would result in potentially significant impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazardous materials, noise, and traffic. During operation, the Project would result in potentially significant impacts related to biological resources, energy, GHG, hazardous materials, water quality, and noise. To avoid, minimize, rectify, and compensate for these construction-related impacts, the Final EIR requires implementation of a suite of mitigation measures, which are summarized in Table 16.

Table 16. Mitigation Measures Required for Central Coast Blue in Final EIR

ID MITIGATION MEASURE DESCRIPTION

CONSTRUCTION
AQ-2(a), AQ-
2(b)
Use of standard control measures and best available control technology for construction equipment to reduce air pollutant emissions Attachment 2

9.F-58Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 48 ID MITIGATION MEASURE DESCRIPTION
BIO-1(a) Avoidance of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii; CRLF) habitat BIO-1(b)
through BIO-
1(e), BIO-2
Implementation of avoidance and minimization measures for special status species (CRLF, southwestern pond turtle, monarch butterfly, and nesting birds) and riparian habitat
BIO-1(f)
through BIO-
1(j)
Preparation of a Biological Resources Assessment and implementation of appropriate surveys and additional mitigation measures for federally listed species for some components of Phase 2 (i.e., agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well) once specific location deta ils are available
BIO-3(a) Preparation of a jurisdictional delineation
BIO-3(b) Compensation of impacts to drainages and wetlands at a minimum 1:1 ratio BIO-3(c) Implementation of best management practices for construction activities near drainages and wetlands
BIO-5
Preparation of a Tree Preservation Plan for native trees that would be trimmed or removed by construction as well as replacement of native trees removed during construction
CR-2(a)
Implementation of a workers’ environmental awareness program training on archaeological sensitivity for all construction personnel prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activities
CR-2(b) Archaeological and Native American monitoring during initial ground disturbance
CR-2(c)
Provisions to stop work in the event of an unanticipated discovery of cultural resources with evaluation of the find by a qualified archaeologist and implementation of additional studies and measures, as needed CR-2(d)
Preparation of archaeological resource studies and implementation of additional mitigation measures for some components of Phase 2 (i.e., agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well) once specific location details are available
HAZ-1(a) Preparation of a Hazardous Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control Plan
N-1 Construction noise reduction measures
T-1 Preparation of a Transportation Management Plan

OPERATION
E-1 Implementation of energy efficiency and renewable energy measures GHG-1 Implementation of GHG reduction measures
HAZ-1(b) Creation and implementation of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan for the AWPF
HWQ-1 Initial quarterly radioactive testing of reverse osmosis discharge and resolution of any exceedances of regulatory standards
N-2
Preparation of an acoustical analysis and implementation of necessary noise reduction measures upon completion of the site design, layout, and equipment selection for the AWPF complex
Attachment 2

9.F-59Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 49 Endangered Species and Critical Habitat
Are you aware of any species listed or proposed to be listed as a Federal threatened or endangered species, or designated critical habitat in the Project area? If so, would they be affected by any activities associated with the proposed Project?
The Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the project and Section 4.2, Biological Resources, of the Final EIR evaluated potential project impacts to federally listed species and critical habitat (7). Four federally listed animal species and no federally listed plant species have the potential to occur within the project area for Phase 1 and the additional injection wells and water distribution pipelines for Phase 2. The four federally listed animal species are CRLF (threatened), southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis; threatened); steelhead-south-central California coast distinct population segment (Oncorhynchus mykiss; threatened), and tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi; endangered). In addition, the California overwintering population of monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) is a candidate species for listing under the Endangered Species Act, meaning that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) determined its listing is warranted but precluded by higher priority listing actions (27). No federally designated critical habitat is present within the project area for Phase 1 and the additional injection wells and water distribution pipelines for Phase 2. However, the locations of the agricultural irrigation pipelines and production well under Phase 2 are not known at this time; therefore, 11 federally listed plant species and 12 federally listed animal species (in addition to CRLF, tidewater goby, southern sea otter, and steelhead) could have the potential to occur at or within the vicinity of the yet-to-be defined locations of the agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well (see Appendix B of the Biological Resources Assessment for a full list). Arroyo Grande Creek, which the agricultural irrigation pipelines under Phase 2 would likely traverse, is federally designated critical habitat for steelhead and habitat for tidewater goby.

Construction and Maintenance Activities
CRLF has the potential to occur in and adjacent to Arroyo Grande Creek and has potential to be present within the limits of two injection wells (IW-5A and IW-5B), one monitoring well (MW- 5A/5B/5C), and portions of the water distribution pipelines adjacent to Arroyo Grande Creek. If CRLF individuals are present within the footprints of Project components, potential direct and indirect impacts may occur if harassment, injury, or mortality of CRLF individuals occurs or if general project-related disturbance and noise in the vicinity of these locations impacts normal breeding and dispersal patterns for the species in the area. The Project also has potential to result in direct impacts to CRLF upland habitat at the water distribution pipelines located within the Oceano County Airport through removal of riparian vegetation associated with Arroyo Grande Creek. Because of the potential for direct and indirect impacts to CRLF individuals as well as direct impacts to CRLF habitat, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(a) and to Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (b) (refer to Table 16 on page 47), which would reduce potential impacts to CRLF.

Southern sea otter and steelhead have a low potential to occur near the discharge point of the existing ocean outfall pipeline in the Pacific Ocean where reverse osmosis concentrate would be discharged. However, the ocean discharge would continue to be regulated by the SWRCB under the Pismo Beach and South San Luis Obispo County Wastewater Treatment Plant’s National Attachment 2

9.F-60Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 50 Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, which include effluent limitations for protection of marine aquatic life. Therefore, no direct or indirect impacts to southern sea otter or steelhead would occur.

Arroyo Grande Creek, located approximately 50 feet south of the nearest Phase 1 project components, contains suitable habitat for steelhead and tidewater goby. However, an earthen levee separates the project area from the creek. Meadow Creek and Oceano Lagoon, located more than 100 feet west and south of the project area, also contain suitable habitat for tidewater goby; however, these water features are isolated from the project area due to existing roadways and development. Therefore, given the distance and intervening topographical features between project components and suitable habitat, no impacts to steelhead or tidewater goby in freshwater environments would occur as a result of construction and maintenance activities for Phase 1 of the project.

The California overwintering population of monarch butterfly has the potential to occur within the eucalyptus grove directly south of the AWPF complex location. No impacts to the eucalyptus grove would occur because the grove is located outside the AWPF complex footprint, and no direct impacts to monarch butterfly related to their mobility or their overwintering habitat would occur. In addition, at this time, monarch overwintering has not been confirmed at this eucalyptus grove. Nevertheless, to minimize potential impacts to the monarch butterfly, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(d) (refer to Table 16 on page 47).

The new production well would have a low likelihood of impacting federally listed species habitats due to the high likelihood that it would be sited in a heavily-developed area with little to no native habitat. General direct and indirect impacts from ground-disturbing construction activities associated with the agricultural irrigation pipelines under Phase 2 could include mortality, injury, harassment, and reduction of reproductive success. There is the potential to impact undisturbed habitat in the Grover Beach city boundaries as well as along Arroyo Grande Creek and south for irrigation pipelines to farmland areas. Because the agricultural irrigation pipelines crossing Arroyo Grande Creek would be installed by augur boring or horizontal directional drilling methods under Arroyo Grande Creek, construction and operation of these pipelines would not cause direct loss or fragmentation of habitat or otherwise alter critical habitat for steelhead or loss of tidewater goby habitat. However, there is potential for hydrogeological fractures (frac-out) to occur during the drilling process. If this occurs, the release of contaminants into Arroyo Grande Creek could adversely affect steelhead and critical habitat as well as tidewater goby. Because of the potential for direct and indirect impacts to federally listed plant and animal species and federally designated critical habitat for steelhead, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(f) through BIO-1(j) for Phase 2 (refer to Table 16 on page 47), which would reduce potential impacts to federally-listed species and designated critical habitat in the project area.

Groundwater Extraction
An analysis prepared by Geoscience Support Services, Inc. determined that Phase 1 of the proposed Project (during which more groundwater may be extracted than injected) would result in a negligible impact to percolation rates of Arroyo Grande Creek such that stream flow would remain adequate for the federally listed amphibian and fish species and riparian habitat that Attachment 2

9.F-61Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 51 Arroyo Grande Creek supports. Under Phase 2 of the proposed project, more advanced purified water would be injected into the groundwater basin than extracted; therefore, this phase would not have an adverse impact on percolation rates and corresponding surface water levels of Arroyo Grande Creek. Thus, groundwater extraction facilitated by Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed Project would not substantially alter the hydrology of Arroyo Grande Creek, and no adverse impacts to federally listed aquatic species would occur.

Clean Water Act Jurisdiction
Are there wetlands or other surface waters inside the Project boundaries that potentially fall under Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction as “Waters of the United States”? If so, please describe and estimate any impacts the proposed Project may have.

As detailed in the Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the Project as well as Section

4.2, Biological Resources, of the Final EIR, Phase 1 and some components of Phase 2 (i.e., additional injection wells and water distribution pipelines) of the project would potentially result in direct impacts to one wetland feature that may potentially be under the jurisdiction of the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (28) (7). In addition, Arroyo Grande Creek is located approximately 50 feet to the south of the nearest Phase 1 project component and may be indirectly impacted by runoff during construction activities. At this time, a formal jurisdictional delineation has not been conducted and the Section 404 permit application has not been initiated, which would determine whether the wetland feature is under the jurisdiction of the USACE. Depending on final design, one segment of the proposed water distribution pipelines may traverse this wetland feature, resulting in temporary impacts during construction. As a result, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3(a) and BIO-3(b) (refer to Table 16 on page 47), in addition to implementation of additional conditions that may be required under the potential Section 404 permit from the USACE.

The new production well would be constructed on a parcel likely within the city limits of Grover Beach where full avoidance of jurisdictional features would be feasible, and impacts would likely be minimal, if any. However, agricultural irrigation pipelines between the AWPF complex and agricultural lands south of Oceano have the highest likelihood of impacting drainages and wetlands that may potentially be under the jurisdiction of the USACE because they would likely traverse Arroyo Grande Creek. The potential agricultural irrigation pipelines that would cross Arroyo Grande Creek would be installed by augur boring or horizontal directional drilling methods under the creek. Utilizing this method, potential frac-out could occur within Arroyo Grande Creek. Therefore, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3(a) and BIO-3(c) (refer to Table 16 on page 47) to reduce project impacts under Phase 2.

Water Delivery System
When was the water delivery system constructed?
Table 17 on page 52 includes the assumed install decades for all pipe materials in the Pismo Beach’s service area. The estimated pipe install decade is based on the historic popular pipe materials and growth rates, although there are likely existing pipes in the distribution system installed before the 1950s and after the 1990s. Estimated useful lifetimes are adapted from accepted pipe lifetimes developed from water utility research and studies in North America (29).

Attachment 2

9.F-62Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 52 Table 17. Assumed Install Decade Based on Pipe Material

PIPE MATERIAL ASSUMED INSTALL DECADE(S)
Asbestos cement 1960–1970
Cast iron 1950
Ductile iron 1980
Galvanized iron 1950
PVC 1980–1990
Steel 1950–1960

The City of Arroyo Grande started developing its existing wells in the 1940s, the Grover City Water District (now the City of Grover Beach) was formed in 1949, and the Lopez Project was developed in the 1960s. The surrounding NCMA agencies developed water delivery systems approximately around the same time. The Coastal Branch Pipeline for the SWP was constructed in the 1990s.

Irrigation Systems
Will the proposed Project result in any modification of or effects to, individual features of an irrigation system (e.g., headgates, canals, or flumes)? If so, state when those features were constructed and describe the nature and timing of any extensive alterations or modifications to those features completed previously.

Phase 1 of Central Coast Blue will not include delivery to agricultural growers. The Central Coast Blue Partners are considering including irrigation deliveries in Phase 2 and will determine if there will need to be any modifications to individual features of existing irrigation systems during Phase 2 design. At this time, there are no anticipated modifications.

National Register of Historic Places
Are any buildings, structures, or features in the irrigation district listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places? A cultural resources specialist at your local Reclamation office or the State Historic Preservation Office can assist in answering this question.

A Cultural Resources Assessment (CRA) was prepared for Phases 1 and 2 of the Project (28) (30).

The CRA identified one historic resource within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) that appeared to be eligible for listing in the NRHP – the Oceano Southern Pacific Railroad Depot (P-40-040781).

The building itself is not located within the APE, but one of the proposed monitoring wells (MW- 5D/5E/5F) is proposed to be developed approximately 35 feet to the southwest of the building in its paved parking lot. This building is significant as a surviving example of early twentieth century railroad architecture and the modern origins of the Oceano community. Existing documentation does not include an evaluation addressing the building’s eligibility for NRHP listing; however, a review of the California State Built Environment Resource Directory indicates the property was previously found eligible for listing in the NRHP through survey evaluation. The proposed monitoring well that would be located in the parking lot of the Oceano Southern Pacific Railroad Depot would not have any major above-ground elements and would not result in the direct alteration of the building; therefore, it would not have any direct impacts to or change the Attachment 2

9.F-63Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 53 existing setting of the building in a negative manner. Furthermore, vibration levels associated with well drilling would be below the threshold for potential damage to historic structures.

Furthermore, as detailed in the CRA, demolition of structures to accommodate Phase 2 components with yet-to-be-determined locations (i.e., the agricultural irrigation pipelines and new production well) is not anticipated to be necessary. In addition, it is anticipated that agricultural irrigation pipelines would be installed under Arroyo Grande Creek and would not be attached to or require alteration of existing bridges. As a result, the Project does not have potential to negatively affect the building through ground-disturbing construction activities. As a result, the CRA recommended a finding of no adverse effect to historic properties under Section 106 of the NHPA for Phases 1 and 2 (28).

Archeological Sites
Are there any known archeological sites in the proposed Project area? As discussed above, a CRA was prepared for Phases 1 and 2 of the Project. The CRA was prepared in conformance with the requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA for Phase 1 and some components of Phase 2 (i.e., the additional injection wells and water distribution pipelines).

However, because the locations of the new production well and agricultural irrigation pipelines are not known at this time, these components will require further evaluation under Section 106 of the NHPA at the time the locations of these components are defined. The Central California Information Center records search identified two known archaeological sites within the APE–a prehistoric lithic and shell scatter (P-40-000394) and a small prehistoric artifact scatter (P-40- 000396). As detailed in the CRA, the presence of P-40-000394 and P-40-000396 within the APE could not be assessed during the pedestrian survey due to dense vegetation and existing development. However, based on previous testing efforts at the site, known disturbances, and the presence of pavement blocking access to the site within the APE, the CRA determined excavation at P-40-000394 would be both unnecessary and infeasible for project impact analysis.

Environmental consultants conducted an Extended Phase 1 study of P-40-000396 to identify the presence or absence of the site within the APE. Based on the results of the Extended Phase 1 study, Rincon recommended that the portions of P-40-000396 within the current APE lack integrity and thus do not contribute to the overall site eligibility for the NRHP. Despite the lack of intact archaeological resources identified within the APE, the local area is highly sensitive for cultural resources, and the potential to encounter unknown archaeological deposits within the APE remains high. Therefore, the Final EIR includes mitigation measures to minimize potential impacts to archaeological resources under Phases 1 and 2, including Mitigation Measures CR- 2(a), CR-2(b), CR-2(c), and CR-2(d) (refer to Table 16 on page 47).

Low Income and Minority Populations
Will the proposed Project have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations?
Project components in Phases 1 and 2 would be located in the census-designed place of Oceano in unincorporated San Luis Obispo County and in the City of Grover Beach. As detailed in Section

4.5, Environmental Justice, of the Final EIR, Oceano and Grover Beach have significant minority populations (greater than 50%), and Oceano is a low-income community (7). Therefore, both Attachment 2

9.F-64Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 54 Oceano and Grover Beach are identified as environmental justice communities. As detailed in Section 4.5, Environmental Justice, of the Final EIR, construction and operation of Phases 1 and 2 would generate localized impacts on the populations of Oceano and Grover Beach related to air pollutant emissions, the use of hazardous materials, noise, and traffic. Project construction activities and associated impacts would be intermittent and/or temporary and would cease upon completion of work activities. The Project’s operational impacts, which are typical of industrial- type projects, are associated with the AWPF, which would be sited in an existing industrial area of Grover Beach. The Final EIR requires implementation of mitigation measures to address these impacts, including Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a), AQ-2(b), HAZ-1(a), HAZ-1(b), N-1, N-2, and T-1 (refer to Table 16 on page 47). Furthermore, the proposed project would have the long-term benefit of protecting the drinking water supply for all local customers served by the Cities of Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande and the Oceano CSD regardless of race, ethnicity, or income level. As a result, not only would the project not result in adverse operational impacts to the environmental justice community in Grover Beach, but it would also benefit this environmental justice community as well as the environmental justice community of Oceano by increasing the stability, reliability, and resiliency of their drinking water supply.

However, due to the close proximity of residential land uses to well locations, implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 in all cases may not be feasible and therefore may not reduce construction noise impacts below the specified thresholds during 24-hour drilling of the injection and monitoring wells. This construction noise impact would adversely affect residents in Oceano and Grover Beach that live within 200 feet of several proposed monitoring wells. Nevertheless, the entire project area is located within the environmental justice communities of Oceano and Grover Beach, and the project’s construction noise impacts would be evenly distributed throughout the project area at 18 well locations, not focused on a single area. Therefore, this impact would not affect one area or population more than another. Furthermore, construction noise impacts would be short-term, temporary, and typical of construction projects occurring throughout the region, which often generate temporary increases in noise. Therefore, although this impact would occur in the environmental justice communities of Oceano and Grover Beach, this impact would not be disproportionately high and adverse. As such, with mitigation incorporated, construction and operation of Phases 1 and 2 proposed Project would not result in any disproportionately high impacts on minority, low income, or disadvantaged communities.

Tribal Lands
Will the proposed Project limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites or result in other impacts on tribal lands?
The APE for Phases 1 and 2 is not located within Tribal lands. As detailed in Section 4.3, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, of the Final EIR prepared for the project, outreach to Native American Tribes was conducted as part of preparation of the CRA as well as to satisfy the tribal consultation requirements of AB 52 for projects subject to CEQA and the outreach requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA. As part of these outreach efforts, informal outreach letters and formal consultation letters were sent to nine local Native American contacts identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. Pismo Beach conducted formal consultation with the three Tribes who requested consultation in June 2020. During informal outreach and formal consultation efforts, no Tribes identified sacred sites or other tribal cultural resources within the Attachment 2

9.F-65Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Environmental & Cultural Resources Compliance Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 55 APE for Phases 1 and 2. However, the Tribes indicated that the area is highly sensitive for cultural resources and requested a worker’s environmental awareness program training and archaeological and Native American monitoring for the project. Although no specific tribal cultural resources were identified in the APE for Phases 1 and 2, the Final EIR includes mitigation measures to minimize potential impacts to archaeological resources (including those of Native American origin) including Mitigation Measures CR-2(a) through CR-2(d) (refer to Table 16 on page 47). These measures are responsive to concerns expressed by the Tribes about the sensitivity of the area for cultural resources and requests for a worker’s environmental awareness program training and archaeological and Native American monitoring.

Invasive Species
Will the proposed Project contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area? There is low potential for construction activities under Phases 1 and 2 of the Project to result in the introduction or spread of invasive, non-native species or noxious weeds (28) (7). In addition, the Final EIR requires implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which includes use of imported fill material known to be free of invasive plant species and removal of weed seeds and propagules from equipment and vehicles before they enter and leave the site during project activities that may disturb riparian habitat. Implementation of this mitigation measure would further minimize the potential for the project to introduce or spread invasive, non-native species or noxious weeds.

Attachment 2

9.F-66Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Required Permits or Approvals
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 56 Required Permits or Approvals
Applicants must state in the application whether any permits or approvals are required and explain the plan for obtaining such permits or approvals.

Permits and Approvals Obtained
Environmental Documentation Requirements (CEQA/NEPA)
In accordance with CEQA, Pismo Beach prepared an EIR which was certified in March 2021 (7).

Since funding is being pursued through USBR’s Title XVI WIIN Act Program and the SWRCB’s CWSRF, a CEQA-Plus document was prepared to help facilitate NEPA compliance. Pismo Beach initiated NEPA compliance efforts with USBR in January 2022. Project representatives are working with USBR representatives to meet NEPA documentation requirements. Potential actions that will be required by USBR include:
x Review Environmental Assessment
x Review the Cultural Resources Assessment and provide report and cover letter to State Historic Preservation Offices
x Review Biological Resources Assessment and initiate Section 7 consultation with USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (if potential take of federally listed species is identified)
x Consult with National Marine Fisheries Service regarding Essential Fish Habitat under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, if impacts are identified x Maintain an administrative record to support USBR’s NEPA findings x Website posting of Finding of No Significant Impact
Infrastructure Permits That Will Be Obtained
The following permits are likely needed for construction but will be confirmed during final design:
x Federal Agencies:
o Environmental Protection Agency – NPDES Construction General Permit o USACE – Clean Water Act 404
x State Agencies:
o Regional Water Quality Control Board – General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit, Clean Water Act 401, Water Reclamation Permit
o California Department of Drinking Water – amended water supply permit o California Coastal Commission – Coastal Development Permit o California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Section 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement for any stream crossings
o Caltrans – grading and encroachment permits
x Local Agencies:
o City of Grover Beach and San Luis Obispo County – grading, encroachment, and building permits
Attachment 2

9.F-67Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Required Permits or Approvals
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 57 o San Luis Obispo County Coastal Development Permit / Land Use Permit o San Luis Obispo County Building Permit
o San Luis Obispo County Well Permit
o San Luis Obispo County Air Quality Management District – authority to construct and permit to operate the WWTP upgrades
o Union Pacific Railroad – Utilities Installation crossing permit Salt and Nutrient Management Plan
A Salt and Nutrient Management Plan is intended to facilitate basin-wide or watershed-wide management of salts and nutrients from all sources in a manner that optimizes recycled water use while ensuring protection of groundwater supply and beneficial uses, agricultural beneficial uses, and human health. Currently, the NCMA agencies do not intend to develop a Salt and Nutrient Management Plan as a component of the Central Coast Blue permitting process due to the high quality of the water that will be produced by the project. A Groundwater Replenishment Reuse Project can typically move forward without the need for one because it meets potable water standards, and full advanced treatment effectively removes salts, constituents of emerging concern, and nutrients, thus protecting the groundwater basin. However, an anti-degradation analysis will likely be required to evaluate the potential impact of Central Coast Blue on groundwater quality within the basin.

Attachment 2

9.F-68Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 58 Project Budget
Funding Plan & Letters of Commitment
Pismo Beach and Central Coast Blue Partners are committed to designing, constructing, and operating the AWPF for at least 30 years to address seawater intrusion concerns in the Basin and to secure a reliable local potable water supply. In accordance with the NOFO requirements, information regarding the funding plan for Project component costs that will be completed under an award for this NOFO and for the entire Project are provided below.

Project Costs Under NOFO (R22AS00115)
Pismo Beach is requesting funding to support permitting, preliminary design, final design, program management, value engineering, construction management, engineering during construction, and construction activities for Central Coast Blue, as described in Table 18.

Table 18. Summary of Tasks through FY2025

TASK DESCRIPTION
Program
Management
Meetings, scheduling, budgeting, invoicing, consultant coordination, stakeholder outreach, procurement strategies, and management plan Planning
Groundwater modeling and update current EIR to include project level analysis for distributed infrastructure that currently is not addressed in certified EIR
CEQA/Permitting Includes development of a source control program, engineering report, report of waste discharge permitting, and regulatory meetings Final Design 60%, 90%, and final design for the AWPF and distributed infrastructure Value Engineering
Form a value engineering team to review 60% design documents, develop a report to identify changes recommended by the value engineering team
Office Engineering
During
Construction
Includes submittal review, RFI responses, change orders, site walks, punchlist development, and drawing management
Construction
Management
Includes oversight for the planning, design, and construction of the AWPF, injection wells, monitoring wells, and pipelines
Construction Includes costs for building the AWPF, injection wells, monitoring wells, and purified water pipelines

Attachment 2

9.F-69Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 59 Project costs that are eligible for funding under this NOFO begin July 26, 2018 when Central Coast Blue’s Title XVI Feasibility Study Approval Memo was signed by the Policy and Administration Director through September 30, 2025. Central Coast Blue’s Title XVI Feasibility Study has been reviewed and approved by USBR, and review findings were transmitted to Congress concurrently with project selections under the fiscal year (FY) 2018 FOA (BOR DO 18 F011) on July 27, 2018.

Construction for Central Coast Blue Phase 1 project is expected to be complete by September 30, 2025. Project costs incurred prior to July 26, 2018 are not included in this funding request because the Title XVI Feasibility Study review findings were not yet approved.

The total cost of tasks that have occurred and are planned to occur between July 26, 2018 through September 30, 2025 is $56,495,408. The Central Coast Blue Partners pursued funding from USBR through the FY 2018 WaterSMART Title XVI WIIN Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects program and received a notice of award in the amount of $796,094. In addition, Central Coast Blue was awarded $1,700,000 through FY 2021 WaterSMART Title XVI WIIN Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects program. The City is actively coordinating with USBR and execution of a financial assistance agreement is anticipated in 2022.

Central Coast Blue Partners are requesting $11,627,758 (25% of the total costs after removing $2,496,094 from FY2018 and FY2021 awards) under this NOFO and are committed to a cost share of $42,371,556 (balance of total costs under this NOFO). Anticipated annual costs by project task are summarized in Table 19 on page 60.

The Cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Grover Beach have budgeted for the costs of Central Coast Blue for the next three fiscal years (FY 2022/2023, FY 2023/2024 and FY 2034/2025) and plan to fund work using income from their water rates. The cities developed a cost sharing agreement, to split the cost based on the benefit to each agency which is currently calculated based on their groundwater entitlement and is shown in Table 20 on page 60. In early 2022, the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach approved a Cost Sharing Agreement for the remaining planning, design and construction phases with a cost based on the project shares agreed to in 2021. Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande will reimburse Pismo Beach for their respective shares of the costs of the Project, including all pre-construction and construction costs.

Ongoing pre-construction costs will continue to be split between Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach until each party reaches its total contribution amount for its share of pre-construction costs.

Additionally, Central Coast Blue Partners are pursuing funding through Round 3 of the Proposition 1 Groundwater Grant Program (GWGP) to help fund project implementation. Central Coast Blue is seeking $12,851,000 in funding through the GWGP, to assist with funding tasks under this NOFO as part of Pismo Beach’s cost share. If Pismo Beach is unable to secure funding through the GWGP program, project costs will be covered by the partner agencies. The Central Coast Blue Partners plan to utilize the SWRCB’s Water Recycling Funding Program through the CWSRF Program to finance construction of Central Coast Blue. The stakeholders submitted the CWSRF application in December 2021. The program would provide Central Coast Blue with low interest financing over a period not to exceed 30 years.

Please note that the costs for preparing and applying in response to this NOFO, including the development of data necessary to support the proposal, are not eligible costs and are not included in the Project budget.

Attachment 2

9.F-70Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 60 Table 19. Summary of Eligible Costs through FY2025
7/26/18 -
9/30/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 Total
Program Mgmt $559,747 $766,250 $766,250 $766,250 $766,250 $3,624,747 Planning $391,125 $391,125
CEQA/ Permitting $178,656 $810,000 $988,656
Final Design $2,394,500 $2,394,500 $4,789,000
Engineering During
Construction $567,000 $567,000 $1,134,000
Construction
Management $1,861,000 $1,861,000 $3,722,000
Construction $20,474,500 $20,474,500 $40,949,000
In-Kind $384,377 $128,126 $128,126 $128,126 $128,126 $896,880 Total $1,513,905 $4,098,876 $3,288,876 $23,796,876 $23,796,876 $56,495,408 Maximum Eligible WIIN Act Grant Request (25%) $14,123,852 Preliminarily Awarded Under the WIIN Act FY 2018 $796,094 Preliminarily Awarded Under the WIIN Act FY 2021 $1,700,000 Requested Funding Under the WIIN Act FY 2022 $11,627,758

Table 20. Summary of Non-Federal Funding Sources through FY2025

FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT

NON - FEDERAL ENTITIES

1. SWRCB Prop 1 Groundwater Planning Grant Program - Round 31 $12,850,000

2. DWR Prop 1 IRWM Program Round 21 $1,000,000

3. SWRCB CWSRF Loan1 $20,158,742

4. Pismo Beach $2,911,324

5. Grover Beach $2,687,376

6. Arroyo Grande $1,866,234

7. In Kind Contributions $896,880
Non - Federal Subtotal $42,371,556

RECLAMATION FUNDING

1. WIIN Act FY2018 Award2 $796,094

2. WIIN Act FY2021 Award2 $1,700,000
Requested Reclamation Funding Under the WIIN Act FY2022 $11,627,758 Total Requested from Reclamation through FY2025 $14,123,852 1 Funding is being pursued and has not been awarded at the time of this application. 2 Preliminarily Awarded Under previous WaterSMART Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant.

Project costs that have been incurred to date include program management, preliminary design, environmental documentation, initial permitting, data collection, in-kind services, and public outreach. These activities have set up the project to initiate final design and permitting phase in March 2022.

Attachment 2

9.F-71Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 61 Total Project Costs
As detailed below in the Budget Proposal and Budget Narrative Sections, the estimated total project cost for Central Coast Blue is $91,853,408. It is anticipated that the Project will be paid for through a combination of grants, low interest loans, and contributions from stakeholder agencies. Project Partners plan to utilize the SWRCB’s CWSRF Program to finance construction of Central Coast Blue. The program would provide Central Coast Blue with low interest financing over a period not to exceed 30 years. If a low-interest loan is not awarded then bond financing will be required at current market rates (approximately 4.5%). Additional funding may be pursued from several state and federal sources, including the SWRCB, DWR, USBR, USDA, California Energy Commission, California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, and the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency to reduce total project costs incurred directly by the Central Coast Blue Partners and the financial impact to ratepayers.

Details regarding cost-sharing between Central Coast Blue Partners associated with the fixed and variable recycled water project costs are outlined in the Cost Sharing Agreement. The cost sharing is apportioned based on share of Project yield. Central Coast Blue Partners are committed to advancing the Project, and a significant investment in time, money, and effort is already being expended to implement the regional project. Anticipated funding sources for the entire Project are shown in Table 21.

Table 21. Summary of Non-Federal Funding Sources for Entire Project

FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT

NON - FEDERAL ENTITIES

1. SWRCB Prop 1 Groundwater Planning Grant Program - Round 31 $12.85 Million

2. DWR IRWM Grant1 $1.00 Million

3. CWSRF Financing1 $46.68 Million

4. Agency Contributions $7.46 Million

5. In Kind Contributions $0.90 Million
Non - Federal Subtotal $68.79 Million

RECLAMATION FUNDING

1. Preliminary Award WIIN Act FY20182 $0.80 Million

2. Preliminary Award WIIN Act FY2022 $1.70 Million

3. FY22 Requested Reclamation Funding $11.63 Million
Future Reclamation Funding Request $8.84 Million
Total Anticipated Reclamation Funding Request $22.96 Million 1 Funding is being pursued but has not been awarded at the time of this application 2 Awarded under WaterSMART Reclamation and Reuse Projects Grant FY2018 and FY2021

Attachment 2

9.F-72Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 62 Budget Proposal
Table 22. Total Project Budget Proposal

BUDGET ITEM DESCRIPTION

COMPUTATION QUANTITY

TYPE TOTAL COST
$/Unit Quantity

SALARIES AND WAGES
Project Manager $87 4,160 hours $362,000
Senior Engineer $60 2,080 hours $125,000
Clerical Support $36 1,248 hours $45,000

FRINGE BENEFITS
Full-Time Employees $40 7,488 hours $300,000

CONTRACTUAL/CONSTRUCTION
Planning & Preliminary Design $1,129,528 1 contract $1,129,528 Phase 1 Program Management $3,065,000 1 contract $3,065,000 Phase 1 Permitting & CEQA/NEPA $810,000 1 contract $810,000 Phase 1 Final Design $4,789,000 1 contract $4,789,000
Phase 1 Engineering During
Construction $1,134,000 1 contract $1,134,000
Phase 1 Construction Management $3,722,000 1 contract $3,722,000 Phase 1 Construction $40,949,000 1 contract $40,949,000 Phase 2 Program Management $1,914,000 1 contract $1,914,000 Phase 2 Permitting & CEQA/NEPA $533,000 1 contract $533,000 Phase 2 Final Design $3,203,000 1 contract $3,203,000
Phase 2 Engineering During
Construction $736,000 1 contract $736,000
Phase 2 Construction Management $2,415,000 1 contract $2,415,000 Phase 2 Construction $26,557,000 1 contract $26,557,000 OTHER
Semiannual Financial Report $148 128 hours $19,000
Semiannual Performance Report $148 256 hours $38,000
Final Performance Report $148 60 hours $9,000
Total Estimated Project Costs $91,853,408
Attachment 2

9.F-73Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 63 Budget Narrative
Salaries and Wages
Compensation and wages are shown in Table 22 on page 62. The primary project manager is Pismo Beach’s Director of Public Works/City Engineer. The Project Manager responsibilities include preparing subcontracts, managing subcontractors, overseeing construction, stakeholder coordination, completing reports, and deliverables. Pismo Beach estimates 4,160 hours of project management for Central Coast Blue over the length of the Project at a rate of $87/hour or $134/hour with fringe benefits.

Pismo Beach’s Senior Engineer is responsible for supporting the project manager. It is estimated that the Senior Engineer will spend approximately 2,080 hours supporting Central Coast Blue over the length of the Project at a rate of $60/hour or $97/hour with fringe benefits.

The clerical support for the Project is Pismo Beach’s Management Analyst. Clerical support includes scheduling, invoicing, and email coordination. Pismo Beach estimates 1,248 hours of clerical support for Central Coast Blue at a rate of $36/hour or $73/hour with fringe benefits.

Fringe Benefits
Fringe benefits include health insurance which includes dental and vision, life insurance, retirement contributions which include social security and Medicare, and other benefits like workers’ compensation, state unemployment insurance, employee assistance program, and deferred contributions. Rates and calculations are provided in the budget proposal.

Travel
Expenses for traveling to the AWPF for project supervision is included in the program management and construction management contracts.

Equipment
The budget proposal assumes all equipment for the Project will be rented. Rental equipment costs will be included in the construction contractor bid, and therefore are not included in this line item.

Materials and Supplies
Similar to the Project equipment budget, all materials and supplies will be included in the construction contractor bid, and therefore are not included in this line item.

Contractual
Contract expenses include planning, permitting, environmental documentation, public outreach, preliminary design, final design, program management, construction management, office engineering during construction, and construction activities.

Planning and preliminary design activities includes stakeholder outreach and coordination, regulatory outreach, water rights support, groundwater modeling, conceptual layouts, and cost estimating. The planning and preliminary design costs are based on value of work currently under contract.

Attachment 2

9.F-74Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 64 Phase 1 and Phase 2 final design, program management, and construction management estimates are each based on 10% of the construction cost estimates for each phase. Office engineering during construction costs, permitting / environmental documentation, and value engineering estimates are based on 3%, 2%, and 0.5% of the construction cost estimates, respectively. Environmental documentation costs include potential costs incurred by Reclamation to prepare and/or review environmental compliance documents.

Pismo Beach will use a competitive public bid process to select a construction company to complete the Project. Minimum qualifications for contractors include being licensed to do business in the State of California. Project-specific criteria for contractors will be defined prior to the Project going out to bid. Construction bid will include labor, equipment, materials and supplies, and insurance. Construction estimates are based on cost estimates developed in the recent Central Coast Blue Preliminary Engineering Report (31) with projected market adjustments. The construction costs were based on the Class 4 Conceptual Report Classification of Opinion of Probable Construction Cost, as developed by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering Cost Estimate Classification System.

These cost estimates have been developed using a combination of data from RS Means CostWorks®, recent bids, experience with similar projects, current and foreseeable regulatory requirements, and an understanding of the necessary project components. As the Project progresses, the costs could vary from the estimates developed in the Preliminary Engineering Report.

For project components where applicable cost data is available in RS Means CostWorks® (e.g. pipeline installation), cost data released in Quarter 1 of 2020 and adjusted for San Luis Obispo, California is used. Material prices were adjusted in some cases to provide estimates that align closer with actual local bid results.

For project components where RS Means CostWorks® data is not available, cost opinions are generally derived from bid prices from similar projects, vendor quotes, material prices, and labor estimates, with adjustments for inflation, size, complexity, and location.

Cost opinions are “planning-level” and may not fully account for site-specific conditions that will affect the actual costs, such as soils conditions and utility conflicts. The cost estimates for construction are shown in Table 23 on page 65.

Attachment 2

9.F-75Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Project Budget
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 65 Table 23. Cost Estimates for Full Scale Project

FULL SCALE PROJECT COST
AWPF Capacity 5.4 MGD
AWPF Effluent 3.9 MGD

CAPACITY/QUANTITY COST
Advanced Treatment 5.4 MGD $26,482,000
Purified Water Pump Station 2,700 gpm $4,226,000
Pipeline Totals 15,700 LF $4,143,000
Injection Wells 6 qty $4,331,000
Monitoring Wells 9 qty $3,740,000
Additional Monitoring Wells 2 qty $800,000
Purified Water Storage 80,000 gal $872,000
Construction Subtotal $44,594,000
Contingency $11,567,000
Total Capital Cost (2021 Dollars) $56,161,000
Total Capital Cost (2024 Dollars) $67,506,000
Implementation Costs $24,347,308
Total Capital Cost $91,853,308
Annual O&M Cost $4,805,000

Other Expenses
Other expenses associated with the Project include the following:
x Semiannual Financial Report
x Semiannual Performance Report
x Final Performance Report
Indirect Costs
Indirect cost rate has not been negotiated for the Project, and therefore not included in the Project budget.

Total Costs
The total eligible cost of the Project under this NOFO is $56,495,408. Of this, the Central Coast Blue Partners are committed to a cost share of $42,371,556 (75% of the total eligible project costs). Expenses will be covered directly by the Central Coast Blue Partners or from other non- federal funding sources secured for the project.

We respectfully request $11,627,758 from the USBR under this NOFO. This represents 25% of the eligible Federal cost share (after reducing the total eligible Federal cost share by $796,000 from FY2018 Award and $1,700,000 FY2021 Award). Please see Table 20 on page 60 for the Proportion of Non-Federal Funding.

Attachment 2

9.F-76Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach References
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 66 References

1. California Department of Water Resources. 2018 SGMA Basin Prioritization Process and Results. 2018.

2. —. Bulletin No. 63-3: Sea-Water Intrusion: Pismo-Guadalupe Area. 1970.

3. Fugro Consultants. Northern Cities Management Area 2015 Annual Monitoring Report. 2016.

4. GSI Water Solutions, Inc. . Northern Cities Management Area 2020 Annual Monitoring Report. 2021.

5. United States Bureau of Reclamation. Central Valley Project. USBR.gov. [Online] https://www.usbr.gov/projects/index.php?id=506 .

6. Rincon Consultants. City of Pismo Beach Climate Action Plan. 2014.

7. Rincon Consulting, Inc. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Central Coast Blue Project. 2021. SCH#2019120560.

8. California Air Resources Board. 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. 2017.

9. United States Bureau of Reclamation. Water Reliability in the West - 2021 SECURE Water Act Report. 2021.

10. United States Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency California. USDA Designates 14 California Counties as Primary Natural Disaster Areas. USDA. [Online] March 28, 2019. [Cited: April 16, 2021.] Release No. 0032.19. https://www.fsa.usda.gov/news-room/emergency- designations/2019/ed_2019_0328_rel_0032.

11. United States Department of Agriculture. https://www.sjgov.org/ . [Online] March 5, 2021. https://www.sjgov.org/uploadedfiles/sjc/departments/agcomm/news/annoucements/cadroug htdisaster03052021.pdf.

12. Geoscience. Central Coast Blue, Phase 1B Groundwater Model Update. 2021.

13. California Department of Water Resources. A Beginner's Guide to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. [Online] [Cited: July 9, 2018.] https://sacdeltaguide.atavist.com/ .

14. Water System Consulting. San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 3 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. 2021.

15. San Luis Obispo County. Lopez Dam. Slocountywater. [Online] https://wr.slocountywater.org/site/?site_id=16&site=ad5cdb23-3e46-41f0-98a9- b169a505c0f4.

16. Water Systems Consulting. Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study. 2015.

17. Stetson Engineers. Lopez Lake Spillway Raise Project Report. 2013.

18. Wallace Group. South San Luis Obispo County Desalination Study. 2008.

19. Carollo & Water Systems Consulting. Technical Memorandum No. 3 Potential Supply Options and Points of Delivery for State Water. 2016.

20. Water Systems Consulting. SSLOCSD Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study. 2016.

21. Woodard & Curran. Carpinteria Advanced Purification Project Preliminary Design Report. 2019.

22. Schumacher, Melanie Mow. personal communication. Pure Water Soquel Costs for Title XVI Grant. March 7, 2022.

23. Monterey One Water. Pure Water Monterey Expansion Project Progress Report. 2018.

Attachment 2

9.F-77Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach References
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act 67 24. Grattan, Stephen R. Irrigation Water Salinity and Crop Production. Oakland : University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 2002. 978-1-60107-244-3.

25. UC Agricultural Issues Center. Current Cost and Return Studies. Agricultural & Resource Economics. [Online] UC Davis, September 28, 2017. [Cited: June 19, 2018.] https://coststudies.ucdavis.edu/en/current/ .

26. UC Berkeley Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Prospective Closure of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Economic Impact Assessment. 2019.

27. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Assessing the status of the monarch butterfly. [Online] January 2021. https://www.fws.gov/savethemonarch/ssa.html .

28. Rincon Consultants. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Central Coast Blue Project. 2020.

This report is not available online because it contains confidential information concerning archaeological sites.

29. American Water Works Association. Buried No Longer: Confronting America's Water Infrastructure Challenge. AWWA. [Online]

30. California Department of Transportation. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01). [Online]
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/environmental-analysis/noise-vibration/guidance-manuals .

31. Water Systems Consulting. Central Coast Blue Preliminary Engineering Report. 2021.

32. Wallace Group. South San Luis Obispo County Desalination Funding Study. 2008.

33. Carollo. Soquel Creek Water District Groundwater Replenishment Feasibility Study. 2016.

34. GSI Water Solutions. Northern Cities Management Area 2016 Annual Monitoring Report. 2017.

35. —. Northern Cities Management Area 2019 Annual Monitoring Report. 2020.

36. —. Northern Cities Management Area 2017 Annual Monitoring Report. 2018.

Attachment 2

9.F-78Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Letters of Project Support
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act A
Letters of Project Support
The following letters of support were submitted less than one year ago (in April 2021) for the Project’s FY21 application. To minimize Project-related requests from our supporters, we chose to submit letters of support from the previous application.

No. Categorized Letters of Support

LOCAL GOVERNMENT / AGENCIES
1 Ed Waage – City of Pismo Beach Mayor
2 Jim Lewis – City of Pismo Beach City Manager
3 Courtney Howard – County of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Division Manager 4 Linda Austin – Oceano Community Services District, President

AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY
5 Vard Ikeda – President, Ikeda Brothers
6 Tom Ikeda – Ikeda Brothers
7 Brian Talley – Talley Farms, Talley Vineyards, Zone 3 Agricultural Member 8 John Hayashi - Y. Hayashi & Sons

BUSINESS COMMUNITY
9 Jocelyn Brennan – South County Chambers of Commerce

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION
10 Andrew Christie – The Sierra Club, San Lucia Chapter

In addition, we received new letters of support from the following representatives.

No. Categorized Letters of Support

STATE & FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
11 Dianne Feinstein – United States Senator
12 Salud O. Carbajal – Member of Congress 24th District 13 Alex Padilla – United States Senator

LOCAL GOVERNMENT / AGENCIES
14 Jeff Lee – City of Grover Beach Mayor
15 Whitney McDonald – City of Arroyo Grande City Manager

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION
16 Melissa James – REACH, President/CEO

Attachment 2

9.F-79Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Unique Entity Identifier
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act B
Official Resolution
Due to the timing of the city council meetings, the Official Resolution will be provided to USBR prior to May 14, 2022 (60 days after the application deadline).

Attachment 2

9.F-80Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Unique Entity Identifier
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act C
Unique Entity Identifier
City of Pismo Beach’s Unique Entity Identifier
DUNS Number: 0779800010000

Attachment 2

9.F-81Council Agenda 5-3-2022

City of Pismo Beach Mandatory Federal Forms
Central Coast Blue FY22 WaterSMART Water Reclamation and Reuse Projects Under the WIIN Act D
Mandatory Federal Forms
The following mandatory Federal forms have been submitted separately via grants.gov.

1. SF-424 Application for Federal Assistance

2. SF-424A Budget Information

3. SF-424D Assurances

4. SF-LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

Attachment 2

9.F-82Council Agenda 5-3-2022