The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06.a. Draft Planning Agreement with Diablo Country Club for Satellite Water Recycling Facility Demonstration ProjectCentral Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: August 4, 2016 Subject: CONSIDER DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTRAL CONTA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT AND DIABLO COUNTRY CLUB FOR A SATELLITE WATER RECYCLING FACILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OR PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF, AS APPROPRIATE Submitted By: Melody LaBella, Associate Engineer Initiating Dept./Div.: Engineering & Technical Services / Planning & Development Services REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: D. Gemmell — Planning & Development Svcs. Div. Mgr. JM. Petit — Director of Engineering & Technical Services K. Alm j.A..) Roger S. Baile) Counsel for the District / General Manager 6.a. ISSUE: Board approval or direction is needed to authorize execution of a Planning Agreement for a satellite water recycling facility (SWRF) demonstration project at Diablo Country Club (DCC). BACKGROUND: In August 2012, the District, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and DCC executed a three-way Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to explore the feasibility of developing a SWRF on DCC's golf course that would divert wastewater flow from the District's nearby sewer line, treat it onsite to produce Title 22 recycled water for irrigating the golf course, and return the process solids back to the District's wastewater collection system. On April 23, 2015, the Board of Directors authorized the General Manager to execute an MOU with DCC. The 2015 MOU documented the mutual agreement of the District and DCC as to the benefits of a SWRF and to identify and resolve technical issues to the mutual benefit of all parties at no net cost to the District. In 2015, DCC also executed an MOU with EBMUD to obtain EBMUD approval to explore the project further because the DCC SWRF would reduce EBMUD's potable water demand. At the September 17, 2015, Board meeting, the District's Board of Directors directed staff to investigate implementation models with regard to ownership, maintenance, and operation of the proposed DCC SWRF project. At the February 18, 2016, Board meeting, the District's Board of Directors authorized staff to apply for a $75,000 planning grant from the California State Water Resources Control Board Water Recycling Funding Program. Since that time, DCC has decided not to pursue this funding mechanism due to the additional time it would add to the overall project schedule. Page 1 of 4 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: August 4, 2016 Subject: CONSIDER DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTRAL CONTA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT AND DIABLO COUNTRY CLUB FOR A SATELLITE WATER RECYCLING FACILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OR PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF, AS APPROPRIATE On March 3, 2016, the District's Board of Directors voted unanimously to authorize the General Manager to proceed with the development of a Demonstration SWRF at DCC, including preparation of an agreement with DCC consistent with the following principles: • The SWRF Demonstration Project will be cost -neutral for the District, in terms of capital, operations and maintenance costs. • Appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) consideration and documentation will be undertaken, along with an opportunity for public comment. • Appropriate EBMUD and Town of Danville project concerns and authorization will be addressed. • Legal constraints and liability issues, both short term and long term, will be addressed. Staff has continued close coordination with DCC and its consultant and has worked with District Counsel to develop a draft Planning Agreement to present to the Board of Directors for approval. The draft Planning Agreement would commit the District to leading and supporting certain planning activities, as described in Exhibit A-1. The major goals of the draft Planning Agreement are the completion of the environmental review process and the successful drafting of a future Operations and Property Transfer Agreement for execution. Exhibit A-2 defines future tasks and responsibilities for the project, should the environmental review process yield an implementable project. The term of the draft Planning Agreement is 12 months from execution and provides two, three-month extensions, upon mutual written consent by both parties. The draft Planning Agreement commits the District to leading and acting as the Approving Agency for the environmental review process, in compliance with CEQA, and gives the District the ultimate discretion to select a suitable site for the development of the project and to direct and approve a project design. The draft Planning Agreement also commits the District to dedicate the available raw wastewater flow, at the location of the project's proposed Diversion Structure (at the intersection of Diablo Road and Matadera Way), above what is needed for the safe and effective operation of the District's wastewater collection system. This excess wastewater flow would be diverted to the SWRF to produce recycled water to meet DCC's minimum recycled water demand, which is understood to be a quantity not Tess than 50 million gallons per year and an average of 0.5 million gallons per day, with summer peak daily demand of approximately 0.8 million gallons per day. Page 2 of 4 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: August 4, 2016 Subject: CONSIDER DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTRAL CONTA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT AND DIABLO COUNTRY CLUB FOR A SATELLITE WATER RECYCLING FACILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OR PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF, AS APPROPRIATE Exhibit B, an April 21, 2016, memo prepared by Brezack & Associates Planning titled, "Adequacy of Proposed Sewage Diversion," notes that the availability of raw wastewater flow at the project's proposed Diversion Structure as 0.35 million gallons per day, which is Tess than the minimum recycled water demand. This dedication of wastewater is made with the understanding that DCC is responsible for supplementing with an alternative supply, such as onsite storage or EBMUD potable water, if there are times when adequate wastewater flow is not available to meet DCC's minimum recycled water demand. As the draft Planning Agreement is currently being reviewed by DCC and their attorney, there may be an updated draft of the Planning Agreement provided to the Board prior to the August 4, 2016, meeting, if feedback is received in time. The draft Planning Agreement is being presented at the August 4, 2016, meeting, as all five Board members are expected to be present and can provide input to staff. Given the short timeframe DCC will have had to review the draft Planning Agreement, staff is requesting that the Board give the General Manager the authority, with guidance from District Counsel, to make non -substantive changes to the Planning Agreement that do not impact its spirit or intent. If substantive changes are requested from DCC that would change the spirit or intent of the current draft Planning Agreement, staff will bring a revised draft Planning Agreement back to the Board at a future meeting. ALTERNATIVES/CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of Directors may decline entering into this Planning Agrement, which would end the District's involvement in this project. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Since DCC will fund external costs and reimburse the District for staff costs, there is no financial impact to the District in entering into this Planning Agreement. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: As a draft of the Planning Agreement was not available at the time, the Real Estate, Environmental & Planning Committee reviewed the proposed assignment of responsibilities contained in the draft Planning Agreement at its July 26, 2016, meeting and recommended Board approval. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Authorize the General Manager to execute a Planning Agreement between Central Contra Costa Sanitary District and Diablo Country Club for a Satellite Water Recycling Facility Demonstration Project, substantially in the form presented. Page 3 of 4 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: August 4, 2016 Subject: CONSIDER DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTRAL CONTA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT AND DIABLO COUNTRY CLUB FOR A SATELLITE WATER RECYCLING FACILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OR PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF, AS APPROPRIATE Further authorize the General Manager, with guidance from District Counsel, to make non -substantive changes to the draft Planning Agreement presented that do not impact its spirit or intent. Or, alternatively, direct staff to bring back to the Board a revised Planning Agreement in final form, which has been approved by DCC and is ready for execution by the District. Attached Suoportina Documents: 1. Draft Planning Agreement 2. PowerPoint Presentation Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT July 28, 2016 PLANNING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT AND DIABLO COUNTRY CLUB FOR A SATELLITE WATER RECYCLING FACILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT This Planning Agreement (Agreement) is entered into as of this day of , 2016 (Effective Date), by and among the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (District) and Diablo Country Club (DCC) (each a Party and collectively the Parties), on the basis of the following facts: RECITALS A. The District owns and operates wastewater treatment facilities in Martinez, California and treats wastewater generated in the service area in which DCC is located. B. The District desires to cause the development of a Satellite Water Recycling Facility Demonstration Project (SWRF) in order to produce Disinfected Tertiary Recycled Water which meets the irrigation use standards set forth in 22 CCR section 60304 (Recycled Water) and to make such Recycled Water available to DCC (the Project) pursuant to an Operations and Property Rights Transfer Agreement (collectively OPRTA). C. The District finds that promoting access to and use of Recycled Water is for the public benefit because it conserves potable water resources. The Parties find that it is the purpose of the proposed Project to both create a new source of drought resistant and sustainable irrigation to DCC and to promote access to and use of Recycled Water. D. The minimum Recycled Water volume desired by DCC from a SWRF during drought and emergency drought conditions shall be understood to mean a quantity not Tess than 50 million gallons per year and an average of 0.5 million gallons per day, with summer peak daily demand of 0.8 million gallons per day (Minimum Recycled Water Demand). E. On July 24, 2012, the Parties and East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to explore development of a SWRF project in order to support the goals enunciated above. F. During the initial exploration period pursuant to the 2012 MOU, the Parties and EBMUD determined it was prudent to enter into two separate bilateral MOUs in order to continue exploring the feasibility of the Project. Therefore, on May 19, 2015, the District and DCC entered into a MOU (2015 MOU) and, on June 3, 2015, EBMUD and DCC entered into a separate MOU. The 2015 MOU called for cooperation by the Parties on delineated tasks set forth therein in order to further investigate of the feasibility of the Project. The Parties have collaborated on and accomplished a variety of the tasks set forth in the 2015 MOU including identifying Project funding. 1 DRAFT July 28, 2016 G. On March 3, 2016, the District Board of Directors authorized the General Manager to develop an agreement with DCC in order to reflect the Parties' collaboration efforts as a result of the 2015 MOU and further authorize the Parties to continue to explore the implementation of a cost-effective Project, resulting in no net cost to the District's operation and maintenance of its existing wastewater facilities or a SWRF. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained herein and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the District and the DCC mutually agree as follows: ARTICLE 1. NEGOTIATIONS Section 1.1 Good Faith Negotiations. (a) DCC to Fund Project Costs. Based upon DCC's commitment to fund the costs and expenses associated with all of the following: (1) a contract with District - approved consultant to produce information as may be required to enable the District to prepare or cause preparation and consideration of any California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)-required document and to reimburse the District for the reasonable costs of complying with CEQA, including administrative costs and the cost of any litigation defense; (2) reimbursement of District staff time; (3) a contract with a Design/Build consultant to design a SWRF subject to the District's specifications; (4) acquiring the site on which a SWRF will be located; (5) dedication of the SWRF to the District for operation and maintenance; and (6) the District's operation and maintenance of the SWRF, the District and DCC hereby commit to negotiate diligently and in good faith, during the Planning Agreement term described in Section 1.2, the terms of a OPTRA for the Project. This Agreement and its Exhibits shall serve as a guide in the negotiation of the OPTRA, although the Parties acknowledge that review of additional information and further discussion may lead to refinement and revision of the Project concepts set forth in the Agreement. During the Planning Agreement term, the Parties shall use good faith efforts to accomplish the respective tasks outlined in Article 2 to facilitate the negotiation of a mutually satisfactory OPTRA. (b) OPTRA. Among other matters, the Parties anticipate that the OPTRA shall address the conditions in which: (1) DCC would develop a SWRF which can be constructed and operated with the goal of delivering to DCC not less than the Minimum Recycled Water Demand subject to availability of wastewater in the District's collection system pursuant to the restrictions, set forth in Section 2.6 and 2.7 below, at a metered location immediately downstream of the SWRF and upstream of pond storage designed 2 DRAFT July 28, 2016 to enable DCC to extract Recycled Water for its irrigation applications at its sole discretion; (2) DCC would convey to the District and District would accept from DCC a SWRF on terms to be negotiated that would enable a financially -feasible Project including, but not limited to, any reversionary rights to the land, the SWRF, and Recycled Water produced by the SWRF; (3) The District would operate and manage the conveyed SWRF and provide Recycled Water to DCC for a term sufficient in length to meet DCC's financial obligations of the Project plus a reasonable period of time beyond the financing period that is acceptable to both Parties; (4) The District retains the right to wastewater upstream of the Project's Diversion Structure and DCC obtains the rights to Recycled Water downstream of a metering location; (5) The District provides Recycled Water to DCC, including identifying the metering location that designates the point -of -delivery, which is anticipated to be immediately downstream of the SWRF UV disinfection and upstream of the pond storage; (6) DCC shall own, operate and maintain the pond storage and have sole responsibility over distribution of Recycled Water from the pond storage; (7) DCC may refuse water provided by the District that does not meet the irrigation use standards currently set forth in 22 CCR section 60304 or any subsequent modification of such standards, if the water provided by the District does not meet such standards based upon the District's failure to operate the SWRF as long as DCC has designed and constructed a SWRF in a manner that is intended to produce recycled water that meets the standards in 22 CCR section 60304 and, if a subsequent modification of such standards requires an upgrade or modification to the SWRF, as long as DCC has funded the costs associated with such upgrade or modification; (8) DCC may demand any amount of Recycled Water from the District subject to the limitations set forth in Section 2.6 and 2.7 below; (9) DCC may supply its irrigation needs with alternative sources of water including, but limited to, DCC's responsibility to supplement its irrigation needs with an alternative supply of water if Recycled Water is not available due to the lack of an adequate supply of wastewater to the District; (10) DCC would reimburse the District for its costs associated with operation and management of a SWRF and provision of Recycled Water to DCC as well as any capital improvements made to a SWRF by the District including, but not limited 3 DRAFT July 28, 2016 to, the District's right to reimbursement of these costs irrespective of the DCC's demand for or receipt of Recycled Water from the SWRF; and (11) The District may terminate provision of Recycled Water to DCC if DCC fails to reimburse the District for operation and management as well as capital improvement costs. As more fully set forth in Section 3.2, the Parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement in itself does not obligate any Party to acquire or convey any property and does not obligate the DCC to any activities or costs to develop the Project, except for the preliminary analysis and negotiations contemplated by this Agreement. Section 1.2 Planning Agreement Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and shall expire twelve months from execution (Term). The Term may be extended for two, three-month extensions, upon mutual written consent by both Parties. If an OPTRA has not been executed by the Parties before the expiration of the Term, then this Agreement shall terminate and neither Party shall have any further rights, obligations, claims, demands, damages, losses or liabilities of any nature under this Agreement except that the DCC's indemnification obligation pursuant to Section 3.5 shall survive such termination. If an OPTRA is executed by the District and DCC then, upon such execution, this Agreement shall terminate, and all rights and obligations of the Parties shall be as set forth in the executed OPTRA. ARTICLE 2. PLANNING TASKS Section 2.1 Overview. To facilitate negotiation of the OPTRA, the Parties shall use reasonable good faith efforts to accomplish the tasks set forth in this Article 2 in a timeframe that will support negotiation and execution of a mutually acceptable OPTRA prior to the expiration of the Planning Agreement term. Exhibit A-1 further delineates the Parties' anticipated tasks during the Term of this Agreement, including any CEQA- related analysis being conducted; and Exhibit A-2 further delineates the Parties' anticipated roles and responsibilities for the future OPTRA and after the CEQA-related analysis is completed as set forth in this Article. Exhibits A-1 and A-2 are attached hereto and incorporated herein. Section 2.2 Financing and Costs of Proiect. DCC shall provide the District with a detailed financial analysis for the Project containing, among other matters, a Project budget (the "Financing Proposal"). The financial analysis shall be refined by the Parties during the Planning Agreement term, as appropriate, and will be used to evaluate the financial feasibility of the Project and to assist in the negotiation of terms. 4 DRAFT July 28, 2016 Section 2.3 Planning Approvals. The DCC acknowledges that the Project requires approvals and entitlements from the District, EBMUD and Contra Costa County, including, but not limited to a Recycled Water User Permit (the "Planning Approvals"). DCC will continue to work with the District to prepare the necessary studies, design the Project, and request to schedule hearings with the District and EBMUD as necessary to secure the Planning Approvals. The District and the DCC agree and acknowledge that the term "Planning Approvals" as used in this Section 2.3 does not include the applicable review and analysis of the Project in accordance with CEQA, as defined in Section 2.4, below, and that the District's completion of such review and analysis in accordance with CEQA shall be completed prior to the District Board's consideration of any OPTRA. As set forth in Section 2.4, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to compel the District to approve or make any finding under CEQA. Section 2.4 Environmental Review. The Parties acknowledge that the Project described herein is preliminary and remains subject to change. The District retains the absolute sole discretion to: (1) modify the Project, create and enter into transactional documents, and modify the Project as may, in its sole discretion, be necessary to comply with CEQA; (2) select other feasible alternatives to avoid significant environmental impacts; (3) balance the benefits of the Project against any significant environmental impacts prior to taking final action if such significant impacts cannot otherwise be avoided; and/or (4) determine not to proceed with the Project. No legal obligations will exist unless and until the Parties have negotiated, executed and delivered mutually acceptable agreements based upon information produced from the CEQA environmental review process and on other public review and hearing processes, subject to all applicable Planning Approvals. The District's discretion described herein specifically includes, but is not limited to, the right to select a suitable site for the development of the Project and to direct and approve a Project design. Notwithstanding the District's discretion with regard to Project design, DCC shall be responsible for contracting with a Design/Build consultant to design a SWRF subject to the District's specifications as set forth in Section 1.1. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to compel the District to approve or make any particular findings with respect to such CEQA documentation. As set forth in Section 1.1 above, DCC shall contract with District -approved consultant to produce information as may be required to enable the District to prepare or cause preparation and consideration of any CEQA-required document, and shall otherwise generally cooperate with the District to complete this task. DCC shall reimburse the District for the reasonable costs of complying with CEQA, including administrative costs and the cost of any litigation defense. Section 2.5 Reports. Unless otherwise waived by the District, the DCC shall provide the District with copies of all reports, studies, analyses, correspondence and similar documents, but excluding confidential or proprietary information, prepared or commissioned by the DCC with respect to this Agreement and the Project, promptly upon their completion. 5 DRAFT July 28, 2016 While desiring to preserve its rights with respect to treatment of certain information on a confidential or proprietary basis, the DCC acknowledges that the District will need sufficient, detailed information about the proposed Project (including, without limitation the financial information described in Section 2.2) to make informed decisions about the content and approval of the OPTRA. The District will work with the DCC to maintain the confidentiality of proprietary information subject to the requirements imposed on the District by the Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6253 et seq.). The DCC acknowledges that the District may share information provided by the DCC of a financial and potential proprietary nature with third party consultants and District Board members as part of the negotiation and decision making process. If this Agreement is terminated without the execution of an OPTRA, the District shall return to the DCC any information submitted by the DCC under this Agreement. The District shall provide the DCC with copies of all reports, studies, analyses, correspondence and similar documents (collectively, "Documents") prepared or commissioned by the District with respect to this Agreement and the Project, promptly following execution of this Agreement with respect to Documents then in its possession or under its reasonable control, and promptly upon their completion with respect to any subsequently prepared Documents. Section 2.6 Wastewater Dedication. The District's raw wastewater flow is an essential component of the Project. As part of the Project, the District is committed to allowing diversion of available raw wastewater flow for the SWRF to produce Recycled Water to meet DCC's irrigation demand, with the understanding that the District's first priority is the safe and effective operation of the District's wastewater collection system, which includes avoiding overflows and odor generation. If a feasible Project is developed pursuant this Agreement and the District has approved any CEQA-required document related to the Project, then DCC shall have the right to wastewater flow at the Project's Diversion Structure sufficient for meeting the Project objectives. To the extent circumstances arise that reasonably require the contribution of raw wastewater and/or treated water to address inadequate flow in the collection system, the Parties will cooperate in good faith to determine the amount of water necessary to contribute back to the system from the Project. It will be the District's goal to meet both of the following Project objectives: (a) Safely and effectively operating the District's wastewater collection system; and (b) Allowing diversion of raw wastewater flow, such that a satellite water recycling facility could produce recycled water to meet DCC's irrigation demand. The District believes these two objectives can be accomplished through an adaptive management approach that includes a combination of planned technical solutions 6 DRAFT July 28, 2016 incorporated into the Project design and implementation, and flexibility in operational practices. Section 2.7 Wastewater Availability. To the extent that raw wastewater flow at the proposed Diversion Structure is not sufficient to produce enough Recycled Water to meet DCC's Minimum Recycled Water Demand, DCC shall be responsible for supplementing its irrigation needs with an alternative supply of water, such as on-site storage and/or EBMUD potable water. Exhibit B, an April 21, 2016, memo prepared by Brezack & Associates Planning titled, "Adequacy of Proposed Sewage Diversion" notes that the availability of raw wastewater flow at the proposed Diversion Structure as 0.35 million gallons per day, which is Tess than the Minimum Recycled Water Demand. Exhibit B is attached hereto and incorporated herein. Section 2.8 Upstream Diversion of Wastewater. If a feasible Project is developed pursuant this Agreement and the District has approved any CEQA-required document related to the Project, then the District shall implement measures to protect and sustain wastewater flow available to the Project by prohibiting upstream diversions, projects, and, or any other actions that would reduce the quantity or quality of wastewater upstream of the Project's Diversion Structure. Section 2.9 Progress Reports. From time to time as reasonably agreed upon by the Parties, each Party shall make oral or written progress reports advising the other Party on studies being made and matters being evaluated by the reporting Party with respect to this Agreement and the Project. ARTICLE 3. GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 3.1 Pilot Project. The District has designated the Project a "pilot" project in order to facilitate it while, at the same time, expressing its intent that it shall not be considered an entitlement available to similar projects in the future. It is expected that many unique elements of the Project will require analysis and modification prior to use or expectation of use by other parties. Both Parties express their commitment to develop the requirements, benefits and costs of any potential future Recycled Water projects. It is the District's further intent that, by designating the Project a "pilot" project, it shall allow the District to adaptively manage the Project by evaluating feasibility, time, cost, and any adverse events in an attempt to improve upon its performance. Section 3.2 Limitation on Effect of Agreement. This Agreement shall not obligate either the District or the DCC to enter into an OPTRA or to enter into any particular OPTRA. By execution of this Agreement, the District is not committing itself to or agreeing to enter into an OPTRA. Execution of this Agreement by the District is merely an agreement to conduct a period of negotiations in accordance with the terms hereof, reserving for subsequent District and District Board action the final discretion 7 DRAFT July 28, 2016 and approval regarding the execution of a OPTRA and all proceedings and decisions in connection with the Project. Any OPTRA resulting from negotiations pursuant to this Agreement shall become effective only if and after such OPTRA has been considered and approved by the District Board following conduct of all legally required procedures, and executed by duly authorized representatives of the District and the DCC. Until and unless a OPTRA is signed by the DCC, approved by the District Board, and executed by the District, no agreement drafts, actions, deliverables or communications arising from the performance of this Agreement shall impose any legally binding obligation on either Party to enter into or support entering into a OPTRA or be used as evidence of any oral or implied agreement by either Party to enter into any other legally binding document. Section 3.3 Notices. Formal notices, demands and communications between the District and the DCC shall be sufficiently given if, and shall not be deemed given unless, dispatched by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or sent by express delivery or overnight courier service, to the office of the Parties shown as follows, or such other address as the Parties may designate in writing from time to time: District: DCC: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Attention: Melody LaBella 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, CA 94553 Diablo Country Club Attention: Frank Cordeiro 1700 Clubhouse Road Diablo, CA 94528 Such written notices, demands and communications shall be effective on the date shown on the delivery receipt as the date delivered or the date on which delivery was refused. Section 3.4 Costs and Expenses. Each Party shall be responsible for its owns costs and expenses in connection with any activities and negotiations undertaken in connection with this Agreement, and the performance of each Party's obligations under this Agreement except for costs and expenses as set forth in Sections 1.1 and 2.4 above. Section 3.5 Indemnification. DCC assumes all responsibility for damages to property or injury or death to persons caused by the negligent performance errors or omissions of DCC and/or its agents or employees. To the extent permitted by law, DCC shall indemnify, hold harmless, release and defend the District, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees and agents from and against any and all actions, claims, demands, damages, disability, losses, failure to comply with any current or prospective laws, and expenses including attorneys' fees and other defense costs or liabilities of any nature that may be asserted by any person or entity including the DCC from any cause 8 DRAFT July 28, 2016 whatsoever arising out of or in any way connected with the activities of DCC, its officials, officers employees and agents hereunder and/or arising out of or connected with DCC's performance of this Agreement, regardless of District's passive negligence. District agrees to provide DCC with reasonable notification of legal claims and/or lawsuits which District may receive and for which it will require indemnification for under this Section 3.5. The terms of this Section 3.5 shall extend beyond the termination of this Agreement and shall not release the Parties from any obligation hereunder resulting from an event that occurred after termination of this Agreement. Section 3.6 Defaults and Remedies. (a) Default. Failure by any Party to negotiate in good faith and carry out the tasks as provided in this Agreement and its exhibits shall constitute an event of default hereunder. The non -defaulting Party shall give written notice of a default to the defaulting Party, specifying the nature of the default and the required action to cure the default. If a default remains uncured fifteen (15) days after receipt by the defaulting Party of such notice, the non -defaulting Party may exercise the remedies set forth in subsection (b). (b) Remedies. In the event of an uncured default by the District, the DCC's sole remedy shall be to terminate this Agreement. Following such termination, no Party shall have any further right, remedy or obligation under this Agreement, except that the DCC's indemnification obligation pursuant to Section 3.5 shall survive such termination. In the event of an uncured default by the DCC, the District's sole remedy shall be to terminate this Agreement. Following such termination, no Party shall have any right, remedy or obligation under this Agreement, except that the DCC's indemnification obligation pursuant to Section 3.5 shall survive such termination. Section 3.7 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Section 3.8 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties regarding the subject matters of this Agreement and any other prior or existing understanding or agreements by the Parties, where formal or informal, regarding any such matters are hereby superseded or terminated in the entirety. Section 3.9 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Section 3.10 Assignment. The Parties may not transfer or assign any or all of their rights or obligations hereunder except with the prior written consent of the other 9 DRAFT July 28, 2016 Party, which consent shall be granted or withheld in that Party's sole discretion, and any such attempted transfer or assignment without the prior written consent of the other Party shall be void. Section 3.11 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into solely for the benefit of the District and the DCC and no other person shall have any right of action under or by reason of this Agreement. Section 3.12 Severabilitv. If any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall to any extent be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement or the application of such term, covenant or condition to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each term, covenant and condition of this Agreement shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. Section 3.13 Amendments. No agreement, alteration, understanding, variation, waiver, or modification or any of the terms or provisions contained herein shall in any manner be binding upon the Parties hereto unless made and executed in writing by all Parties hereto, and if required, approved by the District Board. Section 3.14 No Waiver. No waiver of any default or breach of any covenant of this Agreement by either Party shall be implied from any omission by either Party to take action on account of such default if such default persists or is repeated, and no express waiver shall affect any default other than the default specified in the waiver, and then the waiver shall be operative only for the time and to the extent stated. Waivers of any covenant, term, or condition by either Party shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same covenant, term, or condition. The consent or approval by either Party to or of any act by either party requiring further consent or approval shall not be deemed to waive or render unnecessary their consent or approval to or of any subsequent similar acts. [REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 10 DRAFT July 28, 2016 WITNESS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, and the Diablo Country Club entered into this Agreement by their duly authorized officers as of the date first written above. Authorized Representative of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District: Roger S. Bailey General Manager Central Contra Costa Sanitary District COUNTERSIGNED: Elaine R. Boehme, CMC Secretary of the District Central Contra Costa Sanitary District County of Contra Costa, State of California Approved as to Form: Kenton L. Alm, Esq. District Counsel Date Authorized Representatives of the Diablo Country DCC: Hank Salvo Date Board President Frank Cordeiro, CCM Date General Manager 11 1.0 1.01 1.02 EXHIBIT A-1 TASKS TO BE INITIATED DURING PLANNING AGREEMENT Activity Project Planning Project -Related Agreements Feasibility Design to Support CEQA 1.03 Environmental Review Process (CEQA) 1.04 SWRF Regulatory Permitting Applications 1.05 Agreement with EBMUD (Purveyorship) 1.06 Project Mgt., Schedule & Reporting 1 07 Prepare Request for Proposals for Procuring Design -Build Entity 1.08 Consideration of Project Approval (CEQA) 1.09 Execution of Project Documents (CEQA) 1.10 Funding and Financing of Capital 1.11 Funding of District Staff Time & Expenses 1.12 Public Outreach District Responsibilities Lead Active Participant, Review, and Approval Review/Approving Agency/Active Participant Review and Submit Lead Active Participant, Review, and Approval Active Participant, Review, and Approval Lead Lead None Lead Draft Program & Lead DRAFT July 28, 2016 DCC Responsibilities Support and Fund Lead Engage and Fund Consultant/Provide Information Lead and Prepare Support Lead Lead Active Participant Active Participant Lead Private Financing Full Reimbursement Active Participant DRAFT EXHIBIT A-2 July 28, 2016 FUTURE TASKS TO BE UNDERTAKEN AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PROJECT COMPLETION Activity 1.0 Project Planning/Permitting 1.10 Land & Facilities Conveyance Process 1.20 SWRF Regulatory Permitting Applications 1.30 Recycled Water User Permit 1.40 Agreement with EBMUD (Purveyorship) 2.0 Design & Construction 2.10 Project Mgt., Schedule & Reporting 2.20 Procure Design -Build Entity 2.30 Preliminary Design 2.40 Final Design 2.50 Construct Facilities 2.60 Commissioning 3.0 Ownership 3.10 Diversion/Pump/Force Main 3.20 Recycling Facility 3.30 Ponds 3.40 Irrigation 4.0 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 Operations Diversion/Pump/Force Main Recycling Plant Ponds Irrigation 5.0 Funding Funding and Financing of Capital and Design Build Implementation 5.20 Annual O&M Expenses 5.30 Equipment Replacement Fund 5.40 Pursue Alternative Funding 5.10 6.0 Public Outreach 6.10 !Public Outreach District Responsibilities Active Active Active Active Active Active Collaborate Lead/Review None (EBMUD) Lead Participant, Review, and Approval Participant, Review, and Approval Participant, Review, and Approval Participant, Review, and Approval Participant, Review, and Approval Participant, Review, and Approval Lead Lead None None Lead Lead None None None Lead Lead Collaborate Lead DCC Responsibilities 1 Collaborate Active Participant/Prepare Comply Support Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead None None Lead Lead Collaborate Collaborate Lead Lead Lead Private Financing Full Reimbursement to District Full Reimbursement to District Lead Active Participant Brezack&.Associates Planning TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: PROJECT: EXHIBIT B Frank Cordeiro James M Brezack & Reena Thomas Adequacy of Proposed Sewage Diversion 04/21/2016 Diablo Country Club Satellite Water Reclamation Facility 15-007 I. Executive Summary The feasibility of the Diablo Country Club SWRF depends on a reliable diversion of sewage from the Diablo Interceptor of not less than 0.35 mgd. This minimum diversion needs to be sustainable throughout worst-case drought conditions. The District requires that sewage diversions sustain in - pipe cleansing velocities of not less than 2 fps, once per day. Four operational diversion strategies are presented that reliably meet these requirements. Results of the analysis prove a wide range of successful operating alternatives with flushing capacities between 15 minutes and 6 -hours in duration. Additional diversion strategies exist to supplement flushing of the Diablo Interceptor should they be required. All diversion strategies will require design -level analysis to optimally size individual components of the system consistent with the SWRF treatment plant and storage facilities. Additionally, this analysis confirms the operational flexibility for the discharge of SWRF wastes to the Diablo Interceptor. Depending on the requirements of the District, the Club will be able to safely discharge wastes without interference to the proposed diversion over a range of 3 to 6 hours. II. Introduction This memorandum summarizes the availability of sewage to the proposed Diablo Country Club Satellite Water Reclamation Facility (SWRF). Sewage flows are proposed for diversion from the District's 21 -inch pipeline in Diablo Road (Diablo Interceptor) at Matadera Way to meet the Club's irrigation demand and operational storage requirements for recycled water. III. Sewage Availability Three sewer flow monitoring events were completed in the Diablo Interceptor to determine the adequacy of sewage available to the Club: April 2014; October 2015; and December 2015. Over this 18 -month period, sewage flows were observed to have decreased by approximately 41% percent. This is understood to be a response to the implementation of drought -related water conservation measures required by EBMUD. Similar sewage flow reductions have been noted by the District at the regional wastewater treatment plant in Martinez. The most recently measured average daily flow rate of 0.41 mgd is used as the base or worst-case minimum drought response sewage flow anticipated in the Diablo Interceptor. IV. District Sewer Pipeline Requirements Adherence to the District's velocity criteria is required to minimize solids deposition within their gravity flow pipelines. District Standard Specifications and coordination with staff have identified the following as Project requirements: Diablo Country Club: 15007 1 of 6 BAP Projects:Diablo Country CIub:15-007 DCC Long -Term Water Sustainability Assistance:3. Communications: 15007 DCC Diversion Storage Operations Summary 20160420 rt.docx Brezack&:Associates Planning • Preserve a minimum velocity downstream of the proposed diversion at the location of minimum pipeline slope. • The pipeline segment with the flattest slope is located upstream of Manhole M45.7 where a slope of 0.0065 occurs. • Minimum velocities that maintain self -cleansing of the sewer of 2 fps are required to be met on a once per day basis. • The minimum pipeline velocity of 2 fps should be achieved for a duration of not less than 15 minutes, once per day. • If velocities of 3 fps or greater can be achieved, the flushing duration can be reduced to a minimum of 10 minutes, once per day. Table 1 presents the results of an analysis of the minimum flows required to meet District velocity criteria at the flattest pipeline slope segment downstream of the diversion point. The minimum flow rate that achieves a minimum velocity of 2 fps is 100 gallons per minute (gpm). Table 1: Minimum Velocity Flow Analysis Flattest Slope Section (Upstream of M45.7 C; Diablo Rd and Dustin Ln) Pipeline Slope Pipeline Diameter Pipeline Roughness Coefficient Flow Rate Velocity 0.0065 21 0.013 100 gpm 2.01 fps ft/foot inches IV. Proposed Sewage Diversion Operations A feasible diversion requires that the following two conditions be met: (1) Provide a minimum reliable sewage diversion to the Club that meets a irrigation demand of not less than 0.35 mgd during worst-case drought conditions, and (2) Achieve the District's minimum velocity requirements of 2 fps in the Diablo Interceptor at least once per day for a minimum fifteen -minute flushing period at the downstream minimum slope location. The following four diversion options were developed and analyzed to identify a range of operational strategies capable of meeting the minimum diversion and velocity requirements: • Option 1 Maximum Sewage Diversion to Club: 24-hour diversion to Club, with 1 fifteen -minute flushing cycle at 2 fps • Option 2 Maximum Sewage Flow to District during Low Flow Periods: 18 -hour diversion to Club, from 5 am to 11 pm • Option 3 Minimum Sewage Flow to District during Low Flow Periods: Diablo Country Club: 15007 2 of 6 BAP Projects:Diablo Country Club:15.O07 DCC Long -Term Water Sustainability Assistance:3. Communications:1S007 DCC_Diversion Storage Operations Summary 20160420 rt.docx Brezack:Associates Planning ..a....... ,r.. la ....LLi...IL rl.....i.. 24-hour diversion to Club, with 6 -hour minimum velocity flow remaining from 11 pm to 5 am • Option 4 Diversion Reduction during Peak Sewer Periods: 24-hour diversion, with 3 -hour diversion reduction from 8 am — 11 am Table 2 presents a summary of diversion flows and flushing volumes for each option. Detailed calculations for each option are included as an attachment to this memorandum. Table 2: Diversion Operation Option Summary Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Hours of Diversion Diversion Volume (gpd) Period of Flushing Meeting Minimum Velocity .25 hours 6 hours Maximum Flushing Velocity Achieved (fps) Pond Replenishment Volume (gpd) 24 18 23 21 407,600 361,900 377,900 353,400 2.0 2.52 5 hours 3 hours 2.0 2.87 57,600 11,900 27,900 3,400 As presented in Table 2, Option 1 meets District minimum flushing velocity criteria, while exceeding the irrigation demand. No stored volumes would be required to supplement during irrigation demands up to 407,600 gpd. Figure 1 shows that seasonal irrigation demands are below maximum sewage diversion monthly volumes; therefore no seasonal storage is required. The additional volume diverted and treated above the irrigation demands may be stored in the ponds for maximum day irrigation needs. Diablo Country Club: 15007 3 of 6 BAP Projects:Diablo Country CIub:15-007 DCC Long -Term Water Sustainability Assistance:3. Communications:13007 DCC_Diversion Storage Operations Summary 20160420 rtdocx Brezack; Associates Planning Figure 1: Seasonal Irrigation Demand and Sewage Diversion Million Gallons Per Month L_._ 14.0 -- 12.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 Option 1: Maximum Sewage Diversion and Seasonal Irrigation Demand Sewage Diversion Exceeds Irrigation Demands I Sewage Diversion Seasonal Irrigation Demand a{ ‘''4C 4\4: ��e �1� �� coo ore ice 1 -.)70 c V. Recommendations & Conclusions This analysis concludes that sufficient sewage flow during base drought conditions exists to meet the Club's irrigation demand of 350,000 gpd while meeting the District's minimum pipeline velocity criteria. The following conclusions are drawn from the diversion operation options presented within this memorandum: • 24-hour diversion period options do not provide flexibility for WAS disposal. • Longer flushing periods provide additional flexibility for WAS disposal. • Longer flushing periods provide additional flexibility to re -suspend and move solids through the pipelines. • Reduced diversion options (where a portion of sewage flow is left in pipe during diversions for conveyance to CCCSD) require a more complex diversion structure design and operation. • Operational and capital costs for larger pump sizes should be considered during final design. The following are recommended actions to finalize the project sewage diversion and storage requirements: 1. Verification of irrigation demands to confirm the minimum wastewater flows to be diverted to the Club. Diablo Country Club: 15007 4 of 6 BAP Projects:Diablo Country CIub:13.007 DCC Long -Term Water Sustainability Assistance:3. Communications:15007 DCC_Diversion Storage Operations Summary 20160420 rt.docz Brezack& Associates Planning 2. Diversion pump station preliminary design and operations approval from the District. 3. Conditions stated within the General Agreement between the Club and District regarding approval of the sewage diversion operations concepts. Conditions stated in final operating agreements should allow for flexible diversion operations. Diablo Country Club: 15007 5 of 6 BAP Proiects:Diablo Country CIub:15-007 DCC Long -Term Water Sustainability Assistance:3. Communications:15007 DCC_Diverslon Storage Operations Summary 20160420 rt.docx 0.70 Diversion is sufficient to meet irrigation demand of 0.60 3Du,uuu gpd. 0.50 ? 0.40 0 J LL w 0.30 Q 0.20 0.10 0.00 Diversion Option 1 Sewage in Pipeline Flow Diversion to Club • Flow Remaining in Pipe to CCCSD 0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 1 Hour 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Average Daily Flow Total Volume Diverted and Treated (Gallons per Day) Storage Volume Requred Average Flow Irrigation MGD gpm MGD gpm 0.30 208.43 0.35 729 0.23 160.62 0.35 729 0.19 132.84 0.35 729 0.19 129.86 0.35 729 0.20 135.52 0 0 0.25 172.92 0 0.33 228.17 0 0.56 386.81 0 0.62 431.45 0 0.64 447.42 0 0.63 440.28 0 0.59 408.13 0 0.51 356.55 _ 0 0.45 312.10 0 0.43 300.20 0 0.43 300.60 0 0.43 295.24 0 0.43 299.01 0 0.46 318.15 0 0.49 339.09 0 0.49 340.67 0.35 729 0.49 342.76 0.35 729 0.45 311.90 0.35 729 0.14 94.94 0.35 729 0.41 287 413,600 MG -HR 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 Diversion Rate gpm 208 161 133 130 36 173 228 387 431 447 440 408 357 312 300 301 295 299 318 339 341 343 312 95 283.07 350,000 0.35 407,600 (57,600) Diversion Option 1 -24 Hour Diversion; 15 minute flush Flow Remaining In Average Pipe MGD MG -hour gpm 0.30 0.01 0 0.23 0.01 0 0.19 0.01 0 0.19 0.01 0 0.05 0.002 100 0.25 0.01 0 0.33 0.01 0 0.56 0.02 0 0.62 0.03 0 0.64 0.03 0 0.63 0.03 0 0.59 0.02 0 0.51 0.02 0 0.45 0.02 0 0.43 0.02 0 0.43 0.02 0 0.43 0.02 0.43 0.02 0.46 0.02 0,49 0.02 0.49 0.02 0.49 0.02 0.45 0.02 0.14 0.01 0.41 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 1,500 MGD MGD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.60 0.50 w ? 0.40 O J LL IU W 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 Diversion is sufficient to meet irrigation demand of i u,uuu gpa. 0:00 2:00 Diversion Option 2 Sewage in Pipeline Now Diversion to Club ■ Flow Remaining in Pipe to CCCSD 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 Hour 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Average Daily Flow Total Volume Diverted and Treated (Gallons per Day) Storage Volume Requred Average Flow Irrigation MGD gpm MGD gpm MG -HR 0.30 208.43 0.35 729 0.04 0.23 160.62 0.35 729 0.04 0.19 132.84 0.35 729 0.04 0.19 129.86 0.35 729 0.04 0.20 135.52 0 0 0 0.25 172.92 0 0 0.33 228.17 0 0 0.56 386.81 0 0 0.62 431.45 0 0 0.64 447.42 0 0 0.63 440.28 _ 0 0 0.59 408.13 0 0 0.51 356.55 0 0 0.45 312.10 0 0 0.43 300.20 0 0 0.43 300.60 0 0 0.43 295.24 0 0 0.43 299.01 0 0 0.46 318.15 0 0 0.49 339.09 0 0 0.49 340.67 0.35 729 0.04 0.49 342.76 0.35 729 0.04 0.45 311.90 0.35 729 0.04 0.14 94.94 0.35 729 0.04 0.41 287 413,600 350,000 Diversion Option 2 - No Diversion Between 11 pm - 5 am Diversion Rate gpm 0 0 0 0 0 173 228 387 431 447 440 408 357 312 300 301 295 299 318 339 341 343 312 0 251.31 0.35 361,900 (11,900) Average Flow Remaining In Pipe MGD MG -hour gpm MGD 0.00 0.00 208 0.30 0.00 0.00 161 0.23 0.00 0.00 133 0.19 0.00 0.00 130 0.19 0.00 0.00 136 0.20 0.25 0.01 0 0.00 0.33 0.01 0 0.00 0.56 0.02 0 0.00 0.62 0.03 0 0.00 0.64 0.03 0 0.00 0.63 0.03 0 0.00 0.59 0.02 0 0.00 0.51 0.02 0 0.00 0.45 0.02 0 0.00 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0.46 0.02 0 0.00 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.45 0.02 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 95 0.14 0.36 51,700 0.70 Diversion is sufficient to meet irrigation demand of 0.60 350,000 gpcl. 0.50 ? 0.40 0 J LL W w w 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 Diversion Option 3 Sewage in Pipeline Flow Diversion to Club ■ Flow Remaining in Pipe to CCCSD 0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 Hour 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Average Daily Flow Total Volume Diverted and Treated (Gallons per Day) Storage Volume Requred Average Flow Irrigation MGD gpm MGD gpm MG -HR 0.30 208.43 0.35 729 0.04 0.23 160.62 0.35 729 0.04 0.19 132.84 0.35 729 0.04 0.19 129.86 0.35 729 0.04 0.20 135.52 0 0 0 0.25 172.92 0 0 0.33 228.17 0 0 0.56 386.81 0 0 0.62 431.45 0 0 0.64 447.42 0 0 0.63 7 440.28 0 0 0.59 408.13 0 0 0.51 356.55 0 0 0.45 312.10 0 0 0.43 300.20 0 0 0.43 300.60 0 0 0.43 295.24 0 0 0.43 299.01 0 0 0.46 318.15 0 0 0.49 339.09 0 0 0.49 340.67 0.35 729 0.04 0.49 342.76 0.35 729 0.04 0.45 311.90 0.35 729 0.04 0.14 94.94 0.35 729 0.04 0.41 287 413,600 350,000 0.35 Diversion Option 3 -Maintain 100 gpm minimum Between 11 pm - 5 am Diversion Rate gpm 108 61 33 30 36 173 228 387 431 447 440 408 357 312 300 301 295 299 318 339 341 343 312 0 262.45 Average Flow Remaining In Pipe MGD MG -hour gpm MGD 0.16 0.01 100 0.14 0.09 0.00 100 0.14 0.05 0.00 100 0.14 0.04 0.00 100 0.14 0.05 0.00 100 0.14 0.25 0.01 0 0.00 0.33 0.01 0 0.00 0.56 0.02 0 0.00 0.62 0.03 0 0.00 0.64 0.03 0 0.00 0.63 0.03 0 0.00 0.59 0.02 0 0.00 0.51 0.02 0 0.00 0.45 0.02 0 0.00 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0.46 0.02 0 0.00 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.45 0.02 0 D.00 0.00 0.00 95 0.14 0.38 377,900 35,700 (27,900) 0.70 Diversion is sufficient to meet irrigation demand of 0.60 .3pu,uuu gpdi. 0.50 w 2 0.40 O J LL W ce 0.30 Q 0.20 0.10 0.00 Diversion Option 4 Sewage in Pipeline Flow Diversion to Club • Flow Remaining in Pipe to CCCSD i u'''u'IlIVI 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 Hour 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Average Daily Flow Total Volume Diverted and Treated (Gallons per Day) !Storage Volume Requred Average Flow MGD gpm MGD 0.30 208.43 0.35 0.23 160.62 0.35 0.19 132.84 0.35 Irryation gpm 729 729 729 0.19 129.86 0.35 0.20 135.52 0 0.25 172.92 0 0.33 228.17 0 0.56 386.81 0 0.62 431.45 0 0.64 447.42 0 0.63 440.28 0 0.59 408.13 0 0.51 356.55 0 0.45 312.10 0 0.43 300.20 0 0.43 300.60 0 0.43 295.24 0 0.43 299.01 0 0.46 318.15 0 0.49 339.09 0 0.49 340.67 _ 0.35 0.49 342.76 0.35 0.45 311.90 0.35 0.14 94.94 0.35 0.41 287 413,600 729 0 729 729 729 729 350,000 Diversion Option 4: Reduced Diversion Between 8 am -11 am Flow Remaining In Diversion Rate Average Pipe MGD MG -HR gpm MGD MG -hour gpm MGD 0.04 208 0.30 0.01 0 0.00 0.04 161 0.23 0.01 0 0.00 0.04 133 0.19 1 0.01 0 0.00 0.04 130 0.19 1 0.01 0 0.00 O 136 0.20 1 0.01 0 0.00 O 173 0.25 1 0.01 0 0.00 O 228 0.33 0.01 J 0 0.00 O 387 0.56 0.02 0 0.00 O 105 0.15 0.01 326 0.47 O 105 0.15 0.01 342 0.49 O 105 0.15 0.01 335 0.48 O 408 0.59 0.02 0 0.00 O 357 0.51 0.02 0 0.00 O 312 0.45 0.02 0 0.00 0 300 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0 301 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 O 295 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 0 299 0.43 0.02 0 0.00 O 318 0.46 0.02 0 0.00 O 339 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.04 341 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.04 343 0.49 0.02 0 0.00 0.04 312 0.45 0.02 0 0.00 0.04 95 0.14 0.01 0 245.40 0.35 0.35 353,400 60,200 (3,400) PROPOSED PLANNING AGREEMENT FOR A SATELLITE WATER RECYCLING FACILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT AT DIABLO COUNTRY CLUB Melody LaBelia, P.E. Associate Engineer August 4, 2016 THE CONCEPT* * This map is for demonstration purposes only. The exact facility locations are subject to change. ATTACHMENT 2 1 BACKGROUND • August 2012 • 3 -way memorandum of understanding (MOU) executed between District, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), and Diablo Country Club (DCC) • April 2015 • MOU executed between District and DCC • June 2015 • MOU executed between EBMUD and DCC BACKGROUND • September 2015 • Board directed staff to investigate implementation models • February 2016 • Board authorized staff to apply for a $75,000 Planning Grant • DCC decided not to pursue this grant, due to the time it would add to the overall schedule 07/28/16 2 BACKGROUND • March 2016 • Board authorized General Manager to proceed with development of project, including preparation of Agreement consistent with the following: • Cost -neutral for the District • Appropriate environmental review • Appropriate EBMUD and Town of Danville concerns and authorization addressed • Legal constraints and liability issued addressed DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT • Major Goals: • Complete the environmental review process • Draft Operations and Property Transfer Agreement for future execution, should the environmental review process yield an implementable project N M 1 07/28/16 3 DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT • Would commit the District to leading and supporting certain planning activities • Twelve-month term with two, 3 -month extensions, upon mutual written agreement • Would commit the District to leading and acting as Approving Agency for the environmental review process, in compliance with the CA Environmental Quality Act AN1 L_ II 1N DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT • Would give the District the ultimate discretion in selecting a suitable site for the development of the project and to direct and approve a project design • Would commit the District to dedicate the available raw wastewater flow at the Project's proposed Diversion Structure • In excess of what is needed for the safe and effective operation of the District's wastewater collection system 1111111111 _ 07/28/16 4 DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT • Would establish DCC's minimum irrigation demand as: • 50 million gallons per year • An average of 0.5 million gallons per day • Peak summer demand of approximately 0.8 million gallons per day • Would require DCC to supplement with an alternative supply if adequate wastewater flow is not available to meet minimum demand • Onsite storage, EBMUD potable water EXHIBIT A-1 • District -led tasks to be initiated during the Planning Agreement: • Environmental Review Process • Permission from EBMUD to distribute recycled water in their service area • Project Agreements • Public Outreach 07/28/16 5 EXHIBIT A-1 • DCC -led tasks to be initiated during the Planning Agreement: • Feasibility design to support CEQA • Project management, schedule and reporting • Prepare request for proposals for procuring design -build entity • Capital financing • Reimburse District staff time • Fund District -approved CEQA consultant EXHIBIT A-2 • Future tasks to be undertaken and responsibilities for project completion, if the environmental review process yields an implementable project: • Design and construction • Ownership • Operations • Funding • Outreach 07/28/16 6 EXHIBIT B • April 21, 2016, memo prepared by DCC's consultant, "Adequacy of Proposed Sewage Diversion" • Summarizes available wastewater flow at proposed Diversion Structure from 3 flow monitoring events (April 2014, October 2015, December 2015) • 0.35 — 0.41 million gallons per day RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION • Authorize the General Manager to execute a Planning Agreement between Central Contra Costa Sanitary District and Diablo Country Club for a Satellite Water Recycling Facility Demonstration Project, substantially in the form presented. • Further authorize the General Manager, with guidance from District Counsel, to make non - substantive changes to the draft Planning Agreement presented that do not impact its spirit or intent. 07/28/16 7 RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION • Or, alternatively, direct staff to bring back to the Board a revised Planning Agreement in final form, which has been approved by DCC and is ready for execution by the District. 07/28/16 8