WaterSMART: Title XVI Water Reclamation and 

Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Funding Opportunity R16-FOA-DO-003 

Eastern Municipal Water District 

Recycled Water Strategic and Master Plan 

Perris, California 

December 10, 2015 

Eastern Municipal Water District 

Joe Mouawad, Senior Director of Engineering 

2270 Trumble Road 

P.O. Box 8300 

Perris, CA 92572-8300 

mouawadj@ emwd.org 

Phone: (951) 928-3777 x4463 

Fax: (951) 928-6146 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Table of Contents 

Technical Proposal and Evaluation Criteria.........................................................1
 

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 1
 

Technical Project Description.................................................................................................. 4
 

Project Cost Estimate and Schedule ....................................................................................... 5
 

Project Activities................................................................................................................... 10
 

Evaluation Criteria ................................................................................................................. 12
 

Evaluation Criterion 1: Water Supply................................................................................... 12
 

Evaluation Criterion 2: Status of Title XVI Project .............................................................. 14
 

Evaluation Criterion 3: Environment and Water Quality ..................................................... 16
 

Evaluation Criterion 4: Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency ..................................... 17
 

Evaluation Criterion 5: Cost per Acre-Foot of Water and Other Project Benefits ............... 19
 

Evaluation Criterion 6: Reclamation’s Obligations and Benefits to Rural or Economically 

Disadvantaged Communities ................................................................................................ 21
 

Evaluation Criterion 7: Watershed Perspective .................................................................... 24
 

Environmental Compliance ................................................................................................... 25
 

Required Permits or Approvals ............................................................................................. 28
 

Project Budget Proposal ........................................................................................30
 

Description of Expenditures Planned Through September 2018 ....................................... 30
 

Funding Plan ........................................................................................................................... 31
 

 i 
 

 

 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

List of Abbreviations 

AF acre-feet 

AFY acre-feet per year 

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act 

EMWD Eastern Municipal Water District 

IRP Integrated Resources Plan 

IS Initial Study 

Metropolitan Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 

M&I Municipal and industrial 

MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 

MND Mitigated Negative Declaration 

MT metric tons 

MWh Megawatt Hour 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

O&M Operations & Maintenance 

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

OWOW Plan One Water One Watershed 2.0 Plan 

SAWPA Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority 

SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan 

TEPS Tertiary Effluent Pump Station 

TVRWRF Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility 

 ii 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Technical Proposal and Evaluation Criteria 

Executive Summary 

Date: December 10, 2015 

Applicant Name: Eastern Municipal Water District 

Cities, County, State: Cities of Murrieta and Temecula, Riverside County, California 

Amount of water that will be reclaimed/reused by the project: 8,375 acre feet per year 

Project Activities summary: 

The Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) is requesting funding under the WaterSMART: 

Title XVI Reclamation and Reuse Program for the Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline. 

This project is a component of the Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project, 

an authorized Title XVI project with an approved feasibility study. The Recycled Water System 

Pressurization and Expansion Project will result in the direct use of 8,375 acre-feet per year (AFY) 

of recycled water for beneficial use by pressurizing and expanding EMWD’s existing recycled 

water distribution system. As part of the broader project, EMWD is expanding the existing 

Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility (TVRWRF), including the Tertiary 

Effluent Pump Station (TEPS) to increase facility capacity by 5 mgd. In order to provide the 

increased conveyance capacity and reliability to the system, EMWD is proposing to construct a 

recycled water pipeline, which will run parallel to an existing pipeline. The proposed pipeline will 

enable distribution of over 12,000 AFY of recycled water from the TVRWRF. In addition, a new 

connection between the existing recycled water pipeline and an existing transmission pipeline will 

be installed to provide more reliable operation of that portion of the pipeline. Overall 

implementation of this project will enhance EMWD’s stated Strategic Objective to “maximize 

recycled water use in an environmentally responsible manner” with construction of recycled water 

delivery facilities that “improve operational flexibility and service level where economically 

feasible.” Figure ES-1 provides the EMWD service area location and Figure ES-2 provides an 

overview of the pipeline project proposed for funding. 

 1 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

 2 

Figure ES-1: EMWD Service Area Location 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

 3 

Figure ES-2: Project Proposed for Funding 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Technical Project Description 

The technical project description should provide a brief summary of the Title XVI Project 

or, when there is more than one project sponsor, the applicant’s entire component of the 

Title XVI Project. If Reclamation has approved a feasibility study for the Project Activities, 

information contained in the study should be referenced here. 

Located in arid Southern California, EMWD provides water service to an area of approximately 

542 square miles, with a population of approximately 785,000 that includes the cities of Moreno 

Valley, Perris, San Jacinto, Hemet, Murrieta, and Temecula, and unincorporated areas of 

southwest Riverside County. 

Like many water districts in the region, EMWD, a public water agency annexed in 1951 into the 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan), relies heavily on imported 

water from the Sacramento/San Joaquin Bay-Delta and the Colorado River and faces challenges 

in meeting the water supply needs of its rapidly growing service area. In light of growing demand, 

EMWD has invested in developing and managing sustainable local water resources, including 

groundwater recharge, brackish groundwater desalination, and water recycling. 

EMWD currently delivers over 38,000 acre-feet (AF) of recycled water within its service area, 

much of which is delivered to agricultural customers over the past five years. 

EMWD has been investing in improvements to its recycled water 

system in the past years, however, in order for EMWD to effectively make the transition from 

agricultural to urban use and bring the current system up to a level capable of meeting its new 

customers’ needs, additional key infrastructure investments in the distribution system are 

necessary. 

On October 12, 2007, the US Bureau of Reclamation approved the feasibility study for the 

Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project, which will enable the effective 

transition from the primarily agricultural delivery system to a recycled water system that will meet 

the growing demands of M&I uses. The project consists of several components including design 

and construction of recycled water tanks, recycled water storage facilities, pumping facilities and 

project-related distribution pipelines. These facilities will make 8,375 AFY of recycled water 

available to M&I customers, offsetting the need for potable water. The proposed Temecula Valley 

Recycled Water Pipeline is a component of this broader program to maximize the use of recycled 

water by expanding EMWD’s recycled water distribution system. 

As a part of the broader program, EMWD is expanding the existing TVRWRF from 18 mgd to 23 

mgd. The 5 mgd expansion will include the expansion of the TEPS from 25 mgd to 34.5 mgd. 

TEPS conveys recycled water via an existing 36- inch and 48-inch diameter cement mortar lined 

and coated steel pipe, from the TVRWRF to the Palomar RW Booster Station, where it is pumped 

to Sun City for storage and distribution. The existing 36-inch diameter pipeline, with a length of 

approximately 17,000 linear feet, will not have capacity to convey the increased flows under the 

same hydraulic conditions and will require upsizing. Since EMWD has limited on-site storage at 

 4 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

TVRWRF and does not have a permit to discharge to nearby Murrieta Creek, a parallel pipeline, 

the proposed project “Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline”, will be constructed to provide 

the increased capacity and reliability. 

In addition to the need for increased capacity and reliability, there is an existing connection from 

the existing 36-inch pipeline to an existing 24-inch transmission pipeline. This connection is 

controlled by a 24-inch butterfly valve that is encased in concrete, and EMWD’s Operations and 

Maintenance (O&M) Department are concerned that the valve may have operational issues 

because of the concrete encasement. Since a connection between the existing 24-inch line and the 

new 36-inch line is required for reliability of distribution, it is being proposed that a new 

connection between the TVRWRF and 24-inch be installed and the existing 24-inch valve and 

connection be abandoned. 

The proposed Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline will allow for transmission of additional 

recycled water from the TVRWRF. It will consist of a 36-inch diameter pipeline which will 

generally parallel the existing TVRWP within the TVRWRF and Murrieta Creek from the 

TVRWRF entrance to the connection point with the existing 48-inch transmission main near the 

intersection of Adams Avenue and Murrieta Creek as shown on Figure 1. This alignment is 

approximately 3.6 miles (19,200 feet) from the connection at the TEPS to the transmission main 

connection point. The new pipeline will provide conveyance capacity necessary for future flows 

at the TVRWRF which are anticipated to be up to 24,000 gallons per minute. 

Project Cost Estimate and Schedule 

The total project cost for the Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline is approximately 

$18,785,800. The estimate captures all activities conducted for this project, as described in the 

project tasks. Figure 2 provides an overall schedule for the pipeline project that is requesting 

funding with this application. Construction is scheduled to commence in August 2016 and final 

project closeout will occur by July 2018. Figure 3 provides the overall schedule for the broader 

program, the Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project, which includes the 

subject pipeline project, the Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline. 

 5 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

 6 

Figure 1: Project Proposed for Funding 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Figure 2: Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline Schedule 

 7 
Eastern Municipal Water District 

Temecula Vall

 

Figure 3: Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project Schedule 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District 

Temecula Vall
	 	 	 	

	 	 	 		

	 	 	

	 	 	 	

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Project Activities 

The following tasks will be conducted for the Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline: 

 Task 1 – Planning 

 Task 2 – Design 

 Task 3 – Environmental Documentation 

 Task 4 – Permitting 

 Task 5 – Construction Contracting 

 Task 6 – Construction 

 Task 7 – Administration and Reporting 

The following are brief discussions of the specific activities to be conducted under each task. 

Task 1 – Planning

Planning for the project has been completed. Preliminary design is included in this task and was 

completed in June 2015. 

Task 2 – Design

The Project is currently in the final design stage which will be complete in May 2016. 

Task 3 – Environmental Documentation

A CEQA plus document was prepared for the Project to comply with State and Federal 

environmental requirements. An Initial Study (IS) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) 

was prepared in January 2015 to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality 

Act (CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines, and EMWD’s Administrative Code Resolution 5111, as 

amended. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was prepared in March 2015 

in accordance with §15097 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 

The MND and MMRP were approved by EMWD’s Board of Directors in April 2015 and a Notice 

of Determination was filed with the County. 

Task 4 – Permitting

The proposed recycled water supply pipeline will be placed within the public road rights-of-way 

in the cities of Murrieta and Temecula. Therefore the project will require encroachment permits 

from both cities. An encroachment permit will also be required from the Riverside County Flood 

Control and Water Conservation District for the crossing of Murrieta Creek. All encroachment 

permits will be obtained prior to the start of construction. 

Coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit 

for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities 

(Construction General Permit) will be obtained by the contractor in order to reduce or eliminate 

construction related water quality impacts. 

 10 
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 		

	 	 	 	 	 		

 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Permitting activities will occur during the final stages of design. Discussions with the permitting 

agencies have commenced and no issues with respect to permit acquisition are anticipated. 

Task 5 – Construction Contracting

Following completion of final design and acquisition of permits, the project will be advertised for 

bidding through standard procedures once funding is secured. Specification review will occur in 

the first half of June with construction of the project advertised for bidding by June 2016. A prebid meeting will be held to take questions from contractors, open and review bids for completeness, 

and award the project to the responsible bidder with the lowest bid in accordance with the Public 

Contract Code. A notice to proceed for construction is anticipated to be issued by August 2016. 

Task 6 – Construction

Construction of the proposed Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline is expected to begin in 

August 2016 with completion by February 2018. 

Task 7 – Administration and Reporting

Design and other decisions related to the proposed project have been coordinated with all involved 

parties. During construction, EMWD staff and/or qualified engineering consultants will provide 

construction management and administration, including daily on-site observation; inspection of 

materials used for construction, including soils and concrete; and documentation of these activities. 

EMWD will provide project administration, including administration of grant and grant-related 

reporting. Project closeout will be complete by July 2018. 

 11 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Evaluation Criteria 

Brief narratives describing how the proposed project meets grant criteria are provided in the 

following subsections. The evaluation criteria, as described in the Funding Opportunity 

Announcement, are presented first in bold, followed by specific information on the Recycled 

Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project as well as the facilities proposed for funding 

by this grant application as the Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline. 

Evaluation Criterion 1: Water Supply 

Subcriterion No. 1a ‐	Stretching Water Supplies (35 points)

Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the Title XVI Project is expected to 

secure and stretch water supplies. Consideration will be given to the amount of water 

expected to be made available by the Title XVI Project and the extent to which the project 

will reduce demands on existing facilities and otherwise reduce water diversions. 

1. How many acre-feet of water are expected to be made available each year upon completion 

of the Title XVI Project? Please use the total Title XVI Project water savings, not just 

projected water savings for the Project Activities that will be completed by September 30, 

2018. 

The Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project will make approximately 8,375 

AFY of recycled water available for beneficial use. 

2. Will the Title XVI Project reduce, postpone, or eliminate the development of new or 

expanded non-recycled water supplies? 

The Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project will make 8,375 AFY of 

recycled water available to M&I customers, in-lieu of imported and other potable water supplies. 

As a result, this project will reduce the need for new or expanded non-recycled water supplies by 

a similar amount. 

3. How significantly will the demand on existing Federal water supplies be reduced? List the 

expected reduction to Federal water supply demand (in acre-feet) and the amount of water 

currently supplied directly or indirectly by a Federal facility to the project sponsor. Provide 

calculations. 

The next available increment of water available to EMWD is imported water from Metropolitan. 

In the Riverside area, imported water from Metropolitan is typically composed of a mix of 

approximately 20 percent from the Federal Colorado River Project and the remainder from the 

California State Water Project. Therefore it is estimated that 20 percent of the 8,375 AFY, or 1,675 

AFY on average that is provided by the Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion 

Project, will offset demands on a Federal water system. 

4. How will the project reduce diversions from natural watercourses or withdrawals from 

aquifers? Responses should be specific (including number of acre-feet) and should include 

the percentage by which diversions or withdrawals will be reduced. 

 12 
 

	 	 	 	 	 	 		

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

The 8,375 AFY of recycled water made available by the project would replace imported water 

from Metropolitan, which consists of both Colorado River diversions, as well as State Water 

Project water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta System. As mentioned above, 

EMWD’s imported supply typically consists of approximately 20 percent Colorado River water, 

so the proposed project would reduce diversions from the Colorado River by an estimated 1,675 

AFY. The remaining 80 percent of imported water is supplied by the California State Water 

Project, so it is estimated that the project will reduce diversions of an additional 6,700 AFY from 

the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. 

5. What performance measures will be used to quantify actual benefits upon completion of 

the Title XVI Project? 

Anticipated benefits and the performance measures to quantify the actual benefits are: 

Benefits Measures 

Provide 8,375 AFY of recycled water to M&I 

and agricultural customers, much of which 

will be delivered by the proposed pipeline 

Metered recycled water deliveries 

Change in percentage of EMWD supply 

coming from potable water 

Minimize onsite pumping requirements and 

electricity demand 

Actual horsepower and number of booster 

pumps needed 

Increase recycled water availability during 

peak periods 

Change in potable water supply requirements 

during peak demand periods 

Increase supply reliability and reduce 

dependence on imported supplies 

Change in percentage of EMWD supply 

coming from imported water 

Subcriterion No.1b ‐	Contributions to Water Supply Sustainability (20 points)

Points will be awarded for Title XVI Projects that contribute to a more sustainable water 

supply. 

1. Will the Title XVI Project make water available to address a specific concern (e.g., water 

supply shortages due to climate variability and/or heightened competition for limited water 

supplies)? Consider the number of acre-feet of water to be made available. Explain the 

specific concern and its severity. Also explain the role of the Title XVI Project in addressing 

that concern and the extent to which the Project will address it. 

The project enables the provision of 8,375 AFY of a drought-proof water supply from recycled 

water in-lieu of imported water supplies. EMWD provides water from various sources including 

San Jacinto and Hemet Basin groundwater, recycled water, State Water Project, and Federal 

Colorado River Project water; but imported water makes up the majority of its supplies. With 

recent stringent regulations, heightened competition and reliability concerns for supplies of State 

and Federal waters, alternative sources are actively being developed. In addition, residential and 

urban development projects in the region are putting increased stress on existing water supplies 

and creating major challenges for reliably meeting customer water needs. Recycled water is 

 13 
 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 		

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

already extensively used in EMWD’s service area to meet non-potable demands and EMWD 

continues to actively seek opportunities to expand its use. By doing so, it will reduce its 

dependence on imported water supplies and provide a more sustainable, reliable local water 

supply, which is comparatively unaffected by climate variability. 

2. Will water made available by this Title XVI Project continue to be available during periods 

of drought? To what extent is the water made available by this Title XVI Project more 

drought resistant than alternative water supply options? Explain. 

The project will provide a reliable supply of recycled water, which is a virtually drought-resistant 

water source, unlike surface water supplies. Alternative water sources include imported State 

Water Project water and Colorado River Project water. In recent years these sources have become 

increasingly less reliable. The Colorado River has been experiencing drought conditions for over 

a decade. In addition, the State of California is in a severe drought, which is significantly limiting 

the availability of supplies from the State Water Project. These statewide drought conditions have 

resulted in supplies from the State Water Project being curtailed to a 2014 Table A supply 

allocation of merely 5%, with 2015 allocations at 20%. Therefore, by maximizing recycled water 

use and reducing dependence on imported water supplies, this project will enhance water supply 

reliability even under unpredictable drought conditions. 

Evaluation Criterion 2: Status of Title XVI Project 

Subcriterion No. 2a. ‐	Progress Toward Completion of Title XVI Project (20 points)

Points will be awarded for Project Activities that will bring a Title XVI Project to completion 

(i.e., to full Federal funding levels) or close to completion. 

1. How much Federal funding has been provided for the Title XVI Project to date? 

To date, Federal funding of $10,777,836.18 has been awarded to EMWD from the US Bureau of 

Reclamation for the Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project. 

2. How much Federal funding is necessary to fully satisfy the authorized Federal cost share? 

Federal participation was authorized at 25 percent of total project costs, or up to $12 million, 

whichever is less. Estimated costs for the overall program are $63,222,582.33; hence the federal 

share is $12 million. To date, $10,777,836.18 in Federal funding has been awarded, with 

$1,222,163.82 in Federal share remaining. This amount is being requested under this application 

for the Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline. 

3. Will the funding requested under this FOA satisfy the Federal cost share? 

Yes. The remaining Federal share is being requested with this application. 

 14 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 		

 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Subcriterion No. 2b. Readiness to Proceed (10 Points)

Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the Project Activities that will be 

completed with the requested funding are ready to proceed. Where funding is being 

requested for construction, the following will be considered: 

1. What is the status of necessary environmental compliance measures? 

	 When is environmental compliance expected to be complete? Provide a detailed 

schedule of all environmental compliance activities and a schedule that indicates 

when construction is expected to begin. 

EMWD determined that an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was the appropriate 

type of document to satisfy the requirements of CEQA. An IS & MND was prepared to meet the 

requirements of CEQA, State CEQA Guidelines, and EMWD’s Administrative Code Resolution 

5111, as amended. A MMRP was prepared in accordance with §15097 of the State CEQA 

Guidelines. 

EMWD is also pursuing financial assistance on this project from the Clean Water State Revolving 

Fund. Adherence to the guidelines for State Revolving Fund Loan Applicants requires that the IS 

& MND contain a separate standalone biological report as well as a separate standalone cultural 

resources report. A letter to the California State Historic Preservation Officer has also been 

prepared. 

The MND has been finalized and adopted by the EMWD board, and a notice of determination was 

filed with the County of Riverside on April 2, 2015. Table 1 outlines the schedule of environmental 

compliance activities. Pipeline construction is expected to begin by August 2016. A complete 

project schedule, including construction start dates, is shown in Figure 2. 

Table 1: Schedule of Environmental Compliance Activities 

Milestone Event Dates 

Notice to Proceed for CEQA Document October 2014 

Administrative Draft EA/IS&MND to EMWD for Comments December 2014 

Final Draft EA/IS and MND January 2015 

Notice of Intent filed at County January 14, 2015 

Public Review Period End February 13, 2015 

Final EA/IS and MND including Consultation Summary and MMRP March 2015 

Board Approval April 1, 2015 

Notice of Determination filed at County April 1, 2015 

Appeal Period End May 1, 2015 

2. What is the status of required State and Federal permits for the Project Activities? 

 When are all required permits expected to be obtained? 

Projects that may disturb one or more acres of soil, or projects that are part of a larger common 

plan of development that will disturb one or more acres, are required to comply with the NPDES 

 15 
 

 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Construction General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction 

Activity. Thus, permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region will 

be obtained for Discharges of Groundwater from Construction Dewatering to Surface Waters and 

a General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance 

Activities. Both permits will be obtained by the contractor prior to construction. Consistent with 

the permit provisions, the contractor will develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan 

(SWPPP). The SWPPP must list Best Management Practices that will be implemented prior to and 

during construction to protect storm water runoff. Additionally, an Underground Classification 

permit from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) permit will be needed 

for the bore and jack tunnel to be constructed under Murrieta Creek, and will be obtained by the 

contractor prior to construction. 

No other state or federal permits are anticipated. 

Evaluation Criterion 3: Environment and Water Quality 

Up to 30 points will be awarded based on the extent to which the Title XVI Project will 

improve surface, groundwater, or effluent discharge quality; will restore or enhance habitat 

for nonlisted species; or will provide water or critical habitat for federally listed threatened 

or endangered species: 

1. Will the Title XVI Project improve the quality of surface or groundwater? To what extent 

will the project improve effluent quality beyond levels necessary to meet State or Federal 

discharge requirements? 

Currently, EMWD treats all of the wastewater collected in its service area to tertiary standards for 

use as recycled water by customers, storage in recycled water ponds for later use, or discharge to 

Temescal Creek. As such, the extensive use of recycled water by EMWD, which will be further 

promoted by construction of the Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline, will have beneficial 

effects on the quality of the local surface water systems. Effluent quality of tertiary treatment 

wastewater discharge is near drinking water standards, thereby significantly reducing impacts to 

receiving surface waters. Also, through active monitoring and management of salinity and 

nutrients within the local basins, EMWD promotes maintenance and enhancement of local 

groundwater quality. For example, EMWD has an offset mitigation program for basins that receive 

recycled water, which ensures that for every pound of the salt or nutrient added to the basin, it is 

removed by desalinization wells or mitigated by replenishment with higher quality water. 

Furthermore, reducing the amount of imported water necessary to meet the water demands in the 

EMWD service area will reduce stresses on and help maintain water quality in the natural systems 

the water is derived from. 

2. Will the Title XVI Project improve flow conditions in a natural stream channel? Will the 

project restore or enhance habitat for nonlisted species? If so, how? 

As mentioned above, reduced water imports will reduce overall stresses on the freshwater systems 

that this water is derived from. Provision of 8,375 AFY recycled water, will replace demand for 

water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta pumped through the State Water Project, which 

 16 
 

 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

could lead to improved habitat conditions for non-listed species in the Delta. Offsets to water 

imported from Colorado River will similarly enhance conditions in that river system. 

3. Will the Title XVI Project provide water or habitat for federally listed threatened or 

endangered species? If so, how? 

The proposed pipeline project will enable reliable distribution of recycled water to M&I and 

agricultural users. As such, this project will not directly provide water or habitat for federally listed 

threatened or endangered species. 

Evaluation Criterion 4: Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency 

Up to 25 points will be awarded based on the extent to which the Title XVI Project 

incorporates the use of renewable energy and/or addresses energy efficiency: 

1. Will the Title XVI Project include installing low-impact hydroelectric, solar-electric, wind 

energy, or geothermal power systems or other facilities that enable use of these or other 

renewable energy sources to provide power to components of the Project? Are any energy 

recovery devices or processes included in the Project? Provide the amount of energy expected 

to be generated through renewable energy sources (in kilowatt-hours). What percentage of 

the Title XVI Project’s total energy consumption will be provided by installing renewable 

energy components? 

The project does not include installing renewable energy facilities. 

2. If the Title XVI Project does not itself include renewable energy, will the Title XVI Project 

facilitate power generation in the water delivery system by making more water available? If 

so, explain the relationship between this Title XVI Project and any potential renewable 

energy improvements in the water delivery system. 

EMWD has significantly reduced its energy demand through its recycled water and conservation 

programs. By using more local resources – including recycled water – and promoting conservation 

measures, EMWD is able to avoid importing more energy-intensive water supplies. The proposed 

project will significantly contribute to enhancing overall recycled water use by EMWD. 

In addition to EMWD’s goal of 100 percent beneficial reuse of recycled water, EMWD has a 

strong focus on energy efficiency throughout its operations and has been actively pursuing 

alternative energy sources, including the use of solar, fuel cell technology, digester gas, 

microturbines, and energy optimization software. In fact, EMWD was recognized for its 

commitment toward energy independence with the American Water Works Association’s 

“Outstanding Energy Management Award” in October 2014. 

Two of the four regional wastewater reclamation facilities operated by EMWD use fuel cell 

technology, thereby producing enough energy to power nearly one-third of the respective plants. 

For example, EMWD’s Moreno Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility uses fuel cells to 

power up to 40 percent of the plant at peak hours. The fuel cells produce energy by converting the 

digester gas produced in the wastewater treatment process. This has resulted in annual reductions 

 17 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

of approximately $700,000 in annual electricity purchase costs and 10,600 tons of greenhouse gas 

emissions. Improvements completed at the Perris Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility in 

2014 include the addition of two 300 kilowatt (kW) fuel cells. Resulting electricity production 

provides roughly 30 percent of the power to the plan, thereby further reducing EMWD’s reliance 

on the region’s power grid. 

Work was completed on a 500 kW solar farm at EMWD’s Perris headquarters in early 2015 with 

a Notice of Acceptance on July 30, 2015. The solar project is expected to provide average annual 

savings of $200,000 over the next two decades. In conjunction with nine microturbines, this solar 

farm will make EMWD’s operation and administrative centers “grid-neutral” in terms of energy 

consumption. 

EMWD is currently in the construction phase for its Solar Energy Initiative Phase II Project, which 

will expand renewable energy use at EMWD’s facilities, including facilities that are important to 

the Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project. Construction is expected to be 

completed by March 2016. This solar project involves construction of up to 1-Megawatt solar 

photovoltaic renewable energy generating systems, which are proposed to be implemented at up 

to five of EMWD’s facilities, including the Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation 

Facility. 

3. Will completion of the Title XVI Project lead to a reduction in energy consumption as 

compared to current water supply options? 

 Provide calculations and describe assumptions and methodology. 

 Will the Title XVI Project include any innovative components to reduce energy 

consumption or to recover energy? 

The Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project allows for the use of locally 

produced recycled water in-lieu of energy-intensive imported State Water Project water and 

Federal Water. Several studies have substantiated the energy and environmental benefits 

associated with recycled water use, and more recently, EMWD completed extensive calculations 

to evaluate energy use for all its current water sources, including State Water, Federal Water, and 

recycled water. 

Based on EMWD’s evaluation, State Water requires 2.91 Megawatt Hour (MWh) per AF and 

Federal Water 2.32 MWh/AF, and EMWD’s recycled water uses 0.03 MWh/AF. State Water and 

Federal Water energy usage were estimated based on Metropolitan’s average energy cost and use 

in 2011. EMWD’s recycled water energy usage was estimated based on an average cost of energy 

(0.1066 $/kilowatt-hours in 2012), EMWD’s overall energy usage for recycled water (1,516 MWh 

in 2012) and the approximate volume of recycled water produced (46,937 AF in 2012). 

The Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project is anticipated to provide 8,375 

AFY recycled water, based on conservative estimates. This water will be supplied in-lieu of 

imported water, which as mentioned above, is made up of approximately 80 percent State Water 

and 20 percent Federal Water. Based on these proportions and the estimated energy requirements 

for each source, 8,375 AFY of imported water supplied to EMWD would require a total of 23,383 

 18 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

MWh each year [(0.80)*(8,375 AFY)*(2.91 MWh/AF) + (0.20)*(8,375 AFY)*(2.32 MWh/AF)]. 

In comparison, supplying the same amount of recycled water would require 251 MWh [(8,375 

AFY)*(0.03 MWh/AF)]. This translates into annual energy savings of 23,132 MWh with 

implementation of EMWD’s Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project. 

Based on energy requirements, EMWD also evaluated (indirect) greenhouse gas emissions 

associated with each water source. For these calculations an emission rate of 0.299 metric tons 

(MT) per MWh was used, based on EMWD’s 2012 Climate Action Registry Reporting Online 

Tool submission, whereas State Water emissions were adjusted to reflect 48 percent hydrogenerated electricity. This analysis produced greenhouse gas emissions estimates for State Water 

of 0.45 MT per AF, 0.69 MT/AF for Federal Water, and 0.01 MT/AF for recycled water. Based 

on the proportions of State Water to Federal Water that make up EMWD’s imported water, 

supplying 8,375 AFY of imported water, results in a total of 4,171 MT of greenhouse gas emissions 

per year [(0.80)*(8,375 AFY)*(0.45 MT/AF) + (0.20)*(8,375 AFY)*(0.69 MT/AF)]. In 

comparison, supplying the same amount of recycled water produces 84 MT greenhouse gas 

emissions annually [(8,375 AFY)*(0.01 MT/AF)]. Supplying recycled water in lieu of imported 

water would therefore result in a total annual reduction of 4,087 MT in greenhouse gas emissions. 

As the amount of recycled water (8,375 AFY) that would be supplied by the Recycled Water 

System Pressurization and Expansion Project is a conservative number, annual energy savings and 

greenhouse gas emissions reductions may be much greater. 

4. How does the Title XVI Project’s energy consumption compare to other water supply 

options that would satisfy the same demand as the Project? 

The alternative water supply option is imported water which requires 23,383 MWh compared to 

251 MWH for the 8,375 AFY provided by the project. Details for the comparison are provided in 

question 3 above. 

Evaluation Criterion 5: Cost per Acre-Foot of Water and Other Project Benefits 

Up to 25 points will be awarded based on the cost per acre-foot of water expected to be 

delivered upon completion of the Title XVI Project and other benefits of the project. Please 

use costs related to the entire Title XVI Project, not just the cost of work through September 30, 

2018. 

1. Reclamation will calculate the cost per acre-foot of water produced by the Title XVI 

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 Title XVI Project (include all 

previous and planned work) 

Table 2 below lists the construction costs, by year, for the completed and planned projects that 

compose the Title XVI Project. 

 19 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Table 2: Construction Costs 

Calendar Year Construction Cost 

Actual Incurred Construction Costs for Completed Projects 

1. 2008 $ - 

2. 2009 $2,510,700 

3. 2010 $19,702,823 

4. 2011 $17,891,950 

5. 2012 $10,634,515 

6. 2013 $13,570,754 

7. 2014 $3,287,252 

Estimated Construction Costs for Planned/Current Projects 

8. 2015 $0 

9. 2016 $1,958,930 

10. 2017 $11,895,421 

11. 2018 $415,849 

(b) The total estimated or actual costs to plan and design the Title XVI Project (note: this 

should include the cost to complete a Title XVI feasibility study) 

The total estimated and actual costs to plan and design the project are approximately 

$14,725,007.85. 

(c) The average annual operation and maintenance costs for the life of the Title XVI Project 

(note: this is an annual not total cost) 

Average O&M costs are estimated at $996,600. 

(d) The year the Title XVI Project will begin to deliver recycled water 

The project began delivering recycled water in 2008. 

(e) The projected life (in years) that the Title XVI Project is expected to last (note: this should 

be measured from the time the Title XVI Project starts delivering water) 

The project life of the project is expected to be 30 years. 

(f) All estimated replacement costs by year 

This project expands the Tertiary Effluent Pump Station to 34.5 MGD and constructs the proposed 

pipeline to accommodate the expansion. Therefore, no replacement is involved and this item is not 

applicable. This determination was confirmed with Shaun Wilken (Bureau of Reclamation Grants 

Management Specialist) on December 8, 2014. 

 20 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 		

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

(g) The maximum volume of water (in acre-feet) that will be produced upon completion of 

the Title XVI Project 

The Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project will make approximately 8,375 

AFY of recycled water available for beneficial use. 

2. Comparison of the cost per acre-foot of the Title XVI Project to the cost per acre-foot of 

one alternative (i.e., nonrecycled water option) that would satisfy the same demand as the 

proposed project. Provide the cost per acre-foot for one nonrecycled water alternative that 

would satisfy the same demand. Reclamation will compare the cost per acre-foot that it 

calculates using the information requested in question No. 1 to the cost per acre-foot for the 

nonrecycled water alternative provided by the project sponsor. 

The alternative water source available to the project region is imported water from the 

Metropolitan Water District. As of January 2015, the cost of untreated imported water from 

Metropolitan is $714 per AF. 

3. Some Title XVI project benefits may be difficult to quantify. Describe any economic 

benefits of the project that are not captured by the cost per acre-foot analysis or that are 

difficult to quantify. Points will be awarded based on the potential economic impact of the 

project-related benefits. 

The project has many benefits which are difficult to quantify: 

	 Improved water supply reliability. The reliability of water supply refers to the ability to 

meet water demands on a consistent basis, even in times of drought or other constraints on 

source water availability. This is greatly enhanced by the use of recycled water, which is 

virtually unaffected by climatic variation. 

	 Reduced water supply cost to EMWD customers by producing and supplying local 

recycled water rather than importing supplies. 

	 Reduction in the demand for imported water, thereby reducing annual and seasonal peak 

demands on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and leading to improvements in habitat 

conditions. 

Evaluation Criterion 6: Reclamation’s Obligations and Benefits to Rural or 

Economically Disadvantaged Communities 

Subcriterion No. 6a ‐	Legal and Contractual Water Supply Obligations (10 Points)

Up to 10 points will be awarded for projects that help to meet Reclamation’s legal and 

contractual obligations. 

1. Does the Title XVI 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? Explain. 

 21 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

		

 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

The Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline is consistent with Reclamation’s policy to promote 

water reuse and reclamation so as to improve water supply reliability, improve efficiency, improve 

flexibility during water shortages, and to diversify water supply. 

Subcriterion No. 6b ‐	Benefits to Rural or Economically Disadvantaged Communities (10

Points)

Up to 10 points will be awarded based on the extent to which the Title XVI Project serves 

rural communities or economically disadvantaged communities in rural or urban areas. 

1. Does the Title XVI Project serve a rural or economically disadvantaged community? (A 

rural community is defined as a community with fewer than 50,000 people.) 

The project does not serve a rural community; however, the project does serve economically 

disadvantaged communities within EMWD’s service area. As described in more detail below, 

approximately 24 percent of EMWD’s service area qualifies as a disadvantaged community. The 

proposed pipeline is within the cities of Murrieta and Temecula, but will provide recycled water 

supply to EMWD’s broader service area including the disadvantaged communities of Menifee and 

Perris. 

2. Are any rural or economically disadvantaged communities within the Title XVI Project 

sponsor’s service area? 

EMWD’s service area includes seven incorporated cities in addition to the unincorporated areas 

of the County of Riverside. As shown in Figure 4, disadvantaged communities (census block 

groups where median income is less than 80 percent of the Statewide median) make up 

approximately 24 percent of EMWD’s total service area. Figure 4 also shows the Severely 

Disadvantaged Communities in EMWD’s service area, which are defined as communities with a 

median household income less than 60 percent of the Statewide median. 

 22 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

 23 

Figure 4: Disadvantaged Communities within EMWD’s Service Area 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Evaluation Criterion 7: Watershed Perspective 

Up to 15 points will be awarded based on the extent to which the Title XVI Project promotes 

or applies a watershed perspective by implementing an integrated resources management 

approach, implementing a regional planning effort, or forming a collaborative partnership 

with other entities. 

A watershed perspective generally means an approach to planning directed at meeting the 

needs of geographically dispersed localities across a region or a watershed that will take 

advantage of economies of scale and foster opportunities for partnerships. This approach 

also takes into account the interconnectedness of water and land resources, encourages the 

active participation of all interested groups, and uses the full spectrum of technical 

disciplines in activities and decision making. 

1. Does the Title XVI Project implement a regional or State water plan or an integrated 

resource management plan? Explain. 

EMWD’s Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project addresses watershed 

goals and objectives of the integrated regional water management plan of the Santa Ana River 

Watershed, the 2014 One Water One Watershed 2.0 Plan (OWOW Plan). The OWOW Plan is the 

watershed planning framework for the Santa Ana River Watershed, which was developed through 

facilitated efforts by the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) to guide water resource 

managers for the immediate future through the year 2035. Specifically, the proposed project meets 

the water supply goal to “Maintain reliable and resilient water supplies and reduce dependency on 

imported water” and the objective to “Increase use of recycled water”. 

EMWD’s Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project is consistent with 

California’s Recycled Water Policy. This policy was passed in 2009 in order to promote increased 

use of recycled water from municipal wastewater sources. In the face of significant challenges in 

providing clean water to California’s growing population, this policy represents a major effort to 

enhance and restore the quality of California’s water resources and establish more reliable 

supplies. 

As part of this policy, local and regional water agencies are strongly encouraged to move toward 

clean, abundant, local water for California, with emphasis put on water recycling, particularly as 

these sources of supply are drought-proof, reliable, minimize the State’s overall carbon footprint, 

and can be sustained over the long-term. 

A stated goal within this policy is to substitute as much recycled water for potable water as possible 

by 2030, with a specific mandate established by the State Water Board to increase the use of 

recycled water in California by 200,000 AFY by 2020 and by an additional 300,000 AFY by 2030. 

EMWD’s Recycled Water System Pressurization and Expansion Project is also consistent with 

Metropolitan’s goals to ensure reliability, affordability, water quality, diversity, and flexibility as 

set forth in the Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP). Updated in 2010, the IRP is Metropolitan’s 

strategic plan for water supply, which has identified recycled water as one of the main solutions to 

meeting the water supply challenges faced by Metropolitan and the State. Metropolitan recognizes 

 24 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

that regional water supply reliability can be achieved in part through the implementation of a 

diverse resource portfolio, of which recycled water is a major component. Additionally, recycled 

water is a major focus of the IRP’s foundational actions to implement Metropolitan’s adaptive 

integrated resources strategy. 

2. Does the Title XVI Project promote collaborative partnerships to address water-related 

issues? Explain. 

As mentioned above, this project is an important component in EMWD’s active pursuit to develop 

local and regional plans for expanded water recycling in its service area. EMWD works closely 

with a variety of local agencies and public interest groups in recycled water planning efforts and 

other water-related issues. EMWD has worked closely with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality 

Control Board in updating local basin plans and developing a long-term salinity management plan 

to support and ensure compliance with local basin objectives for salinity and nitrogen. 

Environmental Compliance 

To allow Reclamation to assess the probable environmental impacts and costs associated 

with each application, all applicants must respond to the following list of questions focusing 

on the requirements of NEPA, ESA, and NHPA. Please answer the following questions to the 

best of your knowledge. If any question is not applicable to the Project Activities, or if 

necessary environmental compliance has been completed, please explain. 

If you have any questions, please contact your regional or area Reclamation office (see 

<http://www.usbr.gov/main/offices.html> with questions regarding environmental 

compliance issues. 

1. Will the Project Activities impact the surrounding environment (i.e., soil [dust], air, water 

[quality and quantity], animal habitat, etc.)? 

 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. 

Earth-disturbing work would extend over an area necessary to accommodate the installation of the 

16,500 LF recycled water pipeline including connections to the system. Specific activities would 

primarily consist of trench excavation, pipe-laying, backfill and repaving. 

Potential short-term air quality impacts may occur during temporary construction activities, 

however given that the pipeline will primarily be placed within existing roadways, dust emission 

from soil disturbance are anticipated to be minimal. Construction emissions include potential 

onsite generation of dust during excavation, off-gassing of paving materials and equipment 

exhaust, and offsite emissions from construction employee commuting and/or trucks delivering 

building materials. Water related infrastructure, such as the proposed project requires very few 

vehicle trips for maintenance and operation, typically less than one trip per day per facility. As a 

result, operational air quality impacts will be minimal. Mitigation measures will be utilized, 

 25 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

including watering during construction (to limit dust) and limiting the amount of daily grading 

would ensure impacts related to air emissions are minor. 

Project activities are not anticipated to substantially alter local drainage or contribute substantially 

to runoff water. The proposed pipeline would be placed primarily within existing roadways and 

would therefore not alter the area of impermeable surface within such roadways. Impacts to local 

surface waters will be minimized through implementation of the SWPPP, required under the 

California Construction General Permit. In addition, the preliminary alignment will cross Murrieta 

Creek, which is anticipated to occur using trenchless methodology under deep cover in order to 

minimize impacts to the creek bed. 

It is not anticipated that sensitive habitat communities will experience potentially significant direct 

or indirect adverse impacts from implementation of the proposed project. The proposed pipeline 

will be constructed within existing roadways, in addition to using trenchless methods within 

Murrieta Creek, which will minimize the likelihood of disturbance to natural habitat. Removal of 

any trees, shrubs, or other potential nesting bird habitat is expected to have less than significant 

impacts and will be mitigated by having a biologist conduct a pre-construction clearance survey 

for nesting birds. 

2. Are you aware of any species listed, or proposed to be listed as a Federal endangered or 

threatened species, or designated Critical Habitat in the project area? If so, how would they 

be affected by activities associated with the proposed Project Activities? 

According to the Environmental Assessment/Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, no 

special-status plant or wildlife species were observed on the project site. However, it was 

determined that the project site, in particular areas associated with Murrieta Creek, have a moderate 

potential to provide suitable habitat for yellow warbler and least Bell’s vireo. The yellow warbler 

is a California Department of Fish and Wildlife species or special concern, but it is not federally 

or State listed. Therefore, no federal or State “take” permits would be required for impacts to this 

species, if present, and it would not be considered a constraint to project development 

The least Bell’s vireo is a federal and State endangered subspecies of the Bell’s vireo. To ensure 

that this species is protected, EMWD shall, prior to project implementation, and during the 

appropriate survey period, conduct a focused survey for least Bell’s vireo to determine 

presence/absence within Murrieta Creek within 500 feet of the chosen pipeline alignment. 

No active or remnant avian nests or birds displaying nesting behaviors were detected during the 

habitat assessment, which was conducted in November, outside of the avian nesting season. 

Although the majority of the project site has been developed, the plant communities within and 

adjacent to the project site (in particular the riparian habitat within Murrieta Creek) have the 

potential to provide suitable foraging and cover habitat for year-round and seasonal avian residents 

and migrating songbirds that could occur in the area. 

To ensure the continued absence of nesting birds on or immediately adjacent to the project site, 

EMWD shall implement the following: 

 26 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

	 If ground-disturbing activities or removal of any trees, shrubs, or any other potential 

nesting habitat are scheduled within the avian nesting season (nesting season generally 

extend from February 1 - August 31), a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds 

should be conducted within 10 days prior to any ground disturbing activities. The biologist 

conducting the clearance survey should document a negative survey with a brief letter 

report indicating that no impacts to active bird nests will occur. 

	 If an active avian nest is discovered during the 10-day preconstruction clearance survey, 

construction activities should stay outside of a 300-foot buffer around the active nest. For 

raptor species, this buffer is expanded to 500-feet. It is recommended that a biological 

monitor be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active 

nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. 

Once the young have fledged, normal construction activities can occur. 

3. Are there wetlands or other surface waters inside the project boundaries that potentially 

fall under Federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction as “waters of the United States?” If so, 

please describe and estimate any impacts the Project Activities may have. 

The project includes one creek crossing; however, no wetlands or “waters of the United States” 

will be impacted during construction. It is proposed to construct the pipeline in the crossing areas 

by a trenchless method (i.e., jack and bore or microtunneling) to avoid all impacts to any federally 

protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act at the Project sites. Should 

EMWD decide at a later date to utilize the open trench method of construction for any creek 

crossing, the above mitigation measures would ensure that all impacts to federally protected 

wetlands would be less than significant. 

4. Are there any known archeological sites in the Project Activities area? If so, please 

describe and estimate any impacts the project may have. 

Based on review of records maintained by the Eastern Information Center and a field inspection, 

implementation of the project will have no adverse effect on historic properties as there are none 

in the immediate area that would be impacted. Given this, there is low to moderate potential to 

encounter previously unrecorded subsurface archaeological deposits within portions of the project 

alignment. EMWD shall, at least 30 days prior to beginning Project construction, EMWD shall 

contact the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians to notify the Pechanga Tribe of grading and 

excavation activities and to coordinate and develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and 

Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources; 

the designation, responsibilities, and participation of a professional Native American Tribal 

monitor during grading, excavation and other ground disturbing activities; project grading and 

excavation schedule; terms of compensation for the monitor; and treatment and final disposition 

of any cultural resources, sacred items and human remains discovered on site. The Tribal monitor 

shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities and, with the 

concurrence of EMWD’s Field Engineering Inspector, have the authority to stop or redirect 

grading and/or excavation activities. 

If inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are encountered at any time during construction, 

these materials and their context shall be avoided until a qualified archeologist and a representative 

 27 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

from the closest Tribe to the project site (in this case, the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians) have 

consulted with EMWD regarding appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures for the newly 

discovered resources. Construction personnel shall not collect or retain cultural resources. 

Prehistoric resources include, but are not limited to: chert or obsidian flakes; projectile points; 

mortars and pestles; dark, friable soil containing shell and bone; dietary debris; heat-affected rock; 

or human burials. Historic resources include stone or adobe foundations or walls; structures and 

remains with square nails; and refuse deposits (glass, metal, wood, ceramics), often found in old 

wells and privies. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code §21083.2(b) avoidance is the 

preferred method of preservation for archeological resources. All sacred sites, should they be 

encountered, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. In addition, 

EMWD will relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including scared items, burial goods 

and all archeological artifacts that are found on the project site to the Pechanga Band of Luiseño 

Indians for proper treatment and disposition. 

5. Will the proposed Project Activities have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on 

low income or minority populations? If so, please describe and estimate any impacts the 

project may have. 

The proposed project will not have a disproportionally high or adverse effect on low income or 

minority populations. The construction will primarily occur along existing roadways. Construction 

areas are not centered within areas of primarily low income or minority populations. 

6. Will the Project Activities limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites or result 

in other impacts on tribal lands? If so, please describe and estimate any impacts the Project 

Activities may have. 

The project will not limit access to, or use of, Indian sacred sites or have other impacts on tribal 

lands. As discussed under question 4, although there are no known sacred sites in the project area, 

all sacred sites, should they be encountered, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred 

mitigation, if feasible. 

7. Will the Project Activities contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread 

of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area? If so, please 

describe and estimate any impacts the Project Activities may have. 

Construction will be within already established roadways, which are maintained in a vegetative 

free state. The project will not contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of 

noxious weeds or non-native invasive species. 

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. 

 28 
 

Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

The Murrieta Creek crossing will require a permit from the Riverside County Flood Control and 

Water Conservation District. In addition, as the pipeline will be installed within street rights-ofway in the cities of Temecula and Murrieta, encroachment permits will be required from both 

cities. EMWD will obtain necessary encroachment permits prior to advertising for construction 

bids. Permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region will be obtained 

for Discharges of Groundwater from Construction Dewatering to Surface Waters and a General 

Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance 

Activities, both of which will be obtained by the contractor prior to construction. An Underground 

Classification permit from the OSHA permit will be needed for the bore and jack tunnel to be 

constructed under Murrieta Creek, and will be obtained by the contractor prior to construction. 

 29 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Project Budget Proposal 

Description of Expenditures Planned Through September 

2018 

The evaluation criteria listed in Section V.A. of this FOA should be applied to the entire Title 

XVI Project. Applicants also must provide a description of the Project Activities that are 

planned through September 30, 2018, including a description of Project Activities that have 

previously been completed without Federal funding that are the basis for a request for 

Federal funding under this FOA. Applicants also must provide a cost estimate for the Project 

Activities. 

As described in the Technical Project Description section of this proposal, this project is a part of 

a larger program to expand recycled water use from the TVRWRF. Table 3 provides a summary 

of general activities needed to complete this program, while Table 4 provides a summary of the 

detailed completed and planned activities for the proposed project. 

Table 3: Completed and Planned Activities for the Program to Expand the TVRWRF 

Local Funding Federal Funding 

Received/Awarded 

Total Cost 

Completed Activities 

Gibbel Road Tank and 

Pipeline $5,301,219.83 $1,766,523.27 $7,067,743.10 

Benton Road Tank and 

Pipeline $4,945,156.22 $1,648,385.41 $6,593,541.63 

Leon Booster Station $2,831,995.47 $943,998.49 $3,775,993.96 

LongFellow Tank and 

Pipeline – Phase I $5,092,589.86 $1,697,529.95 $6,790,119.81 

LongFellow Tank and 

Pipeline – Phase II $579,170.78 $193,056.93 $772,227.71 

San Jacinto Recycled Water 

Pipeline $5,359,542.72 $1,896,514.24 $7,256,056.96 

Pre-purchase of Pipeline $1,839,128.18 $613,042.73 $2,452,170.91 

Pre-purchase of Valves 139,455.17 $46,485.06 $185,940.23 

Recycled Water Ponds BS 

(Alessandro & Sun City) $4,268,954.02 $1,545,144.57 $5,814,098.59 

Recycled Water Ponds BS 

(MWD) $1,858,571.86 $619,523.95 $2,478,095.81 

Audie Murphy Ranch 

Pipeline $1,111,802.63 $370,600.88 $1,482,403.51 

Adjustments $562,969.30 ($562,969.30) $0.00 

Subtotal Completed 

Activities $33,890,556.04 $10,777,836.18 $44,668,392.22 

Planned Activities through September 30, 2018 

 30 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Local Funding Federal Funding 

Received/Awarded 

Total Cost 

TVRWRF Effluent Pipeline* $17,563,636.18 $1,222,163.82 $18,785,800.00 

Subtotal Activities through 

September 30, 2018 

$17,563,636.18 $1,222,163.82 $18,785,800.00 

Total Activities $51,454,192.22 $12,000,000.00 $63,222,582.33 

*Federal funding for this activity is being requested as part of this application. 

Table 4: Completed and Planned Activities for the Proposed Project 

Local Funding Federal Funding 

Received/Awarded 

Total Cost 

Completed Activities 

Task 1 - Planning $422,331.01 $0.00 $422,331.01 

Subtotal Completed 

Activities 

$422,331.01 $0.00 $422,331.01 

Planned Activities through September 30, 2018 

Task 2 - Design $710,000.00 $0.00 $710,000.00 

Task 3 -

Environmental 

Documentation 

$57,468.99 $0.00 $57,468.99 

Task 4 - Permitting $7,000.00 $0.00 $7,000.00 

Task 5 - Construction 

Contracting 

$26,200.00 $0.00 $26,200.00 

Task 6 - Construction $13,048,036.18 $1,222,163.82 $14,270,200.00 

Task 7 -

Administration and 

Reporting 

$3,292,600.00 $0.00 $3,292,600.00 

Subtotal Activities 

through September 

30, 2018 

$17,141,305.17 $1,222,163.82 $18,363,468.99 

Total Activities $17,563,636.18 $1,222,163.82 $18,785,800.00 

Funding Plan 

Please include the following chart to summarize your non-Federal and other Federal funding 

sources for the Project Activities that will be completed by September 30, 2018. Denote inkind contributions with an asterisk (*). 

In addition to the funding plan noted in table 1, please provide information specific to funds 

expended to date for the Project Activities and proposed expenditures through September 

30, 2018 that notes both Federal and non-Federal funds. 

 31 
Eastern Municipal Water District Title XVI Grant Proposal 

Temecula Valley Recycled Water Pipeline

Table 5 below summarizes the non-federal funding and other Federal sources for the portion of 

the project that will be completed by September 30, 2018. Additional details on the funds expended 

to date and proposed expenditures through September 30, 2018 are provided in Table 3 and Table 

4. 

Table 5: Summary of Non-Federal and Federal Funding Sources 

Funding Sources Funding Amount 

Non-Federal Entities 

1. Eastern Municipal Water District $17,563,636.18 

Non-Federal Subtotal: $17,563,636.18 

Other Federal Entities 

Not applicable $0 

Other Federal Subtotal: $0 

Requested Reclamation Funding: $1,222,163.82 

Total Project Funding: $18,785,800.00 

 32