WaterSMART 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program 

Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Funding Opportunity R16-FOA-DO-003 

North Bay Water Reuse Program (NBWRP) 

Marin, Napa, and Sonoma Counties, California 

December 10, 2015 

North Bay Water Reuse Authority
 

Sonoma County Water Agency (Administrative Agency for NBWRA) 

Point of Contact:
 

Kevin Booker
 

404 Aviation Boulevard
 

Santa Rosa, CA 95403
 

Kevin.Booker@scwa.ca.gov
 

Tel: 707-521-1865 

Fax: 707-523-4322 

The NBWRA Phase 1 Program is authorized to receive $25 million in federal funding assistance provided under 

two Cooperative Agreements with Reclamation. The first, Cooperative Agreement R10AC20R87, provided 

$7,328,000 from ARRA and is now closed. The second, R14AC00018 (formerly R10AC20093) provides up to 

$17,672,000 of federal funding assistance from Title XVI. 

This application is under R14AC00018 (formerly R10AC20093) that provides up to $17,672,000 of 

federal funding assistance. 
Technical Proposal and Evaluation Criteria .......................................................................... 1
 

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

North Bay Water Reuse Authority and North Bay Water Reuse Program ............... 1
 

Technical Project Description....................................................................................... 2
 

Overview of the North Bay Water Reuse Program.................................................... 2
 

Summary of Phase 1 Results and Benefits................................................................. 5
 

NBWRP Components Included in This Funding Opportunity ................................... 5
 

The Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution
 

Project......................................................................................................... 6
 

Novato South Service Area/LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project...................... 9
 

SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project...................................11
 

Funding Request .........................................................................................................12
 

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

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

Evaluation Criterion 2: Status of Project ...................................................................15
 

Evaluation Criterion 3: Environment and Water Quality ...........................................20
 

Evaluation Criterion 4: Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency ...........................21
 

Evaluation Criterion 5: Cost per Acre-Foot of Water and Other Project Benefits....23
 

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

Economically Disadvantaged Communities .................................................27
 

Evaluation Criterion 7: Watershed Perspective ........................................................27
 

Environmental Compliance ..................................................................................................31
 

Required Permits or Approvals ............................................................................................33
 

Project Budget Proposal.......................................................................................................34
 

SF-424C – Entire Funding Request.....................................................................................35
 

SF-424C – North Marin Water District ................................................................................37
 

SF-424C – Novato Sanitary District.....................................................................................39
 

SF-424C – Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District .................................................................41
 

SF-424C – Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District........................................................43
 

Description of Expenditures Planned through September 2018......................................45
 

Funding Plan................................................................................................................48
 

Table of Contents
 
 

 

 

 

North Bay Water Reuse Authority 

December 10, 2015 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding 

for Fiscal Year 2016 

Technical Proposal and Evaluation Criteria 

Executive Summary 

Applicant 

Sonoma County Water Agency, as administrative agency for the North Bay Water Reuse 

Authority, Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California. 

Kevin Booker, Sonoma County Water Agency, 404 Aviation Boulevard, Santa Rosa, CA 

95403, Kevin.Booker@scwa.ca.gov, 707-521-1865, Fax: 707-523-4322 

North Bay Water Reuse Authority and North Bay Water Reuse Program 

The North Bay Water Reuse Authority (NBWRA), established under a Memorandum of 

Understanding, is comprised of counties, cities, and local water and sanitation districts. 

Current members include the City of Petaluma, Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District (LGVSD), 

Marin County, Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), Napa County, Napa Sanitation 

District (Napa SD), North Marin Water District (NMWD), Novato Sanitary District (Novato SD), 

Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), and Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District 

(SVCSD). Additional information is available at the NBWRA webpage, http://nbwra.org. 

In 2002, local water and wastewater agencies undertook a cooperative, watershed-based, 

regional planning effort that initiated the North Bay Water Reuse Program (NBWRP). The 

purpose of the NBWRP is to develop and provide high quality recycled water for agricultural, 

urban, and environmental uses and to expand the recycled water system throughout the 

greater program area (i.e., Marin, Sonoma, and Napa Counties). The NBWRP also reduces 

reliance on local and imported surface water and groundwater supplies and reduces the 

amount of treated effluent releases to San Pablo Bay and its tributaries. 

In 2009, the NBWRA began implementing Phase 1 of its recycled water program, including 

construction of wastewater treatment plant upgrades, storage, pipelines, and pump stations 

to distribute recycled water for use in compliance with Article 4 in Title 22 of the California 

Code of Regulations. This grant application is anticipated to be the final request for project 

funding assistance under the Phase 1 authorization and when completed, Phase 1 projects 

will provide 3,757 acre-feet per year (AFY) of tertiary treated recycled water for irrigation 

demands and up to 1,700 AFY of tertiary treated recycled water for Napa Salt Marsh habitat 

restoration. 

1 
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Technical Project Description 

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

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

the authorized project. If a feasibility study for the project has been approved by 

Reclamation, information contained in the study may also be referenced here. 

Overview of the North Bay Water Reuse Program 

The North San Pablo Bay region of California’s Napa, Sonoma, and Marin Counties faces 

serious long-term challenges in providing reliable water supplies. The area is not served by 

federal water projects, surface and groundwater sources are limited, and some local 

groundwater basins are over-drafted and are seeing an increase in salinity due to saltwater 

intrusion from the Bay. Urban and agricultural demands, exacerbated by low rainfall, exceed 

the region’s ability to provide a reliable, sustainable, and economical water supply. A clean, 

dependable water supply is also needed to continue the environmental restoration of vital 

tidal wetlands at the base of the San Pablo Bay watershed. The effects of climate change 

are further stressing the area’s water supplies resulting in reduced diversions from the 

Russian River, unpredictable rainfall, and fluctuating temperatures that impact agriculture 

and aquatic habitats. 

The region’s wastewater treatment agencies have long faced strict limits on the timing and 

quality of treated effluent they can send to San Pablo Bay. By treating wastewater to the 

strict levels required for reuse, these agencies can develop recycled water to augment local 

water supply and in turn help protect limited potable water resources. 

The NBWRA is a cooperative program that builds regional water supply resiliency for all 

water users by expanding the use of recycled water for agricultural, urban, and 

environmental uses, thereby reducing reliance on local and imported surface and 

groundwater and reducing the amount of treated effluent releases to San Pablo Bay. The 

NBWRP’s projects provide new, long-term local water supplies that also offer numerous 

economic and environmental benefits for the region, including: 

•	 A reliable, new water supply for the region’s agriculture; 

•	 An alternative water supply for irrigation of parks, golf courses, and public landscaping; 

•	 Increased water for restoration of wetlands and improved in-stream flows for riparian 

habitat and fisheries recovery; 

•	 Reduced demand on limited local surface and groundwater supplies; 

•	 Less discharge of treated wastewater into San Pablo Bay; 

•	 Reduced demand on potable water imported from the Russian River; and 

•	 Leveraged, cooperative funding opportunities through regional agency partnering. 

Each of the NBWRA wastewater agencies have recycled water programs, and through 

partnering with other NBWRP agencies, new recycled water customers can be served 

throughout the Program area. 

To date Reclamation has obligated 81 percent of the $25 million in federal funds authorized 

in P.L. 111-11 Section 9110 for Phase 1 of the NBWRP and the remaining projects are 

being prepared for final design and construction. Phase 1 is comprised of six recycled water 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

distribution system projects managed by the individual NBWRA member agencies. When 

complete, Phase 1 will provide 3,757 AFY of tertiary treated recycled water to the North Bay 

region for irrigation demands. In addition, up to 1,700 AFY of tertiary treated recycled water 

will be released to Napa Salt Marsh for habitat restoration. 

The member agencies collectively prioritized the projects within their individual service areas 

to establish the set of Phase 1 projects. The NBWRP Phase 1 recycled water distribution 

system projects in Marin, Sonoma, and Napa Counties are shown in Figure 1 and 

summarized below. 

•	 Novato South Service Area. LGVSD constructed a new 0.7 million gallon per day (mgd) 

tertiary treatment plant which will serve 204 AFY of landscape irrigation and other 

approved uses to the Hamilton Field area in the Novato South Service Area. NMWD 

completed 8.2 miles of new pipelines from the LGVSD plant and rehabilitated a 

500,000-gallon storage tank for distribution of the recycled water. LGVSD will design 

and construct an expansion to its tertiary treatment plant to increase capacity to 5.4 

mgd. 

•	 Novato North Service Area. NMWD and Novato SD implemented service in the Novato 

North Service Area by expanding tertiary capacity at the existing Novato Recycled Water 

Treatment Facility from 0.5 mgd to 1.2 mgd. The project included 4.6 miles of new 

recycled water distribution pipelines, a booster pump, and rehabilitation of an existing 

500,000-gallon storage tank. 

•	 Novato Central Service Area. Novato SD and NMWD will implement service in the 

Novato Central Service Area through relocation of a Recycled Water Treatment Facility to 

the Novato SD wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and construction of a recycled water 

distribution system serving users south of the WWTP. 

•	 Sonoma Valley Recycled Water Project. SVCSD constructed 1.0 mile of 18-inch and 

approximately 730-feet of 10-inch pipelines, a 100-AF recycled water reservoir at the 

SVCSD WWTP, and designed a new pump station at the SVCSD WWTP. In addition, 

SVCSD has designed 1.5 miles of 10-inch pipeline to serve urban users recycled water 

which will supply approximately 70 acre-feet of recycled water annually. 

•	 Napa Sonoma Salt Marsh Project. SVCSD constructed 3.5 miles of pipeline to bring 

tertiary treated recycled water to two ponds in the Napa-Sonoma Marshes Wildlife Area. 

This pipeline will provide up to 1,700 AFY for habitat restoration of the saline ponds. 

•	 Milliken-Sarco-Tulocay (MST) Project. Napa SD and Napa County are working together to 

extend Napa SD's recycled water pipeline from the WWTP to Napa State Hospital and 

further into the MST area to provide up to 2,137 AFY (at full build-out) for landscaping 

and irrigation purposes. The project consists of new pipeline, four booster pump stations 

along the pipeline routes, and a new booster pump at the WWTP. The project also 

includes building new filters, flow equalization basins, and expanded recycled water and 

secondary effluent pump stations at the treatment plant to increase the capacity of 

recycled water production by 4.5 mgd. 

3 
 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016
 

Figure 1. North Bay Water Reuse Program, Phase 1 Projects Overview 

4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Summary of Phase 1 Results and Benefits 

When the NBWRP was first conceptualized local agencies agreed to jointly plan and 

individually implementation their projects over time with their own schedule for design, bid, 

award, and construction. This allows the Phase 1 projects to be brought online 

incrementally, serving water across the region as projects are completed. This approach also 

facilitates efficient Program planning and management for both federal and state grants and 

local agency budgets. 

What was not apparent at the time was the significance and beneficial impact the Program 

would have on the region’s long-term water supply reliability. This has been demonstrated in 

multiple ways as this new water resource is distributed to diverse end-users during this 

punishing drought. New, spin-off agricultural irrigation projects have been developed that 

receive recycled water from member agencies facilities, environmental restoration projects 

have been implemented that never would have been accomplished without this Program 

and, real, measurable reductions in potable demand have been seen by urban water 

districts. 

With Reclamation’s assistance, the NBWRA built critical capacity into the region’s future 

water supply but also into its member agencies who now know first-hand that by working 

together, water and sanitation districts can add tremendously to the region’s long-term 

quality of life. 

Phase 1 of the NBWRP was authorized in P.L. 111-11 Section 9110 for $25 million in 

federal funds. By establishing strategic partnerships with local, state and federal agencies 

with similar mandates, the NBWRP has been able to maximize the benefits of multiple 

funding sources to facilitate its progress. It is anticipated that at the completion of Phase 1, 

the NBWRA members will have designed and constructed $104 million in recycled water 

infrastructure that was funded through $25 million in federal assistance, $6 million in state 

grant funds, and $73 million in local contributions. 

NBWRP Components Included in This Funding Opportunity 

It is anticipated that this funding opportunity will be the final request under the Phase 1 

authorization. NBWRA requests grant assistance for the following projects: The Novato 

Central Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project, Novato South 

Service Area/LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project, and the SVCSD Wastewater Treatment 

Plant Improvement Project. 

•	 The Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project is a 

partnership between the Novato Sanitary District (NSD) and North Marin Water District 

(NMWD). The Project will implement service in the Novato Central Service Area through 

expansion of the Recycled Water Facility at the Novato SD wastewater treatment plant 

(WWTP) and construction of a recycled water distribution system serving users south of 

the WWTP. 

•	 The Novato South Service Area/ LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project will expand 

LGVSD’s tertiary treatment capacity to 5.4 mgd, immediately providing 46 AFY for urban 

landscaping uses and providing redundancy for additional future recycled water projects. 

•	 SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project is comprised of approximately 

1000 feet of 8- to 24-inch pipeline and associated pumping upgrades within the 

District’s wastewater treatment plant. 

5 
 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

The federal funds requested in this application represent approximately 19.4 percent of the 

NBWRP Authorization. These funds would bring the total NBWRP Phase 1 federal funding 

received to $25,000,000, or 100 percent of the federal funds authorized in P.L. 111-11 

Section 9110. 

The Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project 

Novato Sanitary District (NSD) and North Marin Water District (NMWD) have partnered 

implement service in the Novato Central Service Area through expansion of the Recycled 

Water Facility to the Novato SD wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and construction of a 

recycled water distribution system serving users south of the WWTP. The North Central 

Service Area project is shown on Figure 2. 

Figure 2. Novato Service Area Project 

6 
 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Novato SD Facilities 

The Recycled Water Facility (RWF) at the Novato WWTP was designed to allow for future 

expansion to meet increased recycled water demands. NMWD is planning to expand their 

recycled water distribution system to serve the Central Service Area. Existing and future 

demands covering both the north and central service. Meeting increased demands in the 

north service area and expanding service to the central service area will require the existing 

RWF capacity to be increased from 0.85 mgd to 1.7 mgd. 

All of the proposed improvements will be constructed within the existing Novato WWTP fence 

line. The existing RWF was designed to accommodate expansion to serve the Central Service 

and will not require additional environmental permitting. The existing recycled water 

production facilities at the Novato treatment plant site are permitted under the Regional 

Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) General Water Recycling Order. An additional filter 

feed pump, backwash pump, and distribution pump, as well as, an additional filter are 

needed. Piping and clearwell modifications will also be required to increase the Novato RWF 

capacity to 1.7 mgd. The cost estimate for the treatment plant expansion component of the 

Novato Central Service Area is $2,018,000. North Central Service Area treatment project 

facilities are shown on Figure 3. 

Novato SD is requesting $500,000 in federal funds, which represents approximately 25 

percent of the project costs. 

Figure 3. North Central Service Area Treatment Facilities – Existing NSD RWF Process
 

Structures with New Equipment Required to Increase Capacity to 1.7 mgd
 

7 
 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

North Marin WD Facilities 

NMWD will implement service in the Novato Central Service Area through construction of a 

recycled water distribution system from the Novato SD Waste Water Treatment Plant 

(WWTP) south to Rowland Boulevard and the Vintage Oaks shopping center, and across 

Highway 101 to serve urban users west of Highway 101. The primary customers within the 

Central Service Area would be Vintage Oaks, Lynwood School, Homeowners Associations on 

the west side of Highway 101, and customers along Ignacio Boulevard, including the Marin 

Country Club (MCC), in addition to other smaller secondary users. At the MCC, irrigation for 

the 58 acre eighteen-hole golf course is currently supplied by a combination of MCC’s own 

sources and potable water from NMWD. MCC’s local source includes a well and a significant 

amount of runoff and spring water which is captured in MCC’s six storage ponds along 

Arroyo San Jose. MCC uses potable water purchased from NMWD as a supply during late 

summer/early fall months. 

The Pipeline route runs from Novato Sanitary District Recycled Water Facility to the Vintage 

Oaks Novato SD’s existing utility within paved right of way on Davidson Street from the 

Novato SD WWTP to the intersection with Louis Drive. The pipeline would extend along Louis 

Drive, through the field at Slade Park, and under the Sonoma Marin Area Rapid Transit 

(SMART) railroad ROW (via jack and bore or horizontal directional drill, discussed below) to 

Franklin Street (paved path). Approximately 1,000 feet of pipe would be installed within the 

paved trail on Franklin Street, south to the Novato Community Hospital property. The 

pipeline would extend at a right angle from Franklin through the Novato Community Hospital 

parking lot to the cul-de-sac of Rowland Way. The pipeline would be installed within the 

paved right-of way on Rowland Way (including the crossing at Novato Creek, discussed 

below) to a connection point/turn out at Vintage Way to serve the Vintage Oaks shopping 

center. From Vintage Way (to Redwood Boulevard) the pipeline would cross Highway 101 by 

a jack and bore or horizontal directional drilling from Vintage to Redwood Boulevard. 

The 12-inch pipeline would be installed north from the Highway 101 crossing on Redwood 

Boulevard to Rowland Boulevard, and then west to South Novato Boulevard to serve 

Lynwood School. South from the Highway 101 crossing at Redwood Boulevard, the pipeline 

would be installed within the paved roadway right of way to the NMWD easement in an 

existing paved path that connects to Briarwood Court and continues on Redwood Boulevard 

to South Novato Boulevard. The distribution system at South Novato Boulevard would then 

go east to the Highway 101 vehicle on-ramp to the western entrance of the Caltrans bike 

path (along the west side of Highway 101) and continue within the Caltrans bike path ROW 

south to Entrada Drive through Inn Marin property (parking lot) to Ignacio Boulevard. The 

pipeline would be installed within the paved roadway ROW on Ignacio Boulevard and 

terminate 300 feet east of the intersection at Country Club Drive (near Laurelwood Drive). A 

spur would also extend from Entrada Drive to the existing NMWD Norman Tank. This 

distribution system extension would allow use the District’s existing 500,000-gallon Norman 

Tank for necessary expanded reclaimed water storage. The pipeline route is shown in Figure 

2. 

The cost estimate for the distribution system expansion component of the Novato Central 

Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project is $11,930,000. NMWD is 

requesting $2,750,000 in federal funds, which represents approximately 23 percent of the 

project costs. 

8 
 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Novato South Service Area/LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project 

LGVSD operates a 0.7-mgd Recycled Water (RW) facility, with full redundancy, which 

produces disinfected tertiary recycled water. The RW facility utilizes membrane ultrafiltration 

and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection to treat secondary effluent drawn from wastewater 

treatment plant deep bed filter effluent channel. 

Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) also has a recycled water treatment facility on the 

LGVSD site. This facility is over 25 years old, has reached its useful life, and will be removed 

as part of this project. The plant does not have redundancy and cannot meet peak recycled 

water demand periods, so all recycled water demands in the MMWD system are not able to 

be met. 

The LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project will expand the LGVSD RW facility treatment 

plant capacity to 5.4 mgd by building out the four trains of pressure membranes inside the 

existing RW building (see Figure X - attach Project Location figure). Ancillary pumps, blowers, 

piping, and valves will also be installed as part of this expansion. The feed pump and 

distribution pump systems will also be modified and expanded for this increased flow 

capacity. The existing UV disinfection system will remain in place and increased disinfection 

capacity will be obtained by using the existing MMWD chlorine contact basin and storage 

tank. This expansion and combination of facilities will increase the RW filtration capacity to 

5.4 mgd. Chlorine contact basin capacity may be increased because of its current 4 mgd 

capacity. 

In addition to these improvements, a new pre-treatment process for the recycled water 

storage pond return water will be required to remove algae and other constituents prior to 

its treatment in the RW facility. The existing MMWD treatment facility will be demolished and 

removed. LGVSD may also add a fill station for distribution of recycled water to individual 

customers. 

This project is necessary to improve the quality and reliability of the recycled water served to 

the MMWD system. Currently, the MMWD facility produces 550-600 AFY. The plant 

expansion will increase recycled water use due to the ease of starting and stopping the 

membrane filtration process. This project will allow MMWD to distribute more recycled water 

to their existing customers (who at times use potable water for irrigation) and increase the 

reliability of those supplies because of fewer operational and water quality issues. Under 

current operations, the MMWD plant typically shuts down during the winter months when 

recycled water demand is about 45 AF. 

The additional tertiary treatment capacity will also allow LGVSD to serve potential future 

projects, such as the McInnis Marsh Restoration Project’s horizontal levees (which will also 

mitigate against flood and sea level rise) and an organic crop in the LGVSD reclamation 

areas. 

The LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project is estimated to cost $5,424,000. LGVSD is 

requesting $847,150 in federal funds, which represents approximately 15.6 percent of the 

project costs. 

9 
 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016
 

Figure 4. LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project 

10 
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project 

The SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project consists of design and 

construction of improvements at SVCSD’s wastewater treatment plant. The improvements 

will consist of new infrastructure (flow meter; butterfly valves; pressure relief and gate 

valves; pumps; hydro-pneumatic tank; electrical and instrumentation; approximately 2000 

feet of 8- to 24-inch diameter PVC pipeline, approximately 150 feet of 24-inch steel pipeline 

and miscellaneous appurtenances) within SVCSD’s existing wastewater treatment 

facility. The project will allow SVCSD operational flexibility, enabling SVCSD to retain more 

recycled water during peak flow conditions during the winter. This retained recycled water 

will be directed to recycle water users north and south of the wastewater treatment facility 

for seasonal storage and additional usage. In addition, these improvements will add the 

ability to serve recycled water to urban users at municipal service pressure and reliability 

throughout the year. 

The projects will allow SVCSD to effectively manage its recycled water by maximizing the 

delivery of recycled water thereby ensuring agricultural and urban users’ needs are met 

through operational efficiency. 

SVCSD’s Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements are estimated to cost $3,118,800. 

SVCSD is requesting $750,000 in federal funds, which represents approximately 24 percent 

of the project costs 

Figure 5. SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements 

11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Funding Request 

To date, the Sonoma County Water Agency (as administrative agency for NBWRA) has been 

granted $176,502 in federal funding to cover administrative expenses for Phase I of the 

NBWRP. Due to efficient use of funds, SCWA has lowered its estimated cost of administering 

the grant and does not forecast the need for additional funding for this purpose. Accordingly, 

there is no request for funding to cover administrative expenses in this application. 

Therefore, this application requests $4,847,150 which is the total of the Novato Central 

Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project federal share of $3,250,000, LGVSDMMWD Recycled Water Project of $847,150, and SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant 

Improvements Project of $750,000. If fully funded, the projects in this grant will fulfill the 

remaining federal obligation under P.L. 111-11 Section 9110. 

The NBWRA, has Cooperative Agreement R14AC00018 (formerly R10AC20093) with 

Reclamation, providing up to $17,672,000 of Federal funds1. Funds provided under this 

application request could be administered by modifying the existing Agreement. 

Reclamation has already performed a Cost Price Analysis on the work proposed to be 

funded through this application in Agreement R14AC0018. 

Evaluation Criteria 

Evaluation Criterion 1: Water Supply 

Subcriterion No. 1a: Stretching Water Supplies 

35 points 

Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the 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 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 project? Please use the total project water savings, not just the cost of 

work through September 30, 2018. 

After completion of all the NBWRP Phase 1 projects, the total amount of recycled water used 

for irrigation will increase to 3,757 AFY. In addition, up to 1,700 AFY of tertiary treated 

recycled water will be released to Napa Salt Marsh for habitat restoration. The NBWRP 

components included in this application will provide 322 AFY of tertiary treated recycled 

water for irrigation uses in the Novato Central Area, 46 AFY in the Novato South Service Area 

service area, and 70 AFY in the Sonoma Valley Recycled Water Project. In addition to project 

yield the projects provide key operational improvements to the NBWRP Phase 1 Program: 

redundancy for future water projects, operational flexibility to retain more recycled water 

during winter peak flow conditions to be directed to recycle water users for seasonal 

storage, and the ability to serve recycled water to urban users at municipal service pressure 

and reliability throughout the year. 

1 In addition, the NBWRA had Cooperative Agreement R10AC20R87 with Reclamation, providing $7,328,000 of funds from 

ARRA. Cooperative Agreement R10AC20R87 is closed. Between Cooperative Agreements R10AC20R87 and R14C0018, 

the NBWRA had financial assistance agreements in place for its authorized Federal funding of $25,000,000. 

12 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

2. Will the project reduce, postpone, or eliminate the development of new or expanded nonrecycled water supplies? 

All local sources of water are over-allocated. The North San Pablo Bay area is under heavy 

water use stress due to drought impacts, diminishing and over-drafted groundwater 

supplies, over-diverted surface water supplies, and the need for environmental restoration. 

Groundwater is the only potable water supply in the MST area. There are few viable options 

for new water storage projects that do not involve recycled water. Both the NBWRP as a 

whole and the NBWRP components included in this application will increase recycled water 

supply in the North Bay and reduce or delay development of deeper or new groundwater 

wells that could exacerbate saline intrusion from the Bay. The projects will reduce overdraft 

of marginal groundwater supplies and, reduce the dependence upon potable water for 

agricultural and irrigation uses. These projects will provide a drought-proof water supply to 

offset potable water used for irrigation. Furthermore, using recycled water instead of potable 

water for irrigation generates added opportunity for the areas water supply portfolio, thereby 

delaying the need for additional infrastructure (and associated costs) for future potable 

water supply. 

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. 

No Federal water supplies are provided to the NBWRA service area because the area is too 

remote from the nearest Federal water sources. Connecting to the Orland Project, the 

Sacramento River, or the Delta would be exorbitantly expensive and would reduce 

Reclamation’s ability to use existing Federal water supplies for meeting current obligations. 

Napa County, an NBWRA member agency, is a contractor for the California State Water 

Project, which has the same supply, the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, as the 

Bureau of Reclamation’s Central Valley Project. The use of local supplies such as recycled 

water helps keep water importers such as Napa County from seeking additional water from 

the Delta. This in turn, is a benefit for the federal water supplies. 

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. 

As noted above, all local water sources are drought impacted and under well-documented 

heavy stress and, if over use continues, it may lead to long-term degradation due to sea 

water intrusion, water quality degradation, and/or reduced reliability. The NBWRP will reduce 

these stresses on local water supplies by providing 3,757 AFY of tertiary treated recycled 

water to the North San Pablo Bay for irrigation demands and up to 1,700 AFY for habitat 

restoration. These recycled water deliveries are a direct reduction of diversions from the 

local surface supplies and groundwater basins. 

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

the project? 

Napa SD, SVCSD and all the NBWRA member agencies keep monthly records of recycled 

water usage at the irrigation meters located in the project areas. Benefits will be measured 

by customer surveys to ensure the quantity and quality of the delivered water meets 

13 
 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

customer expectations and by noting the extent to which the recycled water allows greater 

flexibility in water operations. 

Subcriterion No. 1b: Contributions to Water Supply Sustainability 

20 points 

Points will be awarded for projects that contribute to a more sustainable water supply. 

1. Will the 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 project in addressing that 

concern and the extent to which the project will address it. 

Yes. The North Bay region suffers from water supply shortages due to drought and 

associated impacts of climate change exacerbated by increased competition for limited 

surface and groundwater supplies. The regional water supply is further affected by seawater 

intrusion due to groundwater overdraft, impaired groundwaters require alternative sources 

for potable supplies, and increased State regulation of limited surface supplies for fisheries 

and aquatic species restoration. Several NBWRA agencies rely upon imported surface water 

from the Russian River to meet potable needs. NBWRA member agencies are committed to 

implementing projects that will reduce demands on the Russian River and thereby reduce 

conflicts from competing uses by leaving additional water in the river for environmental and 

other purposes. Water users in the MST area are facing chronic groundwater depletion and 

increased pumping and treatment costs. The Program will provide 3,757 AFY of tertiary 

treated recycled water to the North San Pablo Bay for irrigation demands and up to 1,700 

AFY for habitat restoration to help alleviate the water supply and supply reliability needs in 

this area. 

The projects will build resiliency into the region’s water supply through increased 

development and use of recycled water to offset potable water supplies for non-potable 

demands. The NBWRP meets this need by providing “drought resistant” recycled water for 

urban uses and irrigation in the Napa, Sonoma, and Marin County areas. 

The NBWRP is a model for maximizing the benefits of limited water resources in the West. 

As each of the projects in the NBWRP are implemented, demand is reduced on potable 

water across the three-county program area by providing a sustainable long-term supply of 

recycled water for urban, agricultural and environmental uses. This comprehensive regional 

Program provides a sound approach toward meeting local, state, and federal water 

management objectives and regulatory requirements and helps put recycled water to it 

broadest, most beneficial use. 

2. Will water made available by this project continue to be available during periods of 

drought? To what extent is the water made available by this project more drought-resistant 

than alternative water supply options? Explain. 

Yes, because the source water is from a municipal facility and not from groundwater or 

surface waters. So long as the municipal facility remains in operation (and there is no 

reason to believe it would be non-operational), this project will continue to recycle and reuse 

the water. Therefore, it will be available irrespective of hydrologic or climatic conditions. 

Recycled water is a new reliable water supply for the region. The NBWRA member agencies 

14 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

have no other feasible options to obtain alternate drought resistant water supplies due to 

geographical location and lack of surface water storage facilities. 

Evaluation Criterion 2: Status of Project 

Subcriterion No. 2a: Progress Toward Completion of an Authorized Title XVI Project 

20 points 

Points will be awarded for projects that will bring an authorized 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 authorized Title XVI project to date? 

Please see the table below for a summary of Federal funding received to date for all the 

NBWRP Phase 1 projects. 

Project Member Agencies ARRA Grant 

2009 

WaterSMART 

Title XVI Grants 

2009-2015 

Total Federal 

Funding 

Received 

Novato South LGVSD & NMWD $1,425,500 $1,679,875 $3,105,375 

Novato North Novato SD & 

NMWD $2,637,500 $0 $2,637,500 

Novato Central Novato SD & 

NMWD $0 $0 $0 

Sonoma Valley Recycled Water 

Project 

Salt Marsh Project 

SVCSD 

SVCSD 

$1,727,500 $2,342,988 $4,070,488 

MST Project & Napa State Hospital 

Project 

Napa SD & Napa 

County $1,537,500 $8,801,987 $10,339,487 

TOTAL $7,328,000 $12,824,850 $20,152,850 

The projects in this grant application will be completed under the NBWRP Phase 1 

authorization and if fully funded, will fulfill the remaining federal obligation under this 

authorization. The Phase 1 authorization provided for $25,000,000 in federal grant 

assistance and of that amount, Reclamation has provided $20,152,850 (81%), leaving 

$4,847,150 (19%) available. The Projects in this application request the remaining balance 

of the authorization. 

Please see the table on following page for a project specific funding summary of Phase 1 

projects in this application seeking grant assistance. 

15 
 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Project Member Agencies Project Cost 

Previous Federal 

Funding Received for 

This Project 

Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant 

Expansion and Distribution Project Novato SD $2,018,000 $0 

Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant 

Expansion and Distribution Project NMWD $11,930,000 $0 

LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project LGVSD & MMWD $5,424,000 $0 

SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements SVCSD $3,118,800 $0 

Grant Administration for 2016-2018 SCWA $0* $0 

Total $22,490,800 $0 

* $0 dollars in additional funding. SCWA will utilize funds previously obligated under other NBWRP Phase 1 sub-projects to 

conduct all administrative tasks related to these project, as well as, final cooperative agreement closeout. 

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

As this project will be completed under the NBWRP Phase 1 authorization, and if fully 

funded, will fulfill the Phase 1 authorization of $25,000,000. To date, Reclamation has 

provided $20,152,850 leaving $4,847,150 in capacity under the authorization. 

Please see the table below for the amount of federal funding being requested through this 

funding opportunity. The total estimated project costs for the three Projects and the Fiscal 

Year (FY) 2016 grant administration is $4,847,150. Through this funding opportunity, the 

NBWRA is requesting $4,847,150. 

Project Member 

Agencies Project Cost 

Previous Federal 

Funding Received for 

This Project 

Additional Funding 

Requested for This 

Project 

Novato Central Service Area 

Treatment Plant Expansion and 

Distribution Project 

Novato SD $2,018,000 $0 $500,000 

Novato Central Service Area 

Treatment Plant Expansion and 

Distribution Project 

NMWD $11,930,000 $0 $2,750,000 

LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water 

Project 

LGVSD & 

MMWD $5,424,000 $0 $847,150 

SVCSD Wastewater Treatment 

Plant Improvements SVCSD $3,118,800 $0 $750,000 

Grant Administration for 2016-

2018 SCWA $0* $0 $0 

TOTAL $22,490,800 $0 $4,847,150 

* $0 dollars in additional funding. SCWA will utilize funds previously obligated under other NBWRP Phase 1 sub-projects to 

conduct all administrative tasks related to these project, as well as, final cooperative agreement closeout. 

The funding request for Novato SD $500,000 and NMWD of $2,750,000 will complete the 

Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project. The LGVSD 

and MMWD funding request of $847,150 will replace an aging MMWD facility and provide a 

16 
 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

resilient supply. SVCSD’s funding request of $750,000 will provide improvements and 

efficiency of the treatment facilities and distribution system in Sonoma County. 

The SF-424 and SF-424Cs included in this application package show a federal funding 

request of $4,847,150, a total project cost of $22,490,800, and an eligible project cost of 

$19,388,600 to reflect the project cost represented by 25 percent Federal funding and 75 

percent non-federal cost share. 

More detail on the project costs is included in the section “Description of Expenditures 

Planned through September 2018.” 

Subcriterion No. 2b: Readiness to Proceed 

10 points 

Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the project is ready to proceed, 

including consideration of the following: 

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

The following environmental compliance measures apply to all the NBWRP Phase 1 Projects: 

•	 Public Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS). 

Circulated May 2009. (Available at http://nbwra.org/docs/) 

•	 Final EIR. Approved by Member Agencies December 2009. This included: Project 

approval of Phase 1; findings of fact; and approval of the California Environmental 

Quality Act (CEQA) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP). The MMRP is too 

large to include in this application package; however, the NBWRA is happy to provide the 

MMRP if requested. (Available at http://nbwra.org/docs/) 

•	 USFWS Biological Opinion. Issued by USFWS July 2010 for all of the Phase 1 Projects, 

including the MST Project. The Biological Opinion is too large to include in this 

application package; however, the NBWRA is happy to provide the Biological Opinion if 

requested. 

•	 Final EIS. Circulated by Reclamation for Public Comment. June 2010. (Available at 

http://nbwra.org/docs/) 

•	 Record of Decision (ROD) signed January 28, 2011, approving all Phase 1 projects, 

including the MST Project and the Sonoma Valley Recycled Water Project. The ROD 

includes the CEQA MMRP. The ROD is included in this application package as 

Attachment A. 

•	 Section 106 Consultation. State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) issued letter of 

concurrence to Reclamation's determination of no adverse effect to cultural resources 

on March 21, 2011. The SHPO letter is included as Attachment B. The Bureau of 

Reclamation is completing Section 106 Consultation with SHPO for minor pipeline route 

changes associated with the Novato Central Service Area, and anticipates a letter of 

concurrence with the determination of no impact to cultural resources to be issued by 

SHPO in December 2015. 

•	 For the Novato Central Service Area, NMWD has produced a Supplemental 

Environmental Assessment to the Environmental Impact Statement and Addendum to 

the Environmental Impact Report. The NMWD Board of Directors made a CEQA approval 

for this document Sept 15, 2015. The Bureau of Reclamation is completing its review 

17 
 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

process and is anticipated to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) in 

December 2015. 

•	 All of the work for the LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project will occur within the 

footprint of the existing LGVSD/MMWD facilities; therefore, a Mitigated Negative 

Declaration will be necessary. This document will be completed by the end of March 

2016. 

When is environmental compliance expected to be complete? 

The NBWRP has been determined compliant with NEPA, Section 7, and Section 106 except 

for the new NMWD documents as indicated above. 

For the Novato Central Service Area, the Bureau of Reclamation is completing its review 

process and is anticipated to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) in December 

2015. 

The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project is 

anticipated to be complete at the end of March 2016. 

Provide a detailed schedule of all environmental compliance activities and a schedule that 

indicates when construction is expected to begin. 

The table below presents the schedule for each of the NBWRP Phase 1 projects. 

Project Phase Schedule 

Novato South (Hamilton Field) 

LGVSD / WWTP Improvements Complete 

LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project Design 

Bid 

Award 

Construction 

November 2015 – October 2016 

October – November 2016 

November 2016 

November 2016 – September 2017 

NMWD / Pipelines & Storage Complete 

Novato North 

Novato SD / WWTP Improvements 

NMWD / Pipelines & Storage Rehabilitation 

Complete 

Complete 

Novato Central 

NMWD Design 

Bid 

Award 

Construction 

November 2015 –January 2016 

January- February 2016 

May 2016 

April 2016 – May 2017 

Novato SD Design 

Bid 

Award 

Construction 

March 2016 – November 2016 

December 2016 – January 2017 

February 2017 

February 2017 – November 2017 

Table continued on next page 

18 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Project Phase Schedule 

Sonoma Valley Recycled Water Project – SVCSD 

Reservoir R5 Complete 

Recycled Water Line Complete 

Pump Station @ WWTP Design 

Bid 

Award 

Construction 

May 2016 

May 2016 

August 2016 

April 2017 

McGill Recycled Water Project Complete 

5th Street East Recycled Water Project Design 

Bid 

Award 

Construction 

July 2015 

Jan 2016 

April - May 2016 

Aug 2016 

Salt Marsh Project - SVCSD Complete 

MST Project Area 

MST Recycled Water Pipeline - Napa SD & Napa County 

Design/Bid/Award 

Construction 

Complete 

Jul 2014 – Dec 2015 

MST Pipeline Distribution Lines- Napa SD & Napa County 

Napa SD Portion of MST Recycled Water Pipeline 

(Napa State Hospital segment) 

Imola Avenue Extension 

Treatment Capacity Increase Project (Phase 1) 

Recycled Water Pump Station North/South Split 

Design 

Bid 

Award 

Construction 

Design/Bid/Award 

Construction 

Design 

Bid 

Award 

Construction 

Apr 2015-Aug 2015 

Aug 2015-Sep 2015 

Oct 2105 

Nov 2015-Aug 2016 

Complete 

Complete 

Complete 

July 2013 – Apr 2015 

Apr 2014 – Apr 2015 

May 2015 – Jun 2015 

Jun 2015 

Jul 2015 – Feb 2016 

2. What is the status of required State and Federal permits for the project? When are all 

required permits expected to be obtained? 

See above. All State and Federal permits are obtained. 

19 
 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Evaluation Criterion 3: Environment and Water Quality 

30 points 

Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the project will improve surface, 

groundwater, or effluent discharge quality; will restore or enhance habitat for non-listed 

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

species: 

1. Will the 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? 

The NBWRP captures high quality effluent for irrigation reuse and habitat restoration in the 

drought impacted, water short areas of the San Pablo Bay watershed in Marin, Sonoma, and 

Napa Counties. The supply of tertiary treated wastewater from the NBWRP will improve 

water quality in the North San Pablo Bay area in the following ways: 

•	 Reduce disposal of treated wastewater to San Pablo Bay - The NBWRA member agencies 

face strict regulatory limits on the timing and quality of the treated water they can 

discharge to the San Pablo Bay, as well as the rivers and streams that flow to it. By 

treating the wastewater to stricter regulatory levels required for reuse, the agencies can 

recycle the water productively to address water supply needs and reduce the amount 

released to San Pablo Bay and its tributaries. Implementation of Phase 1 projects would 

have an estimated 2020 discharge reduction of 6,121 AFY for all the member agency 

WWTPs combined. 

•	 Improve instream flows by reducing agricultural diversions - The NBWRP provides 

recycled water to local irrigators who historically have dammed local streams and 

diverted limited local runoff to irrigation uses to restore the natural systems that drain to 

the bay. 

•	 Improve groundwater quality by reducing overdraft of the Sonoma Valley and MST 

groundwater basins - The MST groundwater basin has been over pumped, with adverse 

effects on water levels and quality. Groundwater quality problems include arsenic, 

boron, iron, and manganese in concentrations above drinking water standards in 

groundwater wells in southern Napa County. The Sonoma Valley groundwater basin is 

facing encroaching saline intrusion, also affecting agricultural wells. The NBWRP will 

provide an alternative source to the use of groundwater in these areas, thereby reducing 

groundwater pumping and allowing for basin recharge. 

•	 Provide habitat restoration of bittern ponds in the Napa-Sonoma Salt Marsh - Disinfected 

tertiary treated wastewater from the SVCSD WWTP will be delivered to the Napa Salt 

Marsh ponds as a dilution source for bittern ponds, thereby improving water quality. The 

recycled water would be mixed with water from Ponds 7 and 7A. After the pond 

restoration is complete, the recycled water would be used for agricultural irrigation. 

2. Will the project improve flow conditions in a natural stream channel? Will the project 

restore or enhance habitat for non-listed species? If so, how? 

The NBWRP will provide recycled water to agricultural users who have historically diverted 

stream flows that connect to San Pablo Bay. Doing so allows flows to remain in-stream 

providing riparian, fishery and aquatic species habitat, a benefit to local and regional 

watersheds that contribute to surface water supplies within the NBWRP project area. These 

20 
 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

include the Novato Creek Watershed, and Russian River Watershed, all of which provide 

habitat for non-listed species. 

Restoration of the Napa River Unit has long been a vision for local resource agencies, 

conservationists, and planners. It is one of the largest tidal restoration projects on the west 

coast of the United States and one of many restoration projects throughout the San 

Francisco Bay area. Vegetation along the northern reach of the Salt Marsh Project alignment 

includes ruderal species, saltgrass and pickleweed, annual grasses, coyote brush, milk 

thistle, fennel, curly dock, mustard, radish, yarrow, peppergrass, and iceplant. SVCSD has 

observed over 115 bird species at their Hudeman Slough enhancement wetlands. 

3. Will the project provide water or habitat for federally listed threatened or endangered 

species? If so, how? 

Yes, this project will provide water directly affecting a federally listed threatened or 

endangered species. Project implementation will result in potable water offsets, which 

provide a corresponding benefit to local and regional watersheds that contribute to surface 

water supplies within the NBWRP project area. These include the Novato Creek Watershed, 

and Russian River Watershed, all of which provide habitat for the state and federally listed 

central coast steelhead. Additionally, the Russian River Watershed provides habitat for 

federally listed coho salmon and Chinook salmon. Implementation of recycled water projects 

that meet urban irrigation demands have substantial benefit, particularly during peak 

demand summer months, by assisting in the maintenance of in stream flow. Restoration of 

the Napa-Sonoma Salt Marsh will also improve habit for the western snowy plover, a listed 

species which is known to nest on the northwestern levee of salt pond 7A and marsh islands 

east of the access levee. 

Evaluation Criterion 4: Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency 

25 points 

Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the project incorporates the use of 

renewable energy and/or addresses energy efficiency. 

All NBWRA member agencies are committed to designing recycled water projects that are 

energy efficient. Water recycling may reduce greenhouse gas emissions in comparison to 

alternate water supplies and they serve as adaptive responses to climate change because 

they increase local water supplies and water reliability (2008 SWRCB2). 

1. Will the 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 

project’s total energy consumption will be provided by installing renewable energy 

components? 

SVCSD currently has a 1.04 megawatt solar power system installed at the WWTP. LGVSD 

currently has solar power installed at its recycled water facility. The Napa SD treatment plant 

has a biodigester where methane gas (or biogas) is captured and used to produce electricity 

2 Source: Strategic Workplan for Activities in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary, SWRCB, 

Central Valley RWQCB & San Francisco RWQCB. 

21 
 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

by cogeneration to help heat the digester and to power the wastewater treatment plant. No 

additional solar facilities are currently planned to be installed as part of the NBWRP Phase 1 

projects. 

2. If the project does not itself include renewable energy, will the project facilitate power 

generation in the water delivery system by making more water available? If so, explain the 

relationship between this project and any potential renewable energy improvements in the 

water delivery system. 

The use of recycled water from the NBWRP will not make more water available for power 

generation facilities. 

3. Will completion of the project lead to a reduction in energy consumption as compared to 

current water supply options? Provide calculations and describe assumptions and 

methodology. 

Much of the energy involved in municipal water systems is used for pumping. The current 

average energy consumed within the NBWRA service areas is estimated at 1,120 kiloWatthours per AFY (kWh/AFY) of potable water served based on pump station power 

consumption. The average energy consumption under Phase 1 of the NBWRP would be 

approximately 402 kWh/AFY of recycled water served, with potential energy savings of 

approximately 718 kWh/AFY as compared to current energy consumption. (NBWRP EIR/EIS, 

2009) 

Will the project include any innovative components to reduce energy consumption or to 

recover energy? 

The LGVSD recycled water treatment plant and booster pump station uses solar-electric 

power from the LGVSD’s 850,000 kWh/year system. The LGVSD recycled water treatment 

facility is estimated to use 54,300 kWh/year from the solar power system. Some of the 

SVCSD treatment plant and reclamation facilities will use solar-electric power from the 1.04 

MW/year solar power system. 

4. How does the project’s energy consumption compare to other water supply options that 

would satisfy the same demand as the project phase? 

Recycled water is the only feasible supply source available to the NBWRA member agencies 

outside of their current supplies, which are challenged by limited or decreasing yield and 

adverse water quality. Much of the energy involved in municipal water systems is used for 

pumping. The current average energy consumed within the NBWRA service area is 

estimated at 1,120 kWh/AFY of potable water served based on pump station power 

consumption. The average energy consumption under Phase 1 of the NBWRP would be 

approximately 402 kWh/AFY of recycled water served, with potential energy savings of 

approximately 718 kWh/AFY as compared to current energy consumption. (NBWRP EIR/EIS, 

2009) 

22 
 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

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

25 points 

Points will be awarded based on the cost per acre-foot of water expected to be delivered 

upon completion of the project and other benefits of the project. Please use costs related to 

the entire authorized project, not just the cost of work through September 30, 2018. 

1. Reclamation will calculate the cost per acre-foot of the project using information provided 

by project sponsors. Please provide the following information for this calculation: 

a)	 The total estimated construction costs, by year, for the project (include all previous 

and planned work). 

Calendar Construction 

Year Cost 

1. 2010 $877,000 

2. 2011 $9,397,000 

3. 2012 $22,919,000 

4. 2013 $7,639,000 

5. 2014 $20,753,000 

6. 2015 $19,908,000 

7. 2016 $2,980,000 

8. 2017 $5,482,000 

9. 2018 $5,482,000 

b)	 The total estimated or actual costs to plan and design the project (note this should 

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

Design costs for the entire North Bay Water Reuse Program are estimated to be 

approximately $8,865,000. The cost of the NBWRP feasibility study, including 

environmental documentation, was approximately $3,500,000. 

c)	 The average annual operation and maintenance costs for the life of the project (note 

this is an annual not total cost). 

$1,249,000 

d)	 The year the project will begin to deliver recycled water. 

2012 

e)	 The projected life (in years) that the project is expected to last (note this should be 

measured from the time the project starts delivering water). 

50 years 

f)	 All estimated replacement costs, by year. 

Requirements for maintenance and rehabilitation of infrastructure depend on asset 

type, materials of construction, service conditions, maintenance practices, and 

23 
 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

performance expectations. Industry benchmarks specific for recycled water systems are 

sparse, so metrics from potable water systems were used as a surrogate. 

Description of Replacement Requirement Year Cost 

1. Pipelines – assume 50-year useful life Replacement assumed not necessary within lifetime of 

the project $0 

2. Pump equipment – assume 25-year useful life Approximately 2037 $3,000,000 

3. Filters – assume 25-year useful life Approximately 2037 $4,500,000 

4. Storage liner/appurtenances – assume 25-year 

useful life Approximately 2037 $500,000 

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

of the project. 

When complete, Phase 1 of the NBWRP will provide 3,757 AFY of tertiary treated 

recycled water to the North San Pablo Bay for irrigation demands. In addition, up to 

1,700 AFY of tertiary treated recycled water will be released to Napa Salt Marsh for 

habitat restoration. Therefore, the maximum amount of water that will be produced by 

the NBWRP is 5,457 AFY. 

2. Comparison of the cost per acre-foot of the 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. 

Phase 1 of the NBWRP will offset the use of 889 AFY of potable water with recycled water 

within the NBWRA service area. Without this project, the NBWRA member agencies would 

need to rely on the construction of SCWA’s Russian River Water Supply Project in order to 

meet potable water demands in the future. The Russian River Project, serving water 

suppliers in Marin and Sonoma Counties, would increase potable water supplies to the 

NBWRA service area by releasing and using additional water currently stored in Lake 

Sonoma, and diverting water from the Russian River. Construction of the Russian River 

Project would begin in 2012 and would be completed in 2018. This “avoided project” 

consists of approximately 74,000 feet of 18 to 36-inch diameter pipelines, a storage tank 

with a capacity of approximately 4 million gallons, modification to an existing booster pump 

station, and other appurtenances. 

The components of the NBWRA Phase 1 projects were included in the Bay Area Integrated 

Regional Water Management Plan’s Proposition 84 Round 1 Implementation Grant funding 

proposal. The Proposition 84 funding proposal presented the following information on the 

avoided costs of the Russian River Water Supply Project. Capital costs for this project would 

amount to $174,479,000 and average annual operations and maintenance (O&M) costs 

would be about $1,841,000. Over the life of the project, total present value capital and 

O&M costs for this project would amount to $139,925,000. 

24 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

The Phase 1 projects included in the Proposition 84 grant proposal would only supply 1,490 

AFY of recycled water compared to the 4,654 AFY that would be available upon completion 

of the Russian River Project. Therefore, it is assumed that the Russian River Water Project 

would still be built if the NBWRP is implemented, but at a smaller scale. To offset the 

amount of recycled water that would otherwise be used by the Russian River Project if the 

NBWRP were not implemented, NBWRA would use about 33% of the water generated by the 

Russian River Project. Thus, 33 percent of the Russian River Project costs are assumed to 

be avoided by the NBWRP. The total present value avoided costs therefore amount to 

$46,175,000, as shown below. 

Avoided Capital 

Costs 

Avoided 

Replacement 

Costs 

Avoided O&M 

Costs Total Cost Avoided Total Discounted Costs Over 25 Years 

Project Life $174,479,000 Unknown $34,987,000 $209,466,000 $139,925,000 

% Avoided Costs Claimed by Project 33% 

Total Present Value of Discounted Avoided Project Costs Claimed by the NBWRP 

(Total Present Value of Discounted Costs x Percent Avoided Costs Claimed by Project) $46,175,000 

Over a 25-year period, the NBWRP would provide 37,250 AF of potable water offset. 

Therefore, the avoided cost per acre-foot of the Russian River Project is $1,240/AF 

(calculated as the total present value of the Russian River Project divided by the 25-year 

yield of the NBWRP). Present value avoided costs for the avoided project are calculated 

through 2037 to match the useful life of the Russian River project components that have a 

25-year project life. The operations, maintenance, and replacement costs after 25-years are 

unknown, thus, it would be unfair to count benefits after 2037 without knowing the 

comparative costs. 

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. 

Providing a use for the treated wastewater generated by the NBWRA member agencies 

would decrease discharges into North San Pablo Bay and would reduce wastewater agency 

operation costs during the no-discharge period. For example, LGVSD and Novato SD 

currently pump unused effluent to pasture fields. LGVSD estimates that the average annual 

cost to pump effluent to the pasture lands from June 1 to October 31 is about $11,000. By 

delivering recycled water to the Novato South Project area, LGVSD would not incur these 

costs. 

The reliability of a 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. By avoiding 

the use of potable water for non-potable uses, the NBWRP will improve water supply 

reliability in the NBWRA service areas. The availability of imported water is subject to 

climatic changes (i.e., drought) and other unforeseen events such as earthquakes and 

floods. Further, there are few opportunities for further development of groundwater or local 

surface water supplies within the area. 

25 
 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

The project will reduce the problem of ground water over-drafting in the MST groundwater 

basin in Napa County. Economic benefits that are difficult to qualify include the reduced 

need in the future for property owners to dig deeper wells to access groundwater. Other 

economic benefit includes an increased stability in housing and other property prices 

resulting from a more stable potable water supply. 

Although interest in water supply reliability is increasing (e.g., due to increasing water 

demands and concerns over climate-related events), only a few studies have directly 

attempted to quantify its value (i.e., through non-market valuation studies). The results from 

these studies indicate that residential and industrial customers seem to value supply 

reliability quite highly. Stated preference studies find that water customers are willing to pay 

$95 to $500 per household per for total reliability (i.e., a 0 percent probability of their water 

supply being interrupted in times of drought). 

For most studies, this is what households would be willing to pay in addition to their current 

water bill. The challenge in using these values to determine a value of increased reliability 

as a result of the proposed project is recognizing how to reasonably interpret these surveybased household monetary values. The values noted above reflect a willingness to pay per 

household to ensure complete reliability (zero drought-related use restrictions in the future), 

whereas this recycled water project enhances overall reliability, but does not guarantee 100 

percent reliability. Thus, if applied directly to the number of households in the NBWRP 

service areas, the dollar values from the studies would overstate the reliability value 

provided by the NBWRP. Due to the uncertainty involved in applying these numbers to this 

situation, this benefit estimate is not quantified. 

Fertilizing compounds commonly contained in recycled water are typically not found in 

potable water (e.g., nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium). Thus the use of recycled water 

for irrigation will reduce fertilizer costs associated with lands that will be serviced by the 

NBWRP. 

Recycled water will be delivered to the Napa-Sonoma Salt Ponds via the Salt Marsh Pipeline 

from SVCSD’s reclamation system as an ongoing supply of non-saline water for restoration, 

with subsequent agricultural use. Many of the social benefits, including adherence to a 

widely shared “environmental ethic” for recycling and the use of “green” approaches to local 

resource management challenges cannot be easily monetized. Social benefits can be more 

tangible. For example, recycled water yields are not linked to the hydrologic cycle and annual 

precipitation patterns; instead, the yield from recycled water is driven by a stable supply of 

regionally generated wastewater. As a climate-independent water supply option, recycled 

water offers some added economic reliability values to the region compared to traditional 

sources that depend on snow pack, precipitation, and storage Environmental benefits can 

include many of the ecological services and values associated with enhanced stream flows, 

improved instream water quality, and lower summertime water temperatures. These options 

help to: 

• Avoid increased groundwater pumping costs; 

• Protect source water for water providers; 

• Enhance downstream water bodies from increased streamflow; 

• Benefit riparian and aquatic species with increased streamflow; 

• Reduce seawater intrusion; 

26 
 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

• Increase in-stream and near-stream recreation; 

• Leverage water projects with other community projects; 

• Provide local control over water resources; and 

• Increase demonstration of "green ethic." 

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 

Points will be awarded for projects that help to meet Reclamation’s legal and contractual 

obligations. 

1. Does the project help fulfill any of Reclamation’s legal or contractual obligations such as 

providing water for Indian tribes, water right settlements, river restoration, minimum flows, 

legal court orders, or other obligations? Explain. 

The NBWRA member agencies non-recycled water supplies are not Reclamation-controlled 

rivers or facilities. However, the environmental restoration benefits of this project are the 

same as on Reclamation-controlled rivers where similar obligations are found. 

Subcriterion No. 6b: Benefits to Rural or Economically Disadvantaged Communities 

10 points 

Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the project serves rural communities or 

economically disadvantaged communities in rural or urban areas. 

1. Does the project serve a rural or economically-disadvantaged community? (A rural 

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

The project does not serve rural or economically-disadvantaged communities. 

2. Are any economically-disadvantaged communities within the project sponsor’s service 

area? 

There are no economically disadvantaged communities within the project sponsor’s service 

area. 

Evaluation Criterion 7: Watershed Perspective 

15 points 

Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the 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. 

27 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

1. Does the project implement a regional or State water plan or an integrated resource 

management plan? Explain. 

Yes. The NBWRP is a watershed-based, regional recycled water program authorized for 

construction by Congress. The San Francisco Bay Area has a long history of regional 

cooperation in water resources management. In 2004, with the advent of State of California 

bond measures aimed at promoting a new model of integrated regional water management 

throughout California, Bay Area water, wastewater, flood protection, and stormwater 

agencies, cities and counties represented by the Association of Bay Area Governments, and 

water management interests represented by the State Coastal Conservancy and nongovernmental environmental organizations signed a Letter of Mutual Understandings, 

detailing their intent to develop the San Francisco Bay Area Integrated Regional Water 

Management Plan (IRWMP) for the nine-county Bay Area. 

Given the large geographic scope of the Bay Area region and the wide range of water 

management strategies being implemented, original development of the IRWMP was 

approached as a two-step process. Four water management service areas were established 

for the region: Water Supply and Water Quality, Wastewater and Recycled Water, Flood 

Protection and Stormwater Management, and Watershed Management and Habitat 

Protection and Restoration. Each of these four Functional Areas developed a comprehensive 

“Functional Area Document” in order to identify specific needs and challenges relating to the 

specific Functional Area, describe water management strategies and approaches to address 

these needs, and develop an initial list of potential strategies and implementation projects 

that would maximize benefits and enhance opportunities for regional cooperation within a 

given Functional Area. Next, the four Functional Area Documents were integrated, 

culminating in the development of the San Francisco Bay Area IRWMP, which was adopted 

in December 2005. The San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water Management Group is 

governed by the San Francisco Bay Area IRWMP Coordinating Committee (CC), and the San 

Francisco Bay Area IRWMP received California Department of Water Resources approval 

under the 2009 Regional Acceptance Process. Through the IRWMP effort, the CC and 

participating entities established priorities for regional implementation through a 

collaborative planning process. The CC has used this process to identify projects for 

implementation, taking into consideration the evolving needs of the regional, which include 

the need to increase water supply reliability to adapt to potential long-term drought 

conditions and other climate change impacts, among others. 

Through this collaborative process, the CC identified five high priority regional programs for 

implementation and inclusion in their proposal for multiple Proposition 84 Implementation 

Grant funding. The NBWRP Phase 1 projects are an element of the Bay Area IRWMP’s 

Regional Recycled Water Program. The Regional Recycled Water Program was the largest 

program and represents one of the best strategies of addressing long-term drought 

preparedness. 

The NBWRP is critical to implementing the regional integrated plan. In combination with 

State funding, it is key to advancing the overall regional plans and goals identified in the Bay 

Area IRWMP. In 2011, the NBWRA wastewater agencies were awarded $2,500,000 for the 

Phase 1 projects through Proposition 84 Implementation Grant funding. 

In 2012, the CC began the 2013 Bay Area IRWMP Update. As part of the document update, 

all Bay Area water projects had to submit a new project description to be reviewed and 

28 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

scored for incorporation into the 2013 IRWMP. The required information included the 

project need, a detailed project description, costs, schedule, project partnerships, watershed 

benefits, water supply benefits, and water quality benefits. The CC ranked the NBWRP as 

number one out of more than 300 projects in the Bay Area, recognizing the NBWRP as a 

model project for integrated water planning in the Bay Area. The NBWRP was also awarded 

$1,020,000 from Round 2 of Proposition 84 Implementation Grant and $2,000,000 in 

funding from the 2014 Drought Grant Solicitation. 

2. Does the project promote collaborative partnerships to address water-related issues? 

Explain. 

The North San Pablo Bay region of California’s Napa, Sonoma, and Marin Counties faces 

serious long-term challenges in providing reliable water supplies. The area is not served by 

state or federal water projects, surface and groundwater sources are limited, and some local 

groundwater basins are over drafted. Urban, agricultural and environmental demands, 

exacerbated by ongoing drought, exceed the region’s ability to provide a reliable, sustainable 

and economical water supply. A clean, dependable water supply is also needed to continue 

the restoration of vital tidal wetlands at the base of the San Pablo Bay watershed. The 

effects of climate change are further stressing the area’s water supplies with reduced 

diversions from the Russian River, unpredictable rainfall, and fluctuating temperatures. 

The region’s wastewater treatment agencies have long faced strict limits on the timing and 

quality of the treated effluent they can send to San Pablo Bay. By treating wastewater to the 

strict levels required for reuse, these agencies can recycle the water in productive ways that 

augment local water supply and help protect limited potable water resources. Many studies 

conducted over the last decade have verified its safety and recycled water is already in wide 

use throughout the North Bay, elsewhere in California and across the nation. 

The NBWRA agencies joined together with a goal to investigate the feasibility of distributing 

treated wastewater for agricultural, urban and environmental uses and optimize the value of 

recycled water both in their own communities and throughout the North Bay. The NBWRP 

projects provide a new, sustainable local water supply while demonstrating responsible 

approaches that provide numerous economic and environmental benefits for the region, 

including: 

•	 A reliable, new water supply for the region's vineyards and agriculture; 

•	 An alternative water supply for irrigation of parks, golf courses and, public landscaping; 

•	 Increased water for restoration of wetlands and improved in-stream flows for riparian 

habitat and fisheries recovery; 

•	 Reduced demand on limited local surface and groundwater supplies; 

•	 Less discharge of treated wastewater into the Bay; 

•	 Reduced demand on imported Russian River water; and 

•	 Leveraged, cooperative funding opportunities through regional agency partnering. 

Since the NBWRP was conceived over 10 years ago, the NBWRA has made considerable 

headway in its implementation of the Program vision. It has launched and completed 

essential multi-phase technical and economic feasibility studies, conducted a broad 

stakeholder outreach effort targeting both agencies and potential users of recycled water, 

and forged key partnerships to obtain and share funding resources. 

29 
 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

The NBWRP addresses regional water issues by: 

•	 Determining how it can make the region’s recycled water supply provide as many 

benefits as possible to all stakeholders – urban, agricultural and environmental. Every 

aspect of the NBWRP is designed to provide multiple benefits and a sustainable supply 

of new water. 

•	 Providing “drought resistant” recycled water for urban uses and irrigation of high value 

crops in the Napa, Sonoma and Marin County areas; 

•	 Capturing high quality treated effluent to store and reuse for irrigation in the water short 

area of Napa, Sonoma, and Marin Counties; 

•	 Developing dual-purpose facilities that provide increased capacity to store recycled 

water and provide waterfowl and wetland benefits; 

•	 Providing recycled water to local agriculture that historically have dammed and diverted 

local streams for irrigation. By providing an alternative, reliable water supply for on farm 

use, natural riparian systems can once again flow into North San Pablo Bay. 

•	 Preserving current land uses by providing recycled water for restoration of marsh and 

wetland areas on lands surrounding the North San Pablo Bay and through improvements 

to existing levees to meet habitat restoration goals and anticipated sea level rise; and 

•	 Reducing the need for additional large pumping facilities to import water to meet local 

needs. 

Although this region is not served by the federal water project, the NBWRP demonstrates 

how a long-term sustainable supply of recycled water can be developed by partnering with 

the Bureau of Reclamation, and the State of California, for planning and construction costs, 

while the local sponsors provide non-federal cost share and long-term maintenance. 

The NBWRP is also a model for maximizing the benefits of limited water resources in the 

West. As each of the projects in the NBWRP are implemented, they will reduce demand on 

potable water across Marin, Sonoma, and Napa Counties while providing a sustainable longterm supply of recycled water for urban, agricultural, and environmental uses. This 

comprehensive regional program provides a sound approach toward meeting local, state, 

and federal water management objectives and regulatory requirements and helps put 

recycled water to it broadest, most beneficial use. Every aspect of the NBWRP is designed to 

provide multiple benefits and a sustainable supply of new water. 

The NBWRA is a unique and successful collaboration and partnership that has served as a 

model for future large-scale water reuse programs. The NBWRP can readily be held up as 

one of the WaterSMART Initiative’s Model Programs. It integrates the needs of urban users, 

agriculture and the environment into a program designed to virtually create new water. 

Through its reuse strategy, it utilizes high efficiency, energy conserving technology, funding 

partnerships to share costs, and project planning that ensures a long term sustainable 

water supply for the entire North San Pablo Bay Region. 

The NBWRP is an example of regional-scale planning and implementation where the 

benefits of water reuse accrue on multiple levels. This approach allows partners to 

collaborate, identify and integrate diverse needs into water reuse programs. It allows for 

leveraging of non-Federal funding sources to provide local cost-share and local entities to 

realize benefits that would be out of their reach without regional collaboration. It also allows 

many projects to be included into larger programs that when implemented over time, 

30 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

increase both program yield and community benefits while maximizing the value of the 

federal dollar invested. 

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

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

environmental compliance has been completed, please explain. 

1. Will the project 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. 

The NBWRP Phase 1 projects include construction of recycled water pipelines, pump 

stations, and reservoirs. Construction would result in short term impacts to air quality 

relating to construction emissions; however, these impacts would be reduced to less than 

significant through the implementation of mitigation measures identified in the NBWRA 

North Bay Water Recycling Program EIR/EIS. The projects would be implemented in 

conformance with Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Requirements. 

Project construction would have the potential to result in short-term impacts to water quality 

related to disturbance of the construction corridor; these impacts would be reduced to less 

than significant through compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities, which require preparation and 

implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan implementing Best Management 

Practices to protect water quality. Project implementation would have the potential to affect 

aestivation habitat for California red-legged frog; however, pre-construction clearance and 

provision of compensatory mitigation in September 2011, as established in the NBWRA 

Program’s USFWS Biological Opinion, fully offset this temporary impact. The Draft and Final 

EIR/EIS documents are available at the NBWRA webpage: http://nbwra.org/docs/. The 

MMRP is too large to include in this application package; however, the NBWRA is happy to 

provide the MMRP if requested. 

Please also explain the impacts of such work on the surrounding environment and any steps 

that could be taken to minimize the impacts. 

The NBWRP’s MMRP established mitigation to be implemented by the proposed project to 

reduce all environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The MMRP is organized in 

a tabular format, keyed to each mitigation measure incorporated into the project. The tables 

following each measure provide a breakdown of how the mitigation measure would be 

implemented, who would be responsible, and when it would occur. The MMRP is too large to 

include in this application package; however, the NBWRA is happy to provide the MMRP if 

requested. 

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, would they be 

affected by any activities associated with the proposed project? 

31 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Please see above discussion regarding California red legged frog. Additionally, all stream 

channels capable of supporting habitat for central coast steelhead and freshwater shrimp 

would be avoided through pipeline construction using trenchless technology, such that 

impacts would be avoided. 

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 may have. 

The NBWRP Phase 1 projects were specifically designed to avoid impacts to waters of the 

United States through use of pipeline construction using trenchless technology for individual 

stream crossings. As such, potential impacts to wetlands and surface water have been 

minimized. 

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

describe and estimate any impacts the project may have. 

There are known archeological sites that have the potential to occur within the Area of 

Potential Effect (APE). Subsurface investigations, including collection of coring samples, 

have been completed at these locations to confirm that pipeline installation would not 

adversely affect known archaeological sites within the APE. See the documentation of 

Section 106 consultation included in Attachment B for more detail. 

5. Will the project 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. 

No. The project would not affect locations that have a disproportionately high or adverse 

effect on low income or minority populations. Census track data indicates that minorities are 

less than 50 percent of the population, and would not be disproportionately affected. 

6. Will the project 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 may 

have. 

No. Local Native American tribes have been consulted with as part of the Section 106 

process, and the NBWRP includes a monitoring plan for known archaeological sites, and 

would not limit access to or ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites, or any other impacts on 

tribal lands. 

7. Will the project 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 may have. 

The NBWRP recycled water system facilities would be installed primarily within roadways, 

existing treatment facilities, and agricultural areas; as such, the potential for spread of 

noxious weeds or non-native invasive species would be low. 

32 
 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

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. 

The NBWRA EIR/EIS covers the NBWRP Phase 1 projects. As part of its NEPA process, 

Reclamation was issued a USFWS Biological Opinion that covers all the NBWRP Phase 1 

components. The Section 106 Consultation was completed in March 2011 (see 

Attachment B). 

Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project 

The following permits or approvals are needed for the Novato Central Service Area: 

1.	 As noted above, NMWD has approved the EA/Addendum, and it is anticipated that the 

Bureau of Reclamation will complete it consultation and NEPA approval processes in 

December 2015. Permits and approvals that have been acquired, or are in the process 

of being acquired by NMWD are identified below. 

2.	 National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 consultation [State Historic Preservation 

3.	 Office (SHPO)]. 

4.	 Local City of Novato Roadway Encroachment Permit; 

5.	 Sonoma Marin Area Rapid Transit (SMART) Encroachment Permit; 

6.	 Caltrans Encroachment Permit; 

7.	 Land Use Lease Amendment, State Lands Commission. 

Additional acquisition of rights-of-way (ROWs) and temporary construction easements 

may be necessary for construction of some of the proposed facilities. Temporary 

construction easements would also be required for contractor staging areas and 

equipment and materials storage. 

No new permits or approvals are needed for the Novato Treatment Plant Improvements on 

the existing Novato SD site 

Novato South Service Area/LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project 

The LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project will require a County of Marin Encroachment 

Permit for potential work with in the county right-of-way between the LGVSD treatment plant 

and the existing MMWD clear well, which is also within county property. 

SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project 

A CAL/OHSA permit is needed for the SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement 

Project. 

33 
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016
 

Project Budget Proposal 

34 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Description of Expenditures Planned through September 2018 

The evaluation criteria listed in Section IV.D of this FOA will be applied to the entire 

authorized Title XVI project. Applicants must also provide a description of planning, design, 

and construction activities that are planned through September 30, 2018, including a 

description of activities that have previously been completed without Federal funding that 

are the basis for a request for Federal funding under this FOA. Applicants must also provide 

a cost estimate for these activities. 

For the Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project, the 

following NMWD activities are anticipated to occur through September 2018: 

•	 Engineering design of the project facilities – anticipated to be completed by January 

2016. 

•	 Solicitation of bids for construction – anticipated to occur February 2016. 

•	 Award of construction and construction management contracts – anticipated to occur 

April - May 2016. 

•	 Construction activities – anticipated to be completed May 2017. 

Project Project Cost Previous Federal 

Funding Received 

Additional Funding 

Requested 

Novato Central Service Area (NMWD) $11,930,000 $0 $2,750,000 

Design $454,800 

Construction $9,031,500 

Construction Management $1,061,200 

Administrative and legal expenses $279,000 

Right of Way $100,000 

Miscellaneous $1,003,500 

For the Novato Central Service Area Treatment Plant Expansion and Distribution Project the 

following Novato SD activities are anticipated to occur through September 2018: 

•	 Preliminary design tasks including selection of equipment and review of pre-treatment 

alternatives – anticipated to occur December 2015 through February 2016. 

•	 Engineering design and plan preparation – anticipated to occur March through 

November 2016. 

•	 Solicitation of bids for construction, combined with additional WWTP improvements – 

anticipated to occur December 2016 through January 2017. 

•	 Award of construction contracts for project – anticipated to occur February 2017. 

•	 Construction activities – anticipated to occur February 2017 through November 2017. 

45 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Project Project Cost Previous Federal 

Funding Received 

Additional Funding 

Requested 

NSD RWF Phase 1 Expansion Project $2.018,000 $0 $500,000 

Design $219,0000 

Construction $1,270,000 

Construction Management $146,000 

Administrative and legal expenses $135,000 

Contingencies $237,000 

For the LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project, the following activities are anticipated to 

occur through September 2018: 

•	 Preliminary design tasks including selection of equipment and review of pre-treatment 

alternatives – anticipated to occur November 2015 through January 2016. 

•	 Engineering design and plan preparation – anticipated to occur January through October 

2016. 

•	 Solicitation of bids for construction, combined with additional WWTP improvements – 

anticipated to occur October through November 2016. 

•	 Award of construction contracts for project – anticipated to occur November 2016. 

•	 Construction activities – anticipated to occur November 2016 through September 2017. 

Project Project Cost Previous Federal 

Funding Received 

Additional Funding 

Requested 

LGVSD-MMWD Recycled Water Project (LGVSD & MMWD) $5,424,000 $0 $847,150 

Design $319,000 

Construction $4,682,000 

Construction Management $398,000 

Administrative and legal expenses $25,000 

For SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project, the following activities are 

anticipated to occur through September 2018: 

•	 Engineering design of the project facilities, – anticipated to be completed by May 2016. 

•	 Solicitation of bids for construction – anticipated to occur May 2016. 

•	 Award of construction and construction management contracts – anticipated to occur 

August 2016. 

•	 Construction activities – anticipated to be completed April 2017. 

46 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Project Project Cost Previous Federal 

Funding Received 

Additional Funding 

Requested 

SVCSD Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project $3,118,800 $0 $750,000 

Design $502,100 

Construction $2,153,200 

Project inspection fees $260,700 

Administrative and legal expenses $193,100 

Miscellaneous $9,700 

SCWA anticipates performing the following activities in support of grant administration 

through September 2018 funded entirely by existing administration funding previously 

obligated: 

•	 Execute financial assistance agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation – anticipated to 

occur between April and September 2016. 

•	 Semi-annual financial and project reporting, SCWA program management, coordination 

with Reclamation – anticipated to be ongoing between through September 2018. 

The SF-424 and SF-424Cs included in this application package show a federal funding 

request of $4,847,150, a total project cost of $22,490,800, and an eligible project cost of 

$19,388,600 to reflect the project cost represented by 25 percent Federal funding and 75 

percent non-federal cost share.. 

47 
 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Funding Plan 

Please include the following chart (table 1) to summarize your non-Federal and other 

Federal funding sources for that portion of the project that will be completed by 

September 30, 2018. Denote in-kind contributions with an asterisk (*). 

See the table below for a summary of funding sources for the NBWRP Phase 1 project 

components requesting federal funds through this funding opportunity. 

Table 1. Funding Sources 

Funding Sources 

Funding Amount 

Novato 

Central 

Service Area 

NMWD 

Novato Central 

Service Area 

Novato SD 

LGVSD/MMWD 

Recycled Water 

Project 

SVCSD WWTP 

Improvements 

Grant 

Administration Total 

Non-Federal Entities 

Cash on Hand $775,000 $1,518,000 $0 $2,368,800 $0 $4,661,800 

State Funding $8,405,000 $0 $4,576,850 $0 $0 $12,981,850 

NBWRA Member 

Agency Trust* $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Non Federal 

Subtotal: $9,180,000 $1,518,000 $4,576,000 $2,368,800 $0 $17,643,650 

Other Federal Entities 

– Previous 

Reclamation Funding 

through ARRA and 

WaterSMART Grants 

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Other Federal 

Subtotal: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Requested 

Reclamation Funding 

Through This Funding 

Opportunity: 

$2,750,000 $500,000 $847,150 $750,000 $0 $0 

Total Project Funding $11,930,000 $2,018,000 $5,424,000 $3,118,800 $0* $22,490,800 

* $0 dollars in additional funding. SCWA will utilize funds previously obligated under other NBWRP Phase 1 sub-projects to 

conduct all administrative tasks related to these project, as well as, final cooperative agreement closeout. 

In addition to the Funding Plan noted in Table 1, please provide information specific to funds 

expended to date for the entire project scope and proposed expenditures through 

September 2018 that notes both Federal and non-Federal funds. 

The NBWRP is a model for maximizing the benefits of limited water resources in the west. By 

partnering on the local level, agencies and elected officials are developing solutions to meet 

broad constituent needs. This comprehensive regional program provides a sound, viable 

approach toward meeting local, state and federal water resource management objectives 

and regulatory requirements. By establishing a partnership of local, state and federal 

48 
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

agencies with similar mandates, the NBWRP develops cost-saving economies of scale and 

qualifies for access to state and federal funding sources. 

The NBWRP has been authorized for $25 million in federal funding. At this time, the NBWRP 

has received $20,152,850 in federal funding through ARRA, WaterSMART, and Title XVI 

Grants. The NBWRP Phase 1 projects have also been awarded $5,886,800 in funding 

through California Proposition 50 and 84 grants. Local funds have been used to make up 

the balance of expenditures. 

The table below presents NBWRP Phase 1 expenditures through September 2015, and the 

balance of funds available for the Phase 1 projects through September 2018. 

49 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016 

Project 

Participating Agencies

Project Expenditures through September 2015 

Existing Title XVI Grant Funding

Remaining Funds to be Utilized 

through September 2018 

Local Funds

ARRA Funds

Title XVI Funds

California State Grants

Total Expenditures

Proposed 2016

WaterSMART Grant

Remaining Title XVI

Funds to be Authorized

Local Funds

Total 

Novato South LGVSD & 

NMWD $8,778,033 $1,388,000 $1,677,875 $625,000 $12,476,908 $0 $847,150 $0 $4,576,850 $5,424,000 

Novato North Novato SD & 

NMWD $8,976,483 $2,600,000 $0 $625,000 $12,201,483 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Novato Central NMWD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,750,000 $0 $9,180,000 $11,930,000 

Novato Central Novato SD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $1,518,000 $2,018,000 

Sonoma Valley 

Recycled Water 

Project 

Salt Marsh Project 

SVCSD 

SVCSD 

$7,326,401 $1,702,500 $1,383,775 $2,011,800 $12,424,476 $930,977 $750,000 $0 $5,161,730 $6,842,707 

MST Project & Napa 

State Hospital 

Project 

Napa SD & 

Napa County $21,108,650 $1,512,500 $6,339,226 $2,625,000 $31,585,376 $2,492,997 $0 $0 $7,478,991 $9,971,988 

TOTAL $46,189,566 $7,203,000 $9,400,876 $5,886,800 $68,680,242 $3,423,974 $4,847,150 $0 $27,915,571 $36,186,694 

50 
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Funding for Fiscal Year 2016
 

Appendix A: NBWRP Record of Decision
 

51 
-.,•---·' 

f 

Managing Water in the West 

North San Pablo Bay Restoration and Reuse Program 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Record of Decision 

January 2011 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Reclamation 

Mid-Pacific Region 

Sacramento, California 
I. Introduction 

This Record of Decision (ROD) documents the decision of the Department of the Interior (DOI), 

Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region for the North San Pablo Bay Restoration and Reuse 

Program (Program or Project) located in northern California. The Program is the subject of the 

North San Pablo Bay Restoration and Reuse Program Environmental hnpact 

Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS), developed in compliance with the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Reclamation filed the Final EIS (FEIS) with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on 

June 8, 2010. The proposed federal action is the provision of federal funds by Reclamation 

under Title XVI of Public Law (P.L.) 102-575, as amended (Title XVI), to the Sonoma County 

Water Agency (SCWA), which is the administrative agency for the North Bay Water Reuse 

Authority (NBWRA). SCWA will distribute federal funds to other NBWRA members and 

cooperating agencies (Member Agencies) for the implementation of multiple projects examined 

in the EIR/EIS. This ROD is based upon the FEIS and other information in the administrative 

record. 

The purpose of the Program is to create a regional wastewater reuse program with component 

projects to provide recycled water for agricultural, urban, and environmental uses as an 

alternative to discharging treated wastewater to San Pablo Bay. The purpose of-this ROD is to 

explain the decision rationale and factors considered, describe the proposed action and 

alternatives, including mitigation measures, and the monitoring and enforcement program for the 

adopted mitigation measures. 

II. Background 

Program Location and Non-Federal Implementing Agencies 

The NBWRA, comprised of multiple wastewater utilities and one water agency in the North San 

Pablo Bay region of California (i.e., Marin, Sonoma, Napa, and Solano Counties), plans to 

expand the use of recycled water in order to improve water supply reliability and reduce treated 

effiuent discharge into San Pablo Bay with this long-term, multi-agency program. The Program 

area encompasses approximately 318 square miles of land in Marin, Sonoma, and Napa 

Counties. Participants include, but are not limited to, Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District 

(LGVSD), Novato Sanitary District (Novato SD), Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District 

(SVCSD), and Napa Sanitation District (Napa SD). In addition, North Marin Water District 

(NMWD) and the County of Napa are participating financially and providing support. Sonoma 

County Water Agency is the Lead Agency under CEQA. 
Program Purpose and Benefits 

The communities of the North San Pablo Bay region are experiencing both water supply and 

quality issues. Surface and groundwater supplies are limited and highly coveted by competing 

interests, and some local groundwater basins are over-drafted. If managed properly, recycled 

water can supplement and augment local water supplies on a regional basis by providing water 

that meets agricultural and municipal non-potable quality needs. 

The purpose of the Program is to provide recycled water for agricultural, urban, and 

environmental uses and to promote the expanded, beneficial use of recycled water in the North 

San Pablo Bay region. 

Wastewater utilities face strict regulatory limits on the timing, volume, and quality of the treated 

wastewater they can discharge to San Pablo Bay, as well as the rivers and streams that flow to it. 

Implementation of the Program would include wastewater treatment upgrades and construction 

of pipelines, pump stations, and storage facilities to distribute recycled water. All recycled water 

will be used in compliance with Article 4 in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, 

which sets water quality standards and treatment reliability criteria for recycled water. By 

treating wastewater to the stricter regulatory levels required for reuse, the Member Agencies can 

recycle the water productively to address water supply needs and to reduce the amount released 

to San Pablo Bay and its tributaries. 

By providing a secure, reliable recycled water supply, the Program will accomplish at least three 

benefits: continuing the restoration of San Pablo Bay tidal wetlands and tributaries that contain 

habitat for endangered and threatened species; reducing the use of natural regional surface and 

groundwater supplies; and reducing wastewater discharge to regional waterways and San Pablo 

Bay. Because the Program will be implemented by multiple regional entities working in concert 

to address shared problems and to achieve collective goals, the Program is anticipated to create a 

cost-effective supplemental water supply that will have minimal long-term costs to local 

customers. 

Program Objectives 

The Program objectives are to: 

• Offset urban and agricultural demands on potable water supplies • Enhance local and regional ecosystems • Improve local and regional water supply reliability • Maintain and protect public health and safety 
Ill. Alternatives Considered 

The EIR/EIS considered three action alternatives analyzed at a program level, a No Action 

Alternative, and a No Project Alternative. Phase 1 of Alternative 1 was analyzed at a project· 

specific-level. Action Alternatives were formulated to meet the purpose, objectives, and need 

summarized in Section II, supra. Each action alternative consists of treatment, transmission, and 

storage facilities necessary to meet a range of recycled water demand and facility integration 

scenarios within the North San Pablo Bay area through 2020. The alternatives considered in 

detail in the EIR/EIS are discussed below. 

No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, existing conditions and reasonably foreseeable future 

conditions that would exist if the project was not constructed are examined pursuant to CEQA. 

Under the No Project Alternative, the NBWRA would not implement construction of facilities 

identified under the Preferred Alternative to provide a reliable recycled water distribution system 

throughout the North San Pablo Bay area. 

Implementation of the No Project Alternative would avoid the construction-related impacts and 

operational impacts identified for the proposed project. Existing potable supplies of water would 

not be supplemented; the volwne or quality of treated effiuent discharges to North San Pablo 

Bay tributaries would not be improved; environmental benefits would not be provided; and a 

local, sustainable, and energy efficient supplemental water supply would not be utilized. 

Therefore, over the next 10-20 years, current and future water demands would increase pressure 

on both current water supplies and water delivery systems. 

No Action Alternative 

The No Action Alternative represents a "future-without-project" scenario: A continuation of 

existing conditions for an estimation of the most reasonable future conditions that could occur 

without implementation of any action alternative, pursuant to NEPA. The No Action Alternative 

assumes no joint project among the Member Agencies and no Federal funding. Additional 

wastewater treatment capacity and water recycling would occur strictly from individual agencies 

implementing their own local plans independent of other agencies. Because development of 

supplemental water supplies would continue to be a regional challenge, the No Action 

Alternative would likely result in a small increment of water recycling projects within the region. 

Without Federal funding, the non-Federal share of each project cost would be 100 percent, not 

75 percent; therefore, each project would result in increased service rates for individual 

customers
Although the magnitude and duration of impacts would be of a smaller scale compared to an 

Action Alternative or the Preferred Alternative, implementing the No Action Alternative would 

fail to substantially: supplement existing potable supplies of water; beneficially alter the volume 

or quality of treated effluent discharges to North San Pablo Bay tributaries; provide any 

environmental benefits; or take advantage of a local, sustainable, and energy efficient 

supplemental water supply. Therefore, over the next 10-20 years, current and future water 

demands would continue to increase pressure on both current water supplies and water delivery 

systems. 

Alternative 1: Basic System (Preferred Alternative) 

The Preferred Alternative would achieve the Program's purpose and specific objectives 

summarized in Section II, supra, by providing recycled water for agricultural, urban, and 

environmental uses that would both improve regional water supply reliability and reduce 

wastewater discharge to regional waterways and San Pablo Bay. 

The Preferred Alternative would provide 6,655 acre-feet per year (AFY) of recycled water for 

irrigation use and 5,825 AFY for habitat restoration. It would include installation of 

approximately 83 miles of new pipeline, construction of facilities onsite at existing wastewater 

treatment plants (WWTP) to provide an additional 7.8 million gallons per day (mgd) of tertiary 

treatment capacity, and development of approximately 1,020 acre feet (AF) of new storage, 

primarily at existing or planned storage ponds at the WWTPs. 

The Preferred Alternative would be implemented in multiple phases. This ROD covers activities 

collectively referred to in the EIR/EIS as Phase 1, summarized in Table 1 and the following 

project descriptions. Phase 1 will provide 2,883 A YF of recycled water for irrigation use. Site 

specific analysis of any additional activities to be conducted under future, additional phases 

would be analyzed pursuant to NEPA if Federal funding were involved: 
New New Capacity New New 

Pipeline Demand Increase Pumps Storage 

(miles) (AFY) (--dl (HP) fAFl 

LGVSD Peacock Gan -- -- -- -- --LGVSD NMWD URWP7South) 5.9 204 0.7 72 (3) LGVSD Sears Point -- -- -- -- --

Novato SD NMWD URWP (North/CentraD 9.8 542 1.2 259 (3\ Novato SD Sears Point -- -- -- -- --

SVCSD Southern Sonoma Vallev -- -- -- -- --SVCSD Central Sonoma Vallev -- -- -- -- --SVCSD (Sonoma Vallev (IA) (5.2\ 1874\ 0 662 65 

SVCSD Nana Salt Marsh 7.9 (2) 0 0 0 

Nana SD Carneros East -- -- -- -- --Nana SD Milliken-Sarco-Tulucav Area 17.5 2,137 4.5 880 0 Nana SD Nana (local) -- -- -- -- --Nana SD Nana Salt Marsh -- -- -- -- --

Total 4 41.1 2,883 

/46.3) (3,757) 6.4 1,873 65 

I. Sonoma Valley (IA) 5.2 mile pipeline and pumping capacity examined in EIS, but is no longer proposed 

for implementation under Phase 1 due to cultural resource constraints on the pipeline route. It is included in 

this table to maintain consistency with the EIS Phase I Program. Storage and pumping facilities at the 

SVCSD WWTP would still be implemented. Please refer to Section VI Decision, Table 2, for Final Phase 1 

Implementation Plan. 

2. Additional 3,460 AFY release of recycled water to Napa Salt Ponds 7 and 7 A, depending upon year type. 

Because this is a beneficial use that is not related to recycled water supply, this number is tracked 

separately in each of the alternatives. 

3. Existing 0.5 mg reservoir would be rehabilitated to provide recycled water S)'l:ltem storage. 

4. Miles and AFY in parenthesis include Sonoma Valley IA pipeline. 

Table 1 

Phase 1 Facilities 

Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District/North Marin Water District: Novato South Service Area -

Hamilton Field 

LGVSD would upgrade the existing LGVSD WWTP to 0. 7 mgd tertiary capacity and would 

construct a pipeline distribution system to serve recycled water to the Hamilton Field area. 

Novato Sanitary District!North Marin Water District: Novato North Service Area 

Novato SD and NMWD would increase the existing Novato Recycled Water Treatment Facility 

to 1.2 mgd tertiary capacity; install a booster pump; rehabilitate the existing Plum Street Tank to 

store recycle water; connect the current pipeline distribution system to the rehabilitated Plum 

Street Tank; and construct two pipeline distribution systems to serve recycled water: one toward 
A new pipeline would connect the WWTP with the North Service Area pipeline in Olive Drive. 

This would allow continuation of recycled water service to the Stone Tree Golf Course and the 

other customers in the North Service Area during the course of the relocation of the recycled 

water facility to the WWfP. lbis intertie would also incorporate the Plum Street Tank into the 

distribution system serving both the Novato North and Central Service Areas. 

Sonoma Valley Recycled Water Project (SVRWP) 

SVRWP would increase storage capacity at the existing SVCSD WWfP and increase pumping 

capacity for distributing recycled water. A pipeline distribution system to serve recycled water 

in western Sonoma Valley that was included in the EIS/EIR will not be implemented as part of 

Phase 1. 

Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District: SVCSD Napa Salt Pond Pipeline 

SVCSD would construct a recycled water distribution pipeline from the SVCSD WWTP to 

existing SVC SD storage reservoirs and to Napa Salt Marsh Ponds 7 and 7 A for habitat 

enhancement. 

Napa Sanitation District: Milliken-Sarco-Tulucay (MST) Area Project 

Napa SD would install five booster pump stations, a pipeline distribution system to serve 

recycled water to the MST Area. Potential recycled water users include the Napa State Hospital, 

the Napa Valley Country Club, and agricultural and residential parcels. 

Alternative 2: Partially Connected System 

The Partially Connected System represents the median alternative. Each local agency would 

prioritize its own projects. Additional local projects include the Peacock Gap Golf Course area, 

further development of the NMWD Urban Reuse Project, the SVRWP, and projects in Napa 

MST area and the Carneros East areas. Interconnectivity between WWTPs would be expanded 

between Novato SD and LGVSD to serve the Sear's Point Area, as well as a connection between 

SVCSD and Napa SD WWTPs. The Partially Connected System would provide 11,250 AFY of 

recycled water for irrigation use and 2,933 AFY for habitat enhancement. Under this alternative, 

SVCSD would implement a system consisting of installation of 139 miles of new pipelines, 

construction of facilities onsite at the existing WWTPs to provide 15.9 mgd of tertiary treatment 

capacity, and approximately 2,220 AF of storage, primarily at existing or planned storage ponds 

at the WWTPs. 

In most cases, the impacts for the Partially Connected System would be greater than the impacts 

under the Basic System. Although most significant impacts would be mitigated to a less-than----- -----

Alternative 3: Fully Connected System 

The Fully Connected System would maximize the local and regional reuse of recycled water, 

and, incrementally, would have the greatest facility requirements and costs of the three 

alternatives considered. It would include all of the components described under the Partially 

Connected System in addition to pipelines to extend service and connect all four WWTPs. The 

Fully Connected System requires a total of 153 miles of conveyance pipeline, construction of 

facilities onsite at the existing WWTPs to provide an additional 20.8 mgd of tertiary treatment 

capacity, and development of approximately 2,220 AF of storage, primarily at existing or 

planned storage ponds at the WWTPs. The Fully Connected System would provide 12,761 AFY 

of recycled water for irrigation use and 3,085 AFY for habitat enhancement. 

The Fully Connected System would reduce the maximum amount of discharge to the San Pablo 

Bay, offset the maximum amount of groundwater pumping, and provide the maximum amount of 

recycled water use. However, the Fully Connected System could result in adverse impacts to 

existing drainage patterns and storm water flow, as well as temporary construction-related 

impacts to water quality. 

Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

The Environmentally Preferable Alternative is the alternative that best promotes the national 

environmental policies expressed in NEPA. The environmentally preferable alternative is the 

alternative that attains the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without 

degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences, causes 

the least damage to the environment, and best protects natural and cultural resources. 

In general, all the three Action Alternatives would meet the stated project objectives and provide 

environmental benefits by offsetting surface and groundwater use, reducing the need to develop 

additional water supplies, and reducing discharge to San Pablo Bay. In contrast, neither the No 

Project Alternative nor the No Action Alternative would offset the use of potable water supplies 

at the level provided under the Action Alternatives; nor would there be a substantial change in 

the amount of treated effluent discharged to tributaries to North San Pablo Bay. hnplementation 

of the Preferred Alternative would generate 6,655 AFY ofrecycled water. 

Most of the adverse environmental impacts would be associated with facility construction and 

activities. The Preferred Alternative requires construction of the least amount of infrastructure 

among the action alternatives and relies on the use of existing facilities by rehabilitating 

reservoirs and using ponds at the WWTPs; therefore, it would result in less construction-related 

impacts relative to the other Action Alternatives. Although the Preferred Alternative would 
There would be no direct significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the Preferred 

Alternative. The EIR/EIS recommends measures to mitigate any direct significant impacts to a 

less-than-significant level; Member Agencies adopted these measures as conditions of project 

approval. Based on the comparison of environmental effects in the FEIS, the Preferred 

Alternative is the environmentally preferable alternative. 

IV. Decision 

After consideration of the analysis in the EIR/EIS, related Biological Opinion (BO) from the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and other pertinent information in the administrative 

record, Reclamation has decided to approve, and partially fund Phase 1 of the Preferred 

Alternative, as summarized above and described in detail in the administrative record. All 

NBWRA Member Agencies are required to comply with all required mitigation set forth in 

Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and the terms and 

conditions in the FWS BO. The allocation of federal funds for the design, planning, and 

construction of the Project under Title XVI of P.L.l 02-575, Title XVI, Section 1619, as 

amended, is subject to availability of Federal funds and the Member Agencies remaining in 

compliance with all applicable State and Federal rules, regulations, and decisions. 

Basis of Decision, Issues Evaluated, and Factors Considered 

Reclamation's decision to approve Phase 1 of the Preferred Alternative is based upon the 

evaluation of the alternatives discussed in the EIR/EIS and related mitigation measures and/or 

commitments described in the following paragraphs and accompanying MMRP. Phase 1 of the 

Preferred Alternative meets the purposes and objectives stated in the EIR/EIS by advancing the 

following environmental benefits: continuing the restoration of San Pablo Bay tidal wetlands 

and tributaries that contain habitat for endangered and threatened species; reducing the use of 

natural regional surface and groundwater supplies; and reducing wastewater discharge to 

regional waterways and San Pablo Bay. Phase 1 of the Preferred Alternative advances 

Reclamation's mission to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an 

environmentally and economically sound manner, and includes steps to prevent, eliminate, 

and/or minimize damage to the environment. 

Biological Resources 

Federal Section 7 Endangered Species Act Consultation - National Marine Fisheries Service 

On August 25, 2009, Reclamation submitted a Biological Assessment/Fisheries Biological 

Assessment (BA) to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and requested Section 7 

consultation

Based on best available information

on May 6

2010

NMFS concurred with 
Under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA), Reclamation is required to consult with 

NMFS on projects that propose stream modification. NMFS has no FWCA recommendations 

for the Program regarding conservation of fish and wildlife resources because NMFS determined 

the Preferred Alternative contains adequate measures to protect aquatic habitat. 

Federal Section 7 ESA Consultation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

On August 25, 2009, Reclamation submitted the BA to the FWS and requested Section 7 

consultation. On June 8, 2010, FWS issued the BO on Phase 1 of the Preferred Alternative. 

Key terms and conditions, and minimization and avoidance measures in the BO include preconstruction surveys, monitoring, and compensatory mitigation for temporary impacts to 

California red-legged frog habitat and are listed below: 

• Reclamation shall adhere to the Description of the Proposed Action through the NBWRA 

specific funding agreement (i.e., cooperative agreement). As providing Federal funds 

requires SCWA and other NBWRA Member Agencies to remain complaint with all pertinent 

rules, regulations, and permits (including the BO), the cooperative agreement requires that 

SCW A and other NBWRA Member Agencies receiving Federal funds will remain compliant 

with the avoidance and minimization measures of the BO. 

• Construction activities will be confined to the dry season. No project-related activities will 

occur within 48 hours of precipitation. No project-related activities will occur from 

November I through April 31. 

• All streams will be crossed using trenchless techniques. • A qualified biologist, approved by the FWS (Service-approved biologist), will train all 

project staff regarding habitat sensitivity, identification of red-legged frogs, and these 

minimization and avoidance measures before the start of construction. All employees or 

contractors must complete this training prior to beginning any project-related work. A 

Service-approved biologist is defined as any person who has completed at least 4 years of 

university training in wildlife biology or a related science and/or has demonstrated field 

experience with red-legged frogs. The training must include the minimization and avoidance 

measures that are being implemented to avoid and minimize adverse affects to listed species 

as they relate to the project, the penalties for non-compliance, and the boundaries of the 

project area. 

• Within 15 calendar days, prior to the onset of activities, the applicant shall submit the names 

and credentials of any biologists who would conduct activities specified in the following 
work activities begin. Only Service-approved biologists will participate in activities 

associated with the capture, handling, and monitoring ofred-legged frogs. Any biologist 

involved with the surveying/handling will employ sterilization techniques appropriate to 

avoid the transmission of diseases to or from the site. 

• A Service-approved biologist will be present at the work site until all California red-legged 

frog removal, work instruction, and habitat disturbance has been completed. After this time, 

the applicant or contractor will designate a person to monitor on-site compliance with all 

minimization measures. The Service-approved biologist will ensure that this individual 

receives the training outlined in minimization and avoidance measure number three and in 

the identification of the red-legged frog. The Service-approved biologist and on-site monitor 

will have the authority to and shall halt any action that might result in effects that exceed the 

levels anticipated by the Service during review of the proposed action. If work is stopped, 

the Service will be notified within 1 working day of the incident by the approved biologist or 

on-site biological monitor. 

• Vehicle speed will be limited to 10 miles per hour within the project footprint. 

• Vehicular traffic will be confined to existing roads, designated project staging areas, and the 

project footprint. 

• To prevent inadvertent entrapment oflisted species, all excavated steep-walled holes or 

trenches will be sufficiently covered at the end of each workday with plywood or similar 

materials that prevent entrapment of red-legged frogs. All holes will be inspected for 

entrapped red-legged frogs daily, prior to any work activities, and before any such trenches 

or holes are filled. 

• Pipes measuring 4 inches or greater in diameter that are stored at the site will be sealed at 

each end to prevent any listed species from becoming trapped in such pipes. 

• Before construction begins, the project engineer and a Service-approved biologist will 

identify locations for equipment, personnel access, and materials staging to minimize 

disturbance to red-legged frog habitat. 

• All construction equipment must be in good working condition, showing no signs of fuel or 

oil leaks. 

• All fueling and maintenance of vehicles and other equipment and staging areas shall occur at 

least 65 feet from any riparian or aquatic habitat
• Erosion control fabric will consist of natural fibers that will biodegrade over time. No mesh 

erosion control fabric that contains mesh holes smaller than% inch by 1 Yi inch will be 

installed. Only loosely woven jute, used to contain straw and prevent erosion, will be used. 

• Prior to the close of the work window, temporarily disturbed areas will be revegetated with 

native species specific to the project location. 

• No trash will be deposited on the site during construction activities. All trash will be placed 

in trash receptacles with secure lids or stored in vehicles, and removed at the end of each 

work day from the project site. 

• Following construction, all construction debris will be removed from work areas. 

• To compensate for the temporary disturbance of22.32 acres of red-legged frog habitat, the 

applicant will purchase 2.25 acres of red-legged frog habitat credits from a Service-approved 

conservation bank. Credits will be purchased within 6 months of groundbreaking activities. 

• Prior to initiating any groundbreaking activities at the SVRWP Service Area for the purpose 

of constructing the 24-acre water storage pond where a vineyard currently exists, red-legged 

frog protocol surveys will be conducted along 4,000 linear feet of Schell Creek, from 8th 

Street to San Louis Road. If evidence of the red-legged frog is found within this reach of 

Schell Creek, the applicant will compensate for the pennanent loss of red-legged frog 

dispersal habitat by purchasing red-legged frog habitat credits from a Service-approved 

conservation bank at a ratio of 1: 1. 

• The NBWRA and its Member Agencies will not provide recycled water hookups from the 

proposed project for any land that is undeveloped on the date of signature of the BO (i.e., 

June 8, 2010), land that has not been converted to or planted with crops or other cultivated 

plants on the date of the signature of the BO (i.e., June 8, 2010), or any other property that 

would undergo land-use conversion as a result of the recycled water hookup, unless the 

development, land use conversion, or proposed land use is in compliance with the ESA. 

Compliance will be verified by one of the following: 1) authorization for incidental take 

issued by the Service via Section 7 or section 10 of the ESA; or 2) a letter from FWS 

indicating the development or land use conversion is not likely to adversely affect any listed 

species. 

In addition, the BO also requires the member agencies to submit a post-construction compliance 

report prepared by the on-site biologist to the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office within 60 

calendar days of the date of completion of construction activity. This report shall detail: 1) dates 
Compliance with Other Regulations 

NBWRA, its Member Agencies, and Reclamation are and shall continue to comply with all 

applicable federal rules, regulations, and decisions. NBWRA Member Agencies are pursuing or 

have acquired pennit(s) for individual projects as appropriate, including pennits from the United 

States Army Corps of Engineers authorizing the undertaking of the Preferred Alternative 

pursuant to Section IO of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403), Section 404 of the 

Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), and Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and 

Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1413). NBWRA Member Agencies are pursuing water 

quality certification(s) for individual projects, pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act 

from the State Water Resources Control Board and San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality 

Control Board, as appropriate. 

Pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800 (as amended 8-05-2004) regulations implementing Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act, Reclamation will consult with the State Historic 

Preservation Officer (SHPO) and other interested parties regarding Phase 1 of the Preferred 

Alternative's effects on historic properties. No ground disturbing activities will be initiated until 

Reclamation completes the Section 106 compliance process. In the event that unanticipated 

historic properties are discovered or affected after Reclamation completes the Section 106 

compliance process, the NBWRA and its Member Agencies shall immediately notify 

Reclamation. In such an event, NBWRA and its Member Agencies shall follow the procedures 

identified in 36 CFR Part 800.13 (b), with Reclamation serving as the lead federal agency for any 

required Section 106 consultations. 

Consideration of Environmental hnpacts 

As indicated in Section IV, supra, implementing Phase 1 of the Preferred Alternative would 

achieve the Project's purpose and specific objectives summarized above in Section II by 

providing recycled water for agricultural, urban, and environmental uses and to promote the 

expanded, beneficial use of recycled water in the North San Pablo Bay region. Based on the 

analysis presented in the EIR/EIS, the majority of impacts would result from construction 

activities. These are temporary impacts that can and will be mitigated through implementation 

of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR/EIS and M:MRP. 

As identified in the EIR/EIS, Phase 1 of the Preferred Alternative will have secondary effects 

that cannot be fully mitigated through project redesign or mitigation. These include secondary 

impacts related to implementing approved General Plans within the greater North San Pablo Bay 

area. Some of the impacts, such as incompatibility ofland uses, air quality, noise, traffic issues, 

and loss of habitat and historical resources, will be reduced by mitigation measures identified in 

the approved General Plans. However, impacts related to development under the approved 

General Plans, such as land use changes to urban uses in unincorporated Marin County, 
VI. Comments on Final Environmental Impact Report/Final 

Environmental Impact Statement 

On June 3, 2010, SCWA, on behalf of the NBWRA, transmitted the FEIS to Reclamation. On 

June 7, 2010, Reclamation published a Notice of Availability for the FEIS in the Federal 

Register, Volume 75, No. 108. Reclamation filed the FEIS with EPA on June 8, 2010, provided 

the FEIS to the Department of Interior's library, and published a press release for the FEIS on 

June 11, 2010. Reclamation distributed copies of the FEIS to the Member Agencies, the regional 

EPA and DOI offices, libraries, and members of the public requesting a copy. In total, 56 hard 

copies were distributed. 

No comments were received on the FEIS. 

VII. Implementing the Decision and Environmental 

Commitments 

The Member Agencies have adopted all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental 

hann for Phase 1 of the Preferred Alternative and are committed to ensuring that measures 

identified in the EIR/EIS are implemented. The MMRP summarizes all the environmental commitments and mitigation for Phase 1 of the 

Preferred Alternative, specifies the party(ies) responsible for implementation, and provides a 

schedule for completion of all activities; Reclamation has no responsibilities outlined within the 

MMRP. Separately, through the cooperative agreements, Reclamation will require the Member 

Agencies to implement the Reasonable and Prudent Measure (RPM) set forth in the Incidental 

Take Permit in the BO for Phase 1 of the Preferred Alternative. The BO has one term and 

condition which implements the RPM. 1bat term and condition is to adhere to the project 

description which includes the measures listed in Section V, supra. Furthermore, as mentioned 

above, the Member Agencies will also write the post-construction compliance report listed 

above. 

Implementation of the MMRP and RPM is the responsibility of the Member Agencies listed 

below. On the following dates, these agencies adopted the attached MMRP as conditions of 

Project approval as required under CEQA: 

Sonoma County Water Agency - December 8, 2009 

Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District- December 10, 2009 

Novato Sanitary District- December 14, 2009