HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/05/1992, C-7 - CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - INSTREAM FLOW STUDY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CREEK FOR THE WATER RECLAMATION PROGRAM. IIIN^lyllll�llllll�l�l II� MEETING DATE:
Iltl I��IIII cityof San LUIS OBIspO May 5 1992
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER. _7
FROM: William T. Hetland PREPARED BY: John E. Moss
Utilities Director Wastewater Division Manager
and, Robert Livick
Water Reclamation Coordinator
SUBJECT:
Contract for Professional Services - Instream Flow Study of San
Luis Obispo Creek for the Water Reclamation Program.
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
By motion approve and authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement
with Thomas R. Payne and Associates in the amount not to exceed
$14 , 305 for completion of an Instream Flow Study of San Luis
Obispo Creek.
DISCUSSION:
On January 13 , 1992 an agreement was approved with Thomas R. Payne
and Associates to perform a preliminary fisheries study of San
Luis Qbispo Creek. That study was an effort to identify potential
impacts on the creek habitat as a result of the future reduction
in reclaimed water that is currently discharged to San Luis Obispo
Creek and to identify areas of concern that would require
additional evaluation.
On January 22, 1992 , Staff met with personnel from the California
Department of Fish and Game, California Regional Water Quality
Control Board, Central Coast Salmon Enhancement, Land Conservancy
of San Luis Obispo County, and Thomas R. Payne to review the
results of the preliminary study. At this meeting it was
determined that in order to thoroughly evaluate the environmental
impact of the reduction in reclaimed water flow discharged to San
Luis Obispo Creek, and to quantify the needed continued discharge
of reclaimed water to San Luis Obispo Creek to maintain the
desired level of riparian habitat, it would be necessary to
perform an Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM) study of
San Luis Obispo Creek.
The IFIM study will evaluate the impact of reduced flows to San
Luis Obispo Creek by controlling the release of reclaimed water
from the City's reclamation facility to produce a known range of
flow conditions in the creek. Each flow condition will be
evaluated through application of physical habitat modeling of the
relationship between streamflow and total wetted surface area.
The study .will include habitat mapping and modeling for the
various habitat types found along San Luis Obispo Creek from the
reclamation facility discharge downstream to the Pacific Ocean.
Detailed information oft the IFIM procedures proposed may be found
in the attached proposal and scope of work. The results of the
study will be incorporated into the Water Reclamation Project
I
�Ilill�iiimlllllllll�il1111111 city of San t s osIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Thomas R. Payne and Associates
IFIM Study
Page 2
i
I
i
Environmental Impact Report that is currently being prepared by
Staff.
CONCURRENCES:
As stated earlier, Staff met with the California Department of
Fish and Game, California Regional Water Quality Control Board,
Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County, Salmon Enhancement and
Thomas R. Payne to evaluate the preliminary study and determine
the next appropriate course of action. At this meeting it was
agreed that and IFIM would be necessary to- adequately identify the
impacts of a reduced effluent discharge and provide a technical
basis for quantifying the required discharge necessary to maintain
a desired level of riparian habitat.
i Both U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFW) and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) have reviewed the proposed study. USFW
and NMFS have indicated that the proposed study will adequately
address the impact to creek habitat as it relates to water
quantity.
Both the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and Central
Coast Salmon Enhancement (CCSE) have expressed concerns regarding
the adequacy of the proposed study. Specifically these concerns
are:
i
1.. Perform the study when natural stream flows are low.
2 . Measure water depth and velocity at each sampling
station.
3 . Use generalized steelhead rearing curves to generate
weighted usable area versus flow curves.
Both City Staff and the Consultant agree with the first two
concerns and these concerns were addressed in the study plan.
But, the consultant strongly disagrees with concern 3 . This
concern .relates to a desire to alter the study methodology to
evaluate not only the impact the reduction of wastewater flow to
the creek, but to a goal of creating enhanced conditions in order
to support cold water species, such as steelhead trout. Staff
recommends that the IFIM study be performed as proposed by the
Consultant. The study will be structured so that the
aforementioned curves may be applied at a later date. The
comments from DFG and CCSE along with the Consultant's response to
the comments are provided as attachments 1,2 and 3 .
C�- 7-
II����►�►►►i�i►Illlllllli� ��lllll City of san us ogIspo
ii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Thomas R. Payne and Associates
IFIM Study
Page 3
I
I
FISCAL IMPACT:
Total cost for completion of the IFIM study is $14 , 305. Included
i in the attached proposal from Thomas R. Payne and Associates is a
detailed cost estimate. Funding for this project is from the
Sewer fund, Wastewater Administration Operating Budget, Contract
Services, account #052-5072-008-119. Funding for these services
was approved in the 1991-93 Financial Plan and Approved 1991-92
Budget, page D-42 . Prior expenditure related to this project was
for the aforementioned preliminary fisheries study which totaled
$3,773.24. j
This request is being made in accordance with City Finance
Management Manual, Section 207-D, Contracting for Professional
Services Costing greater than $10, 000. Competitive purchasing
i procedures were not used in seeking this proposal. Thomas R.
Payne and Associates was chosen because of the firm's familiarity
with the project resultant from the previous preliminary fisheries
study, the known quality of their work, their standing and
relationship with the regulatory agencies involved, and upon
recommendation of the City's Water Rights Attorney, Mr. Scott
Slater.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Council may direct Staff to not perform the Study to
determine the flow requirements for the maintenance of
riparian habitat in San Luis Obispo Creek and suspend
negotiations. The flow of reclaimed water to San Luis Obispo
Creek would be based on the City's Water Rights and the
quantity of remaining reclaimed water after implementation of
the Water Reclamation Program. This alternative is not
recommended. This alternative is contrary to existing policy
established by Council and would require a change to the
Reclaimed Water Priority Policy.
2. Council may wish to direct staff to solicit proposals for the
required IFIM study from other consultants. This alternative
is not recommended as Staff feels there would be little
possibility of financial savings, Thomas R. Payne and
Associates is already familiar with the project needs, the
habitat of San Luis Obispo Creek and has an established
reputation with the various groups and agencies involved in
the project.
���n�►n►►►�iIIII�IIP��u►91�11� city of San tins OBISpo
i COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Thomas R. Payne and Associates
IFIM Study
Page 4
3 . Council may direct Staff to defer this Study until a later
date. This alternative is not recommended. Evaluation of
the flow requirements of San Luis Obispo -Creek is currently
the most significant step of the Wastewater Reclamation
Project. Until the flow requirement is established, Staff is
limited as to further development of the project as the
amount of reclaimed water available for other reclaimed uses
cannot be determined. Failure to proceed with this project
will result in not meeting the program goal of having a
reclaimed water program in operation by 1994 .
Attachments:
1. Agreement
2 . Comments from California Department of Fish & Game (DFG) and
Central Coast Salmon Enhancement (CCSE)
3 . Response from Thomas R. Payne & Associates to DFG and CCSE
comments
C' /
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AND THOMAS R. PAYNE & ASSOCIATES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this day of
1992, by and between City of San Luis Obispo or "CITY", and
Thomas R. Payne and Associates, "CONSULTANT."
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, CITY desires to retain certain services in conjunction with the
development of the Water Reclamation Program;
WHEREAS, CITY desires to engage consultant to provide services by
reason of its qualifications and experience for performing such services;
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has offered to provide the required services on
the terms and in the manner set forth herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows:
I. PROJECT COORDINATION
A. CITY
The CITY Utilities Director, William T. Hetland, or his designated
representative, shall be the representative of the CITY for all purposes under this
agreement and Robert A. Livick, Water Reclamation Coordinator)is designated
as the Project Manager for the CITY. The Project Manager shall supervise the
progress and execution of this agreement.
B. CONSULTANT
Thomas Payne is hereby designated as Coordinator and Project Manager
for CONSULTANT. Should circumstances or conditions subsequent to the
execution of this agreement require a substitute Coordinator and Project Manager
for any reason, other than those designated above, the Coordinator and Project
Manager designee shall be subject to the prior written acceptance and approval
of'the CITY's Project Manager.
1
II. DUTIES OF CONSULTANT
A Description of Project
Provide a Instream Flow Study of San Luis Obispo Creek for the City of
San Luis Obispo's Water Reclamation Program. Any changes in the Project as
described will be incorporated by written Amendment executed by the CITY's
Project Manager and CONSULTANT.
B. Scope of Technical Services
CONSULTANT agrees to perform those services which are described in
detail hereafter. Unless modified in writing by the parties hereto, duties of
CONSULTANT shall not be construed to exceed those services specifically set forth
herein.
1. Detailed scope of work identifying methods, personnel, location, cost of
services, manhours and a project schedule may be found in the proposal
submitted by Thomas R. Payne and Associates on March 25, 1992
included as Exhibit B.
C. Release of Reports and Information
•
Any reports, information, data, or other material given to, or prepared or
assembled by, CONSULTANT under this agreement shall be the property of CITY
and shall not be made available to any individual or organization by
CONSULTANT without the prior written approval of the CITY's Project Manager.
D. Copies of Reports and Information
If CITY requests additional copies of reports, drawings, specifications, or any
other material in addition to what the CONSULTANT is required to furnish in
limited quantities as part of the services under this agreement, CONSULTANT shall
provide such additional copies as are requested, and CITY shall compensate
CONSULTANT for the costs of duplicating of such copies at CONSULTANT's direct
expense.
E. Oualifications of Consultant
CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified to furnish the services described
under this agreement.
III. DUTIES OF CITY
CITY agrees to cooperate with CONSULTANT and to provide any streamflow
and fisheries habitat data available, as requested.
2
IV. COMPENSATION
For the services described in Exhibit B which are to be performed by the
CONSULTANT, the CITY agrees to pay, and the CONSULTANT agrees to accept,
compensation at the rates estimated for labor, travel, equipment, materials and
supplies as stated in exhibit B. In no event shall the CITY be obligated to pay
more than $14,305 unless this contract is amended in writing signed by both
parties. Payment shall be made within 30 days of the completion of all work.
V. AUTHORIZATION PROGRESS, AND COMPLETION
Specific authorization to proceed with the work described in Exhibit B shall
be granted in writing by the CITY within a reasonable time after the effective
date of this Agreement. The CONSULTANT shall not proceed with the work
without such authorization. The work shall be completed within 60 days after
receipt of the authorization to proceed.
VI. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION
The CrrY's Project Manager shall have the authority to suspend this
agreement wholly or in part, for such period as he deems necessary due to
unfavorable conditions or to the failure on the part of the CONSULTANT to
perform any provision of this agreement. CONSULTANT will be paid the
compensation due and payable to the date of temporary suspension.
VII. SUSPENSION: TERMINATION
A. Right to Suspend or Terminate
The CITY retains the right to terminate this agreement for any reason by
notifying CONSULTANT in writing seven (7) days prior to termination and by
paying the compensation due and payable to the date of termination; provided,
however, if this agreement is terminated for fault of CONSULTANT, CITY shall be
obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of consulting services
which are of benefit to CITY. Said compensation is to be arrived at by mutual
agreement of the CITY and CONSULTANT and should they fail to agree, then an
independent arbitrator is to be appointed and his decision shall be binding upon
the parties.
B. Return of Materials
Upon such termination, CONSULTANT shall turn over to the CITY
immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations and
3
other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT, and for which
CONSULTANT has received reasonable compensation, or given to CONSULTANT in
connection with this agreement. Such materials shall become the permanent
property of CITY. CONSULTANT, however, shall not be liable for CITY'S use of
complete documents if used for other than the project contemplated by this
agreement.
VIII. INSPECTION
CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with every reasonable opportunity for CITY
to ascertain that the services of CONSULTANT are being performed in accordance
with the requirements and intentions of this agreement. All work done and all
materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the CITY Project Manager's
inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve
CONSULTANT of any of its obligations to fulfill its agreement as prescribed.
IX. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS
All original drawings, plans, documents and other materials prepared by or in
possession of CONSULTANT pursuant to this agreement shall become the
permanent property of the CrrY, and shall be delivered to the CITY upon
demand.
X. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT
Failure of CITY to agree with CONSULTANT'S independent findings,
conclusions, or recommendations, if the same areas called for under this
agreement, on the basis of difference in matters of judgment shall not be
construed as a failure on the part of the CONSULTANT to meet the requirements
of this agreement.
XI. ASSIGNMENT: SUBCONTRACTOR'S EMPLO
This agreement is for the performance of professional technical services of
the CONSULTANT and is not assignable by the CONSULTANT without prior
consent of the CITY in writing. The CONSULTANT may employ other specialists
to perform special services as required with prior approval by the CITY.
XII. NOTICE
All notices hereunder shall be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid,
by Certified Mail, addressed as follows:
4
C-7 8
To CITY: Pam Voges
City Clerk Department
City of San Luis Obispo
P.O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
To CONSULTANT: Thomas R. Payne & Associates
P.O. Box 4678
850 G Street, Suite J
Arcata, CA 95521
M. INTEREST OF CONSULTANT
CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not
acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would
conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the services hereunder.
CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this agreement,
no subcontractor or person having such an interest shall be employed.
CONSULTANT certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest
under this agreement is an officer or employee of CITY. It is expressly agreed
that, in the performance of the services hereunder, CONSULTANT shall at all
times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of
CITY.
XIV. INDEMNITY
CONSULTANT hereby agrees to indemnify and save harmless CITY, its officers,
agents, and employees of and from:
A. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against CITY, its
officers, agents or employees by reason of any injury to or death of any person or
corporation caused by any negligent act or omission of CONSULTANT under this
agreement or of CONSULTANT employees or agents;
B. Any and all damage to or destruction of any property, including the
property of CITY, its officers, agents, or employees, occupied or used by or in the
care, custody or control of CONSULTANT, or in proximity to the site of
CONSULTANT's work, caused by any negligent act or omission of CONSULTANT
under this agreement or of CONSULTANT's employees or agents;
C. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against CITY, its
officers, agents, or employees by reason of any injury to or death of or damage
suffered or sustained by any employee or agent of CONSULTANT under this
5
C- 7-q
agreement, however caused, excepting, however, any such claims and demands
which are the result of the negligence or willful misconduct of CITY, its officers,
agents, or employees.
D. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against CITY, its
officers, agents, or employees by reason of any infringement or alleged
infringement of any patent rights or claims caused by the use of any apparatus,
appliance, or materials furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement; and
E. Any and all penalties imposed or damages sought on account of the
violation of any law or regulation or of any term or condition of any permit, when
said violation of any law or regulation or of any term or condition of any permit
is due to negligence on the part of the CONSULTANT.
Consultant, at its own costs, expense, and risks, shall defend any and all suits,
actions, or other legal proceedings that may be brought against or for employees
on any such claim or demand of such third persons, or to enforce any such
penalty, and pay and satisfy any judgment or decree that may be rendered against
CITY, its officers, agents or employees in any such suit, action or other legal
proceeding, when same were due to negligence of the CONSULTANT.
XV. WORKERS COMPENSATION
CONSULTANT certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of
the State of California, which requires every employer to be insured against
liability for workers compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance
with the provisions of that code, and it certifies that it will comply with such
provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this agreement.
XVI. INSURANCE
The CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract
insurance which meets the requirements of Exhibit A; except as Exhibit A
pertains to the requirement for "Errors and Omissions Liability Insurance."
"Errors and Omissions Liability Insurance" is not appropriate to the
CONSULTANTS profession and is not required for the work included in this
Agreement. As evidence of this insurance, the CONSULTANT shall provide the
CITY with a Certificate of Insurance and an Endorsement naming the CITY as
"Additional Insured".
XVII. AGREEMENT BINDING
The terms, covenants, and conditions of this agreement shall apply to, and
shall bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assigns, and
subcontractors of both parties.
6
XVIII.WAIVERS
The waiver of either party of any breach or violation of any terms, covenant,
or condition of this agreement or of any provision, ordinance or law shall not be
deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of violation of the same or of.
any other term, covenant, condition, ordinance, or law. The subsequent
acceptance by either party of any fee or other money which may become due
hereunder shall not be to be a waiver of any preceding breach or violation by the
other party of any term, covenant, or condition of this agreement or of any
applicable law or ordinance.
XIX. COSTS AND ATTORNEY'S FEES
The prevailing party in any action between the parties to'this agreement
brought to enforce the terms of this agreement or arising out of this agreement
may recover its reasonable costs and attorney's fees expended in connection with
such an action from the other party.
XX. DISCRIMINATION
- No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons under this
agreement because of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion or sex of such
person.
If CONSULTANT is found in violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of
the State of California Fair Employment Practices Act or similar provision of
federal law or executive order in the performance of this agreement, it shall
thereby be found in material breach of this agreement. Thereupon, CITY shall
have the power to cancel or suspend this agreement, in whole or in part, or to
deduct from the amount payable to CONSULTANT the sum of Twenty-Five Dollars
($25) for each person for each calendar day during which such person was
discriminated against, as damages for said breach of contract, or both. Only a
finding of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Commission or the
equivalent federal agency or officer shall constitute evidence of a violation of
contract under this paragraph.
If CONSULTANT is found in violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of
this agreement or the applicable affirmative action guidelines pertaining to this
agreement, CONSULTANT shall be found in material breach of the agreement.
Thereupon, CITY shall have the power to cancel or suspend this agreement, in
whole or in part, or to deduct from the amount payable to CONSULTANT the sum
of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250) for each calendar day during which
CONSULTANT is found to have been in such noncompliance as damages for said
breach of contract, or both.
3
7
XXI. AGREEMENT CONTAINS ALL UNDERSTANDTNGS
This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between CITY
and CONSULTANT and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or
agreements, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by
written instrument, signed by both CITY and CONSULTANT. All provisions of this
agreement are expressly made conditions. This agreement shall be governed by
the laws of the State of California.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and CONSULTANT have executed this
agreement on the day and year first above written.
XXII. SUBCONTRACTS
CONSULTANT shall be entitled, to the extent determined appropriate by the
CONSULTANT, to subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this
Project. CONSULTANT shall negotiate and administer subcontracts in accordance
with 40 CFR 33.295. The CONSULTANT shall be responsible to the CITY for the
action of persons and firms performing subcontract work.
The CONSULTANT is authorized by the CITY to subcontract work having a
cost which will not exceed 50 percent of the total amount of compensation due
under this agreement. Subcontractors selected shall be approved in writing by the
CITY Project Manager.
XXIII.JURISDICTION
This agreement shall be administered and interpreted under the laws of the
State of California. Jurisdiction of litigation arising from this agreement shall be
in that state. If any part of this agreement is found to be in conflict with
applicable laws, such part shall be inoperative, null, and void insofar as it is in
conflict with said laws, but the remainder of the agreement shall be in full force
and effect
XXIV.BUSINESS LICENSE
The Contractor and all subcontractors shall have appropriate business
licenses in accordance with the CITY of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
8
ATTEST:
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A Municipal Corporation
Signature Date
CONSULTANT:
)/L�- L 2-- a-
Signature Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
r
Aporney Date
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
John D City AdministratZ Officer Date
William C. Statler, Director of Finance Da e
9
Exhibit A
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSULTANTS
Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or
damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant,
his agents, representatives, employees.
Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/67) covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 (any auto).
3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the Slate of California and Employer's Liability Insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the consultant's profession.
Minimum limits of Insurance
Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: S1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and properly damage. If
Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate
limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required
occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: 51,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Employer's Liability: 51,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Deductible and Self-insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either:
the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations,
claim administration and defense expenses.
Other Insurance Provisions
The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects:
liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations
of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or
borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection
afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers.
2. For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects
the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the
City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall
not contribute with it
3. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not
affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers.
4. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought,
except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
S. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended,
voided, cancelled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice
by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than AVII.
Verification of Coverace
Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements
are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received
and approved by the City before work commences.
EXHIBIT B
WASTEWATER RECLAMATION PROJECT
SAN LUIS OBISPO CREEK
INSTREAM FLOW STUDY PLAN
Introduction
The Utilities Department of the City of San Luis Obispo is currently
upgrading the extent of treatment of wastewater generated within the
City' s service area. In the interest of water conservation, the
Utilities Department proposes to enter into contracts to provide
reclaimed tertiary treated water to irrigation and industrial users .
The reclaimed water would offset the use of potable water for these
purposes and extend available supplies .
Currently, treated wastewater is discharged from .the City' s Water
Reclamation Plant into San Luis Obispo Creek near the intersection of
Highway 101 and Los Osos Valley Road. The discharge, located just
above the confluence of San Luis Obispo and Prefumo creeks, averages
4, 000 acre feet per year (5 . 5 cubic feet per second) . This water
provides the only year-round flow in lower San Luis Obispo Creek and
supports riparian and wildlife resources . Because of the overall low
quality of the discharge water, fishery resources in the lower creek
are limited to tolerant resident fish and anadromous species that
migrate into the upper watershed during natural high flow events.
Initial natural resource agency comments have identified the need to
protect fish and wildlife and determine a level of continued release
adequate to sustain flows to the estuary (CDFG 1991 ) . A preliminary
scoping meeting held in San Luis Obispo on January 22, 1992, resulted
in a proposal to utilize the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology
( IFIM) on the affected stream reach. The objective of the study
would be to describe the incremental relationship between streamflow
and total wetted stream surface area of lower San Luis Obispo Creek.
The IFIM was developed by the Instream Flow Group of the U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service in the late 1970' s to allow an evaluation of
alternative flow regimes for water development projects (Bovee and
Milhous 1978) . Improvements have subsequently been made in the pro-
cess of IFIM scoping and results interpretation (Bovee 1982) , in
approaches to defining study reaches (Morhardt et al. 1984) , and in
techniques of Physical Habitat Simulation (PHABSIM) computer modeling
and analysis (Milhous et al. 1984; Milhous and Schneider 1985; Mil-
hous et al. 1989) .
Study Area
From the wastewater outfall just above Prefumo Creek, San Luis Obispo
Creek flaws 7 .4 miles to the ocean at Avila Beach. Two intermittent
tributaries, Acacia and Davenport creeks, enter San Luis Obispo Creek
from the east at Stream Miles (SM) 6 . 1 and 5 . 51 respectively. Drain-
age from the Irish Hills to the west of the creek is provided by See
Canyon Creek at SM 2 . 0. All of San Luis Obispo Creek downstream of
See Canyon Creek is either estuary or a backwater behind Mar.re Dam, a
low sheet piling structure near SM 1 . 4 . Upstream of the outfall the
creek is typically intermittent but permanent flows are present with-
in the boundaries of the City and in the headwaters and many higher
. elevation tributaries . Numerous small springs in the watershed pro-
vide reliable sources of water.
Discharge from the treatment plant vary depending on the daily water
usage patterns within the city. Flow drops to a low overnight near
2 .5 cubic feet per second (cfs ) when little water is used and peaks
during the day at approximately 6 . 5 cfs (Figure 1 ) . Peak weekend use
is slightly less than peak weekday use. Between the collection sys-
tem and the outfall there is about a 24-hour time delay for passage
through the facility.
Fisheries resources in the upper watershed consist predominantly of
rainbow trout, which are alsopresent in See Canyon Creek. Above
migration barriers, these fish would be resident-strain rainbow
trout, while areas accessible to the ocean support the anadromous
steelhead rainbow trout. The degree to which there may be genetic
overlap between the two strains is not clearly defined in southern
California stocks. Also present in some areas of the creek upstream
of the outfall are three-spine stickleback and speckled dace. A
chinook-salmon pen-rearing project in the estuary has reportedly
resulted in adult salmon migrating to upstream areas. These fish are
unlikely to become established in San Luis Obispo Creek because of
their life history needs and the intermittent character of the creek.
Downstream of the outfall there are presently few fish. The species
reported include carp, goldfish, bluegill, prickly sculpin, Pacific
lamprey, and mosquitofish, along with invertebrate crayfish and ver-
tebrate pond turtles . Tidewater gobies have recently been identified
in the estuary below Marre Dam.
Studer Methods
Project Scoping
Application of the IFIM normally begins with a scoping process to
establish the objectives and analytical framework of the study (Bovee
1982) . Personnel from the California Department of Fish and Game,
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Salmon
Enhancement, Land Conservancy. of San Luis Obispo County, City of San
Luis Obispo, and Thomas R. Payne & Associates (fisheries consultants)
participated ,in an initial discussion session on January 22, 1992 .
Existing conditions in the watershed and potential methods of study
were examined. Several variables, including water quality and
hydrology were considered as part of the process. Streamflow was
identified as the most significant variable affecting. fish and wild-
life populations downstream of the treatment plant.
It was decided to initiate a study of potential flow releases through
application of physical habitat modeling of the relationship between
2
streamflow and total wetted surface area. The proposed method is a
standard PHABSIM approach incorporating habitat mapping, transect
placement, hydraulic data collection, and computer simulation.
Weighted usable area habitat modeling will not be incorporated into
. the study unless the streamflow-wetted area modeling is found
inadequate to assess potential impacts and negotiate an acceptable
level of release. Several issues preclude meaningful application of
habitat models to San Luis Obispo Creek, including existing and post-
project differences in water quality, a scarcity of resident species
in the project area, and a lack of appropriate species criteria
curves . The data collected, however, will be compatible with later
incorporation of weighted usable area concepts, if necessary.
Habitat Mapping
The. percentages and locations of all significant habitat types in
lower San Luis. Obispo Creek would be- determined. by habitat mapping.
Starting at Marre Dam the creek would be walked upstream to the
treatment plant outfall and the distance to the boundary of each hab-
itat type (i.e. pool, riffle, run) would be measured by hip chain.
The location of all landmarks (bridges, tributaries ) would be noted
and distance markers would be placed at regular intervals . Habitat
mapping will form the basis for transect selection and calculation of
habitat-type percentages throughout the reach or in any selected sub-
reach.
Transect Selection
Transect placement would be accomplished by a combination of random
selection and professional judgment in the following steps:
1) All stream reaches within the project area that are accessible
and open to study will be identified and designated for random tran-
sect placement.
2) Within the accessible areas, the habitat type with the lowest
percentage of abundance (from the habitat mapping data) will used as
the basis for random selection (provided that the habitat type is
ecologically significant) .
3) All habitat units of this type within the accessible distance
would be sequentially numbered and a minimum of five units selected
by random number.
4) In the field, the first selected unit would be relocated and, if
judged to be modelable and reasonably typical, a transect would be
placed that would best represent the habitat type.
5). At least one example of each remaining habitat type would then be
located in the immediate vicinity of the random transect (upstream or
downstream) until transects were placed in all significant types .
6) The second randomly selected unit would then be relocated and the
process repeated. (The third or higher randomly selected units would
be selected only as initial units are rejected. )
7) The above steps would be repeated until three clusters of four to
six transects each are placed in the study area, for a total of
twelve to eighteen transects .
3
The proposed process has the advantage of using randomization for
selection without precluding the use of professional judgment for
sites that are unrepresentative or unworkable. It also establishes a
systematic process and minimizes the time required for habitat evalu-
ation in the field. Agency representatives would have the option of
assisting with transect selection in all reaches , in the more readily
accessible reaches, or by review and acceptance of the standardized
approach.
Data Collection
The process of field data collection and the form of data recording
will basically follow the guidelines established in the IFG field
techniques manuals (Trihey and Wegner 1981 ; Milhous et al . 1984) ,
supplemented by additional quality control checks . Discharge meas-
urement will generally follow the guidelines outlined by. Rantz
( 1982) . A minimum of 20 wetted stations per stream transect will be
established, with a goal of no less than 15 wetted stations at the
lowest measured flow. The boundaries of each station along each
transect will be normally at even increments, but significant changes
in velocity, substrate, depth, or other important stream habitat fea-
tures may dictate additional stationing.
Stream discharge at each cluster and water surface elevation at each
transect will be measured at target study flows of 2, 4, and 8 cfs .
Limited flow control is available from the treatment plant, which may
reduce the accuracy of target flows and restrict the duration they
will be available for measurement. The selected flows will enable
the hydraulic model to simulate wetted area over the range of flows
from 40% of the low measured flow to 250% of the high measured flow
(approximately 1 to 20 cfs ) .
Cross-section profiles, headpins, tailpins, and water surface eleva-
tions will be referenced by surveying to arbitrary benchmarks . Sub-
strate composition will be described by particle size and assigned a
code for evaluating channel roughness or possible later habitat anal-
ysis (Bovee 1978) . This amount and type of data will' be suitable for
use in a hydraulic simulation with the IFG4 computer model in the no-
velocity mode for the entire range of. flows .
Data Analysis
A microcomputer version of the hydraulic simulation model IFG4 will
be used in the computer analysis. Once calibration of the data for
the no-velocity simulation is completed for IFG4, wetted area by dis-
charge will be generated. The range of flows included in the simula-
tions will be determined by the calibration flows actually obtained
in the field and by the Suitability of the hydraulic data for extrap-
olation. All transects will be weighted according to the percentage
of each habitat type present in the major designated reaches .
4
Reporting
A final report will be prepared describing the complete process of
study implementation from scoping, habitat mapping, and transect
selection to computer analysis, wetted area calculations, and the
implications of flow release alternatives . The report will be sent
to consulting agencies for their review and discussion of potential
flow releases .
Schedule
Field work is planned for the period between late February and early
March 1992, starting with habitat mapping. Hydraulic data collection
would follow transect selection and tests of travel time and flow
control procedures . Data analysis and report preparation are sched-
uled to be completed by April 1, 1992 . Agency consultation on study
results and flow recommendations would. be scheduled for April .
Literature Cited
Bovee, R.D. 1978 . Probability-of-use criteria for the family Sal-
monidae. Instream Flow Information Paper 4 . United States Fish
and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-78-07 . 79pp.
Bovee, K.D. 1982 . A guide to stream habitat analysis using the
Instream Flow Incremental Methodology. Instream Flow Informa-
tion Paper 12 . United States Fish and Wildlife Service Report
FWS/OBS-82/26 . 248pp.
Bovee, R.D. , and R.T. Milhous . 1978 . Hydraulic simulation in
instream flow studies : theory and techniques . Instream Flow
Information Paper 5 . United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Report FWS/OBS-78/33 . 129pp.
California Department of Fish and Game. 1991 . Letter from Brian
Hunter (CDFG, Yountville) to Robert Livick (City of San Luis
Obispo) , dated July 15, 1991 .
Milhous, R.T. , and D.M. Schneider. 1985 . Unpublished memorandum.
Dated 4 October 1985 . Cooperative Instream Flow Group, Ft. Col-
lins, Colorado. 3pp.
Milhous, R•.T. , D.L. Wegner, and T. Waddle. 1984 . User' s guide to
the Physical Habitat Simulation System (PHABSIM) . Instream Flow
Information Paper 11 . United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Report FWS/OBS-81/43 . v.p.
Milhous, R.T. , M.A. Updike, and D.M. Schneider. 1989 . Physical Hab-
itat Simulation System Reference Manual - Version II . Instream
Flow Information Paper No. 26 . United States Fish and Wildlife.
Service Biological Report 89 ( 16 ) . v.p.
Morhardt, J.E. , D.F. Hanson, and P.J. Coulston. 1984 . Instream flow
analysis : increased accuracy using habitat mapping. Ecological
Analysts, Inc. , Lafayette, California. 8pp.
Rantz, S.E. 1982 . . Measurement and computation of streamflow: Volume
1 . Measurements of stage and discharge. United States Geologi-
cal Survey Water Supply Paper 2175 . 284pp.
Trihey, E.W. , and D.L. Wegner. 1981 . Field data collection for use
with the Physical Habitat Simulation system of the Instream Flow
Group. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Report. 151pp.
6
C-7��o
THOMAS R. PAYNE & ASSOCIATES
COST ESTIMATE PROPOSAL
3/25/92
SAN LUIS OBISPO CREEK INSTREA-M FLOW STUDY
COST VARIABLES RATE
Principal Associate, (PI2) labor/hr 75 . 00
It
" " travel/hr 37 . 50
Fishery Biologist 3, (FB3) labor/hr 40 . 00
travel/hr 20 . 00
Fishery Biologist 2, (FB2) labor/hr 35. 00
.9 .1 It
travel/hr 17 . 50
Lodging, cost/night/person 35 . 00
Meals, cost/day/person 30 . 00
Mileage, cost/mile . 30
Equipment, cost/crew/day (survey gear, meters ) 50 . 00
Miscellaneous, cost/study 200 . 00
Computer cost per reach 100. 00
JOB ELEMENTS HOURS COST
Task I - Habitat Mapping and Transect Selection
Study coordination PI2 hours 8. 00 600 . 00
Habitat mapping FB3 hours 8. 00 320 . 00
FB2 hours 8 . 00 280 . 00
Data base preparation FB2 hours 8 . 00 280 . 00
Travel, labor PI2 hours 8. 00 300 . 00
FB3 hours 8. 00 160 . 00
FB2 hours 8 . 00 140 . 00
Meals and lodging 2 days/nights 130. 00
Airfare 3 roundtrips 1200. 00
Car rental 2 days 100 . 00
Task II - Flow measurements
Labor PI2 hours 18 . 00 1350 .00
FB3 hours 18 . 00 720 . 00
FB2 hours 18 . 00 630 . 00
Meals and lodging 3 days/nights 195.00
Car rental 3 days 150 . 00
Equipment charge Days 3 . 00 450 . 00
Task III - Hydraulic simulation
Labor PI2 hours 4 . 00 300 . 00
FB3 hours 24.00 960. 00
Computer 100 . 00
C-7-�.!
Task IV - Reporting
Labor PI2 hours 8 . 00 600. 00
FB2 hours 16 . 00 640. 00
Miscellaneous costs 200 . 00
Task V - Agency Consultation
Labor PI2 hours 40 . 00 3000 . 00
Travel, labor PI2 hours 18 . 00 675. 00
Mileage 600 . 00 180. 00
Meals and lodging 3 days/nights 195. 00
Airfare 1 roundtrip 400 . 00
Car rental 1 day 50. 00
Total $14, 305. 00
ATTACHMENT 2
STATE OF CAUFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY GEeRsfi 8SUKAWlIN, Coovemcr
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
°OST OFFICE BOX 47 to
1UNTVILIF, CALIFORNIA 94599 February 27, 1992
,.07) 9445500
Mr. Rob Livick
Water Reclamation Coordinator
City of San Luis Obispo
25 Prado Road
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Dear Mr. Livick:
Fishery Releases for Wastewater Reclamation Project,
San Luis Obispo Creek, San Luis Obispo County
Department of Fish and Game personnel have had an opportunity to review
the proposed study plan submitted to your office by Mr. Thomas Payne on the
San Luis Obispo Creek Reclamation project. We have also received input from
Sacramento personnel with specific expertise in Instream Flow Incremental
Methodology. We have the following comments on this plan.
1. The current state of flow in the creek may not permit sampling of low
flow events within the time frame of the work schedule. Given recent
winter storms, flows as low as two cubic feet per second (cfs) may not
be present in the creek until later in the dry season. Since
extrapolation of more than 40 percent below the lowest flow measured is
inappropriate, it is important that the study schedule be flexible
enough to adjust for flow conditions. Needless to say, flow values of
two, four, and eight cfs must represent total creek flow including
discharge.
2. Wetted surface area provides minimal information about habitat
availability. We recommend that in addition to wetted surface area,
water depths and velocities also be collected and be incorporated into
the analysis. We realize that species criteria curves are not available
from creeks in the general vicinity to apply to wetted area modeling.
However, we believe the study results will 'be more useful if the data
from Bovee's (1978) generalized steelhead rearing curves are used to
generate weighted usable area versus flow curves.
Though this study will provide important information towards determining
flows necessary to maintain fish life, it does not provide an analysis of the
uses above and beyond those of fish life. In order for the releases to be
effective, they must be in addition to those necessary to maintain other
downstream uses which have become dependent upon presence of the effluent.
Although Section 1212 of the Water Code states that water released by a
discharger for the prior stated intention of maintaining fishery or other
instream beneficial uses is not available for downstream appropriation, it is
virtually impossible to ensure that such water not be diverted by other
C-I-a3
Mr. Rob Livick
February 27, 1992
Page Two
downstream users, unless sufficient additional water is available for their
use. The water needs of fish and wildlife cannot be considered to be the
total needs of the creek when addressing such issues in the Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) and in protest dismissal terms.
San Luis Obispo Creek currently has little, if any, rearing habitat for
steelhead below the wastewater discharge. This is undoubtedly in part because
of current water quality, but is also because of degraded habitat in the lower
creek reaches. However, positive steps are being taken by the San Luis Obispo
Land Conservancy, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and other
interested groups to acquire easements and restore habitat in the lower creek.
Effluent released to Chorro Creek 'rum the California lien's Colony wastewater
plant successfully supports coldwater species downstream, and it is our
understanding that water quality from the San Luis Obispo plant may be of
similar quality once it is upgraded. We see no reason why San Luis Obispo
Creek cannot also support a coldwater fishery, given adequate water quality
and improved habitat. Our goal is to see the creek restored to a point where
this is possible.
If you have further questions regarding our comments, please contact
Ms. Karen Worcester, Fishery Biologist, telephone (805) 772-4122, or
Ms. Cindy Chadwick, Associate Environmental Services Biologist, telephone
(916) 653-9743.
Sincerely,
Brian Hunter
Regional Manager
Region 3
cc: Mr. Ray Belknap
San Luis Obispo Land Conservancy
979 Osos
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Mr. Paul Cleveland
Central Coast Salmon Enhancement
Post Office Box 277
Avila Beach, California 93424
Mr. Howard Kolb
Regional Water Quality Control Board
81 Higuera, Suite 200
San Luis Obispo, California 93401-5427
C-7-a�
t, VInr�
IN
r,��-r rir� r�
FISH %
P.O. BOX 277 ■ AVILA BEACH, CA ■ 93424
3�°
FOR
EVERYONE
A NON-PROFIT CORPORATION
February 13, 1992
Mr. Robert Livick
Water Reclamation Coordinator
City of San Luis Obispo
25 Prado Road
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: IFIM study for San Luis Obispo Creek.
Dear Mr. Livick,
Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to review the proposal of Thomas R. Payne&
Associates. Mr. Payne is proposing an Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM) study on
lower San Luis Obispo Creek. This IFIM proposal is designed to determine the change in wetted
area in the creek as a result of a change in release of treated sewage effluent.
We ask, how will the creek function as fish and wildlife habitat with reduced flows?As Mr.
Payne pointed out at our meeting of January 22, the proposed study has a limited capacity to
describe the effects on fish and wildlife that will result from reduced flows in the creek. The
study will tell us the percent change in wetted area every 1 ,000 feet. It will not tell us if this
change will reduce the ability of a fish to pass, a deer to drink or a plant to grow.
The IFIM study will not provide us with these answers because it has nothing to compare its
results. There were no studies of the creek conducted before the treatment plant, there has
never been a release of tertiary treated water into the creek and it is not possible to reduce the
effluent flow from the facility now. Additionally, there are no available models that show
criteria for fish and wildlife in a creek such as San Luis Obispo Creek.
Science requires a certain amount of fact before it can make speculative estimates. Facts
describing the functions of the creek with reduced sewage effluent or with improved sewage ;
effluent are simply not available. To my knowledge there is no study that will give us the
answers we seek without these facts. A comprehensive qualitative study would give us a better
idea, but such a study would probably be very expensive.
We are now being given a situation that is very difficult to address. A quantity of water will be
removed from the creek. The City is concerned that a minimum flow be established to maintain a
live stream. While the IFIM study will "determine a level of continued release adequate to
sustain flows to the estuary," it will not develop criteria needed to protect fish and wildlife.
C
,�7-d5
Central Coast Salmon Enhancement, inc.
February 13, 1992
page 2
Finally, because in Mr. Payne's proposal he belittles the salmon run in San Luis Obispo Creek, I
must explain the significance of their presence. It is true they are "unlikely to become
established" in the creek. However,the contribution of these fish as an egg source, a commercial
and recreational caught species, an economic benefit, and an essential element of the ecology, can
not be denied. Further, it is possible that the reduced flows in the creek will interfere with
their instinct to return as they have been for the past four years.
In summary, while I believe Mr. Payne to be a competent fisheries biologist, I do not find that
his proposed IFIM study will provide a conclusive solution to determining the flow necessary to
protect fish and wildlife. It will "determine a level of continued release adequate to sustain flows
to the estuary."Although I do not find that the IFIM will provide us with the answers we seek, it
is probably a necessary first step to establishing minimum flow criteria.
Sincer
Paul Cleveland
Project Manager
805/489-6456
7-�
ATTACHMENT 3
J
THOMAS R. PAYNE & ASSOCIATES
FISHERIES CONSULTANTS
P.O.Box 4678
850 G Street, Suite J
Arcata,California 95521
(707)822-8478
FAX(707)822-8842
March 25, 1992
Mr. Robert Livick
City of San Luis Obispo
25 Prado Road
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
RE: Agency Comment Letters on Instream Flow Study, San Luis Obispo Creek
Dear Rob:
At your request we have reviewed two agency comment letters submitted to the
City concerning the proposed study plan we prepared for instream flow analysis
of San Luis Obispo Creek. One letter is from the California Department of Fish
and Game, dated February 27, 1992, and the second is from Central Coast Sal-
mon Enhancement, Inc., and dated February 13, 1992. Neither letter identifies
issues which have not been anticipated or which may not ultimately be resolved
through the study and subsequent discussions.
California Department of Fish and Game - The CDFG letter provides two com-
ments on the technical details of the study plan and then expresses two policy
statements on flow diversion and stream restoration. The first technical point
suggests that the target flows for the study should represent the total creek flow
including the treatment plant discharge. This is the intention of the study plan
and is necessary to cover the desired range of flows. Some discharge in the
creek and lower tributaries is allowable, however, as long as the total accretion
is no more than about 1-2 cubic feet per second (cfs). These levels can be
accounted for in the hydraulic modeling, but could limit the ability to model
total flows less than 1 cfs.
The second technical comment states that incorporating published steelhead
rearing habitat criteria into the study might provide more useful results. As we
..__discussed in the scoping meeting; there are not now any steel.head rearing in the
waste discharge and use of these criteria would give an unrealistic picture of
the.existing quantity and quality of habitat in the creek. Our opinion is that
such results would change the context of the assessment and create images of
non-existent habitat losses. We recommend that the strategy described in the
first paragraph on page 3 of the study plan be retained.
The first CDFG policy statement identifies a concern that downstream water
users will deplete any negotiated flow releases. This is a legal question and
should be handled by your legal counsel. Their last comment expresses a desire
to establish a coldwater fishery downstream of the treatment plant similar to
one they believe exists in Chorro Creek below another wastewater plant.
Whether there is any obligation on the part of the City to establish a coldwater
fishery below their plant is again a legal issue. It is unlikely that lower San
Luis Obispo Creek historically supported trout year-round, although it may have
Mr. Robert Livick
March 25, 1992
Page 2
retained intermittent pools and some fish. With today's degraded habitat result-
ing from urbanization and land use practices, a major restoration effort will be
required. Our suggestion is for the City to be supportive of this policy but to
consider the impact on the City's needs and goals: greater amounts of high qual-
ity water from the upgraded plant will increase the potential for a coldwater
fishery.
Central Coast Salmon Enhancement, Inc. - The CCSE letter mostly describes the
difficulty of making predictive environmental assessments. The proposed study
plan incorporates one of the latest techniques for improving the science, but
professional judgment and negotiations will still be required, as the letter notes.
No response appears to be needed at this time.
Please let us know if you have any questions or if we can provide further
details on any of these comments.
Sincerely,
ez9v_�
Thomas R. Pay>3le
Principal Associate
C-7�8