EXHIBIT 3-B

Scope of Work

Prop 50 planning grant application by MPWMD to develop an

Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

for the Monterey Peninsula Region

April 2005

NOTE: The scope of work shown in the items below is generally described. For detailed descriptions of each item of work, refer to the Final Proposal Solicitation Package for Planning Grants the Final Grant Program Guidelines. Table 1 - FAAST Checklist and Table B-1 - Evaluation Criteria for Planning Grants from those documents are reproduced at the end of this scope.

1. Complete Questionnaire and Upload FAAST Application

Using FAAST system, create an account for MPWMD, complete the Prop 50 questionnaire, upload attachments. See Table 1 FAAST Checklist (attached).

2. Prepare FAAST Application Attachments

2.1 Attachment 1 - Authorizing Documentation

Develop staff note and resolution for MPWMD Board adoption directing staff to apply for a planning grant for MPWMD sub-region and authorize the General Manager to enter into a contract with the state for a grant.

2.2 Attachment 2 - Eligible Applicant Documentation

Submit documentation of MPWMD’s legal authority over water and ability to enter into grant contract.

2.3 Attachment 3 – Work Plan

Background - develop background for IRWM plan (e.g., history of agency cooperation within MPWMD boundaries). Describe agencies, region, benefits of establishing this area as a region, major water-related infrastructure, quality and quantity of water resources, impaired water bodies, environmental resources, social and cultural factors, economic conditions, responsibility for plan preparation, develop geographic file depicting the region (NAD 27 UTM10 shape file).

Work Items -

• develop an outline for an IRWM plan for the region;
• identify and list planning objectives for each major resource category (e.g., satisfy Order WR 95-10 for protecting resources and developing a reliable water supply, etc.);
• identify key management issues in each watershed and/or jurisdiction;
• describe constraints (e.g., WR 95-10) and conflicts (e.g., Seaside GW Basin lawsuit) in the region; describe how the plan will meet statewide priorities;
• conduct survey of in-process, completed, and adopted planning documents at each local agency within the region;
• review adequacy of agency planning documents for future inclusion in a functionally equivalent IRWMP; identify strategies/concerns that will need additional research/planning;
• conduct survey of other applicable regional, State, and Federal plans (e.g., species recovery plans, RWQCB plans, etc.) and determine how these plans can be integrated into an IRWMP for the region;
• if known, describe integration among strategies or describe a process for developing and integrating strategies;
• review plan for conformance with IRWM guidelines;
• develop schedule and process for adopting, implementing, monitoring, and changing the IRWM;
• describe impacts and benefits of IRWM or describe process to define the impacts and evaluate the benefits; discuss compliance with CEQA
• present data to support planning objectives or describe work needed to support plan;
• discuss process for data management and dissemination;
• describe stakeholders and process for involvement in development and adoption of IRWMP;
• investigate whether there are disadvantaged communities or environmental justice concerns within the region;
• describe link between local area planning efforts and IRWMP; describe how both plans will be implemented;
• describe how IRWM facilitates coordination among local, State, and Federal agencies.

Budget – develop line item budget and estimate for each work item. Confirm that reimbursement request and matching contribution meets guidelines.

Schedule – develop a schedule consistent with the work plan.

2.4 Attachment 4 – Disadvantaged Community Supporting Information

Analyze population and economic data for the region to determine whether there are disadvantaged communities that can be identified within the region. Solicit letters of support for IRWM from leaders within disadvantaged communities. Determine amount of waiver or reduction of funding to request. Discuss any environmental justice concerns within the region and/or disadvantaged community.

2.5 Attachment 5 – Certification of Understanding

If a waiver is requested, submit certification.

Estimate of Time for MPWMD Staff to Prepare Proposition 50 Planning Grant Application

Task		Hours
Task 1	Complete Questionnaire and Upload FAAST Application	40
Task 2.1	Attachment 1 - Authorizing Documentation	8
Task 2.2	Attachment 2 - Eligible Applicant Documentation	4
Task 2.3	Attachment 3 – Work Plan
	Background text	8
	Map	8
	Work Items	40
	Budget	16
	Schedule	8
Task 2.4	Attachment 4 – Disadvantaged Community Supporting Information	16
Task 2.5	Attachment 5 – Certification of Understanding	4
Task	Tracking application, meetings	24
	Total	124

Table 1 – FAAST Checklist
1.	GENERAL INFORMATION The following fields must be completed:
	Project Title – Provide title of the proposal. If this item is not completed FAAST will not accept the application.
	Project Description – Provide a brief description of the proposal, approximately 1-2 paragraphs (max. 1,000 characters). If this item is not completed FAAST will not accept the application.
	Project Director – Provide name and details of the person responsible for executing grant agreement for applicant. Subcontractors that will be paid by the grant cannot be listed as the Project Director.
	Grant Funds Requested – Provide amount of grant funds requested for the proposal in dollars.
	Local Cost Match – “Local Cost Match” is the same as “Funding Match” in the Guidelines. Provide Funding Match for the proposal in dollars. Exhibit G of this PSP provides additional information regarding Funding Match requirements. Applicants must demonstrate that a 25% funding match will be provided, or request a waiver, or reduction of the funding match and submit a signed Certification of Understanding (Exhibit E).
	Total Budget – Provide total cost for the proposal in dollars. This amount must agree with the total proposal costs shown in Attachment 3 of the application.
	Latitude/Longitude – Enter Latitude/Longitude coordinates of the approximate mid-point of the region in degrees using decimal format. Additionally, applicants must also submit a digital geographic file (NAD27 UTM10 shape file) with Attachment 3.
	Watershed – Provide name(s) of watershed(s) the region covers. If the region covers multiple watersheds, list the primary watershed first.
	County – Provide county where the region is located. If the region covers multiple counties, select “Multiple Counties” from the drop down list.
	Responsible Regional Water Board – Provide the Regional Water Board where the region is located. If the region extends beyond more than one Regional Water Board boundary, select “Statewide” from the drop down list. If this item is not completed FAAST will not accept the application.
2.	FUNDING PROGRAMS Applicants must select the type of Planning Grant for which they are applying: IRWM Planning Grant or Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Planning Grant. Applicants may select both, if applicable. If this item is not completed FAAST will not accept the application.
3.	LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION Enter the State assembly, State senate, and U.S. congressional districts where the region is located. For regions that include more than one district, please enter each district. Look at tables provided in FAAST to assist with determining the appropriate districts.
4.	AGENCY CONTACTS If the applicant has been collaborating with State or Federal agencies (e.g., DWR, Regional Water Board, State Water Board, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, etc.) in proposal development, please provide agency name, first and last name of agency contact, phone number, and e-mail address. This information is used to identify individuals that may have an understanding of a proposal and in no way indicates an advantage or disadvantage in the ranking process.
5.	COOPERATING ENTITIES Include entities that have/will assist applicant in proposal development or implementation. Provide name(s) of cooperating entity(ies), role/contribution to proposal, first and last name of entity contact, phone number, and e-mail address.
6.	APPLICATION QUESTIONNAIRE When entered into FAAST the answers to these questions will be used in processing the application and determining eligibility and completeness.
	Q1. Additional Information: Based on the region’s location, what is the applicable DWR district (Northern, Central, San Joaquin, or Southern)? The following link can be used to view each district’s boundaries: http://www.water.ca.gov/nav.cfm?topic=Local_Assistance&subtopic=Groundwater.
	Q2. Additional Information: What are the names and numbers of the groundwater basins underlying the region? The following link can be used for further information on groundwater basin names and numbers: http://www.groundwater.water.ca.gov/bulletin118/.
	Q3. Additional Information: For a region that encompass multiple counties, list the name of each county.
	Q4. Additional Information: For a region that extends beyond more than one Regional Water Board boundary, list the name of each Regional Water Board.
	Q5. Additional Information: Is the applicant requesting a waiver or reduction of the funding match based on disadvantaged communities? If yes, please submit Attachments 4 and 5. If Attachments 4 and 5 are not submitted, the application will not be considered for a waiver or reduction of the funding match.
	Q6. Eligibility: Is the applicant a public agency or non-profit organization as described in Section III of the Guidelines? Yes or No.
	Q7. Eligibility: List the regional agency or regional water management group members that qualify as urban water suppliers and which will receive funding from the proposed grant (see Section III of the Guidelines). If there are none, so indicate.
	Q8. Eligibility: Have all of the urban water suppliers, listed in Q7 above, submitted complete urban water management plans to DWR? Have those plans been verified as complete by DWR? If not, explain.
	Q9. Major Water Issues: Briefly describe the major water related issues within the region.
	Q10. Objectives: Briefly describe the objectives for the IRWM plan.
	Q11. Adoption Date: Identify the adoption date or anticipated adoption date of the IRWM Plan.
	Q12. Stakeholders: List and major stakeholders that are/will participate in the IRWM Plan that were not listed in Item 5 above.
	Q13. Completeness: Have all of the fields in the application been completed? If no, please explain.
7.	APPLICATION ATTACHMENTS Provide the attachments listed below by attaching files to the FAAST application. When attaching files, please use the naming convention found in Section II.B of this PSP. For instructions on attaching files, please refer to the FAAST User Manual. Requirements for information to be included in these attachments are found in Section II.C of this PSP. Digital files and reports should be furnished in non-proprietary formats. Documents with complex layout and formatting should be submitted in PDF format. Embedded images in PDF files should be reduced to web resolution of 72-100 dpi. Text only documents should be submitted in Rich Text File (RTF) format if possible. MS Word (.doc) format should only be used when features are needed that are not available within RTF. Data files should be submitted in non-proprietary formats such as comma separated values (CSV), tab delimited, or other text delimited formats. MS Excel (.xls) format should only be used when features are needed that are not available in non-proprietary formats. Maps, photographs, documents, and reports should be formatted with no component larger than 5MB. Documents greater than 5MB should be divided into their parts (e.g., cover page, table of contents, chapters, figures, photos, appendices). All spatial data should be submitted along with adequate metadata. Metadata should include information fields such as processing steps, geographic projection, attribute field definitions, spatial resolution, data description and contact person. Spatial data in raster format should be submitted in GeoTiff with embedded spatial metadata. Spatial data in vector format should be submitted in Shape file or Geography Markup Language (GML) format. Spatial data files larger than 5MB may be submitted on CD. They must be mailed to State Water Board and must be received by the application due date. CDs received after the due date will not be accepted. The mailing address is: State Water Resources Control Board Division of Financial Assistance Sudhakar Talanki 1001 I Street, 16^th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Applicants must include your Organization Name, Project Title, Grant Program Name, and PIN on each CD submitted.
Attachment #		Attachment Title
	Attachment 1	Authorizing Documentation
	Attachment 2	Eligible Applicant Documentation
	Attachment 3	Work Plan
	Attachment 4	Disadvantaged Community Supporting Information Submit only if requesting a waiver or reduction of the funding match
	Attachment 5	Certification of Understanding – Reduced Funding Match Request Submit a signed copy only if requesting a waiver or reduction of the funding match

TABLE B-1 – EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR PLANNING GRANTS

Criteria	Weighting Factor	Maximum Score
Work Plan Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has a detailed and specific work plan that adequately documents the proposal. Does the proposal include a work plan with specific work items, schedule, and budget for completing the proposal? Is the work plan clear and implementable? Were work item submittals identified? Are the work plan, budget, and schedule consistent with respect to work items and sequence of work items? Is the budget reasonable, logical, and supported with other documentation, assumptions, or estimates? Does the budget demonstrate a minimum funding match of 25% of the total proposal costs? Is the schedule reasonable and show a definite performance period? Will the IRWM Plan be adopted by January 1, 2007?	3	15
Description of Region Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has presented a detailed and specific description that adequately documents the region. Is the region for the proposed Plan well defined? Was the basis for the region’s boundaries presented? Is the region encompassed by the proposal an appropriate area for water management? Did the applicant describe the internal boundaries to the region, major water related infrastructure, and major land-use divisions within the region? Did the application include a figure/map of the region showing the agencies involved in the proposed Plan and the location of proposed implementation projects? Was the quality and quantity of water resources of the region described? If relevant, were areas of special biological significance and other sensitive habitats such as Marine Protected areas and impaired water bodies within the region described? Did the applicant describe important ecological processes, environmental resources, the social and cultural makeup of the regional community, and identify important cultural or social values and economic conditions and trends within the region? Is the regional agency or regional water management group responsible for development of the proposed Plan described? Are the benefits of defining this region and managing water within it versus individual local efforts described in the application? If relevant, did the applicant explain why participation in various regional efforts is appropriate?	1	5
Objectives Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has presented detailed and specific planning objectives. Are the regional planning objectives explained? How were these objectives determined? Will the proposed Plan address major water related objectives and conflicts in the region including at a minimum water supply, groundwater management, ecosystem restoration, and water quality? Does the proposed Plan include statewide priorities?	2	10
Integration of Water Management Strategies Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has adequately documented how water management strategies will be integrated. Does the proposal include multiple water management strategies or a technical process for determining water management strategies to be considered in the proposed Plan? Does the applicant demonstrate an understanding of how the selected water management strategies work together to produce some synergistic effect in water management? Do the water management strategies to be considered meet the IRWM standards? For Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plans, are the proposed Plan’s components consistent with the Critical Coastal Areas Program “Watershed Action Plan Outline”?	2	10
Implementation Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has adequately detailed plan implementation. Does the proposal have a general schedule for implementation of the Plan beyond adoption or a process to determine such a schedule? Does the proposed Plan include or will it develop an institutional structure to ensure project implementation? Is there a mechanism or process in the proposal that allows for monitoring the performance of the plan implementation and changes to the Plan? For NPS projects, does the proposal identify appropriate management measures and practices and implementation responsibilities and schedule?	2	10
Impacts and Benefits Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has adequately presented and documented the impacts and benefits of the Plan. Will the proposed Plan include an analysis of potential impacts within the region and adjacent areas? Does the proposal include an analysis of potential benefits of developing the proposed Plan? Does the proposal discuss a plan for complying with CEQA?	2	10
Data and Technical Analysis Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has presented detailed and specific data and technical analysis components of the proposal. Will available data adequately support the proposed planning? Have technical studies been conducted, or are they planned, that will support the proposed planning?	1	5
Data Management Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has presented detailed and specific data management procedures. Does the proposed Plan include a process for gathering and managing data from development and implementation of the Plan and disseminating data to stakeholders, agencies, and the public? Does the proposal demonstrate how the data management will support statewide data needs?	1	5
Stakeholder Involvement Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has adequately documented stakeholder involvement concerns. Does the proposal identify processes for stakeholder involvement in plan development and implementation of the Plan, including how they may influence decisions? Are water related entities within the region included in the planning process? Does the proposed Plan address environmental justice concerns? Are all appropriate stakeholders included? Is there a process to identify and include additional stakeholders?	1	5
Disadvantaged Communities Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has adequately documented disadvantaged community concerns. Does the region include one or more disadvantaged community(ies)? Does the proposal document water supply and water quality needs of disadvantaged communities? Will implementation of the proposed Plan and associated projects directly benefit disadvantaged communities? Are representatives of disadvantaged communities included in the planning process?	1	5
Relation to Local Planning Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has adequately documented the Plan’s relationship to local planning efforts. Does the application identify existing local planning documents that will form a foundation for the regional plan? Does the application indicate how local agency planning documents will relate to the IRWM water management strategies and the dynamics between the two levels of planning documents?	1	5
Agency Coordination Scoring will be based on whether the applicant has adequately documented agency coordination issues. Does the proposed Plan provide for coordination and cooperation with the relevant local, State, and federal agencies in plan components? Will the proposed Plan facilitate coordination with local land-use planning decision-makers? Will the proposed Plan facilitate coordination with State and federal regulatory agencies?	1	5
Total Possible Points		90

U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2005\2005boardpackets\20050418\ConsentClndr\03\item3_exh3b.doc