HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-271 20200176 Freshwater Trust
GOODS & SERVICES AGREEMENT
PROVIDER: The Freshwater Trust
C I T Y OF PROVIDER'S CONTACT: Tim Wigington
-ASHLAND
20 East Main Street ADDRESS: 700 SW Taylor Street, Suite 200
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Portland, OR 97205
Telephone: 541/488-5587 PHONE: 503-222-9091 x 41
Fax: 541/488-6006
This Goods and Services Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") is entered into by and between the City of
Ashland, an Oregon municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and The Freshwater Trust, an Oregon nonprofit
corporation ("hereinafter "Provider"), for Water Quality Temperature Trading Program Partnership (2018-21);
Phase 2.
1. PROVIDER'S OBLIGATIONS
1.1 Provide Water Quality Temperature Trading Program Partnership (2018-21); Phase 2 (six-year program
period) as set forth in the Scope of Work (Exhibit A). The Scope of Work and other "SUPPORTING
DOCUMENTS" are attached hereto and, by this reference, incorporated herein. Provider expressly
acknowledges that time is of the essence of any completion date set forth in the SUPPORTING
DOCUMENTS, and that no waiver or extension of such deadline may be authorized except in the same
manner as herein provided for authority to exceed the maximum compensation. The goods and services
defined and described in the Scope of Work shall hereinafter be collectively referred to as "Work."
12 Provider shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement and until City's final acceptance
of all Work received hereunder, a policy or policies of liability insurance including commercial general
liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $2,000,000 (two
million dollars) per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage.
1.2.1 The insurance required in this Article shall include the following coverages:
• Comprehensive General or Commercial General Liability, including personal injury,
contractual liability, and products/completed operations coverage; and
• Automobile Liability.
1.2.2 Each policy of such insurance shall be on an "occurrence" and not a "claims made" form, and
shall:
• Name as additional insured "the City of Ashland, Oregon, its officers, agents and
employees" with respect to claims arising out of the provision of Work under this
Agreement;
• Apply to each named and additional named insured as though a separate policy had been
issued to each, provided that the policy limits shall not be increased thereby;
• Apply as primary coverage for each additional named insured except to the extent that two
or more such policies are intended to "layer" coverage and, taken together, they provide
total coverage from the first dollar of liability;
• Provider shall immediately notify the City of any change in insurance coverage
• Provider shall supply an endorsement naming the City, its officers, employees and agents
as additional insureds by the Effective Date of this Agreement; and
• Be evidenced by a certificate or certificates of such insurance approved by the City.
Page I of 7: Agreement between the City of Ashland and The Freshwater Trust
13 All subject employers working under this Agreement are either employers that will comply with ORS
656.017 or employers that are exempt under ORS 656.126. As evidence of the insurance required by
this Agreement, the Provider shall furnish an acceptable insurance certificate prior to commencing any
Work under this Agreement.
1.4 Provider agrees that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, religion, creed, sex, marital status,
familial status or domestic partnership, national origin, age, mental or physical disability, sexual
orientation, gender identity or source of income, suffer discrimination in the performance of this
Agreement when employed by Provider. Provider agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of
federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and regulations. Further, Provider agrees
not to discriminate against a disadvantaged business enterprise, minority-owned business, woman-owned
business, a business that a service-disabled veteran owns or an emerging small business enterprise
certified under ORS 200.055, in awarding subcontracts as required by ORS 279A.I 10.
13 In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by Provider for work to be
performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each
potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the Providers of the Provider's obligations under
this Agreement and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal nondiscrimination laws.
2. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS
2.1 City shall pay Provider the sum of $2,605,342.00 (the "Contact Sum") as provided herein as full
compensation for the Work as specified in the SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS.
2.1.1. Provider will adjust its rates on a biannual basis beginning in July 2021 to account for inflation.
These rate adjustments will be based on the Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) for
the West Region. There will be no decrease in Provider's rates in the case of disinflation.
2.1.2. If inflation will cause Provider's total compensation and reimbursement under this Agreement to
exceed the, Contract Sum, Provider will provide notice to the City of necessary adjustments to the
Contract. The City will negotiate a Change Order or Scope of Work adjustment to provide appropriate
compensation.
22 Except as provided in Section 2.1, in no event shall Provider's total of all compensation and
reimbursement under this Agreement exceed the Contract Sum of $2,605,342.00 without express,
written approval from the City official whose signature appears below, or such official's successor in
office. Provider expressly acknowledges that no other person has authority to order or authorize
additional Work which would cause this maximum sum to be exceeded and that any authorization from
the responsible official must be in writing. Provider further acknowledges that any Work delivered or
expenses incurred without authorization as provided herein is done at Provider's own risk and as a
volunteer without expectation of compensation orreimbursement.
23 Provider will invoice the City for Work performed according to the rates listed in Exhibit C, which may
be adjusted according to Section 2.1.1, and for direct and subcontract costs incurred. The City shall pay
all invoices within sixty (60) calendar days of the date of any invoice from Provider. Provider shall not
submit more than one (1) invoice to the City in any thirty (30) day period.
3. GENERAL PROVISIONS
3.1 This is a non-exclusive Agreement. City is not obligated to procure any specific amount of Work from
Provider and is free to procure similar types of goods and services from other providers in its sole
discretion.
Page 2 of 7: Agreement between the City of Ashland and The Freshwater Trust
iL
32 Provider is an independent contractor and not an employee or agent of the City for anypapo&
33 Provider is not entitled to, and expressly waives all claims to City benefits such as health and disability
insurance, paid leave, and retirement.
3.4 This Agreement embodies the full and complete understanding of the parties respecting the subject
matter hereof. It supersedes all prior agreements, negotiations, and representations between the parties,
whether written or oral.
3.5 This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument executed with the same formalities as this
Agreement.
3.6 The following laws of the State of Oregon are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement:
ORS 279B.220, 279B.230 and 27913.235.
3.7 This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Oregon without regard to conflict of laws
principles. Exclusive venue for litigation of any action arising under this Agreement shall be in the
Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Jackson County unless exclusive jurisdiction is in federal court,
in which case exclusive venue shall be in the federal district court for the district of Oregon. Eachparty
expressly waives any and all rights to maintain an action under this Agreement in any other venue, and
expressly consents that, upon motion of the other party, any case may be dismissed or its venue
transferred, as appropriate, so as to effectuate this choice of venue.
3.8 To the fullest extent provided by law, Provider shall defend, save, hold harmless and indemnify the City
and its officers, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, suits, actions, losses,
damages, liabilities, costs, and expenses of any nature resulting from, arising out of, or relating to the
activities of Provider or its officers, employees, contractors, or agents under this Agreement. Nothing
herein shall be construed to obligate Provider to indemnify the City against any claims, suits, actions,
losses, damages, liabilities, costs, and expenses of any nature attributable to the City's sole negligence
or willful conduct.
3.9 To the fullest extend provided by law, including but not limited to the Oregon Tort Claims Act, the City
shall defend, save, hold harmless and indemnify Provider and its officers, employees and agents from
and against any and all claims, suits, actions, losses, damages, liabilities, costs, and expenses of any
nature resulting from, arising out of, or relating to the activities of the City or its officers, employees,
contractors, or agents under this Agreement. Nothing herein shall be construed to obligate the City to
indemnify Provider against any claims, suits, actions, losses, damages, liabilities, costs, and expenses
of any nature attributable to Provider's sole negligence or willful conduct.
3.10 Neither party to this Agreement shall hold the other responsible for damages or delay in performance
caused by acts of God, strikes, lockouts, accidents, or other events beyond the control of the other or the
other's officers, employees or agents (collectively, Force Majeure). If a Force Majeure event occurs
that causes or may cause delay or nonperformance, Provider shall, within 30 days, notify the City in
writing of the cause, anticipated duration or the delay or non-performance, and the measures that have
been or will be taken to end or minimize the delay or non-performance. Provider shall not be liable for
the loss of Thermal Credits caused by a Force Maj eure event beyond the continued performance of Work
to the degree practicable, and such schedule will be extended for a period reasonably equivalent to the
time lost because of the Force Majeure event. The decision to extend any deadline because of a Force
Majeure event shall be determined by Provider in its reasonable discretion, and Provider will cooperate
Page 3 of 7: Agreement between the City of Ashland and The Freshwater Trust
in good faith with City when determining if such an extension is necessary.
3.11 If any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable,
such provision shall not affect the other provisions, but such unenforceable provision shall be deemed
modified to the extent necessary to render it enforceable, preserving to the fullest extent permitted the
intent of Provider and the City set forth in this Agreement.
3.12 Deliveries will be F.O.B destination. Provider shall pay all transportation and handling charges for the
Goods. Provider is responsible and liable for loss or damage until final inspection and acceptance of the
Goods by the City. Provider remains liable for latent defects, fraud, and warranties.
3.13 The City may inspect and test the Goods. The City may reject non-conforming Goods and require
Provider to correct them without charge or deliver them at a reduced price, as negotiated. If Provider
does not cure any defects within a reasonable time, the City may reject the Goods and cancel this
Agreement in whole or in part. This paragraph does not affect or limit the City's rights, including its
rights under the Uniform Commercial Code, ORS Chapter 72 (UCC).
3.14 Provider represents and warrants that the Goods are new, current, and fully warranted by the
manufacturer. Delivered Goods will comply with SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS and be free from
defects in labor, material and manufacture. Provider shall transfer all warranties to the City. TFT makes
no other representation and grants no other warranties, express or implied, and specifically disclaims all
representations and warranties of any type not set forth in this agreement.
3.15 For purposes of this Agreement "Confidential Information" shall include, but is not limited to (i)
information concerning the Disclosing Party's business methods and practices, personnel, customers,
prospective partners, customers, and suppliers; (ii) information concerning inventions, processes,
methods, products, know-how, patents, patent applications, intellectual property, and other proprietary
rights; (iii) specifications, drawings, models, samples, tools, computer programs, technical information,
presentations, and related materials; and (iv) all prepared notes, documents and materials which reflect,
interpret, evaluate, include or are derived from Confidential Information. The City and Provider
have shared and will continue to share Confidential Information. The City is subject to public disclosure
requirements of ORS 192.410 to 192.505. Confidential Information may only be shared when required
to comply with Oregon law and in accordance with the following process:
3.15.1 In the event the City receives a request for any Confidential Information under Oregon law,
the City shall provide Provider with written notice of the request within two (2) business days of the
receipt of the request.
3.15.2 If Provider does not object to the disclosure of the requested Confidential Information within
ten (10) business days of receiving the notice, the City may disclose the Confidential Information
without reservation or condition and without any liability to Provider.
3.15.3 If Provider objects to the disclosure of the requested Confidential Information within ten (10)
business days of receiving the notice, the City shall assert a trade secret exemption and shall not disclose
any information subject to the exemption.
4. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
4.1 The following documents are, by this reference, expressly incorporated into this Agreement and are
collectively referred to in this Agreement as the "SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:"
Page 4 of 7: Agreement between the City of Ashland and The Freshwater Trust
A. The City of Ashland Water Quality Trading Plan and DEQ acceptance letter
B. Provider's complete written Proposed Second Scope of Work for the City of Ashland for "Water
Quality Temperature Trading Program - Phase 11" dated July 29, 2019.
C. Provider's 2019-2020 Billing Rate Sheet
D. Provider's complete written Proposed Scope of Work for the City of Ashland for "Water Quality
Temperature Trading Program Partnership" Phase I dated August 21, 2018
4.2 This Agreement and the SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS shall be construed to be mutually
complimentary and supplementary wherever possible. In the event of a conflict which cannot be so
resolved, the provisions of this Agreement itself shall control over any conflicting provisions in any of
the SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. In the event of conflict between provisions of two of the
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, the several supporting documents shall be given precedence in the order
listed in Subsection 4.1. above.
5. REMEDIES
5.1 In the event Provider is in default of this Agreement, City may, at its option, pursue any or all of the
remedies available to it under this Agreement and at law or in equity, including, but not limited to:
5. 1.1 Termination of this Agreement
5.1.2 Withholding all monies due for the Work that Provider has failed to deliver within any scheduled
completion dates or any Work that have been delivered inadequately or defectively;
5.1.3 Initiation of an action or proceeding for damages, specific performance, or declaratory or
injunctive relief;
5.1.4 These remedies are cumulative to the extent the remedies are not inconsistent, and City may pursue
any remedy or remedies singly, collectively, successively or in any order whatsoever.
52 In no event shall City be liable to Provider for any expenses related to termination of this Agreement or
for anticipated profits. If previous amounts paid to Provider exceed the amount due, Provider shall pay
immediately any excess to City upon written demand provided.
53 The remedies available under this Agreement shall be in addition to and not a limitation of remedies
otherwise available by law.
5.4 The Parties waives claims for consequential damages arising out of or relating to this Agreement.
6. TERM AND TERMINATION
6.1 Term
This Agreement shall be effective from the date of execution on behalf of the City as set forth below
(the "Effective Date"), and shall continue in full force and effect until June 30, 2025, unless sooner
terminated as provided in Subsection 6.2.
62 Termination
6.2.1 The City and Provider may terminate this Agreement by mutual agreement at any time.
6.2.2 The City may, upon not less than one hundred and eighty (180) days' prior written notice, terminate
this Agreement for any reason deemed appropriate in its sole discretion.
6.2.3 Either party may terminate this Agreement, with cause, by not less than fourteen (14) days' prior
written notice if the cause is not cured within that fourteen (14) day period after written notice.
Such termination is in addition to and not in lieu of any other remedy at law or equity.
6.2.4 Provider may terminate this Agreement if the Work is stopped for a period of ninety (90)
consecutive days through no act or fault of Provider or a Subcontractor, Sub-subcontractor or their
agents or employees or other persons or entities performing portions of the Work under direct or
indirect contract with Provider, for any of the following reasons:
(a) Issuance of an order of a court or other public authority having jurisdiction that requires all
Page 5 of 7: Agreement between the City of Ashland and The Freshwater Trust
Work to be stopped;
(b) An act of government, such as a declaration of national emergency that requires all Work to
be stopped; or
(c) Because the City has not made a payment within the time provided in this Agreement.
6.3 If this Agreement is terminated under Section 6.2, Provider may recover from the City payment for Work
performed and any costs incurred by reason of such termination.
7. NOTICE
Whenever notice is required or permitted to be given under this Agreement, such notice shall be given in
writing to the other party by personal delivery, by sending via a reputable commercial overnight courier, or
by mailing using registered or certified United States mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, to the
address set forth below:
If to the City:
City of Ashland
Attn: Public Works Director
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Phone: (541) 488-5587
With a copy to:
City of Ashland
Legal Department
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Phone: (541) 488-5350
If to Provider:
The Freshwater Trust
Attn: Operations Director
700 SW Taylor Suite 200
Portland, OR 97205
8. WAIVER OF BREACH
One or more waivers or failures to object by either party to the other's breach of any provision, term, condition,
or covenant contained in this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach, whether
or not of the same nature.
9. PROVIDER'S COMPLIANCE WITH TAX LAWS
9.1 Provider represents and warrants to the City that:
9. 1.1 Provider shall, throughout the term of this Agreement, including any extensions hereof, comply
with:
(i) All tax laws of the State of Oregon, including but not limited to ORS 305.620 and ORS
chapters 316, 317, and 318;
(ii) Any tax provisions imposed by a political subdivision of the State of Oregon applicable to
Provider; and
(iii) Any rules, regulations, charter provisions, or ordinances that implement or enforce any of
the foregoing tax laws orprovisions.
Page 6 of 7: Agreement between the City of Ashland and The Freshwater Trust
9.1.2 Provider, for a period of no fewer than six (6) calendar years preceding the Effective Date of this
Agreement, has faithfully complied with:
(i) All tax laws of the State of Oregon, including but not limited to ORS 305.620 and ORS
chapters 316, 317, and 318;
(ii) Any tax provisions imposed by a political subdivision of the State of Oregon applicable to
Provider; and
(iii) Any rules, regulations, charter provisions, or ordinances that implement or enforce any of
the foregoing tax laws or provisions.
9.2 Provider's failure to comply with the tax laws of the State of Oregon and all applicable tax laws of any
political subdivision of the State of Oregon shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. Further,
any violation of Provider's warranty, as set forth in this Article 9, shall constitute a material breach of this
Agreement. Any material breach of this Agreement shall entitle the City to terminate this
Agreement and to seek damages and any other relief available under this Agreement, at law, or in equity.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have caused this Agreement to be signed' in their respective names
by their duly authorized representatives as of the dates set forth below.
CITY OF ASHLAND: THE FRESHWATER TRUST (PROVIDER):
By: By: , C
City Administrator Signa e
Printed Name Printed Name
ate Title
'l
2v
Date
Purchase Order No. (W-9 is to be submitted with this signed Agreement)
APPRO D AS TO FORM:
Assistant Ci Attorney
Date
Page 7 of 7: Agreement between the City of Ashland and The Freshwater Trust
/.4rV t^
artment of Environmental Quality
Dep
F ~ 41 0 ~)regon
Western Region Eugene Office
Kate Brown, Governer 165 East 7th Avenue, Suite 100
~859~
Eugene, OR 97401-3049
(541) 686-7838
FAX (541) 686-7551
TTY 711
March 9, 2018
Paula C. Brown, PE
City of Ashland Public Works Dept.
20 East Main Street
Ashland OR 97520
RE: Water Quality Trading Plan and Performance Standards for Riparian Restoration
Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant
WQ file 93780; NPDES permit #101609
Jackson County
Dear Ms. Brown:
Thank you for resubmitting the City of Ashland's Trading Plan and Performance Standards for Riparian
Restoration. The March 7, 2018 revised plan contains all of the required elements in OAR 340-039-0025
and adequately addresses DEQ's December 19, 2017 comments.
Next Steps
Ashland may generate water quality trading credits at this time. Ashland may use credits after the trading
plan is incorporated into the city's permit. DEQ is committed to drafting a renewal permit with trading
provisions. As a reminder, DEQ must provide an opportunity for public notice and comment on the
trading plan during permit renewal. As you are aware, DEQ cannot guarantee the contents of the issued
permit due to public participation requirements.
We appreciate and support the city's proactive approach in generating thermal credits and improving the
environment. We look forward to working collaboratively with the city on this project and the permit
renewal.
If you have any questions, please contact Wade Peerman 503-229-5046 at or Jon Gasik at 541-776-6242.
I may also be reached at 503-378-5081.
Sincerely,
KAUI,,1~4~~
Ranei Nomura
Water Quality Manager
DEQ Western Region
RN:jg:wp
ec: Scott Fleury, City of Ashland
Wade Peerman, ODEQ Northwest Region Office
Jon Gasik, ODEQ Medford Office
cc: ODEQ Medford Office Facility Files
CITY OF ASHLAND WATER QUALITY TRADING PLAN
Regulatory Background Supporting Trading in Oregon
Over the last fifteen years, Oregon has led other states in utilizing innovative methods such as water quality
trading to comply with the Clean Water Act (CWA). In 2001, the Oregon Legislature directed the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to develop a water quality trading program in the Willamette
River.' In 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also published its water quality trading policy
(2003 EPA Trading Policy), which describes how point and nonpoint sources can participate in market-based
approaches to meet water quality standards at a reduced cost. This policy supports water quality trading as a
flexible approach to achieving water quality and environmental benefits that would otherwise not be attained
under traditional regulatory approaches. The 2003 EPA Trading Policy explicitly endorsed trading for nutrients
and sediment loads, and noted that other constituents can likely be traded if the trades have "the potential to
improve water quality and achieve ancillary environmental benefits."'
Following the 2003 EPA Trading Policy, in 2004, DEQ issued a permit to Clean Water Services (CWS) that allowed
for trading of thermal credits generated from riparian shade projects to assist two publicly owned treatment
works (POTWs) in achieving NPDES permit compliance, and that allowed forthe POTWs to generate thermal
credits by releasing cold water from an upstream reservoir in order to satisfy the permittee's thermal obligation.
Based on this applied experience, in 2OD7 and again in 2009, DEQ developed an Internal Management Directive
(IMD) meant to help agency staff structure trades in NPDES permits. This expanded guidance coincided with
additional guidance from EPA, including a 2007 toolkit for permit writers. In 2011, DEQ issued a permit to the
City of Medford that allows for thermal trading between Medford's POTW and nonpoint sources that create
thermal credits through riparian shade projects.
After ten years of experience with trading in the state, DEQ sought to formalize the lessons learned on trading.
In 2013, EPA Region 10 joined water quality staff from Oregon, Idaho, and Washington, as well as other
stakeholders, in a series of interagency workshops to study the existing water quality trading policies, practices,
and programs from across the nation. The ultimate goal of this "Joint Regional Recommendations on Water
Quality Trading" (JRR) undertaking was to build on lessons from other trading programs and make
recommendations that would ensure future trading programs had "the quality, credibility, and transparency
necessary to be consistent with the Clean Water Act" The end result of this endeavor was a non-binding
recommendations document meant to help foster the efficient and consistent development of robust trading
programs in the region .3 This effort was then taken to the national level through the "National Network on
Water Quality Trading", which ultimately produced an "Options and Considerations" document outlining the
major items to consider when developing a trading program 4
Based in large part on the knowledge gained from these experiences, Oregon began crafting water quality
trading regulations in 2014. In December 2015, after a year of comprehensive deliberation and stakeholder
engagement, the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) unanimously approved water quality trading
rules (OAR 340 Division 039), which clarified the basic requirements of a viable trading program in Oregon. In
March 2016, shortly after the EQC adopted the water quality trading rules, DEQ updated its IMD to complement
the management directive and the changes brought about by the new rules. The following trading plan proposal
for the City of Ashland is consistent with the rules and the intent of the updated 2016 water quality trading ]MD.
1 OR. REv. STAT. 4 468B.555
2 U.S. EPA, Water Quality Trading Policy, 68 Fed. Reg. 1608, 1610 (Jan. 13, 2003), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2003-
01-13/htmi/03-620.htm.
a Willamette Partnership &The Freshwater Trust, Draft Regional Recommendations for the Pacific Northwest on Water Quality Trading
(2014), available at http://willamettepartnershtp.org/our-stories/regional-recommendations-water-quality-trading/.
4 National Network on Water Quality Trading, Building a Water Quality Trading Program: Options and Considerations (2015), available at
http://willamettepartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BuildingaW QTProgram-NN WQT.pdf.
1
Consistency with Water Quality Trading Purpose and Policy
OAR 340-039-0001: PURPOSE AND POLICY
"(1) Purpose. This rule implements ORS 4688.555 to allow entities regulated under the Clean Water Act to meet
pollution control requirements through water quality trading. This rule establishes the requirements for water
quality trading in Oregon. (2) Policy. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality may approve water
quality trading only if it promotes one or more of the following Environmental Quality Commission policies: (a)
Achieves pollutant reductions and progress towards meeting water quality standards; (b) Reduces the cost of
implementing Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs); (c) Establishes incentives forvoluntary pollutant reductions
from point and nonpoint sources within a watershed; (d) Offsets new or increased discharges resulting from
growth; (e) Secures long-term improvement in water quality; or (f) Results in demonstrable benefits to water
quality or designated uses the water quality standards are intended to protect."
Ashland's water quality trading plan is consistent with several EQC policies articulated in the rule. Ashland's
trading plan helps to establish voluntary incentives for nonpoint sources to reduce thermal loading within the
Bear Creek watershed.' In addition, unlike traditional technological solutions for treatment facilities, the
restoration investment underlying Ashland's water quality trading program will appreciate over time into a self-
sustaining solution ,6 which helps secure long-term improvements in water quality. Moreover, in addition to
creating cooler, shaded spaces in the river for fish, Ashland's trading solution will directly advantage beneficial
uses in the watershed by supporting the recruitment of large wood that supports salmonid spawning, rearing
and migration habitat.' In addition to these benefits, Ashland's trading plan is also likely to improve functional
habitat for macro-invertebrate life, provide year-round shading of the waterbody (beyond the time periods
when the restored ecosystem will provide shade credits), help minimize nutrient inputs, result in some
floodplain restoration, and help control erosion s
In addition to promoting several of the EQC policies articulated in the rule, Ashland's trading solution will likely
help to foster a sustainable local economy.9 Riparian plantings require a local workforce (excavators, operators,
equipment suppliers, contractors, and maintenance and restoration professionals), plant stock and supplies are
typically purchased from local nurseries, and project site leases provide an important income stream to local
landowners. On average, 62 cents of every dollar spent on restoration has been shown to stay in the local rural
economy, and every $1 million spent on riparian restoration creates approximately 23 jobs.10 In addition, trading
yields energy use savings compared to technological solutions that require energy to operate-which reduces
the release of airborne greenhouse gas pollutants and also aligns with Ashland's climate mitigation and
adaptation goals."
s Ashland expects that some portion of its projects will be installed on private nonpoint source land, Ashland envisions that those
landowners will be incentivized to participate in the program through financial mechanisms, including lease payments.
6 The solution is "self-sustaining" because, for example, when a mature tree naturally falls (itself an ecosystem-benefiting event), riparian
vegetation and/or another tree will naturally grow in its place, thus allowing the solution to function even in the absence of human
intervention-something that is not possible for built solutions that require maintenance to function over time.
7 Montgomery, D. R., Collins, B. D., Buffington, J. M., & Abbe, T. B. Geomorphic effects of wood In rivers, 37 Ecology and Management of
Wood In World Rivers, 21-47 (2003).
8 See M.D. Tomer & M.A. Locke, The Challenge of Documenting Water Quality Benefits of Conservation Practices: A Review of USDA-ARS's
Conservation Effects Assessment Project Watershed Studies, 64 WATER SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 300, 303 (2011) (noting nutrient and erosion
benefits of buffers); Scott W. Miller et al., Quantifying Macroin vertebrate Responses to In-Stream Habitat Restoration: Applications of
Meta-Analysis to River Restoration, 18 RESTORATION ECOLOGY 8, 8 (2010) (noting benefits of heterogeneous riparian habitat).
9 CITY OF ASHLAND, CLIMATE & ENERGY ACTION PLAN (Jan. 2017).
10 Nielsen-Pincus, M., & Moseley, C. The Economic and Employment Impacts of Forest and Watershed Restoration. 21(2) Restoration
Ecology, 207-214, 212 (2013).
11 CITYOF ASHLAND, CLIMATE & ENERGY ACTION PLAN (Jan. 2017). In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, restoration advances the
City's goals of becoming carbon neutral and increasing the local ecosystem's resiliency to climate change. See also CITY OF ASHLAND, FINAL
COMPREHENSIVE WATER MASTER PLAN (Apr. 2012).
2
Consistency with Water Quality Trading Objectives
OAR 340-039-0003: WATER QUALITY TRADING OBJECTIVES
"Water quality trading authorized under this rule must: (1) Be consistent with anti-degradation policies; (2) Not
cause or contribute to an exceedance of water quality standards; (3) Be consistent with local, state, and federal
water quality laws; (4) Be designed to result in a net reduction of pollutants from participating sources in the
trading area; (5) Be designed to assist the state in attaining or maintaining water quality standards; (6) Be
designed to assist in implementing TMDLs when applicable; (7) Be based on transparent and practical Best
Management Practices (BMPs) quality standards to ensure that water quality benefits and credits are generated
as planned; and (8) Not create localized adverse impacts on water quality and existing and designated beneficial
uses."
(1, 2, 4) Anti-degradation & Net Reduction in Pollutant Loading: Oregon's anti-degradation policy is found in
OAR 340-041-0004. As stated in the 2016 Oregon water quality trading IMD, Oregon's anti-degradation policy
generally prohibits the lowering of existing water quality 12 In the 2003 EPA Trading Policy, EPA states that it
"does not believe that trades and trading programs will result in 'lower water quality' as that term is used in 40
CFR § 131.12(a)(2) when the trades or trading programs achieve a no net increase of the pollutant traded and
do not result in any impairment of designated uses .1113 In line with the 2003 EPA Trading Policy, the 2016 water
quality trading IMD instructs DEQ staff to ensure that trades are designed to result in a net reduction of
pollutants in the trading area as required in OAR 340-039-0003(4). In addition to ensuring this outcome, as
described in the next subsection, it will be necessary to avoid localized impacts to designated uses.
(8) Avoidance of Localized Impacts on Fish: The cold water protection criteria in the Oregon water quality
standards restricts the amount of warming above ambient conditions during spawning use periods. Because
threatened salmonid species inhabit Bear Creek and the water body is designated as critical habitat, the cold
water protection criteria in OAR 340-041-0028(11) apply. According to the 2008 DEQTemperature Water
Quality Standard Implementation IMD, the cold water protection criteria must be met at the location of the
nearest physical spawning habitat downstream of the outfall, not at the edge of the mixing zone 14 With the
proposed relocated outfall into Bear Creek, complete mixing with the receiving stream flow is expected before
the thermal plume reaches downstream spawning areas."
Moreover, DEQ can only approve Ashland's potential trading program16 if Ashland's discharge does not cause
thermal plume impacts on salmonids prohibited under OAR 340-041-0053(2)(d)17According to draft analysis
completed by CH2M Hill, Ashland's discharge has the reasonable potential to violate the spawning impairment
portion of the thermal plume regulations.18 Even with the proposed outfall relocation, CH2M determined that
there is a reasonable potential for Ashland's discharge to still exceed the spawning impairment thermal plume
12 Or. Dept of Envtl. Quality, Water Quality Trading Internal Management Directive, at 9 (updated Mar. 31, 2016), available of
http-.//www.deq.state.or.us/wq/pubs/imds/WQTradlng[MD.pdf.
18 Trading IMD, at 9 (quoting U.S. EPA, Water Quality TradiAg Policy, 68 Fed. Reg. at 1611).
14 Or. Dept of Envtl. Quality, Temperature Water Quality Sta ndard Implementation -A DEQ Internal Management
Directive, § 3.8 (2008), available at http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/pubs/imds/-remperature.pdf.
Is CH2M Hill, Ashland W WTP Outfall Relocation Study, Section 4.4.3 (August 2017).
16 See OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0003(5)-(6).
1z 'Temperature mixing zones and effluent limits authorized under 340-041-0028(12)(b) will be established to prevent or minimize the
following adverse effects to salmonids inside the mixing zone: (A) Impairment of an active salmonid spawning area where spawning redds
are located or likely to be located. This adverse effect is prevented or minimized by limiting potential fish exposure to temperatures of 13
degrees Celsius (55.4 Fahrenheit) or more for salmon and steelhead, and 9 degrees Celsius (48 degrees Fahrenheit) or more for bull trout;
(B) Acute impairment or instantaneous lethality is prevented or minimized by limiting potential fish exposure to temperatures of 32.0
degrees Celsius (89.6 degrees Fahrenheit) or more to less than 2 seconds); (C) Thermal shock caused bya sudden Increase in water
temperature is prevented or minimized by limiting potential fish exposure to temperatures of 25.0 degrees Celsius (77.0 degrees
Fahrenheit) or more to less than 5 percent of the cross section of 100 percent of the 7Q10 low flow of the water body; the Department
may develop additional exposure timing restrictions to prevent thermal shock; and (D) Unless the ambient temperature Is 21.0 degrees of
greater, migration blockage is prevented or minimized by limiting potential fish exposure to temperatures of 21.0 degrees Celsius (69.8
degrees Fahrenheit) or more to less than 25 percent of the cross section of 100 percent of the 7Q10 low flow of the water body."
18 CH2M Hill, Ashland W WTP Outfall Relocation Study, Section 4.4.3 (August 2017).
3
regulation at the beginning and end of spawning period undercurrent operations.19 As such, in order to comply
with these regulations and as a prerequisite fore ngaging in temperature trading as part of its compliance
portfolio, Ashland must address this potential projected near-field thermal exceedance through either direct
effluent cooling or effluent flow diversion awayfrom the receiving stream. Ashland has evaluated a wide range
of options for meeting expected temperature limits in its next NPDES permit, including relocation of the City's
WWTP outfall from Ashland Creek to Bear Creek, treatment wetlands, time-appropriate cold water reservoir
releases, and effluent dispersion. Ashland intends to utilize some combination of these near-field actions to
satisfy the anticipated thermal plume regulations and can then use riparian shade projects to fulfill the portion
of its permit obligation remaining after completing near-field improvements"
(3) Consistent with local, state, and federal water quality laws: The proposed trading program is consistent
with Oregon's anti-degradation policy, localized impact regulations, the Bear Creek watershed temperature
TMDL, baseline regulations (described in detail later in this proposal), and the Oregon trading rule. In addition,
all projectwork will be completed in accordance with applicable local, state, tribal and federal permit
requirements. When the trading plan is incorporated into Ashland's NPDES permit, the expectation is that it will
be done so consistent with the Clean Water Act.
(5,6) Designed to Assist State in Attaining Water Quality Standards and Implementing a TMDL: The 2007 Bear
Creek watershed temperature TMDL allocated Ashland a wasteload allocation (WLA) of 0.1"C above the
applicable criteria in Ashland Creek as well as at the point of maximum impact 2t Ashland expects its discharge
to exceed its thermal WLA (as well as its thermal load limit, once it has a thermal limit in a renewed NPDES
permit). Ashland plans to rely on trading, among several other solutions, to address its thermal WLA
exceedance. Therefore, trading is designed to assist Oregon in implementing the Bear Creek temperature TMDL,
which outlines the informational pathway to attaining temperature water quality standards.'
(7) Based on transparent and practical BMPs quality standards. The proposed BMP quality standards are
described later in this proposed trading plan.
19 CH2M Hill, Ashland W WTP Outfall Relocation Study, Section 4.4.3 (August 2017).
20 Pre-permlt shade projects will in no way violate cold water criteria or thermal plume regulations. Therefore, this regulatory cluster will
not apply to the City until Ashland receives a thermal limit in Its NPDES permit, and the trading plan is incorporated Into its permit.
2 Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, Bear Creek Watershed Total Maximum Daily Load, Section 2, Temperature TMDL, at 46 (2007).
22 TMDLs are "primarily informational tools" that "serve as a link in an implementation chain that includes federally regulated point
source controls, state or local plans for point and nonpoint source pollutant reduction, and assessment of the Impact of such measures
on water quality, all to the end of attaining water quality goals for the nation's waters." Pronsolino v. Nastri, 291 Fad 1123, 1129 (9th Cir.
2002).
4
Eligibility
OAR 340-039-0015: ELIGIBILITY
Ashland is eligible to trade as a NPDES permit holder.23 As described in the following trading plan section,
Ashland's proposed temperature trade is eligible 24 The Bear Creek watershed is water quality limited for
temperature issues related to the salmonid life cycle 25 and so is an eligible waterbody where trading may occur.
As described in the Proposed Trading Plan section of this document, the BMP proposed by Ashland for credit
generation is quantifiable and have BMP quality standards 26
Proposed Trading Plan
The following subsections describe how Ashland's proposed trading plan aligns with each of the required
components of a trading plan, as described in OAR 340-039-0025(5). To better assist in explaining how these
components fit together, this proposal describes some of the -0025(5) requirements out of order.
OAR 340-039-0025(5)(A): TEMPERATURE TRADING
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must identify "the parameter for which water quality trading is
proposed." The trading rule authorizes trading for temperature 27 Ashland's trading plan is designed to help
meet its temperature reduction obligation.
OAR 340-039-0025(5)(C): TRADING AREA
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must include a "description of the trading area including
identification of the location of the discharge to be offset, its downstream point of impact, if applicable, where
trading projects are expected to be implemented, and the relationship of the trading projects to beneficial uses
in the trading area." Trades should occur within the same watershed or area covered by a TMDL to ensure that
the benefits of trades affect the same waterbody where the discharge is occurring.'8 A trading area must
encompass "a watershed or other hydrologically-connected geographic area, as defined within a water quality
management plan adopted for a TMDL, trading framework or trading plan. A trading area must encompass the
location of the discharge to be offset, or its downstream point of impact, if applicable, and the trading project to
be implemented."29 Trading areas must also be consistent with TMDL water quality management plans (WQMP),
where they exist 30 Trading areas may be established in water quality trading frameworks.31
In summary, Oregon rules require that a trading area: 1) identify the location of discharge to be offset, 2)
identify a downstream point of Impact (if applicable), and 3) describe the relationship between trading projects
and beneficial uses. In addition, the trading area 4) must encompass a watershed or other hydrologically-
connected geographic area, as defined within a water quality management plan adopted for a TMDL, trading
framework or trading plan, and 5) must also be consistent with TMDL water quality management plans (WQMP),
where they exist. Consistent with these requirements, Ashland proposes a trading area that encompasses the
whole Bear Creek watershed, upstream of the confluence with the Rogue River.
Ashland's proposed trading area would encompass Ashland's discharge and the point of maximum impact
identified by DEQ in the Bear Creek temperature TMDL.31 The proposed trading area also has a strong
relationship between trading projects and beneficial uses in the watershed. Because the Bear Creek watershed
23 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0015(1).
24 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0015(2).
4 Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, Integrated Report (2012), available at http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/assessment/rpt2012/results.asp.
26 See sections in proposed trading plan on OAR 340-039-0025(5)(d), (f).
NOR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0015(2)(a).
U.S. EPA, Water Quality Trading Policy, 68 Fed. Reg. at 1610. OAR 340-039-0040(1).
OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0005(5).
36 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0035(2) (trading areas must be consistent with any applicable TMDL water quality management plan).
31 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0035(1).
32 Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, Bear Creek Watershed TMDL, Section ll: temperature, at 45, fig. 11 and 12 (2007).
5
is listed forte mperature impairments related to cold-water species life stages,33 riparian revegetation trading
projects such as those proposed by Ashland would be directly linked to improving conditions for temperature-
based beneficial uses. The trading area covers the watershed/hydro logically connected area covered by the k
current Oregon temperature TMDL for the Bear Creek subbasin. This proposed trading area is also consistent
with the Bear Creek TMDL water quality management plan (WQMP): the Bear Creek TMDL WQMP3' speaks to
better management of riparian areas, as well as habitat improvement for salinonids-both of which will be
affirmatively addressed in Ashland's trading plan.
OAR 340-039-0025(5)(D): BMPS
~i
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must include a "description of the water quality benefits that will be
generated, the BMPS that will be used to generate water quality benefits, and applicable BMP quality 1
standards." A BMP is defined as "in-water or land-based conservation, enhancement or restoration actions that i
will reduce pollutant loading or create other water quality benefits. BMPS include, but are not limited to,
structural and nonstructural controls and practices and flow augmentation.i35 A BMP quality standard must
include "specifications for the design, implementation, maintenance and performance tracking of a particular
BMP that ensure the estimated water quality benefits of a trading project are achieved, and that allow for
verification that the BMP is performing as described in an approved trading plan."36
The BMP that will be used to generate water quality benefits under Ashland's trading plan is riparian restoration
in the Bear Creek watershed trading area. Riparian restoration will block thermal loading into the Bear Creek
watershed (see next subsection on Credits for more detail on the calculation methodology). The BMP quality
standard proposed by Ashland for riparian restoration projects will include the following components:
• Sites will be designed, implemented, monitored, verified and tracked consistent with Willamette
Partnership February 16, 2016 Performance Standards for Riparian Revegetation (Exhibit A to this
proposed trading plan).37 Sites will be legally protected for the duration of the credit project life (e.g.,
private leases, or appropriate encumbrances if on publicly owned land).
• In accordance with maintenance plans developed at the outset of credit projects, sites will be visited
regularly for maintenance, especially in early "establishment" years. During site establishment,
minimum maintenance on most sites will usually include one spring ring spray, one summer mow or cut
and one fall spot spray. In irrigated riparian areas, with water rights, irrigation may be an appropriate
option during the first several years. Inter-planting may also be needed. Once a site has become
established, maintenance activities will continue, but will likely occur at less frequent intervals.
• Details on the performance tracking and verification aspects of Ashland's proposed BMP quality
standards are described below in the subsections corresponding with OAR 340-039-0025(5)(G)
verification, and (H) tracking/reporting.
OAR 340-039-0025(5)(F); CREDITS
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must include a "description of the credits needed to meet water
quality-based requirements of an NPDES permit or 401 water quality certification, including: (A) Quantity and
timing: The number of credits needed and any credit generation milestones, including a schedule for credit
generation; (B) Methods used: How credits will be quantified, including the assumptions and inputs used to
33 The proposed outfall location in Bear Creek are designated for year-round salmon and trout migration and rearing use per OAR 340-
041-0028(4)(c), Figure 271A, and are designated for spawning use during October 15 through May 15 per OAR 340-041-0028(4)(a), Figure
271B.
34 OR. AumlN. RULES 340-039-0035(2) (noting that trading areas must be consistent with any applicable TMDL water quality management
plan). Or. Dept of Envtl, Quality, Bear Creek Watershed Total Maximum Daily Load, ch. ll, Water Quality Management Plan (2007),
available at http://www.deq.state.or.us/WO/TMDLs/dots/roguebasin/middlerague/bearcreek/tmdIchp2wgrnp.pdf,
35 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0005(1). !
36 OR. AoMIN. RULES 340-039-0005(2).
37 Willamette Partnership, Performance Standards for Riparian Vegetation (2016), available at http://willamettepartnership.org/wp- {
content/uploads/2014/06/Performance-Stds-for-Rip-Reveg_2016-02-16.pdf.
6
I
derive the number of credits; and (C) Duration of credits: A description of the length of time credits are expected
to be used.
Quantity and Timing: The calculation of Ashland's likely credit need and timing is a three-step process: 1)
calculate maximum projected thermal load exceedances for each period of concern in a year; 2) determine
which portion of those exceedances will be addressed via trading; and 3) apply programmatic ratios.
First, Ashland must identify its maximum projected excess thermal load exceedance(s) throughout the year. A
facility's thermal exceedance is equal to: (Facility Excess Thermal Load) - (Excess Thermal Load Limit), or ETL-
ETLL, where:
• ETL = (Flow eniuentws)) x (°C effluent-aC Temperaturecriteria38) x (Conversion Factor)
• ETLL = (Flow river (cfs)+ Flow effluent (cfs)) x (HUA39) x (Conversion Factor)
Ashland has calculated monthly exceedance values to ensure that the thermal benefits produced in that
maximum projected exceedance time period are largely representative of benefits that might be generated
during other lesser exceedance periods.
Second, Ashland must determine what portion of those monthly exceedances are going to be addressed by
trading. Ashland is evaluating multiple potential changes to facility operations to address both near- and far-field
thermal impacts. Ashland's Outfall Relocation Study has evaluated the current and projected future thermal
loads discharged from the Ashland W WTP as well as other potential options available to address projected
excess thermal loads throughout the year.40 Based on observed water temperature and flows in Bear Creek
(representing monthly critical conditions), the biologically based numeric criteria, and its wasteload allocation,
Ashland calculated the ETL exceedances for different time periods throughout the year based on projected 2040
facility design flows.41
A portion of these projected monthly exceedances will be addressed through near-field upgrades at or near the
facility's discharge. The Outfall Relocation Study analysis has identified actions necessary to address the facility's
near-field thermal impacts, and how dealing with those near-field impacts will change the amount of excess far-
field thermal loads that need to be met via trading. Based on this evaluation, expected changes necessary to
address the near-field limitations will reduce projected maximum ETL exceedances during the May 1- May 14
and October 15 - November 14 periods (these changes to the maximum ETL excesses are noted in Table 1).
38 In Northwest Environmental Advocates v. EPA (NWEA H), the Oregon federal district court set aside NCC as a standard, holding that It
unlawfully supplanted the BBNC In violation of 40 CF.R. § 131.11(6)(2). Nw. Envtl. Advocates v. U.S. Envtl. Protection Agency, 855
F.Supp.2d 1199,1217 (D. Or. 2012). Removal of the NCC from Oregon regulations leaves Oregon with the biologically based numeric
criteria (BBNC) temperature standard. Therefore, the BBNC temperature criteria applicable to Bear Creek must be used to calculate
Ashland's ETL.
99 Ox.AOMiN. RuLEs340-041-0028[12)(1b)(B). DEQ regulations allowfora human use allowance (HUA) in setting temperature permit limits,
providingthat insignificant additions of heatare authorized by DEQin waters that exceed the applicable temperature criteria.This
addition is known as the "human use allowance" (HUA). The calculation of a HUA differs depending on whether a TMDL exists for a
waterbody. The court in NWEA lI explicitly upheld the legality of the HUA provision. 855 r.5upp.2d at 1218, note 8.
40 CH21VI Hill, Ashland W WTP Outfall Relocation Study, Section 4 (August 2017).
41 CH2M Hill, Ashland W WTP Outfall Relocation Study, Section 4, Table 4-12 (August 2017).
7
I
Table 1. Projected maximum excess thermal loads (ETL) and ETL exceedances under monthly critical conditions
using 2040 design flows. The values presented in the table have been taken from the Ashland WWTP Outfall
Relocation Study (Table 4-12) and adjusted based on direction from Ashland where noted to reflect the impact of
the changes to effluent characteristics as a result of adjustment to meet the facility's near field requirements.
Period Biological Temperature Maximum ETL Maximum ETL Excess
Criteria (°C) (million kcal/day) (million kcal/day)"
Jan 15 - Feb 14 13 0.3 N/A
Feb 15 - Mar 14 13 17.9 13.5
Mar 15-Apr 14 13 22.0 18.1
Apr 15 - Apr 30 13 72.5 65.2*
May 1- May 14 13 72.5 28.8**
May 15-Jun 14 18 31.8 24.6
Jun 15-Jul 14 18 56.4 50.7
Jul 15-Aug 14 18 67.4 59.5
Aug 15 - Sep 14 18 68.2 65.0
Sep 15 - Oct 14 18 49.9 48.2
Oct 15 - Nov 14 13 63.0 8.4
Nov 15 - Dec 14 13 44.2 41.5
Dec 15 -Jan 14 13 13.6 9.7
* Apr 15 - May 14 period split into two periods. No changes were made to the maximum ETL excess values, however, it is
expected that measures used to address near-field impacts will also be used to reduce the maximum ETL excess during
this period.
Maximum projected ETL for this split period was reduced to reflect measures that will be implemented to meet near-
field requirements.
Maximum projected ETL for this period reduced to reflect measures that will be implemented to meet near-field
requirements.
As noted in Table 1, there are two periods where the largest maximum ETL excesses are projected to occur: April
15 to May 14 and August 15 to September 14-both have ETL excesses of approximately 65 million kcal/day.
During the April to May period, the discharge from the facility has an associated near-field impact, in addition to
a far-field ETL excess. Ashland's expected near-field actions are expected to reduce the remaining far-field ETL
excess during mid-April to mid-May. The Outfall Relocation Study quantifies the reduction in the May 1-14 ETL
excess (which is expected to be 28.8 million kcal/day after accounting for near-field changes), but at this time,
the change to the April 15-30 ETL excess has not been quantified. Given the expected reductions in the
maximum ETL excess from April 15 to May 14, and the fact that the variability in thermal benefits from riparian
shade from mid-April to mid-October is low (which means that selection of one period will not significantly over-
or under-represent other exceedance periods in terms of shade potential) 43 the period with the greatest
maximum ETL excess that must be addressed through riparian shade is from August 15 to September 14 (Table
42 The projected maximum ETL excess shown accounts for the HUA and the direct reductions in ETL required at the point of discharge to
address near-field effects. Some portion of these maximum ETL exceedances will be addressed through extending the periods of
operation for measures used to address near-field impacts, such as reservoir cold water releases and effluent cooling using constructed
wetlands, through additional periods needed to complement the riparian shade ETL contributions. Similar to riparian shade, the thermal
benefits from these measures vary throughout the year. Accordingly, Ashland will ensure that the ETL exceedances are addressed at all
times using a portfolio of solutions.
43 The thermal benefits that can be generated by riparian shade varies throughout the year. As such, it is important to ensure that the
thermal benefits modeled from planting projects will be generated at the same time as potential thermal impacts caused by the facility
discharge. In this instance, the variability in thermal benefits from riparian shade from mid-April to mid-October is low. Based on work
completed by The Freshwater Trust for Ashland, the potential thermal benefits available in the Bear Creek watershed from April 15 to
May 14 are only 17% lower than in the August 15 to September 14 period. In addition, as noted in the table, Ashland expects that some
or all of its projected April/May exceedance will be addressed via the actions taken to address near-field impacts.
I
8
1). As such, this represents the likely exceedance that will be addressed via Ashland's trading plan, as well as the
period for which thermal benefit values will be quantified and measured against.
Third, programmatic ratios must be applied to the maximum projected exceedance so as to identify the total
credit need for that period. In this instance, 65 million kcal/day of need from riparian shade projects has been
identified for the August 15 September 14 period. As discussed below, Ashland proposes applying a temporal
lag ratio to this "base" exceedance.
Methods Used: Ashland will estimate thermal benefits44 from riparian restoration projects using version 8 of j
DEQ's Shade-a-lator model. Shade-a-lator is a module of the Heat Source model,45 a stream assessment tool
used by DEQ. Heat Source was developed in 1996 as a Master's Thesis at Oregon State University in the
Departments of Bioresource Engineering and Civil Engineering. DEQ currently maintains the Heat Source
methodology and software. Ashland will use an additional tool to complete the modeling: TTools. TTools is an
ArcGIS extension that is also used and maintained by DEQ. TTools is used to sample geospatial data and
assemble high-resolution inputs necessary to run the Heat Source model.
To determine the potential reduction in solar loading (e.g., thermal benefits) that result from riparian planting
projects, Ashland will compare current site conditions46 (the solar load that reaches the surface of the stream
under current conditions) to a future conditions scenario that assumes vegetation conditions (tree height and
canopy density) at maturity (described later in this subsection). The difference in the incoming solar load
(expressed in kilocalories per day) between the two scenarios represents the net thermal benefits generated
from a riparian revegetation project.
The modeling process for each scenario at a site will include multiple physical characteristics of the credit site,
including: the upstream and downstream boundaries of the modeled stream reach, water surface area (based
on the wetted width of the stream), local topography, bank slope, stream orientation, and geographic location
(latitude and longitude). All of the parameters representing these physical characteristics of sites will be
ii
assumed to be the same in the current condition and future condition scenarios.
The future conditions scenario incorporates the vegetation conditions (tree height and canopy density) expected
under the post-implementation conditions. Based on available information, Ashland will apply a future condition
scenario for Shade-a-lator modeling to reflect the anticipated future vegetation conditions.47 Planting plans are
expected to include a high diversity of native trees and shrubs that will contribute to riparian ecological function
and stream health. Ashland will base the vegetation parameters of the future conditions scenario on other
"The term thermal benefit refers to the reduction in thermal loading. In this analysis, thermal benefit is due to a reduction in incoming
solar radiation that results from the implementation of a revegetation project. Thermal benefits represent the expected environmental
benefits from implementing an action. The environmental benefit provided by a project serves as the foundation of a water quality
credit; however, the environmental benefits are not always fully "usable" as water quality credits. That is, not all of the water quality
benefits from an action can necessarily be claimed as offset credits to meet compliance obligations. This is because there may be
uncertainty about the underperformance or failure of a restoration project, or other uncertain factors in the watershed. As a result,
trading policies typically set aside some portion of a project's measured or modeled water quality benefits to account for uncertainty In 1.
the form of a ratio or discount factor. See National Network on Water Quality Trading, Building a Water Quality Trading Program: Options
and Considerations (2015), available at from http://willamettepartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BuildingaWQTProgram-
NNWQT.pdf. a
45 Boyd & Kasper, Analytical Methods for Dynamic Open Channel Heat and Mass Transfer: Methodology for the Heat Source Model
Version 7.0 (2003), available at http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/TMDLs/tools,htm. DEQ has posted this document on its website as a
resource for generally describing the math and assumptions used in Heat Source. While the document explicitly covers Heat Source
version 7 (and therefore Shade--a-lator version 7), the math and assumptions in version 7 are mostly the same as version 8, and so DEQ
considers this document appropriate for summarizing both versions 7 and 8.
46 Multiple input datasets are used to characterize the current conditions at a potential project site. Aerial photography or light detection
and ranging (LiDAR) data will be used to establish current conditions and to highlight the potential riparian areas available for project
implementation. This process involves digitizing the areas of interest, evaluating the current vegetation conditions, and then modeling
the current, pre-project incoming thermal load. These conditions are incorporated into a modeling scenario that quantifies the incoming
solar load that reaches the surface of the stream given the current vegetation conditions.
47 The characteristics of the future conditions that are represented by the model parameters are the future vegetation height and future
canopy density. In the Shade-a-lator model, the canopy density parameter represents the lateral attenuation of solar radiation as it
passes through the riparian canopy.
9
trading planting projects in the Rogue River Basin and reference site surveys, including the riparian revegetation
projects implemented for the City of Medford's water quality trading program in the Rogue River Basin. Some
overstory species planted at riparian revegetation trading projects in the Rogue River watershed have included:
big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa),
and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia). Therefore, if a project includes this species mix, the future conditions
Shade-a-lator parameters would use mature tree heights for these species and associated density values based
on system potential vegetation for the Bear Creek watershed identified in the Bear Creek temperature TMDL
modeling.48 Depending on the species mix at a particular site, the specific Shade-a-lator parameters might be
different, but in all instances, those parameters will be consistent with the system potential vegetation
characteristics associated with the species planted at a site.
For both scenarios, the model then calculates the sun angle every 25 meters (these calculation points are
referred to as "nodes") along the center of the modeled stream reach for every model time step (once per
minute). At each node, the model calculates the total load of incoming solar radiation by considering the
physical characteristics surrounding the node and the characteristics of the vegetation present on the
streambanks (Figure 1). The difference in the incoming solar load (expressed in kilocalories per day) between the
two scenarios represents the net thermal benefits generated from a riparian revegetation project.
Solar Path
Vegetation
Height
erwi
8 none
Distance
Figure 1: A cross-section schematic of the physical characteristics included in Shade-a-lator modeling. When the
sun angle is less than enone all incoming solar radiation is blocked by the local topography. When the sun angle is
greater than 9f„ a all incoming solar radiation reaches the surface of the stream. When the sun angle is between
O one and 6f„ ll the vegetation present attenuates a portion of the incoming solar radiation.
As Figure 1 shows, the sun angle is a key parameter in the Shade-a-lator model. As such, the time of the year
also affects the sun angle and the associated incoming solar radiation that reaches the surface of the stream.
The time of the year also affects the length of the day, and thus the overall total potential incoming solar
48 Or. Dept of Envtl. Quality, Bear Creek Watershed TMDL, Chapter 1, at 34 (2007) (discussing the relevant tree species associated with
system potential vegetation). Height and density model parameters are described in Appendix A to the temperature TMDL. Or. Dept of
Envtl. Quality, Bear Creek Watershed TMDL, Appendix A: Bear Creek Watershed Temperature Assessment, at 16-18 (2007). Ashland
proposes to use a density value of 75% for the time periods within the growing season, from May 15 to October 14, to reflect a full tree
canopy. A reduced density value of 50% is appropriate to represent the canopy conditions in the spring (April 15 to May 14) before full
leaf-out and in the fall (October 15 to November 14) before full leaf-drop. A density value of 10% is appropriate to model winter
conditions when riparian shade is primarily provided by evergreen species.
10
I
1
radiation. Due to these two factors, the modeling time period is a key model parameter. As described above, the,
period with the greatest maximum ETL excess that must be addressed through riparian shade is from August 15
to September 14 (Table 1), and so Ashland proposes calculating thermal benefits from projects during this
period so that the timing of a facility's potential excess thermal load aligns with the period of benefit from a
riparian revegetation project.
Credit Duration: Credit duration, commonly known as credit life, refers to the "length of time credits are
expected to be used.i91 This refers to the period between when a credit becomes usable as an offset and when
the credit is no longer valid. Credits are considered valid for use after the restoration action has been
implemented and verified as functioning. Because Ashland's proposed water quality trading program will be
implemented using actions that take time to realize full benefits, restoration projects must be as effective and
durable as alternative technology solutions. Therefore, verification and ongoing monitoring and maintenance of
project sites are integral parts of any credible trading program. The 2003 EPA Trading Policy provides that
"credits may be generated as long as the pollution controls or management practices are functioning as
expected" and may be used to comply with an annual, seasonal, or monthly NPDES permit limit once they have
been generated 50 Oregon rules also require that the trading plan detail how credits are quantified, taking into
account the underlying assumptions and inputs used to derive the credit quantities 51 In addition, the Oregon
rule definition of a credit identifies the need to specify the period of time over which water quality benefits will
be generated sz
For the purposes of this proposal, Ashland suggests both a minimum credit life consistent with the rules, and the
appropriate start date for the credit life. With respect to a minimum credit life, the City of Medford program
uses an average 20-year credit life, protected by long-term leasehold interests in the nonpoint source properties
where the restoration occurs.53 Clean Water Services likewise uses a minimum 20-year credit life in its
temperature management plans` Consistent with the 2003 EPA Trading Policy and these previous program
precedents in Oregon, Ashland proposes that the credits it produces from riparian vegetation projects have a
minimum 20-year credit life, with the option to extend those credits beyond the minimum life for as long as the
shade sites continue to function as expected. This approach is consistent with the minimum period for which
these projects are expected to function ss and the 2003 EPA Trading Policy. . With respect to an appropriate start
date, because credit life defines how long credits can be "used" and Ashland will not need to use credits for
compliance until it has a new permit, Ashland proposes that the credit life of any pre-permit projects begin on
the date Ashland receives its renewed NPDES permit. The proposed minimum 20-year credit life would not start
when the project is implemented or initially verified, but rather when Ashland gets a permit, and starts using the
credits from those sites to comply with thermal load limits in its permit. For projects implemented after Ashland
receives its new thermal load permit limit, the project life and credit life would both start on the date of initial ¢r
project verification.
I)
49 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0025(5)(f)(C).
50 U.S. EPA, Water Quality Trading Policy, 68 Fed, Reg. at 1612.
53 OR. ADMIN. RULES § 340-039-0025(5)(f)(B).
Sz OR. ADMIN. RULES § 340-039-0005(3) ("Credit: A measured or estimated unit of trade for a specific pollutant that represents the water
quality benefit a water quality trading project generates at a location over a specified period of time, above baseline requirements and
after applying trade ratios or any other adjustments.") (emphasis added).
sa See Or. Dept of Envtl. Quality, City of Medford National Pollutant Discharge Eliminatlon System Waste Discharge Permit, No. 100985
(Dec. 13, 2011); City of Medford, Medford Regional Water Reclamation Facility Thermal Credit Trading Program Plan, at 9 (2011),I
available at http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/trading/docs/MedfordTherrna]Trading.pdf.
54 Clean Water Services, Thermal Load Management Plan, available at https://www.cleanwatersewices.org/media/1479/temperature-
management-plan.pdf, PDF (February 28, 2005),
ss Atwentyyear credit life is likely under-representative of the lifetime and values expected from a healthy, diverse, functional riparian
forest. See Philip Ron[, et al., A Review of Stream Restoration Techniques and a Hierarchical Strategy for Prioritizing Restoration In Pacific
Northwest Watersheds, 22 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FISHERIES MGMT. 1, Tbl. 6 (2002) (noting that while it usually takes 5-20 years for
riparian restoration to achieve response, the benefits of riparian replanting are expected to extend 10-50+ years, with a medium to high
probabilityof success). Unlike most investments, the restoration investment underlying Ashland's water quality trading program will
appreciate overtime into a self-sustaining solution, and so the site will likely continue to function beyond the 20-year credit life.
i
11
P
OAR 340-039-0025(5)(6): BASELINE
Pursuant to the trading rule, a "trading plan must identify any applicable regulatory requirements from OAR
340-039-0030(1) that apply within the trading area and that must be implemented to achieve baseline
requirements." Credits can only be generated from best management practices (BMPs) that result in water
quality benefits above trading baseline requirements. Baseline is included within the trading rule to ensure that
credits are not used to meet a regulatory obligation by more than one entity at any given Lime." The 2003 U.S.
EPA Trading Policy states that "pollutant reductions [should be] greater than those required by a regulatory
requirement or established under a TMDL.i57 In developing its rule, Oregon went one step further and
specifically defined "trading baseline" as the "pollutant load reductions, BMP requirements, or site conditions
that must be met under regulatory requirements in place at the time of trading project initiation."" Regulatory
requirements that are potentially applicable to trading projects include requirements stemming from NPDES
permits, Oregon Department of Agriculture agricultural water quality management area rules, Oregon Board of
Forestry rules, federal management plans or agreements between the state and a federal agency, CWA section
401 certifications, local ordinances, tribal laws or rules, compensatory mitigation projects, or any requirements
derived from a TMDL by designated management agencies responsible for TMDL implementation.-'9
1
Therefore, when Ashland initiates a new trading project, it will assess and document whether any of the
baseline requirements described in the rule affirmatively apply to sites, and explain how these potential Rogue-
specific baseline requirements apply (or not) to each individual site. If affirmative requirements do apply to BMP
i
sites, baseline BMPs can be installed or deductions to site thermal benefit totals can be made to ensure that
credit is not being taken for actions that otherwise are already required by these regulatory requirements. If no
baseline obligations exist at the proposed trading project, the baseline obligation at these sites would be equal
to current conditions. As part of credit verification, Ashland will evaluate each site to ensure that site-specific
baseline requirements have been identified and considered in credit calculation. Below is a current overview of
how the current potential sources of baseline listed in the trading rule might apply in the proposed trading area:
(a) NPDES permit requirements Ashland's permit does not require riparian restoration. There are no
federal or state temperature technology-based effluent limits
(TBELs).
(b) Rules issued by Oregon Inland Rogue Agricultural Water Quality Management Program
Department of Agriculture for an Rules, OAR 603-095-1400 et seq. OAR 603-095-1440(3)(a): "(a)
agricultural water quality Agricultural management of riparian areas shall not impede the
management area under OAR development and maintenance of adequate riparian vegetation to
chapter 603 division 095 control water pollution, provide stream channel stability, moderate
solar heating, and filter nutrients and sediment from runoff. (b) This
condition is not intended to prohibit riparian grazing where it can be
done while managing for riparian vegetation required in OAR 603-
095-1440(3)(a)." In addition, landowners must avoid excessive soil
erosion (OAR 603-095-1440(2)), unnecessary returns from surface
irrigation return flows (OAR 603-095-1440(4)) and discharge waste
(OAR 603-095-1440(5)).
i
If a potential site is actively impeding the development and
maintenance of adequate riparian vegetation, or associated with any 3
of the other prohibited conditions, such a practice would need to be
stopped before credit could be generated from that site.
i
i
56 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340 039 0040(2) (3).
57 U.S. EPA, Water Quality Trading Policy, 68 Fed, Reg. at 1610,
58 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0005(6) (emphasis added).
59 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0030.
A
1
12
(c) Rules issued by Oregon Board of Will be applied if/when forestry-zoned sites are considered for
Forestry under OAR chapter 629 implementation.
divisions 610-680
(d) Requirements ofa federal land These will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Would not apply
management plan, or an unless recruited site is federally or state owned.
agreement between a federal
agency and the state
(e) Requirements established in a Would only apply if Ashland is purchasing credits from land managed
Clean Water Act Section 401 water by an entity subject to a 401 certification. If such an entity is
quality certification engaged as a potential seller of credits, Ashland will review the
entity's 401 certification to ensure that the thermal benefits are not
required by the certification.
(f) Local ordinances Jackson County. Land Dev. Ord. § 8.6.4(A) (2015)fi0: existing
vegetation and tree cover "will be retained" on land within 75 feet
of the top of the Rogue River bank and within 50 feet of any Class 1
or2 streams, except in certain narrowly prescribed, regulator-
approved situations, including where non-native vegetation may be
removed if being replaced with native vegetation. The City of
Ashland's land use ordinance includes similar requirements to
protect riparian areas, but does not affirmatively require restoration
except when offsetting construction activities in protection zones.
City of Ashland Land Use Ord. § 18.3.11(2017)61 Similar provisions
exist in the Phoenix, Oregon Land Dev. Code § 3.7.2 (2017).62
(g)Tribal laws, rules, or permits None that Ashland is aware of as a general matter, but will confirm
on site-by-site basis.
(h) Other applicable rules affecting None that Ashland is aware of as a general matter, but will confirm
nonpoint source requirements on site-by-site basis.
(i) Projects completed as part of Ashland will be acting pursuant to its NPDES permit obligations, not
compensatory mitigation, or a supplemental environmental project (SEP) or settlement. If a j
projects required under a permit or potential project site is already hosting a CWA 404 or SEP project,
approval issued pursuant to Clean Ashland will have the burden to demonstrate the proportion of the
Water Act section 404, or a CWA 402 trading site that is additional.
supplemental environmental
project used to settle a civil penalty
imposed under OAR chapter 340
division 012 or the Clean Water Act
(j) Regulatory requirements a INLAND ROGUE BASIN LOCALADVISORY COMM. & OR. DEP'TOF AGRIC.,
designated management agency INLAND ROGUE AGRICULTURAL WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENTAREA PLAN 12
establishes to comply with a DEQ- (May 2010)63 ("Agricultural activities that eliminate the possibility of
issued TMDL, water quality natural regeneration of trees and shrubs along waterways are not
management plan or another allowed.... [N]ear-stream riparian management [is limited] to
water pollution control plan seasons and practices that enhance growth of grasses, shrubs, and
adopted by rule or issued by order trees canopy.......
under ORS 4688.015 or 4686.110.
OThls document can be found here: https://Jacksoncountyor.org/ds/PDFs?Entryld=37627.
sc Thls document can be found here: http://www.codepublishing.com/OR/Ashland/AI/LandUse/18.3.11.htmIM18.3.11.110.
6 Thls document can be found here:
http://www. pho enlxoregon.gov/sites/defau It/files/fileattachm ents/b ul I dl ng/pla nning/page/354/p I dc.pdf,
O This document can be found here:
http://www.oregon.gov/ODA/shared/Documents/Publications/NaturalResources/IniandRogueAW QMAreaP[an.pdf.
13
OAR 340-039-0025(5)(E): TRADING RATIOS
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must include a "description of applicable trading ratios, the basis for
each applicable trading ratio, including underlying assumptions for the ratio, and a statement indicating whether
those ratios increase or decrease the size of a credit obligation or the number of credits generated from an
individual trading project," The Oregon trading rule requires the use of at least one ratio in a trading plan, and a
description of the assumptions underlying the ratio decisions.64 Trading ratios are "a numeric value used to !I
adjust the number of credits generated from a trading project, or to adjust the number of credits that a credit
user needs to obtain."" The 2007 EPA trading toolkit suggests that ratios may be necessary to address a number
of factors such as delivery, location, equivalency, uncertainty, and retirement.66 Oregon's water quality trading
rule notes that trading ratios may be used to account for attenuation of water quality benefits, BMP
uncertainties, other types of risk, time lag, priority area incentives, or credit retirements.
Depending on the BMP(s) implemented, the applicable ratio(s) will change. To date, in Oregon riparian shade
restoration trading programs, DEQ has approved a 2:1 trading ratio to account for the time lag.67 Based on the
20-year credit life associated with these projects, this ratio is meant to account for the temporal lag in thermal
benefits between planting (Year 0) and when the planted trees reach full shade-producing heights (Year 20). The
logic supporting this ratio is meant to track riparian vegetation growth curves. For example, a growth curve68 for
Black Cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa)--a native species regularly planted by riparian restoration practitioners
in Oregon that has a growth pattern representative of riparian plantings in the area-shows that with average
regional conditions, Black Cottonwoods have grown to 9 feet tall after just one year; 23 feet tall after five years;
43 feet tall after ten years; and 81 feet tall after twenty years.69 So by year 10, approximately half of the
anticipated future thermal benefits will have been achieved at the site, which supports use of a 2:1 ratio. The
mix of species and height classes at a particular site makes identification of an exact ratio difficult, and so the 2:1
ratio attempts to generally convert overall growth trends and timelines into an administrative mechanism.
Ashland proposes the use of a trading ratio for time lag in its trading plan. Specifically, for the pre-permit period, j.
Ashland proposes use of the typical 2:1 time lag ratio, but requests reevaluation of the ratio applicable to these
k
pre-permit sites when its permit is being renewed. Many of Ashland's potential project sites are on narrow
stream reaches, meaning that a few years of successful growth could result in meaningful shade production
much earlier than on wider streams. The 2016 water quality trading IMD contemplates potential ratio
reductions associated with taking early action: "[L]ower ratios are appropriate if the permittee is implementing
BMPs well in advance of the anticipated compliance obligation or if water quality benefit is delivered in advance
of when the credit is needed."70 Accordingly, at the time of permit renewal, Ashland requests that DEQ consider
a lower time lag ratio for these pre-permit sites based on the actual performance of those sites. j
i
In addition, Ashland's projects may be located in priority areas, as identified in OAR 340-039-0043(2)(8). As such,
jl
at the time of permit renewal, Ashland may also propose ratio considerations related to priority area site
implementation.
64 OR. ADMEN. Rums 340-039-0025(5)(e).
6s OR. ADM[N. Runes 340-039-0005(10).
66 U.S. EPA, Water Quality Trading Toolkit for Permit Writers, 30-32, EPA 833-R-07-004 (Aug. 2007, updated June 2009) ("There is not set
limit for how high a trading ratio can be. Trading ratios depend on the specific circumstances in the watershed").
67 See Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, City of Medford National pollutant Discharge Elimination System Waste Discharge Permit, No. 100985
(Dec. 13, 2011), available at http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/trading/does/MedfordNpdesPermit.pdf; Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, Clean
Water Services National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Watershed-based Waste Discharge Permit, Nos. 101141, 101142,
101143, 101144 and MS4 (draft Apr. 2016).
68 Growth curves (a.k.a. site index curves) are established through observation and measurement of species growth, over time, given
specific site conditions. See U.S. Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, PNW-RN-533, Site Index Equations and Mean Annual
Increment Equations for Pacific Northwest Research Station Forest Inventory and Analysis Inventories, 1985-2001 (2002).
69 E.B. Peterson et al., B.C. Ministry of Forests, Black Cottonwood and Balsam Poplar Managers' Handbook for British Columbia, Forestry
Canada, at 46 (1996), available at http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/does/Frr/Frr250.htm.
Jo Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, Trading IMD at 20.
14
OAR 346-039-0025(5)(G): MONITORING
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must include a "description of the following: (A) Proposed methods
and frequency of trading project BMP monitoring, and (B) Proposed methods and frequency of how water
quality benefits generated by a trading project will be monitored." In addition, an entity that engages in trading
must submit an annual report that includes all of the elements described in OAR 340-039-0017(3).
Ashland will submit an annual report that includes all of the elements described in OAR 340-039-0017(3). In
addition to submitting that annual monitoring report, Ashland proposes a monitoring schedule that is consistent
with the. Willamette Partnership's February 2016 riparian addendum to its General Crediting Protocol
(document described in detail in section on BMP Quality Standards)?' Consistent with that protocol, a specific
combination of the following three types of monitoring approaches will be applied throughout the life of each
riparian restoration project to ensure that the project continues to function as expected as it relates to the
performance metrics identified in the document:
1) Quantitative monitoring: project developer implements vegetation monitoring protocol by sampling
random plots on site; implements repeat photo monitoring at full set of on-the-ground camera points;
reports on full suite of performance standards.
2) Qualitative monitoring: on-site, rapid, but standardized, qualitative review of site condition and
progress toward performance metrics accompanied by subset of repeat photos from on-the-ground
camera points used in quantitative years. The same set of camera points will be repeated in all
qualitative monitoring years.
3) Remote monitoring: remote sensing information to provide visual evidence that site still exists; e.g., a
current year aerial image or UDAR taken during growing season to document site persistence.
/ To remain consistent with Willamette Partnership approaches, Ashland proposes to monitor sites according
to the schedule in Table 3:
Table 3. Dispersal of monitoring and reporting approaches over the life of a project.
I Site: Completed Growing Seasons After Planting and Initial Verification
Monitoring Approach _i_0 _Y1Y_Z_ Y4-- Y5 Y6 Y7 Y8 I-Y9 Y10
Quantitative Monitoring ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1-7 ✓ 1
Qualitative Monitoring ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
RemotelMonitorh 1 ✓
Continued Completed Growing Seasons After Planting and Initial Verification
Y11 Y12 Y13 Y14 YIS Y16 Y17 Y18 Y19 Y20
Quantitative Monitoring ✓
Qualitative Monitoring ✓ ✓
Remote Monitoring ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
In addition to this standard proposed site monitoring, if projects are damaged by causes beyond the reasonable
control of the City (e.g., wildlife, flood, vandalism), Ashland proposes that it will report that damage to DEQ.
Ashland proposes reporting such incidents to DEQ within 90 days of learning of the damage, and that such a
report would include: 1) a description of the event, including an assessment of the damage; 2) a plan for
addressing the damage (natural restoration and/or active replanting of the site would be allowed if continued
maintenance of the site is expected to provide a reasonable potential for the long term restoration of the
shading function of the site in an ecologically appropriate manner; replacement with an alternative site or sites
7' Willamette Partnership, Performance Standards for Riparian Vegetation (2016), available at http,.//v illamettepartnership.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/06/Performance-Stds-for-Rip-Reveg_2016-02-S6,pdf.
72 In the event that remote information is not available fora monitoring year designated for remote monitoring, the qualitative
monitoring approach can Instead be used for thatyear. If this occurs, a later year designated as qualitative. monitoring may be monitored
remotely so long as that change does not result in more than two consecutive years of only remote monitoring:
IS
could also be pursued); and 3) a schedule for implementing the remediation plan. If this trading plan is later
incorporated into Ashland's NPDES permit, Ashland proposes that damage to a project due a cause beyond the
reasonable control of the City should not in and of itself be considered a violation of its permit, and that credits
from damaged project sites should remain valid so long as Ashland demonstrates to DEQ that the sites will be
i
restored or alternative solutions will be implemented within a reasonable timeframe. This suggested approach is
consistent with the approach outlined in the City of Medford's permit,73
OAR 340-039-0025(5)(H): TRADING PLAN PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must include a "description of how the entity will verify and
document for each trading project that BMPs are conforming to applicable quality standards and credits are
generated as planned."
The Oregon trading rules require that an entity using trading verify and document that BMPs conform to quality
standards, and that the credits are tracked and made available for the public," To be consistent with the Oregon
water quality trading rule, Ashland will pursue a verification approach consistent with the Willamette
Partnership's standards for verification.71
Specifically, after a site has been implemented, a third-party verifier will conduct a full verification review,
including administrative review of the site's eligibility, technical review of credit calculation, and confirmation
via a site visit that a project has been implemented consistent with the BMP quality standards included in this
trading plan. Until a site is "established" (around project Year 5), verifiers will review monitoring reports and
attest that the site does not appear at risk of failure. At later milestones in the project (specifically Years 5, 10
and 15), a third party verifier will confirm that the site is continuing to mature and develop on a trajectory that is
materially consistent with the as built site and quality standards. In the years between these milestone
verifications, verifiers will continue to review annual monitoring reports and provide attestation that the site
does not appear at risk of failure. At the close of a project's full life, a third-party verifier will conduct a final
verification, including a review of originally estimated credit calculation versus a final credit calculation, a
comparison of predicted Year 20 site conditions versus actual Year 20 site conditions, and an on-site visit to
confirm that Year 20 quality standards have been met.
OAR 340-039-0025(5)(1): TRACKING AND REPORTING
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must include a "description of how credit generation, acquisition and
usage will be tracked and how this information will be made available to the public."
Transparency is critical to a credible trading program. Therefore, in addition to completing monitoring (as
described above), submitting annual compliance reports and completing performance verification, Ashland will
post credit information on a publicly accessible website, registry, or tracking tool in order to disclose project
site- and program-level content and project successes. As evidenced by other ecosystem service program
tracking tools around the country,76 there are several models for hosting this information, including use of a
73 Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, City of Medford National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Waste Discharge Permit, No. 100985,
Schedule D(7)(b)(v) (Dec. 13, 2011).
74 "Credits may be used for compliance with NPDES permit requirements... once implementation of BMPs has been verified as consistent
with applicable BMP quality standards according to OR, ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0025(5)(h)."OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0040(5)."
75 Willamette Partnership, Ecosystem Credit Accounting System Third Party Verification Protocol Version 1.0 (2009), available of
http://willamettepartnership.org/publicatioris/.
76 Environmental credit trading programs have used several approaches to track program progress, Markit, an environmental credit
registry, is one such portal for project information. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) tracks the Ohio River Basin Nutrient
Trading Program through Markit (https://mer.markit.com/brreg/public/orb/index.jsp?s=cp), as does The City of Medford with its
temperature compliance program managed by The Freshwater Trust
(https://products.niarkit.com/brreg/pu blic/index.jsp?e ntity=holding&name=&sta ndardl d=&unitclass=&sort=account_name&dir=ASC&st
art=450). The California Air Resources Board (CARE) uses a password-protected market tracking system called Compliance Instrument
Tracking System Service (CiTSS) to track and manage GHG credits
(http://www.arh.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/markettrackingsysterTi/markettrackingsystem,htm). SOx and NOx trades completed pursuant
the federal Clean Air Act must be registered in an EPA-managed database that serializes credits. EPA, Air Markets Program Data,
1b
third-party registry, registration on agency website, or a hosted registry/tracking tool. For programs that involve
restoration actions that last decades, a single location that serves as a clearinghouse for site-specific
information-including project design documents, annual photo points, monitoring reports, and project
performance information-is useful for both DEQ and external members of the public. Ashland will ensure that:
1) individual thermal benefits and transactions are accounted for and can be tracked, 2) program
implementation progress can be tracked, and 3) sufficient information is provided related to individual project
site trajectory (i.e., annual monitoring reports).
OAR 340-039-0025(6): ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
Pursuant to the trading rule, a trading plan must include a "description of how monitoring and other information
may be used overtime to adjust trading projects and under what circumstances." Significant program )
amendments may require public review and comment, but other small changes will fall under the scope of
adaptive management"
Ashland recognizes the importance of long-term maintenance and monitoring of projects in order to ensure
overall trading program, specific project success and ecological improvement in program areas. The three-tiered
monitoring approach described above will allow for programmatic tracking and evaluation of progress toward
thermal benefit needs. The multi-decadal timeframe of the anticipated trading program necessitates the ability
to adapt implementation, maintenance, monitoring, and performance tracking practices to reflect new
knowledge, technology and information as it emerges. As technologies, BMP implementation, and monitoring
practices evolve, it is expected that more efficient approaches or better knowledge about sources and methods
to achieve program goals will also develop. x
To adapt and improve the program overtime, Ashland therefore proposes a five-year adaptive management
cycle. A five-year review cycle provides a regular opportunity to review available data from the previous years of
implementation, maintenance, and monitoring, and to incorporate new technologies and lessons learned
through previous implementation cycles into BMP quality standards and guidelines, as well as monitoring,
maintenance, and performance tracking protocols. Periodic review also affords transparency and quality control.
A review period of five years is recommended to allow enough time to properly evaluate: 1) progress toward
overall programmatic goals, as well as 2) the effectiveness of maintenance approaches and monitoring g
protocols. Data on restoration projects, while limited, also suggests that there is the potential for substantial
time lag in measuring the ecological effectiveness of watershed restoration, and so a five-year window provides
more flexibility to appropriately collect and analyze these data.
I
d
i
http://ampd.epa.gov/ampd/. The MWMC and Medford use Markitto register Its SRF pilot program sites-to trackand report on progress u
toward achieving program goals, as well as to confirm that projects are in place and meeting quality standards for Implementation.
"In the City of Medford permit, DEQ notes that "significant amendments include changes in trading ratio, types of trades or trading 1.
metrics (for example, addition of an activity to a riparian shade restoration program that provides cooling or prevents heating but is not )
measured using a shading metric), or changes to trading parameters (for example, addition of nutrients to a thermal load credit
program)." DEQnotes that "DEQapproval and public review is not required fortrading agreements, specific projectsites, or minor
I'
amendments to the program provided theyare consistent with the overall direction and objectives of the permittee's DEQ-approved
credit trading program." Or. Dept of Envtl. Quality, City of Medford National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Waste Discharge
Permit, No. 100985, Schedule D(7)(a)(i)-(ii) (Dec. 13, 2011).
)
17 4
t
n
I
Use of SRF Funds to Generate Water Quality Trading Credits
OAR 340-039-0040(4): FINANCIAL ADDITIONALITY
Ashland received a Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) Sponsorship Loan from DEQ in 2013. As stated in its
application, Ashland intended to use a portion of the SRF funds to implement riparian shade projects to help it
comply with its expected thermal load limits. Ashland's intent to use SRF funds to reimburse expenses
associated with implementing, stewarding and monitoring temperature credit projects is relevant in two ways:
financial additionality," and project reimbursement eligibility.
Many trading programs, including Oregon's, include restrictions meant to ensure that the environmental benefit
secured through the sale of a credit is in addition to what would have occurred without it. The Oregon rule
specifically states that "credits generated under an approved trading plan may not include water quality benefits
obtained with public conservation funds."" Therefore, the type of money used to purchase or develop credits
does matter. Fortunately, the Oregon rule explicitly defines SRF loan funds as not being "public conservation
funds"", meaning that trading projects funded by Ashland with these funds do not run the risk of violating
Oregon's financial additionality obligations."
i
I
r
78 To be additional, thermal benefits used to meet Ashland's thermal load exceedance should be generated from BMPs funded by and
implemented by, or on behalf of, Ashland. BMPs that are currently funded by another source of "public conservation funds" are not
considered financially "additional" because they are already occurring. Because these actions would have occurred in the absence of an
Ashland trading program, Ashland could not track any of these benefits to count as offsets against its thermal load exceedance. Federal,
state or local cost-share funds (e.g., "public conservation funds") may be used to supplement BMPs that are being funded by Ashland or
to help meet baseline obligations. However, public conservation funds cannot be used to generate thermal benefits that would count
toward meeting Ashland's ETL excess. In the event that public conservation funds are used to supplement a thermal benefit-generating
restoration project, it would be Ashland's responsibility to demonstrate that no public conservation funds were used to generate thermal
benefits
79 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0040(4).
80 OR. ADMIN. RULES 340-039-0005(4) ("Public Conservation Funds: Public funds that are targeted to support voluntary natural resource
protection or restoration. Examples of public conservation funds include United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) cost share
programs, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) section 319 grant funds, United States Fish and Wildlife Service Partners
for Fish and Wildlife Program funds, State Wildlife Grants, and Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board restoration grants. Public funds
that are not considered public conservation funds include: public loans intended to be used for water quality infrastructure projects, such
as Clean Water State Revolving Funds, USDA Rural Development funds, and utility sewer storm water and surface water management
fees.") (emphasis added).
81 EPA regulations are silent on this particular issue. However, the 2014 statutory amendments to the Clean Water SRF program
suggested a strong inclination toward green infrastructure. Relevant to green infrastructure investment under the SRF program, the 2014
Water Resources Reform and Development Act (2014 WRRDA), Pub. L. No. 113-121, 128 Stat. 1193 (2014), expanded the list of eligible
projects, requires utility recipients of SRF loans to certify that the utility "has selected, to the maximum extent practicable, a project or
activity that maximizes the potential for efficient water use, reuse, recapture, and conservation, and energy conservation and updated
the SRF definitions to incorporate by reference the definition of "treatment works" to include the acquisition of land "that will be an
integral part of the treatment process" and for construction.
18
WILLAMETTE PARTNERSHIP
Performance Standards for Riparian `I
F,
Revegetation
February 16, 2016 i
)
INTRODUCTION
The following is intended to serve as revised performance standards (Section 1) and recommendations (Appendix I
A) for riparian restoration projects generating credits under the Willamette Partnership Ecosystem Credit {
Accounting System. The original standards were developed through collaboration with riparian restoration
experts in the Willamette and Rogue Basins and have since been applied in those watersheds, as well as 4
Oregon's John Day and North Coast watersheds. The standards have continued to evolve between their first
application in 2011 and presently in 2016. Through that time, additional input and review was solicited from
entities that operate throughout Oregon representing expertise in agricultural production, riparian restoration,
and mitigation.`
In 2015, Willamette Partnership engaged in robust discussions regarding how to more efficiently achieve a high
level of confidence regarding riparian site condition through the use of revised performance standards. The
metrics in this performance standard were selected to achieve four key criteria: 1) Science-based and credible; 2)
Transparent and replicable; 3) Efficient and practical to apply; and 4) Applicable to a range of environmental
conditions.
These revised performance criteria have been informed by reference site data from higher-quality riparian forests
in multiple watersheds across Oregon, representing a range of ecoregions and precipitation patterns. Metric
selection was also informed by experience monitoring credit-generating riparian revegetation projects in
accordance with Willamette Partnership's 2011 draft riparian performance standards, review of relevant
literature, and comparison to other riparian revegetation monitoring standards and programs. Documentation
for the revisions incorporated herein is available upon request. Alternate criteria will be considered where
supported by robust documentation of reference site conditions.
1. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR RIPARIAN REVEGETATION PROJECTS GENERATING
CREDITS
A. DEFINITIONS
Canopy Closure': Canopy closure is an upward-looking point estimate of the coverage
of a forest canopy, and may be measured in the field with a spherical
densiometer (also called a mirror optometer) or by analyzing upward-
looking hemispherical photographs.
Page 1
i
Cover (or Absolute Cover)': Cover is a downward-looking measure of the percentage of the
ground surface covered by living plant leaves and stems. Areas not
covered by vegetation are counted as unvegetated substrate. Total
cover may be greater than 100% if species are present in multiple
strata (i.e., tree, shrub and herbaceous layers).
Cover (Canopy): Absolute cover as viewed from above tree height.
Cover (Native Shrub and Vine): Absolute cover as viewed from beneath tree height.
Hydrologic zones': Hydrozones, or hydrologic zones, are areas of relatively homogenous
flood frequency, water table height, patterns of water transfer, and
other hydrological characteristics, particularly those that affect plants.
Invasive Species: A plant species should automatically be labeled as invasive if it
appears on the current Oregon Department of Agriculture Noxious
Weed list, plus known problem species including Mentha pulegium
(pennyroyal) and Elaeagnus angustifolia (Russian Olive).
i
Project year: Project year is measured as the number of completed growing
seasons following initial verification, starting at O.For example, where
plantings are installed in the winter, the following fall would be
considered the beginning of project year 1, because the plantings
have gone through 1 spring and summer growing season.
Sampling: Data will be collected using a standard random sampling method. j
Radial plots, rectangular plots, and belt transect methods are
acceptable.
Shrub': A perennial woody plant that is usually multi-stemmed and normally
grows to heights of 16 feet or less.
Tree3: A perennial woody plant, usually with a single stem or few stems, that
normally grows to a height greater than 16 feet,
Vine': A twining or climbing plant with relatively long stems. Vines may be
herbaceous or woody.
13, PROJECT DESIGN
1. A project area includes the entire area, geospatially delineated, for which the Project Developer
seeks shade credit. Project areas must border a river or stream with perennial flow.4
2. The Project Developer shall characterize reference sites to support project design.
' Jennings, Brown, and Sheil. 1999. Assessing forest canopies and understory illumination: canopy closure, canopy cover, and
other measures. Forestry, Vol. 71, No.1, pp-59-73.
' Chen et al. 2010. GIS-based Spatial Hydrological Zoning for Sustainable Water Management of Irrigation Areas.
International Environmental Modelling and Software Society (iEMSs) 2010 International Congress on Environmental
Modelling and Software Modelling for Environment's Sake, Fifth Biennial Meeting, Ottawa, Canada.
3 Definitions from USDA, http://plants.usda.gov/growth_habits_def.html.
4 The ecological value of intermittent systems and their contribution toward watershed health is recognized; however, at this
time, Willamette Partnership is not able to reflect the inherent ecological diversity in intermittent stream systems.
Furthermore, Willamette Partnership is not aware of a method for developing reference sites for intermittent streams.
Page 2
i
a. Reference Site Selection Requirements:
i. Reference sites must be located within the same Fifth Field HUC (HUC5)1 and be
within 50% of the elevations of the highest and lowest anticipated project aceas.°
ii. As possible, reference sites should be consistent with the soils and/or substrate,
hydrology, and geology of the project site.
iii. Reference sites should support either a naturally regenerating or established
appropriate vegetative community within the active riparian area of a river or stream,
including the area within 75 feet of the river or stream, or otherwise to best reflect
hydrozones at the site.
iv. The reference site must extend over at least 10,000 contiguous square feet (0.23
acres) and be representative of the typical vegetation and substrate.
V. Reference site riparian communities must support at least 5 native woody species,
and trees must have an average minimum height of at least 10 feet, unless the
typical mature plant community forthe setting and substrate is documented
_ otherwise.
vi. Total cover of invasive species should not exceed 20%.
vii. A minimum of two reference sites is required for each HUC5 in which projects are
located?
The Project Developer must detail its reference site search and selection protocol, the
process it went through in seeking references sites consistent with all of these criteria, and
note how the best suitable sites were selected.
If the Project Developer is unable to find a reference site consistent with all of these criteria,
Willamette Partnership will approve use of alternate criteria where justified and documented.
i
b. Reference site data collection: The Project Developer must collect reference site data and
identify site locations, as well as plots or transects where applicable, using GPS or GIS and a
representative photo. Data from each survey must be maintained and made available upon
request, and summary data should be provided in the Project Design.
Data collected must include the following information for each reference site, at a minimum:
• GPS coordinates and datum;
• data collection date(s);
• collector name;
• percent cover of native shrubs and woody vines, by species;e orstem density of
native shrubs and woody vines;
• density of trees;
• percent canopy cover or closure;
• percent cover invasive woody species;
• percent cover invasive herbaceous species;
• woody plant species list; and j
• invasive species list and relative abundances. 9
The Sample Riparian Revegetation Monitoring Protocol (Appendix A. Section 3) and an associated
Sample Monitoring Data Collection Form (available upon request) are provided as examples
illustrating appropriate protocols for collecting data on reference conditions. Willamette Partnership
understands that monitoring procedures will vary to suit the needs of each project or program.
Additional examples of monitoring protocols can be found in the Willamette Partnership 6
Stewardship and Monitoring Plan Example, available at http://willamettepartnership.org/market-
1!
9
s www.oregon.oov/DSUPFRMITS/docs/huc5 odf.
c This range is calculated as (lowest elevation - (lowest elevation* 0.5)) through (highest elevation + (highest elevation* 0.5)).
Reference sites may be used for multiple restoration projects within the same HUC5.
e Including at least all species with cover >5%.
Page 3
tools-rules/water-quality. If a Project Developer elects to use their own protocol, it should be made
available to Willamette Partnership upon request.
3. Planting
a. Base plantings on reference site and professional judgment: Plantings must be based on
appropriate plant community determined by local reference sites. It is understood that
Project Developers will also take into account conditions and species present at a restoration
site and utilize their professional judgment when developing a site-specific planting plan.
b. Use local plant stock if available: Unless otherwise unavailable, the Project Developer
should use only woody plant materials grown from seed, cuttings, or other plant materials
collected from natural populations growing within either the WWETAC Provisional Seed
Zone for Conifer and Shrub Species9 or the EPA Level III EcoregiontO containing the project
area(s). Seed collection at extreme elevation should be avoided.
i
C. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
1. Monitoring: The Project Developer shall submit monitoring reports that describe site condition,
management actions taken, management actions anticipated, and overall progress toward the
performance criteria below on an annual basis, or as described in the General Crediting Protocol.
Sample monitoring reports are available upon request.
2. Performance Criteria: At the end of the 5", 1011, 15w, and 201 project year, collected data must
demonstrate that the project area meets the performance criteria shown in Table 1 below.
Alternate project performance criteria will be considered where supported by robust documentation
of reference site conditions. Review and approval of alternate criteria by Willamette Partnership and
appropriate experts approved by Willamette Partnership should occur prior to initial project
verification.
Table 1. Performance Criteria for Riparian Plantings
Performance criteria
Criteria
Year 5 Year 10 Year 15 Year 20
EITHER: Meets or exceeds 80% of the native 70% of the native Same as
1) Mean stem 1600 live native woody stem woody stem performance criteria
density of native woody stems per density identified density identified for year 15
shrubs and woody acre at the end of the at the end of the
vines" fifth growing fifth growing
season season
OR
2) Site average for
combined native Site average for combined native shrub and woody vine cover 25%
shrub and woody
vine cover
% canopy closure N/A N/A z 25%
or cover
9 The USDA's Western Wildland Environmental Threat Assessment Center (WWETAC) is in Prineville, Oregon,
www.fs.fed,u5/wwetac/,
iowww.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level iii iv.htm.
" Mean woody stem density is determined by counting all live woody stems taller than six inches (regardless of vigor) by
species within reference sites. Count multi-stem species (e.g., Symphoricarpos, Rosa) as one stem per square foot (1' x 1').
Page 4
Native trees/acre None I (Dry ecoregions)12 2 50 trees/acre
(Wet ecoregions)13 2 100 trees/acre
Number of native
woody species At least 5 native woody species present
Invasive woody No greater than 20% cover invasive herbaceous species
and herbaceous No greater than 10% cover invasive woody species
cover
Non-native woody Take and document actions reasonably necessary to evaluate the risk posed to project
and herbaceous site by non-native species, where they are problematic (e.g., Phalaris arundinacea
cover (Reed canary grass), Hedera helix (English ivy), Ilex aquifolium (English holly)), taking
the steps necessary to control those non-native species such that their presence does
not prevent the successful establishment and propagation of native ecosystem
characteristics and functions. This includes monitoring and reporting % cover of such
species.'"
a
9
7
4
I
P
h
12 For the purposes of this performance standard, EPA Level III ecoregions in Oregon that are considered to be "dry":
Klamath Mountains, Blue Mountains, East Cascades, Columbia Basin, Northern Basin and Range.
13 EPA Level III ecoregions in Oregon that are considered to be "wet": West Cascades, Willamette Valley, Coast Range.
14 In particular, this standard is intended to address Phalaris arundinacea. P. amrdinacea was considered for inclusion as an
invasive species; however, given its pervasiveness in western Oregon and the evolving nature of science regarding its role in
riparian function, Willamette Partnership has chosen to forego development of a quantitative standard at this time with the
intention to reconsider its status within the standards by 2020. e
Page 5
I
i
APPENDIX A. VOLUNTARY GUIDANCE AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RIPARIAN REVEGETATION
1. CONSIDERATIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL RIPARIAN REVEGETATION
The following recommendations are based on the experience of riparian restoration professionals from
Clean Water Services in Oregon's Tualatin River basin.
A. H roloav: Consider the frequency and duration of water inundation and groundwater
influences. Divide the planting area into hydrologic zones based on elevation and flood period.
Most sites include one or more of the following planting zones with respect to hydrology during
the growing season: Toe (Wet) - standing or flowing water/nearly constant saturation, anaerobic
soils; Bank and Overbank(Moist) - periodically saturated, anaerobic and/or aerobic soils;
Transition (Dry) - infrequent inundation/saturation, if any; aerobic soils.
B. Soils and substrate: Unless soils and/or site substrate is heavily compacted, tilling and disking I
disturb soils and are generally unnecessary for successful revegetation and may even encourage
colonization by invasive species.
C. Weeds and Site Context: Consider site preparation and future maintenance needs in light of
characteristics of current vegetation. Consider the current and potential influences of areas
surrounding site (e.g., the introduction of propagules of non-native species) and select
boundaries and all-season access points that facilitate maintenance.
D. Plant Materials: To the extent possible, all plant seed and material should be procured from
nurseries that use sustainable practices defined by organizations like Salmon Safe, Food
Alliance, NRCS, etc. NRCS Plant Materials Centers15 provide resources to guide selection of
plant materials. One to two-year old bare root seedlings yield excellent results at most sites.
Bare root or containerized plants may be used, but the cost of transporting and planting
containerized stock is typically higher. Cuttings from native Salix, Populus, Cornus, Spiraea,
Lonicera, and other species can effectively supplement bare root plantings. Salix, Populus, and
Corpus sericea will be most appropriate on steep streambanks. Consider genetic diversity
amongst cuttings, repeated cuttings from the same individuals may not provide the same
benefits in terms of habitat and resilience in the plant community. Native grass and forb seed
can help with erosion and weed control. Small-stature native grasses are recommended to
prevent excessive competition with planted trees and shrubs for moisture and sunlight. Bare root
seedlings should be protected from freezing and drying during transport and planting.
E. Planting: Planting in curved rows at regular spacing intervals can facilitate maintenance. Planting
season with bare root plants typically lasts from late January to mid-March in Western Oregon.
Fall and spring plantings are also possible if using containerized stock. Plan to inter-plant at j
approximately 25 percent of original planting numbers in project year two. When considering
plantings in the zones below the ordinary high water and on point bars, take into account the
geomorphic processes of the stream or river system, as plantings in this area may disrupt
sediment transport processes at the site and downstream. They are also at high risk of loss from
scour.
F. Plant protection: Consider potential for herbivory by beaver, nutria, deer, elk and voles. Select
species and orient planting to reduce losses. In grassy areas, consider spring ring spray for vole
protection and moisture conservation. Voles will not likely girdle plants unless they are under the
cover of grass. In areas with beaver activity, provide sufficient food supplies (willow) near den
and slide access areas to concentrate herbivory activity. Consider supplemental plant material
stocking during the fall months, when beaver are most active in rebuilding structures. Some
professionals choose to protect existing large trees with a min 4' welded wire (or higher if site
floods).
is http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/main/plantmaterials/pmc/
Page 6
i
G. Maintenance: Visit site regularly. During site establishment, minimum maintenance on most sites
includes one spring ring spray, one summer mow or cut and one fall spot spray. In irrigated
riparian areas, with water rights, irrigation may be an appropriate option during the first two
years. The need for irrigation can usually be avoided in a typical summer with proper plant
selection and placement and good grass control (e.g., moisture conservation ring spray) around
plants. In some locations, a 25% inter-plant of lost plants in project year two may be more cost-
effective than irrigation.
H. Woody plant density recommendations: Although woody plant stem densities vary widely P
among Oregon plant communities, and should be confirmed through reference site data, the
recommended range for planting on Willamette Valley riparian areas is between 2,000 and 2,600
stems per acre. Sample formulae for calculating densities are as follows:
Tree stems =square footage of planting area x 0.01
Shrub stems = square footage of planting area x 0.05 r
These formulae are intended to be used as a guide and stem density should be modified for
reflect site conditions, localized reference conditions, restoration objectives, and target plant
community types. For example, these values may need to be adjusted downward for low
precipitation areas, local conditions may dictate planting density, or planting density may vary
f
within the site. ly
2. SAMPLE REFERENCE SITE DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOLS E
Using the Reference Site Data Form (available upon request), collect data using a standard sampling
methodology. At a minimum, radial plots, rectangular plots, and belt transact methodologies are
acceptable. 3
• Radial Plots: Plots located at random to represent the reference sites. Location of plots should '
not be intended to maximize or minimize any particular metric. Random plot locations may be
generated using GIS or other methods. Plots that fall within a stream or pond may be moved p
landward in a direction perpendicular to the stream or pond edge. Plot relocations and unique
conditions should be noted on the data forms.
• Rectangular Plots: Rectangular macroplots with the long end oriented perpendicular to the
stream (and crossing all the hydrozones).
• Belt Transacts: 1m or wider belt transects oriented perpendicular to the stream and covering
the entire riparian corridor within reference sites, as described in Roegner, G.C. at al. 2008.16
Count all live woody stems taller than 6" (regardless of vigor). Count multi-stem species (e.g.,
Symphoricarpos, Rosa) as one stem per square foot W x 1').
Estimate cover of native woody species, non-native woody species, invasive woody species, native
herbaceous species, non-native herbaceous species, invasive herbaceous species, and unvegetated
substrate within reference site plots or transacts to the nearest 5%. Cover is defined as absolute cover
and is measured as the percentage of the ground surface covered by living plant leaves and stems when P
viewed from above. Areas not covered by vegetation are counted as unvegetated substrate. Cover may
be greater than 100% if species are present in multiple strata (i.e., tree, shrub and herbaceous layers).
Indicate 'T' for Trace for species that cover less than 5% of the plot.
Reference Site Data Summary
The Project Developer should summarize reference site plot data for each program area or basin. In
cases where alternate project performance criteria are being considered, this information will help
establish the minimum revegetation standards against which the project(s) will be evaluated by the
Verifier at the end of the fifth growing season following planting. The following table provides an P:
example. l
(
16 Roegner, G.C. et al. 2008. Protocols for Monitoring Habitat Restoration Projects in the Lower Columbia River and Estuary.
Available at bttp://www pnl govlmain/publications/external/technical reports1ENNL 15793 pdf. €
Page 7 €
~I
s
tl
3
Project Developer: Date:
Collected by:
HUC 5 (10 digit):
Number of reference sites: _
Reference site locations
1 2 3
Latitude and longitude
or address, attach ma _
Elevation:
Size:- _ - -
Number of reference
plots or transects:
Number of native
wood species
Reference site photos: Attach photos
Min Max Mean
Woody stem density/plot
or transect; OR _
Combined native shrub
and woody vine cover
Native trees/acre
Canopy cover or closure 1
-
Invasive herbaceous
species cover _ _ _
Invasive woody species
cover
3. SAMPLE RIPARIAN REVEGETATION MONITORING PROTOCOL
The following method, which focuses on methods for measuring native woody stem density and native
and invasive species cover, is for informational purposes. Additional examples of monitoring protocols
are available in the Willamette Partnership Stewardship and Monitoring Plan Example.'
A. Plot Size and Location
Data will be collected using a standard sampling methodology. At a minimum, radial plots,
rectangular plots, and belt transect methodologies are acceptable. Plots will be located
randomly. Location of plots should not be intended to maximize or minimize any particular
metric. Random plot locations may be generated using GIS or other methods. Plots that fall
within a stream or pond may be moved landward in a direction perpendicular to the stream or
pond edge. Plot relocations and unique conditions should be noted on the data forms.
• Radial Plots: Radial plots located at random to represent the planting area. Rectangular
Plots: Rectangular macroplots with the long end oriented perpendicular to the stream
(and crossing all the hydrozones).
• Belt Transects: 1 m or wider belt transects oriented perpendicular to the stream and
covering the entire riparian corridor within reference sites, as described in Roegner, G.C.
et al. 2008.78
The Monitoring Data Form is included as Table 3.
Stewardship and Monitoring Plan Template and Stewardship and Monitoring Plan F_xample are available at:
http://willamettepartnership.org/tools-templates
18 Roegner, G.C. et al. 2008. Protocols for Monitoring Habitat Restoration Projects in the Lower Columbia River and Estuary.
Available at h_ttp•//www pnl gov/main/publications/external/technical reports/PNNL-15793 pdf.
Page 8
B. Native Tree, Shrub and Woody Vine Stem Counts
Using the Monitoring Data Form, count all live woody stems taller than 6" (regardless of vigor)
within plots. Count multi-stem species (e.g., Symphoricarpos, Rosa) as one stem per square foot
(1' x 1'). The count should include both planted and non-planted vegetation. Note significant
instances of low vigor, damage from animals and other apparent problems on the data sheet.
C. Native and Non-Native Species Cover
Estimate cover of native woody species, non-native woody species, invasive woody species,
native herbaceous species, non-native herbaceous species, invasive herbaceous species, ground
substrate within plots to the nearest 5%. Cover is defined as absolute cover and Is measured as
the percentage of the ground surface covered by live plant leaves and stems when viewed from
above. Areas not covered by vegetation are counted as unvegetated substrate. Cover may be
greater than 100% if species are present in multiple strata (i.e., tree, shrub and herbaceous
layers). Indicate T forTrace if a non-native species covers less than 5% of the plot.
D. Timing of Data Collection
Data collection should occur following the expression of seasonal plant growth and mortality and
prior to leaf drop. In most areas this period will include the months of September and October.
Data collected outside of this period are subject to additional review.
E. Determining Sample Size I
Initial sample size may be determined using the minimum plot number in the table below or by I
using the sample size workbook available on the Oregon Department of State Lands website.19
Table 2. Sample summary of sampling plot size relative to site size.
Project Area/Minimum Plot Number20
Plot Size
Up to 2 acres >2 to 5 acres >5 acres
11.7' radius (3.57m) 9 17 25
F. Data Analysis and Reporting
Monitoring should yield data that provide 80% confidence that reported values are within ±10
units of the true population?t Plot or transect data should be summarized in following or similar
format and the results compared to the eligibility standards.
6
19 wwworegon.gov/DSUPERMITS/dots/sample size workbook xls in Oregon Department of State Lands' Routine
Monitoring Guidance for Vegetation (Draft Sept 23, 2009).
20 Where the use of minimum plot number will not yield statistically valid results, additional plot data will be required.
21 Oregon Department of State Lands' Routine Monitoring Guidance for Vegetation (Draft Sept 23, 2009).
Page 9
Tabie 3. Sample Monitoring Data Form
j Project Developer:
Date:
HUC 5: 1 Project Area Name:
Plot or Transect# Number Woody % Native % Non- % Invasive % Native % Non- % Invasive
of woody stem woody native woody herbaceous native herbaceous unvegetated
species count cover woody cover cover herbaceous cover substrate
per acre cover cover
1
2
3...
Tota I
Mean (Clx = Y1-Y2)
Standard Deviation
Standard Error
Low Estimate (Y1)
High Estimate (Y2)
CI= Confidence Interval, x = 80% confidence level, Y1 = low estimate, Y2 = high estimate
Standard Error is calculated as the Standard Deviation divided by the square root of the number of plots (n).
Y1 and Y2 are calculated as Mean ± (standard error * t-factor 80%).
Page 10
4. EXAMPLE PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT CHECKLISTS
Pre-enrollment Checklist
WWETAC Provisional Seed Zones for Conifer and Shrubs _
EPA Level III Ecoregion and HUC 5 boundaries _
Preliminary program area(s) boundary mapped
Land ownership assessed and mapped
Landowner agreement drafted
Existing and potential nursery capacity evaluated _
Existing and potential contractor capacity evaluated
Range of site conditions evaluated
Revegetation limiting factors/risk assessment
Enrollment/Pre-implementation Checklist S
Final program area boundary mapped
Preliminary reference sites selected
Preliminary project area(s) identified and mapped
Landowner agreement(s) signed
Reference site plot data collected and summarized
Site prep, planting and maintenance practices established _
Monitoring plan developed
Preliminary species list established
Preliminary nursery list established
Nursery stock type(s) selected
Preliminary contractor list established
Nursery (incl. seed) and cold storage contract(s) executed
Revegetation contract(s) executed
Implementation Checklist 1
Final project area(s) identified and mapped
Project prescription(s) developed I
Project(s) prepared and inspected
Project(s) planted and inspected
Project(s) maintained and inspected
15% implementation contingency in place for each project
Implementation Checklist 2
Nursery contract(s) evaluated/modified as necessary
Revegetation practices evaluated/modified as necessary
Revegetation contract(s) evaluated/modified as necessary
Monitoring data collected and analyzed
Determination of acceptable progress or contingency plan _
f
p~
d
F
Page 11
The
Freshwater Trust` The Freshwater Trust is a
501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization
Changing the course that actively works to preserve
of conservation. and restore our freshwater ecosystems.
Water Quality Temperature Trading Program - Phase II
Second Scope of Work for the City of Ashland
July 29, 2019
Introduction:
The City of Ashland (the City) selected The Freshwater Trust (TFT) as its partner to develop and implement a
water quality trading (WQT) program for temperature compliance with the Clean Water Act. The City's Water
Quality Trading Plan, which has been accepted by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) as
consistent with Oregon's Water Quality Trading Rule, will focus on implementing riparian revegetation projects
to generate credits (Thermal Credits') to satisfy the City's expected upcoming temperature obligation (Full WQT
Program). Originally, TFT anticipated that this program would consist of three contract phases: 1) program
design (Phase 1), 2) research/demonstration project implementation (Phase 11), and 3) full program
implementation (Phase III). After working through Phase I activities, and in consideration of new information
learned during this period, TFT and the City have adjusted their approach for later phases.
As part of its Phase I deliverables, TFT projected an overall program cost for the City's Full WQT Program, which
the City estimates will require approximately 130 million Thermal Credits. This total covers the entire projected
25-year program period (all credits have a 20-year compliance lifetime and TFT projects a 5-year implementation
(planting and plant establishment) window, which results in a 25-year program). To align with the City's capital
improvement project (CIP) planning process, the City requested that TFT break this total into three periods: (1)
the first six program years, which aligns with the City's Public Works CIP "capital" planning phase and where the
majority of State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan-eligible capital expenses will be incurred; (2) the remaining fourteen
years of the City's 20-year capital planning period; and (3) the five anticipated program years that will fall
outside of the City's 20-year capital planning period.
TFT projected a total program cost for the Full WQT Program of $4,584,962 (2019 with $2,605,342 in the first
6-year program period, $1,717,006 in the next 14-year period, and $262,614 over the final 5-year period. This
second scope of work covers the first 6-year period, which will afford the City and TFT an opportunity to assess
progress and actual costs incurred prior to initiating the second 14-year period. In addition, because this scope
covers the full anticipated implementation window, it will not force TFT to arbitrarily estimate what projects will
be implemented when. Through use of its prioritization and optimization tools, TFT hopes to deliver the
' Each Thermal Credit individually represents one (1) negative kilocalorie per day (kcal/day) of thermal input. Thermal
Credits shall be calculated using protocols accepted by DEQ. All Thermal Credits generated under this Second Scope of
Work shall become the property of the City.
program for less than the estimated total, but proposes to establish contractual not to exceed amounts
associated with the more conservative estimate.
Phase 2: Riparian Research Project Implementation
Up to 6 years after commencement of Phase 2
A. WQT project site recruitment, implementation, stewardship & credit cycle:
1. Site recruitment: TFT will select, recruit, and secure site protection agreements from private
landowners within the Bear Creek watershed. TFT shall execute contractual agreements with
landowners conveying interests in real property to TFT, or otherwise protecting the real property from
uses incompatible with the generation and maintenance of Thermal Credits, for a term no less than
twenty (20) years from the date of certification of the Thermal Credits generated on the landowner's
property. In doing so, TFT will pursue projects that produce comparatively cost-effective credits, and
that align with the City's desire to keep projects as close to the City as possible. TFT will closely
coordinate with the City to stay aligned on priorities, understanding that the City's ability to approve
projects on City-owned lands will be an important variable in determining how many projects can be
implemented within or close to City limits.
2. Site implementation, stewardship & credit cycle management: TFT will prep and implement riparian
restoration activities on privately owned sites consistent with the Trading Plan, calculate Thermal
Credits, and ensure all proper credit cycle documentation is completed. TFT will perform monitoring
and stewardship activities, including plant establishment, on these sites through program year six (6).
TFT will also support the City in implementing and stewarding WQT projects on City-owned land. TFT
will undertake all of these activities in a way that maximizes SRF funding reimbursement.
Task Estimate: $2,605,342
B. Stakeholder outreach: Buy-in from local partners and landowners is key to program success. TFT will
coordinate with the City to identify key stakeholders, communicate with those stakeholders, and develop
and implement a coordinated outreach strategy for the program.
Task Estimate: $24,700 (160 hours).
C. Permit support: TFT will provide technical support to the City for its permit discussions with DEQ. Potential
activities include amendments/adjustments to the Trading Plan, proper reference and incorporation of
trading detail into the City's NPDES permit, compliance schedule development and justification, and
incorporation of pre-permit trading sites into post-permit compliance sites.
Task Estimate: $37,275 (285 hours).
Deliverables:
1. TFT will recruit, implement, and steward all necessary private land credit projects in the Bear Creek
watershed. TFT will implement and manage all mutually agreed aspects of City-owned sites. Volume,
timing and location of project sites will be dependent on the number of City-owned sites that move
forward and landowner interest. TFT will ensure that all credit project sites have been secured and
implemented by the end of Phase 2.
2.Outreach strategy summary.
3.As needed permit support.
Phase 2 Not-to-Exceed Amount: $2,667,317. This total includes:
• $2,605,342 for all WQT project expenses over the first six program years
• $24,700 for stakeholder outreach
• $37,275 for permit support
Suggested Meetings:
• The exact meeting schedule will be determined after contracting, but TFT proposes participation in an
in-person kickoff with the City at the beginning of this Scope of Work.
• The Trust expects to lead conference calls and in-person meetings with the City as needed to adequately
resource this innovative and complex partnership.
Anticipated Timeline:
Program Year
-
Quarters IN MI, u ,n
Task A I
I
Task B k I
Task C
Conclusion:
TFT has proposed this Scope of Work based on its deep experience developing temperature credit trading
programs for Clean Water Act compliance in Oregon, and in particular in the Rogue River Basin. At the
conclusion of this Scope, all project sites will have been implemented.
Contact for next steps:
TFT looks forward to working with the City. Please direct questions, comments and additions to:
Tim Wigington Eugene Wier
Attorney & Finance Director Habitat Restoration Project Manager
503-222-9091 x41 541-708-0934
tim@thefreshwatertrust.org 541-227-9858
eugene@thefreshwatertrust.org
The Thp Ppsh~,,,ate T~us s a 700 SW Taylor Street
501(C)(3) not-for-profit. Suite 200 503.222.9091
FreshwaterTrusta deAll ductationsare lytax
deductible under tax laws. Portland, OR 97205 www.thefreshwatertrust.org
i
The
~h.
Trust~ The Freshwater Trust is a
Freshwater 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization
Changing the course that actively works to preserve
of conservation. and restore our freshwater ecosystems.
2019-2020 Billing Rate Sheet
Senior Directors $175 per hour
Directors $145 per hour
Policy Specialist* $135 per hour
Project Manager $125 per hour
Ecosystem Services Analyst $115 per hour
GIS Analyst $105 per hour
Monitoring/Field Staff $90 per hour
Communications/Design $80 per hour
Field Technician $70 per hour
Invoice/Administration $60 per hour
*While some of The Freshwater Trust's policy specialists are licensed attorneys, The
Freshwater Trust only provides policy analysis and not legal advice to its clients.
t,
700 SW Taylor Street
The Suite 200 The Freshwater Trust is a
Portland, OR 97205 Phone: 503.222.9091 501(C)(3) not-for-profit.
Freshwater Trustm All donations are fully tax
www.thefreshwatertrust.org Fax: 503.222.9187 deductible under tax laws.
Council Business Meeting
September 3, 2019
Agenda Item Approval of Personal Services Contract - Water Quality Temperature Trading
Program Partnership (2018-21); Phase 2
From Paula C. Brown, PE Public Works Director
Kaylea Kathol Public Works Project Manager
Contact Pau Ia.brown (d)-ashland. or.us; (541) 552-2411
kaylea.katholCa_ashland.or.us; (541) 552-2419
SUMMARY
Before the Council is a revised goods and services contract with The Freshwater Trust (TFT) for the first
stage of the City's multi-year water quality trading program. Council approved the initial contract on July
16. 2019, but staff had not received all of TFT's recommended changes. Staff consulted with the City
Attorney and agreed that the proposed changes generally include minor clarifying language to the City's
standard contract and result in a more detailed assessment. Staff is returning to Council for formal approval
of the changes.
This contract is for phase 2 of the Water Quality Temperature Trading Program Partnership (2018-21),
which will complete the first six years of the overall riparian restoration and shading program consistent
with the City's Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) accepted trading plan, the City will be able to
use these projects to meet the Clean Water Act temperature compliance obligations associated with running
the Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Phase 2 is for a not to exceed amount of $2,605,342. This amount has not changed from the council
approval at the July 16, 2019 business meeting.
Contract changes have been reviewed and accepted by the City's Legal Department. The contract and
supporting documents are attached in full. Other than minor adjustments, significant changes include the added
provisions as summarized below:
Section 2:
2.1.1 rate adjustments on a biannual basis beginning in July 2021 to account for inflation
2.3 payment details
Section 3:
3.8 indemnification
3.9 additional hold harmless and indemnification language.
3.10 discussion of Force Majeure event.
3.15 "Confidential Information" definitions
Section 6
6.2.4 termination discussion.
POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED
City Council Goals (supported by this project):
Goal 1: Develop current and long-term budgetary resilience evaluate revenue streams
Goal 3: Enhance and improve transparency and communication
- Develop a robust program to engage with Ashland citizens about City priorities and our
progress on those priorities...
Pagel of 3
C I T Y O F
ASHLAND
Maintain Essential Services - wastewater
Continue to leverage resources to develop and/or enhance Value Services
Department Goals:
• Maintain existing infrastructure to meet regulatory requirements and minimize life-cycle costs
• Deliver timely life cycle capital improvement projects
• Maintain and improve infrastructure that enhances the economic vitality of the community
• Evaluate all city infrastructure regarding planning management and financial resources
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
This project represents priorities within the Council approved 2012 Comprehensive Sewer Master Plan
Update. The Riparian Restoration/Shading project has been approved to meet anticipated temperature
compliance needs at the wastewater treatment plant since 2010. This project is included in the 20-year
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) adopted by Council on April 2, 2019.
At the September 4, 2018 business meeting the City Council approved a personal services contract with The
Freshwater Trust (TFT) for professional services to develop and begin implementation of a water quality
trading program for temperature compliance for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. This contract was only for
phase 1, which included the initial program design architecture of the overall riparian restoration and
shading program. Phase 1 was approved for a not to exceed amount of $130,988.
At the February 6, 2018 business meeting, the City Council approved revisions to the City's Clean Water
State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) agreement. The new loan is for $4,829,000, which will fund a significant
portion of the Riparian Restoration / Shading compliance program ($2,000,000).
BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Staff advertised the request for qualifications-based proposals on September 11, 2017. One proposal was
received on May 15, 2018 from TFT and after staff review and recommendations, Council awarded the
initial phase on September 4, 2018.
The Water Quality Trading Program is one of several capital projects included in the 2012 Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Master Plan (Keller Associates) that will be needed in order to meet anticipated regulatory
temperature limits stemming from the Clean Water Act.
A Water Quality Trading Plan was developed for the City under a previous contract with TFT. Ashland's
Trading Plan was accepted by the DEQ on March 9, 2018, as being consistent with Oregon's Water Quality
Trading Rule. As part of renewal of its National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
(anticipated in 2020), the already approved Trading Plan will be incorporated into the City's NPDES permit.
Ashland's trading program-which will be implemented according to the DEQ approved Trading Plan-
will focus on implementing riparian re-vegetation projects to generate shade "credits" (specifically,
kilocalories of blocked solar load, measured in the same units as the City's temperature permit limits).
Once implemented, the City will able to count these credits against its anticipated upcoming temperature
obligation, and thus achieve compliance with the Clean Water Act. The Trading Plan will be a reference
document for the contract with TFT.
FISCAL IMPACTS
The Riparian Restoration/Shading (water quality temperature credit) project included $4,000,000 in the 20-
year CIP. Funding in the amount of $1,065,000 was included in the 2019-21 BN Wastewater Fund, and it is
anticipated that a total of $2,725,000 will be expended over the six-year projection. All dollars in the CIP
are shown as current year (2019) and will be adjusted during each biennium to reflect increases in
construction costs.
Page 2 of 3
CITY OF
ASHLAND
This particular contract with TFT is unique as unlike typical construction projects, there are no "concrete"
bid items. Costs are based on consultant personnel costs (e.g., recruitment, project management and
oversight, and monitoring), unique lease agreements with private landowners who agree to host trading
projects on their streamside land, third party plant material costs, third party verification costs (which are
required for project shade benefits to be considered "compliance grade" credits by DEQ), subconsultant
planting and stewardship costs, and other factors, all of which will not remain static during a six-year
project time period. In short, projects must be recruited, prepped, implemented, maintained, monitored and
verified for a 20-year period. Because of the non-traditional nature of this program, it is staff's intent to
report to Council on the project status each biennium which will include; work completed, work anticipated
during the next biennium, the remaining costs and impacts due to inflationary requirements. It is
anticipated there would be change order(s) to adjust for inflation but as stated by TFT, there are "hopes to
deliver the program for less than the estimated total but proposes to establish contractual not to exceed
amounts associated with the more conservative estimate."
Phase 2 is structured to allow TFT the time to secure and implement all needed trading sites. All other
remaining program costs (e.g., remaining maintenance, monitoring and verification costs at all of the sites)
will be included in the final phase of the project at a later date. Expenditures on this project to date are
$108,799. Prior expenditures for the riparian restoration included $23,985 to TFT to analyze the water
quality trading benefits and policy support for the City (2011-27).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council move approval of a goods and services contract with The Freshwater Trust to
execute the Water Quality Temperature Trading Program Partnership, Phase 2 in the amount not to exceed
$2,605,342 with a provision for an annual CPI-U rate increase. Phase 2 includes the first six years of the
overall riparian restoration and shading program which will include the majority of the planting and plant
establishment period for the Water Quality Temperature Trading Program.
ACTIONS, OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS
Council has the option to approve this contract or refer staff back for renegotiation or a new request for
proposals. Potential motions include:
1. I move to approve the execution of a revised personal services contract with The Freshwater Trust for
the Water Quality Temperature Trading Program Partnership; Phase 2.
2. I move to direct staff to renegotiate terms with The Freshwater Trust for the Water Quality
Temperature Trading Program Partnership.
3. I move to direct staff to develop a new solicitation for the Water Quality Temperature Trading
Program Partnership.
REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Goods and Services Contract between the City and The Freshwater Trust
Attachment 2: Supporting Documents for Goods and Services Contract
City Council staff report for July 16, 2019
Page 3 of 3
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Purchase Order
Fiscal Year 2020 Page: 1 of: 1
THIS PO NUMBER MUST APPEAR ON ALL
B City of Ashland INVOICES, AND SHIPPING DOCUMENTS.
I ATTN: Accounts Payable Purchase
L 20 E. Main 20200176
Ashland, OR 97520 Order #
T Phone: 541/552-2010
O Email: payable@ashland.or.us
V S C/O Public Works Department
N FRESHWATER TRUST, THE H 51 Winburn Way
700 SW TAYLOR ST
D SUITE 200 P Ashland, OR 97520
Phone: 541/488-5347
O PORTLAND, OR 97205 T Fax: 541/488-6006
R O
Vendor Phone Number Vendor Fax Number Requisition Number Delivery Reference
Paula Brown
Date Ordered Vendor Number Date. Required Freight Method/Terms DepartmenVL-66 tron
09/24/2019 2959 FOB ASHLAND OR/NET30 City Accounts Payable
Item# Descri Lion/PartNa QTY UOM Unit Price Extended Price
Water Quailty Plan Part Phase2
1 Description of Services: 1 $2,605,342.0000 $2,605,342.00
Water Quality Trading Program Partnership, Phase 2
Contract Name: Goods and Services Agreement
Terms of Contract:
Effective Date: 9/10/19
Completion Date: 6/30/2025
Project Account: E-201821-100
GL SUMMARY
086100 - 704200 $2,605,342.00
By: Ca k[' A Date
Authorized Signature 1 -PQ Total $2,605,342.00
FORM .#3 CITY OF
ASHLAND
REQUISITION Date of request: 09/11/2019
Vendor Name The Freshwater Trust
Address, City, State, Zip 700 SW Taylor Suite 200 Portland, OR 97205
Contact Name Tim Wigington
Telephone Number 503-222-9091 x41
Email address
SOURCING METHOD
❑ Exempt from Competitive Bidding ❑ Emergency
❑ Invitation to Bid
❑ Reason for exemption: Date approved by Council: ❑ Form #13, Written findings and Authorization
❑ AMC 2.50 -(Attach copy of council communication) ❑ Written quote or proposal attached
❑ Written quote or proposal attached If council a roval required, attach co of CC
❑ Small Procurement Request for Proposal Cooperative Procurement
Not exceeding $5,000 ate approved by Council: 09/04/18 & 9/3/19 ❑ State of Oregon
❑ Direct Award ettach copy of council communication Contract #
❑ Verbal/Written quote(s) or proposal(s) ❑ Request for Qualifications (Public Works) ❑ State of Washington
Intermediate Procurement Date approved by Council: Contract #
GOODS & SERVICES (Attach copy of council communication) ❑ Other government agency contract
Greater than $5,000 and less than $100,000 ❑ Sole Source Agency
❑ (3) Written quotes and solicitation attached ❑ Applicable Form (#5,6, 7 or 8) Contract #
PERSONAL SERVICES ❑ Written quote or proposal attached Form Intergovernmental Agreement
Greater than $5,000 and less than $75,000 ❑ Form #4, Personal Services >$5K & <$75K Agency
❑ Direct appointment not to exceed $35,000 F1 El Annual cost to City does not exceed $25,000.
Special Procurement
❑(3) Written proposals/written solicitation ❑ Form #9, Request for Approval Agreement approved by Legal and approved/signed by
❑ Form #4, Personal Services >$5K & <$75K City Administrator. AMC 2.50.070(4)
❑ Written quote or proposal attached
Date approved by Council: ❑ Annual cost to City exceeds $25,000, Council
Valid until: (Date) approval required. (Attach copy of council communication)
Description of SERVICES Total Cost
Water Quality Trading Program Partnership, Phase 2 $ 2,605,342.00
Item # Quantity Unit Description of MATERIALS Unit Price Total Cost
0 Per attached quote/proposal TOTAL COST
Expenditure must be charged to the appropriate account numbers for the financials to reflect the actual expenditures accurately.
Project Number 2018-21 - p p Account Number 086100 704200 $ 2605342.00 _
Project Number _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ Account Number _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ $ _ ,
Project Number Account Number
IT Director in collaboration with department to approve all hardware and software purchases:
By signing this requisition form, I certify that the City's public contracting requirements have been satisfied. IT Director Date Support -Yes/ No
Employee:0~ D~ e[]~ Department Head: f
~ alto orgreaterthan $5,OD0)
Department Manager/Supervisor: City Administrator:
(Equal to or greater than $25,000)
Funds appropriated for current fiscal year YES / NO 147,T , P
Finance Director (Equal to or greater than $5,000) Dale
Comments.
Form #3 - Requisition