Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDR Engineering, Inc. 2026-03-05COU No. 2526-154 PAGE 1 OF 7 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES This Agreement, made and entered into this 5th day of March, 2026 (“Effective Date”), by and between CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA, hereinafter referred to as "City" and HDR Engineering, Inc, a corporation organized and in good standing under the laws of the state of Nebraska, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant". RECITALS This Agreement is predicated on the following facts: a. City requires consulting services related to Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing. b. Consultant represents that it has the qualifications, skills, experience and properly licensed to provide these services, and is willing to provide them according to the terms of this Agreement. c. City and Consultant agree upon the Scope-of-Work and Work Schedule attached hereto as Attachment "A", describing contract provisions for the project and setting forth the completion dates for the various services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement. TERMS OF AGREEMENT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 1.1 The Project is described in detail in the attached Scope-of-Work (Attachment "A"). 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 2.1 As set forth in Attachment "A". 2.2. Additional Services. Additional services, if any, shall only proceed upon written agreement between City and Consultant. The written Agreement shall be in the form of an Amendment to this Agreement. 3.0 CONDUCT OF WORK 3.1 Time of Completion. Consultant shall commence performance of services as required by the Scope-of-Work upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed from City and shall complete such services within six years from receipt of the Notice to Proceed. Consultant shall complete the work in accordance with the requirements of the Agreement, even if contract disputes arise or Consultant contends it is entitled to further compensation. 3.2 Standard of Care. Consultant shall perform all services with the care and skill ordinarily used by members of Consultant's profession practicing under the same or similar circumstances at the same time and in the same locality. 4.0 COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES 4.1 Basis for Compensation. For the performance of the professional services of this Agreement, Consultant shall be compensated on a time and expense basis not to COU No. 2526-154 PAGE 2 OF 7 exceed a guaranteed maximum dollar amount of $664,000. Labor charges shall be based upon hourly billing rates for the various classifications of personnel employed by Consultant to perform the Scope of Work as set forth in the attached Attachment A, which shall include all indirect costs and expenses of every kind or nature, except direct expenses. The direct expenses and the fees to be charged for same shall be as set forth in Attachment A. Consultant shall complete the Scope of Work for the not-to- exceed guaranteed maximum, even if actual time and expenses exceed that amount. 4.2 Changes. Should changes in compensation be required because of changes to the Scope-of-Work of this Agreement, the parties shall agree in writing to any changes in compensation. "Changes to the Scope-of-Work" means different activities than those described in Attachment "A" and not additional time to complete those activities than the parties anticipated on the date they entered this Agreement. 4.3 Sub-contractor Payment. The use of sub-consultants or other services to perform a portion of the work of this Agreement shall be approved by City prior to commencement of work. The cost of sub-consultants shall be included within guaranteed not-to-exceed amount set forth in Section 4.1. 4.4 Terms of Payment. Payment to Consultant for services rendered in accordance with this contract shall be based upon submission of monthly invoices for the work satisfactorily performed prior to the date of the invoice less any amount already paid to Consultant, which amounts shall be due and payable thirty (30) days after receipt by City. The invoices shall provide a description of each item of work performed, the time expended to perform each task, the fees charged for that task, and the direct expenses incurred and billed for. Invoices shall be accompanied by documentation sufficient to enable City to determine progress made and to support the expenses claimed. 5.0 ASSURANCES OF CONSULTANT 5.1 Independent Contractor. Consultant is an independent contractor and is solely responsible for its acts or omissions. Consultant (including its agents, servants, and employees) is not the City's agent, employee, or representative for any purpose. It is the express intention of the parties hereto that Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee, joint venturer, or partner of City for any purpose whatsoever. City shall have no right to, and shall not control the manner or prescribe the method of accomplishing those services contracted to and performed by Consultant under this Agreement, and the general public and all governmental agencies regulating such activity shall be so informed. Those provisions of this Agreement that reserve ultimate authority in City have been inserted solely to achieve compliance with federal and state laws, rules, regulations, and interpretations thereof. No such provisions and no other provisions of this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed as creating or establishing the relationship of employer and employee between Consultant and City. Consultant shall pay all estimated and actual federal and state income and self- employment taxes that are due the state and federal government and shall furnish and pay worker's compensation insurance, unemployment insurance and any other benefits required by law for himself and his employees, if any. Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold City and its officers, agents and employees harmless from and against any claims or demands by federal, state or local government agencies for any such taxes or COU No. 2526-154 PAGE 3 OF 7 benefits due but not paid by Consultant, including the legal costs associated with defending against any audit, claim, demand or law suit. Consultant warrants and represents that it is a properly licensed professional or professional organization with a substantial investment in its business and that it maintains its own offices and staff which it will use in performing under this Agreement. 5.2 Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibility is solely to City. Consultant has no interest and will not acquire any direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of the Agreement. Consultant shall not in the performance of this Agreement employ a person having such an interest. If the City Manager determines that the Consultant has a disclosure obligation under the City’s local conflict of interest code, the Consultant shall file the required disclosure form with the City Clerk within 10 days of being notified of the City Manager’s determination. 6.0 INDEMNIFICATION 6.1 Insurance Liability. Without limiting Consultant's obligations arising under Paragraph 6.2 Consultant shall not begin work under this Agreement until it procures and maintains for the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with its performance under this Agreement. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office ("ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form No. CG 20 10 10 01 and Commercial General Liability Coverage – Completed Operations Form No. CG 20 37 10 01. 2. ISO Form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 "any auto" or Code 8, 9 if no owned autos and endorsement CA 0025. 3. Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability Insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant’s profession. B. Minimum Policy Limits Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage including operations, products and completed operations. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work performed under this Agreement, or the aggregate limit shall be twice the prescribed per occurrence limit. COU No. 2526-154 PAGE 4 OF 7 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Worker's compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions liability: $1,000,000 per claim. C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. D. Other Insurance Provisions The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages a. The City, it officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, products and completed operations of the Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, hired or borrowed by the Consultant for the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination of this Agreement. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope-of-protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. b. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. c. Any Consultant failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers as additional insureds. d. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 2. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from Consultant's performance of the work, pursuant to this Agreement. 3. Professional Liability Coverage COU No. 2526-154 PAGE 5 OF 7 If written on a claims-made basis, the retroactivity date shall be the effective date of this Agreement. The policy period shall extend one (1) year from the date of final approved invoice. 4. All Coverages Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled or materially changed in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. E. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with admitted California insurers with an A.M. Best's rating of no less than A- for financial strength, AA for long-term credit rating and AMB-1 for short-term credit rating. F. Verification of Coverage The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time, subject to redactions of HDR’s proprietary and confidential information. Subject to maintaining the confidentiality of proprietary or confidential information disclosed to City, Consultant shall not redact such information upon a showing by the City that it is relevant to a coverage dispute between the City and Consultant’s insurance company. G. Subcontractors Consultant shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each sub- contractor or sub-consultant. All coverage for sub-contractors or sub-consultants shall be subject to all insurance requirements set forth in this Paragraph 6.1. 6.2 Indemnification. Notwithstanding the foregoing insurance requirements, and in addition thereto, Consultant agrees, for the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination of this Agreement, to indemnify the City for any claim, cost or liability that arises out of, or pertains to, or relates to any negligent act or omission or the willful misconduct of Consultant in the performance of services under this contract by Consultant, but this indemnity does not apply to liability for damages for death or bodily injury to persons, injury to property, or other loss, arising from the sole negligence, willful misconduct or defects in design by the City, or arising from the active negligence of the City. “Indemnify,” as used herein includes the expenses of defending against a claim and the payment of any settlement or judgment arising out of the claim. Defense costs include all costs associated with defending the claim, including, but not limited to, the fees of attorneys, investigators, consultants, experts and expert witnesses, and litigation expenses. References in this paragraph to City or Consultant, include their officers, employees, agents, and subcontractors. 7.0 CONTRACT PROVISIONS COU No. 2526-154 PAGE 6 OF 7 7.1 Ownership of Work. All documents furnished to Consultant by City and all documents or reports and supportive data prepared by Consultant under this Agreement are owned and become the property of the City upon their creation and shall be given to City immediately upon demand and at the completion of Consultant's services at no additional cost to City. Deliverables are identified in the Scope-of-Work, Attachment "A". All documents produced by Consultant shall be furnished to City in digital format and hardcopy. Consultant shall produce the digital format, using software and media approved by City. Any modifications or reuse of the documents by City for purposes other than those intended by the Agreement shall be at the City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. 7.2 Governing Law. Consultant shall comply with the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, and all local governments having jurisdiction over this Agreement. The interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by California law and any action arising under or in connection with this Agreement must be filed in a Court of competent jurisdiction in Mendocino County. 7.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement plus its Attachment(s) and executed Amendments set forth the entire understanding between the parties. 7.4 Severability. If any term of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in effect. 7.5 Modification. No modification of this Agreement is valid unless made with the agreement of both parties in writing. 7.6 Assignment. Consultant's services are considered unique and personal. Consultant shall not assign, transfer, or sub-contract its interest or obligation under all or any portion of this Agreement without City's prior written consent. 7.7 Waiver. No waiver of a breach of any covenant, term, or condition of this Agreement shall be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach of the same or any other covenant, term or condition or a waiver of the covenant, term or condition itself. 7.8 Termination. This Agreement may only be terminated by either party: 1) for breach of the Agreement; 2) because funds are no longer available to pay Consultant for services provided under this Agreement; or 3) City has abandoned and does not wish to complete the project for which Consultant was retained. A party shall notify the other party of any alleged breach of the Agreement and of the action required to cure the breach. If the breaching party fails to cure the breach within the time specified in the notice, the contract shall be terminated as of that time. If terminated for lack of funds or abandonment of the project, the contract shall terminate on the date notice of termination is given to Consultant. City shall pay the Consultant only for services performed and expenses incurred as of the effective termination date. In such event, as a condition to payment, Consultant shall provide to City all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work completed hereunder in accordance with the requirements of this Agreement, subject to off-set for any direct damages City may incur as a result of Consultant's breach of contract. 7.9 Execution of Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in duplicate originals, each bearing the original signature of the parties. Alternatively, this Agreement may be COU No. 2526-154 PAGE 7 OF 7 executed and delivered by facsimile or other electronic transmission, and in more than one counterpart, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. When executed using either alternative, the executed agreement shall be deemed an original admissible as evidence in any administrative or judicial proceeding to prove the terms and content of this Agreement. 8.0 NOTICES Any notice given under this Agreement shall be in writing and deemed given when personally delivered or deposited in the mail (certified or registered) addressed to the parties as follows: CITY OF UKIAH HDR ENGINEERING, INC. DEPT. OF ELECTRIC UTILITY ATTN: CHRISTINA M. KEITHLY 1350 HASTINGS RD 1 CAPITOL MALL, SUITE 500 UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 9.0 SIGNATURES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the Effective Date: CONSULTANT ____________________ Date ____________________ Date BY: __________________________ PRINT NAME: _________________ 47-0680568 IRS IDN Number CITY OF UKIAH BY: CITY MANAGER ATTEST ____________________ CITY CLERK Date Elizabeth Mesbah, Vice President March 6, 2026 03/11/2026 03/11/2026 City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 09 HDR developed its proposed team with the Lake Mendocino PP relicensing in mind. Our proposed Project Manager, Chuck Vertucci, is experienced in leading relicensings with smaller Project footprints and less anticipated environmental impacts, where the focus can be on completing the relicensing process in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Working closely with Chuck is our Senior FERC Advisor, Devin Malkin, and Assistant Project Manager, Ian Cain, who bring additional experience in navigating the relicensing process. Our proposed Principal-in-Charge, Elizabeth Dawson, brings an owner’s perspective to our project team and will support the City and the HDR team in this advisory role. Finally, HDR’s key technical leads have held these roles on numerous previous relicensings while working closely with Chuck. The assigned personnel will not be substituted without the City’s approval. HDR has intentionally limited the key personnel proposed for Lake Mendocino PP relicensing to control cost and maintain efficiencies and has confirmed that this Project fits within each key personnel’s overall workload. In addition, our broader team of FERC regulatory specialists and subject matter experts are available to assist, should the relicensing require additional resources. These staff will include junior, mid-level, and senior: •FERC Regulatory Specialists •Aquatic and Terrestrial Biologists •Cultural Resource Specialists •Environmental Planners •Global Information Systems (GIS)/Data Solutions Specialists •Project Administrators and Accountants HDR’s key personnel are introduced in staff biographies on the following page. Full resumes for each are provided in Appendix A. C. Staffing Plan Elizabeth Dawson, PE  Key Personnel PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE PROJECT MANAGER Chuck Vertucci SENIOR FERC ADVISOR Devin Malkin TECHNICAL RESOURCES Aquatic/Water Resources Norm Ponferrada Anna Clabaugh Terrestrial Resources Ian Cain Eliza Schlein Recreation, Aesthetics, and Land Use Resources Matt Paquette Kaden Emerson Cultural Resources Danielle Risse, RPA Kamil Rochon GIS/Data Solutions Keir Keightley, GISP Angela Tang Administration/Accounting Jacare Palmer Tyler Miller Jordyn Texley Figure 2 - HDR Organizational Chart ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER Ian Cain Attachment A City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 18 E. Project Understanding and Approach Key Project Strategies Based on HDR’s 30 years of experience performing FERC hydropower relicensings in California and a preliminary review of available documents and sensitive resources in and around Lake Mendocino PP, HDR has identified four key project strategies for relicensing. Our proposed project approach looks to address each of those issues to support the overall relicensing. 1.Emphasize Project Operations and Constraints The City cannot control or request water from Coyote Valley Dam and Lake Mendocino, but operates Lake Mendocino PP only when USACE releases from Coyote Valley Dam provide enough flow. This lack of control removes or reduces two of the most high-profile issues related to FERC relicensing of hydropower projects—downstream flows and anadromous fish. This is particularly important for Lake Mendocino PP, since Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed fish, steelhead - Central California Coast Distinct Population Segment (DPS) (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)—California Coastal Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU), occur in the East Fork Russian River below Lake Mendocino. This section of the East Fork Russian River is also considered Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for Chinook salmon, while the mainstem Russian River is also considered Designated Critical Habitat (DCH) for Chinook salmon. Section 7 consultation with NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) will be required; however, the potential of Lake Mendocino PP to affect the species, EFH, and DCH will be limited to water quality directly below the powerhouse. Requests for larger studies—including operations modeling, water quantity, water quality/temperature, channel morphology, macroinvertebrates, riparian habitat and other biological resources downstream of the Coyote Valley Dam—can be strongly countered as having no nexus to Lake Mendocino PP. Information on potential Lake Mendocino PP operations that might affect ESA-listed fish can be gathered during data gap surveys, described in Key Project Issue #3. Lake Mendocino PP’s lack of control over the flows also supports the use of the TLP, since it substantively limits the complexities of the relicensing, reduces the need for relicensing meetings (particularly for developing study plans), and improves the likelihood of approval of the TLP by the FERC, as discussed in Key Project Issue #2. 2.TLP is the Right Choice for the Lake Mendocino PP HDR commends the City for its intent to request the TLP and believes this approach presents the best combination of cost savings and process control for the City. Given the details of Lake Mendocino PP, HDR’s recent experience with TLP requests, and FERC’s recent approvals of the TLP, HDR believes the TLP request is likely to be granted by FERC. As the City is aware, the TLP is advantageous to licensees because it puts FERC’s NEPA process after the Final license Application (FLA) is filed, giving the City more opportunities to fully describe its project and potential environmental impacts (or lack thereof) to FERC. Additionally, TLP gives the City more control over a key aspect of relicensing study plans, which are further discussed in Key Issue #3. Finally, the TLP requires fewer meetings and formal deliverables, which represents cost savings for the City compared to the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP). However, HDR does recommend the City hold directed agency meetings beyond the minimum required by the TLP, a strategy we have successfully used on multiple other projects to achieve positive outcomes for the licensees. 3.Development and Implementation of Study Plans HDR and the City both understand that the development and implementation of study plans is one of the major cost drivers for most California relicensing processes. HDR proposes to minimize the need for costly and time-consuming study plan development and implementation during relicensing by conducting data gap surveys for the resource areas that typically require data gathering in relicensings – cultural resources, terrestrial biology, and water resources – as part of the development of the PAD. This will reduce (or eliminate) study plan development and implementation for those resource areas by allowing the City to drive the process. This will also reduce the likelihood of study requests from relicensing participants and increase the City’s chances of successfully disputing any requests that are made. This approach is further outlined below. 4.Focus on Relicensing Outcomes Although costs during relicensing are a substantive concern, HDR also advises careful attention to the environmental or cultural resource measures that may be imposed by agencies and included by FERC in the City’s new license. HDR’s goal is not only for the City to obtain a new license in a cost-effective manner, but to minimize these Protection, Mitigation and Enhancement (PM&E) costs and avoid operational constraints and loss of generation following license issuance. Our thorough understanding of the relicensing process, experience with key resource issues such as ESA-listed fish, and experience negotiating with federal and California state agencies provides the City with a team that is poised to deliver advantageous relicensing outcomes. To support this, HDR proposes several meetings with the resource agencies throughout the relicensing—with the goal of reaching consensus on PM&E measures while keeping the City’s overall relicensing and operational objectives at the forefront, as also described in Key Project Issue #2. Project Management and City Coordination Throughout the course of the relicensing, HDR will coordinate closely with the City using monthly meetings and summaries. Following HDR’s recommended initial Kick-off Meeting, described on the following page, HDR will schedule a series of hour-long virtual meetings with City staff, with an agenda provided in advance. During the development of major relicensing documents, meetings will be scheduled monthly. HDR’s PM and APM will attend all meetings, with the Strategic FERC Advisor attending up to half of the meetings. As the relicensing proceeds, some meetings may be shorter in length or may be replaced by written updates, at the City’s City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 19 discretion. Action items from each meeting will be tracked on the project SharePoint site. HDR’s PM will also be available to attend the City’s bi-monthly Council meetings and present updates to the City Council Members upon request by City staff. HDR will also be available to help prepare presentations and updates that City staff may present directly. HDR assumes attendance at City Council meetings will mostly be tied to major relicensing milestones, such as the development and filing of the PAD, DLA, FLA, and post-FLA processes. HDR will use an internal SharePoint website for document production, review, and storage. HDR’s SharePoint lead will develop, manage, and provide website access to City staff throughout the project. Project Schedule HDR has provided a draft Project Schedule (see Tables 1 and 2 in Section F), including our current recommendations and assuming use of the TLP. No later than one month after contract execution, HDR will refine this schedule based on input from the City, including the Kick-off Meeting, review of existing project documents, and other required and relevant milestones. In addition, HDR will provide a draft schedule for distributing PAD sections to the City for review, along with the timeframe for second review of the full document. HDR will develop a similar schedule for the DLA and FLA. Invoices and Progress Reports HDR will submit monthly invoices and monthly progress reports covering the work under the contract to the City’s PM no later than the first two weeks of each month. The progress report shall include the following, at a minimum: •A brief description of the work completed in the previous month •A brief description of the work projected to be completed by the end of the current month •Summary level information regarding scope, schedule, and budget •Contractual items that may need to be addressed •HDR will discuss the content and format of the progress reports at the Kick-off Meeting and bring a proposed template Project Approach Project Initiation The Lake Mendocino PP relicensing will begin with HDR and the City working together to develop a relicensing strategy that will guide the process throughout. KICK-OFF MEETING HDR will work with the City to prepare for and conduct a Kick-off Meeting with City staff. HDR’s PM, APM, and the Water/Aquatic Resources Lead will attend the meeting, which will be held at the City of Ukiah offices. The Kick-off Meeting will take place over the course of two to three hours, and HDR will provide a draft agenda for the City’s comment and approval prior to the meeting. HDR will also bring the proposed schedule for PAD development (described in Deliverables), the draft Project description and operations, and a template outline for one PAD section to review with the City. Additional items to discuss will include general administrative items, communication protocols, existing and available City and FERC information, anticipated relicensing participants and their contact information, and monthly progress reporting format and content. HDR will also preview the internal SharePoint site, which will be used to house and share relicensing documents and references and will also allow for collaborative development of documents. To take advantage of HDR staff traveling to the City, we also recommend a brief site visit with City staff to help answer any immediate questions and support development of the PAD and data gathering efforts. REVIEW EXISTING CITY AND FERC DATA HDR will review City, FERC, and other reasonably available existing documentation for the Project, including the Project’s current FERC exhibits, to identify the Project’s current FERC boundary and facilities according to the license. HDR will inform the City’s PM by email no later than six weeks after the Kick-off Meeting if missing documentation or information shortcomings are identified. Some documents generally required from the Licensee to complete a PAD include: •As-built drawings (especially if there have been changes not filed with the FERC) •Power Purchase Agreements and other agreements/contracts that relate to the licensed project •Monthly Flow Exceedance Curves •Flow through the powerhouse for a 10-year period of record •Capacity versus head rating •Tailwater rating curves •Monthly and annual gross generation in kilowatt-hours over a 10-year period •Facility maintenance records •FERC inspection records (if not posted to the eLibrary) •Water temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO) data, other water quality data •Records for any other monitoring that may have been done by the licensee in the area of Lake Mendocino PP (fish surveys, benthic macroinvertebrates, etc.). As part of the early outreach to interested parties, HDR will also ask those parties to provide information they possess that is relevant to the Lake Mendocino PP relicensing. HDR will post existing information to the internal SharePoint so both HDR and City staff can access the existing available data during relicensing. RELICENSING PARTICIPANTS CONTACT INFORMATION HDR will work with City staff to identify interested parties and their applicable contact information (e.g., phone numbers, emails, and physical addresses) and provide a comprehensive list to the City. An initial list of potential relicensing participants will be developed for the Kick-off Meeting using FERC’s Service List, the Native American Heritage Commission for Tribal Contacts, and HDR’s understanding of resource agency contacts for FERC relicensings. At the outset, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), USACE, and potentially, the National Park Service are most likely to be active relicensing participants. Regional and local non-governmental organizations like Trout Unlimited, American Rivers, and potentially others may also participate in relicensing and will be part of HDR’s initial list. This list will be updated as the relicensing progresses and additional parties are identified. City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 21 F. Scope of Services (Major Milestones and Deliverables) This section details the major milestones and deliverables as detailed in the City’s RFP. Prepare and File a Notice of Intent HDR will work with City staff to prepare and file the Notice of Intent (NOI) (along with the PAD) declaring that the City intends to seek a new license (relicense) for Lake Mendocino PP. As part of the NOI, the City will request to be FERC’s non-federal representative for informal consultation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and Section 7 of the ESA. This will allow the City to consult with Native American Tribes, the SHPO and the USFWS, as needed during relicensing. The NOI (18 C.F.R. § 5.5) will also be used as the basis of the DLA’s Initial Statement. Prepare and File a Pre-Application Document The PAD (18.C.F.R. § 5.6) provides not only a summary of existing, relevant, and reasonably available information, but the story of the Project and the set-up for the license application. The pillars of Lake Mendocino PP’s story include the small footprint of the FERC Project Boundary, the lack of Project impacts to environmental resources, and the fact that the City does not control flow. Another part of the relicensing strategy and PAD development is to determine active relicensing participants and their interests early in the process. To confirm interested relicensing participants, possible resources issues, and study requests, HDR recommends that the City hold a pre-PAD meeting. The initial list of potential relicensing participants, as described above, will be invited. This approximately one-hour virtual meeting will describe the Project, proposed changes, and relicensing milestones and will also allow participants to request information relevant to the Project—including any issues they feel should be discussed during relicensing. The invitation will include a written request for that information, which will also serve as the PAD questionnaire. The PAD will be tailored as closely as possible to the license application to simplify later development. This will include providing drafts of Exhibit A (Project Description), Exhibit B (Project Operations), Exhibit F (Project Drawings), and Exhibit G (Project Maps) as attachments to the PAD and structuring the PAD’s environmental resource sections to meet the requirements of Exhibit E of the license application to the extent possible. PAD- specific information not included as part of the draft Exhibits will be incorporated as required. Per the schedule developed during the initial internal meetings, HDR will provide the City with individual sections of the PAD for the first round of review and comment—generally three at a time and starting with the Project Description and Operations—spread over the first half of 2026. HDR will provide a minimum of two weeks for City staff to review the documents and provide comments. The entire PAD, with all comments addressed, will be provided to the City for a second round of review and comment approximately two months prior to the PAD filing so there is ample time for the City to review and HDR to address the comments. All documents will be placed on the internal SharePoint, developed and maintained by HDR, and City staff will be provided with access to perform their reviews. Filing of the PAD will occur no later than March 31, 2027 (five years prior to license expiration), though HDR’s proposed schedule includes filing by December 31, 2026, per the City’s RFP. A separate request to use the TLP (18 C.F.R. § 5.3) will be drafted and filed with the FERC, on the same day as the PAD and NOI are filed. A notice of these filing requests will be published in a local newspaper. The City of Ukiah’s website will host the public relicensing documents (or links to the FERC eLibrary) to provide access to relicensing participants. HDR will also provide a copy of the PAD and NOI to local libraries. Consultation with Regulatory Agencies and Other Interested Parties Informal consultation under Section 7 of the ESA and Section 106 of the NHPA is anticipated to require consultation and meetings with the NMFS, USFWS, Native American Tribes, and SHPO. HDR notes that, ultimately, consultation under Section 7 and Section 106 is FERC’s responsibility as the lead agency; once FERC delegates the City as FERC’s non-federal representative, it can engage these parties directly. HDR has had recent success working with these parties early in the process to try to reach consensus and conclude consultation. Informal Section 7 Consultation Informal Section 7 Consultation with NMFS is assumed to be required due to the presence of steelhead—Central California Coast DPS and Chinook salmon—California Coastal ESU as well as DCH and EFH for Chinook salmon in the East Fork Russian River below Lake Mendocino PP. HDR anticipates up to two virtual meetings for informal consultation with the NMFS during the relicensing. Meeting goals include: 1.Educate NMFS on Project operations and the limited ability (if any) to alter stream conditions 2.Resolve any differences that are identified to avoid complications during formal consultation related to impacts and mitigation 3.If necessary, reach agreement on potential conservation measures to be included in the new license that will allow NMFS to conclude Section 7 consultation Based on the current understanding of Lake Mendocino PP operations, HDR has not proposed the development of an Applicant Prepared Biological Assessment (APBA) or EFH document, given the lack of impacts to ESA-listed fish. If new information comes to City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 22 light during relicensing regarding impacts to ESA-listed fish, HDR will work with the City to decide if a different strategic approach to ESA consultation is needed, including development of an APBA and EFH. Informal Section 7 consultation with the USFWS may be required for terrestrial species, but the Project’s footprint and operations limit possible effects on endangered terrestrial species. Information gathered for the PAD, including through data gap surveys, will be used to determine if consultation and PM&E measures are needed or likely to be required for terrestrial endangered species. Up to two virtual meetings with USFWS are anticipated for informal Section 7 consultation. The goal of the meetings is to reach agreement on potential conservation measures and (if necessary) to mitigate for potential impacts that we would include in the new license that will allow USFWS to conclude Section 7 consultation. A preliminary search of USFWS’ iPAC database resulted in eight ESA- listed species with the potential to occur near the Lake Mendocino PP. Of these species, three are listed as Endangered: Burke’s Goldfields (Lasthenia burkei), Contra Costa Goldfields (Lasthenia conjugens), and Showy Indian Clover (Trifolium amoenum); three are listed as Threatened: Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus), Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus); and two are listed as Proposed Threatened: Northwestern Pond Turtle (Actinemys marmorata) and Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus). Terrestrial surveys, described below, will confirm the presence or absence of habitat for these species and document whether any are observed. Potential Project effects (or lack thereof) to these species will be addressed in the PAD. Informal Section 106 Consultation HDR will complete consultation with SHPO and Native American Tribes, as needed, during the development of the license application. A separate cultural resources report, based on data collected during development of the PAD, will be written for use during consultation with Native American Tribes and SHPO. To successfully conclude Section 106 consultation, concurrence from SHPO is needed on: 1.The definition of the Area of Potential Effect 2.Concurrence on the effort to identify resources 3.Concurrence on any National Register eligibility recommendations 4.Agreement on ‘no effect’ or ‘no adverse effect’ on historical properties 5.Verifying that Native American Tribes were consulted (information from Section 106 consultation will be provided in the DLA, if consultation is completed prior to distribution, or in the FLA) Meetings with Regulatory Agencies and Other Interested Parties The Joint Meeting and Site Visit, described below, are the only meetings required by TLP during relicensing. HDR also proposes that the City meet with resource agencies to discuss proposed measures and management plans, if needed. These meetings are in addition to the meetings described above in the PAD and Consultation sections. While these meetings are not required under the TLP, HDR has found that targeted discussions with relicensing participants throughout the process can support better relicensing outcomes, regardless of the FERC process used. The TLP allows the City to have more control over the timing, quantity, and direction of these meetings compared to the more rigid—and expensive—requirements of the ILP. Joint Meeting and Site Visit Within 120 days of the filing of the NOI and PAD, the Joint Meeting (18 C.F.R.§16.8(b)(4)) will be held. As part of planning, the proposed Joint Meeting date and site visit will be published in the PAD, though relicensing participants will need to be consulted with regarding the date. Those relicensing participants who express interest in the Joint Meeting will be offered a site visit. An option for an in-person Joint Meeting will be offered, but it is likely most relicensing participants will attend the virtual meeting. HDR will record the virtual meeting in order to maintain compliance with FERC requirements. The Joint Meeting offers another opportunity to learn which relicensing participants intend to be part of the process, in addition to which elements each participant intends to focus on. This discussion will foreshadow upcoming PAD comments and study requests so the City can prepare to respond to them before they are filed (no later than 60 days after the Joint Meeting). Recommended Meetings Based on extensive experience, HDR recommends that the City work proactively with CDFW, USFWA, and other agencies during DLA development, rather than wait for the agencies to provide comments on the DLA and propose license measures. HDR and the City will draft proposed measures to discuss at virtual meetings, basing them on Project information, agency interest, and likelihood of FERC to add a similar (but likely more complicated) measure to the license if requested by an agency. If agreement on measures can be reached, they will be included in the DLA. By utilizing this approach, the City keeps a measure of control on potential measures by leading consultation with the agencies and reduces the risk of unexpected agency recommendations of license measures after the filing of the FLA and any substantive disagreements that lead to a required Meeting to Resolve Differences (18 C.F.R. § 16.8 c(6)(i)&(iii)). Based on HDR’s current understanding of Lake Mendocino PP, no disagreements on measures are expected, and thus, the Meeting to Resolve Differences is not specifically scheduled or budgeted for, but if needed, HDR’s included budget for agency meetings will be used for this meeting. If the Meeting to Resolve Differences is required, HDR will prepare the required agenda, notifications, and meeting materials and will lead the meeting on behalf of the City. The results of the meeting will be documented in the FLA. City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 23 Develop Study Plans and Conduct Studies Based on HDR’s current understanding of the Project, potential resources where data gaps may be identified include three topics: •Cultural Resources •Terrestrial Biological Resources •Water Quality, including temperature and DO in the East Fork Russian River downstream of Lake Mendocino PP. Therefore, to fill in anticipated data gaps and to curtail formal study requests later in relicensing, HDR recommends performing data collection for those three resources and including the data in the applicable resource sections of the PAD. This early data collection effort should fill most, if not all, of the data gaps for Lake Mendocino PP and address many of the anticipated resource agencies’ interests. More details on the proposed data gap surveys are provided below. HDR has successfully used this approach on prior relicensing projects, including two of our reference projects. Completing these surveys and completing a robust data gap analysis will help the City avoid potentially costly and time-consuming study plan development and implementation. Cultural and Tribal Resources Per the requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA and FERC, HDR will conduct a cultural re-sources data gap survey to identify any potential historic properties, including Tribal resources, which may be affected by continued operations and maintenance of the Project. To accomplish this, HDR will request a records search from the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System at Sonoma State University, which maintains the records for Mendocino County. The records search will identify any previously recorded archaeological or built environment resources, within or adjacent to, the FERC Project Boundary. The search will also provide details on previously conducted cultural resource studies. HDR will also contact the Native American Heritage Commission to request a search of the Sacred Lands File and a current Tribal representative contact list to assist with Tribal consultation. Concurrent to the records search request, HDR will complete and submit an archaeological survey permit request to appropriate federal agencies who have jurisdiction over land within the Project Boundary (e.g., USACE). HDR anticipates that the permit will be issued to HDR under the authority of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act. Following a review of the records’ search data and receipt of any necessary permits, HDR will conduct a pedestrian survey of the defined FERC Project Boundary to update any previously recorded cultural resources and to fully document any newly encountered resources on the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation 532 Series forms. HDR understands that the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant was completed in 1986 and, as such, will not meet the standard 50-year-old threshold for documentation or National Register of Historic Places eligibility consideration until 2036. HDR assumes that any appurtenant facility included under the FERC license dates to the same period and, as such, does not propose to conduct a built environment survey of the power plant. However, HDR does note that consideration of the facility for National Register of Historic Places eligibility will be a condition of the new license when it reaches the 50-year- old threshold. The results of the cultural resources survey will be compiled into a technical report that will be used for Section 106 compliance requirements, as described above, and for associated consultation with Native American Tribes, USACE, FERC, and the SHPO. The compiled data in the report will also assist and inform the development of the cultural and Tribal resource sections in the PAD, DLA, and FLA. Terrestrial Resources Surveys will consist of a general habitat assessment and vegetation mapping to describe the ecology of the Project area and provide information about the potential for special-status wildlife species to occur in the Project area. Concurrently with these activities, there will be a focused special-status plant survey and noxious weed survey, generally following the CDFW’s Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2018) , consisting of two full passes of the Project area. Any special-status species occurrences will be mapped and data on the occurrences collected. A general assessment of aquatic features in the Project area will also occur during these surveys. A formal aquatic resources delineation, following USACE guidelines, is not proposed for terrestrial studies as it is not needed unless the City is proposing new construction activities that may impact an aquatic feature. Biological assessments will include an evaluation of habitat potential for listed or proposed species under the federal and state ESA. Water Resources HDR will monitor water temperature, DO, and water quality parameters downstream of Lake Mendocino PP on the East Fork Russian River if current data are not available. Data collection will include installing continuous water temperature and DO loggers at up to two accessible sites on the East Fork Russian River, including one site downstream of the Lake Mendocino PP discharge and a potential second site further downstream if determined necessary. Each site will include duplicate loggers to avoid data losses due to equipment malfunctions or other issues. The loggers will be deployed in spring and maintained until fall to capture seasonal warming and cooling trends. An additional site visit will occur after equipment installation for data downloads and equipment checks in the summer. This continuous monitoring will allow for evaluation of temperature and DO during periods when the power plant is operating and when it is offline. In addition to continuous temperature and DO monitoring, during each site visit (i.e., spring logger installs, summer data download, and fall equipment removal), HDR will measure instantaneous water quality parameters with a multiparameter water quality meter downstream of the Lake Mendocino PP to provide water quality information. If possible, some attempt will be made to include water quality measurements both when the power plant is operating and when it is offline. HDR will coordinate closely to identify safe access points, schedule City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 24 installations, and determine optimal timing for sampling. Data collected will be compiled into accessible files that could be used to develop a report to characterize downstream temperature, DO, and water quality conditions. HDR will also collect water quality samples at one location downstream of the Lake Mendocino PP and, if needed, a second location further downstream. Samples will be collected once when the project is operating and once when it is offline. A California- certified laboratory will be used to analyze and provide results on the samples. HDR will work with the City on the best timing for grab sampling and logger installations, as well as areas for safe access. Data will be included in the water resources and biological sections of the PAD. Conducting Studies Safely A Site-Specific Safety Plan for the Lake Mendocino PP relicensing will be developed by the PM and one or more experienced field staff as part of the initial set-up of the Project. This will include, at a minimum, information on the Project scope, location and specific sites, schedule for field work, details on how field work will be implemented, key staff safety roles, information on reporting unsafe conditions and/or incidents, an emergency action plan, information on potential safety risks and how to minimize/mitigate them, details on trainings field staff are required to have, requirements for personal protective and other safety equipment, check-in/ check-out procedures, and any other relevant Project-specific safety information. Given the location of the Project, we will also include a section about fire safety and smoke inhalation. Nearby hospitals and other resources will be listed, as will emergency contact information for all crew members. Field staff are required to read, be familiar with and, acknowledge through signature the Safety Plan before going into the field. A copy of the Safety Plan is also carried into the field by each team performing work. Additionally, a Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) will be completed for each specific field task on the Project by the team performing that task. This analysis takes a deeper look at the actions that will be necessary to complete the fieldwork, starting with any anticipated travel requirements. Each step is evaluated for potential hazards and control measures to be implemented to eliminate or minimize each hazard. The JHA form also lists the necessary equipment and training required to perform the task safely. Field team members are responsible for being actively involved in the hazard analysis. JHAs are living documents that are required to be updated as field conditions and activities change. Respond to Comments and Engage in Dispute Resolution HDR anticipates some comments from resource agencies on the PAD and DLA. Comments on the PAD not related to studies will be addressed in the DLA. Comments on the DLA will be addressed in the FLA. A comment tracker, in the form of a table, will be included as part of the Consultation Log for the Project, which will be included in all major relicensing documents. While not required under the TLP, HDR recommends that if any study requests are filed with FERC in response to the PAD and Joint Meeting, a response be drafted and filed with the FERC as part of closing out the First Stage Consultation. For the purposes of this proposal, HDR assumes that only the three data collection efforts described above will be needed. Additional data collection efforts or study development and implementation are not included in this scope of work. HDR also assumes that there will be no formal study disputes requested by any resource agencies given the lack of anticipated issues, the City’s lack of control of flow in the East Fork Russian River, and experience with other TLP relicensings (where no formal study disputes have occurred). HDR does not anticipate that there will be a need for formal dispute resolution, but as described above, one of the proposed meetings could be repurposed for a required second Joint Meeting to address disagreements on measures. License Application Per the TLP, the City must provide a DLA to relicensing participants for review and comment; therefore, this section is broken into DLA and FLA development. Draft License Application With the expectation of no relicensing studies, HDR recommends starting the development of the DLA (18 C.F.R.§ 4.51 and 16.8(c)) in 2028, giving the City ample time to review and finalize the DLA before the target distribution date to the relicensing participants of May 2029. Providing the DLA early to relicensing participants allows more time to respond to comments and assemble the FLA ahead of the target date to file no later than December 18, 2029. The new exhibits that will be developed for the DLA consist of Exhibit C (Construction History), Exhibit D (Cost and Financing), and Exhibit H (Miscellaneous Filing Information). Confidential, Privileged, and Critical Energy Infrastructure Information (CEII) contained in those exhibits will be excluded from the public version of the DLA but will be filed with FERC. The other sections will be updated and reformatted from the PAD, as needed, for use in the DLA. Comments and questions from relicensing participants on the PAD will be addressed in the DLA. The DLA will also include the City’s proposed PM&E measures, if any, that will be included in the new license. The review process for the DLA will flow similarly to the PAD, with HDR providing the City three to four sections at a time for initial review (minimum of 2 weeks), spread over the development period, addressing all comments. The complete DLA will then undergo a second review several months prior to distribution to relicensing participants for 90-day review. All documents will be placed on the internal SharePoint, developed and maintained by HDR, and City staff will be provided with access to perform their reviews. Final License Application Relicensing Participants have 90 days to review and provide written comments on the DLA. Once the comments are received, HDR will review and organize the comments for the City’s review, including a recommended response approach for each comment. HDR will update the FLA based on comments received on the DLA, new information that may be available, and additional changes agreed to by the City. To make the City’s review of the FLA more efficient, it will only provide individual sections for review (minimum of two City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 25 weeks) if the section has substantial updates from the DLA. The complete FLA will be provided to the City for final review and sign off no less than two weeks prior to filing with FERC. All documents will be placed on the internal SharePoint, developed and maintained by HDR, and City staff will be provided with access to perform their reviews. The Notice of Filing (18 C.F.R.§ 4.32(b)(6)) will be submitted so that it is published twice within 14 days of filing the FLA, in a local newspaper. The City of Ukiah’s website will host the FLA (or links to the FERC eLibrary), providing access to relicensing participants. While the RFP calls for filing the FLA by December 31, 2029, HDR recommends a target date of December 18, 2029 to avoid potential holiday schedule conflicts at the end of December. The latest the City can file the FLA is March 31, 2030, two years prior to license expiration, so the proposed schedule provides for some flexibility if needed. Post-FLA Activities Once the City files the FLA, the relicensing transitions into the post-FLA phase, which is less constrained by specific schedules and somewhat out of the control of the City, although it remains important to review and respond to items as they occur. Initially, while FERC prepares to deem the license application ‘Ready for Environmental Analysis’ (REA), it may issue Additional Information Requests (AIR), or clarifications to the City. If FERC issues AIRs, HDR will work with the City on the required response, including a schedule. Considering the lack of complexity of Lake Mendocino PP, HDR anticipates minimal AIRs. NEPA Process FERC’s NEPA process includes participation in site visits, public meetings, and review of FERC’s scoping documents. HDR will participate in the site visits and public meeting, advise the City if HDR suggests responding to comments made during these activities, and review and comment on FERC’s Scoping Documents 1 and 2, if necessary. Based on recent TLP relicensings, HDR assumes minimal comments will be prepared or filed with FERC by the City. This task also includes preparing a response to comments on the City’s FLA that will be filed with FERC. HDR will compile comments into a format that readily shows the commenter, comment, overlap among comments, initial suggestions to FERC, and rationale for suggestion. HDR assumes the City will only respond to comments with which the City does not agree. This will not include comments regarding editorial or other non-PM&E-related comments. HDR will meet with the City to finalize the responses. HDR will then prepare a draft filing with FERC for the City’s review and approval ,and will file the response within 60 days of the deadline for comments. This task also includes preparing and filing comments on FERC’s draft Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). HDR assumes that FERC will issue a draft EA/ EIS, hold a Federal Power Act Section 10(j) meeting, and allow for comments. HDR will review the draft EA/EIS, focusing primarily on PM&E measures, and develop initial suggestions regarding whether the City should comment on the PM&E measure, including the alternative the City might file. HDR will provide the draft comments to the City for review and approval and file the comments with FERC. As part of this task, HDR will also prepare for, participate in, and follow-up on FERC’s Section 10(j) meeting. For reference, a FERC 10(j) meeting is a formal discussion between FERC and federal and state fish and wildlife agencies meant to resolve conflicts or inconsistencies in recommendations to protect and enhance fish and wildlife resources during relicensing. Finally, although FERC’s regulations do not specifically provide a period for comments on the final EA/EIS, HDR recommends that the City review the document for omissions and errors, and file comments with FERC if any are found. Water Quality Certification and CEQA HDR will prepare a draft letter from the City to the SWRCB filing a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) application, participate in a pre-filing meeting with the SWRCB, and file proof of the application with FERC. This will occur within 60 days of FERC’s REA notice. HDR will support the City with a single virtual meeting with the SWRCB prior to submitting the application. HDR will review the draft WQC, if released by the SWRCB, focusing primarily on the conditions, and will also develop initial suggestions regarding whether the City should comment on the draft WQC, including the alternative the City might propose. HDR will provide the draft comments to the City for review and approval and provide them to the SWRCB. If other interested parties provide comments on the draft WQC, HDR will review and provide any recommendations on those comments to the City as well. The final WQC will be issued by the SWRCB no later than one year after the WQC application is filed. As part of the WQC process, the City must complete a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process. Based on HDR’s current understanding of the project, HDR assumes a Categorical Exemption will be the appropriate level of CEQA review. HDR will prepare the Notice of Exemption (NOE) form and supplemental information. Supplemental information will be pulled from the FLA and updated as needed with other publicly available information at the time of filing the NOE. HDR will submit the NOE and supplemental information electronically to the City for review. Upon receipt of the City’s comments, HDR will revise the package to incorporate comments and prepare a final NOE and supplemental information package for approval. HDR will assist the City in submitting the NOE and supplemental information package to the State Clearinghouse through CEQAnet. HDR assumes that the City will be responsible for filing the NOE and supplemental information package with the County Clerk-Recorder’s office as well as paying any applicable fees. License Issuance Once FERC completes its NEPA process, consultation under Section 7 (Endangered Species) and Section 106 (Cultural Resources) is complete, and the City provides a valid water quality certification (or proof of waiver); FERC will have received all the necessary information to issue the City a new license. 26 HDR’s proposed schedule (see Table 1) includes early completion of documents to meet FERC regulatory deadlines without stress and allows ample time for the City’s review of all documents. This schedule assumes a November 3, 2025 notice to proceed from the City, a December 2026 PAD filing, and December 2029 FLA filing per the RFP. The schedule will be further refined based on discussions with the City and the FERC relicensing process. HDR notes that the schedule through the filing of the FLA is well defined by several key FERC milestones and that post-FLA activities rely more heavily on actions by FERC, because others and can be difficult to predict. HDR’s proposed schedule is based on our recent experience on other projects combined with our optimism that the City’s relicensing will not generate much controversy that could cause delays. Yellow shading on the schedule below indicates that the task is estimated to be in progress and green indicates the month the task is estimated to be completed. Project Schedule Major Topic Milestone/Deliverable 2026 2027 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Develop and File NOI/PAD” Meet with Agencies and Request Information Develop Draft NOI/PAD for City Review Develop Draft TLP Request for City Review Finalize and File NOI/PAD Finalize and File TLP Request Complete Early Studies (Results in PAD) Post PAD Activities Plan and Hold Joint Meeting / Site Visit Review Comments and Study Requests Major Topic Milestone/Deliverable 2028 2029 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Develop and Distribute DLA Develop Draft DLA for City Review Finalize and Distribute DLA Develop and File FLA Review Comments on DLA Plan and Hold Meeting to Resolve Differences Finalize and File FLA Table 1: Overview Relicensing Schedule for the City of Ukiah’s Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Project 27 NOTES: •While not shown on this schedule, HDR assumes monthly check-in calls with the City, attendance City Council meetings (if requested), and monthly invoices. •Activities in 2025 will include project start up and working with the City on relicensing strategy. Pre-PAD development will also begin.•Specific due dates will be established while working with the City and based on FERC requirements.•Yellow shading indicates that the task is estimated to be in progress and green indicates the month the task is estimated to be completed.•HDR will provide interim sections of the PAD, DLA, and FLA for City review to spread out City’s time commitments.•HDR assumes there are no formal study disputes and that the City does not perform additional studies. If the City agrees to additional studies, they would occur in 2027 and/or 2028.•The latest the City can file its PAD is March 31, 2027, five years prior to the license expiration. HDR assumes PAD filing in December 2026.•The latest the City can file its FLA is March 31, 2030, two years prior to the license expiration. HDR assumes FLA filing in December 2029.•Post-FLA activities in 2030 and 2031 are a best estimate of when they could occur but the actual schedule will be set by FERC as its NEPA process progresses. •HDR assumes activities for relicensing will be completed in 2031 however, FERC will likely not issue the license until April 1, 2032 even if it is ready earlier. Project Schedule (continued) Table 1.A: Overview Relicensing Schedule for the City of Ukiah’s Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Project Major Topic Milestone/Deliverable 2030 2031 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Post-FLA Activities Additional Information Requests Scoping Document 1 and 2 REA and Comment Responses Apply for WQC Application CEQA Notice of Exemption Draft WQC Review and Comments Final WQC Review and Comment Draft EA/EIR Review and Comment Section 7 Consultation 10(j) Process including Meeting Final EA/EIR Review and Comments 28 HDR also provides a detailed TLP relicensing schedule assuming a PAD filing date of December 18, 2026 and FLA filing date of December 18, 2029 (to limit impacts from the holidays later in December). The schedule also shows the FERC requirement and who is responsible for the item (i.e., the City, FERC, or relicensing participants). Project Schedule Subsection(s)Lead Activity 1 Lake Mendocino PP Timeframe 2,3 (Start & Finish) 18 C.F.R. § 5.3. (b)City File request to use TLP 12/18/2026 (Friday) 18 C.F.R. § 5.5. NOTIFICATION OF INTENT (a)-(g)City File Notice of Intent (NOI) to file an application for a new license and request for non-federal representative status under § 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and § 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (no earlier than 5.5 years and no later than 5 years prior to expiration of the current license)12/18/2026 (Friday) 18 C.F.R. § 5.6. PRE-APPLICATION DOCUMENT (a)-(e)City File Pre-Application Document (PAD) (no earlier than 5.5 years and no later than 5 years prior to expiration of the current license)12/18/2026 (Friday) 18 C.F.R. § 5.7. TRIBAL CONSULTATION --FERC Hold meeting with potentially affected Native American tribes (NLT 30 days of date NOI and PAD filed)12/19/2026 (Saturday)1/18/2027 (Monday) 18 C.F.R. § 5.8. NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDING, DECISION ON USE OF TLP, AND INITIATION OF ESA AND NHPA INFORMAL CONSULTATION (a)FERC Issue Notice of Commencement of Proceeding (NCP) and decision regarding City’s request to use TLP (NLT 60 days of date NOI and PAD filed)12/19/2026 (Saturday)2/16/2027 (Tuesday) (b)FERC Request initiation of informal consultation under § 7 of the ESA and/or § 106 of the NHPA, if appropriate (NLT 60 days of date NOI and PAD filed)12/19/2026 (Saturday)2/16/2027 (Tuesday) 18 C.F.R. § 16.8. FIRST STAGE CONSULTATION – HOLD JOINT MEETING AND SITE VISIT (b)(3)(i)(B)City Consult with the resource agencies, Native American tribes, and members of the public on the scheduling of a joint meeting (NLT 15 days in advance of the joint meeting)2/17/2027 (Wednesday)4/1/2027 (Thursday) (b)(3)(i)(B) [and 18 CFR § 16.8(h)(i)]City Post notice of joint meeting in local newspapers, including purpose, location, time, and agenda (NLT 14 days in advance of the joint meeting)2/17/2027 (Wednesday)4/2/2027 (Friday) (b)(3)(i)(B City Provide to resource agencies, Native American tribes, and FERC a written notice of the time and place of the joint meeting and an agenda of the issues to be discussed at the joint meeting (NLT 15 days in advance of the joint meeting)2/17/2027 (Wednesday)4/1/2027 (Thursday) (b)(3)(ii)(B City Hold the joint meeting and provide an opportunity for a site visit to review the information and discuss the data and studies to be provided by City as part of the consultation process (No earlier than (NET) 30 days but NLT 60 days of date NCP is issued)3/18/2027 (Thursday)4/16/2027 (Friday) (b)(4)Relicensing Participants Resource agencies, Native American tribes and members of the public may attend the joint meeting to express their views regarding resource issues that should be addressed in the application. Attendance of the public at the site visit is at the discretion of City (NET 30 days but NLT 60 days of date NCP is issued)3/18/2027 (Thursday)4/16/2027 (Friday) (b)(4)City Make either an audio recording or written transcripts of the joint meeting, and promptly provide copies of these recordings, upon request (Promptly provide to FERC, agencies, and Indian tribes, upon request)Promptly provide following the joint meeting Table 2: Detailed schedule for City of ukiah’s Lake Mendocino PP Relicensing, assuming the City files the NOI and PAD on Dember 18, 2026. The schedule also assumes the City files its Final License Applications on December 18, 2029. Orange shaded row indicates a required City filing, and a pink shaded row indicates a required City-sponsored meeting. 29 Project Schedule Subsection(s)Lead Activity 1 Lake Mendocino PP Timeframe 2,3 (Start & Finish) 18 C.F.R. § 16.8. FIRST STAGE CONSULTATION - STUDY REQUESTS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION (b)(5)Relicensing Participants Provide to City written comments identifying Relicensing Participant’s determination of necessary studies to be performed or the information to be provided by City (NLT 60 days after joint meeting unless deadline is extended to 120 days by FERC)4/17/2027 (Saturday)6/16/2027 (Wednesday) (b)(6)(i)City & Relicensing Participants During first stage consultation, if City and Relicensing Participant disagree regarding any matter or regarding the need to conduct a study or gather information, City or the Relicensing Participant may refer the dispute in writing to FERC for resolution, providing a copy to other affected parties (any time during first stage consultation). 4/17/2027 (Saturday)Until First Stage Ends (b)(6)(ii)Disagreeing Party If a dispute is filed with FERC, the disagreeing party may file a response (NLT 15 days from the date the dispute is filed with FERC)NLT 15 days from the date the dispute is filed with FERC (b)(6)(iv)FERC FERC resolves dispute ---- 18 C.F.R. § 16.8. SECOND STAGE CONSULTATION – CONDUCT STUDIES (c)(1)City Conduct studies (if necessary)6/17/2027 (Thursday)Until Second Stage Ends (c)(2)Relicensing Participants During Second Stage Consultation, a Relicensing Participant may request City conduct a study or gather information not previously identified. City must promptly initiate the study or gather the information unless it refers the request to FERC for resolution (during second stage consultation). When Second Stage Begins Until Second Stage Ends (c)(2)City City may refer the request to FERC for dispute resolution, copying affected parties.---- (b)(6)(ii)City If City files the dispute with FERC, other affected parties may file a response (NLT 15 days from the date the dispute is filed with FERC)NLT 15 days from the date City files the dispute with FERC (b)(6)(iv)FERC FERC resolves dispute ---- 18 C.F.R. § 16.8. SECOND STAGE CONSULTATION – DRAFT LICENSE APPLICATION c(4)City Provide to agencies and Native American tribes a copy of the DLA, including full documentation of consultation. (No less than 150 days prior to deadline for filing license application) c(5)Relicensing Participants Provide written comments on DLA to City (NLT 90 days of date DLA is distributed)6/1/2029 (Friday)7/23/2029 (Monday)2 c(6)(i)&(iii)City, Relicensing Participants If comments indicate that a resource agency or Native American tribe has a substantive disagreement with City’s conclusions regarding resource impacts or proposed PM&E measures, City holds at least one joint meeting with the disagreeing resource agency or Native American tribe and other agencies with similar or related areas of interest, expertise, or responsibility to discuss and to attempt to reach agreement. City and the disagreeing resource agency or Native American tribe may conclude the joint meeting with a document embodying any agreement and any issues that are unresolved. (NLT 60 days from the date of the written comments of the disagreeing agency or Indian tribe) NLT 60 days from the date of the written comments c(6)(ii)City Consult with disagreeing party and others about scheduling of joint meeting, and provide FERC, disagreeing party and others with written notice of the time and place of the joint meeting and a written agenda of the issues to be discussed at the joint meeting (NLT 15 days in advance of the joint meeting)NLT 15 days in advance of the Joint Meeting c(7)City & Disagreeing Party City and the disagreeing resource agency or Native American tribe may conclude the joint meeting with a document embodying any agreement and any issues that are unresolved.---- 30 Project Schedule Subsection(s)Lead Activity 1 Lake Mendocino PP Timeframe 2,3 (Start & Finish) c(8)City City describe all disagreements with a resource agency or Native American tribe on technical or PM&E measures in its application, including an explanation of the basis for City’s disagreement with the resource agency or Native American tribe.---- 18 C.F.R. § 16.8. THIRD STAGE CONSULTATION – FINAL LICENSE APPLICATION (d)(1)City File a Final License Application (FLA) and provide a copy of the FLA to agencies, Native American tribes, governmental offices and consulted members of the public (NLT 2 years prior to expiration of the current license)December 18, 2029 (Tuesday) (f)City Include in Exhibit E documentation of all consultation regarding comments, recommendation and proposed terms and conditions and studies. If the comments, recommendation and proposed terms and conditions and studies were not accepted by City, describe why. (unspecified)Include in FLA 18 C.F.R. § 5.19. TENDERING NOTICE AND SCHEDULE (Tendering Notice) (a)-(c)FERC Issue Tendering Notice and schedule and post in Federal Register and contact agencies and tribes directly (NLT 14 days after FLA filed)December 19, 2029 (Wednesday)1/2/2030 (Wednesday)2 (d)FERC Resolve requests for additional information gathering or studies made in comments on DLA or PLP (NLT 30 days after FLA filed)December 19, 2029 (Wednesday)1/17/2030 (Thursday) 18 C.F.R. § 5.20. DEFICIENT APPLICATIONS (a)-(b)FERC HDR considers this section not applicable to City’s relicensing. The application will not be deficient.N/A N/A 18 C.F.R. § 5.21. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION N/A FERC May issue additional information requests (AIR) (no specific timeline in regulation)Timeframe and AIRs determined by FERC N/A City File additional information if directed by FERC (no specific timeline in regulation; FERC’s AIR sets filing due date)Timeframe and AIRs determined by FERC 18 C.F.R. § 5.22. NOTICE OF ACCEPTACE AND READY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS (REA Notice) (a)-(c)FERC Issue notice that application is ready for environmental analysis, and requesting comments, protests and interventions, recommendation, preliminary terms and conditions, and preliminary fishway prescriptions, and establishing date for final amendments to application, and updated schedule (no specific timeline in regulation) When FERC deems application is complete; timeframe determined by FERC. 18 C.F.R. § 5.23. RESPONSE TO REA NOTICE (a)Relicensing Participants File comments, protests and interventions, recommendation, preliminary terms and conditions, and preliminary fishway prescriptions NLT 60 days after REA Notice issued As provided in 50 C.F.R., Part 221 (for NMFS) and other regulations for DOA or DOI land agencies, within 30 days of when mandatory conditioning agencies file preliminary terms and conditions and preliminary fishway prescriptions, the licensee and interested parties may file with the mandatory conditioning agency a request for an evidentiary hearing on disputed material facts and/or alternative conditions. The Department’s regulations establish the procedures and timeframe. (a)City & Relicensing Participants File reply comments NLT 105 days after REA Notice issued (c)City File a Clean Water Act (CWA) § 401 water quality certification (WQC), or copy of request for WQC, or evidence of waiver of WQC (NLT 60 days after REA Notice issued)NLT 60 days after REA Notice issued WQC is covered under the CWA, not the FPA. In HDR’s experience, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) rarely waives the WQC and requires the Lead Agency, City in this case, comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) before the SWRCB issues the WQC, although if the SWRCB considers the 1-year statutory deadline for issuing a WQC to be in jeopardy, the SWRCB will issue WQC without CEQA compliance being complete. For this proposal, HDR assumes a Notice of Exemption (NOE) will be sufficient to comply with CEQA. 31 Project Schedule Subsection(s)Lead Activity 1 Lake Mendocino PP Timeframe 2,3 (Start & Finish) 18 C.F.R. § 5.25. APPLICATIONS REQUIRING A DRAFT NEPA DOCUMENT (a)-(b)FERC Issue draft environmental assessment (DEA) or draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) NLT 180 days after comments on REA Notice due (c)City & Relicensing Participants File comments on DEA/DEIS NLT 30 or 60 days, as determined by FERC, after FERC issues DEA/DEIS (d)Mandatory Conditioning Agencies File modified final terms and conditions, and final fishway prescriptions NLT 60 days after comments on DEA/DEIS due Endangered Species Act (ESA) §7 consultation and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPS) §106 consultation are governed by the ESA and NHPA, as compared to the FPA. In HDR’s experience, FERC usually consults directly with NMFS and USFWS under ESA and with SHPO and the Advisory Council under NHPA after FERC issues its DEA/DEIS. ESA consultation usually involves correspondence from FERC to NMFS and/or USFWS seeking concurrence on FERC’s conclusions regarding effects of the action on ESA-listed species. NMFS and/ or USFWS will issue a biological opinion if FERC concludes that the action is likely to adversely affect or result in Jeopardy for a species. In historic resources are associated with the action, FERC will develop and issue a programmatic agreement for execution between, FERC, SHPO, and the Advisory Council. Given the lack of complexity and smaller footprints of City's projects, HDR assumes Section 7 and Section 106 Consultation will be minimal. (e)FERC Issue final environmental assessment (FEA) or final environmental impact statement (FEIS)NLT 90 days after final terms and conditions and final fishway prescriptions due 18 C.F.R § 5.26. SECTION 10(j) PROCESS (a)Fish and Wildlife Agencies File section 10((j) fish and wildlife recommendations NLT 30 or 60 days, as determined by FERC, after DEA/DEIS (b)FERC May request written clarification of recommended fish and wildlife recommendation No specific timeline in regulation (b)City & Relicensing Participants May file response to FERC’s request for clarification Ttimeframe as specified by FERC in request for clarification (b)FERC FERC include in DEA/DEIS preliminary determination of inconsistency (when FERC issues DEA/DEIS)NLT 180 days after comments on REA Notice due (c)Fish and Wildlife Agencies May request meeting to resolve differences No timeframe in FERC regulations (d)FERC If FERC decides to hold Section 10(j) meeting, provide notice to interested parties of Section 10(j) meeting NLT 15 days prior to Section 10(j) meeting (d)FERC, City & Relicensing Participants FERC hold Section 10(j) meeting NLT 90 days after FERC issues preliminary determination of inconsistency (d)FERC FERC issues summary of Section 19(j) meeting No timeframe in FERC regulations (e)FERC FERC posts in Federal Register findings and statements required in FPA Section 19(j)(2)When FERC issues order granting or denying license ORDER ISSUING LICENSE N/A FERC FERC Issues License March 2032 1 The activity description is a good faith effort to summarize the pertinent regulation. The reader is encouraged to read the specific regulation. 2 18 C.F.R. § 385.2007(a)(2) provides that if a filing date falls on a Saturday, Sunday or federal legal public holiday, the deadline for filing becomes the next business day. 3 When an activity is contingent on completion of a previous activity, the schedule assumes the previous activity is completed the latest date possible for that previous activity. City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 47 HDR has worked on over thirty (30) relicensings in California (see Figure 1), including those with many similarities to Lake Mendocino PP, which allows us to accurately estimate the level of effort required to successfully deliver the project and also identify the major tasks and milestones that need to be completed. HDR has outlined our approach to completing the project, detailed several strategic approaches for how to do so more efficiently and cost effectively, and a provided a schedule based on the City’s target filing dates, FERC deadlines, and HDR’s experience with these processes. HDR’s proposed hours and budget by task are provided in Table A-1 with task specific budget assumptions following. As directed in the RFP, HDR’s single page Rate Sheet is provided as Table A-2. H. Fee Proposal (Including Rate Sheet and Assumptions) TASK DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED HOURS BUDGET 1 Project Management and Coordination with City 684 $169,000 2 NOI, PAD, and TLP Request 813 $148,000 3 Consultation and Meetings (non-Section 106) 108 $27,000 4 Develop and Conduct Studies 260 $58,500 5 Respond to Comments and Dispute Resolution 97 $22,500 6 Section 106 Consultation 170 $32,000 7 Draft License Application 438 $82,000 8 Final License Application 281 $53,000 9 FERC’s NEPA Process 211 $46,500 10 Water Quality Certification including CEQA NOE 102 $25,500 TOTAL 3,164 $664,000 11 Optional Project Contingency (~20%)N/A $130,000 TOTAL WITH CONTIGENCY TBD $794,000 Table 3: Budget Estimate Task Contingency Budget HDR’s proposal provides a detailed scope, schedule, and budget (including assumptions) for the City’s consideration. We feel many of the tasks can be budgeted with decent clarity based on FERC’s requirements and HDR’s extensive experience. However, HDR also recognizes that parts of FERC relicensing can be somewhat unpredictable with the potential to significantly impact overall costs. For the Lake Mendocino PP relicensing, HDR sees two major areas where additional costs could be incurred if certain assumptions are incorrect: field studies and post-FLA activities. Regarding field studies, HDR has proposed targeted studies to fill data gaps and mitigate the need for additional (and often more expensive) studies. However, resource agencies may request additional studies and engage in formal study dispute (even if unlikely), which could lead FERC to directing the City to complete additional studies. In addition, the City may identify additional studies it chooses to complete as it prepares the PAD and other relicensing documents if the data may benefit the City’s relicensing strategy. Post-FLA activities can be difficult to budget since the complexity and schedule of those activities may be driven by the outcomes in relicensing leading up to the FLA filing over four years. The post-FLA schedule is also less defined and driven by FERC staff workloads and other agency actions. Finally, as part of the required WQC, the City will complete CEQA, which HDR assumes may be satisfied with a NOE, based on the current understanding of the project and today’s CEQA guidelines. If the project or regulatory landscape changes prior to initiating CEQA, a more expensive CEQA process may be needed (e.g. Mitigated Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report). To assist the City in planning for these uncertainties, HDR recommends the City consider a contingency task with a budget of 15 to 20 percent of the total estimated relicensing cost. This budget could be included as part of the initial contract award or held by the City until a change in the project warrants a contract change order. Regardless, the City has planned for some additional expenditures should they arise. The contingency budget would not be utilized without prior approval by the City and tracked using a “change log” or moving the contingency budget into existing tasks where needed. HDR has successfully used this approach with several relicensing clients and finds it strikes a balance between firm budget planning and the flexibility often needed during relicensing. City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 48 TASK DESCRIPTION FY26 (07/01/25) FY27 (07/01/26) FY28 (07/01/27) FY29 (07/01/28) FY30 (07/01/29) FY31 (07/01/30) FY232 (07/01/31)TOTAL 1 Project Management and Coordination w/ City $ 13,520.00 $ 28,730.00 $ 28,730.00 $ 28,730.00 $ 28,730.00 $ 28,730.00 $ 11,830.00 $ 169,000.00 2 NOI, PAD, and TLP Request $ 51,800.00 $ 96,200.00 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ - $ 148,000.00 3 Consultation and Meetings (non-Section 106)$ - $ 6,750.00 $ - $ 13,500.00 $ 6,750.00 $ -$ - $ 27,000.00 4 Develop and Conduct Studies $ 20,475.00 $ 38,025.00 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ - $ 58,500.00 5 Respond to Comments and Dispute Mtgs.$ - $ 11,250.00 $ -$ - $ 11,250.00 $ -$ - $ 22,500.00 6 Section 106 Consultation $ - $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ - $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ - $ 32,000.00 7 Draft License Application $ - $ - $ 24,600.00 $ 57,400.00 $ -$ -$ - $ 82,000.00 8 Final License Application $ - $ -$ - $ 13,250.00 $ 39,750.00 $ -$ - $ 53,000.00 9 FERC’s NEPA Process $ - $ -$ -$ - $ 11,625.00 $ 23,250.00 $ 11,625.00 $ 46,500.00 10 Water Quality Certification incl. CEQA NOE $ - $ -$ -$ -$ - $ 19,125.00 $ 6,375.00 $ 25,500.00 TOTAL $ 85,800.00 $ 189,000.00 $ 61,300.00 $ 112,900.00 $ 106,100.00 $ 79,100.00 $ 29,800.00 $ 664,000.00 Table 4 provides HDR’s estimated annual fiscal year cashflow for the project duration based on the assumptions and schedule provided in the proposal. Table 4: Estimated Annual Fiscal Year Cashflow City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 49 Budget Assumptions HDR made two major assumptions for its cost proposal: 1.FERC will approve the request to use the TLP. 2.The contract is issued in November 2025 and goes through December 2031, when post-FLA activities will be concluded. Task 1 - Project Management and Meetings 1.Except for the initial kickoff meeting, PM check-in meetings will be held virtually via Microsoft Teams. 2.Up to 60 1-hr PM check-in meetings will be held throughout the Project, with an additional 1-hr per meeting for the APM to prepare the agenda and meeting minutes, at the timing described under Project Management. 3.The PM and APM will attend each 60 check-in meetings. 4.One City Council meeting will be attended virtually by the PM and APM. 5.HDR will maintain an internal SharePoint site accessible to HDR and City staff. 6.The City will design, update, troubleshoot, and upload all necessary documents to its own website, which will be used to host required public information. Task 2 - Prepare and File NOI, PAD, and TLP request 1.Draft NOI and TLP request will be provided to the City on the HDR-hosted SharePoint site. 2.The City will provide one consolidated round of review in Track Changes to NOI and TLP request on the SharePoint site. 3.The City will provide one consolidated round of review in Track Changes to the final NOI and TLP request on the SharePoint site. 4.The City will reimburse HDR for the costs of newspaper notices. 5.Draft PAD sections will be provided to the City on the HDR-hosted SharePoint site. 6.The City will provide one consolidated round of review in Track Changes to PAD sections on the SharePoint site. 7.A complete PAD will be provided for City review on SharePoint. 8.The City will provide one consolidated round of review in Track Changes to the final PAD on the SharePoint site. 9.Final NOI, PAD, and TLP request will be posted on the City’s website. 10.No paper copies of the PAD will be required, and the City will reimburse HDR for the cost of materials and postage should copies of the document on DVD be required. Task 3 - Mandatory Consultation and Meetings (non-Section 106) 1.Up to two virtual, 1-hour informal Section 7 consultation meetings will be held with USFWS. 2.Up to two virtual, 1-hour informal Section 7 consultation meetings will be held with NMFS. 3.Section 106 Consultation meetings are covered in Task 6. 4.A joint Agency Meeting and site visit will be held. 5.The City will support access for the site visit. 6.HDR PM and APM will attend site visit and Joint Meeting, and the Senior FERC Advisor will attend the Joint Meeting virtually. 7.Up to two virtual, 1-hour Relicensing Participant meetings will be held to develop PM&E measures for inclusion in the DLA. Task 4 - Develop and Conduct Studies 1.FERC will not direct the City to conduct additional studies. 2.The City will provide access to the project site. 3.No research trips to archival repositories will be necessary. 4.No cultural resource permits other than Archaeological Resource Protection Act permit issued by the USACE will be required. 5.No more than one previously unrecorded archaeological resource will be identified during the field survey at each project site. 6.The City will reimburse HDR for field equipment costs for studies and laboratory fees associated with water quality analysis. City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 50 Task 5 - Respond to Comments and Dispute Resolution 1. Up to five PAD comment letters will be received for the project. 2. There will be no formal study dispute requests. 3. The meeting to resolve differences (if required) is included in Task 3. Task 6 - Section 106 Consultation 1. No additional records search from the California Historical Resources Information System will be necessary for the cultural or Tribal resources analysis as part of the development of the DLA. 2. Up to two consultation meetings with Native American Tribes will be necessary. 3. Consultation with Native American Tribes will not identify Traditional Cultural Properties, Traditional Cultural Landscapes, or Tribal Cultural Resources requiring further analysis, assessment, or evaluation. 4. No adverse effects on historic properties are anticipated, so additional steps will not be needed. 5. No Historic Properties Management Plan will be necessary. Task 7 - Draft License Application 1. Draft DLA sections will be provided to the City on the HDR- hosted SharePoint site. 2. The City will provide one consolidated round of review in track changes to DLA sections on the SharePoint site. 3. A complete DLA will be provided for City review on SharePoint. 4. The City will provide one consolidated round of review in track changes to the final DLA on the SharePoint site. 5. Final DLA will be posted on the City’s website and posted to the FERC eLibrary. 6. No paper copies of the DLA will be required, and the City will reimburse HDR for the cost of materials and postage should copies of the document on DVD be required. 7. A Supporting Design Report will not be necessary for the DLA. 8. The City will provide known updated information for resources covered in the PAD that should be included in the DLA. 9. No additional field work is anticipated for the development of the DLA. Task 8 - Final License Application 1. Draft FLA sections will be provided to the City on the HDR-hosted SharePoint site. 2. The City will provide one consolidated round of review in track changes to FLA sections on the SharePoint site. 3. A complete FLA will be provided for the City’s review on the SharePoint. 4. The City will provide one consolidated round of review in Track Changes to the final DLA on the SharePoint site. 5. Final FLA will be posted on the City’s website and posted to the FERC eLibrary. 6. No paper copies of the FLA will be required, and the City will reimburse HDR for the cost of materials and postage should copies of the document on DVD be required. 7. The City will reimburse HDR for costs of newspaper notices. Task 9 - FERC’s NEPA process and Additional Information Requests 1. FERC AIR’s will not include additional fieldwork or modeling, but will be clarifying in nature. 2. FERC will not hold an in-person NEPA scoping meeting or Site Visit (consistent with recent TLP proceedings). 3. FERC will not order the City to conduct additional studies. 4. FERC’s 10(j) meeting will be virtual. 5. Draft NEPA responses, including REA comments and draft EA comments, will be provided to the City on the HDR-hosted SharePoint site. 6. The City will provide one consolidated round of review in Track Changes to NEPA responses on the SharePoint site. Task 10 - Water Quality Certification and CEQA 1. The pre-application meeting with the SWRCB will be virtual. 2. A CEQA NOE will be the appropriate level of environmental review for the proposed projects, and the City will be the Lead Agency for the CEQA NOE. 3. The City will be responsible for filing the NOE and supplemental information package and paying all applicable CEQA filing fees with the County Clerk-Recorder’s office. 4. Draft WQC application and CEQA NOE will be provided to the City on the HDR-hosted SharePoint site. 5. The City will provide one consolidated round of review in Track Changes to draft CEQA NOE and WQC application on the SharePoint site. City of Ukiah | Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Relicensing 51 Rate Sheet CATEGORY 1 2025 - 2029 2 FERC PM / Advisors $300.00 - $450.00 Chuck Vertucci*$372.06 Devin Malkin*$313.63 Elizabeth Dawson*$428.55 Sr. Technical Staff $230.00 - $340.00 Ian Cain*$235.29 Matt Paquette*$268.04 Norm Ponferrada*$332.07 Danielle Risse*$276.63 Kelly MacVane $234.40 Technical Staff $130.00 - $230.00 Kaden Emerson $130.71 Anna Claubaugh $206.43 Eliza Schlein $198.26 Kamil Rochon $144.68 Michelle Sandmann $165.62 GIS / Data Solutions $120.00 - $215.00 Kier Keightley*$202.44 Angela Tang $131.54 Admin / Accounting $100.00 - $180.00 Jacare Palmer $178.65 Jordyn Texley $161.59 Tyler Miller $112.91 Table 5: Rate Sheet LEGEND 1 Additional staff will be added within rate categories as needed 2 Rates will be escalated after 2029 through discussions with the City *Indicates key personnel