Common use of GSP Development Clause in Contracts

GSP Development. The purpose of this Framework Agreement is to provide organizational and decision-making structure to support the GSAs working collaboratively to continue development of a GSP. The Working Group, with the support of Technical Consultant, will tackle the last two phases of the four-phase Plan development outlined in the subbasin’s Proposition 1 (AB-1471 Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014) application: Sustainability Planning and GSP Preparation and Submittal. It will also guide execution of the tasks included in the xxxxxxxx’s Proposition 68 (Sustainable Groundwater Management planning grant proposal), if successfully awarded. The Proposition1 grant and Proposition 68 proposal, if successful, serve to guide the subbasin’s groundwater planning efforts. Additionally, the Working Group commits to general management tasks, also outlined in the Proposition 1 grant Work Plan, including actions such as (1) grant management and administration, (2) project management, and (3) quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC). Any changes to the subbasin’s Work Plan included in the Proposition 1 grant scope of work or Proposition 68 proposal are subject to the approval of the Working Group. The parties have agreed to work together as a collaborative planning body on this GSP development for their mutual benefit. The Working Group is neither a Joint Powers Authority nor a governmental entity; rather, it is a collaborative planning effort guided by the parties for their mutual benefit. Any implementation actions to be taken as a result of this planning effort are expected to be taken by the individual parties and approved by the respective governing bodies. Nothing in this agreement precludes an individual GSA from pursuing its own individual studies at its own cost. The Working Group, with the advice of the technical consultant and based on additional presentations by the sponsoring GSA, will jointly determine the extent to which such individual studies are to be used to inform the GSP. Nothing in the agreement precludes an individual GSA from preparing its own GSP. If a GSA chooses to produce a separate GSP, a Coordination Agreement, per SGMA statute and DWR regulations, shall be developed between the preparers of the well-coordinated GSPs and the Working Group. Incremental costs associated with developing a separate, well-coordinated GSP would be paid for separately by the GSA(s) proposing such effort.

GSP Development. The purpose of this Framework Agreement is to provide organizational and decision-making structure to support the GSAs working collaboratively to continue begin development of a GSP. The Working Group, with the support of Technical Consultant, will tackle the last first two phases of the four-phase Plan development outlined in the subbasin’s Proposition 1 (AB-1471 Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014) application: (1) GSP Foundation, (2) Basin Characterization and Analysis, (3) Sustainability Planning Planning, and (4) GSP Preparation and Submittal. It will also guide execution of the tasks included in the xxxxxxxx’s Proposition 68 (Sustainable Groundwater Management planning grant proposal), if successfully awarded. The Proposition1 grant and Proposition 68 proposal, if successful, serve to guide the subbasin’s groundwater planning efforts. Additionally, the Working Group commits to general management tasks, also outlined in the Proposition 1 grant Work Planproposal, including actions such as (1) grant management and administration, (2) project management, and (3) quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC). Any changes to the subbasin’s Work Plan included in the Proposition 1 grant scope of work or Proposition 68 proposal are subject to the approval of the Working Group. The parties have agreed to work together as a collaborative planning body on this GSP development for their mutual benefit. The Working Group is neither a Joint Powers Authority nor a governmental entity; rather, it is a collaborative planning effort guided by the parties for their mutual benefit. Any implementation actions to be taken as a result of this planning effort are expected to be taken by the individual parties and approved by the respective governing bodies. Nothing in this agreement precludes an individual GSA from pursuing its own individual studies at its own cost. The Working Group, with the advice of the technical consultant and based on additional presentations by the sponsoring GSA, will jointly determine the extent to which such individual studies are to be used to inform the GSP. Nothing in the agreement precludes an individual GSA from preparing its own GSP. If a GSA chooses to produce a separate GSP, a Coordination Agreement, per SGMA statute and DWR regulations, shall be developed between the preparers of the well-coordinated GSPs and the Working Group. Incremental costs associated with developing a separate, well-coordinated GSP would be paid for separately by the GSA(s) proposing such effort.

GSP Development. The purpose of this Framework Agreement is to provide organizational and decision-making structure to support the GSAs working collaboratively to continue development of develop a GSP. The Working Group, with the support of Technical Consultant, will tackle the last two phases of the four-phase Plan development outlined in the subbasin’s Proposition Prop. 1 application: (AB-1471 Water Quality1) GSP Foundation, Supply(2) Basin Characterization and Analysis, (3) Sustainability Planning, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014(4) application: Sustainability Planning and GSP Preparation and Submittal. It will also guide execution of the tasks included in the xxxxxxxx’s Proposition 68 (Sustainable Groundwater Management planning grant proposal), if successfully awarded. The Proposition1 grant and Proposition 68 proposal, if successful, serve to guide the subbasin’s groundwater planning efforts. Additionally, the Working Group commits to general management tasks, also outlined in the Proposition Prop. 1 grant Work Planproposal, including actions such as (1) grant management and administration, (2) project management, and (3) quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC). Any changes to the subbasin’s Work Plan included in the Proposition 1 grant scope of work or Proposition 68 proposal are subject to the approval of the Working Group. The parties have agreed to work together as a collaborative planning body on this GSP development for their mutual benefit. The Working Group is neither a Joint Powers Authority nor a governmental entity; rather, it is a collaborative planning effort guided by the parties for their mutual benefit. Any implementation actions to be taken as a result of this planning effort are expected to be taken by the individual parties and approved by the respective governing bodies. Development of the GSP is beyond the scope of this current Framework Agreement. It is expected that the GSAs will develop a subsequent agreement within the next 6-12 months that will cover the terms of GSP production. In the near term, GSAs will work together to define the scope of studies or data collection needed to inform GSP development. To the extent practicable, GSAs will include data collection and studies identified by each GSA as necessary to inform GSP development. If there is disagreement on the GSP scope, definition of studies, or data collection that is necessary or possible, the Working Group will seek input from the Independent Technical Advisor to inform its decision-making. Nothing in this agreement precludes an individual GSA from pursuing its own individual studies at its own cost. The Working Group, with the advice of the technical consultant and based on additional presentations by the sponsoring GSAIndependent Technical Advisor, will jointly determine the extent to which such individual studies are to be used to inform the GSP. Nothing in the agreement precludes an individual GSA from preparing its own GSP. If a GSA chooses to produce a separate GSP, a Coordination Agreement, per SGMA statute and DWR regulations, shall be developed between the preparers of the well-coordinated GSPs separate GSP and the Working Group. Incremental costs associated To xxxxxx the consideration of the beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the subbasin, the parties agree to the following: Parties are committed to an inclusive and transparent process that proactively seeks the engagement and input of potentially impacted parties as identified in SGMA. Parties will work to develop protocols for public engagement, both at public workshops and during regular Working Group meetings. Parties will work collectively to develop an agreed-upon outreach plan, but each GSA is responsible for guiding efforts within their respective jurisdictions. Parties recognize the value in developing shared messages to ensure consistency; joint participation in outreach efforts is encouraged to xxxxxx consistency in message and concretely demonstrate the parties’ coordinated effort. Parties recognize the need to conduct outreach in the near-term to better understand additional representation needs (e.g., environmental, tribal, riparian water users, overlying water users, etc.) beyond the signatories to this agreement. Parties commit to revisit the near-term collaboration structure, as necessary, to account for public feedback. An updated Stakeholder and Communication and Engagement Plan to be developed in Phase 1. Working Group members are encouraged to forward any media inquiries to the Water Forum. When talking to the press, Working Group members are asked to represent their own views only. Water Forum staff will coordinate with developing the Working Group to develop any needed “talking points” for media and other interested parties. Below is a separatelisting of the possible near-term decisions to be made during Phase 1 and 2 of the GSP development. This list is based on the subbasin’s Prop. 1 work plan and is current as of June 2018. This list will be revisited and updated, well-coordinated GSP would be paid for separately by the GSA(s) proposing such effort.as needed,

GSP Development. The purpose of this Framework Agreement is to provide organizational and organizational, decision-making and financial structure to support the GSAs working collaboratively to continue develop begin development of a GSP. The Working Group, with the support of Technical Consultant, will tackle the last first two phases of the four-phase Plan development outlined in the subbasin’s Proposition 1 application: (AB-1471 Water Quality1) GSP Foundation, Supply(2) Basin Characterization and Analysis, (3) Sustainability Planning, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014(4) application: Sustainability Planning and GSP Preparation and Submittal. It will also guide execution of the tasks included in the xxxxxxxx’s Proposition 68 (Sustainable Groundwater Management planning grant proposal), if successfully awarded. The Proposition1 grant and Proposition 68 proposal, if successful, serve to guide the subbasin’s groundwater planning efforts. Additionally, the Working Group commits to general management tasks, also outlined in the Proposition 1 grant Work Planproposal, including actions such as (1) grant management and administration, (2) project management, and (3) quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC). Any changes to the subbasin’s Work Plan included in the Proposition 1 grant scope of work or Proposition 68 proposal are subject to the approval of the Working Group. The parties have agreed to work together as a collaborative planning body on this GSP development for their mutual benefitbenefit and to xxxxxx effective implementation of SGMA requirements. The Working Group is neither a Joint Powers Authority nor a governmental entity; rather, it is a collaborative planning effort guided by the parties for their mutual benefit. Any implementation actions to be taken as a result of this planning effort are expected to be taken by the individual parties and approved by the respective governing bodies. Nothing in this agreement precludes an individual GSA from pursuing its own individual studies at its own cost. The Working Group, with the advice of the technical consultant and based on additional presentations by the sponsoring GSAIndependent Technical Advisor, will jointly determine the extent to which such individual studies are to be used to inform the GSP. Nothing in the agreement precludes an individual GSA from preparing its own GSP. If a GSA chooses to produce a separate GSP, a Coordination Agreement, per SGMA statute and DWR regulations, shall be developed between the preparers of the well-coordinated GSPs separate GSP and the Working Group. Incremental costs associated To xxxxxx the consideration of the beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the subbasin, the parties agree to the following: • Parties are committed to an inclusive and transparent process that proactively seeks the engagement and input of potentially impacted parties as identified in SGMA. Parties will work to develop protocols for public engagement, both at public workshops and during regular Working Group meetings. • Parties will work collectively to develop an agreed-upon outreach plan, but each GSA is responsible for guiding efforts within their respective jurisdictions. • Parties recognize the value in developing shared messages to ensure consistency; joint participation in outreach efforts is encouraged to xxxxxx consistency in message and concretely demonstrate the parties’ coordinated effort. • Parties recognize the need to conduct outreach in the near-term to better understand additional representation needs (e.g., environmental, tribal, riparian water users, overlying water users, etc.) beyond the signatories to this agreement. Parties commit to revisit the near-term collaboration structure, as necessary, to account for public feedback. An updated Stakeholder and Communication and Engagement Plan to be developed in Phase 1. Working Group members are encouraged to forward any media inquiries to the Water Forum. When talking to the press, Working Group members are asked to represent their own views only. Water Forum staff will coordinate with developing the Working Group to develop any needed “talking points” for media and other interested parties. Attachment 1 - Near-Term Decisions Below is a separatelisting of the possible near-term decisions to be made during Phase 1 and 2 of the GSP development. This list is based on the subbasin’s Proposition 1 work plan and is current as of June 2018. This list will be revisited and updated, well-coordinated GSP would be paid for separately by the GSA(s) proposing such effort.as needed,