HomeMy WebLinkAbout000254 Amendment (2) Flcrt �e1s AMENDMENTNW. 6TWT"E
AGRE0MENTFOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN
�lKE CITY OF PORT ANGELES
AND
U8ERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
OCA 2011-03
THIS AMENDMENT NO. h is num]o and entered into this 21u( day of Tuuuocy 2014, by
and between the City of Port Angeles, a non-charter code city ofthe State of Washington,
(hereinafter called the ^^Cll-`y") and Flenocu Eoviroozuoutoi Consultants, a Washington
Corporation authorized to do bumiuceu in the State o[Wmsbinetou, /hurcinof\oc called the
`^C()NSTJ[I/\Nl~^l
NOW, THEREFORE, io consideration of the representations and the terms, conditions,
covenants and ugcu000coim set Dodb in the original AGREEMENT and this
AMENDMENT,the parties hereto agree om fb|1nvvy:
SECTION I
The City entered into the existing AGREEMENT with C()NSL||L]Ay4I on December 9,
2O\l, (the /\[}RCIiMENT), Amendment No.Ioo March |3, 20l2, Amendment No. 2ou
June lg, 20l2, Amendment No. 3oo March 28, 20L3` Amendment No. 4on July |6, 2O|3,
and Amendment No. 5ou November l7` 2AL3.
-'
SECTION 2
1. AMENDMENT SCOPE OF WORK
A. The scope mf professional services \obcperformed iu amended h> include additional
work in Subtuek 16 and oucvv Sub\msk 32, as described in the attached Exhibit A6. This
amendment also authorizes reallocation of existing scope and budget for Subioak 31 and
reallocation ofSubtank 15 and Subtumk26 budgets as described oil the attached Exhibits
A6 and C6. The CONSULTANT abuJ| provide,, and furnish all services and nuu{criu|
necessary to accomplish the additional work in Suh<aok 16 and Su61aak 32 identified in
attached Exhibit/\h.
KU. TIME OF PERFORMANCE
A. All work inSubtamkm 16 and 32 shall bo completed io accordance with the schedule set
forth in the uUuohcd Exhibit B6 of Amendment h. The /\Aroornon1 rocoaioa in k>cco and
effect throughout the period for the Task, Pr 'octSYV02-2O|2, nruoti| I)soconbur3|, 20l5,
whichever is later.
0CA20/|-V3 Amendment 6.Page l January 2l.20l4
Ill. MAXIMUM COMPENSATION
The maximum compensation in Section V of the Agreement is amended to $2,938,057, all
increase of $156,731. The additional budget for Subtask 16 and Subtask 32 is listed in
Exhibit C6.
IV. EXHIBITS
This Amendment, including its exhibits, constitutes the entire Amendment, supersedes all
prior written or oral understanding related to the subject of this Agreement, and may only
be changed by written agreement by both parties. The following exhibits are hereby made
pail of this Amendment:
Exhibit A6 - Scope of Services
Exhibit B6 - Schedule of Performance of Subtasks
Exhibit C6 - Budget of Subtasks
SECTION 3 RATIFICATION
Except as modified herein, the original AGREEMENT is confirmed and ratified. In
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 6 to the
Agreement as of the date and year written above.
CITY OF PORT ANGELES CONSULTANT
...........
Theresa M. Wood
Dan McKeen, City Manager
Title: CFO, Herrera Environmental
ATTEST:
Janess Y'ur'd, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
William E. Bloor, City Attorney
OCA 2011-03 Amendment 6,Page 2 January 21,2014
EXHIBIT A6
S(.'OPE OF SERVI('ES (mmmendm)
The Q.S. Army Corps ofEngineers ruocn(iy indicated to the City of Port Angeles that uu /\ftor
the Fact(/\]lF}Nationwide Permit(NWP)could br processed to provide regulatory coverage for
the existing seawall tinder Clean Water Act Section 404 and Rivers and Harbors /\c1 Section lO.
The Corps further indicated to the City that the/\TF review should be combined with review of
the current proposed Landfill Stabilization pi,Qject and all associated work. This recent opinion
requires noodifiom1iouio the permitting plan tbrihc Landfill Stabilization project nudpreporoi{ou
o[additional permit application materials.
Modifications(o the work of Sub<nuk 16, described below, represent the scope ofservice
necessary to complete the permitting requirements for the LandD/{ Stabilization jeoL as
currently understood based on input from the Corps of Engineers. Additionally,Amendment 6
modifies the additional permit assistance oo the pr 'uc(idcu(ifisdin/\nucndruont5, SobtoVk3l.
Sub1ask 32 is added by this umoudoocn( in order|o por[bnn gcntoohniool investigations at the
East 304 co|\ in order provide insight into nubaur[uuc groundwater and soil conditions.
Groundwater monitoring of landfill gas wells GW], 2` and 3 within the East 304 Cell has
indicated water levels as 00 feet io the wells. Uncertainty associated with presence of'
groundwater depth, |utoru1 extent, and hydraulic properties maxooiu1ed with ncfuom io the East 304
Cell has resulted inconservative design assumptions. The current design assumes that
groundwater is present and there will be a need lor temporary (construction) and permanent
drainage dcwo1ociug systems to maintain long-term stability ofthe sloping refuse io ru000iu after
relocation, and a need for permanent groundwater level monitoring systems. ][the uncertainty
surrounding the occurrence of groundwater iw not resolved before bidding ie completed,this
uncertainty will be reflected in elevated bid ooa(m and could potentially cause schedule doloYm as
u contractor and the design team assess the need for these oleouentu, undcuokoiatmbid
aJiuntruuota. Based on these p 'eo<riaka, agnouodvva1erinvea<iga1iouinudYmuoeo[atudiug
souab.uodoo at the site is being implemented to better define: \\ presence and extent of
groundwater, 2) groundwater dewatering properties, and 3) soil samples targeting chemical
ioopeotx below the refuse.
BACKGROUND
The original Scope of Services dated December 9, 2011 provided for the CONSULTANTto
assess the City's 304-compliant section of the landfill for bluff stability, develop both short and
|oogtcoo etcu1cgioo to preven\reDuoc from spilling onto the beach, and design drainage revisions
to prevent erosion. Based ou the CUNSlJI.I)\NT`m findings, the CITY requested through
0C&2Ull'03 Amendment h.Page 3 January 2l.20l4
Addendum No. 2 that the C(]NsLl[TAY4l investigate solutions and develop conceptual design
alternatives which included subsurface investigations, gmnmnn�hicevouutonm, 304-uocop|iuo\
cell relocation scenarios, comparisons between on-site and off-site disposal, and cost analysis.
Five alternatives were developed that provided o comprehensive overview o[options and their
application to selection criteria including:
/l> Environmental impact
(2) Level o[bnhnobuctuue protection
(3}Cell encroachment(refuse at risk)
uU(5)Ability to monitor and manage future bluff retreat.
Alternative 3, which includes end wall protection mo the existing seawall,was recommended and
approved for design io20|3 and construction in20l4. The Scope of the Services provided under
Amendment included the development ofpermits and the 30% level design to resolve the issue
o[erosion of the marine bluffs that are currently threatening k` expose municipal solid waste and
allow that waste to spill onto the beach. The primary element ofthe design in waste relocation \o
manage the retreat Omzn the most n1-risk orsuo of the |ondO|| along the bluff.
The conceptual design Alternative 3 includes the following elements:
Solid waste located within the northern 150 feet ofthe eastern 304-compliant 1nudfi||
(approximately 265,000 cubic yards) will be relocated to a new cell of similar capacity on the
35l-compliant landfill. The volume was ootiroo1rd from the existing 304-uocop|iuoi landfill well
logs, historic photos, and subsequent borings (four in 2012). Remaining solid waste will be
configured for ustable closure that ties into the remaining east 3O4-onrny|iaut iondfi]1 cover
ays1crn. ln addition,the existing seawall will be upgraded at both east and west ends toprotect
shoreline and Dry Creek erosion and other impacts along the side and behind the seawall. Rip
rap and vertical revo1r000t (mudiul secant wall)will be o(i|ixcd within the approximate footprint
o[the existing rip rap located a1the east and west ends o[the seawall.
Interface with the bluff face outhe ouo\ end will be critical, as the bluff will migrate to the south
over time while the seawall remains stable. The orientation of the end wall protection will be
designed in anticipation of this zuig7cdimu to continue protection of the east end over time. The
end wall protection may be rip rap,vertical revetment, and/or some other form that may be
influenced not only by eventual function, but also by constructability. Seawall ends may have
additional improvements to assure proper seating between seawall fluid collection system and
outer end protection.
I3nib 304 and 351 cover systems will need tococct solid waste closure requirements designated
either bynV/\Cl73-35| or;V/\Cl73-3O4. The cover system may utilize un alternative, approved
liner system that may allow u2.5:l (H:l/) slope. /\ toe drain/intercept will bcdesigned to
intercept residual leachate and landfill gas. Exposed native slopes will be stabilized through
0CA20ll'03 Amendment 0.Page 4 Janomy2l.2Ol4
regrading,where possible. Surface water will proceed nudb through the newly open area o[the
304 East cell and utilize the existing Notch 2 drainage outlet. This outlet will require
modification,
Solid waste removals may extend 0u the west to include removals ( nptm 15 feet depth) along
portions of the central north (mini-cell) and Valley Cell. Both areas are not well defilled
regarding depth or extent and type nf solid waste. The Valley Cell rcouovu| will be reconfigured
for uVV/\C35l or3O4 landfill cover system. Waste removals through these areas anticipate bluff
erosion and surface water conveyance 1*Notch 2.
The 35 1-compliant landfill will be reopened to allow an approximate 271,000 cubic yard cell
development oil top and within the pennitted elevation and footprint boundaries. Solid waste will
bs placed in lifts 10 final grades between 3:| and 3.5:l (l+\/), depending oil the closure strategy.
/\ VV/\C 351 Closure system will be designed with gas wells and/or laterals extending into the
new cell. Cell preparation will begin with the existing cover system being removed from the new
co|i footprint. /\temporary gas management system will hc installed <o control oxygen intrusion
and gas exposure io the working area. The Uno| cover system will include lining system, gas
system, surface water system, and access.
/\n on-site construction access system will be established to nUovx solid v/uote transfer from the
3O4'uornpl}nn\landfill to the 35]-compliant landfill. Waste screening, staging areas, and control
entrances will be included.
Both aboroUoc and |uudO|| facility activities will require permitting. Shoreline work will likely
include activities below the mean higher high water(MHHW) line of the Strait of Juall de Fuca
including site access and construction activities for end wall pudoo\inn at the existing seawall.
Shoreline work also will occur below the ordinary high water mark of Dry Creek for placement
of large woody debris structures io provide roughness and habitat features that will tend to kocD
the atrcuoz {ba|p/ug from rnigcotingxigniriount|y. Permitting will include federal, state, and local
compliance. l.oudD||permitting will be required for opening and roclomiugdhe east 304-
compliant landfill and opening, filling, and operating the 35 1-compliant landfill. SbnrcUnc
permitting may require a scheduling off-set compared to landfill scheduling. End wall protection
nmu1edo\a oou|ysim and initial configurations will require early review byWashington State Fish
and Wildlife and Corps n[Engineers. This early review may delay selection mf tile end wall
approach, resulting in impacts on the Seawall Improvements and End Protection Technical
Memorandum and 3OY4design. l< ia not anticipated this will affect the final design schedule
uu|csm resolving permitting delays restricts finalizing the design.
The scope o[design services is divided in two phases. Phase l`Amendment 3 (April—August
2013) initiated permitting for both landfill and shoreline work; 304-cornpliant landfill and 35 1-
compliant landfill Engineering Report; 30%.Landfill conceptual design; and 30% seawall end
protection and Dry Creek conceptual design. Phase 2,Amendillent 4,(August 2013 —Spring
0C&20!l'03 Amendment 0.Page 5 January 2l.2Ol4
2014) included subsequent permitting efforts and completion of the design process consistent
with regulatory feedback.
Tbu State of Washington [)opadoncoto[Ecology (Eco\ogy) potentially has $2.5 noi||iou in
additional funding to support additional waste removal for the Port Angeles Landfill. The
certainty and tiruiugofthe $2.5 million may not bc known until the winter of20|4. The City is
anticipating this opportunity and within the P/\I.F [cl| Stabilization P 'co[bid package, an Add
Alternative will hc prepared that reflects additional waste removal and the subsequent landfill
and site adjustments to accommodate this removal. Amendment 5 subtasks 26 and 27 make
provision for the scope of service necessary to complete the design, permitting and additional
specification requirements 10 incorporate this alternative into the PALF Cell Stabilization Bid
Package. Additionally, Amendment 5 provides funding for investigation of recently discovered
pooling of groundwater ut the bottom o[the,East 3O4 Ce|| (Subtask 20) design o[working
platforms oo top nf the seawall io prevent work oo the shoreline(Subtuok 29), and for additional
puooit assistance oo the project /Subtaska30and3l).
The apeuifiomubtmakm involved for Amendment 6are:
Smbtamk l6—Permit Development & Applications
The original scope of work included preparing permit application materials for all upland and in-
water work related to the [.undGU Stabilization Project. Subsequent input from the U.S. Army
Corps o[Engineers indicated ongoing concern with the regulatory status of the existing seawall
such that it prevented the Corps from issuing new permits related to the seawall as proposed for
the Landfill Stabilization project. In response tnthis input,the City determined the best approach
to procure all required authorizations for the<irno'oritinol nms10 relocation work was to redesign
and/or eliminate any work within the regulatory boundary of the Corps. The City [bdhur
determined that the work proposed within Dry Creek could be accomplished as a separate and
'
complete prcject and was not interdependent with the Landfill Stabilization Project. As arcmuk
of these decisions, permitting work related to procuring Clean Water Act permits was not
completed, and budget resources were reallocated na other needs oothe project.
With the recent determination by the Cnqpm and the City to pursue an After the Fact ( \TF)
permit for the existing seawall, permit applications and associated materials for Clean Water Act
and related permits will be needed. The ATF permit will be combined with Corps pennittingTor
the planned in-water work in Dry Creek, as well as ftdure beach nourishment and
decommissioning ofun existing groundwater monitoring well |nco1od on the beach within Corps
jurisdiction. Amendment incorporates revisions to the scope and budget 1n respond to these
permitting needs.
Smbtamk1&-2— Permitting
Sw6taxk 86.2.1 —]0ry Creek Supplemental Permitting
OCA 2011-03 Amendment 6,Page 6 January 21,2014
Materials prepared forthe Dry Creek shoreline substantial permit will be submitted to the
Washington Department n[Ecology ) for o Hydraulic Project Approval (14P/\}.
Clearing activities within the Dry Creek ravine related to rcoJigomcrd of the Dry Creek Aoonos
road will require u Forest Practices Pen-nit from Washington Department o[Natural Resources
(VV[)NR).
Activities:
&} Compile materials k`r0PA submittal to YJDF\V.
B) Prepare the required application and ooruyi|c permit oou(eriu|u ±braubnmiUn1 to VV[)NR
for u Forest Practices Permit
Deliverables:
A} Draft Environmental Documents\oCity
B) Dual Environmental Documents |oCity
Smbbamk l6.2^2—Dry Creek Shoreline Permit
()6ioo{ivc: Prepare City of Port Angeles shoreline pmnnh upp|iouhoo rnu{cdulm for Dry Creek
structures br1vpv the ordinary high water mark.
As noted K»roubtayk 16.2` these materials will be submitted to VV[)PW for anllP/\. Materials for
the City of Port Angeles Shoreline Permit will bc developed i000 junction with the Section 4O4
/\IF permit package for Corps of Engineers review (see mu6took l6.4). The budget identified tn
development of the JARPA in this subtask is dependent on concurrent development of the
Section 404 permit application.
Activities:
/\) Prepare the following permit and support documents
o. SEP/\, specific to the Dry Creek in-water work
b. J/\RP/\, specific tm the Dry Creek in-water work
o. Addendum to the Critical Areas Report prepared for the Landfill Stabilization
project shoreline permit
d. Mitigation Technical Memorandum
0) Coordinate nm needed and requested by the City with permit agency stakeholders
during permit review.
[)u|ivcrob|em:
A\ Draft Environmental Documents to City
]0) Final Environmental Documents tmCity
0CA20|l-O3 Amendment 6.Page 7 January zl.20l4
Snbtmmk 16.3—Section 404/Sootipm10 Permit for Existing Seawall and All New Work
Ob�jective: Prepare permit application materials for uSection 404/Section ]O permit process for
the existing seawall and all proposed actions, including landfill grading, revisions(o the seawall
wing walls, relocation mfthe Dry Creek ravine access road,work within Dry Creek, ongoing
beach nourishment, and dcoomnrnimyioniog of'unexisting groundwater monitoring well located on
the beach nJiucmolto the Strait uf Juan doFuca.
Corps review related to the existing meavva]| will be pursuant to on After the Puo{(/\IF) permit to
resolve the yto1uy of the existing seawall. The Corps has indicated (per meeting ooDecember 12,
2013)that the JARPA submitted for the ATF permit should specifically address the criteria and
conditions identified in Nationwide Permit(NYVP) i3.
Activities:
A} Prepare the following permit and support documents
y. ]ARPA
b. Biological Evaluation (BE) for compliance with the Endangered Species Act and
related laws.
8\ Compile all required nno|ehu|e for submittal to Corps b`,ATF permit process,
ioo|odingJ/\QP/\,QE, nuo1uriolaondpcnuitoo|roodydcvc|opeduudpoocursd5brdhe
[oudfi{l 81ohi1izn1ioo p jccL and any relevant materials previously prepared for the
existing seawall.
Q Coordinate as needed and requested by the City with permit agency stakeholders
during permit review.
Deliverables:
/\) Draft Environmental Documents to City
B> Final Environmental Documents toCity
Smbtusk 3I (Amendment 5>—Dry Creek Permit Applications
Remaining work in the scope of Subtask 31 is incorporated with revisions into Amendment 6
Sub1nak |6.2os described above. The remaining approved budget for Subtoak3} will bo
transferred to Subtaak 16 and reallocated to the remaining activities in Su[toyk 16.
Task 32— Monitoring Well Groundwater Investigation
[)c1ennine if refuse is ao1uza1cd, develop iofbouaii0000the elevation and |m1onaL
extent ofsaturation, and determine the hydraulic properties of refuse materials. Soil
characterization will roDun estimates of refuse depth and aid in evaluating and permitting proper
disposal of any contaminated soil. Based onthis, determine if construction dev/a1edugvvUl be
OCA20)l'03 Amendment».Page 8 January 2l.2Ul4
necessary, and determine whether permanent dewatering and monitoring will bo necessary. Knot
pcsacuL zon)uve de`vatcr ng elements from the bidding. If necessary, refine the existing
(conservative)design and assumptions according to new data.
Activities
A. Install Groundwater Monitoring Wells.
o. Conduct two borings using rotv-sooiudrilling.
b. Install one groundwater pimaonnttor/inoui1odugwell with ro<o-sonic drilling
methods and complete as u4-incb diameter monitoring well.
c. Collect samples of refuse and soil. Qualitatively assess the anozplcs for moisture
content and perching. Submit soil samples for olisznioo| characterization o[native
soil below refuse.
B. Monitor Groundwater and Test Aquifer Properties.
o. /\aeosm presence of groundwater io the boringo/weU.
b. if groundwater im present, provide and setup pump and power b` conduct
hydraulic tests (slug tests or pumping tcaim)on the vve|\s and determine aquifer
ponp:dica.
o. Drill one boring further into underlying soil and conduct infiltration test to
estimate potential rate of infiltration oil'storm water into underlying soil.
C. Collect Groundwater Samples.
o. If groundwater is present, oo\|oot gTvundp/o1ez discharge sonmp|ua and analyze for
chemicals of concern to aid in evaluating and permitting of disposal options
during temporary and permanent dop/utnriug.
D. llofioe design of temporary and permanent drvvatmcing systems.
a. /\owouy orod for construction dep/uteriug, and ;cviac aycc language accordingly.
b. Revise permanent den'utcriogtrench design, as necessary.
c. Develop nr refine permanent groundwater level monitoring needs.
Deliverables:
A ooeinoruodunm summarizing data and testing results. |leau|1e will be included in revised
Plans and Specifications.
A. /\uosmu will be suitable without road improvements for tracked drilling equipment.
B. Disposal of drilling and testing derived wastes at Transfer Station or1ouohn1ocollection
oyatcro.
C. Pump presently operating in(3YV-1 will be available and suitable for use for pumping
rcoto.
0CA20l\'03 Amendment 6.Page 9 Januory2l.20|4
EXHIBIT B6
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE OF SUBTASKS
• Subtaoki6.2.l,]IPA— Submittal shall becompleted by March 3l" 2O|4
• Suhtmak \h.2.|,Forest Practices Permit—Shall bo completed by March ]l, 2Ol4
• Subtmyk l6.2.2, Dry Creek Shoreline Permit— Shall becompleted by March 3l, 2U|4
• Suktuok 16.3, Section 404/Section 10 Permit for Existing Suavvu|l and All New Work—
[)rm{\ materials shall be completed by February 28, 2Vl4
• Sob(oakl6.3, Section 4O4/Socdon ]0 Permit for Existing Seawall and All New Work—
Final oontodn|m shall be 000up[c1cd by May 2^ 2014 or two week after City kunmrni(s
review comments.
• Task 32 Monitoring Well Groundwater Investigation shall he completed by March 2Ol4.
END 0FEXHIBIT
0r^20ll-08 Amendment 6.Page l0 Jmnmn 21,2014
EXHIBIT C6
BUDGET OF StJBTASKS
Subtask Amendment 6 Budget
Subtask 16.2,Permitting
(new Subtasks 16.2.1 and 16.2.2) $43,100_
Subtask 31, Dry Creek Permitting,
reallocated scope and budget -35,000
SUBTOTAL, Subtask 16.2 $8,100
Subtask 16.3, Section 404/Section 10 Permit for
Existing Seawall and All New Work $66,300
Subtask 15, Cumulative Effects Analysis, reallocated
budget -13,000
Subtask 26, Additional Refuse Removal Conceptual
Design, reallocated budget -20,000
SUBTOTAL, Subtask 16.3 $33,300
Subtask 32,Monitoring Well Groundwater
Investigation $115,331
TOTAL AMENDMENT 6 $156,731
END OF EXHll31'r
OCA 2011-03 Amendment 6,Page 11 January 21,2014