HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.640 Original Contract
"
-.r , .. ',#
5. ~<./D
AMENDMENT NO.1 TO THE
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE
THE CITY OF PORT ANGELES
AND
BROWN AND CALDWELL
#02-27
THIS A~ENI?~ENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT is made and entered into this .?1~'t:4..day
of ft.l , 2004, by and between THE CITY OF PORT ANGELES, a non-
charter c de city of the State of Washington, (hereinafter called the "CITY") and BROWN
AND CALDWELL, Inc., a California Corporation (hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT").
WHEREAS, the CITY entered in to an AGREEMENT with the CONSULTANT on May 2, 2003,
and
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to amend the AGREEMENT to revise the Scope of Work,
Budget, and Time of Performance
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above representations and the terms, conditions,
covenants and agreements set forth in the original AGREEMENT and this AMENDMENT, the
parties hereto agree as follows:
I .... REVISED SCOPE OF WORK
The revised scope of professional services to be performed and the results to be achieved by
the CONSULTANT shall be as detailed in the attached Exhibit A and shall include all services
and material necessary to accomplish the work.
II TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The work for all Tasks shall be completed by January 31,2005. The schedule for completion
of each task shall be as detailed in Exhibit B.
III MAXIMUM COMPENSATION
The CONSULTANT'S total compensation and reimbursement under the original Agreement
and Amendment No.1 are outlined in the attached Exhibit C. The budget for any Task may
be further adjusted by mutual agreement without an amendment to the Agreement, as long as
the maximum compensation amount of $391,141.00 is not exceeded.
Amendment No 1 to Brown and Caldwell Consultant Agreement
Page 1 of2
, ,
IV SIGNATURES
Except as modified herein, the original Agreement and its Exhibits shall remain in effect.
In WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment NO.1 to the
Agreement as of the day and year first written above.
CITY OF PORT ANGELES:
QQ~oow
MAYOR
CONSULTANT:
~'{"'LU~~
TITLE: ~iAE ~
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i1n~ &AY4j1~
C ATTORNEY
ATTEST:
,&q~ )~II
BECKY U 0 CITY LERK
Amend~enll~o I to Brown and Caldwell Consultant Agreement
Page 2 of2
AMENDMENT NO.1 TO THE AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PORT ANGELES AND BROWN AND CALDWELL
FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
This scope of work is for engineering services to be provided by Brown and Caldwell (the
Consultant) in connection with wastewater and combined sewer overflow (CSO) issues of the
City of Port Angeles, Washington (City).
The six tasks comprising this project and the scope of work for each task are as follows:
. Task 1 - III - Roof Drain Disconnection Pilot
. Task 2 - Condition Assessment of Sanitary Sewer Collection System
. Task 3 - CSO Comprehensive Plan Update
. Task 4 - Direct Wastewater Services
. Task 5 - Treatment Plant Rerating
. Task 6 - EP A Nine Minimum Controls for CSO
These tasks are further described as follows:
Task 1.
III - Roof Drain Disconnection Pilot
Objective. Task 1 involves the continuation of a pilot project by the City to evaluate the cost
effectiveness and institutional barriers of a City-led roof drain disconnection program.
Approach. Consultant services will include the following:
. Task management.
. Update the technical memorandum summarizing the work of the roof drain disconnection
project with additional information after completion of the construction outlining the
construction facts, final costs and addressing the "lessons learned" from the pilot project
to be used in the city-wide disconnection program.
. Acquire the processed Winter 200312004 flow monitoring data for the control and
rehabilitation basins, and the Winter 200312004 precipitation data from the City. Prepare
data sets for use with Brown and Caldwell modeling programs.
Exhibit A - Page 1 of 16
April 2004
. Calibrate Brown and Caldwell III model to the post-construction (Winter 2003/2004)
flow data for the rehabilitation basin. Run III model for the control basin using the
Winter 2000,2001, and 2002 calibration and Winter 2003/2004 precipitation data.
Comparing the predicted and observed Winter 2003 flows for the control basin is a test
that provides confidence that the III model accurately captures the hydrologic behavior of
the basin. If adjustments are deemed necessary for the control basin model, these same
adjustments are assumed to be necessary to the pre-construction rehabilitation basin
model. We will also compare pre- and post-rehabilitation peak flows with control basin
peak flows.
. Once it is verified that the III model is accurately reproducing local hydrology, we will
run two long-term III model simulations of the rehabilitation basin. The first model run
will simulate pre-rehabilitation conditions and the other will simulate post-rehabilitation
conditions. The two long-term simulations will each produce a long time-series of hourly
flow projections. We will perform statistical analysis of the flow projections to estimate
the reduction in the once per year peak flow and volume resulting from the roof drain
disconnection pilot program.
. Update the technical memorandum that summarizes each aspect of the pilot program with
post-rehabilitation flow monitoring conclusions about the effects of roof drain
disconnection, and implications for city-wide roof drain disconnection ordinance.
. Based upon the disconnection program costs and removal effectiveness, present
disconnection cost effectiveness in terms of cost per peak once year flow.
. Prepare a final draft of the recommendation and the cost justification for a roof drain
disconnection ordinance. This draft will incorporate feedback from the City attorney and
the results of the pilot project rehabilitation. It will include recommendations for
exemptions, and construction requirements.
City Responsibilities.
. Provide construction and City engineering/inspection cost information for the roof drain
disconnection proj ecl.
. Provide flow and precipitation data for Winter 2003/2004.
. Review and comment on draft recommendations for a roof drain disconnection
ordinance.
Deliverables.
. Update pilot study memorandum. The memorandum will summarize each of the
elements of the pilot study, including choosing the pilot area, pre-rehabilitation flow
monitoring, source detection/smoke testing, construction, post-rehabilitation flow
monitoring conclusions about the effects of roof drain disconnection, cost-effectiveness,
Exhibit A - Page 2 of 16
April 2004
and implications for city-wide roof drain disconnection ordinance and relationship with
the City's CSO program.
. Final draft of the recommendations for a city-wide roof drain disconnection ordinance.
Exhibit A - Page 3 of 16
April 2004
Task 2. Condition Assessment of Sanitary Sewer Collection System
Objective. Work on Task 2 is directed towards providing direction to the City to develop
replacement schedule and costs for the sanitary sewer collection system. Included in this task is
the preparation of inspection plans for the existing PS 4 force main and a section of the 48-inch
diameter industrial waterline (IWL).
Approach. The approach of the task is broken up into the following subtasks:
Subtask 2.1: Criteria for Inspection of the PS 4 Forcemain and the Industrial Waterline.
The use ofthe existing PS 4 forcemain and the 48-inch IWL is proposed as part ofthe
alternatives for CSO reduction. As part of the determination of feasible alternatives, the
condition and characteristics of the pipelines need to be known.
Consultant services will include the following:
. Provide criteria and listing of necessary testing to determine pipeline characteristics.
This includes providing inspection schedule, cost, and recommendations for any
necessary outside inspection specialists
. Provide names of qualified inspection specialists and estimated costs.
. Provide one site visit during the field-testing of each pipeline (total of2).
City Responsibilities:
. Review the pipeline inspection criteria.
. Perform the necessary testing and inspection as required, including the hiring of any
required outside inspection specialists.
Deliverables:
. Draft Technical Memorandum that outlines the required inspection program criteria.
. Final Technical Memorandum, including results of the pipeline testing.
Subtask 2.2: Development of Prioritization of the Sanitary Sewer Collection System
A program for the inspection and prioritized repair or replacement of the sanitary sewer
collection system shall be developed. This subtask will outline the program goals, criteria
needed to identify the collection system critical elements, and schedule, annual cost for
inspection, and estimated refurbishment/replacement.
Consultant services will include the following:
Exhibit A - Page 4 of 16
April 2004
. Development of draft criteria for prioritizing the initial elements of the collection system.
. Identify critical sewers.
. Provide a workshop with City staff to provide prioritization of the collection system
based on analysis of the characteristics of critical sewers.
. Provide training to City staff in the ranking of pipelines and manhole condition based on
existing defects and characteristics.
. Provide technical memorandum on an inspection and repair/replacement program for the
sanitary sewer collection system. This memorandum will describe the advantages and
disadvantages of techniques for the rehabilitation and replacement of gravity sewers and
manholes.
. Development of draft annual inspection plan.
City Responsibilities:
. Attendance of City staff at Critical Sewer Prioritization Workshop
. Attendance of Public Works and Maintenance staff for defect ranking training.
. Review technical memorandum on the sanitary sewer collection system inspection and
repair/replacement program that outlines the advantages and disadvantages of techniques
for rehabilitation and replacement of gravity sewers and manholes.
Deliverables:
One draft (electronic copy) and one final (one hard copy and one electronic copy) technical
memorandum that describes an inspection and repair/replacement program for the sanitary sewer
collection system. This memorandum will describe the advantages and disadvantages of
different techniques for rehabilitation and replacement of gravity sewers and manholes.
Exhibit A - Page 5 of 16
April 2004
Task 3. CSO Comprehensive Plan Update
Objective. Task 3 involves the development of an update to the "City of Port Angeles
Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Reduction Plan" dated January 1994. The update is required
as part of the City's NPDES Permit, Section lIE, and shall comply with the requirements of
WAC 173-245-090 (2). In addition to the WAC requirements, this task will result in the
definition or development of the following:
1. A preliminary capital improvement program (CIP) necessary to achieve compliance with
the WAC once per year control requirement by 2015 has been developed. Consultant
will further define this CIP
2. Refine prioritized construction sequence and cash flow schedule for identified projects.
3. Identification and scheduling of permit requirements.
4. Analysis ofthe City's funding capacity and potential basis for negotiating
implementation schedule beyond 2015.
5. Development of a detailed CSO CIP, financing program, and rate implementation
recommendations.
Approach. Table 3-1 provides the currently required information that is necessary in the CSO
Comprehensive Reduction Plan to meet the requirements ofW AC 173-245. Subtasks to provide
the work necessary for a comprehensive plan update that meets the requirements of WAC 173-
245 are shown in Table 3-1, and are described below. Additional tasks necessary for CIP
refinement are also included.
Exhibit A - Page 6 of 16
April 2004
Table 3-1. Required Elements of CSO Plan and Updates
Subtask Required for Update of
WAC Part of 1994 CSO CSO Comprehensive Work Required
173-245 Plan Requirements Comprehensive Plan Plan
Note 1 040(2)(a) Flow mOnitoring and samphng
+ +
040(2)(a) Model of CSO events @ each site + +
Note 1 040(2)(a) Possible sediment sampling Note 2 Note 2
41 040(2)(b) Control Alternatives Analysis Complete alternatives analysis and selection
+
4.2 040(2)(c) Selected project effectiveness analysis Long-term (6-yr) model run to define performance
+
4.2 040(2)(c) Impact of project on treatment plant Estimate impact on effluent quality
+
4.2 040(2)(c) Impact of project receiving water quality Estimate expected changes in receiving water quality
+
4.2 040(2)(c) Project const and O&M cost projections Estimate capital and O&M costs of proposed projects
+
4.2 040(2)(c) Technical feasibility Document technical feasibility through on-site tesling or expenence
+ elsewhere
4.2 040(2)(c) SEPA compliance Document SEPA compliance via checklist
+
4.2 040(2)(d) Pnorlty ranking Prioritize individual projects
+ +
4.2 040(2)(d) Cost-effectiveness analysis Demonstrate cost-effective achievement of Ecology regulation
+
4.2 040(2)(d) Project environmental Impacts Descnbe in general with possible mitigation
+
42 040(2)(e) Project plan schedule for next five years Define and schedule near term projects (5 year CIP)
+ +
4.4 040(2)(e) Provide plan for eventual achievement of requirements at all outfalls
Long term plan for "greatest possible with cost flow projection and rate Impacts
reduction at earliest possible date" +
43 090(2)(a) Describe impact of past CSO projects
Assessment of effectiveness of CSO
projects to-date N/A +
4.2 090(2)(b) Reevaluation of priority rankings N/A Included in response to 040(2)d
+
4.2 090(2)(c) List of projects for the next 5 years Included in response to 040(2)e
+ +
Note I CIty will perform the work reqUIred and will provide the data to Consultant for inclusIOn In Plan Update Flow momtormg data will be proVided by the CIty as part of Task 3
Note 2 Sediment samphng IS reqUIred where a hlstoncallfnpact IS dlscemlble.
Exhibit A - Page 7 of 16
April 2004
Subtask 3.1: Continuation of Flow Monitorin2
The Consultant will use previous winter flow data to review the accuracy of the model
that was developed and calibrated using the historical flow information and the flow
monitoring information. The future flow and alternatives will be adjusted based on
additional flow information provided by the additional flow monitoring. Brown and
Caldwell will make recommendations on the future flow monitoring program.
Final adjustments to the alternative's evaluation sizing will be made after the second year
of pilot project verification flow monitoring for III reduction effectiveness is complete.
Impacted pages of the report will be updated at that time.
Subtask 3.2: Update of CSO Reduction Alternatives Technical Memorandum
A draft technical memorandum describing proposed CSO control alternatives was
submitted to the City as part of a previous contract. Brown and Caldwell will incorporate
the City's comments on the technical memorandum into an updated alternatives analysis
memorandum suitable for achieving the WAC requirements. The updated memorandum
will include estimates of capital and O&M costs, and relative ranking of environmental
and socio-economic factors. Requirements and options to accommodate growth in
service area will be examined. Examination of the IWL and PS 4 forcemain must be
completed under Task 2 herein before this update can be completed. The updated
memorandum will be incorporated in the CSO Comprehensive Reduction Plan Update
for submittal to Ecology.
Additional evaluation of Rayonier surplus tanks being considered for City purchase will
also be included in the Technical Memorandum update. This evaluation will be as
described in our March 2, 2004 transmittal.
Subtask 3.3: Evaluation of the Selected CSO Reduction Proiect
After selection of the CSO reduction projects to be implemented, Brown and Caldwell
will provide in-depth analysis for incorporation into the Draft CSO Reduction Plan
Update and CIP development. The following information will be provided as part of the
evaluation:
. Treatment requirements and impacts on the treatment plant
. Change in CSO pollutant discharge
. Volume reduction
. Impact at CSO outfalls during phases of construction
. Prioritization of construction phasing
. Cash flow schedule
. Financing Plan and Rate Impact Analysis
. Permitting requirements
. Land requirements
Exhibit A - Page 8 of 16
April 2004
. Requirements to accommodate growth (Tribal dwelling units)
Fact sheets will be prepared for each individual project included in the reduction plan.
These will describe the project and include pertinent information from the above list
specific to each location. Collectively, these will comprise the long term CIP for the
reduction plan as well as the projects for the next 5-years submitted to Ecology.
The evaluation of potential water quality impacts will focus on the expected reductions in
CSO flows and pollutant loads resulting from the proposed measures prescribed in the
CSO Reduction Plan update. The budget assumes that evaluation of receiving water
quality and sediment quality will not be required.
The potential environmental impacts of existing CSO discharges will be evaluated to help
establish priorities for the proposed CSO reduction projects. This evaluation will be
based on available information regarding the location, approximate volume, and water
quality associated with each of the City existing CSOs.
The completed subtask 3.3 provides the majority of information needed for the Draft
CSO Reduction Comprehensive Plan Update for submittal to Ecology. More
importantly, it defines the projects, schedules and costs to meet WAC requirements by
2015, which is necessary to define a financing plan and to begin design of projects as
necessary to meet that schedule.
Subtask 3.4: Assessment and Evaluation of Effectiveness of 1994 CSO Reduction
Plan
Consultant will evaluate the work that was accomplished to date as described in the 1994
CSO Reduction Comprehensive Plan. The Assessment and Evaluation will be
incorporated into the CSO Reduction Plan Update. This work will be accomplished
through review ofthe annual CSO reports that have been submitted to the Department of
Ecology by the City, and review of projects undertaken since 1994.
In this subtask, we will complete any modifications to the reduction plan found in City
review of earlier products, and prepare the submittal to Ecology.
The CSO Plan Update will include a statement to the effect that each project prescribed
in the Plan will undergo SEP A review in accordance with WAC 197-11.
The draft CSO Reduction Comprehensive Plan will include project descriptions and
evaluation for projects based on flow projections that do not include the disconnection of
roof drains from the system. Modifications based on roof drain disconnection will be
examined in detail during design of each of the recommended facilities and discussed in
subsequent CSO plan updates.
After the post-construction flow monitoring is complete, the system will be reviewed as
adjusted based on this change in flow.
Exhibit A - Page 9 of 16
April 2004
Subtask 3.5: Predesil!n of Selected CSO Reduction Prol!ram
The intention of the Predesign is to identify characteristics, location, sizing, and
construction constraints for each phase of the construction of the program. Adjustments
will be made to the selected program based on the hydraulic effectiveness of the roof
drain disconnection program. Included will be preliminary plan and profile sheets of
conveyance system improvements, details for PS replacement and upgrades, connection
details to the existing Rayonier Outfall, recommended treatment plant modifications,
identification of required permits and easements, environmental requirements, and any
required land purchases.
City Responsibilities.
. Provide annual CSO reports submitted to the Department of Ecology since
1994.
. Provide review comments on deliverables.
. Provide flow and sediment sampling data.
Deliverables.
. Revised Preliminary CSO Reduction Alternative Evaluation technical
memorandum.
. One hard copy and electronic copy ofthe recommended alternative
evaluation from Task 3.3. This will comprise much ofthe CSO plan
update for Ecology submittal.
. Construction schedule and financing plan for implementation by 2015.
. Fact sheets for recommended projects.
. Draft CSO Comprehensive Reduction Plan Update report.
Exhibit A - Page 10 of 16
April 2004
Task 4.
Direct Wastewater Services
Objective. To support the City in wastewater service projects.
Approach. The scope of Task 4 will be on an as-needed basis as determined by the City.
At the direction of the City, Brown and Caldwell will provide labor up to hour and
budget limits as provided in the attached budget for responding to questions and other
activities. Any additional labor beyond the indicated hours and budget will require a
change in scope and budget.
City Responsibilities.
. Provide activity request to Brown and Caldwell.
. Approve estimated schedule, estimated hours and deliverables of each
requested activity.
Deliverables.
. As required for requested services
Exhibit A - Page 11 of 16
April 2004
Task 5.
Treatment Plant Rerating
Objective. The primary objective of the rerating is to determine how to maximize the
hydraulic capacity ofthe treatment plant while satisfying permit requirements,
operational and maintenance requirements, and flexibility inherent in the proposed
blending regulations within acceptable risks. Of equal importance will be to identify the
bottlenecks in the plant and prioritize improvements to add additional capacity to the
plant. These improvements may include changes in operating characteristics, removal of
bottlenecks, and/or construction of new units.
Approach. The process analysis and recommendations will be a collaborative effort of
the City operations and engineering staff with Brown and Caldwell as indicated below.
Brown and Caldwell recognizes that the City staff will ultimately be responsible for
operating the plant and meeting permit conditions.
Consultant services will include the following:
. Task management
. Collection and review of historical performance data.
. Evaluation of the integrity of the sampling and analytical protocols, and flow
monitoring equipment.
. Plant hydraulic profile evaluation and outfall hydraulics.
. Evaluation ofthe primary and secondary clarifier performance.
. Biological process evaluation.
. Solids mass balance.
. Solids treatment train unit process evaluation.
. Addressing air quality and odor control concerns relating to rerating.
. Preparation of a rerating report
The above-described scope of services are further defined as follows:
Collection and Review of Historical Performance Data (Consultant). Three years of
performance data will be compiled and reviewed to assess plant performance in response
to seasonal changes in wastewater characteristics and environmental conditions. Data for
primary effluent, trickling effluent and final effluent, and operational parameters such as
SRT, flows, solids generation rate, and oxygen uptake rate would be part of this review.
Hourly influent data would facilitate the estimation of storm water flows through the
plant. A process objective workshop is recommended as follows:
. Process Objective Workshop (Consultant and City). Conduct one workshop
with City operations and engineering staff and Brown and Caldwell to identify
minimum and maximum operating and process criteria including
. Number of units in service / out of service to meet peak demands
Exhibit A - Page 12 of 16
April 2004
. Attended operations
. Flow blending options
. Effluent limits
. Liquid versus solids stream inventories and need to provide peak capacity
. Reserve capacity
. Construction versus operations flexibility
Evaluation of the integrity of the sampling and analytical protocols and flow
monitoring equipment (Consultant and City). Sampling locations will be verified for
their suitability, and analytical protocols used in the laboratory will be verified. Plant
flow calibration will be verified. Sampling for model calibration will be discussed with
plant staff to confirm the validity of the approach. Any modifications will be
incorporated into a program that will meet plant staff approval.
Plant hydraulic profile evaluation (Consultant). The plant hydraulic profile will be
verified using Consultant's Profile software calibrated to field conditions using the
following procedure:
. Conduct field reconnaissance and review plant data.
. Construct hydraulic model of liquid stream unit processes.
. Calibrate hydraulic model to field conditions.
. Identify hydraulic bottlenecks.
Primary clarifier evaluation (Consultant and City). This analysis will establish the
maximum capacity of the primary and secondary clarifiers, identify inefficiencies, and
determine if any adjustments are required to maximize clarifier performance using the
following procedure:
. Statistically correlate TSS and BOD removals with hydraulic and mass
loading.
. Conduct field inspection of clarifiers.
. Conduct full scale TSS testing.
. Conduct settling tests to measure settleable solids fraction.
Secondary clarifier evaluation (Consultant and City). This analysis will establish the
maximum capacity ofthe primary and secondary clarifiers, identify inefficiencies, and
determine if any adjustments are required to maximize clarifier performance using the
following procedure:
. Statistically correlate TSS and BOD removals with hydraulic and mass
loading.
. Conduct field inspection of clarifiers.
. Conduct full scale DSS, ESS, FSS, and TSS testing.
. Conduct settling tests to create batch-settling curves and conduct state point
analysis.
Exhibit A - Page 13 of 16
April 2004
Biological Process Evaluation. The following services will need to be performed in
order to evaluate the biological processes:
· Summer Sampling Program (City). Over a two-week period, data are taken
simultaneously of various streams in the plant to provide the information
required for a steady-state calibration of the model. A period during the
warmest time of the year is selected so as to observe performance at the
highest annual wastewater temperature. There are two elements to the
wastewater characterization study: (1) wastewater sampling and (2) mass
balance sampling:
o Wastewater Sampling. Daily composite sampling is performed over a
two-week period. For each sampling day, raw influent, secondary
influent (i.e., primary effluent inclusive of any supernatant return
streams), trickling filter effluent and secondary effluent are sampled
and analyzed for total and soluble BOD, COD, and phosphorus, TSS,
TVSS, NH3-N, TKN, N03-N. Samples must be 24-hour composite
samples. Mixed liquor and waste activated sludge (WAS) are sampled
on a once-per-day grab basis and sampled for MLSS, ML VSS, and
COD. Parallel data on operational parameters such as OUR, SVI,
mixed liquor temperature will also be collected. The influent to the
trickling filter will be analyzed separately for COD fractions.
o Mass Balance Sampling. It is anticipated that better raw data may be
available for plant influent flows and loads than for internal plant
sludge and liquid streams. Brown and Caldwell will work with the
City to derive or estimate missing data; however, new monitoring or
metering installations or data collection may be necessary. Data as
daily grabs over a two-week period are preferable. These should
include solids stream recycle flows and concentrations.
· Model Calibration (Consultant). The data from the sampling program and
analysis ofthe historical database will be used to calibrate the Trifil model.
. Analysis of Flow Data and Construction of Storm Flow Model
(Consultant). One hourly influent flow data for one year will be reviewed.
Data for storm flow periods will be analyzed to construct a regression model
for a typical storm flow input to the plant. This model will be superimposed
upon the diurnal input to the process model so as to facilitate the simulation of
storm flow conditions thfough the plant.
· Biological Process Evaluation - Winter Sampling Program (City). This
task will be repeated during a l4-day period at the coldest time of the year to
observe plant performance at the lowest annual wastewater temperature.
Exhibit A - Page 14 of 16
April 2004
. Biological Process Evaluation - Verification of Model Calibration
(Consultant). Data from the winter calibration period will be used to modify
model temperature coefficients if necessary and to verify the model
calibration with an independent set of data.
. Blending Options (Consultant) - The ratio of primary only and secondary
blending as required to meet effluent permit conditions will be identified.
Solids Mass Balance (Consultant and City). Understanding how solids are inventoried,
accumulated and consumed in the liquid and solids stream processes is key to
understanding the capacity ofthe whole plant. The mass balance links the results ofthe
previous tasks together to assess the tradeoffs between increasing performance in one
section of the plant versus another. This task will be accomplished by:
. Evaluate solids data and previous task results.
. Prepare numerical solids mass balance model.
. Calibrate and analyze model results.
. Prepare mass balance diagrams.
Solids Treatment Train Evaluation (Consultant and City). The capacity of the
components making up the solids treatment train will be evaluated from vendors'
performance estimates.
Addressing air quality and odor control concerns relating to rerating (Consultant).
The nature of current odor concerns will be identified. Air quality and odor control
issues relating to the proposed increased flows will be evaluated. Alternatives for
controlling odor to less than detectable at the property line will be developed and
evaluated. A recommended odor control capital program and/or operational changes will
be identified, and cost estimates will be prepared.
Draft Rerating Report (Consultant). Based upon mutually agreed upon assumptions for
plant operation, capacity curves will be developed for all unit processes and integrated
into capacity charts for different seasonal conditions, blending options, and/or different
discharge conditions. A report will be prepared which will contain the results of the
above-referenced tasks. It will contain recommendations for implementing potential
changes in operating strategies and upgrades as determined by the capacity charts.
City Responsibilities.
. The City will have sampling and workshop responsibilities as described above.
Deliverables.
. Draft Rerating Report will be prepared.
Exhibit A - Page 15 of 16
April 2004
Task 6.
EP A Nine Minimum Controls for CSO
Objective. In response to the US EPA's 30 October 2003 Inspection Report, Consultant
recommends the following scope of services to immediately address the EPA's Nine
Minimum Controls for CSO.
Approach. Consultant services will include the following:
. Consultant will work with City personnel to prepare a Draft and Final Pollution
Prevention Plan relating to CSO for submittal to the Washington Department of
Ecology and the EP A.
. Consultant will prepare a design for enhanced screenings control at the treatment
plant. The design will consist of a process flow diagram plan and vendor
information for recommend improvements to the screenings collection at the
treatment plant.
City Responsibilities.
. Review Draft Pollution Prevention Plan and provide comments.
Deliverables.
. Draft and Final Pollution Prevention Plan relating to CSO
. Enhanced screenings control design.
Exhibit A - Page 16 of 16
April 2004
ID Task Name Start FInish
6
1 2004 Amendment Authonzed Fn 4/9/04 Fn 4/9/04
2
3 : Task 1 - 11\ Roof Drain Disconnection Pilot 100 days i Mon 4/12/04 i Fri 8/27/04
I
4 13 City Gathers Roof Drain Cost Information 40 days i Mon 4/12/04 I Fri 6/4/04
5 13 City Provides Flow & Preclpltabon Data for Winter 2003/2004 40 days I Mon 4/12/04 Fri 6/4/04
i
6 13 Consultant Prepares Modeling Runs with Newly Acquired Data 30 days ~ Mon 6/7/04 ! Fn 7/16/04
7 13 Consultant Updates 1/1 Technical Memorandum 11 days I Fri 7/16/04 i Fn 7/30/04
8 13 Consultant Prepares Draft Roof Drain Disconnection Ordinance 11 days i Fn 7/16/04! Fn 7/30/04
9 13 City Reviews 1/1 Technical Memorandum and Roof Drain Disconnection 15 days! Mon 8/2/04! Fri 8/20/04
10 13 Consultant Finals 1/1 Technical Memorandum and Roof Drain Disconnection ( , 5 days i Mon 8/23/04 ! Fn 8/27/04
i I
11 13 Milestone o days: Fn 8/27/041 Fri 8/27/04
I
12 I I
13 i Task 2 - Condition Assessment of Sanitary Sewer Collection System I 55 days i Mon 4/12/04 i Fri 6f25/04
I
14 Subtask 2.1 - Criteria for Inspection of the PS 4 Forcemain and the Indu i 50 days I Mon 4/12/04 ; Fri 6/18/04
15 13 Consultant Finals Pre-Inspection Technical Memorandum I 15 days: Mon 4/12/04 ! Fn 4/30/04
I I
16 13 City Procures Inspection Contractor ! 30 days I Mon 5/3/04 I Fri 6/11/04
i i
17 13 Consultant Prepares Techmcal Memorandum Including Results of the P I 5 days i Mon 6/14/04 i Fri 6/18/04
18 13 Milestone o days 1 Fri 6/18/041 Fn 6/18/04
I
19 Subtask 2.2 - Development of Prioritization of the Sanitary Sewer Collec i 55 days 1 Mon 4/12/04! Fri 6f25/04
I
20 13 Consultant Finals Technical Memorandum for Prioritizing the Initial Elen! 15 days I Mon 4/12/04 ! Fri 4/30/04
------r---~- i
21 13 I City and Consultant Provide a Workshop with City Staff for Training 40 days i Mon 5/3/041 Fri 6/25/04
____L__
22 13 i Milestone o days i Fn 6/25/041 Fn 6/25/04
,L__
23 i I
! I
I I
24 i Task 3 - CSO Comprehensive Plan Update 174 days! Mon 4/12/04 : Fri 12/10/04
I
25 13 Consultant and City Prepare Rayomer Tank Evaluation 15 days i Mon 4/12/04 ! Fri 4/30/04
I
City Provides Annual CSO Reports Submitted to the Department of Ecology i I
26 13 15 days i Mon 4/12/04 1 Fri 4/30/04
- I I
27 13 City Provides Available Flow and Sediment Sampling Datat 1 15 days: Mon 4/12/04 I Fn 4/30/04
I
28 13 Consultant Updates CSO Reduction Alternatives Technical Memorandum I 15 days: Mon 4/12/04 : Fn 4/30/04
I
29 13 Consultant Performs Flow Monltonng Modeling 65 days I Mon 5/3/04 i Fn 7/30/04
30 13 Consultant Prepares CSO Alternatives Evaluation 95 days: Mon 4/12/04 i Fn 8/20/04
I
31 13 Consultant Updates CSO Reduction Plan Report 45 days! Mon 8/23/04l Fn 10/22/04
32 13 Milestone o days i Fn 10/22/04 : Fn 10/22/04
I
33 i3 CIty and Consultant Prepare Schedule and FinanCing Plan for lmplementatlo I 45 days I Mon 8/23/04 ! Fri 10/22/04
34 13 Milestone o days i Fn 10/22/041 Fri 10/22/04
35 13 Consultant Prepares Fact Sheets for Recommended Projects 45 days r Mon 8/23/04! Fri 10/22/04
I
36 13 Milestone o days i Fn 10/22/04 i Fri 10/22/04
i
37 13 CIty Provides ReView Comments on CSO Deliverables 16 days: Fn 10/22/04 i Fri 11/12/04
38 13 Consultant Finals CSO Dellverab/es 15 days I Man 11/15/04: Fri 12/3/04
i
39 13 I City Submits Final CSO Reduction Plant Report to DOE o days I Fri 12/10/04 Fri 12/10/04
I I I
40 I I I
I I
41 I Task 4 - Direct Wastewater Services 190 days I Mon 4/12/041 Fri 12/31/04
42 13 I Consultant Provides On-Call Services at City'S Request 190 days I Mon 4/12/04 i Fn 12/31/04
I
I I I
43 i I
44 i Task 5 - Treatment Plant Rerating Tue 7/6/041 Fri 3/4/05
45 i3 I Consultant Collects and ReViews Historical Performance Data Tue 7/6/04 i Mon 8/23/04
I
7/25
r-
I
I
I
'"
'"
I
..,
~
CJ
. 6/18
""
I
..,
I
. 6/25
I
I
I
I
p:l24258/3/CSO Schedule
Date: Thu 4/8/04
Task
Split
- I Progress
Milestone
Summary ""
Project Summary ""
.., External Tasks
.., External Milestone .
b-~-;~j[ ~.~ ~$J~-::~~~
Deadline
o
.
Page 1
ID Task Name Start FInish
0 7/25
46 13 Consultant and City Conducts Workshop with City Staff to Identify Minimum II 14 days: Tue 7/6/041 Fri 7/23/04
I Tue 7/6/04 i
47 f3 Consultant and City Evaluation of the Integrity of Analytical Protocols and Flo i 15 days I Mon 7/26/04
I I
48 f3 Consultant Evaluates Plan Hydraulic Profile and Outfall Hydraulics I 60 days i Mon 11/1/041 Fn 1/21/05
I
49 f3 Consultant and City Evaluate Primary and Secondary Clanfier Performance ! 60 days 1 Mon 11/1/04 i Fn 1/21/05
I I
50 f3 City Performs Summer Sampling for Biological Process Evaluation I 10 days i Mon 7/12/04 : Fri 7/23/04
I
51 f3 Consultant Performs Biological Process Evaluation Data AnalysIs and Model i 60 days; Mon 11/1/04 i Fri 1/21/05
I
52 13 Consultant and City Perform Solids Mass Balance ! 60 days i Mon 11/1/04! Fri 1/21/05
I
53 -S-- Consultant and City Perform Solids Treatment Train Unit Process Evaluation! 60 days: Mon 11/1/041 Fn 1/21/05
I !
54 13 Consultant Addresses Air Quality and Odor Control Concerns Relating to Rell 60 days I Mon 11/1/04 i Fn 1/21/05
I
55 13 City Performs Winter Sampling for Biological Process Evaluation i 10 days i Mon 11/29/04: Fri 12/10/04
56 13 Consultant Performs Additional Biological Process Evaluation Data AnalYSIS I 5 days i Mon 12/13/04: Fn 12/17/04
57 f3 Consultant Prepares Draft Rerating Report 65 days! Mon 12/6/041 Fri 3/4/05
58 ! I
I
59 ! Task 6 . EPA Nine Minimum Controls for CSO 80 days I Man 4/12/041 Fri 7/30/04
, ~
60 Subtask 6.1 . Pollution Prevention Plan 69 days I Man 4/12/04 i Fri 7/16/04 ""
I I
61 13 Consultant Gathers Pollution Prevention Plan Information Relating to C~ I 25 days i Mon 4/12/041 Fn 5/14/04 I I
I I
62 13 Consultant Prepares Draft Pollution Prevention Plan Relating to CSO 16 days I Fn 5/14/04 [ Fn 6/4/04 I
I
63 13 City ReViews Draft Pollution Prevention Plan 10 days i Mon 6n1041 Fn 6/18/04 1
I
64 13 Consultant Prepares Final Pollution Prevention Plan I 19 days i Fn 6/18/04 i Wed 7/14/04 I I
-L
65 13 I City Submits Final Pollution Prevention Plan to the Washington Departn I o days i Fri 7/16/041 Fn 7/16/04 . 7/16
I ! I
66 Subtask 6.2 - Enhanced Screenings Control Design i 44 days! Tue 6/1/04 ! Fri 7/30/04
I
67 13 --+- Consultant meets With City to Discuss DeSign Alternatives I 9 days i Tue 6/1/041 Fn 6/11/04
68 f3 Consultant Prepares Enhanced Screenings Control DeSign ! 35 days j Mon 6/14/041 Fri 7/30/04 j
69 13 Milestone o days I Fn 7/30/04! Fn 7/30/04 .
I
p:/24258/3/CSO Schedule
Date: Thu 4/Bl04
Task
I'
Progress
Milestone
Summary '"
Project Summary ""
..., External Tasks
..., External Milestone .
L .:' " _ ->-:: ::]
Deadline
o
Split
.
Page 2
3/6
c=J
. 8/27
. 10/22
. 10/22
. 10/22
I
. 12/10
p:/24258/3/CSO Schedule
Date: Thu 4/8/04
Task
Split
'1 Progress
Milestone
Summary \.
Project Summary \.
~ External Tasks
... External Milestone.
:_:,~
Deadline
<}
.
Page 3
3/6
CJ
/30
Progress
Milestone
Summary "
Project Summary "
~ External Tasks
~ External Milestone .
~~~~~
Deadline
JL
v
p:/2425813/CSO Schedule
Date: Thu 4/8/04
Task
Split
.
Page 4
5. W <10
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE
THE CITY OF PORT ANGELES
AND
BROWN AND CALDWELL
#02-27
RELATING TO: WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER ENGINEERING AND PLANNING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into thiscR1d- day of ,2003, by
and between THE CITY OF PORT ANGELES, a non-charter code city of the of Washington,
(hereinafter called the "CITY") and BROWN AND CALDWELL, INC., a California orporation (hereinafter
called the "CONSULTANT").
WHEREAS, the CITY desires engineenng consulting and planning assistance related to wastewater
systems; and
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to engage the professional services and assistance of a qualified consulting
firm to perform the scope of work as detailed in Exhibit A, and
WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT represents that It is in full compliance with the statutes of the State of
Washington for professional registration and/or other applicable requirements, and
WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT represents that it has the background, experience, and ability to perform
the required work in accordance with the standards of the profession, and
WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT represents that it will provide qualified personnel and appropriate facilities
necessary to accomplish the work;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above representations and the terms, conditions, covenants
and agreements set forth below, the parties hereto agree as follows:
SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of professional services to be performed and the results to be achieved by the CONSULTANT
shall be as detailed in the attached Exhibit A and shall include all services and material necessary to
accomplish the work.
The CITY may review the CONSULTANT'S work product, and if it is not satisfactory, the CONSULTANT
shall make such changes as may be reqUired by the CITY. Such changes shall not constitute "Extra
Work" as related in Section XI of this Agreement.
The CONSULTANT agrees that all services performed under this Agreement shall be in accordance with
the standards of the profession and in compliance with applicable federal, state and local laws.
The Scope of Work may be amended upon written approval of both parties.
II OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
Upon completion of the work, all documents, exhibits, photographic negatives, or other presentations of
the work shall become the property of the CITY for use without restriction and without representation as to
suitability for reuse by any other party unless specifically verified or adapted by the CONSULTANT.
However, any alteration or reuse of the documents, by the City or by others acting through or on behalf of
the City, Will be at the City's sole risk.
Page 1 of 5
III DESIGNATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Each party shall designate its representatives in writing. The CONSULTANT'S representative shall be
subject to the approval of the CITY.
IV TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The CONSULTANT may begin work upon execution of this Agreement by both parties and the duration of
the Agreement shall extend through January 31,2004. The work shall be completed in accordance with
the schedule set forth in the attached Exhibit A.
V PAYMENT
The CITY shall pay the CONSULTANT as set forth in this section of the Agreement. Such payment shall
be full compensation for work performed, services rendered, and all labor, materials, supplies, equipment
and incidentals necessary to complete the work.
A. Payment shall be on the basis of the CONSULTANT'S cost for actual labor, overhead and profit plus
CONSULTANT'S direct non-salary reimbursable costs as set forth in the attached Exhibit B.
1. Labor costs shall be based on the hourly rates shown in Exhibit B. Hourly rates shall be based
upon an individual's hourly wage, times the total number of hours worked, times a multiplier of
3.364. The multiplier shall include overhead, CADD, computer and profit.
General clerical time shall be considered an overhead item, except where specific work items
are involved that require one hour or more continued effort, in which case time will be charged
on the basis of hours worked.
2. The direct non-salary reimbursable costs are those directly incurred In fulfilling the terms of this
Agreement, including, but not limited to, travel, subsistence, telephone, reproduction and printing,
supplies and fees of outside services and consultants. No overhead and profit may be added to
direct non-salary reimbursable costs.
B. The CONSULTANT shall submit invoices to the CITY on a monthly basis. Invoices shall detail the
work, hours, employee name, and hourly rate; shall itemize with receipts and invoices the non-salary
direct costs, shall indicate the specific task or activity in the Scope of Work to which the costs are
related; and shall indicate the cumulative total for each task.
C. The CITY shall review the invoices and make payment for the percentage of the project that has
been completed less the amounts previously paid.
D. The CONSULTANT invoices are due and payable within 30 days of receipt. In the event of a
disputed billing, only the disputed portion will be withheld from payment.
E. Final payment for the balance due to the CONSULTANT Will be made upon the completion of the
work and acceptance by the CITY.
F. Payment for "Extra Work" performed under Section XI of this Agreement shall be as agreed to by the
parties in writing.
VI MAXIMUM COMPENSATION
Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by both parties, the CONSULTANT'S total compensation and
reimbursement under this Agreement, including labor, direct non-salary reimbursable costs and outside
services, shall not exceed the maximum sum of $159,920.00. After the City's 2004 budget is approved,
an Amendment to this Agreement may be executed to increase the maximum compensation amount to
cover anticipated costs for the completion of tasks not fully funded in the original Agreement.
Page 2 of 5
VII EMPLOYMENT
Employees of the CONSULTANT, while engaged in the performance of any work or services under this
Agreement, shall be considered employees of the CONSULTANT only and not of the CITY, and claims
that may anse under the Workman's Compensation Act on behalf of said employees while so engaged,
and any and all claims made by a third party as a consequence of any negligent act or omission on the
part of the CONSULTANT'S employees while so engaged, on any of the work or services provided to be
rendered herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the CONSULTANT.
In performing thiS Agreement, the CONSULTANT shall not employ or contract with any CITY employee
without the City's wntten consent.
VIII NONDISCRIMINATION
The CONSULTANT shall conduct ItS business in a manner, which assures fair, equal and non-
discriminatory treatment of all persons, without respect to race, creed or national origin, or other legally
protected classification and, in particular:
A. The CONSULTANT shall maintain open hiring and employment practices and will welcome
applications for employment in all positions, from qualified individuals who are members of minorities
protected by federal equal opportunity/affirmative action requirements; and,
B. The CONSULTANT shall comply With all requirements of applicable federal, state or local laws or
regulations issued pursuant thereto, relating to the establishment of non discriminatory requirements
in hinng and employment practices and assuring the service of all persons without discrimination as
to any person's race, color, religion, sex, Vietnam era veteran status, disabled veteran condition,
physical or mental handicap, or national origin.
IX SUBCONTRACTS
A. The CONSULTANT shall not sublet or assign any of the work covered by this Agreement without the
written consent of the CITY.
B. The CONSULTANT will be using the firms submitted with its proposal as subcontractors.
Subcontractors other than those listed shall not be permitted Without the written consent of the CITY.
C. In all solicitation either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by the CONSULTANT for work to
be performed pursuant to a subcontract, Including procurement of materials and equipment, each
potential subconsultant or supplier shall be notified by the CONSULTANT of Consultant's obligations
under this Agreement, including the nondiscrimination requirements.
X CHANGES IN WORK
Other than changes directed by the CITY as set forth in Section I above, either party may request changes
in the scope of work. Such changes shall not become part of this Agreement unless and until mutually
agreed upon and incorporated herein by written amendments to this Agreement executed by both parties.
XI EXTRA WORK
The CITY may desire to have the CONSULTANT perform work or render services in connection with this
project, in addition to the Scope of Work set forth in Exhibit A and minor revisions to satisfactorily
completed work. Such work shall be considered as "Extra Work" and shall be addressed In a written
supplement to this Agreement. The CITY shall not be responsible for paying for such extra work unless
and until the written supplement is executed by both parties.
XII TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
Page 3 of 5
A. The CITY may terminate this Agreement at any time upon not less than ten (10) days written notice
to the CONSULTANT Written notice will be by certified mail sent to the consultant's designated
representative at the address provided by the CONSULTANT.
B. In the event this Agreement is terminated prior to the completion of the work, a final payment shall be
made to the CONSULTANT, which, when added to any payments previously made, shall
compensate the CONSULTANT for the percentage of work completed.
C. In the event this Agreement IS terminated prior to completion of the work, documents that are the
property of the CITY pursuant to Section II above, shall be delivered to and received by the CITY
prior to transmittal of final payment to the CONSULTANT.
XIII INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS
The CONSULTANT agrees to indemnify the CITY from any claims, damages, losses, and costs,
including, but not limited to, attorney's fees and litigation costs, ansing out of claims by third parties for
property damage and bodily inJury, including death, caused solely by the negligence or willful misconduct
of the CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT employees, affiliated corporations, officers, and subcontractors in
connection With the work performed under this Agreement.
The CITY agrees to indemnify the CONSULTANT from any claims, damages, losses, and costs,
including, but not limited to, attorney's fees and litigation costs, arising out of claims by third parties for
property damage and bodily inJury, including death, caused solely by the negligence or willful misconduct
of the CITY, CITY's employees, or agents in connection with the work performed under thiS Agreement.
If the negligence or willful misconduct of both CONSULTANT and CITY (or a person identified above for
whom each is liable) is a cause of such damage or injury, the loss, cost, or expense shall be shared
between the CONSULTANT and the CITY in proportion to their relative degrees of negligence or willful
misconduct and the nght of Indemnity shall apply for such proportion.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then,
in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused
by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the CONSULTANT and the CITY, its officers, officials,
employees, and volunteers, the CONSULTANT'S liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the
CONSULTANT'S negligence. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification
provided herein constitutes the CONSULTANT'S waiver of immunity under Industrial Insurance, Title 51
RCW, solely for the purposes of this indemnification. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the
parties. The provIsions of thiS section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
However, the CONSULTANT expressly reserves its rights as a third person set forth in RCW 51.24.035.
XIV INSURANCE
The CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, Insurance against
claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the
performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, its agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors.
The CONSULTANT shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing:
1. Automobile Liability insurance With limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for
bodily injury and property damage; and,
2. Commercial General Liability insurance written on an occurrence basIs with limits no less than
$1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for personal injury, bodily
injury and property damage. Coverage shall Include but not be limited to: blanket contractual;
products/completed operations; broad form property damage; explosion, collapse and underground (XCU)
if applicable; and employer's liability; and,
Page 4 of 5
3. Professional Liabilitv insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 limit per occurrence
Any payment of deductible or self insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of the CONSULTANT.
The CITY shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy,
as respects work performed by or on behalf of the Consultant and a copy of the endorsement naming
the CITY as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The CITY reserves
the right to review a certified copy of all required insurance policies in the CONSULTANT'S office.
The CONSULTANT'S insurance shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to
each insured against whom claim is made or SUIt IS brought, except with respects to the limits of the
insurer's liability.
The CONSULTANT'S insurance shall be primary insurance as respects the CITY, and the CITY shall be
given thirty (30) days pnor written notice of any cancellation, suspension or material change In coverage.
XV APPLICABLE LAW
This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of
Washington, and in the event of dispute the venue of any litigation brought hereunder shall be Clallam
County.
XVI EXHIBITS AND SIGNATURES
This Agreement, including its exhibits, constitutes the entire Agreement, supersedes all prior written or
oral understandings, and may only be changed by a written amendment executed by both parties. The
following exhibits are hereby made a part of thiS Agreement:
Exhibit A - Scope of Work
Exhibit B - Consultant Labor Costs and Non-salary Reimbursable Costs
In WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first
written above.
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
~~
----MAYOR
CONSULTANT
TI~i1:t~ ~
ATTEST:
~~ .1F-
BECKY UPT , CI CLERK
'r
<,
,
,.
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PORT ANGELES AND BROWN AND CALDWELL
FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
#02-27
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
This scope of work is for engineering services to be provided by Brown and Caldwell (the
Consultant) in connection with wastewater and combined sewer overflow (CSO) issues ofthe
City of Port Angeles (City), Washington. The scope of services and associated budget is for the
calendar year 2003. In this scope of work, the word "we" refers to Brown & Caldwell.
The four tasks comprising this project and the scope of work for each task are listed below:
Task 1. III - Roof Drain Disconnection Pilot
Objective. Task 1 involves implementation of a pilot project by the City to determine the cost
effectiveness and institutional barriers of a City led roof drain disconnection program.
Approach. Consultant services will include the following:
. Task management
. Provide two site visits for the disconnection project.
· The consultant will interview residents, contractor and City staff to obtain
information for the update of the pilot project technical memorandum with
the "lessons learned".
. Update the technical memorandum summarizing the work ofthe roof drain
disconnection project with additional information after completion of the
construction outlining the construction facts, final costs and addressing the
"lessons learned" from the pilot project to be used in the citywide disconnection
program.
The following work is required to complete this task, but cannot be performed until
after the Winter 2003/2004 season. This work is not included in the budget for this
contract, but will be included in the budget negotiations for 2004 contract.
. Acquire the processed Winter 2003/2004 flow monitoring data for the control and
rehabilitation basins, and the Winter 2003/2004 precipitation data from the City.
We will prepare data sets for use with Brown and Caldwell modeling programs.
. Calibrate Brown and Caldwell III model to the post-construction (Winter
2003/2004) flow data for the rehabilitation basin. Run III model for the control
basin using the Winter 2000, 200 I, and 2002 calibration and Winter 2003/2004
Exhibit A--Page 1 of 11
precipitation data. Comparing the predicted and observed Winter 2003 flows for
the control basin is a test that provides confidence that the III model accurately
captures the hygologic behavior of the basin. If adjustments are deemed
necessary for the control basin model, these same adjustments are assumed to be
necessary to the pre-construction rehabilitation basin model. We will also
compare pre and post rehabilitation peak flows with control basin peak flows.
. Once it is verified that the III model is accurately reproducing local hydrology, we
will run two long-term III model simulations ofthe rehabilitation basin. The first
model run will simulate pre-rehabilitation conditions and the other will simulate
post-rehabilitation conditions. The two long-term simulations will each produce a
long time-series of hourly flow projections. We will perform statistical analysis
of the flow projections to estimate the reduction in the once per year peak flow
and volume resulting from the roof drain disconnection pilot program.
. Evaluation of cost-effectiveness of roof drain disconnection and potential sizing
and cost reduction of the City's CSO control program.
. Update the technical memorandum that summarizes each aspect of the pilot
program with post-rehabilitation flow monitoring conclusions about the effects of
roof drain disconnection, and implications for city-wide roof drain disconnection
ordinance.
. Prepare a final draft of the recommendation for a roof drain disconnection
ordinance. This draft will incorporate input from the City Attorney and the results
ofthe pilot project rehabilitation. It will include recommendations for
exemptions, and construction requirements.
City Responsibilities.
. Provide construction inspection of roof drain disconnection pilot project.
. Provide construction and City engineering/inspection cost information for the roof
drain disconnection proj ect.
To be included in the 2004 Contract:
. Provide flow and precipitation data for Winter 2003/2004.
. Review and comment on draft recommendations for a roof drain disconnection
ordinance.
Deliverables.
. Updated Pilot Project Technical Memorandum.
To be included in the 2004 Contract:
. Update pilot study memorandum. The memorandum will summarize each of the
elements of the pilot study, including choosing the pilot area, pre-rehabilitation
flow monitoring, source detection/smoke testing, construction, post-rehabilitation
flow monitoring conclusions about the effects of roof drain disconnection, and
implications for city-wide roof drain disconnection ordinance and relationship
with the City's CSO program.
Exhibit A--Page 2 of 11
. Final draft of the recommendations for a roof drain disconnection ordinance. We
will incorporate City comments on the interim draft that is currently being
prepared to produce the final draft.
Exhibit A--Page 3 of 11
Task 2. Condition Assessment of Sanitary Sewer Collection System
Objective. Work on Task 2 is directed towards providing direction to the City to develop
replacement schedule and costs for the sanitary sewer collection system. Included in this task is
the preparation of inspection plans for the existing PS 4 force main and a section of the 48-inch
diameter Rainier Waterline.
Approach. The approach of the task is broken up into the following subtasks:
Subtask 2.1: Criteria for inspection ofthe PS 4 forcemain and the Rainier Waterline.
The use of the existing PS 4 forcemain and the 48-inch diameter Rainier Waterline is proposed
as part of the alternatives for CSO reduction. As part of the determination of feasible
alternatives, the condition and characteristics of the pipelines need to be known.
Consultant services will include the following:
. Provide criteria and listing of necessary testing to determine pipeline characteristics.
This includes providing inspection schedule, cost, and recommendations for any
necessary outside consultant services.
. Provide one site visit during the field-testing of each pipeline (total of2).
City Responsibilities:
. Review the pipeline inspection criteria.
. Perform the necessary testing and inspection as required, including the hiring of any
required outside consulting.
Deliverables:
. Draft Technical Memorandum that outlines the required inspection program criteria.
. Final Technical Memorandum, including results ofthe pipeline testing.
Subtask 2.2: Development of Prioritization of the Sanitary Sewer Collection System
As part of DOE regulatory requirements, a program for the inspection and prioritized repair or
replacement ofthe sanitary sewer collection system is required. This subtask will outline the
requirements of the program, criteria needed to identify the collection system critical elements,
and schedule, annual cost for inspection and estimated refurbishment/replacement.
Consultant services will include the following:
Exhibit A--Page 4 of 11
. Development of draft criteria for prioritizing the initial elements of the collection system.
. Identify critical sewers.
. Provide a workshop with City staff to provide prioritization of the collection system
based on analysis of the characteristics of critical sewers.
. Provide training to City staff in the ranking of pipelines and manhole condition based on
existing defects and characteristics.
. Provide technical memorandum on an inspection and repair/replacement program for the
sanitary sewer collection system. This memorandum will describe the advantages and
disadvantages of techniques for the rehabilitation and replacement of gravity sewers and
manholes.
. Development of draft annual inspection plan.
City Responsibilities:
. Attendance of City staff at Critical Sewer Prioritization Workshop
. Attendance of Public Works and Maintenance staff for defect ranking training.
. Review technical memorandum on the sanitary sewer collection system inspection and
repair/replacement program that outlines the advantages and disadvantages of techniques
for rehabilitation and replacement of gravity sewers and manholes.
Deliverables:
. One draft (electronic copy) and one final (one hard copy and one electronic copy)
technical memorandum that describes an inspection and repair/replacement program for
the sanitary sewer collection system. This memorandum will describe the advantages
and disadvantages of different techniques for rehabilitation and replacement of gravity
sewers and manholes.
Exhibit A--Page 5 of 11
Task 3. CSO Comprehensive Reduction Plan Update - Phase 1
Objective. Task 3 involves the development of an update to the "City of Port Angeles
Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Reduction Plan" dated January 1994. The update is required
as part of the City's NPDES Permit, Section lIE, and shall comply with the requirements of
WAC 173-245-090 (2). In addition to the WAC requirements, this task will result in the
definition or development ofthe following:
1. Development of the capital improvement program (CIP) necessary to achieve compliance
with the WAC one per year control requirement by 2015
2. Prioritized construction sequence and cash flow schedule for identified projects
3. Identification and scheduling of permit requirements
4. Analysis of the City's funding capacity and potential basis for negotiating
implementation schedule beyond 2015.
Approach. Table 3-1 provides the currently required information that is necessary in the CSO
Comprehensive Reduction Plan to meet the requirements ofW AC 173-245. Subtasks to provide
the work necessary for a comprehensive plan update that meets the requirements ofW AC 173-
245 are shown in Table 3-1, and are described below. Additional tasks necessary for CIP
development are also included.
Exhibit A--Page 6 of 11
Table 3-1. Required Elements of CSO Plan and Updates
Required for Update of
WAC Part of 1994 CSO CSO Comprehensive
Subtask 173-245- Plan Requirements Comprehensive Plan Plan Work Required
Note 1 040(2)(a) Flow mOnltonng and sampling +
+
040(2)(a) Model of CSO events @ each site + +
Note 1 040(2)(a) Possible sediment sampling Note 2 Note 2
31 040(2)(b) Control Alternatives AnalysIs Complete alternatives analysis and selection
+
3.2 040(2)(c) Selected project effectiveness analysIs Long-term (6-yr) model run to define performance
+
3.2 040(2)(c) Impact of project on treatment plant Eslimate impact on effluent quality
+
3.2 040(2)( c) Impact of project receiving water quality Estimate expected changes in receiving water quality
+
3.2 040(2)(c) Project canst. and O&M cost projections Estimate capital and O&M costs of proposed projects
+
32 040(2)(c) Technical feasibility Document technical feasibility through on-site testing or experience
+ elsewhere
3.2 040(2)(c) SEPA compliance Document SEPA compliance via checklist
+
3.2 040(2)(d) Pnonty ranking + Pnoritlze mdlvidual projects
+
3.2 040(2)(d) Cost-effectiveness analysis Demonstrate cost-effective achievement of Ecology regulation
+
3.2 040(2)(d) Project environmental impacts + Descnbe m general with possible mitigalion
3.2 040(2)(e) Project plan schedule for next five years + + Define and schedule near term projects (5 year CIP)
3.4 040(2)(e) Provide plan for eventual achievement of requirements at all outfalls
Long term plan for "greatest possible with cost flow projection and rate Impacts
reduction at earliest possible date" +
33 090(2)(a) Describe impact of past CSO projects
Assessment of effectiveness of CSO
projects to-date N/A +
3.2 090(2)(b) Reevaluation of priority rankmgs N/A + Included In response to 040(2)d
3.2 090(2)(c) List of projects for the next 5 years + + Included in response to 040(2)e
Note I CIty wIll perform the work reqUIred and wIll provIde the data to BC for mcluslOn m Plan Update Flow rnomtonng data WIll be proVIded by the CIty as part of Task 3
Note 2 SedIment sarnphng IS reqUIred where a hlstoncallrnpact IS dIscernIble
Exhibit A--Page 7 of 11
Subtask 3.1: Continuation of Flow Monitoring
The Consultant will use the all the previous winter flow data to review the accuracy of the model
that was developed and calibrated using the historical flow information and the flow monitoring
information. The future flow and alternatives will be adjusted based on additional flow
information provided by the additional flow monitoring. The Consultant will make
recommendations on the future flow monitoring program. This should be performed in 2003 and
continued in 2004.
To be included in the 2004 Contract:
a) Final adjustments to alternative's evaluation sizing will be made after the
second year of pilot project verification flow monitoring for III reduction
effectiveness is complete. Impacted pages of the report will be updated at that
time. This is a future task to be completed in 2004.
Subtask 3.2: Update ofCSO Reduction Alternatives Technical Memorandum
A draft technical memorandum describing proposed CSO control alternatives was submitted to
the City as part of the previous contract. BC will incorporate the City's comments on the
technical memorandum into an updated alternatives analysis memorandum suitable for achieving
the WAC requirements. The updated memorandum will include estimates of capital and O&M
costs, and relative ranking of environmental and socio-economic factors. Requirements and
options to accommodate growth in service area will be examined. Examination of the Rainier
water line and PS 4 forcemain must be completed under task 2 before this update can be
completed.
Brown and Caldwell will issue the updated memorandum, and will lead an alternatives workshop
with the City to identify the elements of the recommended CSO plan. The recommended CSO
reduction plan will be approved at the workshop. The updated memorandum will be
incorporated in the CSO Comprehensive Reduction Plan Update for submittal to Ecology.
Subtask 3.3: Evaluation ofthe Selected CSO Reduction Proiect
After selection of the CSO reduction projects to be implemented, BC will provide in-depth
analysis for incorporation into the Draft CSO Reduction Plan Update and CIP development. The
following information will be provided as part of the evaluation:
. Impact on treatment plant
. Change in CSO pollutant discharge
. V olume reduction
. Impact at CSO outfalls during phases of construction
. Prioritization of construction phasing
. Cash flow schedule
Exhibit A--Page 8 of 11
. Permitting requirements
. Land requirements
. Requirements to accommodate growth (Tribal dwelling units)
Fact sheets will be prepared for each individual project included in the reduction plan. These
will describe the project and include pertinent information from the above list specific to each
location. Collectively, these will comprise the long term CIP for the reduction plan as well as
the projects for the next 5-years submitted to Ecology.
The evaluation of potential water quality impacts will focus on the expected reductions in CSO
flows and pollutant loads resulting from the proposed measures prescribed in the CSO Reduction
Plan update. The budget assumes that evaluation of receiving water quality and sediment quality
will not be required.
The potential environmental impacts of existing CSO discharges will be evaluated to help
establish priorities for the proposed CSO reduction projects. This evaluation will be based on
available information regarding the location, approximate volume, and water quality associated
with each of the City existing CSOs.
The completed subtask 3.3 provides the majority of information needed for the Draft CSO
Reduction Comprehensive Plan Update for submittal to Ecology. More importantly, it defines
the projects, schedules and costs to meet WAC requirements by 2015, which is necessary to
define a financing plan and to begin design of proj ects as necessary to meet that schedule.
Because the CSO Plan update is not yet due, the following two tasks could be delayed until 2004
for completion.
City Responsibilities.
. Provide annual CSO reports submitted to the Department of Ecology since 1994.
. Provide review and comment on technical memorandum entitled "Preliminary
CSO Reduction Alternative Evaluation" dated September 12, 2002.
. Participate in a one-day workshop to select the final CSO reduction alternatives.
Estimated June 2003.
. Provide flow and sediment sampling data.
Deliverables.
. One hard copy and electronic copy of the revised Preliminary CSO Reduction
Alternative Evaluation technical memorandum
. One hard copy and electronic copy of the recommended alternative evaluation
from Task 3.3. This will comprise much of the CSO plan update for Ecology
submittal.
. Construction schedule and financing plan for implementation by 2015.
. Fact sheets for recommended projects
Exhibit A--Page 9 of 11
The following tasks to be included in the 2004 Contract:
Subtask 3.4: Assessment and Evaluation of Effectiveness of 1994 CSO Reduction Plan
BC will evaluate the work that was accomplished to date as described in the 1994 CSO
Reduction Comprehensive Plan. The Assessment and Evaluation will be incorporated into the
CSO Reduction Plan Update. This work will be accomplished through review of the annual
CSO reports that have been submitted to the Department of Ecology by the City, and review of
projects undertaken since 1994.
In this subtask, we will complete any modifications to the reduction plan found in City review of
earlier products, and prepare the submittal to Ecology.
The CSO Plan Update will include a statement to the effect that each project prescribed in the
Plan will undergo SEP A review in accordance with WAC 197-11.
The draft CSO Reduction Comprehensive Plan will include project descriptions and evaluation
for projects based on flow projections that do not include the disconnection of roof drains from
the system. Modifications based on roof drain disconnection will be examined in detail during
design of each of the recommended facilities and discussed in subsequent CSO plan updates.
After the post-construction flow monitoring is complete, the system will be reviewed as
adjusted based on this change in flow. This is not included in the budget for this contract
but will be included in the Amendment for 2004.
Subtask 3.5: Predesign of Selected CSO Reduction Program
The intention of the Predesign is to identify characteristics, location, sizing, and construction
constraints for each phase of the construction of the program. Adjustments will be made to the
selected program based on the hydraulic effectiveness of the roof drain disconnection program.
Included will be preliminary plan and profile sheets of conveyance system improvements, details
for PS replacement and upgrades, connection details to the existing Rayonier Outfall, any
treatment plant modifications, identification of required permits and easements, environmental
requirements, and any required land purchases. Included will be preparation of contract
documents for the initial CIP element of the program.
Exhibit A--Page 10 of 11
Task 4. Direct Wastewater Services
Objective. To support the City in wastewater service projects.
Approach. The scope of Task 4 will be based on an as-needed basis as determined by the City.
At the direction of the City, Brown and Caldwell will provide labor up to hour and budget limit
as provided in the attached budget for responding to questions and other activities. Any
additional labor beyond the indicated hours and budget will require a change in scope and
budget. The task also includes the following activities:
. Task management
. Up to 4 site visits
City Responsibilities.
. Provide activity request to Brown and Caldwell.
. Approve estimated schedule, estimated hours and deliverables of each requested
activity.
Deliverables.
. As required for requested services
Exhibit A--Page 11 of 11
EXHIBIT B
CONSULTANT LABOR COSTS
AND
NON-SALARY REIMBURSABLE COSTS
City of Port Angeles Amendment
Task 1 - 111 Roof Drain Disconnection Pilot
Direct Labor
Category/Name
ProfessIOnal Rate Hours Subtotal Total
Schneider, Doug $ 4982 2 9964
Jones, Lon $ 3806 22 837 32
Dubm, Tony $ 2778 0
Matteson, JulIe $ 2712 24 650 88
GIesbrecht, Tadd $ 2581 0
Memll, Steve $ 5306 0
Bellows, Pete $ 6282 0
0 $ 0
Kumataka, Greg $ 5154 0
o $ 0
o $ 0
Milne, MIke $ 5289 0
o $ 0
o $ 0
Warburton, Jack $ 6000 0
Twenter, Justm $ 2390 0
o $ 0
TechnIcal
MIller, Larry $ 3300 0
Hunt, Dan $ 2310 0
PIccolo, Steve $ 2711 24 650 64
Tulley, JIm $ 2185 10 21850
Aspma1, Dave $ 3467 0
Johnson, Gene $ 3851 0
AdmInIstratIOn
WIlcox, ShIrley $ 2145 0
HoeldJaJa, Ivonne $ 2532 0
Mason, Enn $ 1900 2 3800
0 $ 0
Subtotal Duect Labor 84 2,49498
IndIrect Labor Cost 19300% 4,81531
Total Labor Cost $ 7,31029
Direct Costs
Long DIstance $ 200 200 00
Fax $ 100 50 5000
MIleage $ 0365 200 7300
Pnntmg $ 100
Phototcopy $ 010 750 75.00
Postage( overnIght) $ 2000 3 60.00
Computer $ 266 50 133 00
CADD $ 377 34 12818
Travel $ 150 15000
$ 86918
Subconsultant Costs
PACE or Polans (survey)
Shannon & Wilson
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Subconsultant Costs $
ProfessIOnal Fee $ 1,096 54
TASK TOTAL
$
9,276.02
Cif} of Port Angeles Amendment
Task 2 - Condition Assessment Sewer Collection System
DIrect Labor
Category/Name
ProfessIOnal Rate Hours Subtotal Total
SchneIder, Doug $ 4982 0
Jones, Lon $ 3806 52 1,97912
Dubm, Tony $ 2778 8 222 24
Matteson, JulIe $ 2712 0
GIesbrecht, Tadd $ 2581 0
Memll, Steve $ 5306 24 1,273 44
Bellows, Pete $ 6282 0
0 $ 0
Kumataka, Greg $ 5154 0
o $ 0
o $ 0
MIlne, MIke $ 5289 0
o $ 0
o $ 0
Warburton, Jack $ 6000 0
Twenter, Justm $ 2390 0
o $ 0
Techmcal
MIller, Larry $ 3300 32 1,05600
Hunt, Dan $ 2310 0
PIccolo, Steve $ 27 II 236 6,39796
Tulley, JIm $ 2185 16 349 60
Aspmal, Dave $ 3467 0
Johnson, Gene $ 3851 8 308 08
Admlmstrallon
WIlcox, ShIrley $ 2145 8 17160
Hoeldjaja, Ivonne $ 2532 0
Mason, Enn $ 1900 0
0 $ 0
Subtotal DIrect Labor 384 11,75804
IndlTect Labor Cost 19300% 22,693 02
Total Labor Cost 34,451 06
DlTect Costs
Long DIstance 000 100 10000
Fax 100 25 2500
MIleage 0365 200 73.00
Pnntmg 100 0
Phototcopy 010 1,500 15000
Postage( overnIght) 2000
Computer 266 92 244 72
CADD 377 292 1,10084
Travel 000 200 200.00
$ 1,89356
Subconsultant Costs
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Subconsultant Costs
ProfeSSIOnal Fee $ 5,16766
TASK TOTAL
41,512.28
City of Port 4.ngeles Amendment
Task 3 - CSO Comprehensive Reduction Plan Update - Phase 1
DIrect Labor
Category/Name
Professional Rate Hours Subtotal Total
Schneider, Doug $ 4982 36 1,79352
Jones, Lon $ 3806 96 3,653 76
DubIO, Tony $ 2778 68 1,889.04
Matteson, Julie $ 2712 0
Giesbrecht, Tadd $ 2581 180 4,645 80
Memll, Steve $ 5306 65 3,448 90
Bellows, Pete $ 62.82 0
0 $ 0
Kumataka, Greg $ 5154 0
o $ 0
o $ 0
Milne, Mike $ 5289 22 1,16358
o $ 0
o $ 0
Warburton, Jack $ 6000 70 4,200 00
Twenter, Justm $ 23.90 32 764 80
o $ 0
Techmcal
Miller, Larry $ 3300 34 1,122 00
Hunt, Dan $ 2310 8 18480
Piccolo, Steve $ 2711 0
Tulley, Jim $ 2185 20 43700
Aspmal, Dave $ 3467 0
Johnson, Gene $ 3851 0
Admmlstratlon
Wilcox, ShIrley $ 2145 12 25740
HoeldJ aJ a, Ivonne $ 2532 28 708 96
Mason, Enn $ 1900 0
0 $ 0
Subtotal Direct Labor 671 24,269 56
Indirect Labor Cost 19300% 46,840 25
Total Labor Cost 71,10981
Direct Costs
Long Distance $ 100 100 00
Fax $ 100 25 25.00
Mileage $ 0365 100 3650
Pnntmg $ 100
Phototcopy $ 0.10 1,000 10000
Postage( ovenught) $ 2000 2 4000
Computer $ 266 609 1,61994
CADD $ 3.77 62 233 74
Travel $ 200 200 00
$ 2,355 18
Subconsultant Costs
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Subconsultant Costs
ProfeSSIOnal Fee $ 10,66647
TASK TOTAL
84,131.46
City of Port Angeles Amendment
Task 4 - Direct Wastewater Services
DIrect Labor
Category/Name
ProfessIOnal Rate Hours Subtotal Total
SchneIder, Doug $ 4982 53 2,640 46
Jones, Lon $ 3806 34 1,29404
DubIO, Tony $ 2778 24 666 72
Matteson, J uhe $ 2712 24 650 88
GIesbrecht, Tadd $ 2581 0
Memll, Steve $ 5306 16 848 96
Bellows, Pete $ 6282 0
0 $ 0
Kumataka, Greg $ 5154 20 1,030 80
0 $ 0
0 $ 0
MIlne, MIke $ 5289 0
o $ 0
o $ 0
Warburton, Jack $ 6000 0
Twenter, Justm $ 2390 0
0 $ 0
Techmcal
MIller, Larry $ 3300 0
Hunt, Dan $ 2310 0
PIccolo, Steve $ 2711 0
Tulley, Jim $ 2185 0
Aspmal, Dave $ 3467 0
Johnson, Gene $ 3851 0
AdmlmstratlOn
Wilcox, ShlTley $ 2145 0
Hoeldjaja, Ivonne $ 2532 0
Mason, Enn $ 1900 0
0 $ 0
Subtotal DIrect Labor 171 7,13186
IndlTect Labor Cost 19300% 13,764 49
Total Labor Cost 20,89635
DlTect Costs
Long DIstance $ 75 7500
Fax $ 100 30 3000
Mileage $ 0365 240 8760
Pnntmg $ 100
Phototcopy $ 010 750 7500
Postage( overnIght) $ 2000
Computer $ 266 171 454.86
CADD $ 377 0
Travel $ 247 246 74
$ 969 20
Subconsultant Costs
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Subconsultant Costs
ProfessIOnal Fee $ 3,13445
T ASK TOTAL
25,000.00
City of Port Angeles Amendment
Cost Summary
DIrect Labor
Category/Name
ProfessIOnal
SchneIder, Doug $
Jones, Lon $
DubIO, Tony $
Matteson, JulIe $
GIesbrecht, Tadd $
Memll, Steve $
Bellows, Pete $
o $
Kumataka, Greg $
o $
o $
MIlne, MIke $
o $
o $
Warburton, Jack $
Twenter, Justm $
o $
Techmcal
MIller, Larry $
Hunt, Dan $
PIccolo, Steve $
Tulley, JIm $
Aspmal, Dave $
Johnson, Gene $
Admlmstral10n
WIlcox, ShIrley $
HoeldJaJa,Ivonne $
Mason, Enn $
o $
Rate Hours
4982 91
3806 204
2778 100
27.12 48
2581 180
53.06 105
6282 0
0
5154 20
0
0
5289 22
0
0
6000 70
2390 32
0
3300 66
2310 8
2711 260
2185 46
3467 0
3851 8
2145 20
2532 28
1900 2
0
1310
19300%
Subtotal Total
4,533 62
7,76424
2,778 00
1,30176
4,645 80
5,571 30
1,030 80
1,16358
4,200 00
764 80
2,178 00
18480
7,048 60
1,00510
308 08
429.00
708 96
3800
45,65444
88,113 07
133,76751
475 00
13000
27010
400 00
10000
2,452 52
1,462.76
796 74
6,087 12
Subtotal DIrect Labor
IndIrect Labor Cost
Total Labor Cost
DIrect Costs
Long Distance
Fax
MIleage
Pnntmg
Phototcopy
Postage( overnIght)
Computer
CADD
Travel
AppraIser
Subconsultant Costs
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Total Subconsultant Costs
ProfeSSIOnal Fee
TASK TOTAL
20,065 13
159,919.76