HomeMy WebLinkAboutC-2814 ,; , C-til6S
\�.�Grr lFOltn.IG� -
.1i ORIGINAL
__ a, AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
Ps: AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENHANCED
,-q:.' ..,--__ .„, WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN FOR THE RIO HONDO/SAN
0 •GABRIEL RIVER WATER QUALITY GROUP BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ARCADIA AND CALIFORNIA WATERSHED ENGINEERI NG
This Amendment No. 3 ("Amendment No. 3") is hereby entered into this / day of
Oa , 2016 by and between the City of Arcadia, a municipal corporation of the
State of California, and California Watershed Engineering, a California Corporation, with respect
to that certain Professional Services Agreement between the parties dated July 11, 2013
("Agreement") and further amended by Amendment No. 1 dated July 16, 2015 and further
amended by Amendment No. 2 dated June 22, 2016.
The Parties agree as follows:
1. Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 of the Agreement, the Scope of Services is hereby amended
as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A".
2. Pursuant to. Section 3.3.1 of the Agreement; the Compensation is hereby amended as
set forth in the attached Exhibit "C".
3. All terms and provisions of the Agreement not amended by this Amendment No. 3 are
hereby reaffirmed.
In witness whereof the Parties have executed this Amendment No. 3 on,the date.set
forth below.
CITY OF ARCADIA _ CALIFORNIA WATERSHED
ENGINEERING
B — y . f� i- B \_f e Vsz
By: '�"inic La -retto y
C GO C'�
City Manager Title:Title: / P Y��` Pa
Dated: /t•% , Dated: t 1 ''T 2c:I , .
1
ATTEST:
By:
Title: G C_.( -1 o,r-(
\11-011 C rk . I Dated: . 11 /q/2_01(e)
APPROVED AS TO.FORM: CONCUR:
,,
SqAdtl. ir.
Stephen P. Deitsch m Tait
City Attorney Public Works Services Director
Exhibit "A"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Scope of Services shall be amended to include the following services, but is not limited to the
following tasks:
In order to protect receiving water quality, 2012 MS4 Permittees undertook conservative
Reasonable Assurance Analyses (RAAs) and developed WMP and EWMP plans proposing
extraordinarily expensive new water quality protection measures. Subsequent formal
LARWQCB Executive Officer approval of more than twenty divergent, similarly costly, WMP and
EWMP plans reinforced the enormous economic impact of the 2012 MS4 Permit. mandated
objectives and requirements. While some agencies debate WMP implementation schedules
and the legality of a multi-decade planning document, the RH/SGR WQG members and
LARWQCB outlined development of a revised EWMP plan, emphasizing affordable multiple
benefit.projects. Consultant responds to that outline by recognizing that existing facilities can
provide these benefits, if operated differently and protected from future substantive pollutant
loads using cost-effective pretreatment Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Watershed
Control Measures (WCMs).
Peck Road Water Conservation Park Lake (Peck Lake) receives runoff from approximately forty
percent of the total RH/SGR WQG area and consultant believes that this percentage may be
increased to more than fifty percent through innovative engineering design. However, Peck
Lake sediments are purportedly impaired for nutrients and legacy organochlorine compounds,
resulting in the development of United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). Despite the impairment, the lake remains critically important
for recharging storm runoff into the regional groundwater basin.
Starting with LACFCD and Department of Public Works (DPW) stream and rain gage data,
consultant shall re-evaluate the hydrology and hydraulic characteristics of key facilities that are
within or adjacent to the WQG area, such as Peck Lake. Then conceptualize operational
decisions, choices, and projects that would encourage local runoff conservation and more
formally document and articulate the hydraulic disconnect of the WQG from downstream
watershed impairments. This would allow the RH/SGR WQG to advocate for plausible local
"downstream solution" alternatives that protect Peck Lake, and other facilities, from pollutant
discharges, while still allowing for continued groundwater recharge and the protection of existing
beneficial use recreational opportunities from•being starved of source water.
Other exemplar"wing" project concepts to support recharge at Peck Lake include:
> Diversion pump station from Arcadia Wash to Peck Lake Concept Design;
> Optimization of retention and detention in the Lower Bradbury Channel ;
➢ Conversion of mineral resource facilities, such as Manning (Gravel) Pit, to higher value
uses; and
➢ Better coordination of beneficial uses among multiple facilities such as Irwindale
Spreading Grounds and Manning Pit, or Lower Bradbury Channel and the Santa Fe
Dam Spreading Grounds.
•
After'Securing improved runoff capture at existing facilities, such as Peck Lake and the "wing"
locations, implementation of EWMP designated high priority projects, such as Recreation and
Sierra Vista Park cisterns and distributed green streets, can be deferred pending the analysis
and assessment of pollutant capture effectiveness based on recently initiated CIMP water and
sediment quality monitoring.
Likewise, subsequent RAAs would better model local runoff capture and reuse, rather than
guessing at the operational management decisions and integration of comingled flows miles
downstream and far beyond the control of the conformed RH/SGR WQG agencies.
Task 1 -Analyze Existing Facility Flow and Operational Data
The development of local financial support, for conceptualized implementation projects, will
benefit from demonstrating a nexus between investing in local storm water runoff capture and
retention and the increasing desperate need to recharge dwindling groundwater supplies and
recreational opportunities. Peck Lake provides such runoff detention and groundwater recharge
services, which might also be supplemented by diverting flows to other nearby construction
materials (mineral) extraction facilities.
The consultant shall procure and analyze available operational reports and existing data for ten
stations, collected by Los Angeles County and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, related to
stream flow or rainfall into, or out of, Peck Lake, Bradbury Channel, Santa Fe Dam, Arcadia
Wash and the confluence of Little and Big Dalton Washes in the San Gabriel River Watershed.
This would be analyzed to better understand short-duration (typically 5 minute increment) flows,
rather than daily statistics typically used in RAA studies. Among the significant objectives of this
analysis would be the assessment of:
> Discharge and/or water surface elevational data critical to operation of Peck Lake.
> Discharge and/or water surface elevational data critical to operation of Santa Fe Dam.
> Stream flow characteristics into Peck Lake to size conveyance and pretreatment
facilities.
> Stream flow characteristics for Arcadia Wash, above Rio Hondo Reach 3, to better
define the range of potential dry and wet-weather diversion opportunities.
> Stream flow characteristics for Bradbury Channel, to develop a detention/retention
analysis.
> Stream or retention facility diversion flow characteristics in the San Gabriel River
Watershed, near the City of Azusa and Los Angeles County Unincorporated Areas.
> Other time series numeric analyses for facilities or gages of important to the
conceptualization of new BMP/WCM retention facilities based on discussions with WQG
Permittees, LARWQCB staff, or the Main San Gabriel Valley Water Master.
Deliverable: Consultant shall statistically analyze and summarize flow characteristics
for up to ten (10) stream gage stations, or similar time series data sources, pertinent to
characterizing potential design, regulatory, and modeling characteristics of importance to
future RH/SGR WGQ EWMPs.
Task 2— Regional Project Pretreatment Feasibility Analysis
Consultant shall prepare a feasibility study to assess potential pretreatment alternatives, near
Peck Lake, that maximize sediment, and sediment borne pollutant, retention, while conveying
purified runoff water flows into Peck Lake for infiltration, groundwater recharge, or subsequent
diversion to other water conservation facilities. Additional potential consolidated pretreatment
facilities or similar operational characteristics and within the Group's boundary, will be identified
to capture runoff volumes not accommodated in the Peck Lake facility or within other drainages
not tributary to this receiving water body. For WQG agreed upon selected location obtain
applicable permits, utility record searches, and infiltration testing to provide additional support
and proof of concept level project feasibility.
As a strawman concept, CWE shall offer the tiered multi-cell subsurface wetland concept shown
in Figure 1. During extended dry-weather periods, runoff flows would be diverted from concrete
lined sections of Sawpit, Santa Anita, potentially Arcadia Washes, or Peck Lake, and
discharged through a subsurface distribution manifold along the east side of the active wetland
cells to maintain vegetation vigor, retain nutrients and uptake water borne pollutants. Retention
within the wetland cells would be used to balance variable inflow volumes against infiltration
losses below the wetland, evapotranspiration above the wetland, and drainage. Clarified
subsurface discharges would be collected in an oversized channel along the west side of the
wetland cells and drain south to Peck Lake. If dry-weather urban runoff volumes continue to
decrease due to conservation, a smaller recirculation line from the lake could be constructed as
part of the proposed Los Angeles County water diversion and conservation pump station
project, which may benefit in the reduction of water column nutrient impairments in Peck Lake.
The distribution manifold and collection drain would be constructed to maintain water levels
below the wetland surface, prevent vector development, and isolate the individual wetland cells
to allow drying of the surficial vegetation and accumulated sediments, to facilitate maintenance
related removal.
•
~ +Y I A" . -N,
+.1 -°, ... .-\4- °-2A Ir t mo1.a;r-
r Y :.y.. --- N: i t' 1 ` -- In6a -:UM
-Y s' y e, - - ,Y. _
4,
�a r a
t.
l ,S ,/ 'LV r
.+• i1 .j�it��y�,'', T,j�d6' •,..-f 4i�'-�r �r. y "p°l/i'"m F lia .~
. if i
i �•/ r; �Y,.*Yet n \° M` i t )°' • 0': iyr "j �„,_
YID ..,, ,J *S i . v.,_ .r 14'''1,,::+.e _ sa Ts " ,/►A
Y-b. - I ' �� t VI twcr� yyr��t}'...tp ,.a ,i r -.4• 4.-?�+t+�t ir■'. �.
RXt�fr:se:4 A�� 3 j �,F•' �r 3S`A • atx:f_-Y�p`t. ri?''r.... f�/*',---,7 fT •-. ...„ i
i ,,v Y l� �%ti;04's;. F f S £ y ^J1",.y, -c'-'4`gn�r'''ice. r� 7 4.;171:77
a,_ { y 7 `
. I„ 1 'I" i' '' .--r . ty.. '' - - . / C'' F i 1✓`-4rat ' wZl-Y�.ti
;::: . :::41% �{/�(]p- `aSLtbwru'Q ti� j •'. . '~ F ��i� ;
- • - i !' - 4„ _, } t Iy ii ...Y�,• ` tit .i .
• : 'fi°,it � 1.. .A.' ". Ma'. e r •-.i'".• : fC If - to +7,-',.. .�•i .. "F
' ,. �M' .. r� ±- r ,o-.0:':.v .4 k ';''':,..",,,:l$, Su . � . ` ,°°
wfoec _ - u� + IF'' T .� f' y i'2%
.
L _ .
1 '° 'w 'SUZY ,'�►
Y. -
,, A ' lMknd React-Wtlf -° .z-
Y.Ay - OGC and SplIway • 4T..° r )"-:"4; " '"h...
a'f t`a'r yt,. ,.Y
Figure 1 Strawman Regional Runoff Pretreatment Wetland Concept
During wet-weather, gravity flows would be diverted, using an inflatable rubber dam, near the
. confluence of the Peck Road Drain with Sawpit Wash, to a high flow weir along the north side of
Wetland Cell 1. (Conceptually, Santa Anita and Arcadia Washes could also be.conveyed to the
high.flow weir, but wetland surface or overflow performance specifications should first be better
assessed.) While some stormwater would be retained within the cells, or filter through the
wetland subsurface to the east collection channel, the majority would sequentially drain south
over the surface and through the emergent vegetation of the tiered wetland cells; resulting in the
retention of sediments and attached pollutants. Clarified runoff would then be collected along
the south side of Cell 3 and flow east back into Sawpit Wash and Peck Lake, where infiltration
and groundwater recharge would occur.
Annually, after the spring nesting season, one of the three wetland cells would be taken out of
service, dried over the summer, and surficial vegetation and sediments harvested during
August, while preserving the tuberous subsurface root system. Once the cell is returned to
active use, emergent vegetation should rise through the reticulated support matrix surface and
within two months be ready to withstand the coming winter storms. Having three wetland cells
would encourage consumptive use of dry-weather runoff, inflow of summer thunderstorms, or
delayed emergent growth in cells undergoing maintenance.
If the Strawman location, under an existing automotive part recycling facility, is found to be
unsuitable, a similar alternative could be considered for the east side of Sawpit Wash, based on
the interpretation of land use conditions in agreements between the City of Monrovia and the
material resource company(ies).
Since it is unclear that a similar over/under wetland design has been evaluated or constructed
elsewhere, the feasibility task includes research to develop reasonably projectable flow,
sedimentation, and pollutant retention potentials, based on comparable BMP and wastewater
applications. Bracketed operational objectives would need to be developed, with regulatory
input, so that agreed upon performance expectations can be utilized in the development of
performance, design, and RAA criteria. A follow on pilot study should also be planned as a
future work effort that is beyond the scope of this proposal.
Once the feasibility of a regional project approach can be confidently identified, CWE will clearly
define the proposed alternative regional project approach in an effort to secure LARWQCB
support; along with that of locally relevant Non-Governmental Organization (NGOs) if Optional
Task A is included. Two (2) drafts and one (1) final Technical Memorandum (TM) will be
prepared identifying the following criteria:
• Alternative proposed pretreatment and infiltration project concept locations
> Tributary drainage areas and necessary ancillary facilities (pump stations, diversion
lines)
> Design treatment capture, infiltration, and flow through water volumes
> Research related to wetland concept and design criteria
> Preliminary Operation and Maintenance (O&M) assumptions and annual cost estimates
> Multi-benefit natural resource and recreation features or attributes
> Concept level design and construction costs
> Proposed implementation schedule with consideration of regulatory authorities
> Event characteristics likely to produce cascading flows from Peck Lake
> Geotechnical, utility search, and infiltration rate study results
> Draft Peck Lake watershed RAA incorporating pretreatment and infiltration facility
assumptions
Deliverable: Consultant shall produce two (2) Draft Regional Pretreatment Facility
Feasibility Analysis TMs and one (1) Final TM Report including soil testing, utility search,
and infiltration study results.
Task 3—Reasonable Assurance Analysis to Demonstrate Compliance
Along with those submitted by other watershed groups, the utility of the LARWQCB-approved
EWMP was compromised, by being unable to functionally distinguish between the impact on
downstream receiving water quality objectives from compliant and non-compliant discharges. In
other words, MS4 discharges that rarely reach receiving water should warrant a lower
implementation priority than runoff which frequently contributes. Similarly the Basin Plan allows
that some beneficial uses, such as Wetland (WET) may accommodate the "infiltration and
purification of naturally occurring contaminants." This is especially true for the RH/SGR WQG,
and areas immediately downstream, where active iterative management for water conservation
distorts RAA model results and assumptions. Based on design and operational constraint
assumptions and data developed in Tasks 1 and 2, with input from regulatory staff and upper
watershed management agencies, CWE shall first analyze and demonstrate the isolation, or
hydraulic discontinuity, of areas above Peck Road Park Dam along with similar drainage
conveyance, capture, and infiltration facilities such as Santa Fe Dam and the Lower Bradbury
Channel. A traditional RAA, and determination of daily pollutant loadings, would be
unnecessary for this analysis, as its intent is to better understand and define patterns of water
conveyance under anticipated operational scenarios.
Furthermore, in some areas the analysis may benefit from a simple alteration of hydraulic
characteristics. For example, assuming the Lower Bradbury functions as a detention basin
above existing underutilized spreading grounds, then the frequency of cascading flows can be
reduced by simply enlarging the diversion conveyance capacity to those spreading grounds,
perhaps with the inclusion of additional peak flow automation controls to address the rare event
when the diversion might not be accommodated. If flows are pumped from Arcadia Wash to
Peck Lake, the impact of larger pumps could be analyzed.
Following the analysis of hydraulic discontinuity in a simple catchment to establish guidance
rules, CWE shall conduct an RAA specific to the Peck Lake watershed, incorporating the
proposed pre-treatment wetland facility and modeling to retain runoff within Peck Lake for
groundwater recharge while providing hydraulic discontinuity from downstream drainage
conveyances and impairments. This supports most existing limitations, since the wet-weather
bacteria TMDL includes suspension of Water Quality Objective during Allowable Exceedance
Days (AED) and High-Flow Suspension (HFS) conditions, while settlement and retention of
sediment in the wetland, along with the Board-approved Water Effects Ratio (WER) and lead
recalculation Site Specific Objectives (SSO) are anticipated to address metal pollutant
discharges.
Remaining pollutant loads, within the Peck Lake watershed, would be controlled using BMPs
previously identified in the LARWQCB EO-approved EWMP; however, the following
reprioritization task would likely defer their implementation until monitoring can demonstrate the
functional effectiveness of the paired pretreatment and lake capture based groundwater
recharge opportunity. Analysis of other areas of the RH/SGR WQG area, which were
performed during preparation of the approved EWMP, would only be reanalyzed as necessary
to address new partially effective flow and load reduction proposals.
Deliverable: Consultant shall produce Hydrologic and Hydraulic analyses to
characterize or demonstrate partial and full hydraulic discontinuity of the RH/SGR area
from downstream conveyances and impairments. Watershed Management Modeling
System (WMMS) based RAA models, similar in content to those previously reviewed
and approved of by LARWQCB staff, however including baseline and proposed Peck
Lake Watershed, and other similarly modified catchment areas, with milestone
implementation and TMDL compliance dates pollutant load analyses.
Task 4— Reprioritization for EWMP Regional Projects
While dependent on the confirmation of assumptions and results developed during earlier tasks,
the RAA will provide valuable insights to support the reprioritization of catchment and the
EWMP identified projects they contain. As an example if the Lower Bradbury Channel functions
as detention basin for most flow events, than the assumed benefit of the eastern Royal Oaks
Trail project drops substantially. If Peck Dam provides isolation and the strawman pretreatment
wetland allows the beneficial use of the lake for groundwater recharge, then the Recreation and
Sierra Vista Park projects could be deferred until wetland construction is completed and its
efficacy demonstrated through CIMP based water quality and sediment monitoring. In order to
streamline efforts, reduce exorbitant EWMP project implementation costs, and provide realistic
implementation schedules for water quality enhancement throughout the watershed, consultant
shall evaluate opportunities to reduce the total number of proposed regional projects and green
streets. Initially this effort will focus on the Peck Lake Watershed and then shift to the Arcadia
Wash Watershed, assuming that a diversion for that watershed, as conceptually shown in
Figure 2, continues to be a preferred and viable alternative, following completion of the
feasibility TM.
a,{.r 3ti i .�: _ i'y :4 r f rr l.�, 2T'C'f"+-y • a__'__ .w(,_$,�"g��fit'J i`ryt 1,
1 ti t xY t-`O emir} o-, ti.i1s r t a• S r `L'�:�� .-it r' r� i 1✓ - Imo`,-`.
_ -,Y 41 ,,i ..=_-,2.-1.;., ,. 1 ! -,;.;e7-1.4:1, :7-,.7, -,,„7 yy r+, . }y, ,f C`
'( ys'i- ^:1 i:•+.� ,r��,- ]fit''J L f�* .< T.,, _� ./'J ','„'tC.,./..n !�V'`G1_'.S
. _..R 'n Jr..*it r7- 1", r' •tti'9 '11C�i- l:e..x .i hsunc�e.0 1
T~1�s .,.}j'1.r.Cle..M t t� F yi .r-ti, wr� 4'+•° rM�'. Wetland" If VI-
i ce, *; i x �s + I • n'`-.r• t� . - , ( ...4 r .li- 1or-••"%.. ,yi,Y `�'�-� `�,c
v- ? '%t . 'Pier '-= i ....r - '_ •. <'1'�
'}� +* 41' ' B e,1 t a f/ e��`_ 'Ic , r a 'I ios,ae z ie . •
, ,,..1'' ''r-+ . .It "f ';I _ •. j tnfllt`ratign r ti`
r:'..�i.`".„ :-4.412;"'1,1 tir •.'.. r 1 f. t, Gs tern / - ..",/., ,,,..,., x tS
t 1rr-- l'r.h'a 1 Bpi" i.-7� ..' N 4, ltip•t �'^c a 4.rs. Y .,s.-":1 ' 't •l f' ,, 1 irrigation, ., z '
}�� z* i t .uf P et1 1 lsr ".•iv- �. �g."!.ti 4 I',
''i4''_:'="1„i..4 r'�. „tib , t i e'!.7 477 1 L ,[QAfswe..� r� _,,
ttt .= �,l1r fd..-"•Z.Sar1..t.:.2,.J tk1 e/ ' Qt i� ���1;
it tt.71 3..:7'.,. f+*9.- 3 . �a; ^ e..
t4 -,"i i o! '. re+ `S .:4%.-u,1 �)`t, Sand Filter ,..,'..),r :'..?...`.:..?'..s.. •-:::..,72 ,1
.3�' Ir r'' (er�.dg �'^ •(pF ✓ - .., -.w .t.-cro„17,t1re +�l,Y "'''.i'...‘,1_:.4-.;',....%.•,`/, s'.
t ,rte .. a9V, ,.-„-�, •.,1;el: t ti,f. _{� ,fir,,::.t* . , .
±�.tt s9„s o 2 w,0 }`� tir r, .�., J+." t j "ate
l:4trs'-3, f ss?s.�:._� f'�° " d pi y; }d� s: se 1�j./0-r i1`4) ,�7t F ,z`p
' • r+s :fir Oe Stf q.,....-:_s;i r %r 7'+y1.1j Z. i~ 4 o fi''
�.,,/, ,wEq,Y i N I * r { ./- ; f 7 5L�„ ..>r1' r a ,-- 4--,t, 1 K,kj
k '' 4- / 0\3' (L.r.
:tit i y 'ra i"• 1 +t' `�", t 1*' 7 i 4 d'-r�1." `i�t 1 9t bra. d f 2�'.;J•�L—
y�- _ .',"dun ifrjrj 0 yir: ; - ,k; t -;^^' "r. , r ,xj 1•'i , .i
y 1 f j 1.r r*E.4 � r.*. •r �), - f y�.. r�tr}>.
r y Pump Stat nrt� b l-v 'e r� � i7-.}�p"C f �'t'Y�7 ��,,
p'j. ; - _,..4;:h../.....� i, et�`t d '�. r' ..r ^�h1s> _ Jam!'/y7 '`ti ''.4.4..,„_"-:-",„')%"'
"Z., Diversio uati••re F�- dx^1'1:1 f '.?tz+;s '64.40:- ./Wl'`.5r.i.' 'C7�' .~ 47.-14k''4'‘'."). -.rye,.:
eiY $ -I _f.. ti �. rxe. t_ ,,
Figure 2 Hypothetical Arcadia Wash Diversion Concept
The consultant shall focus on an analysis of implementation strategies for Peck Lake, which is
extensively managed by RH/SGR WQG Permittees. However, a similar analysis could be
undertaken for Santa Fe Dam, which is operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or the
Irwindale Spreading Ground and Manning Mineral Resources Pit Facilities that are within an
adjacent EWMP Group. In the latter case, several WMP and EWMP groups, that include Los
Angeles County agencies, could benefit from a concept feasibility analysis. Once the current
Peck Lake strategy has been vetted with the Permittees and LARWQCB, consultant shall
perform a similar feasibility analysis within the San Gabriel River portion of the WQG area,
assuming that operational information can be developed with the assistance of the agencies
responsible for facility operation and their future development. No geotechnical, utility, or
infiltration studies would be conducted until such time as pilot or full scale over/under wetland
effectiveness has been assessed, and the project concepts further defined with the
operationally responsible agencies. These effectiveness criteria are not anticipated to be met
within the current proposal scope of work.
Deliverable: Consultant shall revise or amend EWMP or Adaptive Management
Process Chapter or attachment, proposing new EWMP Regional Project implementation
priorities, planning schedules, and interim milestone dates based on pollutant and flow
priorities.
Task 5— RH/SGR WQC and LARWQCB Meetings
While preparation of the original LARWQCB-approved EWMP stretched over 40 months, this
project is anticipated to be substantially complete prior to submission of the Report of Waste
Discharge (ROWD) on June 28, 2017; however, a similar number of client and regulatory
meetings will likely be necessary. Consultant shall meet with LARWQCB staff on a monthly
basis requiring ten (10) meetings, while fifteen (15) client meetings are anticipated to occur
mostly at the midway point between monthly Board meetings and including additional
opportunities to summarize and discuss important technical findings. Meetings related to RAA
assumptions, criteria, and narrow technical issues may be separated from broader regulatory
policy and permit interpretation meetings, so that the appropriate participants and agency staff
are present, and the time of others not wasted on issues where little impact will be provided.
Consultant shall hold an early November kickoff meeting to outline and resolve potential issues
that might slow progress, following change order issuance and receipt of the Notice to Proceed
(NTP). During this meeting, the approach will be summarized and the scope of work tasks
discussed so that Group preferences and reservations identified and further characterized.
Understanding issues is the key to resolving them before they can become problems. This
meeting will provide the foundation for communication and an opportunity for CWE to gain an
understanding of Group expectations and concerns regarding the tasks identified in this
proposal Scope of Work.
Draft meeting agenda will be prepared and distributed two days prior to meeting dates, sign-in
sheets distributed during the meetings, and a brief meeting summaries drafted within two days
following each meeting. Consultant staff shall facilitate discussion and resolution of the
important meeting topics while allowing for productive consideration of alternative concepts.
Issues beyond resolution and overly speculative will be identified as such, and tabled, in order
that progress may continue on the project as a whole. This is anticipated to include the
construction of inter-watershed water conservation systems and sediment removal schemes
that will be undertaken by groups other than the RH/SGR WQG as a whole.
Deliverable: Electronic agenda, completed sign-in sheets, and meeting summaries
shall be prepared by consultant and provided to the RH/SGR WQG lead, then retained
in the consultant's project files for at least three years.
Task 6—Adaptive Management Process/EWMP Plan Amendment
The 2012 MS4 Permit, which was subsequently amended and released on July 1, 2015,
anticipated that modification of an approved EWMP might occur through several potential and
possibly overlapping methods, including: Annual Report submission, the Adaptive.Management
Process (AMP), Comprehensive Alternating Year EWMP Evaluation, EWMP redevelopment in
2021, and CWE further suggests that the ROWD may provide another potential mechanism for
EWMP revision. CWE shall assist the WQG and LARWQCB in determining the least intrusive
method, with the exception of complete EWMP and RAA revision, whereby the proposed
modifications and analyses can be considered by Board staff while still fulfilling required
intrusive permit conditions that might otherwise be imposed on the WQG. Our expectation is
that the AMP can be used to characterize the nature of the revisions contemplated in this
proposal and the ROWD a vehicle for providing a rationale for deviating from Permit
requirements, by allowing existing ongoing beneficial uses to conserve runoff water, when
protected by pretreatment.
Deliverable: Consultant shall produce an EWMP, AMP, or ROWD chapter, attachment,
or amendment that explains how the proposed regional project achieves WQG and
LARWQCB water conservation and pollution prevention goals and objectives as
identified for EWMPs in the 2012 MS4 Permit.
Task 7— Project Management
Project management includes client communication, staff chartering, project coordination,
schedule and budget tracking, and invoicing. Consultant shall proactively engage the RH/SGR
WQG with timely and concise result-driven communications that will facilitate progress in a
productive and timely manner. Challenges with intra and inter agency coordination, permitting,
document exchange, and outreach, will be initially conveyed the WQG Project Manager, the
agency representative to the WQG, the WQG Technical Committee and finally the WQG
Steering Committee, if necessary.
Deliverable: Consultant shall produce schedule updates and monthly, or quarterly,
invoices whose frequency will be correlated with the volume of work effort expended and
anticipated invoice magnitude.
Task 8—Geotechnical Evaluation
Consultant team.shall bore up to 68 borings, at up to six proposed project sites, using a hollow
stem auger drill rig that will extend to depths of up to 60 feet. Once the proposed locations for
drilling have been identified, the number of tests to be conducted at each project site will be
proposed based on the methods and guidelines of the LACDPW, but may be reduced if access
is not granted by the land owner, or if the guidelines exceed the maximum of sixty eighty (68)
borings proposed. Percolation tests depths will be determined based on an evaluation of
preliminary project concepts and depths of MS4 infrastructure from which the projects will divert
from.
Test samples will be collected during drilling in general accordance with the appropriate
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) methods. Standard Penetration Testing
(SPT) and sampling using standard split-spoon or Modified California samplers will be
performed at approximately 2.5-foot intervals for the upper ten feet below ground surface
followed by samples at 5-foot intervals to the maximum depths drilled. Bulk samples will be
collected for the upper soils encountered in each boring. In addition, we will observe and record
•
groundwater levels during and after drilling. Once the samples have been collected and
classified in the field, they will be placed in appropriate sample containers for transport to the
laboratory.
Consultant shall contact Underground Services Alert for the location of utilities within the public
right-of-way. The CWE team assumes that no drilling permits or traffic control will be required to
perform our field services within the parks and all permits will be issued by the respective
City(ies) at no cost. We assume that drilling permits will be required for borings associated with
the LADWP Easement project. If traffic control is needed, setup will conform to the Work Area
Traffic Control Handbook (WATCH).
The samples will be tested in the laboratory to determine physical engineering characteristics.
The findings will be summarized in a geotechnical report, which will include subsurface
exploration procedures, soil conditions encountered, site preparation/earthwork
recommendations, foundation recommendations for subsurface structures, trench construction
recommendations, lateral earth pressures, boring logs, groundwater levels, infiltration rates and
recommended factors of safety, and drainage recommendations.
Deliverable:. Consultant shall produce one (1) Draft and one (1) Final Geotechnical
Reports, in electronic (PDF) format.
Task 9—Stakeholder Outreach Meetings
The 2012 MS4 Permit requires significant Stakeholder outreach, which was completed during
preparation of the approved EWMP. To the degree that the LARWQCB considers this project a
significant revision of the approved EWMP, they may also direct additional outreach efforts.
Consultant shall host, at a location provided by the WQG, up to three (3) meetings to identify
projects objectives, limitations, and facilitate the identification of reasonable and achievable
mitigation strategies that might then be incorporated into discussions with the LARWQCB and
other deliverable products anticipated in this proposal.
Deliverable: Consultant shall produce facilitation services for up to three (3)
stakeholder or stakeholder and LARWQCB meetings, including agenda, sign-in sheets,
PowerPoint presentation, and summaries.
Task 10— Develop MS4 Permit Compliance Assessment
The 2012 MS4 Permit was amended on July 1, 2015, again in September 8, 2016, a new
Annual Reporting format was distributed this summer, and the LARWQCB is likely to partially
assessed permit compliance based on progressive implementation of the most recent EWMP
and CIMP revisions. The WQG currently consists of eight agencies; however there has been
recent discussion regarding potential new partners and the realignment of WQG Permittees. As
it has become difficult for WQG members to integrate, and respond with a coordinated voice, to
these evolving documents and programs. Consultant shall review the relevant regulatory
documents and prepare a summary compliance assessment or checklist to facilitate
implementation and WQG progress in achieving shared regulatory and water quality objectives.
Deliverable: Consultant shall prepare a compliance assessment checklist to facilitate
Permittee staff in cost-effectively prioritizing the implementation of 2012 MS4 Permit and
other associated requirements.
Task 11 —Incorporation of Board EWMP Comments
On April 1, 2016, the LARWQCB provided comments and requested edits that needed to be
incorporated by April 14, 2016, so that the LARWQCB Executive Officer could approve of the
RH/SGR WQG EWMP by the MS4 Permit deadline of April 28, 2016. While these corrections
were completed and EWMP approved, other documents are now in conflict with portions of the
EWMP and must be reconciled to coordinate with the approved EWMP. Consultant shall review
the CIMP and LARWQCB Board notices, then provide recommendations on how to effectively
reconcile the discrepancies, so that they may be incorporated in the Report of Waste Discharge
(ROWD) to be submitted to the LARWQCB by June 28, 2017.
Deliverable: An informal summary of conflicts and discrepancies among 2012 MS4
Permit regulatory documents that could be utilized in ROWD development and
submission.
•
Exhibit "C"
COMPENSATION
Compensation shall be based on time and materials spent in accordance with the
following tasks, not to exceed the total compensation listed:
Development & Enhanced Watershed
Management Program Planning Services $790,537.00
Amendment to Enhanced Watershed Management $521,682.50
Program Planning Services
Total Compensation: $1,312,219.50
The total compensation shall not exceed the total listed without written authorization in
accordance with Section 3.3.1 of this Agreement. (See attached fee breakdown).
Fee
To our knowledge, this proposed work plan is unique in analyzing how to cost-effectively utilize
a highly modified and already impaired lacustrine receiving water body to continue providing a
critically important groundwater recharge beneficial use, by implementing a uniquely designed
pretreatment wetland. The LARWQCB, and their staff, have publically shared their support for
the broad concept contemplated in this proposal, without fundamentally characterizing and
memorializing a process that would reduce the unknowns and protect local Permittees and their
consultants from unanticipated costs. In the following budget summary table, CWE proposes a
Task Level of Effort fee estimate, to support the proposed scope of work. Some tasks, such as
meetings, may be reduced or diverted by the WQG to support alternative analyses or work
efforts; however, both the WQG and CWE will have to remain focused on "must have" study
needs and avoid unproductive "wants" and "what if" analyses, that slows the project schedule
and unjustifiably consume budget. CWE's consistent goal is to provide our client with an
implementable and useful final work product, rather than generate wasteful change order
requests driven by unproductive re-analyses. This budget reflects our intent to provide high
quality innovative services to the RH/SGR WQG. As in the past, we welcome the opportunity to
narrow the scope of work and budget with you, to better reflect the Group's perception of
relative level of effort associated with each of the proposal tasks.
Task 1—Analyze Existing Facility Flow and Operational Data $27,950.00
Task 2—Regional Project Pretreatment Feasibility Analysis $64,600.00
Task 3—Reasonable Assurance Analysis to Demonstrate Compliance $68,800.00
Task 4—Analysis and Reprioritization for EWMP Regional Projects $57,500.00
Task 5—RH/SGRWQC and LARWQCB Meetings $46,600.00
Task 6—Adaptive Management Process/EWMP Plan Amendment $38,700.00
Task 7—Project Management $28,800.00
Task 8—Geotechnical Evaluations $100,000.00
Task 9—Stakeholder Outreach Meetings Supplemental Fee $14,6000.00
Task 10—Develop Permit Compliance Assessment Form $15,000.00
Task 11—Incorporation of Board EWMP Comments $7,000.00
Contingency $52,132.50
Total Fee For Primary Proposal Scope of Work Tasks $521,682.50
CITY OF ARCADIA
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE ENHANCED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
FOR THE RIO HONDO /SAN GABRIEL RIVER WATER QUALITY GROUP
1. PARTIES AND DATE.
This Agreement is made and entered into this eclay of 2013
by and between the City of Arcadia, a charter city organized under the konstitution and
laws of the State of California with its principal place of business at 240 West
Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California 91066 -6021 ( "City ") and California Watershed
Engineering (CWE), a California Corporation, with its principal place of business at
1561 E. Orangethorpe Avenue, Suite 240, Fullerton, CA 92831 ( "Consultant "). City
and Consultant are sometimes individually referred to as "Party" and collectively as
"Parties."
2. RECITALS.
2.1 Consultant.
Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of
certain professional services required by the City on the terms and conditions set forth
in this Agreement. Consultant represents that it is experienced in providing
development of enhanced watershed management program planning services to public
clients, is licensed in the State of California, and is familiar with the plans of City.
2.2 Project.
City desires to engage Consultant to render such services for the development of
the Enhanced Watershed Management Program Plan for the Rio Hondo /San
Gabriel River Water Quality Group ( "Project ") as set forth in this Agreement.
2.3 Memorandum of Understanding
A Memorandum of Understanding ( "MOU ") was made and entered into by and
between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the County of Los Angeles, the
City, and the Cities of Azuza, Bradbury, Duarte, Monrovia, and Sierra Madre
(collectively referred to herein as "MOU Participating Agencies" or individually as "MOU
Participating Agency ") on May 21, 2013 regarding the administration and cost sharing
for development of the enhanced watershed management program for the Rio Hondo/
San Gabriel River Water Quality Group's Watershed. In accordance with the MOU, City
is acting as the contract administrator on behalf of the MOU Participating Agencies.
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
3. TERMS.
3.1 Scope of Services and Term.
3.1.1 General Scope of Services. Consultant promises and agrees to
furnish to the City all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and
customary work necessary to fully and adequately supply the professional development
and program planning consulting services necessary for the Project ( "Services "). The
Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with,
this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and
all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations.
3.1.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from date of execution
to June 30, 2015, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. Consultant shall
complete the Services within the term of this Agreement, and shall meet any other
established schedules and deadlines.
3.2 Responsibilities of Consultant.
3.2.1 Control and Payment of Subordinates; Independent Contractor.
The Services shall be performed by Consultant or under its supervision. Consultant will
determine the means, methods and details of performing the Services subject to the
requirements of this Agreement. City retains Consultant on an independent contractor
basis and not as an employee. Consultant retains the right to perform similar or
different services for others during the term of this Agreement. Any additional personnel
performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall also not be
employees of City and shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and
control. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such
personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and
as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations
respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes,
income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers'
compensation insurance.
3.2.2 Schedule of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services
expeditiously, within the term of this Agreement, and in accordance with the Schedule of
Services set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
Consultant represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to
perform the Services in conformance with such conditions. In order to facilitate
Consultant's conformance with the Schedule, City shall respond to Consultant's
submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of City, Consultant shall provide a more
detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services.
3.2.3 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by
Consultant shall be subject to the prior written approval of City.
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
3.2.4 Substitution of Key Personnel. Consultant has represented to City
that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this
Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Consultant
may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence upon prior written approval
of City. In the event that City and Consultant cannot agree as to the substitution of key
personnel, City shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause. As discussed
below, any personnel who fail or refuse to perform the Services in a manner acceptable
to the City, or who are determined by the City to be uncooperative, incompetent, a
threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of
persons or property, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Consultant at
the request of the City. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as
follows: Jason Pereira, Principal.
3.2.5 City's Representative. The City hereby designates Tom Tait, Public
Works Services Director, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the
performance of this Agreement ( "City's Representative "). City's Representative shall
have the power to act on behalf of the City for all purposes under this Contract.
Consultant shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the City's
Representative or his or her designee.
3.2.6 Consultant's Representative. Consultant hereby designates Jason
Pereira, Principal, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the
performance of this Agreement ( "Consultant's Representative "). Consultant's
Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Consultant
for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant's Representative shall supervise
and direct the Services, using his best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all
means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory
coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement.
3.2.7 Coordination of Services. Consultant agrees to work closely with
City staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to City's staff,
consultants and other staff at all reasonable times.
3.2.8 Standard of Care: Performance of Employees. Consultant shall
perform all Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner,
consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals
in the same discipline in the State of California. Consultant represents and maintains
that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Finally,
Consultant represents that it, its employees and subcontractors have all licenses,
permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to
perform the Services, including a City Business License, and that such licenses and
approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. As provided for in
the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, Consultant shall perform, at its own
cost and expense and without reimbursement from the City, any services necessary to
correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Consultant's failure to comply with
the standard of care provided for herein. Any employee of the Consultant or its sub-
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
3
consultants who is determined by the City to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to
the adequate or timely completion of the Project, a threat to the safety of persons or
property, or any employee who fails or refuses to perform the Services in a manner
acceptable to the City, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Consultant
and shall not be re- employed to perform any of the Services or to work on the Project.
3.2.9 Laws and Regulations. Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of
and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any
manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA
requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Consultant shall be liable for all
violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If the Consultant
performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and
without giving written notice to the City, Consultant shall be solely responsible for all
costs arising therefrom. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold City, its officials,
directors, officers, and employees free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification
provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or
alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations.
3.2.9.1 Immigration Reform and Control Act. Consultant
acknowledges that Consultant, and all subcontractors hired by Consultant to perform
services under this Agreement, are aware of and understand the Immigration Reform
and Control Act ( "IRCA "). Consultant is and shall remain in compliance with the IRCA
and shall ensure that any subcontractors hired by Consultant to perform services under
this Agreement are in compliance with the IRCA. In addition, Consultant agrees to
indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its directors, officials, officers and
employees, from any liability, damages or causes of action arising out of or relating to
any claims that Consultant's employees, or the employees of any subcontractor hired by
Consultant, are not authorized to work in the United States for Consultant or its
subcontractor and /or any other claims based upon alleged IRCA violations committed
by Consultant or Consultant's subcontractor(s).
3.2.10 Insurance.
3.2.10.1 Time for Compliance. Consultant shall not
commence Work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the
City that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Consultant
shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has
provided evidence satisfactory to the City that the subcontractor has secured all
insurance required under this section; provided, however, that in lieu thereof, the
Consultant may provide evidence to the City that all subcontractors are additional
insureds under the Consultant's policies of insurance.
3.2.10.2 Minimum Requirements. Consultant shall, at its
expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against
claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in
connection with the performance of the Agreement by the Consultant, its agents,
Revised 04,13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
4
representatives, employees, subcontractors and volunteers. Consultant shall also
name and obtain insurer's consent to naming the MOU Participating Agencies, their
directors, officials, officers, and employees as an additional insured with proof of
certificate of insurance that they are an additional insured. Such insurance shall meet
at least the following minimum levels of coverage:
(A) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be
when commercially available (occurrence based) at least as broad as the latest version
of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General
Liability coverage for premises and operations, contractual liability, personal injury,
bodily injury, independent contractors, broadform property damage, explosion, collapse,
and underground, products and completed operations; (2) Automobile Liability:
Insurance Services Office Business Auto coverage for any auto owned, leased, hired,
and borrowed by Consultant or for which Consultant is responsible; and (3) Workers'
Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation insurance as required
by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance.
The MOU Participating Agencies, their directors, officials, officers, and employees shall
be listed as additional insured. Any deductibles or self- insured retentions must be
declared to and approved by City and conform to the requirements provided in Section
3.2.10.6 herein.
(B) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall
maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per
occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage, with an aggregate
limit of $1,000,000. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general
aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this
Agreement /location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required
occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident
for bodily injury and property damage; and (3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's
Liability: Workers' Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California. Employer's Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or
disease.
3.2.10.3 Professional Liability. Consultant shall procure and
maintain, and require its sub - consultants to procure and maintain, for a period of three
(3) years following completion of the Project, errors and omissions liability insurance
appropriate to their profession. Such insurance shall be in an amount not less than
$1,000,000 per claim, and shall be endorsed to include contractual liability.
3.2.10.4 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies
shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall provide endorsements on
forms supplied or approved by the City to add the following provisions to the insurance
policies:
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
5
(A) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be
endorsed to state that: (1) the MOU Participating Agencies, their directors, officials,
officers, and employees shall be covered as additional insured with respect to liability
arising out of Services operations and for completed operations performed by or on
behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection
with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects
the MOU Participating Agencies, their directors, officials, officers, and employees, or if
excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant's
scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self- insurance maintained by the
MOU Participating Agencies, their directors, officials, officers, employees and
volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not be called upon to
contribute with it in any way.
(B) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy
shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the MOU Participating Agencies, their directors,
officials, officers, and employees shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to
the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned,
leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant or for which the Consultant is responsible;
and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the MOU
Participating Agencies, their directors, officials, officers, and employees, or if excess,
shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant's scheduled
underlying coverage. Any insurance or self- insurance maintained by the MOU
Participating Agencies, their directors, officials, officers, and employees shall be excess
of the Consultant's insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any
way.
(C) Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability
Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the MOU
Participating Agencies, their directors, officials, officers, and employees for losses paid
under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the
Consultant.
(D) All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this
Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be, reduced or
canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested of cancellation, of intended non - renewal or endorsement reduction in limit or
scope of coverage; provided, however, that in the event of cancellation due solely to
non - payment of premium, ten (10) days notice of cancellation for non - payment of
premium may instead be given to the City.; and (B) any failure to comply with reporting
or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect
coverage provided to the MOU Participating Agencies, their directors, officials, officers,
and employees.
3.2.10.5 Separation of Insureds; No Special Limitations. All
insurance required by this Section shall contain standard separation of insureds
provisions. In addition, such insurance shall not contain any special limitations on the
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
6
scope of protection afforded to the MOU Participating Agencies, their directors, officials,
officers, and employees.
3.2.10.6 Deductibles and Self- Insurance Retentions. Any
deductibles or self- insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City.
Consultant shall guarantee that, at the option of the City, either: (1) the insurer shall
reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self- insured retentions as respects the MOU
Participating Agencies, their directors, officials, officers, and employees; or (2) the
Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses.
3.2.10.7 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed
with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating no less than A:VII, admitted or approved
to do business in California, and satisfactory to the City.
3.2.10.8 Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish City
with complete and accurate copies of current certificates of insurance and
endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to
the City. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed
by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf, and shall be on
forms provided by the City if requested. Copies of all certificates and endorsements
must be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves
the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any
time.
3.2.10.9 Safety. Consultant shall execute and maintain its
work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its
Services, the Consultant shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local,
state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary
precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the
conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions as applicable
shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life protection and life saving
equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and
subcontractors, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang
planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety
devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to
prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and
maintenance of all safety measures.
3.2.10.10 Material Breach. Lack of insurance does not negate
Consultant's obligations under this Agreement. Maintenance of proper insurance
coverage is a material element of this Agreement and failure to maintain or renew
coverage or to provide evidence of renewal may be treated by the City as a material
breach of the Agreement.
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
7
3.3 Fees and Payments.
3.3.1 Compensation. Consultant shall receive compensation, including
reimbursements which receive the City's prior written authorization, for all Services
rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference. The total compensation shall not exceed SEVEN
HUNDRED NINETY THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED AND THIRTY -SEVEN DOLLARS
AND NO CENTS, ($790,537), without written approval of the City Manager. Extra Work
may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the
rates and manner set forth in this Agreement.
3.3.2 Payment of Compensation. Consultant shall submit to City a
monthly itemized statement which indicates work completed and hours of Services
rendered by Consultant. The statement shall describe the amount of Services and
supplies provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the
subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the statement. City
shall, within forty -five (45) days of receiving such statement, review the statement and
pay all approved charges thereon.
3.3.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Consultant shall not be reimbursed
for any expenses unless prior written authorization is obtained from the City.
3.3.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, City
may request that Consultant perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means
any work which is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the
Project, but which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the
execution of this Agreement. Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for,
Extra Work without prior written authorization from City's Representative.
3.4 Accounting Records.
3.4.1 Maintenance and Inspection. Consultant shall maintain complete
and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred under this
Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a
representative of City during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make
transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this
Agreement. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings,
and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of
final payment under this Agreement.
3.5 General Provisions.
3.5.1 Termination of Agreement.
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
8
3.5.1.1 Grounds for Termination. City may, by written notice
to Consultant, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without
cause by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination, and specifying the
effective date thereof, at least seven (7) days before the effective date of such
termination. Upon termination, Consultant shall be compensated only for those services
which have been adequately rendered to City, and Consultant shall be entitled to no
further compensation. Consultant may not terminate this Agreement except for cause.
A termination without cause by City shall not act as or be deemed a waiver of any
potential known or unknown City claims associated with Consultant's performance prior
to the date of termination.
3.5.1.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated
as provided herein, City may require Consultant to provide all finished or unfinished
Documents and Data and other information of any kind prepared by Consultant in
connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall be
required to provide such document and other information within fifteen (15) days of the
request.
3.5.1.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is
terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, City may procure, upon such terms
and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those
terminated.
3.5.2 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this
Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such
other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose:
Consultant:
City:
California Watershed Engineering (CWE)
1561 E. Orangethorpe Avenue, Suite 240
Fullerton, CA 92831
Attn: Jason Pereira, Principal
City of Arcadia
240 West Huntington drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
Attn: Vanessa Hevener, Environmental Officer
Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty -
eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and
addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed
adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
9
3.5.3 Ownership of Materials and Confidentiality.
3.5.3.1 Documents & Data; Licensing of Intellectual Property.
This Agreement creates a non - exclusive and perpetual license for City to copy, use,
modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual
property embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other
documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including
but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on
computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under
this Agreement ( "Documents & Data "). Consultant shall require all subcontractors to
agree in writing that City is granted a non - exclusive and perpetual license for any
Documents & Data the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement. Consultant
represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to license any and all
Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard
to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than
Consultant or provided to Consultant by the City. City shall not be limited in any way in
its use of the Documents and Data at any time, provided that any such use not within
the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at City's sole risk.
3.5.3.2 Confidentiality. Except as otherwise required by
California law, all ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings,
descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other
Documents and Data either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the
performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant. Such materials
shall not, without the prior written consent of City, be used by Consultant for any
purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be
disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or
the Project. Nothing furnished to Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or
is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed
confidential. Consultant shall not use City's name or insignia, photographs of the
Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade
paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the
prior written consent of City.
3.5.4 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with
one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as
may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.
3.5.5 Indemnification.
3.5.5.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall
defend, indemnify and hold the City, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the
County of Los Angeles, the Cities of Azuza, Bradbury, Duarte, Monrovia, and Sierra
Madre, and each of their directors, officials, officers, and employees (each a WOU
Participating Agency ") free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of
action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
10
persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any
alleged acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers,
employees, agents, consultants and contractors arising out of or in connection with the
performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation
the payment of all consequential damages and attorney's fees and other related costs
and expenses. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent Consultant's Services are
subject to Civil Code Section 2782.8, the above indemnity shall be limited, to the extent
required by Civil Code Section 2782.8, to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to
the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant. Consultant shall
defend with Legal Counsel of City's choosing, at Consultant's own cost, expense and
risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind
that may be brought or instituted against a MOU Participating Agency, its directors,
officials, officers, and employees. Consultant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award
or decree that may be rendered against a MOU Participating Agency or its directors,
officials, officers, and employees, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding
arising from Consultant's performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement;
except to the extent that liability is caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct
by a MOU Participating Agency or its directors, officials, officers, and employees.
Consultant shall reimburse a MOU Participating Agency and its directors, officials,
officers, and employees, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of
them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided.
Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any,
received by a MOU Participating Agency, its directors, officials, officers, and employees,
and shall take effect immediately upon execution of this Agreement.
3.5.5.2 The duty to defend and to hold harmless, as set forth
above, shall include the duty to defend as established by Section 2778 of the California
Civil Code, and the duty to defend shall arise upon the making of any claim or demand
against a MOU Participating Agency, its respective officials, officers, agents, employees
and representatives, notwithstanding that no adjudication of the underlying facts has
occurred, and whether or not Consultant has been named in the claim or lawsuit.
3.5.6 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement
of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior
negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by
a writing signed by both Parties.
3.5.7 Attorney's Fees. If either party commences an action against the
other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with
this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and
recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and all other costs of such
action.
3.5.8 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of
the State of California. Venue shall be in Los Angeles County.
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
3.5.9 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every
provision of this Agreement.
3.5.10 City's Right to Employ Other Consultants. City reserves right to
employ other consultants in connection with this Project.
3.5.11 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the
successors and assigns of the Parties.
3.5.12 Assignment or Transfer. Consultant shall not assign, hypothecate,
or transfer, either directly or by operation of law, this Agreement or any interest herein
without the prior written consent of the City. Any attempt to do so shall be null and void,
and any assignees, hypothecates or transferees shall acquire no right or interest by
reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer.
3.5.13 Construction; References; Captions. Since the Parties or their
agents have participated fully in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this
Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for
or against any Party. Any term referencing time, days or period for performance shall
be deemed calendar days and not work days. All references to Consultant include all
personnel, employees, agents, and subcontractors of Consultant, except as otherwise
specified in this Agreement. All references to City include its elected officials, officers,
and employees except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. The captions of the
various articles and paragraphs are for convenience and ease of reference only, and do
not define, limit, augment, or describe the scope, content, or intent of this Agreement.
3.5.14 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or
amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by
both Parties.
3.5.15 Waiver. No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any
other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver,
benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a Party shall give the
other Party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.
3.5.16 No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party
beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.
3.5.17 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared
invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the
remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.
3.5.18 Prohibited Interests. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has
not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee
working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant
warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
12
a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage,
brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or
making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the
right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no
member, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall
have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material
benefit arising therefrom.
3.5.19 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an
equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor,
employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin,
handicap, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation or age. Such non - discrimination shall
include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading,
demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination.
Consultant shall also comply with all relevant provisions of City's Minority Business
Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related programs or guidelines
currently in effect or hereinafter enacted.
3.5.20 Labor Certification. By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies
that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which
require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to
undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to
comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services.
3.5.21 Authority to Enter Agreement. Consultant has all requisite power
and authority to conduct its business and to execute, deliver, and perform the
Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement
have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement and bind each
respective Party.
3.5.22 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts,
each of which shall constitute an original.
3.5.23 Exhibits and Recitals. All Exhibits and Recitals contained herein
are hereby incorporated into this Agreement by this reference.
3.6 Subcontracting.
3.6.1 Prior Approval Required. Consultant shall not subcontract any
portion of the work required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein,
without prior written approval of City. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision
making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement.
Revised 04113
24347.00400 \7931425.1
13
In witness whereof the Parties have executed this Professional Services
Agreement on the date set forth below.
CITY OF ARCADIA
Dominic Lazzare
City Manager
`.5�%--\ <5 , �2DI-�
Date
ATTEST:
I � ,
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
S ep n P. Deets 1
City Attorney
Revised 04/13
24347.00400 \7931425.1
CALIFORNIA WATERSHED ENGINEERING
14
By \( F��b
Signature
\l I K aorPN A ) c--c-0' jpPW 1 #AL
Print Name and Title
61 i � 1201'b
Date
By
Fhature
WN - Ef
Print Name and Title
Date
CONCUR:
Tom Ta t
Public Works Services Director
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.0 Background
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System Permit (MS4 Permit) Order No. R4- 2012 -0175 establishes the waste discharge
requirements for stormwater and nonstormwater discharges within the watersheds of
Los Angeles County. This MS4 Permit was adopted by the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board), on November 8, 2012,
and became effective on December 28, 2012.
The MS4 Permit and all attachments are posted on the Regional Board's website at the
following address:
http:// www. waterboards .ca.gov /losangeles /waterissues /programs /stormwater /municipal/
index.shtml
The MS4 Permit includes provisions that allow permittees the flexibility to customize
their stormwater programs to achieve compliance with certain receiving water limitations
and water quality based effluent limits over time. Specifically, permittees may voluntarily
choose to implement a Watershed Management Program (WMP) or an Enhanced
Watershed Management Program (EWMP).
Both the WMP and the EWMP include prioritization of water - quality issues, identification
of implementation strategies, control measures, and Best Management Practices
(BMPs) sufficient to meet pertinent standards, integrated water - quality monitoring, and
opportunity for stakeholder input.
The two alternatives differ in that while the WMP focuses exclusively on water - quality
improvement, the EWMP uses integrated planning to comprehensively evaluate
opportunities to implement multi- benefit regional projects. Through the EWMP,
permittees will not only implement projects to improve water quality, but also have
incentives to evaluate and, where feasible, implement regional projects that retain all
nonstormwater runoff and all stormwater runoff from the 85th percentile, 24 -hour storm
event for the drainage area tributary to those projects. These projects may also achieve
other benefits such as flood protection, water supply enhancement, recreational
opportunities, and wildlife habitat enhancement.
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
The following permittees are entering into a Memorandum of Understanding to jointly
develop an EWMP:
• County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (County)
• Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD)
• City of Arcadia
• City of Azusa
• City of Bradbury
• City of Duarte
• City of Monrovia
• City of San Marino
• City of Sierra Madre
2.0 Project Area
The Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers originate within the mountains of the Angeles
National Forest and flow through the San Fernando and San Gabriel Valleys. The rivers
extend across urbanized areas and eventually flow into the Los Angeles -Long Beach
Harbor and into the Pacific Ocean. The San Gabriel River flows approximately 60 miles,
while the Los Angeles River flows for approximately 40 miles. The Rio Hondo River is a
tributary of the Los Angeles River that begins at Peck Road Water Conservation Park,
which is fed from the Santa Anita Creek and Sawpit Wash. The Rio Hondo empties into
the Los Angeles River near Downey.
The Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers pass through Whittier Narrows Recreation Area
at the southern portion of the San Gabriel Valley where water is impounded by the
Whittier Narrows Dam. Both rivers have been highly modified with dams and concrete
channels. Several entities discharge into the rivers. This includes; large spreading
grounds for water conservation and groundwater recharge, outflows from sewage
treatment plants' reclaimed water, and non -point source contributions. Recreational and
educational opportunities are planned for the communities along these water bodies.
The Emerald Necklace Coalition is planning for a network of trails, bike - paths, parks
and green spaces along the Rio Hondo, San Gabriel River and lower portion of the Los
Angeles River.
The Project Area for the EWMP covers land within the geographical boundaries of the
Cities (and County /LACFD) properties indicated above. An addendum will be distributed
shortly after the release of this RFP to include a map to show the geographical
boundaries of the RH /SGRWQG. Please note, however, that additional watershed and
subwatersheds outside of the specified project area will have conditions that must be
considered when developing the RH /SGRWQG EWMP.
The RH /SGRWQG EWMP will need to be comprised of at least (2) chapters to address
the two major watersheds that member agencies have regulatory responsibilities. The
project area includes the Upper Rio Hondo Watershed (including Peck Park Lake and
Rio Hondo tributaries) which is a tributary of Reach 2 of the Los Angeles River
Watershed. The eastern portion of the project area includes the upper San Gabriel
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
River Watershed. The addendum will include percentages that each agency in the
RH /SGRWQG is attributed to watersheds.
3.0 Objectives
The objective of the consultant contract is to develop an EWMP and a corresponding
Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Plan (CIMP) for the RH /SGRWQG. The EWMP shall
prioritize water - quality issues and comprehensively evaluate opportunities for
multibenefit regional projects and maximize the recharge and capture and reuse of
stormwater runoff. Ultimately, the EWMP shall include controls to the maximum extent
practicable to ensure that discharges from Permittees' jurisdictions achieve applicable
water - quality standards pursuant to the MS4 Permit.
4.0 Task Items
The consultant shall be familiar with pertinent MS4 Permit provisions and applicable
TMDLs to complete the following work to the satisfaction of the RH /SGRWQG and the
Regional Board, and other associated bodies:
4.1 Provide project management and organize and conduct meetings
4.2 Prepare a Final EWMP Work Plan
4.3 Prepare a Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Plan (CIMP)
4.4 Design Project identification (for each watershed)
4.5 Prepare Draft EWMP Plan
4.6 Prepare a Final EWMP Plan
(Additive item: Prepare NOI in accordance with all requirements contained
within the new permit (Order R4- 2012 -0175) by May 15, 2013. The
RH /SGRWQG will provide a template NOI for this purpose.)
5.0 Project Management, Coordination, and Meetings
The Consultant shall provide project management services to ensure that all work
deliverables are provided on or ahead of schedule and within budget. The consultant
shall:
6.0 Provide a detailed schedule to complete all the tasks of this Scope of Work to be
approved by the RH /SGRWQG. This schedule shall be updated monthly and
provided to the RH /SGRWQG. It is estimated at issuance of this RFP that the
total number of regular meetings will be close to 30 monthly meetings plus a total
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -]
of 8 additional regular meetings that would be needed at the beginning and close
of the process. Also, it is estimated at issuance of this RFP that the meeting
duration would average 1.5 hours, but may be longer for the meetings at the
beginning and end of the process.
Schedule and prepare agendas and minutes for each regular and special
RH /SGRWQG meeting.
6.1 Attend and participate in meetings of the Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC), which will be established pursuant to the MS4 Permit to provide
input in the development of the EWMP. Consultant should assume that six
(6) TAC meetings will occur.
6.2 Attend and lead special meetings with the (RH /SGRWQD) and interested
parties to solicit input and feedback on the Draft EWMP Work Plan, Draft
CIMP, and Draft EWMP Plan. Consultant should assume that three (3)
special meetings will occur.
6.3 Attend and participate in meetings with Regional Board staff and other
stakeholders as needed. Consultant should assume that six (6) meetings
will occur.
7.0 Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) Work Plan
In consultation with the RH /SGRWQG and TAC, the Consultant shall prepare interim
technical memos, a draft Work Plan and a final EWMP Work Plan. The consultant shall
perform, at minimum, the following activities:
7.1 Organize the Work Plan, draft EWMP, and final EWMP into two chapters.
One chapter that meets the requirements for the Los Angeles River
Watershed and associated tributaries (Rio Hondo), and one chapter for
the San Gabriel River Watershed and associated tributaries. Organization
of final EWMP including the two separate chapters shall be consistent and
in compliance with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Board's
requirements.
7.2 Consultant will need to incorporate the existing and emerging work
products from various other individual WMPs, collective WMPs, and other
EWMPs as needed to address regional TMDL compliance for members of
the RH /SGRWQG.
7.3 Identification of Water Quality Priorities: Consultant shall develop a
memorandum characterizing water quality conditions within each WMA,
identifying water quality priorities, determining water body - pollutant
classifications, and assessing sources. Completion of the memorandum
shall include the following:
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
7.3.1 Compile all readily available, relevant, and appropriately collected
water quality monitoring datasets containing data collected within at least
the last 10 years (January 1, 2002). It is expected that the majority of
datasets will be provided by the (RH /SGRWQD) or be available from the
Regional Board. Consultant shall establish quality assurance /quality
control (QA /QC) criteria and conduct a QA/QC check of the data and
identification of the datasets meeting the criteria for use.
7.3.2 Evaluate existing water - quality conditions, including
characterization of stormwater and non - stormwater discharges from
the MS4 and the receiving water body. The evaluation shall
consider existing TMDLs and 303(d) listings as well as available
receiving water and outfall data compiled as part of the task above
and result in the identification of water - quality issues.
7.3.3 Identify the potential water - quality priorities including applicable
water quality based effluent limitations and /or receiving water
limitations established pursuant to TMDLs included in the MS4
Permit and 303(d) listings, and other exceedances of receiving
water limitations.
7.3.4 Classify water - quality issues resulting from stormwater and
nonstormwater discharges to the MS4 and from the MS4 to
receiving waters issues as Category 1 (Highest Priority), Category
2 (High Priority), or Category 3 (Medium Priority) as described in
the Permit.
7.3.5 Identify which 303(d) listings and other exceedances of receiving
water limitations are in the same class as those addressed in a
TMDL in the watershed.
7.3.6 Gather available reports and sampling information and research, to
identify, evaluate, and prioritize known and suspected stormwater
and non - stormwater pollutant sources in discharges to the MS4 and
from the MS4 to receiving waters and any other stressors related to
MS4 discharges causing or contributing to the highest water - quality
priorities (Categories 1 through 3).
7.3.7 Utilize the data compiled as part of the above tasks to complete a
source assessment for the water body - pollutant combinations in
Categories 1 through 3.
7.4 Summary of Existing and Potential Control Measures: Consultant shall
develop a memorandum characterizing existing control measures within
the RH /SGRWQG. The summary shall include:
24347.00400'793142 S. I
A -1
7.4.1 Compile existing control measures, including minimum control
measures, and BMP programs already in effect. Consultant shall
develop a template for RH /SGRWQG members to use to
summarize existing minimum control measures and identify areas
where modification to MCMs may be warranted. Consultant shall
compile submitted materials.
7.4.2 Outline a process for determining which MCMs could potentially be
modified, how to modify MCMs, and information that may be
necessary to support the modifications.
7.4.3 Review existing planning efforts, including TMDL IPs, IRWMPs, etc.
provided by the RH /SGRWQG for projects throughout the
watershed for possible inclusion in the EWMP. Summarize the
regional projects that are proposed in previous planning efforts
including location, preliminary design characteristics, and the status
of project implementation. Also summarize regional control
measures in existing plans that provide multiple benefits and
support beneficial reuse, recycling, or recharge of treated
stormwater in addition to opportunities to incorporate habitat
recreational, and open space.
7.4.4 Review and summarize data regarding performance of regional,
distributed structural, and institutional non - structural control
measures for reducing stormwater and non - stormwater flows and
priority pollutants. Data to be considered will be provided by the
RH /SGRWQG will be specific to southern California, and should be
analyzed in consideration of applicable receiving water limitations,
WQBELs, etc.
7.4.5 Identify a preliminary list of potential regional projects, based on
Task 6.2.3, to retain (i) all non - stormwater and (ii) all stormwater
runoff of the volume equivalent to the 85th percentile, 24 -hour
storm event for the drainage area tributary to the project.
7.4.6 Develop an approach for identifying additional regional projects and
evaluating all potential regional projects. Approach should consider
focusing on publicly -owned properties as well as private properties
with open space (such as large parking lots). Evaluation should
consider opportunities for incorporation of multi -use features at
potential locations.
7.5 Reasonable Assurance Analysis Approach: Consultant shall develop a
to meet the requirements of conducting a Reasonable Assurance Analysis
(RAA) to demonstrate that the watershed control measures identified in
the EWMP will result in MS4 discharges achieving applicable WQBELs
and RWLs per Part VI.C.5.b.iv.(5). Development of the approach shall
include the following:
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
7.5.1 Review existing models and determine which updates, if any, are
needed to perform the RAA. The review should summarize the
pollutants for which models already exist and the modeling period
for each pollutant. The review should also evaluate whether the
existing models can be used to simulate the effect of BMPs on
receiving water quality, or whether additional functionality is
needed. Present these recommendations to the RH /SGRWQG.
7.5.2 Outline the proposed modeling process for evaluating and selecting
watershed control measures. The types of watershed control
measures to be evaluated should be summarized including MCMs
and non - structural, distributed structural, and regional /centralized
structural controls. Describe the process for representing these
watershed control measures in the modeling system and
quantifying their effectiveness. Describe how the model will select
the watershed control measures that are recommended for
implementation via the EWMP. Describe how jurisdictional
boundaries will be accounted for when selecting watershed control
measures.
7.5.3 Outline the process for demonstrating the effects of to-
beimplemented watershed control measures on stormwater quality,
non - stormwater quality, and receiving water quality. Describe how
the effects of BMPs will be compared to receiving water limitations,
TMDL wasteload allocations, WQBELs and other applicable targets
at the watershed and jurisdictional scale.
7.5.4 Outline the process for creating a BMP implementation
sequence /schedule /timeline based on the model- recommended
BMP scenario(s). Consider schedules for watershed control
measures that have already been planned, scheduled, and /or
implemented by agencies in the watershed or region.
7.6 Prepare Draft and Final EWMP Work Plans: Consultant shall prepare a
Draft and Final EWMP Work Plan incorporating the above information
and:
7.6.1 Propose approaches to addressing 303(d) listed and non- 303(d)
listed receiving water exceedances not addressed by a TMDL in
the watershed.
7.6.2 Develop detailed schedule and strategy to complete the EWMP
Plan. Additionally, milestones presented in the NOI should be
reevaluated to ensure consistency or, if necessary, alternatives
shall be proposed for consideration by the Regional Board.
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
7.6.3 Propose a prioritization and sequence to the waterbody pollutant
issues. Prioritization shall include TMDLs and other receiving water
considerations.
7.6.4 Prepare a Draft EWMP Work Plan with a schedule and strategy to
complete the EWMP Plan as described in the MS4 Permit and this
Scope of Work. The Consultant shall provide up to 10 hard copies
(double sided) and electronic copies (in Microsoft Word and PDF)
of the Draft EWMP Work Plan.
7.6.5 Finalize EWMP Work Plan. It is assumed that Consultant will revise
the Draft EWMP Work Plan two times. The Consultant shall provide
four weeks for review of the initial Draft EWMP Work Plan and two
weeks for review of the revised Draft EWMP Work Plan. The
Consultant shall provide up to 20 hard copies (double sided) and
electronic copies (in Microsoft Word and PDF) of the Final EWMP
Work Plan.
7.7 Outreach Specific to EWMP Work Plan Development: Consultant shall
conduct up to four meetings specific to EMWP Work Plan Development to
perform outreach to community groups, nongovernment organizations,
water supply agencies, and other potential project partners and
stakeholders to solicit input on the scope and content of the draft Work
Plan.
7.8 Review and Validation of EWMP Development Scope and Budget
(Task 8): Consultant shall review the Task 8 scope of work and budget
estimate to identify whether significant differences exist and, if necessary,
propose revisions for consideration by the RH /SGRWQG.
Deliverables and Schedule:
1. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 7.3: December 2013
2. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 7.4: December 2013
3. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 7.5.1 December 2013
4. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 47.4.3- 7.4.4: January 2013
5. Draft EWMP Work Plan as described in Task 7.6: April 2014
6. Final EWMP Work Plan as described in Task 7.6: June 2014
7. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 7.8: June 2014
It is expected that one revision will be required of each of the draft memoranda.
However, memoranda will not be finalized, per se; rather final versions of the
information will be presented in the Draft and Final EWMP Work Plans. Note there is no
specific task to revise the Final EWMP Work Plan based on Regional Board comments
as it is expected their comments will be received on the Draft EWMP Work.
Additionally, comments on the Final EWMP Work Plan can potentially be addressed
during EWMP Plan development.
243,471.00400 7931425.1
A -1
8.0 Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Plan (CIMP)
The consultant shall prepare interim technical memos, a draft CIMP and a final CIMP.
The CIMP shall address all TMDL and Non -TMDL monitoring requirements of the MS4
Permit for all members of the RH /SGRWQG including:
• Receiving water monitoring
• Stormwater outfall based monitoring
• Nonstormwater outfall based monitoring
• New development /redevelopment effectiveness tracking
• Regional Studies
In preparing the CIMP, the consultant shall perform the following activities to meet the
requirements of the above - listed monitoring elements:
8.1 Outfall and Receiving Water Monitoring Approach: The Consultant
shall develop an approach to meet all of the required monitoring elements
and generate a memorandum consisting of the following:
8.1.1 Compilation of GIS layers associated with storm drains, channels,
and outfalls.
8.1.2 A summary of all TMDL and MS4 Permit required outfall based,
receiving water, and special study monitoring requirements.
8.1.3 A summary of existing programs completed to date and available
data.
8.1.4 A storm water outfall based monitoring approach including an
estimated number of outfalls necessary to meet the TMDL and MS4
permit requirements.
8.1.5 A non -storm water outfall based screening and monitoring plan
including approaches to 1) conducting an inventory of MS4 outfalls,
2) identify outfalls with significant non - stormwater discharges, 3)
prioritize source investigations, 4) identify sources of significant
non - stormwater discharges, and 5) monitoring of non - stormwater
discharges exceeding criteria.
8.1.6 An approach to integrating TMDL and MS4 Permit receiving water
monitoring requirements and identification of an estimated number
of sites, and general locations, necessary to meet TMDL and MS4
permit requirements.
8.1.7 An approach to integrate, to the extent practicable, the TMDL
special study requirements.
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
8.1.8 A discussion of how RH /SGRWQG members plan to participate in
the Southern California Stormwater Monitoring Coalition (SMC)
Regional Watershed Monitoring Program (bioassessment).
8.2 Site Selection: The Consultant shall develop a memorandum identifying
sites to meet the requirements of MS4 Permit outfall and receiving water
monitoring and TMDL requirements. The memorandum shall consist of the
following:
8.2.1 A summary of field surveys evaluating potential sites, with
consideration of all necessary factors including, but not limited to
the expected representativeness, accessibility, availability of power
as needed and security, to determine the most appropriate
monitoring stations for both dry- and wet - weather monitoring. The
consultant shall consider existing monitoring stations already used
for TMDLs and land use based representative sampling is strongly
encouraged. It is acknowledged that dry weather outfall sites may
not be identified at this point given the MS4 Permit process for
selecting non- stormwater outfall monitoring sites.
8.2.2 A summary of the proposed sites, including the description of
factors used in the selection, photographs of the selected sites, and
maps showing the sites.
8.3 New Development and Re- development Effectiveness Tracking: The
Consultant shall develop a memorandum consisting of the following:
8.3.1 A template for RH /SGRWQG members to use to summarize
existing tracking processes.
8.3.2 Reporting and data management protocols.
8.3.3 A system to share the tracking among the permittees in the
RH /SGRWQG.
8.4 Draft and Final CIMP: The Consultant shall prepare a Draft and Final
CIMP that proposes an optimal and cost - effective monitoring design that
meets the intended objectives of the MS Permit, incorporates the above
information and:
8.4.1 Describes the sample collection methods, analytical methods, field
observation requirements, Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE)
initiation approach, and QA /QC protocols.
8.4.2 If possible, identify appropriate laboratories. It is acknowledged that
due to procurement requirements it may not be possible to identify
laboratories prior to Final CIMP submittal to the Regional Board.
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
8.4.3 Describe how collected data will be compiled and stored to support
future assessment and reporting efforts.
8.4.4 Outline an integrated monitoring and assessment program to
evaluate progress toward achieving applicable limitations.
8.4.5 Describe the process for revising components of the CIMP.
8.4.6 Prepare a Draft CIMP as described in the MS4 Permit and this
Scope of Work. Additionally, a cost estimate to implement the CIMP
shall be provided. The Consultant shall provide up to 10 hard
copies (double sided) and electronic copies (in Microsoft Word and
PDF) of the Draft CIMP.
8.4.7 Finalize CIMP. It is assumed that Consultant will revise the Draft
CIMP two times. The Consultant shall provide four weeks for
review of the initial Draft CIMP and two weeks for review of the
revised Draft CIMP. The Consultant shall provide up to 20 hard
copies (double sided) and electronic copies (in Microsoft Word and
PDF) of the Final CIMP.
8.4.8 The consultant shall revise the CIMP based on the Regional
Board's comments within 2 months of receiving the comments.
8.5 Outreach Specific to CIMP Development: The Consultant shall conduct
up to four meetings specific to CIMP development to perform outreach to
community groups, nongovernment organizations, water supply agencies,
and other potential project partners and stakeholders to solicit input on the
scope and content of the draft CIMP.
Deliverables and Schedule:
1. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 8.1: November 2013
2. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 8.2: February 2014
3. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 8.3: March 2014
4. Draft CIMP as described in Task 8.4: April 2014
5. Final CIMP as described in Task 8.4: June 2014
It is expected that one revision will be required of each of the draft memoranda.
However, memoranda will not be finalized, per se; rather final versions of the
information will be presented in the Draft and Final CIMPs.
9.0 Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) Plan
In consultation with the WMG and TAC, the Consultant shall prepare an EWMP Plan by
implementing all aspects of the Final Work Plan, providing technical memos, a Draft
EWMP Plan and a Final EWMP Plan. It is acknowledged that the following scope items
may need to be revised based on the Final EWMP Work Plan. In preparing the EWMP
Plan, the consultant shall perform the following activities:
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
9.1 Finalize Approach to Addressing USEPA TMDLs, 303(d) Listings, and
Other Exceedances of Receiving Water Limitations: The Consultant
shall address permit requirements related to USEPA TMDLs, 303(d)
listings, and other exceedances of receiving water limitations as follows:
9.1.1 Develop interim numeric milestones and compliance schedules for
the following Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) TMDLs:
a. Peck Road Park Lake TMDLs
b. Santa Fe Dam TMDLs
c. San Gabriel River Metals TMDL
9.1.2 Develop interim numeric milestones and compliance schedules for
the 303(d) listed and non- 303(d) listed receiving water limitations
exceedances not addressed in a TMDL in the watershed.
9.2 Develop List of Regional Projects and Conduct Initial Screening: For
regional projects the Consultant shall:
9.2.1 Identify additional potential locations for regional projects to retain
(i) all non - stormwater and (ii) all stormwater runoff of the volume
equivalent to the 85th percentile, 24 -hour storm event for the
drainage area tributary to the project. Describe the multiuse
features of these potential projects.
9.2.2 Select a preliminary list of regional projects for initial screening
based on the Final EWMP Work Plan approach and develop draft
memorandum.
9.2.3 Develop list of proposed project sites based on RH /SGRWQG
feedback on memorandum.
9.2.4 Conduct preliminary soils analysis and testing of proposed regional
project sites to support feasibility analysis.
9.2.5 Perform an initial environmental study for all proposed regional
projects to support feasibility analysis. Review and summarize the
regulatory issues, environmental permits and other requirements,
for implementing the proposed project sites.
9.2.6 Evaluate the feasibility of constructing all identified regional projects
including rough costs and develop recommended final list.
9.3 Identify Selected Watershed Control Measures and Conduct
Reasonable Assurance Analysis: Utilizing the process outlined in the
Work Plan the Consultant shall:
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
100)�
9.3.1 Prepare quantitative analysis or modeling tool to represent
hydrology, hydraulics, stormwater quality, non - stormwater quality,
and receiving water quality before and after implementation of
watershed control measures.
9.3.2 Summarize MCMs, specific modifications to MCMs proposed by
RH /SGRWQG Agencies, and information supporting modifications
to MCMs provided by RH /SGRWQG Agencies.
9.3.3 For the portion of the watershed that cannot be addressed with
regional projects, identify additional structural and nonstructural
watershed control measures to achieve applicable WQBELs and /or
RWLs for each TMDL, 303(d) listing, and receiving water
exceedances, consistent with applicable compliance schedules in
the Permit. Incorporate effective innovative technologies,
approaches and practices, including green infrastructure and
lowimpact development strategies.
9.3.4 Conduct a Reasonable Assurance Analysis for each TMDL, 303(d)
listing, and receiving water exceedances that consists of an
assessment (through quantitative analysis or modeling) to
demonstrate that the identified in the watershed control measures
will achieve applicable WQBELs and /or RWLs.
Develop Project Schedules and Cost Estimates: Based on the selected
watershed control measures the Consultant shall:
9.4.1 Develop cost estimates for implementing the proposed watershed
control measures. The cost analysis should include any necessary
planning, design, permits, construction, operation and
maintenance, energy, waste removal, post construction monitoring,
and right of way acquisition.
9.4.2 Prepare schedules and sequencing for each of the proposed
watershed control measures. The sequencing shall be based on
the approach outlined in the Work Plan. The schedules should
account for:
9.4.2.1 TMDL compliance schedules, Water Quality Priorities
categories, and proposed milestones.
9.4.2.2 The implementation period and milestones during the
current Permit term should be differentiated from the
future implementation period beyond of the current Permit
term.
9.4.2.3 The schedules shall identify the responsibilities of each
individual Permittee.
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
9.4.2.4 The project schedules should include planning, design,
permits, right of way acquisition, construction, operation
and maintenance, energy, waste removal, and post
construction monitoring. Develop realistic construction
durations for each proposed project including
preconstruction activities such as bid, award, notice to
proceed, move in, construction subactivities depending on
the Scope of Work, construction completion,
postconstruction monitoring, etc.
9.4.2.5 Recommend a reasonable time frame to initiate the
projects, nonstructural solutions, and programs during the
compliance timeframes.
9.5 Prepare Draft and Final EWMP Plans: Consultant shall prepare Draft
and Final EWMP Plans incorporating the above information and:
9.5.1 Incorporate and where necessary, develop milestones and
compliance schedules into the EWMP to measure progress toward
addressing the highest water - quality priorities and achieving
applicable WQBELs and /or RWLs in the shortest time as possible
taking into account technological, operation, and economic factors.
9.5.2 As needed, propose modifications to the CIMP for consideration by
the WMG and Regional Board.
9.5.3 Outline an adaptive management process for the WMG to 1)
support the required every two year comprehensive evaluation of
the effectiveness of the EWMP and 2) modify control measures
and /or monitoring accordingly to address currently identified
priorities and /or future priorities.
9.5.4 Prepare a Draft EWMP Plan as described in the MS4 Permit and
this Scope of Work. The Consultant shall provide up to 10 hard
copies (double sided) and electronic copies (in Microsoft Word and
PDF) of the Draft EWMP Plan.
9.5.5 Finalize EWMP Plan. It is assumed that Consultant will revise the
Draft EWMP Plan two times. The Consultant shall provide four
weeks for review of the initial Draft EWMP Plan and two weeks for
review of the revised Draft EWMP Plan. The Consultant shall
provide up to 20 hard copies (double sided) and electronic copies
(in Microsoft Word and PDF) of the Final EWMP Plan.
9.5.6 The consultant shall revise the EWMP plan based on the Regional
Board's comments within 2 months of receiving the comments.
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
9.6 Outreach Specific to EWMP Plan Development: Consultant shall
conduct up to four meetings specific to EMWP Plan development to
perform outreach to community groups, nongovernment organizations,
water supply agencies, and other potential project partners and
stakeholders to solicit input on EWMP Plan.
Deliverables and Schedule:
1. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 9.1: August 2014
2. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 9.2.1 and 9.2.2: September 2014
3. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 9.2.3 -9.2.6 and 9.3: December 2015
4. Draft Memorandum as described in Task 9.4: February 2015
5. Draft EWMP Plan as described in Task 9.5: April 2015
6. Final EWMP Plan as described in Task 9.5: June 2015
It is expected that one revision will be required of each of the draft memoranda.
However, memoranda will not be finalized, per se; rather final versions of the
information will be presented in the Draft and Final EWMP Plans.
10.0 Additive Items: Prepare NOI in accordance with all requirements
contained within the new permit (Order R4- 2012 -0175) by May 15, 2013.
The RH /SGRWQG will supply a template NOI for this purpose.
10.1 NOI shall specify that RH /SGRWQG is requesting a 30 month
submittal date for the draft EWMP per Part VI.C.4.c.iv of the new
Permit (Order R4- 2012 - 0175).
10.2 NOI shall identify all applicable interim and final trash WQBELs and
receiving water limitations pursuant to Part VI.E of the Permit
(Order R4- 2012 - 0175).
10.3 NOI shall identify members' watershed control measures, where
possible from existing TMDL implementation plans that will be
implemented by the members concurrently with the development of
the EWMP to ensure that MS4 discharges achieve compliance with
applicable interim and final trash WQBELs and receiving water
limitations set forth in Part VI.E of the Permit (Order R4- 2012 -0175)
and the applicable attachment(s) by the applicable compliance
deadlines occurring prior to approval of an EWMP.
10.4 NOI shall further identify the following items:
10.4.1 Plan concept and geographical scope,
10.4.2 Cost estimate for plan development,
10.4.3 Executed MOU among the members of the RH /SGRWQG to fund
development of EWMP (or as alternatively prescribed in section
VI.C.4.b.iii of the permit (Order R4- 2012 -0175)
10.4.4 Interim milestones for plan development and deadlines for their
achievement,
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
10.4.5 Identification of, and commitment to fully implement, one
structural BMP or a suite of BMPs at a scale that provides
meaningful water quality improvement within each watershed (Rio
Hondo -Los Angeles River and San Gabriel River) covered by the
plan within 30 months of the effective date of this order in addition
to watershed control measures to be implemented pursuant to
items 6.2 and 6.3 above. The structural BMP or suite of BMPs
shall be subject to approval by the Regional Water Board
Executive Officer.
10.5 Prepare NOI for Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Plan (CIMP) in
accordance with all requirements contained within the new permit (Order
R4- 2012 -0175) by May 15, 2013. The RH /SGRWQG will supply a
template NOI for this purpose.
24347.00400 \7931425.1
A -1
Project Timelines and Milestones
CWE
U)
0
S
In
v m
C x
t- =r
O Cr
n rF
C/) CO
0
M
(Al
2013
2014
2015
2016
May
Jun Jul Au Se Oct Nov Dec
Jan Feb Mar Apr Ma Jun I Jul I Aug Sep Oct I Nov I Dec
Jan Feb Mar Apr may Jun I Jul Augl S Oct TNov Dec
Jan Feb Mar A r
111111►
* Identification of Water Duality Priondes Draft Memorandum
`►
* Summary of Existing and Potential Control Measures Draft Memorandum
a
Existing Models and Updates Needed to Perform the RAA Draft Memorandum
Y
3
tta► * Summary of Existing Planning Efforts for Possible Inclusion in the EWMP and Analysis of Control Measure Performance Data Draft Memorandum
3
w
`► * Draft EWMP Work Plan
6* Final EWMP Work Plan
`► * EWMP Development Scope and Budget Draft Memorandum
`►
* Outfall and Receiving Water Monitoring Approach Draft Memorandum
`/ * Site Selection Draft Memorandum
`► * New Development and Re Development Effectiveness Track ng Draft Memorandum
U
`► * Draft CIMP
`► * Final CIMP
`► * Final Approach to Addressing USEPA TMDLs, 303(d) Listings, and Other Exceedances of RWLs
Draft Memorandum
`► * Additional Potential Locations and Preliminary List of Regional Projects Draft Memorandum
m
`► * Proposed Project Sites Feasibility Analysis and Selected Watershed
a
Control Measures and RAA Draft Memorandum
w
`► * Project Schedules and Cast Estimates Draft Memorandum
`► * Draft EWMP Plan
Final EWMP Plan
U)
0
S
In
v m
C x
t- =r
O Cr
n rF
C/) CO
0
M
(Al
Exhibit "C"
COMPENSATION
Compensation shall be based on time and materials spent in accordance with the
following tasks, not to exceed the total compensation listed:
Development & Enhanced Watershed
Management Program Planning Services $790,537.00
Total Compensation
$790,537.00
The total compensation shall not exceed the total listed without written authorization in
accordance with Section 3.3.1 of this agreement. (See attached fee breakdown).
24347.00400 \7931425.1
C -1
ENHANCED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR RIO HONDO /SAN GABRIEL RIVER WATER QUALITY GROUP CW=
FEE PROPOSAL AND SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
m of RepreseetaMe EmMMW fo 80 Cwim* m Behalf of th Flan - Jasoo Pereira
s of per 81-MO "lfeetieg (Task 1.01 - SZ648 (Oaf/ InUafes me Pmm Coeso mt and pmporbmal* same of eye subs at 8re meeting)