HomeMy WebLinkAboutC-24601Voo -8a
c -a460
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
AND
THE CITY OF ARCADIA
REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION AND COST SHARING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE COORDINATED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE LOS ANGELES RIVER
AND TRIBUTARIES METALS TMDL (REACH 2)
This Memorandum of Agreement ( "Agreement ") is made and entered into as of the date
of the last signature set forth below by and between the San Gabriel Valley Council of
Governments, a California joint powers authority ( "SGVCOG "), and the City of
Arcadia , a California municipal corporation ( "City "); (hereinafter "Party" or
"Parties ") with respect to the following:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the mission of the SGVCOG includes environmental planning and providing
technically sound science and analyses to its member cities and agencies; and
WHEREAS, Seventeen of the SGVCOG's member cities are located within the Los
Angeles River Reach 2 watershed and the SGVCOG has established effective working
relationships with the adjacent Councils of Governments; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG has previously entered into interagency agreements,
successfully partnering with various cities, SCAG, and CALTRANS to undertake projects and
studies of regional significance; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region ( "Regional
Board ") adopted the Los Angeles River and Tributaries Metals Total Maximum Daily Load
( "TMDL" or "Los Angeles River Metals TMDL ") in September of 2007, with the intent of
improving water quality in the Los Angeles River and its tributaries; and
WHEREAS, this TMDL regulates the discharge of runoff from thirty five cities tributary
to Reach 2 of the Los Angeles River and CALTRANS, herein referred to collectively as the
"Regulated Entities" or singularly a "Regulated Entity ", requiring a high degree of organization
and cooperation from the local watershed agencies; and
WHEREAS, this TMDL requires the preparation of a Coordinated Implementation Plan
( "CIP ") by the Regulated Entities that is designed to reduce the amount of metals pollutants in the
Los Angeles River and its tributaries; and
WHEREAS, the County of Los Angeles and the City of Los Angeles will be
independently preparing separate Implementation Plans; and
WHEREAS, the Regulated Entities agree to prepare a draft by January 11, 2010 and a
final CIP by July 11, 2010 and to adopt and provide the initial funding of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Regulated Entities have agreed to establish a Technical Committee to provide
technical oversight for the development of the CIP, and
WHEREAS, the participating Regulated Entities desire the SGVCOG to provide
administrative services relating to the CIP, including contracting for the development of both the
draft and final CIP and other related activities; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG has agreed to provide such administrative services to the
Regulated Entities to facilitate the successful implementation of the CIP; and
WHEREAS, the Regulated Entities have agreed to share in fully funding the costs of the
development of the CIP, including those costs incurred by the SGVCOG in administering this
Agreement, based on the cost allocation formula contained in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG and the Regulated Entities agree to employ a consultant to
prepare the CIP, and the Regulated Entities are willing to pay the consultant for its services
through the SGVCOG; and
WHEREAS, SGVCOG will execute similar cost - sharing agreements with all other
Regulated Entities before this agreement becomes enforceable, unless stated otherwise elsewhere
in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth
herein, the Parties do hereby agree as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are fully incorporated as part of this
Agreement.
Section 2. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide a mechanism whereby
the Regulated Entities cooperatively fund the development of the CIP and provide funding to the
SGVCOG such that the SGVCOG can administer the necessary professional services contracts to
develop the CIP on behalf of the Regulated Entities.
Section 3. Cooperation. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another to attain the
purposes of this Agreement.
Section 4. Voluntary Nature. Individual Regulated Entities can request approval from the
Regional Board to develop separate Implementation Plans. This Agreement is voluntarily entered
into for the development of the CIP and is applicable to only those Regulated Entities that are
signatory to this Agreement.
Section 5. Term. The term of this Agreement shall remain and continue in effect until
completion of the CIP, and acceptance of the CIP by the Regional Board.
4
Section 6. Coordinated Implementation Plan. The Los Angeles River Metals TMDL
requires the Regulated Entities to develop a CIP which shall include: implementation methods,
an implementation schedule, proposed milestones and any applicable revisions to the TMDL
effectiveness monitoring plan. The CIP that is developed under this Agreement is only applicable
to those Regulated Entities that are a party to this Agreement and have fulfilled all terms of this
Agreement.
Section 7. Assessment for Proportional Costs of the CIP. The City agrees to provide funds
to the SGVCOG based on the funding formula established in Exhibit A and the estimated
development costs in Exhibit B, attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement by this
reference. The SGVCOG will invoice the City upon the execution of this Agreement as set forth
in Section 9 below, based on allocated CIP costs, which includes all administrative costs incurred
by the SGVCOG in the performance of its duties under this Agreement. The SGVCOG
administrative costs include compensation for staff time, audit expenses, and costs incurred in
administrating agreements. Any overpayment or underpayment of the CIP costs shall be credited
or billed to the City in the next invoice or it shall be reimbursed at the termination of this
Agreement.
Section 8. Role of the SGVCOG. The SGVCOG shall enter into substantially and
materially similar agreements with each of the Regulated Entities wishing to participate in the
CIP to effectuate the CIP, invoice and collect from the Regulated Entities the estimated amounts
based on the cost allocation formula in Exhibit A.
Section 9. Invoice and Payment.
a) The SVCOG shall invoice each Regulated Entity for fifty (50) percent of the estimated
cost of the preparation of the CIP on or about July 15, 2009. A second invoice for fifty
(50) percent of the estimated cost shall be sent to the Regulated Entities by the
SGVCOG on or about December 15, 2009. If necessary, a third invoice will be sent
on or about July 15, 2010 for any adjustments or additional expenses incurred by the
SGVCOG.
b) Late Payment Penalty — Beginning as of October 15, 2009, any payment that is late
shall be subject to interest on the original amount due from the date that the payment
first became due. The interest rate shall be equal to the Prime Rate in effect when the
payment first became due plus one percent for any payment that is made from 1 to 30
days after the due date. The Prime Rate in effect when the payment first became due
plus five (5) percent shall apply for any payment that is made from 31 to 60 days after
the due date. The Prime Rate in effect when the payment first became due plus ten
(10) percent shall apply for any payment that is made more than 60 days after the due
date. The rates shall, nevertheless, not exceed the maximum allowed by law.
c) Delinquent Payments — A Regulated Entity's payment is considered to be delinquent
180 days after being invoiced by the SGVCOG. The following procedure may be
implemented to attain payments from the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities per
instructions from the Technical Committee: 1) verbally contact/meet with the manager
from the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities, 2) submit a formal letter to the
delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities from the SGVCOG attorney, and 3) notify the
Regional Board that the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities are no longer a
participating member of the CIP. If a Regulated Entity or Entities remain delinquent
after the above procedures, then any delinquent amount(s) will be distributed in the
following invoice amongst all remaining Regulated Entities proportionate to each
Entity's area as it relates to the overall remaining total Regulated Entities area,
excluding the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities and all references to the
delequent Regulated Entity will be removed from the CIP. The Technical Committee
will revise Exhibit A to show the recalculated costs for each participating Regulated
Entity; these revised exhibits will be sent to the SGVCOG and included with the
annual invoices to the Regulated Entities.
d) Interest Accrual — Any interest accrued on the funds collected per this Agreement
during the term of this Agreement shall be redeposited into the appropriate account
and used for development of the CIP. The SGVCOG shall report on an annual basis to
the Technical Committee the amount of interest accrued by the CIP account(s).
Section 10. Independent Contractor.
a) The SGVCOG is and shall at all times remain a wholly independent contractor for
performance of the obligations described in this Agreement. The SGVCOG officers,
employees and agents performing such obligations shall at all times be under the
SGVCOG's exclusive control. The Regulated Entities shall not have control over the
conduct of the SGVCOG or any of its officers, employees or agents, except as set forth
in this Agreement. The SGVCOG, and its officers, employees, or agents are not and
shall not be deemed to be employees of the Regulated Entities.
b) No employee benefits shall be available to the SGVCOG in connection with the
performance of its obligations under this Agreement. The SGVCOG is solely
responsible for the payment of salaries, wages, other compensation, employment
taxes, worker's compensation, or similar taxes for its employees for performing
obligations hereunder.
c) The Regulated Entities will retain control of the consultant(s)' work product and the
schedule for submitting the CIP to the Regional Board. The SGVCOG will use
reasonable efforts to work with the Regulated Entities to ensure that the draft CIP is
submitted by January 11, 2010 and the final CIP is submitted by July 11, 2010.
However, the Regulated Entities recognize that the draft CIP is due by January 11,
2010 and that this deadline might not be met despite the best efforts of the SGVCOG
and the Regulated Entities.
Section 11. Indemnification.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, the City and the SGVCOG agree to save,
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless each other from any and all liability, claims, suits,
actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, and regulatory proceedings,
losses, expenses, or any injury or damage of any kind whatsoever, whether actual, alleged
4
or threatened, attorney fees, court costs, and any other costs of any nature without
restriction incurred in relation to, as a consequence of, or arising out of, the performance
of this Agreement, and attributable to the fault of the other. Following a determination of
the percentage of fault and or liability by agreement between the Parties or a court of
competent jurisdiction, the Party responsible for liability to the other will indemnify the
other Party to this Agreement for the percentage, of liability determined. The SGVCOG
shall not have any duty to save, indemnify, defend, and hold harmless, and the Regulated
Entities shall save, indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the SGVCOG from any
Regional Board Notice of Violations or third -party litigation resulting from failure of the
Regulated Entities to meet the compliance deadlines in the Los Angeles River Metals
TMDL for submission of the draft and final CIP.
Section 12. Termination of Agreement.
Either Party may terminate this Agreement for any reason, in whole or part, by giving the
other Party thirty (30) days written notice thereof. The City shall be responsible for the
allocated costs of CIP activities incurred up to the date of the termination. SGVCOG shall
notify in writing all Regulated Entities within fourteen (14) days of receiving written
notice from any Regulated Entity that intends to terminate this Agreement.
Section 13. Miscellaneous.
a) Notices. All notices which any Party is required or desires to give hereunder shall be
in writing and shall be deemed given when delivered personally or three (3) days after
mailing by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested) to the following
address or as such other addresses as the Parties may from time to time designate by
written notice in the aforesaid manner:
To SGVCOG Nick Conway
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
3452 E. Foothill Blvd, Suite 910
Pasadena, CA 91107
To City of Arcadia Carmen Trujillo
Management Aide
11800 Goldring Rd, PO BOX 60021
Arcadia, CA, 91066 -6021
b) Separate Accounting and Auditing. The SGVCOG agrees to establish a separate
account to track the revenues from the Regulated Entities and the expenses from of the
CIP. Quarterly financial statements and the annual audit will be made available to all
of the participating Regulated Entities.
c) Binding Effect. f� This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of each
Party to this Agreement and their respective heirs, administrators, representatives,
successors and assigns.
d) Amendment. The terms and provisions of this Agreement may not be amended,
modified or waived, except by an instrument'in writing signed by the Parties.
e) Waiver. Waiver by any Party to this Agreement of any term, condition, or covenant of
this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant.
Waiver by any Party to any breach of the provisions of this Agreement shall not
constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor a waiver of any subsequent breach or
violation of any provision of this Agreement.
f) Law to Govern, Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed, and governed
according to the laws of the State of California. In the event of litigation between the
Parties, venue in the state trial courts shall lie exclusively in the County of Los
Angeles.
I!$
g) No Presumption in Drafting. The Parties to this Agreement agree that the general rule
that an Agreement is to be interpreted against the Party drafting it, or causing it to be
prepared shall not apply.
h) Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties with
respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous
agreements, whether written or oral, with respect thereto.
i) Severability. If any term, provision, condition or covenant of this Agreement is
declared or determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or
unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected
thereby and this Agreement shall be read and constructed without the invalid, void, or
unenforceable provision(s).
j) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each
of which shall be an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute but one
and the same instrument, provided, however, that such counterparts shall have been
delivered to both Parties to this Agreement.
k) Legal Representation. All Parties have been represented by counsel in the preparation
and negotiation of this Agreement. Accordingly, this Agreement shall be construed
according to its fair language.
1) Procurement. All participating Regulated Entities have reviewed the procurement
procedures used in the selection of the consultant(s) for consistency with their
individual procurement practices.
m) Agency Authorization. Each of the persons signing below on behalf of a Party
represents and warrants that he or she is authorized to sign this Agreement on behalf of
such Party.
n) Contact Person. The municipal staff contact person for this agreement shall be
Tom Tait
Name
Deputy Director of Public Works Services
Title
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
on their behalf, respectively, as follows:
DATE: - I '0
ATTEST:
-o k le
City lerk
APPROVED AS TnnO FORM:
f!•
City AttorneyStephen P. Dei tsch
DATE: d 9
ATTEST:
"INIOP", 'K4�11-wj
CITY OF ARCADIA
City OFFICIAL
Donald Penman
City Manager
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS
Nicholas T. Conway
Executive Director
EXHIBIT A
LA River Metals TMDL Im lementation Plan (Reach 2)
Agency
Watershed Area*
Estimated Cost Share
Acres*
Percentage
Professional
Services * **
w/ SGVCOG
Admin Costs
TOTAL COST **
Alhambra
4878
4.38828%
$ ' 9,936.61
$ 1,097.07
$ 11,033.68
Arcadia
6995
6.29275%
$ 14,248.99
$ 1,573.19
$ 15,822.18
Bell
1671
1.50324%
$ 3,403.87
$ 375.81
$ 3,779.68
Bell Gardens
1604
1.44297%
$ 3,267.39
$ 360.74
$ 3,628.13
Bradbury
494
0.44441%
$ 1,006.29
$ 111.10
$ 1,117.39
Caltrans
3815
3.43200%
$ 7,771.25
$ 858.00
$ 8,629.25
Commerce
4193
3.77205%
$ 8,541.25
$ 943.01
$ 9,484.26
Compton
6044
5.43722%
$ 12,311.78
$ 1,359.31
$ 13,671.09
Cudahy
729
0.65581%
$ 1,484.99
$ 163.95
$ 1,648.94
Downey
3621
3.25748%
$ 7,376.07
$ 814.37
$ 8,190.44
Duarte
1084
0.97517%
$ 2,208.14
$ 243.79
$ 2,451.93
El Monte
4605
4.14269%
$ 9,380.50
$ 1,035.67
$ 10,416.17
Glendale
TBA
0.00000%
$ -
$ -
$ -
Huntington Park
1933
1.73894%
$ 3,937.57
$ 434.74
$ 4,372.30
Irwindale
994
0.89421%
$ 2,024.80
$ 223.55
$ 2,248.36
La Canada Flintridge
3637
3.27187%
$ 7,408.66
$ 817.97
$ 8,226.63
Long Beach
3182
2.86255%
$ 6,481.81
$ 715.64
$ 7,197.45
Lynwood
3079
2.76989%
$ 6,272.00
$ 692.47
$ 6,964.47
Maywood
759
0.68280%
$ 1,546.10
$ 170.70
$ 1,716.80
Monrovia
6618
5.95324%
$ 13,480.22
$ 1,488.31
$ 14,968.53
Montebello
5386
4.84528%
$ 10,971.42
$ 1,211.32
$ 12,182.74
Monterey Park
4931
4.43596%
$ 10,044.57
$ 1,108.99
$ 11,153.56
Paramount
2013
1.81091%
$ 4,100.53
$ 452.73
$ 4,553.26
Pasadena
14575
13.11177%
$ 29,689.64
$ 3,277.94
$ 32,967.58
Pico Rivera
1547
1.39169%
$ 3,151.28
$ 347.92
$ 3,499.20
Rosemead
3277
2.94801%
$ 6,675.33
$ 737.00
$ 7,412.33
San Gabriel
2662
2.39475%
$ 5,422.56
$ 598.69
$ 6,021.25
San Marino
2413
2.17075%
$ 4,915.34
$ 542.69
$ 5,458.03
Sierra Madre
1900
1.70925%
$ 3,870.35
$ 427.31
$ 4,297.66
South El Monte
1615
1.45287%
$ 3,289.80
$ 363.22
$ 3,653.01
South Pasadena
2187
1.96748%
$ 4,455.07
$ 491.87
$ 4,946.94
South Gate
3168
2.84996%
$ 6,453.30
$ 712.49
$ 7,165.78
Temple City
2561
2.30389%
$ 5,216.82
$ 575.97
$ 5,792.79
Vernon
1 2990
1 2.68983%
1 $ 6,090.71
$ 672.46
$ 6,763.16
Total
111159.6
100.00%
$ 226,435.00
$ 25,000.00
$ 751,435.00
* The percent area is calculated by excluding the areas for LA County and any others that opt out (Acreage needs to
be verifies for area in Reach 2 LA River)
** Estimated costs are dependent on number of agencies participating, accurate acreage, and final contracting costs.
* ** May increase based on City of LA /CDM's confidentiality agreement
0
523 West Sixth Street, Suite 400
Los Angeles, California 90014
tel: 213 457 -2200
fax: 213 627 -8295
June 4, 2009
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
Subject: Los Angeles River Reach 2 Subwatershed Metals TMDL Implementation Plan -
Revised proposal
Dear Ms. Kennedy,
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) will develop a Los Angeles River (LAR) Metals TMDL
Implementation Plan ( "Plan ") for the LAR Reach 2 subwatershed ready for submittal to the
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) by January 11, 2010.
Project tasks include:
Task 1— Characterize Subwatershed
An overall LAR watershed characterization was completed for the City of Los Angeles. CDM
will refine the characterization to reflect only the LAR Reach 2 subwatershed.
Task 1.1— Conduct Data Review
Review existing data to identify data gaps where additional Reach 2 data may be
available. Compile and review additional data as available and incorporate into data
analyses (GIS and water quality).
Task 1.2 — Characterize LAR Reach 2 Subwatershed
Revise existing LAR watershed characterization to reflect only Reach 2 subwatershed
characteristics, including: (1) GIS layers; (2) hydrologic and water quality characteristics;
and (3) characteristics that affect structural BMP siting, (e.g., groundwater depth, soil, and
environmentally sensitive areas).
Task 1.3 — Assess Water Quality and Pollutant Loads
Revise existing LAR watershed water quality assessment to include only Reach 2
subwatershed metals water quality data. Conduct prioritization analysis using modeling
tools, to identify which catchments contribute the highest loads of metals.
consulting • engineering • construction • operations
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 2
Task 1 Deliverable, Technical Memorandum 1 (TM1) - TM1 summarizes the Reach 2
subwatershed characterization, including data sources, data gaps (and how they were
addressed), data analysis methods and findings. Attachments include maps, figures and
tables illustrating subwatershed characteristics. ,
Task 2 - Develop Range of Urban Runoff Management Options
Under this task CDM will lay the foundation for the Plan by locating priority areas for BMP
implementation, identifying potential structural and non - structural controls, and conducting
a preliminary screening of BMP opportunities to select the best options for additional analysis
under Task 3.
Task 2.1— Identify Reach 2 Subwatershed Collaboration Opportunities (Optional)
Identify opportunities to implement BMPs cooperatively with other planned
subwatershed management activities. Activities include meetings with key stakeholders
with interests/ plans for stream restoration and green infrastructure projects.
Task 2.2 — Develop Categorical BMP Opportunities
Develop a categorical BMP opportunities list for the Reach 2 subwatershed (e.g., infill/
redevelopment, new development, street retrofit, and habitat restoration). Evaluate the
applicability of these opportunities to the subwatershed to provide a foundation for BMP
selection.
Task 2.3 — Identify Potential Structural and Non - structural BMP Opportunities
Identify potential non - structural and distributed/ regional structural BMPs for the Reach 2
subwatershed. Potential structural BMPs will be tailored to maximize water quality
improvement in the most cost effective manner and be limited to publicly -owned parcels.
Task 2.4 — Conduct Preliminary BMP Screening
Develop a BMP decision matrix with screening criteria (e.g., cost, feasibility, effectiveness,
and environmental benefits) and associated weighting factors to evaluate potential BMP
opportunities identified in Task 2.3. The outcome is a ranked BMP list.
Task 2 Deliverable, Technical Memorandum (TM2) - TM2 provides a ranked list of non-
structural and structural BMPs for potential implementation in the subwatershed.
Supporting documentation will include the categorical BMP opportunities available,
range of BMPs considered, and the method for screening and ranking BMPs.
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 3
Task 3 - Develop BMP Implementation Alternatives Recommendations
Prior to starting Task 3, CDM will conduct a meeting with the client to determine the specific
direction of Task3. Task 3 further analyzes the screened list of BMPs developed in Task 2 and
prepares a final recommended list of BMPs for implementation. CDM will apply categorical
BMP implementation concepts on up to two alternatives to extrapolate the watershed -wide
benefits that may be achieved toward meeting the TDML metals loading allocations. This
task's project budget is based on the following: CDM will target identification of up to 10 non-
structural BMPs, and up to 20 distributed and up to 2 regional structural BMP projects. The
actual number of non - structural and structural BMPs analyzed (e.g., field investigations,
quantitative analysis, and cost analysis) will be decided by the client prior to implementation
of Task 3. If the number of BMPs is changed, the Task 3 scope of work and budget will be
modified, as appropriate.
Task 3.1— Conduct Field Investigations
Conduct limited field investigations to provide confirmation of the viability of the highest
ranked BMP opportunities identified in Task 2. The field investigations will not include
detailed site assessments such as underground utility conflicts.
Task 3.2 — Quantify Water Quality Improvements
Quantify water quality improvements expected from implementation of the highest
ranked BMP opportunities. This analysis will link categorical BMP implementation in
Reach 2 with the range of potential outcomes towards achieving compliance with TMDL
requirements.
Task 3.3 — Select Final BMPs
Based on the outcomes of Tasks 3.1 and 3.2, CDM will develop a final list of BMPs for
implementation. The final list will include up to 10 non - structural BMPs, and up to 20
distributed and up to 2 regional structural BMP projects.
Task 3.4 — Prepare Cost Analysis
CDM will develop planning -level cost estimates for BMPs selected in Task 3.3. Analysis
includes engineering, construction, and operation and maintenance costs.
Task 3 Deliverable, Technical Memorandum 3 (TM3) - TM3 identifies the final BMPs for
implementation. This TM will include:
■ Summary and proposed schedule for non - structural BMP implementation;
■ Tabular lists (by Reach 2 subwatershed) with graphical representation (e.g., GIS, aerial
photographs) of structural BMP recommendations;
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 4
• A phased implementation plan and schedule (based on prioritization of selected
BMPs);
• Expected water quality improvements (metals concentrations or loadings) in urban
runoff during implementation (based on implementation schedule); and
• Planning level capital and operation/ maintenance costs.
Project site plans, concept reports or preliminary design reports are not included in Task
3.
Task 4 - Project Meetings and Workshops
Task 4.1— Participate in Project Meetings
■ Project kickoff meeting to review the scope of work, project management and
communication procedures, project schedule, and discuss any data needs.
• Monthly meetings to review progress, resolve issues of concern and, if necessary,
request data. CDM will prepare an agenda for review and prepare meeting notes. (10
meetings)
• Biweekly teleconferences to review project status. (20 teleconferences)
Task 4.2 — Conduct Stakeholder Workshops (Optional)
CDM will participate in up to two 2 -hour stakeholder workshops. CDM will prepare a
presentation, provide a facilitator, and prepare agenda and meeting discussion summary.
Task 4 Deliverables - Meeting or workshop participation, meeting agendas, meeting notes or
summaries, and presentation materials, as needed.
Task 5 - Prepare Los Angeles River Reach 2 Metals TMDL Implementation Plan
The Plan is due to the Regional Board by January 11, 2010. A final submittal, that addresses
Regional Board comments on the draft, is due by July 11, 2010. Project tasks and deliverables
include:
Task 5.1— Develop Draft Plan
CDM will prepare a Draft Plan using the information developed for TMs 1, 2 and 3. Prior
to preparation of the draft, an outline will be developed for review and approval.
Task S.2 — Prepare Final Plan
CDM will prepare a Final Plan ready for Regional Board submittal based on Draft Plan
comments and provide 10 color paper and 50 electronic CD copies.
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 5
Task 5.3 — Prepare Revised Final Plan
CDM will review Regional Board comments on the Final Plan and prepare
recommendations for resolution. Based on client discussions, CDM will prepare a Revised
Final Plan for Regional Board submittal. Ten color paper and 50 electronic CD copies will
be provided.
Task 5 Deliverables - Draft, and final TMDL Implementation Plans ready for submittal to the
Regional Board. Paper and electronic copies of the plans as noted above.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (213) 457 -2200.
Very truly yours,
s �
Hampik Dekermenjian, PE
Vice President
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc.
cc: Richard Meyerhoff
DRAFT
CDM
Estimated Budget for the Development of Los Angeles River Reach 2
Metals TMDL Implementation Plan
Direct
Tasks
Labor
Costs
Task 1 - Watershed Characterization
$24,410
$500
Task 1.1 - Data Review
$2,580
Task 1.2 - Characterize Watershed
$6,130
Task 1.3 - Assess Water Quality and Pollutant Load
$6,570
TM1 Preparation
$9,130
$500
Task 2 - Develop Range of Management Options
$62,965
$2,000
Task 2.1 - Identify Collaboration Opportunties (Optional)
$14,230
$750
Task 2.2 - Develop Categorical BMP Opportunities
$8,350
$250
Task 2.3 - Identify Potential Non- StructurallStructural BMPs
$13,970
$250
Task 2.4 - Conduct Preliminary BMP Screening
$13,970
$250
TM2 Preparation
$12,445
$500
Task 3 - Develop and Evaluate Management Strategies
$65,105
$1,750
Task 3.1 - Conduct Field Investigations
$16,920
$750
Task 3.2 - Quantify Water Quality Improvements
$14,600
$250
Task 3.3 - Select Final BMPs
$11,280
$250
Task 3.4 - Prepare Whole Life Cycle Cost Analysis
$9,860
$250
TM3 Preparation
$12,445
$250
Task 4 - Meetings and Workshops
$27,830
$1,000
Task 4.1 - Project Meetings
$13,320
$250
Task 4.2 - Stakeholder Workshops (Optional)
$14,510
$750
Task 5 - Prepare TMDL IP
$39,875
$1,000
Task 5.1 Prepare Draft Plan
$16,990
$250
Task 5.2 Prepare Final Plan
$11,830
$250
Task 5.3 Prepare Revised Final Plan
$11,055
$500
Total
$220,185
$6,250
Total Cost
$226,435