HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES.2465.07-06-2009BILL NO. 09-122
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO THE GENERAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JACOBS ENGINEERING
GROUP, INC., FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
FACILITY PROJECT, IN THE CITY OF CAPE
GIRARDEAU, MISSOURI
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE
GIRARDEAU, MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS:
ARTICLE 1. The City Manager, for and on behalf of the City
of Cape Girardeau, Missouri, is hereby authorized to execute
Amendment Number 1 to the General Services Agreement for the
Wastewater Treatment Facility Project, in the City of Cape
Girardeau, Missouri. A copy of said Amendment is attached to
this Resolution and made a part hereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF i>r�- 20.
Jay Knudtson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Gayl Conrad, City Clerk 1
c
P
Amendment Number 1
Effective Date ��;)Ddi Amendment No. 1
This Amendment is entered into on the effective date noted above pursuant to the "General
Servcies Agreement" between CITY OF CAPE GIRARDEAU, MISSO I ("Client") and
JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC. ("Consultant"), dated ,
("Agreement"). The Agreement is incorporated herein and forms an integilal part of this
Amendment. However, in case of conflict, the terms of the Amendment shall control.
Services Authorized
Client authorizes Consultant to perform the Services described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein, which Exhibit A is marked with the above noted Amendment No. and
consists of eight pages.
Compensation
To the extent and amount invoiced, Consultant will be compensated for this Amendment on the
following basis of reimbursement:
1. For the salary costs of its professional, technical and supporting personnel for the time
during which they are directly employed in services covered by this Task, multiplied by a
factor of 2.1 to cover overhaead and profit.
a. Salary costs are defined as the salaries paid for regular time and overtime
(including any premium overtime) worked.
b. Included in overhead are:
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. 1
i. Provision for applicable annual salary related expenses, including sick
leave, vacation pay, holiday pay and other ordinary and customary paid
time off, bonuses, the employer's portion of social security,
unemployment and other payroll taxes, Employee's Retirement and
Benefit Plan contributions, employer's portion of group hospitalization
and medical insurance, and the cost of worker's compensation insurance.
ii. The salaries of officers, except for technical or advisory services directly
applicable to the project.
iii. Rent and costs of light, heat and water; equipment depreciation and
maintenance cost; costs of office supplies and reproduction of data for our
internal use; general communications expense, including local telephone
calls and postage; taxes, insurance premiums and license fees; automotive
expense and other transportation and travel expense not chargeable to
specific contracts; and other miscellaneous costs.
Page 1 of 2
F
2
2. For the following direct costs:
a. Travel, subsistence, and incidental expenses of personnel while traveling in
connection with this Task.
b. Transportation by passenger automobiles that Jacobs supplies intermittently in
connection with this Amendment, at the prevailing federal mileage reimbursement
rate. All costs of owned, leased or rented passenger vehicles assigned to this
Amendment and car allowances granted to management and supervisory
personnel are reimbursable. Reimbursement for the cost of special types of
vehicles will be at rates to be mutually agreed upon when such vehicles are
required.
c. Reproduction of drawings, photographs, maps, charts and reports which are
prepared for the Owner's periodic or interim review and also the cost of the
reproduction which constitute the delivery of services.
d. Wire and wireless communication of messages and data in connection with this
Amendment.
e. Insurance required by Owner in addition to the coverage or in excess of the limits
normally carried.
L Subcontracted services such as, but not limited to, borings, surveys, testing and
computing services, if required in the performance of this Amendment.
3. Estimate of Cost of Consultant's Services
a. Consultant estimates that the total cost of the services will be $179,500.00.
Jacobs will consult with the Owner and obtain the Owner's consent before its
costs exceed this estimate. Jacobs does not guarantee, however, that the cost of
the services required by this Agreement will not exceed the estimated amount.
CITY OF CAPE GIDAU, MISSOURI
Z AS11MININT011
TITLE: u r
DATE: 0
GIRAR�_
City of Cape Girard
Amendment No. I 7,X H E UN I
14, n�—ry
JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC.
BY:A—
NAME: -e- v
TITLE: i'I D II V i C �n�S Id S/-)
DATE: /3/01
Page 2 of 2
P
EXHIBIT A — SCOPE OF SERVICES
AMENDMENT NO. 1
Between City of Cape Girardeau (City) and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs)
The scope of services under this Amendment includes facility planning, regulatory assistance
related to the compliance schedule and the settlement agreement, antidegradation review,
geotechnical investigation, a rate study / user charge evaluation, and public involvement plan for
the expansion of the Cape Girardeau Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facility. The tasks are
outlined below.
A. Jacobs will schedule an initial "kick-off' meeting with the City staff to introduce key
personnel, establish communication procedures, discuss project schedule and discuss the
overall expectations for the project. Prior to the meeting, we will provide the City with a
request for available data, such as plant operating data, laboratory and sampling reports,
previous engineering studies, plans and specifications, geotechnical reports, soil borings,
etc. that could facilitate the effort. We want to get City staff concurrence on project
scheduling, anticipated review meetings, and public presentations. This task also
includes other meetings for the facility planning task of the project.
B. Antidegradation Review. New procedures developed by the Missouri Department of
Natural Resources (MDNR) require an antidegradation review to assess water quality
impacts for new or expanded wastewater discharges. The new procedures can involve
varying levels of effort based on available data and the predicted extent of water quality
degradation (none, minimal, or significant) resulting from the expanded facility. Based
on initial correspondence with MDNR, significant degradation is not anticipated if the
average design flow increases only moderately and the facility continues to discharge to
the Mississippi River or if the facility discharges more average flow, but the pollutant
loading remains fairly steady. Therefore, evaluation of significant degradation is not
included in this scope of services. Proposed antidegradation services are summarized
below:
1. Initial review to assess the potential for a non -degrading discharge
2. Consultation meeting with MDNR Water Protection staff (recommended in all cases
and necessary for a finding of no degradation)
3. Further analysis to evaluate minimal degradation (if needed based on findings of
initial review)
a. Analyze readily available water quality data
b. Calculate assimilative capacity for pollutants of concern (POCs)
4. Prepare the antidegradation review report and required MDNR forms
a. Perform a reasonable potential analysis for POCs
b. Develop water quality -based effluent limits for applicable POCs
c. Perform dissolved oxygen analysis using a spreadsheet -based model approved
by MDNR
d. Check for rare and endangered aquatic species
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. 1 — Exhibit A
Page 1 of 8
e. Request a geohydrologic evaluation from the Missouri Division of Geology
and Land Survey
f. Submit draft materials to the City for review, incorporate comments, and
submit to MDNR.
5. MDNR's response will include a Water Quality Review Sheet (containing effluent
limits and monitoring requirements for the new discharge) and Antidegradation
Review Preliminary Determination. Jacobs will review MDNR's response with the
City, and, if acceptable, will prepare an application for an operating permit and
antidegradation review public notice. Assistance with an appeal of MDNR's
response is not included in this scope of services.
6. If requested, Jacobs will support the City in commenting on the draft operating permit
during the public notice period. An allowance of 8 hours has been included for this
task.
7. Jacobs has also allocated 8 hours to assist the City in responding to public notice
comments, if received on the antidegradation review.
C. Facility Plan. In preparing the facility plan, Jacobs will draw basic information from the
existing Engineering Study, dated January 25, 2007 and prepared by Waters Engineering.
Jacobs will prepare the facility plan conforming to 10 CSR 20-4, 6, 7 and 8. The report
will assemble basic project information; present design criteria and assumptions; examine
alternative solutions; present preliminary layouts and cost estimates for the selected
alternative; and review financing and operational requirements. The proposed outline
and general information to be included for the facility plan is as follows:
Executive Summary
1. Introduction
2. Existing Conditions and Projections
a. Planning Period
b. Study Area (from existing study with minor modifications)
c. Land Use (from existing study with minor modifications)
d. Population Projections and Future Growth (from existing study)
e. Current Flows and Waste Loads (from existing study)
f. Forecast of Future Flows and Waste Loads (from existing study with minor
modifications)
3. Existing Facilities Evaluation (We will not perform physical review of these
facilities; rather this will be based on existing studies and information.)
a. Collection System
b. Pumping Stations
c. Treatment Plant
i. Site
ii. Facilities (from existing study)
iii. Performance (from existing study with minor modifications)
4. Project Development
a. Design Wastewater Characteristics (from existing study with minor
modifications)
b. Receiving Water Considerations
Page 2 of 8
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. 1 — Exhibit A
c. Effluent Limitations
d. Treatment Plant Site Requirements/Alternatives
e. Treatment Process Alternatives
f. Evaluation of Alternatives
5. Recommended Project
a. Layout
b. Design Criteria
c. Capital Cost
d. Operation & Maintenance Cost
e. Environmental Impact
6. Project Implementation
a. Cost Impact and Financing
b. Permit Requirements
c. Schedule
7. Jacobs will closely coordinate the development of the facility plan with the City.
Three copies of the draft facility plan will be submitted to the City for review. We
will revise the report based on the City's review comments and submit five copies of
the final facility plan. We will respond to comments on the final facility plan from
MDNR.
8. Jacobs will assist the City in obtaining project clearances from the following
governmental agencies:
a. Historic Preservation
b. U.S. Fish and wildlife Service
c. Missouri Department of Conservation
d. Division of State Parks
e. A-95 Clearinghouse
f. Division of Geology and Land Survey
g. Corps of Engineers District Office
9. Jacobs will assist the City in preparing the treatment plant construction funding (SRF
and/or MWRQ applications. An allowance of 8 hours has been included for this
task.
D. Rate Study / User Charge Evaluation. The following tasks are included:
1. Initial Review of current conditions. We will work with the City to get an
understanding of the current administrative functions such as billing practices, rate
structure and user charge system, ordinances and covenants for setting the current
rates and fees. The following will be reviewed to provide historical background:
1. Annual, monthly, and seasonal revenues
2. User charges / rates
3. Interest income, fees and other miscellaneous revenues
We will also look at historical expenses that will include operating expenses, debt
service, interest, capital expenses, capital improvement costs and estimate which are
fixed variable or non-recurring costs that will affect cost allocation.
Page 3 of 8
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. I — Exhibit A
2. Review of User Class and consumption. Since wastewater user fees are typically
based on water consumption, a review of the water consumption by the various
classes is necessary. We will look at the various users, including residential,
commercial, institutional, industrial, and governmental, and proportionate usage will
be used to distribute the cost of service equitably. One or two years of historical
water consumption or sewer billing data will be reviewed.
3. Review and projection of WWTP flow components. Wastewater charges are typically
billed based on water consumption, however, the charges can be influenced by
volume of wastewater, strength of flows (loading) and infiltration and inflow (UI).
Therefore historical and projected flows and strengths will be used to propose a user
charge system based on allocations for normal and high strength wastes and UI. The
flows and loadings estimated from the Facility Plan tasks described above will be
utilized.
4. Develop a 10 year system revenue requirement (Annual Expense budget).
Identification of Capital Improvement Plan costs; capital expense costs and other
annual commitments for replacement or I/I correction will be used.
The facility plan task will detail the estimated costs of the new WWTP and sludge
facilities and we will estimate the annual debt service cost based on the financing
alternative selected. These costs will go into the expense side of the rate
development. Generally there is an allocation for capital or equipment expense for
system replacement or I/I programs that are planned but of a nature that they are
outside, or separate from the necessary operation & maintenance (O&M) expense
budget. With the city's direction we will include such costs to be covered by the rates.
We will gather historical system O&M costs, the cost of operation projected for the
new WWTP, management and administrative costs from other city departments and
make projections for a ten year period for the rate development.
We will provide an allocation for any reserves that are required by the city, state, or
bond covenants and select a "test year" revenue requirement for the rate development.
Allocating Cost —of -Service to Cost —Causative components. This analysis assigns
the cost -of -service to be recovered from user charges to cost or activity centers and
then allocating those costs to cost causative components. This allocates costs to
various components such as volume, cost of solids handling, and BOD removal, so
that costs per unit can be determined and applied to normal users but also can be
surcharged to users that contribute higher volumes, strength or solids. These are all
steps in allocating equitable rates to the users.
6. Distribution of Costs -of -Service to Customer Class. This analysis looks at further
distributing costs to customer classes based on their service demands. This looks at
costs that are the same for all, such as billing and customer service to seasonal or
Page 4 of 8
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. I — Exhibit A
wholesale customers that vary throughout the year or who only utilize a determined
portion of the system. Pretreatment fees or costs will also be included in this process.
7. Development and Design of Schedule of Rates and Charges and Implementation.
After we have assembled all the cost data and broken them into the various
components and assigned costs for gallon of flow, pound of BOD and pound of solids
and equitably assigned costs to user groups, we will compute actual rate components,
fixed charges and volume charges.
The purpose of a cost of service and rate study is to determine the most equitable rate
to charge the customer to cover the cost of utility system. However, we also
understand that there are practical aspects to consider that impact people on fixed
income and high volume industry or institutions that are critical to the community.
Once the rates are presented we will work with the city to develop graduated
increases or program deferrals to the reduce impact, if warranted, to gain public
acceptance.
E. Public Involvement Plan (PIP). This phase presents an opportunity to begin a
discussion with the community regarding the need for a new waste water treatment
facility for the City of Cape Girardeau. At this phase it is an important time to lay the
groundwork for the ultimate goal of obtaining the public's approval for issuing bonds for
the project.
Goals of the PIP are:
1. Demonstrate the need for a new facility by providing the information about the
current conditions and options to the public.
2. Identify stakeholders and provide means for the City to communicate with them
about the project from beginning to end.
3. Build consensus for the project.
4. Obtain public approval to issue bonds and to set the appropriate rates to provide
for debt service and operation and maintenance costs.
The Objectives of the PIP are:
1. Provide information that is understandable and meaningful to the public and key
stakeholders.
2. Articulate and clarify key issues.
3. Identify potentially relevant problems.
Page 5 of 8
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. 1 — Exhibit A
N
The communication about the project should be targeted at the key
audiences/stakeholders. Jacobs can develop materials to assist the City in providing
information to them. The audience is anticipated to include:
1. Elected /Appointed Officials
2. Governmental Agencies
3. Business/Civic Leaders
4. Key Customers
5. Special Interest Groups/ Organizations
6. General Public
7. Media
A variety of public information tools can be developed to support the project. We have
included the following tools to assist the City:
1. Fact Sheet — Jacobs will develop a project fact sheet for the project at the end of
Phase 1 that summarizes the findings and Facility Plan. This will be developed
along with the City and formatted for the City to use the fact sheet in a variety of
ways including e-mail, dissemination at public meetings and posting on the City's
website.
2. News release — Jacobs will develop a draft news release for dissemination by the
City that will alert the media to the anticipated start of the project, including the
purpose, the anticipated schedule, and the anticipated costs.
3. Talking Points — Jacobs will develop up to 4 talking points at key milestones or
as requested by the City for use by the City in venues such as speaking
engagements, meetings and interviews with the media. These talking points
would focus on technical information as it becomes available or when deemed
appropriate.
4. Website — The City website may be a good avenue to provide project information
to the public. The City can utilize information from the fact sheets, news release
and talking points to update their web -site.
5. Public Information Meetings and Public Hearings) - Two public information
meetings with the general public will be held as well as the required public
hearing. The Jacobs team will support the City with these meetings by attending
the meetings and preparing displays, in addition to the fact sheet for the meeting.
6. Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Support (optional tool) — Jacobs has a great
deal of experience in developing, hosting and facilitating CACs. CACs are an
excellent tool in gathering a broad representation of the community for the project
and providing information. The intent is for the members of the CAC to
disseminate information to their representative organizations/interests.
If requested by the City, Jacobs's could provide help to identify the appropriate
members, develop agendas, attend meetings and provide technical support. One
meeting at the beginning of the project and one held just prior to the public
meeting at the end of the project, might be worthwhile. This task is not included
in the budget at this time.
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. 1 — Exhibit A
Page 6 of 8
F. Geotechnical Investigation. We have developed a scope of work for a geotechnical
evaluation of the subsurface conditions at the two (2) proposed sites. The sites to be
investigated are all within an area prone to sinkhole development which can have
significant impact on foundation design/construction as well as long-term operational
considerations. Because of the potential for sinkhole development at the proposed sites, a
well-planned and sequential subsurface investigation program consisting of site
reconnaissance/mapping, geophysical surveys and test borings is recommended. We
have outlined herein the proposed scope of work and the associated costs to develop a
geotechnical site evaluation report.
Our initial efforts will be to review existing geologic information and reports from the
project area including the recent U. S. Corps of Engineers "Cape LaCroix Creek Sinkhole
Study" report. We will conduct a site reconnaissance of the two proposed sites in an
effort to estimate if any surface features suggest one of the sites may be more prone than
the other for the development of sinkholes. In addition, for the area around the existing
plant site we will review the available geotechnical information for the existing plant.
We will also review the Shannon & Wilson report for Site 2 (near the Public Works
office) and use that existing information in our evaluation.
The karstic features in this geographic area are typically enlarged, vertical solutioned
joints in limestone (Plattin formation) filled with loess or clay. Joints in the area range up
to 5 to 10 ft wide and generally oriented north to south with a secondary joint set and
faulting trending east -west. These enlarged, clay -filled vertical joints are typically
spaced 25 to 100 ft in this area.
At the two proposed sites, we will conduct a geophysical investigation employing
electrical resistivity methods to identify anomalies that may be associated with karstic
features within the underlying bedrock formation. For Site 2 (near the Public Works
office), two equally spaced lines would be oriented east -west and two lines oriented end-
to-end would be oriented north -south. The reverse orientations would be performed for
Site 1 (the soccer park site). We expect anomalies within the bedrock may be difficult
to detect and we have chosen Geotechnology for their expertise in interpretation of
geophysical data to perform this phase of the study. At this time we do not plan on
performing any geophysical investigation methods at the current WWTP site.
We propose to drill a total of 4 test borings at the two proposed sites (three borings at Site
1 and one boring at Site 2). We will make use of the existing subsurface information
presented in the March 30, 2000 letter report prepared by Shannon & Wilson for Site 2.
It is assumed that an ATV mounted drill rig can access the proposed boring locations.
We have estimated the depth to bedrock at approximately 35 to 50 feet below the existing
ground surface. Core samples in bedrock will be obtained at two of the boring locations
at Site 1 and the one boring at Site 2 to a depth of 15 feet into rock. All boreholes will be
grouted upon completion of drilling because it is important in karstic areas not to provide
a path for surface water infiltration to jeopardize the integrity of the site.
Page 7 of 8
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. I — Exhibit A
Drilling and sampling operations will be performed in accordance with ASTM standards
and other recognized industry procedures. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) will be
taken at 2.5 -foot intervals for the first 15 feet below ground surface and at 5 -foot centers
thereafter, in each boring. The samples will be sealed and labeled for later laboratory
testing. In addition, three-inch OD undisturbed, thin-walled tube (Shelby Tube) samples
will be obtained in fine-grained soil strata.
Following completion of the borings, a laboratory -testing program will be undertaken to
evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Laboratory
tests will be completed on representative samples of the on-site materials. The following
laboratory tests will be performed on select soil samples in accordance with ASTM
standards: moisture content, Atterberg limits, and unconfined compression. On
representative rock core samples we will perform unconfined compression tests.
Our efforts will be directed towards evaluating the sites in terms of which site is more at
risk to develop sinkholes; which site has better subsurface conditions resulting in less
foundation costs; and what is the impact of the seismic vulnerability and site hazards.
Our findings and recommendations will be developed and summarized in a report. The
report will include feasible foundation types and preliminary foundation capacities.
It should be noted that once a site is selected and a plant layout is determined, a more
detailed geotechnical/geophysical investigation of that site may be required to provide
site specific design recommendations. The information obtained during this site
evaluation phase will supplement any additional effort.
G. Regulatory Assistance / Schedule of Compliance. Jacobs will assist the City in
negotiating a Settlement Agreement (SA) with MDNR and the Attorney General to
extend the Schedule of Compliance currently listed in the City's NPDES permit.
Services anticipated to include:
1. Initial meeting with City to discuss City's options
2. Assist the City with development of suggested schedule of tasks to get into
compliance
3. Meetings with MDNR to discuss SA (it is assumed that this will take 3-4 meetings)
4. Jacobs' assistance will be technical and regulatory advice only. The City will be
responsible for retaining legal representation separate from this contract.
H. The scope of services under this Task Order does not include the following:
1. Topographic surveys, final design, and bidding and construction phase services.
2. Evaluation of significant degradation of Mississippi River for the antidegradation
review (see paragraph B above).
3. Assistance with appeal of MDNR's Antidegradation Review Determination (see
paragraph B.1 above).
4. Collection and analysis of water quality samples.
5. Development of a Citizens Advisory Committee is not included.
Page 8 of 8
City of Cape Girardeau
Amendment No. 1 — Exhibit A