Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/05/2005, C9 - TECHNICAL STUDIES FOR INVESTIGATION OF REGULATORY OPTIONS AT THE WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY. councit Metbn °i C)os j agenda RCPORt �m �� ne CITY OF SAN LU IS O B I S P O FROM: Department Head John Moss, Utilities Directo Prepared By: David Hix, Wastewater Div' ion Manager SUBJECT: TECHNICAL STUDIES FOR INVESTIGATION OF REGULATORY OPTIONS AT THE WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY. CAO RECOMMENDATION Approve agreement with Larry Walker Associates in the amount of $89,000 for a feasibility analysis of regulatory options for the City's Water Reclamation Facility. DISCUSSION The Problem in a Non-technical Nutshell In May of 2000 the State of California adopted the California Toxics Rule (CTR) which added additional constituents to the long list of compliance requirements for wastewater facilities. The State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has identified compliance limits for the City's Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) for a number of these new constituents that the City can not currently achieve. Several studies have been completed already in an effort to better characterize the relevance of these requirements and the impact of the City's discharge of these new constituents on San Luis Obispo Creek and its beneficial uses. The additional studies recommended in this report will review the feasibility and estimated cost of options available for the City to pursue that may provide legal and technically justified relief from those new requirements that are not technically justified and/or impacting actual beneficial uses of San Luis Obispo Creek. The other alternative being reviewed concurrently with this request is the feasibility and cost of meeting the new requirements through upgrade to our WRF with new and/or modified treatment processes. The end result of these efforts will be to provide the decision makers (our Council and the RWQCB) with the information needed to determine the most beneficial and cost effective approach to compliance. A separate business item is being presented to Council at this same meeting that more thoroughly discusses all of the current negotiations with the RWQCB, new regulations affecting the WRF, along with a status report and schedule for Council as a prelude to upcoming reports and decisions. The Technical Details On May 31, 2002, the RWQCB adopted a new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the City's WRF. The permit contained requirements for special studies that included performing a detailed analysis of the WRF's effluent, called a Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA), determining the fate of Trihalomethanes (THMs) as they naturally degrade while traveling downstream in San Luis Obispo Creek, and monitoring groundwater up and down gradient of the WRF's discharge to determine if the discharge is affecting groundwater �" r Investigation of Regulatory Options at the Water Reclamation Facility Page 2 quality., These studies have been completed and, along with the RWQCB's Basin Plan, have been used to establish interim and permanent discharge limits in the WRF's NPDES permit that may lead to significant and costly treatment process upgrades. The most significant finding of the studies was the presence and amount of THMs in the WRF's effluent and San Luis Obispo Creek. THMs are a common by-product when chlorine, used in the treatment processes and for disinfection, comes into contact with organics. The results of these studies showed that THMs are present in the WRF's discharge at levels that exceed State standards. The studies also showed that through natural degradation compliance with the standard is achieved approximately 23,000 downstream of the WRF's outfall. Because the WRF's discharge makes up the majority of flow in San Luis Obispo Creek, a condition referred to as an Effluent Dominated Waterbody (EDW), the City receives no benefit from dilution in meeting this water quality objective for the creek. The City has now been given an interim discharge limitation with a compliance schedule to meet an extremely stringent final limit, in five years. The driver behind the requirement for this stringent limit, and many others, is the Municipal and Domestic Supply beneficial use designation (MUN) for San Luis Obispo Creek. This beneficial use, i.e. drinking water use of the creek, does not actually exist in San Luis Obispo Creek. The use would be inappropriate for an EDW. The application of MUN standards to the City's discharge will result in costly facility upgrades with very little corresponding benefit to the water body. Currently studies continue on in-plant generation of THMs to determine the extent that levels of THMs may be reasonably reduced without costly facility upgrades. Because of the uncertainty of the outcome of these,studies and the potential significant costs required to build and operate new processes, it is important that the City concurrently pursue studies to determine the appropriateness of applying these and other standards to San Luis Obispo Creek. This feasibility study will look at possible regulatory opportunities the City may need to pursue prior to, or as an option to, designing and building new and costly processes at the WRF. This study will review the following options currently available to the City under the same laws that established the regulations. One option will consider the actual beneficial uses of San Luis Obispo Creek as listed in the RWQCB Basin Plan and the potential for eliminating the MLN beneficial designation. This is also known as de-designation. As stated above, the MUN designation is the primary driver for the majority of the WRF's most stringent discharge requirements and that beneficial use does exist on San Luis Obispo Creek. The study will review and consider the option for developing Site Specific Water Quality Objectives or (SSOs) for the creek. SSOs could be developed for pollutants, such as THMs, if it can be demonstrated that the current objective is overly protective of existing beneficial uses and unwarranted. Finally, a point of compliance study will be performed to determine at what point downstream of the WRF compliance is achievable with only minor modifications to our treatment facility and presumed reductions in THM generation.. A scope of work, schedule and cost estimate will be developed for the most promising and achievable of these regulatory relief options. This information can then be considered along with full compliance options through facility upgrade, to determine our most appropriate and cost effective direction. �, 1 -� Investigation of Regulatory Options at the Water Reclamation Facility Page 3 Larry Walker Associates, Inc., specialize in water quality regulations and studies and have extensive knowledge with the California Toxics Rule, State Implementation Plan and State water quality regulations and policies. Larry Walker Associates have prepared several similar studies for other agencies and provide support for all of the documents and studies they develop. Larry Walker Associates are very familiar with the City's NPDES permit and the RWQCB from prior work assisting the City in its last permit negotiations. Few firms posses the expertise; experience and excellent service offered by Larry Walker Associates. FISCAL IMPACT This feasibility study will cost $89,000. A total of$189,700 is available in the Sewer Fund's general carryover which can be used to fund this study. Staff is recommending contracting with Larry Walker Associates rather than issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) because of their comprehensive knowledge and experience. ALTERNATIVES Council may direct staff to issue an RFP for these services. This alternative would provide other proposals for consideration. However, staff does not feel that another consultant would bring the understanding, expertise, knowledge and value that will be provided through contracting with Larry Walker and Associates. Soliciting proposals will also result in delays in completing this required analysis and may result in this information not being available to the City and RWQCB during future permit development. ATTACHMENTS 1. Scope of Work 2. Agreement and Terms Attachment 1 707 4th Street, Suite 200 530.753.6400 www.lwa.com Davis,CA 95616 530.753.7030 fax - 1 I L A R R Y W A L K E R CITY L; "< l!_ March 15, 2005 1A Mr. Dave Hix City of San Luis Obispo ASSOCIATES 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Proposal for Feasibility Analysis of Regulatory Options Dear Mr. Hix: In response to your request,Larry Walker Associates ("LWA' is submitting this proposal to analyze regulatory options which potentially could allow the City of San Luis Obispo Wastewater Reclamation Facility (WRIT to comply with NPDES permit requirements without extensive facility improvements. The proposal addresses regulatory options with respect to current trihalomethanes ("THMs") limits and anticipated nitrate limits. LWA's scope of services, schedule, and cost estimate are presented below. SCOPE OF SERVICES LWA tasks anticipated under this proposal are as follows: Task 1: Assess Actual Beneficial Uses of San Luis Obispo Creek. Task 1.1: Review available information (to be furnished by the City) regarding beneficial uses of the creek. Task 1.2: Make a reconnaissance survey of the creek with City staff. Task 1.3: Compare actual uses with the uses designated in the Basin Plan. Task 1.4: Review monitoring data upstream-and downstream of the WRF. Task 1.5: Determine which actual and designated uses are impaired due to water quality. Task 1.6: Assess the benefits that would be.achieved as a result of City compliance with current and anticipated permit requirements for THMs and nitrate. Task 2. Analyze the potential for site-specific objectives for THMs. Task 2.1: Contract with the Department of Fish and Game to collect on two occasions fish tissue samples for analysis. LWA will accompany DFG staff and handle the fish samples collected for delivery to the laboratory. Task 2.2: Contract with an analytical laboratory to analyze tissue samples for THMs. Task 2.3: Review the EPA criteria document(s) for THMs of concern. eq - 4 Attachment 1 Task 2.4: Calculate the fish tissue levels that are the basis for the CTR organisms only and water plus organisms criteria. Task 2.5: Assess the potential impact of EPA's new human health methodology on the CTR THM criteria and calculate corresponding fish tissue levels. Task 2.6: Compare the tissue levels of THMs of concern with the tissue levels that are the basis for the CTR criteria, and with the tissue levels based on the new EPA human health methodology. Task 2.7: Prepare a brief technical memorandum presenting the results of the analysis and containing estimates of the site-specific objectives for THMs of concern based on actual fish tissue levels observed in fish in the creek. Task 2.8: Meet with the City to review the results of the analysis. Task 3. Analyze the potential for de-designation of the municipal drinking water (MUN) use downstream of the treatment plant. Task It Review the EPA requirements for de-designation of uses and recent and current efforts in California to perform use attainability analyses (UAAs) for MUN. Task 3.2: Performa preliminary UAA for the MUN use based on available information. Task 3.3: Prepare a brief technical memorandum presenting the results of the analysis and assessing the potential for de-designation of the MUN use in the creek Task 3.4: Meet with the City to review the results of the analysis. (Combine with Task 2.8.) Task 4. Analyze the potential for a downstream point of compliance. Task 4.1: Based on the results of: Tasks 1,2 and 3;the separate THMs Reduction Evaluation, and the THM model,determine the points in the creek where compliance with various THM limits could be achieved (current permit limits and potential limits based on SSOs and possible future human health criteria). Task 4.2: Analyze the potential for conservation easements or other non-WRF actions the City could take to protect and/or enhance beneficial uses of the creek. Task 4.3: Prepare a brief technical memorandum presenting the results of the analysis and assessing the potential for downstream points of compliance for THM as well as nitrate limits. Task 4.4: Meet with the City to review the results of the analysis. (Combine with Task 2.8.) Task 5. Develop scope, schedule and cost estimate to pursue regulatory options. Task 5.L• Prepare a preliminary scope, schedule and cost estimate to develop SSOs, UAAs or other options that appear to offer potential for regulatory relief. Task 5.2: Meet with the City to review the results of the analysis and determine which options,if any, the City is interested in pursuing. (Combine with Task 2.8.) Task 5.3: Based on the results of Task 5.2,prepare an outline of a proposal to pursue regulatory options for discussion with the Regional,Board staff. Task 5.4: Meet with the Regional Board staff to review the results of Tasks 1 to 4 and the proposal for further pursuit of regulatory options and determine their receptiveness to pursuit of such options. This meeting would coincide with the meeting to discuss the results of the separate THMs Reduction Evaluation. �q -S Attachment I Task 6. Contract administration. LWASCHEDULE It is LWA's understanding the results of these studies are to be presented to the Regional Board at the same time as the THMs Reduction Evaluation. The THMs Reduction Evaluation is required to be submitted to the Regional Board by November 1, 2005 as outlined in the December 20,2004 Draft Modification of WRF NPDES Permit. The following table outlines the time needed to complete the corresponding task or tasks after receipt of notice to proceed,but does not suggest a start date. LWA will work with the City to determine when the study should begin to meet the November deadline. Task Number Time to Complete Task Notes 1 1 months Thus task will be completed within one month after receipt of notice to proceed. 2,3 and 4 5 months These tasks-will be completed five months after receipt of notice to proceed and concurrently with Task 1 5 1 month This task will be completed one month after completing Tasks 1 through 4 and will be completed by November 1 2005 LWA COST ESTIMATE The estimated cost for the work described above is $ 89,000 as detailed on the attached spreadsheet dated February 15,2005. The actual cost may vary from the estimate if necessary to meet additional City or Regional Board requirements.. Please call if you have any questions or if you need additional information. Sincerely, nF. alker Chief Executive Officer Larry Walker Associates, Inc. (530) 753-6400 Enclosure: LWA cost estimate dated February 15, 2005 V Ce Attachment 1 0 000 pop �ppc (ppo �0{ 0 0 � 0 o� � c� o�� � o0 R01 'N7_ tO Co 8ONO Af"ts TOD � �fD N ' �,i t� O E G CN Un r' ONrM -Cr zNI� NORM N NN 47 N M H E V W (q y1 H V!fA 69 Vi M 64 69 64 CH Vf W 19 ua 69 V1 to!A 69 69 Vi 4.4!to V po go �j �i O LL E O n O O o E Co N 69 fR b! 6> 0cc 0 V dor m m3 c R N G7 d o O O O O Op O O O O o o O O O O O O O O O O o N (n O O N N OO t0 N M t0 M M 'r <o ? 00 � 1 O) N O Q 0 V Co M Q M tO Co 00 C14 r%- T IW Oi rl tc N N CV Co (O 1.. O C4-'r r C7 R I N CO N M M N N N v C N d J V w O 3 `� a F- J yH 60*f9 M 69 69 69 fA fR CA V}lA 69 V!to 69 fA 69 69 GA CA fR 6Y V!Vf 6Y 64 N 3 � � cc w Co ^ N CD Cn X000 MNN OCORO Co COO OD O COQ h tO Lo N M < NCO N N N N .a r O C N O 'O V N C N A 0 Q Z% d 6 U t!J ioLo E r N W Q M rCL IL N 7 - Ca = «y H i.. N 0 Co V2 1 Co � 00 � Co � CDN � � 'a' < Co � N Co N V N O oaf � � y w o a •- � C m � � � CONON7 N N CO O 40 W CM r.. O. N 0 %1 N N N N N N �- N N V N V' < N < w OrO C C L m R W A C A y m .0 Y m m y -a �`�. r� � � m > r N ' t7� me L = '� g'~ o -c d N <D O a CO e m =c m Q o. E y E E A d E m a`� E o 0 LL. a w e �e 3 o m v, c e is c rn o c rn .fir v m m w m o W. m E `�' f° CM c c H m .� c m �,� CS as m °� c rqe tyC m m G a E ai - E ' — Z E ' c m m L Cp E N a r m m l0 a CED ` y m '� .tea L� EE y $ m vii �Ep a;i II c QQ� {Ep >Si $ $ E O' W m C W U > ` > E m U' 'c yy>� >y Luc. �..p L c m R r c p -5 o W m m C y N G LL .m.. N N m y O C E O C N f0 0 m y m W C M W CUC 7 O m C C >. a mm C H f0 'C m L_ L_ Q N N N �" ClCl. m �+ _ m m _ O QC U Q > d o m c m a in E • �° m m m y t C r+ Q C W E CL `m W ow € @ 2v m m S2 2 5S W — c y E n W > �i W > W o a � scgzcS " d` � ciac�ia d` za d` w' ¢` M oma 2v _YrW rYrW rYrW MrYW<rY hrYW VrYmmW NYmmW NYW NYWp M 1YlW'f CCYMrW NMrW MrW QNYW! YA rY N!JRfCMYVY�{' hYYNYM ui M hY 4Yt YOhN tVrr1"Blot"R, %14 12 12 YrrrrA W W rW W rW is . &!!acw_M 7 . Z \ Mn p / ) k \ ek \ 64 . ƒ _C-4 CYo � ) 7 { f Co j B CL 5 - § \ \ § #& 7 \ 7� § k i) CN cc / yCDk j0 k / E g2Q / /LL $ . B � § JImIf I � ) a , 2M0 & § $2k /k © % c -0 « Co 05 t® § & � « =f § k -o 42 E 22a CD CD§ a # ` = § ) aJ � � � 2As ■ CD « ] a2f2 § $ 882x » © kk ■ 777 \I ■ # C7 ® & a & § I 'Iu'J § L2 � i0i �q �� Attachment 2 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on , by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal ,corporation, hereinafter referred to as City,and Larry Walker Associates,Inc.;hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS,the City wants a Feasibility Analysis of Regulatory Options. WHEREAS, Contractor is qualified to perform this type of service and has submitted a proposal to do so which has been accepted by City. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained,the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and entered,as. fust written above,until acceptance or completion of said services. 2. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Contractor shall receive therefor compensation in a total sum not to exceed$89,000. 4. CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to provide services as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement. Contractor further agrees to the contract performance terms as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement. 5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Administrative Officer of the City. 6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or representation be binding upon the parties hereto. Attachment 2 Agreement Paget 7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail, postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows: City John Moss Utilities Director City of San Luis Obispo 879 Morro Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Contractor Larry Walker Associates,Inc. 509 4'h Street Davis,CA. 95616 8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,A Municipal Corporation By: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR By: City rney - 1O i Attachment 2 Exhibit B CONTRACT PERFORMANCE TERMS 1. Business Tax. Contractor must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo business tax certificate prior to execution of the contract. Additional information regarding the City's business tax program may be obtained by calling(805) 781-7134. 2. Ability to Perform. Contractor warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary to carry out and complete the work hereunder in compliance with any and all federal, state, county, city, and special district laws,ordinances, and regulations. 3. Laws to be Observed. Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and shall observe and comply with all applicable state and federal laws and county and City of San Luis Obispo ordinances, regulations and adopted codes during its performance of the work. 4. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes that Contractor is required to pay. 5. Permits and Licenses. Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices necessary. 6. Safety Provisions. Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to safety established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety. 7. Public and Employee Safety. Whenever Contractor's operations create a condition hazardous to the public or City employees; it shall, at its expense and without cost to the City, furnish, erect and maintain such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs and other devices and take such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent accidents or damage or injury to the public and employees. 8. Preservation of City Property. Contractor shall provide and install suitable safeguards, approved by the City, to protect City property from injury or damage. If City property is injured or damaged as a result of Contractor's operations, it shall be replaced or restored at Contractor's expense. The facilities shall be replaced or restored to a condition as good as when the Contractor began work. 9. Immigration Act of 1986. Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all sub-contractors engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to work in the United States pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and other applicable laws shall be employed in the performance of the work hereunder. 10. Contractor Non:Discrimination. In the performance of this work, Contractor agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit such sub-contractors as it may employ, to engage in discrimination in employment of persons because of age, race, color, sex, national origin or ancestry, .sexual orientation,or religion of such persons. 11. Work Delays. Should Contractor be obstructed or delayed in the work required to be done hereunder by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City, or by strikes, fire, earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain materials, equipment, or labor due to federal government restrictions arising out of defense or war programs,then the time Cn — � c Attachment 2 Exhibit B:Contract Performance Terms Page B-2 of completion may, at the City's sole option,be extended for such periods as may be agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. 12. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original invoice and acceptance by the City of the services provided by Contractor(Net 30). 13. Inspection. Contractor shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of Contractor are being performed in accordance with the requirements and intentions of this contract. All work done and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the City's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve Contractor of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract requirements. 14. Audit. The City shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and other written materials used by Contractor in preparing its invoices to City as a condition precedent to any payment to Contractor. 15. Interests of Contractor. Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any interest direct or indirect or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the work hereunder. Contractor further covenants that, in the performance of this work, no sub-contractor or person having such an interest shall be employed. Contractor certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest in performing this work is an officer or employee of the City. It is hereby expressly agreed that, in the performance of the work hereunder, Contractor shall at all times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. 16. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold the City and its agents, officers and employees harmless from and against any and all claims asserted or liability established for damages or injuries to any person or property, including injury to Contractor's employees, agents or officers which arise from or are connected with or are caused or claimed to be caused by the acts or omissions of Contractor, and its agents, officers or employees, in performing the work or services herein, and all expenses of investigating and defending against same, provided, however, that Contractor's duty to indemnify and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liability arising from the. established sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees. 17. Year 2000 Compliance. The Contractor warrants that the goods or services provided to the City, including those provided through subcontractors, are "Year 2000 compliant." For the purpose of this contract, "Year 2000 compliant" means that goods or services provided to the City will continue to fully function, fault-free, before, at and after the Year 2000, without interruption or human intervention; and if applicable, any data outside of the date range 1990- 1999, including leap years, will be correctly processed in any level of computer hardware or software, including, but not limited to, microcode, firmware, application programs, files and data bases. This warranty supersedes all warranty disclaimers or limitations, and all limitations on liability,otherwise provided by the Contractor. Upon request by the City,the Contractor will provide the City with a description of its Year 2000 compliance strategy, or statement of why this is not relevant to contract performance. 18. Contract Assignment. Contractor shall not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of the contract, or its right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a contract to any individual or business entity of any kind without the previous written consent of the City. Attachment 2 Exhibit B:Contract Performance Terms Page B-3 19. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that Contractor is not faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify Contractor in writing of such defect or failure to perform; which notice must give Contractor a 10 (ten) calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work or cure the deficiency:. If Contractor has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days specified in the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may terminate the contract immediately by written notice to Contractor to said effect. Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations,responsibilities or rights under the contract. In said event, Contractor shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its services performed from the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received the City's Notice of Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the City's damages from such breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for goods or services as of the last milestone or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by Contractor as may be set forth in the Agreement payment schedule; compensation for any other work, services or goods performed or provided by Contractor shall be based solely on the City's assessment of the value of the work-in- progress in completing the overall workscope. The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed abandonment of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to permit a full and complete accounting of costs. In no event, however, shall Contractor be entitled to receive in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal. 20. Ownership of Materials. All original drawings; plan documents and other materials prepared by or in possession of Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall become the permanent property of the City, and shall be delivered to the City upon demand.. 21. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information, data, or other material given to, prepared by or assembled by Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall be the property of City, and shall not be made available to any individual or organization by Contractor without the prior written approval of the City. 22. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports, drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what Contractor is required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the work or services under these specifications, Contractor shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate Contractor for the costs of duplicating of such copies at the Contractor's direct expense. 23. Required Deliverable Products. Contractor will provide: a. Three (3) copies of the final report that addresses all elements of the workscope. Any documents or materials provided by Contractor will be reviewed by City staff and, where necessary, Contractor will respond to staff comments and mak_a such changes as deemed appropriate. b. One camera-ready original, unbound, each page printed on only one side, including any original graphics in place and scaled to size,ready for reproduction. CA I3 Attachment 2 Exhibit B:Contract Performance Terms Page B-4 C. When computers have been used to produce materials submitted to the City as a part of the workscope, Contractor must provide the corresponding computer files to the City, compatible with the following programs whenever possible: • Word Processing Word o Spreadsheets Excel • Desktop Publishing Coreldraw, Pagemaker • Computer Aided Drafting(CAD) AutoCad Computer files must be on 31/2", high-density, write-protected diskettes, formatted for use on I3M-compatible systems. Each diskette must be clearly labeled and have a printed copy of the directory. 24. Attendance at Meetings and Hearings. As part of the workscope and included in the contract price is attendance by the Contractor at up to 2 public meetings to present and discuss its findings and recommendations. Contractor shall attend as many "working" meetings with staff as necessary in performing workscope tasks. 25. Insurance. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Contractor, its agents, representatives,employees or sub-contractors. a. Minimum scope of insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: • Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). • Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). • Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. • Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to Contractor's profession. b. Minimum limits of insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: • General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit .shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. • Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. • Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. • Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. C. Deductibles and self-insured retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or Contractor shall procure a C�' - � � Attachment 2 Exhibit B:Contract Performance Terms Page B-5 bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other insurance provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions; • The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Contractor; products and completed operations of Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by Contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, official, employees, agents or volunteers. • For any claims related to this project, Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. • Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. • Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. • Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail,return receipt requested,has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII. f. Verification of coverage.. Contractor shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance showing maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting general liability and automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. C!R L4�'