Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/26/1993, 4 - WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT - DRAFT EIR (llry�lyllll�lll�lllll II MEETING DATE: G ��Ijllllll city oSan Llys OBISpO 10/26/93 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: John Moss PREPARED BY: Dave Pierce Acting 'ties Director Water Projects Ler SUBJECT: Water Reclamation Project - Draft EIR RECOMMENDATION: By motion, a. approve the appropriation of funds in the amount of $65,000.00 from the Water Fund to the Water Reclamation Project for contract services in support of the preparation of an EIR. b. approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a contract with Stetson Engineers, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for hydrologic services. REPORT W BRIEF An appropriation of $65,000 from the Water Fund is needed for additional evaluations of the impacts which the Water Reclamation Project may have on San Luis Obispo Creek. At this time, a contract should be awarded to Stetson Engineers Inc. in the amount of $30,000 to complete a hydrologic analysis of the lower San Luis Obispo Creek basin and to determine a monitoring program to identify when downstream users are taking water dedicated to instream uses. Approximately $5,000 will be required for expert testimony before the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Up to $25,000 will be required for additional evaluations of impacts on habitat and wildlife. And $5,000 is reserved for contingencies and miscellaneous costs associated with the processing of the EIR. The Draft EIR distributed in March 1993, contained a proposal to dedicate 1 cubic foot per second of the reclaimed water for instream use. The Department of Fish and Game, the Division of Water Rights, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board proposed that the 1 cfs be measured approximately 5 miles downstream because there was no plan for-controlling pumping by downstream users.- With this condition reclamation program would not be economical. City staff and representatives of each of the three state agencies met to determine what was needed to proceed with a project. The Division of Water Rights will enforce the dedication of the 1 cfs to instream uses. The City needs to determine how much water will be available for downstream use in order to describe the impact on downstream users and in stream uses. The City needs to propose a method for monitoring the amount of water in the basin so that the Division of Water Rights can take enforcement action when the dedicated water is being removed from the creek. The City then needs to describe the impact on the riparian plants and wildlife based on the amount of water to remain in the creek. The proposed appropriation will provide the funding to accomplish these tasks. 4— City of san Luis OBISpo SCOUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Reclamation - EIR Page 2 DLSCUSSION Water Reclamation, a Major City Goal in the 1991-93 Financial Plan (page B-29), has been incorporated into a broader Major City Goal to "... aggressively pursue the development of long range water supply ..." in the 1993-95 Financial Plan (page B-20). The Water Reclamation Project will provide the distribution system needed to use the disinfected tertiary treated reclaimed water being produced by the City's upgraded Water Reclamation Facility. Dedication of 1 cubic foot per second (cfs) for instream uses is a significant feature of the.proposed project. This dedication serves two purposes. It responds to the Council approved priorities that set maintenance of the Creek habitat as one of the highest uses for reclaimed water. The dedication gives the instream uses a water right that can be enforced to prevent other users from removing that 1 cfs. It also helps mitigate the impact of a reduced flow to the Creek. In March 1993, a draft EIR for the Water Reclamation Project was distributed for public comment. The Department of Fish and Game, the State Division of Water Rights and the Regional Water Quality Control Board all responded with statements that the City should measure the dedicated release near the confluence with See Canyon Creek (approximately 5 miles downstream from the Water Reclamation Facility outfall). The projecrcould not proceed with such a provision as there would be no control over downstream extractions from the creek. In dry.weather there may be no water to sell as all may have to be discharged to maintain the flow level at the end of the Creek. I Staff proposed to work with these three State agencies, to further discuss the issues with downstream property owners, and then to rewrite the Draft EIR and distribute it once again for public comment. A meeting with all three agencies was held in Sacramento on July 30, 1993. John Moss, Dave Pierce, and the City's Water Rights Attorney met with the Assistant Director of the State Division of Water Rights (DWR), several of his staff, the Executive Officer of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Coast Region (RWQCB), the local biologist from the Department of Fish & Game, and an assistant to the Director of the Department of Fish and Game (F&G). The meeting was opened with a reminder that this case is unusual in that the water purveyor (City) is volunteering to dedicate, for instream uses, water that it has imported from outside the basin. Also, since the City no longer uses water from San Luis Obispo Creek, any lack of water in the lower basin is the result of users other than the City. 4— �����►��i��llllll�pi ����ll city of San cats OBISpo Warms COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT y Reclamation - EIR Page 3 Bill Leonard stated that the RWQCB comments on the EIR had been focused on Fish and Game concerns but that the Regional Board has been trying for years to convince the City to reuse its effluent. The representatives of the Division of Water Rights agreed that the information presented indicated that the effluent from the treatment plant belongs to the City, that downstream wells near the creek are pumping water from the creek underflow, and that the DWR has enforcement responsibility to prevent downstream users from taking water that the City might dedicate to instrea n uses. DWR requested that the City propose a method for determining when the downstream basin is being overpumped. At other locations, this has been accomplished by monitoring the levels of key wells within the basin. Additionally, staff will work with the local representative of the Department of Fish and Game to insure that impacts to biological resources are adequately addressed in the EIR and to develop mitigations that will best reduce these impacts. Major concerns that still need to be addressed include: How much will the flow be reduced? What are the impacts of reduced flow on agriculture, on water quality, on habitat, and on species of concern? What is the potential impact for growth as the result of having additional water? To acquire this additional information. The Instream Flow Study has been expanded to consider temperature changes and habitat characteristics. A hydrological evaluation will model the lower San Luis Obispo Creek basin to determine the amount of water that can be extracted by the downstream users and to determine where to locate a monitoring well. Additional biological evaluations will be needed to determine the impact that the proposed flow might have on the rare and endangered species in the area. After the impacts are determined, staff will work with Fish and Game to determine mitigation measures to reduce the impacts. " t• 3 ���h�►�u��llllll�l►►► �dlll city of san tins oBispo - COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Reclamation - EIR Page 4 Appropriation: An appropriation of$65,000 from the Water Fund is needed to complete the EIR for the Water Reclamation Project. Of this total it is expected that $30,000 will be used for the hydrologic study, approximately $5,000 will be required for expert testimony before regulating agencies including the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), an .undetermined amount, estimated to be less than $25,000, will be required for additional evaluation of the potential impact to riparian habitat and wildlife, and $5,000 is included for contingencies and miscellaneous costs associated with the processing of the EIR. If the cost of the biological studies exceeds the delegated authority for the CAO to award, they will be brought back for Council review and award. These additional studies are needed in order to have sufficient information to prepare an EIR that will assure the Department of Fish & Game, the Division of Water Rights and the RWQCB that the City has clearly identified and understands the impacts that this project might have on San Luis Obispo Creek. Sixty-five thousand dollars is a lot of money. However, it is quite small compared to the value of the proposed dedication of 1 cfs for the maintenance of habitat in the Creek. If that 1 cfs was distributed and sold for irrigation as part of the project, the total output available for irrigation would be increased by 330 acre feet per year. At current water rates the retail value of that amount of water is $350,000 per year. Should the Council eventually certify the EIR and proceed with design and construction of the project, a better supported EIR should help others see that when the City decided to exercise its rights to the reclaimed water it also made-a major contribution to maintenance of the environment of San Luis Obispo Creek. Alternatives: Appropriate $30,000 at this time for the award of the contract for a hydrologic study. Require staff to return to Council for additional appropriations for the biological studies and costs associated with hearings before the State Water Resources Control Board. Direct staff to cancel or delay the project. The Water Reclamation Project is a viable drought resistant source of 1830 acre feet of water per year. This is slightly more than the increase in the safe annual yield of the Salinas Dam expansion which will have a similar project cost. If year round uses are developed, the Water Reclamation Project has the potential of delivering up to 3300 acre feet per year. `7 �����►�►i���IIIII�Ipll�lll city of san -.tis oBispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT y Reclamation - EIR Page 5 Direct staff to proceed without this study. Although it is possible that an EIR could be written without the additional information to be provided by these studies, the EIR would likely be contested by one or more state agencies and by several individuals. The EIR would likely be tied up in litigation and the cost of defending it would likely exceed the cost of these studies. The Council would have to accept an EIR that painted the worst possible picture of environmental impacts and would have to certify that despite these possible impacts the project should go forward. Hydrologic Services: The consultant selected to analyze the lower San Luis Obispo Creek Basin needs to be highly competent and must have credibility to present findings and recommendations to the State Water Resources Control Board at a hearing on the petition for change in place and purpose of the use of treated wastewater. Ali Shahroody with the firm Stetson Engineering Inc. was recommended by the City's water rights attorney, Scott Slater, as he has worked on several similar cases and is experienced in providing expert testimony at SWRCB hearings. Staff discussed the situation with Mr. Shahroody and Mr. Slater to determine what would be needed to provide the information requested by the DWR. Mr. Shahroody was asked to submit a proposal which is included as Exhibit B of the attached proposed agreement for hydrologic services. Staff proposes that a contract be awarded to Stetson Engineering. This firm is best qualified as it has highly developed technical skills and has experience in making presentations at contested administrative hearings before the State Water Resources Control Board. The cost of$30,000 is similar to that paid for the 1990 Ground Water Basin Evaluation of the Edna Valley and to that of a proposal received earlier this year from a local firm for a similar evaluation of the lower San Luis Obispo Creek Basin. Alternatives: Award a Contract to Stetson Engineers Inc. as proposed. Direct staff to request additional proposals and proceed with a more formal evaluation of firms. This will add at least two months to the process and is unlikely to result in any savings. Staff feels that a key qualification is the successful presentation of proposals at contested hearings. The recommended firm of Stetson Engineers Inc. has the demonstrated capabilities and reputation to provide this level of service. 14 —� ��u►i�ib�►��IIIIII�I�i ������1 city of San LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Reclamation - EIR Page 6 FISCAL IMPACT The Water Reclamation Project was not included in the FY 1993-94 Capital Improvement Program because the actual scope and phasing of the project was not to be decided until the completion of the EIR. The method of design was being discussed and it was expected that there would be no expenditure of funds until FY 1994-95. Staff felt that the EIR prepared in March would be satisfactory with only minor changes being needed as the result of the public comments. Following is a summary of the expenditures to date, encumbrances and projected additional requirements through the completion of the EIR and hearing on the petition for relocation of the point of use of the treated wastewater. Spent Encumbered Future Total To Date Needs Tom Payne & Assoc. - Fisheries Biologist $18,239.25 $7,110.00 $25,349.25 Hatch & Parent - Water Rights 3,937.50 15,158.95 $19,096.45 Robert Gibson - Archaeologist 3,995.50 $3,995.50 Hydrologist/Geologist 35,000.00 $35,000.00 Biological Studies 25,000.00 ' $25,000.00 Contingency and misc. 2.000.00 5.000.00 $7.000.00 TOTAL $28,172.25 $22,268.95 $65,000.00 $115,441.20 Due to 1992-93 Water Operations savings, sufficient fund balance exists to fund this one-time capital project expenditure. The project will not affect the projected fund reserves presented in the September 7, 1993, Water Fund report. As identified in that report, the required 20% unreserved fund balance will be achieved by the end of the 1993-95 Financial Plan period. Staff is recommending that the Water Reclamation Project be funded from the Water Fund. As a Water Supply Project, future revenues should accrue to the Water Fund. Attachments: Proposed agreement including Proposal from Stetson Engineers Inc. g:kdevekcir_cMt.egd T— AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this day of , by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and Stetson Engineering Inc., hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City requires certain hydrologic services for the evaluation of the lower San Luis Obispo Creek Basin; WHEREAS, Contractor has proposed to provide those services as set forth herein; 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 first written above, until acceptance or completion of said services. 2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. The General Terms and Conditions and the Special Terms and Conditions attached as Exhibit A, the Contractor's proposal dated [ m,,iWj IJ-,A13 ] attached as Exhibit B, and the Contractor's Standard Fee Schedule effective July 1, 1993 attached as Exhibit C, are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement. 3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Contractor shall receive therefor: compensation for the performance of the work as described in Exhibit B at the rates shown in Exhibit C, not to exceed $30,000 without prior written authorization of the Utilities Director. 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 described in Exhibit B. 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 Council of the City. q-7 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. 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 City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Contractor Ali Shahroody Stetson Engineers Inc. 2171 E. Francisco Blvd. Suite K San Rafael, CA 94901 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: Diane Gladwell, City Clerk Peg Pinard, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: e y G/Jor se City Attorney CONTRACTOR By: ay: �_Q GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS CONTRACT PERFORMANCE 1. Ability to Perform. The 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. 2. Laws to be Observed. The 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. 3. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes which the Contractor is required to pay. 4. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices necessary. 5. Insurance Requirements. The Contractor shall maintain throughout the contract insurance in the form, coverages, and amounts specified in Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement. 6. Business Tax. The Contractor shall maintain throughout the contract a valid City of San Luis Obispo business tax certificate. Additional information regarding the City's business tax program may be obtained by calling (805)781-7134. 7. Safety Provisions. The Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to safety established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety. 8. Public and Employee Safety. Whenever the 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. 9. Preservation of City Property. The 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 the Contractor's operations, it shall be replaced or restored at the Contractor's expense. The facilities shall be replaced or restored to a condition as good as when the Contractor began work. 10. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all subcontractors 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. 11. Contractor Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contractor agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit such subcontractors 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. 12. Work Delays. Should the 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 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. In the event that there is insufficient time to grant such extensions prior to the completion date of the contract, the City may, at the time of acceptance of the work, waive liquidated damages which may have Exhibit A 4-9 accrued for failure to complete on time, due to any of the above, after hearing evidence as to the reasons for such delay, and making a finding as to the causes of same. 13. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original invoice and acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment, or services provided by the Contractor(Net 30). 14. Inspection. The Contractor shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of the 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. 15. 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. 16. Interests of Contractor. The 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. The Contractor further covenants that, in the performance of this work, no subcontractor or person having such an interest shall be employed. The 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, the Contractor shall at all times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. 17. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. The 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 the 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 the 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 the Contractor's duty to indemnify and hold barmless shall not include any claims or liability arising from the established sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees. 18. Contract Assignment. The 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. 19. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Contractor is not faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the Contractor in writing of such defect or failure to perform; which notice must give the Contractor a 10 (ten) calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work or cure the deficiency. If the 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 the Contractor to said effect..Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations,responsibilities,or rights under the contract except, however, any and all obligations of the Contractor's surety shall remain in full force and effect, and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in any manner waived by the termination thereof. In said event, the 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. 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 the Contractor be entitled to receive in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal. • Exhibit,Al T_� O SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Contract Term. This Agreement provides for completion of the work described in Exhibit B plus presentations as needed based on this work to support the City Water Reclamation Project in regulatory hearings or court challenges. The work defined in Exhibit B is to be completed within 90 days after the necessary data has been obtained from local sources. It is anticipated that hearings and challenges of the EIR could continue for another year. 2. Contractor Invoices. The Contractor shall deliver a monthly invoice to the City. The invoice shall include a detailed listing of charges and work performed. 3. Ownership of Materials. All original drawings, plan documents and other materials prepared by or in possession of the 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. 4. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information,data,or other material given to,prepared by or assembled by the 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 the Contractor without the prior written approval of the City. 5. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports, drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Contractor is required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the work or services under these specifications, the Contractor shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate the Contractor for the costs of duplicating of such copies at the Contractor's direct expense. 6. Required Deliverable Products. The contractor will be required to provide: a. 10 copies of a Final Report which addresses all elements of the workscope. Any documents or materials provided by the Contractor will be reviewed by City staff and, where necessary, the Contractor will be required to respond to staff comments and make 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. C. When computers have been used to produce materials submitted to the City as a part of the workscope, the Contractor must provide the corresponding computer files to the City, compatible with the following programs unless otherwise directed by the project manager: Word Processing Wordperfect Version 5.1 Spreadsheets Lotus Release 2.4 Desktop Publishing Coreldraw.Version 3.0 Pagemaker Version 4.0 Computer Aided Drafting (CAD) Autocad Release 12 Computer files must be on 5-1A', high-density, write-protected diskettes, formatted for use on IBM-compatible systems. Each diskette must be clearly labeled and have a printed copy of the directory. Exhibit • 2171 E,Francis,._ .bd.,Suite K • San Rafael,Calikmia 94901 • ,..S)457.0701 • FAX:(41 S)437-1638 •3104 Fast Camey Avenue • West Covina.Uifomia 91791 + (81P4957-6202 • FAX:(81 331.7063 •3651 W.Guadalupe Rd.,Suite A209 • Mesa;Arizona 85202 • (602)639.5910 • FAX.(602)839-4560 �� • .O GA. . ctober 12, 1993 ReOy urSan Rafael . Jobm-Mois Dtilities Director City -of San Lan Luis Obispo -955 Morro .Street .San.Luis .Obispo, California 93401 Re: Saa.Luis Obispo Creek Proposal '. 'rear Mr.• Iios6: The following proposal to provide hydrologic services iu connection with the City of San Luis Obispo•s (City) 'release of effluent to San Luis Obispo Creek is divided into two phases; a basic investigation and model development. Results of the Phase I study (basic investigation) would indicate the need and expected level of success for conducting the Phase 21 modeling activities. The proposed specific., tasks are..as ;follows: Phase . I - Basicnvestigation and Live-Stream Determination A. Determine the hydrogeological and hydraulic characteristics of San Luis Obispo Creek alluvium downstream- of the point of effluent discharge. . B. Locate active wells and estimate historical water production from the alluvium. Power records, if available, may be utilized to estimate water production. C. If power records are not available, determine irrigated agriculture based on land use information from State and County land use maps ' and aerial photographs. Based on irrigated acreage and type. of crops, estimate water production and consumptive use. Also, estimate water use try the riparian vegetation. L2'd 92:9T E6. 2T 130 Gxl,►h,T �• . STETSON ENGINEERS INC John Moss City of San Luis Obispo October 12, 1993 Page .2 D. Utilize effluent discharge measurements by the City and San Luis Obisbo Creek flow measurements in the hydrologic, analysis. Also, estimate all t tributary flows o San Luis Obispo Creek downstream fo the Treatment Plant outfall. E.. Estimate the rate of subflow in San Luis Obispo Creek under steady-state conditions. F. Develop a water balance based on historical flow and land use conditions for one or more reaches of San Luis Obispo Creek. G. Correlate surface flow at the crossing near Squire Canyon (flow measurements from 1971-1985) and effluent discharge for the drought months to develop a relationship between livestream and effluent discharge. H. Compare subsurface water-level measurements, surface flow and seasonal pumping to determine a threshold between livestream and water-levels in key wells so that a trigger level may be established to reduce pumping in order to .maintain a livestream condition. I. Prepare a technical memo on findings and recommendations of the Phase I study. Phase LI - Model DeveloP ment and Operation A. Develop a flow model of the San Luis Obispo Creek alluvium using the U.S. Geological Survey MODFLOW. Calibrate the model for steady state condition (average annual) and transient condition (seasonal pumping) utilizing hydrological data and information developed under Phase I. Be . Utilize a river package so that surface and subsurface flow interactions are simulated. C. Operate the model with and without the effluent discharge and provide a comparison. y-l3 UE•d 92:9T E6. 2T 100 . TE SISN ' w. 'John, Moss . .City:-of San.Luis"Obispo October '12,:. 1993 -D. Operate .the model for various scenarios, such as: 1-. Effluent discharge of-one cfs. 2. Effluent discharge to maintain livestream. 3. . Reduction of pumping to maintain a livestream. 4. Additional discharge needed to replenish the basin and maintain a level of pumping. .5. Discharge necessary to maintain a live stream with restricted pumping. 6. Flow available with a discharge of 1 cfs'. 7. Pumping possible with a release of 1 cfs dedi.catdd ..and-protected for instream use.' 8. Discharge needed to maintain a live stream while permitting the downstream users to pump sufficient water to continue the current agriculture operations under good water management practices. E. Develop a criteria to operate the basin by use of key monitoring wells F. Prepare a technical memorandum on the results of Phase IIS study. The estimated cost of the investigation is $20,000 for Phase I and $10,000 for Phase II. Phase II work may not be necessary and would not be started without authorization. The above cost estimates are based upon the attached fee schedule and City personnel obtaining needed data from local sources. The cost- of preparation for hearings and .:'attendancs at meetings and hearings is not included in the above estimates. We will need the City to -collect the following fhforMat on that- is .expi cted to. be available from local soutcesa 1-14 . . !jq•d 92:9T E6. ZT J.30 STETSON John Moss City of San Luis Obispo October 12, 1993 Page 4 - 1. -1. Drillers Reports (logs, well construction, pump test results, etc. ) for wells located along San Luis Obispo Creek and near Treatment Plant (County Health Department and California Department of Water Resources) . 2. Water-level data for wells along San Luis Obispo Creek and neat Treamment Plant (County Flood Cdntrci or other sources) . 3. Streamflow measurements for the entire Sart Luis Obispo Creek watershed (County Flood Control) . 4. . Historical monthly effluent realeases. 5. Any pertinant studies or maps including the Boyle ground-water study. Once the data from local sources are obtained, it is expected that the Phase I study will require about 60 days. Phase II will require an additional 30 days . Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal. Do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions. Since 1 , iver S. Page OSP.-Mem ccs Scott. Slater, •Esq. "•d 1.2:95 Es. 2T 1J0 e 3104 East t__ .ey Avenue a West Covina,California 91791 ,818)967-6202 a FAX:(818) 331-7065 a 2171 L Francisca Blvd.,Suite K a San Rafael;tal,fany 94901 • (413)157-0701 • FAX:(41 S)137.1638 STETSON a 2651 W.Guadalupe Rd.,Suite A209 a Mas;Arizona es2o2 • (602)(139-5910 a FAX:(602)839-6360 ENc1NEERS INC y Reply to: STANDARD FEE SCHEDULE Effective July 1, 1993 Thomas M. Stetson $135.00 Per Hour Stephen B. Johnson $120.00 Per Hour Oliver S. Page $120.00 Per Hour All Shahroody $120.00 Per Hour Supervising Senior Engineer S 95.00 Per Hour Senior Engineer I $ 85.00 Per Hour Senior Engineer iI $ 80.00 Per Hour Associate I $ 75.00 Per Hour Associate II S 65.00 Per Hour Associate Engineer 1 $ 70.00 Per Hour Associate Engineer 11 $ 65,00 Per Hour Assistant Engineer 1 $ 55.00 Per Hour Assistant Engineer 11 $ $0,00 Per Hour Clerical I S 50.00 Per Hour Clerical 11 $ 35.00 Per Hour Engineering Ald/Draftsperson 1 $ 45.00 Per Hour Engineering Aid/Draftaperson Il $ 30.00 Per Hour Basis for Developing Standardized Rates: . r . 2.85 x Gross Annual Salary 1,840 Hours EXPENSES: Telephone, reproduction, commercial transportation (coach), meals, lodgin-, computer charges, postage and other expenses are billed at cost Mileage Is billed at $0.30 per mile. w A E R R E 5 O U F. C E E N G 11 N E F, a INSURANCE REQI i-VItMENTS: Consultant Servic%..j The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives,employees, or subcontractors. Minimum Scone of Insurance Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). 3., Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the consultant's profession. Minimum Limits of Insurance Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: 1. 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. 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. 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 the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. 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 the Contractor, products and completed operations of the Contractor, premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor, or automobiles owned, leased,hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, official, employees, agents or volunteers. 2. For any claims related to this project, the 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 the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3. 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. 4. The 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. 5. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended,voided, cancelled by either patty, 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. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M.Best's rating of no less than A:VII. 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. Exhibit D J