HomeMy Public PortalAbout080-2017 - RSd-Commonwealth Engineering- Westside interceptor project,GaXFMtN, ORIGINAL
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this Z7 day of June, 2017, by and between the
City of Richmond, Indiana, a municipal corporation acting by and through its Board of Sanitary
Commissioners and its Storm Water Management Board (hereinafter referred to as the "City")
and Commonwealth Engineers, Inc., 7256 Company Dr., Indianapolis, Indiana 46237 (hereinafter
referred to as the "Contractor").
SECTION I. STATEMENT AND SUBJECT OF WORK
City hereby retains Contractor to provide professional engineering services for part of the
Richmond Sanitary District's approved Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Long Term Control
Plan (LTCP), which services shall include work relating to the preliminary engineering for the
West Side Interceptor Improvements Project.
City sent Contractor a Request for Proposal (RFP) on March 30, 2017, a copy of which RFP is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "A".
On May 5, 2017, Contractor submitted a proposal to City for its preliminary engineering for the
West Side Interceptor Improvements Projects, as set forth and contained in Exhibit `B", which
Exhibit `B" is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this
Agreement. Contractor shall provide all professional preliminary engineering services for the
West Side Interceptor Improvements Project as set forth above. Exhibit `B" also includes
Contractor's Fee Tabulation and Standard Hourly Rates & Reimbursable Expenses Schedule for
this Project.
Should any provisions, terms, or conditions contained in any of the documents attached hereto as
Exhibits, or in any of the documents incorporated by reference herein, conflict with any of the
provisions, terms, or conditions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall be controlling.
The Contractor shall furnish all labor, material, equipment, and services necessary for the proper
completion of all work specified. Contractor's services shall be performed in accordance with the
standard of professional practice ordinarily exercised by the applicable profession under similar
circumstances at the same time and in the locality where the services are performed. Professional
services are not subject to, and Contractor does not provide, any warranty or guarantee, express or
implied. Contractor shall submit statements or bills monthly.
No performance of services shall commence until the following has been met:
1. The City is in receipt of any required certificates of insurance;
2. The City is in receipt of any required affidavit signed by Contractor in
accordance with Indiana Code 22-5-1.7-11(a)(2);and
3. A purchase order has been issued by the Purchasing Department.
SECTION II. STATUS OF CONTRACTOR
Contractor shall be deemed to be an independent contractor and is not an employee or agent of
the City of Richmond. The Contractor shall provide, at its own expense, competent supervision
of the work.
Contract No. 80-2017
Page 1 of 6
SECTION III. COMPENSATION
City shall pay Contractor a sum not to exceed One Hundred Ninety -Four Thousand One Hundred
Fifty -Nine Dollars and Zero Cents ($194,159.00) for complete and satisfactory performance of
the work required hereunder. The monies paid to Contractor are based upon a fee schedule set
forth in Exhibit "B", and attached with this Agreement. The monies paid to Contractor shall be
paid 50% by the Richmond Sanitary District and 50% by the Stormwater Department.
SECTION N. TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall become effective when signed by all parties and shall continue in effect
until no later than December 31, 2018.
Notwithstanding the term of this Agreement, City may terminate this Agreement in whole or in
part, for cause, at any time by giving at least thirty (30) working days written notice specifying
the effective date and the reasons for termination which shall include but not be limited to the
following:
a. failure, for any reason of the Contractor to fulfill in a timely manner
its obligations under this Agreement;
b. submission of a report, other work product, or advice, whether oral or written, by the
Contractor to the City that is incorrect, incomplete, or does not meet reasonable
professional standards in any material respect, provided that Contractor was notified
in writing of deficiencies, given ten (10) working days to cure deficiencies and
failed to remedy such deficiencies.
c. ineffective or improper use of funds provided under this Agreement;
d. suspension or termination of the grant funding to the City under which this Agreement
is made; or
e. unavailability of sufficient funds to make payment on this Agreement.
In the event of such termination, the City shall be required to make payment for all work
performed prior to the date this Agreement is terminated, but shall be relieved of any other
responsibility herein.
This Agreement may also be terminated, in whole or in part, by mutual Agreement of the parties
by setting forth the reasons for such termination, the effective date, and in the case of partial
termination, the portion to be terminated.
SECTION V. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
Contractor agrees to obtain insurance and to indemnify the City for any damage or injury to
person or property or any other claims to the extent caused by Contractor's negligent conduct or
performance or non-performance of this Agreement; provided, however, that nothing contained in
this Agreement shall be construed as rendering the Contractor liable for acts of the City, its
officers, agents, or employees. Contractor shall as a prerequisite to this Agreement, purchase and
thereafter maintain such insurance as will protect it from the claims set forth below which may
arise out of or result from the Contractor's negligent operations under this Agreement, whether
such operations by the Contractor or by any sub -contractors or by anyone directly or indirectly
employed by any of them, or by anyone for whose acts the Contractor may be held responsible.
Coverage Limits
Page 2 of 6
I:1
li
A
17
E
Worker's Compensation & Statutory
Disability Requirements
Employer's Liability $100,000
Comprehensive General Liability
Section 1. Bodily Injury $1,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate
Section 2. Property Damage $1,000,000 each occurrence
Comprehensive Auto Liability (if applicable)
Section 1. Bodily Injury $1,000,000 each person
$1,000,000 each occurrence
Section 2. Property Damage $1,000,000 each occurrence
Comprehensive Umbrella Liability $1,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 each aggregate
F. Errors & Omissions Insurance $1,000,000 per claim
$2,000,000 aggregate
SECTION VI. COMPLIANCE WITH WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW
Contractor shall comply with all provisions of the Indiana Worker's Compensation law, and shall,
before commencing work under this Agreement, provide the City a certificate of insurance, or a
certificate from the industrial board showing that the Contractor has complied with Indiana Code
Sections 22-3-2-5, 22-3-5-1 and 22-3-5-2. If Contractor is an out of state employer and therefore
subject to another state's worker's compensation law, Contractor may choose to comply with all
provisions of its home state's worker's compensation law and provide the City proof of such
compliance in lieu of complying with the provisions of the Indiana Worker's Compensation Law.
SECTION VII. COMPLIANCE WITH INDIANA E-VERIFY PROGRAM
REQUIREMENTS
Pursuant to Indiana Code 22-5-1.7, Contractor is required to enroll in and verify the work
eligibility status of all newly hired employees of the contractor through the Indiana E-Verify
program. Contractor is not required to verify the work eligibility status of all newly hired
employees of the contractor through the Indiana E-Verify program if the Indiana E-Verify
program no longer exists. Prior to the performance of this Agreement, Contractor shall
provide to the City its signed Affidavit affirming that Contractor does not knowingly employ
an unauthorized alien in accordance with IC 22-5-1.7-11 (a) (2). In the event Contractor
violates IC 22-5-1.7 the Contractor shall be required to remedy the violation not later than
thirty (30) days after the City notifies the Contractor of the violation. If Contractor fails to
remedy the violation within the thirty (30) day period provided above, the City shall consider
the Contractor to be in breach of this Agreement and this Agreement will be terminated. If
Page 3of6
the City determines that terminating this Agreement would be detrimental to the public
interest or public property, the City may allow this Agreement to remain in effect until the
City procures a new contractor. If this Agreement is terminated under this section, then
pursuant to IC 22-5-1.7-13 (c) the Contractor will remain liable to the City for actual
damages.
SECTION VIII. IRAN INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES
Pursuant to Indiana Code (IC) 5-22-16.5, Contractor certifies that Contractor is not engaged
in investment activities in Iran. In the event City determines during the course of this
Agreement that this certification is no longer valid, City shall notify Contractor in writing of
said determination and shall give contractor ninety (90) days within which to respond to the
written notice. In the event Contractor fails to demonstrate to the City that the Contractor has
ceased investment activities in Iran within ninety (90) days after the written notice is given to
the Contractor, the City may proceed with any remedies it may have pursuant to IC 5-22-
16.5. In the event the City determines during the course of this Agreement that this
certification is no longer valid and said determination is not refuted by Contractor in the
manner set forth in IC 5-22-16.5, the City reserves the right to consider the Contractor to be
in breach of this Agreement and terminate the agreement upon the expiration of the ninety
(90) day period set forth above.
SECTION IX. PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION
A. Pursuant to Indiana Code 22-9-1-10, Contractor, any sub -contractor, or any person acting
on behalf of Contractor or any sub -contractor shall not discriminate against any employee
or applicant for employment to be employed in the performance of this Agreement, with
respect to hire, tenure, terms, conditions or privileges of employment or any matter
directly or indirectly related to employment, because of race, religion, color, sex,
disability, national origin, or ancestry.
B. Pursuant to Indiana Code 5-16-6-1, the Contractor agrees:
That in the hiring of employees for the performance of work under this
Agreement of any subcontract hereunder, Contractor, any subcontractor, or any
person acting on behalf of Contractor or any sub -contractor, shall not
discriminate by reason of race, religion, color, sex, national origin or ancestry
against any citizen of the State of Indiana who is qualified and available to
perform the work to which the employment relates;
2. That Contractor, any sub -contractor, or any person action on behalf of Contractor
or any sub -contractor shall in no manner discriminate against or intimidate any
employee hired for the performance of work under this Agreement on account of
race, religion, color, sex, national origin or ancestry;
3. That there may be deducted from the amount payable to Contractor by the City
under this Agreement, a penalty of five dollars ($5.00) for each person for each
calendar day during which such person was discriminated against or intimidated
in violation of the provisions of the Agreement; and
4. That this Agreement may be canceled or terminated by the City and all money
due or to become due hereunder may be forfeited, for a second or any subsequent
violation of the terms or conditions of this section of the Agreement.
Page 4 of 6
C. Violation of the terms or conditions of this Agreement relating to discrimination or
intimidation shall be considered a material breach of this Agreement.
SECTION X. RELEASE OF LIABILITY
Contractor hereby agrees to release and hold harmless the City and all officers, employees or
agents of the same from all liability which may arise in the course of Contractor's performance of
its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. The City hereby agrees to release and hold harmless
the Contractor and all officers, employees or agents of the same from all liability which may arise
in the course of City's performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement.
SECTION XI. MISCELLANEOUS
This Agreement is personal to the parties hereto and neither party may assign or delegate any of
its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. Any such
delegation or assignment, without the prior written consent of the other party, shall be null and
void. This Agreement shall be controlled by and interpreted according to Indiana law and shall
be binding upon the parties, their successors and assigns. This document constitutes the entire
Agreement between the parties, although it may be altered or amended in whole or in part at any
time by filing with the Agreement a written instrument setting forth such changes signed by both
parties. By executing this Agreement the parties agree that this document supersedes any
previous discussion, negotiation, or conversation relating to the subject matter contained herein.
This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be
an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
The parties hereto submit to jurisdiction of the courts of Wayne County, Indiana, and any suit
arising out of this Contract must be filed in said courts. The parties specifically agree that no
arbitration or mediation shall be required prior to the commencement of legal proceedings in said
Courts. By executing this Agreement, Contractor is estopped from bringing suit or any other
action in any alternative forum, venue, or in front of any other tribunal, court, or administrative
body other than the Circuit or Superior Courts of Wayne County, Indiana, regardless of any right
Contractor may have to bring such suit in front of other tribunals or in other venues.
Any person executing this Contract in a representative capacity hereby warrants that he/she has
been duly authorized by his or her principal to execute this Contract.
In the event of any breach of this Agreement by Contractor, and in addition to any remedies,
Contractor shall be liable for costs incurred by City in its efforts to enforce this Agreement,
including but not limited to, City's reasonable attorney's fees, to the proportionate extent that
Contractor is determined to be in breach of this Agreement.
In the event that an ambiguity, question of intent, or a need for interpretation of this Agreement
arises, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties, and no presumption
or burden of proof shall arise favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any
of the provisions of this Agreement.
Page 5 of 6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement at Richmond, Indiana, as of
the day and year first written above, although signatures may be affixed on different dates.
"CITY"
THE CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA
by and through its Board of
Sanitary Commissioners
By:
Sue Miller, President
C z2w��
Ama ice President
r ��tt+eins, ember
Dated: (D ^ 17 7
The City of Richmond, Indiana, by and through its
Storm Water Management Board
s, President
Sue Miller, Vice President
A i, ember
Dated: 6 � /
Dated: �— I % I'�-
"CONTRACTOR"
COMMONWEALTH ENGINEERS,
INC.
P!1
By:_ 5i6�n
Title: \JfUr ' RE15lAb-),l
Dated: (P — )9 " "
Page 6 of 6
{ o DAVE SNOW
0 o Mayor
Ipr
WILLIAM N. HARRIS
Director
CITY OF RICHMOND
DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION
2380 LIBERTY AVENUE•RICHMOND, INDIANA 47374
PHONE (765) 983-7450•FAX (765) 962-2669
March 30, 2017
Commonwealth Engineers, Inc.
Attn: Brian Desharnais
7256 Company Drive
Indianapolis, IN 46237
Re: Request for Proposals
West Side Interceptor
The Richmond Sanitary District is seeking the assistance of a professional engineering consultant
to complete a work related to the West Side Interceptor. Please review the attached RFP and, if
interested in this work, please contact me at ewelch _.richmondindiana.gov or 765-983-7483 to
set a meeting to discuss more detailed project information and scoping.
Thanks,
Eli.fah W. Welch, P.E.
District Engineer
Richmond Sanitary District
EXHIBIT A - Page 1 of 19
Richmond Sanitary District
Reauest for Proaosal
West Side Interceptor Collection System Characterization and Evaluation
The Richmond Sanitary District is seeking the assistance of a professional engineering consultant (Herein
after referred to as ENGINEER) to complete preliminary engineering investigation, characterization,
capacity and stability evaluation and analysis and then recommend rehabilitation and/or improvement
designs related to the West Side Interceptor as required by RSD's Approved CSO LTCP.
Respondents to this Request for Proposal (RFP) shall comply with the terms and conditions contained
herein. This RFP is composed of six (6) parts as follows:
Part 1 — Background
Part 2 — Information Available from the Richmond Sanitary District
Part 3 — Proposed Preliminary Scope of Work
Part 4 — Deliverables
Part 5 — Form and Content of your Response to RFP
Part 6 — Submittal Requirements
Part 1: Background
The Richmond Sanitary District's latest CSO LTCP update was approved in 2010 and contained 3 projects
related to the West Side Interceptor. These projects are identified as the following:
1. West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer
2. West Side Interceptor (Lower)
3. West Side Interceptor (Upper)
These projects were originally at least partially identified as part of the 2002 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan as
well. This sewer lies along the west side of the Whitewater River gorge and was installed in 1934.
Excerpts of these documents relating to the West Side Interceptor are included as part of this RFP.
Part 2: Information Available from the Richmond Sanitary District
1. GIS data (may be inaccurate and/or incomplete)
2. CSO LTCP documents
3. 2002 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Documents
4. West Side Interceptor As-Builts
5. CCTV data as required and completed post interceptor cleaning scheduled for mid-2017 prior to
flow metering
6. Flow meter data will be provided by Gripp, Inc. at locations as directed by the ENGINEER with
meters owned by RSD
Part 3: Proposed Preliminary Scope of Work
The scope of work identified here is preliminary, very general in nature, and is expected to be refined
through discussions during the pre -proposal meeting.
CSO LTCP Compliance Evaluation - Determine and complete preliminary evaluations and
recommendations for work required to be in compliance with and satisfy all requirements related to the
West Side Interceptor as contained within the approved CSO LTCP.
1. West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer
2. West Side Interceptor (Lower)
3. West Side Interceptor (Upper)
EXHIBIT A - Page 2 of 19
The LTCP and 2002 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan identify a relief sewer for the west side
interceptor, whose need and/or alternatives should be evaluated as part of this project.
Commonwealth Engineers completed an evaluation of the West Side siphon as part of the East
Side Interceptor project. This information should be evaluated and supplement new data to be
collected during this project. The LTCP and Master Plan also identify sewer rehabilitation and
structural reinforcement of the interceptor as it lies on the west side of the Whitewater River gorge
which is susceptible to slope failure. The sewer is also prone to maintenance issues, including
heavy root intrusion which can quickly cause decreased capacity. Maintenance is difficult and
expensive when performed. Lining should be evaluated for these reasons if the existing sewer
shows adequate capacity is available.
The above work shall include but not be limited to the below:
1. Survey and manhole inspections of the West Side Interceptor and pertinent upstream/downstream
manholes
2. Capacity Evaluation and System Characterization of the West Side Interceptor including hydraulic
modeling of the interceptor
3. Structural and Stability Evaluation and Recommendations for the interceptor
All analysis should include consideration of the approved CSO LTCP.
Part 4: Deliverables
The following deliverables, at a minimum, shall be provided in report form and would be required at the
completion of this preliminary phase of this project:
1. Hydraulic Model of the West Side Interceptor and connecting overall system model (using existing
model files).
2. Technical Memos and Final Report with figures and drawings identifying project evaluation
summary, interceptor characterizations as related to the CSO LTCP, alternatives analysis and
recommended project alternative(s).
3. Manhole and Pipe survey and inspection data
4. Preliminary engineering cost estimates.
5. Recommended phasing of work (if applicable)
6. Recommended Scope of Work required to complete the final design for all upgrades or
rehabilitation.
All of the above information shall be prepared and delivered in hard copy and electronic versions.
Part 5 — Form and Content of your Response to RFP
Respondents to this RFP shall submit a response which shall be organized and include information as
follows:
Section 1 — Company Introduction identifying at a minimum all parties involved in response to the RFP.
Section 2 — Proposed Scope of Work that meets all the requirements of the CSO LTCP as well as any
additional work outlined here or during discussions with RSD staff.
Section 3 — Estimated project schedule.
Section 4 — Project Team identifying the key staff members of the respondent's firm who will be dedicated
to the project, including a description of each member's roles and responsibilities on this project.
Section 5 — Fee Tabulation
PART 6 — SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
EXHIBIT A - Page 3 of 19
A pre -proposal meeting will be held at the RSD admin office at a time and date to be coordinated between
RSD and ENGINEER.
Four bound copies of your response shall be submitted to the Richmond Sanitary District at a time and date
agreed to by RSD and ENGINEER during the pre -proposal meeting. Submittals shall be delivered to:
Richmond Sanitary District
Attn: Elijah Welch
2380 Liberty Avenue
Richmond, IN 47374
Questions shall be directed to Elijah Welch at ewelchgrichmondindiana.gov or 765-983-7483.
2a�o �So c-T��' U�'n�9� •
o
•
•OI
ti
I
OI
C
�
e
C
20
9
S
IL
til-
aa
c3
SS
- H12
IL_
m
I
Op
EXHIBIT A - Page 5 of 19
EXHIBIT A - Page 6 of 19
E X) S I N G SCALE: 1"=2,000'
="sEUE i i r JR 2,000' 1,000' 0 2,000'
COM0WEALTH
� arm r. roi w.. er ra r. teo wu s.v a.a ra �. e
Yuri r MaA bar. r Qna aw r� r �!e
CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA
WAYNE COUNTY
REVISED MAY 2010 CSO LTCP
EXISTING EAST SIDE INTERCEPTOR AND
3.5 WEST SIDE INTERCEPTOR RELIEF SEWER
The April 2002 LTCP included two projects that would increase the capacity of the West Side
Interceptor while simultaneously removing flows from the East Side Interceptor. Descriptions of
the two projects, which were identified as Project #9 West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer and
Project #10 Siphon are as follows:
Proiect #9 West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer
Project #9 will increase the capacity of the West Side Interceptor while simultaneously removing
flows entering the East Side Interceptor (see Appendix G Figure 3 in the April 2002 LTCP).
This project involves the construction of a pump station in the vicinity of Hub Etchison Parkway
and SW G Street (on the west side of Whitewater River). The existing gorge sewer and east -
west interconnecting siphon which currently routes all flows generated within the West Side
Interceptor sewersheds into the East Side Interceptor could then be disconnected. A 15-inch
force main would be routed from the pump station along SW G Street to Abington Pike then
south to the lower reaches of the Round Barn Road Interceptor. The estimated cost of the
pump station and force main as presented in the April 2002 LTCP was $3.5 million (2002
dollars) or $4.7 million (2010 dollars using ENR Cost Index Ratio of 1.34). This project would
free up an estimated 3 MGD of capacity in the East Interceptor during wet -weather. 1.5 MGD
would be available in dry weather conditions in the East Interceptor for future growth in areas
such as the Chester Boulevard sewershed (Based on RSD Sanitary Sewer Master Plan -
Section 3.4.8 January 2002).
Project #10 Siphon
The existing siphon that connects the West Side Interceptor to the East Side Interceptor
consists of a single 21-inch diameter concrete pipe that is approximately 500 feet long and has
an elevation drop of approximately 12.6 feet. The maximum wet weather design flow rate was
stated in the April 2002 LTCP as 2.66 MGD (approximately 3 MGD as stated above). With 2.66
MGD, the velocity in a 21-inch siphon would only be 1.7 feet per second. During dry weather,
flows and velocities would be even lower, and it is likely that sediment is accumulating in the
siphon. Current siphon design standards require that multiple pipes be used of varying sizes so
that adequate flushing velocities are maintained throughout the expected range of flow rates. At
average flow rates, velocities should be a minimum of 3 feet per second.
The April 2002 LTCP stated that the probable project costs were $10,000 for Project #10
Siphon. Updating this cost to 2010 by using a factor of 1.34 (ENR Cost Index Ratio) provides
current project cost of $13,400 for Projects #10. The 2007 LTCP Update also proposed to
upgrade the existing siphon, so that it has at least two pipes and a flow control structure that
directs low flows into a smaller pipe and allows higher flows to continue through both pipes.
The estimated probable project costs for upgrading the existing Siphon is $0.5 million (2007
dollars) or $0.55 million (2010 dollars using ENR Cost Index Ratio of 1.10).
The necessity of Project #10 was assessed as part of the 2010 LTCP Update based on past
operation and maintenance experience and the calibrated hydraulic model. Richmond Sanitary
District personnel were interviewed, and it was reported. that there have been no major
operation and maintenance concerns with the single 21-inch siphon. Although the average
velocities in the siphon are under the minimum 3 feet per second limit, the lack of operation and
maintenance problems suggest that the siphon is being sufficiently flushed during periodic wet
weather events. The calibrated hydraulic model associated with this 2010 LTCP update
Richmond Sanitary District Development of Conveyance System Alternatives
Draft CSO LTCP Update Revised May 2010
3-8
EXHIBIT A - Page 7 of 19
confirms that periodic flushing is sufficient to clear depositions. As a result, Project #10 has
been deemed unnecessary.
It should be noted that the RSD will continue to characterize and evaluate collection system
basins on the west side of the East Fork of the Whitewater River to determine the viability of
additional alternatives, such as sewer separation.
3.6 OTHER SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PROJECTS
In addition to the conveyance system projects as described in the above sections, which are
specifically related to the reduction or elimination of combined sewer overflows, additional
projects are needed in the sanitary sewer portion of the conveyance system. These projects
are needed to reduce sewer surcharging that causes basement backups, to eliminate sanitary
sewer overflows, and to provide sewer service for future growth. These projects are listed in
Table 3-2 and are included in this LTCP Update so that an implementation plan can be
developed that considers the priorities and costs of all needed projects.
Richmond Sanitary District
Draft CSO LTCP Update
Development of Conveyance System Alternatives
Revised May 2010
3-9
EXHIBIT A - Page 8 of 19
Table 3-2
Summary of Probable Project Costs for Collection System Projects
Project
Probable
Project Cost
(2010 Dollars)
Comment
SW 4t' G. Street Lift Station and
Forcemain (Part of NW 13t' Interceptor
System)
$1,568,568
Project completed.
Southeast Basin SSO Reduction
$5,090,342
Project completed.
Chester Boulevard Interceptor — Phase
I and II
$5,357,641
Project completed.
Chester Boulevard Interceptor — Phase
III
$2,000,000 a
Extend sewer under 1-70 to pick up another
lift station.
NW 13t' Street Interceptor, NW Branch
(Eadham Cemetery)
$2,300,000 a
Sewer separation & 1/1 reduction.
West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer
$4,700,000 a
Capacity expansion
West Side Interceptor (Lower)
$2,300,000 a
Structural reinforcement.
West Side Interceptor (Upper)
$740,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/I.
Round Barn Road (NW Branch)
$660,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/1.
Short Creek Interceptor (Niewoehner)
$600,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/I.
Round Barn Road (West Branch)
$340,000 a
Future capacity work.
North/Far North Richmond Collector
$600,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/1.
Short Creek Interceptor (Lower)
$550,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/I.
Midwest Industrial Park
$350,000 a
Phase II sanitary sewer extension.
Contingency (total amount based on
$700,000 per year for 20 years)
$14,000,0008
Specific projects to be determined. Total
amount based on $700,000 per year for 20
years.
Subtotal
$41,156,551
Projects Completed
$12,016,651
Total
$29,140,000
a ENR Cost Index Ratio of 1.34 used to convert 2002 dollar to 2010 dollars.
ENR Cost Index Ratio of 1.06 used to convert 2008 dollar to 2010 dollars.
Richmond Sanitary District Development of Conveyance System Alternatives
Draft CSO LTCP Update Revised May 2010
3-10
EXHIBIT A - Page 9 of 19
EXHIBIT A - Page 10 of 19
5.4 WEST SIDE INTERCEPTOR ALTERNATIVES
The April 2002 LTCP and the 2007 CSO LTCP Update includes two projects that would
increase the capacity of the West Side Interceptor, while simultaneously removing flows from
the East Side Interceptor. Previously, these projects were referred to as Project #9: West Side
Interceptor Relief Sewer and Project #10: Siphon. The West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer
would include a pump station and a 15 inch force main and would essentially disconnect the
flows generated in the West Side Interceptor sewersheds from the East Side Interceptor. This
project would free up an estimated 3 MGD of capacity of the East Side Interceptor during wet
weather and provide for additional capacity for growth in the East Side Interceptor. The Siphon
project, as proposed in the 2002 CSO LTCP and 2007 CSO LTCP Update, would have
essentially reduced the pipe size due to perceived issues with the lack of velocity in the existing
21 inch siphon. This project was reviewed as part of the development of the hydraulic model for
the revised 2010 CSO LTCP and deemed unnecessary due to the historical lack of
maintenance issues on the siphon and due to the hydraulic model showing that periodic flushing
periods occur. The RSD will continue to characterize and evaluate collection system basins on
the west side of the East Fork of the Whitewater River to determine the viability of additional
alternatives, such as sewer separation; however, the 2010 CSO LTCP recommends the
construction of a West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer as well as structural reinforcement and
infiltration and inflow (1/1) reduction projects.
5.5 REMAINING COLLECTION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES
Localized collection system wet weather conditions such as basement backups, excessive
surcharging and/or sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) have resulted in the prioritization of several
projects. These projects will focus on repairing the existing infrastructure and reducing 1/1 from
the publicly owned sewers and the privately owned portions of the system. These projects will
be needed on an ongoing basis to keep the wet weather flows within the capacity of the
proposed interceptor and WWTP improvements. It is recommended that the District initiate and
fund an infiltration/inflow removal program to annually seek and eliminate excessive 1/1.
Since the submittal of the 2007 CSO LTCP Update, the following projects have been completed
or are currently underway:
• Southeast Basin SSO Reduction —2010.
• East Side Interceptor Phase 1— 2010.
• Chester Boulevard Interceptor, Phase I and II — Completed.
• SW 0 G. Street Lift Station and Forcemain — Completed.
The following projects are proposed to be a part of the Richmond Sanitary Sewer District's
ongoing Infiltration/Inflow Removal Program:
• Chester Boulevard Interceptor Phase Ill.
• NW 13t' Street Interceptor, NW Branch (Earlham Cemetery).
• West Side Interceptor (Lower).
• West Side Interceptor (Upper).
• West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer.
• Short Creek Interceptor (Lower).
• Short Creek Interceptor (Niewoehner).
• Round Barn Road (Northwest Branch).
• Round Barn Road (Vilest Branch).
Richmond Sanitary District Alternative Evaluation
Draft CSO LTCP Update Revised May 2010
EXHIBIT A - Page 11 of 19
• North/Far North Richmond Collector.
• Midwest Industrial Park.
5.6 WWTP AND WET WEATHER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
As outlined throughout Chapter 4, several modifications at the wastewater treatment plant are
necessary to ensure maximization of flow as required by the Nine Minimum Controls and is the
basis of the Revised CSO LTCP. Two general concepts were proposed as part of the
evaluation of alternative:
Improve and/or modify existing process units to maximize the flow that can be treated
during wet weather conditions.
Construct new wet weather flow retention and/or treatment facilities for the retention and
treatment of combined sewer overflows.
Regarding the WWTP, several modifications are proposed that are intended to expand the wet
weather capacity to 36 MGD. These modifications and improvements include the following unit
processes:
• Pretreatment.
• Primary treatment.
• Rouging towers.
• Intermediate clarifiers.
• Activated sludge modifications.
At a peak wet weather flow of 36 MGD, this leaves approximately 60 MGD that will need to
either be treated through a separate wet weather process or stored for bleed -back to the WWTP
for full treatment. Three primary alternatives were considered in this portion based on excess
wet weather flows and volumes estimated by the XPSWMM model and include the following
alternatives:
• Constructed wetlands.
• Equalization.
• Wet weather treatment facility such as Actiflo.
Given the site limitations, construction issues and effluent quality considerations a wet weather
treatment system, such as Actiflo, was the chosen end of pipe treatment for peak CSO wet
weather flow. Therefore, the selected alternative for treating peak wet weather flow conveyed to
the headworks is to modify all WWTP unit processes consistent with a peak flow of 36 MGD and
construct an Actiflo peak wet weather treatment unit on the WWTP site designed to a peak flow
of 60 MGD. It should be noted that the final sizing of the Actiflo system may be reduced
dependent upon post -construction monitoring results. Another consideration during the design
of this facility will be the utilization of equalization in conjunction with the Actiflo system, which
again, will be further considered during design and may reduce the cost.
5.7 SELECTED ALTERNATIVE ESTIMATED COSTS
The sum of the estimated costs for projects outlined in the Chapter 3, Chapter 4 and the
preceding sections of Chapter 5 is approximately (a) $98,401,751 and (b) $80,740,000 when
the projects that are either completed or underway are excluded.
Richmond Sanitary District Alternative Evaluation
Draft CSO LTCP Update Revised May 2010
Summary of Probable Project Costs for Other Sanitary Sewer System Projects
Project
Probable Project Cost
(2010 Dollars)
Comment
SW 4th G. Street Lift Station and Forcemain
(Part of NW 13th Interceptor System)
$1,568,568
Project completed.
Southeast Basin SSO Reduction
$5,090,342
Project completed.
Chester Boulevard Interceptor — Phase I and
II
$5,357,641
Project completed.
Chester Boulevard Interceptor — Phase 111
$2,000,000 a
Extend sewer under 1-70 to pick up
another lift station.
NW 13th Street Interceptor, NW Branch
(Earlham Cemetery)
$2,300,000 a
Sewer separation & 1/1 reduction.
West Side Interceptor Relief Sewer
$4,700,000 a
West Side Interceptor (Lower)
$2,300,000 a
Structural reinforcement.
West Side Interceptor (Upper)
$740,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/1.
Round Barn Road (NW Branch)
$660,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/I.
Short Creek Interceptor (Niewoehner)
$600,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/I.
Round Barn Road (West Branch)
$340,000 a
Future capacity work.
North/Far North Richmond Collector
$600,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/1.
Short Creek Interceptor (Lower)
$550,000 a
Sewer rehabilitation to reduce 1/I.
Midwest Industrial Park
$350,000 a
Phase II sanitary sewer extension.
Contingency (total amount based on
$700,000 per year for 20 years)
$14,000,000 a
Specific projects to be determined.
Total amount based on $700,000
per year for 20 years.
Subtotal
$39,156,551
Projects Completed
$12,016,551
Total
$27,140,000
a ENR Cost Index Ratio of 1.34 used to convert 2002 dollar to 2010 dollars.
ENR Cost Index Ratio of 1.06 used to convert 2008 dollar to 2010 dollars.
Richmond Sanitary District APPENDIX E
Draft CSO LTCP Update EXHIBIT A - Page 12 of 19 Revised May 2010
SRN1TW/ Sk-tN£lZ Wl Wrl F-JC tJ Lffly rM DI(LTt/t L-ur/ I Ifu
E7iP
Richmond Sanitary District Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan
One property at 3208 Chester Boulevard appears to have sewer available but is
not connected/receiving a sewer bill.
Summary
Based upon reported wet -weather operating problems at the Far North pump
station, the high average run-times at both pump stations, evidence of overflow at
the North pump station at the time of inspection due to wet weather, the lack of
existing information on the hydraulic capacity and performance of the sewage
collection system in the, basin, and most importantly, the impact this system has
on highly utilized/over-utilized downstream basin systems; additional work is
recommended for further consideration in the planning phase. This work would
include field identification and verification of the hydraulic capacity and current
performance of both pump stations. RSD's O&M files should be augmented with
this information as well as manufacturer's information on the facilities.
I/I assessment and removal in the sewer system tributary to the Far North pump
station would also appear to be warranted in future work planning as would
capacity upgrades at each station if run-time utilization increases are consistently
documented.
3.9 WEST SIDE MAnv IrrI mmyrOR SEWER BASIN
3.9.1 Description of Basin
The West Side Main Interceptor Sewer Basin is one of the oldest within the
District. It was originally a combined sewer interceptor constructed to convey
sewage flows to the wastewater treatment plant. The sewer system was separated
in the 1980's and all CSO's along its length were abandoned. The existing
interceptor serves the central core of the west side of the City of Richmond.
These are predominantly residential areas in the south, east of Abington Pike and
south of SW E St., and generally north of W. Main St. and east of NW 5& St. It is
considered to be a wholly contained interceptor sewer basin receiving no flows
from other tributary basins. Flows from the West Side Interceptor Basin are
conveyed by inverted siphon across the East Fork of the Whitewater River to the
East Side Interceptor on Liberty Avenue north of S. K St. The basin consists of
approximately 790 acres of land of which 752 acres (greater than 95%) are
sewered. This area is, therefore, considered completed developed.
The basin consists of approximately 61,200 feet of sanitary sewer ranging in
diameter from 6 inches to 21 inches and 340 manholes.
Pump Stations
There are no pump stations in this basin.
CMID, Inc. 3-25 May 2001
EXHIBIT A - Page 13 of 19
Richmond Sanitary District Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan
3.9.2 Identification of Existing Sewage Collection System Problems
RSD Trouble Spots
RSD's "Trouble Spot" list contains locations through the 300 block (W) on
Richmond Avenue which are subject to frequent sewage back-up under both dry -
and wet -weather circumstances. RSD also reports problems with surcharge, back
up and overflow in the west side main interceptor sewer system north of Sheridan
and NW G St. RSD maintains a wet -weather emergency pumping location in the
basin at Sheridan and Butler Streets.
RSD has identified three sewer segments with negative hydraulic gradients along
this interceptor. These segments are located as follows:
■ East of NW 1'` St., north of Pearl Street in the 21-inch line.
■ East of the intersection of NW 1 a St. & Pearl St. in the 21-inch line.
■ East of the intersection of Whitewater Boulevard and Dodge St. in the 21-
inch line.
RSD is also concerned about the structural integrity of this interceptor and its
ability to provide adequate maintenance for it due to difficulty with access in
many areas within the gorge.
PMC Database
RSD's PMC database records 'document sewage back-up complaints at 19 and
304 Richmond Avenue under dry- and wet -weather circumstances.
Customer Survey Results
There are numerous customer complaints involving either sanitary sewer service
or combined sanitary and storwater/drainage service spread throughout this basin.
Thirteen customers responded that they had sanitary sewer problems and 23
responded that they had stormwater and sanitary sewer problems. These
problems do not seem to be concentrated in any particular area nor in generally
close proximity to the main interceptor. The majority are, however, located north
of Randolph St. in the upper '/Z of the basin.
3.9.3 Hydraulic Analysis
Now Monitoring
Flow meters were placed in two locations within this basin during the Evaluation
Phase of the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. They were placed in the 21"
interceptor line just upstream of the inverted siphon across the East Fork of the
CMID, Inc. 3-26 May 2001
EXHIBIT A - Page 14 of 19
Richmond Sanitary District Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan
Whitewater River connecting to the East Side Main Interceptor and monitoring
flow from virtually all of the basin, and in the 24" line at NW G St. and Sheridan
St. isolating roughly % of the basin all north of the Norfolk & Western Railroad
and west of Bridge Avenue/Sheridan Street.
The meter on the downstream/lower end of the interceptor sewer recorded an
average daily dry -weather flow of approximately 1.33 MGD. Of this,
approximately 46% (0.616 MGD) was estimated as base infiltration. Maximum
daily dry -weather flow was recorded as 1.63 MGD. This yields a peak to average
daily flow ratio of approximately 1.2. Maximum depth of flow during dry
weather was recorded at 8.39 inches accounting for approximately 20% of the
available pipe capacity. This site exhibited a good velocity gradient. Small
increases in depth of flow resulted in large increases in flow quantity. As a result
of the rainfall event captured during the flow monitoring period, peak daily flow
in the lower end of the interceptor was recorded at 2.66 MGD. This corresponded
to a flow depth of approximately i 1 inches. Peak wet- to peak dry -weather flow
ratios were approximately 2. The interceptor appeared to convey this peak wet
weather flow without surcharge at this location and the site exhibited a relatively
short recovery time of approximately 2 days after the rainfall event.
The meter on the upper end of the West Side Main Interceptor sewer recorded an
average daily dry -weather flow of approximately 0.72 MOD. Of this,
approximately 65% (0.472 MGD) was estimated as base infiltration. Maximum
daily dry -weather flow was recorded as 0.85 MGD. This yields a peak to average
daily flow ratio of approximately 1.2. Maximum depth of flow during dry
weather was recorded at 8.8 inches accounting for approximately 30% of the
available pipe capacity. As a result of the rainfall event captured during the flow
monitoring period, peak daily flow in the northwest branch of the interceptor was
recorded at 2.62 MGD. This corresponded to a flow depth of approximately 66
inches. Peak wet- to peak dry -weather flow ratios were approximately 3.1;
however the interceptor sewer system at this location did not appear to have
capacity to convey these wet -weather flows without surcharge of approximately
3.5 feet. The flow data exhibited some backwater characteristics associated with
the wet -weather event. The system experienced a relatively short recovery period
after the rainfall event of approximately 2 days.
Night -Flow Isolation
Night -flow isolation was not performed in this basin.
Sewer Extension
Over 95% of the land within this basin is developed and sewered. As such this
area is, to all intents and purposes, completely developed; therefore, existing and
future conditions are virtually the same with respect to wastewater production,
CARD, Inc 3-27 May luul
EXHIBIT A - Page 15 of 19
Richmond Sanitary District Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan
and flow rates are not expected to change measurably in response to any planned
redevelopment.
One property in this basin was identified as not receiving a sewer bill while being
in close proximity to an existing sewer. This property is 505 NW L St.
Summary
The lower reaches of the West Side Main Interceptor have the ability to convey
current and anticipated dry weather flows without difficulty; however, the
hydraulic gradient of the interceptor in its lower reaches is good. The grade
flattens north of S. G St. and hydraulic restriction during wet weather occurs at
some point along the interceptor south of NW G St. and Sheridan St. M removal,
restored structural integrity, improved cleaning and potential relief sewer
construction are all options to consider in the elimination of the bottlenecking in
the interceptor during wet -weather.
Relief sewer construction to convey additional wet -weather flows to and through
the lower reaches of this interceptor sewer system must; however, be considered
in the context of impact on the East Side Main Interceptor Sewer and its
associated wet -weather related operating problems including combined sewer
overflow and overflow from other points along the interceptor. When considered
in the context of CSO LTCP development, it may be necessary to re-route flows
from the West Side Main Interceptor to an alternate location; however, absent
development of the LTCP, it is impossible to analyze how flows from the West
Side Main Interceptor will affect the operation of the East Side Main Interceptor
during wet -weather in the future.
3.10 NORniwEsMTH STREET INTERCEPTOR SEWER BASIN
3.10.1 Description of Basin
The Northwest 13t' Street Interceptor Sewer Basin serves the west -central
portions of the District from Test Road north to I-70 and generally from Abington
Pike west to NW/SW 20a` St. It consists of approximately 2300 acres of land of
which approximately 50% is sewered. This development is predominantly
residential south of the Pennsylvania Central Railroad and predominantly
industrial north thereof.
The sewer system was generally constructed in the 1960's utilizing concrete pipe,
vitrified clay pipe and masonry brick or block manhole construction. It consists
of approximately 119,200 feet of sewer ranging in diameter from 6 inches to 24
inches and 540 manholes.
CWD,1w. 3-28 May 2001
EXHIBIT A - Page 16 of 19
2oo7 $SIN17w1e Y "twr+r.'- mrtsf �/<- rLHly
Richmond Sanitary District Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan
experiences problems with receiving heavy I/I and operating under high
water conditions during wet weather.
Each area within this basin, North and Far North, is served by a primary
pumping station; therefore, the basin's hydraulic and performance
characteristics are generally defined by the performance of the pump
stations.
2.2.9 WEST SIDE MAIN INTERCEPTOR SEWER BASIN
The West Side Main Interceptor Sewer Basin is one of the oldest within
the District. It was originally a combined, sewer interceptor constructed to
convey sewage flows to the wastewater treatment plant. The sewer system
was separated in the 1980's and all CSO's along its length were
abandoned. The existing interceptor serves the central core of the west
side of the City of Richmond. It is a wholly contained interceptor sewer
basin receiving no flows from other tributary basins. Flows from the West
Side Interceptor Basin are conveyed by inverted siphon across the East
Fork of the Whitewater River to the East Side Interceptor on Liberty
Avenue north of S. K St. The basin consists of approximately 790 acres of
land of which 752 acres (greater than 95%) are severed. The basin
consists of approximately 61,200 feet of sanitary sewer ranging in
diameter from 6 inches to 21 inches and 340 manholes.
RSD has identified three sewer segments with negative hydraulic
gradients along this interceptor. These segments are located as follows:
East of NW 1' St., north of Pearl Street in the 21-inch line.
East of the intersection of NW 1" St. & Pearl St. in the 21-inch
line.
East of the intersection of Whitewater Boulevard and Dodge St. in
the 21-inch line.
Flow meters were placed in two locations within this basin during the
Evaluation Phase of the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. They were placed in
the 21" interceptor line just upstream of the inverted siphon across the
East Fork of the Whitewater River connecting to the East Side Main
Interceptor and monitoring flow from virtually all of the basin, and in the
24" line at NW G St. and Sheridan St. isolating roughly V2 of the basin all
north of the Norfolk & Western Railroad and west of Bridge
Avenue/Sheridan Street.
The meter on the downstream/lower end of the interceptor sewer recorded
an average daily dry -weather flow of approximately 1.33 MGD. Of this,
approximately 46% (0.616 MGD) was estimated as base infiltration
Maximum daily dry -weather flow was recorded as 1.63 MGD. This
CMD, Inc. 2-13 January 2002
EXHIBIT A - Page 17 of 19
Richmond Sanitary District Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan
yielded a peak to. average daily flow ratio of approximately 1.2.
Maximum depth of flow during dry weather was recorded at 8.39 inches
accounting for approximately 20% of the available pipe capacity. This
site exhibited a good velocity gradient. Small increases in depth of flow
resulted in large increases in flow quantity. As a result of the rainfall
event captured during the flow monitoring period, peak daily flow in the
.lower end of the interceptor was recorded at 2.66 MGD. This
corresponded to a flow depth of approximately 11 inches. Peak wet- to
peak dry -weather flow ratios were approximately 2. The interceptor
appeared to convey this peak wet weather flow without surcharge at this
location and the site exhibited a relatively short recovery time of
approximately 2 days after the. rainfall event.
The meter on the upper end of the West Side Main Interceptor sewer
recorded an average daily dry -weather flow of approximately 0.72 MGD.
Of this, approximately 65% (0.472 MGD) was estimated as base
infiltration. Maximum daily dry -weather flow was recorded as 0.85
MGD. This yielded. a peak to average daily flow ratio of approximately
1.2. Maximum depth of flow during dry weather was recorded at 8.8
inches accounting for approximately 30% of the available pipe capacity.
As a result of the rainfall event captured during the flow monitoring
period, peak daily flow in the northwest branch of the interceptor was
recorded at 2.62 MGD. This corresponded to a flow depth of
approximately 66 inches. Peak wet- to peak dry -weather flow ratios were
approximately 3.1; however the interceptor sewer system at this location
did not appear to have capacity to convey these wet -weather flows without
surcharge of approximately 3.5 feet. The flow data exhibited some
backwater characteristics associated with the wet -weather event. The
system experienced a relatively short recovery period after the rainfall
evert of approximately 2 days.
The lower reaches of the West Side Main Interceptor have the ability to
convey current and anticipated dry -weather flows without difficulty,
however, the hydraulic gradient of the interceptor in its lower reaches is
good. The grade flattens north of S. G St. and hydraulic restriction during
wet weather occurs at some point along the interceptor south of NW G St.
and Sheridan St.
2.2.10 NoRTHWEST13TH STREET INTERCEPTOR SEWER BASIN
The Northwest 13`h Street Interceptor Sewer Basin serves the west -central
portions of the District from Test Road north to I-70 and generally from
Abington Pie west to NW/SW 20m St. It consists of approximately 2300
acres of land of which approximately 50% is sewered. The sewer system
was generally constructed in the 1960's utilizing concrete pipe, vitrified
clay pipe and masonry brick or block manhole construction. It consists of
CM0, Inc. 2-14 January 2002
EXHIBIT A - Page 18 of 19
1,0o Z S f i"t�1-fiy .�{`^' E-r�. r►� �4sTt �- f WIV
(Z�co.y►rnE-vaEo o yrZ ►14t /Mif }�[�N
EXMIT D
BASIN -LEVEL CIP PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
WEST SIDE MAVV INTERCEPTOR
Problem Statement
The West Side Main Interceptor Sewer Basin is one of the oldest within the District. It was
originally a combined sewer interceptor constructed to convey sewage flows to the wastewater
treatment plant in the late 1920's. The sewer system was separated in the 1980's and all CSO's
along its length were abandoned. The existing interceptor serves the central core of the west side
of the City of Richmond. Flows from the West Side Interceptor Basin are conveyed by inverted
siphon across the East Fork of the Whitewater River to the East Side interceptor on Liberty
Avenue north of S. K St. This is the most hydraulically taxed portion of the East Side Interceptor
System and has significant CSO and SSO impacts. The interceptor is structurally deficient and
has failed in catastrophic fashion on numerous previous occasions.
Capacity/Utilization.— Dry Weather
= 30%
Capacity/Utilization— Wet Weather
= 45%
Number of Customer Complaints
= 39
Regulatory Requirement to Improve Sewers
= Low
Impact on Economic Development
= Low
Impact on Community Health/Enhancement
= High
The lower reaches of the West Side Main Interceptor have the ability to convey current and
anticipated dry -weather flows without difficulty. I/I removal is recommended as the initial phase
in the elimination of the bottlenecking in the interceptor during wet -weather upstream of Sheridan
Ave. Structural enhancement of the interceptor is also recommended.
CIP Project Recommendations
Two (2) projects are proposed for RSD's CIP to address structural enhancement of the West Side
Main Interceptor and to increase capacity in the most critical portions of the interceptor. Goals,
scheduling and funding associated with these projects are as follows:
Structural Reinforcement of Interceptor
This project is proposed to structurally enhance the oldest, most heavily used portions of the
interceptor which have been experiencing catastrophic failure for many years. Structural
enhancement will sustain an additional 50- to 100 year useful life of the interceptor and also
provides for an approximate 20% increase in capacity of the existing interceptor sewer system.
Structural enhancement is proposed to be accomplished utilizing a "no -dig" technology such as
cured -in -place pipe lining.
Estimated Project Cost = $1,000,000
Proposed Project Schedule July 2010 — Design
January 2011 - Construction
Sewer Rehabilitation —Upstream of Sheridan Ave.
Estimated Project Cost = $ 542,200
Proposed Project Schedule July 2010 — Design
January 2011— Construction
7
EXHIBIT A - Page 19 of 19
IF
CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA
May 5, 2017
A wealth of resources to master a common goal.
May 5, 2017
Mr. Elijah W. Welch, P.E.
District Engineer
Richmond Sanitary District
2380 Liberty Avenue
Richmond, Indiana 47374
RE: Proposal for
West Side Interceptor Improvements Planning Study
Dear Mr. Welch and RSD Board of Commissioners,
Commonwealth Engineers, Inc. (CEI) is pleased to submit our Proposal for the West Side Interceptor
Improvements Planning Study. As seen in the proposal, hydraulic SWMM-based collection system modeling
is one of our core competencies, along with sewer planning and design efforts. As such, this project will be
efficiently and cost-effectively completed by our experienced personnel, which allow the Richmond Sanitary
District to proceed with a defendable path forward with its Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Long -Term
Control Plan (LTCP).
I would be happy to review the details of the proposal to ensure that it meets your needs and expectations.
Thank you for the opportunity to continue our professional relationship with the Richmond Sanitary District
(RSD) on this important project.
Please contact me if you have any questions
Sincerely,
Brian Desharnais, Ph.D., P.E.
Vice President
Enclosure
EXHIBIT B - Paae 2 of 39
TABLE OF CONTENTS
West Side Interceptor Improvements Planning Study
Proposal
® Section 1 Company Overview
® Section 2 Project Approach & Scope of Work
Task 1
Workshops and Project Management
Task 2
Existing Data Review, Surveying, and Smoke Testing
Task 3
Flow, Level, and Rainfall Metering
Task 4
Existing Conditions Hydraulic Modeling
Task 5
Hydraulic and Geotechnical Alternative Analyses
Task 6
Summary Report
® Section 3 Project Schedule
Section 4 Project Team
® Section 5 Fee Tabulation
EXHIBIT B - Page 3 of 39
i
SECTION 1
Company Overview
City of Richmond, Indiana
West Side Interceptor Improvements Planning Study
Mav S. 2017
EXHIBIT B - Page 4 of 39
FIRM DESCRIPTION
Since 1974, Commonwealth Engineers has earned a reputation as a top -
tier water resources firm providing award -winning, cost-effective
planning, permitting, design, and construction engineering solutions.
Over forty-two years later, our commitment and dedication to protecting
water quality, and more generally the quality of life for Indiana residents,
continues to grow.
Consistently ranked as one of the top engineering firms in the State, our
focus remains solely on Indiana Clients and their needs.
Our staff includes 19 professional engineers and 8 design engineers. Additionally, we employ planners, surveyors,
environmental scientists, regulatory coordinators, and funding (grant) experts, among other experienced support staff.
We also offer more than 25 years of experience with in-house electrical, mechanical, instrumentation & control, and
energy savings engineering services. Various staff certifications include: ACAD 2014 certified professionals, INDOT
certified utility coordinator, CFM, LEED, NASSCO, and a Certified Energy Auditor (C.E.A.) to name a few.
Our integrated team's philosophy is to serve in partnership with clients like the City of Fort Wayne, to understand your
current position, recommend valid solutions, and work together to achieve successful projects.
ENGINEERING EXPERTISE OFFICE STAFFING
Registered Professional Engineers (P.E.) 19
Water resources comprise 95% of all Commonwealth's
annual business and we have become a leader in these areas
of environmental engineering. Our engineering team is
committed to helping Indiana communities resolve storm
drainage issues. We utilize the latest in computer software to
compliment our engineers' experience. Environmental,
archaeological/historical, monetary, and regulatory impacts
all have to be included in the analysis. Additionally, since
infrastructure projects can require close coordination with
applicable regulatory agencies, we have three (3) Regulatory
Specialists on staff. Through the course of project
development, our Regulatory Specialists have assisted many
of our clients with the ability to better understand the
sometimes complicated permitting process. They will also act
as a liaison between in-house staff members and the
regulatory personnel. This provides an effective management
tool, resulting in quicker review of permits, which in turn, is a
result of the enhanced communications. _
Design Engineers (E.I.)
8
Registered Land Surveyor
1
Designers
7
Resident Project Representatives
9
CADD Specialists
7
Regulatory Specialists
3
Marketing
6
Clerical
5
Accounting
3
Information Technology
2
Total
70
• 100% Locally Owned and Operated
• Niche Engineering Services for Water and Wastewater
Resource Projects with Award -Winning Designs
• Support of Green Initiatives and Sustainable Approach
• In -House Grant Specialists, Environmental Compliance
Quality Control
EXHIBIT B - Page 5 of 39
OFFICE LOCATION
COMMONWEALTH TEAM: Commonwealth Engineers, Inc. intends to utilize our
Fort Wayne Regional Office as our base for the services provided for this project.
Though targeted personnel (outlined in Section 4 of this proposal) originate from
both our Indianapolis and Fort Wayne Offices, drawing on the collective expertise
and strength of the entire Company. Additionally, our team includes geotechnical
engineering expertise from SME to assist with planning -level assessments and
recommendations pertaining to slope stability, especially along the Sim Hodgin
Parkway.
Et. WWne Regional Office
9604 Goldwater Rd., Ste. 203
Fort Wayne, IN 46625
Corporate Headquarters
7256 Company E
Indianapolis, IN
Evansville Regional Office
1419 W Lloyd Expressway, Suite 401
EXHIBIT B - Page 6 of 39
SECTION 2
Project Approach & Scope of Work
City of Richmond, Indiana
West Side Interceptor Improvements Planning Study
May 5, 2017
EXHIBIT B - Page 7 of 39
PROJECT APPROACH - MODELING
The Commonwealth Team thoroughly understands the
Richmond Sanitary District's (RSD) needs with respect to
necessary hydraulic modeling and preliminary engineering.
Our approach is one that recommends RSD involvement at
key steps along the project schedule, ensuring that the end
product meets your expectations.
Based on GIS mapping, we recommend expanding the City's
existing XPSWMM model to account for sewers generally
larger than 12 to 18-inches in diameter. Modeling for sewers
less than 12-inches are recommended when addressing
specific hydraulic problem areas or at areas where significant
cross connections exist. Figure 1 on the next page contains
an approximate layout of the proposed model extents,
where it is acknowledged that the model extents would be
tweaked to capture targeted problem areas. We estimate
that the model expansion will include up to 185 nodes.
It is our understanding that the West Side Interceptor Basin
is a separate sanitary area. Sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs)
are prohibited in Indiana. The reality though, is that sanitary
sewer collection systems experience significant impacts due
to infiltration and inflow (1/1). In older sanitary collection
systems, 1/1 can approach hydraulic behavior and wet
weather responses similar to a combined system. As of date,
the Indiana Department of Environmental Management
(IDEM) has not established guidance pertaining to acceptable
levels of service for separate sanitary systems. In the absence
of guidance, communities such as Richmond struggle with
selecting a suitable design storm and usually end up selecting
a severe rainfall event such as a 10-yr 1-hr design storm,
which for the City of Richmond equates to approximately
1.83 inches in an hour. For example, the 10-yr 1-hr design
storm was used when sizing infrastructure for the NW 13th
Street Interceptor Improvements, and we recommend the
same approach for the West Side Interceptor Improvements.
.Photo 1 - West Side Interceptor Alignment along
the Whitewater River Valley Trail
EXHIBIT B - Page 8 of 39
Sri t, � (j`' ��.� C � �"• .. �� l � ��
'L+�' , :• a \` 1 1!' � � � '. ■ "'��- f _ a r {" P � = � _
Ali. LJ
dt
AY
•s it . � .� t �_ _;..'� � � , .::. 4 � ,,,
r 4
ffiG� 4 a
A. .�
`I ."i Proposed el Extents
i
�- -
AIM-
i. r P Jri Y p
�
J t
A wealth of resources to master a common goal.
PROJECT APPROACH - SURVEYING & GEOTECHNICAL FIELD WORK
Surveying is an important component of the
proposed work. For example, surveying accuracy
is very important to arrive at meaningful
conclusions when building the hydraulic model
and assessing alternative analyses. For this effort,
the Commonwealth Team recommends
surveying the existing structures and inverts to
small horizontal and vertical tolerances. Also, as
shown on the photo to the right, there are
approximately 50 sanitary structures that have
been categorized as 'difficult structures' from an
access standpoint, where extra effort will be
needed to measure top of castings and measure
inverts.
Another important component of the proposed
work is the geotechnical assessment of the West
Side Interceptor along the approximately 2-mile
corridor along the western slope. The
Commonwealth Team includes geotechnical
engineering specialists with expertise in slope
stability from SME, whose primary role is to
inspect the sloped alignment and propose
planning -level improvements that can be
implemented to reinforce the slope stability
assuming the existing West Side Interceptor stays
as -is or needs replacing. It is our understanding
that the RSD desires a solution that will solve the
hydraulic and geotechnical concerns along the
West Side Interceptor for the long -haul. Including
this planning -level geotechnical assessment
within this study is prudent, which will allow for
targeted tasks to be performed during design.
Photo 2 - West Side Interceptor Along Sim Hodgins Parkway
EXHIBIT B - Page 10 of 39
PROJECT APPROACH - SMOKE TESTING & SUMMARY REPORT
Photo 3 - Smoke at Storm Drains
Pipe Diameter (in)
Upper Subbasin
Length (ft)
8
7,024
12
8,034
18
5,364
707
24
30
-
48
633
Total
41,157
Table 1- Summary of Sewers in the Upper West Side
Interceptor Subbasin for Smoke Testing
As shown on Figure 2 on the next page, the West Side
Interceptor Basin is generally divided into an upper and
lower region. Smoke testing is recommended in the upper
region due to historically high amounts of 1/1. Based on GIS
mapping of sewer sizes and lengths illustrated on Figure 3,
Table 1 below is a summary of the sewers in the upper
subbasin recommend for smoke testing.
Smoke testing is a quick and efficient method for identifying
deficiencies of a sanitary or combined sewer collection
system. Smoke placed under pressure by a blower within the
sewers identifies potential pathways of 1/I. If smoke can
escape the collection system, clean water can enter the
collection system along the same path. CEI typically
encounters the following deficiencies during smoke testing
related to both public infrastructure and private facilities.
Table 2 - Typical Deficiencies Encountered During
Smoke Testing
EXHIBIT B - Page 11 of 39
A wealth of resources to master a common goal.
PROJECT APPROACH - SMOKE TESTING & SUMMARY REPORT
CEI's general approach to smoke testing is summarized below:
I. Schedule
• A detailed schedule of the work planned will be provided to
the City in advance of the smoke testing. However, the
smoke testing schedule requires some coordination with
weather forecasts. For example, the smoke testing should
not be performed during periods of high winds, heavy rains
or after large rain events when areas have substantial
ponding of surface water.
II. Public Notification
• CEI will provide public notification of the smoke testing in
the area to be tested by hanging notification flyers on the
residents' doors.
• All field personnel will have copies of the Material Safety
Data Sheets (MSDS) for the liquid smoke to pass out to
concerned residences.
• All personnel will be cordial, respectful and courteous to the
public during this process and have been educated on the
variety of potential problems that may occur during smoke
testing for a homeowner.
III. Traffic Control
• CEI can provide basic safety measures to minimize traffic
concerns, including utilizing cones and hazard lights on
vehicles. Any substantial traffic control, including flaggers or
temporary barricades will be coordinated with the City on a
project by project basis.
• CEI will attempt to control smoke from being a hazard in
high volume intersections by placing plugs within the
sanitary sewers, covering inlets directly connected to the
sanitary sewers and strategically selecting setup manholes
for the blower.
Photo 4 - Smoke at Cleanout
Photo 5 - Smoke at Roof Drain
Photo 6 - Blower Equipment
EXHIBIT B - Page 13 of 39
PROJECT APPROACH - SMOKE TESTING & SUMMARY REPORT
IV. Smoke Testing Procedure
Smoke testing will consist of a setup manhole where the blower will be positioned.
• The setup manhole will not be a manhole with four influent/effluent sewers, unless unavoidable.
Ideally, the manhole will have a single influent and effluent sewer.
• Each setup shall only smoke test approximately three manholes, or = 800-1,000 feet upstream and
downstream of the setup manhole.
• Sewer plugs shall be utilized as necessary to make the smoke concentration stronger in segments
of the sanitary sewers and to prevent the smoke from exiting the system in undesirable locations
(i.e. high volume intersections). Plugs shall only be placed in 12-inch diameter and smaller sewers.
• CEI will allow two to five minutes after starting the blower with smoke entering the sewer system
before beginning visual inspection. Smoke should be exiting the vent pipes along the roof of any
structure attached to the sanitary sewer. This allows the field personnel to track how far the
smoke has travelled within the sewer system.
• All smoke incidences shall be accurately and neatly recorded on aerial maps. A digital picture of
observed incidents shall also be taken of the incident smoking.
• A standard legend will be utilized on the maps to identify smoke incidences.
V. Summary Reports
A summary report will be provided to the
City upon the completion of the smoke
testing and modeling. In general, CEI
anticipates providing a summary for the
smoke testing that contains an overall figure
displaying the smoke incidents observed,
along with digital photographs and more
detailed figures documenting the location of
the incident. In addition, the summary
report will contain recommendations from
the modeling effort, along with planning -
level cost estimates.
Photo 7 - Example Smoke Testing Report Figures
EXHIBIT B - Page 14 of 39
SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1— Workshops and Project Management
1.1 Kick -Off Workshop: Conduct a Kick -Off Workshop with RSD to confirm scope, work plan, coordination with
other projects in the area, lines of communication, and schedule. The Kick -Off Workshop will be held during
the data collection phase of the study to provide clarity about the required data to be provided by RSD which
includes:
• GIS data.
• CSO LTCP Documents.
• 2002 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Documents.
• West Side Interceptor As-Builts.
• CCTV data as required and completed post interceptor cleaning.
• Flow metering data (at locations recommended by Engineer).
• Locations and records of complaint areas in the subbasin particularly related to basement backups.
• Guidance on allowable surcharge depth to minimize basement backups.
• Reports or planning studies describing future flow / growth projections for various areas of the
collection system. For the sake of this proposal, it is assumed that future growth is insignificant.
• Other relevant information such as large industrial water users.
A discussion is recommended regarding the desired level of control for the subbasin, which will involve
guidance from Brady Dryer, Commonwealth's in-house expert on all things regulatory. After the Kick -
Off Meeting, the Commonwealth Team will revisit the site to confirm recommended model extents
and to confirm historical problem areas.
1.2 Calibration Review, Future Growth Assessment, and Alternative Brainstorming Workshop: Conduct a
Workshop with RSD to review the calibrated model, review future growth plans in the subbasin, and to
review / brainstorm preliminary alternatives.
1.3 Alternatives and Draft Report Workshop: Conduct a Review Workshop with RSD to summarize the
alternatives, recommendations, and the contents of the draft Summary Report.
1.4 Meeting Notes: Complete and distribute all workshop notes within seven (7) days of each meeting.
1.5 Project Management: Project management including general correspondence, project updates,
invoicing, scheduling, budget maintenance, etc.
EXHIBIT B - Page 15 of 39
SCOPE OF WORK
Task 2 — Existing Data Review Surveying and Smoke Testing
The goal of this component of the project is to characterize the subbasin in order to collect data for the
XPSWMM hydraulic model development and recommendations for 1/1 reduction in the upper region.
2.1 Review Existing Data: Review data as described in Task 1.1.
2.2 Set Control, Survey, and Structure Inspections: Coordinate with RSD to confirm horizontal and vertical
control requirements. The top of castings of up to 185 sewer structures will be surveyed, whereby
approximately 50 sewer structures are characterized as difficult access. Tentative plan is to locate the
structures using GPS and or conventional methods where necessary due to tree cover. This will provide
horizontal location with reasonable accuracy; however will not provide the target vertical accuracy.
Next, control will be set sparsely throughout the site in open areas using GPS. Next, run conventional
levels through the site incorporating all manhole structures starting from and checking above -
mentioned control along the way to isolate the project into smaller sections for quality -control. This
will provide the vertical level of accuracy needed.
Structure inspections involving measure downs (along with pipe materials, structural materials,
structure dimensions, photos) will be performed on up to 185 sewer structures, whereby
approximately 50 sewer structures are characterized as difficult access. Detailed 1/1 inspections will not
be performed, though major problems will be noted if observed. Deliverables include (a) a summary of
the horizontal and vertical control, (b) point file and elevations of top of castings, (c) PDFs of structure
inspection sheets, and (d) GIS shapefile.
2.3 Smoke Testing Notification: Travel to provide notifications to homeowners.
2.4 Smoke Testing Field Work: Perform smoke testing in the 41,157 LF of sewer in the upper region of the
West Side Interceptor Subbasin.
2.5 Smoke Testing Technical Memorandum: Assemble summary figures and brief narrative that will be
referenced in an appendix within the Summary Report. Deliverable includes the following:
• Technical Memorandum (furnish one (1) PDF electronic copy and two (2) hard copies).
Task 3 — Flow Level and Rainfall Metering
The goal of this component of the project is to review metering data that is necessary to calibrate the
XPSWMM hydraulic model. It is assumed that RSD has performed all flow and level metering, rainfall metering,
and this data is available via the Gripp web access.
3.1 Review Metering Data: Review rainfall and flow metering data and categorize rainfall events according
to frequency and duration.
EXHIBIT B - Page 16 of 39
SCOPE OF WORK
Task 4 — Existing Conditions Hydraulic Model
4.1 Create Physical Model of the Subbasin: Import surveying data of sewer structures into existing
XPSWMM model. Add inverts, pipe lengths, top of castings, and all related necessary data in common
datum into the model and finalize physical model expansion.
4.2 Process Metering Data: Identify dry weather and wet weather spans during metering period.
Determine 24-hour dry weather temporal constants for weekday and weekend periods. Identify
calibration and validation periods.
4.3 Convert Metering Data to SWMM Format: Convert flow metering data (flow and level) and rainfall
data into usable format for XPSWMM.
4.4 Dry Weather Calibration: Import dry weather metered data and 24-hour temporal weekday and
weekend constants into the model. Calibrate the model to dry weather conditions. Perform a
comparative analysis of the dry weather model output vs. the dry weather gauged data.
4.5 Wet Weather Calibration: Import wet weather metered data into the model. Calibrate the model to
wet weather conditions using flow metering data. Perform a comparative analysis of the wet weather
model output vs. the wet weather gauged data.
4.6 Field Checks: Perform additional field checks and verifications of key sanitary structures, top of
castings, and first floor elevations based on wet weather calibration efforts.
4.7 Assess Existing Conditions Hydraulic Performance: Assess the hydraulic performance of the existing
collection system using up to three (3) design storms. Based on the results of these simulations, (a)
identify locations in the existing collection system that are hydraulic bottlenecks and (b) quantify
duration of system impairment due to wet weather. Deliverables include the following:
• All existing condition files and associated model runs.
Task 5 — Hydraulic and Geotechnical Alternative Analyses
5.1 Hydraulic Model Alternative Analyses & Technical Memorandum: It is assumed that future growth is
insignificant, whereby a future growth model will not be needed. Using the calibrated model, generate
up to five (5) alternative analyses. Generate brief technical memorandum that will serve as a
referenced appendix in the summary report describing the calibration, future growth assumptions,
selection of design storms, modeling of alternatives, etc. Deliverables include the following:
• All model alternative files and associated model runs.
• Technical Memorandum (furnish one (1) PDF electronic copy and two 2 hard c
EXHIBIT B - Page 17 of 39
8
SCOPE OF WORK
5.2 Geotechnical Analyses & Technical Memorandum: Perform a one -day site visit to walk the sewer
alignment (in the roughly 2-mile area of concern). The site visit will include walking near portions of
the top (and possibly the bottom) of the slope to review existing conditions (e.g. for readily observable
signs of slope distress and/or erosion, type of vegetative cover, etc.), the water level in the river, and
the presence of existing structures near the slope. Efforts will be made to estimate the slope angle in
some areas of the slope that are readily accessible. Based on the observations from site visit, prepare
planning -level options and associated preliminary cost estimates for improving slope stability assuming
the interceptor sewer will stay in -place or needs to be replaced. In developing these options, discuss
the benefits and drawbacks of each option. Summarize findings, options for slope improvement, and
associated cost estimates in a technical summary memo. Deliverable includes the following:
• Technical Memorandum (furnish one (1) PDF electronic copy and two (2) hard copies).
Task 6 —Summary Report
6.1 Draft Summary Report: Develop a draft summary report along with supporting graphics and figures,
whereby the aforementioned technical memorandums (smoke testing memo, hydraulic alternatives
memo, and geotechnical memo) will be referenced appendices. Deliverable includes the following:
• Draft Report (furnish one (1) PDF electronic copy and two (2) hard copies).
6.2 Final Summary Report: Update the summary report based on the Draft Report Workshop from Task
1.3 and RSD's comments. Deliverables include the following:
• Final Report (furnish one (1) PDF electronic copy and two (2) hard copies).
OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Upon separate written authorization by RSD and negotiated fees, Commonwealth Engineers can provide the following
example additional services:
• Elevate the summary report into a format for SRF funding.
• Provide flow metering or additional surveying.
• Perform standardized infiltration/inflow assessments when performing structure measure downs.
• Attend additional meetings.
• Model additional alternatives.
• Perform design and construction engineering assistance of proposed alternative.
EXHIBIT B - Page 18 of 39
SECTION 3
Project Schedule
City of Richmond, Indiana
West Side Interceptor Improvements Planning Study
May 5, 2017
EXHIBIT B - Page 19 of 39
PROJECT SCHEDULE
The following is a tentative project schedule (weather -pending) assuming a notice to proceed by June 1, 2017. In
summary, the project should take approximately ten (10) months. Project schedule can be expedited if necessary.
• Smoke Testing
• Surveying & Structure Inspections in Non Foliage Areas
• Surveying & Structure Inspections in Foliage Areas
• Review Flow Metering
• Geotechnical Analyses
• Data Analysis & XPSWMM Hydraulic Modeling
• Summary Report
June 2017 to July 2017
July 2017 to August 2017
October 2017 to November 2017
September 2017 to October 2017
September 2017 to October 2017
November 2017 to January 2018
February 2018 to March 2018
EXHIBIT B - Page 20 of 39
SECTION 4
Project Team
City of Richmond, Indiana
West Side Interceptor Improvements Planning Study
Mav 5.2017
EXHIBIT B - Page 21 of 39
KEY PERSONNEL
The priority in developing our team for this project was to assemble experienced professionals with the abilities to
provide hydraulic collection system modeling and preliminary engineering report (PER) development that is accurate,
efficient, cost-effective, and on -time for the Richmond Sanitary District (RSD). In addition, due to the geotechnical
concerns associated with the slope stability of the West Side Interceptor, key members from SME are included to
assess with planning -level geotechnical engineering assessments. To these ends, we offer the Commonwealth Team
that is technically strong and adept in all aspects of sewer system surveying, hydraulic SWMM modeling, geotechnical
analyses, and PER development.
Our lead team members have successfully worked together with RSD staff. Likewise, our significant knowledge of
RSD's existing XPSWMM model, experience with RSD flow metering, local geology, and long-term collection system
goals means that our team can hit the ground running. The proposed Commonwealth Team:
• has visited the West Side Interceptor Basin, researched existing documentation, and has a thorough understanding
of the project needs through past site visits;
• has extensive experience with XPSWMM modeling for PER development, particularly through our past efforts
developing the City's LTCP XPSWMM model and previously assessing the hydraulics originating from this basin;
has extensive experience using multiple data sources such as field testing, record drawings, and mapping to
accurately build hydraulic models;
• has experience with the City's GIS system and record drawings through our past design and Long Term Control
Plan (LTCP) update experience;
EXHIBIT B - Page 22 of 39
KEY PERSONNEL
As shown on the organizational chart, there are four (4) primary tasks, including (a) Surveying & Structure Inspections,
(b) Smoke Testing, (c) Data Analysis & XPSWMM Hydraulic Modeling, and (d) Geotechnical Analyses. The eight (8) key
personnel associated with these tasks are described below, along with detailed resumes of senior staff.
COMMONrVEALTH-
ENGINEERS, INC.
Brian Desharnais, PhD, PE - Project Manager brings extensive experience working with large City
municipal infrastructure. He has successfully managed field work, sanitary sewer improvements,
rehabilitation, sewer separation, hydraulic modeling, and sanitary / combined sewer compliance
projects for Cities such as Fort Wayne, Indianapolis, and Richmond, Indiana. This past experience,
coupled with familiarity of RSD Staff, makes him ideally suited to lead the team.
Andrew Robarge, PE - Project Engineer possesses extensive experience with the City of
Richmond's existing XPSWMM hydraulic model through past RSD projects such as the East Side
Interceptor Replacement Projects, NW 13th Street Interceptor Replacement Project, and the last
LTCP Update. Andrew has many years of experience calibrating wet weather responses in
separate and combined sewer systems.
Jason Sanford, PLS - Land Surveyor has accumulated a lengthy history of performing surveying
work related to sewer system investigations and structure inspection metrics. Jason has
experience working with RSD staff, and he knows a lot about the existing collection system
through his past work with the East Side Interceptor Project. This experience makes Jason ideally
suited to lead surveying efforts.
EXHIBIT B - Page 23 of 39
KEY PERSONNEL
COMMONWEALTH'
ENGINEERS, INC.
Chris Ripke, EIT - Field Engineer has experience with a variety of field investigations and field
engineering. Chris has lead many teams including smoke testing, flow metering, structure
inspections, and construction inspection. He has an enormous amount of experience
communicating with the public, which makes him perfectly suited to lead smoke testing field
investigations.
Brian Wilson, EIT - Design Engineer has experience building hydraulic SWMM models,
incorporating relevant alternative modeling results, and assisting with the assembly of plans and
specifications pertaining to wastewater engineering projects. Brian also has experience
assembling preliminary engineering reports and technical memorandums and ensuring that all
requirements are included.
Matthew Desjardins, PE - Geotechnical Engineer has extensive expertise with various types of
earth retention systems, including segmental -block known as mechanically stabilized earth
(MSE), natural stone, auger cast -in -place (ACIP), soldier -pile and lagging (SP&Q, and steel sheet
pile retaining walls. He designs and prepares designs for specialized geotechnical systems such as
soil grouting, underpinning and shoring, as well as dewatering systems
Joel Rinkel, PR - Geotechnical Engineer provides geotechnical engineering, construction
materials services, pavement engineering, geo-civil design services, shoring design services,
forensics evaluations for below -grade structures, and expert witness testimony. He is a lead
designer for earth retention systems, dewatering systems, reinforced slopes, special ground
improvement techniques and underpinning systems.
EXHIBIT B - Page 24 of 39
Surveying & Structure
Inspections
Jason Saftftrdl� PL$
Land
Surveyor
M&#Jannmk
Field
Assistant
Legend
Elijah Welch, PE
Richmond Sanitary District
District Engineer
R- f
Smoke Testing
Chrls RIPIco, Eff
Field
Engineer
Orion +an, SIT
Design
Engineer
Data Analysis &
XPSWMM Modeling
AndmN Roaar",1
Project Engineer /
Modeler
Orion Win, EIT
Design
Engineer
BradyDryer
Regulatory
Assistance
Geotechnical Analyses
COMMONWEALTH'
ENGINEER, INC.S M E
Mrwwwrrrr.a�r
EXHIBIT B - Page 25 of 39
EDUCATION:
Ph.D. in Civil
Engineering
Northwestern
University, 2000
Hydraulic Engineering
Courses, Clemson
University, 1995
M.S. in Environmental
Engineering, Rose-
Hulman, 1995
Brian M. Desharnais, Ph.D., P.E.
Project Manager
Brian has been involved in the design and planning of stormwater and wastewater projects.
Based on his advanced education and work experience, he has extensive knowledge of the
theory, design, and practical application of collection systems and treatment plants. One of
Brian's primary strengths is advanced hydraulic engineering including storm, sanitary, and
combined collection systems.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• Pogues Run Sewer Separation Design - Indianapolis, IN: Managed the design of a multi -
phased sewer separation project involving sewer sizes ranging from 12" to S4" in
diameter. Extensive use of green sustainable infrastructure. Developed a hydraulic model
(XPSWMM) and designed the sewer separation and associated sustainable design
(bioswales and water quality basin) within an existing highly urbanized area.
B.S. in Civil Engineering
Fall Creek Siphon and Lift Station Design - Indianapolis, IN: Designed and assisted with
Merrimack College,
1993
construction engineering of a 24" siphon under Fall Creek using horizontal directional
REGISTRATION:
drilling construction. Designed a dry weather pump station and wet weather relief siphon
Indiana Professional
overflow. Developed a hydraulic model (XPSWMM) and designed a low flow dry weather
Engineer - PE 10708217
pump station and high flow wet weather pump station, which replaced an aged gravity
MEMBERSHIPS:
American Society of
connection across Fall Creek.
Civil Engineers (ASCE)
• East Marion County Siphon Hydraulic Modeling - Indianapolis, IN: Modeled (XPSWMM)
Indiana Water
Environment
and designed a fourth parallel siphon along the city's East Marion County Regional
Association (IWEA)
Interceptor to convey 64 MGD of flow as a part of the upgrades to Lift Station 313.
Water Environment
Federation (WEF)
• Subbasin Modeling - Fort Wayne, IN: Expanded and recalibrated sewershed models
PATENT & AWARDS:
(XPSWMM, SWMM5, and Mike Urban) of subbasins J03012, M18256, Q06002, and
U.S. Patent (No.
S02008. Developed alternative recommendations to relieve capacity constraints with
7,297,245)
Electrokinetic Soil
respect to overflows and basement backups.
Sampling Technology
• Combined Sewage Ponds Hydraulic Analysis - Fort Wayne, IN: Created hydraulic models
Rose-Hulman Career
Achievement Award
(XPSWMM and custom hydraulic models) of the combined sewage ponds to assess
(2015)
hydraulic options related to sweetwater delivery to assist with odor control.
Gelet Excellence in
Ewing Street East-West Storm Sewer Extension Phase I -Fort Wayne, IN: Managed the
Engineering Teaching
Award (2006 & 2002)
design which involves sewer separation in a heavily urbanized area with extensive utility
American Chemical
coordination.
Society's Award in
Environmental
Chemistry (2000)
EXHIBIT B - Page 26 of 39
ASCE's Daniel W. Mead
Award in Engineering
Ethics (1994)
HYDRAULIC SOFTWARE
& ENGINEERING
WORKSHOPS:
Optimizer WCS
XPSWMM
SWMM5
MIKE URBAN
Visual Hydraulics
GPS-X
PSMJ Project
Management &
Principals Bootcamps
PSM1 Regional Office
Workshop
ASCE Excellence in Civil
Engineering Education
Teaching Workshop
Various National
Science Foundation
Effective Teaching
Workshops
ASCE Water Quality
Modeling Workshop
Brian M. Desharnais, Ph.D., P.E.
Project Manager
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE (Continued)
• Sweetwater Design - Fort Wayne, IN: Managed the design of a sweetwater pumping
system for Wet Weather Pond 1.
• Master Plan Modeling Optimization Study - Fort Wayne, IN: Optimized future
improvement options at the wet weather storage facilities and the separate and combined
sewer system, including the 3RPORT rock tunnel, using SWMM5 and Optimizer WCS.
• Treatment Complex Influent Optimization Study - Fort Wayne, IN: Developed and
assessed near -term and long-term improvements using SWMM5 for the City's collection
system in an effort to optimize flows to the WPCP, Wet Weather Pump Station, and Wet
Weather Ponds.
• Southwest Area Modeling Project - Fort Wayne, IN: Performed preliminary engineering
and modeling of GS and Junk Ditch Pump Stations.
• Swift Interceptor Relief Sewer Phase III - Fort Wayne, IN: Managed the design of a sewer
extension using a combination of trenchless and open -cut construction.
• Parallel Interceptor Routing Study Phase II - Fort Wayne, IN: Developed and assessed
screening -level and planning -level hydraulic modeling of the three proposed alternatives
for the 3RPORT rock tunnel.
ACADEMIC
EXPERIENCE:
. East Side Interceptor Replacement Design Phases I through III - Richmond, IN: Oversaw
Associate Professor at
the design of a multi -phased 54" interceptor using a combination of open cut and rock
Trine university
(Angola, IN)
tunneling.
Taught Civil Engineering
Courses:
LTCP & LIAA Modeling - Richmond Sanitary District: Managed the development of a
Fluid Mechanics
hydraulic model (XPSWMM) of the City's collection system and developed alternative
Environmental
Engineering
recommendations.
Environmental
Lift Station Designs - Plymouth, Chesterfield, Waynetown, & Jackson County RSD:
Chemistry
Water Treatment Plant
Designed numerous lift stations in these example communities.
Design
Wastewater Treatment
a LTCP Modeling - New Haven, Montpelier, Speedway, Nappanee, Plymouth, Decatur,
Design
Rensselaer, Crown Point, & Bluffton, IN: Managed the development of hydraulic models
Engineering Capstone
of the collection systems.
Design
Hazardous Waste
• Long Term Control Plan Phase II - Plymouth, IN: Designed two (2) Pipe Network Storage
Engineering
Systems to meet 10-yr 1-hr design storm compliance.
EXHIBIT B - Page 27 of 39
Fnl IrATIMU-
B.S. Civil Engineering
Minor in
Environmental
Engineering
Trine University, 2007
REGISTRATION:
Indiana Professional
Engineer
No. 11100674
HYDRAULIC
SOFTWARE &
ENGINEERING
WORKSHOPS:
Optimizer WCS
XPSWMM
SWMM5
MIKE URBAN
Visual Hydraulics
US EPA Initial
Distribution System
Evaluation: Planning
and Implementing
Optimizer Training
XPSWMM Training
PSMJ Project
Management
Bootcamp
MEMBERSHIPS:
American Water
Works Association
(AWWA)
Water Environment
Federation (WEF)
Andrew Robarge, P.E.
Project Engineer
Andrew has been with Commonwealth Engineers for ten (10) years. His responsibilities include
preliminary engineering report preparation, hydraulic modeling, design calculations, and
developing plans and specifications for sanitary, combined and storm sewer systems. Andrew
also has experience with GIS and construction inspection/engineering. Andrew possesses an
extensive understanding of the City of Fort Wayne's collection system.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• City of Fort Wayne — Ewing Street East-West Storm Sewer Extension: Assisted with the
design of sewer separation in the heavily urbanized downtown area. Work included
design, specifications and cost estimating.
• City of Fort Wayne — Swift Interceptor Relief Sewer Phase III: Assisted with the design of
a sanitary sewer extension using open -cut and trenchless construction. Work included
design, specifications, and cost estimating.
• City of Fort Wayne — Sweetwater Design: Designed a sweetwater pumping system and
large diameter sewer pipe connection for Wet Weather Pond 1 including specifications
and cost estimating.
• Richmond Eastside Interceptor Replacement - Phases I through III: Assisted with SWMM
system modeling to analyze alternatives for replacement of the City's failing main
interceptor for compliance with their LTCP. Phase I and II involved a 54" diameter
replacement interceptor constructed using open cut and rock tunneling. Phase III involved
over 8,000 LF of S4" diameter interceptor, whereby 80% is being installed using rock
tunneling, while the rest is open -cut. Designed a variety of sanitary and combined
connection sewers ranging from 12" to 24".
• City of Indianapolis — Pogue's Run Sewer Separation: Developed a SWMM collection
system modeling that supported the design including the hydraulic modeling of
sustainable components such as bioswales and a water quality basin. Designed collection
system consisting of approximately 15,000 feet of pipe ranging from 12" to S4".
• City of Indianapolis - Fall Creek Siphon Repair: Assisted with developing a hydraulic model
(XPSWMM) and designing a low flow dry weather pump station and high flow wet weather
24" siphon (installed using mid -sized horizontal directional drilling) which replaced an aged
gravity connection.
• Chesterfield Sanitary Sewer Separation Project. Construction inspection of sanitary sewer
separation project containing the entire combined portion of the Town of Chesterfield.
Work included construction of new sanitary sewers, drainage inlets, and a lift station.
Indiana Water
Environment Plymouth, Chesterfield, Waynetown, Jackson County RSD - Lift Station Designs: Designed
Association (IWEA) numerous lift stations in these example communities.
EXHIBIT B - Page 28 of 39
Andrew Robarge, P.E.
EDUCATION:
B.S. Civil Engineering Project Engineer
Minor in
Environmental RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE (Continued)
Engineering
Trine University, 2007
REGISTRATION:
Plymouth Long Term Control Plan — Phase II: Construction inspection of large diameter
Indiana Professional
RCP used as offline CSO system storage and interceptor enlargement in key locations.
Engineer
Project constructed two storage systems consisting of 60" diameter RCP with a total
No. 11100674
storage volume of 275,000 gallons.
HYDRAULIC
• Town of Osgood - WWTP Improvements: Design of treatment plant expansion including a
SOFTWARE &
0.5 MG Above Ground Storage Tank.
ENGINEERING
WORKSHOPS:
. City of Fort Wayne - Master Plan Modeling Optimization Study: Assisting with
Optimizer WCS
optimization modeling associated with future improvement options at the wet weather
XPSWMM
storage facilities and the separate and combined sewer system, including the 3RPORT
SWMM5
deep bedrock tunnel, using SWMMS and Optimizer WCS.
MIKE URBAN
. City of Fort Wayne - Southwest Area Modeling Study: Implemented real time control
Visual Hydraulics
measures and pumping solutions to optimize hydraulic performance in the GS and Junk
US EPA Initial
Ditch Interceptors using SWMM5.
Distribution System
• Richmond Sanitary District - LTCP & UAA Modeling: Analyzed field work and assisted with
Evaluation: Planning
and Implementing
the development of a hydraulic model (XPSWMM) of the City's collection system and
developed alternative recommendations.
Optimizer Training
XPSWMM Training
• Richmond Sanitary District - WWTP Modeling: Performed / analyzed field surveying and
PSMJ Project
assisted with the development of a hydraulic model of the City's WWTP. Identified
Management
hydraulic bottlenecks and assessed the hydraulic capacities of major processes and
Bootcamp
proposed capital improvements.
MEMBERSHIPS: City of Indianapolis — Pogue's Run Sewer Separation: Analyzed field work and assisted
American Water with the development of a XPSWMM collection system modeling that supported the
Works Association design including the hydraulic modeling of sustainable components such as bioswales and
(AWWA) a water quality basin.
Water Environment
Federation (WEF) City of Terre Haute Sanitary - Sewer Master Plan. Analyzed field work, sewer system
Indiana Water connectivity, and performed growth projections, planning and preliminary sizing of the
Environment entire separate sanitary portion of the Terre Haute wastewater collection system.
Association (IWEA) New Haven, Montpelier, Elwood, Decatur, Bluffton & Nappanee - LTCP Modeling:
Performed / analyzed field work and assisted with the development of the hydraulic
models (XPSWMM) of the collection systems. Analyzed collection system connectivity,
alternative analyses, and designed capital improvements to assist these communities with
the requirements of their LTCPs and/or UAAs.
EXHIBIT B - Page 29 of 39
EDUCATION:
M.S. Environmental
Science, Water
Resources
Concentration
Indiana University,
2005
Brady M. Dryer
Environmental Compliance Manager
EXPERIENCE & EXPERTISE
Brady brings many years of education and practical experience in addressing and
solving environmental issues. In his previous capacity with the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM) Office of Water Quality (OWQ), Brady reviewed and
approved Combined Sewer Overflow Long Term Control Plans, Combined Sewer Overflow
Operational Plans and Use Attainability Analyses. Working in the Office of Water Quality,
Brady also acquired a vast understanding of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
and Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permits that he continually applies on a case by
case basis for Commonwealth's clients.
Through his years of experience at Commonwealth, Brady has expanded his skill set to include
the following regulatory technical areas:
B.S. Environmental IDEM Office of Land Quality Land Application
Management
• Indiana University, Industrial Pretreatment Program Compliance Assistance
2002 e Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Permitting
MEMBERSHIPS: Industrial Stormwater (Rule 6) Permitting and Compliance
Indiana Water a Indiana Department of Natural Resource Environmental and Floodway Permitting
Environment Programs
Association . IDEM 401 Water Quality Certification
Indiana Rural Water . United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland programs
Association
• Drinking Water Regulations
American Water
Works Association Brady has and continues to contribute to State environmental rule -making initiatives and
implementation such as antidegradation, nutrient water quality standards and operator work
Water Environment groups.
Federation
To enhance his abilities to serve Commonwealth's clients, Brady currently serves as the Chair
Indiana Industrial on the Indiana Water Environment Association (IWEA) Government Affairs Committee (GAC)
Operators and a member of the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) Environmental
Association Business Committee.
Brady's skill set is not only limited to environmental policy and regulations, he also
compliments the engineering staff through assisting with our client's planning studies and
funding agency coordination.
EXHIBIT B - Page 30 of 39
EDUCATION:
Associates Degree
in Science
Vincennes
University,
Vincennes, IN
REGISTRATION:
Indiana Registered
Land Surveyor
#LS20800120
MEMBERSHIPS:
Indiana Society of
Professional Land
Surveyors
Jason Sanford, PLS
Land Surveyor
EXPERIENCE & EXPERTISE
With many years of experience as a Professional Land Surveyor and Mapper, Jason is
responsible for managing all land surveying activities and staffing, ensuring best practices are
followed and quality assurance goals are obtained. Jason has a thorough knowledge of
principles, practices and procedures of ALTA surveys, topographic surveys, boundary surveys,
legal descriptions and easement preparation. Jason's experience includes performing ALTA/
ACSM land title surveys, boundary surveys, topographic surveys, flow metering, smoke testing,
elevation certificates, hydraulic and sewer modeling, construction inspection, and construction
layout. He has vast experience with survey equipment including GPS, total stations, robotic
total stations, data collectors, smoke machines and flow meters.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Jason has worked on the following projects while at Commonwealth Engineers:
• Berne, IN - Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements
• Crown Point, IN - Sewer Separation and Infiltration / Inflow Reduction
• Culver, IN - Sanitary Sewer Treatment Plant and Interceptor Rehabilitation, Drainage Study
• Fishers, IN - Hague & Allison Road Lift Stations Evaluations
• Indianapolis, IN - Pleasant Run Deep Tunnel Advanced Facility Plan
• Indianapolis, IN - 86th and Washington Streets Septic Tank Removal
• Indianapolis, IN - Pogue's Run Sewer Separation and Drainage
• Indianapolis, IN - Small Diameter Sanitary/Combined Sewer Rehabilitation
• Jonesboro, IN - Wastewater Collection System Improvements
• Kennard, IN - Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements / Sewer Collection System
Rehab
• Lapel, IN - Waterworks Improvements
• Lowell, IN - High Rate Wet Weather Treatment
• Oolitic, IN - Sanitary Sewer Treatment Plant and Interceptor Rehabilitation
• Orange County, IN - Waterway Debris Removal
• Orleans, IN - Wastewater Collection & Treatment Rehabilitation
• Osgood, IN - Storm Sewer Rehabilitation / Wastewater Treatment Plant Rehabilitation
• Nappanee, IN - CSO Elimination / Wet Weather Treatment
• New Haven, IN - Sanitary Sewer Study / Modeling
• Nineveh, IN - Camp Atterbury Military Camp Sewer Infiltration / Inflow Reduction
• Pierceton, IN - Pierceton Elementary School Site Design / Building Relocation
• Plymouth, IN - Water Treatment Plant Improvements
• Prince's Lake, IN - Wastewater Collection & Treatment Rehabilitation
• Richmond, IN - East Side Interceptor Project Phase II
• Speedway, IN - GIS Mapping
EXHIBIT B - Paize 31 of 39
r&SME
MATTHEW C. DESJARDINS, PE
SENIOR PROACT ENGINEER
1- (734)637-0061 0 desjardins@sme-usa.com
• Geotechnical and Design Services
• Shallow and Deep Foundations
• Earth Retention Systems
• Retaining Wall Design
BACKGROUND
Matt, a Senior Project Engineer with 20 years of experience, provides geo-civil and
geotechnical design services. He is responsible for designing and preparing plans and
specifications for various types of earth retention systems, including segmental -block
known as mechanically stabilized earth (MSE), natural stone, auger cast -in -place
(ACIP), soldier -pile and lagging (SP&L), and steel sheet pile retaining walls. Matt also
undertakes both shallow and deep foundation design. He designs and prepares design
plans and specifications for specialized geotechnical systems such as soil grouting,
underpinning and shoring, as well as dewatering systems. Matt also provides project
management expertise in the area of more traditional geotechnical engineering topics.
RELATED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Lead designer for several earth retention systems required to protect existing structures
and surrounding properties and allow for construction of Detroit Water and Sewerage
Department (DWSD) Combined Sewer Overflow Projects Nos. 2, 6 and 8. Design and
implementation of both a river and a road crossing was required. Responsible for global
stability analyses; lateral earth pressure and surcharge load calculations; soil stress
distribution modeling; bending moment, stiffness, and deflection analyses for steel
beams, braces and walers, and providing a construction sequencing plan to transition
from a temporary to a permanent/final condition. Also responsible for analyzing ground
bearing pressures generated by proposed crane loading and provide recommendations
as required to prevent collapse/damage to existing improvements.
Performed slope stability analyses, and subsequently developed repair plans for
existing slope stability issues for numerous projects within Michigan and northwest
Ohio. Also, performed global stability analyses of temporary slopes required to
construct proposed new improvements, including evaluating options and developing
designs for stabilizing temporary slopes to accept construction traffic and/or
concentrated construction loading. Representative projects include:
• Euclid WWTP Improvements —Euclid, Ohio
• West Pine River Road — Midland, Michigan
• West River Road — Sanford, Michigan
• University of Michigan — University Hospital — Ann Arbor, Michigan
EXHIBIT B - Page 32 of 39
e&S M E RELATED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Developed scope of work and subsequent design of earth retention, underpinning and
shoring systems for numerous projects ranging from approximately $50,000 to
$5,000,000 in valuation. Engineer responsible for managing SME designs from early
conceptual (design development) stages through the issuance of final construction
documents Representative projects include:
• V&M Star Steel Expansion —Youngstown, Ohio
• Oakland University, P-32 Parking Structure — Rochester, Michigan
• University of Notre Dame — South Bend, Indiana
• University of Michigan, North Quad Residential and Academic Complex — Ann
Arbor, Michigan
Extensive experience designing deep earth retention systems with multiple levels of
internal bracing for large industrial and civil projects, particularly in soft ground or where
stability concerns exist. Representative projects include:
• Marathon Oil Heavy Oil Project — Detroit, Michigan
• Dearborn CSO Contracts Nos. 2, 6 and 8 —Dearborn, Michigan
• Severstal Steel 2007 Cold Mill Modernization — Dearborn, Michigan
Experienced in the design of both shallow and deep foundation systems (drilled piers,
H-piles, timber piles), use of in -situ testing methods (i.e., vane -shear and pressuremeter
testing), specialty underpinning methods (i.e., mini -piles and chemical grouting), ground
improvement methods and reinforced slopes.
Experienced in developing scope of service and managing geotechnical evaluations,
including formulating project scope, conducting technical analyses, and preparing
written reports and plans. Completed geotechnical evaluations for numerous
commercial, industrial, educational, healthcare and residential projects throughout
southeast Michigan and northwest Ohio. Projects ranged in estimated construction cost
from approximately $150,000 to $220 million in valuation.
Experienced in performing forensic evaluations of distressed structures and devising
repairs and/or provide recommendations for repair consistent with the Client's
expectations, budget and tolerance of risk.
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Engineering in Mining Engineering, Laurentian University
Master of Engineering in Civil Engineering, Lawrence Technological University
REGISTRATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS
Professional Engineer — Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Iowa
Professional Engineer — Puerto Rico (currently inactive)
AFFILIATIONS
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)
Chi Epsilon — National Civil Engineering Honor Society
EXHIBIT B - Page 33 of 39
e&SME
JOEL W. RINKEL, PE
SENIOR CONSULTANT
1- (734) 260-0441 u rinkel@sme-usa.com
• Geotechnical Engineering
• Earth Retention/Underpinning Engineering
• Pavement Engineering
• Dewatering Engineering
• Forensic Evaluations/Expert Witness
BACKGROUND
Joel provides geotechnical engineering, construction materials services, pavement
engineering, geo-civil design services, shoring design services, forensics evaluations
for below -grade structures, and expert witness testimony. He is responsible for project
and client management, including preparation of geotechnical reports, and lead
designer for earth retention systems, dewatering systems, reinforced slopes, special
ground improvement techniques and underpinning systems. Joel serves as Owner's
representative for assessing subsurface conditions and their impact on the design and
performance of subgrade-supported structures. He has been with SME for 24 years and
has served as project manager for over 1,500 geo-civil design, geotechnical, pavement
and construction materials services projects.
RELATED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Project manager and lead consultant for evaluating slope stability, dewatering, earth
retention, and subgrade stabilization for a CSO Expansion project in Washington,
Indiana. Responsible for analyzing 40-foot tall slopes exposed to surface water runoff
and groundwater seepage, preparing design details and recommendations for earth
retention, preparing recommendations for dewatering and subgrade stabilization using
lime -based additives
Project manager and lead consultant for temporary and permanent dewatering
analyses at various CSO projects in Noblesville and Indianapolis, Indiana; Akron
and Columbus, Ohio; and in Lower Michigan. Dewatering analyses are based on
using gravity and vacuum -assisted (pumping) methods. Evaluate permeability, particle
size, porosity, storativity, drawdown, ground subsidence (after dewatering) and
pressure head of water -bearing soil strata. Estimate flow rates and prepare dewatering
plans and recommendations for pumping rates up to 1 MGD. Also, prepare slurry wall
plans and details to cut-off groundwater from entering excavations, and analyze stability
of slopes impacted by slurry walls.
Lead Geo-Civil designer/consultant for over 100 earth retention systems (up to 70 feet
tall) or specialty underpinning systems (up to 30 feet tall) for construction sites in the
public and private sectors, some of which include projects for University of Notre
Dame, Michigan Department of Transportation, Eastern Michigan University,
University of Michigan, Michigan State University, and Central Michigan
University. Earth retention and underpinning systems include auger -cast piles,
boulders/ledge rock, cast -in -place concrete, masonry block, micropiles, mechanically
stabilized earth (MSE) for both soft -face and hard -face systems, sheet piling, shotcrete
and soil nails, segmental concrete units, and soldier piles with wood lagging. Design
methodologies based on Allowable Stress Design (ASD) and Load Resistance and
Factor Design (LRFD).
EXHIBIT B - Page 34 of 39
r&S M E RELATED PROJECT EXPERIENCE CONT.
Responsible for design of plans and details, specification preparation, reviewing
submittals and design alternates, preparing cost estimates, responding to RFIs,
contractor pre -bid and post -bid meetings, performing pre -condition and post -condition
assessments, preparing building monitoring programs and installing/recording
monitoring devices and preparing as-builts and punchlist/project closeout documents.
Project Manager and Designer for underpinning the existing Clements Library at the
University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The project involved constructing a
partial basement underneath the existing three story structure. Underpinning systems
consisted of mini -piles, segmental concrete, tiebacks and steel bracing that were
preloaded to maintain strict control on building movement during construction. Actual
building movement (after completion) was recorded at less than 1/8 of an inch. No
building cracking or distress was observed.
Owner's representative for earth retention and underpinning project at the University
of Notre Dame near South Bend, Indiana. Used design expertise to advocate for the
Owner (and the project) by preparing biddable and buildable design documents,
reviewing alternates, and aligning project expectations to meet and exceed time and
budget expectations.
A tanker fire destroyed the recently reconstructed Nine Mile Road Bridge over 1-75 in
Hazel Park, Michigan in 2009. The repair and reconstruction of the bridge was designed
and constructed on an accelerated schedule and completed in seven months. Provided
geotechnical consultation and management for the project, which included construction
of pile support foundations while maintaining traffic on 1-75. Provided geotechnical
recommendations and design for foundations, geo-foam, earth retention, and slope
stability for construction of the bridge abutments, embankments and piers based on the
Load Resistance and Factor Design (LRFD) methodology.
Project Manager for resident engineering services related to a $25 million pavement
and site grading improvement project at Henry Ford Comnxinity College in Dearborn,
Michigan. Responsible for evaluating slope and subgrade stability, soil improvement
techniques using lime -treatment, and testing of new pavement surfaces.
EDUCATION
B.S., Civil Engineering, Michigan Technological University
M.S., Civil Engineering, Wayne State University
REGISTRATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS
Professional Engineer —Michigan
EXHIBIT B - Page 35 of 39
SECTION 5
Fee Tabulation
City of Richmond, Indiana
West Side Interceptor Improvements Planning Study
May 5,1017
EXHIBIT B - Page 36 of 39
:7h
Fee Tabulation
The following is a summary of the proposed fee. The next several pages contain present billing rates and a detailed
fee breakdown.
• Workshops & Project Management
(Tasks 1 in Detailed Fee Breakdown)
$
27,178 (Lump Sum)
• Existing Data Review, Surveying, & Smoke Testing
(Tasks 2 in Detailed Fee Breakdown)
$
75,626 (Hourly)
• Data Analysis, XPSWMM, & Hydraulic Alternative Analyses
(Tasks 3, 4 & 5.1 in Detailed Fee Breakdown)
$
63,523 (Lump Sum)
• Geotechnical Assessment and Alternative Analyses
(Tasks 5.2 in Detailed Fee Breakdown)
$
15,210 (Lump Sum)
• Summary Report (PER)
(Tasks 6 in Detailed Fee Breakdown)
$
12,622 (Lump Sum)
Subtotal: $ 194,159
Lump Sum - Clarifications
• Engineer may alter the distribution of compensation between individual tasks noted herein to be consistent with services
actually rendered, but shall not exceed the total Lump Sum amount unless approved in writing by the Owner.
• The Lump Sum includes compensation for Engineer's services and services of Engineer's Consultants, if any. Appropriate
amounts have been incorporated in the Lump Sum to account for labor, overhead, profit, and Reimbursable Expenses.
• The portion of the Lump Sum amount billed for Engineer's services will be based upon Engineer's estimate of the percentage
of the total services actually completed during the billing period.
Standard Hourly Rates - Clarifications
• Engineer may alter the distribution of compensation between individual tasks of the work noted herein to be consistent with
services actually rendered, but shall not exceed the total estimated compensation amount unless approved in writing by
Owner.
• The total estimated compensation for Engineer's services included in the breakdown by tasks incorporates all labor, overhead,
profit, Reimbursable Expenses and Engineer's Consultants' charges.
• The amounts billed for Engineer's services will be based on the cumulative hours charged to the Project during the billing
period by each class of Engineer's employees times Standard Hourly Rates for each applicable billing class, plus Reimbursable
Expenses and Engineer's Consultants' charges. Standard Hourly Rates are subject to change on July 1 of each year.
EXHIBIT B - Page 37 of 39
STANDARD HOURLY RATES & REIMBURSEABLE EXPENSES SCHEDULE
COMMONWEALTH ENGINEERS, INC.
STANDARD HOURLY RATES AND REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES SCHEDULE
July 1, 2016 - June 30, 2017
Billing Class
Rate Per Hour
Billing Class
Rate Per Hour
Principal III
$
88.02
Environmental Compliance Manager
$
39.40
Principal II
$
80.76
Compliance Specialist
$
20.00
Principal
$
73.82
Resident Project Representative IV
$
34.53
Project Manager IV
$
73.06
Resident Project Representative III
$
30.46
Project Manager III
$
68.35
Resident Project Representative II
$
27.49
Project Manager 11
$
55.74
Resident Project Representative 1
$
24.51
Project Manager 1
$
50.18
Clerical III
$
27.55
Senior Electrical Engineer
$
65.57
Clerical II
$
22.52
Clerical
$
16.82
Project Engineer IV
$
56.76
Project Engineer I II
$
45.48
Reproduction Processor
$
21.00
Project Engineer 11
$
42.80
Project Engineer 1
$
39.74
Trainee
$
15.91
Engineering Intern III
$
36.40
CADD Specialist IV
$
34.58
Engineering Intern II
$
30.68
CADD Specialist III
$
31.40
Engineering Intern 1
$
29.09
CADD Specialist II
$
26.85
CADD Specialist 1
$
21.51
Designer IV
$
43.27
Designer III
$
35.70
IT Manager
$
44.57
Designer 11
$
34.22
IT Tech
$
24.00
Designer 1
$
29.34
Multimedia Coordinator
$
38.25
Surveyor $ 30.52
Grants Manager $ 42.94 Field Technician $ 22.06
In order to arrive at the total billing rate, the above direct payroll rates shall be multiplied by factors of 40%
and 96.4286%to account for payroll and general overhead costs respectively. In addition, a 15% profit level
is then added to arrive at total labor costs. This is a total multiplier factor of 3.1625 times direct payroll rates.
Reimbursable Expenses
1. Travel: Starts at the office and shall be at the then approved rate by the U.S. Internal Revenue
Service, plus 15% profit.
2. Subsistence and Lodging: Actual Cost, plus 15% profit.
3. Express Charges and Postage, other than first class mail: Actual Cost, plus 15% profit.
4. Paper Prints: $0.75 per square foot, plus 15% profit.
5. Special Tests and Services of Special Consultants (not used without specific written consent of
Owner): Actual Costs, plus 15% profit.
It is agreed that the Owner will make payment of each invoice presented by Commonwealth within thirty (30)
days from the date of the invoice. Payments received after this time shall be subject to an interest charge of
1 % per month.
EXHIBIT B - Page 38 of 39
COMMOAMEALTH-
ENGINEERS, INC.
TASKIHOUR SUMMARY
EMPLOYEE NAM]
TASK
TASK 1 - WORKSHOPS & PROJECT MANAGEMENT
1.1 Kick -Off Workshop
1.2 Cal Review and Fut Growth & Brainstorming Workshop
1.3 Alternatives & Draft Report Workshop
1.4 Meeting Notes
-1.5 P_rojec_t Management
-Task --------------------------------- 1 Sub -total
TASK 2 - EXISTING DATA REVIEW, SURVEYING, & FIELD W
2.1 Review Existing Data
2.2 Collect and Review Field Survey
2.3 Smoke Testing Notification
2.4 Smoke Testing Field Work
_2.5 Smok_e Testing Tech Memo ----------------------
Task 2 Sub -total
TASK 3 - FLOW, LEVEL, AND RAINFALL METERING
3.1 Review Metering Data
- ------3----------------------------------------------
Task Sub -total
TASK 4 -EXISTING CONDITIONS HYDRAULIC MODEL
4.1 Create Physical Model of Subbasin
4.2 Process Metering Data
4.3 Convert Metering Data to SWMM Format
4.4 Dry Weather Calibration
4.5 Wet Weather Calibration
4.6 Field Checks
4.7 Assess Existing Conditions Hydraulic Performance
-Task 4 Sub -total � --------------------------------
TASK 5 - HYDRAULIC & GEOTECH ALTERNATIVE ANALYSE;
5.1 Hydraulic Model Alternative Analyses & Tech Memo
5.2 Geotechnical Analyses & Tech Memo
Task 5 Sub -total
TASK 6 - SUMMARY REPORT
6.1 Draft Summary Report
6.1 Draft _Summary Report
-Task6Sub-total-----------------
GRAND TOTAL
ENGINEERI!
PROJECT NA
ESTIMATE DAI
PROJECT MAN
RATE YEAR Who change on July 1, 2017)
START DATE:
DURATION (MC
DIRECT LABOF
SUB -CONSULT
REIMBURSABL
Principal Field Total
Ill Technician Hours
Janneck
Total
Cost
w. Multiplier
Direct
Labor
Sub-
Consultant
Expenses
SME
32
$1,681
$250
$5,567
32
$1,681
$250
$5,567
32
$1,681
$250
$5,567
12
$579
$1,832
_______
40
$2,734
$8,646
0
0
1481
$8,357
$0
$750
$27,178
16
$911
$2,880
240
500
$13,233
$2,500
$44,349
36
$1,183
$450
$4,193
144
$4,830
$2,000
$17,274
----------
60
$2,192
$6,931
0
240
756
$22,348
$0
$4,950
$75,626
20
$614
$1,941
0
0
20
$614
$0
$0
$1,941
60
$2,366
$7,481
22
$705
$2,228
22
$705
$2,228
55
$2,024
$6,400
100
$4,709
$14,893
10
20
$526
$100
$1,763
--------10
_3_0
----- 309
$1,405
--- ---- 8
$12,4
---------
----- -_--
100
$4,443
--- $39----
162
$7,003
$22,146
0
32
$1,821
$8,000
$250
$15,210
0
194
$8,824
$8,000
$250
$37,355
73
$2,751
$8,699
29
$1,240
$3,922
0
0
0
250
10211
15291
$3,991
$56,5-721
$0
$8,000
$0
$6,050
$12,622
$194,159