Loading...
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