053-19 - Terraphase Engineering - Robinson Noble - ContractCITY OF PORT ORCHARD PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS Agreement is made effective as of the loth day of September 2019, by and between the
City of Port Orchard, a municipal corporation, organized under the laws of the State of Washington,
whose address is:
CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON (hereinafter the "CITY")
216 Prospect Street
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
Contact: Mayor Robert Putaansuu Phone: 360.876.4407 Fax: 360.895.9029
And Robinson and Noble, Inc., a corporation, organized under the laws of the State of
Washington, doing business at:
ROBINSON NOBLE, INC. (hereinafter the "CONSULTANT")
2105 South C Street
Tacoma, WA 98402
Contact: Joseph E. Becker, LHG Phone: 253.475.7711 Email: JBecker@robinson-noble.com
Principal Hydrogeologist
for personal services in connection with the following Project:
2019-2020 ESSB 6091 Foster Pilot Project Services
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Services by Consultant.
A. The Consultant shall perform the services described in the Scope of Work attached to this
Agreement as Exhibit "A thru D." The services performed by the Consultant shall not exceed the Scope of
Work without prior written authorization from the City.
B. The City may from time to time require changes or modifications in the Scope of Work.
Such changes, including any decrease or increase in the amount of compensation, shall be agreed to by the
parties and incorporated in written amendments to the Agreement.
2. Schedule of Work.
A. The Consultant shall perform the services described in the Scope of Work in accordance
with the tasks identified within Exhibit "A thru D" and the terms of this Agreement. If delays beyond the
Consultant's reasonable control occur, the parties will negotiate in good faith to determine whether an
extension is appropriate.
B. The Consultant is authorized to proceed with services upon receipt of a written Notice to
Proceed.
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc
Contract No. C053-19
l,'.\ENGINESRING\W ATER\W ell #13\2019 - 2020 Well 013 Project\AdminTonsultant Selection Well # 13\Water Rights_ Foster\RobNob 2019-2020\PSA_RN 2019-2020 Foster (with SEC
edits) dom Rev 7/18/2019
1 of 10
3. Terms. This Agreement shall commence on AugWC2p 2019 ("Commencement Date") and shall
terminate December 31, 2020 unless extended of terminated in writing as provided herein, The
City reserves the right to offer two (2) one-year extensions prior to contract expiration to
retain the selected company's services.
4. Compensation.
❑ LUMP SUM. Compensation for these services shall be a Lump Sum of
❑1C TIME AND MATERIALS NOT TO EXCEED, Compensation for these services shall not exceed
32$4,900 without written authorization and will be based on the list of billing rates and
reimbursable expenses attached hereto as Exhibit "A thru E."
❑ TIME AND MATERIALS. Compensation for these services shall be on a time and materials basis
according to the list of billing rates and reimbursable expenses attached hereto as Exhibit " "
❑ OTHER. _
5. Payment.
A. The Consultant shall maintain time and expense records and provide them to the City
monthly after services have been performed, along with monthly invoices in a format acceptable to the City
for work performed to the date of the invoice.
B. All invoices shall be paid by City warrant within thirty (30) days of receipt of a proper
invoice. If the City objects to all or any portion of any invoice, it shall so notify the Consultant of the same
within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt and shall pay that portion of the invoice not in dispute, and
the parties shall immediately make every effort to settle the disputed portion,
C. The Consultant shall keep cost records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement available
for inspection by City representatives for three (3) years after final payment unless a longer period is
required by a third -party agreement. Copies shall be made available on request.
D. On the effective date of this Agreement (or shortly thereafter), the Consultant shall comply
with all federal and state laws applicable to independent contractors, including, but not limited to, the
maintenance of a separate set of books and records that reflect all items of income and expenses of the
Consultant's business, pursuant to Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 51.08.195, as required by law, to
show that the services performed by the Consultant under this Agreement shall not give rise to an employer -
employee relationship between the parties, which is subject to Title 51 RCW, Industrial Insurance.
E. If the services rendered do not meet the requirements of the Agreement, the Consultant will
correct or modify the work to comply with the Agreement. The City may withhold payment for such work
until the work meets the requirements of the Agreement.
6. Discrimination and Compliance with Laws
A. The Consultant agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for
employment or any other person in the performance of this Agreement because of race, creed, color,
national origin, marital status, sex, age, disability, or other circumstance prohibited by federal, state, or
local law or ordinance, except for a bona fide occupational qualification.
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc.
Contract No, C05349
U.IENGPIEERING\WATFAIWni] Hl]1201 S - 2020 Well Nll Prof etOMminTonsultent Selealon Well Rl JMater Right.—PorteraoteNob 2019-20201P SA_RN 2019-2020 Post.,(wilh SEC
edits) do" Rev 7/l a/20 t 9
2of10
B. Even though the Consultant is an independent contractor with the authority to control and
direct the performance and details of the work authorized under this Agreement, the work must meet the
approval of the City and shall be subject to the City's general right of inspection to secure the satisfactory
completion thereof. The Consultant agrees to comply with all federal, state and municipal laws, rules and
regulations that are now effective or become applicable within the term(s) of this Agreement to the
Consultant's business, equipment and personnel engaged in operations covered by this Agreement or
accruing out of the performance of such operations.
C. The Consultant shall obtain a City of Port Orchard business license prior to commencing
work pursuant to a written Notice to Proceed.
D. Violation of this Paragraph 6 shall be a material breach of this Agreement and grounds for
cancellation, termination, or suspension of the Agreement by the City, in whole or in part, and may result
in ineligibility for further work for the City.
7. Relationship of Parties. The parties intend that an independent contractor -client relationship
will be created by this Agreement. As the Consultant is customarily engaged in an independently
established trade which encompasses the specific service provided to the City hereunder, no agent,
employee, representative or sub -consultant of the Consultant shall be or shall be deemed to be the
employee, agent, representative or sub -consultant of the City. In the performance of the work, the
Consultant is an independent contractor with the ability to control and direct the performance and details
of the work, the City being interested only in the results obtained under this Agreement. None of the
benefits provided by the City to its employees, including but not limited to compensation, insurance, and
unemployment insurance, are available from the City to the employees, agents, representatives or sub -
consultants of the Consultant. The Consultant will be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for
the acts of its agents, employees, representatives and sub -consultants during the performance of this
Agreement. The City may, during the term of this Agreement, engage other independent contractors to
perform the same or similar work that the Consultant performs hereunder.
8. Suspension and Termination of Agreement
A. Termination without cause. This Agreement may be terminated by the City at any time for
public convenience, for the Consultant's insolvency or bankruptcy, or the Consultant's assignment for the
benefit of creditors.
B. Termination with cause. This Agreement may be terminated upon the default of the
Consultant and the failure of the Consultant to cure such default within a reasonable time after receiving
written notice of the default.
C. Rights Upon Termination
I . With or Without Cause. Upon termination for any reason, all finished or unfinished
documents, reports, or other material or work of the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall
be submitted to the City, and the Consultant shall be entitled to just and equitable compensation for
any satisfactory work completed prior to the date of termination, not to exceed the total
compensation set forth herein. The Consultant shall not be entitled to any reallocation of cost,
profit or overhead. The Consultant shall not in any event be entitled to anticipated profit on work
not performed because of such termination. The Consultant shall use its best efforts to minimize
the compensation payable under this Agreement in the event of such termination. Upon
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc.
Contract No. C053-19
U1ENGINEFUNGIWATER\Welt 913\2018 .2020 Well 413 Project\Admin\Consultant Selection Well N13\Water Rights FosteAlkobNob 2019-2020TSA RN 2019-2020 Foster (with SEC
edits)docu Rev 7/18/2019
3of10
termination, the City may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or
otherwise.
2. Default. If the Agreement is terminated for default, the Consultant shall not be
entitled to receive any further payments under the Agreement until all work called for has been
fully performed. Any extra cost or damage to the City resulting from such default(s) shall be
deducted from any money due or coming due to the Consultant. The Consultant shall bear any extra
expenses incurred by the City in completing the work, including all increased costs for completing
the work, and all damage sustained, or which may be sustained, by the City by reason of such
default.
D. Suspension. The City may suspend this Agreement, at its sole discretion. Any
reimbursement for expenses incurred due to the suspension shall be limited to the Consultant's reasonable
expenses, and shall be subject to verification. The Consultant shall resume performance of services under
this Agreement without delay when the suspension period ends.
E. Notice of Termination or Suspension. If delivered to the Consultant in person, termination
shall be effective immediately upon the Consultant's receipt of the City's written notice or such date as
stated in the City's notice of termination, whichever is later. Notice of suspension shall be given to the
Consultant in writing upon one week's advance notice to the Consultant. Such notice shall indicate the
anticipated period of suspension. Notice may also be delivered to the Consultant at the address set forth in
Section 15 herein.
9. Standard of Care. The Consultant represents and warrants that it has the requisite training, skill
and experience necessary to provide the services under this Agreement and is appropriately accredited and
licensed by all applicable agencies and governmental entities. Services provided by the Consultant under
this Agreement will be performed in a manner consistent with that degree of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by members of the same profession currently practicing in similar circumstances.
10. Ownership of Work Product.
A. All data, materials, reports, memoranda, and other documents developed under this
Agreement whether finished or not shall become the property of the City, shall be forwarded to the City at
its request and may be used by the City as it sees fit. Upon termination of this Agreement pursuant to
paragraph 8 above, all finished or unfinished documents, reports, or other material or work of the Consultant
pursuant to this Agreement shall be submitted to City. Any reuse or modification of such documents,
reports or other material or work of the Consultant for purposes other than those intended by the Consultant
in its scope of services under this Agreement shall be at the City's risk.
B. All written information submitted by the City to the Consultant in connection with the
services performed by the Consultant under this Agreement will be safeguarded by the Consultant to at
least the same extent as the Consultant safeguards like information relating to its own business. If such
information is publicly available or is already in the Consultant's possession or known to it, or is rightfully
obtained by the Consultant from third parties, the Consultant shall bear no responsibility for its disclosure,
inadvertent or otherwise. The Consultant is permitted to disclose any such information only to the extent
required by law, subpoena or other court order.
11. Work Performed at the Consultant's Risk. The Consultant shall take all precautions necessary
and shall be responsible for the safety of its employees, agents and sub -consultants in the performance of
the work hereunder, and shall utilize all protection necessary for that purpose. All work shall be done at
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc.
Contract No. C053-19
U:\ENGINEERING\W AYF.R\W ell Al M2018 - 2020 Well #13 ProjecOAd min\Consultsnl Selection Well # 13\Water Rights_ Faster\RobNob 2019-2020\PSA RN 2019-2020 Foster (with SEC
edits) docx Rev 7/18/2019
4of10
the Consultant's own risk, and the Consultant shall be responsible for any loss of or damage to materials,
tools, or other articles used or held by the Consultant for use in connection with the work.
12. Indemnification. The Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials,
employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits,
including all legal costs and attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from the negligent acts, errors or
omissions of the Consultant in performance of this Agreement, except for injuries or damages caused by
the sole negligence of the City.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then,
in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused
by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials,
employees, agents and volunteers, the Consultant's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the
Consultant's negligence. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement.
IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE
INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE CONSULTANT'S WAIVER OF
IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES
OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE
MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
13. Insurance. The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement,
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in
connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or
employees.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Consultant shall obtain insurance of the types described below:
1. Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non -owned, hired and leased
vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01
or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy
shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage.
2. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG
00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage and shall cover
liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors and personal injury
and advertising injury. The City shall be named by endorsement as an additional
insured under the Consultant's Commercial General Liability insurance policy with
respect to the work performed for the City.
3. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the
State of Washington.
4. Professional Liability insurance appropriate to the Consultant's profession,
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc.
Contract No. C053-19
UAENGINEER[NG1WA7'PR\Well #13\2018 - 2020 Well #13 ProjecdAdmin\Consultant SeleetiOn Well 0131W&ter Rights_ Foster\RohNoh 2019-2020\PSA_RN 2019-2020 Foster (with SEC
edits) doex Rev 7/18/2019
5of10
B. Minimum Amounts of Insurance
Consultant shall maintain the following insurance limits:
1. Automobile Liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily
injury and property damage of $1,000,000 per accident.
2. Commercial General Liabili1y insurance shall be written with limits no less than
$1,000,000 each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate.
3. Workers' Compensation Employer's Liability each accident $1,000,000, Employer's
Liability Disease each employee $1,000,000, and Employer's Liability Disease —
Policy Limit $1,000,000.
4. Professional Liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than $1,000,000
per claim and $1,000,000 policy aggregate limit.
C. Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions for
Automobile Liability, Professional Liability and Commercial General Liability insurance:
1. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respect the City.
Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall
be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
2. The Consultant's insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be
cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
The City will not waive its right to subrogation against the Consultant. The
Consultant's insurance shall be endorsed acknowledging that the City will not waive
their right to subrogation. The Consultant's insurance shall be endorsed to waive the
right of subrogation against the City, or any self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage
maintained by the City.
4. If any coverage is written on a "claims made" basis, then a minimum of a three (3) year
extended reporting period shall be included with the claims made policy, and proof of
this extended reporting period provided to the City.
D. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII.
E. Verification of Coverage
The Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the amendatory
endorsements, including but not necessarily limited to the additional insured endorsement,
evidencing the insurance requirements of the Consultant before commencement of the work.
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc.
Contract No. C053-19
U.\ENGINEERING\WATERMall 413t2018 - 2020 Well AD Project\AdminTonsultent Selection Well k13\Water Rights_ Fostet\RohNoh 2019-2020tPSA_RN 2019-2020 Foster (with SEC
edits) do" Rev 7/19/2019
6of10
14. Assigning or Subcontracting. The Consultant shall not assign, transfer, subcontract or encumber
any rights, duties, or interests accruing from this Agreement without the express prior written consent of
the City, which consent may be withheld in the sole discretion of the City.
15. Notice. Any notices required to be given by the City to the Consultant or by the Consultant to the City
shall be in writing and delivered to the parties at the following addresses:
Robert Putaansuu
Mayor
216 Prospect Street
Port Orchard, WA 98366
Phone: 360.876.4407
Fax: 360,895.9029
CONSULTANT
Robinson Noble, Inc.
2105 South C Street
Tacoma, WA 98402
Phone: 253.475.7711
Fax: 253.472.5846
16. Resolution of Disputes and Governing Law.
A. Should any dispute, misunderstanding or conflict arise as to the terms and conditions
contained in this Agreement, the matter shall first be referred to the Mayor, who shall determine the term
or provision's true intent or meaning. The Mayor shall also decide all questions which may arise between
the parties relative to the actual services provided or to the sufficiency of the performance hereunder.
B. If any dispute arises between the City and the Consultant under any of the provisions of
this Agreement which cannot be resolved by the Mayor's determination in a reasonable time, or if the
Consultant does not agree with the Mayor's decision on a disputed matter, jurisdiction of any resulting
litigation shall be filed in Kitsap County Superior Court, Kitsap County, Washington.
C. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of Washington. In any suit or action instituted to enforce any right granted in this Agreement, the
substantially prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs, disbursements, and reasonable attorneys'
fees from the other party.
17. General Provisions.
A. Non -waiver of Breach. The failure of either party to insist upon strict performance of any
of the covenants and agreements contained herein, or to exercise any option herein contained in one or more
instances, shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of said covenants, agreements, or options,
and the same shall be in full force and effect.
B. Modification. No waiver, alteration, modification of any of the provisions of this
Agreement shall be binding unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the City and
the Consultant.
C. Severabilit♦,. The provisions of this Agreement are declared to be severable. If any
provision of this Agreement is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or
unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of
any other provision.
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc.
Contract No. C053-19
UAENGINEERINOVATEMWe1 I #13\2019 - 2020 Well #13 ProjectWdminTonsultant Selection Well 417.Waler Rights_ FosterVtobNob 2019-20201PSA RN 2019-2020 Foster (with SEC
edits) door Rev 7/18/2019
7of10
D. Entire Agreement. The written provisions of this Agreement, together with any Exhibits
attached hereto, shall supersede all prior verbal statements of any officer or other representative of the City,
and such statements shall not be effective or be construed as entering into or forming a part of or altering
in any manner whatsoever, the Agreement or the Agreement documents. The entire agreement between
the parties with respect to the subject matter hereunder is contained in this Agreement and the Exhibits
attached hereto, which may or may not have been dated prior to the execution of this Agreement. All of
the above documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement and form the Agreement document as fully
as if the same were set forth herein. Should any language in any of the Exhibits to this Agreement conflict
with any language contained in this Agreement, then this Agreement shall prevail.
18. Title VI
The City of Port Orchard, in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 252,
42 U.S.C. 2000d to 2000d-4 and Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Department of Transportation
subtitle A, Office of the Secretary, Part 21, nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs of the
Department of Transportation issued pursuant to such Act, must affirmatively insure that its contracts
comply with these regulations.
Therefore, during the performance of this Agreement, the Consultant, for itself, its assignees, and
successors in interest agrees as follows.
1. Compliance with Regulations: The Consultant will comply with the Acts and the Regulations
relative to Nondiscrimination in Federally -assisted programs of the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), as they may be amended from time to
time, which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this Agreement.
2. Nondiscrimination: The Consultant, with regard to the work performed by it during this
Agreement, will not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex, age,
disability, income -level, or LEP in the selection and retention of subcontractors, including
procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The Consultant will not participate directly or
indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by the Acts and the Regulations as set forth in
Appendix A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, including employment
practices when this Agreement covers any activity, project, or program set forth in Appendix B of
49 C.F.R. part 21.
Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment: In all
solicitations, either by competitive bidding, or negotiation made by the Consultant for work to be
performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials, or leases of equipment, each
potential subcontractor or supplier will be notified by the Consultant of the Consultant's
obligations under this Agreement and the Acts and the Regulations relative to Non-discrimination
on the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, income -level, or LEP.
4. Information and Reports: The Consultant will provide all information and reports required by
the Acts, the Regulations and directives issued pursuant thereto and will permit access to its
books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by
the City or the FHWA to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Acts, Regulations, and
instructions. Where any information required of the Consultant is in the exclusive possession of
another who fails or refuses to furnish the information, the Consultant will so certify to the City
or the FHWA, as appropriate, and will set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc.
Contract No, C053-I9
U:\ENGFNEERING\WATER\Well 413\2018 - 2020 Well kU ProjecEAdmin\Consultant Selection Well !tU\Water Rights_ Foster\RobNob 2019-2020\PSA—RN 2019-2020 Foster (with SEC
edits) docx Rev 7/18/2019
8of10
Sanctions for Noncompliance: In the event of the Consultant's noncompliance with the Non-
discrimination provisions of this Agreement, the City will impose such contract sanctions as it or
the FHWA may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to:
1. withholding payments to the Consultant under the Agreement until the Consultant
complies; and/or
2, cancelling, terminating, or suspending the Agreement, in whole or in part.
6. Incorporation of Provisions: The Consultant will include the provisions of paragraphs one
through six in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment,
unless exempt by the Acts, the Regulations and directives issued pursuant thereto. The Consultant
will take action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the City or the FHWA may
direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance. Provided,
that if the Consultant becomes involved in, or is threatened with litigation by a subcontractor, or
supplier because of such direction, the Consultant may request the City to enter into any litigation
to protect the interests of the City. In addition, the Consultant may request the United States to
enter into the litigation to protect the interests of the United States.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year set forth
above.
CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, CONSULTANT
WASHTNGTON Joseph E �ckefly signed by Joseph
Becker Date: 2019.08.1416:27:59
By; By. -07 00•
Robert Putaa uu, Mayor Joseph E. Becker
Name:
ATTia
UT N ATE: President
itle:
By:
m rson, MMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM. -
By:
S Cates, City Attorney
RT
`\`OFtpu.tllllltrt� '%
�rrt'� . C,O QT •�,�,
_ SEAL -
'''�C1 1N1ASN�,��``��.
Cii)p qt Port Orchard and Robinson Noble. Inc
Contract No. C053-19
1JAENGMEERINGIWATERM0 #13\201R - 2020 Well 413 ProjeaWdminTonsultent Selection Well All Mater Rights_ Foster\RobNob 2019-20201PSA_RN 2019-2020 F05ter (wish SEC
edits) do- Rev ?/I nO19
9of10
APPENDIX A
During the performance of this Agreement, the Consultant, for itself, its assignees, and successors in
interest agrees to comply with the following non-discrimination statutes and authorities; including but not
limited to:
Pertinent Non -Discrimination Authorities:
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U S.C. § 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252), (prohibits
discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin); and 49 C.F.R. Part 21.
• The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, (42
U.S.C. § 4601), (prohibits unfair treatment of persons displaced or whose property has been
acquired because of Federal or Federal -aid programs and projects);
• Federal -Aid Highway Act of 1973, (23 U.S.C. § 324 et seq.), (prohibits discrimination on the
basis of sex);
• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq.), as amended, (prohibits
discrimination on the basis of disability); and 49 C.F.R. Part 27;
• The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq.), (prohibits
discrimination on the basis of age);
• Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, (49 USC§ 471, Section 4 7123), as amended,
(prohibits discrimination based on race, creed, color, national origin, or sex);
• The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, (PL 100-209), (Broadened the scope, coverage and
applicability of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 and
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, by expanding the definition of the terms "programs
or activities" to include all of the programs or activities of the Federal -aid recipients, sub -
recipients and contractors, whether such programs or activities are Federally funded or not);
• Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibit discrimination on the basis
of disability in the operation of public entities, public and private transportation systems, places
of public accommodation, and certain testing entities (42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12189) as
implemented by Department of Transportation regulations at 49 C.P.R. parts 37 and 38;
• The Federal Aviation Administration's Non-discrimination statute (49 U.S.C. § 47123) (prohibits
discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, and sex);
• Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low -Income Populations, which ensures discrimination against minority
populations by discouraging programs, policies, and activities with disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low-income populations;
• Executive Order 13166, Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English
Proficiency, and resulting agency guidance, national origin discrimination includes discrimination
because of limited English proficiency (LEP). To ensure compliance with Title VI, you must take
reasonable steps to -ensure that LEP persons have meaningful access to your programs (70 Fed.
Reg. at 74087 to 74100);
• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended, which prohibits you from
discriminating because of sex in education programs or activities (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq).
City of Port Orchard and Robinson Noble, Inc.
Contract No. C053-19
U:\ENGINEERING\WATER\Well 013\2018 - 2020 Well #13 Project\Admin\Consullam Selection Well #13\Water Rights_ Foster\RobNob 2019-2020\PSA_RN 2019-2020 Foster (with SEC
edits) do" Rev 7/18/2019
10 of 10
Exhibit A *0
ROBINSON
NOBLE
August 13, 2019
Mr. Mark Dorsey
Public Works Director
City of Port Orchard
216 Prospect Street
Port Orchard, WA 98366
Subject: Robinson Noble scope of work and cost estimate for ESSB 6091 'Foster' Pilot Project
Streamflow Augmentation/Restoration, Net Ecological Benefits & Hydrogeological Services
Dear Mark,
In February, the City of Port Orchard contracted with Robinson Noble to provide hydrogeologic
and water rights consulting in relation to the City's Foster pilot project. In July, with changes in
the project, the City decided to send out a competitive request for qualifications to complete
the work. Earlier today, you emailed me to say that the Robinson Noble team was selected to
continue the Foster pilot work and asked for a new scope of work. We appreciate the City's
confidence in our work.
With this letter, I am providing a new scope of work and cost estimate. It is based on the
previous scope, as well as new information that has come to light since the previous scope
was written. This new information includes the final guidance from Ecology for the net
ecological benefit analysis (dated July 31) and the latest modeling. As you directed, this scope
includes, as noted below, the work previously completed.
I've broken down the scope into two general tasks: 1) completing the modeling and providing a
hydrogeologic impact report; and 2) providing CRA services, including writing the draft Report
of Examinations. Subtasks that are complete or partially complete as of the time of writing this
scope are noted with comments on status. If a subtask description does not have a status
comment, work has yet to begin.
Task 1: Modeling and Hydrogeologic Impact Report
Subtask 1A: Initial Model Modifications and Error Estimates
As a requirement of the preliminary permits for Wells 12 and 13, Ecology requires the USGS
Kitsap groundwater model be used to analyze potential impacts of withdrawals from the wells.
Prior using the model, slight modifications were needed, such as inserting Wells 12 and 13 and
changing the number of stress periods. In addition, an estimate of model error was necessary
so that modeled changes in streamflow can be addressed with respect to model error. The
estimate of model error was also used to estimate the area of potential influence of the new
wells, i.e. the area in which stream impacts may rise above the level of model error.
Status: this work is complete
Subtask 1 B: Steady-state Modeling
2105 South C Street 17625 1301 Avenue NE, Suite 102
Tacoma, Washington 98402 www.robinson-nobla.com Woodinville, Washington 98072
P: 253.475.7711 1 F: 253.472.5846 P:425.488.0599 1 F:425.488.233D
August 13, 2019
Mr. Mark Dorsey
Robinson Noble Foster Pilot Project Services Scope of Work
Page 2
As a requirement of the preliminary permits, the USGS Kitsap groundwater flow model needs
to be used to conduct steady-state modeling simulations of the proposed new water
withdrawals under water right applications G1-28476A (Well 12) and G1-28162A (Well 12) as
well as the change applications related to G1-*04166C, GI-2458gC, G1-26119P, G1-24437P,
G1-2644P, and G1-26454P which make Well 13 as an additional point of withdrawal for Wells 6,
7, and 10; make Well 11 an additional point of withdrawal for McCormick Wells 1, 2, 3, and 4B;
and make Well 12 an additional point of withdrawal for Well 11 and McCormick Wells 1, 2, 3,
and 413.
Baseline model simulations will first be run using currently allowed water rights withdrawals.
Then predictive simulations will be run with the newly propose withdrawals under the above
listed applications. The results of the two sets of runs will be compared to determine projected
stream flow impairments. Separate model runs will be conducted for each of the applications
as well as combinations of all the applications.
Status: the majority of this work is complete, and it likely will be all complete by the effective
date of the new contract (unless Ecology requests additional model modifications, see optional
subtask 1 E below). The simulations had to be re -run when the projected future water demand
was revised in July.
Subtask 1C: Stream Record Analysis.
In order to prioritize timing of potential mitigation, as well as examine the relationship between
critical periods of natural streamflow and any projected impacts to stream flow, an analysis of
the hydrographs of the potentially impacted streams needs to be made. We will examine and
analyze existing stream gage records available from Kitsap PUD and the USGS for each of the
potentially impacted streams where such data is available. Results will be provided in the Task
1 report.
Status: the majority of this work is complete, and it likely will be all complete by the effective
date of the new contract.
Subtask 1D: Transient Modeling.
Transient modeling will allow timing of impacts to be defined. However, based on the
provisions of the preliminary permits for Wells 12 and 13, transient modeling is to occur
following consultation with Ecology and the Tribes. In a previous meeting with Ecology, the City
requested Ecology concurrence on conducting transient modeling. Ecology's concurrence was
given.
Transient modeling will look at several combinations of the above listed water rights
applications and compare results to baseline simulations under currently authorized rights.
Various simulations will be run including looking at the effects of instantaneously changing to
the new water rights amounts and phasing in the new rights over a 50-year period based upon
projected water demands provided by the City's engineer, BHC. Because of the extremely long
run times for the USGS Kitsap model, most the transient simulations will use year -long stress
periods. However, to investigate the effect of seasonal changes in production, several
August 13, 2019
Mr. Mark Dorsey
Robinson Noble Foster Pilot Project Services Scope of Work
Page 3
simulations will be made with month -long stress periods. (A single model run of 50 years with
month -long stress periods takes about four full days.)
Results will be analyzed to look to total projected impairments of streams as well the timing of
the impairments, both annually and seasonally. Results will be presented to the Tribe and
Ecology for comment.
Status: the majority of this work is complete. It is likely the analysis of results will be
completed by the effective date of the new contract. The simulations had to be re -run with the
revision to the water demand in July. The presentation of results to the Tribe and Ecology is not
yet scheduled.
Subtask 1E: (Optional) Refinement/Modification of the Model
According to the preliminary permits, Ecology may require refinement or modification of the
model (based on the model results) followed by re -running some or all of the previous model
simulations. We will not know whether this will be required until after results are presented to
the Tribe and Ecology. There are two main concerns that may prompt modification of the
model. The first is that the deep aquifer at Well 12 location is poorly represented in the model.
In the model, the aquifer at Well 12 is essentially absent (the modeled Well 12 produces from a
low permeability zone'). The second is the depth of Well 13. The deep aquifer at the Well 13
site in the model is at about 800 feet below sea level. Drilling of Well 13 found the aquifer
considerably deeper, at about -1100 to -1500 below sea level (this zone is partially in a confining
unit and partially in bedrock within the model).
If required, the model will be modified to address these conditions and the simulations re -run
as necessary. In this case, an additional meeting with the Tribe and Ecology presenting the
revised model results will likely be required.
Subtask 1 F: Hydrogeology and Impact Report.
The deliverable for Task 1 will be a technical memorandum describing the hydrogeology of the
area, the stream hydrographic analysis, the modeling procedures and results, and a summary of
projected impacts to area streams. The report will be written so that it is easily incorporated
into a later draft Reports of Examination for the various water right applications.
Subtask 1G: Project Management, Meetings, and other Assistance.
Task 1 includes a number of meetings, including meetings between the team members, two
meetings with the Tribe and Ecology (either together or separately), and attendance Foster
legislative committee meetings as directed. It also includes additional general project
management time. Other non-scoped technical assistance will be provided as requested by the
City.
Status: several team member meeting have occurred, as well as one meeting with Ecology
and one informal meeting with the Tribe.
' This situation results in the simulated Well 12 producing a very large amount of drawdown in the
model. Of course, since Well 12 has yet to be drilled, the lack of a deep aquifer at the site may be real.
August 13, 2019
Mr. Mark Dorsey
Robinson Noble Foster Pilot Project Services Scope of Work
Page 4
Task 1 Schedule
The complexity of the model simulations coupled with changing guidance from Ecology has
significantly changed the scheduling of Task 1. Currently, Task 1 can likely be completed by the
end of September provided model modification is not required. If the model needs to be
modified and various simulations re -run, task 1 could potentially run to the end of November.
Task 2: Water Right Processing
This scope of work assumes the applications will be processed through a streamlined Cost
Reimbursement Agreement (CRA) with Robinson Noble acting as the consultant conducting all
work, including drafting the Reports of Examination (ROEs), Matt Rakow with Ecology
previously indicated a streamlined CRA will be allowed. The work is divided into six subtasks.
Subtask 2A: Tier 1 Avoidance Analysis.
The ROEs will need to address the three tiers of analysis described in pilot project legislation.
The first tier is avoidance. For this subtask, Robinson Noble will work with Tom Pors to address
avoidance of impairments in the ROEs. Tom Pors has indicated, based on Ecology guidance,
that the tier 1 analysis will be rather simple.
Subtask 2B: Tier 2 Minimization Analysis.
This work will involve two set types of mitigation: stream augmentation and replacement water
rights. Work on the stream augmentation portion of this subtask will be completed by Robinson
Noble in conjunction with our subconsultant, Carollo Engineers (Carollo). Carollo's scope of
work is summarized here but the full body of their scope is included as part of this scope and is
attached as Exhibit A. For the replacement water rights portion of this subtask, work will be
completed by Robinson Noble in conjunction with our subconsuitant, WestWater Research
(WestWater). WestWater's scope of work is summarized here but the full body of their scope
is included as part of this scope and is attached as Exhibit B. Subtask 2B will start with a team
meeting to discuss the results of the impairment analysis and to coordinate subtask
communications and workloads between team members and the City.
Stream augmentation will be proposed for those impacted creeks where it is reasonably
attainable. Currently this includes creeks within the Port Orchard service area (Blackjack, Ross,
Anderson, and Parrish), as well as creeks in within neighboring purveyors service areas where
agreements might be reached to provide augmentation. Specifically, these are Salmonberry
Creek via West Sound Utilities and Gorst Creek (and possibly the Union River) via the City of
Bremerton.
Stream augmentation at Blackjack, Ross, Anderson, and Parrish will use the previous stream
mitigation plan developed for the City in 2006 which provided design concept stream
augmentation on these four creeks provided the sites can handle the (presumed) new larger
flows. Carollo will use the City's hydraulic model to confirm transmission capacities to the sites
Similar conceptual designs will be provided for Salmonberry and Gorst Creeks if agreements
can be worked out with West Sound and the City of Bremerton.
August 13, 2019
Mr. Mark Dorsey
Robinson Noble Foster Pilot Project Services Scope of Work
Page 5
For other impacted creeks, Robinson Noble will provide support for determining that stream
augmentation as being not reasonably attainable. Carollo will assist with definition of
conceptual -level stream augmentation and provide definition of where it is not reasonably
attainable by looking at costs and impediment to extending City service to the more distant
impacted streams.
For creeks where stream augmentation is not reasonably attainable (currently scoped as upper
Blackjack, Clalla, Crescent, Purdy, Burly, Huge/Minter, Rocky, and Coulter Creeks), a search will
be conducted for replacement water rights that potentially could be purchased to mitigate
modeled impacts. The water right search will be accomplished WestWater Research. Based on
our experience in the area, we believe that few if any such water rights will be found. However,
the search needs to be accomplished to satisfy Ecology's tier 2 guidance. Should suitable water
rights be identified by the search, we will attempt to ascertain the owners of said rights and
contact them as to their interest in selling the rights. Negotiating the actual sale of rights to the
City is outside the current scope, More details on the water right search are provided in the
attached scope of work from WestWater.
Subtask 2C: Tier 3 Compensation Analysis.
The third tier is compensation analysis. Work on subtask 2C will be completed by Robinson
Noble in conjunction with our subconsultant, Environmental Science Associates (ESA). ESA's
scope of work is summarized here but the full body of their scope is included as part of this
scope and is attached as Exhibit C.
The compensation analysis will consist of several major facets: developing the compensation
plan, completing the NEB analysis to demonstrate the plan adequately offsets impairments,
and working with stakeholders to get general agreement on the plan and the NEB analysis. We
plan for three meetings with stakeholders.
We assume the development of projects for the tier 3 mitigation will occur from potential
mitigation projects in existing reports and that no new projects will need to be identified. We
also assume no field work will be required for either the selection/development of mitigation
projects or calculations of ecological benefit. ESA will develop an analysis framework with
mitigation projects and preliminary credit/debit calculations which will be shared with the City
and stakeholders and subject to revisions to address comments.
When the framework is agreed upon, ESA will prepare a NEB report following Ecology's final
guidance dated July 31". The report will include an evaluation and description of impacts and
ecological offsets, as well as a matrix that describes all impacts and offsets, summing up the
net benefits in a quantitative or semi -quantitative manner. It will also include a discussion of
financial and other assurances that mitigation will be implemented and remain in place,
monitoring or evaluations plans to ensure lasting benefits, and descriptions of contingency
plans or corrective actions to be taken if goals are not met. We anticipate the City will need to
participate in developing with the assurances and contingency sections. Assistance from the
City may also be required to obtain support from tribal, state and local resource managers.
Subtask 2D: Monitoring, Reporting, Compliance, and Assurance.
August 13, 2019
Mr. Mark Dorsey
Robinson Noble Foster Pilot Project Services Scope of Work
Page 6
This subtask will involve designing monitoring, reporting, compliance, and assurance conditions
for the ROEs. We will work together with Tom Pors, and in consultation with Ecology, to
identify compatible conditions for inclusion as provisions in the ROEs. ESA will provide
monitoring and assurance plans within their subtask 2C report that will be used as input for this
subtask.
Subtask 2E: Draft Reports of Examination.
Robinson Noble will write draft ROEs for the two new and six change applications that are
pending. The results of Task 1 and Subtasks 2A — 2D will be incorporated into the draft ROEs.
We presume that preliminary drafts may be submitted to the Tribe for comment. Following
possible incorporation of Tribal comments, the drafts will be delivered to Ecology. Ecology's
comments will be worked into final drafts for posting on Ecology's website.
Subtask 2F: Project Management, Meetings, and other Assistance.
This scope includes five in -person meetings between Robinson Noble and various team
members as the project progresses, attendance at Foster legislative committee meetings as
requested, and attendance at three meetings with Tribal or other stakeholders. This task also
includes project management following the end of Task 1 and any assistance of Robinson
Noble with other parts of the process not specified in Tasks 1 and 2.
Task 2 Schedule
Task 2 was scheduled to start in June but has been delayed due to the time Task 1 has taken.
Task 2 work will begin following the effective date of the new contract, assumed to be
September 1St. Because of the evolving nature of the Foster program and the uncertainty of
whether subtask 1 E will be required, as well as meetings with and review by the Tribes and
Ecology, the schedule below Is an estimate.
Subtask 2A: Tier 1 Avoidance Analysis
Subtask 2B: Tier 2 Minimization Analysis
Subtask 2C: Tier 3 Compensation Analysis
Subtask 2D: Monitoring, Reporting, etc.
Subtask 2E: Draft Reports of Examination
Subtask 2F: PM, Meetings, Other Assistance
Estimated Cost
September
September - November
September - November
December — January 2020
February— August 2020
September 2019 — August 2020
While this current version of the scope of work is better defined than the version from earlier
this year, it is still expected that the exact nature of the required work may evolve as the
project progresses and with input from the Tribe, WDFW, and Ecology. Therefore, the following
cost estimate is truly an estimate and could be higher or lower depending upon how the project
progresses.
Based on our current understanding of the project and the conditions outlined in this scope, we
estimate the cost of our services for Task 1, as described above, to be $80,500. This includes
August 13, 2019
Mr. Mark Dorsey
Robinson Noble Foster Pilot Project Services Scope of Work
Page 7
$17,500 for optional subtask 1 E and $3,500 for other assistance as request under subtask 1 G.
Our estimate for Task 2, including the services of ESA, Carollo, and WestWater, is estimated at
$294,400. Together, the total estimated cost is $374,900. This estimate is based upon
Robinson Noble's current fee schedule, attached as Exhibit D.
The estimated cost includes work to date. As of today, we have invoiced $41,659 under the
existing contract and have another $3,472 booked against the project but not yet invoiced. It is
likely that we will accrue another $4,000 or $5,000 worth of work prior to the end of the current
contract and the start of the new contract. This projects to approximately $50,000 worth of
work being completed prior to the execution date of the new contract. Consequently, the work
yet -to -be completed under the new contract is estimated at $324,900. Of course, this total
depends on how much work we actually complete prior to the new contract as well as the start
date of the new contract.
I hope this scope of work and cost estimate is adequate for your needs. Please contact us if we
can provide additional information or modify the scope of work to better assist the City. If you
have questions or need additional information, please contact me. Thank you for the
opportunity to continue being of service to the City.
Sincerely,
Robinson Noble`, Inc.
/Osph E, Becker, LHG
Principal Hydrogeologist
Exhibit B
SCOPE OF WORK
ROBINSON NOBLE
PORT ORCHARD STREAMFLOW AUGMENTATION STUDY
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following Scope of Services has been developed to assist the City of Port Orchard (City) with the
identification of conceptual infrastructure needed for stream augmentation. The task will consider using
City water or wholesale water from Group A water systems and identify the water system infrastructure
needed to deliver the water, including pipes, pump station, etc.
PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS
• Carollo Engineers, Inc. will be referred to as "Consultant" in this document.
• The City of Port Orchard and its staff will be referred to as "City" in this document.
• Robinson Noble Inc. will be referred to as "Prime".
• Environmental Sciences Associates will be referred to as "ESA"
• All meetings will be held at the City offices unless specified as a teleconference.
• Draft deliverables will be provided in electronic copy (PDF and/or Microsoft Word) transmitted
via email or secure file transfer.
• Consultant to provide an agenda, meeting materials, and a meeting summary documenting
discussions, action items, and decisions for all facilitated meetings. Meeting summary and
related materials will be transmitted electronically in MS Word and PDF formats via email.
• The Prime and City will print and produce additional copies of all documents as necessary for
their use beyond what will be provided by the Consultant, as stated within this scope of
services.
• Consultant shall not be responsible for warranties, guarantees, fitness for a particular purpose,
breach of fiduciary duty, loss of anticipated profits, or for economic, incidental or consequential
damages to the Prime, City or any third party arising out of breach of contract, termination, or
for professional negligence. Additionally, Consultant shall not be responsible for acts and
decisions of third parties, including governmental agencies, other than Consultant's
subconsultants, that impact project completion and/or success.
DRAFT: 6/ 13/2019 1
The Prime shall furnish Consultant with available studies, reports, and other data pertinent to
Consultant's services; obtain or authorize Consultant to obtain or provide additional reports and
data as required; furnish to Consultant services of others required for the performance of
Consultant's services hereunder, and Consultant shall be entitled to use and rely upon all such
information and services provided by the Prime, City or others in performing Consultant's
services under this Agreement.
• The services to be performed by Consultant are intended solely for the benefit of the Prime or
City. No person or entity not a signatory to this Agreement shall be entitled to rely on
Consultant's performance of its services hereunder, and no right to assert a claim against
Consultant by assignment of indemnity rights or otherwise shall accrue to a third party as a
result of this Agreement or the performance of Consultant's services hereunder.
• The City shall arrange for access to and make all provisions for Consultant to enter upon public
and private property, as required for Consultant to perform services hereunder.
• In providing opinions of cost, financial analyses, economic feasibility projections, and schedules
for potential projects, Consultant has no control over cost or price of labor and material;
unknown or latent conditions of existing equipment or structures that may affect operation and
maintenance costs; competitive bidding procedures and market conditions; time or quality of
performance of third parties; quality, type, management, or direction of operating personnel;
and other economic and operational factors that may materially affect the ultimate project cost
or schedule. Therefore, Consultant makes no warranty that the City's actual project costs,
financial aspects, economic feasibility, or schedules will not vary from Consultant's opinions,
analyses, projections, or estimates.
• Project is anticipated to last four (4) months. It is assumed each Monthly Progress Report
and Invoice requires 3 hours of Project Manager (PM) effort, 1 hour of Quality Manger/PIC,
and 1 hour for Document Processing.
• It is assumed meetings or workshops will be attended by two Consultant Staff: Project
Manager (4 hours) and Professional (6 hours). Document Processing of 1 hour is assumed for
meeting minutes.
• It is assumed teleconferences will be attended by two Consultant Staff: Project
Manager (1.5 hours) and Professional (3 hours). Document Processing of 1 hour is assumed for
meeting minutes.
• It is assumed that each stream augmentation option in Task 200 will require 4 hours of
Professional effort, 2 hours of GIS effort, 1 hour of PM effort, and 15 minutes of Quality
Manager Effort.
• It is assumed that costing each stream augmentation option in Task 300 will require 2 hours of
Professional effort, 1.75 hour of GIS effort, 0.25 hours of PM effort, and 5 minutes of Quality
Manager Effort.
DRAFT: 6/13/2019
Tasks
Task 100 — Project Management
The objective of this task is to track and execute the project in accordance with the schedule, budget,
and quality expectations that are established. This task includes the following project management work
activities:
1. Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices. This subtask includes preparing and submitting the
work -in -progress reports and monthly invoices showing current project scope, budget, and
schedule status and identifying key issues or elements of the project that will need to be
addressed in the proceeding weeks. An electronic version of the monthly progress reports and
invoices will be sent to the Prime for review and approval. Provide regular communication on
project progress to the Prime. Conduct internal coordination as required to manage the project.
2. Kick-off Teleconference. Attend a kick-off meeting with City to establish goals and criteria for
analyses. Discuss available data and tools.
3. Ecology Coordination Meeting. Facilitate a meeting with Ecology Staff to review and obtain
comments on the Stream Augmentation infrastructure methodology. Incorporate comments
into Tasks 200 through 400.
Task 200 — Stream Augmentation Analysis
The objective of this task is to identify infrastructure needed to provide direct stream augmentation
with potable water. The task will consider using City water or wholesale water from Group A water
systems. Infrastructure needed to deliver the water will be identified, including pipes, pump station, etc.
Subtasks include:
1. Stream Augmentation Meeting. Attend a meeting with Prime and City to review the location and
quantity of stream augmentation needed based on data and input provided from the City, the
City's water rights attorney, Prime, and ESA. It is assumed that 15 sites will be considered: four
sites in or directly adjacent to the City Service area and eleven sites outside the City's service
area. It is assumed the City will identify Group A water systems that have sufficient available
supply for stream augmentation outside of the City's service area, including West Sound Utility
District, City of Bremerton, and Washington Water.
2. City Stream Augmentation Verification. Evaluate stream augmentation by the City to up to four
existing sites in or directly adjacent to City's Service Area that have current conceptual designs.
These designs were based on a previously proposed lower augmentation rates. The evaluation
will use the City's hydraulic model to verify the transmission capacity for to the new
augmentation rates. Document any new pressure or velocity deficiencies due to stream
augmentation during the hydraulic modeling from the Maximum Day Demand (MDD) and MDD
plus fire flow scenario for near -term and long-term demand projections. Propose improvements
to mitigate new deficiencies. It is assumed the City will provide a calibrated model and demand
scenarios representing the study conditions and includes the augmentation sites. Review of the
on -site stream augmentation conceptual design is not included in this task.
3. Outside City Service Area Stream Augmentation. Evaluate up to eleven sites outside the current
service area. Two options for stream augmentation: 1. Extend City service to the site and 2.
DRAFT: 6/13/2019
Purchase wholesale supply from nearby Group A. Evaluations will be made using engineering
calculations; the City's hydraulic model will not be used.
a. Extend City Service. Identify a potential option to extend the City water system to up to
eleven stream augmentation sites outside of current service area. Assess the
infrastructure needed to convey supply to the augmentation site, based on engineering
calculation, including booster pump stations and transmission piping.
b. Group A Stream Augmentation. it is assumed that Group A systems identified by the City
with sufficient available supply will only be identified for two stream augmentation
sites. For those two sites, Consultant will identify infrastructure needed to convey
wholesale supplies. It is assumed that the City will provide a meter location, available
supply, minimum pressure, and typical disinfection residual concentrations. Assess the
infrastructure needed to convey supply to the augmentation sites, based on engineering
calculations, including booster pump stations and transmission piping. Identify sites that
cannot be served by Group A system.
4. Transmission Routing Teleconference. Facilitate a teleconference with the Prime and City to
coordinate preferred routes for transmission piping.
5. Stream Augmentation Infrastructure Workshop. Facilitate a workshop with City to review and
comment on the potential infrastructure needed to supply for the 15 potential stream
augmentation sites.
Task 300 —Stream Augmentation Infrastructure Costs
The objective of this task is to estimate the infrastructure costs for stream augmentation sites. Costs will
be calculated based on capital infrastructure and potential connection charges for wholesale water
purchases for up to 17 stream augmentation options identified in Task 200. Subtasks include:
1. Infrastructure Costs. Calculate infrastructure costs for up to 25 stream augmentation options.
Capital costs will be based on planning -level conceptual estimates. Transmission costs will be
based on typical cost per linear foot of water main installation. Connection charges for the
purchase of Group A supply is assumed to be provided by the City.
2. Cost Teleconference. Facilitate a teleconference with the Prime and City to review infrastructure
costs.
3. Selection Workshop. Attend a workshop facilitated by the Prime to review stream augmentation
options.
Task 400 — Documentation
The objective of this task is to document the stream augmentation evaluations in previous tasks.
Subtasks include:
1. Draft Report. Document Tasks in a short report, including stream augmentation locations,
required infrastructure, and costs. Provide a draft Report for Prime review and comment.
2. City Review Draft Report. Incorporate Prime comments into a City Review Draft Report. Submit
Report to City for review and comment.
3. Final Report. Incorporate City comments into a final signed and sealed Report forsubmittal to
Prime.
DRAFT: 6/13/2019
Meeting List:
• Kick-off Teleconference.
• Ecology coordination Meeting.
• Stream Augmentation Meeting.
• Transmission Routing Teleconference.
• Stream Augmentation Infrastructure Workshop.
• Cost Teleconference.
• Selection Workshop.
Deliverable List:
• Meeting Agenda, materials, and summary.
• Draft Report.
• City Review Draft Report.
• Final Report.
DRAFT: 6/13/2019 5
a
W*eslW l e I 805 W Idaho Street #310
Base, l0 83702
(20M8)4in O33ffl-02ca
55
,cwcirch c
To:
Robinson Noble
From:
WestWater Research
Date:
June 10, 2019
Re:
City of Port Orchard
Background and Purpose
West Coast Southwest Rocky Mountain
20522 NE 116" Circle 4747 N 71, Sheet 9412 320E Vine drive #223
Brush Prairie, WA 98606 Phoenix, AZ 85014 Fort Collins, CO 80524
(360) 695-5233 (602) 595-7009 (970) 672-1811
Exhibit C
The City of Port Orchard is attempting to move municipal water supply wells to alternative locations. Hydrologic studies
have shown evidence that doing so may have negative impact on surface water stream flow and senior water right
holders. To reduce these impacts, the city may be required to acquire available water rights to provide in -kind mitigation
for reduced stream flows, New draft legislation affecting water rights may allow other out -of -kind mitigation efforts if
there is evidence no water rights are "reasonably attainable" for in -kind mitigation. This proposal provides a scope of
work and budget to evaluate water rights within certain regions to determine if there are potentially available water
rights for acquisition that would be considered "reasonably attainable".
Scope of Work
Water Rights Desktop Review
Task 1: Review Ecology Water Rights Data
• WestWater will acquire updated versions of Ecology's GWIS geodatabase as well as other
tabular datasets in the WRTS database system. Study area will be determined and delineated
in coordination with client to cover the Blackjack, Olalla, Crescent, Purdy, Burley, Huge/Minter,
Rocky, and Coulter Creek systems.
• WestWater will perform initial selection of diversion data for all water rights. GIS data will be
crosschecked to tabular water rights datasets to ensure that all water rights have been mapped
and no water rights are being missed. Any discrepancies between GIS datasets and tabular
data, if any, will be researched and resolved resulting in a master list of water rights within the
defined geographic area.
• A web based map will be set up to host and maintain data on the ArcGIS online platform to
provide access to original and filtered water rights data, and any other geospatial data utilized
or developed during the process.
• Water rights will initially be filtered down based on water rights status, ownership, size, use type
and other screening criteria as determined by WestWater. All records will be properly noted to
identify reason for exclusion. Any remaining water rights will be reviewed with additional scrutiny
in Task 2.
Port Orchard Water Rights Assessment
Page 2
Task 2: Perform a preliminary validity analysis
• Any water rights identified from the initial selection and review will undergo further analysis. This
will involve an additional screening based on initial mapping of water rights and may include
aerial imagery analysis, document review, and other research as needed.
• Based on the results of the analysis, a list of candidate water rights will be compiled to be further
analyzed in Task 3,
Task 3: Water Right Ownership Research
To determine if identified water rights are potentially available for acquisition, current ownership
will need to be determined in order to contact water right holders Current water right ownership
is not actively maintained by Ecology and requires additional review of water rights place of use
information and county land ownership records.
All existing places of use within Ecology's GIS layers will be utilized and verified against water
right documents to assure accuracy. A preliminary review of GIS layers indicates that there are
a significant number of unmapped water rights within the region. Unmapped places of use may
need to be mapped using water rights application maps and/or legal descriptions on water rights
documents. Due to the large amount of unmapped water rights in the subject area, mapping
place of use could require considerable efforts and may affect budget depending on how many
records require review.
Parcel data maintained by relevant counties will be acquired and overlaid on the place of use
data. Water right ownership is generally appurtenant to landownership. Landowner information
for parcels adjoining the place of use of a water right will be recorded. WestWater anticipates
that multiple landowners may be identified for some water rights due to general legal
descriptions of the water right place of use or quality limitations of legal descriptions provided
on water right certificates. This information will assist in further narrowing the list of candidate
water rights. For example, water rights that have been divided through multiple property sales
often do not represent viable acquisition opportunities.
Task 4: Water Right Field Inspection Analysis
If potential water right acquisition opportunities arise, field inspections for each candidate water
right may be conducted if determined necessary and beneficial to determining if the rights are
reasonably available. Data developed in the ArcGIS online webmap under Task 1 will be utilized
to collect pictures, additional notes, and any other relevant data supporting water rights. The
field inspections provide an opportunity to verify the location of the water rights, ownership
information, as well as determine the current use of the water right.
Task 5: Water Right Owner Outreach
Letters of inquiry may be sent to landowners that fulfil criteria of potential acquisition
opportunities to determine willingness to sell. WestWater will consult with i Port Orchard
and other legal counsel to determine if this task is necessary and the best approach to execute.
www.waterexchange,com
Port Orchard Water Rights Assessment
Page 3
Task 6: Summary report of findings
• A summary report outlining the research process and findings will be developed. Accompanying
maps will be developed to display diversions researched and any identified candidate water
rights. Detailed profile maps of candidate water rights will be identified along with field
observations and photos if applicable.
Project Schedule
Work will be completed within 12 weeks of engagement. At approximately the 4t� week of the project a conference call
will be held to discuss the results of Task 1 and 2 to determine next required steps of project, If candidate water rights
are identified, Task 3 will be completed to further filter the results at approximately week 5. A second conference call
may be required to discuss findings. If determined that field visits are required, Task 4 will be completed at
approximately week 6 followed by Task 5 if water rights are determined to be potentially available for acquisition. A
report will be furnished at the completion of the project.
Task/Week
1 112
3
4
5
6
17
8
Task 1: Review Ecology Water Rights Data
Task 2: Perform a preliminary validity analysis
Task 3: Water Right Ownership Research
Task 4: Water Right Field Inspection Analysis
Task 5. Water Right Owner Outreach
Task 6: Summary report of findings
Project Deliverables
Project deliverables to the following:
• Web map built displaying Points of Diversion information and filtered datasets displaying
analysis results
• Up to 3 conference calls to discuss results and findings
• Summary report discussing methodology and research results
I&
www.wa unge.com
Port Orchard Water Rights Assessment
Page 4
Project Budget
To complete all tasks within the scope it is estimated to cost between $31,300 and $44,240. Depending on the results
of the analysis, field verification and water right owner outreach (Tasks 4 and 5) may not be necessary.
Task 1: Review Ecology Water Rights Data
$12,560
Task 2: Perform a preliminary validity analysis
$7,180
Task 3: Water Right Ownership Research
$6,000
Task 4: Water Right Field Inspection Analysis
$9,360
Task 5: Water Right Owner Outreach
$3,580
Task 6: Summary report of findings
$5,560
Subtotal
$31,300
$12,940
Optional Tasks Subtotal
Grand Totals
$31,300 - $44,240
i&
www.waterexchange.com
5309 Shilshale Avenue NW
Suite 200
1969-2019 Seattle, WA 98107
206.769.9658 phnre
206.789.9684 tax
Exhibit D
Scope of Work
Preparation of Net Ecological Benefit Analysis
For the City of Port Orchard ESSB 6091 Pilot Project
June 4, 2019
Project Understanding
The City of Port Orchard's (City) application for an additional municipal water right has been accepted as a pilot
project for the joint legislative task force on water mitigation formed by the Washington State Legislature in
ESSB 6091. RCW 90.94.090(8) outlines a mitigation sequence that the City, as a pilot project participant, must
follow when creating a mitigation plan to offset impacts from the proposed projects. The mitigation sequence
includes avoidance, minimization, and compensation. As part of the compensation step, "net ecological benefit"
to fish and related aquatic resources are to be provided using in -kind and/or out -of -kind mitigation.
The City has applied for water right changes and new water rights for new Wells 12 and 13. To mitigate for the
water withdrawal effects, the City is planning for both in -kind and out -of -kind mitigation actions. Achieving "net
ecological benefit" necessitates that the anticipated benefits of the mitigation portfolio offset the anticipated
impacts of the project. A scientifically -sound, defensible analysis framework is needed characterize the
anticipated impacts and benefits. In May 2019, Ecology published Draft Final Guidance for Determining Net
Ecological Benefit which provides an overview of the information Ecology will be looking for in such analysis.
This document is out for public comment which will be addressed in a final version. This scope of work is based
on the Draft Final Guidance and may need to be adjusted pending changes included in the final version expected
to be issued in July 2019.
Robinson Noble has been hired by the City to provide hydrogeological and water rights services for the pilot
project. However, they need assistance in performing the required net ecological benefit analysis. This proposed
scope of work is for Environmental Science Associates (ESA) to develop and implement an analysis comparing
the anticipated water withdrawal impacts to the anticipated mitigation benefits. This analysis will document the
extent to which the proposed mitigation portfolio meets the net ecological benefit threshold. Following is ESA's
understanding of the anticipated impacts and mitigation portfolio:
• The City's water rights applications are for the deep sub -sea level aquifer, which will reduce impacts on
Kitsap County streams from existing shallower municipal wells, but which could result in smaller impacts
to a larger geographic area.
• The geographic area of potential effect includes approximately 20 named creek systems in the project
vicinity. Preliminary analysis indicates the largest magnitude of flow depletion is on the order of 0.15
cubic feet per second (110 acre-feet per year).
City of Port Orchard Foster Pilot Project
ESA Scope of Work
June 2019
Scope of Work
Task 1. Stakeholder Meetings
ESA will participate in up to three meetings with project stakeholders to introduce the net ecological benefit
analysis requirements and gain meeting participants' approval of the analysis method being implemented. Up to
two ESA staff will participate in each meeting. ESA will prepare PowerPoint presentations and handouts, as
needed, to support the planned topic for each meeting. Additional discussions with stakeholders to follow up on
specific topics or questions are anticipated.
Assumptions:
• The City or Robinson Noble, with input from ESA, will develop the list of stakeholders and will be
responsible for stakeholder outreach.
• ESA is not responsible for stakeholder meeting logistics. ESA will communicate with meeting organizers
to help set the agenda for net ecological benefit topics.
• Each meeting will be in the vicinity of Port Orchard or Poulsbo and last up to 3 hours in length,
• If stakeholder meetings identify tasks or effort that is beyond the established scope and budget, ESA will
notify the City and Robinson Noble and provide a written amendment to the scope and/or budget. ESA
will undertake such additional work only upon the City's written authorization.
• ESA will prepare summary notes of the net ecological benefit topic of each meeting.
• Up to 24 hours of discussions with stakeholders outside of the meetings are expected to follow up on
specific topics or questions about the mitigation or net ecological benefit analysis.
Deliverables:
• Summary of meeting discussions focusing on net ecological benefit in electronic format.
• PowerPoint presentations and handouts, as needed, to support each meeting.
Task 2. Analysis Framework Development
ESA will review available background materials and develop a structured and transparent analysis framework to
use as the basis for making a net ecological benefit determination. The framework will be developed to meet the
requirements of Ecology's 2019 Draft Final Guidance document. The framework will calculate the anticipated
ecological impacts associated with surface water flow depletions as well as the anticipated ecological benefit
associated with the proposed out -of -kind mitigation. The impacts and benefits are expected to be calculated by
assigning points.
Ecology's 2008 Implementation Plan for the Adoption of Water Resources Management Programs in WRIA 27
(Lewis) and WRIA 28 (Salmon -Washougal) will be introduced to stakeholders as a potential framework to use. It
is anticipated that the overall concept of scoring impacts and benefits will be accepted by the stakeholders, but
that revisions will be necessary. Up to three iterations of the analysis framework will be conducted to test and
refine the scoring system and address comments from stakeholders. The development of iterations will include
review and documentation of scientific literature to support the framework scoring assignments,
City of Port Orchard Foster Pilot Project
ESA Scope of Work
June 2019
Flow depletion inputs to the analysis framework will be provided to ESA. ESA will work with Robinson Noble to
obtain information on the anticipated impacts of the water withdrawals. These inputs are expected to be in
terms of the magnitude of surface water reductions (to nearest 0.1 cubic feet per second) and the length of river
(to nearest 0.1 river mile). The location of the impacts relative to proposed in -kind mitigation (i.e., upstream or
downstream) will also be needed.
Habitat type and quantity inputs will be calculated by ESA using GIS, ESA will work with Robinson Noble to
identify up to six potential habitat mitigation projects from existing reports. ESA will use GIS tools to prepare
conceptual polygons by habitat type in the project area and quantify the area and/or length. The habitat types
may include: side channels, wetlands, and connected floodplains among others. The area calculations may need
to be made under up to two flow scenarios (e.g., late summer low flow and extreme storm event).
Assumptions:
• The development of the mitigation projects and calculation of ecological uplift will be a desktop exercise
and does not include fieldwork or survey.
• No new potential mitigation projects will need to be identified by ESA other than those in existing
reports.
• Framework development discussions with the stakeholders will use the surface water depletion
estimates provided by Robinson Noble.
• Robinson Noble will provide surface water depletion inputs for the framework that indicate the spatial
extent, time duration, and magnitude of water depletion. For example, X miles of 0.1 cubic feet per
second (cfs) depletion over three weeks and Y miles of 0.2 cfs depletion over two weeks.
• Habitat type and quantity inputs will be developed by ESA using information from existing reports. It is
anticipated that assumptions about the project footprint, area of influence, and design features will be
necessary and ESA will document those in the framework
• Up to three iterations of the analysis framework will be conducted to address comments from the City
and stakeholders.
Deliverobles:
• Analysis framework table with preliminary credit and debit calculations.
Task 3. Net Ecological Benefit Analysis Report
ESA will prepare a Net Ecological Benefit Analysis Report per the requirements of Ecology's 2019 Draft Final
Guidance document, The report will describe the methods and results of the analysis framework developed in
Task 2. The analysis will be a structured and transparent ledger or matrix describing all the impacts and offsets.
The documentation of net ecological benefit analysis required in Ecology (2019) includes elements that ESA and
Robinson Noble will need to work together to prepare. Table 1 lists the elements required in Ecology (2019) anc
the responsible company.
City of Port Orchard Foster Pilot Project
ESA Scope of Work
June 2019
Table 1. Net Ecological Benefit Elements and Company Responsibilities
Element
Responsibility
Demonstrate that complete avoidance and minimization of impacts is not
Robinson Noble
reasonably attainable with water offset projects.
ESA
Structure the analysis in the form of a ledger or matrix that describes all
the impacts and offsets in detail and sums up the net benefits in a
quantitative or semi -quantitative manner.
Describe any ecological impacts that are not offset through in -place and
ESA
in -kind replacement of consumptive water use.
Include an evaluation of impacts and offsets based on a detailed
ESA
hydrological analysis, conceptual model, or numerical model.
Document financial and other assurances that the mitigation will be fully
ESA/ Robinson Noble
implemented and remain in place for the full duration of the new water
use (likely in perpetuity).
Include monitoring and evaluation plans that describe or detail
ESA
maintenance needed to ensure lasting benefits.
Include contingency plans or corrective actions to be taken if goals and
ESA/ Robinson Noble
measures are not achieved.
Include information that describes the level of support for the proposed
Robinson Noble/City
mitigation pilot from tribal, state and local resource managers (which
of Port Orchard
may be in the form of letters of support or agreement).
Identify and document scientific sources and methods of analysis
ESA
ESA will prepare a draft report in electronic format. Three rounds of review of the draft report are anticipated.
The first draft will be provided for City review. ESA will address comments and submit a second draft for
stakeholders (tribe(s)) review. ESA will address comments and submit a third draft for Ecology review. ESA will
address comments and electronically submit a final report.
Assumptions:
• City will provide compiled written comments on first draft.
• Robinson Noble or City will provide compiled written comments from stakeholders (tribe(s)) on second
draft.
• Robinson Noble or City will provide compiled written comments from Ecology on third draft.
• Robinson Noble will respond to comments on text prepared by them.
• If the comments require more effort than is included in the established scope and budget, ESA will
notify the City and Robinson Noble and provide a written amendment to the scope and/or budget. ESA
will undertake such additional work only upon the City's written authorization.
Deliverables:
• Three drafts and a final Net Ecological Benefit report will be delivered in electronic format.
4
City of Port Orchard Foster Pilot Project
ESA Scope of Work
June 2019
Task 4. Proiect Management
ESA will conduct project management activities including communication with the City, Thomas Pors, Robinson
Noble (prime consultant), and the ESA project team. In addition, monthly invoices and progress reports will be
prepared.
Assumptions:
• The project is anticipated to last up to 20 months from NTP to project closeout.
Deliverobles:
• Invoices and progress reports.
• Monthly, or more frequent, project updates via email and/or teleconference with the Robinson Noble
project manager.
Budget
The ESA budget for each task is presented in Table 1. The project will be billed on a time and materials, not -to -
exceed basis. The total authorized amount for all tasks is $88,950.00. Surplus budget from completed tasks can
be moved to other tasks.
Table 1. Budget by Task.
Task Budget
Task 1. Stakeholder Meetings$15,410.00
Task 2. Analysis Framework Development Y p $32,000.00
Task 3. Net Ecological Benefit Report $34,250.00
Task 4. Project Management $7,290.00
Total $88,950.00
5
ROBINSON
NOBLE
General Fee Schedule Exhibit_E
January 1, 2019
Professional Positions
Fee per Hour
Principal Engineer, Hydrogeologist or Environmental Scientist
$187
Associate Engineer, Hydrogeologist or Environmental Scientist
$171
Senior Engineer, Hydrogeologist or Environmental Scientist
$146
Senior Project Engineer, Hydrogeologist or Environmental Scientist
$126
Project Engineer, Hydrogeologist or Environmental Scientist
$113
Staff Engineer, Hydrogeologist or Environmental Scientist
$102
Senior Field Staff
$93
Field Staff
$80
Legal Support/Expert Witness Services/Testimony
150% of above rates
Support Positions
Senior GIS/CAD Specialist
$95
Senior Technician
$95
Senior Administrator
$83
GIS/CAD Specialist
$83
Technician
$83
Administrator
$72
Clerical Support
$72
Other Fees and Costs
Subcontracts/ Professional services
15%
Management Fee Outside laboratory services
15%
Construction subcontracts
15%
Other Costs Travel (auto)
$0.64/mile
Travel (other)
Cost +10%
Per diem
Prevailing State rate +10%
Other direct expenses
Cost +10%
Field and laboratory testing/equipment rental
See following pages
This fee schedule is subject to change according to contract or Professional Services Agreement conditions.
Robinson Noble, inc. rates effective January 1, 2019
Hydrogeologic Equipment Rental Schedule
January 1, 2019
Equipment
Unit
Rate
Water Level Transducer and Data Logger
Per day
$25
Field Laptop Computer
Per day
$40
Electric Water Level Sounder(s) 0 to 300 ft
Flat fee per project
$30
over 300 ft
Flat fee per project
$60
DC Submersible Purge Pump (Single Stage)
Per pump
List price + 10%
DC Submersible Purge Pump (Dual Stage)
Per pump
List price + 10%
Double -Ring Infiltrometer
Per day
$50
Schonstedt Gradient Magnetometer
Per day
$75
Geonics EM-61 Metal Detector
Per day
$500
Downhole Gamma/Resistivity/Temperature
Per day
$500
Logging Equipment
Downhole Caliper Logging Equipment
Per day
$350
Draw Works
Per day
$600
Mechanical Sieve Sample Equipment
Flat fee per well
$50
2-inch Gasoline -powered Centrifugal Pump
Per day
$100
(includes hoses)
2-inch Submersible Pump + Controller
Per day
$180
Generator & Fuel
Per day
$70
Hand Auger
Per day
$50
Survey Gear (laser level & rod)
Per day
$85
FlowTracker Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter
Stream Gaging Equipment
Per day
$200
pH Field Meter
Per day
$25
GPS
Per day
$20
Other Equipment
Negotiated
Negotiated
i
Digital Camera
Per day
$10
nis tee scnedule is subject to change according to contract or Professional Services Agreement conditions.
Robinson Noble, Inc. rates effective January 1, 2079
Environmental Equipment Rental and Consumable Schedule
January
1, 2019
Equipment
Unit
Rate
Water Level Transducer and Data Logger
Per day
$50
Field Laptop Computer
Per day
$40
Electronic Water Level Sounder
Per day
$30
Electronic Interface Probe
Per day
$75
DC Operated Peristaltic Pump
Per day
$45
2-inch Gasoline -powered Centrifugal Pump
Per day
(includes hoses)
2-inch Submersible Pump + Controller
Per day
Generator & Fuel
Per day
Low -Flow Bladder Pump
Per day
Photoionization Detector
Per day
Combustible Gas Indicator
Per day
GPS
Per day
Water Quality Meter
Per day
Teflon Water Bailer
Per day
Soil Sampling Equipment (manual)
Per day
Mechanical Sieve Sample Equipment
Flat fee per project
Survey Gear (laser level & rod)
Per day
pH Field Meter (soils)
Per day
Soil Vapor Extraction System
Per month
Digital Camera
Per day
Hand Auger
Per day
Other Equipment
Negotiated
Consumable Items:
Polyethylene Purge/Sampling Tubing
Each 10 feet
DC Submersible Purge Pump (Single stage)
Per pump
DC Submersible Purge Pump (Dual Stage)
Per pump
Silicone Peristaltic Pump Head Tubing
Each foot
Bladders for Low -Flow Bladder Pump
Each
Water Sample Bailer
Each
Bailer Rope/String Each 10 feet
$100
$350
$70
$175
$75
$65
$20
$200
$30
$25
$50
$85
$50
$750
$10
$50
Negotiated
$2.50
List price + 10%
List price + 10%
$4.00
$5.00
$10
$1.00
Personal Protection Equipment Per day per person $50
This fee schedule is subject to change according to contract or Professional Services Agreement conditions.
Robinson Noble, Inc rates effective January 1, 2073
Geotechnical Field and Laboratory Testing Schedule
January1, 2019
Test --— -- � Fee_
Portable Nuclear Density Gauge Per Hour $5.00
Slope Inclinometer Per day $250
Direct Shear Point $200
YMoisture -Density Relationship Curves: Each 1 pt $120
Sieve Analyses (Gradations -Wet Sieve)
Bulk Sieve (if gravelly or >101b)
200 Wash
Hydrometer Analysis
Falling Head Permeability
Atterberg Limits
(Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit)
Moisture Content
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
Po 1 nts
Resistivity 4-point Gauge
Hand Auger
Consolidation Test Incremental Loading
(9 loads, 0.125 TSF to 32 TSF, 4 unloads)
Shelby Tube Extrusion/Sample Description
Single -Ring Infiltrometer
Each
Multiple pts $225
Each
$150
Add
$70
Each
$80
Each
$175
Each
$165
Each
$220
Each
$12
Day
$225
Each
$20
Day
$300
Per day
$50
$550
$50/each additional load
$40
Per day
$50
This fee schedule is subject to change according to contract or Professional Services Agreement conditions.
Robinson Noble, Inc. rates effective January 1, 2019