HomeMy WebLinkAbout32546 / 83-10�
July 21, 1983
(CARRIED
PURPOSE:
INITIATED BY:
ll 10 RESOLUTION
LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN )
SUPPLEMENTAL TASK ORDER N0. 2 AGREEMENT WITH
HOWARD NEEDLES TAMNNIEN & BERGENDOFF
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Oshkosh that the
proper City officials are hereby authorized and directed to enter into Supple-
mental Task Order No. 2 to the agreement between the City of Oshkosh and Howard
Needles Tammen & Bergendoff dated Sune 20, 1979, regarding consultant services
in connection with improvements to the sewerage system.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that money for this purpose is appropriated
from Account No. 919-191, Sewer Utility Construction in Progress.
- 11 -
SUBMITTED BY
:FPrOVED
�-
�
�
�
�
I..J
��
�
�
�^
('
�
RESOLUTION # 10
SUPPLEMENTAL TASK ORDER N0. 2
to the
Agreement Dated Be[ween
the Lity of Oshkosh
' in the State of Wisconsin
and
Howard Needles Tammen b Bergendoff
for
Consultant Services in Connection With
lmprovements to the Sewerage System
2-1.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of this supplemental task order is to
establish scope, schedule and payment provisions for
Step l, the facilities planning phase of the program
as more specificaily described herein.
2-2.0 SCOPE
2-2.1 The scope of the work to be performed under this
supplemental task order shall be in accordance with
the general provisions described in the Agreement
between the City of Oshkosh and Howard Needles Tammen
� Bergendoff, dated June 20, 1979, Article 2.1.2 and
2.1.2,1,
�
�
�-2.2
� Z-?.2.7
� .O1
"racilities plannin phase. Upon receipt of the City's
written au[horization to proceed with the facitities
planning phase the Consultant shall:
"�repare a��acitities pianning study and report in
ac:cordance with the EPA Step 1 regulations, and as
further defined in supplemental task orders."
The Consultant wili:
Pre�are facitities plan
administration and Coordination
£sLablish an engineering team to prepare [he facilities
� +�lan. Mee4 at periodic intervals with Gity officials
to discuss problems and progress. Furnish written
monthly prograss reports.
� .�2
�,�
�,
faci.lities Plan Introduction
�teview alt pertinent existing background information
including planning studies�, sewer maps, photographs
and soils information. �
� - 11A - '
RESOLUTIOPd # 10
Prepare a general description of the planning area.
Describe the purpose and scope of Che Facilities
� Plan. Briefly summarize previous planning and sewer
, evaluation reports prepared iar [he planning area.
Describe the approprSate background legislatior�,
intergovernmental relationships, and lJisconsin DNR
proceedings related to the facilities planning effort.
Describe the relationship of the Facitity P1an Co Lhe
East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission
208 Regional Plan.
03 Effluent Limitations
Describe existing effluent limitations, including
WPDES permits. Discuss reiationship of limitations
to project. Discuss impact of project on ability
to meet effluent limitations.
0�+ Current Situation
Describe and define the sewer sysYem conYributory
to the South Side interceptor and to the State Street
pump station, as shown on AtYachment "A".
Review the fiydraulic and operationa� characteristics
� of the City sewer system as it relates to the planning
area to determine existing capacity available. Prepare a
sewer map of the portion of the system in the planning
area. Perform an infiltration and inftow analysis
of sewers tributary to the South Side interceptor and
to the State Street pumping.station. This analysis'
shall be of sufficient scope and detail as to permit
a concurrent SSES, Step 2 design program. Details
of the 161 analysis are contained in the Subconsultant's
proposed c.ontract, Attachment "B".
Conduct an environmental inventory along potential
interceptor routes and river crossing locations which
includes climate, [opography, soils and geology,
hydrology, surface and 9roundwater, flood plaiRS, wei-
►ands and coastal zone. Gather data as required to
describe and discuss specific conditions in the planning
area.
Collec[ and interpret available data on population
statistics, social characteristics, past trends,
density and distribution for the years 1950, 1960,
1970 and 1978• Utilize ECWRPC population forecasts
for the years 1980, 1990, and 2000 for the Lity service
area.
Gollect and interpret available data on the existing
and projected economic climate including income,
ri
— 11B —
0
[ '
05
RESOLUTION # 10
employment, and dis[ribution of the commercial, in-
dustrial, and agricultural sector within the planning
area.
Collect and interpret available da[a and information
on existing land use patterns, controls and projec[ed
land use trends within the planning area as related
to the proposed program.
Lollect and
on recorded
the planning
data.
interpret available data and i�formation
historic and archaeological sites within
area. Prepare and summarize the tollected
Document the organiaa[ional contexY, struc[ure, and
authority of the City and the cities, villages, town-
ships, san7tary districts, or private enterprises
responsible for collection, conveyance, and treatment
of wastewaters within Yhe pianning area. Review and
describe the intergovernmental relationships at the
Federal, State, regional and loeal level for planning,
design, construction, financing, and operation of the
facilities within the planning area.
Conduct an aerial photography and mapping survey
control program along the south interceptor corridor.
Future Situation
Establish a planning period to be used considering the
useful life of wastewater collection and conveyance
components, the planning periods previously used by
the City a,nd East Lentral Wisconsin RegionaT Planning
Commission (ECWRPC), and the effects of staged con-
struction throughout the Program.
From the Existing Situation Inventory, review and
describe the past and present land use trends in the
planning area and the effect of past and present sewer
extension limitations on land use; review and summarize
current population estimates and forecasts within the
planning area; review and describe the probable impact
of the Program on population and economic grcwth and
forecasts; identify and define potential growth con-
straints on the planning area such as land use controls,
current and future land use trends, air quality plans,
and land development controls; and finalize and de-
scribe the population forecasts for the planning area
within the previously selected planning period.
Identify acreage of residential, industrial, com-
mercial, and institutional land usage, based on land
/1 use projections. Forecast populations expec[ed in the
�' tributary area of the South Side interceptor and State
3
- llC -
RESOLUTION # 10
Street pumping station, and the effect of these popu-
lations on [he area. Develop criteria, and project
� wastewater flows and loadings expected from the plan-
ning area. Identify the future hydraulic and operational
' characteristics of the system as it relates to the
• projected flows from the planning area. Discuss the
future environmental situation.
06 Alternatives and Evaluation
Identify the alternatives to be considered for evalua-
tion including no action, sewer rehabilitation, sewer
reinforcement, new interceptor construction, and/or
combina[ions, for each subbasin in the areas shown in
Attachment "A", with the intent being to eliminate
overflows and building flooding to the degree feasible.
Gather subsurface data for the interceptor routes.
Conduct a preliminary design of the alternatives.
Identify the advantages and disadvantages of each aiter-
native considering engineering, monetary, and environ-
mental factors. Conduct a preliminary screening of
the alternatives, to eliminate those which appear to
be unacceptable based on engineering, monetary and
environmental considerations. Identify the interests
of the public and other groups with regard to the pre-
liminary screening of interceptor alternatives through
a public informational meeting conducted by the City.
�i Conduct a cost-effective analysis of the final alter-
natives surviving the preliminary screening including
a comparison of energy and resource use between aiter-
natives. Identify the environmental impact of those
final alternatives surviving the prescreening. Discuss
the reliability and flexibility of each final alter-
native und'er detailed consideration. Consider in-
novative technology where applicable.
07 Plan Selection
Summarize the cost-effective analysis for each finaT
alternative. Identify the interests of the public and
other groups with regard to the final alternatives
through a public information meeting conducted by the
City. Summarize the environmental aspects of each
alternative. Select the most cost-effective and
environmentally sound plan.
.OS The Selected Plan
Describe and iltustrate the selected ptan. Identify
and discuss secondary environmental impacts and adverse
impacts which cannot be avoided. Identify irreversible
and irretrievabie commitments of resources. Identify
^ construction impacts and measures to be taken to
t• minimize adverse impacts. Refine the preliminary design
and cost estimate of the plan.
4
- 11D -
RESOLUTION # 10
09 Plan Implementation and Approval
w` IdenYify institutional responsibility with regard to
. construc[ion, operation and maintenance of [he selecced
plan. Identify the steps to be taken to implement the
' plan and prepare an implemenYation schedule. Develop
a financial plan for funding of the selected pian.
Summarize public participa[ion. Identify a construc-
tion schedule for. plan implementation.
�
�
.10
Establish the overall ObM cosCs for the proposed
project based upon previausly estimated power, chemical,
and other material costs.
Revise and expand the previous capital cost estimate
for the selected plan in order to establish a finai
capital cost estimate to be used for financial planning
by the City. Identify in the estimate those costs at-
tributable to industrial capacity and subject to in-
dustrial cost recovery. Add the ObM costs obtained to
obtain a total project cost for developing an overall
financial pian.
Determine the extent of funding assistance available
from State and Federal agencies. Determine the need
for local funds. Determine the most feasible method
of obtaining the local share.
Based upon the extent of local financing necessary
and the method decided upon to obtain this financing,
assist the City in the development of a financial plan
for the proposed pro}ect indicating the total annual
cost to operate and maintain the facilities and retire
debt.
Finalize Plan
Submit 10 copies of
review by the City
Prepare summary of
public hearing.
the draft Facilities Plan for
and make necessary minor revisions.
finding.s and graphics for final
Submit 100 copies of the final Facilities Plan to the
�ity for review and processing through pubiic hearing
and agency review and approval. Assist the City with
the public hearing and agency review and approval.
Z-3.0 SCHEDULE
2-3.1 The work under this Supplemental Task Order shaTl
commence upon receipt by the Consultant of an executed
copy of this Supplemental Task �rder, no[ification of
Che City by the USEPA of Step 1 Grant Award, and written
authorization to proceed from the City to the Gonsultant.
�
- 11E -
RESOLUTION $ 10
2-3.2 Attachment "C" contains an estimated schedule, with
�a project duration of approximately 9 months to
� point of submittal to the SLate and federal agencies
- � for review.
2-4.0 Minority Business En[erprises (MBE)
MBE subconsultants have been retained to assist in
the development of the facilities plan. The names
of these firms are PolyTech, Inc. and Ojibo�e Naterials
Supply. PolyTech, Inc. will be utilized in the portion
of the work dealing with gathering of data about Yhe
current situation. Ojibwe Materials Supply will be
utilized to obtain soil boring data. Level of effort
'is illustrated on the EPA Form �700-41, Attachment "D".
2-4.0 PAYMENT
2-4.1 Payment for the work defined under this SupplemenCal
Task Order shall be on the basis of a cost plus fixed
fee for Step 1 work as defined by EPA and in accordance
with the general provisions described in Article 8.1.1.
2-4.2 The estimated direct labor costs, indirect costs, other
direct costs, and profit (computed at 15 percent of the
total of direct labor and indirect costs) are itemized
/� in the attached EPA Form 5700-41(2-76), Attachment "D".
�� Total charges for this Supplemental Task Order wilt not
exceed $367,440.00 unless agreed to in writing.
!
�
- 11F -
J
RESOLUTION # 10
HOWAR� NEEOLES TAMMEN 8. BERGENDQF�
July 12, 1983
Mr. Jack Schneider
Directar of Public Works
City of Oshkash
215 Church Avenue
Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54901
Re: Oshkosh Facilities Plan
Supplemental TasSc Order No. 2
Rescope and Rebudget to Reflect
SSES Recoa¢nendations
Dear Mr. Schneider:
The purposa of this letter is to request permission ta modify the scope and
budget for several of the work items identified in Supplemental Task Order
No. 2, a copy of which is attached for yaur re-review.
Specifically, we are requesting authorization to expand the scope of
Section 2-2.2.1.04 to include the follawing two paragraphs:
"Collect and interpret additional data regarding excess infiltration and
inflow sources located during the SSES work in the Stringham Creek
drainage area. This work shall include flow manitoring and television
inspectian work as necessary to locate major leaks and/or crass-
connections between the stoxm and sanitary sewers in this area."
"Collect and interpret additional data in support nf the City`s basement
foundation drain pilot study in sub-district '�G". This wark shall
include flow monitoring before and after corrective measures are taken,
and shall include analysis of effects and prcjection of impacts on the
entire study area."
In addition, we are requesting authorization to incorporate the results nf
these studies, and the results o£ the SSES, into the £acilities plan, by
amending Section 2.2.2.1.06 with the iallowing parag:aph:
"The altsrnative analys.ia snall incorporate the results cf the SSES, the
Stringham Creek study, and the basement foundation drain pilot study,
when those results beccme available, by amendment to the plan as
necessary."
Prchl�ecis Engineers Vlanners
6815 Wesl Capild Drive. Milwaukee. Wiscomin S13/6, <10 t612310
Perl�wn James F Finn FE PaW L Heineman PE. Gerartl F Fon PE. Bmwning Grow PE Cha�les T Henn�gan PE Etlgar B Jo�nson PE. Oanie� J. Watkms PE.
pamel J Spigai PE. Jo�n L. Cotlon PE, Franc�s %. Nalf PE. Roberl 5 Coma PE, Donato A. pupies PE. W�Iilam Lwe AfA. Wril.am C Meretliro PE. Rnbert D Mbfei PE.
,lames L luille. Jr. PE
♦uoelalea Uaniel J Appel PE Ro�ert W Pmbaitls PE Don R Ort PE Rederick FI Sterbenz P[. Roperl 8 Konmar PE Kentlai� T Lmco�n CFn J2cN P$netltl PE.
Roberls W. Smithem PE Jack Q 1�omOSOn PE Rlc�ara D. Peckman PE Jo�n A Eggen AIA Harry 0. Be�ossa PE. RaiO� E Rob�son PE. Ceo� P Counls FE.
StepM1en G Goatlara PE, Harvey K Hammond. Jr PE. Sta��ey I. Mast PE, Rober� W. Anna PE. Marvin C. Gersten PE Cary C G000man AI0.. WaRe� SnaMo FE.
G��tlon H. Staney, Jr. PE James O A�ssell PE Hogh E Sc�a�� PE Polantl Waoswotlh. Jr. PE. flws L Jensen. Fank S. �amm PE. A�eraodel F$tatly PE.
,7onn W WiqM 7E, Tnomas N pyer PE
Onlee� Alexantlria. VA. Atlanta. Gn. Bamn Rouge. L A. Bosmn. MA Cape Coral, Fl.. Casper, WY. Ghanestun. SQ Charleston. WV. Cnicago. IL Geveiana. OH, 6allas. T%,
D¢mEr. CQ Faidield. NJ. Mouston. TX. NtlianapoGS.IN. Kdnsas Ci�y, MQ LexingtOn, M0.l.os Angel¢5. G/+, Miami. FL Mllwaukee. W I. Minneapoiis. M4. Newdrk, OE. NeW York.NV.
Orlantln Fl, Ovedend Park. N5. P�ilatlelphia. PA. Pnoenlx, AZ SeaVle. WA, Tempa, FL, Tucson_ AZ. Tulsa. OH. Penang. M1falaysia. Rio De Janer%Brazn
- 11G -
RESOLUTION ,� 10
Mr. Jack Schneider
July 12, 1983
Page 2
Finally, we are requesting modification of Section 2-4.2
maximum fee for Supplemental Task Order 2 from $367,400
increase of $43,572, as detailed on the attached 5700-41
and Manhour/Expense Estimate.
to increase the
to $410,952, an
(2-76) EPA form,
This amendment will nct affect the overall project budget as far as the
USEPA grant is concerned. As we have pointed aut earlier, the project is
currently $131,358 under budget, and these funds xauld come £rom that
underrun. However, since this work is a change in scope and budget for the
task orders alreadq authorized by the council, the amendment should receive
their approval.
Sf the council is in agreement with this amendment, please sign in the
space below, and forward a ccpy to us.
Very truly yours,
HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF
� c�� � � �-
�� ��.�.�.�.� ,
David R. Wright, P.E.
Principal Ehvironmental Engineer
AIITHORIZED:
Jack Schneider
Director of Public Worke
City of Oshkoeh
DRW/ ec
Enclosures
HNTB No. 0140 (precon/6)
- 11H -
Donald A. Dupies
Partner
Da
RESOLUTION # 10
Manhour/Expense Estimate
Amendment to T.O. 2
Oshkosh Facilities Plan
� 4
Item Project I Engineer ITechnician � Secretary EXpense
Manager`
__ - � i
Stringham Creek Study I ;
Flow Monitoring 10 15 '
T.V. Inspection 20 �I 30 �
Analysis of Results 75 3� i
Repart to City 1� 15 ;
�
�
Pilat Study Assistance ;
Flow idonitoring 10 60
Analysis of Results 25 , 40
Report to City 15 z5
'��� i
Facilities Plan Modifications
SSES Alternatives 30 i 80 ;
Stringham Creek 5 I 20 i
Pilot Study 25 � 65 �
SWM'�T 3 AnalvSiS 5 I 5� .
TOTAL
HNTB No. 0140 (precon/6)
i7o
- 11I -
�5
.�
�� 700
, 10,000
; 5
,,
i
' 2,400
5
5
5
5
75 : 25
2��00
$15,t0o
RESOLUTION # 10
COST OR PRICf SUMMARY FORMAT FOR SUBAGREEMENTS UNDER U.S. EPA GRANTS Form Apqoved
' (See eccompanying instructions 8e/ore completinB this lorn.) OMB No. 158-R0144
PARTI•GEHERAL �
1.0l1ANTEE ' 2. GRANT MUMlER
City of Oshkost� . - C550 431
�. X11ME OF COMTRAGTOA OR SUBCOMTRACTOR � •. DATE OC PqpPOS1k
iiOS�P F� T�LFS R7�Nt''1FS4 6 BERffi`IDOFF 7/ 12 / 83
6. AGDRE55 DF CONTRACTOR OR iUBCONTRACTOR [l�IuM LfP aw/s) 6. TYPE OF SEAVICE T O BE FURKISHED
' � 6815 West Capitol Drive
� . Facilities planning
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53216 ammendment #1 to T.O. 2
� � PART II.COST SUMMARY
ESTI-
� 7. 0111ECT L�1lOR (Speely l�Dor uN�orf��) MATED MOUpLY ESTI4ATED TOTALS
NOURS RM�C COST
Project Manager 170 520.00 S 3,400 .s'.
Office Field En ineer 430 15.00 6 450 '� -'c-���
Technician 75 10.00 �750 3� �-:� � +
Secretarial _ 25 9.00 225 ���`�--i". .�' ��
OIRECT LA60R TOTALa
!. INDIRECT COSTS (SD���b �/���cP w�f peols)
Salary related costs
General overhead costs
INDIRECT CO5T5 TOTAL:
9. OTXER DIRECT COSTS
•. TR�VEL
�1)TR�rySPORT�TIOM 2�000 miles @ 0.20/Mile
(Z� PER OIEM
TRAVEI SUBTOTAL:
Q EOUIPMENT, MATERI�LS, SUPPLIES (Sqclly uf�lerl��)
Flow meter rentals – "i rr��.,rh�
EpUIPMENT S
G.SUBCONTR11CT5
T.V. Inspection
SUBTOT�L:
d. OTHER (Sy�Nl1 ulr/wl��)
OTMERSUBTOTAL:
e.� OTHER DIRECT COSTS TOTAL:
�o. TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
11.PROFIT 15% of sum of Direct Labor olu�
��. TOTAL PRICE
PA ie.m 57D0•�l (2-76)
FATE ' • BASE =
QTY 1 COST
– 11J –
ESTIMATEO
COST
+�—
ESTIMATED
COST
ESTIMATED
COST
2,700
ESTIMATED
COST
0,000
ESTINATED
COST
S
PAGE 1 OF 5
J
RESOLUTIOI`1 � 10 � _ __srROi..
PART 111 •PRICE SUMMARY
�� COMPETITOR'S C�TALOG lISTINGS, IN-XOUSE ESTIM�TES. PRIOR QUOTES MIIRY.ET PROPOSED
(Ino�ureb�blorPrlcecovplrimn) PRICEI51 �R�CE
:.v
`�' ".'�'
y��— ��-
�_���-_' ' .'_.
�„�%�'�� °-`
`�� ��-
�.� � ` ,_;�:
- =� �`_
, :� ���.
.,'�^4. r� y,_ ` ..��1 _�-�.' ,,.nt�' ..,Y-�x . �..!F w��-�, c ' - S
.� . ,-. .� . ..:. . i
. .. , . .; . a..._. _ _, .. ._ , . .. _. . ... . .. . ..: � � -
PART IV•CERTIFICATIONS
1�. CONTR�CTOR
1��. MAS A FEDER�L AGENCY OR A FE�ER�LLY CERTIilEO STATE ON LOC�L AGENCY PERFONMED ANT :�EVIEW OF YOUA
ACCOUNTS OR RECOROS IN GONNECTION MITH ANY �THER FECERAI GR�NT OR CONTRACT �/IITN11t TME DAST TMfLVE MOMTN5/
� vES � wo (ll "Y�s" tir� n�me �tldrr�� �nd tsl�pl�one numbn oI nv/ewfnQ olllca) ..
Defense Contract Audit Agency
1�0.7MI5 SUMMARY CONFORMS WITH TME iOLLOWING COST PRINCIPLES .
Federal Pra.lu�rnnt Regulaticros and 41 CFR 1-152 and 1-15.4 -��
14e.
This proposal is submitted for nse in connection with and in response to f1) Request from the City -��i
�
of �shkosh . This is to certify to tfie besl of my knowSedge
end belie( that thr cost an pricing data summarized herein are complete, current, and accurate as of
(2� 7/12/83. __end tfia[ a financial management capability exists to Eully and eccu-
ratelyaccount torthe hnancial transactions under this project. I fudhe� ceRiEy that 1 understand thet the
subagreemrnt price may be su6ject to downward renegotialmn and/or recoupment schere the ebove cast ond
pricing data have been defermined, as e result of audit, tt'ot fo� ave b n comp]ete, cu �nt and accurate as .-
o(the date ebove. j } � � ___ .
(3) 7/12/83 � �' �� "
p/1TE Oi EMECUTION PGN�TUR � PROPOSCR
�
Principal Engineer
� T�TLE OF O110PpSER
U. GPANTEE REVIEMEF
[ eerti[y that I have reviewed the cost/pcice summary set forth herein and the ptoposed costs/price eppear
� accep.able for ;nbagreement award.
OI.tE OF E%ECUTiON {IGN�TUPE OF 11EV1EM[P
� TTLE OF REV�EwER
16. EPA REVIEWER (!7 �pplic�ble)
DATE O� EAECUTION ' SIGni.TURE OF qEV1ENFR
TITLE OF REV�ENEN
E�A Ferm 57VU-11 (7•701
— IlK —
c,�-/� � �
c�i-C �� F�' cOt
� �� � N'
O
C] � N �
�� y ..
co r
� �^ .�o 0
. �
� �W d
r' , o
z3
�, �
�
� �
� y
�
7J
H
C=1
C7
a
�
�
�
�
a
�
ct
� i -.
O s�
�$ t „�
�� ;;t
m j,s
�3 �'�%
W
m
X
o x
�s �
a N
co •
�i
�
N
\
�d
G
�
F'
N•
�
�
0
n
�
m
x
N
0