HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-058 Contract - URS Energy & Construction
Contract for Personal Services
CITY OF CONTRACTOR: URS Energy & Construction, Inc.
ASHLAND
20 East Main Street CONTACT: Steve Samuelson, P.E.
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Telephone: 541/488-6002 ADDRESS: 10900 NE 8rn St, Suite 500
Fax: 541/488-5311 Bellevue WA 98004
TELEPHONE: 425-451-4500
DATE AGREEMENT PREPARED:
January 15 2013 FAX: 425451-4190
BEGINNING DATE:
Jan 28, 2013 COMPLETION DATE: December 31, 2013
COMPENSATION: Time and materials not to exceed E $62 510 2 2fl /3
GOODS AND SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: as per attached Exhibit C: letter dated January 10,
2013 re. Seventh Independent Consultant's Safe Inspection Report Cost of Proposed Services
ADDITIONAL TERMS:
NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to AMC 2.50.120 and after consideration of the mutual covenants contained
herein the CITY AND CONTRACTOR AGREE as follows:
I. All Costs by Contractor. Contractor shall, provide all personal services and shall at its own risk and
expense, perform any work, and furnish all labor, equipment and materials required for the work described
above and attached as Exhibit C.
2. Qualified Work: Contractor has represented, and by entering into this contract now represents, that all
personnel assigned to the work required under this contract are fully qualified to perform the work to which
they will be assigned in a skilled and worker-like manner and, if required to be registered, licensed or
bonded by the State of Oregon, are so registered, licensed and bonded. Contractor must also maintain a
current City business license.
3. Completion Date: Contractor shall provide all goods in accordance with the standard's and specifications,
no later than the date indicated above and start performing the work under this contract by the beginning
date indicated above and complete the work by the completion date indicated above.
4. Compensation: City shall pay Contractor for the specified goods and for any work performed; Including
costs and expenses, specked above or in Exhibit C. Payments shall be made within 30 days of the date
of the invoice. Should the contract be prematurely terminated, payments will be made for work completed
and accepted to date of termination. Compensation under this contract, including all costs and expenses
of Contractor, is limited to $56,825 base only or $62,510 if Additional Work is required. unless a separate %
written contract is entered Into by the City. Owner may withhold payment of that portion of an invoice 7,
disputed by Owner in good faith, and shall timely pay the other, undisputed portions of any invoice.
5. Ownership of Documents: All documents that are or are to be deliverables under the contract shall be
the property of the City.
6. Statutory Requirements: ORS 279B.020, 2796.220, 2798.225, 27913.230, 279B.235, ORS Chapter 244
and ORS 670.600 are made part of this contract. Contractor shall comply with these and all other federal,
state and local laws and regulations applicable to the work under this Contract. n
7. Living Wage Requirements: If contractor is providing services under this contract and the amount of N
this contract is $19,494 or more, Contractor is required to comply with chapter 3.12 of the Ashland ilf f I
Municipal Code by paying a living wage, as defined In this chapter, to all employees performing work Z x231
under this contract and to any subcontractor who performs 50% or more of the work under this contract.
Contractor is also required to post the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B predominantly in areas where it
will be seen by all employees.
8. Indemnification: Contractor agrees to defend, Indemnify and save City, its officers employees and
G.%pub-rvrkstcng112.27 FFRC Pan 12 Inspl4_AdminlcontracIV013-02.28 12.27 FERC Pt 12 Conrmct- pdatcd rbm.dmv
agents harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogations, or
other damages resulting from third party claims for injury to any person (including injury resulting in death),
or third party claims for damage (including loss or destruction) to physical property, to the proportionate
extent caused by the Contractor's negligence in the performance of this contract of whatsoever nature
arising out of or incident to the performance of this contract by Contractor (including but not limited to,
Contractor's employees, agents, and others designated by Contractor to perform work or services
attendant to this contract). Contractor shall not be held responsible for any losses, expenses, claims,
subrogation, actions, costs, judgments, or other damages, directly, solely, and proximately caused by the
negligence of City.
9. Termination:
a. Mutual Consent. This contract may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of both parties.
b. City's Convenience. This contract may be terminated at any time by City upon 30 days' notice in
writing and delivered by certified mail or in person.
C. For Cause. City may terminate or modify this contract, in whole or in part, effective upon delivery of
written notice to Contractor, or at such later date as may be established by City under any of the following
conditions:
i. If City funding from federal, state, county or other sources is not obtained and continued at levels
sufficient to allow for the purchase of the indicated quantity of services;
ii. If federal or state regulations or guidelines are modified, changed, or interpreted in such a way that
the services are no longer allowable or appropriate for purchase under this contract or are no
longer eligible for the funding proposed for payments authorized by this contract;
iii. If any license or certificate required by law or regulation to be held by Contractor to provide the
services required by this contract is for any reason denied, revoked, suspended, or not renewed.
d. For Default or Breach.
i. Either City or Contractor may terminate this contract in the event of a material breach of the
contract by the other. Prior to such termination the party seeking termination shall give to the
other party written notice of the breach and intent to terminate. If the party committing the breach
has not entirely cured the breach within 15 days of the date of the notice, or within such other
period as the party giving the notice may authorize or require, then the contract may be
terminated at any time thereafter by a written notice of termination by the party giving notice.
ii.Time is of the essence for Contractor's performance of each and every obligation and duty under
this contract City by written notice to Contractor of default or breach may at any time terminate
the whole or any part of this contract if Contractor fails to provide services called for by this
contract within the time specified herein or in any extension thereof.
iii. The rights and remedies of City provided in this subsection (d) are not exclusive and are in
addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract.
e. Obligation/Liability of Parties. Termination or modification of this contract pursuant to subsections a,
b, or c above shall be without prejudice to any obligations or liabilities of either party already accrued prior to
such termination or modification. However, upon receiving a notice of termination (regardless whether such
notice is given pursuant to subsections a, b, c or d of this section, Contractor shall immediately cease all
activities under this contract, unless expressly directed otherwise by City in the notice of termination. Further,
upon termination, Contractor shall deliver to City all contract documents, information, works-in-progress and
other property that are or would be deliverables had the contract been completed. City shall pay Contractor
for work performed prior to the termination date if such work was performed in accordance with the Contract.
10. Independent Contractor Status: Contractor is an independent Contractor and not an employee of the
City. Contractor shall have the complete responsibility for the performance of this contract and for any
federal or state taxes applicable to payments under this contract Contractor will not be eligible for any
federal Social Security, state Worker's Compensation, unemployment insurance or Public Employees
Retirement System benefits from this contract payment, except as a self-employed individual.
11. Non-discrimination Certification: The undersigned certifies that the undersigned Contractor has not
discriminated against minority, women or emerging small businesses enterprises in obtaining any required
subcontracts. Contractor further certifies that it shall not discriminate in the award of such subcontracts, If
any. The Contractor understands and acknowledges that it may be disqualified from bidding on this
contract, including but not limited to City discovery of a misrepresentation or sham regarding a subcontract
or that the Bidder has violated any requirement of ORS 279A.110 or the administrative rules implementing
the Statute.
G:1pub-wrks\cng\12-27 FERC Port 12 lwp\A_Admin\12-27 FERC Pt 12 COMMCLdmx
12. Asbestos Abatement License: If required under ORS 468A.710, Contractor or Subcontractor shall
possess an asbestos abatement license.
13. Assignment and Subcontracts: Contractor shall not assign this contract or subcontract any portion of
the work without the written consent of City. Any attempted assignment or subcontract without written
consent of City shall be void. Contractor shall be fully responsible for the acts or omissions of any assigns
or subcontractors and of all persons employed by them, and the approval by City of any assignment or
subcontract shall not create any contractual relation between the assignee or subcontractor and City.
14. Use of Recyclable Products: Contractor shall use recyclable products to the maximum extent
economically feasible in the performance of the contract work set forth in this document.
15. Default. The Contractor shall be in default of this agreement if Contractor: commits any material breach
or default of any covenant, warranty, certification, or obligation it owes under the Contract; if it loses its
QRF status pursuant to the QRF Rules or loses any license, certificate or certification that is required to
perform the work or to qualify as a QRF If Contractor has qualified as a ORF for this agreement; institutes
an action for relief in bankruptcy or has instituted against it an action for insolvency; makes a general
assignment for the benefit of creditors; or ceases doing business on a regular basis of the type identified
in its obligations under the Contract; or attempts to assign rights in, or delegate duties under, the Contract.
16. Insurance. Contractor shall at its own expense provide and maintain the following insurance:
a. Worker's Compensation insurance in compliance with ORS 656.017, which requires subject
employers to provide Oregon workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers
b. General Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than
$1,000,000, for each occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. It shall Include
contractual liability coverage.
c. Automobile Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than
$1,000,000, for each accident for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, including coverage for
owned, hired or non-owned vehicles, as applicable.
d. Notice of cancellation or change. There shall be no cancellation, material change, reduction of
limits or intent not to renew the insurance coverage(s) without 30 days' written notice from the
Contractor or its insurer(s) to the City.
e. Additional Insured/Certificates of Insurance. Contractor shall name The City of Ashland, Oregon,
and its elected officials, officers and employees as Additional Insureds on the General Liability
and Automobile Liability insurance policies required herein but only with respect to Contractor's
services to be provided under this Contract. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by
this Contract, the Contractor shall fumish acceptable insurance certificates prior to commencing
work under this contract The contractor's insurance is primary and noncontributory. The
certificate will specify all of the parties who are Additional Insureds. Insuring companies or
entities are subject to the City's acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies;
trust agreements, etc. shall be provided to the City. The Contractor shall be financially
responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions and/or self-insurance.
f. Professional Liability insurance combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than
$1,000,000 for each claim.
17. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue: This contract shall be governed and construed in accordance with
the laws of the State of Oregon without resort to any jurisdiction's conflict of laws, rules or doctrines. Any
claim, action, suit or proceeding (collectively, "the claim") between the City (and/or any other or
department of the State of Oregon) and the Contractor that arises from or relates to this contract shall be
brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Circuit Court of Jackson County for the State of
Oregon. ff, however, the claim must be brought in a federal forum, then it shall be brought and conducted
solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon filed in Jackson
County, Oregon. Contractor, by the signature herein of its authorized representative, hereby consents to
the in personam jurisdiction of said courts. In no event shall this section be construed as a waiver by City
of any form of defense or immunity, based on the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution,
or otherwise, from any claim or from the jurisdiction.
18. Arbitration. If any disputes, disagreements, or controversies arise between the parties pertaining to the
interpretation, validity, or enforcement of this Agreement, the parties shall, upon the request of either
party, submit such dispute to binding arbitration. Except as otherwise provided in this contract, arbitration
shall be requested b delivering to the other party a written request for arbitration. Within five 5 days of
(iApub-wrWcng42-27 FERC Pan 12 rnspv. Admin)12-27 FFRC Pt 12 Conrrrwtdocr
receipt of such request, the parties shall select a mutually agreeable arbitrator and designate mutually
agreeable rules of arbitration. If the parties cannot agree upon. an arbitrator within five (5) days, an
arbitrator may be appointed by the presiding judge, Jackson County Circuit Court, upon the request of
either party submitted in accordance with ORS 36.310. If the parties have not designated mutually
agreeable rules of arbitration at such time as the arbitrator is appointed, the arbitrator shall adopt rules for
the arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be binding upon the parties.
The City and Contractor agree to a consolidated arbitration of such claims, disputes and other matters in
question between themselves regarding the project, with claims, disputes and other matters in question
regarding the project between and among the City, Contractor and the City's third parties designees and
contractors and anyone else under contract with the City or any other party to perform work or services
related to the project.
Notwithstanding any dispute under this Agreement, whether before or during arbitration, Contractor shall
continue to perform its work pending resolution of a dispute, and the City shall make payments as
required by the Agreement for the undisputed portions of the work.
19. Attorney Fees. If either party commences any arbitration, legal action, suit, or proceeding against the
other to rescind, interpret or enforce the terms of this Agreement, the parties agree that the prevailing
party shall be awarded reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred in any such arbitration, action, suit
or proceeding and in any later appeals filed as a consequence thereof. Such costs shall bear interest at
the maximum legal rate from the date incurred, until the date paid by the losing party.
20. Severability. If any part, term or clause of this Agreement is held by a court or arbitrator to be
unenforceable, of no effect or In conflict with any law, the validity of the remaining provisions and clauses
shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be construed and in force as if the
Agreement did not contain the particular part, term or clause held to be unenforceable.
21, THIS CONTRACT AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS CONSTITUTE THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE PARTIES. NO WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE OF TERMS OF THIS
CONTRACT SHALL BIND EITHER PARTY UNLESS IN WRITING AND SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES.
SUCH WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE, IF MADE, SHALL BE EFFECTIVE ONLY IN
THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE GIVEN. THERE ARE NO
UNDERSTANDINGS, AGREEMENTS, OR REPRESENTATIONS, ORAL OR WRITTEN, NOT
SPECIFIED HEREIN REGARDING THIS CONTRACT. CONTRACTOR, BY SIGNATURE OF ITS
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE/SHE HAS READ THIS
CONTRACT, UNDERSTANDS IT, AND AGREES TO BE BOUND BY ITS TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
22. Non-appropriations Clause. Funds Available and Authorized: City has sufficient funds currently
available and authorized for expenditure to finance the costs of this contract within the City's fiscal year
budget. Contractor understands and agrees that City's payment of amounts under this contrail
attributable to work performed after the last day of the current fiscal year is contingent on City
appropriations, or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow City in the exercise of its reasonable
administrative discretion, to continue to make payments under this contract. In the event City has
insufficient appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority, City may terminate this contract
without penalty or liability to City, effective upon the delivery of written notice to Contractor, with no further
liability to Contractor except payment of amounts earned by Contractor prior to delivery of notice.
23. Prior Approval Required Provision. Approval by the City of Ashland Council or the Public Contracting
Officer is required before any work may begin under this contract.
24, Certification. Contractor shall sign the certification attached hereto as Exhibit A and herein incorporated
by reference.
25. Force Majeure. Any delay or failure of Contractor in performing its obligations under the contract shall be
excused if and to the extent such delay or failure results from any cause beyond the reasonable control of
Contractor, and Contractors time of performance will be equitably adjusted to cover the effect thereof.
26. Warranty:
a. Contractor warrants that the work will be performed in accordance with that degree of care and
skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering profession applicable to similar work
under similar circumstances. This warranty is exclusive and in lieu of any and all other warranties
relating to the work whether statutory, express or implied, and Contractor disclaims an such
G:\pub-wrksteng\I2-27 FERC Part 121nsp1A_Admin\12-27 FERC Pt 12 Contmctdotx
other warranties, and/or fitness for a particular purpose and any and all warranties arising from
course of dealing and/or usage of trade. Any other statements of fact or descriptions expressed in
the contract shall not be deemed to constitute a warrant of the work or any part thereof.
b. Contractor may rely upon and use in the performance of the work information supplied to it by
Owner without independent verification, and Contractor shall not be responsible for defects in the
work attributable to its reliance upon or use of such information; provided, that in the event
Contractor discovers an error, omission, defect or deficiency in such information, Contractor shall
notify City thereof and shall not proceed with the affected work except as directed by City.
27. Risk Allocation. Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary in this Agreement and to the fullest
extent permitted by law, neither Owner nor Consultant shall be liable, whether based on contract, tort,
strict liability, warranty, indemnity, or any other cause whatsoever, for any consequential, special,
incidental, indirect, punitive or exemplary damages, or damages arising from or in connection with loss of
power, loss of use, loss of revenue or profit (actual or anticipated), loss by reason of shutdown or non-
operation, increased cost of construction, cost of capital, cost of replacement power or customer claims;
provided, however, that (1) the limitation of liability shall not apply with respect to Owner's indemnity and
save harmless obligations to Consultant, and shall not affect Owner's obligation to pay Consultant as
required under this Agreement' and (2) Consultant shall be liable for up to the total amount of the contract
in the event Consultant erroneously determines, due to breach of the standard of care set forth in
paragraph 26.a above, that some or all of the reservoir cannot be used and the City loses full or partial
use of the reservoir as a direct result of such erroneous determination.
Contractor: City of Ashland
By By
D'e rtment Head
Si natur _ v~gJ6 KA,30 -C
.14 ~Cr,yl/t~ / /~74-2 Pri t Name
PrintTN e z~za~,3
/'.1' Date
Title
Funds appropriated for current fiscal year:
W-9 One copy of a W-9 is to be
submitted with the signed contract.- Date
Approved as to form?) ` A /l
Legal Department ate
Purchase Order No.
URS
LEGAL TENT
13Y
DATE:- -7
--D~L3
G:\pub-wrkskng\r2-27 FHRC Part 121nsplA Admin\12-27 FERC Pt 12 Contwi.doc
EXHIBIT A
CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS: Contractor, under penalty of perjury, certifies
that (a) the number shown on the attached W-9 form is its correct taxpayer ID (or is waiting for
the number to be issued to it and (b) Contractor is not subject to backup withholding because (i)
it is exempt from backup withholding or (ii) it has not been notified by the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) that it is subject to backup withholding as a result of a failure to report all interest
or dividends, or (iii) the IRS has notified it that it is no longer subject to backup withholding.
Contractor further represents and warrants to City that (a) it has the power and authority to enter
into and perform the work, (b) the Contract, when executed and delivered, shall be a valid and
binding obligation of Contractor enforceable in accordance with its terms, (c) the work under the
Contract shall be performed in accordance with the highest professional standards, and (d)
Contractor is qualified, professionally competent and duly licensed to perform the work.
Contractor also certifies under penalty of perjury that its business is not in violation of any
Oregon tax laws, and it is a corporation authorized to act on behalf of the entity designated above
and authorized to do business in Oregon or is an independent Contractor as defined in the
contract d uments, and has checked four or more of the following criteria:
(I) I carry out the labor or services at a location separate from my residence or is in a
specific portion of my residence, set aside as the location of the business.
f~) Commercial advertising or business cards or a trade association membership are
purchased for the business.
/(3) Telephone listing is used for the business separate from the personal residence
/ listing.
(4) Labor or services are performed only pursuant to written contracts.
(5) Labor or services are performed for two or more different persons within a period
of one year.
(6) 1 assume financial responsibility for defective workmanship or for service not
provided as evidenced by the ownership of performance bonds, warranties, errors and
omission insurance or liability insurance relating to the labor or services to be
provided.
Contractor (Date)
G:1pub-wrks%cngU -27 FERC Part 12 InspkAAdmin112-27 FERC Pt 12 Contmct.docx
EXHIBIT C
TARS
January 10, 2013
Mr. Pieter Smeenk, P.E., S.E.
City of Ashland
Public Works Engineering Division
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
i
I
i
Re: Reeder Gulch Project No. 1107-OR
Seventh Independent Consultant's Safety Inspection Report
Cost of Proposed Services
Dear Mr. Smeenk:
i
We are gratified that the City selected our proposal for cost negotiations to i
determine a possible award of the 2013 Independent Consultant Safety Inspection
Report. Due to completion of our recent scopes of work for the City we believe we
are best qualified to complete this work efficiently and resolve any lingering
requirements by the FERC. We have therefore attractively priced the scope without
excessive contingency in the costs and hope that you find it acceptable.
Our December proposal included the appropriate level of detail needed to fully
describe our approach, but was not parsed into specific tasks for pricing. We
therefore have excerpted verbatim our approach from the December proposal after
which we have included an expanded description that includes specific tasks to
facilitate pricing.
PROPOSAL SCOPE DISCUSSION
Deliverables from that FERC letter that are part of the work include the following:
1. Re-formatted Potential Failure Modes Analysis (PFMA) Report
2. Seventh Independent Consultant Safety Inspection Report for the Reeder Gulch j
Project (2013 Part 12 report) j
I
i
The FERC requirement for Deliverable 1 is described on Page 3 of Appendix A as
follows:
'he September 2003 PFMA Report should be re-written by the next Independent
Consultant to the current format outlined In Chapter 14 of the FERC Engineering
Guidelines. Also, all potential failure modes should be thoroughly reviewed and fully
developed during the 2013 Pad 12.
URS CM alim, j
10900 WE 0°st'.1, Sole 500 I
BMlma WA 9800
Tel 425 451 4500
Fav 425.451 4980
City of Ashland
FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Report for Hosler Dam
Project No. 2012-27
Please note that there are two distinct, but related, elements that the FERC is requiring
in this statement. The first is a requirement for a re-formatted PFMA report and the
second is for a detailed review of all potential failure modes (PFM's). URS would like to
point out that the venue for the second requirement is Chapter 3 of the Part 12D Safely
Inspection Report Outline (See Enclosure 2 of RFP Appendix A.)
Since URS was not a party to the April 2003 PFMA session, our production of the re-
formatted PFMA report will not include any new thinking or evaluations on our part, but
will simply consist of re-organizing the material in the original report to conform with the
FERC required outline' defined in Appendix D of Chapter 14 of their Engineering
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects. Examples of how the original text
would be reorganized include the following:
e Chapter 5 of the original report was titled 'Likely Consequences of Potential Failure
Modes". URS typically includes this type of Information in Chapter 4, "Potential
Failure Modes Identified" preceding the discussions of the PFM's. This is because a
given classification for a considered PFM in general might be decided on the basis of
likely consequences. We find that including the discussion and comparison of
consequences up-front in Chapter 4 provides a good foundation for the rationale
statements made for each considered PFM.
Chapter 5 of the present FERC outline is titled "Additional Monitoring or Performance
Items Discussed". There may not be much documentation of these types of data
that would go in this section. Some candidates Include the following:
I
o Original Report, Section 7.2 discusses the possibility of adding stream gages at
the East and West Forks.
o Original Report, Section 7.4 discusses the possibility of monitoring for debris
accumulation.
o Original Report, Section 8.3 recommends developing safety guidelines for
operator access under normal operations and emergencies.
Any other information elsewhere in the report that does not appear to be a PFM rlsl(
reduction measure and that might logically go in this Chapter will be added but URS
will not generate new material for this section, as introduced above.
e Chapter 7 of the original report was titled "Summary Of Potential Actions Identified In
The PFMA With Respect To Performance Monitoring (Instrumentation and Visual
Surveillance)." According to the required FERC outline, this material more properly
belongs as part of Chapter 4, "Potential Failure Modes Identified".
URS might add to the re-formatted PFMA report any easily-obtained, factual
information from project references already in hand that supports statements made
in the PFMA report. For example, inundation maps from the EAP are often included
in a PFMA appendix as an illustration of hazard potential; response spectra are often
included as a graphic portrayal of how high the input seismicity is; PMF hydrographs
are helpful In estimating duration of overtopping conditions; and construction photos
are usually added, especially any that illustrate important findings, such as where the
rock on the left side transitions from weathered to unweathered rock2. Such data is
beneficial, especially since the PFMA report is the central reference document about
which the FERC dam safety program is organized. Having concise but relevant
reference Information is very useful whenever PFMA reviews are conducted. In the
' httn://fert.eov/industriesn,ydr orwwei/safety/guidelines/enx gtddp/chap14 gdf
See for example, Exhibit 3-5 of our August 2012 stability analysis report for the dam. !
Page 2
City of Ashland
FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Report for Hosler Dam
Project No. 2012-27
interest of maintaining, an economical budget, we do not intend to Invest
considerable time data mining for this purpose. We will only utilize Information we
already have or that to which the City readily has access.
a It Is convenient to number the PFM's for efficient referencing in correspondence and
further studies. In addition to numbering the PFM's a concise descriptive title will be
added, where presently absent. These additions to the report facilitate the further
dialogue that is part of the FERC's ongoing process.
URS proposes to complete the PFMA re-write as the first activity of this scope of work.
In addition to directly satisfying one scope Item and FERC requirement, it will allow us to
become fully familiarized with the PFMA report findings and prepare us for the PFMA
review to be conducted jointly with the City and the FERC. The FERC requlres3 the
consultant to direct a group review of identified potential failure modes, in which the
group evaluates the adequacy and completeness of Identified PFM's, category
assignments, risk reduction measures and recommends revisions to these Items If
warranted. In addition to original PFMAs, URS has participated in the process of
trilateral PFMA reviews on some projects' . Our goal Is to minimize this part of the effort
through careful preparation and scheduling. Completing the PFMA re-write is the first
step In attaining that goal. Other steps we would propose include the following:
1. URS would draft Chapter 3, 4 and 75 of the 2013 Part 120 report in advance of the
PFMA review session and field Inspection. In preparation of Chapter 3, where we
evaluate the PFMA report findings, we would involve a small, multi-disciplinary team
within our office to address hydrology, seismology, structural and geotechnical I
aspects of the PFMA. Additional failure modes thinking, white very possible, in all
likelihood will be more administrative In nature. Critical failure modes requiring
mitigation are In our opinion very unlikely. Our preparation, however, should enable
us to best prepared to address any FERC concerns during the PFMA review.
2. We would send the re-written PFMA and our first drafts of the 3 chapters listed
above to the FERC to allow them familiarization prior to the review session.
3. URS proposes to conduct the PFMA review on the day before the field Inspection at j
the FERC offices In Portland. This would allow as many of the FERC local staff to
participate and we would further request that Bruce Brand participate from
Washington using video conferencing. Since URS recently completed the finite
element analyses that presumably have resolved all Issues related to the structure !
and its performance, the PFMA review should be efficiently conducted and i
concluded.
4. Given our recent work on this dam, URS does not envision that any significant issues
will result. We had one recommendation related to checking erodibilily of the upper l
left abutment for floods sufficient to overtop. i
I
' Appendix A, page 1
~ These are distinct from what the FERC refers to as "Supplementary PFMA" sessions, which are ~
conducted on dams with pending modifications.
' Chapter 3 - Discussion of Potential Failure Modes Analysis Report; Chapter 4 -Surveillance and
Monitoring Programs Relative to Potential Failure Modes; Chapter 7-Assessment of Supporting Technical
Information Document
HIM Page 3 II
I
i
i
i
City of Ashland
FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Report for Hosler Dam
Project No. 2012-27
SPECIFIC TASKS FOR PRICING
I
Task 1 - Protect Management - This is an allowance for processing Invoices,
budgellhour tracking and overall team coordination. It Includes hours for the Project
Manager as well as administrative personnel.
Task 2 - PFMA Rewrite - These hours are required to produce the re-formatted 2003
PFMA report, with an allowance for the addition of minor supporting (factual) information.
See scope discussion (above) which is excerpted from our December proposal for
details.
I
Task 3 - Instrumentation Review - These hours are required for review of survey data
since the prior Part 12 report. Survey measurements are the only feature of the Dam
Safety Surveillance and Monitoring Plan (DSSMP) requiring evaluation versus Action
Levels. Other DSSMP features having Action Levels Including Strong Ground Motion
accelerometers and reservoir levels apply to emergency response only and require no
evaluation on our part for preparation of the 2013 Part 12D report.
Inasmuch as URS completed a highly detailed review of all survey data through the
measurements made in January 2012, this will be a simple task. The level of detail in
the 2012 Stability Analysis report will not be Included. Instead, the review and
evaluation will include all measurements made since the last Part 12 report (only). We
already have data through the early part of last year but will require the additional
measurements made since then. We presume these will include measurements made
this month, In January 2013. Our evaluation will consist of comparison to Lower and 1
Upper Action Levels. We will Include any graphs furnished by the City In an Appendix, i
but will not summarize the latest results in graphical format. Further, regression
analyses, such as we performed for the 2012 Stability Analysis Report, will not be
necessary for at least 10 more years since the addition of 2 data points to the evaluation
and the passing of another year cannot have a significant Impact on a revised analysis.
Regression analyses are therefore not included in our proposed scope of work.
Instead, we will tabulate survey information for each point as follows:
I
1. Evaluation statistics including the expected value, historic maximum and date of
measurement, Upper and Lower Action Levels. j
2. Bounding values for the period 2000 through 2012 including dates of maximum
and minimum values. i
We also will provide review and comment on any reading or comments provided by the
surveyors that requires Interpretation.
Task 4 - PFMA Review - These hours are required for a URS multi-disciplinary team to
review the PFMA report in-house and develop our own assessment of it as required by
the FERC. We will summarize our findings in Chapter 3 of the Part 12 report and we will
develop the first draft of this Chapter before the PFMA review session conducted with
the FERC. See scope discussion (above) for more details. The hours for this task are
for the review session only. Our budget to produce the first draft is part of Task 6.
Page 4
V 8fS
i
I
i
City of Ashland ~
FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Report for Hosler Dam
Project No. 2012-27
Task 5 - Left Abutment Erodibilitv - These hours are required to complete the erodibility f
evaluation of the weathered rock in the left abutment of the dam, as we recommended In
our 2012 Stability Analysis report.
Initially, the 2003 PFMA study concluded that erosion potential in the left abutment under
large floods should be evaluated. Penultimately, a 2008 erodibility evaluation concluded
satisfactory resistance of the channel rock under normal spillway dischargesa, but this
did not address the original PFMA recommendation. This motivated our 2012
recommendation to evaluate the weaker material above El. 2,815 on the left side for
erosion during overtopping flows.
There are two basic components to this activity: 1) estimation of the scour threshold for
the weathered rock, and, 2) calculation of the overtopping stream power. Erosion is
likely when the stream power exceeds the scour threshold. Completion of this task will
provide an essential input into the PFMA review session to be conducted with the FERC.
Task 6 - Initial Drafts of Select Part 12 Reoorl Chapters - These hours are required to
produce the initial drafts of Chapters 3, 4, and 7. See scope discussion (above) for more
details. Tasks 2 and 4 must be completed before we can develop our first draft of
Chapter 3 (Discussion of Potential Failure Modes Analysis Report). Chapter 3 will be
further revised after the PFMA review session with the FERC (see Task 7) to include a
concise summary of the review session involving the City/FERC/URS.
Task 3 must be completed before we can develop our first draft of Chapter 4
(Surveillance and Monitoring Programs Relative to Potential Failure Modes).
Completion of our instrumentation review and our Initial draft Is a useful input into the
PFMA review session and further will allow us to focus our allonlion during the field
inspection on corroborating indications (if Indicated 7).
URS developed a revised STI Document Chapter 8 for the City as part of our work
scope in 2012. We thus are already familiar with the STI Document, as of last year's
revision, and will supplement our existing knowledge of the STI Document with any
material recently added by the City. Please note that our proposed scope does not
include us 'filling in the gaps' of the STI document and we are required by the FERC in
our assessment to note any such gaps in our review of the STI Document, which we will
do when drafting Chapter 7 (Assessment of Supporting Technical Information
Document) of the Part 12 report. Task 5 will also be completed before we draft Chapter j
7 of the Part 12 report and we will Include a simple summary of the PMF erodibility I
potential of the left abutment rock, very similar to the edits we proposed for Section 8.2.4
PMF conditions were dismissed at the time of the 2008 evaluation because of the high tailwater which, it
was argued, would dissipate some of the energy of the higher flows. This misses the point of the 2003
PFMA team recommendation, which was focused on the erodible portion of the left abutment, which is
located above the PMF tallwater and thus remains a potential vulnerability. I
' Given our recent work on the dam and understanding of instrumentation, it is considered highly unlikely
that there would be any indications requiring field corroboration (measurement of a single survey
monument outside of the Action Levels, for example). However, the absence of contrary Indications offers
a degree of validation, as well.
Tins Page 5
i
I
City of Ashland
FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Report for Hosler Dam
Project No. 2012-27
of the STI Document for erodibility of channel rock during spills under normal water
surface elevation.
Task 7 - Field Inspection and PFMA Review Session with the FERC - These hours are
required to conduct the PFMA review session with the FERC In Portland, followed by the
field inspection of the dam concurrently with the FERC annual inspection the next day.
We are allowing 3 days for this task which includes travel and PFMA review session for
day 1, Part 12 Inspection for day 2, and day 3 as a travel day for return to Bellevue.
Proposed Independent Consultant Steve Samuelson, P.E., will be the only URS
representative traveling to Portland and the dam as part of this task, but we will make I
any of the additional staff members who participated In Task 4 available by phone. We
assume that not more than 4 hours will be required for this PFMA review.
URS will develop an Inspection log from the 2009 Part 12 report and will specifically look
for observations made by the prior consultant, in addition to our own direct observations.
The field inspection will also look for any observations that correspond to any of the
identified potential failure modes, including any new ones that might be identified during
the review session with the FERC.
Task e - Part 12 Report - It is our intention to have most evaluations completed prior to
Task 7 (field activities). This task will Involve developing second drafts of Chapter 3, 4,
and 7 and first drafts of all remaining Chapters.
Significant changes to Chapter 3 may or may not be necessary, depending upon what j
results from the PFMA review session with the FERC. It has been our experience In the
past that no significant new analyses or risk reduction measures have resulted from
such PFMA reviews, but sometimes the FERC has simple requests such as changes In
monitoring frequency, or additions of routine inspection of various features by the
operators to their surveillance program, for example.
The drafting of chapter 5, Field Inspection is the most substantive portion of this Task
and obviously requires completion of Task 7.
Chapter 6 is concerned with Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Programs Relative to
Potential Failure Modes. Since prior potential failure modes did not identify O&M-
sensitive PFM's, it Is unlikely that such will result from the PFMA review and the
requirements of this Chapter should be efficiently addressed.
Our final conclusions and recommendations will be summarized in Chapter 1 of the
report, which will be certified, signed and stamped by Steve Samuelson, P.E. Slate of
Oregon. We do not anticipate that significant recommendations will be needed, as most
issues are in the process of being resolved. It would not be unexpected, however, for
the PFMA review session to result in a FERC requirement for protection of the
weathered material In the upper left abutment. The Independent Consultant's view on
such recommendations will be made in Chapter 1 of the report.
i
i
Mq Page 6
City of Ashland
FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Report for Hosler Dam
Project No. 2012-27
COST OF SERVICES
URS proposes to perform this project under the same terms and conditions as our
recent contract for the Hosler Dam Stability Analysis (City of Ashland Project No,
2010-04, PO Number 10592). Labor costs are equal to a multiplier of 2.8 on bare
salary at the time the work is performed.
L HOURS COST
1. Project Management 16 $ 1,968
2. PFMA Rewrite 88 13,588
3. Instrumentation Review 10 1,720 I
4. PFMA Review 50 10,584
5. PMF Erodibllity of Left Abutment 40 7,168
6. Part 12 Initial Drafts, Chapters 3, 4, & 7 44 7,688
7. PFMA Review Session and Part 12 Inspection 24 4,128
8. Part 12 Report 52 9,156
TOTAL LABOR: 330 $ 56.000
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
Rental Car $ 180
Misc. Travel Expenses (Fuel, taxi, parking, etc.) 110 I
Lodging 220
Meals & Incidental Expenses 140
Reproductions 100 I
Shipping/Postage 75
SUBTOTAL: $ 825
TOTAL $ 56.825
i
We are grateful for the opportunity to continue providing services to the City of i
Ashland and look forward to completing this scope of work for you. If you have any
questions, please contact me.
i
Sincerely,
L
f
Steve Samuelson, P.E.
Project Manager and Independent Consultant
CO: Mike Pevona
Steve Berson
Thom Ferguson
11IRS Page 7
i
I
i
1
Oily of Ashland
FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Report for Hester Dam
Project No. 2012-27
Task and ascription Start Finish
1 Project Management _ Throu hout Overall Schedule
2 PFMA Rewrite _ 1/2812013 2127/2013
3 Instrumentation Review 2/2512013 2/27/2013
_ 4 PFMA Review 314/2013 3/8/2013
5 PMFErotllblptYolLehAbutment.__._ _2/27!2013_ 3/7/2013
6 Part 121nitial Drafts, Cha tars 3, 4, & 7 2%1=13 3/11/2013
7a PFMA Review Session 3/192013 3/1912013
7b Concurrent Pan 12 & FERG Annual Inspection 3/20/2013 3/20/2013
Be Part 12 Report (2nd Drafts of Chaptes 3, 4, 7, 1 st drafts of others) 325/2013 4/22/2013
8b Finalize Part 12 Report 5812013 5/1012013
Project Corn letion _ See Note 2
Notes:
Schedule is contingent upon timely receipt of necessary Inputs from
the City of Ashland
2. Finalizing the Partl2 report by May 10th is contingent upon receipt of
the City's comments on the draft of the entire report one week prior to
the Finish Dale show for task 8b
URS Energy and Construction 1/14/2013
/
Page
"w,,-d 1 1 FIECA. RDER 1 1
CITY OF
ASHLAND DATE PO NUMBER
20 E MAIN ST. 3/13/2013 11480
ASHLAND, OR 97520
(541) 488-5300
VENDOR: 016631 SHIP TO: Ashland Public Works
URS ENERGY & CONSTRUCTION INC (541) 488-5587
10900 NE 8TH STREET SUITE 500 51 WINBURN WAY
BELLEVUE, WA 96004 ASHLAND, OR 97520
FOB Point: Req. No.:
Terms: Net Dept.:
Req. Del. Date: Contact: Rob Morris
Special Inst: confirming? NO
Quantity Unit Description Unit Price Ext. Price
URS Inspection Report $56,825 62,510.00
FERC Additional Work Allowance $5,625
Contract for Personal Services
Beqinninq date: 01/28/2013
Completion date: 12/31/2013
SUBTOTAL 62 510.00
BILL To: Account Payable TAX 0.00
20 EAST MAIN ST FREIGHT 0.00
541-5522010 TOTAL 62,510.00
ASHLAND, OR 97520
Account Number Project Number Amount Account Number Project Number Amount
E 670.08.15.00.70420 E 201227.999 15 627.50
E 690.11.15.00.60240 E 201227.999 46,882.50
(1 rC ~~y~i~
Auth ed Signature VENDOR COPY
FORM #3• CITY OF
A request for a Purchase Order ASHLAND
REQUISITION Date of request: 01/17/13
Required date for delivery: 12/31/2013
Vendor Name URS Energy & Construction, Inc.
Address, City, State, Zip 10900 NE 8"' Street, Suite 500, Bellvue, WA 98004
Contact Name & Telephone Number Steve Samuelson: (425) 4514284
Fax Number (425) 4514980
SOURCING METHOD
❑ Exempt from Competitive Bidding ❑ Emergency
❑ Reason for exemption: ❑ Invitation to Bid (Copies on file) ❑ Form #13, Written findings and Authorization
❑ AMC 2.50 Date approved by Council: ❑ Written quote or proposal attached
❑ Written quote or proposal attached
❑ Small Procurement Cooperative Procurement
Less than $5.000 ® Request for Proposal (Copies on file) ❑ State of Oregon
❑ Direct Award Date approved by Council, Contract #
❑ Verbal/Written quote(s) or proposal(s) ❑ State of Washington
Intermediate Procurement ❑ Sole Source Contract #
GOODS & SERVICES ❑ Applicable Form (#5,6, 7 or 8) ❑ Other government agency contract
$5.000 to $100.000 ❑ Written quote or proposal attached Agency
❑ (3) Written quotes attached ❑ Form #4, Personal Services $5K to $75K Contract #
PERSONAL SERVICES ❑ Special Procurement Intergovernmental Agreement
$5.000 to $75.000 ❑ Form #9, Request for Approval ❑ Agency
❑ Less than $35,000, by direct appointment ❑ Written quote or proposal attached Date original contract approved by Council:
❑ (3) Written proposals attached Dale approved by Council: (Date)
❑ Form 44, Personal Services $5K to $75K Valid until: Date
Description of SERVICES Total Cost
URS Inspection Report ($56,825) FERC Additional Work Allowance ($5625) $62,510
Item # Quantity Unit Description of MATERIALS Unit Price Total Cost
TOTAL`COSTs
® Per attached quotelproposal art
Project Number 2012.27
Account Number: 670.08.15.00.704200 (25%), 670.08.38.00.704200 (25%), 690.11.15.00.602400 (50%)
'Expenditure must be charged to the appropriate account numbers for the financials to accurately reflect the actual expenditures.
IT Director in collaboration with department to approve all hardware and software purchases:
IT Director Dafe' Support -Yes No
By signing this requisition form, I certify that the City's public contracting requireme ave.been satisfied.
Employee Signature: Department Head Signature::1 x
(Equal to or greatir than $5,000)
Additional signatures f applicable):
Funds appropriated for current fiscal year ~S// NO ,(Q:'< - ~2 3 ZO/3
Finance Director- (Equal to org er than $5,000) Date '
Comments:
Form #3 - Requisition
CITY OF
FORM #12 ASHLAND
REQUEST FOR BUDGET REVIEW
To: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director
From: Michael R. Faught, Public Works Director
Date: January 25, 2013
Re: Request for Budget Review to Verify Adequate Funds Available
in accordance with AMC 2.50.080(A) for Formal Processes the Finance Director must sign off that there are appropriate funds
for the project before the project is put out for bids. (Note: The department is to request by memo a budget review to the
Finance Director to ensure adequate funds are available prior to releasing the Invitation to Bid (ITB) or Request for Proposal
(RFP). If the amount of the successful bid or proposal exceeds the initial amount approved as a result of the budget review, the
department is to request by memo another budget review to ensure adequate funds are available for the additional amount prior
to the department requesting approval from the City Council to award and execute the intended public contract.)
REQUEST FOR BUDGET REVIEW PRIOR TO RELEASE OF ITB OR RFP:
Prgject name and number: FERC Part 12 Hosler Dam Safety Inspection
Description ofproject: Seventh Independent Consultant's Safety Inspection Report for Hosler Dam
Amount budgeted. $80,000.00
Account Number(s) and amounts if nudliple accounts: 670.08.15.00.704200 (25%);
670.08.38.00.704200 (25%); 690.11.15.00.602400 (50%)
Timeline gf inttfended project: Beginning Date: February 1, 2013; Completion Date: December 31, 2013 7~'-
Funds appropriated for current fiscal year: YE / NO
Department Bead
1 1AS1/ J Finance Direct ~ Date
Date L
mot=- D - - FY lot ; -Ze, [f
REQUEST FOR BUDGET REVIEW UPON CONTRACT AWARD IF ACTUAL
BID/PROPOSAL EXCEEDS THE INITIAL AMOUNT APPROVED ABOVE PRIOR TO
RELEASING ITB OR RFP:
Actual amount of bidlproposal: S
Funds appropriated for current fiscal year: YES / NO
Department Head
Finance Director Date
Date
Form #12 - Request for Budget Review to Verily Adequate Funds Available, Page 1 of 1, 1/25/2013