Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2019-195 20190076 Cornforth Consultants
Contract for Personal Services CITY O F CONSULTANT: CORNFORTH CONSULTANTS AS H LAN D CONTACT: GERRY M. HESLIN, PE 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 ADDRESS: 102 SW GREENBURG ROAD, SUITE 111 Telephone: 541/488-6002 PORTLAND, OR 97223 Fax: 541/488-5311 TELEPHONE: 503-452-1100 EMAIL: gheslin @CornforthConsultants.com • EFFECTIVE DATE: JUNE 6, 2018 TERM/COMPLETION DATE: PHASE 1: JUNE 30, 2019 NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT: $97,500 SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES - FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION (FERC) INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT FOR PART 12-D SAFETY INSPECTION AND DAM SAFETY REPORT; PROJECT#2018-15. SEE ATTACHED PROJECT SCOPE. ADDITIONAL TERMS: In the event of conflicts or discrepancies among the contract documents,the City of Ashland Contract for Personal Services will be primary and take precedence,and any exhibits or ancillary contracts or agreements having redundant or contrary provisions will be subordinate to and interpreted in a manner that will not conflict with the said primary City of Ashland Contract. FINDINGS: Pursuant to AMC 2.50.120, after reasonable inquiry and evaluation, the undersigned Department Head finds and determines that: (1) the services to be acquired are personal services; (2) the City does not have adequate personnel nor resources to perform the services; (3)the statement of work represents the department's plan for utilization of such personal services; (4)the undersigned consultant has specialized experience, education,training and capability sufficient to perform the quality, quantity and type of work requested in the scope of work within the time and financial constraints provided; (5) the consultant's proposal will best serve the needs of the City; and (6) the compensation negotiated herein is fair and reasonable. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein the CITY AND CONSULTANT AGREE as follows: 1. Findings/ Recitations. The findings and recitations set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 2. All Costs by Consultant: Consultant shall, at its own risk and expense, perform the personal services described above and, unless otherwise specified, furnish all labor, equipment and materials required for the proper performance of such service. 3. Qualified Work: Consultant 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 service 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. 4. Completion Date: Consultant shall start performing the service under this contract by the beginning date indicated above and complete the service by the completion date indicated above. 5. Compensation: City shall pay Consultant for service performed, including costs and expenses, the sum specified above. 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. 6. Ownership of Documents: All documents prepared by Consultant pursuant to this contract shall be the property of City. 7. Statutory Requirements: ORS 279C.505, 279C.515, 279C.520 and 279C.530 are made part of this contract. 8. Living Wage Requirements: If the amount of this contract is$20,688.86 or more, Consultant is required to comply with chapter 3.12 of the Ashland Municipal Code by paying a living wage, as defined in this chapter, to all employees performing work under this contract and to any Subcontractor who performs 50% or more of the service work under this contract. Consultant is also required to post the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B predominantly in areas where it will be seen by all employees. 9. Indemnification: Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and against all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses,judgments, subrogations, or other damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death), or damage (including loss or destruction)to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to the performance of this contract by Consultant(including but not limited to, Consultant's employees, agents, and others designated by Consultant to perform work or services Contract for Personal Services 1 • attendant to this contract). Consultant shall not be held responsible for any losses, expenses, claims, subrogations, actions, costs,judgments, or other damages, directly, solely, and proximately caused by the negligence of City. 10. Termination: a. Mutual Consent. This contract may be terminated at any time by the mutual written consent of both parties. b. City's Convenience. This contract may be terminated at any time by City upon not less than 30 days' prior written notice 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 Consultant, 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; H. 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; or Hi. If any license or certificate required by law or regulation to be held by Consultant 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 Consultant may terminate this contract in the event of a 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. H. Time is of the essence for Consultant's performance of each and every obligation and duty under this contract. City by written notice to Consultant of default or breach may at any time terminate the whole or any part of this contract if Consultant fails to provide services called for by this contract within the time specified herein or in any extension thereof. Hi. 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, cord of this section, Consultant shall immediately cease all activities under this contract, unless expressly directed otherwise by City in the notice of termination. Further, upon termination, Consultant 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 Consultant for work performed prior to the termination date if such work was performed in accordance with the Contract. 11. Independent Contractor Status: Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Consultant shall have the complete responsibility for the performance of this contract. Consultant shall provide workers' compensation coverage as required in ORS Chapter 656 for all persons employed to perform work pursuant to this contract. Consultant is a subject employer that will comply with ORS 656.017. 12. Assignment and Subcontracts: Consultant 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. Consultant 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. 13. Default. The Consultant shall be in default of this agreement if Consultant: commits any material breach or default of any covenant, warranty, certification, or obligation it owes under the Contract; its QRF status pursuant to the QRF Rules or loses any license, certificate or certification that is required to perform the Services or to qualify as a QRF if consultant has qualified as a QRF 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. 14. Insurance. Consultant shall at its sole expense provide the following types of 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. Professional Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $2,000,000 (two million dollars) per occurrence. This is to cover damages caused by any error, omission or negligent act related to the professional services to be provided under this Contract. c. General Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than$2,000,000 (two million dollars) per occurrence for'Bodily Injury and Property Damage. Contract for Personal Services 2 • d. Automobile Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $1,000,000 (one million dollars)for each accident for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, including coverage for owned, hired or non-owned vehicles, as applicable. e. 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 Consultant or its insurer(s)to the City. f. Additional Insured/Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall name The City of Ashland, Oregon, and its elected officials, officers and employees as Additional Insureds on any insurance policies, excluding Professional Liability and Workers' Compensation, required herein, but only with respect to Consultant's services to be provided under this Contract. The consultant's insurance is primary and non-contributory. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Contract, the Consultant shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates prior to commencing work under this contract. 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 Consultant shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions and/or self-insurance. 15. 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 Consultant 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. If, 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. Consultant, 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. 16. 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. CONSULTANT, 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. 17. Nonappropriations 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. Consultant understands and agrees that City's payment of amounts under this contract 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 Consultant, with no further liability to Consultant. Certification. Consultant shall sign the certification attached hereto as Exhibit A and herein incorporated by reference. Consultant: City of Ashland By By Signature Department Head Print Name Print Name Title Date W-9 One copy of a W-9 is to be submitted with the signed contract. Purchase Order No. Contract for Personal Services 3 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, it is an independent Contractor as defined in the contract documents, it is authorized to do business in Oregon, it is authorized to act on behalf of the City, and Contractor has checked four or more of the following criteria that apply to its business. (1) 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. (2) 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) I 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) Contract for Personal Services 4 CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON EXHIBIT B City of Ashland LIVING ALL employers described below must comply with City WAG E of Ashland laws regulating oavment of a livina waae. $14.81 per hour, effective June 30, 2017. Irk The Living Wage is adjusted annually every June 30 by the Consumer Price Index. Employees must be paid a working on a project or portion of employers may add the value of business of their employer, if the health care, retirement,401K and IRS living wage: employer has ten or more employees, eligible cafeteria plans(including and has received financial assistance childcare) benefits to the amount of ➢ For all hours worked under a service for the project or business from the wages received by the employee. contract between their employer and City of Ashland in excess of the City of Ashland if the contract $20,688.86. ➢ Note: For temporary and part-time exceeds$20,688.86 or more. employees,the Living Wage does not ➢ If their employer is the City of apply to the first 1040 hours worked in ➢ For all hours worked in a month if the Ashland, including the Parks and any calendar year. For more details, employee spends 50%or more of the Recreation Department. please see Ashland Municipal Code employee's time in that month Section 3.12.020. ➢ In calculating the living wage, For additional information: Call the Ashland City Administrator's office at 541-488-6002 or write to the City Administrator, City Hall, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520, or visit the City's website at www.ashland.or.us Notice to Employers: This notice must be posted predominantly in areas where it can be seen by all employees. CITY OF ASHLAND Contract for Personal Services 5 i �I I I �I J P-1426 it Estimated Cost by Task Task Estimated Task Cost Task 1 -FERC IC Approval,Pre-Conference, Initial Site Visit,Project Management $9,700 Task 2 -Review Existing Documents $19,900 Task 3 -Preliminary PFM Review with FERC, Revise PFMs as Necessary $ 3,800 Task 4 -Field Inspection and PFMA Review Session $15,700 Task 5 -Part 12D Safety Inspection Report, STID ?N Updates $46,500 Task 6 -Respond to FERC Questions $ 1,900 Total Estimated Cost $97,500 We trust that the above scope of work and cost estimate is sufficient for your needs. If you have any questions, please contact erry Heslin. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City on this important dam s review. . Respectfully, CORNFORTH CO INC. Michael R.Meyer,P.E. President Enclosure: Attachment 1 April 5,2018 4 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. CORNFORTH C O N S U L T A N T S 10250 S.W.Greenburg Road,Suite 111 Portland.Oregon 97223 Phone 503-452-1100 Fax 503-452-1528 April 5, 2018 P-1426 Ms.Paula Brown,P.E.,Public Works Director City of Ashland Public Works-Engineering 20 E.Main Street Ashland,Oregon 97520 Proposed Engineering Services Part 12 Dam Safety Inspection and Report,• Hosler Dam Ashland,Oregon Dear Ms.Brown: °` In accordance with your request, we are pleased to submit this proposal to provide engineering services related to the 2018 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)Part 12 Dam Safety Inspection at Hosler Dam. This letter provides summary of our proposed work tasks and an estimate of cost to provide these services. We propose that the Part 12 inspections and report preparation tasks be completed jointly by two FERC-recognized Independent Consultants (ICs), Gerry Heslin and Arthur Martin. Resumes for Mr. Heslin and Mr. Martin have been provided to the City to facilitate the IC approval process conducted by FERC for each Part 12 inspection cycle. Mr. Heslin will be the Project Manager, lead consultant and primary point of contact for the City on this assignment; however, both he and Mr. Martin will be involved with the dam safety inspections, data review and preparation of the safety inspection report. Scope of Work Our proposed scope of work includes the following tasks: Task 1 - Obtain FERC Approval of IC and Pre-Conference with FERC. The first task to be completed for this assignment is to obtain FERC approval for the proposed ICs. This would involve preparing resumes for Mr. Heslin and Mr. Martin for review by FERC's office in Washington DC. Following approval of the ICs we would ask the City to coordinate a pre- conference with the FERC Portland Regional Office. During the conference,FERC normally lays out their expectations for the Part 12 inspection and advises the licensee and ICs of any particular issues that should be addressed during the Part 12 inspection and report. We anticipate that the • P-1426 pre-conference with FERC would be completed by teleconference. As a follow up to the pre- conference,we propose to meet with the City to discuss any issues of concern for the project. We also propose to complete a brief site visit to Hosler Dam with City staff to become familiar with the project before completing any document or data review. Task 1 would also include overall project management efforts for the work. Task 2-Review Previous Documents. Task 2 would include a review of the documents relevant to the Part 12 safety inspection. The objective of Task 2 is for the ICs to develop and understanding of the structure, its basis of design, Potential Failure Modes(PFMs),and any items of concern on the project. Documents typically necessary to be reviewed include: the most-recent Part 12D report, the Supporting Technical Information Document (STID), the Dam Safety Surveillance and Monitoring Report (DSSMR), City operations procedures and plant operating records,the most-recent FERC annual inspection report, and correspondence between FERC and the City related to the project. We also understand that the previous IC is completing follow-up studies related to Probable Maximum Flood(PMF), foundation erodibility, and the project rating curve. Task 3 -Preliminary Review of PFMs. Task 3 would involve coordinating a brief meeting with the FERC project engineer to go over the PFMs for the project to make sure no substantive rewrites are necessary before convening the Potential Failure Mode Analysis (PFMA) review session. Recently, the FERC Portland Regional Office has placed increasing emphasis on the structure and wording of PFMs for projects under their jurisdiction. In our experience, conducting a brief review of PFMs in a small group early in the process enables the PFMA review session to be completed quickly and efficiently. We propose to conduct this meeting with FERC and the City by teleconference. Any revisions to the PFMs would be made before the field inspection. Task 4- Field I vi ction and PFMA Review Session. Task 4 would include field work for the Part 12 inspection. +m inspect% would focus on all water-retaining structures, spillway gates, flow control valves, and;sn - ante structures. For costing purposes, we have assumed that all areas requiring inspectioni. 1 be accessible by foot during the inspection. If there are areas of the project that are not accessible by foot, rope-access techniques could be utilized but have not been included in this cost proposal. A PFMA review session would also be completed as part of Task 4. We have assumed that the review meeting would be completed immediately before or after the field inspection. During the meeting, the PFMs in the current version of the STID would be reviewed and discussed with FERC, City engineering and operations staff, and the ICs. Any suggested changes to the PFMs would be documented and included in the Part 12D inspection report. Task 5 - Part 12D Report and STID Updates. Following the field inspection, the ICs would prepare the safety inspection report and any updates to the STID. Draft copies of the Part 12D report and STID updates would be prepared for the City to review before final hard copies are prepared and printed. The Part 12D report would be prepared following the outline provided by April 5,2018 2 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. r I S. . I P-1426 FERC in their Part 12D reminder letter issued to the City before the inspection. We propose to schedule a teleconference meeting with City staff to discuss comments on the draft documents before changes are made. We anticipate that approximately three weeks would be required to incorporate City comments on the draft documents and reproduce hard copies for submission to FERC. Task 6-Respond to FERC Questions. The fmal task in the Part 12D cycle is to respond to any questions from FERC related to information in the Part 12D report or STID updates. Responses to any questions would be submitted to the City for review and comment. To maintain proper lines of communication,we propose that finalized responses be provided to FERC by the City. Schedule After receiving an authorization to proceed, and after FERC's approval of the Independent Consultants, we will coordinate with the City to schedule kW*ates for the Part 12 Inspections. The first task would be to collect all relevant project in 0 and instrumentation data for rig,review and assessment. It is anticipated this review<4would be,completed prior to the field inspections of project facilities. For planning purposes, we anticip. - ubmitting a draft of the Part 12D report approximately three months after the field inspections. For a November 1 report due date, this would suggest that the field inspection should be completed in late June 2018. We will finalize and deliver the final Part 1 deport hard copies and electronic copy within three III weeks after receipt of the City's review cont ents, ,,4 Cost Estimate We estimate the cost to complete the scope of work outlined above would be a Not-to-Exceed amount of $97,500. A breakdlvvn of the estimated costs by tasks is provided in the table below. A detailed breakdo\sn of staff hours and estimated cost for each task is included as Attachment 1. W- ;- ee not to exceed this amount without your prior written authorization. April 5,2018 3 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. • LABOR ESTIMATE OF LABOR I Job Name Hosier Dam Part 12D Job No. P-1426 Prep.Date 3/29/2018 Prep.By GMH 8 U rt L m n O Q = n ryya N O rn ` H O Task Description iw= iw co co 0 U u H 0 Project Management 16 16 Obtain FERC Approval for IC 2 2 4 Pre-conference with FERC 2 2 4 Meet w/City to Identify Key Issues,Obtain Review Doc's,Brief Site Visit 14 14 Review Previous Part 12 6 ' 8 14 Review STID 6 8 14 Review DSSMR&Instrumentation Trends 4 8 12 Review Operations Procedures&Plant Operating Records ,(9 4 4 8 Review Existing Stability Analyses 6 8 14 Review FERC Inspection Report -il 2 2 4 Review New Rating Curve,Erodibility Report,and PMF Routing 4 6 10 Review Project Correspondence € ' 1 ',, 4 4 8 Review PFMs with City and FERC PRO 4 4 8 Modifiy PFMS As Needed Before Field Inspection 6 2 8 Inspection Prep 2 2 4 Mobilization/Demobilization 10 10 20 PFMA Review Session 8 8 16 Field Inspection 10 10 20 Draft Part 12 Report 32 80 24 6 142 Draft STID Updates 8 16 6 4 34 Meeting w/City 4 4 8 Final Part 12 Report 4 8 4 6 22 Final STID Updates 4 8 4 4 20 Response to FERC Questions 4 4 8 0 Labor(Hr): 166 206 38 22 432 1 1 Prop ...' I /7 Proposal I March 2018 F11/41,k FaIll CITY 0 F ASHLAND PROJECT #J 2018-15 FERC INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT INSPECTION SAFETY I 12 SAF PART . FOR P 1 DAM —- RT - - OSLER H SAFETY REPORT DAM AND D ....„.. .... ... ,- „,.,.. ., ..„ .,-, :,...71,,,,,-..,i. 1-,7, ,-.•-r4,-4.-",",,,..":„,,,:t‘,,,,,,g7i,.4.,;.,,./.:,,,,,,,,,; .4 t'.°.4'-,°*"''''' '3'.•'.v.?,t ,Z.,-if., `Q.'-, . ..... -4., ' ..—,. ---------t- ---„ - .--,''sy.t"**1,—,,k•tlft ''.. t % ''..`,,".4,,,, *AIN . .•' 4:iiiii,,,:;:,--..;:..ttv.r.7---r.7 ,.:.,,, „ .,,,, ,.. ''' .- ..:,...*,A44,<,,,,t if''' Ak,'.31.^,':':).371'4,..:' •', > ■:,,1,d+. ._. :77,::',,i,"*,•, '''' . ' ' - -, ' i,-;''''''''''',14.4'r'4.1'‘"''-.':oft'Z'",,,-*';1"iLl r,:'' . --''''l 1*, 4';,:,',J,'-,:-, .:,.,-,',.,-: ' --1- - - ..,..),...z : ',!,t1,4„,:,,taft:::,,,,.f,,,,,-....: .4'.;,.?.--:','Z'',li'l,''''':::•,;';, ' '1•"'' '''' ',5*- ' , ,.‘, .,..,:i , ' ?":1q," f-,,,'i ;• cici'"',/ L'',,*-,' 1,,,t.t.Ai./"'',-.''' "`,' '' 1'4, '' ''''''4'/0.,' ,...., Asit:01 , . t , • „,,.. ,,,,, .', . , , 4 ',1., ,,A4Av.4.6;'.Vt.:',■°,0'4..'''A ',41'',- 1'ti.:', , ''':'''''''‘. 1,' '..i. ' '''.'-'1,'1,`i'''l' .1'4, ..•,'".:'„?' ,:t:,--,,I,Ft.-.,-tp,,1_,-.1,..n, . ‘,„,,,,, ,N.,,,,,,,,,,,, s,,,,,,-, 4: , ,,,,,,,....- ,, iiii ''''''''‘''s.:,'-'. -'6,72:''' ' ' ' ' ,4"q* ::*c:'-,;1;,,, •,„a.',---” •• ' '4..„ ,, • , ,_, , :.. •:.i14,,,t-•46:,i.f:.,,'; — 4...' '' „4,'":,;' ' "' -"' .„ • .‘,.- ,, ' •c-oRNF H 0 ... "RTI S ' ULTA N 0 N S S C „,,■ . .tants.com f t_il .ort hcons www.corn 1 SECTION 8- PROPOSAL FORM Proposals should be prepared and organized in a clear and concise manner, and must include all information required by RFP. Headers,Titles or Tabs should be used to identify required information. Responses to the Evaluation Criteria found in Section 6 shall be organized in the same order listed in that Section, preferably by re-stating the Criteria,then responding below. REQUIRED RESPONSE DOCUMENTS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR RESPONSE: (Place a check in front of the item indicating inclusion in your response) ® RESPONSE TO ALL EVALUATION CRITERIA listed in Section 6 ® SECTION 8—Proposal Form ! Bidder Residency Information ® Independent Contractor Certification MWESB INFORMATION City encourages contracting with minority owned,woman owned, and emerging small business (MWESB). The State of Oregon offers a certification process. Indicate below if your business is a MWESB and if so,which categories have been state certified. MWESB certified?Yes No X . If yes, indicate which categories below: Minority Owned Woman Owned Emerging Small Business_ Veteran Owned_ ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF ADDENDA TO PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS: Proposer acknowledges receipt of Addenda and agrees to be bound by their contents. Circle each RFP addendum received:01 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, 10 Check if not applicable or no addenda were received: OSBEELS/OSBGE/ORBAE No.(s) Provide name(s),title(s), and certification number(s)for each Key Person listed under Section 6.3 (b). Attach additional sheet if necessary) Name: Gerry Heslin Title: Civil Engineer Certification No: 53154 Name: Arthur Martin Title: Civil Engineer Certification No: 14040 Name: David Bugni Title: Structural Engineer Certification No: 15065 Name: Title: Certification No: Name: Title: Certification No: Name: Title: Certification No: 19 PROPOSER INFORMATION: Cornforth Consultants,Inc. Proposer Company Name 10250 SW Greenburg Road, Suite 111, Portland, OR, 97223 Company Address (from which work will be performed) 503.452.1100 503.452.1528 93-0837288 Telephone Number Fax Number FEDERAL ID NUMBER Person Signing REP Michael R. Meyer Title President Signature: Email Address: mmeyer @cornforthconsultants.com 20 • e' CORNFORTHCit y of Ashland Project No.2018-15 •,,,.. C O N S U L T A N T S FERC Independent Consultant for Hosier Dam 10250 S.W.Greenburg Road.Suite 111 Portland,Oregon 97223 Phone 503-452-1100 Fax 503-452-1528 Bidder Residency Information Cornforth Consultants,Inc.is a C corporation. We have been incorporated in the State of Oregon since 1983. Our State of Oregon Business Registry Number is 968705-15. All of our proposed key project staff are Oregon Residents,and are registered Professional Engineers in Oregon. Independent Contractor Certification Cornforth Consultants,Inc. hereby certifies that we are an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Bidder Residency Information March I,2018 Independent Contractor Certification ro7) COR.NFOR.TH y Cit of Ashland Project No.2018-15 �. •� C O N S U L T A N T S FERC Independent Consultant for Hosler Dam 10250 S.W.Greenburg Road.Suite 111 Portland,Oregon 97223 Phone 503-452-1100 Fax 503-452-1528 March 1, 2018 Ms. Paula Brown, P.E., Public Works Director City of Ashland Public Works- Engineering 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Project No. 2018-15 FERC Independent Consultant for Part 12 Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report Hosler Dam in Ashland, Oregon Dear Ms. Brown: Cornforth Consultants,Inc. (CCI)is pleased to present this proposal to provide Independent Consultant Services for the FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report for the City of Ashland's Hosler Dam. This proposal provides a summary of our project approach and understanding, examples of similar project experience, qualifications and experience of our proposed project team members, and our staffing availability and response time. 4.1 Project Approach 4.1) Provide a description of your firm's approach to complete a FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection and Darn Safety Report for Hosler Dam. Include a summary of prior partnerships with FERC and city stalls. Include a summary of your quality control program. Project Approach and Understanding Based on the RFP document,Phase 1 would consist of a Part 12D safety inspection and report. Necessary studies identified during the previous safety inspection are anticipated to be completed and available for review with the Supporting Technical Information Document(STID)for the project. We intend to approach the work using a framework similar to that employed on several recent Part 12D inspections. We would assign Gerry Heslin and Arthur Martin to execute the work as co-Independent Consultants(ICs). Mr.Heslin and Mr.Martin have completed multiple Part 12D inspections together,and their work has been received favorably by FERC. If authorized,Mr.Heslin and Mr.Martin would remain available to continue work for Phase 2. The individual tasks anticipated for Phase 1 are outlined in the following paragraphs. Task 1 —Obtain FERC Approval for Independent Consultants. The first item to be completed for Phase 1 would be to submit resumes for Mr.Heslin and Mr. Martin to FERC for approval. Since both have been approved multiple times to complete Part 12D inspections,this step is anticipated to require little effort. Task 2—Review STID and Supplemental Studies. This task involves a review of existing information on the project. The objective is for the ICs to develop an understanding of the structure,its basis of design,Potential Failure Modes (PFMs), and any previously-identified concerns on the project. A brief meeting with the City would likely be helpful before beginning the data review to highlight any on-going studies and/or concerns at the project. Typical documents that are helpful for the review include the most recent Part 12D report, the STID, the most recent FERC annual inspection report, operations &maintenance procedures,the most recent Dam Safety Surveillance and Monitoring Report (DSSMR), and any relevant correspondence with FERC that is not included in the STID. Cornforth Consultants,Inc. 1 March 1,2018 • City of Ashland Project No.2018-15 ° ® FERC Independent Consultant for Hosler Dam Task 3—Preliminary Review of PFMs. FERC and the Portland Regional Office,in particular, have placed an emphasis on improving the structure and completeness of the PFMs for projects in recent years. In our recent experience,it has been helpful to schedule a meeting with the FERC project engineer to identify any perceived shortcomings in the PFMs before the field inspection and review of the Potential Failure Mode Analysis(PFMA) report are completed. If suggested revisions are identified, the PFMs can be revised before a large group meets to discuss the PFMs during the field inspection. Task 4—Field Inspection and PFMA Review. Once the document review and any necessary revisions to the PFMs are completed, the field inspection would be performed. We anticipate that the field inspection would be performed with the City's operations staff and the project engineer from FERC. The inspection would focus on all water-retaining structures, spillway gates,flow-control valves, and any conveyance structures identified in the PFMs that could result in an uncontrolled release of stored water. Generally, access to all project features is provided by project operations staff;however, our firm has the d4 , capability to use rope-access techniques to inspect areas that are inaccessible on foot,if necessary. � t A formal review of the PFMs in the PFMA report would be completed either before the field inspection . 4',.� or after, depending on what is preferred by the City 1 - �'' ` and/or the FERC project engineer. The PFMA review Gitty of Ashlar 's l p � gi rd's Hosler Darn session is typically completed on site with project operations and engineering staff. City staff,the ICs, and the FERC project engineer review and discuss the PFMs, and revise them as necessary to clarify initiating mechanism,progression to failure, or to address new equipment and/or procedures that affect the likelihood of the PFM occurring. Proposed modifications to PFMs are recorded and included in the Part 12D inspection report so they can be reviewed again by the FERC Portland Regional Office before they are incorporated into the STID. Task 5—Part 12D Report and STID Updates. Following the field inspection and PFMA review session,the Part 12D inspection report would be prepared summarizing the inspection and the review of project documentation. The report would follow the outline included with the letter that FERC provided to the City reminding that a Part 12D inspection is due to be completed. We would provide a draft copy of the report to the City and address any comments before providing final copies. An electronic version of the report would be included with each hard copy of the Part 12D inspection report. If required, any updates to the STID would be prepared and provided to the City in electronic format. Task 6—Responding to FERC Questions. If needed,we would respond to any requests from FERC to clarify information and/or recommendations in the Part 12D inspection report. This is not a common occurrence,but FERC can ask for addenda to be issued for the Part 12D report after it is submitted to clarify items for the record. Prior Partnerships with FERC CCI has successfully completed Part 12D safety inspections since 1983, and we have tailored our approach to performing safety inspections as FERC has increased its reporting requirements. Currently, CCI has five FERC-approved ICs on staff who routinely work in pairs on safety inspection assignments. Mr. Heslin and Mr. Martin have worked together on three inspections as co-ICs, and have proven to be an effective and thorough team. Their deliverables have always been accepted by FERC on the first Cornforth Consultants,Inc. 2 March 1,2018 • City of Ashland Project No.2018-15 o FERC Independent Consultant for Hosler Dam submission without any required addenda. In addition, our ICs are involved in numerous professional organizations, and serve on technical committees with many FERC engineers. These interactions have fostered a positive working relationship and have contributed to successful submittals. Please see Sections 4.2.b and 4.2.c for more information regarding our FERC-related program experience. Quality Control Program CCI's well-established project management policies and procedures are implemented on all projects to ensure that professional, quality work products are developed that meet our client's needs, and that the project is delivered for the contracted budget and schedule. Listed below are key components of our quality control program that have proven to be very successful over the years. These methods would serve as our approach to the overall management and integration of all activities required for the work. • A senior-level engineer(Gerry Heslin)is assigned as the Project Manager(PM), and becomes the point-of-contact with the City P h' • The PM consults with the City, and creates a detailed project schedule with key milestones and delivery dates • Technical staff(Arthur Martin, David Bugni) are assigned to the project based on the detailed schedule of work tasks, and report directly to the PM • Progress of the technical work is monitored frequently by the PM • The PM is responsible for maintaining close communications with the designated City point-of- contact, and would immediately communicate any items that may affect the budget, schedule, or deliverable items • Issues and concerns are discussed with the City so that project objectives and deliverables can be modified,if needed,to meet the City's needs • All deliverables are final peer-reviewed by in-house, senior-level staff(Gerry Heslin,Mike Meyer) • Draft reports are submitted for review by the City, and finalized to address comments • Project expenditures are updated weekly and reviewed by the PM • In-house meetings,both formal and informal, are held frequently to review progress,identify potential issues, and resolve conflicts to keep the project on track 4.2 Project Experience 4.2.a) Describe how your firm is organized and how its resources will be utilized to complete the work. Firm Resources and Organization CCI is a C corporation. We are a 28-person geotechnical engineering firm headquartered in Portland, Oregon. Our firm was founded in 1983 by Dr. Derek Cornforth, and is currently in its 35th year of operation. CCI is highly specialized in performing complex geotechnical and geologic assignments with particular emphasis in dams, dam safety studies, seismic and liquefaction studies, earthquake engineering, and slope stability evaluation/mitigation.We have a very experienced staff of 23 geotechnical engineers and engineering geologists with exceptionally low turnover. Ten of our senior associates have 14 to 43 years of experience in the State of Oregon. Five of our senior associates have been approved by FERC as Independent Consultants for dam safety evaluations. In addition to our full- time professional staff,we have six senior staff consultants who have a combined total of over 240 years of engineering experience, and can provide on-call technical expertise, as needed. Because all of our key staff are located in Portland, Oregon,we can readily call upon additional resources to assist with multiple design tasks or fast-track issues that arise during the course of a project. Cornforth Consultants,Inc. 3 March 1,2018 City of Ashland Project No.2018-15 FERC Independent Consultant for Hosler Dam °` r 4.2.b) Provide a summary of relevant FERC related program experience. FERC-Related Program Experience CCI has extensive experience performing dam safety evaluations for various dam owners including the US. Army Corps of Engineers, City of Portland Water Bureau, Eugene Water&Electric Board, City of Astoria, City of Spokane, PacifiCorp, and Portland General Electric. CCI's recent FERC-related program experience includes: Pelton-Round Butte Hydroelectric Complex FERC Part 12D Safety Inspections,Madras, OR; Bull Run Hydroelectric Complex FERC Part 12D Safety Inspections, Sandy, OR; Oak Grove Hydroelectric Complex FERC Part 12D Safety Inspections,Three Lynx, OR; and Upriver Dam FERC Part 12D Safety Inspections, Spokane,WA. One of our proposed co-ICs for this project,Arthur Martin, retired from FERC as Portland Regional Director, and has over 50 years' experience performing dam safety evaluations,including potential failure modes analysis, risk analysis, risk-informed decision making, and development of interim risk reduction measures. 4.2.c) Provide a concise description of at least three projects in the last 10 years involving similar work to those listed in the scope of work. Similar Projects in the Last 10 Years Pelton-Round Butte Hydro Complex FERC Part 12 Safety Inspections and PFMA Review Madras, Oregon; Owner: Portland General Electric (PGE) CCI performed the 2012 and 2017 Part 12D Safety Inspections and �' ' k Reporting for PGE's Pelton-Round Butte Hydro Complex which 414 .. includes a 204-foot high, thin-arch concrete dam, with a crest length - of 776-feet; a 440-foot high, 1,450-foot long earth and rockfill dam and powerhouse; and an earth and rockfill embankment with a central . . concrete spillway and powerhouse section with multiple radial-arm spillway gates. Each structure is considered a separate project with its ...3�, own PFMA Report, STID, and Part 12D Safety Inspection Report. Inspection and review tasks included detailed review of prior technical reports, field inspections with FERC and PGE, assessment of operational procedures, review and assessment of existing surveillance and monitoring instrumentation,review of the PFMA workshop/report with FERC regulators,an audit PGE's dam safety program, and preparation of the Part 12D Safety Inspection Report. Bull Run Dam No. 1 and No. 2 FERC Part 12 Safety Inspections and PFMA Review Sandy, Oregon; Owner: City of Portland Water Bureau (PWB) CCI performed the 2017 Part 121) Safety Inspections and Reporting; for PWB's Bull Run Dam No. 1 and No. 2. Dam No. 1 is a curved concrete gravity structure 194-feet high and 970-feet long. Dam No. 2 t,.r_.��, ,-ice includes a 145-foot high earth and rockfill dam and other appurtenant structures. CCI's scope of work included on-site project inspections, review of construction and instrument monitoring history, developing; recommendations for operations and maintenance, and preparation o the Part 12D Safety Inspection Report. A large amount of geotechnical information was reviewed including piezometer data and slope stability calculations. Other work tasks included participating in the PFMA review sessions and preparing the draft and final PFMA summary reports for both dams. FERC also requested an independent audit of the City's Owner Dam Safety Program (OI)SP'' to bring it in line with the most recent FERC guidance documents. Cornforth Consultants,Inc. 4 March 1,2018 • I • A r/Siot1, City of Ashland Project No.2018-15 ./ 4' " FERC Independent Consultant for Hosler Dam Oak Grove Hydro Complex FERC Part 12 Safety Inspections and PFMA Review Three Lynx, Oregon; Owner: Portland General Electric (PGE) The Oak Grove Hydro Complex is comprised of several structures including: Lake Harriet Dam, a 45-foot high concrete-arch structure; `.� Timothy Meadows Dam, a 110-foot high earthfill embankment; and Frog Lake Dam, a 50-foot high earthfill embankment. In 2012 and 2017, CCI performed the FERC Part 12D Safety Inspections for the Owner,PGE. Inspection and reporting tasks included field inspections of the existing structures, participation in the PFMA workshop sessions, review of past studies and construction records, review of instrumentation•ata,recommendations for operational and maintenance-related issues, assisting PGE in preparing the STID, and preparing the Part 12D Safety Inspection Report. The work required extensive modifications to the PFMs to bring them in to line with the most recent FERC guidance for risk-informed decision making. 4.2.d) Indicate which members of the proposed project team, if any, who worked on the example projects, and their involvement. These team members should be included,in the Key Persons list submitted in 4.3(b) below. Key Staff Involved on Projects in Section 4.2.c Both of our firm's proposed ICs for this project, Gerry Heslin and Arthur Martin,worked on the example projects in Section 4.2.c. Mr Heslin was the co-IC for the Bull Run and Oak Grove projects. Mr. Martin was the co-IC for the Pelton-Round Butte and Bull Run projects. Mr. Bugni has worked in a supporting role providing structural analysis for all of the projects listed in Section 4.2.c. 4.2.e) Indicate your contingency plan should the FERC approved inde pendent consultant/lead investi g ator is una ble to complete the project. Contingency Plan In the event that either Mr. Heslin or Mr.Martin are unable to complete the project as Independent Consultant/Lead Investigator,our contingency plan is to have Mike Meyer and Chris Carpenter complete the safety inspections and reporting tasks.Both Mr.Meyer and Mr. Carpenter have been approved by FERC as Independent Consultants,and have performed multiple Part 12D safety inspections in recent years. 4.2. Submit references for three of the projects described above. Include the Owner's name, organization name, contact name, contact email and phone. References for Projects in Section 4.2.c 1. Pelton-Round Butte Part 12D Safety Inspections: Owner: Portland General Electric; Contact: Sid Hillier, P.E., Civil Engineering Manager; Email: Sid.Hillier @pgn.com; Phone: 503.464.7989 2. Bull Run No. 1 and No. 2 Part 12D Safety Inspections: Owner: City of Portland Water Bureau; Contact Gerald Pierce, P.E., Portland Hydro Power Assistant Manager; Email: Gerald. Pierce @portlandoregon.gov; Phone: 503.823.7523 3. Oak Grove Part 12D Safety Inspections: Owner: Portland General Electric; Contact: David Hendrix, P.E., Power Supply Engineering Services; Email: David.Hendrix @pgn.com; Phone: 503.464.8119 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. 3 March 1,2018 • • 'r- City of Ashland Project No.2018-15 4. ®` FERC Independent Consultant for Hosier Dam 4.3 Project Team Experience 4.3.a) Provide a description of the proposed organizational structure to be used for the project. Organizational Structure , , .`CORNFORTH i vas ' ,., C O N S U L T A N T S CITY OF ASHLAND Contract Manager " Mike Meyer,P.E., Public Works Dire Paula Br own, PI;. Overall Project Manager Gerry Heslin,PE.,G.E. 1 Structural Engineer Independent Consultants David Bugni,P.E., S.E. Gerry Heslin,P.E., G.E. Arthur Martin,RE. 4.3.b) Provide a list of the key staff proposed for this project ("Key Person(s)'). Be specific on the individual that will be named as the Independent Consultant responsible for FERC compliance. This individual must be approved by FERC prior to any contract execution. Provide a concise summary of each key person(s)'s role, and a description of their relevant experience for this project. Key Staff's Project Role and Experience Gerry Heslin, P.E., G.E. - Project Manager/Independent Consultant Experience: Role:As the Project Manager and co-IC for the project,Mr.Heslin would be the primary 21 Years technical contact for the City. He would coordinate and assign all work tasks to the License: project team,and would be responsible for maintaining the project schedule and budget. P.E., G.E. - OR Qualifications: Mr. Heslin has 21 years of experience performing dam safety studies in Education: the Pacific Northwest. He has been approved by FERC as an Independent Consultant M.S. for Part 12D safety inspections, and has also participated in a Risk Informed Decision Geotechnical Making (RIDM) symposium coordinated by FERC. Mr. Heslin's similar project Engineering experience includes assignments as IC or Project Manager for: Oak Grove Hydro Virginia Tech Complex Part 12D Safety Inspections and Reporting in 2017 (PGE); Bull Run Hydro Complex Part 12D Safety Inspections and Reporting in 2017 (PWB); Upriver Dam FERC Part 12 STID Updates(City of Spokane,WA);Bear Creek Dam Seismic Stability Evaluation (City of Astoria, OR);John Day Dam North Embankment liquefaction Evaluation (Corps of Engineers); Hebgen Dam Intake Tower Modifications (North # Western Energy); and Cowlitz Falls Dam Fish Passage Structures(Tacoma Power). F Mr. Heslin has extensive experience managing and coordinating Part 12D safety inspection and reporting assignments for dam owners. He was the co-IC and Project Manager for the Oak Grove and Bull Run Part 12D safety inspections, and is very knowledgeable about the latest FERC guidelines regarding dam safety and reporting %" requirements. Cornforth Consultants,Inc. 6 March 1,2018 • Pr✓/ City of Ashland Project No.2018-15 fir°+ FERC Independent Consultant for Hosler Dam Arthur Martin, P.E. -Independent Consultant Experience: Role: Mr. Martin would be the co-IC for the project,and would lead the review of the 56 Years project documents (i.e., STID,DSSMR, all recent work completed by AECOM). License: Qualifications: With 56 years of dam safety experience, Mr. Martin has performed P.E. - OR numerous Part 12D safety inspections in more than 15 states. He has been approved • Education: by FERC as an Independent Consultant for concrete and embankment dams, and was M.S.. Civil previously the Director of the Portland Regional Office of FERC, which administers Engineering, the dam safety and license compliance program for over 400 dams in the Pacific University of Northwest, Alaska, and Wyoming. During his tenure, he participated on numerous Texas dam review teams,and also trained technical staff in the inspection of concrete gravity and embankment dams. Since joining CCI in 1997,he has provided senior engineering services on numerous concrete, rockfill, and earthen dams throughout the region. David Bugni, P.E., S.E. - Structural Engineer Experience: Role:Mr.Bugni is a registered Oregon Structural Engineer,and would provide structural 32 Years analysis and review for the project,as needed. License: Qualifications: Mr. Bugni has provided structural engineering services to public and P.E., S.E. - OR private clients in the Pacific Northwest for over 32 years, and has worked with CCI Education: on hydro projects for the last 20 years. In 2016,he joined CCI as an expert staff M.S. Structural consultant, and has assisted with the structural-related aspects on many of the firm's En 'neerino hydroelectric projects. Mr. Bugni has served on the State of Oregon's Seismic Task University of Force, and the City of Portland's Bureau of Buildings Structural Advisory Board. California at Prior to becoming a staff consultant for CCI,Mr. Bugni held a teaching position at Berkeley Portland State University's Department of Civil Engineering Graduate School where he lectured in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 4.3.c) Submit resumes that support each hey Person's relevant experience. No more than five resumes should be submitted as Appendix A, and will not count against page limit. Key Staff Resumes Detailed resumes for our Key Project Staff are included with this proposal in Appendix A. 4.3.d) Indicate which individual will manage the project and be the primary contact. Indicate the specific experience this individual has managing project similar to the proposed project. Project Manager/Primary Point-of-Contact Gerry Heslin,P.E., G.E.would manage the project and be the primary contact with the City. Please see Section 4.3.b for his qualifications and experience managing projects similar to the proposed project. 4.3.e) State the estimated proportion of each hey Person's time that will be spent on City's project vs. total time spent on all Key Person's projects during the term of contract. Percentage of Key Staff's Time Commitment % of Time on % of Time on Key Staff Project Role City's Project Other Projects Gerry Heslin, P.E., G.E. Project Manager/ 40% 60% Independent Consultant Cornforth Consultants,Inc. 7 March 1,2018 i/ 407 City of Ashland Project No.2018-15 FERC Independent Consultant for Hosler Dam Arthur Martin, P.E. Independent Consultant 50% 50% David Bugni, P.E., S.E. Structural Engineer 20% 80% 4.4 Ability to Successfully Complete Similar Projects On Time and Within Budget 4.4) For each of the three (3)projects listed in response to 4.2(c),provide a discussion of whether the project was completed on time and on budget or needed to be revised. Briefly explain the reason for any revisions, and what attempts were made to bring the project back on schedule and within budget. Successful Completion of Projects in Section 4.2.c In our experience,it's always best to carefully outline scope, schedule, and cost ahead of the work. However, even the most diligent planning cannot prevent items from coming up that require contract modifications. Our management philosophy calls for project managers to clearly communicate with the Owner regarding technical matters as well as contract items. The following outlines our experiences with the projects listed in Section 4.2.c. The Oak Grove Part 12D inspection was completed as FERC was updating their engineering guidelines. At the PFMA session, the FERC project engineer required major changes to the project PFMs to bring them in-line with new guidelines. Rather than spending days rewriting the PFMs as a group,it was decided to postpone the PFMA review until after re-writes had been completed. Once the group reconvened, the PFMA review for all three dams was completed very quickly. The fee for the additional effort was modest, and was authorized by PGE through a contract modification. The schedule was not modified, and the Part 12D report was submitted ahead of schedule. CCI was selected to complete the Pelton-Round Butte Part 12D inspection shortly after the Oak Grove PFM experience described above. In anticipation that FERC would require PFMs to be re- written, a contingency scope item was added to the contract to be activated in the event that the work was required. FERC did require heavy modifications to the PFMs,but this was identified in the pre- coordination call before any substantive work had been completed. Since the re-writes were completed before a large group was assembled, the impact to the budget was minimal. There was no impact on the schedule because the effort was incorporated into the original work schedule. The Bull Run Part 12D inspection was the final project completed in Section 4.2.c. Costs were submitted as part of the proposal, and were based on information provided in the RFP. In between awarding the work to CCI and creating a contract for the work, FERC clarified that a quantitative hydraulic study was required to address a Category 3 PFM. The City asked for an estimate of effort required to fulfill the requirement, and added the work to the scope before the contract was signed. The work was completed on budget and met the delivery schedule outlined by FERC. 4.5 Termination for Default 4.5) Proposers shall indicate if they have had a contract terminated for default in the last five years. Termination for Default in the Last 5 Years CCI has never had a contract terminated for default in the last five years or in the entire 35 years that we have been in business. Cornforth Consultants,Inc. 8 March 1,2018 Appendix A: Key Project Staff Resumes - ` % C O N S U L T A N T S CORNFORTH • GERRY HESLIN, SENIOR ASSOCIATE ENGINEER Education M.S. in Geotechnical Engineering,Virginia Tech,Blacksburg,Virginia B.S.in Civil Engineering,University of Portland,Portland,Oregon Registration Civil Engineer—Oregon,Washington Geotechnical Engineer—Oregon Societies Member,United States Society on Dams(USSD) Member,Association of State Dam Safety Officials(ASDSO) Member,Society of American Military Engineers(SAME) Honors 2006-2007 President,Oregon Section ASCE Geotechnical Group 2009-2011 Leadership Development Group—American Council of Engineering Companies of Oregon Professional Career 2001-present Cornforth Consultants,Inc.,Portland,Oregon;Senior Associate Engineer 1997-2000 Shannon&Wilson,Inc.,Seattle,Washington;Senior Engineer Relevant Experience Mr.Heslin has 21 years of dam safety experience in the State of Oregon. His technical experience has focused heavily on dams and levee embankments.He has been approved by FERC as an Independent Consultant for Part 12D safety inspections. Mr.Heslin attended a Risk Informed Decision Making(RIDM)symposium coordinated by the FERC,and has applied concepts introduced at the symposium to dam safety projects. Representative projects include the following: Oak Grove Hydroelectric Complex 2017 Part 12D Safety Inspections and PFMA Review,Three Lynx, Oregon, Portland General Electric(PGE). Project Manager and co-Independent Consultant for the 2017 Part 12D Safety Inspections and PFMA review for PGE's Oak Grove hydro complex. The facilities include three earth fill dams;one rockfill/concrete composite dam;flowline conduits;penstocks;and a powerhouse. Inspection and reporting tasks included:dam safety inspections,participation in PFMA review sessions; updates of the STID;review of past studies and construction records;review of instrumentation data; providing recommendations for operational and maintenance-related issues;and preparation of the Part 12D Safety Inspection Report. Bull Run Dam Hydroelectric Project Part 12D Safety Inspection and PFMA Review,Sandy,Oregon, City of Portland Water Bureau(PWB). Project Manager and co-Independent Consultant for the 2017 Part 12D Safety Inspection and PFMA Workshop for PWB's Bull Run Dam No.2;a 145-foot-high earth and rockfill dam;a 1,000-foot-long, 15-foot diameter,power supply tunnel;and 1,800-foot long,7-foot diameter water supply tunnel. Participated in the PFMA Workshop sessions and prepared the draft and fmal PFMA summary report.Conducted on-site project inspections,reviewed construction and instrument monitoring history, developed recommendations for operations and maintenance,evaluated history and repair of sinkhole areas, and prepared the FERC Part 12 Dam Safety Inspection Report. Upriver Dam Hydroelectric Facility FERC Part 12 STI Updates,Spokane,Washington, City of Spokane. Lead Technical Reviewer responsible for updating Section 7 of the Supporting Technical Information Document(STID)for the City of Spokane's Upriver Dam. Reviewed data from piezometers and survey monitoring points and evaluated data trends with respect to potential failure modes identified for the structure. Created data plots and summarized how existing surveillance and monitoring program provides data that addresses failure modes. Bear Creek Dam Seismic Stability Evaluation,Astoria,Oregon, City of Astoria. Project Manager responsible for a seismic stability evaluation of a concrete gravity dam located near the Cascadia Subduction Zone.Utilized existing information to build a 3-D model of the dam.The model was used to understand the complex geometry of the abutments and the extents of weak sandstone in the foundation.Completed two rounds of exploratory drilling and piezometer installations to collect samples and measure groundwater levels at the base of the structure. Supervised structural geologic mapping of the abutments and utilized data to develop a rock mass strength for the left and right sides of the canyon. Supervised limit-equilibrium analyses and incorporated results from several analysis sections to characterize the resistance offered by the abutments. Cowlitz Falls Dam Fish Passage Structures,Randle,Washington, Tacoma Power. Project Manager and Lead Geotechnical Engineer responsible for the design and construction of fish passage structures at Cowlitz Falls Dam.Coordinated two rounds of land-based and overwater drilling to characterize two potential sites for ladder and screen structures.Designed permanent shoring walls up to 45 feet tall to fit fish capture facility between the spillway and access road.Coordinated laboratory testing program to determine soil and rock properties necessary for foundation design and slope stability evaluations.Completed slope stability and lateral load analyses necessary to design anchored drilled shafts to support a 12-foot diameter flowline bearing on a marginally-stable slope.Provided designs for foundations on rock,spread footings,and deep foundations for the new fish passage structures. Summarized work in a geotechnical analysis report. John Day Dam North Embankment Liquefaction Evaluation, Rufus,Oregon, U.S.Army Corps of Engineers(USACE). Project Manager and Lead Geotechnical Engineer responsible for a Phase lA seismic safety evaluation of the North Embankment Dam at the USACE's John Day Hydro Project on the Columbia River. Reviewed existing boring logs and identified areas most likely to be underlain by the target alluvium deposit. Coordinated exploration and instrumentation program to characterize the liquefaction potential and piezometric head under the downstream rockfill shell. Supervised calibration of in-situ testing equipment and coordinated laboratory testing program. Performed in-situ permeability testing in bedrock and summarized the results for the Corps to use in their seepage model. Performed liquefaction potential calculations and summarized all field and office work in a geotechnical report. Hebgen Dam Intake Tower Modifications,Gallatin County,Montana,North Western Corporation. Lead Geotechnical Engineer responsible for designing ground anchors and rock bolts for a seismic upgrade of an existing intake tower at Hebgen Dam.Completed full-scale,sacrificial test anchors to determine ultimate bond stress of highly altered and sheared bedrock formation.Designed 55-strand,Class 1 anchors to develop test loads of 2,600 kips.Also designed lower capacity grouted and spin-lock rock bolts to temporarily stabilize the tower to allow portions of the tower bracing to be removed.Removal of bracing was required to facilitate access for drilling equipment. Heslin Resume 2 Comforth Consultants,Inc. CORNFORTH C O N S U L T A N T S ARTHUR MARTIN, SENIOR ASSOCIATE ENGINEER Education M.S. in Geotechnical Engineering,University of Texas at Arlington,Arlington,Texas B.S. in Civil Engineering,Texas Tech University,Lubbock,Texas Registration Civil Engineer—Oregon Societies Member,United States Society on Dams(USSD) Member,Association of State Dam Safety Officials(ASDSO) Member,American Society of Civil Engineers(ASCE) Professional Career 1997-present Cornforth Consultants,Inc.,Portland,Oregon;Staff Consultant 1988-96 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC),Portland,Oregon;Regional Director 1985-88 FERC,Portland,Oregon;Deputy Regional Director 1982-85 FERC,Fort Worth,Texas;Regional Engineer 1973-82 FERC,Fort Worth,Texas;Chief,River Basins and Licensed Projects Branch 1960-73 Federal Power Commission(predecessor agency to FERC),Fort Worth,Texas;Staff Engineer Relevant Experience Mr.Martin has 56 years of experience with dams,dam safety,and risk assessments. Prior to joining CCI in 1997,he was the Director of the Portland Regional Office of the FERC which administers the dam safety and license compliance program for over 400 dams in Oregon,Washington,Idaho,Montana,Alaska,and Wyoming. Representative projects include the following: Pelton-Round Butte Hydroelectric Complex Part 12D Safety Inspections and PFMA,Madras,Oregon, Portland General Electric(PGE). Co-Independent Consultant tasked with completing the Part 12D Safety Inspection for a 204-foot high,thin-arch,concrete dam. Inspection and reporting included a detailed review of prior inspection reports;review and assessment of historical instrument monitoring data;review of the prior technical analyses and project information contained in the project's STID;and on-site field inspections to assess current conditions of project facilities. Additional tasks included preparation of the Part 12D Safety Inspection Report in accordance with FERC guidelines,and developing updated descriptions of the identified Potential Failure Modes(PFMs)for the dams. Bull Run Dam Hydroelectric Project Part 12D Safety Inspection and PFMA Review,Sandy,Oregon, City of Portland Water Bureau(PWB). Co-Independent Consultant for the 2017 Part 12D Safety Inspection for PWB's 180-foot high concrete gravity arch dam and powerhouse. Mr.Martin was a core team member for the PFMA workshop and prepared the PFMA report. Other inspection and reporting included field safety inspections,review and assessment of dam surveillance and monitoring instrumentation,evaluation of project operations,and preparation of the Part 12D Safety Report. Assisted the Owner with the preparation of the STID. PFMA Workshop Facilitator-USACE Fern Ridge Dam,Eugene,Oregon, U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). FERC-trained facilitator for a Potential Failure Mode Analysis(PFMA)workshop completed for the USACE's Fern Ridge Dam and Reservoir Project located on the Long Tom River northwest of Eugene, Oregon. Mr.Martin conducted an on-site visit of the project,reviewed construction and instrument monitoring histories including the most recent engineering studies and analyses,developed recommendations for operations and maintenance,coordinated/facilitated a PFMA workshop for in-house Corps of Engineers staff,and prepared the draft and fmal PFMA Summary Report. External Audit Facilitator,Owner's Dam Safety Program,Portland,Oregon, Portland General Electric (PGE). FERC-approved Independent Consultant responsible for performing an external audit of PGE Owner's Dam Safety Program(ODSP)to confirm compliance with regulatory requirements established by FERC. Work tasks included completing extensive peer review and quality control review of the ODSP;conducting interviews with select management and operation and maintenance staff to evaluate their understanding of the company's ODSP and dam safety training;completing an assessment of the effectiveness of the dam safety training for both operation and management staff;and preparing a draft and fmal version of an external audit report of PGE's ODSP for submission to FERC. Upriver Dam Hydroelectric Facility Part 12D Safety Inspection and PFMA Review,Spokane, Washington, City of Spokane. Co-Independent Consultant for the 2014 Part 12D Safety Inspection and Report for the City of Spokane's Upriver Dam Hydro Facilities.The existing structure is an eight-bay(with radial- arm gates),concrete spillway dam centrally located between adjacent earthfill embankment sections on either side.Tasks included performing Independent Technical Review of existing reports;quality control review of construction and maintenance records,instrumentation data,and project documentation;and correspondence pertinent to the updated Part 12 study. Performed dam safety inspections and prepared the Part 12 Summary Report in accordance with FERC guidelines. Participated in a PFMA review session with the Owner and FERC staff,and prepared revised descriptions of Potential Failure Modes(PFMs)for the dam. Oak Grove Hydroelectric Complex Part 12D Safety Inspections and Reporting,Three Lynx,Oregon, Portland General Electric. Co-Independent Consultant assisting with a condition and safety inspection of three dams and all appurtenant structures. Lead the review of the dam safety inspection report and assisted in seismic stability evaluation of Timothy Lake Dam,Lake Harriet Dam and Frog Lake Dam. Participated in PFMA review meeting and provided senior-level review of summary inspection Part 12D report,and STID. Mt.Tabor Dam No.'s 1,5 and 6 Part 12D Safety Inspections,Portland,Oregon, City of Portland Water Bureau(PWB). Co-Independent Consultant responsible for completing a condition and safety inspection of three dams and reservoirs and all appurtenant structures for PWB. Participated in the PFMA workshop meetings and provided senior-level review of prior summary inspection Part 12D reports.Assisted with the preparation of the project's first STID.Prepared updated dam safety inspection report and assisted with seepage analyses and slope stability studies to verify stability under identified Potential Failure Modes (PFMs). Carmen Smith Hydroelectric Complex Part 12D Safety Inspections and PFMA Workshop,McKenzie Bridge,Oregon, Eugene Water&Electric Board Co-Independent Consultant tasked with the inspection of two earth and rockfill dams(225-foot high and 70-foot high);a 17-foot high embankment diversion dam; concrete radial-gated spillway structures;and flow conduits for each dam. Mr.Martin was a core member of the PFMA team and assisted in preparing the PFMA Report.He also co-authored the Part 12D Inspection Report,and assisted with preparing the STID. Martin Resume 2 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. COQNFOI : H. C O N S U L T A N T S DAVID BUGNI, STRUCTURAL ENGINEER Education M.S.in Structural Engineering/Structural Mechanics,University of California,Berkeley,California B.S.in Civil Engineering,Oregon State University,Corvallis,Oregon Registration Structural Engineer—Oregon Civil Engineer—California,Washington Societies Past-Chair and Member,Structural Engineers Association of Oregon Member,American Concrete Institute Member,Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Member,American Institute of Steel Construction Honors 1996-present City of Portland Bureau of Buildings Structural Advisory Board 1995-1997 State of Oregon Seismic Task Force(Senate Bill 1057) 2003-2004 City of Portland Rehabilitation Code Task Force 2012-2013 Oregon Seismic Resilience Professional Career 2016-present Cornforth Consultants,Inc.,Portland,Oregon; Staff Consultant 1996-2016 David Bugni&Associates,Estacada,Oregon,Owner 1992-1996 Jacobs Engineering(formerly CRS Sirrine),Lake Oswego,Oregon,Manager of Structural Engineering,Western Region 1986-1992 Kramer Gehlen&Associates,Vancouver Washington,Associate 1984-1986 H.J.Brunnier Associates,San Francisco,California,Associate Relevant Experience Mr.Bugni has 32 years of Structural Engineering experience in the Pacific Northwest.Representative projects include the following: Pelton-Round Butte Hydro Complex Part 12D Safety Inspections and PFMA,Madras,Oregon, Portland General Electric(PGE). Structural Engineer assisting with the 2017 Part 12D Safety Inspections and Reporting for PGE's Pelton-Round Butte Hydro Complex which includes a 204-foot high,thin-arch concrete dam,with a crest length of 776-feet;a 440-foot high, 1,450-foot long earth and rockfill dam and powerhouse; and an earth and rockfill embankment with a central concrete spillway and powerhouse section with multiple radial-arm spillway gates.Each structure is considered a separate project with its own PFMA Report,STID, and Part 12D Safety Inspection Report. Provided structural analysis and review of the project documents. Bull Run Dams No. 1 and No.2 Part 12D Safety Inspection and PFMA Review,Sandy,Oregon, City of Portland Water Bureau(PWB). Structural Engineer assisting with the 2017 Part 12D Safety Inspections and Reporting for PWB's Bull Run Dams No. 1 and No.2. Dam No. 1 is a curved concrete gravity structure 194- feet high and 970-feet long. Dam No.2 includes a 145-foot high earth and rockfill dam and other appurtenant structures.Provided structural analysis and review of the project documents. Oak Grove Hydro Complex 2012 and 2017 Part 12D Safety Inspections and PFMA Review,Three Lynx, Oregon, Portland General Electric(PGE). The Oak Grove Hydro Complex is comprised of several structures including:Lake Harriet Dam,a 45-foot high concrete-arch structure;Timothy Meadows Dam,a 110-foot high earthfill embankment;and Frog Lake Dam,a 50-foot high earthfill embankment.In 2017,Mr.Bugni was the Structural Engineer assisting with the Part 12D Safety Inspections for the Owner,PGE.Provided structural analysis and review of the project documents. T.W.Sullivan Hydro Plant Seismic Risk Assessment,West Linn,Oregon, Portland General Electric (PGE). Structural Engineer responsible for comprehensive seismic risk assessment and stability analysis of a concrete dam and powerhouse built in 1895.The facility is owned by Portland General Electric(PGE),and is located on the Willamette River in Oregon. Work tasks included assessments of flotation,linear elastic dynamic response spectra,linear elastic time history,and nonlinear time history seismic analyses.Work was coordinated closely with Cornforth Consultants,who was PGE's selected geotechnical team member. Faraday Dam Powerhouse Seismic Evaluation,Estacada,Oregon, Portland General Electric(PGE). Structural Engineer responsible for a seismic safety evaluation of an unreinforced masonry powerhouse structure located at a major concrete dam on the Clackamas River in Oregon. The project is owned by Portland General Electric(PGE). The assignment featured a seismic evaluation and retrofit of the existing structure in accordance with ASCE/SEI 41-13. Rivermill Dam Downstream Fish Collector,Estacada,Oregon, Portland General Electric(PGE). Structural Engineer and Project Delivery Team Member responsible for structural designs for a new fish collector facility at Portland General Electric(PGE)'s Rivermill Dam on the Clackamas River.Coordinated closely with Cornforth Consultants,who was the geotechnical team member responsible for foundation design and anchorage of the new structure. Services included design of the fish counting station platform,fish bypass support pipes,collector channel wall framing,and connections into the foundation system. Willamette Falls Dam Fish Diversion,West Linn,Oregon, Portland General Electric(PGE). Structural Engineer responsible for design of a large,500 cfs diversion structure for Portland General Electric(PGE). Services and designs were performed in close coordination with Cornforth Consultants,who was the geotechnical design firm within the Project Delivery Team. Tasks included design of a 30-foot tall precast concrete training wall,and a 216-foot-long precast concrete,steel and aluminum fish bypass flume structure. Also,designed bridge,draft tube,and roadway/bridge deck upgrades to support continued operation of the facility. Oswego Lake Dam Seismic Improvements,Lake Oswego,Oregon, Lake Oswego Corporation. Structural Engineer responsible for seismic stability assessment and flood passage improvements to Oswego Lake Dam, which is a 30-foot-tall concrete gravity structure.Provided anchorage designs for a new Obermeyer-type spillway gate,and supports for a new pipe network. Coordinated with Cornforth Consultants on the design of high capacity tie-down anchors comprised of high-strength steel bars that penetrate through the dam into the rock foundation. Bugni Resume 2 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. CORNFORTH C O N S U L T A N T S www.cornforthconsultants.com Council Business Meeting June 5, 2018 Award of Contract for FERC Independent Consultant for Part 12-D Safety Title: Inspection and Dam Safety Report; Project #2018-15 From: Paula Brown, PE Public Works Director paula.brown(a�ashland.or.us Scott Fleury, PE Deputy Public Works Director scott.fleury@ashland.or.us Summary: Before the Council is a contract for professional engineering services with Comforth Consultants for$97,500,to provide Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC) Independent Consultant for Part 12-D Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report; Project#2018-15. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: • Move to approve the award of a contract for engineering services with Cornforth Consultants for$97,500, to provide FERC Independent Consultant for Part 12-D Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report. • Request staff renegotiate the contract with Cornforth Consultants to include or delete the following items within the contract(state the intended corrections). • Redirect staff efforts and not award the contract. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Council approve the award of a contract for engineering services with Cornforth Consultants for$97,500,to provide FERC Independent Consultant for Part 12 Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report; Project#2018-15. Resource Requirements: The Water Supply and Electric Divisions split the costs for FERC services to include the Part 12 Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report. The 2017-19 biennium budget has funds available for contracted services. Policies,Plans and Goals Supported: Council Goals: 4 Evaluate real property and facility assets to strategically support city mission and goals Department Goals: • Maintain existing infrastructure to meet regulatory requirements and minimize life-cycle costs • Deliver timely life cycle capital improvement projects • Maintain and improve infrastructure that enhances the economic vitality of the community • Evaluate all city infrastructure regarding planning management and financial resources Pagelof3 CITY OF ASHLAND • Background and Additional Information: The City of Ashland generates hydroelectric power through the powerhouse located at the water treatment plant along Ashland Creek. As the City generates hydropower,we are obligated to follow FERC requirements for management and improvement of the system, which includes the hydro-generator, Hosier Dam, Reeder Gulch/Reservoir and the water treatment plant. As such, the City follows FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Guidelines and requirements to ensure the safe operation of the system and provide protection for the citizens of Ashland. As a FERC licensee, the City has numerous obligations to adhere to for compliance under the FERC Part 12 Safety Inspection Guidelines, which include five subparts: • A - General Provisions • B - Reports and Records • C - Emergency Action Plans • D -Inspection by Independent Consultant • - E- Other Responsibilities of Applicant or Licensee Reeder Gulch is operated by the Public Works Department. Reeder Gulch is a concrete arch dam on Ashland Creek, also known as Hosler Dam. Reeder Gulch was constructed in 1928. In addition to Hosler Dam there are two small concrete diversion dams at the upper end of the reservoir across the East and West Forks of Ashland Creek that predate Hosier Dam. The City is required to hire an independent inspection consultant to meet the requirements of 12- D for the safety inspection and dam safety report. This consultant must be approved by FERC before they can perform any inspection and analysis duties associated with the system. The City has hired numerous independent consultants (IC) over the years for dam safety review, analysis and inspection. The City's previously approved consultant, Steven Samuelson of AECOM has been a part of past reports and follow on assessments required by FERC. As such, a new IC was required for this 2018 Part 12-D assessment. Staff wrote and solicited proposals for this year's Part 12-D inspection and for the follow-on 5- year service contract. Proposals were received on March 1, 2018. Staff received one proposal from Cornforth Consultants out of Portland, and upon evaluation, deemed it to be sufficient. Cornforth Consultants proposed two co-ICs for this work. Both resumes were submitted to FERC for approval. FERC has since approved both Gerry Heslin and Arthur Martin as co-ICs for the City's project. This council item is for the initial inspection work. The follow on service requirements will be negotiated under separate contract(s). Through the evolution of Part 12-D requirements a potential failure mode analysis (PFMA)has been included in the inspection reports since 2003. This PFMA has been refined over the years through inspection, engineering analysis and in consultation with FERC. The IC analyzes and categorizes these potential failure modes and recommends projects and adjustments to the City's Dam Safety and Surveillance Monitoring Plan(DSSMP). A left abutment erodibility evaluation and geologic update was required by FERC as a result of the PFMA from the 2008 inspection report. That study was completed in October 2015 and the PMFA updated in 2016, but has not yet been approved by FERC. The results from the PMFA, along with the Dam Safety and Page2of3 CITY OF ASHLAND Surveillance Monitoring Report and DSSMP will provide the starting point for this year's Part 12-D assessment and report. Attachments: • City of Ashland Contract with Cornforth Consultants o includes attached scope of work and RFP response Page 3 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND s. ` Client#:53660 CORNCONSU • /YYYY) /DD ACORD,. CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 6/08/2018 DATE(MM yDDs THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND,EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW.THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S),AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT:If the certificate holder Is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(ies)must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement.A statement on this certificate does not confer any rights to the certificate holder In lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT Trudy Henry Greyling Ins. Brokerage/EPIC PHONE 770.552.4225 FAX 866.550.4082 (A/C,No,Ext): (NC,No►: 3780 Mansell Rd.Suite 370 EMAIL trud hen rs tin com Alpharetta, GA 30022 ADDRESS: Y• rY�9 Y 9 INSURER(S)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC# INSURER A:Hartford Accident a Indemnity comp.ny 22357 INSURED Twln CI Fire In.urance Co. 29459 Cornforth Consultants, Inc. INSURER B: City 10250 SW Greenburg Rd. Suite 111 INSURER C:Hartford Underwriters Ina.Co. 30104 Portland, OR 97223 1 INSURER B. INSURER E: _INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: 17-18 REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. or TYPE OF INSURANCE NDDL SUER _ISP. WVQ_ POLICY NUMBER (pawn j MM DYY LIMITS A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL UABILITY 84SBWCG4222 11/01/2017 11/01/2018 EACH OCCURRENCE $2,000,000 ICLAIMS-MADE © OCCUR PRglifialEo ance) $2,000,000 MED EXP(Any one person) $10,000 PERSONAL 8 ADV INJURY $2,0001000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $41000,000 POLICY l X JJEC I 1 LOC PRODUCTS-COMP/OPAGG $4,000,000 OTHER: $ C AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY 84UEGNS5013 11/01/201711/01/2018FFDa 1NGLEUMIT $1,000,000 X ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY(Per person) $ OWNED -SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY(Per accident) $ AUTOS ONLY AUTOS A HIRED X NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $ AUTOS ONLY (Per ac tde4d) A x UMBRELLA LIAB X OCCUR 84SBWCG4222 11/01/2017 11/01/20181 EACH OCCURRENCE •$2,000,000 EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $2,000,000 DEC I XI RETENTION$10000 $ WORKERS COMPENSATION Mum 84WBGBN1174 11101/2017 11/01/2018 X Isrnrum I ER AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY ANY PROPRIETORRARTNEWEXECUTIVE Y/N E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $1,0001000 OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? N N/A (Mandatory In NH) E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYEE $1,000,000 It yes,describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS 1 VEHICLES(ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,may be attached If more space Is required) RE: CCI No.2700; City of Ashland#2018-15; Professional Engineering Services FERC Part 12-D Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report City of Ashland, Oregon, and its elected officials, officers and employees are named as Additional Insureds on the above referenced liability policies with the exception of workers compensation where required by written contract.The above referenced liability policies with the exception of workers compensation and (See Attached Descriptions) CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION Cit of Ashland SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE y THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN 20 East Main Street ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Ashland, OR 97520 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE I .©,f� T O 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION.All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2016/03) 1 of 2 The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD #S1089751/M967426 THEN2 , • Client#: 320005 CORNFCON ACORDTM CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MM/DD/YYYY) • 6/07/2018 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND,EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW.THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S),AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT:If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(ies)must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement.A statement on this certificate does not confer any rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT NAME: USI Kibble&Prentice PR PHONE 6300- PAX LAIC,No,Exl):206 441 I W.NO): 610-362-8528 601 Union Street, Suite 1000 ADMORESS: PL.CertRequest@usi.com Seattle,WA 98101 INSURER(S)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIL# INSURER A:Barkley Insurance Company 32603 INSURED INSURER B: Cornforth Consultants, Inc. — 10250 SW Greensburg Rd.,Suite 111 INSURER C: Portland, OR 97223-5460 INSURER : INSURER E: INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. RR ADOLSUBR TYPE OF INSURANCE IN WJ POLICY NUMBER IMM/DD�IYYY) (MM/L POLICY EXP LIMITS COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ ICLAIMS-MADE I I OCCUR PREMISES TO RENTED $ MED EXP(Any one person) $ PERSONAL&ADV INJURY $ GE 'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $ POLICY PRO- JECT LOC PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGG $ OTHER: _ $ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT IEa accident) ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY(Per person) $ OWNED SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY(Per accident) $ AUTOS ONLY AUTOS AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY tperTM DAMAGE $ UMBRELLA LIAB _ OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $ DED I I RETENTION$ WORKERS COMPENSATION PER OTH- AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY STATUTE ER ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $ OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? N(A --- — (Mandatory In NH) EL.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYEE $ If yes,describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below EL.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $ A Professional AEC901742702 11/01/2017 11/01/2018 $2,000,000 per claim Liability $2,000,000 annl aggr. DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS 1 LOCATIONS/VEHICLES(ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,may be attached If more space Is required) RE: CCI#2700, City of Ashland#2018-15, Professional Engineering Services FERC Part 12-D Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION City of Ashland SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE y o THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN 20 East Main Street ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Ashland, OR 97520 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ©1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION.All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2016/03) 1 of 1 The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD #S23245753/M21757051 VLAZP • DESCRIPTIONS (Continued from Page 1) umbrella are primary& non-contributory where required by written contract.Waiver of Subrogation is applicable where required by written contract& allowed by law. SAGITTA 25.3(2016/03) 2 of 2 #51089751/M967426 !p Purchase Order ,� Fiscal Year 2019 Page: 1 of: 1 �-�►� 7�71V1>��d� EP�E�Z?N=�lL—= B City of Ashland RL I am.vE=ziy ,�? ® MET I ATTN: Accounts Payable Purchase L As E. Main 20190076 Ashland, OR 97520 Order# T Phone: 541/552-2010 O Email: payable @ashland.or.us V CORNFORTH CONSULTANTS, INC. H C/O Public Works Department N 10250 SW GREENBURG ROAD and, O Way A D SUITE 111 P Ashlland, OR 97520 O PORTLAND, OR 97223 Phone: ax 5 /488- 00347 T Fax: 541/488-6006 O Isle=EM5I I Paula Brown _3�=1[?311'1r��s[°efe=�Ie€eS — — 07/11/2018 4053 FOB ASHLAND OR/NET30 City Accounts Payable =,Cag® -*_® n1r—= Engineering Services (FERC) 1 Professional engineering services related to FERC Part 12-D 1 $97,500.0000 $97,500.00 Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report Contract for Personal Services Effective date: June 6, 2018 Completion date: PHASE 1: June 30, 2019 Project Account: E-201815-999 *************** GL SUMMARY*************** I 081500-704200 $97,500.00 I I I By da. C Date: I Hi I(g I orized •.nature = — $97,500.00 FORM UP'� 1 CITY OF Test for a Purchase Order 0-0 ASHLAND A request L. , , , �� � 06/14/2018 REQUISITION Date of request: Vendor Name Cornforth Consultants , ' Address,City,State,Zip 102 SW Greenburg Road,Suite 111 Portland,OR 97223 IF • . !,, Contact Name Gerry Heslin,PE Q Lt h Z""/Telephone Number 503 452 1100 / n� %it, /4y[tom Email address r ' f/1-/-. " gheslin Rcornforthconsultants.com 1 SOURCING METHOD V ❑ 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 _(Attach copy of council communication) (If council approval required,attach copy of CC) ❑ Small Procurement Cooperative Procurement Less than$5,000 CI Request for Proposal (Copies on file) ❑ State of Oregon ❑ Direct Award Date approved by Council: 06/05/2018 Contract#_ •ID Verbal/Written quote(s)or proposal(s) (Attach copy of council communication) ❑ 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 and solicitation 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 11 Written quote or proposal attached Date original contract approved by Council: ) tae ❑ (3)Written proposals/written solicitation Date approved by Council: (Date) _(Attach copy of council communication) ❑ Form#4, Personal Services$5K to$75K Valid until: (Date) Description of SERVICES Total Cost Professional engineering services related to FERC part 12-D Safety Inspection and Dam Safety Report $ 97,500.00 Item# Quantity Unit Description of MATERIALS Unit Price Total Cost ❑ Per attached quote/proposal TOTAL COST Expenditure must be charged to the appropriate account numbers for the financials to reflect the actual expenditures accurately. Project Number 2018-15 -— _ _ Account Number 081500 _ 704200 $ 97,500 - - Project Number -- -_ _ _ Account Number - $_ — — — —Project Number -- — _ Account Number - $_,_ _ _,- - -•_ _ IT Director in collaboration with department to approve all hardware and software purchases: By signing this requisition form,I certify that the City's public contracting requirements have been satisfied. �JIT/D�irector Date Support:Yes/No 1 Employee:\s A) D�� I�\" Department Head: d% ( 2$ J'I) 20/8 qua/to or greater than$5,000) Department Manager/Supervisor: City Administrate . (Equal oorgreaterthan$ ,000) Funds appropriated for current fiscal year. / NO �-- __ 7 t i Fina - Director-(Equ rgreaterthan$5,000) Date Comments: Form#3-Requisition Contract for Personal Services • CITY OF CONSULTANT: CORNFORTH CONSULTANTS ASHLAND CONTACT: GERRY M. HESLIN, PE 20 East Main Street /02.5C Ashland, Oregon 97520 ADDRESS: 103 SW GREENBURG ROAD, SUITE 111 Telephone: 541/488-6002 PORTLAND, OR 97223 Fax: 541/488-5311 TELEPHONE: 503-452-1100 EMAIL: gheslin@CornforthConsultants.com EFFECTIVE DATE: JUNE 6, 2018 TERM/COMPLETION DATE: PHASE 1: JUNE 30, 2019 NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT: Not to exceed $97,500; see exhibit C. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES - FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION (FERC) INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT FOR PART 12-D SAFETY INSPECTION AND DAM SAFETY REPORT; PROJECT#2018-15. SEE ATTACHED PROJECT SCOPE. ADDITIONAL TERMS: In the event of conflicts or discrepancies among the contract documents,the City of Ashland Contract for Personal Services will be primary and take precedence,and any exhibits or ancillary contracts or agreements having redundant or contrary provisions will be subordinate to and interpreted in a manner that will not conflict with the said primary City of Ashland Contract. FINDINGS: Pursuant to AMC 2.50.120, after reasonable inquiry and evaluation, the undersigned Department Head finds and determines that: (1) the services to be acquired are personal services; (2) the City does not have adequate personnel nor resources to perform the services; (3)the statement of work represents the department's plan for utilization of such personal services; (4)the undersigned consultant has specialized experience,education,training and capability sufficient to perform the quality, quantity and type of work requested in the scope of work within the time and financial constraints provided; (5) the consultants proposal will best serve the needs of the City; and (6) the compensation negotiated herein is fair and reasonable. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein the CITY AND CONSULTANT AGREE as follows: 1. Findings i Recitations. The findings and recitations set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 2. All Costs by Consultant: Consultant shall, at its own risk and expense, perform the personal services described above and, unless otherwise specified, furnish all labor, equipment and materials required for the proper performance of such service. 3. Qualified Work: Consultant 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 service 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. 4. Completion Date: Consultant shall start performing the service under this contract by the beginning date indicated above and complete the service by the completion date indicated above. 5. Compensation: City shall pay Consultant for service performed, including costs and expenses, the sum specified above. 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. 6. Ownership of Documents: All documents prepared by Consultant pursuant to this contract shall be the property of City. 7. Statutory Requirements: ORS 279C.505, 279C.515, 279C.520 and 279C.530 are made part of this contract. 8. Living Wage Requirements: If the amount of this contract is$20,688.86 or more, Consultant is required to comply with chapter 3.12 of the Ashland Municipal Code by paying a living wage, as defined in this chapter, to all employees performing work under this contract and to any Subcontractor who performs 50% or more of the service work under this contract. Consultant is also required to post the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B predominantly in areas where it will be seen by all employees. 9. Indemnification: Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and against all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses,judgments, subrogations, or other damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death), or damage (including loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to the negligent performance of this contract by Consultant (including but not limited to, Consultants employees, agents, and others designated by Consultant to perform work or Contract for Personal Services 1 services attendant to this contract). Consultant shall not be held responsible for any losses, expenses, claims, subrogations, actions, costs,judgments, or other damages, directly, solely, and proximately caused by the negligence of City. 10. Termination: a. Mutual Consent. This contract may be terminated at any time by the mutual written consent of both parties. b. City's Convenience. This contract may be terminated at any time by City upon not less than 30 days' prior written notice 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 Consultant, 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; or iii. If any license or certificate required by law or regulation to be held by Consultant 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 Consultant may terminate this contract in the event of a 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 Consultant's performance of each and every obligation and duty under this contract. City by written notice to Consultant of default or breach may at any time terminate the whole or any part of this contract if Consultant 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, Consultant shall immediately cease all activities under this contract, unless expressly directed otherwise by City in the notice of termination. Further, upon termination, Consultant 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 Consultant for work performed prior to the termination date if such work was performed in accordance with the Contract. 11. Independent Contractor Status: Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Consultant shall have the complete responsibility for the performance of this contract. Consultant shall provide workers'compensation coverage as required in ORS Chapter 656 for all persons employed to perform work pursuant to this contract. Consultant is a subject employer that will comply with ORS 656.017. 12. Assignment and Subcontracts: Consultant 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. Consultant 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. 13. Default. The Consultant shall be in default of this agreement if Consultant: commits any material breach or default of any covenant, warranty, certification, or obligation it owes under the Contract; its QRF status pursuant to the QRF Rules or loses any license, certificate or certification that is required to perform the Services or to qualify as a QRF if consultant has qualified as a QRF 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. 14. Insurance. Consultant shall at its sole expense provide the following types of 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. Professional Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $2,000,000 (two million dollars) per occurrence. This is to cover damages caused by any error, omission or negligent act related to the professional services to be provided under this Contract. Contract for Personal Services 2 • c. Genera! Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $2,000,000(two million dollars) per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. d. Automobile Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $1,000,000 (one million dollars) for each accident for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, including coverage for owned, hired or non-owned vehicles, as applicable. e. 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 Consultant or its insurer(s) to the City. f. Additional Insured/Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall name The City of Ashland, Oregon, and its elected officials, officers and employees as Additional Insureds on any insurance policies, excluding Professional Liability and Workers' Compensation, required herein, but only with respect to Consultant's services to be provided under this Contract. The consultant's insurance is primary and non-contributory. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Contract, the Consultant shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates prior to commencing work under this contract. 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 Consultant shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions and/or self-insurance. 15. 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 Consultant 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. If, 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. Consultant, 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. 16. 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. CONSULTANT, 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. 17. Nonappropriations 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. Consultant understands and agrees that City's payment of amounts under this contract 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 Consultant, with no further liability to Consultant. Certification. Consultant shall sign the certification attached hereto as Exhibit A and herein incorporated by reference. Consultant: City of Ashland �A gy 44 1/(t By ',Ai �gnature Department Head 6 e c-c 1 M. 1-1 es 1 ,_ „4/0.4,46 Print Name Print Name t c< Pre 5;ctec,•.t e/Z?A* Title Date W-9 One copy of a W-9 is to be submitted with ( ? © ® 7 (o the signed contract. Purchase Order No. Contract for Personal Services 3 it 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 current standard of practice, 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, it is an independent Contractor as defined in the contract documents, it is authorized to do business in Oregon, it is authorized to act on behalf of the City, and Contractor has checked four or more of the following criteria that apply to its business. ✓ (1) 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. ✓ (2) 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) I 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. Ma (;0zfen) CC 5 TAB , 1■9c. Contractor (Date) Contract for Personal Services 4 CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON EXHIBIT B City of Ashland LIVING ALL employers described below must comply with City WAG E of Ashland laws regulating navment of a living wage. $14.81 per hour, effective June 30, 2017. /r The Living Wage is adjusted annually every June 30 by the Consumer Price Index. Employees must be paid a working on a project or portion of employers may add the value of business of their employer, if the health care, retirement, 401K and IRS living wage: employer has ten or more employees, eligible cafeteria plans(including and has received financial assistance childcare) benefits to the amount of )=. For all hours worked under a service for the project or business from the wages received by the employee. contract between their employer and City of Ashland in excess of the City of Ashland if the contract $20,688.86. ➢ Note: For temporary and part-time exceeds$20,688.86 or more. employees, the Living Wage does not ➢ If their employer is the City of apply to the first 1040 hours worked in ➢ For all hours worked in a month if the Ashland, including the Parks and any calendar year. For more details, employee spends 50%or more of the Recreation Department. please see Ashland Municipal Code employee's time in that month Section 3.12.020. ➢ In calculating the living wage, For additional information: Call the Ashland City Administrator's office at 541-488-6002 or write to the City Administrator, City Hall, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520, or visit the City's website at www.ashland.or.us Notice to Employers: This notice must be posted predominantly in areas where it can be seen by all employees. CITY OF ASHLAND Contract for Personal Services 5 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CORNFORTH C O N S U L T A N T S 10250 S.W.Greenburg Road,Suite 111 Portland,Oregon 97223 Phone 503-452-1100 Fax 503-452-1528 April 5, 2018 P-1426 Ms.Paula Brown,P.E.,Public Works Director City of Ashland Public Works-Engineering 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Proposed Engineering Services FERC Part 12 Dam Safety Inspection and Report Hosier Dam Ashland,Oregon Dear Ms. Brown: In accordance with your request, we are pleased to submit this proposal to provide engineering services related to the 2018 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC)Part 12 Dam Safety Inspection at Hosier Dam. This letter provides a summary of our proposed work tasks and an estimate of cost to provide these services. We propose that the Part 12 inspections and report preparation tasks be completed jointly by two FERC-recognized Independent Consultants (ICs), Gerry Heslin and Arthur Martin. Resumes for Mr. Heslin and Mr. Martin have been provided to the City to facilitate the IC approval process conducted by FERC for each Part 12 inspection cycle. Mr. Heslin will be the Project Manager, lead consultant and primary point of contact for the City on this assignment; however, both he and Mr. Martin will be involved with the dam safety inspections, data review and preparation of the safety inspection report. Scope of Work Our proposed scope of work includes the following tasks: Task 1 - Obtain FERC Approval of IC and Pre-Conference with FERC. The first task to be completed for this assignment is to obtain FERC approval for the proposed ICs. This would involve preparing resumes for Mr. Heslin and Mr. Martin for review by FERC's office in Washington DC. Following approval of the ICs we would ask the City to coordinate a pre- conference with the FERC Portland Regional Office. During the conference,FERC normally lays out their expectations for the Part 12 inspection and advises the licensee and ICs of any particular issues that should be addressed during the Part 12 inspection and report. We anticipate that the P-1426 pre-conference with FERC would be completed by teleconference. As a follow up to the pre- conference, we propose to meet with the City to discuss any issues of concern for the project. We also propose to complete a brief site visit to Hosier Dam with City staff to become familiar with the project before completing any document or data review. Task 1 would also include overall project management efforts for the work. Task 2-Review Previous Documents. Task 2 would include a review of the documents relevant to the Part 12 safety inspection. The objective of Task 2 is for the ICs to develop and understanding of the structure, its basis of design, Potential Failure Modes(PFMs), and any items of concern on the project. Documents typically necessary to be reviewed include: the most-recent Part 12D report, the Supporting Technical Information Document (STID), the Dam Safety Surveillance and Monitoring Report (DSSMR), City operations procedures and plant operating records, the most-recent FERC annual inspection report, and correspondence between FERC and the City related to the project. We also understand that the previous IC is completing follow-up studies related to Probable Maximum Flood (PMF), foundation erodibility, and the project rating curve. Task 3 -Preliminary Review of PFMs. Task 3 would involve coordinating a brief meeting with the FERC project engineer to go over the PFMs for the project to make sure no substantive rewrites are necessary before convening the Potential Failure Mode Analysis (PFMA) review session. Recently, the FERC Portland Regional Office has placed increasing emphasis on the structure and wording of PFMs for projects under their jurisdiction. In our experience, conducting a brief review of PFMs in a small group early in the process enables the PFMA review session to be completed quickly and efficiently. We propose to conduct this meeting with FERC and the City by teleconference.Any revisions to the PFMs would be made before the field inspection. Task 4- Field Inspection and PFMA Review Session. Task 4 would include field work for the Part 12 inspection. The inspection would focus on all water-retaining structures, spillway gates, flow control valves, and conveyance structures. For costing purposes, we have assumed that all areas requiring inspection will be accessible by foot during the inspection. If there are areas of the project that are not accessible by foot, rope-access techniques could be utilized but have not been included in this cost proposal. A PFMA review session would also be completed as part of Task 4. We have assumed that the review meeting would be completed immediately before or after the field inspection. During the meeting, the PFMs in the current version of the STID would be reviewed and discussed with FERC, City engineering and operations staff, and the ICs. Any suggested changes to the PFMs would be documented and included in the Part 12D inspection report. Task 5 - Part 12D Report and STID Updates. Following the field inspection, the ICs would prepare the safety inspection report and any updates to the STID. Draft copies of the Part 12D report and STID updates would be prepared for the City to review before final hard copies are prepared and printed. The Part 12D report would be prepared following the outline provided by April 5,2018 2 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. P-1426 FERC in their Part 12D reminder letter issued to the City before the inspection. We propose to schedule a teleconference meeting with City staff to discuss comments on the draft documents before changes are made. We anticipate that approximately three weeks would be required to incorporate City comments on the draft documents and reproduce hard copies for submission to FERC. Task 6-Respond to FERC Questions. The fmal task in the Part 12D cycle is to respond to any questions from FERC related to information in the Part 12D report or STID updates. Responses to any questions would be submitted to the City for review and comment. To maintain proper lines of communication,we propose that finalized responses be provided to FERC by the City. Schedule After receiving an authorization to proceed, and after FERC's approval of the Independent Consultants, we will coordinate with the City to schedule key dates for the Part 12 Inspections. The first task would be to collect all relevant project information and instrumentation data for review and assessment. It is anticipated this review would be completed prior to the field inspections of project facilities. For planning purposes, we anticipate submitting a draft of the Part 12D report approximately three months after the field inspections. For a November 1 report due date, this would suggest that the field inspection should be completed in late June 2018. We will fmalize and deliver the final Part 12D report hard copies and electronic copy within three weeks after receipt of the City's review comments. Cost Estimate We estimate the cost to complete the scope of work outlined above would be a Not-to-Exceed amount of $97,500. A breakdown of the estimated costs by tasks is provided in the table below. A detailed breakdown of staff hours and estimated cost for each task is included as Attachment 1. We agree not to exceed this amount without your prior written authorization. A fee schedule showing hourly rates is also attached. April 5,2018 3 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. l P-1426 Estimated Cost by Task Task Estimated Task Cost Task 1 -FERC IC Approval, Pre-Conference,Initial Site Visit, Project Management $9,700 Task 2 -Review Existing Documents $19,900 Task 3 -Preliminary PFM Review with FERC,Revise PFMs as Necessary $ 3,800 Task 4 -Field Inspection and PFMA Review Session $15,700 Task 5 -Part 12D Safety Inspection Report, STID Updates $46,500 Task 6 -Respond to FERC Questions $ 1,900 Total Estimated Cost $97,500 We trust that the above scope of work and cost estimate is sufficient for your needs. If you have any questions, please contact Gerry Heslin. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City on this important dam safety review. Respectfully, CORNFORTH CONSULTANTS,INC. Michael R. Meyer,P. E. President Enclosure: Attachment 1 April 5,2018 4 Cornforth Consultants,Inc. l __ LABOR ESTIMATE OF LABOR Job Name Hosler Dam Part 12D Job No. P-1426 Prep.Date 3/29/2018 - Prep.By GMH L rr a n m Q'5) Q E T.-, p H y "ED if; U Task Description _ ii;w . co w`2 U in OF 0 Project Management 16 16 Obtain FERC Approval for IC 2 2 4 Pre-conference with FERC 2 2 4 Meet w/City to Identify Key Issues,Obtain Review Doc's,Brief Site Visit 14 14 Review Previous Part 12 6 8 14 Review STID - 6 8 14 Review DSSMR&Instrumentation Trends 4 8 12 Review Operations Procedures&Plant Operating Records 4 4 8 Review Existing Stability Analyses 6 8 14 Review FERC Inspection Report 2 2 4 Review New Rating Curve,Erodibility Report,and PMF Routing 4 6 10 Review Project Correspondence 1 4 4 8 Review PFMs with City and FERC PRO 4 4 8 Modifiy PFMS As Needed Before Field Inspection 6 2 8 Inspection Prep 2 2 4 1 Mobilization/Demobilization _ 10 10 20 PFMA Review Session 8 8 16 Field Inspection 10 10 20 Draft Part 12 Report 32 80 24 6 142 Draft STID Updates 8 16 6 4 34 Meeting w/City 4 4 8 Final Part 12 Report 4 8 4 6 22 Final STID Updates 4 8 4 4 20 Response to FERC Questions 4 4 - 8 0 Labor(Hr): 166 206 38 22 432 1 4 MCORNFORTH C O N S U L T A N T S Fee Schedule Personnel Hourly Rate Senior Associate Engineer/Geologist* $230 Associate Engineer/Geologist $198 Project Engineer/Geologist $170 Staff Engineer/Geologist $156 Engineer/Geologist $144 Senior Technician $122 Senior CADD/Graphics $118 CADD/Graphics $100 Secretary $ 78 *Includes Principal and Staff Consultant Effective January 1, 2018 Legal Department Review DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL AND CONTROL This form will accompany the document through the drafting, review,and signature processes, and will be kept with the City's final executed copy of the document. Required fields are indicated in gray scale. Document: Cornforth Consultants Contract (Include names of parties to the document) Type of Document: Contract N Lease ❑ Easement ❑ Deed ❑ IGA ❑ Other(Specify) Dept Contact: Tam'Campos ACTION REQUESTED: Dept:Public Works Phone: Ext 2420 C Review Draft Date submitted to Legal: 06'08/2018 El Approve final and forward to '' Draft due by 06'15/2018 (Unless indicated,Legal will return document to you) Return Requested by Tani Campos Complete this section ONLY the first time this form is filled out Has this document been previously worked on by the Legal Dept Staff? U No ❑ Yes If yes, by whom? LEGAL DEPT First Date Received by Legal / / Date: 67y By:kV__ USE ONLY Returned to Dept. for Revision Date: By: Received for additional review by Legal Date: By: Returned to Dept. for Revision Date: By: Received for additional review by Legal Date: By Returned to Dept. for Revision Date: By: Received for Additional Review by Legal Date: By Returned to Dept for Revision Date: By: Final Logged out by Legal Date: By: Comments from LEGAL to DEPARTMENT: Comments from DEPARTMENT to LEGAL: I See Attached. Please note that we used the old contract template because that was what was included in the RFP.The proposed changes are consistent with previous change requests that we have seen from other consultants. Let me know if you have any questions.Thanks! Return original executed document to City Does this document need to be recorded? Recorder for safekeeping? ❑ No ❑ Yes C No ❑ Yes CITY ADMINISTRATOR/DEPARTMENT HEAD Please do not sign the attached document until this form has been approved by the Legal Dept below: FINAL LEGAL DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: Date: ;'ic i G:Uegal\DEPARTMENTS\Contracting\FORMS\Legal Doc Transmittal-KLB.docx • . • memo To: Tami Campos From: Dave Lohman CC: Kris Bechtold;Paula Brown;Katrina Brown Date: 6/12/18 Re: Cornforth Consultants Contract This contract looks fine to me,and I don't necessarily recommend any changes. But I do want to note a couple of minor concerns that you and Paula may want to keep in mind regarding this contract and that are worth attending to in future contracts. 1. Paragraph 4,Completion Date,refers to"the beginning date indicated above." There is an "Effective Date"provided near the top of the page,but no"beginning date." Those are 2 separate concepts that we need to be more careful about distinguishing from one another. Actually,"Effective Date"is only occasionally useful to denote. "Beginning Date"is usually important to denote. This may well be a problem with the old form. 2. This purportedly is a"not to exceed"contract in which 432 hours are estimated to be the time required for completion of the work. Unless I just missed it,the consultant does not identify how one can determine how much the City would be required to pay if the work requires less than 432 hours. (My guess is that those 432 hours at the hourly rates of the individuals involved totals$97,500, but the documents do not allow one to make that computation). My hope is that the contractor's monthly billings will show the time spent by each individual and his or her hourly rate so that the City is able to pay an appropriate amount lesser than the full$97,500 if the work ends up requiring less than 432 hours. Otherwise,it is effectively a contract for the set amount of$97,500,instead of a contract not to exceed that amount.