AGREEMENT BETWEEN FAIRFIELD-SUISUN SEWER DISTRICT AND
CITIES OF FAIRFIELD AND SUISUN CITY
REGARDING SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM MASTER PLANNING SERVICES T
his Agreement (“AGREEMENT”) is entered into and effective as of __________________, 2025 by and between the FAIRFIELD-SUISUN SEWER DISTRICT, a special district organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (“DISTRICT”) the CITY OF FAIRFIELD, a municipal corporation, and the CITY OF SUISUN CITY, a municipal corporation; herein individually called “CITY” or collectively called “CITIES.”
RECITALS
W HEREAS , DISTRICT is updating its sewer Collection System Master Plan (CSMP, “Project”) to account for changes in growth assumptions based on updated City General Plans, update its Collection System Asset Management Plan (CSAMP) model with asset condition data obtained over the past five years, and integrate project recommendations from the CSMP and CSAMP into a combined CSMP document and planning tool; and
W
HEREAS, DISTRICT and CITIES wish to join their sewer assets into the District’s CSMP and CSAMP models to plan as a single, connected collection system, decrease total planning costs, and potentially identify opportunities for construction efficiency between DISTRICT and CITIES; and W
HEREAS, DISTRICT is willing to administer the CITIES’ portions of the Project Scope and DISTRICT’s portion of the Project Scope together and to otherwise administer Project on CITIES’ behalf under the terms and conditions set forth herein; and
WHEREAS, CITIES wish to contract with DISTRICT to have DISTRICT administer the CITIES’ Project Scope in conjunction with the DISTRICT Project Scope (collectively the “Combined Project”); and
WHEREAS, on July 1, 2022, DISTRICT and CITIES entered into a Seventh Amendment to the 1965 Agreement for collection of sanitary sewer charges, which established Collection System Rehabilitation/Replacement (R/R) Reserve Funds, to be funded by the DISTRICT and used for rehabilitation and/or replacement of collection system assets owned by CITIES; TERMS
NO W, THEREFORE , DISTRICT and CITIES agree as follows:
1. P
roject Definition and Scope of Services.
A. Combined Project Scope of Services. DISTRICT, in consultation with the CITIES, has developed the scope of work for the Combined Project. Staff from both CITIES were i
ncluded in scope development meetings and invited to review and provide comments, which ha
ve been incorporated into the Combined Project Scope. The Combined Project scope of services is included as “Exhibit A” to this AGREEMENT.
B. I
temized Breakdown of Tasks between District and Cities . DISTRICT and CITIES acknowledge that certain elements of the Combined Project Scope are directly attributable to each particular agency, while others provide mutual benefit and cannot be practically broken
down into individual tasks attributable to each party. An itemized breakdown of tasks included within the Combined Project scope of services, and the proportional share of each task attributable to DISTRICT and each CITY is included as “Exhibit B” to this AGREEMENT.
C. P
roject Modification. The Combined Project Scope (“Exhibit A”) may be modified during the course of work as necessary to address unforeseen conditions, increases or reductions in sco
pe, or otherwise. The modifications shall be in the form of contract amendments between the DISTRICT and Combined Project consultant, and will be approved in accordance with D
ISTRICT’s Purchasing Policy (Policy No. 2135). It is acknowledged that such contract amendments may or may not increase or decrease the overall cost of the Combined Project.
The estimated costs of Project work attributable to each CITY, as described in Section 3 below, identify component costs including a contingency. DISTRICT and the CITIES agree th
at all contract amendments will be discussed at regularly scheduled project meetings, and that any contract amendments that alter either CITY’s Project work and costs shall require written approval by the affected CITY’s Director of Public Works, with such approvals or disapprovals made on a timely basis so as not to disrupt the project timeline or result in additional project costs due to time delays
.
2. Im
plementation of the Project.
A. Procurement. DISTRICT will conduct and be responsible for the procurement of all contracts associated with the implementation of the Combined Project, including selecting a
nd awarding a qualified consultant to perform the Combined Project scope of Services.
P
rocurements shall follow DISTRICT’s Purchasing Policy (Policy No. 2135). CITIES may p
articipate in the selection process by reviewing proposals and bids, and providing timely comments to DISTRICT, but the final selection of contractors and consultants shall be made by
DISTRICT.
B. P
roject Management. DISTRICT shall be responsible for project management and administration of the Combined Project. DISTRICT will also be responsible for all DISTRICT staff costs, and other direct costs related to oversight of elements of the Combined Project scope attributable to DISTRICT. CITIES will be responsible for all CITY staff costs and other direct costs related to oversight of elements of the Combined Project scope attributable to CITIES, including data collection and review and adoption of project d
eliverables.
3. P
roject Cost, Payments, and Compensation.
A. Project Cost Paid by the CITIES. CITIES agree to be responsible for and pay those costs associated with the Project Scope per Sections 3(B) and 3(C) below. If either CITY hires third-party design consultants, inspectors, or others to aid in the implementation and/or oversight of the CITY’s Project scope, the respective CITY is responsible for paying for these costs directly.
B. A
mount of Project Cost Paid by the CITY OF FAIRFIELD. This AGREEMENT authorizes the CITY OF FAIRFIELD to pay all actual Combined Project expenses attributable to the CITY OF FAIRFIELD as defined above in accordance with the maximums and procedures in this Section 3. The CITY OF FAIRFIELD’s Project Scope is estimated to cost that amount s
et forth below (“Estimated Cost”):
$ 204,976 for Collection System Master Planning Services further identified in “Exhibit B”
$ 50,000 Contingency
$ 254,976 Total
Any amounts over the Estimated Cost shall require an amendment to this AGREEMENT prior to encumbrance of those costs. CITY OF FAIRFIELD agrees not to withhold its agreement for reasonable expenses related to implementation of the Project scope attributable to CITY OF FAIRFIELD. All parties agree to proceed with the project acknowledging that if the Project scope attributable to CITY OF FAIRFIELD exceeds resources available to CITY OF FAIRFIELD, the Project scope attributable to CITY OF FAIRFIELD may not be completed.
C. Amount of Project Cost Paid by the CITY OF SUISUN CITY. This AGREEMENT authorizes the CITY OF SUISUN CITY to pay all actual Combined Project expenses attributable to the CITY OF SUISUN CITY as defined above in accordance with the maximums and procedures in this Section 3. The CITY OF SUISUN CITY’s Project Scope is estimated to cost that amount set forth below (“Estimated Cost”):
$ 151,712 for Collection System Master Planning Services further identified in “Exhibit B”
$ 40,000 Contingency
$ 191,712 Total
Any amounts over the Estimated Cost shall require an amendment to this AGREEMENT prior to encumbrance of those costs. CITY OF SUISUN CITY agrees not to withhold its agreement for reasonable expenses related to implementation of the Project scope attributable to CITY OF SUISUN CITY. All parties agree to proceed with the project acknowledging that if the Project scope attributable to CITY OF SUISUN CITY exceeds resources available to CITY OF SUISUN CITY, the Project scope attributable to CITY OF SUISUN CITY may not be completed.
D. Project Cost Paid by DISTRICT. DISTRICT agrees to be responsible for and pay all actual Combined Project expenses attributable to the DISTRICT per Section 3(E) below. If the DISTRICT hires third-party design consultants, inspectors, or others to aid in the implementation and/or oversight of the DISTRICT’s Project scope, the DISTRICT is responsible for paying for these costs directly.
E. Amount of Project Cost Paid by DISTRICT. Portions of the Combined Project scope attributable to DISTRICT are estimated to cost as follows:
$ 675,687 Total
F. Payment Upon Invoice.
(i) Invoices. In accordance with Sections 3(B) and 3(C) CITIES shall reimburse DISTRICT the costs incurred by DISTRICT to complete the portions of the Combined Project scope attributable to each CITY. DISTRICT shall present invoices no more frequent than monthly and include the selected consultant’s invoice(s) and any approved amendments for work listed in Section 3(B) and 3(C) above. After review and approval of invoices by each CITY’s Director of Public Works or designee, approval of
which shall not take more than fifteen (15) calendar days from the DISTRICT’s issuance to the CITY, invoices shall be forwarded to the CITY’s Finance Department for payment to DISTRICT within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt by the Finance Department.
Alternatively, upon review and approval of invoices by each CITY’s Director of Public Works or designee, each CITY may direct District to draw a portion of the invoiced amount from the respective CITY’s Collection System R/R Reserve fund. The maximum amount authorized to be drawn from each CITY’s Collection System R/R Reserve fund under this agreement is set forth below:
$ 205,000 from City of Fairfield’s Collection System R/R Reserve Fund $ 191,712 from City of Suisun City’s Collection System R/R Reserve Fund
(ii) Interest on Overdue Invoices. CITIES agree that approved invoices that are not paid within the time established in Section 3 (F)(i) above shall be assessed a one percent (1%) per month interest charge, and that CITIES agree to pay and shall be financially responsible for such interest charges to the DISTRICT. Interest charges shall not accrue if a CITY reasonably disputes an invoice.
(iii) Use of Reserve Funds for Delinquent Payments. CITIES agree that invoices presented by the DISTRICT to each CITY as outlined in Section 3(F)(i), that are not paid within ninety (90) calendar days from the DISTRICT’s issuance to the CITY, shall be subject to direct reimbursement from the respective CITY’s Collection System R/R Reserve Fund. The DISTRICT will deduct and reduce from the respective CITY’s Collection System Reserve Fund, the outstanding invoice amount plus interest (Section 3 (F)(ii)) on the overdue invoice to supplement the payment due to the DISTRICT.
4. Adoption and Actions Taken based on Project Results.
A. Adoption of the Project. Prior to DISTRICT accepting the work of the selected consultant and/or adopting any deliverables, DISTRICT shall issue draft copies to each CITY for review and address any outstanding comments identified by either CITY related to the Project scope attributable to that CITY and request CITY accept the response. Each CITY may choose to adopt elements of deliverables produced under the Combined Project Scope at their discretion.
B. Project Recommendations. Upon Project completion, CITIES will assume full discretion and responsibility for implementation of any or all recommendations identified by the Project attributable to facilities owned and maintained by each respective CITY. At DISTRICT’s discretion, DISTRICT will assume responsibility for implementation of any recommendations identified as a result of the Project attributable to facilities owned and maintained by DISTRICT.
5. Access to Records / Document Retention.
DISTRICT will maintain Combined Project deliverables and other information regarding the implementation of the Combined Project for at least seven (7) years following completion of the project. Financial records associated with the Combined Project, including payables records, receivable records and grants receivable records, shall be maintained at least seven (7) fiscal years after the transactions are recorded. CITIES, or the duly authorized representatives of the CITIES, shall have access to any books, documents, papers and records of the DISTIRCT which are directly pertinent to the subject matter of this AGREEMENT for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts and transcriptions. Except where longer retention is required by any federal or state law,
DISTRICT shall maintain all required records for at least seven (7) years after CITIES make final payment for any of the work authorized hereunder and all pending matters are closed, whichever is later.
6. Term of the Agreement.
The term of this AGREEMENT shall commence on the date first above written and shall continue through the DISTRICT’s payment of the final consultant invoice and DISTRICT’s written confirmation of completion of the Combined Project; except that the obligations of the parties under Paragraph 7 (Indemnification) shall continue in full force and effect after said expiration date or early termination in relation to acts or omissions occurring prior to such dates during the term of the AGREEMENT, and the obligations of DISTRICT to CITIES shall also continue after said expiration date or early termination in relation to the obligations prescribed by Paragraph 5 (Access to Records/Retention).
7. Indemnification.
A. By DISTRICT. DISTRICT shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend, in any actions at law or in equity, the Cities, their officers, employees, agents, and elective and appointive boards, from all claims, losses, damage, including property damage, personal injury, including death, and liability of every kind, nature and description, including attorneys’ fees, to the extent arising from District’s operations, or from any persons directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for, District, excepting the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Cities.
B. By CITIES. CITIES shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend, in any actions at law or in equity, the DISTRICT, its officers, employees, agents, and elective and appointive boards, from all claims, losses, damage, including property damage, personal injury, including death, and liability of every kind, nature and description, including attorneys’ fees, to the extent arising from CITIES’ operations, or from any persons directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for, CITIES, excepting the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the DISTRICT.
C. Each party shall notify the other party immediately in writing of any claim or damage related to activities performed under this AGREEMENT. The parties shall cooperate with each other in the investigation and disposition of any claim arising out of the activities under this AGREEMENT, providing that nothing shall require either party to disclose any documents, records or communications that are protected under peer review privilege, attorney-client privilege, or attorney work product privilege.
8. Ongoing Duties and Responsibilities. In addition to the parties' duties and responsibilities as described in other sections of this AGREEMENT, the parties acknowledge and agree to perform the following on an ongoing basis during the time that the Project is under implementation:
A. Regular Staff Meetings. The respective staffs of CITIES and DISTRICT, and their retained consultants or contractors, will meet as needed to address matters contained in this AGREEMENT.
B. Commitment of Staff and Resources. CITIES and DISTRICT agree to assign and provide sufficient staff and/or resources to this process to efficiently meet the goals and tasks set forth in this AGREEMENT.
9. Warranty of Legal Authority. Each party warrants and covenants that it has the present legal authority to enter into this AGREEMENT and to perform the acts required of it hereunder. If any
party is found to lack the authority to perform the acts required of it hereunder or is prevented from performing the acts by a court of competent jurisdiction, this AGREEMENT shall be void.
10. Severability. If any provision of this AGREEMENT, or any portion thereof, is found by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable or invalid for any reason, such provision shall be severable and shall not in any way impair the enforceability of any other provision of this AGREEMENT.
11. Dispute Resolution. The parties agree to negotiate in good faith any disputes or disagreements arising from this AGREEMENT. In the event that the parties cannot come to agreement within a reasonable period of time, the parties agree to the use of a third party, independent mediator to help the parties come to mutual agreement. The parties agree not to seek remedy or dispute resolution through the courts without first attempting in good faith to resolve the dispute through negotiation or mediation, but in no way does this requirement limit the rights of any party to seek redress through legal action.
12. Attorneys' Fees. In the event that either party commences legal action of any kind or character to enforce the provisions of this AGREEMENT or to obtain damages for breach thereof, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to all costs and reasonable attorney's fees incurred in connection with such action.
13. No Waiver. The waiver by any party of any breach or violation of any requirement of this AGREEMENT shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any such breach in the future, or of the breach of any other requirement of this AGREEMENT.
14. Notices. All notices required or authorized by this AGREEMENT shall be in writing and shall be delivered in person or by deposit in the United States mail, by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Any mailed notice, demand, request, consent, approval or communication that any party desires to give the other party shall be addressed to the other party at the address set forth below. Any notice sent by mail in the manner prescribed by this paragraph shall be deemed to have been received on the date noted on the return receipt or five days following the date of deposit, whichever is earlier.
Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District:
General Manager
1010 Chadbourne Rd.
Fairfield, CA 94534
City of Fairfield:
Director of Public Works
1000 Webster St.
Fairfield, CA 94533
City of Suisun City:
Director of Public Works
701 Civic Center Blvd.
Suisun City, CA 94585
Changes may be made in addresses to where notices are to be delivered by giving notice pursuant to this provision.
15.EntireAgreement.ThisAGREEMENT,includinganydocumentsexpresslyincorporatedby referencewhetherornotattachedhereto,constitutestheentireagreementbetweentheparties relatingtothesubjectofthisAGREEMENTandsupersedesallpreviousagreements,promises, representations,understandingsandnegotiations,whetherwrittenororal,amongthepartieswith respecttothesubjectmatterhereof.
16.Amendment/Modification.Exceptasspecificallyprovidedherein,thisAGREEMENTmaybe modifiedoramendedonlyinwritingandwiththepriorwrittenconsentofbothparties.Inparticular, onlyeachCITYactingthroughitsCouncilintheformofanamendmentofthisAGREEMENT,may authorizeextraand/orchangedworkifbeyondthescopeofservicesprescribedinSections1and3 above.FailureofDISTRICTtosecuresuchauthorizationinwritinginadvanceofperformingany oftheextraorchangedworkshallconstituteawaiverofanyandallrightstoadjustmentinthecosts tobepaidbytheaffectedCITYandnocompensationshallbepaidforsuchextrawork.
17.RecitalsAdopted.ThepartiesherebyagreetoandadopttheAGREEMENTrecitalsasportionsof theAGREEMENT.
18.Termination.ThisAGREEMENTmaybeterminatedbyanypartyforanyreasonpriorto DISTRICTauthorizingtheselectedconsultanttoproceedwithCombinedProjectbygivingwritten noticeofsuchterminationtoallparties;provided,however,thatnosuchterminationmaybe effectedunlessanopportunityforconsultationisprovidedpriortotheeffectivedateofthe termination.CITIESherebyauthorizeeachoftheirCityManagerstomakealldecisionsandtakeall actionsrequiredunderthisParagraphtoterminatethisAGREEMENTonbehalfofeachCITYfor theconvenienceoftheCITY.
19.ExecutioninCounterparts.ThisAgreementmaybeexecutedinseveralcounterparts.Signed copiesandfacsimileversionsofthisAgreementshallhavethesameforceandeffectassignatureof theoriginal.Signaturesmaybetransmittedelectronically.
INWITNESSWHEREOF,thisAGREEMENTwasexecutedbythepartiesheretoasofthedatefirst abovewritten.
CITYOFFAIRFIELD:
By:
___________________________________
By:
______________________________
MayorCityManager
CITYOFSUISUNCITY:
By:
__________________________________
By:
_____________________________
MayorCityManager
FAIRFIELD-SUISUNSEWERDISTRICT:
By:
____________________________
By:
________________________
Pident,BoardofDirectorseneralManager/DistrictEngineer
Page7of8
APPROVEDASTOFORMATTESTAPPROVEDBYTIlECITYOF
CityofFairfieldCityofFairfieldFARFIELD
By:By:_________________________Date:________________________ CityAttorneyCityClerk
APPROVEDASTOFORMATTESTAPPROVEDBYTHECITYOF
CityofSuisunCityCityofSuisunCitySUISUNCITY
By:By:___________________________Date:__________________________ CityAttorneyCityClerk
APPROVEDASTOFORMATTESTAPPROVEDBYTI-IE
Fairfield-SuisunSewerDistrictFairfield-SuisunSewerDistrictFAIRFIELD-SUISUNSEWER
DISTRICT
By:LJ’’CDate:_______________
DistrictCounselDistrictClerk
ATTACHMENTS:
ExhibitA—CombinedProjectScopeofServices
ExhibitB—ItemizedTaskandCostBreakdownBetweenAgencies
Page8of8
15. Entire Agreement. This AGREEMENT, including any documents expressly incorporated by reference whether or not attached hereto, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties relating to the subject of this AGREEMENT and supersedes all previous agreements, promises, representations, understandings and negotiations, whether written or oral, among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.
16. Amendment / Modification. Except as specifically provided herein, this AGREEMENT may be modified or amended only in writing and with the prior written consent of both parties. In particular, only each CITY acting through its Council in the form of an amendment of this AGREEMENT, may authorize extra and/or changed work if beyond the scope of services prescribed in Sections 1 and 3 above. Failure of DISTRICT to secure such authorization in writing in advance of performing any of the extra or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all rights to adjustment in the costs to be paid by the affected CITY and no compensation shall be paid for such extra work.
17. Recitals Adopted. The parties hereby agree to and adopt the AGREEMENT recitals as portions of the AGREEMENT.
18. Termination. This AGREEMENT may be terminated by any party for any reason prior to DISTRICT authorizing the selected consultant to proceed with Combined Project by giving written notice of such termination to all parties; provided, however, that no such termination may be effected unless an opportunity for consultation is provided prior to the effective date of the termination. CITIES hereby authorize each of their City Managers to make all decisions and take all actions required under this Paragraph to terminate this AGREEMENT on behalf of each CITY for the convenience of the CITY.
19. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts. Signed copies and facsimile versions of this Agreement shall have the same force and effect as signature of the original. Signatures may be transmitted electronically.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this AGREEMENT was executed by the parties hereto as of the date first above written.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD:
By: By:
Mayor City Manager
CITY OF SUISUN CITY:
By: By:
Mayor City Manager
FAIRFIELD-SUISUN SEWER DISTRICT:
By: By:
President, Board of Directors General Manager/District Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM
City of Fairfield
By:
City Attorney
ATTEST
City of Fairfield
By:
City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE CITY OF
FARFIELD
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM
City of Suisun City
By:
City Attorney
ATTEST
City of Suisun City
By:
City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE CITY OF
SUISUN CITY
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District
By:
District Counsel
ATTEST
Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District
By:
District Clerk
APPROVED BY THE
FAIRFIELD-SUISUN SEWER
DISTRICT
Date:
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A – Combined Project Scope of Services
Exhibit B – Itemized Task and Cost Breakdown Between Agencies 1 7/14/25
Exhibit A
Collection System Master Plan Update
Scope of Services
The scope of services presented below details Woodard & Curran’s proposed work plan to update the Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District (District/FSSD) Collection System Master Plan. All deliverables, including meeting agenda, presentations, and minutes, Technical Memoranda (TMs), reports, and data will be submitted electronically. All meetings and workshops will be conducted virtually via MS Teams unless indicated otherwise in this Scope of Services.
Woodard & Curran, as the prime consultant, will provide overall project management and lead the tasks related to hydraulic modeling and capacity assessment, preparation of the Master Plan report, and development of the “model viewer” application. Carollo, as subconsultant to Woodard & Curran, will lead the update of the InfoAsset Planner (IAP) model, development of rehabilitation and replacement (R&R) solutions, and update of the District’s funding model. Woodard & Curran and Carollo will both be involved in developing the capital improvement plans. Woodard & Curran and Carollo are referred to as the “project team” in this scope of services.
Task 1 – Project Management
This task includes meetings and coordination with the District, the Cities of Fairfield and Suisun City (Cities), and the project team, as well as contract and subcontract administration, budget and schedule tracking, progress reporting, and implementation of Woodard & Curran ’s quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program.
Subtask 1.1 – Project Administration
Woodard & Curran will use the Integrated Schedule and Budget Management (ISBM) approach to monitor project budget and schedule throughout the project. This subtask also includes subcontract administration, preparation of invoices, and preparation of monthly progress reports to document the work completed during the previous month, anticipated work for the coming month, and any project issues and decisions made.
Subtask 1.2 – Progress Meetings and Communication
The project team will participate in an in -person project kickoff meeting and monthly teleconference progress meetings during the project. The meetings will be attended by Woodard & Curran’s project manager and project team members as needed. Additional, informal teleconference check-ins may be held if needed. In addition to progress meetings, there will be project workshop meetings and training , which are included in their respective tasks below .
Woodard & Curran will prepare agenda and minutes for the k ick-off meeting and progress meetings; action items and decisions will be documented in meeting minutes.
2 7/14/25
Subtask 1.3 – Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Woodard & Curran will hold an internal Senior Technical Approach Review (STAR) workshop at the start of the project. The STAR Workshop brings together the project team, Woodard & Curran technical review leads, and other technical experts to review the project scope, schedule and technical challenges to ensure that all project objectives will be met. Deliverables review and checking are included under respective tasks.
Task 1 Deliverables:
• Monthly invoices and progress reports
• Project schedule updates
• Meeting agenda and minutes
Task 1 Assumptions:
• 18-month project duration
Task 2 – Data Collection and Review
This task includes the collection and review of information regarding the existing wastewater collection system.
Subtask 2.1 – Existing Information
Woodard & Curran will prepare a data request list of additional or updated data and information that may be relevant to the study effort. The information may include additional data, facility information and other required information including but not limited to:
• Current geographic information system (GIS) base mapping, including parcels, streets, and other relevant layers
• Digital mapping related to the Cities’ existing land uses, general plan or other specific planning areas, as available
• Record drawings of any sewer facilities for which up -to-date data is not included in the current GIS
• Pump station data, record drawings and operating information • Cities’ planning documents, including General Plan, Housing Element, and information on development projects currently in the planning/permitting process (“projects in the pipeline”)
• Water consumption data by parcel (e.g., monthly water use for winter months for past 2 to 3 years), as available
• Current and historical permanent (and any available recent temporary) flow meter data • Historical rainfall records
• Operations and maintenance records and information on known sewer “hot spots” • CCTV inspection data
• Rehabilitation project plans
• Historical cost data/bid tabulations from District and city sewer projects • District’s and Cities’ design and construction standards • Current Sewer System Management Plans
• Current 5-year Capital Improvement Plans
3 7/14/25
In addition, Woodard & Curran will incorporate interview information with District and Cities’ engineering and operations staff to supplement the information available in documents, maps, and files. An optional task has been included to perform survey, if needed (See Subtask 14.2) Task 2 Deliverables:
• Data request list
• Manhole survey data (if surveys are authorized under Subtask 14.2) Task 2 Assumptions:
• Majority of data for the collection system sewers and manholes are available through the GIS and previous models
Task 3 – Flow Monitoring
This task will involve conducting a system-wide temporary flow monitoring program to collect data to quantify dry and wet weather flows. The data will also be used in Task 5 to calibrate the hydraulic model.
Subtask 3.1 – Prepare Flow Monitoring Plan
Woodard & Curran will prepare a flow monitoring plan to describe the strategy for the flow monitoring program and identify recommended sites for meter and rain gauge placement. In preparing the plan, Woodard & Curran will solicit District and City staff input into the proposed meter locations. Fifteen (15) meters were installed for the 2018 program, which effectively captured flow from the major sewer basins. This task assumes 15 meters for this Master Plan Update . The plan will be submitted to the District for review and approval.
Subtask 3.2 – Conduct Flow Monitoring Program
After District’s approval of the plan, Woodard & Curran’s flow monitoring subcontractor, V&A Engineers (V&A), will install, calibrate and maintain the flow meters for up to three months (12 weeks) during the 202 5/26 wet weather season (likely during the December/January/February timeframe, to be determined jointly by Woodard & Curran and District). Woodard & Curran will review flow monitoring site reports to confirm final flow meter locations and will periodically review the flow monitoring data during the flow monitoring periods to check data quality and consistency.
V&A will also obtain rainfall data for locations throughout the service area from up to five (5) Weather Underground personal weather stations.
V&A will provide final electronic data files (15 -minute data) at the conclusion of the monitoring.
Analysis of the flow monitoring data to quantify infiltration/inflow (I/I) and develop design flows is an integral part of model calibration and system performance evaluation and will be conducted as part of Tasks 5 and 6.
Task 3 Deliverables:
• Flow Monitoring Plan showing proposed meter sites and alternate sites, if applicable • Flow Monitoring Data
4 7/14/25
Task 3 Assumptions:
• 15 area-velocity flow meters installed for a period of up to three months during the 2025/26 wet weather season.
• Rainfall data will be obtained from Weather Underground personal weather stations available on-line.
• Includes approximately $5K of V&A labor effort to obtain encroachment permits. • District or City staff will assist with traffic control for any sites where more than standard traffic control measures are needed (alternately, District can authorize additional budget for third-party traffic control services) ; clean any meter sites if necessary prior to meter installation; and provide secure locations and access for rain gauge installation.
Task 4 – Hydraulic Model Network Update
Subtask 4.1 – Update FSSD Model Network. Woodard & Curran will update the existing FSSD hydraulic model based on any changes and additions to the trunk sewer system made since the last update, as reflected in current GIS files and/or record drawings provided by the District.
Subtask 4.2 – Develop City of Fairfield Network. Woodard & Curran will expand the District’s sewer model to incorporate City of Fairfield sewers. The initial sewer data will include information from the City’s Heart of Fairfield sewer study, as well as data from the City’s GIS database. Following initial construction, a QA/QC process called “model validation” will be used to verify the data before beginning any model runs. This process includes checking network connectivity and data completeness and reasonableness for a pparent discrepancies (e.g., negative pipe slopes, outlet pipe invert elevations higher than inlet invert elevations, etc.). Missing or suspect data will be resolved to the extent possible through review of available record drawings , field verification by City staff, or surveying (if authorized under Subtask 14.2). Model network will generally include all sewers where elevation data is available; for areas of the City’s system where data is missing from the GIS, assumptions based on minimum slope or best engineering judgement will be used, or the pipes omitted from the model.
Task 4.2 Assumptions
• Woodard & Curran will provide up to approximately 40 hours of model validation effort (including record drawing review and incorporating field -collected data). City will be responsible for rectifying any missing, erroneous, or inconsistent data (e.g., pipe diameters, invert elevations, etc.) needed for th e model that cannot be readily resolved by Woodard & Curran.
Subtask 4.3 – Develop City of Suisun City’s Network . Woodard & Curran will expand the District’s sewer model to incorporate City Suisun City’s sewer. The initial sewer data will be based on the City’s GIS database. Following initial construction, a QA/QC process called “model validation” will be used to verify the data before beginning any model runs. This process includes checking network connectivity and data completeness and reasonableness for apparent discrepancies (e.g., negative pipe slopes, outlet pipe invert ele vations higher than inlet invert elevations, etc.). Missing or suspect data will be resolved to the extent possible through review of 5 7/14/25
available record drawings, field verification by City staff, or surveying (if authorized under Subtask
14.2).
Task 4.3 Assumptions
• Woodard & Curran will provide up to approximately 12 hours of model validation effort (including record drawing review and incorporating field -collected data). City will be responsible for rectifying any missing, erroneous, or inconsistent data (e.g., pipe diameters, invert elevations, etc.) needed for the model that cannot be readily resolved by Woodard & Curran.
Task 4 Assumptions
• Model will be developed in InfoWorks ICM hydraulic modeling software; Woodard & Curran will use its own software licenses for the modeling work.
Task 4 Deliverables:
• Hydraulic model files (to be provided at end of project). • Documentation of model development will be included in the TM on Model Development, Calibration, and Flow Project ions prepared after completion of Task 5 (see Task 5 Deliverables).
Task 5 – Update Flows and Growth Projections
Subtask 5.1 – Existing Base Wastewater Flows
Woodard & Curran will review existing data collected under Task 2 to determine the best approach for using this data to develop existing base wastewater flows. It is anticipated that water use or sewer billing records will be the primary source of data fo r developing existing model loads.
Commercial, industrial, and/or institutional users which may contribute significantly greater flows than average or exhibit atypical use patterns will be identified individually based on water use data or information provided by District or City staff. Existing parcel loads will be parcel based, or aggregated to the model subcatchments if necessary.
Subtask 5.2 – Model Calibration
Woodard & Curran will use the flow monitoring data collected as part of this study to calibrate the hydraulic model. The model will first be calibrated for dry weather flows to confirm the base wastewater flow estimates developed under Subtask 5.1, as well as to refine diurnal wastewater profiles and non -rainfall groundwater infiltration (GWI) rates. GWI is estimated based on the difference between model-simulated base wastewater flows and observed flows at the meter sites, and expressed as a unit areal flow (gpd/acre) distributed uniformly to the meter tributary area.
Wet weather parameters will be determined for each flow meter tributary area based on calibration to monitored storm events.
For portions of the sewer system where flow monitoring is not performed, wet weather and GWI parameters will not be changed from previous model values. Pump station flow data will be used for confirmation of overall system flows.
6 7/14/25
Subtask 5.3 – Future Base Wastewater Flows
Through the data collection efforts under Task 2 and interviews with Planning staff, Woodard & Curran will identify the most useful source of information for developing land use projections and parcel-based future wastewater loads. Specific planning issues and potential growth or redevelopment areas in the cities, the potential timing of future development, as well as the best approach for incorporating future construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in the flow projections will be discussed with th e Cities’ Planning staff . Based on these discussions and the information collected future land use information will be tabulated at the parcel level, drawing upon the various available sources of information described above. The parcel -based land uses and flows developed in this subtask will be compiled in a GIS database for use in developing model loads.
Subtask 5.4 – Technical Memorandum
Findings from this task will be documented in a draft Technical Memorandum.
Task 5 Deliverables:
• Draft TM on Model Development, Calibration, and Flow Projections. Comments on the draft TM will be incorporated in the final Master Plan report.
Task 5 Assumptions:
• Up to two phasing scenarios will be analyzed, as defined by City and District staff. Additional phasing analyses to identify project or phase triggers may be performed as part of other tasks (see Subtasks 7.3 and 12.3).
Task 6 – Develop Performance Criteria
Woodard & Curran will work with the District and Cities to review and update the criteria used to assess the capacity of the system and size capacity improvements. Woodard & Curran will review the District’s and Cities’ current sewer design criteria and standards, including criteria used in the previous Master Plan. Based on this review and discussions and decisions made with the District and Cities, Woodard & Curran will provide recommendations for design standard updates, as well as work with the agencies to update or refine the design storm and hydraulic criteria to be used for assessing the capacity of existing sewer facilities and sizing new facilities for this Master Plan.
In addition to the design storm, these criteria will include Manning’s “n” factors; maximum d/D values or acceptable level of surcharge (or minimum freeboard); minimum and maximum velocities, slopes, and depth of cover; and pump station design and reliability considerations (e.g., firm capacity). Note that while the Cities and District will likely benefit from using the same design storm, different capacity criteria are often applied to smaller diameter sewers. Woodard & Curran will work with the Cities and District staff to identify appropriate criteria for each agency.
A brief technical memorandum will be prepared to provide background information and recommendations for the District and Cities to review and serve as basis for discussion at a workshop to review and reach agreement on the criteria. 7 7/14/25
For fee estimating purposes, this task effort has been distributed evenly between the three agencies.
Subtask 6.1 – Review FSSD Capacity Deficiency Criteria
This subtask includes reviewing and updating the existing capacity deficiency criteria for FSSD, as described above.
Subtask 6.2 – Develop City of Fairfield Capacity Deficiency Criteria This subtask includes developing capacity deficiency criteria for City of Fairfield , as described above.
Subtask 6.3 – Develop City of Suisun City Capacity Deficiency Criteria This subtask includes developing capacity deficiency criteria for City of Suisun City , as described above.
Subtask 6.4 – Climate Change Sensitivity Analysis
This subtask includes a sensitivity analysis and discussion of a proposed approach to design storm consideration of climate change. D etailed analyses of climate change models is not part of this scope. It is anticipated that the sensitivity analysis will be based on running the model with an alternate design storm (as developed and published by others) or an assumed increase in rainfall for the Master Plan design storm.
Findings from this subtask will be discussed at the Task 7 workshop and incorporated into the Master Plan report.
Task 6 Deliverables:
• TM summarizing Design Flow and Hydraulic Criteria considerations. Comments on the draft TM will be incorporated in the final Master Plan report. • Workshop and workshop materials
Task 7 – Capacity Analysis
Subtask 7.1 – Evaluate Existing System Performance
Using the hydraulic model and based on the criteria established in Task 6, Woodard & Curran will evaluate the performance of the existing sewers under existing and future dry and design wet weather flows. Thematic maps and hydraulic gradeline plots will be prepared to present the identified capacity problem areas. Woodard & Curran will develop preliminary solutions to capacity deficiencies and test those solutions in the model. Preliminary solutions may include upsizing deficient pipes, optimizing existi ng or potential new flow diversions, or potential reduction of I/I in targeted areas. Findings from this subtask will be discussed at a workshop and incorporated into the Master Plan report.
Subtask 7.2 – Perform RDI/I Analysis
8 7/14/25
Woodard & Curran will evaluate the I/I flow characteristics associated with the different areas of the system (based on model results and flow monitoring data) and their location with respect to identified capacity deficiencies, and identify areas that may be suitable for rehabilitation efforts to reduce I/I. The hydraulic model will be used to evaluate various scenarios of I/I reduction ( i.e., assumed percent reductions in targeted areas) to identify the amount of reductions that would be necessary to eliminate needed capacity improvement projects. Up to five (5) I/I reduction scenarios will be modeled.
Findings from this subtask will be discussed at the workshop and incorporated into the Master Plan report.
Subtask 7.3 – Analysis of Potential Service Area Expansions Woodard & Curran will analyze up to five ( 5) service area expansion scenarios. Development assumptions for the scenarios will be provided by the District and Cities. As part of the analysis, Woodard & Curran will identify potentially capacity deficient pipes, and the approximate number of units that would trigger capacity deficiencies. Findings from this subtask will be summarized in a brief TM.
Task 7 Deliverables:
• Workshop agenda and minutes
• Brief TM summarizing results of analyses of potential service area expansions. Comments on the draft TM will be incorporated in the final Master Plan report.
Task 8 – Updates and Additions to Asset Management Model Subtask 8.1 – Update IAP Model and Develop Rehabilitation and Replacement Solutions for FSSD
Carollo will implement a stepwise process for updating the InfoAsset Planner (IAP) model developed by Carollo in 2022 for the District and Cities’ collection systems. These steps include:
1. Receive and review current GIS data of the District’s collection system assets (pipelines and manholes), force mains, and other available features and appurtenances such as lateral connections, blow-offs and air release valves.
2. Receive and review current closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection results consisting of National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO) Pipeline Assessment Certification Program (PACP) scores.
3. Update the IAP model with the new GIS asset inventory (for gravity sewers), PACP scores, edits to the inventory identified in the hydraulic model, and replacement recommendations from the hydraulic analysis.
4. Facilitate a 2-hour risk model updated interactive workshop with the District’s and Cities’ staff to present the current risk parameters (consequence and likelihood of failure scoring approach), unit costs (developed by Woodard & Curran in Task 10), and management strategies and gain consensus for updates to be incorporated into the IAP model.
9 7/14/25
5. Update the IAP model by incorporating the changes established during the risk model update workshop.
6. Prepare for and facilitate a 2-hour climate change interactive workshop with the District’s and Cities’ staff to present options for incorporating the impact of climate change into the risk prioritization and capital planning development processes. Level of effort for developing the proposed climate change impact analysis strategy is based on th e following approach:
a. In collaboration with District and Cities staff, identify future scenarios for evaluation considering hazards such as sea level rise, flooding, weather -related erosion, wildfire, power disruptions, and if appropriate, earthquakes. b. Using GIS, develop maps correlating hazard vulnerability to the collection system assets.
c. Pair hazard vulnerability with the risk analysis for the R&R recommendation results. d. Identify non -R&R related projects recommended to mitigate the risk of hazard vulnerability, if appropriate.
7. Update the IAP model with recommendations from the climate change workshop, if applicable. Run the IAP model to develop R&R recommendations. Present District’s IAP model results in graphical format to the District.
8. Facilitate an IAP model results review meeting with District’s and Cities’ staff to present and gather feedback on the IAP model results. Update unit costs, where applicable, from updates to costs developed as part of Subtask 10.1.
9. Apply feedback from the IAP model results review meeting, climate change workshop, and force main risk assessment results (Subtask 8.4) into a draft Collection System Asset Management and R&R Update Technical Memorandum (CS AM and R&R Update TM).
The TM will describe the processes followed for preparing the updates developed under Task 8.
10. After submitting the draft CS AM and R&R Update TM, Carollo will facilitate a 1 -hour TM review meeting with District ’s and Cities’ staff and document comments and responses in a tracking log. After addressing review comments, the final CS AM and R&R Update TM will be submitted.
Subtask 8.2 – Update IAP Model and Develop R&R Solutions for City of Fairfield Carollo will update the IAP model and develop R&R solutions for the City of Fairfield following the approach described in Subtask 8.1 with the following modifications:
1. Receive and review current GIS data of the City’s collection system assets (pipelines and manholes), and other available features such as lateral connections. Update GIS data configuration for import into the IAP model schema.
2. Receive and review current CCTV inspection results consisting of NASSCO PACP scores. The level of effort for this step is based on the expectation that only minor adjustments/review of the PACP scores may be needed and that most of the results will be linkable to the GIS data.
3. No forcemain analysis is expected for the City’s sewer system. 10 7/14/25
11 7/14/25
Subtask 8.3 – Update IAP Model and Develop R&R Solutions for City of Suisun City Carollo will update the IAP model and develop R&R solutions for Suisun City following the approach described in Subtask 8.1 with the following modifications:
1. Receive and review current GIS data of the City’s collection system assets (pipelines and manholes), and other available features such as lateral connections. Update GIS data configuration for import into the IAP model schema.
2. Receive and review current CCTV inspection results consisting of NASSCO PACP scores. The level of effort for this step is based on the expectation that only minor adjustments/review of the PACP scores may be needed and that most of the results will be linkable to the GIS data.
3. No forcemain analysis is expected for the City’s sewer system.
Subtask 8.4 – Evaluate Force Main Risks and Identify Solutions Carollo will review the GIS data available for the District’s force mains and develop a risk model building on the preliminary analysis developed by Carollo in the 2022 Collection System Asset Management Plan report. Carollo will present the proposed risk model and preliminary results in a review meeting with District staff. Carollo will apply feedback from the review meeting to update the IAP model and resulting R&R recommendations , including recommendations for condition assessment along with unit costs developed as part of Subtask 10.1. The results and recommendations will be incorporated into the draft FSSD CS AM and R&R Update TM.
Task 8 Assumptions:
• risk model update workshop
• climate change workshop
• IAP model results meeting
• Force Main IAP model and preliminary results meeting
• draft CS AM and R&R Update TM review meeting
• CCTV inspection results will consist of NASSCO PACP scores, readily importable into the IAP model.
• The GIS data from the District is assumed to be in the same schematic format as was used for the previous IAP model. However, the GIS data to be received from the Cities is expected to require adjustments (similar to what was required previously) to adapt to the schematic format of the IAP model.
• A single IAP model will be configured containing the asset inventory from all three agencies.
Task 8 Deliverables:
• Presentation materials and summaries for workshops and meetings • Draft and final CS AM and R&R Update TM and comment/response log
12 7/14/25
Task 9 – Develop Capacity Solutions
Subtask 9.1– Develop/Evaluate FSSD Capacity Improvement Alternatives Based on the preliminary solutions and results of the I/I analysis for the FSSD system, Woodard & Curran will evaluate potential project alternatives in further detail, including review of projects sites on aerial mapping or in the field. The purpose of these evaluations is to confirm the suitability of pipeline alignments, and identify any design, constructability, permitting, or environmental issues that could potentially be “fatal flaws” or that should be considered in project development.
Woodard & Curran will incorporate the final proposed solutions in the model to confirm that all capacity issues have been addressed.
Subtask 9.2 – Develop/Evaluate Fairfield Capacity Improvement Alternatives Based on the preliminary solutions and results of the I/I analysis for the Fairfield system, Woodard & Curran will evaluate potential project alternatives in further detail, including review of projects sites on aerial mapping or in the field. The purpose of these evaluations is to confirm the suitability of pipeline alignments, and identify any design, constructability, permitting, or environmental issues that could potentially be “fatal flaws” or that should be considered in project development.
Woodard & Curran will incorporate the final proposed solutions in the model to confirm that all capacity issues have been addressed.
Subtask 9.3 – Develop/Evaluate Suisun City Capacity Improvement Alternatives Based on the preliminary solutions and results of the I/I analysis for the Suisun City system , Woodard & Curran will evaluate potential project alternatives in further detail, including review of projects sites on aerial mapping or in the field. The purpose of these evaluations is to confirm the suitability of pipeline alignments, and identify any design, constructability, permitting, or environmental issues that could potentially be “fatal flaws” or that should be considered in project development. Woodard & Curran will incorporate the final proposed solutions in the model to confirm that all capacity issues have been addressed.
Subtask 9.4 – Evaluate Flow Transfers Between Basins
Woodard & Curran will review opportunities to transfer flow between the Central, Suisun, and Inlet pump stations when necessary. The District already has pipelines connecting the Central, Suisun, and CBC Pump Stations (CBC flows to Inlet PS); as part of this evaluation, Woodard & Curran will work with the District to define the scenarios that the flow transfers should address, and use the model to identify any additional facilities that would be needed to address those scenarios. Up to five (5) scenarios will be evaluated.
Findings from this subtask will be documented in a brief TM.
This task includes preparing opinions of probable cost for the recommended sewer system improvement projects and developing a prioritized, phased Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for each agency for implementation of the improvements.
13 7/14/25
Subtask 10.1 – Develop Cost Criteria and Prepare Cost Estimates Based on data collected for District’s and Cities’ historical sewer projects, as well as data from similar agencies compiled by Woodard & Curran, Woodard & Curran will develop appropriate unit cost factors for sewer construction and allowances for contingencies, design, environmental review, permitting, right of way acquisition, and construction management. Some capacity projects identified in Task 9 may require more specific cost assumptions (e.g. pump station upgrades and siphons). The cost estimating assumptions are assumed to be developed to a planning level (AACE Class 5). These cost factors will be applied to the project recommendations identified in Task s 8 and 9.
Subtask 10.2 – Develop Project Prioritization Criteria and Rankings In collaboration with the District and Cities, the Project Team will develop a prioritization approach for the condition -based R&R needs, climate change adaptation strategies, and capacity related recommended projects. The prioritization approach is to consider project drivers, risk mitigation, and the District’s and Cities’ strategic objectives. The Project Team will present the prioritization approach and project cost summaries in a collaborative in-person workshop with the District and Cities and facili tate their selection of the preferred prioritization approach to be used for prioritizing the recommended capital project needs.
The Project Team will apply the prioritization approach to rank the projects recommended for the District and each City. The prioritized projects will be provided in graphical (i.e. GIS -based map) format and in tabular format along with associated project costs for the District’s projects and the projects for each City for review and feedback.
The Project Team will facilitate a project prioritization results review meeting with the District and Cities and update the prioritization approach based on meeting feedback. The updated project prioritization results will be incorporated into the Capital Improvement Plans to be developed in the following subtasks.
14 7/14/25
Subtask 10.3 – Develop FSSD Capital Improvement Plan
The Project Team will group the District’s projects, prioritized in Subtask 10.2, into logical project packages for construction based on factors such as proximity, project type and likely construction methods, timing, and hazard vulnerability. Project packages will also consider project budget targets as provided by the District. Project-specific construction and capital cost estimates will be developed as part of Subtask 10.1.
Based on the projects developed under Task 8 and Task 9, and the cost estimates and project rankings developed under Subtasks 10.1 and 10.2, the Project Team will compile the proposed District projects into project packages appropriate for pre-design. The projects will be compiled in a separate stand-alone CIP document for the District, which will also include brief descriptions of the process used for prioritization and project packaging. This information will be incorporated into the Task 13 Master Plan report, with the District’s CIP document included as an appendix.
Subtask 10.4 – Develop City of Fairfield Capital Improvement Plan The Project Team will group the City’s projects, prioritized in Subtask 10.2, into logical project packages for construction based on factors such as proximity, project type and likely construction methods, timing, and hazard vulnerability. Project packages will also consider project budget targets as provided by the City. Project-specific construction and capital cost estimates will be developed as part of Subtask 10.1.
Based on the projects developed under Task 8 and Task 9, and the cost estimates and project rankings developed under Subtasks 10.1 and 10.2, the Project Team will compile the proposed City projects into project packages appropriate for pre-design. The projects will be compiled in a separate stand-alone CIP document for the City of Fairfield, which will also include brief descriptions of the process used for prioritization and project packaging. This information will be incorporated into the Task 13 Master Plan report, with the City’s CIP document included as an appendix.
Subtask 10.5 – Develop Suisun City Capital Improvement Plan The Project Team will group the City’s projects, prioritized in Subtask 10.2, into logical project packages for construction based on factors such as proximity, project type and likely construction methods, timing, and hazard vulnerability. Project packages will also consider project budget targets as provided by the City. Project-specific construction and capital cost estimates will be developed as part of Subtask 10.1.
Based on the projects developed under Task 8 and Task 9, and the cost estimates and project rankings developed under Subtasks 10.1 and 10.2, the Project Team will compile the proposed City projects into project packages appropriate for pre-design. The projects will be compiled in a separate stand -alone CIP document for the City of Suisun City, which will also include brief descriptions of the process used for prioritization and project packaging. This information will be incorporated into the Task 13 Master Plan report, with the City’s CIP document included as an appendix.
15 7/14/25
Task 10 Assumptions:
• Project prioritization (in-person) workshop
Task 10 Deliverables:
• Presentation materials and summaries for workshops and meetings • Project cost estimates.
• FSSD CIP document, including prioritized and grouped FSSD CIP projects. • City of Fairfield CIP document, including prioritized and grouped Fairfield CIP projects. • City of Suisun City CIP document, including prioritized and grouped Suisun City CIP projects.
Task 11 – Update Funding Model
In this task, the District’s long -term (100-year) funding model initially developed as part of the 2022 Collection System Asset Management Plan project will be updated to incorporate the updated IAP model results (Task 8) and the prioritized capital improvement projects (Task 10). The model update process involves steps (distributed across subtasks 11.1, 11.2 and 11.3) as described in the 2022 Collection System Asset Management Plan.
Subtask 11.1 – Update Funding Model
1) Carollo will import the results of the IAP model replacement timing and R&R and operations and maintenance (O&M) projects into the funding model to update the 100 - year plan. Unit costs and resulting project cost totals developed in Task 10 will also be imported.
2) Calculate the calendar year assignments for R&R projects using the hybrid approach (timing is mid-way between the age -based and condition-based R&R year assignments).
Then, aggregate the resulting costs per year.
3) Generate costs tables for each of three scenarios: age-based, condition-based, and hybrid. 4) Calculate the updated rolling-average and cost-redistribution results. 5) Import the updated calculation results into PowerBI.
Subtask 11.2 – Review and Update Model Scenarios
After updating the funding model, Carollo will facilitate a virtual review meeting with District’s and Cities’ staff for review and feedback. After addressing review comments and feedback, the funding model will be updated for transfer to the District and Cities. The level of effort for this task assumes review comments and feedback do not involve substantial revi sions to underlying model calculations. If significant configuration changes are desired by the District and/or Cities that are expected to involv e additional effort, upon request, Carollo will prepare a scope and cost for negotiation and approval prior to proceeding.
16 7/14/25
Subtask 11.3 – Funding Model Dashboards
The funding model dashboards will be updated based on review comments and feedback from the District and Cities and the files prepared for transfer to the District and Cities. The level of effort for this task assumes review comments and feedback do not in volve substantial revisions to the PowerBI layout and visualization. If significant configuration changes are desired by the District and/or Cities that are expected to involve additional effort, upon request, Carollo will prepare a scope and cost for negotiation and approval prior to proceeding.
Task 11 Assumptions:
• The previous MS Excel and PowerBI dashboard files will be updated with new replacement timing and unit costs developed in the previous tasks.
• funding model review meeting
Task 11 Deliverables
• Funding Model PowerBI file
• Prioritized and grouped Funding Model MS Excel file
Task 12 – Additional Studies
Subtask 12.1 – Design Standards Review
Under this task, the project team will review District and Cities’ design standards, focusing on the criteria used to design new sewers or replace existing sewers, including for sewering of new development areas. The goal of this task is to provide consistency with both the capacity criteria defined in Task 6, as well as between the Cities and District.
The findings of this review will be discussed at the workshop in Task 6, and the recommendations will be incorporated into the TM prepared under Task 6. Note that this task is intended to focus on sizing standards (including flow factors for new development); more technical review of standard drawings and specifications is not included.
Subtask 12.2 – I/I Reduction Program
Based on the findings of Subtask 7.2, Woodard & Curran will work with the District and Cities to prepare an I/I reduction program. As part of this task, Woodard & Curran will identify areas where I/I reduction could be most cost -effective (because I/I triggers a capacity project and/o r because the sewershed has relatively high rates of I/I). The I/I reduction program would include recommended I/I investigations, potential type and amount of sewer rehabilitation, and estimated planning level costs. The recommended I/I reduction program will be described and incorporated into the Master Plan report under Task 13.
Subtask 12.3 – Infill Development Policies
Under this task, Woodard & Curran will work with the District and Cities to identify policy recommendations associated with infill. This task includes:
17 7/14/25
• Review of capacity triggers downstream of potential infill development sites. For sewers with predicted deficiencies, the number of additional units before a project is needed will be identified. Project triggers for up to 6 locations are assumed. • Identify policy recommendations for developer options to address projected deficiencies.
Recommendations are expected to include:
o Self-construct potential improvements
o Implement I/I reduction activities upstream of projected deficiency. o Contribute to a planned I/I reduction project
Proposed policies will be discussed in a brief TM
Task 12 Deliverables
• Brief TM on Infill development policies
Task 13 – Prepare Master Plan
Subtask 13.1 – Draft Master Plan
Woodard & Curran will incorporate the methodology, findings, and recommendations of the study into a comprehensive Master Plan Update report. The report appendices will contain the final TMs from previous tasks, which will include supporting data including flow monitoring data plots, model calibration graphs, model data and results tables, detailed project cost estimates and maps, and other pertinent information. The report will include an Executive Summary section that can be extr acted as a stand -alone d ocument and provided to District officials or other interested parties. A workshop will be held to discuss and review the draft report and receive District comments.
Subtask 13.2 – Final Master Plan
Woodard & Curran will prepare a final Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Update report, incorporating the District’s comments on the Draft report. The final plan will serve as a basis for future master plan updates.
Subtask 13.3 – Sewer Planning WebTool
Woodard & Curran will developenhancements and/or replacement of the “Model Viewer” application originally developed for the District’s 2 020 Collection System Master Plan. The enhanced WebTool will include sewer condition, R&R, and CIP project data, as well as modeling/capacity information, as well as capabilities to track developments and CIP projects. The intent is for the WebTool to be accessible to the Cities as well as the District.
The following paragraphs describe the steps that Woodard & Curran will follow to develop the enhanced Model Viewer.
A. Collect User Requirements and System Configuration
Woodard & Curran will work with FSSD to determine user requirements and database needs for storing, viewing, and validating data collected for the WebTool. Woodard & Curran will review 18 7/14/25
existing documentation and materials developed for the Model Viewer and will work with FSSD to identify requirements on general functionality such as user permissions, data visualization, and data collection and validation processes. Woodard & Curran will also present several system configuration options and work with FSSD to identify which approach best fits identified user requirements and database needs as well as IT requirements.
Woodard & Curran will hold up to two meetings with FSSD to collect requirements for user interface and navigation, data and information collection, data validation, and data collection and validation processes. Woodard & Curran will then prioritize feature s in the system based on available budget.
B. Configure System to Meet WebTool Needs
Woodard & Curran will develop the WebTool in the system identified through the two virtual meetings. Implementation of the system will include configuration and customization of existing features and functionality. The proposed system will be configured and customized according to the results of the two meetings discussed above.
Woodard & Curran will install, configure, customize, and test the system in FSSD’s environment.
The following features will be installed and customized as described below:
• Geospatial Layers – Woodard & Curran will install additional geospatial layers into the WebTool which includes reference data, hydraulic model outputs, AM model outputs, and Capital Improvement Plan data. For each layer, specific variables will be made available on the WebTool with specific editable fields for data tracking. Visualization of specific layers will be set to adjust based on editable field updates.
• Data Entry Forms – Woodard & Curran will configure simple, user-friendly data entry forms for editable fields used for data tracking. These forms will be associated with tracking parcel development potential, unit development per parcel, project status, method, cost, actual vs estimate costs, dates, and review notes. • System Modules – Woodard & Curran will modify WebTool features and user interface to best support external users and viewing and editing data along with any other requirements identified.
• External User Sign-In – Woodard & Curran will work with FSSD IT to develop access to selected external users to be able to view and edit the WebTool.
C. Test, Finalize, and Provide User Workshop
Woodard & Curran will demonstrate the WebTool to users identified by FSSD. Woodard & Curran will lead user testing of the WebTool on FSSD’s server with selected users to test the functionality and obtain user sign -off. Woodard & Curran will make revisions to the WebTool as necessary during user testing.
Upon receiving user sign -off, Woodard & Curran will finalize the WebTool on FSSD’s server and perform final testing. At the end of deployment, Woodard & Curran will hold one 1-hour training workshop for the end users. Training will include instructions on how to edit data and demonstrate how to see data layers and updated features.
19 7/14/25
Subtask 13.3 Assumptions
• FSSD IT staff will provide secured remote access to FSSD IT server during development and testing.
• FSSD IT staff will provide all hardware associated with this task and will install and configure any necessary software, databases, and SSL certificates needed to operate in FSSD’s environment.
• FSSD IT staff will develop appropriate authentication and access for external users to gain access to the WebTool
• Not all task needs are identified at this time. Level of effort limited to budgeted hours. • FSSD will be responsible for maintaining internal APIs and databases, if applicable. • FSSD IT staff will be responsible for setting up databases for the WebTool. • FSSD IT staff will be responsible for developing secure connection to WebTool and backend geospatial layers and database(s) for external users.
Task 13 Deliverables
• Workshop presentation materials and summary
• Draft Master Plan Update report
• Final Master Plan Update report (MS Word and pdf files) • Final hydraulic model files
• WebTool files
Task 14 – Optional Tasks
Subtask 14.1 – Additional flow meters (10 meters)
Under this task, up to ten ( 10) additional flow meters would be installed. It is assumed that the meters would be installed at the same time as the other meters. This task includes effort associated with calibration of the additional meters.
Subtask 14.2 – Survey
Where data is not readily available with regard to invert elevations of pipes or other structures at manhole locations, up to 25 manholes can be surveyed by Woodard & Curran’s surveying subcontractor, LCC Engineering.
Agreement Between FSSD and Cities Regarding Collection System Master Planning Services Exhibit B: Itemized Task and Cost Breakdown Between Agencies Task Total Task
Budget ($) FSSD Fairfield Suisun City FSSD Fairfield Suisun City Task 1: Project Management $69,831 65% 20% 15% $45,390 $13,966 $10,475 Task 2: Data Collection and Review $15,365 65% 20% 15% $9,987 $3,073 $2,305 Task 3: Flow Monitoring $198,735 50% 25% 25% $99,368 $49,684 $49,684 Task 4: Hydraulic Model Update $40,790 12% 58% 29% $5,000 $23,770 $12,020
4.1 Update FSSD Model Network $5,000 100% 0% 0% $5,000 $0 $0
4.2 Develop City of Fairfield Network $23,770 0% 100% 0% $0 $23,770 $0
4.3 Develop City of Suisun City Network $12,020 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $12,020 Task 5: Update Flows and Growth Projections $113,270 100% 0% 0% $113,270 $0 $0
5.1 Develop Existing Base Wastewater Flows $23,990 100% 0% 0% $23,990 $0 $0
5.2 Model Calibration $34,490 100% 0% 0% $34,490 $0 $0
5.3 Develop Future Planning Scenarios $28,130 100% 0% 0% $28,130 $0 $0
5.4 Draft Technical Memorandum $26,660 100% 0% 0% $26,660 $0 $0 Task 6: Develop Performance Criteria $23,925 48% 26% 26% $11,415 $6,255 $6,255
6.1 Review FSSD Capacity Deficiency Criteria $6,255 100% 0% 0% $6,255 $0 $0
6.2 Develop Fairfield Capacity Deficiency Criteria $6,255 0% 100% 0% $0 $6,255 $0
6.3 Develop Suisun City Capacity Deficiency Criteria $6,255 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $6,255
6.4 Climate Change Sensitivity Analysis $5,160 100% 0% 0% $5,160 $0 $0 Task 7: Capacity Analysis $54,780 65% 20% 15% $35,607 $10,956 $8,217
7.1 Evaluate Existing System Performance $20,420 65% 20% 15% $13,273 $4,084 $3,063
7.2 Perform RDI/I Analysis $18,030 65% 20% 15% $11,720 $3,606 $2,705
7.3 Analysis of Potential Service Area Expansions $16,330 65% 20% 15% $10,615 $3,266 $2,450 Task 8: Updates and Additions to Asset Management Model $124,443 100% 0% 0% $124,443 $0 $0
8.1 FSSD AM Model Updates $89,550 100% 0% 0% $89,550 $0 $0
8.2 Fairfield AM Model Updates $18,567 100% 0% 0% $18,567 $0 $0
8.3 Suisun City AM Model Updates $5,463 100% 0% 0% $5,463 $0 $0
8.4 Force main risk model and R&R results $10,863 100% 0% 0% $10,863 $0 $0 Task 9: Develop Capacity Solutions $47,330 38% 43% 19% $17,995 $20,185 $9,150
9.1 Develop/Evaluate FSSD Capacity Improvement Alternatives $10,255 100% 0% 0% $10,255 $0 $0
9.2 Develop/Evaluate Fairfield Capacity Improvement Alternatives $20,185 0% 100% 0% $0 $20,185 $0
9.3 Develop/Evaluate Suisun Capacity Improvement Alternatives $9,150 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $9,150
9.4 Evaluate Flow Transfers Between Basins $7,740 100% 0% 0% $7,740 $0 $0 Task 10: Develop Capital Improvement Plan $122,607 53% 30% 17% $64,402 $37,040 $21,165
10.1 Develop Cost Criteria and Prepare Cost Estimates $11,650 100% 0% 0% $11,650 $0 $0
10.2 Develop Project Prioritization Criteria and Rankings $30,347 100% 0% 0% $30,347 $0 $0
10.3 Develop FSSD Capital Improvement Plan $22,405 100% 0% 0% $22,405 $0 $0
10.4 Develop Fairfield Capital Improvement Plan $37,040 0% 100% 0% $0 $37,040 $0
10.5 Develop Suisun City Capital Improvement Plan $21,165 0% 0% 100% $0 $0 $21,165 Task 11: Update Funding Model $23,428 100% 0% 0% $23,428 $0 $0
11.1 Update Funding Model $11,886 100% 0% 0% $11,886 $0 $0
11.2 Review and Update Model Scenarios $5,961 100% 0% 0% $5,961 $0 $0
11.3 Funding Model Dashboards $5,581 100% 0% 0% $5,581 $0 $0 Task 12: Additional Studies $45,770 58% 21% 21% $26,517 $9,627 $9,627
12.1 Design Standards Review $9,970 33% 33% 33% $3,323 $3,323 $3,323
12.2 I/I Reduction Program $16,890 100% 0% 0% $16,890 $0 $0
12.3 Infill Development Policies $18,910 33% 33% 33% $6,303 $6,303 $6,303 Task 13: Prepare Master Plan $152,101 65% 20% 15% $98,866 $30,420 $22,815
13.1 Draft Master Plan $52,774 65% 20% 15% $34,303 $10,555 $7,916
13.2 Final Master Plan $18,147 65% 20% 15% $11,796 $3,629 $2,722
13.3 Sewer Planning WebTool $81,180 65% 20% 15% $52,767 $16,236 $12,177 Total $1,032,375 -- -- -- $675,687 $204,976 $151,712
Percentage of Task Atributable to Agency Estimated Agency Task Budget