October 22, 2024
Economic Development
PORT
DATE: October 22, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Charles Gerard, Port Director
Lizeht Zepeda, Senior Business Assistance Office
Subject: Port Contract with Moffatt and Nichol for Facilities Assessment
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed expenditure was approved in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-2025 Port Budget ($150,000 Account
String: 40163080 400733 36035). The Port is also
requesting a budget amendment to increase the budget
by $134,000 to meet the total scope amount of $259,000
plus $25,000 contingency.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The Port seeks approval of a contract agreement with
Moffatt and Nichol to complete a comprehensive facilities assessment of Port infrastructure as well as an
amendment to increase the budget to meet the amount of
scope total plus contingency for a final budget of
$284,000.
RECOMMENDED ACTION ADOPT a resolution approving a budget amendment increasing the Port’s budget from the Port Fund by
$134,000; and APPROVE a contract agreement with
Moffatt and Nichol in the amount of $284,000 for a
comprehensive facilities assessment of the Point Potrero Marine Terminal wharfs, graving basins, and piers, for a term ending June 30, 2025 – Economic Development
AGENDA
REPORT
415
October 22, 2024
Department (Charles Gerard 510-829-2253/Lizeht
Zepeda 510-620-6653).
DISCUSSION:
Background
Henry J. Kaiser developed four shipyards in Richmond between 1941 and 1942 that employed thousands who constructed more than 747 vessels during World War II.
Shipyard Number 3 became the Point Potrero Marine Terminal (PPMT). It houses several key infrastructure components including wharfs, graving basins and piers.
These facilities are critical to the Port’s current and future operational capabilities.
These structures require a comprehensive assessment to evaluate their current physical condition for safety, waterfront industrial capacity, and potential for rehabilitation and restoration with the goal of establishing budgets and priorities to sustain and expand operations for long-term use.
Procurement and Selection Review
A Request for Proposal (RFP) was issued on August 1, 2024, outlining the scope of work, evaluation criteria, and submission deadlines (Attachment 2). The RFP was viewed by a wide range of qualified vendors, including those who specialize in marine engineering and restoration of historical waterfront facilities. On August 12, 2024, the Port held a meeting with potential vendors and toured the PPMT areas to be covered within the assessment. Vendors attending this meeting included:
Moffatt and Nichol
AME Engineering
PCI Construction
Shannon & Wilson Geotech
ENGEO
Liftech
AECOM
COWI
The Port received two (2) proposals as follows between August 20, 2024, and August 23, 2024 (Attachment 3 and 4).
Contractor Name / Sub-contractor Name Location Bid Value Moffatt and Nichol
ENGEO
Tourney Consulting
Oakland, CA $245,000
Liftech
ENGEO
Power Engineering Construction Co.
Oakland, CA $223,645
Following a review of the proposals and presentations provided by each vendor, the Port staff found both vendors were very well positioned to undertake this work, and that each vendor had unique qualifications related to specific facilities. The scoring process by the evaluation team had both proposals score equivalently (Attachment 6). Moffatt 416
October 22, 2024
and Nichol had stronger credentials and capabilities related to evaluation of the graving basins and piers, including experience with World War II era graving basins. Moffat and Nichol are a larger organization that can call on experts from across the country as needed. Liftech is a smaller local company that has done significant work throughout the Bay Area on facilities very similar to the wharfs at PPMT. These wharfs front the Harbor Channel and the Point Potrero Turn and the wharf supporting the Auto Warehousing Company (AWC) Roll-On and Roll-Off (RoRo) operations. Liftech was also the prime contractor in the Honda Port of Entry rehabilitation project work for Berths 7 and 8 in support of the significant project that took place between 2008 and 2010. As a result, Liftech is particularly well suited to re-evaluate these wharf areas and provide assessment on condition and rehabilitation requirements.
Given the unique strengths of these two organizations, the Port Director sent a letter to both vendors on September 13, 2024, requesting that they work together on a joint proposal to the Port to complete the scope of work requested in the RFP. It is important to note that these two companies have successfully worked together and have completed joint projects at other ports within the Bay Area.
On September 20, 2024, Moffatt and Nichol submitted a revised proposal that incorporates a collaborative effort between Moffatt and Nichol and Liftech (Attachment 5). Moffatt and Nichol will serve as the primary contractor and will work with Liftech as well as ENGEO and Power Engineering as subcontractors for this effort (Attachment 1.
Moffatt and Nichol will lead the evaluation of the graving basins and the finger piers, and they will be responsible for overall project management and reporting. Liftech will lead the evaluation of the wharfs at Berths 5-8.
Next Steps
Given, City Council approval City Staff will initiate contract process for a total not-to- exceed-amount of $259,000 with Moffatt and Nichol. The Port will add a contingency of $25,000 for a total contract value of $284,000. The additional funding for this project will be transferred from the Port Fund.
Upon Notice to Proceed, the project is expected to take 5 months to complete. If Notice to Proceed is provided in November 2024, the target completion date for the project is expected to be April 2025.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Standard City Contract
Attachment 2 – 2024 Port Assessment RFP
Attachment 3 – 2024-08-23 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment Proposal and Fee-MN Attachment 4 – Proposal Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment Liftech Attachment 5 – 2024-09-20 PPMT Assessment Proposal Fee Estimate R1 – MN Attachment 6 – PPMT Assessment Ranking
Attachment 7 – Port Resolution Facilities Assessment
417
CITY OF RICHMOND
STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: Project Manager:
Project Manager E-mail: Project Manager Phone No:
Vendor No: Contract No:
Description of Services:
The parties to this STANDARD CONTRACT do mutually agree and promise as follows:
1. Parties. The parties to this Contract are the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation (“the City”), and the following named Contractor:
Contractor Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Contact Person:
Telephone: Email:
Business License No:
2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is ________________________ and terminates ______________ unless terminated earlier as set forth herein.
3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $______________ (“Contract Payment Limit”) unless a Contract Amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager. If this amount includes a contingency, Contractor acknowledges that any use of such contingency shall be for work beyond the original scope of services and requires prior written authorization by the City. If noted below, Compensation for work done under this Contract, shall not exceed as follows:
FY
total compensation shall not exceed $
FY total compensation shall not exceed $
FY total compensation shall not exceed $
4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor agrees to perform all work at its own cost and expense, to furnish all labor, tools, equipment, materials, except as otherwise specified, in accordance with Exhibit A:
Service Plan which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. [ ] A California corporation , [ ] limited liability corporation, [ ] general partnership, [ ] limited partnership, [ ] individual, [ ] non-profit corporation, [ ] individual dba as [specify:]______________________________ [ ] other [specify:]__________________________________ 418
5. City Obligations. City shall make payments to the Contractor in accordance with the Payment Provisions set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
6. Authorized Representatives and Notices. This Contract is subject to the Authorized Representatives and Notices Provisions (Exhibit C), attached hereto and incorporated herein.
7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
9. Insurance Provisions. This Contract is subject to the Insurance Provisions (Exhibit F) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
10. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' agreement hereto:
CITY OF RICHMOND,
a municipal corporation [BUSINESS NAME]
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice President should sign below)
By:
Title By:
I hereby certify that this Contract Title:
has been approved by City Council
or the City Manager. Date Signed:
By:
City Clerk
(* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign below)
Approved as to form:
By:
By: Title:
City Attorney
Date Signed:
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement Exhibit G 419
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
EXHIBIT A
SERVICE PLAN
Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the Project Manager (set forth in Exhibit B), perform the following services and be compensated as outlined below [or attach service plan if necessary]:
420
1300 Clay Street, Suite 350
Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 645-1238
www.moffattnichol.com
September 20, 2024
Charles Gerard
Port Director
Port of Richmond
1322 Canal Blvd, Richmond, CA 94804
Reference: Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment Proposal an d Fee Estimate Revision 1
Dear Mr. Gerard:
In response to your September 13, 2024 letter concerning the Po rt of Richmond Point Potrero Marine Terminal (PPMT) Assessment, we are pleased to submit thi s revised proposal and fee estimate. As requested, Moffatt & Nichol and Liftech Consultant s have formed a single team to deliver this assessment work for the Port:
• Moffatt & Nichol to serve as prime consultant with Matt Trowbr idge serving as project manager and main point of contact
• Liftech to lead evaluation of Berths 5-8
• Moffatt & Nichol to lead evaluation of the graving basins and finger piers • Power Engineering Construction Company will provide constructa bility review and cost estimating services
• ENGEO will provide the geotechnical assessment
• Liftech to provide a rapid visual inspection of the existing W hirley crane next to Basin 5 and provide recommendations to the Port
We have revised the attached scope and fee per this approach and to address all of the comments in your September 13, 2024 letter. Our team is excited to suppo rt the Port of Richmond on this assignment. Please contact me at (510) 788-5959 or [email protected] at any time to discuss the contents of this proposal.
Very truly yours,
MOFFATT & NICHOL
Matthew Trowbridge, PE, SE
Vice President
Office: 510-788-8959
Cell: 562-505-2138
[email protected]
421
1 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Scope of Work
The proposed scope of work includes the following tasks:
1. Project Management
2. Meetings
3. Data Review
4. Above Water Routine Inspection
5. Condition Assessment Report
Task 1: Project Management
This task includes project management hours to lead the M&N team. Work includes project control tasks such as monthly invoicing and subconsultant management. B udget assumes 1 hour per week over 22 weeks.
Deliverable: Monthly invoice
Task 2: Meetings
This task includes budget allowance for the kickoff meeting and biweekly virtual progress meetings. The purpose of the biweekly progress meetings is for the Port to ask questions and to direct the focus of the assessment. Budget assumes 1.5 hours pe r week over 22 weeks. All meetings assume attendance by 3 members of the M&N team. At the Port’s request, M&N will attend at least two and up to three city council meetings to present the findings of the assessment in Microsoft PowerPoint.
Deliverables:
• Meeting notes via email
• City Council Presentation Slides (.ppt and .pdf)
Task 3: Data Review
M&N will confirm we have all required documents needed to progress the work. Note that the Port has confirmed via the RFP and the September 13, 2024 letter tha t some existing information is available. M&N will review and request any required documents n ot currently in hand from the Port through a Data Gap Memorandum. Examples of documents that will be requested to progress the work include, but are not limited to, the following:
• As-built / record drawings including existing dwg files • Previous inspection and condition assessment reports
• Previous geotechnical data and recommendation reports at the s ite • Recent topographic, boundary, and bathymetric surveys and util ity data at the site • Previous engineering assessments, calculations, and reports • Previous construction records (e.g. pile driving records) • Historical data from the Kaiser shipyard construction • Photographs and drawings of the finger piers
• Liftech to provide geotechnical information from previous work at Berths 7 and 8 422
2 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Note that M&N and the Port should check with operators/tenants and contractors to compile additional records that may not be in current possession by the Port.
Deliverable: Data Gap Memorandum
Task 4: Above Water Routine Inspection
Prior to mobilization, the M&N team will prepare an inspection safety plan and activity hazard analysis to plan the field work based on site specific conditio ns. The safety plan will be shared with the Port and Tenants for review and approval prior to mobilization to site.
The M&N team will perform an above water routine inspection in accordance with American Society of Civil Engineers Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment No. 130 (ASCE No. 130). The intent of the inspection is to assess the general con dition of the structure, assign a Condition Assessment Rating, and make recommendations for next steps. The work includes above deck and above water, below deck visual inspection by a 2 -man crew (unless otherwise noted) led by a senior engineer-inspector.
• Graving basin and finger piers inspections will be completed b y M&N inspection staff using M&N’s inspection skiff assuming it can be launched from and sto red at the PPMT for the duration of the inspection work.
• Berths 5-8 inspections will be completed by Liftech inspection staff using Power Engineering Construction’s inspection boat.
The following durations and special conditions are noted for each structure:
• Inspection Planning and Mobilization
o 8 hours to prepare and review pre-inspection safety plan and a ctivity hazard analysis, prepare equipment for mobilization, and demobilize from site.
• Berth 7-8:
o Wharf: 1,550 ft long x 40 ft wide = 60,000 SF
o Backlands: 1,550 ft long x 75 ft wide = 116,000 SF
Outer wharf and topside, 2-man = 1 day
Inner wharf, 2-man = 1 day with confined space entry
access/equipment/supervision provided by Power Engineering
• Berth 5-6:
o Wharf: 740 ft long x 47 ft wide = 35,000 SF
o Backlands: 475 ft long x 50 ft wide = 24,000 SF
Above deck and above water, 2-man = 1 day
• Graving Basins:
o ~7,000 ft of berthing line
o 6 graving basin structures at 610 ft x 35 ft each = 128,000 SF Above deck, 2-man = 0.5 day
Below deck, 2-man on foot = 1.5 days
Above water, 2-man with inspection skiff = 1 day
• Finger Piers:
o 2 finger piers at 550 ft x 48 ft each = 52,500 SF
423
3 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Above deck, 2-man = 0.5 day
Below deck, 2-man with inspection skiff to as-built = 1 day
• Geotechnical Inspection:
o The M&N team has budgeted for a day of inspection for 1 geotec hnical engineer from ENGEO to participate in inspection activities with Liftech and Power at Berth 5-8.
The M&N team will summarize the results of the inspection in an inspection report including an executive summary, introduction, site description, inspection a pproach summary, observed conditions, photos, assignment of condition ratings for each ma jor structural element per ASCE No. 130, and recommendations.
Deliverables:
• Site-specific pre-inspection safety plan
• Above Water Inspection Report (.doc and .pdf and electronic tr ansfer of all photos generated during inspection)
Task 5: Condition Assessment Report
The following work will be completed during this task:
• Task 5.1: Geotechnical Characterization Report
• Task 5.2: Settlement Evaluation between Berths 6/7
• Task 5.3: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 5-6
• Task 5.4: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 7-8
• Task 5.5: Expand Operations at Berth 7-8
• Task 5.6: Load Rating at Graving Basins
• Task 5.7: Whirley Crane Recommendations
• Task 5.8: Project Planning
• Task 5.9: Cost Estimates
• Task 5.10: Condition Assessment Report
Task 5.1: Geotechnical Characterization Report
M&N subconsultant, ENGEO, will perform a review of existing con struction documentation, geotechnical reports, and other documents provided by the Port of Richmond for geotechnical and geological data in order to characterize the subsurface con ditions. ENGEO will use this information, as well as any publicly available historical topographic maps or aerial photographs to create a geotechnical characterization report for the subject p ortions of the Port. This document will be valuable as a basis for future analyses for assessments, upgrades, and repairs. In support of this report, ENGEO will perform a limited amount of shoreline slope stability (if necessary based on observations during site inspections) as well as develop a range of likely vertical capacities for pile foundations based on pile diameter and depth for up to four pile types/diameter combinations at three different subsurface profiles. Additionally, a bearing capacity estimate for the graving basin structures will be provided.
Deliverable: Geotechnical Characterization Report (.doc and .pdf)
424
4 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Task 5.2: Settlement Evaluation between Berths 6/7
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, Liftech will assess and document the likely cause of settlement observed between Berths 6/7.
Task 5.3: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 5-6
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, Liftech will assess and document the likely cause of erosion observed behind Berth 5-6.
Task 5.4: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 7-8
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, Liftech will assess and document the likely cause of erosion observed behind Berth 7-8.
Task 5.5: Expand Operations at Berth 7-8
Based on information collected during Task 2 Data Review and results from Task 5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report, Liftech will evaluate options to increase the load capacity of Berths 7-8 to accommodate tractors, farm equipment, heavy pr oject cargo, and mobile harbor cranes.
Task 5.6: Load Rating at Graving Basins
Based on information collected during Task 2 Data Review and results from Task 4 Above Water Inspection and Task 5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report , M&N will perform a load rating calculation for vertical operational loads at the Graving Basins.
Task 5.7: Whirley Crane Recommendations
Given the marine environment and the crane’s age, we anticipate that corrosion may have compromised its structural integrity, mechanical functionality, and accessibility, potentially increasing hazards in certain areas. Liftech will perform one-d ay visual inspection of the crane, identifying structural, mechanical, and electrical deficiencies in need of repair from public safety consideration, such as risk of collapse. We will provide qualit ative concepts for securing the at- risk crane components. Based on this initial assessment, we wi ll develop recommendations for the work required to secure the cranes. A short report will be provided with photos, findings, recommendations, and ROM of cost estimate.
Deliverable: Whirley Crane Reports (.doc and .pdf)
Task 5.8: Project Planning
Based on the results of all tasks above, the M&N team will work closely with the Port to develop a list of potential projects (up to 10). The M&N team will incl ude opportunities for expansion of operations with minimal capital investment.
As part of this task, M&N will host an Independent Technical Re view Workshop. The 4-hour workshop will gather senior marine engineers from across M&N to review the results of the 425
5 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
inspection and advise on best path forward based on their experience working on similar projects throughout the US. This workshop will be covered by M&N and not charged to the Port of Richmond.
Task 5.9: Cost Estimates
M&N subconsultant, Power Engineering Construction, will prepare budgetary cost estimates for the potential projects (up to 10). The estimates will be prepar ed consistent with AACE International Class 5 accuracy (-30% / +50%) consistent with the level of design (planning phase, concept screening).
Deliverable: Cost Estimates
Task 5.10: Condition Assessment Report
A Condition Assessment Report will be prepared to summarize the work completed during Task
5. All subtasks will have a section of the report documenting the results of the subtask. The report will include a prioritized project list sorted by need, opportunity, urgency, and cost. The M&N Team will work closely with the Port to identify a sequencing approa ch for the proposed projects to minimize potential impact to port operations. An executive summ ary will prepared to provide an overview of the outcomes of the work for decision makers. The f inal report will include the following:
• Summary of conditions found during field investigation. • Recommendations for urgent repairs to maintain service of the facilities. • Recommendations for short-, mid-, and long-term repairs/ upgra des along with associated budgets. This will be formatted into a 5-, 10-, and 20-year capital expenditure plan. • Recommendations for next steps that may include additional inv estigations and materials testing to help refine the recommendations.
M&N will schedule a meeting to present the draft condition repo rt to the Port. All Port comments received on the draft report will be documented in a comment tr acking log and formal responses will be documented.
Deliverable: Condition Assessment Report (.doc and .pdf)
426
6 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Schedule
The project scope and fee estimate are based the following schedule:
Notice to Proceed (NTP) November 2024
Data Gap Memorandum Within 2 weeks of NTP
Site-Specific Pre-Inspection Safety Plan December 2024
Above Water Inspections December 2024 and January 2025 Geotechnical Characterization Report January 17, 2025
Above Water Inspection Report February 14, 2025
Draft Condition Assessment Report March 7, 2025
Final Condition Assessment Report March 28, 2025
Note that the RFP asks for a meeting with Port staff at 8 weeks into the project and prior to release of final assessment. We propose that our biweekly meetings with the Port can be used to review progress of the work and closely coordinate on key findings and path forward. We also envision that separate meetings will be scheduled to review the results of the inspection and to present the draft condition assessment report to the Port.
The schedule is based on NTP being received at the end of November. However if the NTP is received sooner the schedule can shift to the left. We understand the Port will need input by the end of 2024 to plan budgets for 2025 and beyond - M&N will plan to provide reasonable assumptions to the Port to use for budget planning regardless of the how far the assessment work has progressed.
Fee Estimate
The following budget allowance is proposed on a time and materi als not-to-exceed (T&M NTE) or lump sum basis, whichever the Port prefers. Refer to the att achment for a detailed hours and cost summary table.
Task
No. Task Description Total
1 Project Management $9,750
2 Meetings $15,500
3 Data Review $20,500
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection $63,250
5 Condition Assessment Report $141,000
Total (without confined space work) $250,000
Confined Space Entry $9,000
Total (with confined space work included) $259,000
427
7 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Assumptions
1. Inspection work assumes 8-10 hour days.
2. All necessary site access is assumed to be provided by and/o r coordinated by the Port.
We will coordinate closely with the Port to plan the inspections and assume the sites will be readily accessible for inspection on the agreed days. Power Engineering Construction will provide manhole and confined space access for Liftech to perform inspection behind the bulkhead wall at Berths 6-8.
3. No weather delays are budgeted. Our team is local so if the weather is not favorable then the inspection day will be deferred to the next available good weather day with no impact to budget.
4. We assume the M&N inspection skiff can be launched from and safely stored overnight at a secure location at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal for the duration of the inspection work.
5. Our proposal does not include underwater inspection, materia l sampling / testing, or other advanced inspection and testing approaches at this time.
6. All required site data will be provided by the Port. No site surveys or geotechnical investigation is required.
7. No lateral analysis will be completed at this time (seismic, mooring, berthing, etc.)
8. No inspection of buildings is included. No inspection of fac ility utilities or systems is included.
9. All deliverables include draft and final submission for Port review. The project budget assumes one round of Port comments for each draft deliverable. The reviews will be in parallel with the work, such that progress can continue during reviews.
10. All deliverables will be provided electronically. No hard copy submittals are included.
11. A budget allowance of $1,000 is included for approved expenses.
Attachments
• Detailed Fee Estimate
• September 13, 2024 Letter from Port of Richmond
428
Port of Richmond
Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
Moffatt & Nichol - Fee Estimate
Task
No. Task Description M&N Cost Sub Cost Sub Mark-up Other Direct Costs Total Total
(Rounded)
1 Project Management $7,436 $2,040 $204 $0 $9,680 $9,750 2 Meetings $9,351 $5,481 $548 $0 $15,380 $15,500
3 Data Review $3,376 $15,622 $1,562 $0 $20,560 $20,500
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection $38,676 $21,652 $2,165 $1,000 $63,493 $ 63,250 5 Condition Assessment Report $34,434 $96,792 $9,679 $0 $140,905 $141, 000 $93,273 $141,587 $14,159 $1,000 $250,019 $250,000
Add Confined Space $0 $8,064 $806 $0 $8,870 $9,000
Total (with confined space) $93,273 $149,651 $14,965 $1,000 $258,889 $259,000 Detailed Summary Table
Task
No. Task Description M&N Cost Sub Cost Sub Mark-up Other Direct Costs Total
1 Project Management $7,436 $2,040 $204 $9,680
2 Meetings $9,351 $5,481 $548 $15,380
3 Data Review $3,376 $15,622 $1,562 $20,560
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection $0
4.1 Pre-Inspection Safety Plan & Mob Prep $2,242 $0 $2,242
4.2 Inspection $20,746 $21,652 $2,165 $1,000 $45,563
4.3 Reporting $15,688 $0 $15,688
5 Condition Assessment Report $0
5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report $338 $11,014 $1,101 $12,453
5.2 Settlement Evaluation B6/B7 $0 $10,148 $1,015 $11,163
5.3 Erosion Evaluation B5-B6 $0 $4,190 $419 $4,609
5.4 Erosion Evaluation B7-B8 $0 $4,190 $419 $4,609
5.5 Expand Operations B7-B8 $0 $14,992 $1,499 $16,491
5.6 Load Rating at Graving Basins $7,592 $2,920 $292 $10,804
5.7 Whirley Crane Recommendations $0 $11,328 $1,133 $12,461
5.8 Project Planning $14,864 $13,890 $1,389 $30,143
5.9 Cost Estimates $1,864 $9,360 $936 $12,160
5.10 Condition Assessment Report $9,776 $14,760 $1,476 $26,012 $93,273 $141,587 $14,159 $1,000 $250,019
9/20/2024
Total (without confined space)
Total
429
Port of Richmond
Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
Moffatt & Nichol - Fee Estimate
Moffatt & Nichol Labor
Matt
Trowbridge Sean Hart Martin
Anderson
Wice
Ibrahimi
Damilola
Taiwo
Azadeh
Bozorgzadeh Jim Brady Coy Butler Bill Dubbs Jack Fink
Project
Manager
Inspection
Lead
Inspection
Lead
Project
Engineer
Project
Engineer
Structural
Lead
Senior
Structural
Advisor
Senior
Structural
Advisor
Senior
Inspection
Advisor
Senior
Estimator
$338.00 $297.00 $235.00 $189.00 $235.00 $338.00 $338.00 $338.00 $315.00 $338.00 1 Project Management 22 22 $7,436
2 Meetings 18 11 29 $9,351
3 Data Review 2 4 8 14 $3,376
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection 0$ 0
4.1 Pre-Inspection Safety Plan & Mob Prep 2 4 2 8 $2,242
4.2 Inspection 2 40 40 2 84 $20,746
4.3 Reporting 2 20 48 70 $15,688
5 Condition Assessment Report 0$ 0
5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report 1 1 $338
5.2 Settlement Evaluation B6/B7 0$ 0
5.3 Erosion Evaluation B5-B6 0$ 0
5.4 Erosion Evaluation B7-B8 0$ 0
5.5 Expand Operations B7-B8 0$ 0
5.6 Load Rating at Graving Basins 4 4 16 4 2 30 $7,592
5.7 Whirley Crane Recommendations 0$ 0
5.8 Project Planning 12 8 16 8 4 4 52 $14,864
5.9 Cost Estimates 2 4 6 $1,864
5.10 Condition Assessment Report 4 8 32 44 $9,776
7 1 1 0 3 01 6 2 0 1 2 46203 6 0 $93,273
$23,998 $30,591 $0 $30,618 $0 $4,056 $1,352 $2,028 $630 $0 Subconsultant Labor
Jeff Fippin
Principal
Geotech Eng Sr. Struct Engr Sr. Struct
Engr/PM
Project
Engr/PM Design Engr Admin
Principal
Project
Executive
Project
Manager
Project
Engineer
Boat
Operator
$390.00 $330.00 $247.00 $180.00 $150.00 $300.00 $255.00 $215.00 $177.00 $145.00 $288.00 $240.00 $150.00 $142.00 1 Project Management 8 8 $2,040
2 Meetings 4 4 7 2 4 21 $5,481
3 Data Review 4 16 3 14 8 8 8 61 $15,622
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection 2 8 4 24 40 4 16 8 106 $21,652 5 Condition Assessment Report 0$ 0
5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report 4 6 22 8 4 44 $11,014
5.2 Settlement Evaluation B6/B7 4 8 8 12 4 36 $10,148
5.3 Erosion Evaluation B5-B6 1 2 4 6 2 15 $4,190
5.4 Erosion Evaluation B7-B8 1 2 4 6 2 15 $4,190
5.5 Expand Operations B7-B8 2 4 16 24 8 54 $14,992
5.6 Load Rating at Graving Basins 2 4 4 10 $2,920
5.7 Whirley Crane Recommendations 43 0 1 4 48 $11,328
5.8 Project Planning 4 16 2 2 12 32 68 $13,890
5.9 Cost Estimates 28 8 32 50 $9,360
5.10 Condition Assessment Report 2 4 8 24 8 4 4 8 62 $14,760 26 6 70 8 8 57 179 0 64 8 36 40 88 8 598 $141,587
$10,140 $1,980 $17,290 $1,440 $1,200 $17,100 $45,645 $0 $11,328 $1,160 $1 0,368 $9,600 $13,200 $1,136 Confined Space Entry
Sr. Struct
Engr/PM Design Engr Project
Manager
Project
Engineer Field Lead Confined
Space Gear
$255.00 $177.00 $240.00 $150.00 $142.00 $82.00
Add Confined Space Entry (1 day) 8 8 2 8 16 8 50 $8,064 8 8 281 6 8 50 $8,064
$2,040 $1,416 $480 $1,200 $2,272 $656Totals
Liftech Consultants Power Engineering Construction
Total Hours Total CostTask
No. Task Description
Totals
Associate
Geotech Eng
Geotech
Project Eng Senior CAD Project
AssistantTask
No. Task Description
Total
Cost
Total CostTotal Hours
Totals
Liftech Consultants Power Engineering Construction
Total Hours
9/20/2024
ENGEO (Geotech)
Task
No. Task Description
430
1 PORT OF RICHMOND
September 13, 2024
Erik Soderberg, PE, SE
President
Liftech Consultants, Inc.
344 Thomas L Berkley Way
Oakland, CA 94612
Matthew Trowbridge, PE, SE
Vice President
Moffatt and Nichol
1300 Clay Street, Suite 350
Oakland, CA 94612
Subject: Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
Dear Mr. Soderberg and Mr. Trowbridge:
The Port of Richmond appreciates your firm’s interest in supporting the Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment request for proposal. After the review of your proposals and interviews, the Port finds both your firms well qualified to support our needs. We believe each firm has unique technical qualifications that can support our effort. Thus, we would like to invite both your firms to support the study with focus on the following:
Liftech to lead the evaluation of berths 5, 6, 7, and 8. As a reminder, the key focus of the investigation is to assess why the area between berths 6 and 7 has subsided. Moffat and Nichol to lead the evaluation of the Graving Basins and the finger piers. We would like to have Power Engineers, who are on the Liftech team, support constructability review and provide cost analysis for all areas of the project. Engeo who is on both teams, should support the geotechnical assessment. As additional scope, Liftech to conduct a visual inspection of the Whirley Crane located next to Basin 5 and summarize potential concerns related to its structural integrity and capacity to resist seismic and wind loads in a memorandum. This memorandum should provide recommendations for next steps to evaluate is structural integrity.
The Port requests that the consultant team as noted above submit a modified scope of work, schedule and fee that incorporates the following:
1. The Port intends to contract with one firm that will assign a project manager who will be responsible for managing the budget, schedule, and quality of deliverables. The Port does not have a preference as to the lead consultant.
2. The consultant shall schedule and attend an online coordination meeting with the Port every other week to discuss the progress of the work. The intent of the discussion is to allow the Port to ask questions and direct the focus of the assessment.
431
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
2 3. The consultant shall attend at least two city council meetings to present the findings of the assessment at the request of the Port. The consultant shall summarize their findings in a PowerPoint or similar format.
4. Liftech will complete a below deck inspection of the berths 5, 6, 7, and 8 as noted in your proposal.
The Port will not provide a ladder or support to gain access. Please include this in your cost proposal.
5. Inspections shall be by visual observation by field walk and by boat at all facilities. Diving inspections are not required at this time.
6. No materials sampling or testing is required.
7. The Port will provide all geotechnical reports for the site as well as historical data from the Kaiser Shipyard’s construction. Liftech to provide geotechnical information for Berths 7 and 8. This information will serve as the basis for Engeo’s work supporting the assessment.
8. The Port has photographs and drawings of the finger piers, which we will provide for Moffatt and Nichol’s use in assessing conditions.
9. The final report shall include the following:
a. Summary of conditions found during field investigation. b. Recommendations for urgent repairs to maintain service of the facilities. c. Recommendations for short-, mid-, and long-term repairs/ upgrades along with associated budgets. This should be formatted into 5-, 10-, and 20-year capital expenditure plan.
10. Recommendations for next steps that may include additional investigations and materials testing to help refine the recommendations.
11. All materials generated by the consultant shall be submitted in their native formats to the Port of Richmond at the conclusion of the contract.
12. The total not to exceed fee should be about $250,000.
13. Please submit your revised scope of work, schedule, and fee by September 20, 2024.
We appreciate your interest in supporting the Port of Richmond. For details related to contracting please call Charles Gerard at 510-620-6792 or [email protected]. For clarification on the requested scope of work, please contact Robert Stevens at 415-533-1864 or [email protected]
Sincerely,
Charles J. Gerard
Charles Gerard
Port Director
CC Lizeht Zepeda, Alan Wolken, and Robert Stevens
432
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT PROVISIONS
1. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR:
a. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated in the manner set forth herein.
b. All payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photo copying, meals and travel, etc). Invoices, shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request.
c. All City vendors receiving new contracts shall sign up to receive electronic payments through the City’s Automated Clearinghouse (ACH) payments service/provider.
2. SUBMISSION OF INVOICES:
Contractor shall submit timely invoices by email to
[email protected] and/or to the following address: Attention:
City of Richmond Finance/Account Payable
Project Manager:
P.O. Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804
3. All invoices that are submitted by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of the City Project Manager, before payments shall be authorized.
4. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days after completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.
5. All appropriate permits, certificates, and licenses, including a City business license shall be obtained and maintained for the duration of this Contract before any payment is authorized.
6. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract is executed by the City. The insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be maintained by Contractor for the duration of this Contract and must be in place before any payment is authorized. 433
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT C
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES
1. All required written notices shall be delivered: (i) by hand; or (ii) sent by registered, express, or certified mail, with return receipt requested or with delivery confirmation requested from the U.S. postal service; (iii) sent by overnight or same day courier service at the party’s respective address listed in this Section.
2. Each notice shall be deemed to have been received on the earlier to occur of: actual delivery or the date on which delivery is refused; or three (3) days after notice is deposited in the U.S. mail or with a courier service in the manner described above (Sundays and City holidays excepted).
3. Either party may, at any time, change its notice address (other than to a post office box address) by giving the other party three (3) days prior written notice of the new address.
4. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from Contractor to the City shall be addressed to the City at:
City of Richmond –
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: ______________________________________________________
5. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from the City to Contractor shall be addressed to Contractor at:
Business Name
Street Address
City, State Zip
Email: ______________________________________________________ 434
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT D
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. INDEPENDENT PARTIES:
Contractor hereby declares that Contractor is engaged as an independent business and Contractor agrees to perform the services as an independent contractor. The manner and means of conducting the services and tasks are under the control of Contractor exce pt to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this Contract. No civil service status or other right of employment will be acquired by virtue of Contractor’s services. None of the benefits provided by the City t o its employees, including but not limited to unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation plans, vacation and sick leave, are available from the City to Contractor, its employees or agents. Deductions shall not be made for any state or federal taxes, FICA payments, PERS payments, or other purposes normally associated with an employer - employee relationship from any compensation due to Contractor. Payments of the above items, if required, are the responsibility of Contractor.
2. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE:
Contractor and the City agree that time is of the essence regarding the performance of this Contract.
3. STANDARD OF CARE:
Contractor agrees to perform all services hereunder in a manner commensurate with the prevailing standards of like professionals or service Contractors, as applicable, in the San Francisco Bay Area and agrees that all services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by the City.
4. IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT (IRCA):
Contractor assumes all responsibility for verifying the identity and employment authorization of all of its employees performing work hereunder, pursuant to all applicable IRCA or other federal, or state rules and regulations. Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from and against any loss, damage, liability, costs or expenses arising from any noncompliance of this provision by Contractor.
5. NON-DISCRIMINATION:
Consistent with the City’s policy and state and federal law that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable conduct, Contractor and its employees, contractors, and agents shall not harass or discriminate against any job applicant, City employee, or any other person on the basis of any kind of any statutorily (federal, state or local) protected class, including but not limited to: race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, disability (both mental and physical) including HIV and AIDS, medi cal condition (e.g. cancer), genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, pregnancy, political 435
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
affiliation, military and veteran status or legitimate union activities . Contractor agrees that any violation of this provision shall constitute a material breach of this Contract.
6. CITY PROPERTY:
a. Each and every report, draft, work product, map, record, applicable plans, drawings, calculation, data, specification, video, graphic or any other material or document produced, prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor pursuant to or in connection with this Contract shall be the exclusive property of the City.
b. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 11 below, indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data. c. No report, information or other data given to or prepared or assembled by Contractor pursuant to this Contract shall be made available to any individual or organization by Contractor without prior approval of the City Manager or their designee. d. Contractor shall, at such time and in such form as City Manager or their designee may require, furnish reports concerning the status of services and tasks required under this Contract.
7. RECORDS:
a. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the services, tasks, work, documents and data in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of Contractor’s performance under the Contract, as well as maintain books and records related to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by the City that relate to the performance of the services and tasks under this Contract (collectively the “Records”). b. All Records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Contractor shall provide free access to the Records to the representatives of the City or its designees during regular business hours upon reasonable prior notice. The City has the right to examine and audit the Records, and to make copies or transcripts therefrom as necessary, and t o allow inspection of all proceedings and activities related to this Contract. Such Records, together with supporting documents, shall be kept separate from other documents and records and shall be maintained by Contractor for a period of five (5) years after receipt of final payment. c. If supplemental examination or audit of the Records is necessary due to concerns raised by the City’s preliminary examination or audit of records, and the City’s supplemental examination or audit of the records discloses a failure to adhere to appropriate internal financial controls, or other breach of this Contract or failure to act in good faith, then Contractor shall reimburse the City for all reasonable costs and expenses associated with the supplemental examination or audit.
436
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
8. PERMITS AND LICENSES:
Contractor, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract, all appropriate permits, certificates and licenses, including a City business license , required in connection with the performance of the services and tasks hereunder . The failure to obtain such permits and licenses shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumst ances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.
9. TERMINATION:
a. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder immediately upon transmission of written notice to Contractor as provided in Exhibit C “Authorized Representatives and Notices”.
b. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Exhibit B; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
10. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.
11. HOLD HARMLESS:
a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City) and hold harmless the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (“Indemnitees”) from and against any and all loss, damages, liability, obligations, claims, suits, judgments, costs and expenses 437
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
whatsoever, including attorney’s fees and costs of litigation (“Claims”), arising from or in any manner connected to Contractor’s performance of its obligations under this Contract or failure to comply with any of its obligations under this Contract or out of the operations conducted by Contractor even if the City is found to have been negligent. If the Claims filed against Indemnitees allege negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct on the part of Contractor, Contractor shall have no right of reimbursement against Indemnitees for the costs of defense even if negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct is not found on the part of Contractor.
Contractor shall not have any obligations to indemnify Indemnitees if the loss or damage is found to have resulted solely from the negligence or the willful misconduct of the City. The defense and indemnification obligations of this Contract are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Contract. b. This indemnification obligation shall survive this Contract and shall not be limited by any term of any insurance policy required under this Contract; provided however, that if this Contract is for design professional services, this indemnity provision is limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the design professional (as defined in California Civil Code section 2782.8).
12. LIMITATIONS UPON SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENT:
a. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee. b. Contractor shall not assign, sublease, hypothecate, or transfer this Contract, or any interest therein, directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise, without prior written consent of the City Manager. Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to transfer to the City Manager at least thirty (30) days in advance of the desired transfer. The City Manager or their designee may consent or reject such request in their sole and absolute discretion. Any attempt to do so without said consent shall be null and void, and any assignee, sublessee, hypothecate or transferee shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer. However, claims for money against the City under this Contract may be assigned by Contractor to a bank, trust company or other financial institution without prior written consent.
c. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture. d. Only those persons and/or businesses whose names and resumés are attached to this Contract shall be used in the performance of this Contract. However, if after the start of this Contract, Contractor wishes to use sub-contractors, at no additional costs to the City, then 438
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to add sub-contractors including the names of the sub-contractors and the reasons for the request to the City Manager at least five (5) days in advance. The City Manager may consent or reject such requests in their sole and absolute discretion.
e. Each sub-contractor shall be required to furnish proof of workers’ compensation insurance and shall also be required to carry general, automobile and professional liability insurance (as applicable) in reasonable conformity to the insurance carried by Contractor. f. In addition, any tasks or services performed by sub-contractors shall be subject to each provision of this Contract. Contractor shall include the following language in their Contract with any sub-contractor: “Sub-Contractors hired by Contractor agree to be bound to Contractor and the City in the same manner and to the same extent as Contractor is bound to the City.” g. The requirements in this Section 12 shall not apply to persons who are merely providing materials, supplies, data or information that Contractor then analyzes and incorporates into its work product.
13 SAFETY:
a. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor will be solely and completely responsible for conditions of all vehicles owned or operated by Contractor, including the safety of all persons and property during performance of the services and tasks under this Contract. Contractor shall assume sole and complete responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any of subcontractor's employees This requirement will apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours.
In addition, Contractor will comply with all safety provisions in conformance with U.S.
Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Act, any equivalent state law, and all other applicable federal, state, county and local laws, ordinances, codes, and any regulations that may be detailed in other parts of the Contract. Where any of these are in conflict, the more stringent requirements will be followed. Contractor’s failure to thoroughly familiarize itself with the aforementioned safety provisions will not relieve it from compliance with the obligations and penalties set forth herein.
b. Contractor will immediately notify the City (in no event less than 24 hours) of any incident of death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage that occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract. Contractor will promptly submit to the City a written report of all incidents that occur in connection with this Contract. This report must include the following information: (i) name and address of injured or deceased person(s); (ii) name and address of Contractor’s employee(s) involved in the incident; (iii) name and address of Contractor’s liability insurance carrier; (iv) a detailed description of the incident; and (v) a police report.
c. Contractor acknowledges that the City shall have the right to impose, at the City’s sole discretion, requirements that it deems are necessary to protect the health and safety of the City employees, residents, and visitors. Contractor agrees to comply with all such requirements, 439
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
including, but not limited to, mandatory vaccinations, the use of personal protective equipment (e.g. masks), physical distancing, and health screenings. Contractor also agrees to make available to the City, at the City’s request, records to demonstrate Contractor’s compliance with this Section.
14. INSURANCE:
Insurance requirements are set forth in Exhibit F to this Contract. Contractor shall abide by the insurance requirements set forth in said Exhibit F.
15. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS:
a. During the term of this Contract, Contractor shall keep fully informed of all existing and future state and federal laws and all municipal ordinances and regulations of the City of Richmond which affect the manner in which the services or tasks are to be performed by Contractor, as well as all such orders and decrees of bodies or tribunals having any jurisdiction or authority over the same. Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws, state and federal and all ordinances, rules and regulations enacted or issued by the City. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50, 2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable. b. Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor is required to provide the City with documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance as prescribed in § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code. c. Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or sub-Contractor under an agreement or sub-agreement with the City for public works, goods or services to refrain from discriminatory employment or practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential sub-contractor .
d. Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies . Contractor agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.
16. INTEGRATED CONTRACT:
The Recitals and exhibits are a material part of this Contract and are expressly incorporated herein. This Contract represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall 440
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
be held to vary the provisions hereof. Any modification of this Contract will be effective only by written execution signed by both the City and Contractor.
17. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS:
In the event of a conflict between these General Conditions and those of any Exhibit or attachment hereto, these General Conditions shall prevail; provided, however, that any Special Condition as set forth in Exhibit E shall prevail over these General Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more Exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor, and the terms and conditions preferred by the City shall prevail over those preferred by the Contractor.
18. FORCE MAJEURE:
Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of such an obligation is prevented or delayed by reason of acts of God, strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, failure of power, restrictive governmental laws and regulations enacted after the date of this Contract, riots, civil unrest, acts of terrorism, insurrection, war, declaration of a state or national emergency or other reasons of a like nature not within the reasonable control of such party.
19. CONFLICT OF LAW:
This Contract shall be interpreted under, and enforced by the laws of the State of California without regard to any choice of law rules which may direct the application of laws of another jurisdiction. The Contract and obligations of the parties are subject to all valid laws, orders, rules, and regulations of the authorities having jurisdiction over this Contract (or the successors of those authorities). Any suits brought pursuant to this Contract shall be filed with the courts of the County of Contra Costa, State of California.
20. CLAIMS:
Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provisions of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six months after accrual of the cause of action.
21. INTERPRETATION:
This Contract shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.
22. WARRANTY:
If any product is be provided to the City as part of this Contract, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to 441
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets any specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light bulbs and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor's expense, including shipping.
23. SEVERABILITY:
In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.
24. AUTHORITY:
City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City.
The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that they are duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, and shall be personally liable to City if they are not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.
25. WAIVER:
The waiver by City of any breach of any term or provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach. Inspections or approvals, or statements by any officer, agent or employee of the City relating to the Contractor’s performance, or payment therefore, or any combination of these acts, shall not relieve the Contractor’s obligation to fulfill this Contract as prescribed; nor shall the City be thereby stopped from bringing any action for damages or enforcement arising from any failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Contract.
26. COUNTERPARTS:
This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts (including by fax, PDF, DocuSign, or other electronic means), each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
27. SANCTUARY CITY CONTRACTING ORDINANCE (SCCO):
The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the 442
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor must submit the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement, attached hereto as Exhibit G. 443
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
EXHIBIT E
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
The General Conditions are hereby amended to include the following modifications and/or provisions (if applicable, otherwise please state “NONE”):
444
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
EXHIBIT F
INSURANCE PROVISIONS
___ Check here if Risk Management has approved waiving insurance requirements for this contract.
a. Before the commencement of the terms of this Contract, and during the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, Contractor shall furnish the City’s Risk Manager with certificates showing the type, amount, class of operations covered, effective dates and dates of expiration of insurance coverage in compliance with Sections 10.b. (1) through (5) Such certificates, which do not limit Contractor’s indemnification, shall also contain substantially the following statement:
“Should any of the above insurance covered by this certificate be canceled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the insurer affording coverage shall provide thirty (30) days’ advance written notice to the City of Richmond. Attention: Risk Manager.” Contractor shall maintain in force at all times during the performance of this Contract all appropriate coverage of insurance required by this Contract with an insurance company licensed to offer insurance business in the State of California with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII or Standard & Poor’s Rating (if rated) of at least BBB unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Contractor shall deliver updated insurance certificates to the City at the address described in Section 17.f. prior t o the expiration of the existing insurance certificate for the duration of the term of Contract. Endorsements naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insured shall be submitted with the insurance certificates.
b. COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS:
Contractor shall maintain insurance coverage and limits at least as broad as:
(1) Workers’ Compensation:
Statutory coverage as required by the State of California. (2) Liability:
Commercial general liability coverage in the following minimum limits:
Bodily Injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate - all other
Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate
If submitted, combined single limit policy with per occurrence limits in the amounts of $2,000,000 and aggregate limits in the amounts of $4,000,000 will be considered equivalent to the required minimum limits shown above. Additional 445
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
Insured Endorsement naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers is required. (3) Automotive:
Comprehensive automobile liability coverage (any auto) in the following minimum limits:
Bodily injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence
Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence
or
Combined Single Limit: $2,000,000 each occurrence
Additional Insured Endorsement naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers is required. (4) Professional Liability:
Professional liability insurance which includes coverage appropriate for the professional acts, errors and omissions of Contractor’s profession and work hereunder, including, but not limited to, technology professional liability errors and omissions if the services being provided are technology -based, in the following minimum limits:
$2,000,000 each occurrence
Technology professional liability errors and omissions shall include, or be endorsed to include: property damage liability coverage for damage to, alteration of, loss of, or destruction of electronic data and/or information “property” of the City in the care, custody, or control of Contractor. If not covered under Contractor’s liability policy, such “property” coverage of the City may be endorsed onto Contractor’s Cyber Liability Policy as covered property as follows: cyber liability coverage in an amount sufficient to cover the full replacement value of damage to, alteration of, loss of, or destruction of electronic data and/or information “property” of the City that will be in the care, custody, or control of Contractor. (5) Cyber Liability:
Coverage shall be sufficiently broad to respond to the duties and obligations as are undertaken by Contractor in this Contract and shall include, but not be limited to, claims involving infringement of intellectual property, copyright, trademark, trade dress, invasion of privacy violations, information theft, damage to or destruction of electronic information, release of private information, alteration of electronic information, extortion and network security. The policy shall provide coverage for breach response costs as well as regulatory fines and penalties as well as credit monitoring expenses with limits sufficient to respond to these obligations with the following minimum limits:
$2,000,000 per occurrence or claim.
446
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
As to commercial general liability and automobile liability insurance, such insurance will provide that it constitutes primary insurance with respect to claims insured by such policy, and, except with respect to limits, that insurance applies separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought. Such insurance is not additional to or contributing with any other insurance carried by or for the benefit of the City.
c. SUBROGATION WAIVER:
Contractor hereby agrees to waive rights of subrogation that any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors. d. FAILURE TO SECURE:
If Contractor at any time during the term hereof should fail to secure or maintain the foregoing insurance, the City shall be permitted to obtain such insurance in Contractor’s name or as an agent of Contractor and shall be compensated by Contractor for the costs of the insurance premiums at the maximum rate permitted by law and computed from the date written notice is received that the premiums have not been paid.
e. ADDITIONAL INSUREDS:
The City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be named as additional insured(s) under all insurance coverages, except workers’ compensation and professional liability insurance. The naming of an additi onal insured shall not affect any recovery to which such additional insured would be entitled under this policy if not named as such additional insured. An y additional insured named herein shall not be held liable for any premium, deductible portion of any loss, or expense of any nature on this policy or any extension thereof. Any other insurance held by an additional insured shall not be required to contribute anything toward any loss or expense covered by the insurance provided by this policy.
Additional Insured coverage under Contractor’s policy shall be primary and non-contributory and will not seek contribution from the City’s insurance or self -insurance. Any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the additional insured(s). f. SUFFICIENCY OF INSURANCE:
The insurance limits required by the City are not represented as being sufficient to protect Contractor. Contractor is advised to consult Contractor’s insurance broker to determine adequate coverage for Contractor. The coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Contract; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of the coverage carried by or available to Contractor; whichever is greater. 447
EXHIBIT G
SANCTUARY CITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
The undersigned, an authorized agent of (hereafter
"Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12-18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”). Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain business relations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor understands the meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:
a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:
i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private-sector business and government agencies; ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."
Contractor understands that it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.
Contractor further understands and agrees that Contractor's failure to comply with the SCCO shall constitute a material default of the Contract and the City Manager may terminate the Contract and bar Contractor from bidding on future contracts with the City for five (5) years from the effective date of the contract termination.
By executing this statement, Contractor certifies that it complies with the requirements of the SCCO and that if at any time during the term of the Contract it ceases to comply, Contractor will promptly notify the City Manager in writing. Any person or entity who knowingly or willingly supplies false information in violation of the SCCO shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $1,000 fine.
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day of , 20 , at , California.
Printed Name: Title:
Signed: Date:
Business Entity:
448
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 1:
Consultants and Contractors
Type 1 – Page 1 of 4
Revised: September 2011
In all instances where a CONTRACTOR or its representatives will be conducting business and/or providing services, the City requires the following MINIMUM insurance requirements and limits.
CONTRACTOR shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, agreement, or other order for work, services or supplies, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the CONTRACTOR, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Maintenance of proper insurance coverage is a material element of the contract. Failure to maintain or renew coverage or to provide evidence of renewal may be treated by the City as a material breach of contract.
CONTRACTOR agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which it has agreed to provide Commercial General Liability insurance, CONTRACTOR shall look solely to its insurance for recovery. CONTRACTOR hereby grants to CITY, on behalf of any insurer providing Commercial General Liability insurance to either CONTRACTOR or CITY with respect to the services of CONSULTANT herein, a waiver of any right to subrogation which any such insurer of said CONTRACTOR may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.
Original, signed certificates and original, separate policy endorsements, naming the City as an additional insured for general liability, as well as a waiver of subrogation for Workers’ Compensation insurance, shall be received and approved by the City before any work may begin. However, failure to do so shall not operate as a waiver of these insurance requirements.
City reserves the right to modify or require additional coverages for specific risk exposures depending on scope of CONTRACTORS work.
Minimum coverage is detailed below. The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy.
The minimum limits stated herein shall not serve to reduce the policy limits of coverage of CONTRACTOR.
Minimum Scope of Insurance – the following forms shall be provided and coverage shall be at least as broad as the following:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (ISO Occurrence Form CG 0001) including coverage for bodily and personal injury, property damage, and products and completed operations.
2. Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability coverage (ISO Form CA 0001, Code 1, Any Auto)
3. Original and Separate Additional Insured Endorsements for General Liability (ISO Form CG 20 10 11/85 or its equivalent) with primary and non-contributory language.
4. Workers’ Compensation Insurance as required by the State of California including Employer’s Liability coverage.
5. Original and Separate Waiver of Subrogation for Workers’ Compensation and Builder’s Risk/ Course of Construction Insurance.
6. Builder’s Risk/Course of Construction insurance covering all risks of loss less policy exclusions when the City of Richmond has a financial interest in the property. – (Only required for Construction Contracts involving property)
7. Contractor’s Pollution Liability (if applicable for Construction Contractors)
Required Coverage
Minimum Limits
Workers’ Compensation and
Employers’ Liability
Statutory limits as required by the State of California including $1 million Employers’ Liability per accident, per employee for bodily injury or disease.
If CONTRACTOR
is self-insured, provide a certificate of Permission to Self- Insure, signed by the California Department of Industrial Relations and Self- Insurance. If contractor is a sole proprietor (has no employees) than contractor must sign “Contractor Release of Liability” found at:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.
449
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 1:
Consultants and Contractors
Type 1 – Page 2 of 4
Revised: September 2011
PROJECT COST R EQUIRED LIMIT
$0 - $5 million $2 million p/o
$5 million - $10 million $5 million p/o
Over $10 million $10 million p/o
Fireworks $5 million p/o
General Liability
(primary and excess limits
combined)
Includes coverage for bodily injury, personal injury, property damage and products and completed operations. The policy shall not exclude coverage for XCU perils (explosion, collapse, or damage to underground property).
If the policy includes a general aggregate, either the general aggregate shall apply separately to this project, service or location or the minimum required aggregate limit shall be twice the per occurrence limit ($4 million aggregate limit).
Policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Richmond as an additional insured per the conditions detailed below.
Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage.
Builders’ Risk/Course of
Construction – Covers property
under construction, repair or
renovation as well as equipment
and materials to be installed.
(Only required for Construction
Projects involving property and
equipment installation.)
Coverage shall include all risks of direct physical loss, excluding earthquake, for an amount equal to the full completed value of the covered structure or replacement value of alterations or additions, including soft costs and business interruption.
If the project does not involve new or major reconstruction, an Installation Floater may be acceptable. For such projects, a property installation floater shall be obtained that provides for the improvement, remodel, modification, alteration, conversion or adjustment to existing buildings, structures, processes, machinery and equipment. The Property Installation Floater shall provide property damage coverage for any building, structure, machinery or equipment damaged, impaired, broken or destroyed during the performance of the Work, including during transit, installation and testing at the City of Richmond’s site.
The City of Richmond shall be named as loss payee as its interest may appear. The insurer shall waive all rights of subrogation against City.
Contractor’s Pollution Liability (if
applicable)
Protects against:
unexpected/unintended release of
pollution resulting from contractors
covered operations such as:
HVAC, paving, carpentry, pipeline
& tank installation, drillers,
remediation contractors,
maintenance, mechanical,
demolition, excavation, grading,
street/road construction,
residential & commercial builders.
Same limits as General Liability.
Required Policy Conditions
A. M. Best Rating A:VII or Better. If the A.M. Best Rating falls below the required rating, CONTRACTOR must replace coverage immediately and provide notice to City.
Additional Insured Endorsement
Applicable to General Liability Coverage.
The City of Richmond, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be named as additional insureds for all liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf of the named insured, including but not limited to bodily injury, deaths and property damage or destruction arising in any respect directly or indirectly in the performance of this contract.
ISO form CG 20 10 (11/85) or its equivalent is required. The endorsement must not
exclude products and completed operations
coverage. If it does, then CG 20 37 (10/01) is also required. 450
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 1:
Consultants and Contractors
Type 1 – Page 3 of 4
Revised: September 2011
Additional Insured Endorsement
(continued)
SAMPLE Endorsements can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61
Primary and Noncontributory The contractor’s insurance coverage must be primary coverage as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self insurance maintained by the City is wholly separate from the insurance of the contractor and in no way relieves the contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance.
Waiver of Subrogation
Endorsement Form
Contractor’s insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for Workers Compensation and Builder’s Risk/ Course of Construction coverage during the life of this contract.
SAMPLE Endorsements can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61
Deductibles and Self-Insured
Retentions
Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retention as respects the City or the CONTRACTOR shall procure a financial guarantee in an amount equal to the deductible or self-insured retention guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.
Contractor is responsible for satisfaction of the deductible and/or self-insured retention for each loss.
Loss Payable Endorsement (only
required when Builder’s Risk
and/or Course of Construction
Insurance is required.)
Applicable to Builder’s Risk/Course of Construction naming the City of Richmond as Loss Payee.
SURETY BONDS
(If a Public Works/Engineering
Project)
The Contractor shall provide:
1. A Bid bond
2. A Performance Bond
3. A Payment Bond
Umbrella/Excess Liability Policies
If an Umbrella or Excess Liability Policy is used to meet the liability limits, coverage shall be as broad as specified for underlying coverages and cover those insured in the underlying policies.
Claims-Made Policies
If any insurance policy is written on a claims-made form: 1) the retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work. 2) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work. 3) If coverage is canceled or non- renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase an extended period coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
Subcontractors
CONTRACTOR
shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish to the City for review and approval, separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
CONTRACTOR agrees to defend and indemnify the City of Richmond for any damage resulting to it from failure of either CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor to take out or maintain the required insurance policies. The fact that insurance is obtained by CONTRACTOR, and/or CONTRACTOR’s subcontractors, will not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of CONTRACTOR, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this contract. Damages recoverable by CITY from CONTRACTOR or any third party will not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
451
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 1:
Consultants and Contractors
Type 1 – Page 4 of 4
Revised: September 2011
Verification of Coverage
All original certificates and endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work may begin . The City
of Richmond reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies including endorsements affecting the coverage at any time.
Original insurance certificates and required policy endorsements shall be mailed, or delivered to the Designated Project Manager for the City of Richmond.
Insurance certificates and endorsements may be faxed to the Designated Project Manager. However, Contractor must mail the original certificates and endorsements to Designated Project Manager once faxed.
Continuous Coverage
CONTRACTOR shall maintain the required insurance for the life of the contract. Should the CONTRACTOR cease to have insurance as required during this time, all work by the CONTRACTOR pursuant to this agreement shall cease until insurance acceptable to the City is provided. In the event that CONTRACTOR fails to comply with the City’s insurance requirements, the City may take such action as it deems necessary to protect the City’s interests. Such action may include but is not limited to termination of the contract, withholding of payments, or other actions as the City deems appropriate.
If services or the scope of work extend beyond the expiration dates of the required insurance policies initially approved by the City, CONTRACTOR must provide updated certificates and endorsements indicating that the required coverage, terms and conditions are still in place. Renewal certificates and updated endorsements shall be mailed to the Designated Project Manager.
Cancellation
CONTRACTOR shall ensure that coverage shall not be cancelled, reduced or otherwise materially changed except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice has been given to the City.
Reporting Requirements
Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
Consistent with Public Policy
The insuring provisions, insofar as they may be judged to be against public policy shall be void and unenforceable only to the minimum extent necessary so that the remaining terms and provisions herein may be consistent with public policy and thus enforceable.
452
1 PORT OF RICHMOND
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - POINT POTRERO MARINE TERMINAL ASSESSMENT
Background
Henry J Kaiser developed four shipyards in Richmond
between 1941 and 1942 that employed thousands who
constructed more than 747 vessels during World War II .
Immediately following the war, the Kaiser Corporation
converted Shipyard Number 3 , which is the last remaining war time shipyards in Richmond, to a ship repair facility. In 2009, the Port of Richmond (Port) rehabilitated Shipyard Number 3 into a state -of-the-art Roll On/ Roll Off (RoRo) terminal for the import of automobiles. The facility is now called the Point Potrero Marine Terminal (PPMT), which is shown in Figure 1 . See Figure 2 for a 1945 aerial view of the PPMT facility.
As a department of the City of Richmond, t he Port is
seeking interested parties to complete an assessment of the physical infrastructure of the Point Potrero Marine terminal, specifically the wharfs that front the Harbor Channel and the Point Potrero Turn as well as the Graving Basins and fin ger piers with the goal of establishing budgets and priorities to sustain and expand operations.
Figure 3 illustrates the study area in red, green and
blue. The area in red is known as berths 5 and 6.
These berths have seen limited use over the last 40
years, primarily as lay berthing. Little information
regarding this area is available . However, erosion
has occurred between the concrete w harf and
asphalt a s shown in the exhibit on the following
pages. Additionally, the Port has found an area of
settlement as shown in Figure 4 and seeks to
understand the cause and potential solutions.
Figure 1. Port of Richmond’s Point
Potrero Marine Terminal
Figure 2. Point Potrero Marine Terminal 1945
453
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
2 Figure 3. Point Potrero Marine Terminal Wharf Assessment 454
EX GASMAIN - CONNECTED TOBUILDING?
JT
JT
ROUTE CONDUITUNDER BUILDING PERIMETERFOUNDATION - PROTECT BUILDING JT
PROVIDE 200 FEET CABLESLACK COIL
EXISTING ELECTRICAL CONDUIT
EXISTING ELECTRICAL CONDUIT ANDCONDUCTORS FROMSUBSTATION NUMBER 6PER ROSENDIN - 480 V - 200 AMP/3 PHASE FEEDER(500 LF)
JTAT&T PULLBOX
FIRE HYDRANT
PORT PULLBOXELECTRICAL PULL BOX
SAW CUT SLAB ANDINSTALL CONDUITS PERSPECIFICATIONS1-2" FO1-4" ATT4-3" ELECTRICAL JT JT
STUB CONDUITS ATFUTURE EQUIPMENTROOM
INSTALL 1-2" FOINSTALL 1-4" AT&TINSTALL 4-3" ELECTRICAL
FUTUREOSC
(E) CONCRETE SLAB IS 6"THICK WITH #6 REBAR AT12" & 6" O.C.
SS
SS
E
EE
EXITING ELECTRICAL SWITCHGEAR - ABANDON
ABANDON EXISTINGELECTRICAL CONDUITSS (-3') FROMSURFACEINV 12.6±1.6% ± CO CO120 LF4" ABS SS RUN AT .009%FWFWFWFW
WWWWNEW PIPE WILL ROUTE TO BATHROOMWATER ON CEILING
EX WATER LINEEX GAS LINE
EXISTING FWWATER VALVE
NEW 6" C900PVC FSFIRE RISER
WV
Xref rigger-existing.dwg
PROPOSED GENERATOR
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
SSSSSS
SS
SSSSSSSS
SS
EXISTING FMFOR RED OAKBELOWGRADE SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
EXISTING FMFOR RED OAKHUNG ON CEILING OF BASIN 5
FMPENETRATEWALL
EXISTINGCRANE RAIL
FACE OFDOCK
CONCRETEDECK CONCRETEDECK
AA
BASIN 5
A
B
C
D
AREA OFEROSION
GRAVINGBASIN #5
14' NAVD88
30'±
PILE
APPROXIMATESLOPE
EROSIONHOLE
CRANERAIL
SECTION A
REVISIONS
NO. BYDATEDESCRIPTION34
DRAWN:DESIGNED:CHECKED:CSW|ST2CSW|ST2RCS
SHEET NO.COUNTY NO.
DATE
RICHMOND
PORT OF RICHMOND
RCS APPV'D12
APPROVED:
FILE NO.
JOB NO.SCALE
CALIFORNIA
NONE 121 PARK PLACERICHMOND, CA 94801CONTRA COSTA
REVISIONS
NO. BYDATEDESCRIPTION34
DRAWN:DESIGNED:CHECKED:CSW|ST2CSW|ST2RCS
SHEET NO.COUNTY NO.20035125
DATE07.15.2024
RICHMOND
PORT OF RICHMOND
RCSPOINT POTRERO MARINE TERMINALBERTH 5 AND 6 CONDITIONSAPPV'D12 APPROVED:
FILE NO.
JOB NO.SCALE
CALIFORNIA
NONE
EX-1 121 PARK PLACERICHMOND, CA 94801CONTRA COSTA
PLAN
PHOTOGRAPH A
PHOTOGRAPH B
PHOTOGRAPH C
PHOTOGRAPH D
455
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
4 The area in green is an active area known as berths 7 and 8 which is used for unloading vehicles. The Port completed improvements within berths 7 and 8 in 2012 as shown in Figure 5 supported by an inspection report dated September 10, 2009, prepared by Collins Engineers, Inc.
Figure 4. Settlement of Wharf
456
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
5 Figure 5. Plan view of Berths 7 and 8 at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal
457
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
6 Based upon previous inspections there is considerable damage to piles, beams, deck, and related structural components of Berths 7 and 8 . While the 2012 work repaired much of the wharf, there are areas requiring a reduction in load capacity. In addition, the soil beneath the cut off wall erodes allowing sinkholes to form within the asphalt on the landside approach to the concrete wharf. Figure 6 illustrates a 1943 concept drawing of the wharf.
Figure 6. 1943 Drawing of Berths 7 and 8
Berths 7 and 8 of PPMT is currently leased to Auto Warehousing Company for the import of vehicles from Korea and Japan as shown in Figure 7 . The Port would like to assess the conditions of Berths 7 and 8 for continued importation of vehicles as well as for expansion to heavier equipment such as construction and farm equipment. The Port will also evaluate alternative use options in the future that may include heavy general or project cargo and/or potentially supporting cargo handling equipment such as mobile harbor cranes. For Berths 5 and 6, the Port would like to understand its condition and cause of the settlement. 458
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
7 Figure 7 Roll on/ off Cargo is the Primary use for Berths 7 and 8
The area in blue consists of five graving basins, largely in the same configuration as seen in the 1940s.
These berths are used for berthing of vessels such as the Red Oak Victory ship (Richmond Museum Association) and other operating commercial vessels berthing. The Port has some records of the basins as shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8 Graving Basin Section
459
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
8 Finally, the Port is interested in understanding the g eneral conditions of the finger piers located on the west side of the faci lity as s hown in Figure 9. These were constr ucted in the 1940s and updated by tenants through the years. The Port has limited information regarding these facilities.
Figure 9 Finger piers
For the entire wharf , graving basins , and finger piers the Port seeks costs to design and construct improvements to continue and enhance operations. As these improvements cannot be made at one time, the Port seeks a prioritized list of projects that can be completed over the next 5 to 10 years. The Port is also seeking input on sequencing of repairs and upgrades in terms of highest need and accommodation of current operational activities and variables.
460
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
9 Proposal Requirements
If you are interested in providing a proposal for this effort, in less than 30 pages , please provide the following information:
A. Cover letter detailing your interest in the project and contact information. In the letter describe your compliance with Richmond’s ordinances as well as review of any addenda issued.
B. A narrative describing your firm and subconsultants detailing their roles and responsibilities.
Include a summary of the key team members that will be supporting the Port’s effort.
C. At least three previous projects where you have performed a similar scope of work including references.
D. A narrative detailing how your experience with similar marine infrastructure will help establish conditions and priorities when little existing data may be available. As a small port with limited funding, the Port is interested in how your team’s experience can be leveraged to develop a rehabilitation plan with limited expense.
E. A scope of work that succinctly details the tasks you intend to perform . At a minimum, this shall include the following:
i. Review and interpretation of existing documents provided by the Port ii. Field review of existing conditions for Berths 5,6, 7, and 8 iii. If you believe that under wharf inspection of Berths 5, 6, 7, and 8 which may include boats and divers as well as materials testing is critical, please provide a sco pe of work . This work should be offered as an optional service. Additionally, please clearly define how this effort will enhance your team’s recommendations.
iv. Draft conditions assessment and recommendations for rehabilitation including cost analysis and phasing recommendations
v. Meeting with Port staff to review draft at 8 weeks into t he project and prior to release of final assessment.
vi. Final conditions assessment that responds to comment include a summary of next steps F. A schedule to perform the work.
In a separate document marked “Port Assessment Fee” please provide your fee to complete the work.
Please note that all work must be inclusive of the following:
1. City of Richmond Ordinance No. 16-12 N.S Richmond Business Opportunity Ordinance.
2. Compensation shall be consistent with Prevailing Wage Requirements as required by the Department of Industrial Relations.
3. Execute an agreement with the City of Richmond ; a copy is included in Exhibit A. No changes to this agreement will be made.
461
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
10 Port Provided Information
The Port will provide information it possesses for PPMT. The vendor shall note that it may or may not be useful or complete. A summary of this information includes:
• 2012 Plans for repairs to Berths 7 and 8 prepared by Liftech • 2009 Conditions Assessment for Berths 7 and 8 prepared by Collins Engineers • Topographic, boundary, utility, and bathymetric data prepared by various parties • 2024 Videos and photographs of berths 5 and 6 prepared by CSWST2 • 1940’s era design and as-built records, which are incomplete. • 2011 Winch installation calculation prepared by Moffatt and Nichol for the Graving Basin 3 • 2015 Moring and fender analysis for the Red Oak Victory prepared by COWI
Schedule
The Port anticipates this effort will be completed as follows:
Task Date
Release RFP Late July 2024
Prep Proposal Meeting August 5, 2024 at 2:00 PM
Response Due Mid-August 2024
Interview if Necessary Late August 2024
Negotiations with Vendor Early September 2024
City Council Approves Agreement Late September 2024
Notice to Proceed October 2024
Final Assessment Report March2025
Submittal Process
The Port will hold a non-mandatory preproposal meeting at 1322 Canal Boulevard on August 5, 2024, at 2:00 PM. This will be an opportunity to review site conditions.
Any questions from prospective vendors must be submitted via the electronic BidsOnline system no later than 5:00 p.m., Friday August 9, 2024. As necessary, responses to questions will be issued via an addendum.
Electronic Proposals shall be submitted via the City’s secure online bidding system. All required sections of the proposal must be submitted via the website. Vendor is solely responsible for “on time” submission of their electronic proposal. The Bid Management System will not accept late proposals and no exceptions shall be made. Contractors will receive an e -bid confirmation number with a time stamp from the Bid Management System indicating that their bid was submitted successfully. The City will only receive those proposals that were transmitted successfully no later than 2:00 p.m., Friday, August 16, 2024. 462
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
11 Evaluation Criteria
The sole purpose of the proposal evaluation process is to determine which solution best meets the Port’s needs. The Port will review all proposals received as part of a structured evaluation process. For each decision point in the process, the Port will evaluate proposers according to specific criteria.
A review committee will evaluate all responses to the RFP that meet the submittal requirements and deadline. Submittals that do not meet the requirement or deadline will not be considered. The review committee will rank the proposals and arrange interviews if the top two or three firms if deemed necessary.
The table below describes the criteria that will be used to review proposals and interview performance , if deemed necessary. The Port offers a total of 100 points, weighted as follows:
Criteria Total Points Available
Demonstrated experience in team members with
assessing conditions of 1940’s era marine
infrastructure
30 Detailed work plan that clearly illustrates meeting
the Port’s needs in an efficient manner
40 Demonstrated ability to assess conditions, establish budgets, and prioritize repairs with limited
information.
30 Port’s Rights Reserved
For this RFP, City and Port are used interchangeably. The Port reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to:
• Select the proposal which in its sole judgment best meets the needs of the City. The recommended selection of the evaluation committee is final and subject only to review and final approval by the City Council.
• Reject any or all proposals and to waive technicalities and informalities when such waiver is determined by the City to be in the City’s best interest. • Retain all accepted proposals, including proprietary documentation, regardless of which proposal is selected. No proposals will be returned to proposers. • Request any supplementary information it deems necessary to evaluate proposer’s experience or qualifications. This may include supplemental financial information, additional interview(s), and/or additional presentation by the proposer. • Reconsider any proposal submitted at any stage of the procurement. It also reserves the right to meet with select proposers at any time to gather additional information.
Furthermore, the City reserves the right to delete or add functionality (i.e., modules and components) until the final contract signing.
463
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
12 • Cancel, in part or in its entirety, this RFP, including, but not limited to: selection schedule, submittal date, and submittal requirements. If the City cancels or revises this RFP, all proposers will be notified in writing by the City.
• Revise the RFP prior to the date that proposals are due. The City will communicate changes through addendum to this RFP. All registered proposers will be notified of revisions to the RFP. The City reserves the right to extend the date by which the proposals are due. • To reject any and all proposals and to waive informalities and minor irregularities in any proposals received. Failure to furnish all information requested or to follow the format requested herein may disqualify the proposer, in the sole discretion of the City. False, incomplete, misleading or unresponsive statements in a proposal may also be sufficient cause for a proposal’s rejection.
Finally, the Port notes the following:
• This RFP does not commit the City to award a contract. All proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the City and public records, and as such, may be subject to public review.
• The City shall not be liable for any pre -contractual expenses incurred by prospective proposers or designated subcontractors, including but not limited to costs incurred in the preparation or submission of proposals.
• The City shall be held harmless and free from any and all liability, claims, or expenses whatsoever incurred by, or on behalf of, any person or organization responding to this RFP.
Bids Online Codes
95900
91842
92500
92517
92542
92588
464
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
13 ATTACHMENT A
STANDARD CITY CONTRACT
465
CITY OF RICHMOND
STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: Project Manager:
Project Manager E-mail: Project Manager Phone No:
Vendor No: Contract No:
Description of Services:
The parties to this STANDARD CONTRACT do mutually agree and promise as follows:
1. Parties. The parties to this Contract are the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation (“the City”), and the following named Contractor:
Contractor Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Contact Person:
Telephone: Email:
Business License No:
2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is ________________________ and terminates ______________ unless terminated earlier as set forth herein.
3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $______________ (“Contract Payment Limit”) unless a Contract Amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager. If this amount includes a contingency, Contractor acknowledges that any use of such contingency shall be for work beyond the original scope of services and requires prior written authorization by the City. If noted below, Compensation for work done under this Contract, shall not exceed as follows:
FY
total compensation shall not exceed $
FY total compensation shall not exceed $
FY total compensation shall not exceed $
4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor agrees to perform all work at its own cost and expense, to furnish all labor, tools, equipment, materials, except as otherwise specified, in accordance with Exhibit A:
Service Plan which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. [ ] A California corporation , [ ] limited liability corporation, [ ] general partnership, [ ] limited partnership, [ ] individual, [ ] non-profit corporation, [ ] individual dba as [specify:]______________________________ [ ] other [specify:]__________________________________ 466
5. City Obligations. City shall make payments to the Contractor in accordance with the Payment Provisions set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
6. Authorized Representatives and Notices. This Contract is subject to the Authorized Representatives and Notices Provisions (Exhibit C), attached hereto and incorporated herein.
7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
9. Insurance Provisions. This Contract is subject to the Insurance Provisions (Exhibit F) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
10. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' agreement hereto:
CITY OF RICHMOND,
a municipal corporation [BUSINESS NAME]
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice President should sign below)
By:
Title By:
I hereby certify that this Contract Title:
has been approved by City Council
or the City Manager. Date Signed:
By:
City Clerk
(* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign below)
Approved as to form:
By:
By: Title:
City Attorney
Date Signed:
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement Exhibit G 467
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
EXHIBIT A
SERVICE PLAN
Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the Project Manager (set forth in Exhibit B), perform the following services and be compensated as outlined below [or attach service plan if necessary]:
468
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT PROVISIONS
1. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR:
a. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated in the manner set forth herein.
b. All payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photo copying, meals and travel, etc). Invoices, shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request.
c. All City vendors receiving new contracts shall sign up to receive electronic payments through the City’s Automated Clearinghouse (ACH) payments service/provider.
2. SUBMISSION OF INVOICES:
Contractor shall submit timely invoices by email to
[email protected] and/or to the following address: Attention:
City of Richmond Finance/Account Payable
Project Manager:
P.O. Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804
3. All invoices that are submitted by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of the City Project Manager, before payments shall be authorized.
4. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days after completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.
5. All appropriate permits, certificates, and licenses, including a City business license shall be obtained and maintained for the duration of this Contract before any payment is authorized.
6. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract is executed by the City. The insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be maintained by Contractor for the duration of this Contract and must be in place before any payment is authorized. 469
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT C
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES
1. All required written notices shall be delivered: (i) by hand; or (ii) sent by registered, express, or certified mail, with return receipt requested or with delivery confirmation requested from the U.S. postal service; (iii) sent by overnight or same day courier service at the party’s respective address listed in this Section.
2. Each notice shall be deemed to have been received on the earlier to occur of: actual delivery or the date on which delivery is refused; or three (3) days after notice is deposited in the U.S. mail or with a courier service in the manner described above (Sundays and City holidays excepted).
3. Either party may, at any time, change its notice address (other than to a post office box address) by giving the other party three (3) days prior written notice of the new address.
4. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from Contractor to the City shall be addressed to the City at:
City of Richmond –
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: ______________________________________________________
5. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from the City to Contractor shall be addressed to Contractor at:
Business Name
Street Address
City, State Zip
Email: ______________________________________________________ 470
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT D
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. INDEPENDENT PARTIES:
Contractor hereby declares that Contractor is engaged as an independent business and Contractor agrees to perform the services as an independent contractor. The manner and means of conducting the services and tasks are under the control of Contractor exce pt to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this Contract. No civil service status or other right of employment will be acquired by virtue of Contractor’s services. None of the benefits provided by the City t o its employees, including but not limited to unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation plans, vacation and sick leave, are available from the City to Contractor, its employees or agents. Deductions shall not be made for any state or federal taxes, FICA payments, PERS payments, or other purposes normally associated with an employer - employee relationship from any compensation due to Contractor. Payments of the above items, if required, are the responsibility of Contractor.
2. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE:
Contractor and the City agree that time is of the essence regarding the performance of this Contract.
3. STANDARD OF CARE:
Contractor agrees to perform all services hereunder in a manner commensurate with the prevailing standards of like professionals or service Contractors, as applicable, in the San Francisco Bay Area and agrees that all services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by the City.
4. IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT (IRCA):
Contractor assumes all responsibility for verifying the identity and employment authorization of all of its employees performing work hereunder, pursuant to all applicable IRCA or other federal, or state rules and regulations. Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from and against any loss, damage, liability, costs or expenses arising from any noncompliance of this provision by Contractor.
5. NON-DISCRIMINATION:
Consistent with the City’s policy and state and federal law that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable conduct, Contractor and its employees, contractors, and agents shall not harass or discriminate against any job applicant, City employee, or any other person on the basis of any kind of any statutorily (federal, state or local) protected class, including but not limited to: race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, disability (both mental and physical) including HIV and AIDS, medi cal condition (e.g. cancer), genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, pregnancy, political 471
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
affiliation, military and veteran status or legitimate union activities . Contractor agrees that any violation of this provision shall constitute a material breach of this Contract.
6. CITY PROPERTY:
a. Each and every report, draft, work product, map, record, applicable plans, drawings, calculation, data, specification, video, graphic or any other material or document produced, prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor pursuant to or in connection with this Contract shall be the exclusive property of the City.
b. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 11 below, indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data. c. No report, information or other data given to or prepared or assembled by Contractor pursuant to this Contract shall be made available to any individual or organization by Contractor without prior approval of the City Manager or their designee. d. Contractor shall, at such time and in such form as City Manager or their designee may require, furnish reports concerning the status of services and tasks required under this Contract.
7. RECORDS:
a. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the services, tasks, work, documents and data in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of Contractor’s performance under the Contract, as well as maintain books and records related to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by the City that relate to the performance of the services and tasks under this Contract (collectively the “Records”). b. All Records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Contractor shall provide free access to the Records to the representatives of the City or its designees during regular business hours upon reasonable prior notice. The City has the right to examine and audit the Records, and to make copies or transcripts therefrom as necessary, and t o allow inspection of all proceedings and activities related to this Contract. Such Records, together with supporting documents, shall be kept separate from other documents and records and shall be maintained by Contractor for a period of five (5) years after receipt of final payment. c. If supplemental examination or audit of the Records is necessary due to concerns raised by the City’s preliminary examination or audit of records, and the City’s supplemental examination or audit of the records discloses a failure to adhere to appropriate internal financial controls, or other breach of this Contract or failure to act in good faith, then Contractor shall reimburse the City for all reasonable costs and expenses associated with the supplemental examination or audit.
472
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
8. PERMITS AND LICENSES:
Contractor, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract, all appropriate permits, certificates and licenses, including a City business license , required in connection with the performance of the services and tasks hereunder . The failure to obtain such permits and licenses shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumst ances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.
9. TERMINATION:
a. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder immediately upon transmission of written notice to Contractor as provided in Exhibit C “Authorized Representatives and Notices”.
b. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Exhibit B; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
10. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.
11. HOLD HARMLESS:
a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City) and hold harmless the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (“Indemnitees”) from and against any and all loss, damages, liability, obligations, claims, suits, judgments, costs and expenses 473
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
whatsoever, including attorney’s fees and costs of litigation (“Claims”), arising from or in any manner connected to Contractor’s performance of its obligations under this Contract or failure to comply with any of its obligations under this Contract or out of the operations conducted by Contractor even if the City is found to have been negligent. If the Claims filed against Indemnitees allege negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct on the part of Contractor, Contractor shall have no right of reimbursement against Indemnitees for the costs of defense even if negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct is not found on the part of Contractor.
Contractor shall not have any obligations to indemnify Indemnitees if the loss or damage is found to have resulted solely from the negligence or the willful misconduct of the City. The defense and indemnification obligations of this Contract are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Contract. b. This indemnification obligation shall survive this Contract and shall not be limited by any term of any insurance policy required under this Contract; provided however, that if this Contract is for design professional services, this indemnity provision is limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the design professional (as defined in California Civil Code section 2782.8).
12. LIMITATIONS UPON SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENT:
a. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee. b. Contractor shall not assign, sublease, hypothecate, or transfer this Contract, or any interest therein, directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise, without prior written consent of the City Manager. Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to transfer to the City Manager at least thirty (30) days in advance of the desired transfer. The City Manager or their designee may consent or reject such request in their sole and absolute discretion. Any attempt to do so without said consent shall be null and void, and any assignee, sublessee, hypothecate or transferee shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer. However, claims for money against the City under this Contract may be assigned by Contractor to a bank, trust company or other financial institution without prior written consent.
c. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture. d. Only those persons and/or businesses whose names and resumés are attached to this Contract shall be used in the performance of this Contract. However, if after the start of this Contract, Contractor wishes to use sub-contractors, at no additional costs to the City, then 474
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to add sub-contractors including the names of the sub-contractors and the reasons for the request to the City Manager at least five (5) days in advance. The City Manager may consent or reject such requests in their sole and absolute discretion.
e. Each sub-contractor shall be required to furnish proof of workers’ compensation insurance and shall also be required to carry general, automobile and professional liability insurance (as applicable) in reasonable conformity to the insurance carried by Contractor. f. In addition, any tasks or services performed by sub-contractors shall be subject to each provision of this Contract. Contractor shall include the following language in their Contract with any sub-contractor: “Sub-Contractors hired by Contractor agree to be bound to Contractor and the City in the same manner and to the same extent as Contractor is bound to the City.” g. The requirements in this Section 12 shall not apply to persons who are merely providing materials, supplies, data or information that Contractor then analyzes and incorporates into its work product.
13 SAFETY:
a. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor will be solely and completely responsible for conditions of all vehicles owned or operated by Contractor, including the safety of all persons and property during performance of the services and tasks under this Contract. Contractor shall assume sole and complete responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any of subcontractor's employees This requirement will apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours.
In addition, Contractor will comply with all safety provisions in conformance with U.S.
Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Act, any equivalent state law, and all other applicable federal, state, county and local laws, ordinances, codes, and any regulations that may be detailed in other parts of the Contract. Where any of these are in conflict, the more stringent requirements will be followed. Contractor’s failure to thoroughly familiarize itself with the aforementioned safety provisions will not relieve it from compliance with the obligations and penalties set forth herein.
b. Contractor will immediately notify the City (in no event less than 24 hours) of any incident of death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage that occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract. Contractor will promptly submit to the City a written report of all incidents that occur in connection with this Contract. This report must include the following information: (i) name and address of injured or deceased person(s); (ii) name and address of Contractor’s employee(s) involved in the incident; (iii) name and address of Contractor’s liability insurance carrier; (iv) a detailed description of the incident; and (v) a police report.
c. Contractor acknowledges that the City shall have the right to impose, at the City’s sole discretion, requirements that it deems are necessary to protect the health and safety of the City employees, residents, and visitors. Contractor agrees to comply with all such requirements, 475
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
including, but not limited to, mandatory vaccinations, the use of personal protective equipment (e.g. masks), physical distancing, and health screenings. Contractor also agrees to make available to the City, at the City’s request, records to demonstrate Contractor’s compliance with this Section.
14. INSURANCE:
Insurance requirements are set forth in Exhibit F to this Contract. Contractor shall abide by the insurance requirements set forth in said Exhibit F.
15. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS:
a. During the term of this Contract, Contractor shall keep fully informed of all existing and future state and federal laws and all municipal ordinances and regulations of the City of Richmond which affect the manner in which the services or tasks are to be performed by Contractor, as well as all such orders and decrees of bodies or tribunals having any jurisdiction or authority over the same. Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws, state and federal and all ordinances, rules and regulations enacted or issued by the City. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50, 2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable. b. Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor is required to provide the City with documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance as prescribed in § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code. c. Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or sub-Contractor under an agreement or sub-agreement with the City for public works, goods or services to refrain from discriminatory employment or practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential sub-contractor .
d. Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies . Contractor agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.
16. INTEGRATED CONTRACT:
The Recitals and exhibits are a material part of this Contract and are expressly incorporated herein. This Contract represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall 476
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
be held to vary the provisions hereof. Any modification of this Contract will be effective only by written execution signed by both the City and Contractor.
17. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS:
In the event of a conflict between these General Conditions and those of any Exhibit or attachment hereto, these General Conditions shall prevail; provided, however, that any Special Condition as set forth in Exhibit E shall prevail over these General Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more Exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor, and the terms and conditions preferred by the City shall prevail over those preferred by the Contractor.
18. FORCE MAJEURE:
Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of such an obligation is prevented or delayed by reason of acts of God, strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, failure of power, restrictive governmental laws and regulations enacted after the date of this Contract, riots, civil unrest, acts of terrorism, insurrection, war, declaration of a state or national emergency or other reasons of a like nature not within the reasonable control of such party.
19. CONFLICT OF LAW:
This Contract shall be interpreted under, and enforced by the laws of the State of California without regard to any choice of law rules which may direct the application of laws of another jurisdiction. The Contract and obligations of the parties are subject to all valid laws, orders, rules, and regulations of the authorities having jurisdiction over this Contract (or the successors of those authorities). Any suits brought pursuant to this Contract shall be filed with the courts of the County of Contra Costa, State of California.
20. CLAIMS:
Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provisions of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six months after accrual of the cause of action.
21. INTERPRETATION:
This Contract shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.
22. WARRANTY:
If any product is be provided to the City as part of this Contract, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to 477
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets any specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light bulbs and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor's expense, including shipping.
23. SEVERABILITY:
In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.
24. AUTHORITY:
City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City.
The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that they are duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, and shall be personally liable to City if they are not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.
25. WAIVER:
The waiver by City of any breach of any term or provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach. Inspections or approvals, or statements by any officer, agent or employee of the City relating to the Contractor’s performance, or payment therefore, or any combination of these acts, shall not relieve the Contractor’s obligation to fulfill this Contract as prescribed; nor shall the City be thereby stopped from bringing any action for damages or enforcement arising from any failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Contract.
26. COUNTERPARTS:
This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts (including by fax, PDF, DocuSign, or other electronic means), each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
27. SANCTUARY CITY CONTRACTING ORDINANCE (SCCO):
The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the 478
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor must submit the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement, attached hereto as Exhibit G. 479
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
EXHIBIT E
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
The General Conditions are hereby amended to include the following modifications and/or provisions (if applicable, otherwise please state “NONE”):
480
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
EXHIBIT F
INSURANCE PROVISIONS
___ Check here if Risk Management has approved waiving insurance requirements for this contract.
a. Before the commencement of the terms of this Contract, and during the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, Contractor shall furnish the City’s Risk Manager with certificates showing the type, amount, class of operations covered, effective dates and dates of expiration of insurance coverage in compliance with Sections 10.b. (1) through (5) Such certificates, which do not limit Contractor’s indemnification, shall also contain substantially the following statement:
“Should any of the above insurance covered by this certificate be canceled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the insurer affording coverage shall provide thirty (30) days’ advance written notice to the City of Richmond. Attention: Risk Manager.” Contractor shall maintain in force at all times during the performance of this Contract all appropriate coverage of insurance required by this Contract with an insurance company licensed to offer insurance business in the State of California with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII or Standard & Poor’s Rating (if rated) of at least BBB unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Contractor shall deliver updated insurance certificates to the City at the address described in Section 17.f. prior t o the expiration of the existing insurance certificate for the duration of the term of Contract. Endorsements naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insured shall be submitted with the insurance certificates.
b. COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS:
Contractor shall maintain insurance coverage and limits at least as broad as:
(1) Workers’ Compensation:
Statutory coverage as required by the State of California. (2) Liability:
Commercial general liability coverage in the following minimum limits:
Bodily Injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate - all other
Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate
If submitted, combined single limit policy with per occurrence limits in the amounts of $2,000,000 and aggregate limits in the amounts of $4,000,000 will be considered equivalent to the required minimum limits shown above. Additional 481
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
Insured Endorsement naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers is required. (3) Automotive:
Comprehensive automobile liability coverage (any auto) in the following minimum limits:
Bodily injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence
Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence
or
Combined Single Limit: $2,000,000 each occurrence
Additional Insured Endorsement naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers is required. (4) Professional Liability:
Professional liability insurance which includes coverage appropriate for the professional acts, errors and omissions of Contractor’s profession and work hereunder, including, but not limited to, technology professional liability errors and omissions if the services being provided are technology -based, in the following minimum limits:
$2,000,000 each occurrence
Technology professional liability errors and omissions shall include, or be endorsed to include: property damage liability coverage for damage to, alteration of, loss of, or destruction of electronic data and/or information “property” of the City in the care, custody, or control of Contractor. If not covered under Contractor’s liability policy, such “property” coverage of the City may be endorsed onto Contractor’s Cyber Liability Policy as covered property as follows: cyber liability coverage in an amount sufficient to cover the full replacement value of damage to, alteration of, loss of, or destruction of electronic data and/or information “property” of the City that will be in the care, custody, or control of Contractor. (5) Cyber Liability:
Coverage shall be sufficiently broad to respond to the duties and obligations as are undertaken by Contractor in this Contract and shall include, but not be limited to, claims involving infringement of intellectual property, copyright, trademark, trade dress, invasion of privacy violations, information theft, damage to or destruction of electronic information, release of private information, alteration of electronic information, extortion and network security. The policy shall provide coverage for breach response costs as well as regulatory fines and penalties as well as credit monitoring expenses with limits sufficient to respond to these obligations with the following minimum limits:
$2,000,000 per occurrence or claim.
482
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
As to commercial general liability and automobile liability insurance, such insurance will provide that it constitutes primary insurance with respect to claims insured by such policy, and, except with respect to limits, that insurance applies separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought. Such insurance is not additional to or contributing with any other insurance carried by or for the benefit of the City.
c. SUBROGATION WAIVER:
Contractor hereby agrees to waive rights of subrogation that any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors. d. FAILURE TO SECURE:
If Contractor at any time during the term hereof should fail to secure or maintain the foregoing insurance, the City shall be permitted to obtain such insurance in Contractor’s name or as an agent of Contractor and shall be compensated by Contractor for the costs of the insurance premiums at the maximum rate permitted by law and computed from the date written notice is received that the premiums have not been paid.
e. ADDITIONAL INSUREDS:
The City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be named as additional insured(s) under all insurance coverages, except workers’ compensation and professional liability insurance. The naming of an additi onal insured shall not affect any recovery to which such additional insured would be entitled under this policy if not named as such additional insured. An y additional insured named herein shall not be held liable for any premium, deductible portion of any loss, or expense of any nature on this policy or any extension thereof. Any other insurance held by an additional insured shall not be required to contribute anything toward any loss or expense covered by the insurance provided by this policy.
Additional Insured coverage under Contractor’s policy shall be primary and non-contributory and will not seek contribution from the City’s insurance or self -insurance. Any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the additional insured(s). f. SUFFICIENCY OF INSURANCE:
The insurance limits required by the City are not represented as being sufficient to protect Contractor. Contractor is advised to consult Contractor’s insurance broker to determine adequate coverage for Contractor. The coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Contract; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of the coverage carried by or available to Contractor; whichever is greater. 483
EXHIBIT G
SANCTUARY CITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
The undersigned, an authorized agent of (hereafter
"Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12-18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”). Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain business relations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor understands the meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:
a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:
i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private-sector business and government agencies; ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."
Contractor understands that it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.
Contractor further understands and agrees that Contractor's failure to comply with the SCCO shall constitute a material default of the Contract and the City Manager may terminate the Contract and bar Contractor from bidding on future contracts with the City for five (5) years from the effective date of the contract termination.
By executing this statement, Contractor certifies that it complies with the requirements of the SCCO and that if at any time during the term of the Contract it ceases to comply, Contractor will promptly notify the City Manager in writing. Any person or entity who knowingly or willingly supplies false information in violation of the SCCO shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $1,000 fine.
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day of , 20 , at , California.
Printed Name: Title:
Signed: Date:
Business Entity:
484
POINT POTRERO MARINE TERMINAL ASSESSMENT
PROPOSAL
Produced for Port of Richmond
AUGUST 2024
485
ii
Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Contents
1. Cover Letter 1
Why Moffatt & Nichol? 2
2. Project Team 3
3. Project Experience 13
4. Leveraging Marine Infrastructure Experience 20
5. Scope of Work 22
6. Project Schedule 29
This document is fully interactive.
Just click on any Table of Contents
item or on the tabs to the right to
navigate directly to that section.
486
1 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
August 23, 2024
Charles Gerard
Port Director
Port of Richmond
1322 Canal Blvd, Richmond, CA 94804
Submitted via Planet Bids
RE: Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment Proposal
Dear Mr. Gerard:
The Port of Richmond is undertaking a critical effort to assess the existing infrastructure at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal. This assessment will serve to inform the Port’s strategic plan and support the City of Richmond’s goal to sustain and grow Port operations. To be successful, the Port will need an expert in assessing marine infrastructure that can efficiently access the condition of the existing infrastructure on a fast-tracked schedule and help develop a program for needed improvements to support both existing and potential future business opportunities.
The Moffatt & Nichol (M&N) team is uniquely qualified to deliver this assignment – we have significant experience assessing, inspecting, repairing, upgrading, retrofitting, and replacing aging marine infrastructure from all eras including the 1940s. Delivering marine and port infrastructure projects is our core business – we employ the largest and most experienced group of specialized marine engineers and port planning professionals in the US. We are experts at working closely with agencies to develop marine infrastructure improvement programs and to prioritize work that balances the costs of improvements with expected business opportunities and revenues. We regularly work with clients where there is a lack of existing as-built information, where budgets are constrained, and where there is a need to develop creative solutions to stretch funding both during the design and construction phases.
M&N has significant experience helping former shipyards transition their infrastructure from graving basins and dry docks for ship building and ship repair to other commercial uses. Designing and modernizing shipyard marine infrastructure is part of who we are as a company - we were founded in 1945 to help the US Navy build up the shipyards in Long Beach - and to this day we are serving the Navy to design and construct two major dry dock projects in the US.
M&N will comply with all applicable City of Richmond ordinances. M&N is in receipt and will comply with Addendum #1 issued on August 16, 2024.
This work will be completed primarily from our local Oakland and Walnut Creek offices with additional support as needed from our west coast port infrastructure and inspection teams. We have the capacity to complete this work efficiently on a fast-tracked schedule and look forward to the opportunity to partner with the Port on this important assignment. Please contact me at (510) 788-8959 or [email protected] at any time to discuss the contents of this proposal.
Very truly yours,
MOFFATT & NICHOL
Matthew Trowbridge, PE, SE
Vice President
1300 Clay Street, Suite 350
Oakland, CA 94612
Tel: (510) 645-1238
moffattnichol.com
487
2 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
THE M&N TEAM ADVANTAGE
Project Manager Matt Trowbridge will lead M&N team
and direct all services and deliverables. Matt has 16
years of port and marine inspection and rehabilitation
design experience.
FAST PACED, HANDS ON PROJECT
MANAGER
We bring a flexible, collaborative, and open-minded
approach to working with you.
Our team has worked on similar sized / aged ports
throughout the Bay area and offers the complete service package of inspection & rehabilitation expertise needed to complete this project.
EXPERIENCE & EXPERTISE IN PORTS
& MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE
M&N has been in the Ports and Marine industry for
80 years. We have experience serving nearly every major port authority in the country and are currently ranked
#1 in Marine & Port Facilities by Engineering News-Record.
MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE IS OUR
CORE BUSINESS
Our team is accustomed to working with a wide range
of information on older ports. Moreover, our inspectors- engineers are experts in waterfront structure design and construction methods, allowing them to confidently
compensate data gaps.
ABILITY TO WORK WITH LIMITED DATA
WHY MOFFATT & NICHOL?
1. Marine Infrastructure is our Core Business. We
employ the largest and most experienced group
of specialized marine engineers and port planning
professionals in the US. We regularly work with clients to solve complex structural and geotechnical problems.
2. Working with Limited Information. We regularly
work on projects at existing marine terminals built in
all eras (including the 1940s) where there is limited
to no existing information available - we will employ
strategies for the assessment work to progress using
our experience and making reasonable assumptions
without requiring a significant field investigation and testing program – these programs are very expensive
and not justified for this level of assessment.
3. Budget Conscious, High Value. We know how to
work within constrained budgets—because of our
expertise in marine engineering and port planning we
can provide significant value.
4. Experience and Expertise. We offer our team’s
combined experience in marine infrastructure, since
our founding in 1945, to the Port—we have overcome
the challenges the Port faces many times for other
clients (settlement, sinkholes, aging infrastructure,
lack of as-built information, limited budgets, need to
maintain operations, etc.).
5. Face Paced, Hands On. Our proposed project
manager, Matt Trowbridge, thrives in fast-paced
projects. He spent years in the field inspecting
marine infrastructure and is an expert at
synthesizing inspection results and cost estimates
into high-level summaries that can be used
by decision makers to prioritize infrastructure
investments to maximize revenue.
6. “One Stop” Shop. M&N is a full-service inspection
and testing firm meaning that we employ trained and
licensed inspectors including certified engineer-divers.
We can self-perform any specialized inspection services that may be required for this work.
7. Port of Richmond Mindset. We understand the Port of
Richmond is different than larger ports like Long Beach, Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Francisco. We work with
ports of all sizes (e.g., Port of Humboldt Bay, Crescent City Harbor District, Port San Luis) on projects of all sizes from small thousand-dollar studies to large billion-
dollar programs. It is important for us to understand the Port’s goals and priorities and develop the assessment
program that best serves the Port of Richmond.
#
1 by
ENR
M&N understands the Port’s budget constraints and limited resources. With our team, you are getting expert services from a mid-sized firm whose focus is building long-term relationships providing our core business services.
BUDGET CONSCIOUS, HIGH VALUE
PORT OF RICHMOND MINDSET
488
3 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
2. Project Team
We have assembled an outstanding team of experts in port infrastructure assessment, rehabilitation and design. The M&N team features a roster of highly qualified and experienced professionals and subconsultants who bring proven, practical strategies to port development projects. This section provides an overview of the M&N team and staff assigned to the project.
M&N Overview
Moffatt & Nichol (M&N)’s history begins in 1945 in San Pedro Bay, growing to become a leading U.S.-based global infrastructure consultant specializing in the planning and design of facilities that shape coastlines, harbors and rivers as well as transportation systems associated with goods movement.
We are innovators in the planning, design, inspection, assessment, and operations engineering of container and cargo; military; LNG, oil, and gas energy; ferry; cruise homeports and ports-of-call; dry bulk and material handling; and offshore wind energy facilities around the world. M&N has decades of experience working with port authorities, shipping companies, and marine terminal operators worldwide.
Our firm’s stability, combined with our more than 75‐year focus on port planning and development, is one of the major benefits of working with a firm our size—in an industry where the second largest engineering firm can purchase the fifth largest, the stability of working with smaller firms who value relationships over dollars cannot be overstated.
Specialized in Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment The ability to perform analysis and design, as well as underwater and above-water inspections on structures in the marine environment, is an important part of M&N’s core business practice. We are one of the very few firms that specializes in waterfront inspection and assessments, as well as waterfront facility design and repair/rehabilitation services. M&N employs an experienced group of waterfront inspectors and engineer- divers specializing in inspecting and performing repair designs for marine structures. Our team has extensive experience inspecting graving basins, dry docks, piers, wharves, bulkheads and retaining wall structures, dolphins, floating structures, dry docks, slopes, and other waterfront structures, comprised of timber, concrete, steel, composites, and stone masonry.
Our in-house inspection engineers perform structural assessments and develop repair or retrofit designs for rehabilitating marine structures to extend service life, serve new commercial uses, provide additional structural capacity, or upgrade to comply with current codes.
With limited maintenance budgets, cost-conscious facility operators seek alternatives to traditional structure repair or replacement. Our experienced team regularly develops alternatives that result in significant project cost and schedule reductions when compared to demolition and replacement.
M&N provides an engineer’s perspective to inspecting and rehabilitating waterfront and marine facilities. All engineering recommendation services are conducted by registered engineers and engineer-divers who understand the structural significance of observed conditions, compile reports from collected data, and provide effective engineered solutions for repairing and rehabilitating important marine structures and infrastructure.
MOFFATT & NICHOL
BY THE NUMBERS
TYPE OF
ORGANIZATION
CORPORATION
YEAR FOUNDED
1945
MAIN POINT OF
CONTACT/ PROJECT
MANAGER
MATT TROWBRIDGE, PE, SE
52 OFFICES WORLDWIDE
FIRM HEADQUARTERS
4225 East Conant Street
Long Beach, CA 90808
LOCAL OFFICES
1300 Clay Street, Suite 350,
Oakland, CA 94612
2185 N. California Blvd, Suite 500,
Walnut Creek, CA 94612
1,200
EMPLOYEES WORLDWIDE
489
4 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Speciality Subconsultants
ENGEO | Geotechnical Engineering
ENGEO is an award-winning, employee-owned California Corporation of more than 400 geotechnical and civil engineers, geologists, hydrologists, hydrogeologists, environmental scientists, coastal engineers, construction quality-assurance representatives, and laboratory testing specialists serving clients in the U.S. and abroad for over 50 years.
ENGEO’s services include Geotechnical, Geological, Environmental and Water Resources Engineering and construction-phase testing and observation of soil, concrete, and structural steel.
ENGEO has extensive experience in providing services for marine structure projects throughout the Bay Area and beyond, including those for the Port of Richmond. Select projects include Port of Richmond Terminal 4, Terminal 2 Dredge Evaluation, and Terminal 1 Redevelopment. We have an excellent relationship with M&N and have a proven history of working well together on previous projects. ENGEO has partnered with M&N both as a subconsultant or as part of the same consulting team to perform geotechnical services for BP Richmond MOTEMS Evaluation and Seismic Retrofit, Chevron Richmond Refinery Wharf Geotechnical Peer Review, San Rafael Sea Level Rise Adaptation, Port of Oakland Berth 23-24 Improvements, Treasure Island Ferry Terminal, Hunters Point Shipyard Shoreline, and Redwood Shores Levee Evaluation, among other projects.
Tourney Consulting Group | Materials Testing and Service Life Evaluation
Tourney Consulting Group, LLC (TCG) is the concrete industry’s leader on concrete structure service life and maintenance, serving engineering firms. TCG has worked continuously with M&N for 20 years. TCG is a national consulting engineering company that focuses on quantification of concrete durability and cost-effective service life solutions for concrete structures. The in-house professional engineers have extensive experience in designing cost effective and durable concrete systems and in evaluating the condition of existing marine structures. Their engineering team provides recommendations to designers to produce highly durable maintenance/repair of concrete systems at the lowest cost.
The service life of exposed concrete structures is often shortened by unseen conditions not identified in visual inspections. The TCG laboratory is AASHTO Approved, US Army Corps Validated, US Navy Approved, and CCRL Compliant. TCG’s forensic and detailed laboratory investigations uncover conditions that, if addressed early, will lower life cycle maintenance costs. TCG experts will determine root causes for possible deterioration and recommend means to cost effectively repair and protect facility.
*Note: TCG is not scoped to complete work in this phase of work but is a key team member if more advanced material testing is determined to be valuable as a result of the initial assessment.
400
50 STAFF
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
LOCAL OFFICE
1630 San Pablo Avenue
Oakland, CA 94612
PORT OF
RICHMOND
EXPERIENCE
2000 YEAR FOUNDED
13 20
STAFF
YEARS EXPERIENCE
WITH M&N
Providing as-needed
services to M&N’s projects
requiring materials
testing.
490
5 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Team Organization
The organization chart below provides an overview
of the proposed team members and their respective
responsibilities. The chart illustrates the expected
flow of communication between the Port and M&N’s
Project Manager, Matt Trowbridge, as well as the
internal team structure. The relatively flat and efficient M&N team organizational structure lists the key
personnel proposed for this assignment. Each team
member has been selected for their demonstrated
ability to contribute towards a common set of goals
and objectives on the Port’s behalf.
This team has extensive experience working together
to complete similar waterfront facility inspections
and assessments throughout the West Coast, and
will complete the work using established processes
and best practices. The proposed team members and
necessary inspection equipment is readily available for this work, and M&N is committed to quickly deploying
the necessary resources as soon as the notice to
proceed (NTP) is issued.
PROJECT TEAM
Legend:
Moff att & Nichol
ENGEO
Tourney Consulting Group
Key Team Member
Port of Richmond
PROJECT MANAGER
Matt Trowbridge, PE, SE
SENIOR ENGINEERS / ADVISORS
Jim Brady, PE, SE
Coy Butler, PE
Bill Dubbs, PE
INSPECTION LEADS
Sean Hart, PE
Martin Anderson, PE, SE
MARINE STRUCTURAL LEADS
Azadeh Bozorgzadeh, PhD, PE
Turel Gur, PhD, PE
INSPECTION / PROJECT ENGINEERS
Wice Ibrahimi
Damilola Taiwo, PE
GEOTECHNICAL LEAD
Jeff Fippin, PE, GE
COST ESTIMATING LEADS
Jack Fink, PE
Jerry Neal, PE
MATERIALS TESTING
Kyle Stanish, PhD, FACI, PE, SE
Figure 2-1 M&N Team Organization Chart
STAFF EXPERTISE &
EXPERIENCE
Our Inspection & Rehabilitation (I&R) personnel are
experts in the inspection, condition assessment, and
rehabilitation design of the same marine structures
located at the Port’s facilities (e.g., concrete graving basins, marginal wharves, finger piers, etc.).
491
6 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
EDUCATION
MCE, Civil Engineering with
Structural Engineering Emphasis,
University of South Florida
BS, Civil Engineering, Rose-Hulman
Institute of Technology
REGISTRATION
PE: CA, Civil C78789
SE: CA, Structural S6197
Design-Build Professional:
Assoc. DBIA AS-3745
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Port of Lake Charles Portwide Assessment and Inspections, Lake Charles, LA. Project advisor & client manager to plan and execute two cycles of portwide inspections and assessments. The work included assessment of 15 marine terminals, identification of infrastructure needs, and development of planning estimates for required investments. Worked closely with the Port to develop a program to prioritize and implement improvements. Served as Engineer of Record to lead detailed engineering for several projects that were funded based on the condition assessment work.
Port of San Francisco Rapid Structural Inspections, San Francisco, CA. Project director for the above water inspection and condition assessment of 12 existing terminals on the San Francisco northern waterfront from the Hyde Street Harbor Fuel Dock to Pier 23.5. The work included rapid inspections of the above water / underdeck and above deck condition of the existing structures and recommended next steps for continued safe operation, additional investigations needed, or improvements required.
Phillips 66 Richmond Products Terminal Inspections, Richmond, CA. Project director for the above water, underwater, structural, electrical, mechanical, and corrosion system inspection of an existing marine oil terminal. Authored inspection report to document defects and recommend improvements to continue safe operations.
Port of Lake Charles, Berth 9 Rehabilitation, Lake Charles, LA. Project manager and engineer of record for a bulkhead wall inspection and rehabilitation / repair project. The wall rehabilitation design required a unique structural solution to allow Port vessel and terminal operations to continue without interruption during construction.
Port of Lake Charles Berth 4, 5, & 6 Mooring Upgrades, Lake Charles, LA. Project manager and structural lead for a mooring upgrade project to add new mooring bollards to an existing wharf to accommodate larger vessels.
AMPORTS Benicia Emergency Post-Event Inspection, Port of Benicia, CA. Project manager to lead an emergency post-event inspection after a fire event at the AMPORTS pet coke export berth in 2022. Mobilized inspection team day after event. Developed innovative repair approach and supported owner to secure emergency permits to install temporary improvements to restore operations while a permanent wharf reconstruction project could be permitted.
Port of Long Beach, Port-Wide Underwater Inspection and Monitoring On-Call Contract, Long Beach, CA. Assistant project manager and engineer-diver for underwater inspection at marine terminals. Provided on-call underwater inspection and monitoring services to assist Port staff’s implementation of corrosion preventative maintenance. The inspection program includes scheduled inspections of all Port waterfront assets and on-call/emergency inspections.
Matt leads multidisciplinary teams
in the assessment, investigation,
inspection, analysis, modeling,
design, and construction of
port infrastructure projects.
Matt regularly delivers projects
at operating terminals where
unique design and construction
solutions are required to minimize
impact to vessel and terminal
operations. He is a marine
structural engineer and spent
years as a structural inspector and
underwater engineer-diver. Matt
is experienced in evaluating the
condition of marine structures
and developing cost effective
repair and rehabilitation strategies.
He has extensive experience
in the design and construction
of auto, general cargo, liquid,
gas, container, and bulk marine
terminals. He has represented the
owner during major construction
projects and worked closely with
contractors, stakeholders, and
engineers to resolve construction
issues and deliver projects. He has
significant experience supporting
projects during procurement
and construction and has strong
relationships with west coast and
bay area contractors.
With 16 years of port infrastructure inspection, assessment, and rehabilitation experience, Matt brings a hands-on & fast paced approach to his projects. He is an expert in synthesizing inspection results and cost estimates into high level summaries for decision makers to prioritize infrastructure investments and maximize revenue.
MATTHEW TROWBRIDGE, PE, SE, ASSOC. DBIA
PROJECT MANAGER
492
7 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Coy is M&N’s leading expert on all things related to graving drydocks and shipyards. He has worked on many of the existing shipyards in the United States including US Navy shipyards along the East Coast shores in Virgina, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina. He is valuable resource of information related to port marine structures and will work closely with Matt to review any structural nuances.
COY BUTLER, PE
EDUCATION
MCE, Structural Engineering, North
Carolina State University
BS, Structural Engineering, Old
Dominion University
U.S. Department of Commerce
and State of Virginia Apprentice
Certificate, Hull Designer, Newport
News Shipbuilding and Drydock
Company, Newport News, Virginia
REGISTRATION
PE: NC
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Norfolk Naval Shipyard Dry Dock #1 Caisson Replacement, Portsmouth, VA. Senior structural engineer for both the design of repairs to the granite and concrete caisson seat at the dry dock’s east end and a new replacement caisson. The general purpose finite element analysis program NASTRAN was used to determine caisson loads on the seat as input to design of repairs to the damaged granite. For those repairs, Mr. Butler provided oversight and QC of the numerical modeling and repair design which included crack filling, grout joint repointing, and spall patching.
Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Dry Dock 3 Repair Valves, Operators, and Sluice Gates, Philadelphia, PA. Senior structural engineer for site investigation, engineering services, design, and construction document preparation to repair various valves, operators, sluice gates, stop logs, and incidental items at Dry Dock 3.
Charleston Naval Shipyard Dry Dock Flood Protection Study, Dry Docks 1, 2, and 5, Charleston, SC. Project engineer for study to determine the most cost effective and least operationally-disruptive means of “flood-proofing” the dry docks against a 100-yr return interval storm surge event. Dry dock 1 was built in 1908 using granite block construction.
Graving Dry Dock Failure Evaluation, Ingleside, TX. Senior structural engineer who evaluated a graving dry dock that had suffered a major failure of its hydrostatic relief system during dewatering which had resulted in heavy damage to the dry dock floor. He initially provided a site visit to view the failed dry dock and to collect available data on the original design and subsequent renovation/improvements made to the dry dock. Following the site visit, Mr. Butler performed structural analysis/evaluation of the dry dock’s original design and failure mechanisms.
Additional projects Mr. Butler has worked on include:
• Norfolk Naval Shipyard Modifications to Dry Docks 1, 2, 4 and 8, Portsmouth, Virginia
• Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Dry Docks 2–5 Capstans Replacement, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
• Ocean Transport Barge (OTB) Piers, Newport News Naval Shipyard, Newport News, Virginia
• Dynamic Mooring Analysis, Conditional Facility Certification Report, Guam Shipyard, Santa Rita, Guam
• Fort McHenry Shipyard Conversion, Baltimore, Maryland • Structural Repair & Fuel System Replacement, Pier H, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
• Charleston Naval Shipyard Piers S, T, and U Modernization and Upgrade of Mooring and Fendering Systems, North Charleston, South Carolina Mr. Butler is a senior structural
engineer with more than 52 years
of experience acquired on a variety
of structural and civil engineering
projects. His experience includes
10 years’ experience with a
shipbuilding and dry dock
company for which he provided
strength analyses, design,
and construction document
preparation. He provides in-depth
structural analysis, design, and
construction documents review
for large and deep foundations
associated with those structures.
SENIOR ENGINEERS & ADVISORS
493
8 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Jim is M&N’s senior structural engineer in Northern California. Having spent his career working in the Bay Area marine industry, his depth of knowledge on port structures and engineering design will provide an added value to the team.
JIM BRADY , PE, SE
SENIOR ENGINEERS & ADVISORS
EDUCATION
MS, Structural Engineering,
University of California, Berkeley
BS, Civil Engineering, University of
California, Berkeley
REGISTRATION
PE: CA, Civil C30246
PE: CA, Structural S3652
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
AMPORTS Pier 95 Reconstruction, Benicia, CA. Project engineer who developed alternative designs to replace an existing 110-foot by 800-foot section of a timber pier destroyed by fire. Completed the final design of the selected alternative: 24-inch octagonal prestressed concrete piles supporting post-tensioned girders and precast deck planks. Project included extensive seismic analysis and design work to meet the California State Lands Commission Marine Oil Terminals requirements.
Chevron Long Wharf 2010 MOTEMS Support, Richmond, CA. The scope of this project is to complete an internal inspection of the Chevron Richmond Deepwater Outfall Pipeline (DWOP) to allow Chevron to maintain the DWOP lease with California State Lands Commission (CSLC) allowing the Chevron Richmond Refinery to continue disposing of treated process water into the San Francisco Bay.
Widening of Inner Harbor Turning Basin, Port of Oakland, CA. Directed design of tall sheet pile retaining structures for the Inner Harbor Turning Basin Widening project. The 70-foot long walls were also designed for seismic loading. Developed and analyzed various anchoring systems along the length of the wall to accommodate numerous interferences along the wall alignment.
Ninth Avenue Terminal, Oakland, CA. Developed alternative concepts and cost estimates for the seismic retrofit of an old timber and concrete wharf.
Work included evaluation of shed loads to the wharf structure.
Golden Gate Ferry Terminal Improvements, San Francisco Bay, CA. Structural Engineer for modification to the three Golden Gate ferry terminals to accommodate ADA guidelines. The modifications require the replacement of the existing ferry vessel access facilities. The project has involved developing terminal alternatives, including costs and environmental issues associated with each alternative.
Jim has over 40 years of structural
experience focused primarily of
transportation facilities (bridges
and port facilities) which includes
vehicular bridges, railroad
bridges, wharves and piers,
ferry terminals, and offshore
structures. He has also performed
waterfront structure’s inspection
to evaluate structural adequacy
for requirements of the California
State Lands MOTEMS policy. He
has lead and supervised engineers
in design and analysis for various
types of structures including
loading arms for wharves, fixed
and floating structures, ferry
terminals, off-loading facilities,
railroad structures, and seismic
retrofit for bridges.
494
9 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
As M&N’s West Coast I&R lead, Bill guides inspection teams and manages major projects related to marine, port, and waterfront infrastructure. He is familiar with ports of all sizes and has designed structural repairs/rehab for commercial, naval, and industrial ports throughout the world. His expertise in structural engineering and rehab options will provide tremendous value to the team.
BILL DUBBS, PE
SENIOR ENGINEER / INSPECTION
EDUCATION
BS, Structural Engineering,
University of California at San Diego
REGISTRATION
PE: CA, Civil C75931
CERTIFICATIONS
TWIC – US Dept. of Homeland
Security
Merchant Mariner Document –
USA000040313 (100GT Master)
ADCI Commercial Diver and
Supervisor (USA)
Construction Quality Management
– U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
NAVFAC
EM-385 40-hr Construction Hazard
Awareness Safety Training
OSHA 30-hr Construction Safety
and Health
Current CPR/1st-Aid/Emergency
Oxygen Administration
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Fender System Upgrade at North Berth of B Street Pier, San Diego Unified Port District.
Served as the Project Manager and design lead for this significant project at the port’s preferred cruise ship terminal slip. The project included the preparation of plans, specifications, and cost estimates for the replacement of the existing fender system at the North Berth of the B St. Pier. Three design concepts were presented to the District for review with discussion of each.
Site Inspection and Pier Repair Design for Imperial Beach Pier, San Diego Unified Port District. As Team Leader, conducted a comprehensive above water and below water structural and utility inspection of the iconic Imperial Beach Pier. Bill compiled the inspection data and delivered a comprehensive report of the team’s findings, along with repair recommendations and cost estimates.
POLB, Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment Services. Engineer-diver and inspection team leader participated in the inspection of particular POLB facilities, above and below water inspection, condition assessment, and rehabilitation design development. Services included routine inspection of above and below water elements of Port facilities, including piles, steel and concrete sheet pile bulkheads, pile repairs (jackets, wrappings), steel coatings and corrosion protection, slope protection systems, and wharf appurtenances such as bollards, cleats, fender systems and safety ladders.
Valero Crude Oil Terminal MOTEMS Audit, Benicia, CA. Boat operator and diver for the underwater inspection of over 300 concrete filled steel pipe piles, located in the challenging stretch of water known as the Carquinez Straight. Inspection included 100% Level 1, 10% Level 2, and 5% Level 3.
Structural Engineer responsible for the seismic and structural analysis of the pier. Hand calculations and non-linear models (demand and push-over) were executed to demonstrate the structural integrity of the 40-year-old concrete and steel structure.
Broadway Pier, San Diego, CA. Involved in eight separate above- and below-water repair construction inspections to ensure quality control specifications were in compliance. Also authored “Guide to Inspecting Pile Repairs at Broadway Pier,” an instructional pamphlet providing the client with inspection guidance for their in-house divers.
Scripps Institute of Oceanography MARFAC Berthing Pier Replacement Program.
Project Manager and primary designer for the development and production of Detailed Project Program for the modernization and replacement of a berthing wharf and pier. The project required close interaction with agencies including partial landowner US Navy, USACE, California Coastal Commission, Port of San Diego, and Department of Fish and Wildlife. The program ultimately served as the bidding document for the full-design contract.
Bill leads inspection and
rehabilitation projects for clients
that include the U.S. Navy; Ports
of San Diego, Long Beach, Los
Angeles, and San Francisco;
Cities of Coronado, Oceanside,
and San Diego, as well as
major oil companies, private
marinas, and terminal operators.
Bill leads a team of talented
and experienced inspection
engineers that are trained and
certified to perform many types
of underwater and above water
inspections. In addition to I&R, Bill
performs followup engineering
design for structures requiring
extension to service life, re-
purposing, and upgrades for
modern code compliance.
495
10 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Sean is our local inspection and rehabilitation (I&R) lead. He will plan and execute the inspection work.
SEAN HART, PE
INSPECTION LEAD
EDUCATION
MS, Structural Engineering,
California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo
BS, Civil Engineering, California
State University, Chico
BS, Construction Management,
California State University, Chico
REGISTRATION
PE: CA, Civil C88079
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
POSF Pier 27 Fender Emergency Repairs. Project Manager and lead design engineer of replacement fender structure.
Port of SF Rapid Assessments. Project Manager and Inspection lead for Rapid structural inspection and evaluation of POSF infrastructure (Piers and Wharves).
Stabilize Alcatraz Wharf. Project Manager and lead structural designer.
Provided structural inspection, design and construction support for the rehabilitation and seismic upgrade of the Alcatraz Fixed Wharf.
Johnson Pier. Design of Pier expansion and repairs to existing structural concrete elements.
Avila Pier Inspection. Led inspection, evaluation, and retrofit design of timber ocean pier including the development of priority level of repairs to allow the most critical repairs to proceed as funding is made available.
Harford Pier Assessment. Structural assessment of timber ocean pier and timber superstructure. Preliminary design of retrofits to both pier and canopy superstructure.
Hornblower Pier 3 Float. Provided design and construction support for the retrofit of existing guide piles and the replacement of the existing float.
WETA Emergency Response Inspection. Engineer providing as needed rapid post event structural inspections of WETA terminal facilities within the Bay Area.
Chevron Eureka MOTEMS. Inspection lead for above water inspection of timber and steel pile supported structures.
KM Richmond MOTEMS. Inspection lead for above water inspection of concrete tanker and barge wharf structures
Golden Gate Ferry Emergency Repairs. Emergency post event inspection of Ferry terminal facility and repair design and construction support.
Bair Island Marina. Inspection and evaluation of corroded sheet pile wall system, retrofit design and construction support of the marina steel sheet pile wall and steel waler system
Chevron RLW WMEP . Ongoing inspection and repair design of structural elements within the RLW facility.
Chevron RLW Construction Support for MOTEMS Repairs. Provided construction support activities for structural deficiencies requiring repair identified in the above water and below water of MOTEMS Audit inspection.
Georgia Ports Authority Crane Tie Down Upgrades at CB1 & CB 9. Engineer performed analysis of wharf structure and design of crane beam retrofits to accommodate ship to shore container crane upgrades.
Georgia Ports Authority CB4-CB7 Upgrades. Structural Engineer design fender upgrades along with other structural upgrades.
Sean has ten years of experience
focused on structural & marine
projects. He leads facility
inspection & rehabilitation projects
at ports throughout the Bay area.
Sean is also a structural engineer
with expertise in developing PS&E
and construction bid documents
for upgrades of marine structures.
496
11 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Jeff’s prior experience at the Port of Richmond will provide rapid assessment and integration of geotechnical parameters.
JEFF FIPPIN, PE, GE
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
EDUCATION
MS, Civil Engineering, Specializing
in Geotechnical Engineering,
University of Texas at Austin
BS, Civil and Environmental
Engineering University of California
at Davis
REGISTRATION
PE: CA, Civil C58935
Geotechnical Engineer: CA-GE 2631
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Port of Richmond Terminal 4, Richmond, CA. Principal in Charge. Jeff performed the peer review and was the primary point of contact with the Port of Richmond, City of Richmond staff, and California Coastal Conservancy staff. Jeff also assisted in explaining the proposed mitigation to BCDC staff. ENGEO performed a third-party peer review of revetment design associated with the removal of facilities at the Port of Richmond’s Terminal 4 site. During construction, the revetment moved significantly. ENGEO was retained to review documents from design as well as Contractor submittals and construction logs. ENGEO participated in field observations during test pits into the revetment and provided opinion on the cause of revetment movement and mitigation.
Port of Richmond Terminal One Redevelopment, Richmond, CA. Project Manager.
Jeff provided technical oversight of the analyses and the report. The Latitude project is an approximately 13-acre site located at the closed Terminal One of the Port of Richmond. The site was originally used for shipping and transport, warehouse utilities, storage, and other port-related industrial activities. Most buildings and structures have been demolished and removed from the project site; remaining is an approximately 94,000-square-foot port operations warehouse building (the Terminal One Warehouse) that sits partially on a 480 foot long marginal pier (the Terminal One Pier) constructed in 1915. To address seismic shoreline stability, a deep soil mix buttress will be constructed along the shoreline.
BP Richmond MOTEMS Evaluation, Richmond, CA. Project Manager. Jeff directed staff performing field exploration, performed foundation and stability analyses, and wrote the geotechnical report. Included in the requirements of MOTEMS is the assessment of mooring/berthing and seismic performance at existing and new marine oil terminals. Built in the 1950s, the terminal consists of an approximately 42-foot-wide, 242-foot- long pile-supported concrete Tanker Wharf, connected to shore by two approximately 20-foot-wide by 60-foot-long pile-supported concrete causeways. The concrete Tanker Wharf is supported on 16-inch-diameter octagonal prestressed concrete piles consisting of 75- and 80-foot-long plumb piles and 87-foot-long batter piles.
Jeff has performed Geotechnical Engineer of Record services on other relevant projects, including:
• IMTT Terminal MOTEMS Audit and Emergency Pile Repairs, Richmond, CA
• Plains MOTEMS Audit, Richmond, CA
• Chevron Richmond Refinery Wharf Geotechnical Peer Review, Richmond, CA
• Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Dredging Analysis, Richmond, CA • Richmond Marina Point Development, Richmond, CA
Jeff brings 28 years of engineering
expertise focused on the
geotechnical services including
soft ground engineering,
liquefaction evaluation, seismic
site response, slope stability,
deep foundation design, ground
improvement, value engineering,
and structural construction. Jeff’s
experience with Port of Richmond
projects includes the role as the
geotechnical lead on projects such
as Terminal 4, Terminal 2 Dredge
Evaluation, and Terminal One
Redevelopment.
497
12 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Jack’s 35 years of estimating and engineering experience for ports and marine infrastructure, including older Bay area ports and dry docks, will provide cost estimates that consider the Port’s long-term planning priorities and programmatic goals.
JACK FINK, PE
COST ESTIMATOR
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering, Texas A&M
University
REGISTRATION
PE: CA, Civil C60931
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Alcatraz Fixed Wharf Structural Repair, San Francisco, CA. Cost estimator/ scheduler. M&N was retained to evaluate the structural capacity of the wharf and to develop a repair design for the deteriorated concrete structure (beams, slabs, and piles). At each design submittal, a cost estimate and construction schedule were provided, using the NPS cost estimating format and requirements. Construction Cost: $30M.
Port of San Francisco Pier 92 Fender Design. Cost Estimator for construction of fender repair project for marginal wharf with semi-permanent mooring of aggregate transport barge. New fender elements incorporated discrete fenders using composite piles and floating fenders which are supported with a new steel wale frame built onto the existing timber pier structure.
Port of Long Beach, Pier B On-Dock Rail Support Facility East Expansion, Long Beach, CA. Lead cost estimator/construction scheduler for 800-feet of new retaining walls. The cost estimate included the excavation of existing bank material, demolition and removal of a portion of the existing concrete retaining wall, construction of a new steel king pile/sheet pile retaining wall, installation of ground anchor tiebacks, installation of CIDH piles, installation of a concrete facing on the steel retaining wall, backfill, and miscellaneous utility work. Cost estimates were performed for three separate stretches of the new retaining wall, each with their own access issues and existing utility crossings. Construction Cost: $21.7M.
MOTCO Replace/Upgrade Pier 2 Concord, CA. Task leader for the construction cost estimate and schedule for replacement of Pier 2 including landside facilities. This $90M project was recently bid and the engineer’s estimate was within 3% of the low bid contractor.
Port of Oakland Berths 55-59 Wharf Upgrades, Oakland, CA. Performed quality control check on cost estimate and construction schedule for the design to upgrade existing container wharf facilities at Berth 55-59 to accommodate ultra-large container vessels (ULCVs) of 24,000 TEU capacity.
Golden Gate Ferry Terminal Improvements, San Francisco, CA. Lead cost estimator.
This project involved the construction of both new and temporary ferry terminal facilities for the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway, and Transportation District.
Vopak Terminal Los Angeles Berths 187-190 MOTEMS Compliance Upgrade, Los Angeles, CA. Lead cost estimator/scheduler for the design of a seismic upgrade to an existing marine oil terminal within the Port of Los Angeles to comply with the Marine Oil Terminals Engineering and Maintenance (MOTEMS).
Jack is a senior estimator at M&N
bringing a wealth of knowledge
of older Ports and Bay area marine
infrastructure. Jack possesses
a comprehensive background
in hard dollar cost estimating
and opinions of probable costs,
combined with engineering,
constructability analysis, and
construction management.
498
13 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
3. Project Experience
As the largest dedicated marine terminal engineering
firm in the US, we have an unmatched history in the
inspection, assessment, and repair/rehabilitation
engineering design of waterfront facilities and port
infrastructure. Recent relevant projects are presented in the table below. Our six representative project examples provided on the following pages demonstrate our
proven success delivering projects with a similar scope of work.
EXCEEDING THE
EVALUATION CRITERIA
DEMONSTRATED EXPERIENCE IN TEAM MEMBERS
WITH ASSESSING CONDITIONS OF 1940’S ERA
MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE.
All of the projects presented below in which our
key team members have direct experience were
constructed in or before the 1940s.
No Project Location Year Built
Condition Assessment
Inspection
Historical
Budget Constraints
Repairs
UpgradesKey Team Members
1 Port of Lake Charles Portwide
Inspection & Upgrades
Lake Charles, LA 1920s Matt Trowbridge
2 Alcatraz Wharf Condition
Assessment & Repairs
San Francisco, CA 1940s Sean Hart, Jack Fink 3 Port of San Francisco Rapid
Structural Assessments
San Francisco, CA pre WWII Matt Trowbridge, Sean Hart, Jack Fink
4 Port of Benicia Inspections &
Repairs
Benicia, CA 1940s Matt Trowbridge,
Turel Gur
5 Port of San Diego Condition
Inspections & Repairs
San Diego, CA 1900s-1960s Bill Dubbs, Martin
Anderson
6 Port of Long Beach Underwa-
ter Inspection On-Call
Long Beach, CA pre WWII Matt Trowbridge, Bill
Dubbs
Table 3-1 M&N team experience in port assessment & upgrades 499
14 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
PORT OF LAKE CHARLES PORT-WIDE INSPECTIONS & UPGRADES
CLIENT
Port of Lake Charles
CONTRACT START/END DATES
2015-2022
REFERENCE
Nick Pestello, Director of
Engineering, Maintenance, &
Development
Lake Charles Harbor & Terminal
District, [email protected],
(337) 493-3627
Established in 1924 by the Louisiana state legislature and officially opened in November 1930, the Port of Lake Charles is a deep draft coastal port home to 40 industrial tenants. M&N was retained to perform two cycles of comprehensive assessments of the Port’s City Docks Terminals (12 deep water berths, 200 acres), Bulk Terminal 1 (BT-1), and Bulk Terminal 4 (BT-4) with the goal of establishing baseline conditions and overall condition ratings for each berth.
M&N conducted above and underwater inspections, acoustic imaging and bathymetry surveys. The resulting condition assessment report provided detailed descriptions of each facility, overall condition ratings, images highlighting typical defects, and bathymetric surveys. As part of the Condition Assessment, recommendations for repairs and cost estimates were prepared, prioritized by urgency and grouped by repair type. Across all sites, M&N provided thorough assessments and actionable recommendations. The results of the portwide inspection work was a prioritized list of repair and upgrade projects. M&N worked closely with the Port to plan and execute the repair and upgrade projects. An example of one of the repair and upgrade projects completed after the portwide inspections is shown below.
Port of Lake Charles, Berth 9 Bulkhead Wall Reconstruction Berth 9 consists of a transit shed to support bagged rice export operations partially supported on land and partially supported over water. The shed substructure consists of a tied back steel bulkhead wall with a concrete pile supported slab landside of the wall and a timber wharf waterside of the wall. During inspection, M&N identified significant defects in the existing steel bulkhead wall requiring high-priority repairs.
The bulkhead wall typically had severe defects, including 100 percent section loss at previous tie-rod locations every eight feet.
Repairing or replacing the failing bulkhead wall was essential; however, so was keeping the terminal operational during construction. M&N developed an innovative repair approach to replace the wall working within the existing shed overhead clearance restrictions. This consisted of installing 24-inch diameter helical piles torqued to capacity to laterally support a concrete wall installed in front of the existing wall. This approach met the Port’s budget constraints and allowed operations to continue without interruption during construction.
500
15 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
ALCATRAZ WHARF CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND REPAIRS
CLIENT
Golden Gate National Parks
Conservancy
CONTRACT START/END DATES
2016-2021
REFERENCE
David Dusterhoff, PMP ,
Construction Control
Representative, Alcatraz,
[email protected],
(415) 317-2152
M&N was contracted by the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy in San Francisco to assess and develop a comprehensive repair and retrofit plan for Alcatraz Wharf. The project aimed to address the deteriorating conditions of the wharf while preserving its historical integrity and ensuring it remains operational for daily visitors and staff. The project began with a thorough review of existing documentation related to the Alcatraz waterfront structure and fixed wharf, focusing on historical records of the wharf’s construction, previous repairs, and modifications, particularly the limited repairs and seismic strengthening conducted in 2001.
Field investigations involved both above-water and underwater inspections to evaluate the wharf's current conditions. Above-water inspections were carried out by boat and by walking along the shoreline during low tide, focusing on visual assessments of the deck slabs, beams, and fenders. Underwater inspections were performed by engineer divers. Following the inspections, a detailed condition assessment was prepared. Based on the findings, M&N conducted an analysis to predict the remaining life of the concrete structures. This analysis informed the development of repair and retrofit alternatives, each with associated cost estimates, recommended contingencies, and projected repair intervals.
Four alternatives were compared, focusing on seismic retrofitting and minimizing the impact on the historical fabric and daily operations.
A value-based analysis was performed to select the preferred alternative, considering the impact on the historical significance of the wharf, visitor accessibility, repair longevity, and overall cost-effectiveness. The selected alternative offered the least disruption to the historical site while ensuring longer intervals between necessary repairs. The project included seismic design elements and extended the wharf's service life by at least 50 years.
M&N developed detailed design documents, conducted value engineering assessments, and coordinated with the NPS Denver Service Center to facilitate permitting. The project also included a fender pile replacement for the Alcatraz Wharf and mooring analyses for both the Wharf and the Alcatraz Landing in San Francisco.
By leveraging a thorough understanding of the wharf's historical significance and applying modern engineering techniques, M&N has ensured that the Alcatraz Wharf will continue to serve as a critical access point for the island, balancing preservation with necessary modernization.
501
16 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO RAPID STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENTS
CLIENT
Port of San Francisco
CONTRACT START/END DATES
2023-Ongoing
REFERENCE
Matthew Bell, Senior Structural
Engineer, matthew.n.bell@sfport.
com, (415) 606-4459
The POSF’s Rapid Structural Assessment (RSA) Program is critical to ensuring the safety and functionality of over-water structures within the Port’s waterfront jurisdiction. This program involves recurring inspections to assess the structural integrity of critical infrastructure, focusing on deck framing and the above-water portions of piles. The RSA inspections are typically conducted from a boat at low tide, allowing for detailed visual assessments.
M&N was contracted to perform RSA inspections for 12 existing facilities along the Port’s northern waterfront. The substructures, primarily constructed of concrete and timber, were evaluated for general structural conditions and potential safety risks. The inspections included a comprehensive review of original construction drawings and any subsequent modifications, informed by past RSA reports and other relevant inspection documents provided by the Port. The site inspections were conducted using an inspection skiff during low tide, with M&N staff performing thorough visual inspections and recording observations and photographs. Where accessible, inspections were also conducted on foot. The inspection scope was guided by ASCE MOP 130 - Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment (2016), which served as the primary reference for organizing and documenting the RSA report.
Key components of the RSA reports included visual inspection, condition assessment, and a summary report. Each structure was assigned a color- coded rating in accordance with the ATC-20-1 Field Manual’s Posting System and Rapid Evaluation Method. This rating system included areas where original design live loads may need to be restricted or lowered ("yellow tag") and areas deemed unsafe for any access ("red tag").
Pier 43.5 Bay Trail Link Substructure – 2023
10 Photo 2. Typical pile-deck connection. Note pile offset buildup.
Photo 3. Deck soffit with pile grid
Pier 43.5 Bay Trail Link Substructure – 2023
10 Photo 2. Typical pile-deck connection. Note pile offset buildup.
Photo 3. Deck soffit with pile grid
M&N inspection staff conduct above-water inspections of deck soffit and piles.
M&N inspection staff conduct on site assessment of
typical pile to deck connections.
502
17 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
PORT OF BENICIA INSPECTIONS & REPAIRS
CLIENT
AMPORTS and Valero Benicia
CONTRACT START/END DATES
2000 & 2022
REFERENCE
Tia Youk, Manager of Project
Engineering, tia.youk@valero.
com, (707) 745-7841
The Port of Benicia has several berths serving the automobile import, agricultural import/export, and liquid and bulk material cargo import/ export for the Valero Benicia refinery. The facility in use today was originally designed and constructed in three phases beginning in 1941, and has been expanded, upgraded, and repaired numerous times. The AMPORTS Benicia Wharf structure consists of a concrete and timber wharf with three docks, a timber trestle, a steel Shiploader and Hopper, and a mooring dolphin.
Following two fire events at the Port, M&N served as Engineer of Record and provided inspections and development of repair/replacement documents.
AMPORTS Pier 95 Reconstruction
M&N initially evaluated the fire damage that occurred in the early 2000’s on this 110-foot-by-800-foot section of a timber pier, then developed replacement alternatives and completed final design. M&N also acted as the owner’s representative for the preparation of all bid documents, handled the bidding process, and served as the construction manager for this project. The replacement involved extensive construction cost estimating, by M&N, to meet the client’s budgetary restraints. Cost estimates were made from the conceptual level through the final design. M&N’s construction cost estimate was within 2% of the low bid.
The final design consisted of 24-inch octagonal prestressed concrete piles supported with post-tensioned girders and precast deck planks, and included all marine hardware required for ship mooring. The pier was also outfitted with a new fender system, a fire suppression system, electrical works, potable water and sewer systems, and extensive seismic analysis and design work.
AMPORTS Petroleum Coke Dock Emergency Repairs
In 2022, the Valero Lower Dock Silos and the AMPORTS Wharf at the Port of Benicia in Benicia, CA, were affected by a fire. M&N was contracted by Valero to perform a Post Event Inspection of the AMPORTS wharf to develop emergency repairs for the Shiploader and mooring and berthing systems. The day after the fire and through the weekend, M&N inspection staff were onsite performing a post event inspection. M&N completed above water inspections and determined that the concrete structures were largely unaffected by the fire, but the timber members sustained significant damage.
Based on the findings from the inspection, M&N provided a comprehensive report detailing the condition of the structure and prioritized repair recommendations. M&N worked closely with Valero and AMPORTS to permit an emergency repair project to return the petroleum coke export operations within 15 weeks of the fire event.
M&N served as Engineer of Record for the repairs, which included demolition of existing damaged structures, installation of new floating berthing structures, wharf strengthening at berthing point locations, and vertical/lateral retrofit at the shiploader structure.
503
18 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
M&N has provided the Port with above and below water
inspection, condition assessment, and rehabilitation design services under on-call contracts since the early 1980s. Most of these projects have involved significant inspection, repair design, and programmatic studies in support of increasing the service life of the District’s aging waterfront infrastructure. Many of the projects have required design-level above- and below-water inspections culminating in construction documents for repair, rehabilitation, and replacement. Many of the District’s heavy commercial facilities were originally constructed in the early 1900s up to the mid 1960’s. Some key projects that spotlight M&N’s depth of services are described below.
Broadway Pier and Port Pavilion - Modernization of a 1913 pier structure to support a new $21 million interim cruise ship terminal/ conference facility. The work included planning; above- and below- water inspection; and plans, and specifications and estimates (PS&E) for structure repair. The work also included seismic retrofit of a 100-year-old concrete pier, and design of a bonded concrete structural deck overlay to improve load capacity, with follow-on construction engineering services.
B Street Pier - Preparation of bid documents (PS&E) for the replacement of the existing fender system for the
1923-constructed facility that services cruise ships. The design incorporated underwater inspection of the existing fender system and demolition of the existing fender system. Project also included bid-phase services and construction support services.
Other projects include design efforts for implementation of a combination of anchored sheet pile wall and deep soil mixing ground improvement techniques to stabilize the aged structure.
National City Marine Terminal – Constructed in the 1960’s, the concrete structures comprising the berths at the terminal are approaching the end of their service life. The District has contracted M&N for engineering efforts to initiate and/or complete the design for rehabilitation of Berth 24-11 and Berths 24-3/4. Initial efforts included prioritized repair recommendations based on damages observed and assessment of the condition. Laboratory analysis of concrete core samples extracted from key locations was performed to determine the exact nature of the cement chemistry distress. Rehabilitation of all berths were assigned rehabilitation priority based on condition assessment. Projects culminated in rehabilitation design of Berths 24-11 and 24-34 with structural concrete pile repairs, replacement concrete deck construction, and design of electrical shorepower infrastructure.
Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal – The terminal structure is primarily composed of a mole pier protected by a cyclopean wall, with construction complete in 1957. M&N has performed numerous studies and structural analysis involving crane load capacities, dredging, heavy-lift operations, and electrical upgrades.
CLIENT
San Diego Unified Port District
CONTRACT START/END DATES
1980s - current
REFERENCE
Ernie Medina, Chief Engineer
[email protected], (619)
686-6200
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, AS-NEEDED MARINE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 504
19 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
PORT OF LONG BEACH, ON-CALL
ENGINEERING WATERFRONT FACILITIES
INSPECTION & ASSESSMENT SERVICES
M&N has provided the Port with above and below water
inspection, condition assessment, and rehabilitation
design services under on-call contracts since 2013.
M&N’s services under the current Waterfront Facilities
Inspection and Assessment On-Call include routine
inspection of above and below water elements of Port
facilities, including all pile types (concrete, steel, timber, plastic), steel and concrete sheet pile bulkheads, pile repairs (jackets, wrappings), steel coatings and corrosion protection, slope protection systems, and wharf
appurtenances such as bollards, cleats, fender systems
and safety ladders.
Our engineer-divers assign element-level damage ratings for each defect and provide general measurements
and supporting photographic documentation. Each
inspection assignment includes a detailed report
providing structural assessment discussion and analysis, with supporting defect tables and defect location
drawings.
This contract includes routine inspections completed
on a regular cycle, post-construction inspections, and
post-event emergency inspections as a result of incident or damage. M&N is a key partner to support the Port
to maintain and enhance the structural integrity of the Port’s waterfront facilities through thorough inspections and detailed engineering services.
CLIENT
Port of Long Beach
CONTRACT START/END DATES
2013 - current
REFERENCE
Joel Aguilar, PE, SE, Assistant Director, Engineering
Design Division, [email protected], (562) 283-
7882
505
20 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
4. Leveraging Marine
Infrastructure Experience
EXCEEDING THE
EVALUATION CRITERIA
DEMONSTRATED EXPERIENCE IN TEAM MEMBERS
WITH ASSESSING CONDITIONS OF 1940’S ERA
MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE.
The table below shows 12 similar ports / marine
terminals that M&N team members worked on
that were constructed in or before the 1940s.
M&N offers the Port a team with extensive experience
leading condition assessments, inspections, repairs,
rehabilitations and upgrade programs for marine
infrastructure projects. M&N was founded in 1945 to help build up the Navy Shipyards in Long Beach and served
as the design engineer for many west coast marine
infrastructure projects since the 1940s. We have been
involved in thousands of projects working on 1940s (and older) marine infrastructure. Table 4-1 provides a list of M&N Bay Area projects that were constructed in the
1940s (or earlier).
Project Name Year Constructed Location Services Provided Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO) 1940s Concord Water Front Engineering Record for 30 years, Wharf Inspections, Repair and Replacement Plans, Design
and Construction Support
Naval Weapons Station Concord, Pier 3 1942 Concord Condition Assessment, Geotechnical Field Investiga- tion, Design of Replacement and Upgrade Service
Port of Benicia and AMPORTS Terminal 1940’s Benicia Post Event Inspection, Structural Assessment, Engi- neering Design Development
Alcatraz Island Waterfront Infrastructure 1940s San Francisco Condition Inspection, Maintenance, Long-term Repair and Replacement Plans, Seismic Retrofitting
Chevron, Richmond Long Wharf Early 1900s, late
1940s
Richmond Regular Inspections, Condition Assessments, R&R Design, Construction Support
Mare Island Dry Docks 1854 and Pre-
WWII
Vallejo Condition Inspection, Maintenance, Repair and
Replacement Plans Service
Port of San Francisco (POSF) Piers Pre-WWII San Francisco Rapid Structural Assessment (RSA), Condition Inspec- tions, Field Investigations, Design of Repairs, Seismic Upgrades, Construction Support
Port of Stockton Pre-WWII Stockton Condition Inspection, Bridge Inspections, Repair and Replacement Plans Service
Alameda Naval Station Pre-WWII Alameda Condition Inspection, Maintenance, Repair and Replacement of Finger Piers for Naval Ships
Fort Mason Piers Pre-WWII San Francisco Condition Assessment and Design of Repairs Hartford Pier Pre-WWII Avila Beach Conditional Inspection, Repair Design, Field Investi- gation, Construction Support
Avila Pier Repair 1908, 1987 Avila Beach Conditional Inspection, Repair Design, Field Investi- gation, Construction Support
Table 4-1 M&N team experience providing similar services at ports constructed in the early 1900s. 506
21 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
At M&N, delivering marine engineering projects is
our core business. We employ the largest and most
experienced group of specialized marine structural
engineers and port planning professionals in the
United States. Our staff’s combined experience will be
leveraged to support the Port on this assignment. We
regularly work on marine infrastructure where limited
to no information is available. Especially during the
planning phase, where funding is limited, we will
employ the following strategies to overcome lack of
existing information:
• Review M&N library to determine if as-builts are
already on file from previous work.
• Check with operators/tenants and contractors to
see if they have record files.
• Involve a local senior engineer to support the
project (e.g., Jim Brady has 47 years of experience
working on bay area marine infrastructure
projects).
• Involve our company expert on graving basins /
dry docks to support the project (Coy Butler has
52 years of experience and supported hundreds
similar projects for former shipyards).
• Host an Independent Technical Review (ITR)
workshop – M&N regularly organizes independent
technical review teams comprised of senior marine
engineers from offices across the company to be
involved in complex projects or for situations like
this project (old structures, lack of existing data,
etc.). These workshops are covered on company
overhead and not charged to the client. These
workshops provide significant value early in a
project as they serve to share knowledge and
lessons learned from other similar projects and
serve to identify the best path forward.
M&N engineers have significant field inspection
experience. The same engineers that lead the
inspection lead the development of repair and
rehabilitation plans. This results in efficiencies, reduces errors and inconsistencies, and provides valuable
training for our engineers to learn best practices and
repair and detailing approaches. For example, our
proposed Project Manager, Matt Trowbridge, spent
years as an inspector and a certified commercial diver
and now regularly works on marine infrastructure
design and rehabilitation projects.
M&N employs cost estimators that spent most
of their careers working for marine contractors.
Our estimators use the same estimating approach
as contractors, regularly check material pricing,
and coordinate closely with marine contractors on
equipment, approaches, and means and methods.
The cost estimators assigned to this project (Jack
Fink and Jerry Neal) are local to the bay area and are
two of the most experienced estimators at M&N. This
experience will lead to improved accuracy in the cost
estimates.
Although M&N staff have the capabilities to perform
advanced investigations and specialized material
testing – our approach is only to recommend those
approaches where it is truly necessary. Many times
infrastructure owners are sold expensive investigation
and testing programs when they are not necessary.
This program is in an early stage and therefore
detailed investigation and specialized testing is not
warranted. Our approach will be to leverage our
experience and expertise to cost effectively develop
a program with prioritizations and budgetary cost
estimates that will be adequate for the Port and City
to progress planning.
LEVERAGING A
PROVEN APPROACH
The M&N team brings strategies for every phase
of the project based on past projects and lessons
learnt. Our inspection/engineer staff have an
excellent grasp of waterfront structure design and
construction methods. So even if older structures
have minimal plan sets or are lacking complete
records, our team can proceed based on the
results of inspections, available records, and prior
experience working on similar structures.
A narrative detailing how your experience with similar marine infrastructure will help establish conditions and priorities when little existing data may be available. As a small port with limited funding, the Port is interested in how your team’s experience can be leveraged to develop a rehabilitation plan with limited expense.
507
22 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Project Understanding
The Port of Richmond is undertaking a critical effort to assess the existing infrastructure at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal. This assessment will serve to inform the Port’s strategic plan and support the City of Richmond’s goal to sustain and grow Port operations. The condition assessment includes Berths 7-8 (Auto Terminal), Berths
5-6 (Lay Berth), Graving Basins, and Finger Piers. Recently under new leadership, the Port’s priorities include
projects to improve safety and security, providing
division between port operations and public amenities
and attractions, and completing long term planning
to expand port operations. The first step to long term
planning is to complete this condition assessment to
determine infrastructure needs, priorities, budgetary
estimates, and opportunities for expanded operations.
Port of Richmond is a smaller port with limited funding so all work performed on this contract must provide
significant value.
The Kaiser Richmond shipyards, constructed in the
1940s, played a significant role in supporting the war
effort during World War II. In 2009, the Port converted the facilities into a state-of-the-art roll-on / roll-off (RoRo) automobile import terminal operated by the Auto
Warehousing Company. It is critical that operations at
Berths 7-8, are maintained as this is the Port’s primary revenue generating asset at Point Potrero. The Port has observed the following conditions to be studied in more detail during this assessment:
• Area of settlement (approximately 6” over two years)
between Berths 6 and 7
• Erosion and loss of fill material landside of the
concrete wharf at Berths 5 and 6
• Areas of reduced load capacity and erosion / sinkholes landside of wharf at Berths 7 and 8
• Graving basins do not have load ratings
• Finger pier as-built conditions are unknown
5. Scope of Work
508
23 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
The goals of the condition assessment and subsequent
planning are as follows:
• Berths 5 and 6: assess conditions, determine cause
of erosion behind B5/B6, and determine cause of
settlement between B6/B7.
• Berths 7 and 8: assess conditions, determine cause of erosion behind B7/B8, determine cause of settlement
between B6/B7, and evaluate Berths 7-8 for larger
loads such as tractors, farm equipment, heavy project
cargo, mobile harbor cranes, etc.
• Graving Basins: assess conditions and confirm
acceptable operational live loads.
• Finger Piers: assess conditions and develop as-built
drawings.
• Sustain Operations: minimize impacts to existing
operations to protect revenue.
• Expand Operations, Long Term Planning: develop a
program for needed improvements, including:
– Identify opportunities for expansion of operations
with minimal capital investment
– Develop prioritized project list sorted by need,
opportunity, urgency, and cost
– Sequence potential projects to minimize port
operation impacts
– Provide budgetary cost estimates
509
24 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Task 1: Project Management
This task includes project management hours to lead the M&N team. Work includes project control tasks such as
monthly invoicing and subconsultant management. Budget
assumes 1 hour per week over 22 weeks.
Deliverable: Monthly invoice
Task 2: Meetings
This task includes budget allowance for the kickoff meeting and biweekly progress meetings. Budget assumes 3 hours per week over 22 weeks. All meetings assume attendance by 3 members of the M&N team.
Deliverable: Meeting notes via email
Task 3: Data Review
M&N will confirm we have all required documents needed to progress the work. Note that the Port has confirmed via the RFP that some existing information is available. M&N will review and request any required documents not currently in hand from the Port through a Data Gap Memorandum. Examples of documents that will be requested to progress the work include, but are not limited to, the following:
• As-built / record drawings including existing dwg files; • Previous inspection and condition assessment reports; • Previous geotechnical data and recommendation reports at the site;
• Recent topographic, boundary, and bathymetric surveys and utility data at the site;
• Previous engineering assessments, calculations, and reports; and • Previous construction records (e.g., pile driving records).
Note that M&N and the Port should check with operators/tenants and contractors to compile additional records that may not be in current possession by the Port.
Deliverable: Data Gap Memorandum
Task 4: Above Water Rapid Inspection
Prior to mobilization, the M&N team will prepare an inspection safety plan and activity hazard analysis to safely plan the field work based on site specific conditions. The safety plan will be shared with the Port and Tenants for review and approval prior to mobilization to site.
M&N will perform an above water rapid inspection in accordance with American Society of Civil Engineers Waterfront Facilities
EXCEEDING THE
EVALUATION CRITERIA
DETAILED WORK PLAN THAT CLEARLY ILLUSTRATES
MEETING THE PORT’S NEEDS IN AN EFFICIENT
MANNER.
M&N’s proven project delivery approach includes
thorough planning, clear communication, and
efficient execution. Our team has developed this
scope of work plan based on our understanding
of the Port’s goals and our experience developing
similiar project plans.
510
25 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Inspection and Assessment No. 130 (ASCE No. 130). The intent of the inspection is to assess the general condition of the structure, assign a Condition Assessment Rating, and make recommendations for next steps. The inspection is not intended to classify and document every defect - the intent is to understand the general condition of the structures and make recommendations for additional inspections and/ or investigations only if deemed necessary.
The work includes above deck and above water, below deck visual inspection by a 2-man crew led by a senior engineer-inspector and boat operator. M&N will use our inspection skiff for above water, below deck inspections and will assume the skiff can be launched from and stored at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal for the duration of the inspection work. The following durations and special conditions are noted for each structure.
• Inspection Planning and Mobilization:
– 16 hours to prepare and review pre-inspection safety plan and activity hazard analysis, prepare equipment for mobilization, and demobilize from site.
• Berth 7-8:
– Wharf: 1,550 ft long x 40 ft wide = 60,000 SF
– Backlands: 1,550 ft long x 75 ft wide = 116,000 SF
• Above deck, 2-man = 0.5 day
• Above water, below deck, 2-man with inspection skiff = 1.5 days • Note that inspection of confined space (manhole access) behind the sheet pile wall at Berth 7 and 8 is not proposed at this time. M&N will rely on previous inspection reports, observations made during this inspection, and experience to determine cause of settlement.
• Berth 5-6:
– Wharf: 740 ft long x 47 ft wide = 35,000 SF
– Backlands: 475 ft long x 50 ft wide = 24,000 SF
• Above deck, 2-man = 0.25 day
• Above water, below deck, 2-man with inspection
skiff = 0.75 days
• Graving Basins:
– ~7,000 ft of berthing line
– 6 graving basin structures at 610 ft x 35 ft each = 128,000 SF • Above deck, 2-man = 0.5 day
• Below deck, 2-man on foot = 1.5 days
• Above water, 2-man with inspection skiff = 1 day
511
26 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
• Finger Piers:
– 2 finger piers at 550 ft x 48 ft each = 52,500 SF
• Above deck, 2-man = 0.5 day
• Below deck, 2-man with inspection skiff to as-built = 1.5 days • Geotechnical Inspection:
– The team has budgeted an additional day of inspection with MN Inspection Lead / Boat Operator for Geotechnical Engineer to visually inspect the critical geotechnical condtion findings from the inspection.
M&N will summarize the results of the inspection in an inspection report including an executive summary, introduction, site description, inspection approach summary, observed conditions, photos, assignment of condition ratings for each major structural element per ASCE No. 130, and recommendations.
Deliverables:
• Site-specific pre-inspection safety plan
• Above Water Inspection Report
Task 5: Condition Assessment Report
The following work will be completed during this task:
• Task 5.1: Geotechnical Characterization Report
• Task 5.2: Settlement Evaluation between Berths 6/7
• Task 5.3: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 5-6
• Task 5.4: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 7-8
• Task 5.5: Expand Operations at Berth 7-8
• Task 5.6: Load Rating at Graving Basins
• Task 5.7: Project Planning
• Task 5.8: Cost Estimates
• Task 5.9: Condition Assessment Report
Task 5.1: Geotechnical Characterization Report
M&N subconsultant, ENGEO, will perform a review of existing construction documentation, geotechnical reports, and other documents provided by the Port of Richmond for geotechnical and geological data in order to characterize the subsurface conditions.
ENGEO will use this information, as well as any publicly available historical topographic maps or aerial photographs to create a 512
27 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
geotechnical characterization report for the subject portions of the Port. This document will be valuable as a basis for future analyses for assessments, upgrades, and repairs. In support of this report, ENGEO will perform a limited amount of shoreline slope stability (if necessary based on observations during site inspections) as well as develop a range of likely vertical capacities for pile foundations based on pile diameter and depth for to four pile types/diameter combinations at three different subsurface profiles. Additionally, a bearing capacity estimate for the graving basin structures will be provided.
Deliverable: Geotechnical Characterization Report
Task 5.2: Settlement Evaluation between Berths 6 & 7
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, the M&N Team will assess and document the likely cause of settlement observed between Berths 6/7.
Task 5.3: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 5-6
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, the M&N Team will assess and document the likely cause of erosion observed behind Berth 5-6.
Task 5.4: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 7-8
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, the M&N Team will assess and document the likely cause of erosion observed behind Berth 7-8.
Task 5.5: Expand Operations at Berth 7-8
Based on information collected during Task 2 Data Review and results from Task 5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report, the M&N team will evaluate options to increase the load capacity of Berths 7-8 to accommodate tractors, farm equipment, heavy project cargo, and mobile harbor cranes.
Task 5.6: Load Rating at Graving Basins
Based on information collected during Task 2 Data Review and results from Task 4 Above Water Inspection and Task 5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report, the M&N team will perform a load rating calculation for vertical operational loads at the Graving Basins. 513
28 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
Task 5.7: Project Planning
Based on the results of all tasks above, the M&N team will work closely with the Port to develop a list of potential projects (up to 10). The M&N team will include opportunities for expansion of operations with minimal capital investment.
As part of this task, M&N will host an Independent Technical Review Workshop. The 4-hour workshop which will gather senior marine engineers from across M&N to review the results of the inspection and advise on best path forward based on their experience working on similar projects throughout the US. This workshop will be covered by M&N and not charged to the Port of Richmond.
Task 5.8: Cost Estimates
M&N will prepare budgetary cost estimates for the potential projects (up to 10). The estimates will be prepared consistent with AACE International Class 5 accuracy (-30% / +50%) consistent with the level of design (planning phase, concept screening).
Task 5.9: Condition Assessment Report
A Condition Assessment Report will be prepared to summarize the work completed during Task 5. All subtasks will have a section of the report documenting the results of the subtask. The report will include a prioritized project list sorted by need, opportunity, urgency, and cost.
The M&N Team will work closely with the Port to identify a sequencing approach for the proposed projects to minimize potential impact to port operations. An executive summary will prepared to provide an overview of the outcomes of the work for decision makers.
M&N will schedule a meeting to present the draft condition report to the Port. All Port comments received on the draft report will be documented in a comment tracking log and formal responses will be documented.
Deliverable: Condition Assessment Report
514
29 Port of Richmond | Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
1. COVER LETTER2. PROJEECT TEAM3. PROJEECT EXPERIENCE4. LEVERAGING EXPERIENCE5. SCOPE OF WORK6. PROJECT SCHEDULE P241984
6. Project Schedule
The project scope and fee estimate are based the following schedule:
No Task Schedule
1 Notice to Proceed (NTP) November 2024
2 Data Gap Memorandum Within 2 weeks of NTP
3 Site-Specific Pre-Inspection Safety Plan December 2024 4 Above Water Inspections December 2024 and January 2025 5 Geotechnical Characterization Report January 17, 2025 6 Above Water Inspection Report February 14, 2025
7 Draft Condition Assessment Report March 7, 2025
8 Final Condition Assessment Report March 28, 2025
Note that the RFP asks for a meeting with Port staff at 8 weeks into the project and prior to release of final assessment. We propose that our biweekly meetings with the Port can be used to review progress of the work and closely coordinate on key findings and path forward. We also envision that separate meetings will be scheduled to review the results of the inspection and to present the draft condition assessment report to the Port.
The schedule is based on NTP being received at the end of November. However if the NTP is received sooner the schedule can shift to the left. We understand the Port will need input by the end of 2024 to plan budgets for 2025 and beyond - M&N will plan to provide reasonable assumptions to the Port to use for budget planning regardless of the how far the assessment work has progressed. 515
Point of Contact:
Matt Trowbridge, PE, SE
Vice President, Ports and Energy
P: 510.788.8959 | M: 562.505.2138
E: mtrowbridge@moff attnichol.com
1300 Clay Street, Suite 350
Oakland CA 94612
516
August 23, 2024
PROPOSAL
Point Potrero Marine Terminal
Assessment, Port of Richmond
517
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A.
Cover Letter....................................... ................................................... .......................... 2 B. Liftech Team and Subconsultants Narrative and Key Personnel Summaries .................. 3 C. Projects and References .............................................................................. .................. 9 D. Experience Narrative ................................................................................. ....................16 E. Scope ................................................................................................ ............................18 F. Schedule ............................................................................................. ..........................19 G. Appendix – Detailed Resumes .......................................................................... ............20
518
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
A. Cover Letter
Port of Richmond
Attention: Charles Gerard, Port Director
1322 Canal Boulevard
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
Proposal for Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
Dear Charles:
Liftech has assembled a highly qualified team with relevant experience and expertise to help the Port address the challenges posed by your older wharf constructed in the 1940s and to provide the services outlined in the subject Port RFP.
Liftech Consultants Inc. is a consulting engineering firm with 60 years of worldwide experience in marine structures including wharves, floats, dockside container handling cranes, and other equipment. We are a California Corporation based in Oakland. Liftech will be the prime consultant working closely with the Port providing structural assessment and repair recommendation for wharf, piers, and graving basins at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal, Port of Richmond. We will retain ENGEO Incorporated, San Ramon, to assist with geotechnical engineering and Power Engineering Construction Company, Alameda, a contractor, to assist with wharf inspection, constructability concept review, and ROM budget of construction cost.
Liftech has significant experience working on projects at the Port including the wharf repairs and upgrades at Berths 7 & 8 at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal in 2010. Our team’s extensive wharf repair experience and marine design expertise enables us to assist the Port with implementing a practical repair program that provides the best benefit for the cost and that is commensurate with the allocated Port funding.
The Liftech team brings the Port the following qualifications:
Key personnel experienced with the wharf structure from past work.
Creative marine engineering for practical and cost-effective solutions.
Design/build experience for approaching repair projects.
Technical advisors to the Port in addressing the Port’s challenges.
Liftech understands the requirements of Ordinance 16-12 N.S., Section 2.50.070, and acknowledges receiving Addendum Number 1.
Thank you for this opportunity to submit our proposal. We look forward to continuing to help the Port for many years in the future.
Sincerely,
Erik Soderberg, President
519
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
B. Liftech Team and Subconsultants Narrative and Ke y Personnel Summaries Liftech Team and Narrative
In response to the Port’s RFP, Liftech has assembled a highly qualified team consisted of key individuals who have expertise and experience in structural, geotechnical, and marine construction to help the Port addressing the structural issues encountered with an old wharf constructed in 1940s. Our team looks forward to working with Port’s staff in a collaborative approach in identifying work priorities based on structural risk assessment and considering benefits and costs.
Liftech Consultants Inc.
Liftech Consultants Inc. is an award-winning, employee-owned consulting engineering firm founded in 1964 and based in Oakland. We provide marine and crane engineering worldwide.
Liftech is a small business enterprise registered as a C Corporation with 27 employees consisting of nine structural engineers, six civil/professional engineers, one electrical engineer, two mechanical engineers, two designers, and seven support staff. Most employees live and work in the East Bay Area. All work will be performed by local staff.
Liftech has a long history working with the Port of Richmond since 1980s and has significant knowledge of the wharf structures at various terminals. We performed the wharf upgrade design for Point Potrero Terminal to become a modern auto terminal for auto warehousing in 2010 and designed the new IMTT terminal in 2015.
Liftech has extensive wharf project experience and knowledge. Our creative engineering solutions, often in collaboration with marine contractors, allow us to win and work successfully on many challenging marine projects, including design/build projects with tight budgets and schedules. Our engineers look forward to bringing proven design solutions to the Port.
ENGEO Incorporated
ENGEO is an award-winning, employee-owned California Corporation of more than 400 geotechnical and civil engineers, geologists, hydrologists, hydrogeologists, environmental scientists, coastal engineers, construction quality-assurance representatives, and laboratory testing specialists serving clients in the US and abroad for over 50 years. ENGEO serves all types of projects including transportation, flood control, water storage, conveyance and treatment, industrial facilities, civic structures, healthcare, education, energy, manufacturing, ports, harbors, waterfront development, residential, mixed-use communities, and urban development. ENGEO has extensive experience in providing services for marine structure projects throughout the Bay Area and beyond, including those for the Port of Richmond.
ENGEO has partnered with Liftech on numerous projects including the new pile design at the Chevron Richmond Terminal, WETA Central Bay O&M facility, the Red and White Fleet Terminal in San Francisco, McNears Pier, and evaluation of the effects of dredging at the Port of Oakland, among others.
Power Engineering Construction Company
Power Engineering Construction Company (Power), is a leader in marine construction with 38 years of experience throughout California. Power is uniquely positioned as a top marine contractor with an in-house ADCI-certified diving division, offering an extensive understanding of marine structures for thorough and efficient condition assessments and design repair inspections. Their divers are equipped with specialized vessels, cutting-edge equipment, and 520
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
engineering support, excelling in diverse marine environments, including challenging conditions like strong currents and active operating facilities. Power's diving operations consistently exceed OSHA, USCG, and USACE regulations, adhering to ADCI's best practices and ASCE Manual of Practice 130 guidelines for waterfront facility inspections. Power provides constructability evaluation and accurate ROM budget estimates.
Liftech and Power share a proven track record, successfully collaborating on numerous design/build wharf and float projects.
Key Personnel Summaries
LIFTECH CONSULTANTS INC., KEY PERSONNEL
Erik Soderberg, PE, D.PE, SE
Principal, Technical Advisor, Structural Engineer
Experienced in the design, review, repair, and modification of a variety of structures including over two dozen wharves and piers, bollard and fender system designs and upgrades, over a dozen floats, hundreds of container cranes, over a dozen bulk loader structures, review and design of dozens of bridging and gangway systems, detailed review of cruise terminal gangway system including design of portions of the system. Port experience includes Port of Oakland, Port of Redwood City, POLA/POLB, Port of NY/NJ, Port of Houston, Port of Seattle, Port of Richmond, Massport, Port of Virginia, Port Everglades, Port of West Sacramento, Modern Terminals in Hong Kong, Port of Guam.
Project Role Principal-in-Charge, Structural
Years of
Experience
30 Distinguishing
Qualifications
• Management experience and design expertise
• Expert in wharf design and berthing and mooring sy stem design
• Serves on ASCE Committee: Seismic Design of Wharve s & Piers
• Author of many technical papers for ASCE regarding wharves, floats, and container cranes
521
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
Sugiarto Loni, PE, SE
Principal, Structural Engineer
Extensive management experience and design expertise with marine structures and building facilities. Work includes managing a variety of engineering projects ranging from small projects with short duration to large projects requiring multi-discipline coordination.
Project manager for shore power vault design for 12 berths at Port of Oakland, project manager for 9,500 LF of crane girder design and construction at Port Everglades, principal-in-charge for bollard and fender upgrades for Port of Oakland Berth 10, and Berths 9, 10, 20 and 21 wharf conditional assessment, and Pt. Potrero Terminal upgrades for Auto Warehousing at Port of Richmond.
Port experience includes Port of Richmond, Port of Oakland, Port of Redwood City, Port of Guam, and Port Everglades in Florida.
Project Role Project Manager, Structural
Years of
Experience
40 Distinguishing
Qualifications
• Significant management experience and structural d esign expertise
• Experience with multi-discipline design team coord ination • Experience with wharves, bollards and fenders, and shore power vaults design
• Construction documents coordination of multi-disci pline projects
• Technical specifications
• Construction cost estimates
522
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
ENGEO INCORPORATED, KEY PERSONNEL
Jeffrey Fippin, PE, GE
Principal in Charge, Geotechnical Scope
Jeff brings more than 28 years of experience coordinating complex field investigations, providing design recommendations and collaborating with various stakeholders in providing geotechnical services to both public and private sector clients.
Jeff has led the evaluation and design of shoreline stabilization projects throughout the Bay Area. Jeff’s experience with Port of Richmond projects includes serving as the geotechnical lead on projects such as Terminal 4 Revetment, Terminal 2 Dredge Evaluation, and Terminal One Redevelopment.
Jeff’s extensive port experience includes work at the Port of Oakland, Port of Richmond, Port of San Francisco, and Port of Stockton.
Project Role Principal in Charge, Geotechnical Scop e
Years of
Experience
28 Distinguishing
Qualifications
• More than 28 years of experience
• Significant expertise in soft ground engineering, liquefaction evaluation, seismic site response, slope stability, deep foundation design, ground improvement, value engineering, ground improvement, and structural construction
• Experience with wharves, ports, shorelines, and sh ipyards in the Bay Area
523
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
POWER ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION CO., KEY PERSONNEL
David Mik
President
As a leader in heavy civil and marine construction, David brings exceptional creativity and hands-on experience to complex construction projects. He joined Power in 1992, has been a principal since 1997, and has held positions from Project Engineer to his current position as President.
David’s lifetime of marine activities, education, and naval experience make him a tremendous asset when solving construction challenges in and around sensitive marine environments.
Project Role Contractor
Years of Experience 31
Distinguishing
Qualifications
• Builds strong client relationships through reliabi lity and clear, honest communication.
• Excellent problem-solving skills for identifying p otential risks and developing strategic solutions that optimize cost efficiency and outcomes.
• Clear communicator who provides updates, addresses
concerns, and coordinates efforts with crew and stakeholders seamlessly.
• Stays abreast of industry trends, technologies, an d best practices.
524
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
Organization Chart
525
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
C. Projects and References
Liftech has significant marine project experience in the Bay Area as shown in the maps below:
526
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
In the following pages, we present three relevant marine projects to illustrate our experience and approach in addressing similar issues for the Point Potrero Marine Terminal.
527
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
Point Potrero Marine Terminal, Berths 7 & 8 Rehabilitation, Port of Richmond, California Project Dates: 2010–2012. Wharf construction budget: $5M; Liftech design fee: $365K.
Manager: Bill V. Robbins, Email: [email protected] ; Mobile: (503) 449-6894.
This project highlights our experience with assessing older wharves, damage repairs and upgrades, and our expertise in developing innovative and cost-effective designs. Project phasing was required.
The wharf at Pt. Potrero Marine Terminal (PPMT) was constructed in the 1940s to serve Kaiser Shipyards operations that built Liberty and Victory Ships during World War II. The wharf was constructed to support heavy equipment loading. The shipyards were decommissioned after WW II and became part of the Port in the 1980s. In 2010, the Port developed PPMT into an auto terminal for vehicles from Asia with an on-dock rail yard connecting to the BNSF rail line.
The Port retained TransDevelopment Group (TD), as the
Development Manager (DM). TD retained Liftech to
evaluate the wharf, including condition review, design
repairs for the wharf deck and piling, and design the
fendering and mooring system upgrades for serving auto
carrier vessels up to 46,000 t displacement. Upgrades
included local strengthening of the wharf structure.
Wharf Condition
The wharf consisted of two sections, an outer 46’-4” wide reinforced concrete deck supported by concrete piles and an inner 68 ft wide reinforced concrete deck supported by timber piles. There is a concrete sheet pile wall separating the inner and outer wharves. Due to its age, the wharf had significant damage including:
• Missing top cover and exposed and corroding reinfo rcing steel in many areas. • Significant corrosion damage at many concrete pile s and rot damage to the timber piles.
Some timber piles lost all strength and had fallen into the water. • The original fenders were gone. Rubber tires, hung off from the wharf deck, were used.
Despite the significant damage, the wharf structure was well designed, surviving the Lorma Prieta earthquake with minor damage. Most damage was due to its old age, lack of maintenance, and corrosion.
Project Approach
Sugi Loni was the principal-in-charge for this project supported by Erik Soderberg as technical lead and Thomas Griswold as design engineer. Liftech retained Collins Engineers, Inc. to perform the above and underwater Level III wharf inspection and document and rate damaged piles and wharf deck, performed concrete strength tests, and developed repair cost estimates.
We met with the DM and the Port to discuss the project scope and budget. The Port did not have enough budget to complete all the work recommended by the DM team. Priorities were established to meet minimum requirements: (a) on-dock rail yard, (b) fender and bollard upgrades, (c) pile and deck repair as needed to meet operations, (d) minimum site work.
Liftech developed an operation plan to limit repairs based on vessel layout, Ro-Ro ramp location, and auto traffic flow.
528
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
Liftech performed a wharf deck capacity analysis accounting for reinforcing loss using the Yield Line method to determine the deck capacity and developed and directed a load test by running a water tank truck across the deck to confirm the wheel load rating. Where adequate load capacity could not be confirmed by analysis, k-rail was installed to prevent vehicle access.
Three types of pile repairs were made as follows:
Type 1 – Concrete pile repair
Removed all loose concrete, cleaned exposed rebar,
applied corrosion inhibition compound, and poured grout to the deck underside. The cylindrical form work was left in- place
Type 2 – Timber pile repair
Damaged or missing timber piles were replaced with cast- in-place reinforced concrete piles spanning from competent portions of the timber pile, 2’-0 below mudline, to the deck underside.
Type 3 – Replacement with new steel piles
For area requiring new piles, a steel pipe pile was driven from above the deck by cutting a hole in the deck. Once the pile was installed, the deck reinforcing was repaired and new concrete placed to reconstruct the deck.
Fender and Bollard Upgrades
We performed berthing and mooring analysis based on the 46,000 t Sunshine Ace Auto Carrier Vessel, and designed wharf strengthening for the larger fender and bollard reactions. The strengthening beam is shown below. A new concrete beam extending one bay of the outer
wharf was added at each bollard to
distribute the mooring and berthing
forces into the deck. Where
possible, fenders and bollards were
placed at the same location. The
design allowed deck operations
during construction.
By working closely with the DM and Port of Richmond staff, Liftech delivered wharf improvements meeting tenant
operational requirements. Liftech’s design approach and practical design solutions enabled the DM and Port to complete this major auto terminal on time and on budget.
The hatched area indicates the ramp and
traffic loading. Only damage in this area was
repaired, less than 50% of the total wharf area.
529
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
Port of Oakland – Berth 10 Wharf Assessment and Upgrades, Port of Oakland, California Project Dates: 2022 - Present. Wharf construction budget: $3.5M; Liftech design fee: $348K.
Edwin Draper, Port Supervising Engineer; Email: [email protected]; Tel: (510) 627- 1269.
This project highlights our experience and expertise to assess an old, damaged wharf, determine allowable deck loads, and design cost effective berthing and mooring systems for a variety of barges.
The Berth 10 wharf was constructed in the 1940s. It is a reinforced concrete structure with a thin deck supported on transverse beams that are supported on concrete piles. The wharf had timber fender piles that were mostly gone. Many barges berthed against the front row of the concrete piles causing significant damage to the structural piles as shown in the photograph below. Due to lack of maintenance, there was significant corrosion damage to the underside concrete deck, above deck, beams, and piles. The original transit shed shown in Figure 1 is gone.
Figure 1: Original wharf cross section and existing conditions photographs In 2011, Port of Oakland retained Liftech Consultants Inc. (Liftech) to perform a condition assessment and determine the allowable live loads for the wharf deck in its as-is condition, without repairing damaged areas.
Liftech performed a visual condition assessment in accordance with “Routine Inspections” of ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 130 (ASCE No. 130), Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment, 2015. We documented the field findings and rated the damage from minor, moderate, major, and severe categories. Based on this damage, we performed analysis to determine governing capacity of deck, beam, and piles based on the damaged conditions. We summarized the capacities and prepared an allowable loading map as shown below:
530
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
Figure 2: Wharf loading diagram based on as-is conditions In 2023, as a follow up to the wharf assessment project, the Port retained Liftech to provide fender and mooring design for berthing various sizes of barges and tugboats to prevent further damage to the front row concrete piles. The Port has a limited budget and does not want to upgrade the wharf structure since this is not a revenue generating project for the Port. Liftech developed a design criterion for a mooring system with a 20-year design life, reused the Port’s available bollards, spaced fender systems only as far apart as needed to accommodate various vessel sizes, limiting the number of costly fender systems.
Liftech developed several cost savings designs:
• Use thicker wall for steel pipe pile in lieu of
expensive coatings.
• Use fewer high strength bolts for the bollard
to minimize the number of drillings through
the existing concrete deck to avoid rebar
conflict and limit costs.
The project is under construction with anticipated
completion in January 2025.
531
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) - Central Bay Operations & Maintenance Facility Design, Alameda, California.
Project Completion in 2020. Construction budget: $52M; Total design fee: $3.5M.
WETA Contact: Michael Gougherty, Senior Planner, Telephone: (415) 364-3189.
This project highlights our design/build experience to manage a design team and provide marine structural engineering design.
In 2018, WETA solicited a design/build team to deliver the Central Bay Operations & Maintenance Facility in Alameda, which serves as the home base for the SF Bay Ferry fleet in the central bay. The facility is used to maintain vessels operating on the Alameda, Oakland, Richmond, and South San Francisco ferry routes, and to coordinate emergency transportation services during a regional disaster, disruption in transportation, or both.
On the land, the facility includes an operations and maintenance building, fuel yard, working yard, park improvements, and seawall. On the water, the facility includes a pile supported pier, gangway, concrete service float with maintenance shed and crane, and system of pile-moored concrete floats with an array of fendering and mooring systems for berthing up to 12 ferry vessels.
As part of the design/build team, Liftech served as the design prime assembling and leading a design team consisting of architect, civil, geotechnical, and MEP subconsultants to provide design and construction documents to support Power Engineering Construction (Power) as marine contractor for in water work and C. Overaa & Company as building and landside contractor. The photograph below shows the completed project.
To meet the WETA construction budget and schedule, the design/build team implemented several significant cost-savings approaches including:
532
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
1. A new ground improvement technique, Direct Power Compaction, to mitigate the risk of liquefaction of the hydraulically placed fill in an earthquake.
2. A cantilevered seawall design eliminating the ne ed to drill tiebacks through the existing seawall and the rock dike the existing seawall sits on.
3. A continuous mat foundation for the building to address differential settlements.
4. Integrating the float mooring and vessel berthin g structures into the float walkway system using simple pinned pipe bracing.
5. A simple pile supported pier with a pinned elast omeric bearing pile connection to reduce cost and ensure minor damage in large earthquakes.
Liftech, ENGEO, and Power worked collaboratively to develop practical engineering solutions that resulted in significant cost savings for the project.
D. Experience Narrative
Liftech personnel, Sugi Loni, Thomas Griswold, and Erik Soderberg, have a long history working with the Port since the 1980s (Sugi and Tom) with Erik joining in the 1990s. Together, they bring in-depth knowledge of the wharf structures, in particular with the wharf at Point Potrero Marine Terminal, having worked on the wharf rehabilitation for a modern auto terminal for auto warehousing. Our experience with the Port’s projects is shown below.
Additionally, Liftech has significant marine design experience working on wharf projects in the Bay Area, evaluating existing wharves for supporting heavy loads, such as container crane wheel loads, and special marine structures such as floats for ferry terminals. Our project delivery experience includes providing design and construction documents for owners to solicit public bids to working for contractors as part of the design/build team to provide creative design solutions as part of many winning design/build teams.
We understand that the Port has challenges in addressing many structural condition issues with limited funding. Liftech’s team will be able to assist the Port by leveraging our knowledge of wharf structures from past work and our engineering expertise and experience in developing cost-effective solutions. Our team experience includes evaluating, rehabilitating, and upgrading of wharf structures similar to the Point Potrero wharf structure. 533
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
Liftech has assembled a small team with structural, geotechnical, and marine construction experience relevant to the Port’s project needs. The team will act as the Port’s advisor. We will listen to understand the Port’s needs and advise the Port what work is practical to accomplish without extensive engineering studies, as we typically understand what damage is significant and what repair methods are suitable. We will help the Port rank the work based on structural risk assessment, economic evaluation, and long-term performance and associated maintenance and repair costs.
Our approach to the terminal assessment study will be a collaborative discussion with the Port’s staff to understand the Port’s short-term and long-term needs.
For this RFP, we have developed our approach to the scope of work outlined in the RFP and our understanding from the job walk discussion in a spreadsheet in the scope Section E. Our approach is to rely on our knowledge from past projects, perform visual underdeck wharf review, assess the structural risk, advise the Port of the required work, and help set priorities and ROM budget.
534
Scope of Work
Point Potrero Marine Terminal (PPMT) Assessment
Proposed Scope of Work
Item Scope Approach Assumptions
a. Review available existing documents including drawings, reports, geotechnical data, etc., provided by Port and studies performed by Liftech for the following facilities:
- Wharf drawings for Berths 5, 6, 7, and 8
- Graving basins
- Finger piers
We understand that the Port has limited as-built and
design drawings for these facilities
b. Prepare document templates for field review and taking field notes. c. Meet with Port to understand the work priorities, business opportunities, etc., that the study will need to address.
a. Berths 5, 6, 7, and 8 - Inner Wharf, Timber Pile Supported Wharf - Perform one day field review to assess below deck wharf conditions by structural and geotechnical engineers.
b. Berths 5, 6, 7, and 8 - Outer Wharf - Concrete Pile Supported Wharf and Finger Piers - Perform one day of field review by boat to assess the below deck wharf condition by structural and geotechnical engineers. Power will provide boat and crew. c Graving Basins and Finger Piers
- Perform one day field review of graving basins and finger pier top decks by structural engineers.
d. Summarize field review findings.
a. Present field review findings to Port. Obtain Port's input for priority upgrades. b. Develop design repair/upgrade concepts for the following:
- Soils erosion and deck settlements.
- Increase wharf deck capacity for heavier cargoes, such as construction equipment. - Evaluate graving basins deck capacity.
c. Develop ROM budget estimates for the above repair/upgrades. d. Develop draft report summarizing the findings.
e. Meet with Port to review draft report and obtain input. f. Final report with a recommendation for next steps.
4 Optional Services
Allowance
a. An allowance for brainstorming ideas and concepts to accommodate other business opportunities such as supporting the upcoming wind farm construction work.
Geotechnical
Characterization Report
b. ENGEO will compile existing subsurface information (borings, pile driving records, geological maps, historical shoreline mapping, and dredging) and create a report for future reference and to reduce future project time researching historical information. The report will include idealized contours of fill, bedrock, and Bay deposits. It will include results of analysis performed in support of Task 3b.
Underwater Inspection c On as needed basis. We will recommend underwater inspection if it is needed to develop the concept design. A daily rate for underwater inspection is provided.
Liftech will collaborate with geotechnical engineer and marine contractor to develop repair and upgrade
concepts based on our collective experience working
on these types of structures. We do not propose to
perform detailed investigation, engineering, and
drawings preparation until such time as the Port is
ready to proceed with the project.
The concept design is descriptive enough to develop
ROM budget cost estimates but is not adequate for
soliciting bids or construction.
To clarify, concept designs are not final designs
suitable for construction, but have less detail and are used to clarify generally what is required to aid in
budget planning.
1 Review Existing
Documents
2 Field Review
3 Condition Assessment and
Recommendation
Port provides crew and ladder for access to below deck
of inner wharf.
Inspection at low tide conditions.
The field review is cursory with the purpose to
understand the wharf structural conditions. No
destructive testing or involved inspection is proposed.
Underwater piles inspection is excluded as the extent of the inspection scope is unknown at this time. However, a daily cost for performing underwater inspection is
provided in case it is necessary.
Summary of field review findings will not be a detailed report, but an overview to clarify a general assessment of condition and pertinent issues.
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, August 23, 2024
535
PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF WORK
Duration
Week # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
Task 1 - Documents Review
Notice to Proceed 1 day
Staffing request for Documents Review 2 wks
Develop template for field review (account for holi days) 2 wks Prepare work plan 1 wk
Review work plan with Port 1 day
Outer wharf and finger piers review by boat 1 day
Inner wharf below deck review 1day
Graving basins review 1 day
Summarize findings (account for holidays) 3 wks
Review findings with Port and obtain input 1 day
Develop concepts - soils erosion control, pier capa city upgrades. 8 wks Graving basins deck capacity analysis 2 wks
Progress meeting with Port
Prepare initial draft report 2 wks
Present draft report and obtain input 1 day
Finalize draft report 2 wks
Recommend optionsl services to occur prior to conc ept design N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\[Liftech Design Schedule_01_sl.xlsx]Design Schedule Task 4 - Optional Services
Task 2 - Above Deck and Above Water Field Review
Task 3 - Condition Assessment and Concept Design
June, 25 May, 25 April, 25 Mar, 25
17 working weeks (account for two weeks of Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays) 21-Feb-25 Jan, 25 Dec, 24 Nov, 24
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, August 23, 2024
536
N:\Proposals\P-R\Richmond_Port of\2024-08-05 RFP Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment\!Working\! Proposal_Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment_Liftech Consultants_04_Accept.docx
RFP – Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment, Aug ust 23, 2024
G. Appendix – Detailed Resumes
537
Erik G. Soderberg, CE, D.PE, SE
President, Senior Structural Engineer
Liftech Consultants Inc.
A California Corporation 344 - 20th Street, Suite 360, Oakland, CA 94612-3593 1-510-832-5606 [email protected] www.Liftech.net
Education
MS, Civil Engineering
University of Texas, 1994
BS, Civil Engineering
Virginia Tech, 1992
Employment History
Liftech Consultants Inc., 1994–
Present
Professional Affiliations
American Association of Port
Authorities
American Institute of Steel
Construction
American Society of Civil Engineers
Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute
Structural Engineers Association of
Northern California
Professional Registrations
California S4426
California C56137
Also registered in Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana,
Maryland, Mississippi, New Jersey,
New York, Pennsylvania, South
Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and
Washington
Papers, Presentations, and
Articles
“San Francisco Floating Fire Station
35: Overview and Lessons Learned,”
co-authors Leah Olson and Di Liu,
Presented and Published ASCE
COPRI Ports 2022
“Seismic Response of Container
Cranes and Effects on Wharf
Response and Crane Structure
Performance,” co-authors Derrick
Lind and Di Liu, Presented and
Published ASCE UCLA Lifelines
Conference 2021-22
Professional Experience
Mr. Soderberg has 30 years of experience as a
skilled designer and project manager. He is
experienced in the design, review, repair, and
modification of a variety of structural and crane
related systems including over two dozen wharves
and floats, hundreds of container cranes, and over a
dozen bulk loader structures.
Representative Project Experience
Port Everglades Crane Procurement, Crane
Modification, and Wharf Expansion, Fort
Lauderdale, FL (2015–2024). Technical oversight
with focus on the wharf expansion. Supervised
studies to determine parameters for the new cranes
and identify required upgrades to the landside
infrastructure. The Liftech team provided crane
procurement specifications, design review, and
fabrication review services for the new cranes
fabricated in China. Designed 5,000 feet of new crane
girders, about 3,500 feet for the new cranes at B30-
32, and an additional 1,500 feet for the existing
cranes at B30. The new girders were offset from the
existing girders, permitting continued operations of
the existing cranes during construction, and to suit a
larger rail span. The crane girder systems include
cable trenches, power vaults, crane stowage
locations, rail frogs, and compact crane stops.
Other Wharf Design and Review: Designed 3,600-
foot container wharf for Port of Oakland Berths 57–
59. Designed extension of Port of Oakland Berth 30
and modifications to Berths 32 and 33. Designed Port
of Oakland Berths 23–25 upgrades, including dolphin
and fender retrofit and replacement. Designed 432-
foot Port of Redwood City wharf. Designed 550-foot
wharf for cement unloading facility in West
Sacramento.
538
Sugiarto Loni, CE, SE
Principal, Senior Structural Engineer
Liftech Consultants Inc.
A California Corporation 344 - 20th Street, Suite 360, Oakland, CA 94612-3593 1-510-832-5606 [email protected] www.Liftech.net Education
MS, Civil Engineering
University of California, Davis,
1983
BS, Civil Engineering
California State University,
Sacramento, 1980
Employment History
Liftech Consultants Inc., 2008–
Present
AECOM, 2004–2008
Liftech Consultants Inc., 1984–
2004
Professional Affiliations
American Society of Civil
Engineers
Structural Engineers Association
of Northern California
Professional Registrations
California S3041
California C38423
Florida PE 64266
Guam SE 1487
Guam CE 1470
Papers, Presentations, and
Articles
“Innovative Wharf Details:
Elastomeric Bearing Pile-Deck
Connection and Finned
Monopile,” co-authors Erik
Soderberg and Derrick Lind,
Published ASCE COPRI Ports
2013
Professional Experience
Mr. Loni has 40 years of extensive management experience and design expertise with marine terminal structures,
including crane-wharf interface, container and intermodal yard structures, building facilities, and marine structures. He is responsible for contract negotiations, technical oversight, and quality assurance of project deliverables. His work includes managing a variety of engineering projects ranging from small projects with short duration to large projects with multi-discipline coordination.
Representative Project Experience
Wharf Design and Review: Designed Port of Richmond
and Port of Redwood City wharf replacements.
B10 Structural Assessment and B9, 20, and 21 Wharf
Evaluation, Port of Oakland, Oakland, CA (2022). Project manager responsible for the following: (1) Berth 10,
reviewing existing documents, performing site condition review, structural analysis, and determining wharf capacity for storing and handling dredged materials, (2) Berths 9, 20, and 21, reviewing existing documents, evaluating pile
capacity due to berth dredging, and performing post-dredge wharf structural assessment.
Infrastructure Upgrade, Port Everglades, Fort
Lauderdale, FL (2015–Ongoing). Project manager
responsible for managing multiple engineering disciplines for infrastructure upgrade to accommodate new, larger cranes.
The port operates seven low profile STS cranes at their Southport terminal and procured new low profile cranes
capable of serving vessels up to 22 containers across with up to 8 high on deck. Worked with our team to make studies to determine parameters for the new cranes and identify required upgrades to the landside infrastructure. Designed 5,000 feet of new crane girders. The new girders for new cranes were offset from the existing girders, permitting continued operations of the existing cranes during
construction, and to suit a larger rail span. The crane girder systems include cable trenches, power vaults, crane
stowage locations, rail frogs, and compact crane stops.
539
Di Liu, PE
Principal, Project Engineer
Liftech Consultants Inc.
A California Corporation 344 - 20th Street, Suite 360, Oakland, CA 94612-3593 1-510-832-5606 [email protected] www.Liftech.net Education
PhD, University of Kentucky,
Lexington, 2015
MS, Structural Engineering
University of Kentucky, Lexington,
2010
BE, Architectural Engineering
Beijing University of Technology,
China, 2002
Employment History
Liftech Consultants Inc., 2014–
Present
China IPPR Engineering Corp.,
2003–2008
Professional Affiliations
American Society of Civil Engineers
Structural Engineers Association of
Northern California
Professional Registrations
California C84419
Papers, Presentations, and
Articles
“San Francisco Floating Fire
Station 35: Overview and Lessons
Learned,” co-authors Erik
Soderberg and Leah Olson,
Published ASCE COPRI Ports
2022
“Seawall Movement and Piling
Design at the San Francisco
Waterfront,” co-author Erik
Soderberg, Published ASCE
COPRI Ports 2019
Professional Experience
Mr. Liu is an experienced designer and project manager. His work includes structural analysis, design review, modification review, and feasibility studies of container cranes, wharves, and other structures.
Wharf Design and Review: Project manager for Port of Oakland B23–25 upgrades, including dolphin and fender retrofit and replacement.
Container Crane Wheel Load Studies : Assisted with container crane wheel load studies for Modern Terminals Limited, Port of Felixstowe, Port of Tacoma, and the Vancouver Deltaport terminal. Project manager for Port of Oakland crane girder capacity study and uniform wharf girder analysis method.
Float and Gangway Design: Project manager for structural design of the San Francisco Treasure Island float. Participated in design of other float and gangway projects including the WETA Downtown San Francisco Ferry Terminal Expansion project that included participation in designing the piling, two new steel floats with associated super structures and mooring and berthing systems, three new gangways, and refurbishment modifications to the existing float.
Container Crane Design and Review : Provided container crane structural analysis and design review assistance for various ports including Yantian International Container Terminals in China and Maher Terminals in Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA.
Container Crane Modification and Relocation : Reviewed designs for crane modifications for Port of Oakland SSA ZPMC crane raise. Design review for Port of Oakland TraPac crane raise.
Assisted with HPH ECT Nelcon crane relocation feasibility study for Hutchison Ports. Provided crane modification contingency analysis for Modern Terminals Limited in Hong Kong.
Structural Analysis of Trolley Structure : Analyzed the trolley primary structure to investigate retrofit options for improving the performance of a Cargotec trolley for the Port of Helsingborg.
Structural Analysis of RMG Crane : Analyzed an intermodal rail mounted gantry crane structure for Paceco España.
Research and Development Project : Performed various analysis, debugging, and other R&D studies to help maintain Liftech’s in- house structural software.
540
Thomas F. Griswold, CE, SE
Senior Structural Engineer
Liftech Consultants Inc.
A California Corporation 344 - 20th Street, Suite 360, Oakland, CA 94612-3593 1-510-832-5606 Lif [email protected] www.Liftech.net Education
MS, Civil Engineering
University of California, Berkeley,
1973
BS, Civil Engineering
University of California, Berkeley,
1972
AB, Mathematics, Pomona
College, 1965
Employment History
Liftech Consultants Inc., 1979–
Present
Other, 1973–1979
Professional Affiliations
American Institute of Steel
Construction
American Society of Civil
Engineers
International Code Council
Structural Engineers Association
of Northern California
Professional Registrations
California S2216
California C25580
Papers, Presentations, and
Articles
“Evaluating the Seismic Capacity
of a Newly Designed Wharf at the
Port of Oakland,” co-authors Shah
Vahdani, John Egan, Robert Pyke,
Chih-Cheng Chin, and Tom
LaBasco, Published ASCE Ports
2007
“Increasing Crane Girder Capacity
Using the Strut-and-Tie Method,”
co-authors Michael Jordan, Joe
Oakley, and Derrick Lind,
Published ASCE Ports 2004
Professional Experience
Mr. Griswold is a senior structural engineer with special expertise in concrete wharf and building design. His experience includes the design and analysis of wharves, buildings of various structural types, cranes, and other special structures.
Wharf Design and Wharf Strengthening : Worked with Manson Construction designing a 550’ wharf, access bridge, and mooring platform structures for a cement unloading facility in Sacramento, CA, for Cemex, Inc. Participated in the design of a new wharf at Berths 57–59 and the rehabilitation of an existing wharf at Berths 32–33 at the Port of Oakland. Managed a project at the Middle Harbor Terminal at the Port of Oakland to replace piles that would intrude into the ship channel after berth deepening. Designed strengthening for crane rail girders and seismic strengthening at the APL terminal at the Port of Los Angeles.
Wharf Review : Analyzed the crane rail girder capacities and the crane wheel loads at all container crane facilities at both Virginia International Terminals and the Port of Oakland. This allows the ports to determine whether they can move a crane from one facility to another.
Concrete Runway Design : Designed concrete runways for rubber- tire gantry cranes at the 7th Street Terminal, Transbay Container Terminal, and Middle Harbor Terminal at the Port of Oakland.
Concrete Barge : Worked with Manson Construction designing a 45’ x 115’ concrete barge that is a component of a Water Emergency Transportation Authority ferry terminal in South San Francisco.
Container Crane Design and Review : Analyzed ZPMC dockside container cranes at ports in Mumbai, Gothenberg, and
Bremerhaven, and Ansaldo Cranes for Puertos Mexicanos, to determine whether they met the specifications. Designed log cranes for Price Industries.
Building Design and Review: Was lead structural designer for two- story tilt-up buildings for Rainin Instrument, Legacy Partners for Applied Signal Technology, and Lincoln Technology Center.
Participated in the design of three-story steel-framed buildings at the Port of Oakland at Berths 30 and 55. After the Loma Prieta earthquake, reviewed and assessed damage to more than a dozen buildings.
541
JEFFREY A. FIPPIN, PE, GE
Principal
Jeff brings more than 28 years of experience coordi nating complex field investigations, providing design
recommendations and collaborating with various
stakeholders in providing geotechnical services to both public and private sector clients. Jeff is an expert in so ft ground engineering, liquefaction evaluation, seismic site response, slope stability, deep foundation design, ground improvement, value engineering, and structural construction. Jef f has performed services for marine structures in the San Francisco Bay and Southern California areas. Jeff served as t he
Geotechnical Engineer of Record for evaluation of s everal marine oil terminals, repurposing of the wharves at Richmond Terminal One, Brooklyn Basin, Encinal Terminals, an d
leading the evaluation of the shoreline improvement s at the historical Hunters Point Shipyard. Jeff has led the evaluation and design of shoreline stabilization projects thro ughout the Bay Area. Jeff’s experience with Port of Richmond p rojects includes the role as the geotechnical lead on projects such as Terminal 4, Terminal 2 Dredge Evaluation, and Terminal One Redevelopment.
SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Port of Richmond Terminal 4 —Richmond, CA
Principal in Charge . Jeff performed the peer review and was the primary point of contact with the Port of Richmond, City of Richmond staff, and California Coastal Conservancy staff.
Jeff also assisted in explaining the proposed mitig ation to BCDC staff. ENGEO performed a third-party peer revi ew of revetment design associated with the removal of fac ilities at the Port of Richmond's Terminal 4 site. During cons truction, the revetment moved significantly. ENGEO was retain ed to review documents from design as well as Contractor
submittals and construction logs. ENGEO participated in field observations during test pits into the revetment and provided our opinion on the cause of revetment movement and
mitigation.
Port of Richmond Terminal One Redevelopment —
Richmond, CA
Project Manager. Jeff provided technical oversight of the analyses and the report. The Latitude project is an
approximately 13-acre site located at the closed Te rminal One of the Port of Richmond. The site was originally used for shipping and transport, warehouse utilities, storage, and other port-related industrial activities. Most buildings and structures have been demolished and removed from the project s ite; remaining is an approximately 94,000-square-foot po rt
EDUCATION
BS Civil and Environmental
Engineering University of California
at Davis 1995
MS Civil Engineering, Specializing in
Geotechnical Engineering University
of Texas at Austin 1997
EXPERIENCE
Years with ENGEO: 22
Total Years of Experience: 28
REGISTRATIONS &
CERTIFICATIONS
Civil Engineer, CA-CE 58935
Geotechnical Engineer, CA-GE 2631
Professional Engineer, NV-PE 17701
Professional Engineer, WA-PE
24000815
Professional Engineer, CNMI, 592
SPECIALIZATIONS
•
Compressible Soil
• Deep Foundations
• Laboratory Testing
• Liquefaction Analyses
• Port and Harbor Facilities
• Seismic Spectra Development
• Soil Structure Interaction
• Ground Improvement
• Slope and Shoreline Stability
AFFILIATIONS
ASCE American Society of Civil
Engineers
DFI – Deep Foundations Institute
542
JEFFREY FIPPIN, PE, GE
operations warehouse building (the Terminal One War ehouse) that sits partially on a 480-foot- long marginal pier (the Terminal One Pier) construc ted in 1915. The site will be redeveloped for multi-family buildings providing approximately 330 residential units, and the wharf will be repurposed to provide public access and open space. To address seismic shoreline stability, a deep soil mix buttress will be constructed along the shoreline.
WETA Central Bay Operations and Maintenance Facility —Alameda, CA Project Manager . Jeff performed oversight of the engineers perform ing analyses, performed technical review of all deliverables, and managed t he field staff performing construction observations. The project included construction of a floating dock for mooring 12 ferries, fixed gangway pier, a new seawall, four-story administration building, and fuel yard. ENGEO provided geotechnical recommendations for all of the improvements including piles for the pier and floats.
ENGEO designed the new seawall as a cantilevered soldier pile wall with shotcrete construction.
ENGEO recommended an emerging ground improvement technique, Direct Power Compaction, to mitigate liquefaction of the hydraulically place d fill at a significant cost savings from the approach in the preliminary design by the owner's preliminary design team. During construction, we monitored vibrations, earthwork, and pile driving. ENGEO also performed special inspections during landside construction.
Brooklyn Basin —Oakland, CA
Principal in Charge. Jeff is managing the geotechnical design services. This redevelopment of 65 acres of former Port of Oakland land is located adjacent to the Oakland Estuary and Jack London Square. The project will include an environmentally sustainable, mixed-use urban master plan with 3,100 residential units; 200,000 square f eet of retail and commercial space; and 30 acres of parks, public trails and open space, plus new marinas and renewed wetlands.
Hunters Point Shipyard Phase 2 and Candlestick Point —San Francisco, CA Project Manager and Principal in Charge . Jeff has led the geotechnical design and construc tion of these joint projects since 2011. Together, the H unters Point Shipyard and Candlestick Point areas comprise over 700 acres of waterfront land along San Francisco’s southeastern shore. Our investigations for the site included drilling borin gs over water, in contaminated subsurface conditions, drilling inside Candlestick Park, drill ing in an active housing development, and coordination with the Navy and the City of San Fran cisco. The structures that we are designing at this site need to be designed with foundations that address both the compressible Young Bay Mud and liquefiable fill. The site is also being ra ised to address potential sea-level rise, which results in consolidation of the underlying Young Ba y. As part of this work, we performed an evaluation of the stability of the various structures that form the Hunters Point Shipyard shoreline under loading from both new fill as well as earthquakes. We also performed stability evaluations of the shoreline along Candlestick Point.
Jeff has performed Geotechnical Engineer of Record services on other relevant projects, including:
• IMTT Terminal MOTEMS Audit and Emergency Pile Repa irs, Richmond, CA • Plains MOTEMS Audit, Richmond, CA
• Chevron Richmond Refinery Wharf Geotechnical Peer Review, Richmond, CA • Chevron Richmond Refinery Wharf New Fender, Dolphi n and Breasting Pile Analysis, Richmond, CA
• Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Dredging Analysis, Ric hmond, CA • Richmond Marina Point Development, Richmond, CA
543
Treasure Island Surge Barrier and Ferry Terminal, San Francisco, CA ($33M) Completed March 2022 I Design-Build I Project Executive/Preconstruction Design-Build Breakwater and Ferry Terminal; a critical component of expansive residential development on Treasure Island. The terminal is married up to a land-based transportation hub at the entrance to Treasure Island. The ferry terminal is a fixed concrete pier, a gangway, and a steel float; the terminal will support both regional ferries and water taxis. A second component of the project was a large concrete breakwater designed to protect the ferry terminal from substantial swell and wind conditions inherent on the San Francisco side of Treasure Island.
SFDPW Floating Fireboat Station 35, San Francisco, CA ($20M) Completed March 2022 I Design-Build I Project Executive/Preconstruction This was the design-build of a first-of-its-kind floating fireboat station for the San Francisco Fire Department.
The new station is a 2-story 16,000 square foot building on top of a steel float. The float was built with the mobility and strength to experience limited impact in the event of a major earthquake to serve as an emergency facility. Work included design, fabrication, and installation of the steel float, steel guide piles and land connections including full MEP utilities, seawall stabilization, vehicular access ramp, and steel pier structure for public access and viewing area.
WETA Downtown San Francisco Ferry Terminal ($79M)
Completed June 2020 I CM-at-Risk I Project Executive/Pre-Construction This project expanded the downtown San Francisco ferry terminal from one terminal to three and created a spacious new facility for the public and ferry riders. The terminal will also serve as an emergency service facility in the event of a regional disaster. Located in the sensitive marine environment of San Francisco Bay, the work involved construction of 35,000 sq. ft. of over-water concrete, a new pedestrian bridge (15-by-108-feet), three gangways (each 15-by-105 feet), and three floats (each 42-by-135-feet).
Power Engineering Construction Company – President 2012 - Present Oversees companywide operations. Provides pre-construction design assistance, budgeting, and estimating on complex marine and civil projects.
Power Engineering Construction Company – Vice President 1997 - 2012 Supervised all Power Engineering Construction operations Power Engineering Construction Company – Project Manager 1994- 1997 Managed relationships with key stakeholders, created benchmarks for success and deliverables and planned work assignments that meet critical pat schedule requirements.
Power Engineering Construction Company – Project Engineer 1992- 1994 Responsible for project schedule, field layout, quality control, submittals, field correspondence, and general project support.
Relevant Project Experience:
Work History:
Education:
MS Civil Engineering - Stanford
University 1992
BS Marine Engineering, Valedictorian
Massachusetts Maritime Academy
1986
David Mik
President I 31 Years Experience I 31 Years with Power
As a leader in Heavy Civil and Marine Construction, David brings exceptional creativity and hands-on experience to complex construction projects. He joined Power in 1992, has been a principal since 1997, and has held positions from Project Engineer to his current position as President.
David’s lifetime of marine activities, education, and naval experience make him a tremendous asset when solving construction challenges in and around sensitive marine environments. Below are some highlighted projects built along San Francisco's waterfront.
544
Jeff VanMeter, PE
Preconstruction I 14 Years Experience I 14 Years with Power Ferry Building Underdeck Repairs ($2.3M)
Completed June 2023 I Design-Build I Preconstruction
This project addressed critical areas of underdeck concrete damage at the Ferry Building in San Francisco.
Over 2,750 square-feet of severe soffit spalling, and 460 linear-feet of concrete beam deterioration were identified for repair. The beam repairs involved 190-feet of active utilities. Crews installed work platforms underneath the deck by boat, demolished all delaminated concrete, and off-hauled the concrete debris by boat to place in a dumpster on the Flexi Float Barge. Once all unsound concrete was removed, all existing rebar was either cleaned or removed entirely and replaced with new steel reinforcing. All concrete beams were cast in place during night pours and the soffits were shot with shotcrete. All work was completed in compliance with environmental permitting with zero incident.
WETA Downtown San Francisco Ferry Terminal ($79M)
Completed June 2020 I CM-at-Risk I Project Manager
This project expanded the downtown San Francisco ferry terminal from one terminal to three and created a spacious new facility for the public and ferry riders. The terminal will also serve as an emergency service facility in the event of a regional disaster. Located in the sensitive marine environment of San Francisco Bay, the work involved construction of 35,000 sq. ft. of over-water concrete, a new pedestrian bridge (15-by-108-feet), three gangways (each 15-by-105 feet), and three floats (each 42-by-135-feet).
Exploratorium Pier 15 & 17 Repairs, San Francisco, CA ($51M) Completed August 2012 I Design-Assist I Project Engineer The project required a complete reconstruction of Pier 15 and 17 as part of a conversion into the Exploratorium Museum. Work activities included a seismic upgrade of Pier 15, complete reconstruction of both pier aprons, driving of steel piling ranging from 24” to 72” diameter, removal of a large portion of the concrete infill deck between the piers, extensive below deck and below water concrete repair, heavy timber framing, and new over water cast-in-place concrete deck sections along the entrance corridors to the new museum.
Power Engineering Construction Company – Director of Estimating 2020-Present Provides pre-construction design assistance, budgeting, and estimating and also manages projects in the field which includes the description below.
Power Engineering Construction Company – Project Manager 2013-2020 Managed relationships with key stakeholders, created benchmarks for success and deliverables and planned work assignments that meet critical pat schedule requirements.
Power Engineering Construction Company – Project Engineer 2009-2013 Responsible for project schedule, field layout, quality control, submittals, field correspondence, and general project support.
Jeff provides preconstruction design consulting, scheduling, and estimating on complex marine and civil projects. With 10 years of experience as a Project Manager in the field and another 4 in Estimating, he is skilled at breaking down complex projects into achievable construction solutions. His solutions focus on safety, quality, and client satisfaction.
A majority of Jeff's projects have been time and budget sensitive and range from full spectrum marine construction to complex heavy civil underground utility works; both large and small. Below are some highlighted waterfront projects.
Education:
BS Civil Engineering
Cal Polytechnic
University
2009
Relevant Project Experience:
Work History:
545
Scott Williams
Project Manager I 15 Years Experience I 7 Years with Power Scott has a breadth of experience in the Marine and Heavy-Civil industry as both a Project Manager and Superintendent.
He provides an overall critical path on projects from development to completion including support on and off site. He’s completed many successful jobs in California involving over-water concrete work, pile driving, shoring, installation of floating docks and gangways, commercial diving, underwater work, demolition, and temporary structures. His work ethic is extremely steadfast which allow his teams to depend on him for critical elements of the project. They rely on his technical expertise to confirm construction details, order materials, and make sure all is done to fit the projects budget and schedule.
Education:
BS Civil Engineering
San Diego State
University
2009
Relevant Project Experience:
Balboa Marina Expansion ($8.6M)
Project Manager
This is an improvement and expansion project adding 25% more private slips and establishing a new public dock to Balboa Marina, known as one of Newport Beach’s finest. Apart from the installation of new docks and utilities, the project necessitated the demolition and replacement of an existing seawall, including 36 deep soil mixing columns and 2 king piles for footing support. The project is on track for successful completion with minimal noise disturbance to nearby residents and finishing in time for the eagerly anticipated annual lighted boat parade.
United Stated Coast Guard Wharf Extension ($6.3M)
Project Manager
This project was demolition of an existing wharf fender system and installation of various new components. This included forty-eight 24-inch precast concrete wharf piles; seventy-two 24-inch precast concrete fender piles with HDPE rub strips; nine 16-inch fiber reinforced plastic piles, new bollards, and updated utilities. Additionally, twelve heavily reinforced concrete pile caps were cast in place, fifty-five precast concrete deck panels were installed, and lastly, the topping slab and curbs were formed-and-poured.
Chevron Long Wharf MOTEM Upgrades, Richmond, CA ($44M)
Project Manager
MOTEMS work commenced during Chevron's initial cost review and encompassed estimating, scheduling, field investigation, and destructive testing of wharf elements to establish the project scope. Construction activities involved pile driving, concrete wharf demolition, underwater and above-water concrete wharf construction, prefabricated steel platform installation, and modifications to dock mooring systems. Throughout the project, all tasks were executed from barges, necessitating daily coordination with both Chevron and SF Bay's vessel traffic control system while working around the existing wharf traffic.
Moffett Field Hangar 3 Emergency Repairs, Moffett Field, CA ($38M) Project Engineer
A historic landmark of the Bay Area, this hangar was displaying localized timber failures over 33% of the building structure and presenting hazard of collapse. In order to facilitate emergency timber truss repairs at Hangar 3, KPFF, Liftech, and Power Engineering partnered in a design-build effort to construct a temporary shoring system that would stabilize the failing structure, a scaffolding tower to facilitate repairs, a network of steel exoskeleton truss jacking systems to lift the building’s roof structure back to original profile, and procedures for repair and replacement of timber elements in kind to the original structure. All efforts focused on maintaining the historical aspects of the original design and function.
546
547
1300 Clay Street, Suite 350
Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 645-1238
www.moffattnichol.com
September 20, 2024
Charles Gerard
Port Director
Port of Richmond
1322 Canal Blvd, Richmond, CA 94804
Reference: Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment Proposal an d Fee Estimate Revision 1
Dear Mr. Gerard:
In response to your September 13, 2024 letter concerning the Po rt of Richmond Point Potrero Marine Terminal (PPMT) Assessment, we are pleased to submit thi s revised proposal and fee estimate. As requested, Moffatt & Nichol and Liftech Consultant s have formed a single team to deliver this assessment work for the Port:
• Moffatt & Nichol to serve as prime consultant with Matt Trowbr idge serving as project manager and main point of contact
• Liftech to lead evaluation of Berths 5-8
• Moffatt & Nichol to lead evaluation of the graving basins and finger piers • Power Engineering Construction Company will provide constructa bility review and cost estimating services
• ENGEO will provide the geotechnical assessment
• Liftech to provide a rapid visual inspection of the existing W hirley crane next to Basin 5 and provide recommendations to the Port
We have revised the attached scope and fee per this approach and to address all of the comments in your September 13, 2024 letter. Our team is excited to suppo rt the Port of Richmond on this assignment. Please contact me at (510) 788-5959 or [email protected] at any time to discuss the contents of this proposal.
Very truly yours,
MOFFATT & NICHOL
Matthew Trowbridge, PE, SE
Vice President
Office: 510-788-8959
Cell: 562-505-2138
[email protected]
548
1 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Scope of Work
The proposed scope of work includes the following tasks:
1. Project Management
2. Meetings
3. Data Review
4. Above Water Routine Inspection
5. Condition Assessment Report
Task 1: Project Management
This task includes project management hours to lead the M&N team. Work includes project control tasks such as monthly invoicing and subconsultant management. B udget assumes 1 hour per week over 22 weeks.
Deliverable: Monthly invoice
Task 2: Meetings
This task includes budget allowance for the kickoff meeting and biweekly virtual progress meetings. The purpose of the biweekly progress meetings is for the Port to ask questions and to direct the focus of the assessment. Budget assumes 1.5 hours pe r week over 22 weeks. All meetings assume attendance by 3 members of the M&N team. At the Port’s request, M&N will attend at least two and up to three city council meetings to present the findings of the assessment in Microsoft PowerPoint.
Deliverables:
• Meeting notes via email
• City Council Presentation Slides (.ppt and .pdf)
Task 3: Data Review
M&N will confirm we have all required documents needed to progress the work. Note that the Port has confirmed via the RFP and the September 13, 2024 letter tha t some existing information is available. M&N will review and request any required documents n ot currently in hand from the Port through a Data Gap Memorandum. Examples of documents that will be requested to progress the work include, but are not limited to, the following:
• As-built / record drawings including existing dwg files • Previous inspection and condition assessment reports
• Previous geotechnical data and recommendation reports at the s ite • Recent topographic, boundary, and bathymetric surveys and util ity data at the site • Previous engineering assessments, calculations, and reports • Previous construction records (e.g. pile driving records) • Historical data from the Kaiser shipyard construction • Photographs and drawings of the finger piers
• Liftech to provide geotechnical information from previous work at Berths 7 and 8 549
2 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Note that M&N and the Port should check with operators/tenants and contractors to compile additional records that may not be in current possession by the Port.
Deliverable: Data Gap Memorandum
Task 4: Above Water Routine Inspection
Prior to mobilization, the M&N team will prepare an inspection safety plan and activity hazard analysis to plan the field work based on site specific conditio ns. The safety plan will be shared with the Port and Tenants for review and approval prior to mobilization to site.
The M&N team will perform an above water routine inspection in accordance with American Society of Civil Engineers Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment No. 130 (ASCE No. 130). The intent of the inspection is to assess the general con dition of the structure, assign a Condition Assessment Rating, and make recommendations for next steps. The work includes above deck and above water, below deck visual inspection by a 2 -man crew (unless otherwise noted) led by a senior engineer-inspector.
• Graving basin and finger piers inspections will be completed b y M&N inspection staff using M&N’s inspection skiff assuming it can be launched from and sto red at the PPMT for the duration of the inspection work.
• Berths 5-8 inspections will be completed by Liftech inspection staff using Power Engineering Construction’s inspection boat.
The following durations and special conditions are noted for each structure:
• Inspection Planning and Mobilization
o 8 hours to prepare and review pre-inspection safety plan and a ctivity hazard analysis, prepare equipment for mobilization, and demobilize from site.
• Berth 7-8:
o Wharf: 1,550 ft long x 40 ft wide = 60,000 SF
o Backlands: 1,550 ft long x 75 ft wide = 116,000 SF
Outer wharf and topside, 2-man = 1 day
Inner wharf, 2-man = 1 day with confined space entry
access/equipment/supervision provided by Power Engineering
• Berth 5-6:
o Wharf: 740 ft long x 47 ft wide = 35,000 SF
o Backlands: 475 ft long x 50 ft wide = 24,000 SF
Above deck and above water, 2-man = 1 day
• Graving Basins:
o ~7,000 ft of berthing line
o 6 graving basin structures at 610 ft x 35 ft each = 128,000 SF Above deck, 2-man = 0.5 day
Below deck, 2-man on foot = 1.5 days
Above water, 2-man with inspection skiff = 1 day
• Finger Piers:
o 2 finger piers at 550 ft x 48 ft each = 52,500 SF
550
3 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Above deck, 2-man = 0.5 day
Below deck, 2-man with inspection skiff to as-built = 1 day
• Geotechnical Inspection:
o The M&N team has budgeted for a day of inspection for 1 geotec hnical engineer from ENGEO to participate in inspection activities with Liftech and Power at Berth 5-8.
The M&N team will summarize the results of the inspection in an inspection report including an executive summary, introduction, site description, inspection a pproach summary, observed conditions, photos, assignment of condition ratings for each ma jor structural element per ASCE No. 130, and recommendations.
Deliverables:
• Site-specific pre-inspection safety plan
• Above Water Inspection Report (.doc and .pdf and electronic tr ansfer of all photos generated during inspection)
Task 5: Condition Assessment Report
The following work will be completed during this task:
• Task 5.1: Geotechnical Characterization Report
• Task 5.2: Settlement Evaluation between Berths 6/7
• Task 5.3: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 5-6
• Task 5.4: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 7-8
• Task 5.5: Expand Operations at Berth 7-8
• Task 5.6: Load Rating at Graving Basins
• Task 5.7: Whirley Crane Recommendations
• Task 5.8: Project Planning
• Task 5.9: Cost Estimates
• Task 5.10: Condition Assessment Report
Task 5.1: Geotechnical Characterization Report
M&N subconsultant, ENGEO, will perform a review of existing con struction documentation, geotechnical reports, and other documents provided by the Port of Richmond for geotechnical and geological data in order to characterize the subsurface con ditions. ENGEO will use this information, as well as any publicly available historical topographic maps or aerial photographs to create a geotechnical characterization report for the subject p ortions of the Port. This document will be valuable as a basis for future analyses for assessments, upgrades, and repairs. In support of this report, ENGEO will perform a limited amount of shoreline slope stability (if necessary based on observations during site inspections) as well as develop a range of likely vertical capacities for pile foundations based on pile diameter and depth for up to four pile types/diameter combinations at three different subsurface profiles. Additionally, a bearing capacity estimate for the graving basin structures will be provided.
Deliverable: Geotechnical Characterization Report (.doc and .pdf)
551
4 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Task 5.2: Settlement Evaluation between Berths 6/7
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, Liftech will assess and document the likely cause of settlement observed between Berths 6/7.
Task 5.3: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 5-6
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, Liftech will assess and document the likely cause of erosion observed behind Berth 5-6.
Task 5.4: Erosion Evaluation behind Berth 7-8
Based on the results of the Task 4 Above Water Inspection, Liftech will assess and document the likely cause of erosion observed behind Berth 7-8.
Task 5.5: Expand Operations at Berth 7-8
Based on information collected during Task 2 Data Review and results from Task 5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report, Liftech will evaluate options to increase the load capacity of Berths 7-8 to accommodate tractors, farm equipment, heavy pr oject cargo, and mobile harbor cranes.
Task 5.6: Load Rating at Graving Basins
Based on information collected during Task 2 Data Review and results from Task 4 Above Water Inspection and Task 5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report , M&N will perform a load rating calculation for vertical operational loads at the Graving Basins.
Task 5.7: Whirley Crane Recommendations
Given the marine environment and the crane’s age, we anticipate that corrosion may have compromised its structural integrity, mechanical functionality, and accessibility, potentially increasing hazards in certain areas. Liftech will perform one-d ay visual inspection of the crane, identifying structural, mechanical, and electrical deficiencies in need of repair from public safety consideration, such as risk of collapse. We will provide qualit ative concepts for securing the at- risk crane components. Based on this initial assessment, we wi ll develop recommendations for the work required to secure the cranes. A short report will be provided with photos, findings, recommendations, and ROM of cost estimate.
Deliverable: Whirley Crane Reports (.doc and .pdf)
Task 5.8: Project Planning
Based on the results of all tasks above, the M&N team will work closely with the Port to develop a list of potential projects (up to 10). The M&N team will incl ude opportunities for expansion of operations with minimal capital investment.
As part of this task, M&N will host an Independent Technical Re view Workshop. The 4-hour workshop will gather senior marine engineers from across M&N to review the results of the 552
5 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
inspection and advise on best path forward based on their experience working on similar projects throughout the US. This workshop will be covered by M&N and not charged to the Port of Richmond.
Task 5.9: Cost Estimates
M&N subconsultant, Power Engineering Construction, will prepare budgetary cost estimates for the potential projects (up to 10). The estimates will be prepar ed consistent with AACE International Class 5 accuracy (-30% / +50%) consistent with the level of design (planning phase, concept screening).
Deliverable: Cost Estimates
Task 5.10: Condition Assessment Report
A Condition Assessment Report will be prepared to summarize the work completed during Task
5. All subtasks will have a section of the report documenting the results of the subtask. The report will include a prioritized project list sorted by need, opportunity, urgency, and cost. The M&N Team will work closely with the Port to identify a sequencing approa ch for the proposed projects to minimize potential impact to port operations. An executive summ ary will prepared to provide an overview of the outcomes of the work for decision makers. The f inal report will include the following:
• Summary of conditions found during field investigation. • Recommendations for urgent repairs to maintain service of the facilities. • Recommendations for short-, mid-, and long-term repairs/ upgra des along with associated budgets. This will be formatted into a 5-, 10-, and 20-year capital expenditure plan. • Recommendations for next steps that may include additional inv estigations and materials testing to help refine the recommendations.
M&N will schedule a meeting to present the draft condition repo rt to the Port. All Port comments received on the draft report will be documented in a comment tr acking log and formal responses will be documented.
Deliverable: Condition Assessment Report (.doc and .pdf)
553
6 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Schedule
The project scope and fee estimate are based the following schedule:
Notice to Proceed (NTP) November 2024
Data Gap Memorandum Within 2 weeks of NTP
Site-Specific Pre-Inspection Safety Plan December 2024
Above Water Inspections December 2024 and January 2025 Geotechnical Characterization Report January 17, 2025
Above Water Inspection Report February 14, 2025
Draft Condition Assessment Report March 7, 2025
Final Condition Assessment Report March 28, 2025
Note that the RFP asks for a meeting with Port staff at 8 weeks into the project and prior to release of final assessment. We propose that our biweekly meetings with the Port can be used to review progress of the work and closely coordinate on key findings and path forward. We also envision that separate meetings will be scheduled to review the results of the inspection and to present the draft condition assessment report to the Port.
The schedule is based on NTP being received at the end of November. However if the NTP is received sooner the schedule can shift to the left. We understand the Port will need input by the end of 2024 to plan budgets for 2025 and beyond - M&N will plan to provide reasonable assumptions to the Port to use for budget planning regardless of the how far the assessment work has progressed.
Fee Estimate
The following budget allowance is proposed on a time and materi als not-to-exceed (T&M NTE) or lump sum basis, whichever the Port prefers. Refer to the att achment for a detailed hours and cost summary table.
Task
No. Task Description Total
1 Project Management $9,750
2 Meetings $15,500
3 Data Review $20,500
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection $63,250
5 Condition Assessment Report $141,000
Total (without confined space work) $250,000
Confined Space Entry $9,000
Total (with confined space work included) $259,000
554
7 Port of Richmond PPMT Assessment
Proposal and Fee Estimate R1
Assumptions
1. Inspection work assumes 8-10 hour days.
2. All necessary site access is assumed to be provided by and/o r coordinated by the Port.
We will coordinate closely with the Port to plan the inspections and assume the sites will be readily accessible for inspection on the agreed days. Power Engineering Construction will provide manhole and confined space access for Liftech to perform inspection behind the bulkhead wall at Berths 6-8.
3. No weather delays are budgeted. Our team is local so if the weather is not favorable then the inspection day will be deferred to the next available good weather day with no impact to budget.
4. We assume the M&N inspection skiff can be launched from and safely stored overnight at a secure location at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal for the duration of the inspection work.
5. Our proposal does not include underwater inspection, materia l sampling / testing, or other advanced inspection and testing approaches at this time.
6. All required site data will be provided by the Port. No site surveys or geotechnical investigation is required.
7. No lateral analysis will be completed at this time (seismic, mooring, berthing, etc.)
8. No inspection of buildings is included. No inspection of fac ility utilities or systems is included.
9. All deliverables include draft and final submission for Port review. The project budget assumes one round of Port comments for each draft deliverable. The reviews will be in parallel with the work, such that progress can continue during reviews.
10. All deliverables will be provided electronically. No hard copy submittals are included.
11. A budget allowance of $1,000 is included for approved expenses.
Attachments
• Detailed Fee Estimate
• September 13, 2024 Letter from Port of Richmond
555
Port of Richmond
Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
Moffatt & Nichol - Fee Estimate
Task
No. Task Description M&N Cost Sub Cost Sub Mark-up Other Direct Costs Total Total
(Rounded)
1 Project Management $7,436 $2,040 $204 $0 $9,680 $9,750 2 Meetings $9,351 $5,481 $548 $0 $15,380 $15,500
3 Data Review $3,376 $15,622 $1,562 $0 $20,560 $20,500
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection $38,676 $21,652 $2,165 $1,000 $63,493 $ 63,250 5 Condition Assessment Report $34,434 $96,792 $9,679 $0 $140,905 $141, 000 $93,273 $141,587 $14,159 $1,000 $250,019 $250,000
Add Confined Space $0 $8,064 $806 $0 $8,870 $9,000
Total (with confined space) $93,273 $149,651 $14,965 $1,000 $258,889 $259,000 Detailed Summary Table
Task
No. Task Description M&N Cost Sub Cost Sub Mark-up Other Direct Costs Total
1 Project Management $7,436 $2,040 $204 $9,680
2 Meetings $9,351 $5,481 $548 $15,380
3 Data Review $3,376 $15,622 $1,562 $20,560
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection $0
4.1 Pre-Inspection Safety Plan & Mob Prep $2,242 $0 $2,242
4.2 Inspection $20,746 $21,652 $2,165 $1,000 $45,563
4.3 Reporting $15,688 $0 $15,688
5 Condition Assessment Report $0
5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report $338 $11,014 $1,101 $12,453
5.2 Settlement Evaluation B6/B7 $0 $10,148 $1,015 $11,163
5.3 Erosion Evaluation B5-B6 $0 $4,190 $419 $4,609
5.4 Erosion Evaluation B7-B8 $0 $4,190 $419 $4,609
5.5 Expand Operations B7-B8 $0 $14,992 $1,499 $16,491
5.6 Load Rating at Graving Basins $7,592 $2,920 $292 $10,804
5.7 Whirley Crane Recommendations $0 $11,328 $1,133 $12,461
5.8 Project Planning $14,864 $13,890 $1,389 $30,143
5.9 Cost Estimates $1,864 $9,360 $936 $12,160
5.10 Condition Assessment Report $9,776 $14,760 $1,476 $26,012 $93,273 $141,587 $14,159 $1,000 $250,019
9/20/2024
Total (without confined space)
Total
556
Port of Richmond
Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
Moffatt & Nichol - Fee Estimate
Moffatt & Nichol Labor
Matt
Trowbridge Sean Hart Martin
Anderson
Wice
Ibrahimi
Damilola
Taiwo
Azadeh
Bozorgzadeh Jim Brady Coy Butler Bill Dubbs Jack Fink
Project
Manager
Inspection
Lead
Inspection
Lead
Project
Engineer
Project
Engineer
Structural
Lead
Senior
Structural
Advisor
Senior
Structural
Advisor
Senior
Inspection
Advisor
Senior
Estimator
$338.00 $297.00 $235.00 $189.00 $235.00 $338.00 $338.00 $338.00 $315.00 $338.00 1 Project Management 22 22 $7,436
2 Meetings 18 11 29 $9,351
3 Data Review 2 4 8 14 $3,376
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection 0$ 0
4.1 Pre-Inspection Safety Plan & Mob Prep 2 4 2 8 $2,242
4.2 Inspection 2 40 40 2 84 $20,746
4.3 Reporting 2 20 48 70 $15,688
5 Condition Assessment Report 0$ 0
5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report 1 1 $338
5.2 Settlement Evaluation B6/B7 0$ 0
5.3 Erosion Evaluation B5-B6 0$ 0
5.4 Erosion Evaluation B7-B8 0$ 0
5.5 Expand Operations B7-B8 0$ 0
5.6 Load Rating at Graving Basins 4 4 16 4 2 30 $7,592
5.7 Whirley Crane Recommendations 0$ 0
5.8 Project Planning 12 8 16 8 4 4 52 $14,864
5.9 Cost Estimates 2 4 6 $1,864
5.10 Condition Assessment Report 4 8 32 44 $9,776
7 1 1 0 3 01 6 2 0 1 2 46203 6 0 $93,273
$23,998 $30,591 $0 $30,618 $0 $4,056 $1,352 $2,028 $630 $0 Subconsultant Labor
Jeff Fippin
Principal
Geotech Eng Sr. Struct Engr Sr. Struct
Engr/PM
Project
Engr/PM Design Engr Admin
Principal
Project
Executive
Project
Manager
Project
Engineer
Boat
Operator
$390.00 $330.00 $247.00 $180.00 $150.00 $300.00 $255.00 $215.00 $177.00 $145.00 $288.00 $240.00 $150.00 $142.00 1 Project Management 8 8 $2,040
2 Meetings 4 4 7 2 4 21 $5,481
3 Data Review 4 16 3 14 8 8 8 61 $15,622
4 Above Water Rapid Inspection 2 8 4 24 40 4 16 8 106 $21,652 5 Condition Assessment Report 0$ 0
5.1 Geotechnical Characterization Report 4 6 22 8 4 44 $11,014
5.2 Settlement Evaluation B6/B7 4 8 8 12 4 36 $10,148
5.3 Erosion Evaluation B5-B6 1 2 4 6 2 15 $4,190
5.4 Erosion Evaluation B7-B8 1 2 4 6 2 15 $4,190
5.5 Expand Operations B7-B8 2 4 16 24 8 54 $14,992
5.6 Load Rating at Graving Basins 2 4 4 10 $2,920
5.7 Whirley Crane Recommendations 43 0 1 4 48 $11,328
5.8 Project Planning 4 16 2 2 12 32 68 $13,890
5.9 Cost Estimates 28 8 32 50 $9,360
5.10 Condition Assessment Report 2 4 8 24 8 4 4 8 62 $14,760 26 6 70 8 8 57 179 0 64 8 36 40 88 8 598 $141,587
$10,140 $1,980 $17,290 $1,440 $1,200 $17,100 $45,645 $0 $11,328 $1,160 $1 0,368 $9,600 $13,200 $1,136 Confined Space Entry
Sr. Struct
Engr/PM Design Engr Project
Manager
Project
Engineer Field Lead Confined
Space Gear
$255.00 $177.00 $240.00 $150.00 $142.00 $82.00
Add Confined Space Entry (1 day) 8 8 2 8 16 8 50 $8,064 8 8 281 6 8 50 $8,064
$2,040 $1,416 $480 $1,200 $2,272 $656Totals
Liftech Consultants Power Engineering Construction
Total Hours Total CostTask
No. Task Description
Totals
Associate
Geotech Eng
Geotech
Project Eng Senior CAD Project
AssistantTask
No. Task Description
Total
Cost
Total CostTotal Hours
Totals
Liftech Consultants Power Engineering Construction
Total Hours
9/20/2024
ENGEO (Geotech)
Task
No. Task Description
557
1 PORT OF RICHMOND
September 13, 2024
Erik Soderberg, PE, SE
President
Liftech Consultants, Inc.
344 Thomas L Berkley Way
Oakland, CA 94612
Matthew Trowbridge, PE, SE
Vice President
Moffatt and Nichol
1300 Clay Street, Suite 350
Oakland, CA 94612
Subject: Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
Dear Mr. Soderberg and Mr. Trowbridge:
The Port of Richmond appreciates your firm’s interest in supporting the Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment request for proposal. After the review of your proposals and interviews, the Port finds both your firms well qualified to support our needs. We believe each firm has unique technical qualifications that can support our effort. Thus, we would like to invite both your firms to support the study with focus on the following:
Liftech to lead the evaluation of berths 5, 6, 7, and 8. As a reminder, the key focus of the investigation is to assess why the area between berths 6 and 7 has subsided. Moffat and Nichol to lead the evaluation of the Graving Basins and the finger piers. We would like to have Power Engineers, who are on the Liftech team, support constructability review and provide cost analysis for all areas of the project. Engeo who is on both teams, should support the geotechnical assessment. As additional scope, Liftech to conduct a visual inspection of the Whirley Crane located next to Basin 5 and summarize potential concerns related to its structural integrity and capacity to resist seismic and wind loads in a memorandum. This memorandum should provide recommendations for next steps to evaluate is structural integrity.
The Port requests that the consultant team as noted above submit a modified scope of work, schedule and fee that incorporates the following:
1. The Port intends to contract with one firm that will assign a project manager who will be responsible for managing the budget, schedule, and quality of deliverables. The Port does not have a preference as to the lead consultant.
2. The consultant shall schedule and attend an online coordination meeting with the Port every other week to discuss the progress of the work. The intent of the discussion is to allow the Port to ask questions and direct the focus of the assessment.
558
RFP - Point Potrero Marine Terminal Assessment
2 3. The consultant shall attend at least two city council meetings to present the findings of the assessment at the request of the Port. The consultant shall summarize their findings in a PowerPoint or similar format.
4. Liftech will complete a below deck inspection of the berths 5, 6, 7, and 8 as noted in your proposal.
The Port will not provide a ladder or support to gain access. Please include this in your cost proposal.
5. Inspections shall be by visual observation by field walk and by boat at all facilities. Diving inspections are not required at this time.
6. No materials sampling or testing is required.
7. The Port will provide all geotechnical reports for the site as well as historical data from the Kaiser Shipyard’s construction. Liftech to provide geotechnical information for Berths 7 and 8. This information will serve as the basis for Engeo’s work supporting the assessment.
8. The Port has photographs and drawings of the finger piers, which we will provide for Moffatt and Nichol’s use in assessing conditions.
9. The final report shall include the following:
a. Summary of conditions found during field investigation. b. Recommendations for urgent repairs to maintain service of the facilities. c. Recommendations for short-, mid-, and long-term repairs/ upgrades along with associated budgets. This should be formatted into 5-, 10-, and 20-year capital expenditure plan.
10. Recommendations for next steps that may include additional investigations and materials testing to help refine the recommendations.
11. All materials generated by the consultant shall be submitted in their native formats to the Port of Richmond at the conclusion of the contract.
12. The total not to exceed fee should be about $250,000.
13. Please submit your revised scope of work, schedule, and fee by September 20, 2024.
We appreciate your interest in supporting the Port of Richmond. For details related to contracting please call Charles Gerard at 510-620-6792 or [email protected]. For clarification on the requested scope of work, please contact Robert Stevens at 415-533-1864 or [email protected]
Sincerely,
Charles J. Gerard
Charles Gerard
Port Director
CC Lizeht Zepeda, Alan Wolken, and Robert Stevens
559
POINT POTRERO MARINE TERMINAL ASSESSMENT
Submittal date 08.23.2024 10.9.2024
Summary Prepared by: Robert Stevens
Review Team: Charles Gerard, Lizeht Zepeda, Alan Wolken, and Daniel Santos Element Total Points Available Liftech Moffatt and Nichol Did the vendor demonstrate experience in assessing
conditions of 1940’s era marine infrastructure? 30 26 27 Did the vendor provide a detailed work plan that
clearly illustrates meeting the Port’s needs in an
efficient manner? 40 33 34
Did the vendor demonstrate the ability to assess
conditions, establish budgets, and prioritize repairs
with limited information and resources? 30 27 26
Total: 100 86 86
Is this a Richmond firm or have partners that
comply with the Richmond Business Opportunity
Ordinance? No No
Consultant Base Cost $173,193.00 $245,000.00
Consultant Optional Cost $50,452.00 $0.00
Consultant Total Cost $223,645.00 $245,000.00
Consultant Contacts
Moffat and Nichol Contact Matthew Trowbridge [email protected] Liftech Contact Sugi Loni [email protected]
Scoring
560
Reso. No. _____