Richmond City Council
December 3, 2024

/33 0D\
✔ ✔ ✔
Jay Zhong
CFO
925-339-8607 11/3/24
✔
1079
/RFDO$VVLVWDQFH3URFHGXUHV0DQXDO (;+%,74
'LVFORVXUHRI/REE\LQJ$FWLYLWLHV
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
 ,GHQWLI\WKHW\SHRIFRYHUHGIHGHUDODFWLRQIRUZKLFKOREE\LQJDFWLYLW\LVRUKDVEHHQVHFXUHGWRLQIOXHQFHWKHRXWFRPHRID FRYHUHGIHGHUDODFWLRQ
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
VXEFRQWUDFWVVXEJUDQWVDQGFRQWUDFWDZDUGVXQGHUJUDQWV  ,IWKHRUJDQL]DWLRQILOLQJWKHUHSRUWLQ,WHPFKHFNV6XEDZDUGHHWKHQHQWHUWKHIXOOQDPHDGGUHVVFLW\VWDWHDQG]LSFRGHRI WKHSULPHIHGHUDOUHFLSLHQW ,QFOXGH&RQJUHVVLRQDO'LVWULFWLINQRZQ  (QWHUWKHQDPHRIWKHIHGHUDODJHQF\PDNLQJWKHDZDUGRUORDQFRPPLWPHQW ,QFOXGHDWOHDVWRQHRUJDQL]DWLRQOHYHOEHORZ DJHQF\QDPHLINQRZQ )RUH[DPSOH'HSDUWPHQWRI7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ8QLWHG6WDWHV&RDVW*XDUG  (QWHUWKHIHGHUDOSURJUDPQDPHRUGHVFULSWLRQIRUWKHFRYHUHGIHGHUDODFWLRQ LWHP
 ,INQRZQHQWHUWKHIXOO&DWDORJRI)HGHUDO
'RPHVWLF$VVLVWDQFH
&)'$
QXPEHUIRUJUDQWVFRRSHUDWLYHDJUHHPHQWVORDQVDQGORDQFRPPLWPHQWV  (QWHUWKHPRVWDSSURSULDWHIHGHUDOLGHQWLI\LQJQXPEHUDYDLODEOHIRUWKHIHGHUDODFWLRQLGHQWLILFDWLRQLQLWHP HJ5HTXHVWIRU
3URSRVDO
5)3
QXPEHU,QYLWDWLRQIRU%LG
,)%
QXPEHUJUDQWDQQRXQFHPHQWQXPEHUWKHFRQWUDFWJUDQWRUORDQDZDUGQXPEHU WKHDSSOLFDWLRQSURSRVDOFRQWUROQXPEHUDVVLJQHGE\WKHIHGHUDODJHQF\  ,QFOXGHSUHIL[HVHJ5)3'(


 )RUDFRYHUHGIHGHUDODFWLRQZKHUHWKHUHKDVEHHQDQDZDUGRUORDQFRPPLWPHQWE\WKH)HGHUDODJHQF\HQWHUWKHIHGHUDODPRXQW RIWKHDZDUGORDQFRPPLWPHQWVIRUWKHSULPHHQWLW\LGHQWLILHGLQLWHPRU  (QWHUWKHIXOOQDPHDGGUHVVFLW\VWDWHDQG]LSFRGHRIWKHOREE\LQJHQWLW\HQJDJHGE\WKHUHSRUWLQJHQWLW\LGHQWLILHGLQ,WHPWR LQIOXHQFHWKHFRYHUHGIHGHUDODFWLRQ
 (QWHUWKHIXOOQDPHVRIWKHLQGLYLGXDO
V
SHUIRUPLQJVHUYLFHVDQGLQFOXGHIXOODGGUHVVLIGLIIHUHQWIURP D
 (QWHU/DVW1DPH
)LUVW1DPHDQG0LGGOH,QLWLDO
0O

 (QWHUWKHDPRXQWRIFRPSHQVDWLRQSDLGRUUHDVRQDEO\H[SHFWHGWREHSDLGE\WKHUHSRUWLQJHQWLW\ ,WHP
WRWKHOREE\LQJHQWLW\

,WHP
 ,QGLFDWHZKHWKHUWKHSD\PHQWKDVEHHQPDGH
DFWXDO
RUZLOOEHPDGH

SODQQHG
 &KHFNDOOER[HVWKDWDSSO\ ,IWKLVLV
DPDWHULDOFKDQJHUHSRUWHQWHUWKHFXPXODWLYHDPRXQWRISD\PHQWPDGHRUSODQQHGWREHPDGH  &KHFNDOOER[HVWKDWDSSO\ ,ISD\PHQWLVPDGHWKURXJKDQLQNLQGFRQWULEXWLRQVSHFLI\WKHQDWXUHDQGYDOXHRIWKHLQNLQG SD\PHQW
 &KHFNDOOER[HVWKDWDSSO\ ,IRWKHUVSHFLI\QDWXUH  3URYLGHDVSHFLILFDQGGHWDLOHGGHVFULSWLRQRIWKHVHUYLFHVWKDWWKHOREE\LVWKDVSHUIRUPHGRUZLOOEHH[SHFWHGWRSHUIRUPDQGWKH GDWH
V
RIDQ\VHUYLFHVUHQGHUHG ,QFOXGHDOOSUHSDUDWRU\DQGUHODWHGDFWLYLW\QRWMXVWWLPHVSHQWLQDFWXDOFRQWDFWZLWKIHGHUDO RIILFLDOV ,GHQWLI\WKHIHGHUDORIILFHU
V
RUHPSOR\HH
V
FRQWDFWHGRUWKHRIILFHU
V
HPSOR\HH
V
RU0HPEHU
V
RI&RQJUHVVWKDW
ZHUHFRQWDFWHG
 &KHFNZKHWKHURUQRWDFRQWLQXDWLRQVKHHW
V
LVDWWDFKHG
 7KHFHUWLI\LQJRIILFLDOVKDOOVLJQDQGGDWHWKHIRUPDQGSULQWKLVKHUQDPHWLWOHDQGWHOHSKRQHQXPEHU Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 30-minutes per response, including time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0348-0046), Washington, D.C. 20503. SFLLL-Instructions Rev. 06-04

/33 0D\ 1080
Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-G
Construction Contract DBE Commitment
Exhibit 15-G: Construction Contract DBE Commitment

1. Local Agency: 2. Contract DBE Goal:

3. Project Description:

4. Project Location:

5. Bidder's Name: 6. Prime Certified DBE: 7. Bid Amount:

8. Total Dollar Amount for ALL Subcontractors: 9. Total Number of ALL Subcontractors:

10. Bid
Item
Number

11. Description of Work, Service, or
Materials Supplied

12. NAICS or
Work
Category
Codes

13. DBE
Certification
Number

14. DBE Contact Information
(Must be certified on the date bids are
opened)

15. DBE
Dollar
Amount
Local Agency to Complete this Section upon Execution of Award 16. TOTAL CLAIMED DBE PARTICIPATION

22. Local Agency Contract Number:

23. Federal-Aid Project Number:

24. Bid Opening Date: %

25. Contract Award Date:

IMPORTANT: Identify all DBE firms being claimed for credit, regardless of tier. Names of the First Tier DBE Subcontractors and their respective item(s) of work listed above must be consistent, where applicable with the names and items of the work in the "Subcontractor List" submitted with your bid. Written confirmation of each listed DBE is required.

26. Award Amount:

Local Agency certifies that all DBE certifications are valid and information on this form is complete and accurate.

27. Local Agency Representative’s Signature 28. Date

29. Local Agency Representative’s Name 30. Phone

31. Local Agency Representative’s Title

17. Preparer’s Signature 18. Date

19. Preparer’s Name 20. Phone

21. Preparer’s Title
DISTRIBUTION: 1. Original – Local Agency

2. Copy – Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE). Failure to submit to DLAE within 30 days of contract execution may result in de-obligation of federal funds on contract.

3. Include additional copy with award package.

January 2023
City of Richmond
Lincoln Safe Route to School CML- 05137(055 )
29 6th St, Richmond, CA 94801
BuildCorp Inc
$ 27,360.00 1
$ 456,000.00
2 Traffic Control 561990 50891 MZB Engineering 192 Athlone Lane Corona, $ 27,360.00 $ 27,360.00

6.00 11/03/2024
Jay Zhong 925-339-8607
CFO
1081
Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-G
Construction Contract DBE Commitment
INSTRUCTIONS – CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT DBE COMMITMENT

CONTRACTOR SECTION

1. Local Agency - Enter the name of the local agency that is administering the contract.

2. Contract DBE Goal - Enter the contract DBE goal percentage as it appears on the project advertisement.

3. Project Description - Enter the project description as it appears on the project advertisement (Bridge Rehab, Seismic Rehab, Overlay, Widening, etc).

4. Project Location - Enter the project location(s) as it appears on the project advertisement.

5. Bidder’s Name - Enter the contractor’s firm name.

6. Prime Certified DBE - Check box if prime contractor is a certified DBE.

7. Bid Amount - Enter the total contract bid dollar amount for the prime contractor.

8. Total Dollar Amount for ALL Subcontractors – Enter the total dollar amount for all subcontracted contractors.

SUM = (DBEs + all Non-DBEs). Do not include the prime contractor information in this count.

9. Total number of ALL subcontractors – Enter the total number of all subcontracted contractors. SUM = (DBEs + all Non-DBEs). Do not include the prime contractor information in this count.

10. Bid Item Number - Enter bid item number for work, services, or materials supplied to be provided.

11. Description of Work, Services, or Materials Supplied - Enter description of work, services, or materials to be provided. Indicate all work to be performed by DBEs including work performed by the prime contractor’s own forces, if the prime is a DBE. If 100% of the item is not to be performed or furnished by the DBE, describe the exact portion to be performed or furnished by the DBE. See LAPM Chapter 9 to determine how to count the participation of DBE firms.

12. NAICS or Work Category Codes - Enter NAICS or Work Category Codes from the California Unified Certification Program database.

13. DBE Certification Number - Enter the DBE’s Certification Identification Number. All DBEs must be certified on the date bids are opened.

14. DBE Contact Information - Enter the name, address, and phone number of all DBE subcontracted contractors.

Also, enter the prime contractor’s name and phone number, if the prime is a DBE.

15. DBE Dollar Amount - Enter the subcontracted dollar amount of the work to be performed or service to be provided.

Include the prime contractor if the prime is a DBE. See LAPM Chapter 9 for how to count full/partial participation.

16. Total Claimed DBE Participation - $: Enter the total dollar amounts entered in the “DBE Dollar Amount” column. %: Enter the total DBE participation claimed (“Total Claimed DBE Participation Dollars” divided by item “Bid Amount”). If the total % claimed is less than item “Contract DBE Goal,” an adequately documented Good Faith Effort (GFE) is required (see Exhibit 15-H DBE Information - Good Faith Efforts of the LAPM).

17. Preparer’s Signature - The person completing the DBE commitment form on behalf of the contractor’s firm must sign their name.

18. Date - Enter the date the DBE commitment form is signed by the contractor’s preparer.

19. Preparer’s Name - Enter the name of the person preparing and signing the contractor’s DBE commitment form.

20. Phone - Enter the area code and phone number of the person signing the contractor’s DBE commitment form.

21. Preparer’s Title - Enter the position/title of the person signing the contractor’s DBE commitment form.

LOCAL AGENCY SECTION

22. Local Agency Contract Number - Enter the Local Agency contract number or identifier.

23. Federal-Aid Project Number - Enter the Federal-Aid Project Number(s).

24. Bid Opening Date - Enter the date contract bids were opened.

25. Contract Award Date - Enter the date the contract was executed.

26. Award Amount – Enter the contract award amount as stated in the executed contract.

27. Local Agency Representative’s Signature - The person completing this section of the form for the Local Agency must sign their name to certify that the information in this and the Contractor Section of this form is complete and accurate.

28. Date - Enter the date the DBE commitment form is signed by the Local Agency Representative.

29. Local Agency Representative’s Name - Enter the name of the Local Agency Representative certifying the contractor’s DBE commitment form.

30. Phone - Enter the area code and phone number of the person signing the contractor’s DBE commitment form.

31. Local Agency Representative Title - Enter the position/title of the Local Agency Representative certifying the contractor’s DBE commitment form.

January 2023
1082
Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-H
Proposer/Contractor Good Faith Effort
EXHIBIT 15-H: PROPOSER/CONTRACTOR GOOD FAITH EFFORTS
Cost Proposal Due Date ___________________ PE/CE
Federal-aid Project No(s). _____________________ Bid Opening Date ___________________ CON The established a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal of for this contract. The information provided herein shows the required good faith efforts to meet or exceed the DBE contract goal.

Proposers or bidders submit the following information to document their good faith efforts within five (5) calendar days from cost proposal due date or bid opening. Proposers and bidders are recommended to submit the following information even if the Exhibit 10-O1: Consultant Proposal DBE Commitments or Exhibit 15-G:

Construction Contract DBE Commitment indicate that the proposer or bidder has met the DBE goal. This form protects the proposer’s or bidder’s eligibility for award of the contract if the administering agency determines that the bidder failed to meet the goal for various reasons, e.g., a DBE firm was not certified at bid opening, or the bidder made a mathematical error.

The following items are listed in the Section entitled “Submission of DBE Commitment” of the Special Provisions, please attach additional sheets as needed:

A. The names and dates of each publication in which a request for DBE participation for this project was placed by the bidder (please attach copies of advertisements or proofs of publication):

Publications Dates of Advertisement
B. The names and dates of written notices sent to certified DBEs soliciting bids for this project and the dates and methods used for following up initial solicitations to determine with certainty whether the DBEs were interested (please attach copies of solicitations, telephone records, fax confirmations, etc.):

Names of DBEs Solicited Date of Initial Solicitation Follow Up Methods and Dates

May 2020
10/23/2024
CML-5137(055) 10/23/2024
BuildCorp Inc
6 Proterra Builders, Inc 10/21/2024
10/21/2024
10/21/2024
MZB Engineering Inc. 10/21/2024
1083
Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-H
Proposer/Contractor Good Faith Effort
C. The items of work made available to DBE firms including those unbundled contract work items into economically feasible units to facilitate DBE participation. It is the bidder's responsibility to demonstrate that sufficient work to facilitate DBE participation in order to meet or exceed the DBE contract goal.

Items of Proposer or Bidder Breakdown of Amount Percentage Work Normally Performs Item Items ($) Of
(Y/N) Contract
D. The names, addresses and phone numbers of rejected DBE firms, the reasons for the bidder's rejection of the DBEs, the firms selected for that work (please attach copies of quotes from the firms involved), and the price difference for each DBE if the selected firm is not a DBE:

Names, addresses and phone numbers of rejected DBEs and the reasons for the bidder's rejection of the DBEs:

Names, addresses and phone numbers of firms selected for the work above:

E. Efforts (e.g. in advertisements and solicitations) made to assist interested DBEs in obtaining information related to the plans, specifications and requirements for the work which was provided to DBEs:

May 2020
2 Traffic control $ 27,360.00 6
Countervail Engineering 512-799-6983, no answer
1084
Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 15-H
Proposer/Contractor Good Faith Effort
F. Efforts (e.g. in advertisements and solicitations) made to assist interested DBEs in obtaining bonding, lines of credit or insurance, necessary equipment, supplies, materials, or related assistance or services, excluding supplies and equipment the DBE subcontractor purchases or leases from the prime contractor or its affiliate:

G. The names of agencies, organizations or groups contacted to provide assistance in contacting, recruiting and using DBE firms (please attach copies of requests to agencies and any responses received, i.e., lists, Internet page download, etc.):

Name of Agency/Organization Method/Date of Contact Results H. Any additional data to support a demonstration of good faith efforts:

May 2020
1085
BID TABULATION DBE= 6%
PROJECT NAME Lincoln SRT
LOCATION Chanslor & Richmond greenway
BID DATE October 23, 2024 DBE = 12% DBE=5.33% DBE=6%
PROJECT NO. 23041
REF
NO.

BID ITEM
NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT UNIT

AMOUNT BID UNIT

AMOUNT BID UNIT

AMOUNT BID UNIT

AMOUNT BID
1 1 Mobilization 1 LS $20,000 $ 20,000.00 $45,600 $ 45,600.00 $16,700.00 $ 17,400.00 $25,400.00 $ 25,400.00 2 2 Traffic Control and Construction Area Signs 1 LS $25,000 $ 25,000.00 $98,000 $ 98,000.00 $10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 3 3 Remove Exist AC Speed Bump 110 SF $20 $ 2,200.00 $45.45 $ 5,000.00 $60.00 $ 6,600.00 $15.00 $ 1,650.00 4 4 Construct Raised Intersection 3080 SF $25 $ 77,000.00 12.99 $ 40,000.00 $20.00 $ 61,600.00 $28.00 $ 86,240.00 5 5 Construct Raised Concrete Median 190 SF $100 $ 19,000.00 $200 $ 38,000.00 $100.00 $ 19,000.00 $140.00 $ 26,600.00 6 6 Construct Raised Crosswalk 2680 SF $30 $ 80,400.00 $19.40 $ 52,000.00 $40.00 $ 107,200.00 $18.00 $ 48,240.00 7 7 Install Detectable Warning Surface 2 EA $2,300 $ 4,600.00 $2,000 $ 4,000.00 $3,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $4,700.00 $ 9,400.00 8 8 Adjust SSCO Cover to Grade 2 EA $1,000 $ 2,000.00 $3,000 $ 6,000.00 $2,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $850.00 $ 1,700.00 9 9 Adjust SSMH Cover to Grade 1 EA $1,000 $ 1,000.00 $5,000 $ 5,000.00 $3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 10 10 Adjust SDMH Cover to Grade 2 EA $2,010 $ 4,020.00 $3,000 $ 6,000.00 $2,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $1,200.00 $ 2,400.00 11 11 Adjust Water Valve Cover to Grade 3 EA $1,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $3,000 $ 9,000.00 $2,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $850.00 $ 2,550.00 12 12 Install Pre-Formed Thermoplastic Crosswalk Marking 4690 SF $35 $ 164,150.00 $7.46 $ 35,000.00 $40.00 $ 187,600.00 $32.00 $ 150,080.00 13 13 Install 12” Thermoplastic Pavement Marking or Crosswalk 1010 LF $17 $ 17,170.00 $27.72 $ 28,000.00 $10.00 $ 10,100.00 $8.50 $ 8,585.00 14 14 Install Thermoplastic Pavement Marking 140 SF $25 $ 3,500.00 $91.43 $ 12,800.00 $20.00 $ 2,800.00 $13.50 $ 1,890.00 15 15 Install Solar Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon 8 EA $12,500 $ 100,000.00 $6,700 $ 53,600.00 $1,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $12,500.00 $ 100,000.00 16 16 Paint Curb Red 200 LF $10 $ 2,000.00 $10 $ 2,000.00 $15.00 $ 3,000.00 $6.00 $ 1,200.00 17 17 4” Diagonal Stripe (White) 50 LF $12 $ 600.00 $40 $ 2,000.00 $50.00 $ 2,500.00 $7.00 $ 350.00 18 18 Install Caltrans Striping detail 28 120 LF $17 $ 2,040.00 $33 $ 4,000.00 $30.00 $ 3,600.00 $18.00 $ 2,160.00 19 19 Install New Sign and Post 10 EA $1,000 $ 10,000.00 $1,000 $ 10,000.00 $620.00 $ 6,200.00 $850.00 $ 8,500.00

TOTAL AMOUNT BID
10% Contingency $ 53,768.00 $ - $ 46,860.00 $ -
TOTAL BID AMOUNT (including 10% contingency)
$496,000.00 $40,000.00
$ 508,145.00
Corcus Construction, Inc
$ 508,145.00
Available in grant
BID QUANTITIES ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE BuildCorp Inc S&H Construction, Inc. $ 591,448.00 $ 456,000.00 $ 515,460.00
$ 537,680.00 $ 456,000.00 $ 468,600.00
1086
PROJECT NAME Lincoln SRT
LOCATION Chanslor & Richmond greenway
BID DATE October 23, 2024 DBE = 12% DBE=5.33% DBE=6%
PROJECT NO. 23041
REF
NO.

BID ITEM
NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT UNIT

AMOUNT BID UNIT

AMOUNT BID UNIT

AMOUNT BID UNIT

AMOUNT BID
BID QUANTITIES ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE BuildCorp Inc S&H Construction, Inc. Corcus Construction, Inc $ (40,000.00)
1087
93-23 Sept. 12, 2023
9/27/2023
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
AMENDMENT MODIFICATION SUMMARY - (E-76)
FEDERAL AID PROGRAM CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONDLA LOCATOR: 04-CC-0-RCH PROJECT LOCATION:PREFIX: CML IN RICHMOND, VICINITY OF LINCOLN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLPROJECT NO: 5137(055) TYPE OF WORK:SEQ NO: 2 THE CITY OF RICHMOND PROPOSES PEDESTRIAN ENHANCEMENTS AT PREV AUTH / AGREE DATES:STATE PROJ NO: 0423000298L-N FED RR NO'S: PE:AGENCY: RICHMOND PUC CODES: R/W:

ROUTE:

PROJ OVERSIGHT:ASSUMED/LOCAL ADMIN CON:

DISASTER NO:

ENV STATUS / EIS 09/01/2022 SPR:

TIP DATA
RW STATUS / DT: 1 02/08/2023 MCS:

MPO: MTC
INV RTE: OTH:

FSTIP YR: 22/23
BEG MP:

STIP REF: 20600006473
END MP:

FSTIP ID CC170056
BRIDGE NO:

PROG CODE LINE NO IMPV TYPE FUNC SYS URBAN AREA URB/RURAL DEMO IDY003 30 28Y003 31 17FUNDING SUMMARY

PHASE PROJECT COST FEDERAL COST AC COST PE
PE PREV. OBLIGATION $0.00 $0.00 $0.00PE THIS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00PE SUBTOTAL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 R/W
RW PREV. OBLIGATION $0.00 $0.00 $0.00RW THIS REQUEST $0.00 $0.00 $0.00RW SUBTOTAL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 CON
CON PREV. OBLIGATION $603,900.00 $497,000.00 $0.00CON THIS REQUEST $1,200.00 $0.00 $0.00CON SUBTOTAL $605,100.00 $497,000.00 $0.00 OTH
OTH PREV. OBLIGATION $0.00 $0.00 $0.00OTH THIS REQUEST $0.00 $0.00 $0.00OTH SUBTOTAL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL: $605,100.00 $497,000.00 $0.00
PROJECT END DATE (PED): 09/30/2024
ALT. PROJ NO:STATE REMARKS
05/08/2023 SEQ 1: Authorizing federal funds for CON.01/25/2024 CONVERT $1,000 FROM THE PREVIOUS FEDERAL FUNDS FOR CON TO CE, AND THE LOCAL AGENCY MATCH CONTRIBUTES $200 TO MATCH THE CONVERTED FUND.02/13/2024 SEQ 2: Authorizing federal funds for CE, including advertising costs (shifting federal funds from CON). CE is eligible after the approval Sequence 2.

FEDERAL REMARKSAUTHORIZATION
AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH REQUEST:OTH PREPARED IN FADS BY: TRAN, DUY ON 2024-01-26 529-9319 FOR: CE AUTHORIZATION REVIEWED IN FADS BY: HOANG, KHA B ON 2024-02-13 653-6460 DOCUMENT TYPE: AMOD SUBMITTED IN FADS BY: WULFF, DARLENE ON 2024-02-14 FOR CALTRANS PROCESSED IN FADS BY: SIGNATURE, NOT_REQUIRED ON 2024-02-14 FOR FHWA E-76 AUTHORIZED DATE IN FMIS GRACE REGIDOR ON 2024-02-21 21:27:12.0 1098
SIGNATURE HISTORY FOR PROJECT NUMBER 5137(055) AS OF 02/27/2024

FHWA FMIS SIGNATURE HISTORY
MOD # SIGNED BY SIGNED ON1 WAII HAYS 02/15/2024
WAII HAYS 02/15/2024GRACE REGIDOR 02/21/2024
0 WAII HAYS 05/11/2023
WAII HAYS 05/11/2023GRACE REGIDOR 05/15/2023
FHWA FMIS 3.0 SIGNATURE HISTORYCALTRANS SIGNATURE HISTORY DOCUMENT TYPE SIGNED BY SIGNED ONAMEND/MOD WULFF, DARLENE 02/14/2024 1099

FINANCE LETTER
02/13/202404-CC-0-RCHCML-5137(055)0423000298
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONTo: City of Richmond
Date:

D_CO_RT:

Project No:

Adv. Project Id:

Project End Date: 09/30/2024
EA No:

Est Tot Proj Costs: $605,100

PRO RATA OR

LUMP SUM

FINANCE ITEMS LOCAL
$0.00 $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00
Contract Items: $549,000
Contingencies: $54,900
Total: $603,900
Construction Lump Sum $603,900.00 $601,590.00 82.45% $496,000.00 $107,900.00 Agency Construction Engineering Lump Sum $1,200.00 $1,200.00 83.33% $1,000.00 $200.00 Totals: $605,100.00 $602,790.00 $497,000.00 $108,100.00 FEDERAL PART.

COST
TOTAL COST OF FED. REIMB %
WORK

FEDERAL
Y003
Participation Ratio: 99.62% This Finance Letter was created based on specific financial information provided by the responsible local agency. The following encumbrance history is prepared by Local Assistance Accounting Office and is provided here for local agency's information and action.

Signature:

Title: HQ Sr. Area Engineer
CE Authorization. Construction Engineering is eligible after the approval of sequence 2. (279) 599-4989
Printed Name: Darlene Wulff
Telephone No:

For questions regarding finance letter, contact:

Remarks: _________________________________ ADV. PROJECT ID APPROP. UNIT STATE PROG. FED/ STATE ENCUMBRANCE AMOUNT APPROP YEAR EXPENDITURE AMOUNT ENCUMBRANCE BALANCE REVERSION DATE* APPROVED AMOUNT EXPIRATION DATE Cooperative Work Agreement ACCOUNTING INFORMATION CML-5137(055) 0423000298 23102F 2030010820 F $497,000.00 2223 $0.00 $497,000.00 06/30/2028 *Please submit invoices to the appropriate Districts by April 1st to avoid funds lapsing on the June 30th reversion date listed above and to allow sufficient timefor Accounting and SCO year-end closing procedures.

December 3, 2024
Public Works
DATE: December 3, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Chavarria, PE, Director of Public Works
Robert Armijo, PE, Deputy Director of Public Works / City Engineer
Jeffrey Barich, PE, Senior Civil Engineer
Subject: Resolution to Award a Contract to Watearth for Operational Cost Study of Wastewater Treatment Plant,
Sewer Collections System, and Stormwater Collections
System
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed expenditure in an amount not to exceed $670,947 for the duration of the 18-month contract will be funded from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund [Account
String: 40322731-400202].

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

Not applicable.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The Water Resource Recovery Division is requesting City Council to adopt a resolution approving an 18-month
contract with Watearth for a study on the operational
costs of the City’s entire wastewater and stormwater
systems.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: ADOPT a resolution to award an 18-month contract for $670,947 with Watearth beginning on December 1, 2024
and ending on May 31, 2026, for Operational Cost Study
of Wastewater Treatment Plant, Sewer Collections
System, and Stormwater Collections System – Public
Works Department (Jeffrey Barich 510-412-2009 / Robert
Armijo 510-620-5477 / Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478).

AGENDA
REPORT
1101

December 3, 2024
DISCUSSION:

Background
The City of Richmond has a contract operator, Veolia Water, to operate and maintain the Wastewater Treatment Plant, Sewer Collections System, and Stormwater Collections System. Veolia has been the contract operator of these City facilities since 2002. Veolia’s contract with the City has been amended and/or extended five times.

The long-term operating contract is set to end in May 2027.

The City wants to evaluate the options for these services moving forward once Veolia’s contract sunsets. The first step of this evaluation is to do an operational study of the system to determine the true and real cost to operate. Once this has been determined, the next steps would be to recommend a preferred alternative on how to move forward with the City’s facilities. This could include one or a combination of the following: (a) entering into a new contract with a private company operator, (b) entering into a new contract with a public-sector operator, or (c) increasing City staff and taking over the operations and maintenance in-house.

Analysis
In relation to the above, the Water Resource Division of Public Works released a Request for Proposal (RFP) on July 3, 2024, to solicit firms to do the feasibility study and evaluation of the wastewater and stormwater systems. On July 31, 2024, one proposal (and fees/cost) was received from Watearth. City staff thoroughly evaluated this proposal and conducted an interview with the firm on October 10, 2024.

Watearth was found to be an experienced firm capable of conducting the study of the City’s wastewater/stormwater systems. Watearth has performed similar analyses and studies for previous clients and can provide the City with an unbiased and informative evaluation of the systems and a recommendation on how the City should move forward once the long-term operational contract with Veolia sunsets in 2027.

Conclusion
City staff requests that the City Council adopt the Resolution to award an 18-month contract with Watearth beginning on December 1, 2024 and ending on May 31, 2026, for an amount not to exceed $670,947 for the Operational Cost Study of Wastewater Treatment Plant, Sewer Collections System, and Stormwater Collections System. 1102

December 3, 2024
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – Contract
Attachment 3 – RFP
Attachment 4 – Watearth Proposal
Attachment 5 – Evaluation Matrix
1103
Reso. No. XX-24

DocID #31758v1
RESOLUTION NO. __-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND,

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH WATEARTH FOR

OPERATIONAL COST STUDY OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, SEWER

COLLECTIONS SYSTEM, AND STORMWATER COLLECTIONS SYSTEM FOR AN 18-MONTH PERIOD BEGINNING DECEMBER 1, 2024, AND ENDING ON MAY 31, 2026, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $670,947.00
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond operates and maintains a Wastewater Treatment Plant, Sewer Collections System, and Stormwater Collections System; and WHEREAS, the City of Richmond has a contract operator, Veolia Water, to perform the operations and maintenance of the wastewater and stormwater systems; and WHEREAS, the contract with Veolia has been in place since 2002 and has been amended and/or extended five times; and
WHEREAS, the City’s contract with Veolia ends in May 2027; and WHEREAS, the City of Richmond Public Works Department Water Resource Recovery Division wants to evaluate options for these services once Veolia’s contract sunsets in 2027; and WHEREAS, the City aims to obtain an evaluation of the costs to operate the systems and determine a course of action and preferred method to operate these systems once the contract expires; and
WHEREAS, the Water Resource Recovery Division released an Request for Proposal (RFP) on July 3, 2024 to solicit firms to perform the evaluation and study; and WHEREAS, the Water Resource Recovery Division received one proposal on July 31, 2024 from Watearth; and
WHEREAS, the Water Resource Recovery Division thoroughly evaluated the proposal and conducted an interview with the firm on October 10, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Water Resource Recovery Division deemed Watearth to be an experienced firm capable of performing the services requested; and WHEREAS, the contract with Watearth would be for an amount not to exceed $670,947; over an 18-month term.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richmond that a contract with Watearth is approved for the Operational Cost Study of Wastewater Treatment Plant, Sewer Collections System, and Stormwater Collections System for a period of 18 months beginning December 1, 2024 and ending on May 31, 2026, for an amount not to exceed $670,947. *********************
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held December 3, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

PAMELA CHRISTIAN

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
1104
Reso. No. XX-24

DocID #31758v1
(SEAL)
Approved:

EDUARDO MARTINEZ
Mayor
Approved as to form:

DAVE ALESHIRE
City Attorney
State of California }
County of Contra Costa : ss.

City of Richmond }
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Resolution No. XX-XX, finally passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on December 3, 2024.

Pamela Christian, Clerk of the City of Richmond
1105
Reso. No. XX-24

DocID #31758v1
CLERK’S

CERTIFICATE
I, Pamela Christian, City Clerk of the City of Richmond, do hereby certify as follows:

The foregoing resolution is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution No. XX-XX duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City duly and regularly held at the regular meeting place thereof on the 3rd day of December 2024, of which meeting all the members of said City Council had due notice and at which a majority thereof were present; and that at said meeting said resolution was adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

An agenda of said meeting was posted before said meeting at City Hall, 450 Civic Center Plaza in the City of Richmond, California, a location freely accessible to members of the public, and a brief description of said resolution appeared on said agenda.

I have carefully compared the foregoing with the original on file and of record in my office, and the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of the original resolution adopted at said meeting.

Said resolution has not been amended, modified or rescinded since the date of its adoption and the same is now in full force and effect.

Dated: , 2024.

City Clerk of the City of Richmond
[SEAL]
1106

CITY OF RICHMOND

STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: City Project Manager:

City Project Manager E-mail: City 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:
☐ A California corporation, ☐ limited liability corporation ☐ general partnership, ☐ limited partnership, ☐ individual, ☐ non-profit corporation, ☐ individual dba as [specify:] ____________________ ☐ other [specify:] _______________________________

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 the Service Plan set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein.

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. 1107

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. Sanctuary City Compliance Statement. This Contract is subject to the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement (Exhibit G), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein.

11. 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: _________________________ By: ___________________________ Title: ________________________ Title: __________________________ Date Signed: _________________ Date Signed: ___________________ I hereby certify that this Contract (* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer or Assistant has been approved by City Council Treasurer, or Secretary or Assistant Secretary should or the City Manager. sign below)
By: _________________________ By: ___________________________ City Clerk Title: __________________________
Date Signed: ____________________
Approved as to form:
(NOTE: Pursuant to California Corporations Code Section By: _________________________ 313, if Contractor is a corporation or nonprofit organization, City Attorney this Contract (1) must be signed by (a) the Chairperson of the Board, President, or Vice-President and (b) the
Chief Financial Officer or Assistant Treasurer, or
Secretary or Assistant Secretary)
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
1108
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]:
1109
Proposal for
Feasibility Study on the Options to Deliver
Wastewater and Stormwater Services in the
City of Richmond
City of Richmond, Public Works
Attn: Jeff Barich, PE
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
Contact Watearth Principal
Jennifer J. Walker PE, DWRE, ENV SP, CFM, QSD, LEED AP BD+C 1151 Harbor Bay Parkway Suite 208H,
Alameda, CA 94502
510.529.5552
[email protected]
Overall Page 1
1110
Table of Contents
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Table of Contents
Tab 1. A. Vendor Cover Letter (✓ 3 pages maximum) 03
Tab 2. B. Background and Project Summary Section 06
Tab 3. C. Methodology Section 08
Tab 4. D. Staffing 26
Tab 5. E. Qualifications 47
Tab 6. F. Cost Information 55
This section was mailed in an envelope to City of Richmond.

Tab 7. G. Value Added Services 56
Tab 8. H. Contractor Assignment of Sub-Contract 57
Tab 9. I. Previous Contracts with City of Richmond 58
Tab 10. J. Exceptions to this Request for Proposals 59
Tab 11. K. Statement of Impartiality and Disclosure 60
This proposal adheres to the following formatting requirements:
✓ 20 double-sided pages (40 digital pages)
✓ inclusive of graphics, forms, pictures, photographs, dividers, etcetera ✓ not inclusive of cost proposal, resumes, required forms, certifications, front and back covers, or letters of commitment from sub-consultants ✓ Page size of 8.5 inches x 11 inches
✓ Font size for body text is 12 points
✓ Minimum left and right margins of 1.0 inch, and top and bottom margins of 0.7 inches
Overall Page 2
1111
Hello, Jeff Barich.

I’m Jennifer J., from .

This is a proposal that we wrote for you and the City of Richmond, CA.

You are about to experience something interesting: engineers with personality.

We're a weird mix of engineers and environmental professionals. Everyone here is an incredible communicator, equally capable of leading and supporting projects. In this respect, we are a team-run company. I want you to know about this, because it means that everyone assigned to work on this potentially risk-prone systemwide service analysis for you will be not only technically equipped to succeed, but also socially and professionally excellent at providing a degree of collaborative recommendation and
decision making that will lessen the City team’s
burden. How?
That’s what we do.

Every day.

Yes, we provide progress reports. Yes, we track
earned value to get you the best and most timely
results – but don’t all the good professional firms do
this? Don’t let staffing and workloads at the City be a cause for stress on this project: select Watearth for a riskmanaged approach to helping the City make decisions that the constituency can support, and that will be responsive to budgetary and schedule constraints, including consideration of the regulatory environment.

Although Watearth primarily focuses on the needs of municipal clients and water providers, we do not have existing working relationships with either the City or the service operators, or the regional water districts – our impartiality is a guarantee of this proposal. Our recommendations will be grounded in
engineering and economics expertise.

Watearth is an engineering and environmental planning
consulting firm specialized in addressing the exact type of process analysis and long-range planning that you
need. The current operator providing wasterwater
and stormwater services within the City, Veolia, has
held a contract for two decades. Any change to

1112
A. Vendor Cover Letter
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
this implementation has the potential to
be highly disruptive, which is why a
feasibility study is a logical next step.

Watearth has provided water and
wastewater planning to dozens of
clients, including Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as part of the forward-thinking 2035 Master Plan Environmental Impact Report, which involved a unique analysis of the existing discharge permit with the City. Other projects have included a watershed sanitary survey for California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet), water supply assessments for clients like City of Pleasanton, internal process analysis for clients like Texas Water Development Board, industrial water and wastewater treatment processes and permitting for a private client working throughout California, and wastewater, stormwater, and water planning review for the City of Santa Rosa.

Watearth’s stormwater expertise is oceans deep: our company was founded with the development of a stormwater management policy for the City of Houston, and quickly went on to address all manner of stormwater planning, modeling, design, and construction observation needs, including support for an Alameda County Drainage Criteria Manual, development of large-scale stormdrain modeling for the Los Angeles County Public Works Rubio Wash system, civil hydraulic designs on the Adventure Park Stormwater Capture and Diversion project and Caltrans ALA61 in Alameda project, inspections during construction for San Gabriel Valley Water Company and for Caltrans in San Benito County, stormwater operations and maintenance planning for Santa Monica, Sacramento-area development hydromodification and water quality modeling and design, and hundreds more.

More than this, we understand project owner advocacy and have been asked to make recommendations to City Councils before. Watearth is a known quantity in these spaces.

Let us show you how easy this can be.

Watearth’s TRUSTED Signature Project Delivery™ process is designed to address sensitive projects demanding collaborative project management in seven steps that focus on client
satisfaction (achieving a 95% client satisfaction rating!) and that reflect Watearth’s 15 years of being the best in the business.

This team brings an energy and enthusiasm to projects that I have never seen before in decades of working with other consultants.

I look forward to working with you.

I always ask myself: “What would
Jennifer [Walker] do?”
Dahlia Fadl
City of Rancho Cordova

1113
A. Vendor Cover Letter
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Affirmations:

1. Watearth reviewed and understood all elements of the RFP as part of producing this proposal.

2. Watearth intends to perform the services as outlined within the RFP and this proposal.

3. Watearth is willing to enter into an agreement under the terms and conditions prescribed by the RFP, insurance requirements (Attachment A of the RFP) and in the sample Service Agreement (Attachment B of the RFP).

4. Watearth has 12 fulltime and 2 parttime staff members. Our client base is substantially municipal, with clients like City of Santa Rosa, County of Napa, City of Oakland, and others similar.

5. Our office nearest to City of Richmond is located at 1151 Harbor Bay Parkway Suite 208H, Alameda, CA 94502. The phone number is 510.529.5552. The project will be managed from this address.

6. The proposal terms, including cost, will be valid for a period of at least 180 days following submission.

7. The single person for contact during the RFP review process will be Operations and Marketing Manager Adam (Susskind) Wolven ([email protected], 213.293.5964)

8. This cover letter is signed by Jennifer J. Walker, the CEO of Watearth, an authorized official of the company.

1114
B. Background and Summary
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Our Understanding of the Project
Watearth understands the City of Richmond’s initiative to assess and enhance its wastewater and stormwater service delivery. Richmond, a diverse and dynamic community, relies on a multi-modal transit hub and various municipal services, including stormwater and wastewater systems.

Currently, most of these services are provided through a long-standing agreement with Veolia Water West Operating Services Inc. The City’s Department of Public Works oversees this agreement, managing industrial dischargers, sewer lateral repairs, stormwater rate updates, and select capital improvement projects. Additionally, the City must comply with regulatory requirements, such as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, adding stress and urgency to City operations.

The City’s infrastructure includes wastewater and stormwater systems comprised of numerous sewer lines, stormwater main lines, catch basins, ditches, and lift stations. With the wastewater system serving approximately 88,500 residents and the stormwater system covering the entire city (population: 114,301 and about 34 square miles of land), Richmond faces significant operational, maintenance, and compliance challenges. Management of these large-scale systems has been outsourced to Veolia for the last twenty years, any recommendation to bring these operations back in-house will need to consider the impact to City employees who are already overwhelmed with tasks resulting in project management and responsiveness challenges.

The key considerations here are: risk management, health and wellbeing, public safety, and economic considerations/return on investment.

Richmond's contract with Veolia, initially established in 2002 and subsequently amended multiple times, underscores the complexity and evolving nature of the city's service needs. The amendments addressed various operational enhancements, infrastructure repairs, and compliance measures, including those necessitated by a settlement agreement with environmental advocacy groups. Recommendations resulting from Watearth’s feasibility study will need to consider the City’s commitment to providing vital infrastructure and environmental protection, such as flood control and clean water, which are essential for community well-being. A balance of cost-savings and service effectiveness will need to be discussed.

This project concerns a detailed analysis of the wastewater systems, storm drain systems, and city planning for large infrastructure. It requires

1115
B. Background and Summary
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
navigating internal city processes and addressing political risks: the risk to the City is substantial both from a cost perspective and from a public-trust perspective, which is why Principal Jennifer J. Walker (a respected engineer
and orator with experience in litigation, expert witness depositions, presentations to council and other decision making authorities, and stakeholder communication) will be tasked with providing guidance when beginning negotiations. One of the primary objectives of this project will need to be establishing either that the status quo is the best fit alternative, or that some other delivery method will provide equally or more reliable service to the constituency.

Given these complexities and risks, Watearth’s study will document the existing service delivery system, identify and evaluate alternative service delivery models, engage the community, and ultimately recommend an optimal service delivery option. The scope of work involves:

1. Documenting Existing Services

2. Identifying Service Delivery Options

3. Evaluating Options

4. Community Engagement

5. Selecting the Optimal Service Delivery Option

6. Preparing Implementation Documents
Watearth brings a fresh perspective to this project, as we do not have existing relationships with any of the entities involved, including Veolia Water West Operating Services Inc., West County Wastewater District, Stege Sanitary District, or East Bay Municipal Utility District. This lack of prior relationships means our approach remains unbiased and focused solely on the best interests of the City of Richmond. However, Watearth has the benefit of having worked with similar agencies, and understands their essential strengths and weaknesses. We have collaborated with Metroplitan Water District of Southern California, City of Houston, San Luis Obispo, Pleasanton, Water Boards, state agencies, and private water utilities like Suburban Water and American Water.

Throughout the project, Watearth will address the critical need for a communicative and integrated consultant to avoid project delays and contribute to smooth progress. Financial limitations impacting availability of City staff to conduct this feasibility in-house means that Watearth needs to integrate with the City team – our recommendations, your decisions, and clear communication throughout. The City will be part of the process, but Watearth will mitigate City headaches by assuming responsibility for project execution.

That is fast. Thanks
for letting me know.

Liuzong Zhou
San Gabriel Valley

1116
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Before We Talk About Watearth’s Work Plan…
Let’s discuss the “elephant in the room”: innovative solutions. How innovative is too innovative to be reliable and dependable? In 2024 and 2025, that question is likely to drive project professionals to discussions of Artificial Intelligence (or AI).

These tools are in their nascent stages. They are advanced “predictive text” generators that provide statistically relevant combinations of words based on user prompts – but these models are only capable of a simulacrum of human cognition. They are not capable of actual thought.

Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI tools like OpenAI's GPT-4, Google's Gemini, and Microsoft's Azure OpenAI Service have become increasingly valuable in analyzing large datasets – including those like City of Richmond’s dataset, which is composed of written contract documents and City master plans concerning wastewater and stormwater implementation. These tools have some strengths and some weaknesses, and the right consultant is going to save City of Richmond money by using them appropriately but will not become overly reliant on them where they are inadequately sophisticated to understand risks involved in this project.

Strengths:

1. Efficiency and Speed: AI tools can process and analyze vast amounts of data much faster than humans. For instance, GPT-4 can quickly parse through hundreds of pages of contracts and master plans, identifying key themes, clauses, and data points. This efficiency saves significant time, allowing for faster decision-making and project advancement.

2. Consistency: AI tools provide consistent results without fatigue, a common issue in human analysis. This consistency ensures that all documents are reviewed with the same level of scrutiny, reducing the likelihood of oversight.

3. Natural Language Processing (NLP): Tools like GPT-4 and Bard excel in NLP, enabling them to understand and interpret complex language within documents. They can extract relevant information, summarize content, and even detect discrepancies or unusual clauses in contracts.

Weaknesses:

1. Contextual Understanding: While AI can process and analyze data, it often lacks deep contextual understanding. Nuances in Richmond’s contract language or city planning details may be missed or misinterpreted without human oversight.

2. Quality of Output: The accuracy of AI output can vary based on the quality of the input data and the sophistication of the model. Human

1117
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
experts are needed to validate the AI's findings, ensuring that critical details are correctly understood and acted upon. A quality control plan tailored to AI output is essential.

3. Ethical and Legal Considerations: AI tools might inadvertently overlook legal and ethical considerations present in contract documents and master plans. Human intervention is necessary to ensure compliance with all relevant laws and ethical standards.

4. Adaptability: AI tools may struggle with unique or highly specialized documents that deviate from the patterns they were trained on. Human experts can adapt to these unique cases more flexibly and intuitively.

AI tools like GPT-4, Gemini, and Azure OpenAI Service enhance the efficiency and consistency of analyzing large datasets, they cannot entirely replace human expertise. Human intervention remains crucial for ensuring contextual accuracy, ethical compliance, and adaptability to unique scenarios. The optimal approach for City of Richmond’s project will involve a hybrid model where AI handles the bulk of data processing and analysis, while human experts provide oversight, validation, and nuanced understanding. This collaboration maximizes efficiency while maintaining the high standards necessary for complex document analysis tasks.

Project Approach
Task 1: Document Existing Service Delivery System
Data collection, review, and documentation play a pivotal role in accurately evaluating service delivery systems in the City of Richmond (City), a critical aspect of water resource management. Watearth will perform rigorous data collection and review processes; collecting all available data for review is essential to produce reliable documentation that will serve the Feasibility Study to Deliver Wastewater and Stormwater Services project (referred to as “project”). Following collection and review of provided data and publicly available data, Watearth will create a list of outstanding data needs and reach out to the City to coordinate.

The process begins with reviewing the existing arrangements with Veolia Water West Operating Services, Inc. and other service providers within City boundaries

1118
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
including West County Wastewater District, the Stege Sanitary District, and the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and documenting the process.

Documentation will include information such as service areas, customers, services, service level indicators, performance outcomes, costs, source of funding, relevant agreements, regulations, legal requirements (e.g., Baykeeper Settlement), and the input from existing service providers and City officials.

When reviewing existing contracts and arrangements, Watearth will follow a work plan outlined in Table 1 below.

Watearth has experience acting as a
project owner advocate – for Los
Angeles County on a water rights
dispute, for City of Killeen regarding
stormwater permit compliance, and for
several private clients as an expert
witness during litigation. City of Richmond needs a high degree of attention to detail combined with tactful communication to contribute to project success rather than create new headaches for your team. This is where Watearth shines.

Table 1: Documentation Work Plan
Document Title Data Reviewed and Extracted
Veolia Contract Documents • Company obligations/City obligations • Repair and replacement
• Service fees
• Cost savings
• Site suitability and familiarity
• Zoning
• Satisfaction of conditions and failure of conditions
• Requirements
• Replacement
• Term of Agreement
• Relationship of parties
• Additional services
Storm Drain Master Plans • Background information
• Land use and categories
• Watershed and system characteristics
• Hydrologic analysis
• Storm drain analysis
• Drainage zones
• Model results
• Permitting requirements
Force Main System Condition
Assessment Reports
• Access information
• Visual assessments
• Sulfide test information
• Concrete test results
Weekly progress reports are valuable to
City staff for project tracking and are
much appreciated!
Jeremiah Sunwoo
City of Rancho Palos Verdes

1119
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Watearth has executed large data collection and evaluation projects such as Evaluation of the Texas Water Development’s (TWDB) environmental Review Process, City of Hemet Water Distributions project, the City of Houston Raw Document Title Data Reviewed and Extracted
• Other information
Wastewater Treatment
Master Plan
• Condition of existing facilities and performance
• Flow data information
• Capacity assessments
• Discharge requirements including future planning
• Secondary treatment information
• Recommended improvements/capital improvement
projects (CIP)
• Regulatory requirements
• Sustainable design elements/innovation options
San Francisco Baykeeper vs.

City of Richmond Settlement
Agreement
• Review settlement details and relevant details on
resolutions
• Provisions
• Funding and payments
• Compliance
• Breach of agreement
Wastewater Collection
System Master Plans
• Existing system description
• Lift station conditions/inspections/costs
• Lift station capacity information
• Force main conditions/inspections
• System flows and capacity
• Pipeline repair information
• Improvement recommendations/CIPs
• Permitting requirements
• Land use information
• Conceptual costs
Water Resource Recovery
Documents
• CIPs and fiscal year information
• City budgets
• Key City officials
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Facility Plan
• Existing facilities
• Recycled water demands and projections
• Flow and load data including
domestic/commercial/industrial specifics
• Capacity information
• Water quality
• Liquid and solid treatment information
• Emissions
• Conditions assessments
• Planned improvements/CIPs
• Permitting requirements

1120
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Water GIS evaluation, and many others. Richmond’s stormwater system spans the entire City, and the wastewater system serves approximately 88,500 of the City’s 110,600 residents. These large systems impact a large area, and coordinating system improvements with the City and with the approval of City stakeholders will be a large undertaking to maintain quality service to the affected population.

Watearth will also review geographic information systems (GIS) data of the stormwater and wastewater systems as well as other relevant City GIS information to document key system connection points, water treatment plant locations, lift station locations, stormwater outfalls, and high-level capacity information that can be used to help determine alternative flow patterns if system changes are recommended in later tasks of the project. Watearth has reviewed large water and wastewater systems for cities of a similar scale including the City of Hemet and the City of Chino. The GIS data and specific service providers service areas will be reviewed to determine whether different stormwater and wastewater providers have the capacity to take on a larger service to the City. Additionally, identifying key variables influencing the City, such as population center demographics, climatic conditions, and water use patterns across different sectors including residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural, will provide context for how service delivery systems can be altered to best serve the City.

Within Task 1, the Watearth team will perform an economic, commercial and financial review of the terms and conditions (T&Cs) of the existing arrangements in delivering wastewater and storm water services that the City has.

The City expects the assessment of the above-mentioned arrangements to include among others:

1. Service: service areas, customers and services, service level indicators, performance outcomes, applicable regulations, legal requirements (e.g. Baykeeper Settlement)

2. Costs and sources of funding, relevant contracts, and the input of existing service providers and City officials.

For services provided by:
(i) Veolia Water West Operating Services, Inc. (Veolia), under certain contracts,
(ii) other public agencies within the City’s boundaries, like the West County Wastewater District, the Stege Sanitary District, and the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) or self-performed, and (iii) self-performed services.

1121
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

We will assess based on City provided documentation and/or interviews with the City of Richmond, the economic, commercial and financial T&C’s, including any cost or out of pockets expenses associated with those services.

Watearth will use our TRUSTED™ Signature
Project Delivery Process to make the
City’s job easier. Watearth will coordinate
team meetings to discuss data available,
any outstanding data needs, and gather
City official feedback regarding
expectations for not only the project but key concerns they may have with the current stormwater and wastewater systems. Waterth will provide meeting agendas and meetings minutes for all meetings as well as weekly progress reports to ensure the team is informed of all project decisions. The City’s assessment of service quality, cost, innovation potential of service providers, meeting regulatory requirements, service provider best management practices, and environmental consciousness will be valuable documentation to include with previous documentation listed above. The documentation will be included in a summary email deliverable accompanied by one deliverable review meeting with the City of Richmond to provide comments and feedback. All Watearth deliverables undergo a QA/QC process that involves peer review, project manager review, technical editing, and principal approval to ensure quality deliverables. Watearth will coordinate the scoped meeting with the City providing meeting agendas and meeting minutes with actions items.

Challenges Solutions Qualifications
Gathering relevant project
data including documents.

Researching the correct data
sources for GIS and other
data and filling in data gaps.

Watearth has 5 inhouse
scientists who excel in data
management, among them,
Jeremy Liby and Alyssa Wilson
are assigned to this proposal.

Managing
miscommunication or
misunderstanding of project
details from different project
stakeholders or service
providers involved in project
considerations.

Regular project reporting
following our TRUSTED™
Signature Project Delivery
process and QA/QC process
– weekly status reports, and
internal and external kickoff
meetings.

Watearth has several wellqualified project managers
who have completed
projects throughout California
and other regions and
achieved 95% client
satisfaction.

Managing large quantities of
data from many different
service providers.

Collecting and organizing
data systematically in file
management software and
task management software.

Watearth has the file and task
management software to
handle large datasets and
has worked on large water
system projects upwards of
500K connections.

Your emails summarizing what has been
worked on and what is needed is really
helpful and keeps us focused to make
sure we remain responsive.

Enrique Baul
Los Angeles County Public Works

1122
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Task 2: Identify Options
Figure 1: Process Flow Chart
Based on data collection, review, and documentation of existing stormwater and wastewater service information, Watearth will identify feasible options for delivery of services. Potential feasible options include the following:

1. Status quo (existing delivery of services),

2. Private sector service providers,

3. Public sector service providers,

4. In-house services (City), or

5. Combination of private sector, public sector, and in-house services.

Watearth will compile key information such as quality of service, cost, meeting regulations, and other factors related to the existing conditions. This information will be considered the baseline to compare all other feasible options for stormwater and wastewater delivery services.

Watearth will coordinate with the City to gather a list of reputable private sector and public sector service providers. This list of providers will be researched along with the existing service providers. With the permission of City staff, Watearth will contact and screen each potential provider to determine if they have the capacity to serve the City of Richmond or a percentage, to be determined in collaboration with the City, of the City that provides economic value. If service capacity is feasible, City operated service connection points will be evaluated to determine if service providers can adequately tie into existing connections to limit additional infrastructure development.

Additional installation and maintenance of stormwater and wastewater infrastructure like stormwater lift stations, wastewater lift stations, stormwater outfall development, additional pipeline infrastructure, and treatment facilities Compilation
•Existing
Service
Provided to
City as
baseline
and status
quo option
Alternatives
•Gather a list
of reputable
service
providers
with City
coordinatio
n.

Determination
•Determine
whether
selected
service
providers
have the
capacity to
serve the
City.

Additional
Considerations
•Review
installation
of additional
facilities,
improvemen
ts needed to
current
systems, and
maintenanc
e needs.

Reporting
•Report all
options in an
easily
digestable
format to
present to
the City
(summary
email and
review
meeting).

1123
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
are likely in the event the City decides to change from status quo services.

Watearth will provide high-level order of magnitude cost estimating for proposed infrastructure, and cost will be considered for short-term and longterm planning purposes valuable for later phases of the project.

In addition to capacity and
infrastructure improvements, cost
of services to City customers, water
quality considerations, meeting
regulatory requirements will all be
factored when determining
whether various service providers
can contribute to the City’s
stormwater and wastewater
services. Gathering data on potential service providers will be similar to the work plan outlined in Table 1 above. Once service providers are screened, Watearth will compile a list of up to six stormwater and wastewater service options that are feasible to serve the City. Watearth will provide a summary email deliverable accompanied by one deliverable review meeting with the City of Richmond to provide comments and feedback. All Watearth deliverables undergo a QA/QC process that involves peer review, project manager review, technical editing, and principal approval to ensure quality deliverables. Watearth will coordinate the scoped meeting with the City providing meeting agendas and meeting minutes with actions items.

The Watearth Team RECOMMENDS a Risk Workshop to identify Project risks and desired allocations.

While not an RFP scoped task, based on the Watearth team’s experience, it is a critical exercise that will help the City of Richmond understand project’s risks and risk transfer.

Bringing private sector partners into a project can help to deliver projects effectively and efficiently, assuming there is an adequate assignment of each one of the projects risks between the private and public sector parties to the one best able to manage them. To determine the Project’s main risks, in addition to the review performed in Task 1, the Watearth team proposes a 2-4 hour workshop with the City to:
• identify the Project’s objectives: this entails articulating overarching goals of the services provided; and
• identify the Project’s risks during the different phases (design, construction, operations) and desired risk allocation.

The report was a really good one. Very thorough.

The Country Club really liked it and are excited
to work on the recommendations. The City also
like it – good and comprehensive. Project
management and communication was really
good regarding status, technical memos, and
keeping us in the loop.

Goutam Dobey
City of Redlands

1124
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

In our experience the knowledge obtained from the Project’s internal stakeholders during the workshop is a superior source of information that either confirms or revisits the risk allocation.

Challenges Solutions Qualifications
Compiling large quantities of
data accurately and
identifying key information.

Watearth compiles easily
understood deliverables,
including feasibility studies
that clearly point to project
solutions.

Watearth follows a written
data and file management
process processes to ensure
all data received has been
checked for accuracy and
filed appropriately.

Receiving complete and
accurate data from potential
service providers.

Detailing appropriate
contingencies, cost
estimating, and what final
service options will entail.

Recent feasibility studies, like
Sorenson Park, have helped
out clients to secure $20M+ in
grant funding.

Task 3: Evaluate Options
Watearth will coordinate with City staff to determine the best options for stormwater and wastewater service to the City. Once a focused list of options is developed, Watearth will evaluate each option based on relevant factors including:

1. Quality of service,

2. Cost (annual costs and life-cycle costs),

3. Regulatory requirements,

4. Innovative technologies,

5. Best practices, and

6. Environmental considerations.

To strengthen the evaluation of the above-listed elements, the Watearth team will develop a criteria-based evaluation of the service delivery options from an economic, commercial, and financial perspective and will develop a cash flow analysis of the preferred service delivery options (this could be combination of public/private service providers or other) and compared it against the status quo. The cash flow analysis will consider the capital investments and operations of the services provided over a 20–30-year time frame, timeline to be determined by the City based on collaboration. This assumes that CapEx and OpEx assumptions/projections will be provided by the City and that financing assumptions to be provided by or in collaboration with the City of Richmond.

Watearth will implement our TRUSTED Project Delivery Process to prepare progress reports with highlights from service evaluation and provide to the City for feedback. With input from City staff, Watearth will weight each factor above appropriately with City goals and preferences. Additionally, Watearth has

1125
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
experience with the Rubio Wash Drainage Study project and City of Hemet Water Distributions project where large stormwater systems and wastewater systems were evaluated to determine deficiencies and provide recommendations for improvements. Feasible stormwater and wastewater service providers will need to be well aligned with City goals and future planning for stormwater and wastewater.

For example, stormwater services may include options like innovative multibenefit stormwater capture facilities that can divert stormwater for flood mitigation, treatment of stormwater, and repurposing of stormwater for future use. Watearth is experienced in developing feasible stormwater recommendations as we have completed multiple stormwater capture projects including the $41M Adventure Park Multi-Benefit Stormwater Capture project.

These experiences allow Watearth to evaluate potential service providers and their abilities to provide innovative
services. The City of Richmond is a
location where multi-benefit
stormwater capture projects can
benefit both wetter winter conditions
and the warmer dry conditions in the
summer. This type of solution may be
more economical than other major
stormwater infrastructure
improvement projects. The City can
facilitate projects like these and
reduce long-term costs as well as
helping with other environmental
and socioeconomic concerns such as water quality, water supply, recreational improvements for the City, and equity.

Similarly, innovative wastewater practices including but not limited to nutrient removal, energy conservation in treatment plants, and public programs to upgrade residential and commercial water fixtures help with water quality, producing less wastewater that needs treatment, and helps the environment in not using as much non-renewable energy sources and energy sources damaging to the environment. Watearth has managed two LEED Feasibility analyses for SoCalGas Facilities that implemented innovative technologies related to stormwater and wastewater as well as a Water and Wastewater 2035 Master Plan for Cal Poly.

1126
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Once all factors are weighted and all feasible stormwater and wastewater service provider options have been evaluated, Watearth will rank each option in order of preference. The rankings will be provided in a summary email deliverable accompanied by one deliverable review meeting with the City of Richmond to provide comments and feedback. All Watearth deliverables undergo a QA/QC process that involves peer review, project manager review, technical editing, and principal approval to ensure quality deliverables.

Watearth will coordinate the scoped meeting with the City providing meeting agendas and meeting minutes with actions items.

Task 4: Community Engagement
Watearth and the City will lead a joint effort for community engagement. The City of Richmond is largely comprised of residential communities, parks and open space, and industrial/port activities with lesser areas of commercial and other land uses (City of Richmond, 2024). To match the predominant land uses in the City, Watearth, with City coordination, will develop a list of key stakeholders that are relevant to the project like residential community members, industrial providers, and City officials. Presenting to the key stakeholders of the City will Challenges Solutions Qualifications
Identify service provider
benefits spanning many
different key factors.

Evaluate the factors for
each service provider
and prioritize the City’s
needs and
preferences.

Watearth has completed several
Decision Support Systems/Matrices
throughout California and will use the
same skills to make sure the needs and
priorities of the City are considered.

Developing decision
matrix documenting each
step to determine the best
options for stormwater
and wastewater service.

Coordination with the
City and project
stakeholders.

Watearth implements design matrices
many projects as we have for the Port
of Corpus Christi BMP Analysis project,
TWDB Sediment BMPs project, and the
South Santa Rosa Infrastructure Plan
project.

1127
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
allow the appropriate representative population to learn about the best stormwater and wastewater service options.

Watearth will assist in coordinating up to three community meetings and will prepare meeting agendas. Agendas will focus on public messaging regarding system service option recommendations ranked in order of preference and providing an opportunity for a Questions & Answers (Q&A) sessions at the end of the community meetings. In addition, Watearth will develop up to three additional means of supporting community engagement collateral including presentation slides that summarize each stormwater and wastewater service option with pros and cons for each option and graphics that provide informative visualization for each option.

Additional community
engagement collateral that
Watearth will provide for nonmeeting events may include brochures, posters, blog posts, or
social media posts. Public website
links or mailing addresses will be
provided on outreach materials
for the community to provide
project feedback. Watearth will
provide all community
engagement collateral to City staff for review prior to community meetings or other events. All Watearth deliverables undergo a QA/QC process that involves peer review, project manager review, technical editing, and principal approval to ensure quality deliverables.

Watearth has provided successful collateral and meeting facilitation on projects for Los Angeles County, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (award winning!), and more.

Watearth has experience working with
many stakeholders that vary from
governmental agencies, private entities,
and all the way to community groups.

Watearth has experience working with
We’re glad to have your expertise on the
project. It’s really helping our case.

James A. Martinez
Law Offices of James A. Martinez

1128
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
stakeholders while working on Multi-Benefit Stormwater Capture projects and the development of the LA Metro Equity Toolkit. Watearth will consider the individual stakeholders and consider their views on various climate, economic, and other relevant issues Watearth will only present factual data. Watearth will help determine ways to effectively communicate detailed information through visualization in presentations or assisting in Q&A sessions. Watearth’s marketing and outreach collateral is award winning!
Challenges Solutions Qualifications
Scheduling
meetings with
several
stakeholders.

Early communication with City
staff and stakeholders to
schedule meetings in order to
meet the City’s project
schedule.

Watearth staff have conducted
hundreds of presentations and
hosted meetings with key project
stakeholders (City staff, industrial,
residential communities, etc) as we
did on the TWDB process evaluation
project, the LA Metro Equity Toolkit
development project, and the
SoCalGas LEED consulting projects.

Presenting to
stakeholders that
have different
beliefs.

Compiling conflicting views from
stakeholders and pulling out
non-factual information in order
to capture valuable information
that is common across groups.

Watearth has experienced
technical experts for evaluating
specific sector solutions as well as
business operation managers
experienced with working across
business sectors.

Task 5: Selection of Service Delivery Option
Watearth will compile all feedback from
City officials and community engagement
meetings and present a recommendation
for the optimal stormwater and
wastewater service delivery option. Based
on community and City feedback from
community meetings, Watearth will revisit
the ranking of service options presented in the previous “evaluate options” task and determine if there is a change in ranking order. Watearth is experienced in facilitating community outreach and weighing different opinions similar to what we have done in the TWDB Environmental Review Process Evaluation project.

Watearth gathered agency feedback and balanced TWDB employee opinions and recommendations in order to recommend feasible updates to their review process. This type of coordination is similar to what is needed on this project. City preferences and community feedback will shape feasible solutions for stormwater and wastewater delivery services.

Thank you Jennifer and Jeremy. You all
were very responsive and helpful with all
of my questions, and it was a pleasure
working with you and your team.

Andrew Kim, P.E.

Los Angeles County Public Works

1129
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Watearth will provide a summary email deliverable with a recommended service plan and details about key factors as discussed previously in this proposal. The email deliverable will be accompanied by one deliverable review meeting with the City of Richmond to provide comments and feedback. All Watearth deliverables undergo a QA/QC process that involves peer review, project manager review, technical editing, and principal approval to ensure quality deliverables. Watearth will
coordinate the scoped meeting with
the City providing meeting agendas
and meeting minutes with actions
items.

Challenges Solutions Qualifications
Balancing conflicting
opinions of City officials
and community
members in relation to
making a final decision
of service delivery.

Considering factual data
gathered from research
and engagement
meetings to prepare a
solution meeting City
needs and preferences.

Watearth has project managers with
decades of experience providing
unbiased consulting to private and
public agencies on politically
sensitive projects to determine the
optimal solutions.

Task 6: Prepare Implementing Documents
The preparation of implementing
documentation will be contingent on
selecting an optimal stormwater and
wastewater service plan for the City of
Richmond. Once the City has approved
the recommendation of a service plan,
all previous documentation on the
selected service providers which
potential include private sector, public
sector, and the City will be compiled. All
relevant quality of service, cost,
regulatory requirements, innovative
technology implementation, best
practices, and environmental factors
will be compiled from previous tasks.

Additionally, other factors such as new
infrastructure installation will be included as well. These items will be input into an implementation plan technical memorandum for later execution.

The plan will include service provider information, service areas served by specific providers with high-level capacity information, new infrastructure Thank you for a great presentation! I learned
a lot and imagine our members did as well.

Lauri Shahar
San Fernando Valley Bar Association

1130
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
development and improvements to make the service plan feasible, order of magnitude cost estimating to carry out the plan short-term and long-term, maintenance procedures, and a list of additional benefits. The plan will also outline potential unresolved items that may need negotiation or further coordination such as pricing of stormwater and wastewater services, and additional funding sources. Watearth is experienced in identifying appropriate funding sources: we have worked on more than 20 grant-funded projects, including a stormwater design project with a $15M grant from Caltrans, on Prop 84 grant project looking at low impact development and stormwater best management practices within the entirety of the Bay Area, and more for citylevel clients like Citrus Heights and Nuview, where Watearth was instrumental in not just completing funding applications, but also identifying potential sources and achieving funding success. A potential list of funding sources may include but is not limited to the following:

1. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF),

2. California Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Grant Program,

3. Storm Water Grant Program (SWGP), and

4. California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Water-Energy Grant Program.

Depending on the outcome of the selection of service delivery option in Task 5, Watearth may provide services including the following:

1. Recommending status quo service delivery with supporting documentation;

2. Providing an implementation plan that includes a mix of private sectors, public sectors, and/or the City providing service. Additional services may include:
a. Providing evaluation criteria for project bidders such as cost evaluation, quality of service, and expertise of systems; b. Developing a scope of work; and
c. Budget estimating.

A contingency budget is included as optional for the City of Richmond’s consideration. This optional budget is intended to address deliverables stemming from the selected alternative in Task 5 that may not be apparent at this time. This could include facilitation of negotiation meetings and preparation of collateral, training for in-house City staff, or other – all of which will benefit

1131
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
from additional definition as the Richmond/Watearth team approaches the completion of Task 5.

All implementation documentation will
comprise of information from previous tasks and
will be submitted as a summary technical
memorandum accompanied by one
deliverable review meeting with the City of
Richmond to provide comments and
feedback. All Watearth deliverables undergo a QA/QC process that involves peer review, project manager review, technical editing, and principal approval to ensure quality deliverables. Watearth will coordinate the scoped meeting with the City providing meeting agendas and meeting minutes with actions items.

Deliverable Output

1. Task 1
a. Kickoff Meeting with City+Watearth
b. Up to 2 collaborative City+Watearth workshops regarding Literature Review and Data Gathering
i. Agenda and Minutes
ii. Summary Email at end of task + one round of City
comments

2. Task 2
a. Up to 4 collaborative City+Watearth workshops regarding Identified Options
i. Agenda and Minutes
ii. Summary Email + one round of City comments
Challenges Solutions Qualifications
Identifying a
comprehensive
list of action items
to incorporate
into an
implementation
plan for delivery
of service.

Watearth will manage data collected
with a file management and task
management software and add to
the implementation plan throughout
the project. Don’t let your selected
consultant create headaches for you
here. Watearth knows how to keep
track of the details.

Watearth has developed design
decision matrices used on
design projects and tracking
construction submittals and RFIs
for the Adventure Park and
Water Board Environmental
Review Process Evaluation
projects.

You did a great job of distilling
very complex guidance into
something approachable.

Jayson Hudson
USACE

1132
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

3. Task 3
a. Up to 3 collaborative City+Watearth workshops regarding Evaluated Options
i. Agenda and Minutes
ii. Summary Email + one round of City comments

4. Task 4
a. Up to 3 Community Meetings
i. Agenda
ii. Presentations
iii. Summary of Community Questions (and Answers from
Technical Expert)
iv. Marketing Collateral (up to 3: brochure, flier, or similar up to 200 words) – one round of comments by City on each
b. Up to 2 collaborative City+Watearth workshops regarding outcomes of community meetings.
i. Agenda and Minutes

5. Task 5
a. Up to 2 collaborative City+Watearth workshops regarding Selection of an Option
i. Agenda and Minutes
ii. Summary Email + one round of City comments

6. Task 6
a. Final Implementation Plan (Technical Memorandum)
i. Includes one City+Watearth review meeting with Agenda and Minutes
ii. Includes a Draft and Final Implementation Plan which incorporates one round of City comments.
b. Contingency (Time & Materials). Optional task with optional deliverables. May include:
i. Scope of Work and Budget for RFP
ii. Assistance in selecting a bidder
iii. Or others to be determined during Task 5.

1133
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Schedule
The above schedule implies the following dates, as per the RFP, but is abstracted to allow for variations in City notice to proceed or City Council input.

Date Activity
October 2024 Begin Project
April 2025 City Council – Progress report
May 2025 Begin Task 4
August 2025 City Council – Input on options
September 2025 Begin Task 5
November 2025 City Council – Direction
December 2025 Begin Task 6
March 2026 Complete Project
Division of Responsibility & City Tasks
Watearth will provide the execution of evaluations (operational, technical (engineering and environmental), and financial) as well as the project management necessary to lessen the burden placed on the City Staff spearheading this feasibility study.

Watearth will request the following from the City representative(s):

1. Responsiveness to data requests, assuming new reference documents are identified that were not flagged in the original RFP.

2. Responsiveness to requests for meetings or interviews of value.

3. Facilitation of introductions to internal or external stakeholders already known to the City.

4. Participation in a collaborative decision-making environment lead and organized by Watearth. This will keep City objectives in focus. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Task 6: Prepare Implementing Documents
Task 5: Selection of Service Delivery Option
Task 4: Community Engagement
Task 3: Evaluate Options
Task 2: Identify Options
Task 1: Document Existing Service Delivery System
Estimated Project Schedule, Weeks
Draft Development Comment Period and Revised Draft(s) Final Development

1134
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Staffing Resource Plan
The Watearth team is composed of five key staff members expected to deliver the greatest value and best degree of client coordination and efficiency.

Additional resources are available on an as-needed basis.

Watearth, an Alameda-based firm, will act as the prime consultant on this project by providing the engineering and environmental technical expertise associated with wastewater and stormwater planning, with support in the field of economics analysis from Arup, with whom we have worked before. Watearth was also recently a guest at the Climate Adaptation International Conference (January 2024) with Arup.

Staff responsibilities and commitment to the project are illustrated in the organizational chart below.

Principal Environmental Engineer
Jennifer J. Walker PE, D.WRE, ENV SP, CFM, QSD
City council recommendations. Quality assurance. 40% on project.

Project Manager
Jeremy Liby
Project Management. Client Coordination. Technical Oversight. 90% on project.

Watearth © 2024
Senior Water Resources Engineer
Mark Alan Locke PE
Operations analysis. 80% on project.

Environmental Planner
Alyssa Wilson
GIS Analysis, data management. 90% on project.

Environmental Engineer
Jacob Guise
Data analysis, operations, project coordination. 90% on project.

Senior Economist
Abigail Rolon
Economic feasibility, reporting, workshop. 20% on project.

Wastewater and Stormwater Economics
Additional support staff are available within Watearth and Arup as needed.

Senior Economist
Alfonso Mendez Lossada
Economics feasibility analysis, quality control. 10% on project.

Arup joins the Watearth team to contribute economics expertise. Their commitment is evidenced by the letter on the following page:

1135
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Overall Page 27
1136
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

The team assembled for the City of Richmond's wastewater and stormwater service delivery RFP consists of professionals with backgrounds in environmental engineering, planning, project management, and economics.

Principal Environmental Engineer Jennifer J. Walker, PE, DWRE, ENV SP, CFM, QSD, LEED AP BD+C is the driving force behind Watearth Inc., bringing over 30 years of experience in
sustainable and resilient solutions. Expertise spans stormwater, wastewater, water quality, flood control, and green
infrastructure. Walker's strategic vision, combined with detailed technical knowledge, means both high-level planning and nuanced project details are understood. Previous projects, such as the Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Water Resources Master Plan, various projects for the Texas Water Development Board, South Santa Rosa Area Specific Plan for Wastewater and Stormwater, and the SFEI Bay Area Stormwater Best Management Practices tool development showcase the ability to deliver comprehensive environmental documentation and master plans, making Walker an asset for the Richmond project.

Jeremy Liby, Project Manager, has over 12 years of experience in environmental science and planning and project
management, specializing in data collection, geology, GIS, and coordination with municipal clients. Recent projects, including the California Department of Veterans' Affairs Watershed Sanitary Survey and the Texas Water Development Board’s Internal Environmental Review Process project, highlight the ability to manage complex projects effectively and to achieve client satisfaction. Liby’s strong project management skills, combined with the ability to interpret and present complex data clearly, make Liby a key player in ensuring the Richmond project meets its goals efficiently. Note this commentary from one of Jeremy’s satisfied clients, for whom Watearth provided operational analysis.

We sincerely appreciate the professionalism of you and your staff as we worked through the review process. This comprehensive report will serve as the instrument to continue to evaluate our processes, identify areas of improvement and implement necessary improvements along the way.

Les Davis
Texas Water Development Board

1137
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Mark Alan Locke, PE, our Senior Water Resources Engineer, brings to the table a career spanning over four decades focused on operations and maintenance of large-scale infrastructure.

Leadership roles at federal agencies like the USDA and USACE equips Locke with a deep understanding of regulatory compliance and risk management. Experience in quality control of hydrologic and hydraulic models, as demonstrated in projects like the Caltrans Alameda ALA61 hydraulic design, Alameda County Flood Control District Zone 12 Drainage Master Plan and the Los Angeles County Public Works Adventure Park Regional Stormwater Management project will lend to the necessary technical and managerial expertise for Richmond's wastewater and stormwater systems.

Environmental Engineer Jacob Guise is a dedicated
environmental engineer with a multidisciplinary approach to water and environmental projects. Expertise in water quality modeling, GIS, and environmental report writing is crucial for planning and master planning applications. Work on projects such as the South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Area Wastewater and Stormwater evaluations and the City of San Pablo ESA Phase 1 and 2 demonstrates the ability to manage technical assessments and compliance with local, state, and federal guidelines, making Guise a valuable asset.

Alyssa R. Wilson, our proposed Environmental Planner brings specialized skills in GIS and sustainability, supporting environmental planning projects by facilitating project permitting and data interpretation. Experience in presenting GIS data and creating cohesive project exhibits ensures that the Richmond project will have clear and actionable visual data
representations. Work on projects like the Port of Corpus Christi Drainage Master Plan and the Los Angeles Bureau of Engineering Zoo Master Plan demonstrates the ability to handle large-scale planning and environmental impact assessments effectively.

Abigail Rolon, one of our Senior Economists, leads Arup’s economics offering in the Americas. She helps clients assess the social, economic, and environmental impacts of their
infrastructure projects, develops funding and financing plans for their execution and operation, and evaluates alternative delivery methods. Her clients include public sector agencies, non-governmental organizations, and infrastructure investment funds.

1138
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Alfonso Mendez-Lossada, Senior Economist, has over 33 years of experience structuring financial transactions and leads Arup’s Transaction Advice Infrastructure Advisory offering, advising public sector clients on P3 project procurement, financial structuring, Value for Money and strategic P3 policy. He has led and structured a large number of project finance transactions for public and private sector clients (both brownfield and greenfield) with more than 60 projects requiring over $25bn in debt.

Team Synergy
The combination of Walker’s strategic leadership, Locke’s extensive regulatory and operational expertise, Liby’s project management acumen, Guise’s technical proficiency, Wilson’s GIS and data presentation skills, and Rolon and Mendez-Lossada’s public infrastructure program economics analysis expertise forms a well-rounded team capable of addressing the complex needs of Richmond’s wastewater and stormwater services. Their collective experience in managing significant projects with multiple stakeholders, ensuring regulatory compliance, and delivering sustainable solutions will be instrumental in conducting a thorough feasibility study and providing collaborative and actionable recommendations for the City of Richmond.

Watearth and Arup are partnered on several contracts for stormwater engineering and climate adaptation and financial planning for municipal agencies for clients like City of Oakland, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and City of Los Angeles.

Watearth was also recently a guest at the Climate Adaptation International Conference (January 2024) with Arup.

Resumes follow on subsequent pages.

1139
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Jennifer J. Walker PE, DWRE, ENV SP, CFM, QSD, LEED AP BD+C Principal Environmental Engineer Walker is the embodiment and driving spirit behind Watearth’s commitment to delivering the TRUSTED™ Signature Project Delivery experience to clients like City of Richmond.

Walker, President of Watearth, Inc., has an earned reputation for bringing unique insights to projects and has delivered to municipal clients the sort of owner advocacy, impartiality, technical expertise, and risk management that City of Richmond needs to evaluate two decades of precedent service delivery. As a water resources engineer chiefly concerned with developing sustainable and resilient solutions, over 30 years of practice producing foundational environmental documentation and master plans, nuanced and complex hydraulic and hydrologic models, and civil designs grounded in solid science and reality have prepared Walker to
consult authoritatively and collaboratively with
the City. Walker is an expert in stormwater,
wastewater, water quality, flood control, green
infrastructure, hydrology and hydraulics, water
resources, and complex projects with multiple
stakeholders. For the sensitive matters of
litigation, Walker has been called upon time and time again as an expert witness.

From CIPs to extensive regional planning studies, Walker adopts an appropriate level of detail on projects, and will adapt Watearth’s efforts on this planning study to respond to Richmond’s objectives by working in tandem with the assigned Watearth project manager to establish a Project Management Plan that sets appropriate standards for the necessary degree of communication. By understanding projects at both ends of the spectrum, Walker has routinely proven an asset to project teams needing a nuanced approach that addresses upstream and downstream project concerns. In addition, Walker's presence on the project ensures critical questions can be answered with confidence.

Walker's resume includes highlight projects across our nation's geography.

Walker has consulted at a principal level for over a dozen years, with projects for major municipal clients in California and Texas carrying fees and construction costs over $22M. Walker navigates grant funding and regulatory policy deftly and will provide your project with the same on-budget and on-schedule success provided to clients like Los Angeles County, Texas Water Development Board, San Francisco Estuary Institute, Alameda County, and Caltrans.

Walker brings an exceptional
ability to present the 30,000-foot
view while staying attuned to the
detailed nuances of the project.

Mayor Parker
City of Houston
Overall Page 31
1140
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Walker is looking to the future and developing solutions accordingly. As a result, Walker is ahead of the curve integrating climate change adaptation into projects and assessing cost-benefit.

Key Takeaway
Walker has 30 years of experience and is a rock-solid asset to municipal clients on politically and technically complex projects – both as an individual expert and as Watearth’s executive leader.

Education • MCE. Civil Engineering c. Water Resources. University of Houston. • BS. Civil Engineering c. Environmental and Water. Kansas State University. • Management Development for Entrepreneurs. UCLA Anderson School of Management.
• Building a High-Performing Business. Tuck Executive Education at Dartmouth.

Licenses & Certifications • PE. State of California. #C77079. • PE. Multiple other states.
• QSP/QSD. California Stormwater Quality Association. #21187. • ENV SP. Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure.
• DWRE. American Academy of Water Resource Engineers.
• CFM. Association of State Floodplain Managers (Texas Floodplain Management Association). #0848-05N.
• LEED AP BD+C. US Green Building Council. #11511130
• Permaculture Designer's Certificate. Sustainable Development and Water.

Permaculture Research Institute.

Representative Projects
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Water Resources Master Plan (San Luis Obispo, CA):

Conducted technical studies for EIR, including Water Supply Assessment, Wastewater Feasibility, and Reclaimed Water Facility impacts. Evaluated treatment options. Analyzed water supply and demand, modeled distribution systems with conservation BMPs, and assessed wastewater flows. Evaluated 2035 development impacts on city infrastructure and facilitated stakeholder involvement.

San Rafael Site Design and Environmental Services for First-of-its-Kind Discharge Permit: Provided urban planning, parking analysis, and permitting for sanitary sewer discharge and treatment design for industrial client operating statewide in California. Conducted site design, including topographic surveying, landscape Overall Page 32
1141
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
design, and civil design coordination. Assisted with architecture, structural, and MEP peer reviews, and created marketing materials.

California Department of Veterans' Affairs (CalVet) Watershed Sanitary Survey Services/Rector Reservoir (Napa Valley, CA): Updated Rector Reservoir watershed sanitary survey with recent water quality data. Achieved client satisfaction and received no comments from reviewing agency.

City of Pleasanton Water Supply Assessment for EIR (Pleasanton, CA): Developed SB610 Water Supply Assessment for CEQA compliance in support of the Housing Element Update.

Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) Assessment of the Board’s Environmental Review Process and Procedures: Provided expertise in federal and state environmental regulations, process improvement, and records management for TWDB’s review process.

Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) Municipal Water Conservation Planning Tool: Led Beta Testing phase, coordinated stakeholders, and provided recommendations for TX-specific water conservation strategies and model development.

Killeen MS4 City Council Permit Recommendations: Guided city staff and council on stormwater quality codes meeting federal and state requirements.

Developed MS4 permit stormwater criteria and served as stormwater quality expert.

Los Angeles Bureau of Engineering (LABOE) Zoo Master Plan and Zoo Vision Plan EIR Hydrology and Water Quality Technical Studies (Los Angeles, CA): Prepared water resources sections for Los Angeles Zoo Master Plan, including stormwater, recycled water, and wastewater treatment evaluations. Conducted hydrology modeling and assessed water quality impacts to Los Angeles River.

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) Water Conservation and Sustainability (Los Angeles, CA): Evaluated stormwater capture, bus/rail wash water treatment, and conservation strategies. Identified potential savings in water consumption and developed water conservation BMPs.

Alameda County Flood Control District (ACFCD) Zone 12 Drainage Master Plan Site Study (Oakland, CA): Provided hydrologic, hydraulic, and water quality services for Oakland’s drainage system. Analyzed urban drainage, recommended water quality projects, and developed engineering and costs.

California Statewide Phase II MS4/NPDES Tool: Developed statewide toolkit for evaluating stormwater permit compliance. Grant funded project.

Overall Page 33
1142
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) Bay Area Regional Green Infrastructure Tool and Green Plan-It Master Plan (Bay Area, CA): Provided technical support for GIS-based Green Infrastructure tool in Bay Area. Updated GI feasibility matrix and performed watershed-wide water quality modeling.

City of Santa Monica BMPs O&M Manual (Santa Monica, CA). Performed NPDES and MS4 Permitting for TMDL compliance. Developed O&M Plan for City BMPs ranging from permeable pavement and LID BMPs to manufactured BMPs.

Performed site reconnaissance of BMPs. Evaluated manufactured treatment systems and custom designed wet and dry weather stormwater treatment at SMURF facility, including filtering, ultraviolet disinfection, and other measures.

Included customized O&M fact sheets and inspection sheets for all BMPs maintained by the City of Santa Monica. Watearth's manual was ultimately the criteria used by the City to hire a maintenance contractor.

City of Kingwood Water and Wastewater Masterplan.

Greater Houston Partnership Wastewater Capacity Feasibility Study.

Brownsville Public Utilities Board Wastewater Sludge Disposal Feasibility Study.

Los Angeles Sanitation Haynes Park.

LABOE Venice Auxiliary Wastewater Pumping Plan Hydrology and Hydraulics Analysis.

University of Houston Conservation and LID/Landscape Master Plan: Developed landscape-based water conservation and stormwater BMP Master Plan for campus. Integrated Green Infrastructure, greywater, and alternative water sources for irrigation.

Springwoods Village 1,200-Acre Master Plan Water Resources Design Guidelines:

Recommended water, wastewater, and water conservation guidelines for a 1,200-acre community. Developed criteria for sustainable water management practices.

Monterey Bay Charter School Alternative Water Supply Evaluation and Design (Pacific Grove, CA): Evaluated and designed greywater, rainwater, and condensate systems. Conducted water balance modeling, prepared technical reports, and assisted with permitting and construction services.

Greywater System Sizing and Design: Estimated interior water demands and greywater generation from sinks, showers, and laundry. Designed irrigation systems for various plant types and efficiency levels across California. Prioritized water conservation through fixtures, efficient irrigation, and greywater reuse.

Overall Page 34
1143
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Water Distribution System Modeling and Master Plan for The Woodlands:

Developed water and wastewater Master Plan. Conducted ongoing water distribution system modeling based on land use and population projections.

Created GIS database and modeled demand and fire flow. Sized system components including wells, pumps, and storage tanks.

Cinco Ranch Water Distribution and Wastewater System Modeling and Master Plan: Developed and maintained water distribution system modeling. Analyzed water demands and conducted fire flow modeling. Optimized system layout and sized components including wells, pumps, and storage tanks. Included interconnections with neighboring systems.

City of Buena Park Orangethorpe Intersection Storm Drain CIP/LID to Solve Flooding (Buena Park, CA). The purpose of the project was to perform alternatives analysis, design, and construction-phase services to alleviate flooding near the Orangethorpe and Stanton intersection. The work plan for the project was to address street flooding, design cost-effective storm drain improvements, and provide project alternatives. Modeled existing and proposed hydrologic conditions using 2D Innovyze XPSWMM. The second phase was to design the stormwater drainage system, including using Low Impact Development (LID). Included Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), Operations and Maintenance Plan (O&M) and an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP). Prepared 75% drawings for new storm drain and LID features.

City of Houston Water Conservation Plan and Raw Water GIS and Model Development. Compiled and analyzed raw water customer data for municipal systems as large as 500K accounts and residential populations of 3M. Developed GIS database for raw water customers, raw water canals, pump stations, and key water supply facilities. Determined available water allocation. Performed field verification of raw water delivery points. Developed modeling information for hydraulic model of raw water system. Developed Water Conservation Plan.

Analyzed existing utility data. Evaluated conservation BMPs for implementation cost-benefit. Included green-house gas components. Developed water conservation model. Worked with focus group convened by Mayor. Developed Drought Response Plan.

Overall Page 35
1144
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do not Copy.

Jeremy Liby
Project Manager
Liby is a talented environmental
planner and project manager with
over 12 years of experience in data
collection and analysis, Geographic
Information Systems, and
coordination with municipal clients.

Over the last 4 years, Liby has
become one of Watearth’s star
project managers, with an acute understanding of our project management process which results in high marks for client satisfaction on metrics that matter, including consistency and desire to work with Jeremy again.

Liby supports Watearth projects by interpreting complex datasets and translating it into clear and descriptive reports and exhibits that follow Watearth’s reader-friendlydocumentation process. Utilizing hands-on field experiences combined with an extensive spatial analysis and data collection background makes Liby a key team member and support resource for Watearth projects.

Key Takeaway
As a project manager, Liby is among Watearth’s strongest contenders. Liby is fully committed to creating an integrated and collaborative environment to facilitate decision making on this sensitive project for the City of Richmond.

Education • BS. Geology. University of Colorado.

Licenses & Certifications • GIS Certificate. University of Denver.

Representative Projects
City of Pleasanton Water Supply Assessment for EIR (Pleasanton, CA): Developed SB610 Water Supply Assessment for CEQA compliance in support of the Housing Element Update.

Caltrans District 4 Caltrans Task Order 19, ALA61 Between Davis Street and Encinal Avenue (Alameda, CA): Conducted GIS-intensive hydrologic and hydraulic assessment for State Route 61 improvement project. Developed drainage plans for project phases.

I have really enjoyed the great diversity in
projects this career provides. It feels good
knowing I am making a positive difference in the
world. Whether it is pointing out environmentally
significant items or improving a drainage system
for a town, the impact is important for society.

Jeremy Liby
Watearth
Overall Page 36
1145
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do not Copy.

California Department of Veterans' Affairs (CalVet) Watershed Sanitary Survey Services/Rector Reservoir (Napa Valley, CA): Conducted watershed sanitary survey and updated report with recent water quality data. Achieved client satisfaction and no comments from reviewing agency.

Napa 5-Way Intersection Improvements Project: Provided drainage analysis, Caltrans Initial Site Assessment, water quality technical study, and Short Form Stormwater Data Report.

Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) Assessment of the Board’s Environmental Review Process and Procedures: Provided expertise in federal and state environmental regulations, process improvement, and records management for TWDB’s review process.

City of Hemet Water Distribution System Analysis (Hemet, CA): Conducted analysis of water distribution system. Evaluated existing systems, performed flow testing, and developed GIS maps.

City of Redlands Country Club Drainage Study (Redlands, CA). Provided an analysis of the Redlands Country Club Golf Course and contributing watershed for flood risk and identifying potential mitigation measures. Used aerial imagery and topographic data to accurately delineate drainage areas within the contributing watershed. These drainage areas were input into HEC-HMS modeling software along with calculated hydrologic parameters to determine peak flows and flow volume within each drainage area. The flow determined in modeling is the flow that travels from each drainage area into the golf course at several discharge points. Flood mitigation measures were developed to reduce peak flows and flow volume at each discharge point with the goal of reducing flooding and erosion/sedimentation within the golf course. Provided expertise in hydrology and hydraulics, spatial analysis, modeling, and design to successfully execute this project.

Los Angeles County Public Works (LACPW) Rubio Wash Hydrology and 1D/2D Hydraulics Drainage Study for Stormwater Infrastructure Improvement Master Plan (Los Angeles, CA): Conducted hydrology and hydraulics study for Rubio Wash drainage improvement. Included GIS inventory and MODRAT hydrology.

Los Angeles County Public Works (LACPW) Adventure Park Runoff and Stormwater Capture Regional Water Quality Project (Los Angeles County, CA):

Managed Caltrans-funded stormwater quality project. Designed civil features, conducted environmental assessments, and managed permits. Included LID design and stakeholder outreach.

Overall Page 37
1146
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Mark Alan Locke PE
Senior Water Resources Engineer
Locke is a senior engineer with a
career spanning more than four
decades. The bulk of Locke’s career
has been working with and for
federal agencies, such as USDA and
USACE. From 2012 to 2019, Locke
was engaged with the Army Corps
as a Safety Program Manager, a
Deputy Director and Chief, and a
Director at the Southwestern Division.

Locke provides seasoned oversight of Operations & Maintenance (O&M), focusing on large scale infrastructure.

Watearth proposes Locke to City of Richmond as an operations manager with an acute understanding of cost estimating and the risks that occur when operational responsibilities transition from one team to another. Locke is expert in identifying potentials for communication and process breakdowns that result in infrastructure setbacks.

Locke approaches projects as an engineer and a professional considering all needs and workable solutions. Locke has worked on various projects, from exceedingly small farms projects to large government projects. Experience working on such a range of projects has allowed Locke to recognize there is not only one solution for a project and has helped Locke develop the skills to make meaningful recommendations to municipal clients.

Key Takeaway
Locke’s four decades of experience includes work on all phases of projects, resulting in a collaborative approach to risk management.

Education • BS. Agricultural Engineering. Kansas State University. • Graduate Course. Structure and Slope Stability. Kansas State University.

Licenses & Certifications • PE. State of Kansas. #9758.

Representative Experience
Alameda County Flood Control District (ACFCD) Zone 12 Drainage Master Plan Site Study (Oakland, CA): Provided hydrologic, hydraulic, and environmental I saw engineering as an opportunity to take my
individual skills to use for the betterment of
individuals, the environment, and society as a
whole. There is nothing better than helping to
solve an individual’s problem, saving a
community from flooding, or creating a solution
to help sustain the environment.

Mark Alan Locke PE
Watearth
Overall Page 38
1147
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
services for Oakland’s Zone 12 Drainage Master Plan, encompassing Lake Merritt. Analyzed urban drainage systems, identified water quality projects, and recommended alternatives, including cost estimates and preliminary designs.

Los Angeles Bureau of Engineering (LABOE) Zoo Vision Plan EIR Hydrology and Water Quality Technical Studies (Los Angeles, CA): Prepared water resources and sustainability sections for the Zoo’s Vision Plan EIR, addressing steep slopes, landslides, and water quality impacts on the Los Angeles River. Conducted SWMM modeling and evaluated treatment options for animal exhibits.

Los Angeles County Public Works (LACPW) Rubio Wash Hydrology and 1D/2D Hydraulics Drainage Study (Los Angeles, CA): Provided hydrology and hydraulics for Rubio Wash drainage study, crucial for LA’s flood control system.

Utilized GIS for storm drain inventory and XPSWMM for modeling at various storm levels.

Los Angeles County Public Works (LACPW) Adventure Park Runoff and Stormwater Capture Regional Water Quality Project (Los Angeles County, CA):

Managed Caltrans-funded stormwater quality project, diverting San Gabriel River watershed flows to underground capture. Designed LID features, secured permits, and developed WQMP and O&M Plans.

Caltrans District 4 Caltrans Task Order 19, ALA61 (Alameda, CA): Conducted GIS-intensive drainage assessment for SR 61 improvements in Alameda County.

Assessed existing drainage compliance and developed preliminary plans for CAPM project phases.

Big Beau (Tropico) Solar Water Supply Assessment and Water Rights for CEQA (Kern County, CA): Assessed water supply and quality for solar project, recommended drainage and mitigation measures. Researched water rights and secured preliminary environmental permits.

City of Citrus Heights O&M Updates and Staff Training (Citrus Heights, CA):

Provided city staff O&M training, updated documents, and developed educational materials.

USACE Civil and Stream Restoration/Channel Improvements Planning (Los Angeles, CA): Participated in Santiago Creek flood control channel VE workshop, proposing cost-saving ideas and improvements for flood risk reduction.

USDA-NRCS National Design Engineer: Led design and review of agency's largest structures. Developed policies, coordinated A&E contracts, and managed ARRA implementation. Served on national dam safety boards and updated NRCSID.

Overall Page 39
1148
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do not Copy.

Jacob Guise
Environmental Engineer
Guise is a dedicated and talented Environmental Engineer with experience in water quality modeling, geographic information systems, and environmental report writing. Guise brings a multidisciplinary approach to water and environmental projects, having watershed and water resource modeling and technical expertise for planning and master planning applications. As a staff engineer, Guise has assessed compliance for chemical and thermal discharges from changes in water quality standards while following local, state, and federal guidelines.

Key Takeaway
Guise is a water resources engineer with experience in water resources management and municipal project planning.

Education • BS. Environmental Engineering c. Biological and Chemical Processes.

University of Delaware.

Representative Projects
Napa 5-Way Intersection Improvements Project: Provided drainage analysis, Caltrans Initial Site Assessment, water quality technical study, and Short Form Stormwater Data Report.

City of Santa Rosa South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Infrastructure Plan (Santa Rosa, CA). Evaluation of existing and proposed water and wastewater systems. Site reconnaissance, technical memorandums, watershed maps, hydrology calculations, stormwater management, flood mitigation, and conceptual improvements for future growth.

City of San Pablo Phase 1 and 2 ESA (San Pablo, CA). Developed Phase 1 and 2 ESA, evaluating contaminated sites and historical data. Created health and safety plan, performed site reconnaissance, and produced GIS exhibits. Utilized EDR report for historical data and completed draft and final ESAs.

Oil Spill and Drill Cuttings Deposition Modeling. Supported global oil spill and drill cuttings deposition projects. Created control files, executed model runs, analyzed results, and wrote environmental impact assessments for over 30 projects worldwide, including locations in Africa, Montenegro, Southeast Asia, and the Gulf of Mexico.

Chemical and Thermal Discharge Modeling. Assessed compliance of chemical and thermal discharges with local, state, and federal guidelines.

Overall Page 40
1149
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do not Copy.

Alyssa R. Wilson
Environmental Planner
Wilson is a talented Environmental
Planner with experience in GIS and
sustainability. Wilson has assisted
on many of Watearth’s
environmental planning projects
and is a crucial support asset on
project teams. Wilson supports
many Watearth projects by
facilitating project permitting and interpreting data for reporting purposes. As a specialist in GIS, Wilson produces straightforward, descriptive exhibits that follow Watearth’s documentation process. These exhibits introduce a level of cohesion and communication within our team, facilitating our efforts to meet or beat accelerated schedules.

Wilson focuses on presenting GIS maps as a tool for practical, big-picture thinking. Wilson is exceptionally skilled in presenting fieldwork data in GIS maps creating helpful graphics and maps to help build understanding about an area.

While at Watearth, Wilson has created GIS graphics for proposals and projects presenting various data, ranging from hydrology and general data to calculating hydrological parameters and delineating drainage areas.

Additionally, Wilson has experience organizing GIS data in Excel spreadsheets and converting attribute table data in GIS shapefiles to spreadsheets.

Key Takeaway
Wilson is a specialist in GIS and data management with experience facilitating project permitting and large-scale planning.

Education • BS. Energy and Environmental Policy (m. Geography/GIS, m. Wildlife Ecology and Conservation). University of Delaware.
• Study Abroad. The GREEN Program Short Term Study Abroad in Sustainability and Renewable Energy. Reykjavik University.

Representative Projects
San Rafael Site Design and Environmental Services for First-of-its-Kind Discharge Permit: Provided urban planning, parking analysis, and permitting for sanitary sewer discharge and treatment design for industrial client operating statewide in California. Conducted site design, including topographic surveying, landscape I like making a difference in local communities
and having clean water and an available water
source is a crucial issue. In addition, I have
always enjoyed geography and the water, so it
has been great to combine my interests into a
rewarding career.

Alyssa R. Wilson
Watearth
Overall Page 41
1150
D. Staffing
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do not Copy.
design, and civil design coordination. Assisted with architecture, structural, and MEP peer reviews, and created marketing materials.

California Department of Veterans' Affairs (CalVet) Watershed Sanitary Survey Services/Rector Reservoir (Napa Valley, CA). Updated watershed sanitary survey for Rector Reservoir, Napa County. Reported recent water quality data and field observations. Achieved client satisfaction and received no comments from reviewing agency.

Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) Assessment of Environmental Review Process. Expertise in federal and state environmental regulations, TWDB’s environmental review process, Root Cause analysis, and records management.

Improved process efficiency and compliance.

Los Angeles Bureau of Engineering (LABOE) Zoo Master Plan and Zoo Vision Plan EIR Hydrology and Water Quality Technical Studies (Los Angeles, CA). Prepared water resources and sustainability sections of Master Plan and EIR for Los Angeles Zoo, addressing steep slope and erosion issues. Designed treatment filtering exhibits and assessed water demands and conservation measures, including recycled water use. Evaluated water quality impacts and treatment options for animal exhibit and wastewater systems.

Port of Corpus Christi Authority (PCCA) Drainage Master Plan. Developed Stormwater Master Plan for Inner Harbor and Rincon areas, integrating Green Infrastructure with gray infrastructure. Provided technical input and peer review for GIS-based Green Infrastructure tool. Recommended Bioretention, Vegetated Swales, and Stormwater Wetlands to enhance water quality. Conducted geotechnical sampling and PCSWMM modeling for hydrology, hydraulics, and water quality.

Los Angeles County Public Works (LACPW) Rubio Wash Hydrology and 1D/2D Hydraulics Drainage Study for Stormwater Infrastructure Improvement Master Plan (Los Angeles, CA). Conducted hydrology and 1D/2D hydraulics study for Rubio Wash subwatershed. Addressed flood control deficiencies with GIS inventory and modeling. Designed stormwater management solutions for watershed and channel.

City of Hemet Water Distribution System Analysis (Hemet, CA). Conducted water distribution analysis, flow testing, and deficiency correction. Developed GIS maps and technical reports for system improvements.

Overall Page 42
1151
Abigail Rolon
Abigail brings 18 years of international experience in
economic and financial evaluations of infrastructure projects in multiple sectors.

Abigail Rolon leads the economics offering in the Americas. She helps clients assess the social, economic, and environmental impacts of their infrastructure projects, develops funding and financing plans for their execution and operation, and evaluates alternative delivery methods. Her clients include public sector agencies, non-governmental organizations, and infrastructure investment funds.

Project experience
Biosolids P3 Feasibility Study, San Jose, CA
Arup was engaged by the City of San José (City) to assess the viability of a P3 procurement for a facility that processes biosolids into a commercial product, such as a fertilizer, at the San Jose-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility (RWF). Arup’s analytical framework for the study consisted of conducting workshops with City staff to determine the City’s project and procurement objectives, the City’s project technical requirements, and the City’s desired project risk transfer. Subsequently, Arup performed a market sounding through a Request for Information and one-on-one meetings with potential project participants to understand the market’s interest in delivering the project as envisioned by the City. Based on the market findings and Arup’s own knowledge of and experience with P3 projects, Arup developed a financial analysis to assess the potential commercial feasibility and costs to the City using proxy P3 facilities. Finally, Arup provided recommendations on the potential procurement structure. Abigail was the Project Manager responsible for leading a multidisciplinary team.

BART Automated Parking System Feasibility Analysis- Dublin Pleasanton Station- P3 Feasibility Study, Dublin and Pleasanton, CA To minimize the footprint of parking and increase its supply at the BART Dublin Pleasanton Station, where for many years the demand has exceeded the supply, Arup developed a financial feasibility analysis of implementing a fully automated parking garage. Abigail was the project manager for the study, which included assessing different technologies and costs, revenue potential, parking fees, and different procurement methods.

Presidio Parkway (Doyle Drive), San Francisco, CA
Arup is the lead technical and financial advisor to the San Francisco County Transportation Authority (SFCTA) assisting the client with the procurement of a private partner to design, build, finance, operate, and maintain a replacement facility for Doyle Drive. Abigail worked with the travel demand modelers and developed the methodology to assess the benefits related to the avoided negative consequences of having the Presidio Parkway unavailable plus other benefits achieved by enhancements on the new facility. Among the benefits quantified were increases in travel times of travelers crossing the Profession
Economics
Current position
Associate Principal
Joined Arup
2010
Years of experience

18.0 Qualifications
MS, Urban Planning, University
of California Los Angeles
(UCLA), 2005
Bachelors in Economics Centre of
Economic Research (CIDE),
Mexico City, Mexico, 1998
Certificate in Public-Private
Partnerships, Institute for PublicPrivate Partnerships, Ongoing Certificate in Benefit-Cost
Analysis, Center of Project
Evaluation and Special Studies
(CEPEP), Mexico City, Mexico,
2002
Availability
20%
Overall Page 43
1152
viaducts due to rerouting and increases in travel times of non-users of the viaducts affected by additional congestion, caused by rerouting former users of the viaducts.

Los Angeles Convention Center Expansion Delivery Options Analysis Abigail was the project manager for the Los Angeles Convention Center expansion feasibility analysis. The purpose of the study was to assess the viability to fund the expansion using alternative funding sources such as real estate, naming rights, tax increment, and an alternative procurement model such as a public-private – partnership. The analysis included a real estate market assessment of the vicinity of the project, identification of operational improvements to reduce the deficit, and a financial modelling exercise to assess the City’s annual payments of using alternative procurements.

Long Beach Courthouse P3, Lender’s Technical Due Diligence, Long Beach, CA, Project Manager for the lenders’ technical due diligence for the new Long Beach Courthouse to be delivered under a Design-build- finance- maintain- and operate (DBFOM) scheme ($400m Facility).

The work involved revision of the concession, design-builder, and facility manager contracts, preparation of the technical and financial analysis of the courthouse, and management of a diverse team of technical experts to produce the Due Diligence Report. Abigail was key in negotiating the security package on behalf of the Lenders.

San Francisco Climate Action Plan Funding and Financing Strategies, San Francisco, CA Led the identification and assessment of funding and financing mechanism for the short- and mediumterm implementation of the City’s CAP. The San Francisco Climate Action Plan (CAP) calls for goals, strategies, and actions across six sectors to reach zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. To achieve this, funding sources need to be secured in a timely manner. The study looked at a comprehensive list of funding mechanisms including federal and state grants, user fees, sales taxes, parking fees, property taxes, congestion pricing, and the creation of a carbon tax, among others..

Benefit Cost Analysis of California High Speed Rail, CA The State of California is planning to undertake a multibillion-dollar investment to connect by rail Southern and Northern California. Abigail worked closely with the travel demand modelers to identify and quantify the economic benefits of undertaking the California High Speed Rail. This task involved identifying and assessing benefits to both intercity and urban high-speed train passengers (net of fares paid); reduction of airside delay for air passengers; reduction in aircraft operating costs; reduction of highway delay for both intercity and urban auto trips; and reduction of accident and air pollution costs from intercity and urban auto trips.

Overall Page 44
1153
Alfonso Mendez-Lossada
Alfonso has extensive experience advising clients on
structuring complex financial transactions for infrastructure and project financing, finding innovative solutions and leading collaborative, results-oriented and inter-disciplinary teams.

Alfonso Mendez has over 33 years of experience structuring financial transactions and leads Arup’s Transaction Advice Infrastructure Advisory offering, advising public sector clients on P3 project procurement, financial structuring, Value for Money and strategic P3 policy. He has led and structured a large number of project finance transactions for public and private sector clients (both brownfield and greenfield) with more than 60 projects requiring over $25bn in debt. He has closed numerous transactions including the creation of new assets class in the international financial markets. Alfonso’s extensive experience in project finance and structured finance is focused on infrastructure, P3s, and concessions for public and private sector clients. He specializes in the structuring, marketing, and execution of structured projects and financial transactions with economic, accounting, tax or regulatory emphasis. He leads teams in profitable business units focused in financial advisory and investment banking services. He specializes in deal advisory and financial analysis for public and private infrastructure procurement and development.

Project experience
Biosolids P3 Feasibility Study, San Jose, CA
Arup was engaged by The City of San José (City) to assess the viability of a P3 procurement for a facility that processes biosolids into a commercial product, such as a fertilizer, at the San Jose-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility (RWF). Arup’s analytical framework for the study consisted of conducting workshops with City staff to determine the City’s project and procurement objectives, the City’s project technical requirements, and the City’s desired project risk transfer. Subsequently, Arup performed a market sounding through a Request for Information and one-onone meetings with potential project participants to understand the market’s interest in delivering the project as envisioned by the City. Based on the market findings and Arup’s own knowledge of and experience with P3 projects, Arup developed a financial analysis to assess the potential commercial feasibility and costs to the City using proxy P3 facilities. Finally, Arup provided recommendations on the potential procurement structure.

Alfonso was the Project Director overseeing the quality of deliverables.

Potrero Bus Yard Modernization Project, San Francisco, CA Lead Financial Advisor, advising the City of San Francisco in the evaluation and procurement of the rebuild and expansion of the Potrero Yard project to serve the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Muni fleet as it transitions to battery electric vehicles. This project includes joint development with the inclusion of affordable housing. .Alfonso is currently the leading the Financial workstream, providing financial, commercial, and structuring advice.

Profession
Finance
Current position
Associate Principal
Joined Arup
2016
Years of experience
33 Qualifications
MBA, Finance, Instituto de
Estudios Superiores de
Administracion (IESA), Caracas,
Venezuela
BS, Electronic Engineering
(Hons), Universidad Simon
Bolivar (USB), Caracas,
Venezuela
Availability
10%
Overall Page 45
1154
San Jose Airport Connector, San Jose, CA
Acting as Lead Procurement and Financial Advisor to City of San José Department of Transportation to develop a new approach to transit that can be designed and built faster, at a lower cost, and that offers a better rider experience than traditional transit systems. The first step is a proposed connector between Mineta San José International Airport and Diridon Station in the west end of San José’s Downtown. Arup is now involved in the first predevelopment phase, ultimately working towards a long-term revenue risk DBFOM agreement.

Long Beach Civic Center, Long Beach, CA
Lead Financial Advisor to the City of Long Beach for this social infrastructure P3 project. Arup was responsible for leading the client through the procurement of a private partner to develop, DBFOM a new city hall, main library, city park, and Port headquarters including a mixed-use real estate development that cross subsidized the project.

Los Angeles Convention Center, City of Los Angeles, CA
Lead Financial Advisor, assessed for the alternative P3 procurement for an expansion project for the City’s Convention Center, fostering a development impact on the downtown neighborhood. Arup was hired to evaluate financing and delivery options for a $750m project to modernize and expand the Los Angeles Convention Center. Built in 1971 and expanded in 1993, the Los Angeles Convention Center is one of the City’s largest capital investments and continued return on investment is critical for the city’s economic future. Arup provided financial modeling, financing alternatives assessment, commercial evaluation, economic impact analysis, and real estate analysis services.

Los Angeles Street Civic Building, Los Angeles, CA
Lead Financial Advisor, acting as the lead procurement and financial advisor to the Los Angeles Bureau of Engineering for this social infrastructure P3 project under a DBFOM structure. The project entails a high-rise office building of 753,730 gross square feet with up to 1,173 parking spaces in a subterranean garage with a maximum envelop height of 450 feet. The project will include office and commercial spaces, a museum, and a childcare facility.

Independent Advisor, San Francisco, CA
Investment & Corporate Banking / Strategic Business Planning Consultant performing financial advisory services and investment banking activities primarily for several private sector companies as well as for other financial institutions in Latin America. Advised two Brazilian construction companies in structuring, raising and closing financing for two large infrastructure projects in Peru.

Puerto Rico P3 Guidelines, San Juan, Puerto Rico
Lead Financial Advisor to the Puerto Rico Public-Private Partnerships Authority (PPPA) in the development of a set of guidelines and procedures to complete the current regulatory framework for the procurement of P3s. Arup provided advisory service to the PPPA and helped them draft guidelines of several items that shall optimize efficiency of the P3 procurement, including preliminary development agreements, unsolicited proposals, and preliminary feasibility studies. These policies will enable the Authority to attract significant private investment into Puerto Rico’s infrastructure projects.

P3 Procurement Policy Development, Lima, Peru
Lead Financial Advisor, advised the World Bank and the Ministry of Economy and Finance of Peru in the improvement of the P3 project evaluation processes and the development of a P3 procurement policy for Peru. Arup’s scope included reviewing recent P3 procurement processes and developing policy guidelines (a Green Book), such as project evaluation gateways, standard approach to risk allocation, financial structuring, and procurement guidelines for P3 projects in Peru.

Overall Page 46
1155
E. Qualifications
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study

© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Qualifications of the Firm and Staff
Watearth has been providing stormwater and wastewater consulting since 2008 to municipal and city government clients who have unique needs with respect to their organizational planning and stakeholders. Namely, unlike certain private sector clients, City government teams, City of Richmond included, are uniquely underfunded and understaffed, resulting in a heightened need for consultants who address project management and the associated communication as the central pillar of project execution. Further, City constituents (residents and businesses) demand a certain level of reliable service and are a distinct stakeholder group. As Watearth has done for dozens of City clients before, we will merge our team and our expertise with Richmond to develop integrated solutions that consider all of the risks associated to either maintaining the status quo service arrangement or selecting an alternative.

As an unaffiliated and independent firm, but experienced with municipal planning and specifically with water, wastewater, and stormwater projects, Watearth is uniquely positioned to help the City of Richmond provide for the wellbeing of constituents (and save City staff project management pains).

Watearth is joined by long-time partners at Arup. Their economists specialize in advising public entities regarding infrastructure programs. Arup is a global multidisciplinary firm of advisors, economists, planners, engineers, and designers offering a broad range of professional services that combine to make a real difference to our clients and their projects. A wholly independent, trust-owned company, Arup holds a reputation in the industry as a leader in sustainable and resilient infrastructure.

Water and Wastewater
The successful design, development, and maintenance of water infrastructure requires the integration of many disciplines. The Watearth team has wideranging skills spanning advisory and specialist technical services, including for the sensitive matter of litigation, deposition, and expert witness work, and also on projects that are politically sensitive projects involving water rights, regulatory overreach, and Mayor-appointed task forces. We apply this expertise on every kind of project, from flood risk management and water resource planning to water engineering, treatment, design, wastewater, and river engineering.

Experience delivering infrastructure projects from feasibility through construction and operations enables our team to draw from local, national, and international best practices. We use the best and brightest amongst a global network of experienced practitioners to deliver our projects, and water infrastructure advisory is no exception.

1156
E. Qualifications
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Economic Advisory and Client Advocacy
For clients of all sizes, developing a robust business case and establishing new models of funding and delivery makes the difference between hopeful ambitions and deliverable realities. Having strong supporting evidence and a clear purpose enables projects to maintain consensus and withstand political and economic change. We act as economic planning consultants to many clients worldwide, helping leaders to align deep planning insights to local needs and longer-term social and economic goals.

The Watearth team helps clients understand the economic potential or impact of proposals or policies, developing strategic responses, comprehensive solutions, and area plans across the infrastructure environment. Our economic planning team works in collaboration with client leadership, funders, and community leaders to develop a collective vision backed by practical, investable plans. We support clients to revitalize districts, develop innovation hubs, attract green finance, and protect and revitalize infrastructure.

Don’t let this project create problems for Richmond – any disruption to 20 years of precedent is going to be a challenge. Select the Watearth team, and we will take a long, hard look at the numbers, and tie them back to the costs of running a government that is concerned with planning, feasibility, design, construction, operations and maintenance, and environmental compliance. The Watearth team understands all these discipline areas because we operate in them daily.

Arup’s full suite of advisory services span the entire project lifecycle, from planning to feasibility and business case assessments, to procurement strategy development, procurement process, bid evaluation, financial close and beyond into operations. As a trusted advisor, Arup regularly advises in this capacity. 15 Years of Wastewater and Stormwater Excellence
An extremely abridged history of Watearth’s stormwater and wastewater expertise.

Three references are included on subsequent pages, as flagged in the chart. 2008
Houston
Stormwater
Master Plan
2013-2018
Water Board
Studies incl.

Conservation
2014
Killeen City
Council Recs.
2019
Cal Poly
W/WW
Master Plan
(Reference)
2023
CalVet
Watershed
Sanitary
Survey
(Reference)
2023
Water
Board
Review of
Operations
(Reference)
2024
San Rafael
W/WW
Treatment
2024
Santa Rosa
W/WW
Specific
Plan
Analysis

1157
E. Qualifications
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study

© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Projects
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Water Resources Study Enhances Master Plan! Technical Studies for EIR, Water Supply Assessment, Wastewater Feasibility, and Reclaimed Water Facility Impacts Evaluation
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Watearth conducted comprehensive water supply and wastewater technical studies for Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. Our team prepared a Water Supply Assessment to support the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), performed detailed water supply and demand analyses, and developed water supply mitigation strategies. We modeled the water distribution system, integrating conservation Best Management Practices (BMPs) and alternative supply sources, and developed dry and wet weather wastewater flows. Additionally, we executed a mass balance study for the wastewater reclamation facility, evaluated the impacts of 2035 development on the city's wastewater collection system, water distribution system, and treatment capacity. Utilizing WaterCAD and SewerCAD modeling, we facilitated extensive stakeholder involvement, including Cal Poly departments, the City, and the public.

Reference: Dennis K. Elliot; Interim Associate
Vice President of Facilities Management and
Development; Cal Poly San Luis Obispo; 1
Grand Ave, Building 70 Room 117, San Luis
Obispo, CA 93407; 805-756-2090;
[email protected]
Contract Amount: $140K.

Dates: June 2018 to September 2019
Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J.

Walker PE (responsible for quality and
project management), Alyssa Wilson
(responsible for data inventory and analysis).

Last Five Years: Yes

1158
E. Qualifications
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Large-Scale Grant-Funded Stormwater Treatment Project, Primed by Watearth with Multiple Subconsultants
This Caltrans-funded project diverted
flows from the San Gabriel River
Watershed into a 19.5-acre-foot
underground stormwater capture
facility. Untreated discharges were
sent to the sanitary sewer, with
overflows treated on-site before
release into Sorensen Drain – a
capacity analysis was performed.

Watearth managed subconsultants,
provided planning engineering,
project management, civil design, and environmental documentation. Key activities included PS&E preparation, groundwater and water quality sampling, geotechnical studies, and developing groundwater treatment processes. We ensured compliance with local, state, and federal requirements, securing $15M in Caltrans and Safe Clean Water program grants. Our proactive efforts maintained project momentum and community benefits.

Reference: Louis Romero; Capital Projects Management Associate; Los Angeles County Public Works; 900 S. Fremont Avenue Alhambra, CA 91803; (626) 300-3221; [email protected]
Contract Amount: $4M.

Dates: March 2019 to Ongoing
Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J. Walker PE (responsible for quality and project management), Mark Locke PE (specifications and design), Alyssa Wilson (responsible for data inventory and analysis).

Innovative Urban Planning and Treatment Services in Palm Springs Location: Palm Springs, CA
For the 340 W San Rafael industrial; project, Watearth
provided urban planning and environmental services.

Our team conducted a parking analysis, managed
permitting related to sanitary sewer discharge, and
executed site design and vertical integration. We
provided Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)
and site topographic surveying. Our civil design work
included utility coordination, grading plans from 60% to 100%, and peer review of architectural, structural, and

1159
E. Qualifications
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

MEP disciplines. Additionally, we delivered landscape design with a curated plant palette and graphic design services for marketing materials.

Contract Amount: $123K
Dates: December 2020 to Ongoing
Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J. Walker PE (treatment process design, site design, permitting), Mark Alan Locke PE (quality review) Last Five Years: Yes
CalVet Watershed Sanitary Survey Yields Positive Results: “It has been painless.” Location: Napa Valley, CA
Watearth performed a watershed sanitary
survey for the Rector Reservoir in Napa
County, updating the previous report with
recent water quality measurements and
field observations. Our client expressed
high satisfaction with our services, and the
reviewing agency approved our work
with no comments.

Reference: Le’Juan Bean; Contract Analyst; CalVet Office of Procurement and Contracts; 1227 O Street, 1st Floor, Sacramento, CA. 95814; 916.651.3044; [email protected]
Contract Amount: $31K.

Dates: January 2023 to July 2023
Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J. Walker PE (quality review), Jeremy Liby (project manager and technical writing), Alyssa Wilson (geographic information systems)
Last Five Years: Yes
Infrastructure Plan for Santa Rosa Drives Future Water and Wastewater Growth A Comprehensive Evaluation and Planning for Water and Wastewater Systems Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Watearth supported the City of Santa Rosa in developing a 1900-acre infrastructure plan. The project included site reconnaissance, technical evaluations of current water and wastewater systems, and development of watershed maps and hydrology calculations. The plan integrated a "One Water" approach, focusing on groundwater recharge, flood mitigation, and Congratulations on such a quick
response from State Water. That is rather
unusual. Thank you for your efforts on this
project. It has been painless on our end.

We appreciate your organization and
due diligence in completing this project.

Don Callison
CalVet

1160
E. Qualifications
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study

© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
recreational benefits. Our recommendations are guiding future growth and infrastructure improvements.

Contract Amount: $150K
Dates: June 2024 to Ongoing
Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J. Walker PE (quality review), Jeremy Liby (project manager and technical writing), Alyssa Wilson (geographic information systems), Jacob Guise (water/wastewater project engineering)
Last Five Years: Yes
City Water Supply Assessment – The Art of Simplicity
Location: Pleasanton, CA
Watearth developed a Senate Bill 610 Water Supply Assessment (WSA) to support the City of Pleasanton's Housing Element Update in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This assessment was crucial in ensuring the city’s plans met state regulatory requirements.

Contract Amount: $30K
Dates: April 2021 to December 2022
Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J. Walker PE (quality review and water supply analysis)
Last Five Years: Yes
Water Board Operational Assessment: From Proposed Project Manager Jeremy Liby!
Watearth provided an in-depth assessment of the Texas Water Development Board’s (TWDB) environmental review process and procedures. Our expertise in federal and state environmental regulations, process mapping, process improvement, and records management helped TWDB enhance its review process through a comprehensive Root Cause analysis.

The team is incredibly impressed with the level of detail and thought put into the report. […] this review has already been the basis for me to initiate the internal review of the environmental process to streamline it and get us on a better, more efficient track. You have been incredibly patient and persistent, and I’m so grateful for the chance to work with you both! Les Davis
Texas Water Development Board

1161
E. Qualifications
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study

© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Reference: Les Davis; Assistant Deputy Executive Administrator for Water Supply and Infrastructure; Texas Water Development Board; 1700 North Congress Avenue Austin, TX 78701; (512) 936-0829;
[email protected]
Contract Amount: $75K.

Dates: September 2022 to August 2023
Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J. Walker PE (quality review), Jeremy Liby (project manager and technical writing), Alyssa Wilson (geographic information systems)
Last Five Years: Yes
Water Board Municipal Water Conservation Planning Tool Refined with Comprehensive Testing
Watearth contributed significantly to the development of the TWDB's Municipal Water Conservation Planning Tool. Our team provided Texas-specific water information, assisted in creating the User Guide, and played a pivotal role in Alpha and Beta Testing. We coordinated with team members and TWDB staff to select Beta Testers, facilitated training, troubleshooting, and one-on-one assistance, and gathered feedback to provide recommendations for future model releases.

Contract Amount: $100K
Dates: August 2018 to November 2018
Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J. Walker PE (conservation and demands modeling, and stakeholder collaboration)
Last Five Years: No
Council Guidance on Stormwater Quality Codes for Compliance with Permit Watearth collaborated with a developer's committee to guide the City of Killeen staff and City Council on stormwater quality codes that met federal and state requirements. We developed stormwater criteria for MS4
permit compliance and served as stormwater quality
experts during presentations to the City Council. Our
contributions included providing input on code and policy related to stormwater quality in Killeen.

Contract Amount: $15K
Dates: January 2013 to January 2014

1162
E. Qualifications
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Proposed staff involved and role: Jennifer J. Walker PE (permitting and City Council communication)
Last Five Years: No
Projects
Expanded List
StormwaterW/WWClient AdvocacyOperations Analysis
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Water Resources Master Plan • • • • South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Infrastructure Plan • •
340 W San Rafael Site Industrial Permitting and Treatment • • • • CalVet Watershed Sanitary Survey • • •
City of Pleasanton Water Supply Assessment • •
TWDB Assessment of the Board’s Process and Procedures • • TWDB Municipal Water Conservation Planning Tool • • •
Killeen Stormwater Permit Assistance City Council Recommendations • • • LABOE Zoo Master Plan and Zoo Vision Plan EIR • • • •
LA Metro Water Conservation and Sustainability • • •
City of Oakland Mosswood Park Master Plan • •
Alameda County Zone 12 Drainage Master Plan • •
San Francisco Estuary Institute Bay Area Regional Green Infrastructure Tool and Green Plan-It Master Plan • •
University of Houston Conservation Master Plan • • • •
Springwoods Village 1,200-Acre Master Plan Water Resources Design Guidelines • • • •
City of Kingwood Water and Wastewater Masterplan. • • • Greater Houston Partnership Wastewater Capacity Feasibility Study. • • • Brownsville Public Utilities Board Wastewater Sludge Disposal Feasibility Study. • • •
Los Angeles Sanitation Haynes Park. • • • •
LABOE Venice Auxiliary Wastewater Pumping Plan Hydrology and Hydraulics Analysis.
• • • •
Los Angeles Sanitation Haynes Park. • • • •

1163
F. Cost Information
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

F. Cost Information
This section has been submitted in physical copy to:

City of Richmond, Public Works
Attn: Jeff Barich, PE
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
Per the RFP, the cost document is not included within this digital proposal.

Overall Page 55
1164
G. Value Added Services
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Is the City of Richmond routinely hiring consultants who really listen? We want you to get the level of service you need, particularly given the sensitivities of this project, which may disrupt two decades of precedent.

Our TRUSTED™ Signature Project Delivery Process guides all of our projects with precision, clarity, and excellence. Here’s how we achieve outstanding results through each phase of our process:

1. Takeoff. We start strong by making sure our technical teams have all the information that was provided by the client during the procurement.

2. Results-Oriented Management. We prioritize timely project initiation. Key Steps: Internal and external project kick-off, quality assurance and control.

3. Understand and Communicate. Transparent communication and accurate progress tracking are the cornerstones.

4. Schedule and Budget Management. We navigate challenges and protect our clients by managing meticulously and addressing changes promptly.

5. Turn In Deliverables. Delivering high-quality, checked deliverables is our priority, coupled with communication as new information comes to light.

6. End Well. We address final comments and conclude projects neatly, expressing gratitude and reflecting on a job well done.

7. Drive Performance. Continuous improvement is our goal. We gather client feedback and prepare lessons learned for future collaborations.

Is this just marketing jargon?
No. Our TRUSTED™ Signature Project Delivery Process is the nexus of our internal project management efforts. It helps us achieve the following for Richmond:

1. Relief for Overworked City Staff: By providing a structured and efficient process, we help Richmond employees manage their workload more effectively, reducing stress and enhancing organization.

2. Commitment to Community Services: Our process underscores Richmond’s dedication to vital infrastructure projects, ensuring these essential services are delivered efficiently and effectively.

3. Navigation of Regulatory Compliance Challenges: We understand the urgency of meeting regulations. Our streamlined processes mean projects are completed on time, helping clients stay compliant.

4. Communication Between Consultant and City: Our process emphasizes clear and consistent communication, integrating seamlessly with client teams to prevent delays.

H. Contractor Assignment of Sub
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

H. Contractor Assignment of
Subcontract
Watearth has selected Arup to perform the economics analysis portion of the scope for this project. Our selection process and quality control measures are designed to integrate our subconsultant with our internal team.

Selection Process for Subcontractor:

1. Long-Standing Partnership: We have a well-established teaming relationship with Arup, characterized by successful past collaborations.

2. Regular Communication: To maintain alignment and understanding of Arup's expertise, we engage in regular business development and proposal-specific calls. These interactions help us stay updated on their qualifications and mean they share our acute understanding of project requirements.

3. Qualification Review: Prior to final selection, Arup was required to submit their qualifications for a thorough review. This process included evaluating their technical expertise, experience in similar projects, and overall ability to meet the project’s demands.

Quality Control Measures:

1. Integrated Project Management: We will employ integrated project management practices to ensure Arup’s work aligns with our standards and the City of Richmond’s requirements. This includes regular coordination meetings and progress reviews.

2. Performance Monitoring: Continuous performance monitoring will be conducted to ensure Arup meets contractual obligations.

3. Compliance Assurance: Our quality control measures are designed to ensure that Arup complies with all provisions of our contract with the City of Richmond. This includes adherence to project schedules, budget constraints, and regulatory requirements.

4. Risk Management: We will proactively identify and mitigate any risks associated with the subcontracting arrangement. This includes establishing clear communication channels, defining roles and responsibilities, and implementing contingency plans as needed.

1166
I. Previous Contracts with City
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

July 31, 2024
City of Richmond, Public Works
Attn: Jeff Barich, PE
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
Subject: City of Richmond Feasibility Study on the Options to Deliver Wastewater and Stormwater Services in the City of Richmond – Previous Contracts with City
Dear Engineer Barich,
Watearth Inc. is has not been party to a contract with the City of Richmond in the last three years as either prime consultant or subconsultant. Further, we have no existing relationships with the parties mentioned in the RFP that would influence our recommendations to the City. We propose that our unbiased approach will favor exclusively the results that are most favorable to the City and its constituency.

Sincerely,
Jennifer J. Walker PE, D.WRE, ENV SP, CFM, QSD, President, Watearth

J. Exceptions to this RFP
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

July 31, 2024
City of Richmond, Public Works
Attn: Jeff Barich, PE
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
Subject: City of Richmond Feasibility Study on the Options to Deliver Wastewater and Stormwater Services in the City of Richmond – Exceptions to this Request for Proposal
Dear Engineer Barich,
Watearth, Inc. does not take exception(s) to this RFP, including but not limited to the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement – RFP (Attachment B).

Watearth understands that failure to make exceptions to the RFP or Standard Services Agreement within this proposal will be deemed a waiver of any objection, and that any exceptions would be considered during the proposal evaluation process.

Sincerely,
Jennifer J. Walker PE, D.WRE, ENV SP, CFM, QSD, President, Watearth

1168
K. Statement of Impartiality
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

July 31, 2024
City of Richmond, Public Works
Attn: Jeff Barich, PE
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
Subject: City of Richmond Feasibility Study on the Options to Deliver Wastewater and Stormwater Services in the City of Richmond – Statement of Impartiality and Disclosure
Dear Engineer Barich,
Watearth acknowledges that the nature of this Project requires an impartial unbiased approach on the part of our team. Watearth declares that we and subconsultants (Arup) are not currently, and will not, during the performance of these services, participate in any other similar work involving a third-party with interests currently in conflict or likely to be in conflict with City of Richmond’s interests. Additionally, Watearth is not subject to pending or active investigations or litigation that would affect our reputation or ability to carry out the Project.

Sincerely,
Jennifer J. Walker PE, D.WRE, ENV SP, CFM, QSD, President, Watearth

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, photocopying, 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.
a. 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.
b. 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.

4. 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.
1170
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; or (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
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: ________________________________________________

5. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from the City to Contractor shall be addressed to Contractor at:

Attn:

Email: ________________________________________________ 1171
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 except 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 to 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, 1172
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
disability (both mental and physical) including HIV and AIDS, medical condition (e.g. cancer), genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, pregnancy, political 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 to 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.
1173
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
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.

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 circumstances 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 1174
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
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 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 1175
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
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 jointventure 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 Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to add subcontractors 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 1176
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
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, 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.
1177
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
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 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 1178
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
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 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, 1179
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
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 United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor must submit the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement, attached hereto as Exhibit G. 1180
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”):
1181
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.

1. CERTIFICATES: 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 coverage requirements set forth by the City and incorporated herein.

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 set forth in Exhibit C prior to 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.

2. COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS: The City’s insurance requirements depend upon the type of service being provided and/or the provider. The City’s insurance requirements will fall into one of the following categories (unless otherwise provided by the City):

Consultants and Contractors – Type 1
Professional Services – Type 2
Environmental Risk/Hazardous Waste Material – Type 3
Lease of City Property – Type 4
Vendors, Suppliers, Small Grant Recipients & Nonprofit Organizations – Type 5 Transportation Providers – Type 6
Professional Services Pyrotechnics – Type 7
Cyber and I.T. Risks – Type 8
1182
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
The insurance requirements classification applicable to this Contract shall be attached to this Exhibit F and made a part hereof.

3. 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.

4. 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.

INSERT INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CLASSIFICATION APPLICABLE TO THIS CONTRACT: (IF NECESSARY, CONFIRM WITH RISK MANAGER)
1183
___ 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 SelfInsure, signed by the California Department of Industrial Relations and SelfInsurance. 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.
1184
___ 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 REQUIRED 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. 1185
___ 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 nonrenewed, 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.
1186
___ 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.
1187
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT G

SANCTUARY CITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
The undersigned, (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.

Printed Name: Title:

Signed: Date:

Business Entity:
1188

Request for Proposals
Feasibility Study on the Options to Deliver Wastewater and Stormwater Services in the City of Richmond
Release Date: July 3, 2024
Deadline for Submittal
July 31, 2024
Contact: Wayne Tanda, MRG Consultant
City of Richmond
Department of Public Works
1189

INTRODUCTION
The City of Richmond is requesting proposals from qualified firms to assess the options to deliver wastewater and storm water services in the City of Richmond. This request for proposal (RFP) describes the project, the required scope of services, the consultant selection process, and the minimum information that must be included in the proposal.

Failure to submit information in accordance with the RFP requirements and procedures may be cause for disqualification. The anticipated term of this contract will be for a period of eighteen (18) months and an option to renew for six (6) additional months by means of a mutual agreement of both parties.

Vendors are required to read and understand all information contained within this entire RFP package. By responding to this RFP, the vendor agrees to have read and understood these documents.

ABOUT THE CITY
The City of Richmond is a charter city located in Contra Costa County, part of the San Francisco Bay Area with a population of 110,567 residents. Richmond is one of the region’s most diverse communities: 42.5% of residents identify as Hispanic or Latino,

20.2% identify as Black or African American alone, 17.8% identify as White alone (not Hispanic or Latino), and 15.4% identify as Asian alone (15.4%).1 Richmond is home to a multi-modal transit hub that includes BART, Amtrak and AC Transit, marinas, shopping, recreational and cultural amenities, and 32 miles of shoreline. This all contributes to making Richmond among the most desirable up-and-coming communities in California.

The City of Richmond provides a full range of municipal services including police and fire protection; construction and maintenance of highways, streets, and infrastructure; library services; storm water and municipal sewer systems; operation of a wastewater treatment facility; and the administration of recreational activities and cultural events.

The City also operates the Richmond Memorial Convention Center and the Port of Richmond.

PROJECT BACKGROUND / DESCRIPTION
The City of Richmond would like to assess its wastewater and storm water services to ensure that the services are delivered as effectively and efficiently as possible. Most services are currently being provided through an agreement with Veolia Water West Operating Services, Inc. The City’s Department of Public Works is responsible for the management of this Agreement along with related services such as the monitoring of industrial dischargers, the repair of sewer laterals, the update of storm water rates, and the management of selected capital improvement projects.

The City of Richmond is also responsible for ensuring compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (N.P.D.E.S.) Permit No CA0038539 which expires March 31, 2024. A draft of the new permit has been issued and is under review 1 Quickfacts Richmond city, California. 2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/richmondcitycalifornia 1190

by City Staff.

The Richmond storm water system covers the entire City. The wastewater system serves approximately 88,500 of the city’s 110,600 residents. The City is regulated for the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) under N.P.D.E.S Permit No CAS612008 issued to Contra Costa County Clean Water Program. Richmond is one of 19 co-permittees under Order No. R2-2022-0018, issued May 11, 2022.

The provision of wastewater collection and treatment in the North Richmond and East Richmond Heights areas is provided by the West County Wastewater District. In the Richmond Annex area wastewater collection is provided by the Stege Sanitary District and wastewater treatment is provided by the East Bay Municipal Utility District.

In 2002 the City of Richmond entered into an agreement with US Filter Operating Services Inc. for the operations, maintenance and the design and construction of certain capital improvements at the City’s Wastewater Treatment Facility. The Facility has a capacity of treating 24 million gallons per day.

In 2004 the agreement was amended to reflect the replacement of US Filter by Veolia Water North America Operating Service, Inc. This Amendment also included the operation, maintenance, and construction management of the City's sanitary collection system and the storm water collection system. The collection systems consisted of an estimated 185 miles of sewer lines with appurtenant manholes, 13 wastewater lift stations, and an estimated 94 miles of stormwater main lines, 3,300 catch basins, 1,200 manholes, 12 miles of ditches and 7 stormwater lift stations.

In 2007 the agreement was amended twice. Amendment Number 2 was adopted to ensure Veolia’s subcontractor complete the upgrades and repairs of the City's sanitary sewer and stormwater lift/pump stations and then Veolia would assume full responsibility for the continued operation and maintenance upon completion of said repairs. Amendment 3 was later entered into to address the placement of the generator for the Sunset Pointe Sewage Pump Station.

In 2016 Amendment Number 4 was entered into to update the assets originally listed in Schedule 17 of the Agreement, including increased cost(s) for the operation and maintenance of the stormwater pump station located at the Moody Underpass and the newly constructed Wet Weather Storage Facility at the wastewater treatment plant, and the definition and responsibility of the funding of capital improvements.

The most recent amendment (Amendment Number 5) occurred in 2018. Certain enhanced operational activities, capital improvements, and other efforts were added to the agreement to comply with the Settlement Agreement entered with San Francisco Baykeeper and West County Toxics Coalition in the matter of Baykeeper and West County Taxies Coalition v. City of Richmond. In addition, the term of the agreement with Veolia was extended through May 15, 2027.

Relevant information on the City’s wastewater and storm water services are available at the links shown below:
1191

 2002 Veolia Contract
 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/53703/Veolia-OriginalContract  2004 Veolia Contract Amendment #1
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/53700/Veolia-ContractAmendment-1  2007 Veolia Contract Amendment #2
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/53701/Veolia-ContractAmendment-2  2007 Veolia Contract Amendment #3
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/54335/Veolia-Amendment3---Sunset-Point-Generator  2016 Veolia Contract Amendment #4
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/53698/Veolia-ContractAmendment-4  2018 Veolia Contract Amendment #5
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/53699/Veolia-ContractAmendment-5  2006 Storm Drain Master Plan
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/69724/Storm-Drain-MasterPlan---2006  2016 Force Main System Condition Assessment Report
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/69725/Force-Main-SystemCondition-Assessment-Report---2016  2010 Wastewater Treatment Master Plan
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/5628/Master-Plan01252010?bidId=  2018 San Francisco Baykeeper vs. City of Richmond Settlement Agreement https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/46265/Baykeeper-RichmondSettlement-Agreement-March-20-2018?bidId=  2018 Wastewater Collection System Lift Station Master Plan https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/69723/WastewaterCollection-System-Lift-Station-Master-Plan---2018  2021 Storm Drain Master Plan Update
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/69722/Storm-Drain-MasterPlan-Update---2021  FY 2023-27 Water resource Recovery Capital Improvement Plan https://city-richmond-ca-budget-book.cleargov.com/16458/introduction/cityofficials  FY 2023-24 Water Resource Recovery Operating Budget
https://city-richmond-ca-budget-book.cleargov.com/16462/introduction/cityofficials  2016 WWTP Facility Plan
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/40233/Richmond-WWTPFacility-Plan---FINAL-DRAFT-2016-10-07  2011 WW Collection System Master Plan
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=8015  2019 Wastewater Collection System Updated Master Plan 1192

https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/69757/City-of-Richmond2019-Wastewater-Collection-System-Master-Plan

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The consultant will conduct a Feasibility Study on the options to deliver wastewater and storm water services in the City of Richmond as described in the following tasks:

1. Document Existing Service Delivery System
The City’s existing arrangement in delivering wastewater and stormwater services shall be researched and documented. The services include those in the agreement with Veolia Water West Operating Services, Inc. and those provided by the City of Richmond. The services provided within the City’s boundaries by the West County Wastewater District, the Stege Sanitary District, and the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) shall also be researched and documented. The documentation shall include all relevant aspects of the service delivery including, but not necessarily limited to, service areas, customers, services, service level indicators, performance outcomes, costs, source of funding, relevant agreements, regulations, legal requirements (e.g.

Baykeeper Settlement), and the input of existing service providers and City officials.

2. Identify Options
In consultation with City staff, the consultant will identify options in the delivery of services provided by a private contractor(s), other public agencies, and in-house (City of Richmond) staff. The following examples are provided to add clarity:
 Status quo – existing delivery of services
 Stand alone or combination of two or more of the following service providers.

1. Private sector service providers

2. Public sector service providers – (i.e. West County Wastewater District, Stege Sanitary District, EBMUD)

3. In-house services

3. Evaluate Options
The options will be evaluated based on relevant factors and ranked in order of preference. Examples of relevant factors to consider include the following.  Quality of service
 Economics – (i.e. cost, source of funding, debt management, impact on ratepayer)
 Regulatory requirements
 Emerging technologies
 Best practices
 Environmental
Consultant will prepare and present progress report to the City Council to solicit the City Council’s input on their priorities, preferences, and concerns.

4. Community Engagement
The consultant will assist the City engage the community in the review of the existing and desired wastewater and stormwater services through the preparation and presentation of material at up to three (3) community meetings and/or other means of soliciting input as determined to be appropriate by consultant and confirmed by the City. 1193

5. Selection of Service Delivery Option
The consultant will consider the City Council’s input and the input from the community and prepare and present their findings and recommendation to the City Council.

6. Prepare Implementing Documents
Following the direction of the City, and in consultation with City staff, the Consultant will prepare documents to implement the selected service delivery option. For illustration, the documents may include a detailed RFP for private sector services, negotiation points with another public entity or entities for services in the City of Richmond, and/or the resources, costs, sources of funding, and performance metrics for the expansion of in-house services.

PROJECT MILESTONES – Subject to change
Date Activity
October 2024 Begin Project
April 2025 City Council – Progress report
May 2025 Begin Task 4
August 2025 City Council – Input on options
September 2025 Begin Task 5
November 2025 City Council – Direction
December 2025 Begin Task 6
March 2026 Complete Project
RFP SCHEDULE – Subject to change
Date Activity

7.03.24 Release RFP

7.17.24 Final Day to Submit Questions (5:00 PM)

7.24.24 Responses to Questions posted on BidsOnline

7.31.24 RFP Due Date (3:00 PM)

8.21.24 Interview Notifications to Short List
Week of 9.02.24 Short List Interviews

9.27.24 Final Selection and Contract Negotiations

10.08.24 City Approval

10.22.24 Effective Date of Contract

PROPOSAL FORMAT GUIDELINES
The proposal should be concise, well organized, and demonstrate the proposer’s qualifications and experience applicable to the Project. The proposal shall be limited to 20 double-sided pages (8.5 inches x 11 inches), inclusive of graphics, forms, pictures, photographs, dividers, etcetera, but not of cost proposal, resumes, required forms, certifications, front and back covers, or letters of commitment from sub-consultants. The required font size is 12 points, with minimum left and right margins of one inch, and top 1194

and bottom margins of 0.7 inches.

Each proposal will adhere to the following order and content of sections. Proposal should be straightforward, concise and provide “layman” explanations of technical terms that are used. Emphasis should be concentrated on conforming to the RFP instructions, responding to the RFP requirements, and on providing a complete and clear description of the offer. Proposals, which appear unrealistic in the terms of technical commitments, lack of technical competence or are indicative of failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of this contract, may be rejected. The following proposal sections are to be included in the Vendor’s response:

A. Vendor Cover Letter
A cover letter, not to exceed three pages in length, should summarize key elements of the proposal and shall:
 Confirm that all elements of this RFP have been reviewed and understood.
 Include a statement of intent to perform the services as outlined.  Express company’s willingness to enter into an agreement under the terms and conditions prescribed by this RFP, insurance requirements (Attachment A) and in the sample Service Agreement (Attachment B).  Submit a written description and brief history of the company’s experiences, qualifications, and successes in providing wastewater and storm water services described herein. Please indicate the number of employees, client base and location of offices.
 Indicate the address and telephone number of the vendor’s office located nearest to Richmond, California, and the office from which the project will be managed.
 Stipulate that the proposal terms, including cost, will be valid for a period of at least 180 days.
 Identify a single person for contact during the RFP review process; and  Cover letter shall be signed by an authorized official of the company.

B. Background and Project Summary Section
The Background and Project Summary Section should describe your understanding of the City, the work to be done, and the objectives to be accomplished. Refer to description of services for this RFP.

C. Methodology Section
Provide a detailed description of the approach and methodology to be used to accomplish the Scope of Services of this RFP. The Methodology Section should include:
1) A work plan that describes in detail the method to conduct the scope of services.
2) Detailed project schedule, identifying all tasks and deliverables to be performed, durations for each task, and overall time of completion. 3) Detailed description of specific tasks you will require from City staff. 1195

Explain what the respective roles of City staff and your staff would be to complete the tasks specified in the Scope of Services.

D. Staffing
Describe proposed Project team organization, including identification and responsibilities of key personnel. Indicate role and responsibility of prime consultants and all sub-consultants. If applicable, indicate how local firms are being utilized to ensure a strong understanding of state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, policies, requirements, and permitting. Indicate the extent of the commitment of key personnel for the duration of the Project and furnish resumes of key personnel. Provide an indication of the staffing level for the Project. The City of Richmond’s evaluation of the proposal will consider the proposer’s entire team; therefore, no changes in the team composition will be allowed without prior written approval of the City of Richmond. Sub-consultant letters of commitment are required and must be submitted with the proposal.

Describe the experience of the proposer’s Project team in detail, including the team’s Project Manager, and other key staff members, on projects of similar size, capacity, and dollar value. For each similar project, include the client’s name and correct telephone number. It is the City of Richmond’s policy to interview proposers’ references as well as references identified by the City of Richmond.

E. Qualifications
The information requested in this section should describe the qualifications of the firm, key staff and sub-contractors performing projects within the past five years that are similar in size and scope to demonstrate competence to perform these services. Information shall include:
1) Names of key staff that participated on named projects and their specific responsibilities with respect to this scope of service. 2) A summary of your firm’s demonstrated capability, including length of time that your firm has provided the services being requested in this Request for Proposal.
3) Provide at least three (3) references that received similar services from your firm. The City of Richmond reserves the right to contact any of the organizations or individuals listed. Information provided shall include:
a) Client Name and contact info
 Telephone & e-mail address
 Address
b) Description of services provided including contract amount c) Project start and end dates
F. Cost Information
In a separate sealed envelope, provide the total direct and indirect costs to complete all tasks identified in the scope of services. Electronic proposal should acknowledge that the envelope was mailed to the City of Richmond. 1196

Even if the method of payment to proposer will be fixed fee, a detailed cost breakdown shall be provided identifying: (1) the number of staff hours and hourly rates for each professional and administrative staff person who will be committed to this Project; (2) all other direct costs, such as materials and reproduction costs; and (3) sub-consultant services, if needed. These rates will also be used to negotiate rates for other projects (including optional tasks) that may be assigned. No additional funds will be paid above and beyond the original quote given by the selected Vendor.

Proposers will be paid at the same rates set forth in their cost proposal unless further negotiated in writing and agreed to by the City of Richmond. Envelopes will be opened after the firm is selected to begin negotiations (see section on Pre-Award Negotiations)
G. Value Added Services
Please provide any additional services of benefit not specifically required herein, which the Respondent offers to provide.

H. Contractor Assignment of Sub-Contract
The resulting contract shall not be assigned, transferred, or sublet, in whole or in part, without the prior written approval of the City of Richmond. If Proposers intend to subcontract any portion of the resulting contract, they must describe their process for selecting such subcontractor(s) and the quality control measures that the Proposer will employ to ensure that any subcontractor complies with the provisions of Proposer’s contract with the City.

I. Previous Contracts with the City of Richmond
The proposer shall submit a list which indicates all prime contracts and/or amendments awarded to the proposer by the City of Richmond for the last three (3) years. The list shall include a short description of the Project, the Project scope of work, award date, completion date, name of City of Richmond’s assigned Project Manager, and contract value.

J. Exceptions to this Request for Proposals
The proposer shall state whether it takes exception(s) to this RFP, including but not limited to the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement – RFP (Attachment B). If the proposer does take exception(s) to any portion of the RFP or contract, the specific portion to which exception(s) is taken must be identified by section number and explained. Requests for changes or additions to sections of City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement must be shown by requesting deletion of specific words and/or by providing new requested contract language. Requests for complete replacement of the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement for another contract will not be granted. Failure to make exceptions to the RFP or Standard Services Agreement within the proposal will be deemed a waiver of any objection. Exceptions will be considered during the proposal evaluation process.

K. Statement of Impartiality and Disclosure
1197

The nature of this Project requires an impartial unbiased approach on the part of the proposer’s team. This proposal shall include a statement declaring that the proposer’s and sub-consultants are not currently, and will not, during the performance of these services, participate in any other similar work involving a third-party with interests currently in conflict or likely to be in conflict with City of Richmond’s interests. Additionally, proposer is required to disclose any pending or active investigations or litigation that may affect the reputation or ability of the proposer to carry out the Project.

PROCESS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS
Questions Concerning Request for Proposals
All questions must be submitted via the electronic BidsOnline system on the Q&A tab by 5:00pm PST, on July 17, 2024. If the City finds it necessary to issue an addendum, prospective Offerors will receive e-mail notification of addendum.

Otherwise, answers to questions received will be provided on the Q&A tab and notification will be sent by July 24, 2024. It is the proposer’s responsibility to periodically check the BidsOnline website www.ci.richmond.ca.us/bids for any possible addenda to the RFP that may have been posted.

Any party submitting a proposal shall not contact or lobby any City Council member, City official, employee (except those specified for contact) or agent regarding the RFP.

Any party attempting to influence or circumvent the RFP, bid submittal, and review process may have their proposal rejected for violating this provision of the RFP.

Interested parties may download copies of the above-mentioned proposal by visiting the City's web site, www.ci.richmond.ca.us/bids. To download RFP, new vendors will be required to register. Once the vendor downloads any documents relative to a solicitation, that vendor's name will appear on the Prospective Bidders list for that project and will receive any addenda or notifications relating to the RFP.

Submission of Proposals
The proposal and any required certifications shall be signed by an individual or individuals authorized to execute legal documents on behalf of the proposer.

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. Contractor 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.

The proposal must be received no later than 3:00 p.m., local time, on July 31, 2024.

The City of Richmond reserves the right to waive inconsequential irregularities. 1198

GENERAL GUIDELINES
This RFP does not commit the City of Richmond to award a contract, to defray any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal pursuant to this RFP, or to procure or contract for work. The City of Richmond may reject a proposal without providing the reason(s) underlying the rejection. A failure to award a contract to the proposer with the lowest cost proposal shall not constitute a valid cause of action against the City of Richmond. The City shall not be responsible for work done, even in good faith, prior to final approval of the proposed contract. The City may investigate the qualifications of any respondent under consideration, require confirmation of information furnished by the respondent, and require additional evidence or qualifications to perform the Services described in this RFP.

The City reserves the right to:

1. Reject any or all proposals.

2. Issue subsequent Requests for Proposal.

3. Postpone opening for its own convenience.

4. Remedy technical errors in the Request for Proposal process.

5. Negotiate with any, all, or none of the Respondents.

6. Solicit best and final offers from all or some of the Respondents.

7. Select one or more Respondents.

8. Accept other than the lowest proposed fees.

9. Waive informalities and irregularities in proposals.

Public Records
All proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the City of Richmond and public records and, as such, may be subject to public review. Documents protected by law from public disclosure will not be disclosed by the City of Richmond if clearly marked with the word "confidential" on each applicable page. Trade secrets may be marked as confidential only to the extent they meet the requirements of California Government Code section 6254.7. Only information claimed to be a trade secret at the time of submittal to the City of Richmond and marked as "confidential" will be treated as a trade secret.

Insurance Requirements
The City of Richmond requires consultants doing business with it to obtain insurance, as shown in RFP Attachment A. The required insurance certificates must comply with all requirements of the standards as shown and must be provided within fifteen (15) days of issuance of the Notice of Intent to Award and prior to the commencement of any work on the Project.

Business Licenses
The successful Contractor and all subcontractors used in the work will be required to hold or to obtain a City of Richmond business license for which the fee will not be waived.

Compliance with City Ordinances
The contractor and all subcontractors shall comply with the City of Richmond Nondiscrimination Clauses in City Contracts Ordinance (Richmond Municipal Code 1199

(RMC) Chapter 2.28), Business Opportunity Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.50), Local Employment Program Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.56), Living Wage Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.60) and Ordinance Banning the Requirement to Provide Information of Prior Criminal Convictions on all Employment Applications (“Ban the Box”) (RMC Chapter

2.65), which are incorporated into the Contract Documents by this reference.

Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance (SCCO)
The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 (Attachment D) 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 United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”).

Proposers must submit the attached Sanctuary City Compliance Statement with their Proposal. (Attachment C)
Limited Liability Company Disclosure Statement (LLCS)
Resolution No. 86-21 (Attachment E), approved by City Council on July 6, 2021, requires disclosure of the identities of beneficial & responsible owners of Limited Liability Corporations (LLC). Proposers must submit the attached Disclosure Statement of Limited Liability Companies Form with their Proposal (Attachment F).

Collusion
By submitting a proposal, each respondent represents and warrants that its proposal is genuine and not false or collusive or made in the interest of, or on behalf of any person not named therein; that the respondent has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other person to submit a false proposal, or any other person to refrain from submitting a proposal; and that the respondent has not, in any manner, sought collusion to secure any improper advantage over any other person submitting a proposal.

Withdrawal of Proposals
A respondent may withdraw their proposal before the expiration of the time for submission of proposals by delivering to the Finance Department a written request for withdrawal signed by, or on behalf of, the respondent.

Ownership of Documents
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials produced for the Project shall be the sole and exclusive property of the City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part for the Project shall be subject to private use, copyrights, or patent rights by Respondent in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of the City. The City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright, or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced for this project.

PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS
The nature of this Project requires an impartial unbiased approach on the part of the proposer’s team. The proposer will disclose participation by any member of the team with any private entity or public agency that currently provides or may provide the delivery of wastewater and/or storm water services for the City of Richmond. It will be 1200

at the sole discretion of the City to determine if there is a conflict of interest.

All proposals shall be reviewed to verify that the Respondent has met the minimum requirements. Proposals that have not complied with requirements, do not meet minimum content and quality standards, or take unacceptable exceptions to the General Terms and Conditions of the Service Agreement, will be eliminated from further consideration. Proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by an evaluation committee.

The top Proposals may then be invited to make a presentation to the evaluation panel in a City Office in Richmond, California, at no cost to the City. The selected proposal shall provide the most cost-effective approach that meets the City’s requirements. The lowest price proposal will not necessarily be selected.

The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, or to make no award. The City also reserves the right to require modifications follow-up with requests for additional information, including, but not limited to, follow-up interviews. The City may request Best and Final offers based upon improved understanding of the offers or changed scope of service. The City will negotiate with that vendor to determine final pricing, and contract form. Because this proposal is negotiable, all pricing data will remain confidential until after award is made, and there will be no public opening and reading of Proposals.

Overall responsiveness to the RFP is an important factor in the evaluation process. The criteria upon which the evaluation of the proposals will be based include, but are not limited to, the following:

The Proposal/Methodology and Approach to Work – 30%
The proposer’s responsiveness to the RFP including completeness and thoroughness of proposal; all required information must be provided in the format specified. This category will also evaluate:
 Ability to provide services as outlined in the RFP.
 Approach and proposed methodology to project scope
 Demonstrated knowledge of the work required
 Explanation of the Project or services required
 Innovative approaches and internal measures for timely completion of Project Experience/Past Performance/References – 20%
Consideration will be given based upon the firm’s experience, years in business, past and current client references; technical expertise and professional competence in areas directly related to this RFP; number of years of experience in performing similar work.

Project Team – 20%
Respondent should demonstrate that all key personnel have been successfully involved with projects of similar scope and magnitude. This category will evaluate the firm’s:
 Qualifications and relevant individual experience
 Unique qualification of key personnel
 Staff Availability / Time commitment of key members
 Organization chart
Proposer Qualifications – 20%
1201

This category will evaluate the respondent’s ability to take upon itself the responsibilities set forth in the Scope of Services and produce the required outcome in a timely manner.

Consideration will be given for the overall quality of the proposal, including a demonstrated understanding of the purpose, scope and objective of the services to be performed. It is the intention of the City of Richmond to award a contract to the Respondent who furnishes satisfactory evidence that the Respondent has the requisite experience and ability to enable the Respondent to execute the work successfully and properly, and to complete services in a timely manner. To determine the degree of responsibility to be credited to the Respondent, the City of Richmond will weigh the evidence that the Respondent has performed satisfactorily other contracts of like nature, magnitude and comparable difficulty and comparable rates of progress.

Innovative Solutions for Cost Analysis – 10%
Respondent should demonstrate that they have considered innovation solutions for this analysis with projects of similar scope and magnitude. This category will evaluate the firm’s:
 Evaluation of the proposer’s ability to introduce innovative solutions or methodologies specifically for analyzing WWTP costs (capital and operations).  Consideration of unique approaches or technologies that enhance the accuracy, efficiency, and comprehensiveness of the cost analysis.  Innovative data collection and analysis techniques, including the use of emerging technologies and best practices to provide a thorough and insightful feasibility study.

Pre-Award Negotiations
The City may elect to conduct negotiations with the highest ranked respondent for purposes of:
 Resolving minor differences and information
 Clarifying necessary details and responsibilities
 Emphasizing important issues and points
 Receiving assurances from respondents
 Cost/budget clarifications
 Addressing any potential project risks or concerns
If the City cannot successfully negotiate a contract with the highest ranked respondent, the City may begin negotiations with the second highest ranked respondent.

Award
City staff will recommend a company to the City Manager and City Council for approval.

The services provided by the successful bidder shall be governed by a Standard Services Agreement (Attachment B).

Attachments
A. Insurance Requirements
B. Standard Contract
C. Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
D. Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18
E. Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) Resolution No. 86-21 F. Limited Liability Corporation Form
1202
Proposal for
Feasibility Study on the Options to Deliver
Wastewater and Stormwater Services in the
City of Richmond
City of Richmond, Public Works
Attn: Jeff Barich, PE
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804-1630
Contact Watearth Principal
Jennifer J. Walker PE, DWRE, ENV SP, CFM, QSD, LEED AP BD+C 1151 Harbor Bay Parkway Suite 208H,
Alameda, CA 94502
510.529.5552
[email protected]
Overall Page 1
1203
Table of Contents
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Table of Contents
Tab 1. A. Vendor Cover Letter (✓ 3 pages maximum) 03
Tab 2. B. Background and Project Summary Section 06
Tab 3. C. Methodology Section 08
Tab 4. D. Staffing 26
Tab 5. E. Qualifications 47
Tab 6. F. Cost Information 55
This section was mailed in an envelope to City of Richmond.

Tab 7. G. Value Added Services 56
Tab 8. H. Contractor Assignment of Sub-Contract 57
Tab 9. I. Previous Contracts with City of Richmond 58
Tab 10. J. Exceptions to this Request for Proposals 59
Tab 11. K. Statement of Impartiality and Disclosure 60
This proposal adheres to the following formatting requirements:
✓ 20 double-sided pages (40 digital pages)
✓ inclusive of graphics, forms, pictures, photographs, dividers, etcetera ✓ not inclusive of cost proposal, resumes, required forms, certifications, front and back covers, or letters of commitment from sub-consultants ✓ Page size of 8.5 inches x 11 inches
✓ Font size for body text is 12 points
✓ Minimum left and right margins of 1.0 inch, and top and bottom margins of 0.7 inches
Overall Page 2
1204
Hello, Jeff Barich.

I’m Jennifer J., from .

This is a proposal that we wrote for you and the City of Richmond, CA.

You are about to experience something interesting: engineers with personality.

We're a weird mix of engineers and environmental professionals. Everyone here is an incredible communicator, equally capable of leading and supporting projects. In this respect, we are a team-run company. I want you to know about this, because it means that everyone assigned to work on this potentially risk-prone systemwide service analysis for you will be not only technically equipped to succeed, but also socially and professionally excellent at providing a degree of collaborative recommendation and
decision making that will lessen the City team’s
burden. How?
That’s what we do.

Every day.

Yes, we provide progress reports. Yes, we track
earned value to get you the best and most timely
results – but don’t all the good professional firms do
this? Don’t let staffing and workloads at the City be a cause for stress on this project: select Watearth for a riskmanaged approach to helping the City make decisions that the constituency can support, and that will be responsive to budgetary and schedule constraints, including consideration of the regulatory environment.

Although Watearth primarily focuses on the needs of municipal clients and water providers, we do not have existing working relationships with either the City or the service operators, or the regional water districts – our impartiality is a guarantee of this proposal. Our recommendations will be grounded in
engineering and economics expertise.

Watearth is an engineering and environmental planning
consulting firm specialized in addressing the exact type of process analysis and long-range planning that you
need. The current operator providing wasterwater
and stormwater services within the City, Veolia, has
held a contract for two decades. Any change to

1205
A. Vendor Cover Letter
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
this implementation has the potential to
be highly disruptive, which is why a
feasibility study is a logical next step.

Watearth has provided water and
wastewater planning to dozens of
clients, including Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as part of the forward-thinking 2035 Master Plan Environmental Impact Report, which involved a unique analysis of the existing discharge permit with the City. Other projects have included a watershed sanitary survey for California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet), water supply assessments for clients like City of Pleasanton, internal process analysis for clients like Texas Water Development Board, industrial water and wastewater treatment processes and permitting for a private client working throughout California, and wastewater, stormwater, and water planning review for the City of Santa Rosa.

Watearth’s stormwater expertise is oceans deep: our company was founded with the development of a stormwater management policy for the City of Houston, and quickly went on to address all manner of stormwater planning, modeling, design, and construction observation needs, including support for an Alameda County Drainage Criteria Manual, development of large-scale stormdrain modeling for the Los Angeles County Public Works Rubio Wash system, civil hydraulic designs on the Adventure Park Stormwater Capture and Diversion project and Caltrans ALA61 in Alameda project, inspections during construction for San Gabriel Valley Water Company and for Caltrans in San Benito County, stormwater operations and maintenance planning for Santa Monica, Sacramento-area development hydromodification and water quality modeling and design, and hundreds more.

More than this, we understand project owner advocacy and have been asked to make recommendations to City Councils before. Watearth is a known quantity in these spaces.

Let us show you how easy this can be.

Watearth’s TRUSTED Signature Project Delivery™ process is designed to address sensitive projects demanding collaborative project management in seven steps that focus on client
satisfaction (achieving a 95% client satisfaction rating!) and that reflect Watearth’s 15 years of being the best in the business.

This team brings an energy and enthusiasm to projects that I have never seen before in decades of working with other consultants.

I look forward to working with you.

I always ask myself: “What would
Jennifer [Walker] do?”
Dahlia Fadl
City of Rancho Cordova

1206
A. Vendor Cover Letter
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Affirmations:

1. Watearth reviewed and understood all elements of the RFP as part of producing this proposal.

2. Watearth intends to perform the services as outlined within the RFP and this proposal.

3. Watearth is willing to enter into an agreement under the terms and conditions prescribed by the RFP, insurance requirements (Attachment A of the RFP) and in the sample Service Agreement (Attachment B of the RFP).

4. Watearth has 12 fulltime and 2 parttime staff members. Our client base is substantially municipal, with clients like City of Santa Rosa, County of Napa, City of Oakland, and others similar.

5. Our office nearest to City of Richmond is located at 1151 Harbor Bay Parkway Suite 208H, Alameda, CA 94502. The phone number is 510.529.5552. The project will be managed from this address.

6. The proposal terms, including cost, will be valid for a period of at least 180 days following submission.

7. The single person for contact during the RFP review process will be Operations and Marketing Manager Adam (Susskind) Wolven ([email protected], 213.293.5964)

8. This cover letter is signed by Jennifer J. Walker, the CEO of Watearth, an authorized official of the company.

1207
B. Background and Summary
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Our Understanding of the Project
Watearth understands the City of Richmond’s initiative to assess and enhance its wastewater and stormwater service delivery. Richmond, a diverse and dynamic community, relies on a multi-modal transit hub and various municipal services, including stormwater and wastewater systems.

Currently, most of these services are provided through a long-standing agreement with Veolia Water West Operating Services Inc. The City’s Department of Public Works oversees this agreement, managing industrial dischargers, sewer lateral repairs, stormwater rate updates, and select capital improvement projects. Additionally, the City must comply with regulatory requirements, such as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, adding stress and urgency to City operations.

The City’s infrastructure includes wastewater and stormwater systems comprised of numerous sewer lines, stormwater main lines, catch basins, ditches, and lift stations. With the wastewater system serving approximately 88,500 residents and the stormwater system covering the entire city (population: 114,301 and about 34 square miles of land), Richmond faces significant operational, maintenance, and compliance challenges. Management of these large-scale systems has been outsourced to Veolia for the last twenty years, any recommendation to bring these operations back in-house will need to consider the impact to City employees who are already overwhelmed with tasks resulting in project management and responsiveness challenges.

The key considerations here are: risk management, health and wellbeing, public safety, and economic considerations/return on investment.

Richmond's contract with Veolia, initially established in 2002 and subsequently amended multiple times, underscores the complexity and evolving nature of the city's service needs. The amendments addressed various operational enhancements, infrastructure repairs, and compliance measures, including those necessitated by a settlement agreement with environmental advocacy groups. Recommendations resulting from Watearth’s feasibility study will need to consider the City’s commitment to providing vital infrastructure and environmental protection, such as flood control and clean water, which are essential for community well-being. A balance of cost-savings and service effectiveness will need to be discussed.

This project concerns a detailed analysis of the wastewater systems, storm drain systems, and city planning for large infrastructure. It requires

1208
B. Background and Summary
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
navigating internal city processes and addressing political risks: the risk to the City is substantial both from a cost perspective and from a public-trust perspective, which is why Principal Jennifer J. Walker (a respected engineer
and orator with experience in litigation, expert witness depositions, presentations to council and other decision making authorities, and stakeholder communication) will be tasked with providing guidance when beginning negotiations. One of the primary objectives of this project will need to be establishing either that the status quo is the best fit alternative, or that some other delivery method will provide equally or more reliable service to the constituency.

Given these complexities and risks, Watearth’s study will document the existing service delivery system, identify and evaluate alternative service delivery models, engage the community, and ultimately recommend an optimal service delivery option. The scope of work involves:

1. Documenting Existing Services

2. Identifying Service Delivery Options

3. Evaluating Options

4. Community Engagement

5. Selecting the Optimal Service Delivery Option

6. Preparing Implementation Documents
Watearth brings a fresh perspective to this project, as we do not have existing relationships with any of the entities involved, including Veolia Water West Operating Services Inc., West County Wastewater District, Stege Sanitary District, or East Bay Municipal Utility District. This lack of prior relationships means our approach remains unbiased and focused solely on the best interests of the City of Richmond. However, Watearth has the benefit of having worked with similar agencies, and understands their essential strengths and weaknesses. We have collaborated with Metroplitan Water District of Southern California, City of Houston, San Luis Obispo, Pleasanton, Water Boards, state agencies, and private water utilities like Suburban Water and American Water.

Throughout the project, Watearth will address the critical need for a communicative and integrated consultant to avoid project delays and contribute to smooth progress. Financial limitations impacting availability of City staff to conduct this feasibility in-house means that Watearth needs to integrate with the City team – our recommendations, your decisions, and clear communication throughout. The City will be part of the process, but Watearth will mitigate City headaches by assuming responsibility for project execution.

That is fast. Thanks
for letting me know.

Liuzong Zhou
San Gabriel Valley

1209
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Before We Talk About Watearth’s Work Plan…
Let’s discuss the “elephant in the room”: innovative solutions. How innovative is too innovative to be reliable and dependable? In 2024 and 2025, that question is likely to drive project professionals to discussions of Artificial Intelligence (or AI).

These tools are in their nascent stages. They are advanced “predictive text” generators that provide statistically relevant combinations of words based on user prompts – but these models are only capable of a simulacrum of human cognition. They are not capable of actual thought.

Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI tools like OpenAI's GPT-4, Google's Gemini, and Microsoft's Azure OpenAI Service have become increasingly valuable in analyzing large datasets – including those like City of Richmond’s dataset, which is composed of written contract documents and City master plans concerning wastewater and stormwater implementation. These tools have some strengths and some weaknesses, and the right consultant is going to save City of Richmond money by using them appropriately but will not become overly reliant on them where they are inadequately sophisticated to understand risks involved in this project.

Strengths:

1. Efficiency and Speed: AI tools can process and analyze vast amounts of data much faster than humans. For instance, GPT-4 can quickly parse through hundreds of pages of contracts and master plans, identifying key themes, clauses, and data points. This efficiency saves significant time, allowing for faster decision-making and project advancement.

2. Consistency: AI tools provide consistent results without fatigue, a common issue in human analysis. This consistency ensures that all documents are reviewed with the same level of scrutiny, reducing the likelihood of oversight.

3. Natural Language Processing (NLP): Tools like GPT-4 and Bard excel in NLP, enabling them to understand and interpret complex language within documents. They can extract relevant information, summarize content, and even detect discrepancies or unusual clauses in contracts.

Weaknesses:

1. Contextual Understanding: While AI can process and analyze data, it often lacks deep contextual understanding. Nuances in Richmond’s contract language or city planning details may be missed or misinterpreted without human oversight.

2. Quality of Output: The accuracy of AI output can vary based on the quality of the input data and the sophistication of the model. Human

1210
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
experts are needed to validate the AI's findings, ensuring that critical details are correctly understood and acted upon. A quality control plan tailored to AI output is essential.

3. Ethical and Legal Considerations: AI tools might inadvertently overlook legal and ethical considerations present in contract documents and master plans. Human intervention is necessary to ensure compliance with all relevant laws and ethical standards.

4. Adaptability: AI tools may struggle with unique or highly specialized documents that deviate from the patterns they were trained on. Human experts can adapt to these unique cases more flexibly and intuitively.

AI tools like GPT-4, Gemini, and Azure OpenAI Service enhance the efficiency and consistency of analyzing large datasets, they cannot entirely replace human expertise. Human intervention remains crucial for ensuring contextual accuracy, ethical compliance, and adaptability to unique scenarios. The optimal approach for City of Richmond’s project will involve a hybrid model where AI handles the bulk of data processing and analysis, while human experts provide oversight, validation, and nuanced understanding. This collaboration maximizes efficiency while maintaining the high standards necessary for complex document analysis tasks.

Project Approach
Task 1: Document Existing Service Delivery System
Data collection, review, and documentation play a pivotal role in accurately evaluating service delivery systems in the City of Richmond (City), a critical aspect of water resource management. Watearth will perform rigorous data collection and review processes; collecting all available data for review is essential to produce reliable documentation that will serve the Feasibility Study to Deliver Wastewater and Stormwater Services project (referred to as “project”). Following collection and review of provided data and publicly available data, Watearth will create a list of outstanding data needs and reach out to the City to coordinate.

The process begins with reviewing the existing arrangements with Veolia Water West Operating Services, Inc. and other service providers within City boundaries

1211
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
including West County Wastewater District, the Stege Sanitary District, and the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and documenting the process.

Documentation will include information such as service areas, customers, services, service level indicators, performance outcomes, costs, source of funding, relevant agreements, regulations, legal requirements (e.g., Baykeeper Settlement), and the input from existing service providers and City officials.

When reviewing existing contracts and arrangements, Watearth will follow a work plan outlined in Table 1 below.

Watearth has experience acting as a
project owner advocate – for Los
Angeles County on a water rights
dispute, for City of Killeen regarding
stormwater permit compliance, and for
several private clients as an expert
witness during litigation. City of Richmond needs a high degree of attention to detail combined with tactful communication to contribute to project success rather than create new headaches for your team. This is where Watearth shines.

Table 1: Documentation Work Plan
Document Title Data Reviewed and Extracted
Veolia Contract Documents • Company obligations/City obligations • Repair and replacement
• Service fees
• Cost savings
• Site suitability and familiarity
• Zoning
• Satisfaction of conditions and failure of conditions
• Requirements
• Replacement
• Term of Agreement
• Relationship of parties
• Additional services
Storm Drain Master Plans • Background information
• Land use and categories
• Watershed and system characteristics
• Hydrologic analysis
• Storm drain analysis
• Drainage zones
• Model results
• Permitting requirements
Force Main System Condition
Assessment Reports
• Access information
• Visual assessments
• Sulfide test information
• Concrete test results
Weekly progress reports are valuable to
City staff for project tracking and are
much appreciated!
Jeremiah Sunwoo
City of Rancho Palos Verdes

1212
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Watearth has executed large data collection and evaluation projects such as Evaluation of the Texas Water Development’s (TWDB) environmental Review Process, City of Hemet Water Distributions project, the City of Houston Raw Document Title Data Reviewed and Extracted
• Other information
Wastewater Treatment
Master Plan
• Condition of existing facilities and performance
• Flow data information
• Capacity assessments
• Discharge requirements including future planning
• Secondary treatment information
• Recommended improvements/capital improvement
projects (CIP)
• Regulatory requirements
• Sustainable design elements/innovation options
San Francisco Baykeeper vs.

City of Richmond Settlement
Agreement
• Review settlement details and relevant details on
resolutions
• Provisions
• Funding and payments
• Compliance
• Breach of agreement
Wastewater Collection
System Master Plans
• Existing system description
• Lift station conditions/inspections/costs
• Lift station capacity information
• Force main conditions/inspections
• System flows and capacity
• Pipeline repair information
• Improvement recommendations/CIPs
• Permitting requirements
• Land use information
• Conceptual costs
Water Resource Recovery
Documents
• CIPs and fiscal year information
• City budgets
• Key City officials
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Facility Plan
• Existing facilities
• Recycled water demands and projections
• Flow and load data including
domestic/commercial/industrial specifics
• Capacity information
• Water quality
• Liquid and solid treatment information
• Emissions
• Conditions assessments
• Planned improvements/CIPs
• Permitting requirements

1213
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Water GIS evaluation, and many others. Richmond’s stormwater system spans the entire City, and the wastewater system serves approximately 88,500 of the City’s 110,600 residents. These large systems impact a large area, and coordinating system improvements with the City and with the approval of City stakeholders will be a large undertaking to maintain quality service to the affected population.

Watearth will also review geographic information systems (GIS) data of the stormwater and wastewater systems as well as other relevant City GIS information to document key system connection points, water treatment plant locations, lift station locations, stormwater outfalls, and high-level capacity information that can be used to help determine alternative flow patterns if system changes are recommended in later tasks of the project. Watearth has reviewed large water and wastewater systems for cities of a similar scale including the City of Hemet and the City of Chino. The GIS data and specific service providers service areas will be reviewed to determine whether different stormwater and wastewater providers have the capacity to take on a larger service to the City. Additionally, identifying key variables influencing the City, such as population center demographics, climatic conditions, and water use patterns across different sectors including residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural, will provide context for how service delivery systems can be altered to best serve the City.

Within Task 1, the Watearth team will perform an economic, commercial and financial review of the terms and conditions (T&Cs) of the existing arrangements in delivering wastewater and storm water services that the City has.

The City expects the assessment of the above-mentioned arrangements to include among others:

1. Service: service areas, customers and services, service level indicators, performance outcomes, applicable regulations, legal requirements (e.g. Baykeeper Settlement)

2. Costs and sources of funding, relevant contracts, and the input of existing service providers and City officials.

For services provided by:
(i) Veolia Water West Operating Services, Inc. (Veolia), under certain contracts,
(ii) other public agencies within the City’s boundaries, like the West County Wastewater District, the Stege Sanitary District, and the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) or self-performed, and (iii) self-performed services.

1214
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

We will assess based on City provided documentation and/or interviews with the City of Richmond, the economic, commercial and financial T&C’s, including any cost or out of pockets expenses associated with those services.

Watearth will use our TRUSTED™ Signature
Project Delivery Process to make the
City’s job easier. Watearth will coordinate
team meetings to discuss data available,
any outstanding data needs, and gather
City official feedback regarding
expectations for not only the project but key concerns they may have with the current stormwater and wastewater systems. Waterth will provide meeting agendas and meetings minutes for all meetings as well as weekly progress reports to ensure the team is informed of all project decisions. The City’s assessment of service quality, cost, innovation potential of service providers, meeting regulatory requirements, service provider best management practices, and environmental consciousness will be valuable documentation to include with previous documentation listed above. The documentation will be included in a summary email deliverable accompanied by one deliverable review meeting with the City of Richmond to provide comments and feedback. All Watearth deliverables undergo a QA/QC process that involves peer review, project manager review, technical editing, and principal approval to ensure quality deliverables. Watearth will coordinate the scoped meeting with the City providing meeting agendas and meeting minutes with actions items.

Challenges Solutions Qualifications
Gathering relevant project
data including documents.

Researching the correct data
sources for GIS and other
data and filling in data gaps.

Watearth has 5 inhouse
scientists who excel in data
management, among them,
Jeremy Liby and Alyssa Wilson
are assigned to this proposal.

Managing
miscommunication or
misunderstanding of project
details from different project
stakeholders or service
providers involved in project
considerations.

Regular project reporting
following our TRUSTED™
Signature Project Delivery
process and QA/QC process
– weekly status reports, and
internal and external kickoff
meetings.

Watearth has several wellqualified project managers
who have completed
projects throughout California
and other regions and
achieved 95% client
satisfaction.

Managing large quantities of
data from many different
service providers.

Collecting and organizing
data systematically in file
management software and
task management software.

Watearth has the file and task
management software to
handle large datasets and
has worked on large water
system projects upwards of
500K connections.

Your emails summarizing what has been
worked on and what is needed is really
helpful and keeps us focused to make
sure we remain responsive.

Enrique Baul
Los Angeles County Public Works

1215
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

Task 2: Identify Options
Figure 1: Process Flow Chart
Based on data collection, review, and documentation of existing stormwater and wastewater service information, Watearth will identify feasible options for delivery of services. Potential feasible options include the following:

1. Status quo (existing delivery of services),

2. Private sector service providers,

3. Public sector service providers,

4. In-house services (City), or

5. Combination of private sector, public sector, and in-house services.

Watearth will compile key information such as quality of service, cost, meeting regulations, and other factors related to the existing conditions. This information will be considered the baseline to compare all other feasible options for stormwater and wastewater delivery services.

Watearth will coordinate with the City to gather a list of reputable private sector and public sector service providers. This list of providers will be researched along with the existing service providers. With the permission of City staff, Watearth will contact and screen each potential provider to determine if they have the capacity to serve the City of Richmond or a percentage, to be determined in collaboration with the City, of the City that provides economic value. If service capacity is feasible, City operated service connection points will be evaluated to determine if service providers can adequately tie into existing connections to limit additional infrastructure development.

Additional installation and maintenance of stormwater and wastewater infrastructure like stormwater lift stations, wastewater lift stations, stormwater outfall development, additional pipeline infrastructure, and treatment facilities Compilation
•Existing
Service
Provided to
City as
baseline
and status
quo option
Alternatives
•Gather a list
of reputable
service
providers
with City
coordinatio
n.

Determination
•Determine
whether
selected
service
providers
have the
capacity to
serve the
City.

Additional
Considerations
•Review
installation
of additional
facilities,
improvemen
ts needed to
current
systems, and
maintenanc
e needs.

Reporting
•Report all
options in an
easily
digestable
format to
present to
the City
(summary
email and
review
meeting).

1216
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
are likely in the event the City decides to change from status quo services.

Watearth will provide high-level order of magnitude cost estimating for proposed infrastructure, and cost will be considered for short-term and longterm planning purposes valuable for later phases of the project.

In addition to capacity and
infrastructure improvements, cost
of services to City customers, water
quality considerations, meeting
regulatory requirements will all be
factored when determining
whether various service providers
can contribute to the City’s
stormwater and wastewater
services. Gathering data on potential service providers will be similar to the work plan outlined in Table 1 above. Once service providers are screened, Watearth will compile a list of up to six stormwater and wastewater service options that are feasible to serve the City. Watearth will provide a summary email deliverable accompanied by one deliverable review meeting with the City of Richmond to provide comments and feedback. All Watearth deliverables undergo a QA/QC process that involves peer review, project manager review, technical editing, and principal approval to ensure quality deliverables. Watearth will coordinate the scoped meeting with the City providing meeting agendas and meeting minutes with actions items.

The Watearth Team RECOMMENDS a Risk Workshop to identify Project risks and desired allocations.

While not an RFP scoped task, based on the Watearth team’s experience, it is a critical exercise that will help the City of Richmond understand project’s risks and risk transfer.

Bringing private sector partners into a project can help to deliver projects effectively and efficiently, assuming there is an adequate assignment of each one of the projects risks between the private and public sector parties to the one best able to manage them. To determine the Project’s main risks, in addition to the review performed in Task 1, the Watearth team proposes a 2-4 hour workshop with the City to:
• identify the Project’s objectives: this entails articulating overarching goals of the services provided; and
• identify the Project’s risks during the different phases (design, construction, operations) and desired risk allocation.

The report was a really good one. Very thorough.

The Country Club really liked it and are excited
to work on the recommendations. The City also
like it – good and comprehensive. Project
management and communication was really
good regarding status, technical memos, and
keeping us in the loop.

Goutam Dobey
City of Redlands

1217
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.

In our experience the knowledge obtained from the Project’s internal stakeholders during the workshop is a superior source of information that either confirms or revisits the risk allocation.

Challenges Solutions Qualifications
Compiling large quantities of
data accurately and
identifying key information.

Watearth compiles easily
understood deliverables,
including feasibility studies
that clearly point to project
solutions.

Watearth follows a written
data and file management
process processes to ensure
all data received has been
checked for accuracy and
filed appropriately.

Receiving complete and
accurate data from potential
service providers.

Detailing appropriate
contingencies, cost
estimating, and what final
service options will entail.

Recent feasibility studies, like
Sorenson Park, have helped
out clients to secure $20M+ in
grant funding.

Task 3: Evaluate Options
Watearth will coordinate with City staff to determine the best options for stormwater and wastewater service to the City. Once a focused list of options is developed, Watearth will evaluate each option based on relevant factors including:

1. Quality of service,

2. Cost (annual costs and life-cycle costs),

3. Regulatory requirements,

4. Innovative technologies,

5. Best practices, and

6. Environmental considerations.

To strengthen the evaluation of the above-listed elements, the Watearth team will develop a criteria-based evaluation of the service delivery options from an economic, commercial, and financial perspective and will develop a cash flow analysis of the preferred service delivery options (this could be combination of public/private service providers or other) and compared it against the status quo. The cash flow analysis will consider the capital investments and operations of the services provided over a 20–30-year time frame, timeline to be determined by the City based on collaboration. This assumes that CapEx and OpEx assumptions/projections will be provided by the City and that financing assumptions to be provided by or in collaboration with the City of Richmond.

Watearth will implement our TRUSTED Project Delivery Process to prepare progress reports with highlights from service evaluation and provide to the City for feedback. With input from City staff, Watearth will weight each factor above appropriately with City goals and preferences. Additionally, Watearth has

1218
C. Methodology Section
Wastewater and Stormwater Delivery Study
© Watearth, Inc. 2024. Do Not Copy.
experience with the Rubio Wash Drainage Study project and City of Hemet Water Distributions project where large stormwater systems and wastewater systems were evaluated to determine deficiencies and provide recommendations for improvements. Feasible stormwater and wastewater service providers will need to be well aligned with City goals and future planning for stormwater and wastewater.

For example, stormwater services may include options like innovative multibenefit stormwater capture facilities that can divert stormwater for flood mitigation, treatment of stormwater, and repurposing of stormwater for future use. Watearth is experienced in developing feasible stormwater recommendations as we have completed multiple stormwater capture projects including the $41M Adventure Park Multi-Benefit Stormwater Capture project.

These experiences allow Watearth to evaluate potential service providers and their abilities to provide innovative
services. The City of Richmond is a
location where multi-benefit
stormwater capture projects can
benefit both wetter winter conditions
and the warmer dry conditions in the
summer. This type of solution may be
more economical than other major
stormwater infrastructure
improvement projects. The City can
facilitate projects like these and
reduce long-term costs as well as
helping with other environmental
and socioeconomic concerns such as water quality, water supply, recreational improvements for the City, and equity.

Similarly, innovative wastewater practices including but not limited to nutrient removal, energy conservation in treatment plants, and public programs to upgrade residential and commercial water fixtures help with water quality, producing less wastewater that needs treatment, and helps the environment in not using as much non-renewable energy sources and energy sources damaging to the environment. Watearth has managed two LEED Feasibility analyses for SoCalGas Facilities that implemented innovative technologies related to stormwater and wastewater as well as a Water and Wastewater 2035 Master Plan for Cal Poly.