REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
PERMITTING FOR DREDGING AND TERMINAL 2 SLOPE ANALYSIS
The Port of Richmond (“Port”) is requesting proposals from consultants to complete technical studies necessary to acquire permits to perform maintenance dredging at Terminal 2, t he Point Potrero Marine Terminal (PPMT) Berths 7 and 8 . As an optional service, provide support for permitting dredging of the entrance c hannel to the Marina Bay Yacht Harbor (MBYH). We present the locations of the proposed dredge episodes in Attachment A. The Port seeks permits to dredge the berths at Terminal 2 and PPMT to a depth of between 33 and 37 feet at mean lower low water (MLLW) and the MBYH to 12 to 13 feet below MLLW.
Dredging last occurred at the MBYH and PPMT in 2017 as well as at Terminal 2 in 2021 . The Port completed a bathymetric survey of these facilities in 2024, which we include in Attachment B. In 2016, the Port dredged Terminal 2 and found instability in the adjacent slope, which we evaluated in 2021; we include the evaluation in Attachment C. The 2021 dredge followed the recommendations in Alternative 1 without issue.
The Port seeks a consultant to perform the technical studies and acquire permits from the United State s Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Bay Conservation and Development Commission. In addition, the Port would like further evaluation for Terminal 2 as detailed in Attachment C.
The Port of Richmond has 10 -Year dredging permit for Terminals 2, 3, 7, and 8 which expires in 2027 as well as an expired 10-year permit for Terminal 2. See the permit included in Attachment G. The following tables illustrate previous dredging events. Note that there remains about 126,000 CY of dredge material under the 10-year permit for Terminals 2, 3, 7, and 8.
Port of Richmond Previous Dredge Episodes Since 2010
Date Volume (CY) Terminal
11/15/2011 53,817 MBYH
11/19/2015 14,756 2
8/15/2017 44,802 7 and 8
8/15/2017 33,103 MBYH
2/15/22 4,000 2
Port of Richmond USACE 10-Year Dredge Permits
Location
Allowed
Volume (CY)
Expiration
Date Permit #
Total
Volume
Remaining
Volume
Terminals 2, 3, 7, and 8 171,000 6.1.2027 2016-00302S 44,802 126,198 Terminal 2 50,000 12.31.2024 2015-00092S 18,756 Expired
The Port seeks permits to complete the dredging of Terminals 2, 7, and 8 in 2025.
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
Scope Of Services
The Port requires the consultant to perform all tasks necessary to secure the permits to complete the maintenance dredging at Terminals 2, 7, and 8. At a minimum, these tasks include:
1. Complete a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) to characterize the sediment at the project site.
2. Perform field sampling and analysis of the sediment consistent with the SAP and summarize the results in a Sediment Characterization Results (SCR) document.
3. Obtain permits to complete dredging of Terminals 2, 7, and 8 for the work to be completed in 2025. If possible, secure a permit for dredging of the MBYH in 2025 as an optional service.
4. Provide permitting support including compilation of a joint Dredge Material Management Office (DMMO) application for a multi- year permit (10 years) for maintenance dredging from the United State Army Corp of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, as well as the Bay Conservation and Development Commission for Terminals 2, 3, 7, 8, and the MBYH.
In addition, we seek a consultant to e valuate the existing recommendations for Terminal 2 and provide a recommendation to advance one to the 10% level of design that would include plans and cost to construct.
To support the effort, the consultant may recommend additional sampling of underlying soils.
Port Furnished Materials
The Port will provide the following information and materials to the selected Consultant:
1. AutoCAD version of the dredging limits illustrated in Attachment 1.
2. Review and comment of the SAP, SCR, and permit conditions.
3. Plans and specifications for maintenance dredging of all facilities.
4. Past permits or reports of previous dredging activity at the Port, if available.
Proposal Requirements
If you are interested in providing a proposal for this effort, in less than 1 0 pages (single sided with a 1 0- point font), please provide the following information:
A. Cover letter detailing your interest in the project and contact information. In the letter describe your compliance with Richmond’s ordinances as well as review of any addenda issued.
B. A discussion of the understanding of the work required to acquire the permits and any strategies to expedite acquisition. Permitting must be ready for construction in 2025 as noted above.
C. A scope of services illustrating tasks and deliverables.
D. A schedule of activities and key milestones.
E. The list of key personnel assigned to the project and their expertise with permitting for maintenance dredging.
F. A description of similar maintenance dredging and slope stability projects.
G. Three (3) references and contact information
H. A total “not to exceed” fee quotation separating the permitting and Terminal 2 planning , 10-year permits, and MBYH as separate tasks. This is not counted to the page limit.
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
Please note that all work must be inclusive of the following:
1. City of Richmond Ordinance No. 16-12 N.S. Richmond Business Opportunity Ordinance.
2. City of Richmond Ordnance Number 15-10 N.S. Local Employment Ordinance.
3. Compensation shall be consistent with Prevailing Wage Requirements as required by the Department of Industrial Relations.
4. Execute an agreement with the City of Richmond ; a copy of which is included in Attachment D.
No changes to this agreement will be made.
5. The City of Richmond requires consultants doing business with it to obtain insurance, as shown in the Attachment D Standard Contract’s Exhibit F. 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.
6. 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.
7. The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 (Attachment E) 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 E)
8. Resolution No. 86-21 (Attachment F), 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)
Schedule
The Port anticipates this effort will be completed as follows:
Task Date
Release RFP November 20, 2024
Response Due December 16, 2024
Negotiations with Vendor December 2024
City Council Approves Agreement January 2025
Notice to Proceed February 2025
Acquire Permits for Terminals 2, 7, and 8 August 2025
Finalize Remaining Tasks December 2025
Submittal Process
Any questions from prospective vendors must be submitted via the electronic BidsOnline system no later than 5:00 p.m., December 3, 2024. As necessary, responses to questions will be issued via an addendum.
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
Electronic Proposals shall be submitted via the City’s secure online bidding system. All required sections of the proposal must be submitted via the website. Vendor is solely responsible for “on time” submission of their electronic proposal. The Bid Management System will not accept late proposals and no exceptions shall be made. Contractors will receive an e -bid confirmation number with a time stamp from the Bid Management System indicating that their bid was submitted successfully. The City will only receive those proposals that were transmitted successfully no later than 2:00 p.m., December 16 , 2024.
Evaluation Criteria
The sole purpose of the proposal evaluation process is to determine which solution best meets the Port’s needs. The Port will review all proposals received as part of a structured evaluation process. For each decision point in the process, the Port will evaluate proposers according to specific criteria.
A review committee will evaluate all responses to the RFP that meet the submittal requirements and deadline. Submittals that do not meet the requirement or deadline will not be considered. The review committee will rank the proposals and arrange interviews of the top two or three firms if deemed necessary.
The table below describes the criteria that will be used to review proposals and interview performance , if deemed necessary. The Port offers a total of 100 points, weighted as follows:
Criteria Total Points Available
The overall experience of the team as evidenced by
recent representative projects 50
Strategy to acquire permits allowing for
maintenance dredging as quickly as possible 50
Adherence to the parameters contained in this RFP. 10
Port’s Rights Reserved
For this RFP, City and Port are used interchangeably. The Port reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to:
• Select the proposal which in its sole judgment best meets the needs of the City. The recommended selection of the evaluation committee is final and subject only to review and final approval by the City Council.
• Reject any or all proposals and to waive technicalities and informalities when such waiver is determined by the City to be in the City’s best interest. • Retain all accepted proposals, including proprietary documentation, regardless of which proposal is selected. No proposals will be returned to proposers. • Request any supplementary information it deems necessary to evaluate proposer’s experience or qualifications. This may include supplemental financial information, additional interview(s), and/or additional presentation by the proposer.
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
• Reconsider any proposal submitted at any stage of the procurement. It also reserves the right to meet with select proposers at any time to gather additional information.
Furthermore, the City reserves the right to delete or add functionality (i.e., modules and components) until the final contract signing.
• Cancel, in part or in its entirety, this RFP, including, but not limited to: selection schedule, submittal date, and submittal requirements. If the City cancels or revises this RFP, all proposers will be notified by the City.
• Revise the RFP prior to the date that proposals are due. The City will communicate changes through addendum to this RFP. All registered proposers will be notified of revisions to the RFP. The City reserves the right to extend the date by which the proposals are due. • To reject any and all proposals and to waive informalities and minor irregularities in any proposals received. Failure to furnish all information requested or to follow the format as determined by City, in its sole discretion, requested herein , may disqualify the proposer .
False, incomplete, misleading or unresponsive statements in a proposal may also be sufficient cause for a proposal’s rejection.
Finally, the Port notes the following:
• This RFP does not commit the City to award a contract. All proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the City and public records, and as such, may be subject to public review.
• The City shall not be liable for any pre -contractual expenses incurred by prospective proposers or designated subcontractors, including but not limited to costs incurred in the preparation or submission of proposals.
• The City shall be held harmless and free from any and all liability, claims, or expenses whatsoever incurred by, or on behalf of, any person or organization responding to this RFP. • The City of Richmond administers grant funds from various local, state, and Federal sources.
All grant-funded expenditures shall comply with the terms and conditions of the grant and the applicable Federal, State, and Local requirements for such expenditures. • Contracts awarded under this solicitation shall/may be funded, in whole or in part, with Federal grant funding. All Federal grant awards are subject to Uniform Administrative Requirements and Cost Principles, codified in 2 CFR 200. See 2 CFR 200 Appendix II.
Bids Online Codes
90742
91843
92500
96109
95900
ATTACHMENT A
DREDGING AREAS
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
ATTACHMENT B
BATHYMETRIC SURVEY
SEE SEPARATE DOCUMENT
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis A
TTACHMENT C
T
ERMINAL 2 SLOPE ANALSYIS
Memorandum February 15, 2021
130 Battery Street, Suite 400
San Francisco, California 94111
415.230.0862
\\sf1\sf\PROJECTS\Bou dr eau _Assoc i at es\200600-01.01 - Port of Richmond Terminal 2\Deliverables\Geotech Evaluation Memo\Terminal 2 Geotechnical Design Memo_021421.docx
\\sf1\sf\PROJECTS\Bou dr eau _Assoc i at es\200600-01.01 - Port of Richmond Terminal 2\Deliverables\Geotech Evaluation Memo\Terminal 2 Geotechnical Design Memo_021421.docx
To: Robert Stevens, CSWST2, and Christine Boudreau, Boudreau, LLC From: Michael Whelan, PE, and Casey Janisch, PE, Anchor QEA, LLC cc: Jaclyn Gnusti, Anchor QEA, LLC
Re: Slope Stability Evaluation
Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Maintenance Dredging
Richmond, California
Introduction
The purpose of this memorandum is to describe Anchor QEA, LLC’s evaluation of the geotechnical stability of the side slopes adjacent to the proposed berth maintenance at the Port of Richmond’s Terminal 2 facility. The proposed maintenance entails dredging the berth to required elevations of −32 to −35 feet mean lower low water (MLLW). Each option would also include a potential over - dredge of 2 feet. to −37 feet MLLW.
A geotechnical evaluation has been performed to assess the stability of bank side slopes adjacent to the proposed dredging area . The stability analysis consisted of evaluating the slope prior to and after removal of the dredged material at the toe of the slope to determine the effect of dredging on the side slope factor of safety (FOS).
The following are presented in this memorandum:
• Discussion of subsurf ace conditions, including the following:
‒ A generalized soil profile developed from review of cone penetrometer testing (CPT) ‒ Derivation of soil properties and engineering parameters used in the stability evaluation • Presentation and discussion of the geotec hnical evaluations of slope stability for pre - and post-dredge conditions
• Presentation of conclusions, recommendations, and design considerations with respect to the proposed dredging
The evaluations and conclusions presented herein are based on our understanding of the Port of Richmond’s dredging needs and on the current geometry of the bank side slopes as of the date of this memorandum. Any changes to these assumptions and expectations may affect the results of the analyses and conclusions and would require a re-evaluation.
February 15, 2021
Subsurface Conditions
A bathymetric survey of the site was completed by eTrac on September 3, 2020. This survey included bathymetry of the proposed dredge area up the bank to the waterline. This information was used to develop the geologic profile for stability evaluation. The complete set of bat hymetry survey sheets, with annotations added to represent the slope stability analyses and conclusions, are provided in Attachment 1.
Subsurface Investigations
A subsurface investigation of the site was performed by Anchor QEA in December 2020, consisting of two CPT investigations from the upland bank of the shoreline adjacent to the termin al. Each CPT was performed to a depth of 50.5 feet below ground surface.
The number, location, and depth of explorations w ere selected by Anchor QEA based upon the expected site conditions, the proposed project limits, and site access. Exploration locations were recorded in the field with a handheld differential global positioning system ( DGPS). The CPTs performed by ConeTec were used to develop soil profiles and determine soil engineering properties .
The CPT report is provided in Attachment 2.
Subsurface Soil Profile
The following is a description of the generalized subsurface soil profile, with a discussion of the key characteristics of the major soil units encountered during our investigation, listed in order from the ground surface downward.
• Fill: The uppermost 8 to 9 feet of the shoreline bank consists of sandy fill material. This unit is interpreted as previously placed fill that was used to build up the site adjacent to the terminal.
The top 5 feet of this layer were excavated by hand for utility clearance . • Bay Mud: Underlying the fill material, bay mud was found. This silty to clayey layer extends to a depth of 42 to 44 feet below ground surface. This unit begins at a soft to medium stiff consistency and exhibits increas ing strength with depth. • Sand: The sand unit was encountered below the bay mud, starting at a depth of approximately 42 to 44 feet below ground surface and extending to approximately 48 feet below ground surface. There were interbedded laminations of silt and sandy silt recorded sporadically throughout this layer.
Groundwater
The depth to groundwater was not directly observed during the exploration program, and piezometers were not installed. Due to the site’s proximity to the bay, groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate with the tidal cycle.
February 15, 2021
Engineering Soil Properties
Engineering soil properties are listed in Table 1. These parameters were derived using the results of the CPT testing, interpreted in concert with engineering properties of similar subsurface deposits in the region. Strength parameters for stability evaluations were derived from Table 6 and Figure 7 of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command Soil Mechanics: Design Manual 7.01 (NAVFAC 1986).
Table 1
Strength Parameters for Stability Evaluations
Soil Unit
Depth Below
Ground Surface
(feet)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)
Effective Friction
Angle (degrees)
Effective
Cohesion
(psf)
Fill 0 to 9 120 35 --
Bay Mud 9 to 44 115 25 to 29a 600 to 1,400b
Sand > 44 120 38 --
Notes:
a. The effective friction angle of this layer varied, increasing with depth. b. The effective cohesion of this layer varied, increasing with depth. pcf: pounds per cubic foot
psf: pounds per square foot
Slope Stability Evaluations
Slope stability was evaluated for slope conditions typical for Terminal 2, based on the 2020 bathymetric survey (Attachment 1). The analysis assumed 2 feet of allowable over -dredging would occur at the dredge footprint .
Slope stability was evaluated using limit equilibrium methods ( LEM) coded in the Rocscience Slide2 software package. The LEM procedure calculates the FOS as the resisting force (i.e. , soil strength) divided by the driving force (i.e. , weight of the soil mass plus other external loads). The F OS was computed for a suite of assumed trial “slip surfaces” that were identified using a search routine in the software . The search routine iteratively optimized the geometry of the slip surfaces until the lowest FOS was identified, and that surface was presented as the “critical” slip surface. The LEM procedure satisfied both force and moment equilibrium in the free -body diagram.
Stability was evaluated for the existing (pre-dredging) condition and for four potential dredge conditions, as follows:
• Alternative 1: dredging to a target elevation of −32 feet MLLW over as much of the berth as possible without destabilizing the slope
• Alternative 2: dredging to a target elevation of −35 feet MLLW, to the greatest extent possible without destabilizing the slope
February 15, 2021
• Alternative 3: dredging to a target elevation of −35 feet MLLW without an offset and sloping the bank from toe of slope
• Alternative 4: installing a sheet pile wall at the toe of slope to support dredging to an elevation of −37 feet MLLW over the full berthing area
Up to 2 feet of overdredge allowance is envisioned for each dredging alternative.
Slope Stability Evaluation Results and Recommendations
The soil profile and strength parameters used for the slope stability evaluation are presented in Table 1. A target FOS of 1.5 is the minimum recommended FOS for long-term stability evaluations and is based on recommendations presented in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2003) and Duncan and Wright (2005).
Our evaluation indicated that the current bank slopes are below the recommended long-term FOS of
1.5 for static conditions, and below 1.0 for a seismic event with a return period of 2,475 years, indicating the potential for movement of the slope materials in a sufficiently large earthquake . It would be necessary to regrade or add structural support elements to the slope in order to achieve the recommended FOSs for static and seismic conditions.
The dredging alternatives presented below describe how to perform each alternative without further decreasing the existing FOS of the slope . (It is important to recognize that these recommendations do not increase the current stability of the slope .) The alternatives are generally described relative to an estimated Berthing Line, which generally follows the waterward edge of existing berthing structures at Terminal 2.
Alternative 1: The site can be dredged to a consistent elevation of −32 feet MLLW to the existing toe of slope without impacting the existing stability of the slope . Refer to Attachment 1, Sheet A1.
Alternative 2: The site can be dredged to an elevation of − 32 feet MLLW at the toe of the slope , as in Alternative 1. The remaining site can be dredged to an elevation of −35 feet MLLW while maintaining a minimum offset of 20 feet from the toe of the slope to maintain the existing stability of the slope. Refer to Sheet A2.
Alternative 3: The site can be dredged to an elevation of − 35 feet MLLW at the toe of the slope if the entire slope is cut back at an angle of 2H:1V. This option would impact the upland portion of the site to accommodate the extension of this slope. Further design work would be needed to implement this alternative. Refer to Sheet A 3.
Alternative 4: Installation of a sheet pile wall at the toe of the slope would allow dredging to the desired depth of −35 feet MLLW (or deeper, depending on the structural design of the wall) , but February 15, 2021
would require substantial cost expenditure. Further design work would be needed to implement this alternative. Refer to Sheet A4.
The seismic condition of the slope was analyzed, confirming that the post-dredge condition is identical to the pre-dredge condition FOS (below 1.0 for a seismic event with a return period of 2,475 years), indicating the potential for movement of the slope materials .
References
Duncan, J.M., and S.G. Wright, 2005. Soil Strength and Slope Stability. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
NAVFAC (Naval Facilities Engineering Command), 1986. Soil Mechanics: Design Manual 7.01.
September 1986.
Rocscience Inc., 2020. Slide2 Modeler, Version 2020 9.012 – 2D Limit Equilibrium Analysis for Slopes. https://www.rocscience.com/.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), 2003. Slope Stability. Engineer Manual EM 1110-2-1902.
October 31, 2003.
Attachments
Attachment 1 Port of Richmond Terminal 2: Pre-Dredge Survey (by eTrac Inc. ), with annotations by Anchor QEA
Sheet A1 Alternative 1 – Dredge to −32 feet
Sheet A2 Alternative 2 – Dredge to −32 and −35 feet with Offset Sheet A3 Alternative 3 – Dredge to −35 feet with 2H:1V Slope Excavation Sheet A4 Alternative 4 – Install Sheet Pile Wall and Dredge to −35 feet
Attachment 2 CPT Report (by ConeTec Inc.)
Attachment 1
Port of Richmond Terminal 2: Pre-Dredge
Survey
$
IF SHEET IS LESS THAN 11"X17"
IT IS A REDUCED PRINT,
SCALE ACCORDINGLY
eTrac Inc.
637 LINDARO STREET
SUITE 100
SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901
415.462.0421
eTracInc.com
FILE NAME:
BOUD_20200903_Richmond Terminal 2_11X17.dwg
PORT OF RICHMOND
TERMINAL 2
PRE-DREDGE SURVEY
SURVEY DATE:
SEPTEMBER 03, 2020
Anchor QEA
130 Battery Street
Suite 400
San Francisco, CA
415.230.0862
0' MLLW
-40' MLLW
6KHHW
Existing Toe of
Slopea t- 3 2 '
Estimated
Berthing Line
Alternative 1: Dredge to -32' west of red boundary
$
IF SHEET IS LESS THAN 11"X17"
IT IS A REDUCED PRINT,
SCALE ACCORDINGLY
eTrac Inc.
637 LINDARO STREET
SUITE 100
SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901
415.462.0421
eTracInc.com
FILE NAME:
BOUD_20200903_Richmond Terminal 2_11X17.dwg
PORT OF RICHMOND
TERMINAL 2
PRE-DREDGE SURVEY
SURVEY DATE:
SEPTEMBER 03, 2020
REVISION #
Anchor QEA
130 Battery Street
Suite 400
San Francisco, CA
415.230.0862
0' MLLW
-40' MLLW
6KHHW
Dredging to -35:
Offset 20' from
Toe of Slope
Alternative 2: Dredge to -35' west of orange boundary
and -32' between red & orange boundaries
Existing Toe of
Slope at -32'
Estimated
Berthing Line
$
IF SHEET IS LESS THAN 11"X17"
IT IS A REDUCED PRINT,
SCALE ACCORDINGLY
eTrac Inc.
637 LINDARO STREET
SUITE 100
SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901
415.462.0421
eTracInc.com
FILE NAME:
BOUD_20200903_Richmond Terminal 2_11X17.dwg
PORT OF RICHMOND
TERMINAL 2
PRE-DREDGE SURVEY
SURVEY DATE:
SEPTEMBER 03, 2020
REVISION #
Anchor QEA
130 Battery Street
Suite 400
San Francisco, CA
415.230.0862
0' MLLW
-40' MLLW
6KHHW
Alternative 3: Dredge to -35' at Berthing Line and
dredge/excavate a 2H:1V slope upland
Estimated
Berthing Line
Projected Top of
Slope Inclined
2H:1V from
Existing Toe
6KHHW
$
IF SHEET IS LESS THAN 11"X17"
IT IS A REDUCED PRINT,
SCALE ACCORDINGLY
eTrac Inc.
637 LINDARO STREET
SUITE 100
SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901
415.462.0421
eTracInc.com
FILE NAME:
BOUD_20200903_Richmond Terminal 2_11X17.dwg
PORT OF RICHMOND
TERMINAL 2
PRE-DREDGE SURVEY
SURVEY DATE:
SEPTEMBER 03, 2020
REVISION #
Anchor QEA
130 Battery Street
Suite 400
San Francisco, CA
415.230.0862
0' MLLW
-40' MLLW
Alternative 4: Install sheet-pile wall at Berthing
Line to facilitate deeper dredging
Sheetpile
Installed along
Berthing Line
Attachment 2
CPT Report (by ConeTec Inc.)
PRESENTATION OF SITE INVESTIGATION RESULTS
Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Project
Prepared for:
Anchor QEA
ConeTec Job No: 20-56-21677
--
Project Start Date: 01-Dec-2020
Project End Date: 01-Dec-2020
Report Date: 03-Dec-2020
Prepared by:
ConeTec Inc.
820 Aladdin Avenue
San Leandro, CA 94577
-
Tel: (510) 357-3677
[email protected]
www.conetec.com
www.conetecdataservices.com
Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Project in Richmond, CA
Introduction
The enclosed report presents the results of the site investigation program conducted by ConeTec Inc. for Anchor QEA of Seattle, Washington. The program consisted of cone penetration testing (CPTu) at two (2) locations.
Project Information
Project
Client Anchor QEA
Project Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Project
ConeTec Project # 20-56-21677
An aerial overview from Google Earth including the CPT test locations is presented below.
Rig Description Deployment System Test Type
CPT truck rig (C17) 30-ton truck mounted cylinder CPTu
Coordinates
Test Type Collection Method EPSG Number
CPTu Consumer grade GPS 32610
Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Project in Richmond, CA
Cone Penetrometers Used for this Project
Cone Description Cone
Number
Cross
Sectional Area
(cm2)
Sleeve
Area
(cm2)
Tip
Capacity
(bar)
Sleeve
Capacity
(bar)
Pore Pressure
Capacity
(psi)
446:T1500F15U500 446 15 225 1500 15 500
Cone 446 was used in both soundings.
Cone Penetration Test
Depth reference Depths are referenced to the existing ground surface at the time of test.
Tip and sleeve data offset 0.1 Meter
This has been accounted for in the CPT data files.
Additional Comments
Advanced plots with Ic, Phi, Su(Nkt), and N1(60)Ic, as well as Soil Behavior Type (SBT) Scatter plots have been included in the data release package.
Calculated Geotechnical Parameter Tables
Additional information
The Normalized Soil Behaviour Type Chart based on Q tn (SBT Qtn) (Robertson, 2009) was used to classify the soil for this project. A detailed set of calculated CPTu parameters have been generated and are provided in Excel format files in the release folder. The CPTu parameter calculations are based on values of corrected tip resistance (qt) sleeve friction (fs) and pore pressure (u2).
Effective stresses are calculated based on unit weights that have been assigned to the individual soil behaviour type zones and the assumed equilibrium pore pressure profile.
Soils were classified as either drained or undrained based on the Qtn Normalized Soil Behaviour Type Chart (Robertson, 2009). Calculations for both drained and undrained parameters were included for materials that classified as silt mixtures (zone 4).
Limitations
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Anchor QEA (Client) for the project titled “Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Project”. The report’s contents may not be relied upon by any other party without the express written permission of ConeTec, Inc. (ConeTec). ConeTec ha s provided site investigation services, prepared the factual data reporting, and provided geotechnical paramete r calculations consistent with current best practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
The information presented in the report document and the accompanying data set pertain to the specific project, site conditions and objectives described to ConeTec by the Client. In order to properly understand the factual data, assumptions and calculations, reference must be made to the documents provided and their accompanying data sets, in their entirety.
CONE PENETRATION TEST
Cone penetration tests (CPTu) are conducted using an integrated electronic piezocone penetrometer and data acquisition system manufactured by Adara Systems Ltd., a subsidiary of ConeTec.
ConeTec’s piezocone penetrometers are compression type designs in which the tip and friction sleeve load cells are independent and have separate load capacities. The piezocones use strain gauged load cells for tip and sleeve friction and a strain gauged diaphragm type t ransducer for recording pore pressure.
The piezocones also have a platinum resistive temperature device (RTD) for monitoring the temperature of the sensors, an accelerometer type dual axis inclinometer and a geophone sensor for recording seismic signals. All signals are amplified down hole within the cone body and the analog signals are sent to the surface through a shielded cable.
ConeTec penetrometers are manufactured with various tip, friction and pore pressure capacities in 5 cm2, 10 cm 2 and 15 cm2 tip base area configurations in order to maximize signal resolution for various soil conditions. The specific piezocone used for each test is described in the CPT summary table presented in the first appendix. The 15 cm 2 penetrometers do not require friction reducers as they have a diameter larger than the deployment rods. The 10 cm2 piezocones use a friction reducer consisting of a rod adapter extension behind the main cone body with an enlarged cross-sectional area (typically forty-four millimeter diameter over a length of thirty-two millimeter with tapered leading and trailing edges) located at a distance of 585 millimeters above the cone tip.
The penetrometers are designed with equal end area friction sleeves, a net end area ratio of 0.8 and cone tips with a sixty-degree apex angle.
All ConeTec piezocones can record pore pressure at various locations. Unless otherwise noted, the pore pressure filter is located directly behind the cone tip in the “u 2” position (ASTM Type 2). The filter is six millimeters thick, made of porous plastic (polyethylene) having an average pore size of 125 microns (90- 160 microns). The function of the filter is to allow rapid movements of extremely small volumes of water needed to activate the pressure transducer while preventing soil ingress or blockage.
The piezocone penetrometers are manufactured with dimensions, tolerances and sensor characteristics that are in general accordance with the current ASTM D5778 standard. ConeTec’s calibration criteria also meets or exceed s those of the current ASTM D5778 standard. An illustration of the piezocone penetrometer is presented in Figure CPTu.
CONE PENETRATION TEST
Figure CPTu. Piezocone Penetrometer (15 cm2)
The ConeTec data acquisition systems consist of a Windows based computer and a signal conditioner and power supply interface box with a sixteen bit (or greater) analog to digital (A/D) converter. The data is recorded at fixed depth increments using a depth wheel attached to the push cylinders or by using a spring loaded rubber depth wheel that is hel d against the cone rods . The typical recording interval is 2.5 centimeters; custom recording intervals are possible. The system displays the CPTu data in real time and records the following parameters to a storage media during penetration:
• Depth
• Uncorrected tip resistance (qc)
• Sleeve friction (fs)
• Dynamic pore pressure (u)
• Additional sensors such as resistivity, passive gamma, ultra violet induced fluorescence , if applicable
All testing is performed in accordance to ConeTec’s CPT operating procedures which are in general accordance with the current ASTM D5778 standard.
CONE PENETRATION TEST
Prior to the start of a CPTu sounding a suitable cone is selected, the cone and data acquisition system are powered on, the pore pressure system is saturated with silicone oil and the baseline readings are recorded with the cone hanging freely in a vertical position.
The CPTu is conducted at a steady rate of two centimeters per second , within acceptable tolerances .
Typically, one-meter length rods with an outer diameter of 1.5 inches ( 38.1 millimeters) are added to advance the cone to the sounding termination depth. After cone retraction final baselines are recorded.
Additional information pertaining to ConeTec’s cone penetration testing procedures:
• Each filter is saturated in silicone oil under vacuum pressure prior to use • Recorded baselines are checked with an independent multi-meter • Baseline readings are compared to previous readings
• Soundings are terminated at the client ’s target depth or at a depth where an obstruction is encountered, excessive rod flex occurs, excessive inclination occurs, equipment damage is likely to take place, or a dangerous working environment arises • Differences between initial and final baselines are calculated to ensure zero load offsets have not occurred and to ensure compliance with ASTM standards
The interpretation of piezocone data for this report is based on the corrected tip resistance (q t), sleeve friction (f s) and pore water pressure (u). The interpretation of soil type is based on the corr elations developed by Robertson et al. (1986) and Robertson (1990, 2009). It should be noted that it is not always possible to accurately identify a soil behavior type based on these parameters. In these situations, experience, judgment and an assessment of other parameters may be used to infer soil behavior type.
The recorded tip resistance (qc) is the total force acting on the piezocone tip divided by its base area. The tip resistance is corrected for pore pressure effects and termed corrected tip resistance (qt) according to the following expression presented in Robertson et al. (1986):
qt = qc + (1-a) • u2
where: qt is the corrected tip resistance
qc is the recorded tip resistance
u2 is the recorded dynamic pore pressure behind the tip (u2 position) a is the Net Area Ratio for the piezocone (0.8 for ConeTec probes)
The sleeve friction (f s) is the frictional force on the sleeve divided by its surface area. As all ConeTec piezocones have equal end area friction sleeves, pore pressure corrections to the sleeve data are not required.
The dynamic pore pressure (u) is a measure of the pore pressures generated during cone penetration. To record equilibrium pore pressure, the penetration must be stopped to allow the dynamic pore pressures to stabilize. The rate at which this occurs is predominantly a function of the permeability of the soil and the diameter of the cone.
CONE PENETRATION TEST
The friction ratio (Rf) is a calculated parameter. It is defined as the ratio of sleeve friction to the tip resistance expressed as a percentage. Generally, saturated cohesive soils have low tip resistance, high friction ratios and generate large excess pore water pressures. Cohesionless soils have higher tip resistances, lower friction ratios and do not generate significant excess pore water pressure.
A summary of the CPTu soundings along with test details and individual plots are provided in the appendices. A set of files with calculated geotechnical parameters were generated for each sounding based on published correlations and are provided in Excel format in the data release folder. Information regarding the methods used is also included in the data release folder.
For additional information on CPTu interpretations and calculated geotechnical parameters , refer to Robertson et al. (1986) , Lunne et al. (1997) , Robertson (2009) , Mayne ( 2013, 2014) and Mayne and Peuchen (2012).
PORE PRESSURE DISSIPATION TEST
The cone penetration test is halted at specific depths to carry out pore pressure dissipation (PPD) tests, shown in Figure PPD-1. For each dissipation test the cone and rods are decoupled from the rig and the data acquisition system measures and records the variation of the pore pressure (u) with time (t).
Figure PPD-1. Pore pressure dissipation test setup
Pore pressure dissipation data can be interpreted to provide estimates of ground water conditions, permeability, consolidation characteristics and soil behavior.
The typical shapes of dissipation curves shown in Figure PPD -2 are very useful in assessing soil type, drainage, in situ pore pressure and soil properties. A flat curve that stabilizes quickly is typical of a freely draining sand. Undrained soils such as clays will typically show positive excess pore pressure and have long dissipation times. Dilative soils will often exhibit dynamic pore pressures below equilibrium that then rise over time. Overconsolidated fine -grained soils will often exhibit an initial dilatory response where there is an initial rise in pore pressure before reaching a peak and dissipating.
Figure PPD-2. Pore pressure dissipation curve examples
PORE PRESSURE DISSIPATION TEST
In order to interpret the equilibrium pore pressure (u eq) and the apparent phreatic surface, the pore pressure should be monitored until such time as there is no variation in pore pressure with time as shown for each curve in Figure PPD-2.
In fine grained deposits the point at which 1 00% of the excess pore pressure has dissipated is known as t100. In some cases this can take an excessive amount of time and it may be impractical to take the dissipation to t100. A theoretical analysis of pore pressure dissipations by Teh and Houlsby (1991) showed that a single curve relating degree of dissipation versus theoretical time factor (T*) may be used to calculate the coefficient of consolidation (ch) at various degrees of dissipation resulting in the expression for ch shown below.
ch= T*∙a2∙√Ir
t
Where:
T* is the dimensionless time factor (Table Time Factor) a is the radius of the cone
Ir is the rigidity index
t is the time at the degree of consolidation
Table Time Factor. T* versus degree of dissipation (Teh and Houlsby (1991)) Degree of
Dissipation (%) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
T* (u2) 0.038 0.078 0.142 0.245 0.439 0.804 1.60
The coefficient of consolidation is typically analyzed using the time (t 50) corresponding to a degree of dissipation of 50% (u50). In order to determine t50, dissipation tests must be taken to a pressure less than u50. The u 50 value is half way between the initial maximum pore pressure and the equilibrium pore pressure value, known as u100. To estimate u50, both the initial maximum pore pressure and u100 must be known or estimated. Other degrees of dissipations may be considered, particularly for extremely long dissipations.
At any specific degree of dissipation the equilibrium pore pressure (u at t 100) must be estimated at the depth of interest. The equilibrium value may be determined from one or more sources such as measuring the value directly (u100), estimating it from other dissipations in the same profile, estimating the phreatic surface and assuming hydrostatic conditions, from nearby soundings, from client provided information, from site observations and/or past experience, or from other site instrumentation.
For calculations of c h (Teh and Houlsby (1991 )), t 50 values are estimated from the corresponding pore pressure dissipation curve and a rigidity index (Ir) is assumed. For curves having an initial dilatory response in which an initial rise in pore pressure occurs before reachin g a peak, the relative time from the peak value is used in determining t50. In cases where the time to peak is excessive, t50 values are not calculated.
Due to possible inherent uncertainties in estimating Ir, the equilibrium pore pressure and the effect of an initial dilatory response on calculating t50, other methods should be applied to confirm the results for ch.
PORE PRESSURE DISSIPATION TEST
Additional published methods for es timating the coefficient of consolidation from a piezocone test are described in Burns and Mayne ( 1998, 2002), Jones and Van Zyl (1981) , Robertson et al. (1992) and Sully et al. (1999).
A summary of the pore pressure dissipation tests and dissipation plots are presented in the relevant appendix.
REFERENCES
ASTM D5778-12, 2012, "Standard Test Method for Performing Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soils", ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. DOI: 10.1520/D5778-12.
Burns, S.E. and Mayne, P.W., 1998, “Monotonic and dilatory pore pressure decay during piezocone tests”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal 26 (4): 1063-1073. DOI: 1063-1073/T98-062.
Burns, S.E. and Mayne, P.W., 2002, “Analytical cavity expansion -critical state model cone dissipation in fine-grained soils”, Soils & Foundations, Vol. 42(2): 131-137.
Jones, G.A. and Van Zyl, D.J.A., 1981, “The piezometer probe: a useful investigation tool”, Proceedings, 10th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 3, Stockholm: 489-495.
Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K. and Powell, J. J. M., 1997, “Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice”, Blackie Academic and Professional.
Mayne, P.W. , 2013, “Evaluating yield stress of soils from laboratory consolidation and in -situ cone penetration tests”, Sound Geotechnical Research to Practice (Holtz Volume) GSP 230, ASCE, Reston/VA:
406-420. DOI: 10.1061/9780784412770.027.
Mayne, P.W. and Peuchen, J. , 2012, “Unit weight trends with cone resistance in soft to firm clays ”, Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization 4, Vol. 1 (Proc. ISC-4, Pernambuco), CRC Press, London: 903-910.
Mayne, P.W., 2014, “Interpretation of geotechnica l parameters from seismic piezo cone tests”, CPT’14 Keynote Address, Las Vegas, NV, May 2014.
Robertson, P.K., Campanella, R.G., Gillespie, D. and Greig, J., 1986, “Use of Piezometer Cone Data”, Proceedings of InSitu 86, ASCE Specialty Conference, Blacksburg, Virginia.
Robertson, P.K., 1990, “Soil Classification Using the Cone Penetration Test”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Volume 27: 151-158. DOI: 10.1139/T90-014.
Robertson, P.K., Sully, J.P., Woeller, D.J., Lunne , T., Powell, J.J.M. and Gillespie, D.G., 1992, “Estimating coefficient of consolidation from piezocone tests”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 29(4): 539 -550. DOI:
10.1139/T92-061.
Robertson, P.K., 2009, “In terpretation of cone penetration tests – a unified approach”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Volume 46: 1337-1355. DOI: 10.1139/T09-065.
Sully, J.P., Robertson, P.K., Campanella, R.G. and Woeller, D.J., 1999, “An approach to evaluation of field CPTU dissipation data in overconsolidated fine-grained soils”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 36(2): 369- 381. DOI: 10.1139/T98-105.
Teh, C.I., and Houlsby, G.T., 1991, “An analytical study of the cone penetration test in clay”, Geotechnique, 41(1): 17-34. DOI: 10.1680/geot.1991.41.1.17.
APPENDICES
The appendices listed below are included in the report:
• Cone Penetration Test Summary and Standard Cone Penetration Test Plots • Advanced Cone Penetration Test Plots with Ic, Su(Nkt) and N1(60)Ic • Soil Behavior Type (SBT) Scatter Plots
• Pore Pressure Dissipation Summary and Pore Pressure Dissipation Plots
Cone Penetration Test Summary and Standard Cone Penetration Test Plots
Job No: 20-56-21677
Client: Anchor QEA
Project: Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Project
Start Date: 01-Dec-2020
End Date: 01-Dec-2020
CONE PENETRATION TEST SUMMARY
Sounding ID File Name Date Cone
Assumed Phreatic
Surface 1
(ft)
Final
Depth
(ft)
Northing 2
(m)
Easting 2
(m)
Elevation 3
(ft)
Refer to
Notation
Number
RT-CPT-1 20-56-21677_CP01 01-Dec-2020 446:T1500F15U500 7.6 50.52 4196722 556119 10 RT-CPT-2 20-56-21677_CP02 01-Dec-2020 446:T1500F15U500 8.3 50.52 4196635 556127 10
1. The assumed phreatic surface was based on the shallowest pore pressure dissipation tests performed within the sounding. Hydrostatic conditions are assumed for the calculated parameters.
2. The coordinates were acquired using consumer grade GPS equipment, datum: WGS 1984 / UTM Zone 10 North.
3. Elevations are referenced to the ground surface and are derived from the Google Earth Elevation for the recorded coordinates.
Sheet 1 of 1
The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 1002003000
10 20
30 40
50 60
qt (tsf)
Depth (feet)
0.01.02.03.0fs (tsf)
0.02.04.06.08.0Rf (%)
01002003000u (ft)
0369SBT Qtn
Anchor QEAJob No: 20-56-21677Date: 2020-12-01 12:03Site: Port of Richmond Terminal 2 ProjectSounding: RT-CPT-1Cone: 446:T1500F15U500 Max Depth: 15.400 m / 50.52 ftDepth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ftAvg Int: Every PointFile: 20-56-21677_CP01.CORUnit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009)SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010Coords: UTM 10N N: 4196722m E: 556119m Undefined
Sands
Very Stiff Fine Grained
Sand Mixtures
Sands
Sand Mixtures
Clays
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Sand Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Clays
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Clays
Clays
Sand Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Sands
Sand Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Sand Mixtures
Sands
Silt Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Undefined
32.5 Ueq(ft)
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)
Assumed Ueq
Hydrostatic Line
Dissipation, Ueq not achieved
Dissipation, Ueq achieved
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 1002003000
10 20
30 40
50 60
qt (tsf)
Depth (feet)
0.01.02.03.0fs (tsf)
0.02.04.06.08.0Rf (%)
01002003000u (ft)
0369SBT Qtn
Anchor QEAJob No: 20-56-21677Date: 2020-12-01 09:19Site: Port of Richmond Terminal 2 ProjectSounding: RT-CPT-2Cone: 446:T1500F15U500 Max Depth: 15.400 m / 50.52 ftDepth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ftAvg Int: Every PointFile: 20-56-21677_CP02.CORUnit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009)SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010Coords: UTM 10N N: 4196635m E: 556127m Undefined
Clays
Sands
Sand Mixtures
Sands
Sand Mixtures
Clays
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Sand Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Sands
Clays
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Silt Mixtures
Sands
Gravelly Sand to Sand
Sand Mixtures
Clays
Clays
Silt Mixtures
32.7 Ueq(ft)
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)
Assumed Ueq
Hydrostatic Line
Dissipation, Ueq not achieved
Dissipation, Ueq achieved
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Advanced Cone Penetration Test Plots with Ic, Phi, Su(Nkt), and N1(60)Ic
The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 01002003000
10 20
30 40
50 60
qt (tsf)
Depth (feet)
01002003000 u (ft)
0.01.02.03.04.0Ic (PKR 2009)
2030405060Phi (deg)
04 812Su (Nkt) (tsf)
0204060N160 (Ic RW1998) (bpf)
Anchor QEAJob No: 20-56-21677Date: 2020-12-01 12:03Site: Port of Richmond Terminal 2 ProjectSounding: RT-CPT-1Cone: 446:T1500F15U500 Max Depth: 15.400 m / 50.52 ftDepth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ftAvg Int: Every PointFile: 20-56-21677_CP01.CORUnit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009)Su Nkt: 15.0 SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010Coords: UTM 10N N: 4196722m E: 556119m
32.5 Ueq(ft)
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)
Assumed Ueq
Hydrostatic Line
Dissipation, Ueq not achieved
Dissipation, Ueq achieved
N(60) (bpf)
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 01002003000
10 20
30 40
50 60
qt (tsf)
Depth (feet)
01002003000 u (ft)
0.01.02.03.04.0Ic (PKR 2009)
2030405060Phi (deg)
04 812Su (Nkt) (tsf)
0204060N160 (Ic RW1998) (bpf)
Anchor QEAJob No: 20-56-21677Date: 2020-12-01 09:19Site: Port of Richmond Terminal 2 ProjectSounding: RT-CPT-2Cone: 446:T1500F15U500 Max Depth: 15.400 m / 50.52 ftDepth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ftAvg Int: Every PointFile: 20-56-21677_CP02.CORUnit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009)Su Nkt: 15.0 SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010Coords: UTM 10N N: 4196635m E: 556127m
32.7 Ueq(ft)
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Target Depth
Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)
Assumed Ueq
Hydrostatic Line
Dissipation, Ueq not achieved
Dissipation, Ueq achieved
N(60) (bpf)
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Drill Out
Soil Behavior Type (SBT) Scatter Plots
Anchor QEAJob No: 20-56-21677Date: 2020-12-01 12:03Site: Port of Richmond Terminal 2 ProjectSounding: RT-CPT-1Cone: 446:T1500F15U500 Legend
Sensitive, Fine Grained
Organic Soils
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Sand Mixtures
Sands
Gravelly Sand to Sand
Stiff Sand to Clayey Sand
Very Stiff Fine Grained
Depth Ranges
>0.0 to 5.0 ft
>5.0 to 10.0 ft
>10.0 to 15.0 ft
>15.0 to 20.0 ft
>20.0 to 25.0 ft
>25.0 to 30.0 ft
>30.0 to 35.0 ft
>35.0 to 40.0 ft
>40.0 to 45.0 ft
>45.0 to 50.0 ft
>50.0 ft
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 Qtn,cs = 70
Ic = 2.6
0.10 1.0 10.01.0
10.0 100
1000
Fr (%)
Qtn
Qtn Chart (PKR 2009)
Legend
Sensitive Fines
Organic Soil
Clay
Silty Clay
Clayey Silt
Silt
Sandy Silt
Silty Sand/Sand
Sand
Gravelly Sand
Stiff Fine Grained
Cemented Sand
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
0.02.04.06.08.01.0 10.0
100
1000
Rf(%)
qt (bar)
Standard SBT Chart (UBC 1986)
Legend
CCS (Cont. sensitive clay like)
CC (Cont. clay like)
TC (Cont. transitional)
SC (Cont. sand like)
CD (Dil. clay like)
TD (Dil. transitional)
SD (Dil. sand like)
CCS
CC
TC
SC
CD
TD
SD
0.10 1.0 10.01.0
10.0 100
1000
Fr (%)
Qtn
Modified SBTn (PKR 2016)
Anchor QEAJob No: 20-56-21677Date: 2020-12-01 09:19Site: Port of Richmond Terminal 2 ProjectSounding: RT-CPT-2Cone: 446:T1500F15U500 Legend
Sensitive, Fine Grained
Organic Soils
Clays
Silt Mixtures
Sand Mixtures
Sands
Gravelly Sand to Sand
Stiff Sand to Clayey Sand
Very Stiff Fine Grained
Depth Ranges
>0.0 to 5.0 ft
>5.0 to 10.0 ft
>10.0 to 15.0 ft
>15.0 to 20.0 ft
>20.0 to 25.0 ft
>25.0 to 30.0 ft
>30.0 to 35.0 ft
>35.0 to 40.0 ft
>40.0 to 45.0 ft
>45.0 to 50.0 ft
>50.0 ft
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 Qtn,cs = 70
Ic = 2.6
0.10 1.0 10.01.0
10.0 100
1000
Fr (%)
Qtn
Qtn Chart (PKR 2009)
Legend
Sensitive Fines
Organic Soil
Clay
Silty Clay
Clayey Silt
Silt
Sandy Silt
Silty Sand/Sand
Sand
Gravelly Sand
Stiff Fine Grained
Cemented Sand
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
0.02.04.06.08.01.0 10.0
100
1000
Rf(%)
qt (bar)
Standard SBT Chart (UBC 1986)
Legend
CCS (Cont. sensitive clay like)
CC (Cont. clay like)
TC (Cont. transitional)
SC (Cont. sand like)
CD (Dil. clay like)
TD (Dil. transitional)
SD (Dil. sand like)
CCS
CC
TC
SC
CD
TD
SD
0.10 1.0 10.01.0
10.0 100
1000
Fr (%)
Qtn
Modified SBTn (PKR 2016)
Pore Pressure Dissipation Summary and Pore Pressure Dissipation Plots
Job No: 20-56-21677
Client: Anchor QEA
Project: Port of Richmond Terminal 2 Project
Start Date: 01-Dec-2020
End Date: 01-Dec-2020
CPTu PORE PRESSURE DISSIPATION SUMMARY
Sounding ID File Name Cone Area
(cm 2)
Duration
(s)
Test
Depth
(ft)
Estimated
Equilibrium Pore
Pressure U eq
(ft)
Calculated
Phreatic
Surface
(ft)
RT-CPT-1 20-56-21677_CP01 15 300 40.19 32.6 7.6
RT-CPT-2 20-56-21677_CP02 15 300 41.01 32.7 8.3
Sheet 1 of 1
0 100 200 300
0.0 20.0
40.0 60.0
0.0 -20.0 Time (s)
Pore Pressure (ft)
Anchor QEAJob No:20-56-21677Date:12/01/2020 12:03Site:Port of Richmond Terminal 2 ProjectSounding:RT-CPT-1Cone:446:T1500F15U500 Area=15 cm² Trace Summary: Filename:20-56-21677_CP01.PPFDepth:12.250 m / 40.190 ftDuration:300.0 s u Min:-15.0 ftu Max:35.2 ftu Final:32.6 ftWT: 2.323 m / 7.621 ftUeq:32.6 ft 0 100 200 300
0.0 20.0
40.0 60.0
0.0 -20.0 Time (s)
Pore Pressure (ft)
Anchor QEAJob No:20-56-21677Date:12/01/2020 09:19Site:Port of Richmond Terminal 2 ProjectSounding:RT-CPT-2Cone:446:T1500F15U500 Area=15 cm² Trace Summary: Filename:20-56-21677_CP02.PPFDepth:12.500 m / 41.010 ftDuration:300.0 s u Min:-10.1 ftu Max:32.8 ftu Final:32.7 ftWT: 2.521 m / 8.271 ftUeq:32.7 ft RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
ATTACHMENT D
STANDARD CONTRACT
CITY OF RICHMOND
STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: Project Manager:
Project Manager E-mail: Project Manager Phone No:
Vendor No: Contract No:
Description of Services:
The parties to this STANDARD CONTRACT do mutually agree and promise as follows:
1. Parties. The parties to this Contract are the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation (“the City”), and the following named Contractor:
Contractor Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Contact Person:
Telephone: Email:
Business License No:
2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is ________________________ and terminates ______________ unless terminated earlier as set forth herein.
3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $______________ (“Contract Payment Limit”) unless a Contract Amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager. If this amount includes a contingency, Contractor acknowledges that any use of such contingency shall be for work beyond the original scope of services and requires prior written authorization by the City. If noted below, Compensation for work done under this Contract, shall not exceed as follows:
FY
total compensation shall not exceed $
FY total compensation shall not exceed $
FY total compensation shall not exceed $
4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor agrees to perform all work at its own cost and expense, to furnish all labor, tools, equipment, materials, except as otherwise specified, in accordance with Exhibit A:
Service Plan which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. [ ] A California corporation , [ ] limited liability corporation, [ ] general partnership, [ ] limited partnership, [ ] individual, [ ] non-profit corporation, [ ] individual dba as [specify:]______________________________ [ ] other [specify:]__________________________________
5. City Obligations. City shall make payments to the Contractor in accordance with the Payment Provisions set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
6. Authorized Representatives and Notices. This Contract is subject to the Authorized Representatives and Notices Provisions (Exhibit C), attached hereto and incorporated herein.
7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
9. Insurance Provisions. This Contract is subject to the Insurance Provisions (Exhibit F) which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
10. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' agreement hereto:
CITY OF RICHMOND,
a municipal corporation [BUSINESS NAME]
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice President should sign below)
By:
Title By:
I hereby certify that this Contract Title:
has been approved by City Council
or the City Manager. Date Signed:
By:
City Clerk
(* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign below)
Approved as to form:
By:
By: Title:
City Attorney
Date Signed:
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement Exhibit G
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]:
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT PROVISIONS
1. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR:
a. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated in the manner set forth herein.
b. All payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photo copying, meals and travel, etc). Invoices, shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request.
c. All City vendors receiving new contracts shall sign up to receive electronic payments through the City’s Automated Clearinghouse (ACH) payments service/provider.
2. SUBMISSION OF INVOICES:
Contractor shall submit timely invoices by email to
[email protected] and/or to the following address: Attention:
City of Richmond Finance/Account Payable
Project Manager:
P.O. Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804
3. All invoices that are submitted by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of the City Project Manager, before payments shall be authorized.
4. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days after completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.
5. All appropriate permits, certificates, and licenses, including a City business license shall be obtained and maintained for the duration of this Contract before any payment is authorized.
6. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract is executed by the City. The insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be maintained by Contractor for the duration of this Contract and must be in place before any payment is authorized.
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT C
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES
1. All required written notices shall be delivered: (i) by hand; or (ii) sent by registered, express, or certified mail, with return receipt requested or with delivery confirmation requested from the U.S. postal service; (iii) sent by overnight or same day courier service at the party’s respective address listed in this Section.
2. Each notice shall be deemed to have been received on the earlier to occur of: actual delivery or the date on which delivery is refused; or three (3) days after notice is deposited in the U.S. mail or with a courier service in the manner described above (Sundays and City holidays excepted).
3. Either party may, at any time, change its notice address (other than to a post office box address) by giving the other party three (3) days prior written notice of the new address.
4. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from Contractor to the City shall be addressed to the City at:
City of Richmond –
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: ______________________________________________________
5. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from the City to Contractor shall be addressed to Contractor at:
Business Name
Street Address
City, State Zip
Email: ______________________________________________________ Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT D
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. INDEPENDENT PARTIES:
Contractor hereby declares that Contractor is engaged as an independent business and Contractor agrees to perform the services as an independent contractor. The manner and means of conducting the services and tasks are under the control of Contractor exce pt to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this Contract. No civil service status or other right of employment will be acquired by virtue of Contractor’s services. None of the benefits provided by the City t o its employees, including but not limited to unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation plans, vacation and sick leave, are available from the City to Contractor, its employees or agents. Deductions shall not be made for any state or federal taxes, FICA payments, PERS payments, or other purposes normally associated with an employer - employee relationship from any compensation due to Contractor. Payments of the above items, if required, are the responsibility of Contractor.
2. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE:
Contractor and the City agree that time is of the essence regarding the performance of this Contract.
3. STANDARD OF CARE:
Contractor agrees to perform all services hereunder in a manner commensurate with the prevailing standards of like professionals or service Contractors, as applicable, in the San Francisco Bay Area and agrees that all services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by the City.
4. IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT (IRCA):
Contractor assumes all responsibility for verifying the identity and employment authorization of all of its employees performing work hereunder, pursuant to all applicable IRCA or other federal, or state rules and regulations. Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from and against any loss, damage, liability, costs or expenses arising from any noncompliance of this provision by Contractor.
5. NON-DISCRIMINATION:
Consistent with the City’s policy and state and federal law that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable conduct, Contractor and its employees, contractors, and agents shall not harass or discriminate against any job applicant, City employee, or any other person on the basis of any kind of any statutorily (federal, state or local) protected class, including but not limited to: race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, disability (both mental and physical) including HIV and AIDS, medi cal condition (e.g. cancer), genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, pregnancy, political Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
affiliation, military and veteran status or legitimate union activities . Contractor agrees that any violation of this provision shall constitute a material breach of this Contract.
6. CITY PROPERTY:
a. Each and every report, draft, work product, map, record, applicable plans, drawings, calculation, data, specification, video, graphic or any other material or document produced, prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor pursuant to or in connection with this Contract shall be the exclusive property of the City.
b. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 11 below, indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data. c. No report, information or other data given to or prepared or assembled by Contractor pursuant to this Contract shall be made available to any individual or organization by Contractor without prior approval of the City Manager or their designee. d. Contractor shall, at such time and in such form as City Manager or their designee may require, furnish reports concerning the status of services and tasks required under this Contract.
7. RECORDS:
a. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the services, tasks, work, documents and data in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of Contractor’s performance under the Contract, as well as maintain books and records related to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by the City that relate to the performance of the services and tasks under this Contract (collectively the “Records”). b. All Records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Contractor shall provide free access to the Records to the representatives of the City or its designees during regular business hours upon reasonable prior notice. The City has the right to examine and audit the Records, and to make copies or transcripts therefrom as necessary, and t o allow inspection of all proceedings and activities related to this Contract. Such Records, together with supporting documents, shall be kept separate from other documents and records and shall be maintained by Contractor for a period of five (5) years after receipt of final payment. c. If supplemental examination or audit of the Records is necessary due to concerns raised by the City’s preliminary examination or audit of records, and the City’s supplemental examination or audit of the records discloses a failure to adhere to appropriate internal financial controls, or other breach of this Contract or failure to act in good faith, then Contractor shall reimburse the City for all reasonable costs and expenses associated with the supplemental examination or audit.
Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
8. PERMITS AND LICENSES:
Contractor, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract, all appropriate permits, certificates and licenses, including a City business license , required in connection with the performance of the services and tasks hereunder . The failure to obtain such permits and licenses shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumst ances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.
9. TERMINATION:
a. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder immediately upon transmission of written notice to Contractor as provided in Exhibit C “Authorized Representatives and Notices”.
b. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Exhibit B; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
10. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.
11. HOLD HARMLESS:
a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City) and hold harmless the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (“Indemnitees”) from and against any and all loss, damages, liability, obligations, claims, suits, judgments, costs and expenses Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
whatsoever, including attorney’s fees and costs of litigation (“Claims”), arising from or in any manner connected to Contractor’s performance of its obligations under this Contract or failure to comply with any of its obligations under this Contract or out of the operations conducted by Contractor even if the City is found to have been negligent. If the Claims filed against Indemnitees allege negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct on the part of Contractor, Contractor shall have no right of reimbursement against Indemnitees for the costs of defense even if negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct is not found on the part of Contractor.
Contractor shall not have any obligations to indemnify Indemnitees if the loss or damage is found to have resulted solely from the negligence or the willful misconduct of the City. The defense and indemnification obligations of this Contract are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Contract. b. This indemnification obligation shall survive this Contract and shall not be limited by any term of any insurance policy required under this Contract; provided however, that if this Contract is for design professional services, this indemnity provision is limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the design professional (as defined in California Civil Code section 2782.8).
12. LIMITATIONS UPON SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENT:
a. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee. b. Contractor shall not assign, sublease, hypothecate, or transfer this Contract, or any interest therein, directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise, without prior written consent of the City Manager. Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to transfer to the City Manager at least thirty (30) days in advance of the desired transfer. The City Manager or their designee may consent or reject such request in their sole and absolute discretion. Any attempt to do so without said consent shall be null and void, and any assignee, sublessee, hypothecate or transferee shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer. However, claims for money against the City under this Contract may be assigned by Contractor to a bank, trust company or other financial institution without prior written consent.
c. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture. d. Only those persons and/or businesses whose names and resumés are attached to this Contract shall be used in the performance of this Contract. However, if after the start of this Contract, Contractor wishes to use sub-contractors, at no additional costs to the City, then Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to add sub-contractors including the names of the sub-contractors and the reasons for the request to the City Manager at least five (5) days in advance. The City Manager may consent or reject such requests in their sole and absolute discretion.
e. Each sub-contractor shall be required to furnish proof of workers’ compensation insurance and shall also be required to carry general, automobile and professional liability insurance (as applicable) in reasonable conformity to the insurance carried by Contractor. f. In addition, any tasks or services performed by sub-contractors shall be subject to each provision of this Contract. Contractor shall include the following language in their Contract with any sub-contractor: “Sub-Contractors hired by Contractor agree to be bound to Contractor and the City in the same manner and to the same extent as Contractor is bound to the City.” g. The requirements in this Section 12 shall not apply to persons who are merely providing materials, supplies, data or information that Contractor then analyzes and incorporates into its work product.
13 SAFETY:
a. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor will be solely and completely responsible for conditions of all vehicles owned or operated by Contractor, including the safety of all persons and property during performance of the services and tasks under this Contract. Contractor shall assume sole and complete responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any of subcontractor's employees This requirement will apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours.
In addition, Contractor will comply with all safety provisions in conformance with U.S.
Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Act, any equivalent state law, and all other applicable federal, state, county and local laws, ordinances, codes, and any regulations that may be detailed in other parts of the Contract. Where any of these are in conflict, the more stringent requirements will be followed. Contractor’s failure to thoroughly familiarize itself with the aforementioned safety provisions will not relieve it from compliance with the obligations and penalties set forth herein.
b. Contractor will immediately notify the City (in no event less than 24 hours) of any incident of death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage that occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract. Contractor will promptly submit to the City a written report of all incidents that occur in connection with this Contract. This report must include the following information: (i) name and address of injured or deceased person(s); (ii) name and address of Contractor’s employee(s) involved in the incident; (iii) name and address of Contractor’s liability insurance carrier; (iv) a detailed description of the incident; and (v) a police report.
c. Contractor acknowledges that the City shall have the right to impose, at the City’s sole discretion, requirements that it deems are necessary to protect the health and safety of the City employees, residents, and visitors. Contractor agrees to comply with all such requirements, Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
including, but not limited to, mandatory vaccinations, the use of personal protective equipment (e.g. masks), physical distancing, and health screenings. Contractor also agrees to make available to the City, at the City’s request, records to demonstrate Contractor’s compliance with this Section.
14. INSURANCE:
Insurance requirements are set forth in Exhibit F to this Contract. Contractor shall abide by the insurance requirements set forth in said Exhibit F.
15. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS:
a. During the term of this Contract, Contractor shall keep fully informed of all existing and future state and federal laws and all municipal ordinances and regulations of the City of Richmond which affect the manner in which the services or tasks are to be performed by Contractor, as well as all such orders and decrees of bodies or tribunals having any jurisdiction or authority over the same. Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws, state and federal and all ordinances, rules and regulations enacted or issued by the City. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50, 2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable. b. Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor is required to provide the City with documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance as prescribed in § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code. c. Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or sub-Contractor under an agreement or sub-agreement with the City for public works, goods or services to refrain from discriminatory employment or practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential sub-contractor .
d. Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies . Contractor agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.
16. INTEGRATED CONTRACT:
The Recitals and exhibits are a material part of this Contract and are expressly incorporated herein. This Contract represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall Contract No: For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
be held to vary the provisions hereof. Any modification of this Contract will be effective only by written execution signed by both the City and Contractor.
17. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS:
In the event of a conflict between these General Conditions and those of any Exhibit or attachment hereto, these General Conditions shall prevail; provided, however, that any Special Condition as set forth in Exhibit E shall prevail over these General Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more Exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor, and the terms and conditions preferred by the City shall prevail over those preferred by the Contractor.
18. FORCE MAJEURE:
Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of such an obligation is prevented or delayed by reason of acts of God, strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, failure of power, restrictive governmental laws and regulations enacted after the date of this Contract, riots, civil unrest, acts of terrorism, insurrection, war, declaration of a state or national emergency or other reasons of a like nature not within the reasonable control of such party.
19. CONFLICT OF LAW:
This Contract shall be interpreted under, and enforced by the laws of the State of California without regard to any choice of law rules which may direct the application of laws of another jurisdiction. The Contract and obligations of the parties are subject to all valid laws, orders, rules, and regulations of the authorities having jurisdiction over this Contract (or the successors of those authorities). Any suits brought pursuant to this Contract shall be filed with the courts of the County of Contra Costa, State of California.
20. CLAIMS:
Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provisions of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six months after accrual of the cause of action.
21. INTERPRETATION:
This Contract shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.
22. WARRANTY:
If any product is be provided to the City as part of this Contract, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets any specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light bulbs and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor's expense, including shipping.
23. SEVERABILITY:
In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.
24. AUTHORITY:
City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City.
The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that they are duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, and shall be personally liable to City if they are not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.
25. WAIVER:
The waiver by City of any breach of any term or provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach. Inspections or approvals, or statements by any officer, agent or employee of the City relating to the Contractor’s performance, or payment therefore, or any combination of these acts, shall not relieve the Contractor’s obligation to fulfill this Contract as prescribed; nor shall the City be thereby stopped from bringing any action for damages or enforcement arising from any failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Contract.
26. COUNTERPARTS:
This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts (including by fax, PDF, DocuSign, or other electronic means), each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
27. SANCTUARY CITY CONTRACTING ORDINANCE (SCCO):
The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor must submit the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement, attached hereto as Exhibit G.
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”):
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
EXHIBIT F
INSURANCE PROVISIONS
___ Check here if Risk Management has approved waiving insurance requirements for this contract.
a. Before the commencement of the terms of this Contract, and during the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, Contractor shall furnish the City’s Risk Manager with certificates showing the type, amount, class of operations covered, effective dates and dates of expiration of insurance coverage in compliance with Sections 10.b. (1) through (5) Such certificates, which do not limit Contractor’s indemnification, shall also contain substantially the following statement:
“Should any of the above insurance covered by this certificate be canceled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the insurer affording coverage shall provide thirty (30) days’ advance written notice to the City of Richmond. Attention: Risk Manager.” Contractor shall maintain in force at all times during the performance of this Contract all appropriate coverage of insurance required by this Contract with an insurance company licensed to offer insurance business in the State of California with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII or Standard & Poor’s Rating (if rated) of at least BBB unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Contractor shall deliver updated insurance certificates to the City at the address described in Section 17.f. prior t o the expiration of the existing insurance certificate for the duration of the term of Contract. Endorsements naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insured shall be submitted with the insurance certificates.
b. COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS:
Contractor shall maintain insurance coverage and limits at least as broad as:
(1) Workers’ Compensation:
Statutory coverage as required by the State of California. (2) Liability:
Commercial general liability coverage in the following minimum limits:
Bodily Injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate - all other
Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate
If submitted, combined single limit policy with per occurrence limits in the amounts of $2,000,000 and aggregate limits in the amounts of $4,000,000 will be considered equivalent to the required minimum limits shown above. Additional Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
Insured Endorsement naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers is required. (3) Automotive:
Comprehensive automobile liability coverage (any auto) in the following minimum limits:
Bodily injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence
Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence
or
Combined Single Limit: $2,000,000 each occurrence
Additional Insured Endorsement naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers is required. (4) Professional Liability:
Professional liability insurance which includes coverage appropriate for the professional acts, errors and omissions of Contractor’s profession and work hereunder, including, but not limited to, technology professional liability errors and omissions if the services being provided are technology -based, in the following minimum limits:
$2,000,000 each occurrence
Technology professional liability errors and omissions shall include, or be endorsed to include: property damage liability coverage for damage to, alteration of, loss of, or destruction of electronic data and/or information “property” of the City in the care, custody, or control of Contractor. If not covered under Contractor’s liability policy, such “property” coverage of the City may be endorsed onto Contractor’s Cyber Liability Policy as covered property as follows: cyber liability coverage in an amount sufficient to cover the full replacement value of damage to, alteration of, loss of, or destruction of electronic data and/or information “property” of the City that will be in the care, custody, or control of Contractor. (5) Cyber Liability:
Coverage shall be sufficiently broad to respond to the duties and obligations as are undertaken by Contractor in this Contract and shall include, but not be limited to, claims involving infringement of intellectual property, copyright, trademark, trade dress, invasion of privacy violations, information theft, damage to or destruction of electronic information, release of private information, alteration of electronic information, extortion and network security. The policy shall provide coverage for breach response costs as well as regulatory fines and penalties as well as credit monitoring expenses with limits sufficient to respond to these obligations with the following minimum limits:
$2,000,000 per occurrence or claim.
Contract No: For the Contract between the City
of Richmond and
As to commercial general liability and automobile liability insurance, such insurance will provide that it constitutes primary insurance with respect to claims insured by such policy, and, except with respect to limits, that insurance applies separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought. Such insurance is not additional to or contributing with any other insurance carried by or for the benefit of the City.
c. SUBROGATION WAIVER:
Contractor hereby agrees to waive rights of subrogation that any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors. d. FAILURE TO SECURE:
If Contractor at any time during the term hereof should fail to secure or maintain the foregoing insurance, the City shall be permitted to obtain such insurance in Contractor’s name or as an agent of Contractor and shall be compensated by Contractor for the costs of the insurance premiums at the maximum rate permitted by law and computed from the date written notice is received that the premiums have not been paid.
e. ADDITIONAL INSUREDS:
The City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be named as additional insured(s) under all insurance coverages, except workers’ compensation and professional liability insurance. The naming of an additi onal insured shall not affect any recovery to which such additional insured would be entitled under this policy if not named as such additional insured. An y additional insured named herein shall not be held liable for any premium, deductible portion of any loss, or expense of any nature on this policy or any extension thereof. Any other insurance held by an additional insured shall not be required to contribute anything toward any loss or expense covered by the insurance provided by this policy.
Additional Insured coverage under Contractor’s policy shall be primary and non-contributory and will not seek contribution from the City’s insurance or self -insurance. Any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the additional insured(s). f. SUFFICIENCY OF INSURANCE:
The insurance limits required by the City are not represented as being sufficient to protect Contractor. Contractor is advised to consult Contractor’s insurance broker to determine adequate coverage for Contractor. The coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Contract; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of the coverage carried by or available to Contractor; whichever is greater.
EXHIBIT G
SANCTUARY CITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
The undersigned, an authorized agent of (hereafter
"Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12-18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”). Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain business relations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor understands the meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:
a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:
i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private-sector business and government agencies; ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."
Contractor understands that it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.
Contractor further understands and agrees that Contractor's failure to comply with the SCCO shall constitute a material default of the Contract and the City Manager may terminate the Contract and bar Contractor from bidding on future contracts with the City for five (5) years from the effective date of the contract termination.
By executing this statement, Contractor certifies that it complies with the requirements of the SCCO and that if at any time during the term of the Contract it ceases to comply, Contractor will promptly notify the City Manager in writing. Any person or entity who knowingly or willingly supplies false information in violation of the SCCO shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $1,000 fine.
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day of , 20 , at , California.
Printed Name: Title:
Signed: Date:
Business Entity:
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
ATTACHMENT E
RICHMOND SANCTUARY CITY CONTRACTING ORDINANCE NO. 12-18
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
CITY OF RICHMOND
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
The undersigned, an authorized agent of (hereafter "Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12 -18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”). Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain business relations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor understands the meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:
a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:
i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private -sector business and government agencies;
ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."
Contractor understands that it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.
Contractor further understands and agrees that Contractor's failure to comply with the SCCO shall constitute a material default of the Contract and the City Manager may terminate the Contract and bar Contractor from bidding on future contracts with the City for five (5) years from the effective date of the contract termination.
By executing this Statement, Contractor certifies that it complies with the requirements of the SCCO and that if at any time during the term of the Contract it ceases to comply, Contractor will promptly notify the City Manager in writing. Any person or entity who knowingly or willingly supplies false information in violation of the SCCO shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $1,000 fine.
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day of , 20 , at , California.
Printed Name: Title:
Signed: Date:
Business Entity:
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
ATTACHMENT F
RESOLUTION NO. 86-21 - DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OF LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES FORM
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
Disclosure Statement for Limited Liability Companies
This Statement Shall be included with all Bid and Proposal Submissions Is your Business a Limited Liability Company (LLC)? YES NO If you answered YES, please provide the City with the names and business addresses of any and all shareholders, directors, officers, members, managers, other authorized persons, partners, and “Beneficial Owners” of the applying LLC. A Beneficial Owner is any person or entity who: (1) exercises substantial control over the applying LLC; (2) owns 25% or more of the interest in the applying LLC; or (3) receives substantial economic benefits from the assets of the applying LLC.
If any LLC shareholder, director, officer, member, manager, other authorized person, partner, or Beneficial Owner is itself an LLC or other business entity, the names and business addresses must also be provided for any and all shareholders, directors, officers, members, managers, other authorized persons, partners, and Beneficial Owners of that LLC or other business entity all the way up through each entity in the organizational chart until ultimate ownership by individual people is disclosed.
Name: _____________________
Title: _____________________
Address:__________________________________________
Name: _____________________
Title: _____________________
Address:__________________________________________
Name: _____________________
Title: _____________________
Address:__________________________________________
☐ Check this box if additional ownership information is attached to this Disclosure Statement.
In signing this Disclosure Statement, I represent that the information submitted in this Disclosure Statement, and any attachments, is true and correct.
Signature: _____________________
Printed Name: _____________________
Title: _____________________
Date: _____________________
RFP – Permitting for Dredging and Terminal 2 Slope Analysis
ATTACHMENT G
10-YEAR DREDGE PERMIT FOR TERMINALS 2, 3, 7, AND 8
ENG FORM 1721, Nov 86 1 (33 CFR Part 325 (Appendix A))
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
PERMITTEE: Port of Richmond
PERMIT NO.: 2016-00302S
ISSUING OFFICE: San Francisco District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the permittee or any future transferee. The term "this office" refers to the appropriate District or Division office of the Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted activity or the appropriate official of that office acting under the authority of the commanding officer.
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The permittee is authorized to initially remove approximately 70,000 cubic yards of sediment, and a total of approximately 171,000 cubic yards over the 10-year life of the permit, from 9.7 acres (approximately) within the Port of Richmond’s Terminals 2, 3, 7 and 8 Berths located on Harbour Way in the Richmond Inner Harbor, in the City of Richmond, Contra Costa County, California. The permitted project design depth is -35 feet mean lower low water (MLLW) plus a 2-foot overdepth allowance in the Terminals 2, 7 and 8 Berths, and -38 feet MLLW plus a 2 -foot overdepth allowance in the Terminal 3 Berth. The dredged material will be removed using a mechanical dredge. The dredged material will be transported to an appropriate disposal site by dredged material scows pushed or towed by tug boats. The permittee is hereby authorized to place suitable dredged material at the Alcatraz Island Dredged Material Disposal Site (SF -11), the San Pablo Bay Dredged Material Disposal Site (SF -10), the San Fran cisco Deep Ocean Disposal Site (SF-DODS), a permitted beneficial reuse site, or at an appropriate upland disposal location outside Corps jurisdiction. All work shall be conducted in accordance with the attached drawings entitled, “Applicant: Port of Richmond; Project: Terminals 2, 3, 7 and 8 Maintenance Dredging; USACE File No.: 2016-00302S; Date: March 2, 2017,” in eleven sheets dated March 2, 2017 (Attachment 1).
Prior to each dredging episode, the Dredge Material Management Office (DMMO) will evaluate the sediments to be dredged for disposal or reuse suitability. The DMMO includes representatives from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco Bay Con servation and Development Commission (BCDC), San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The DMMO is tasked with approving sampling and analysis plans in conformity with testing manuals, rev iewing the test results and reaching consensus regarding a suitable disposition for the material.
PROJECT LOCATION: Port of Richmond, Richmond, Contra Costa County, California.
GENERAL CONDITIONS:
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on June 1, 2027. If you find that you need more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this office for consideration at least one month before the above date is reached.
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and conditions of this permit. You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make a good faith transfer to a third party in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a modification of this permit from this office, which may require restoration of the area.
ENG FORM 1721, Nov 86 2 (33 CFR Part 325 (Appendix A))
3. If you discover any previously unknown historic or archeological remains while accomplishing the activity authorized by this permit, you must immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and State coordination required to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
4. If you sell the property assoc iated with this permit, you must obtain the signature of the new owner in the space provided and forward a copy of the permit to this office to validate the transfer of this authorization.
5. If a conditioned water quality certification has been issued f or your project, you must comply with the conditions specified in the certification as Special Conditions to this permit. For your convenience, a copy of the certification is attached if it contains such conditions. (Conditional Water Quality Certificati on for Maintenance Dredging at the Port of Richmond Terminal 2 , issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, under CIWQS Place No. 817785 on September 4, 2015 and Conditional Water Quality Certification for Maintenance Dredging at the Port of Richmond Terminals 7 and 8 , issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, under CIWQS Place No. 409471 on October 20, 2016 (Attachments 2 and 3).)
6. If a conditioned coastal zone consistency concurrence or determination has been issued for your project, you must comply with the conditions specified in the concurrence or determination as Special Conditions to this permit. For your convenience, a copy of the concurrence or determination is attached if it contains such conditions. (Conditioned Coastal Zone Consistency Determination for the Port of Richmond Terminal s 2, 3, 7 and 8 Berths Maintenance Dredging Project issued by the S.F. Bay Conservation and Developme nt Commission (BCDC), Permit No.
M1997.017.00, issued July 10, 1996 amended through February 28, 2017, Amendment No. 3 (Attachment 4).)
7. You must allow representatives from this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time deemed necessary to ensure that it is being or has been accomplished in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of your permit.
8. You understand and agree that, if future operations by the United States require the removal, relocation or other alteration of the structure or work authorized herein, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, you will be required, upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby, w ithout expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration (Section 10 only).
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1. All dredging operations shall be limited to June 1 through November 30 each year for the following reasons:
a. In order to minimize impacts to federally listed steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), dredging and disposal operations shall occur from June 1 through November 30. Dredging outside this environmental work window would require consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act) and approval from the NMFS and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
b. In order to minimize impacts to federally listed Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tschwytscha), dredging and disposal operations shall occur from June 1 through November 30. Dredging outside this environmental work window would require consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act) and approval from the NMFS and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
c. In order to minimize impacts to federally listed North American green sturgeon (Acipenser medirosrtis), dredging and disposal operations shall occur only from June 1 through November 30. Dredging outside this environmental work window would require consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act) and approval from the NMFS and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
c. No dredging activities shall occur during the sensitive Pacific herring spawning season, December 1 to March 1.
Dredging outside this environmental work window would be determined by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
ENG FORM 1721, Nov 86 3 (33 CFR Part 325 (Appendix A))
2. Additional Standard DMMO Conditions for dredging projects are found on pages 4A-4E of this permit, and shall be adhered to at all times.
FURTHER INFORMATION:
1. Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to undertake the activity described above pursuant to:
(X) Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. § 403). Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act generally regulates all structures and work occurring below the plane of mean high water in tidal waters of the United States; in former diked baylands currently below mean high water ; outside the limits of mean high water but affecting the navigable capacity of tidal waters ; or below the plane of ordinary high water in non -tidal waters designated as navigable waters of the United States. Navigable waters of the United States generally include all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; and/or all waters presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for future use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. The term "structure" includes, without limitation, any pier, boat dock, boat ramp, wharf, dolphin, weir, boom, breakwate r, bulkhead, revetment, riprap, jetty, artificial island or reef, permanent mooring structure, power transmission line, permanently moored floating vessel, piling, or any other obstacle or obstruction. The term "structure" does not include bridges and cau seways constructed in or over navigable or tidal waters of the United States, since this regulatory responsibility has been delegated to the U.S. Coast Guard under the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. No. 89 -670). The term "work" includes , without limitation, any dredging or disposal of dredged material, filling, or other modification of a navigable water of the United States.
(X) Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1344). Section 404 of the Clean Water Act generally regulates all discharges of dredged or fill material occurring below the plane of ordinary high water in non -tidal waters of the United States; or below the high tide line in tidal waters of the United States ; and within the lateral extent of wetlands adjacent to these waters. Waters of the United States generally include the territorial seas; all traditional navigable waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including waters subje ct to the ebb and flow of the tide; wetlands adjacent to traditional navigable waters; non -navigable tributaries of traditional navigable waters that are relatively permanent, where the tributaries typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally; and wetlands directly abutting such tributaries. Where a case -specific analysis determines the existence of a "significant nexus" effect with a traditional navigable water, waters of the United States may also include non-navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent; wetlands adjacent to non -navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent; and wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting a relatively permanent non -navigable tributary. The term "dredged material" means material that is excavated or dredged from waters of the United States. The term "fill material" means material placed in waters of the United States where the material has the effect of replacing any portion of a water of the United States with dry land or of changing the bottom elevation of any portion of a water of the United States. Examples of such fill material include, but are not limited to, rock, sand, soil, clay, plastics, constructio n debris, and materials us ed to create any structure or infrastructure in waters of the United States. The term "fill material" does not include trash or garbage.
(X) Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research , and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. § 1413). Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act generally regulates the transport of dredged material for the purpose of disposal in ocean waters. Ocean waters is defined as those waters of the open seas lying seaward of the base line from which t he territorial seas is measured, as defined in the Convention of the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone (15 UST 1606; TIAS 5639).
ENG FORM 1721, Nov 86 4 (33 CFR Part 325 (Appendix A))
2. Limits of this authorization:
a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, State, or local authorizations required by law.
b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
c. This permit does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others.
d. This permit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
3. Limits of Federal Liability: In issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume any liability for the following:
a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpermitted activities or from natural causes.
b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities undertaken by or on behalf of the United States in the public interest.
c. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused by the activity authorized by this permit.
d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.
e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit.
4. Reliance on Applicant's Data: The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.
5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision: This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
b. The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false, incomplete, or inaccurate. (See Item 4 above.)
c. Significant new information surfaces which thi s office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision.
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modification, and revocation procedures contained in 33 C.F.R. Section 325.7 or en forcement procedures such as those contained in 33 C.F.R. Sections 326.4 and 326.5. The referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the Terms and Conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any corrective measures ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations (such as those specified in 33 C.F.R. Sectio n 209.170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the cost.
6. Extensions: General Condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity authorized by this permit. Unless there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest decision, the Corps will normally give favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit.
ENG FORM 1721, Nov 86 5 (33 CFR Part 325 (Appendix A))
Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the Terms and Conditions of this permit.
_____________________________________________________ _________________________________________ (PERMITTEE) (DATE)
Jim Matzorkis
Port of Richmond
This permit becomes effective when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army, has signed below.
_____________________________________________________ _________________________________________ (DISTRICT ENGINEER) (DATE)
John C. Morrow
Lieutenant Colonel, US Army
District Engineer
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the ter ms and conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.
_____________________________________________________ _________________________________________ (TRANSFEREE) (DATE)