In the PEIR, the LCWA agreed with the consulting Tribes that the Los Cerritos Wetlands is part of a tribal traditional cultural landscape (TCL) and could be significantly impacted by projects conducted within the wetlands.
Because the TCL was not formally documented, the LCWA has hired Cogstone Resource Management to conduct a TCL study. This will include:
A records search for a 5 mile buffer around the entire Los Cerritos Wetlands to put the wetlands into a larger regional context.
Conducting ethnographic and historic research to document past use of the Los Cerritos Wetlands, and wetlands in general, by the Tongva and Acjachemen. This would include documenting the collection of salt from the wetlands and the connection of the Cerritos wetlands to the villages of Puvungna and Motuucheyngna.
Collecting oral histories from Tribal community members as recommended by the Tribal representatives and digitally record their explanations of current and past usage of the wetlands. At the end of the project, digital and hard copies of the finalized oral history will be provided to each participant and Tribe. Participants will be compensated for their time.
Currently we have government and private grant funding to compensate each Tribe's participation on TAG. Please see the LCW Tribal Advisory Group framework document attached which includes a more detailed description of this group. It is a draft, so we welcome any feedback you have.
Since there are multiple concurrent planning efforts taking place within the Los Cerritos Wetlands, we want to take this opportunity to clarify the differences between the LCWA's South LCW planning effort and the Los Cerritos Wetlands Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project, a parallel planning process taking place within the North Area of the wetlands . While the LCWA's restoration plan (i.e. PEIR) does encompass the boundaries of much of the Wetlands Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project, that project is led by Beach Oil Mineral Partners (BOMP) and not LCWA. The LCWA is a co-applicant of the project's Coastal Development Permit because the 5-acre property owned by LCWA is involved in the land swap. LCWA has been involved in the planning process in an advisory role to ensure the developed plans for the Los Cerritos Wetlands Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project are in line with LCWA's habitat restoration goals. While the LCWA maintains an active partnership with BOMP for the improvement of the Los Cerritos Wetlands, we do not oversee or advise on their day to day operations or tribal consultation and monitoring efforts.
The formation of the TAG is something the LCWA looks forward to, and we hope that you will join us! We want to schedule the initial intertribal TAG meeting on May 25, 2021 from 10am-12pm. The meeting will be held remotely.
Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority · El Encanto · 100 N. Old San Gabriel Canyon Road· Azusa, CA 91702 ♦ Office-626.815.10 19 ♦ Fax-626.815.1269 ♦
240
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 221
RE: Invitation to Los Cerritos Wetlands Tribal Advisory Group April 27, 2021
Please contact Sally Gee, Project Manager, (1.) if your tribe is interested in participating in the TAG, (2.) if you can attend the initial TAG meeting on the date and time mentioned above, and (3.) provide us with the name and contact information of your tribal representative(s). If your tribe is no longer interested in participating, please let us know that as well. Ms. Gee is also available to answer any questions you may have. We look forward to working with you.
Sally Gee, LCWA Project Manager
100 N. Old San Gabriel Canyon Rd. Azusa, CA 91702
Office: 626-815-1019 x 104
[email protected]. gov
Sincerely,
Mark Stanley
Executive Officer
Attachments:
LCW Tribal Advisory Group_Draft Framework 2021.04
Project Location Map
Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority · El Encanto · 100 N. Old San Gabriel Canyon Road· Azusa, CA 91702 ♦ Office-626.815.10 19 ♦ Fax-626.815.1269 ♦
241
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 222
Los Cerritos Wetlands Tribal Advisory Group
Draft Framework
Lead: Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority (LCWA)
representatives from the State Coastal Conservancy and the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy
Participants:
Tribes (traditional knowledge input, design input, and tribal cultural experts) LCWA Consultants (present and solicit feedback on designs/ stewardship) Goal of Tribal Advisory Group from LCWA perspective:
Establish a long-term relationship between tribal entities and the LCWA Incorporate traditional ecological knowledge and tribal perspectives into restoration designs and a Traditional Cultural Landscape Study for the LCW
Keep tribal community updated on progress of projects
Provide enhanced access to the LCW to tribal community
Suggested meeting schedule: 2-4 meetings annually depending on project milestones and need through the end of 2022, 2-hour meetings
Topics of discussion:
Tribal Goals and Objectives of restoration in the LCW complex Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project
o Restoration design input
Biological resources
Cultural resources
Landscape design
Traditional Ecological Knowledge
o Public access design input
Signage/ educational materials (future phases)
o Private tribal dedication area
o Cultural interpretation of technical studies
o Native American monitoring (data collection/ construction phase) o Traditional Cultural Landscape Study
Public programming/ stewardship activities (could happen now, no fundi ng) Initial meeting (May 2021):
Discuss role, purpose, and expectations of the tribal advisory group and compensation Establish membership and how to add members (LCWA expectation: start with 6 tribes who consulted on the AB52 process, allow other tribes to ask to join) Agreement on topics of discussion
Update status of LCWA's restoration planning
Funding: Each Tribe will receive a stipend to compensate representatives for meeting participation and document reviews. A Tribe may appoint multiple representatives to the project, but the stipend amount will not increase with additional members.
242
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 223
Exhibit A
Lakewood
Los Alamitos
SOURCE: ESRI
Huntington
Beach
D Program Boundary
Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Plan Program EIR
Regional Location
243
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 224
SOURCE: Mapbox, LC'NA Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Plan Program El R Figure 2-4
South Area
244
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 225
APPENDIX J. JULY 23, 2021 SITE VISIT SIGN IN SHEET
245
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 226
co~tone
PALEONTDLOGV - ARCHAEOLOGY- HISTORY
Name
Christina Conley
Christine Pereira
Dani Ziff
Sandonne Goad
Gabrielle Crowe
Clark Stevens
Amber Dobson
Sam Dunlap
Eric Zahn
Joyce Perry
Los Cerritos Wetlands Tribal Site Visit
7/23/2021
Phone
Gabrielino Tongva 626-407-8761
Indians of California
Coastal Commission 714-610-1864
Coastal Commission 310-991-5042
Gabrielino-Tongva 951-807-0479
Nation
Gabrielino-Shoshone 909-615-9837
Tribe
New West Land Co. 310-614-6636
Coastal Commission 562-590-5071
Gabrielino Tongva Tribe 909-262-9351
Tidal Influence 858-353-6 113
Juanefio Band of Mission 949-293-8522
Indians
Branch Offices
Email
Christina.rnarsden@alurnni. usc .edu
[email protected]
[email protected]. gov
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
sarndunlap@earthlinknet
[email protected]
[email protected]
1518 West Taft Avenue
Orange. CA 92865
Office [714[ 974-8300
San Diego - Riverside - Morro Bay- Sacramento -Arizona
cogstone,com
Toll free (888) 333-3212
Federal Certifications WOSB. EDWOSB, SOB
State Certifications DBE, WBE, SBE. UOBE
246
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 227
APPENDIX K. INTERVIEW CONSENT FORM AND QUESTIONS
247
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 228
cogstone
PALEONTOLOGY - ARCHAEOLOGY-HISTORY
CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH
Los Cerritos Wetlands Landscape S tudy
Cogstone will be conducting a stu dy to identify past, present and future use of the Los Cerritos Wetlands, led by Desiree Martinez, Cogstone Archaeologist. Interviews will be used for the landscape study for the Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority. You were selected as a possible participant in this study because of you r knowledge and expertise. Your participation in this research study is voluntary.
LARGER PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority has received funding to move forward on project level designs on 105-acres of wetlands in Seal Beach, near Heron Point, called the South Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Proj ect (South LCW Project). As part of the South LCW Project, the LCWA looks to accomplish the following:
• Conduct focused biological, geotechnical, and archeological surveys • Complete 65% restoration designs and project level CEQA • Complete a Traditional Cultural Landscape Study of the Los Cerritos Wetlands Cogstone has been hired to conduct the Traditional Cultural Landscape Study, including interviewing Tribal members from the Gabrielino Tongva and Acjachemen Nations.
WHAT SHOULD I KNOW ABOUT A RESEARCH STUDY?
• Whether or not you take part is up to you.
• You can agree to take part and later change your mind. • Your decision will not be held against you.
• You can ask all the questions you want before you decide.
WHY IS THIS RESEARCH BEING DOJ\TE?
This project is being done to better understand the Tongva and Acjachemen relationship to the Los Cerritos Wetlands, salt water marshes, and the greater cultural landscape, encompassing 3 miles around the Los Cerritos Wetlands, including the villages of Puvungna and Motuucheyngna. The project outcomes- summary within the cultural landscape study to inform the restoration.
1518 West Taft Avenue
Orange, CA 92865
Office [714) 974-8300
Branch Offices
San Diego - Riverside - Morro Bay - Sacramento - Arizona Federal Certifications WOSB, EDWOSB, SOB
State Certifications DBE, WBE, SBE, UDBE
cogstone.com
Toll free {888) 333-3212
248
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 229
Los Cerritos Wetlands Landscape Study Interviews (Cogstone 5418) ARE THERE ANY RISKS IF I PARTICIPATE?
• Although unlikely, there may be questions which bring up sensitive topics. You may choose to not answer anything.
• You have the option of remaining anonymous within the report ARE THERE ANY BENEFITS IF I PARTICIPATE?
You will be compensated $250 for your participation. Furthermore, it is our hope that your communities and all people of Los Angeles will benefit from this research in the form of betterinformed policy and clearer understandings of what it will take for Los Angeles to become water sustainable and respect Indigenous sovereignty.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF IT AKE PART IN THIS STUDY?
If you volunteer to participate in this study, the researcher(s) will ask you to do the following:
• Answer the question listed in the document "LCW Tribal Interview Questions" • Interviewer will write notes during the interview
• Consent to audio recording of the interview
• Consent to video recording of the interview
• Consent to digital photographs to be taken during the interview You will be given a copies of:
• audio recording of the interview
• video recording of the interview, if any
• photos photographs to be taken during the interview
• transcript of audio and/or video recording
WILL INFORMATION ABOUT ME AND MY PARTICIPATION BE KEPT
CONFIDENTIAL?
If you choose to use your real name or consent to being recorded on a group video, your information will not be kept confidential.
If you request confidentiality, researchers will do their best to make sure that your private information is kept confidential. Even so, participating in research may involve a loss of privacy or a breach in confidentiality, especially if you are participating in conversation circles or events with other people beyond the research team. Study data will be physically and electronically secured, but with electronic data there is always a risk of breach of data security.
Use of personal information that can identify you:
cogstone .com
249
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 230
Los Cerritos Wetlands Landscape Study Interviews (Cogstone 5418) You will be identified as yourself unless otherwise requested. You may request to use an alias or to be kept out of a video.
How information about you will be stored:
Data produced by this project will include video/audio recordings of interviews and transcripts of these recordings, as well as written notes. These materials will be kept on a password protected server at Cogstone Resource Management. Participants will be provided copies of materials on a DVD or flash drive.
People and agencies that will have access to your information:
Research team members will have access to the recordings for the purposes of transcription and analysis. You can decide whether you want your name or an alias to be used in publications.
How long information from the study will be kept:
Videos, audio, written researcher notes and transcripts will be kept in perpetuity at Cogstone and may be donated to a research facility for future research.
WILL I BE PAID FOR MY PARTICIPATION?
Interviewees and conversation circle participants will receive a $250 honorarium in gratitude for your participation. Please fill out and return a W9 to Desiree WHO CAN I CONT ACT IF I HA VE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS STUDY? The research team:
If you have any questions, comments, or concerns about the research, you can talk to Desiree Martinez [email protected] (626) 722-1938.
WHAT ARE MY RIGHTS IF I TAKE PART IN THIS STUDY?
• You can choose whether you want to be in this study, and you may withdraw your consent and discontinue participation at any time.
• You may refuse to answer any questions that you do not want to answer. cogstone .com
250
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 231
Los Cerritos Wetlands Landscape Study Interviews (Cogstone 5418) Los Cerritos Wetlands Consent Form
Name:
Tl'ibal
Entity :
Addl'ess:
Phone : I Email: I
Check all that apply :
I A2I'ee To: Yes No
... participate in this study □ □
... have my name used within the Cultural □ □ Landscape study ... audio recording during the interview □ □ .. . video recording of the interview □ □ ... photographs to be taken during the interview □ □
Signature: Date: --------------
cogstone .com
251
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 232
cogstone
PALEONTOLOGY - ARCHAEOLOGY-HISTORY
Los Cerritos Wetlands Quest.ions
l . How did your tribal community use the Los Cerritos Wetlands in the past?
2. How did your tribal community use salt marshes in the past?
3. Have you or your family personally used the Los Cerritos in the past? If yes please explain how.
4. Do you know of other families that have used the Los Cerritos Wetlands?
5. Do you have any infonnation regarding the connection of the Los Cerritos wetland and the villages of Puvungna or Motuucheyngna?
6. Do you know of other places, villages, water sources e tc. that have connections to the Los Cerritos Wetlands?
7. What plants and animals within salt marshes, and Los Cerritos Wetlands in particular, are important to your tribal community?
8. What types of activities would you like to be able to do within the Los Cerritos Wetlands in the future?
9. What types of spaces would your tribal conmmnity like to have in the Los Cerritos Wetlands?
10. Anything to add?
11. Recommendations or other people to interview?
1518 West Taft Avenue
Orange, CA 92865
Office (714) 97 4-8300
Branch Offices
San Diego - Riverside - Morro Bay - Sacramento - Arizona Federal Certifications WOSB, EDWOSB, SOB
State Certifications DBE, WBE, SBE, UDBE
cogstone.com
Toll free (888) 333-3212
252
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 233
CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX L. SURVEY RESULTS AND EXTENDED
PHASE I TESTING LOCATON MAPS
253
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 236
APPENDIX M. SOILS MAP
254
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 237
Figure M - 1. Soils map
Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration
City of Long Beach
Los Angeles County, CA
City of Seal Beach
Orange County, CA
II ii Project Area
USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey 2021
- 112 - Balcom clay loam
- 125 - Bolsa silty clay loam
- 173 - My ford sandy loam (2 - 9% slopes)
- 175 - Myford sandy loam (9 - 15%
slopes)
- IJ00LA- Urban land (dredged fill
substratum)
- 1230LA - Bolsa, drained-Typic
Xerothents, dredged spoil-Typic
Fluvaquents complex
0 250 500 feet
11111111 N
0 50 I 00 Meters i
111111111 A
1 :6,500 1 in = 542 ft
255
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project Cogstone 238
CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX N. DPR SITE RECORDS
256
ENCLOSURE 2
257
All that glitters – Review of solar facility impacts on fauna P.A. Fleming
Environmental and Conservation Sciences, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, Western Australia, 6150, Australia
A R T I C L E I N F O
Keywords:
Lake effect
Microclimate
Green energy
Solar panel
Glint
Glare
Bird
Bat
Fauna
Wildlife
Sustainable energy solutions
Climate change
SDG15: Life on Land
SDG13: Climate Action
SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
ABSTRACT
Utility-scale solar facilities (‘solar farms’/‘solar parks’) represent vast altered landscapes – currently covering ~0.025 % of the earth’s land surface. The rapid transformation of landscapes necessitates urgent research into biodiversity impacts of solar facilities worldwide. Evidence for fauna impacts at both concentrating solar power (CSP) and photovoltaic (PV) solar facilities was analysed. Solar facilities impact fauna through habitat loss and fragmentation, altered microclimate, and creation of novel habitat. Evidence suggests increases in insect, bird and bat species richness and abundance around solar facilitates built over degraded landscapes, likely due to introduction of novel habitat and presence of generalist species, but a decrease when comparison is made with intact reference landscapes. CSP facilities attract large numbers of flying insects and therefore insectivorous birds, while both heliostats (CSP) and PV solar panels are attractive to waterbirds, with the timing and direction of bird movements indicating they are responding to linear polarised light reflections from panels. While generalist bat species make use of solar facilities, data to date indicates a decrease in bat species richness and activity around solar facilities. Extrapolating from USA studies, an estimated 17.3 million birds die at solar facilities around the world every year. Direct impacts of solar facilities include injuries and deaths due to collisions and burns, while entrapment, starvation and increased predation risk are also recorded causes of mortalities.
Solar facilities significantly impact local fauna, particularly attracting and affecting insectivores and waterbirds.
Further research is needed to fully understand these effects and develop mitigation strategies for sustainable solar energy expansion.
1. Introduction
Solar energy is a key component in the global shift towards transitioning to a low carbon future and achieving the emissions targets established by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [1]. However, as the total capacity of solar power facilities has increased, the impact on living organisms, particularly birds and bats, has also increased [2–4]. Many industries who are making the transition to green energy are required to consider whether utility-scale solar facilities could have detrimental impact on migrating shorebirds (protected under international legislation) or waterbirds and bats, and the balance of those risks with alternatives [4,5]. Such information is required to meet the demands of Environmental Impact Assessments, and warrants a critical review of available data.
At the end of 2023, an estimated 37,886 km2 of the earth’s surface (0.025 % of the world’s land area, or about the area of Denmark) was covered by solar panels, with the area increasing dramatically year-byyear since [6,7]. The vast expanses of solar facilities (also known as ‘solar parks’ or ‘solar farms’) have unique impacts on fauna that we are only just beginning to identify. The reflective surfaces of solar panels can attract insects (e.g., [8,9]), providing new feeding opportunities for bird and bat species (e.g., [10–13]). However, the glare from solar farms can also create a visual disturbance (illusion of water surface) potentially changing animal behaviour and collision risk [3,14]. The physical presence of solar panels can therefore disrupt migratory flight routes as well as foraging and nesting sites [3,15,16].
There have been a great many reviews of the effects of solar energy generation on wildlife (e.g., [4,17]), including many that are specific to solar energy generation in California USA (e.g., [4,7,18,19]), or that have specifically addressed whether waterbirds are attracted to solar facilities (e.g., [14,20]). However, much of the work reviewed by these articles is unpublished reports [7], with notably fewer publications of raw data (reviewed by [21]) than reviews on the topic. A general consensus across all published reviews is a call for additional research on some of the potential impacts of solar facilities, and movement beyond hypotheses with little supporting evidence or those based on extrapolation from other human infrastructures [21].
The marked variation in solar radiation and technological advancement across the globe (Fig. 1) influences where solar facilities have been E-mail address: [email protected].
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2025.115995
Received 1 April 2025; Received in revised form 13 June 2025; Accepted 22 June 2025 Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 Available online 15 July 2025
1364-0321/© 2025 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). 258
built, and therefore which biomes are affected [22]. However, there is also marked geographic bias in our understanding of the biodiversity impacts of solar energy, with the majority of studies of their biodiversity impacts coming from xeric environments in Europe or North America [20,21]. This geographic and climatic bias limits the generality of findings, providing insufficient insights into the potential impacts of solar infrastructure on diverse taxonomic groups across other ecological systems.
This review sets out to synthesise the potential impacts of glint and glare from solar facilities on insects, birds and bats, addressing four main questions.
1. Do solar facilities alter wildlife community species richness and abundance?
2. Do solar facilities attract (or cause avoidance) in volant species?
3. What are the causes of mortality associated with solar facilities?
4. What are the biodiversity costs of solar facilities, and can we mitigate these costs?
The conclusion briefly introduces some key remaining research gaps.
2. Methods
This literature search used the Harzing’s Publish or Perish platform to search through the Google Scholar platform on February 6, 2025. The search terms were ‘solar panel’ AND ‘glint’ or ‘glare’ AND either ‘bird’, ‘bat’, fauna’ or ‘wildlife’ (separate searches). Google Scholar was chosen in preference to other databases, as it picks up grey literature, including unpublished reports, theses, and other documentation that proved informative.
The literature search resulted in 954 articles, of which 207 articles were repetitions and 11 were unavailable (not English or publications not available through the Murdoch University library). The titles and abstracts of the remaining 736 articles were reviewed. The majority (651) were not deemed relevant to the topic. Many addressed glint and glare around airports and potential impact on humans (14), or environmental impact assessments (19). Others addressed topics such as glint and glare in terms of social acceptance and community preferences (7), but did not include fauna specifically. A total of 25 fauna-specific publications were revealed through this search. An additional 76 publications were added to this search by reviewing the references of key papers.
Solar power generation has two main types.
• Concentrated Solar Power (CSP): These plants use reflective flat (‘heliostats’) or curved (parabolic trough CSP system) mirrors to concentrate sunlight and generate thermal energy. The concentrated heat is directed to a central receiver to produce steam that drives turbines. This intense solar energy around concentrating towers can pose risks to flying animals, although trough facilities may reduce this risk. In a recent meta-analysis, Smallwood [7] reported 5.6 times more bird and 91.5 times more bat fatalities/MW/year at CSP projects compared with PV panels (Table 1). CSP was the first large-scale solar technology – and therefore there is more data on the biodiversity impacts of this form of solar energy (Box 1) – but CSP is now being rapidly surpassed by photovoltaic systems [25].
• Solar Photovoltaic (PV): PV systems use semiconductor cells to convert sunlight directly into electricity. Within the last decade, the price of PV systems has declined by 89 % [26] and utility-scale solar energy production is now rapidly increasing across the globe and is set to be the world’s largest renewable energy source by 2029 [27].
Because of the marked differences in the physical structure and mortality impacts of CSP and PV systems, their impacts are considered separately where data allows.
List of abbreviations including units and nomenclature
CSP Concentrated Solar Power
PV Photovoltaic
c-Si crystalline silicon
Fig. 1. The marked variation in solar radiation (background raster colours) and technological advancement across the globe influences where solar facilities have been built (dots reflect installed solar facilities, with relative size of the dots reflecting solar generation capacity), and therefore which biomes are affected. Sources:
Photovoltaic potential is derived from the Global Solar Atlas v2 [23], and represents the average daily totals. The data for operating solar facilities is sourced from Global Solar Power Tracker [24].
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 2 259
Box 1
Concentrating Solar Power plants
As of 2020, the least expensive utility-scale concentrated solar power stations (CSP) in the United States and worldwide were still five times more expensive than utilityscale photovoltaic power (PV) stations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrate d_solar_power) but CSP is one of the few renewable electricity technologies that can generate fully dispatchable or even fully baseload power at very large scale [25].
Therefore, despite its costs, CSP may have an important role to play in the decarbonisation of power grids as a dispatchable electricity source to balance the intermittent renewables, such as wind power and PV.
Southern California, USA, accounts for nearly 80 % of all utility scale solar facilities in California, and 50 % of all those developments across the USA [4]. Three large CSP systems located in the Mojave Desert of Southern California have been extensively studied for bird and bat mortalities (reviewed by [7]):
a.Solar One. The world’s first CSP plant was the 10-MW Solar One (1982–1988), which used water/steam as the heat transfer fluid. This was upgraded to Solar Two (1996–1999, using molten salt to capture and store the sun’s heat). Solar One was the first large-scale test of its kind and was one of the first utility-scale solar projects. Until its construction, the environmental hazards of solar power plant operation were unknown [28]. The only wildlife fatality monitoring reported before 2012 was in 1982–1983 at Solar One, with reports of birds being singed by concentrated sunlight from the heliostat fields at this CSP plant [28].
b.Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (‘Ivanpah’) (Fig. 2a). The 377-MW Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (2014 – present) [29] includes 173,500 heliostats that follow the sun’s trajectory, solar-field-integration software, and solar-receiver steam generators. Avian mortality due to singeing in high-flux regions in the air space above the heliostat fields at Ivanpah have been documented [3,30]. In these instances, birds had been exposed to concentrated solar radiation exceeding safe limits – estimated to be 4–50 kW/m2 for birds [31]. Exceeding these limits can result in fatal burns, highlighting the need for careful management and mitigation strategies [31].
c.Genesis. The Genesis Solar Energy Project (2013 – present) is a 140 MW CSP using solar trough technology, with a system of solar collector arrays composed of parabolic mirrors. Substantial bat mortality has been reported at Genesis, where the most dangerous project feature to bats was the evaporation ponds, followed by power blocks, fences, and solar collector arrays [7].
d.Other CSP facilities. Leading countries in CSP installations are Spain (total capacity of 2.3 GW), the USA (1.5 GW), China (596 MW), Morocco (533 MW) (Fig. 2b), and South Africa (500 MW). As of 2024, the Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Solar Park in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (Fig. 2c) facility has a total capacity of 950 MW, including a 100 MW CSP plant with the world’s tallest solar receiver tower (263 m), a 600 MW parabolic trough complex, and a 250 MW PV station.
3. Results and discussion
Here, I first describe studies that have examined insect, bird and bat communities around solar facilities, as the initial step towards understanding whether animals might be attracted to or avoid these sites.
Second, I present evidence supporting five potential mechanisms for why animals may be attracted to solar facilities, the ecological costs and potential mitigation measures for these aspects. Third, potential causes of mortalities are then described, and extrapolation from mortality monitoring is presented. Finally, this paper concludes by raising unanswered questions and identifying research needs to better understand the biodiversity impacts of solar facilities.
3.1. Do solar facilities alter wildlife community species richness and abundance?
A number of studies demonstrate significant differences in fauna diversity and community composition around solar facilities (Table 2; Table 3). Most fauna studies have been carried out through comparison between paired solar facilities and adjacent ‘reference’ habitat (see summary of data in Table 2).
In their meta-analysis, Blaydes et al. [32] analysed the weight of evidence to support 27 potential management interventions to improve and enhance biodiversity of insect pollinators, and report evidence for positive effects of presence of flowering plants, season-long access to resources, taller or structurally diverse vegetation, increasingly semi-natural or heterogeneous landscape, and proximity and connectivity to semi-natural habitat. By contrast, where the vegetation within solar facilities is heavily managed or removed (e.g. mown or heavily grazed), there is likely to be fewer insects.
There are contrasting results for birds, which could reflect the choice of reference landscape for comparison (Table 3b). Lower bird diversity and/or density have been reported for some solar facilities compared with adjacent untransformed land as reference [16,33,34]. By contrast, many solar facilities have been located on relatively flat, homogeneous terrain at sites where there was already substantial anthropogenic disturbance. In some such cases, for example compared with reference farmland, the addition of artificial resources at PV facilities can result in increased diversity of insects and birds (especially insectivores) [8, 10–12,17,35]. While there is minimal data available for bat communities, studies have shown reduced activity [8,13,36] and reduced feeding [37] for insectivorous bat species around PV facilities, but again highlight the importance of where the sampling is carried out (Table 3c).
This form of experimental design (comparing solar facilities with reference sites) has come under criticism, with preference for a beforeafter control-impact (BACI) approach identified as ideal [38]. It also needs to be recognised that there are survey limitations in terms of visibility and access constraints around PV facilities that can influence survey results [38], with visibility or acoustic recording interference at solar facilities compared with reference sites. Alternative experimental methods include quantifying measures such as reproductive success (e. g., pre-post disturbance [39], or comparison between habitats [35]), while Environmental Impact Assessments have necessitated the application of animal community composition at proposed sites with that at established solar facilities (e.g., [40]). The importance of comparable reference sites in interpreting impact of solar facilities [35], as well as experimental design appropriate to address the treatment difference, are therefore important considerations in interpreting results of these fauna studies.
3.2. Do solar facilities attract (or cause avoidance) in volant species? Five broad mechanisms have been presented in the literature to explain attraction to or avoidance of solar facilities. These include (1) the creation of novel habitats and resources, (2) the provision of water through evaporation ponds, and (3) increased foraging opportunity.
Furthermore, (4) the concentration of solar energy and (5) the reflection of light and sound from solar panels – representing large expanses of smooth flat surfaces – can create attraction or cause avoidance in animals. These five mechanisms are discussed below.
3.2.1. Lost, altered, and novel habitat
Utility-scale solar facilities have an enormous footprint, and consequent habitat loss is recognised as a key threat for fauna [19], with concerns raised for invertebrates, reptiles, bats, and birds (reviewed by [21]). About 2–6 ha of land are needed per megawatt (MW) of installed solar capacity [15]. The 10 largest solar facilities are in China, all measuring over 70 km2
, with the largest – Talatan Solar Park in China –
occupying ~420 km2 [43]. While the overall area required per MW for solar facilities is smaller than that required for wind farms (estimated 1–16 ha per MW to allow appropriate spacing to minimise interference between turbines), the degree of clearing for solar facilities is much greater than for wind energy (where only ~0.3 ha per MW clearing is required) [44]. As well as habitat loss and disturbance (e.g., [9,45]), solar facilities also contribute to habitat fragmentation, with large expanses of solar panels and other infrastructure (e.g., power lines and non-permeable fencing) creating barriers to species’ daily, seasonal, and migratory movements [3,15,16].
Solar facility installations have largely happened in deserts and across unused farmland or decommissioned industrial sites (e.g., [46, 47]). There, solar panels shade the ground and alter the microclimate underneath them [48], influencing the absorption and reflectance of heat and leading to both heating and cooling effects at different scales (e.
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 3 260
g., [49–52]). Studies have identified effects on soil moisture (e.g., [51, 53]) and the soil microbiome [51], which in turn influence plant growth [9,51–56].
PV panels can also provide thermal refuges for fauna that would be otherwise limited in specific contexts (e.g., deserts), or can offer novel foraging, roosting, sheltering, and nesting habitats [21]. For example, Harvey and Associates [30] recorded Common ravens Corvus corax and six raptor species perching on facilities at the Ivanpah CSP facility.
WEST [33] present comparative data for Ivanpah and adjacent desert, which demonstrate American kestrels Falco sparverius were seven times more commonly recorded at the solar facilities, where they were recorded frequently perched on structures (Fig. 3). At a PV facility in South Africa, Visser et al. [16] reported aerial hawkers using the panels as foraging perches, ground-dwelling francolins foraging in the shade under the panels, and five species nesting on the solar panel supports.
Jeal et al. [34] recorded Western barn owl (Tyto alba) roosting in torque tubes (hollow, structural elements that connect rows of solar panels).
Similarly, Golawski, Mitrus and Jankowiak [12] identified that PV facilities in Poland provided safe breeding sites for birds, while fences around the facilities served as observation points, foraging sites, and singing perches.
3.2.1.1. Costs. The transformation of landscapes under solar facilities can lead to dramatic loss of habitat and population connectivity, but also represents novel habitat that can benefit generalist species [33], altering food webs. These changes contribute to a general finding of more open country/grassland, aerial, and generalist ground-foraging birds [11,16, 33] and generalist bat species [13] at solar facilities compared with reference sites. Furthermore, while animals may benefit from the use of solar facilities for nesting, reproductive success at such sites can be reduced by the presence of predators within the facility footprint. For example, mammal and bird scavengers (e.g., kit fox Vulpes macrotis, coyote Canis latrans, Common raven) may be attracted to solar energy facilities by availability of unmanaged refuse and carcasses of birds that succumbed to operation-related injuries (e.g., collision with infrastructure) [3,18,33,57,58].
In addition to loss of habitat, fences create barriers to species’ movements, and can cause entrapment. For example, Visser et al. [16] noted that large-bodied birds become trapped between double fencing, lacking the manoeuvrability to take off. Similarly, water-obligate Fig. 2. Examples of concentrating solar power (CSP) facilities. (a) The eastern tower of the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility, showing concentrated solar flux either side of the tower. (b) the Ouarzazate Solar Power Station in Morocco is the world’s largest CSP plant at 510 MW. Note the evaporation ponds to the southern boundary of the image (immediately above the scale bar) (c) The Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Solar Park, United Arab Emirates, including parabolic trough CSP and PV facilities, is one of the world’s largest renewable projects, which will reach 5 GW by 2030. Sources: (a) Craig Dietrich - Flickr: Ivanpah Solar Power Facility, (b) and (c) Google Earth.
Table 1
Average [95 % confidence interval] reported bird and bat fatalities/MW/year for three Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) and 10 photovoltaic (PV) facilities in California, USA [7].
Average [95 % CI] fatalities/MW/year
Concentrated Solar Power (CSP)
facilities
Solar photovoltaic (PV)
facilities
Birds 64.61 [41.74–149.95] 11.61 [8.37–17.56]
Bats 5.49 [0.25–11.65] 0.06 [0.01–0.10]
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 4 261
species that require water to take off are likely to be trapped by solar facility fencing [59], and Greater roadrunner Geococcyx californianus – which prefer to run rather than fly – are disproportionately represented in mortalities at Ivanpah (Fig. 4; [33]).
3.2.1.2. Can we mitigate some of these costs?. Fencing solar facilities is vital for human safety and security of structures, but fencing design could be modified to reduce the chances of creating barriers and causing animal entrapment. To mitigate barriers to species’ movements [3,15, 16], it may be possible to create permeable fencing that selectively allows animal passage. For example, a photovoltaic solar facility constructed in Pahrump, Nevada, USA (Valley Electric Association), left the majority of native plants and washes in place when installing the solar panels, and kept 30 openings in the fences (25 cm wide by 18 cm tall) for desert fauna to freely pass [48] (Fig. 5). Wildlife movements for this pilot ‘wildlife friendly’ solar facility are being monitored, with tortoises, rattlesnakes, black-tailed jackrabbits, and kit foxes reported using the fence openings to date [60].
3.2.2. Evaporation ponds
Another reason birds and bats could be attracted to solar facilities is the presence of standing water in evaporation ponds associated with the facilities (e.g. Fig. 2b). Environmental dust on the panel surface prevents sunlight from penetrating the solar cells, reducing energy conversion efficiency [61]; washing panels and dust suppression management is therefore common practice in many facilities [19]. First generation monocrystalline and polycrystalline silicon (c-Si) PV panels contain hazardous chemicals such as lead, ethylene vinyl acetate, chlorofluorocarbons, and poly/brominated flame retardants, while second-generation photovoltaic panels include cadmium telluride (CdTe), copper indium gallium diselenide (CIGS), and other heavy metal-containing materials [20]. Up to 18 metals can be released from solar panels, including aluminium from supporting structures, while substantial amounts of lead, cadmium and antimony leach from c-Si panels, and chromium, selenium, cadmium and lead leach from thin-film panels [62]. Acid rain can increase leaching, especially from broken or damaged PV panels [20]. Water is also used at solar facilities for turbine cooling, where it is often treated with chemicals (e.g. selenium) to prevent fouling and to control the pH [19]. The wastewater from these activities is then held in evaporation ponds to concentrate for disposal.
3.2.2.1. Costs. Evaporation ponds can act as a lure for fauna, but can also increase various risks for these animals. Pollution caused by leaching of chemical substances into evaporation ponds can increase exposure to toxic chemicals [63,64], and could be lethal to birds and other animals attracted to these ponds [19,20,65]. For example, selenium toxicity has been linked to high egg mortality and birth defects in birds using evaporation ponds [65].
Animals can also become trapped at the ponds. For example, Jeal et al. [34] reported 37 carcasses of 15 species (seven bird, seven mammal and one reptile species) around evaporation ponds at a PV facility in South Africa, compared with only 8 carcasses in the solar field.
The authors attributed deaths of half of the animals to drowning (the ponds had a slippery plastic lining, inhibiting escape), and noted entrapment and aggression could contribute to mortalities of young birds.
3.2.2.2. Can we mitigate some of these costs?. Few studies have included evaporation ponds in mortality assessments for solar facilities [3,16,34] although – as the deaths of birds and mammals at these ponds verify – they are important to consider for future management improvements [15]. Fencing and bird-exclusion netting are important for restricting fauna access to evaporation ponds [34], but birds can become entrapped in the nets, creating an even greater impact; mesh size, thickness and maintenance are therefore important considerations [66]. For open waterbodies, providing ‘ladders’, reducing the slope of the pond margins, and non-slip pond lining are all good management options [34].
3.2.3. Increased foraging opportunities
Physical structures associated with solar facilities can provide novel niches and microhabitats that attract insects (see Section 3.1). For example, Diehl et al. [67] proposed that insects may be attracted to the prominence of solar towers at the Ivanpah CSP facility, as these tall features stood out in the desert landscape marked by low profile vegetation. Diurnal aquatic insects – including Diptera, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Odonata, Heteroptera and Coleoptera species – are also attracted to polarised light reflected by solar panels [68,69], with many aquatic species seeing the panels as potential breeding sites (see Section
3.2.5). Changes in vegetation associated with management of the facilities can also attract insects. Unmanaged vegetation under solar panels may provide suitable habitat for insects [32] and therefore insectivores (e.g., [8,17]).
Table 2
Examples of differences in fauna species diversity, species richness, or activity/abundance between solar facilities and adjacent reference habitat.
Metric: Less at solar facilities No difference More at solar facilities Species diversity • Arthropods [8,41]
• Birds [17]
Species richness • Birds [34], [35]
B
• Bats [8]
• Arthropods [41]
B
• Birds [8,33]
• Bats [36]
• Arthropods [9,42], [41]
B
• Birds [11,17], [35]
B
Activity or
abundance
(e.g., counts)
• Birds [16]
A, [34], [35]B
• Bats [8,13,36,37]
• Arthropods [41,42] • Arthropods [9]
• Birds [8,10–12,17], [35]
B
A p = 0.06; B results depended on which reference habitat was compared.
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 5 262
Table 3
Examples of studies comparing solar facilities and reference sites for (a) invertebrates, (b) birds and (c) bats.
Study Solar facility Reference sites Conclusion (solar facilities compared with reference) a. Invertebrates
Montag, Parker and
Clarkson [8],
southern UK
11 PV solar facilities Nearby arable land (same farm) • Greater numbers of butterfly species (p = 0.008) • Nearly twice the numbers of bumblebees (p = 0.06)
Graham et al. [9],
Oregon, USA
1 single-axis tracking PV panel facilitya full
shade
Full-sun reference plots outside the solar
facility
• Lower pollinating insect density
• Reduced species richness
• Reduced species diversity
partial shade Full-sun reference plots outside the solar facility
• Greater species richness in summer
• Greater species diversity in summer
• Greater abundance in summer.
b. Birds
WEST [33], California,
USA
40 plots within the 377-MW Ivanpah CSP
facility
40 offsite plots (1–3 km from the
heliostat arrays; ‘desert’)
• Similar species richness
• Fewer birds (0.24-fold)
• Different bird species communities (one-way PERMANOVA calculated from data presented in their Table 2a; pseudo-F = 11.89, p = 0.028). Generalist species more common, e.g., black-throated sparrow Amphispiza bilineata, house finch Haemorhous mexicanus, and horned lark Eremophila alpestris Visser et al. [16],
Northern Cape,
South Africa
5 transects within 96-MW 180 ha PV facility
(grass and low ground cover between the
solar arrays promoted after construction)
5 transects within adjacent
untransformed landscape
• Marginally fewer birds (0.70 times; P = 0.06).
• Similar numbers of species
• Different bird species communities - shrub/woodland
species largely absent, while open country/grassland,
aerial, and generalist species more common
Jeal et al. [34],
Northern Cape,
South Africa
8 ‘sub fields’ sampled within 50-MW CSP
parabolic trough facility
44 transects adjacent rangelands • Lower abundance (0.007 times; p < 0.001) • Lower species richness (p < 0.001)
Kitazawa et al. [35],
Hokkaido, Japan
3 PV solar facilities Wetlands (5 plots) or abandoned
farmland (5 plots)
• Lower bird species richness
• Reduced abundance
Pastures (6 plots) or cropland (6 plots) • Comparable bird species richness and abundance DeVault et al. [10],
Arizona, Colorado,
and Ohio, USA
5 PV arraysb 5 nearby airport grasslandsb (typically
mowed at least once per year during the
growing season)
• About twice the bird activity (mean across locations =
3.468 birds per ha) than in airfields (1.598),
• Estimated ‘bird hazard index’ (combined bird mass [kg]/ ha/month/location) not significantly different (p = 0.808).
Montag, Parker and
Clarkson [8],
southern UK
11 PV solar facilities Nearby arable land (same farm) • Greater abundance of insectivorous birds (authors attributed to greater floral diversity).
Jarˇcuˇska et al. [17],
Slovakia
32 PV solar facilities 32 adjacent grassland plots • Greater total bird species richness (especially insectivores) (p = 0.030)
• Greater diversity (p = 0.004)
• No difference in overall abundance (p = 0.903)
Copping et al. [11],
Fens, UK.
6 solar facilities – plots on ‘mixed habitat’ c Adjacent arable farmland • Greater (2.6 times) bird abundance • Greater (2.45 times) species richness
Same 6 solar facilities – plots with ‘simple
habitat’
d
Adjacent arable farmland • Greater (1.4 times) bird abundance • Comparable (0.96 times) species richness
Golawski, Mitrus and
Jankowiak [12],
Poland
43 PV facilities constructed over farmland
(sampled on boundaries of facilities)
43 reference sites ~500m away • Greater bird diversity (p = 0.008) • Different bird community composition
c. Bats
Montag, Parker and
Clarkson [8],
southern UK
8 PV solar facilities Paired plots on arable land (same farm) • Comparable bat species richness (p = 0.55) • Comparable bat activity (p = 0.09)
Szabadi et al. [13],
Hungary
15 PV solar facilities (each with a mosaic of
landuses)
Adjacent other human-altered habitats
(e.g., arable land, grassland and green
areas within settlements)
• Bat species that commonly adapt to anthropogenic habitat were commonly recorded at the solar facilities
• Detection of feeding buzzes at solar farms proved that bats not only commuted over this habitat but also foraged there.
Adjacent semi-natural habitats (forests) • Species of conservation concern – those that were more commonly associated with forest habitat – were less
common; 4 taxa: p < 0.01
Adjacent semi-natural habitats
(watersides)
• Reduced overall bat activity (all species grouped) (P <
0.001)
Tinsley et al. [36], UK 19 PV facilities on either grazed or mowed grassland, or on cut arable crops
Middle of solar facility and open
reference field sites
• Reduced activity (overall 0.33 fold difference); activity of 4 (of 8) species significantly reduced (p < 0.05)
• No effect on species richness (p = 0.282).
Boundaries of solar facility and reference
field sites (i.e., hedgerows, tree lines,
woodland or vegetated ditches)
• Reduced activity (overall 0.54 fold difference); activity of 4 (of 8) species significantly reduced (p < 0.05)
• No effect on species richness (p = 0.942).
Barr´e et al. [37],
Rhone Valley, ˆ
France.
9 PV facilities built on reclaimed industrial
sites and agricultural land
paired reference sites (100–500 m away) • Bats flew faster (+10 to +44 %) and straighter (+33 %) (changes in flight features that are explicit indicators of a decrease in bat feeding behaviour) with lower probability of prey capture attempts (− 18 to − 39 %).
a Panel movements allowing varying shade treatments.
b Both airfield and PV arrays likely to be affected by active bird control at one site (i.e., harassment and lethal removal). c ‘mixed habitat’: infrequent cutting or grazing of the grass around the solar panels, which allowed greater sward height and the presence of wildflowers). d ‘simple habitat’: vegetation intensively managed through cutting or grazing.
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 6 263
3.2.3.1. Costs. Insects attracted to solar facilities in turn attract foraging insectivorous birds and bats [3,68], which can increase their risk of collision and burn injuries [21]. For example, 41 of 47 recorded bird mortalities due to solar flux at Ivanpah were primarily insectivores, indicating they had been foraging around the CSP collection towers (by contrast, waterbirds and other birds that feed on vegetation were not reported to have the same burn injuries) [3].
3.2.3.2. Can we mitigate some of these costs?. It may be possible to reduce attractiveness of solar facilities for fauna. For example, it has been noted that there are fewer insects within PV solar facilities where the vegetation is heavily managed or removed (e.g. mown or heavily grazed) [32], which in turn could reflect reduced bird and bat [37] activity. Clearing vegetation around CSP solar towers has also been implemented to make the area less attractive to birds at CSP facilities [70].
Curtailment options for CSP facilities – suspending operations at key migration times – has also been recommended to avoid migration periods when numbers of aerial foraging birds are likely to be greatest [70].
Preventing birds and bats from roosting and perching on panels may also reduce the likelihood of them foraging around the facility. For example, a range of potential deterrents have been trialled at Ivanpah, including LED lighting, perching-deterrent spikes, ‘BirdBuffer’ chemosensory deterrent, ‘BirdGuard’ sonic deterrent to deter avian species from entering this area associated with elevated flux mortality, and an Acoustic Technology Ultrasonic Bat Deterrence system to interfere with echolocation capabilities of bats [33].
3.2.4. Concentrated solar energy
Concentrated solar flux associated with CSP facilities can attract insects that would normally seek out solar radiation [21]. For example, the bright light and heat around CSP collection towers (e.g., Fig. 2a) attracts diurnal insects. Although absolute numbers were not quantified, Kagan et al. [3] reported many hundreds of killed butterflies, dragonflies and other insects at Ivanpah. Diehl et al. [67] assessed different survey methods to detect and observe animals flying near the Ivanpah towers. A modified x-band radar recorded 708,872 biological tracks in May (approximately equal numbers of insects and vertebrates) when insect activity peaked around mid-day and diurnal bird activity peaked late afternoon, and 428,207 tracks in September (about three quarters of traces identified as insects) when activity of both insects and vertebrates (bats and nocturnal birds not distinguished) peaked in early evening to midnight. By contrast, video imagery recorded an undisclosed number of instances of insects incinerated in the solar flux, but only detected a total of 37 birds or suspected birds near the towers. A total of 1922 arthropods were recorded in Malaise traps deployed on the ground around the facility, although these mostly represented terrestrial species, and did not reflect the species composition of burned insects accumulated on the ground. The insect activity associated with the CSP towers in turn attracts aerial insectivores including birds and bats [3].
3.2.4.1. Costs. Burn-related mortalities are a significant risk for CSP solar facilities. Birds can be burned or incinerated when they fly through concentrated beams of solar flux, where air temperatures may reach more than 800 ◦C (temperatures greater than 160 ◦C result in compromised keratin molecular structure and permanently weaken bird feathers, [71]). Because of these extreme temperatures, deaths of small animals flying around the CSP towers may be difficult to detect or identify [67]. Experimental work has shown that temperatures greater than 160 ◦C result in compromised keratin molecular structure and permanently weaken bird feathers [71].
Burn deaths at CSP facilities are specifically relevant to aerial insectivores (e.g., swallows, swifts and martins), which spend most of their time in flight and are therefore likely to increase the chances of encountering space where there is high solar flux [3,28]. Depending on the severity and length of exposure, exposure to the concentrated solar flux results either in immediate death (catastrophic loss of flying ability) or delayed mortality because of flight impairment [3]. Therefore, in addition to direct immediate mortalities, aerial foraging birds that are singed and injured would be unable to feed, and injured birds would be more vulnerable to predators [2,3].
The unique circumstances of CSP facilities was shown by Kagan et al. [3], who compared bird mortalities for three solar plants that had different technology: Desert Sunlight (PV), Genesis (CSP with trough) and Ivanpah (CSP with concentrating tower). Burn injuries were substantially higher for Ivanpah, where burning (‘solar flux injury’) (47 of 141 carcasses) was as common as collision trauma (43 of 141 carcasses) as a cause of death. Remaining samples (46 of 141 carcasses) were in too poor condition to determine cause of death (46 of 141).
The bright lights around CSP facilities could also increase collision risk due to glint and glare blinding. While Kagan et al. [3] noted that there was no evidence found for significant tissue burns or eye damage caused by exposure to solar flux around the Ivapah CSP towers, it is likely that visible tissue damage is not prerequisite for blinding impacts to nevertheless happen. For example, the issue of glare from large expanses of solar panels has been recognised as a significant health and safety issue in civil aviation, raising concern either from pilots or air-traffic controllers (e.g., [31,72,73]), and for drivers where solar panels line roads (e.g., [74]).
Although glint and glare hazards are recognised for humans, the question of ocular blinding has rarely been addressed in the wildlife literature. Jeal et al. [34] recorded that when flushed during the day, Western barn owls – normally only active at night – would swipe or collide with mirrors, suggesting temporary blindness due to the panels.
Collision due to acute blinding could also be exacerbated from high-speed predator-prey encounters in which either the prey or pursuer may collide with panels [7]. Smooth surfaces such as mirrors and smooth glass (on PV units) produce more specular reflections with greater intensity and tighter beams (and therefore greater risk for ocular hazards) compared with CSP trough solar receivers (which produce more diffuse reflections with lower solar intensities) [31].
3.2.4.2. Can we mitigate some of these costs?. McCrary et al. [28] reported 13 of 70 recorded bird fatalities (19 %; 7 species) at Solar One CSP were likely due to burning, as evidenced by heavily singed flight and contour feathers. The authors concluded that the primary hazard was from heliostats in standby mode – when the heliostats focussed on four small areas (~5m in diameter) of sky around the tower at a height of 80 m (rather than on the receiver) [28]. By contrast with the high-temperature receiver itself, which emits a considerable amount of thermal radiation, it was recognised that the irradiance in the air around the receiver during standby was optically transparent, and it was unlikely that the birds were able to detect heat at high-flux regions around the receiver [31]. Using this information, computer programming has been developed to control heliostat angles during standby, thereby ensuring that air temperatures remain below 160 ◦C, reducing the incidence of ‘hot spots’ [31,71].
3.2.5. Solar panels represent large expanses of smooth, flat surfaces Many animals, including insects and birds, have well-tuned polarisation vision (reviewed by [75]) and use the information from polarised light for navigation and to locate resources (reviewed by [68]). Therefore, polarised light pollution – “light that has undergone linear polarisation by reflecting off smooth, dark buildings, or other human-made objects” – can represent an ecological trap for these species [68]. For example, orientation towards horizontally polarised light sources is the primary guidance mechanism used by at least 300 diurnal aquatic insect species (e.g., dragonflies, mayflies, caddisflies, stoneflies, diving beetles, water bugs) in their search for suitable water bodies to act as feeding or P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 7 264
breeding habitat, and oviposition sites [68]. Because of their strong horizontal polarisation signature, artificial polarising surfaces (e.g., asphalt, gravestones, cars, plastic sheeting, pools of oil, glass windows, and solar panels) are commonly mistaken for bodies of water by ‘polartactic’ species [68,69,76].
Smooth darker surfaces (such as solar panels) are more effective at producing polarised light than are brighter surfaces [68]. At the Brewster angle, solar panels polarise reflected light almost completely (degree of polarisation d ≈ 100 %, substantially exceeding typical polarisation values for water d ≈ 30–70 %). Diehl, Robertson and Kosciuch [14] demonstrated that both thin-film and c-Si solar panels are capable of polarising sunlight to a high-degree (visible maximum: 83 %; ultraviolet maximum 84 %), with at least 35 % polarised light over a narrower range of vertical angles, such as a bird would be exposed to Fig. 3. Raptor behaviour around Ivanpah and adjacent desert sites, showing flight height and perching. Drawn from raw data presented by [33 Table 6]. There were significantly more observations of American kestrels at the Ivanpah solar facilities than for the desert sites (Chi-test χ2 1 = 304.2, p < 0.001); none of the other raptor
species were significantly more or less common (p > 0.05).
Fig. 4. Comparison between ’avian use’ surveys (WEST, 2016 Table 2a; x-axis) and mortality monitoring (WEST, 2016 Table 7; y-axis) at Ivanpah. Species towards the top left of the graph show mortalities that are disproportionate to other species in respect to their relative activity around the heliostats. The ’bird use’ data presented by WEST (2016, Table 2a) show significant differences in bird species communities recorded between the solar facility and adacent desert (one-way PERMANOVA calculated from their data: pseudo-F = 11.89, p = 0.028), with species more commonly recorded using the heliostats including generalist species (in descending order of percentage contribution to the difference between solar facility and adacent desert by SIMPER analysis: Yellow-rumped warbler Setophaga coronata, Horned lark Eremophila alpestris, House finch Haemorhous mexicanus, Western meadowlark Sturnella neglecta, Common raven Corvus corax, Rock pigeon Columba livia, American pipit Anthus rubescens, and Brewer’s blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus).
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 8 265
when they are flying over a solar facility.
Solar panels can therefore be mistaken for waterbodies by waterbreeding insects (e.g., mayflies, dolichopodid dipterans, and tabanid flies exhibit oviposition behaviour above solar panels), and may even be more attractive than waterbodies [69]. Similarly, it has been argued that birds mistake reflection from a solar facility for a water body and hone in on it, with the risk that solar panels can therefore represent ‘mega-traps’ [3,14]. This ‘Lake Effect’ Hypothesis [77] implies that (1) birds in flight perceive large solar PV facilities as water bodies, (2) reorient and descend toward those facilities, and (3) in some cases either collide with the panels or are unable to take off from the ground [14]. Evidence for these three steps is described below.
First, there is experimental evidence that birds can detect linear polarisation of light (reviewed by [78]). Certain waterbirds have been shown to be directly attracted to the bright reflection of light from pools of oil (in which they drown) presumably as they were searching for water [79]. Experimentally testing this concept, Bern´ath et al. [79] laid out shiny white and dark plastic sheets and recorded bird behaviour around the material. They recorded a range of species approaching and attempting to drink or forage. For example, White storks (Ciconia ciconia) and Great white egrets (Egretta alba) attempted to probe the surface, while Barn swallows (Hirundo rustica), House martins (Delichon urbia), and Sand martins (Riparia riparia) attempted to drink from and forage above the sheets. This field study suggests that the birds mistook optical cues of the sheets as the surfaces as small waterbodies.
Diehl, Robertson and Kosciuch [14] reported three experiments that similarly showed that birds could see terrestrial sources of polarised light, and use those cues to locate waterbodies. The authors showed the feeders with high polarised light properties were more conspicuous to wild birds and guided their feeding behaviour. Next, they simulated the polarised light visual properties of natural water bodies and tested bird responses to surfaces over 4 days. Finally, they compared ground-based water sources of different polarisation properties and showed that birds preferentially visited the treatment (black) with the highest degree of polarised light in both the visible and ultraviolet ranges for bathing and drinking. Their results confirm that many different bird species can Fig. 5. A ‘wildlife friendly’ photovoltaic solar facility constructed in Pahrump, Nevada, USA (Valley Electric Association), (a) left large open areas of native vegetation between banks of PV panels. (b) The ground was not bladed or graded at construction, and this resulted in an uneven/wavy placement of the panels, which would break up light reflection from the panels. (c) Mojave desert tortoises Gopherus agassizii were removed from the area during construction, kept in a holding pen, and then released back into the facility after construction was done. (d) Thirty openings at the bottom of the fences (25 cm wide by 18 cm tall) allowed tortoises and other wildlife to move in and out of the facility. Photos by Dr Jennifer Wilkening, Research Ecologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 9 266
detect horizontally polarised light and that they can use that information to help locate waterbodies, as evidenced by feeding and bathing behaviour.
Second, there is evidence that birds will reorient towards solar facilities. Millions of migratory songbirds initiate migration around twilight, when the sun is near the horizon and the maximum degree of polarisation is present (typically 70–80 % in clear, blue sky) (reviewed by [78,80]). There is substantial experimental support from behavioural experiments that many migratory songbirds rely on this celestial information for compass orientation, responding strongly to manipulations in direction of light polarisation [78]. Conflicting results for experiments with different bird species suggest species-specific differences in the use of polarised light versus magnetic information for orientation, or differences in the ecological situations under which birds use both types of information [78,80].
Given the influence of polarised light in navigation and orientation towards waterbodies, it raises the question of whether animals are diverted from their migratory paths due to polarised light pollution from solar facilities. Diehl, Robertson and Kosciuch [14] used portable X-band radar to track bird movements at two PV facilities to see if birds changed their flight paths (directions or altitudes) toward PV facilities. Evidence for change in direction was inconclusive, which the authors attributed to relief in terrain overwhelming the potential influence of the presence of PV panels on direction of travel. However, south-bound birds (possibly migrating) were more commonly recorded descending, especially near midday, suggesting they were seeking water or refuge in the extremely arid landscape [14]. Takacs et al. [ ´ 81] used a drone-mounted polarisation camera to capture reflected light from fixed-orientation solar panels, showing the largest panel areas with exactly or nearly horizontal polarisation at sunrise and at sunset when in parallel with the panels, and around noon when the drone flew perpendicular to the solar panel rows. The degree of polarised light pollution from solar facilities therefore varies depending on the angle of approach, as well as time of day, and these time of day differences need to be accounted for when interpreting the birds’ behaviour.
Third, there is evidence that birds will collide with solar panels or become trapped on the ground. WEST [33] recorded four
water-associated species associated with the heliostats at Ivanpah (one record each of: American avocet Recurvirostra americana, Greater yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca, Killdeer Charadrius vociferus, and Least sandpiper Calidris minutilla). Kosciuch et al. [82] synthesised results from fatality monitoring studies at 10 PV facilities across 13 site-years in California and Nevada, reporting 86 species amongst 669 avian detections. Waterbirds were recorded at all of the facilities in the Sonoran and Mojave Deserts Bird Conservation Region. Notably, 54 % of all carcasses were just ‘feather-spot’ remains, and of the intact carcasses, cause of mortality could also not be determined for approximately 61 % (86 % of ducks and geese, 93 % of grebes, and 100 % of loons), significantly limiting power of the study to make conclusions about cause of death in waterbirds at solar facilities [82]. Extending this work to live bird counts, Kosciuch et al. [59] recorded presence of aquatic birds at PV facilities. Together, these records provide compelling evidence that waterbirds have been attracted to solar facilities, suggesting they perceived the presence of water at the sites [59].
As well as birds, it is possible that solar facilities can interfere with bat movement patterns. The large expanses of flat solar panel surfaces reflect sound waves and can therefore interfere with navigation by microbats, causing echoes and reflections of echolocation calls. Bats perceive horizontal, smooth surfaces (‘acoustic mirrors’) as water due to their similar echo-acoustic properties, and may attempt to drink from these regardless of the material they are made of, as demonstrated in both laboratory settings [83] and in nature [84]. Echolocation was the main way these bats recognised water surfaces, taking dominance over conflicting sensory information provided by e.g., vision, olfaction, touch and taste. Solar panels would also reflect moonlight, and reflected polarised light from panels could be perceived as waterbodies by bats [85].
3.2.5.1. Costs. Collision risk is a major cause of death at both PV and CSP facilities, with flying wildlife (bats, birds, and aquatic insects) potentially colliding with reflective surfaces of PV panels or CSP heliostats, or associated infrastructure (i.e., power lines and perimetral fences). Direct mortality through collision is one of the most addressed impacts of PV energy [21], although most information comes from unpublished reports that employ non-standardised methodologies [7].
In the first study to report mortalities at solar facilities, McCrary et al. [28] reported 70 bird fatalities (representing 26 species) at Solar One (CSP with concentrating tower), with the most frequent cause of mortality identified as collision (evidenced as the presence of broken bones, usually mandibles or wings) accounting for 81 % of recorded bird deaths (20 species). Most (>75 %) collisions were associated with the mirrored heliostats. Similarly, Kagan et al. [3] reported that trauma – including impact, predation and undetermined trauma – was a significant cause of mortality for three different technology solar plants, representing 56 % of 61 mortalities at Desert Sunlight Solar Farm (PV), 30 % of 141 mortalities at Ivanpah (CSP), and 26 % of 31 mortalities at Genesis (CSP).
The linear polarised light pollution from solar facilities can cause diversion from flight paths for waterbirds. Kagan et al. [3] reported a greater proportion of waterbird mortalities at Desert Sunlight (PV) (coots, grebes and cormorants making up 48 % of all bird mortalities at this facility) compared with the two CSP facilities where aerial and terrestrial foragers represented most mortalities (Genesis 80 % and Ivanpah 89 %) (Chi-test assuming an equal proportion of air, terrestrial and water foraging guilds between the three facilities: χ2 4 = 17.35, p =
0.002; analysis carried out by myself based on data presented in their report). The difference was attributed to size and continuity of reflection from hard surfaces differing between facilities where the long banks of adjacent panels provided a continuous sky/water appearance at Desert Sunlight (compared with parabolic shape at Genesis and dark appearance from above at Ivanpah) [3]. By the time a bird may realise the panels are not water, it may be too late for the bird to stop its dive from the sky and fly away [86]. Birds that collide with the panels are also likely to be disoriented or injured and more vulnerable to predation [3].
As well as increasing the direct risk of collision and injuries, diversion off flight paths will increase depletion of energy reserves, potentially stranding animals and leading to mortality from starvation.
Obstruction from panels and fencing can also hinder birds from taking-off [3]. For example, water-obligate birds that require water for take-off (sensu [82]) – including loons (Gaviiformes), grebes (Podicipediformes), cormorants (Suliformes), coots (Gruiformes) and some ducks (Anseriformes; e.g., Ruddy duck Oxyura jamaicensis) – and those that use water for some aspect of their life history (e.g., family Charadriidae) are amongst the mortalities at solar facilities. Stranding of these birds would contribute to the disproportionate number of waterbirds represented amongst the cases where starvation has been identified as cause of death [3].
Solar panels can also elicit aggressive behavioural interactions due to the novel reflective surfaces. Smallwood [7] argued that reflected self-images on CSP heliostats or PV panels might elicit aggressive responses of birds motivated to defend territory, as has been shown for collision with windows, where males and young birds can both be significantly overrepresented relative to their abundance in habitat surrounding the building [87,88]. Substantiating this prediction requires behavioural observation of how birds interact with the solar panels.
Finally, clutter due to physical structures causes echolocation challenges and confusion for microbats [37], and PV solar farms can act as sensory traps for bats, challenging their ability to navigate [36].
Furthermore, bats mistake smooth, vertical surfaces as clear flight paths, repeatedly colliding with them [89]. For example, Ingeme et al. [90] showed that many Critically Endangered Southern bent-wing bats P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 10 267
(Miniopterus orianae bassanii) collided with a smooth metal fence placed at 45◦ outside a maternity roost, and 1.03 % of juveniles consequently suffered critical injuries that warranted their euthanasia. More data on cause of death is required for bat mortalities to understand why they die at solar facilities.
3.2.5.2. Can we mitigate some of these costs?. Approximately one-third of the incident light received by a solar cell is reflected [61]. Glare from solar panels around airports has been mitigated by considered locations, or blocking light reflection in particular directions by adding a tree screen around the facility (e.g., [91]). Alternatively, application of antireflective coatings and/or texturing to the panels (‘nanocoatings’) could be used to reduce associated glare and glint [92]. Nanocoatings redirect incident light to trap it – improving light absorption [61] and can substantially improve system performance [91,92], increasing panel energy efficiency by up to ~50 % [93,94]. Because they also reduce the degree to which solar panels polarise light, nanocoatings also have value in reducing biodiversity impacts of solar facilities. For example, Horvath ´ [95] reported that microtextured surfaces on solar panels greatly reduced polarised light pollution and reduced attractiveness to polartactic insects.
Larger scale modifications have also proven effective in reducing fauna impacts. For example, white outlines and/or white grid lines on solar panels – which result in a loss of less than 1.8 % in energyproducing surface area – reduce horizontally polarising light and are 10- to 26-fold less attractive to aquatic egg-laying insects than the same panels without white partitions [69,96]. Mechanical surface modification can also reduce the likelihood of bat collisions due to mistaking the surface for water. For example, Abdul Rahman et al. [97] placed string of different diameters across flat smooth plates, and showed that bats significantly decreased the frequency of drinking attempts with increasing diameter of the strings. It does not appear that similar detailed studies have been caried out with birds. Diehl, Robertson and Kosciuch [14] note that it is still not known how much polarisation is required to attract birds; such data is required to identify the required changes to PV facilities to reduce the effects of polarised light pollution for bird species.
3.3. Studies that have quantified mortalities of volant species Monitoring mortalities is an important tool for understanding the reasons for fatalities. Variation in where, when and how mortality monitoring has been carried out are informative about the causes of death.
3.3.1. Differences between sites – it matters where you monitor First, mortality monitoring results can be strongly influenced by where the surveys are carried out. A comprehensive Bird and Bat Management Plan developed for the Ivanpah CSP (initially written in 2013, latest version: [98]) was developed to document mortalities, use that information to develop and implement adaptive management responses, and report the monitoring results. Over nine years of bird and bat mortality monitoring using sniffer dogs and on-foot surveys (Table 4 and references therein), an average of 616 ± 360 (SD) birds per annum were recovered injured or dead around the facility. The timing of mortalities indicates strong seasonal patterns, peaking in spring and autumn, with migratory warblers and swallows making up 46–59 % of the identified cases.
A subset of the banks of heliostats were monitored over the first four years, but this monitoring was not continued. This change in where monitoring has been carried out has confounded interpretation of which species are impacted by the facility. The highest density of mortalities has been around the concentrating towers, which account for 30.6–98.5 % of reported mortalities. Waterbird mortalities were more likely to be recorded when more of the heliostat area was surveyed (Fig. 6). When only the towers were surveyed for mortalities, small insectivores (warblers and aerial foraging birds) represented the dominant records for mortalities. Finally, some mortalities (e.g., Greater roadrunner) have been specifically associated with the fencelines around the facility, and it is not clear whether the fences were systematically searched each year.
The change in where monitoring was carried out has also confounded interpretation of cause of death data. Mortalities at Ivanpah have included burn injuries (evident from singed feathers), collision (evident from broken bones), and other causes (e.g. entrapment or occurrence in the air-cooled condenser buildings, electrocution, vehicle strike, and predation), with a shift towards burn injuries as the surveys have altered their focus to only recording mortalities at the towers (mortalities from other parts of the facility were only recorded as incidental records) (Fig. 7). In the most recent reports, close to three quarters of the bird mortalities showed evidence of feather singeing (Table 4).
In a meta-analysis across different solar facilities [7], where mortalities were standardised on an energy-generation basis, the gen-tie has been identified as the most dangerous project feature to birds at some projects (i.e., risk of electrocution), whereas the solar collectors — PV panels or mirrors (i.e., risk of collision) — were the most dangerous at others [7]. On a project-wide basis, however, more birds died by collision with solar collectors [7].
Comparison between avian use surveys and mortalities can serve to identify which species are most at risk from solar facilities. For example, analysis of data presented by WEST [33] (their Table 2a and Table 7) indicated disproportionate mortalities for the Greater roadrunner, Mourning dove Zenaida macroura, and some of the sparrows and warbler species in the year of survey (Fig. 4). There were also marked differences between some of the bird guilds, with waterbirds representing only 0.9 % of avian use counts, but 3.8 % the fatalities. Similarly, aerial foragers (use: 2.1 %, mortalities 8.4 %) and raptors (use: 1.0 %, mortalities: 4.4 %) were disproportionately represented in the mortality counts.
3.3.2. It matters when you monitor
Mortality monitoring results can also be strongly influenced by when surveys are carried out. For example, mortality monitoring results can be biased low by insufficient monitoring duration [7]. Daily mortality monitoring at Ivanpah was compared with the timing of biologically relevant seasons, using the timing of migration determined through sightings reported via eBird website (www.ebird.org) and radar data from over 140 weather stations (synthesised on the Cornell Lab of Ornithology’s BirdCast website; www.birdcast.info) [33]. The comparison was used to confirm that the entire spring and fall migration periods – when the majority of bird passages through the solar facilities were expected and also the majority of mortalities were recorded – had been included in their monitoring period. This study is an excellent example of ensuring an adequate monitoring period is addressed.
3.3.3. It matters how you monitor
The method of survey can also influence results for mortality monitoring. For example, Smallwood [7] reported bird fatality rates averaged 3 times higher at PV projects searched by foot rather than car.
There is also significant bias in species’ deaths reported. Many mortalities are assessed from feather-spots only, which significantly compromises identification of both species and cause of death. It is estimated that an average of 22 % of fatalities at solar facilities are unable to be identified to species using morphological methods [7]. The application of eDNA methods to identify bird species mortalities has recently been trialled, showing 84.1 % alignment with carcasses identified via traditional morphological methods [106]. eDNA methods may therefore help to reduce the proportion of unidentifiable mortalities for future monitoring.
Finally, mortality estimates require appropriate adjustment for scavenging, searcher efficiency, and the effect of body size on carcass detectability (many carcass removal trials have used larger birds than P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 11 268
the species that they are adjusting these values to) [7]. In a review of mortality reporting across 14 facilities in California USA [reports performed between 1982 and 2018 and obtained under California Public Records Act (PRA) and federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests], Smallwood [7] reported an annual statewide fatality estimate of 37,546 birds and 207 bats projected to California’s 2020 installed capacity of 1948.8 MW of CSP and 12,220 MW of PV systems (14,168.8 MW total). However, these estimates were biased toward identification of large bird and bat species. ‘Bridging’ these data to the species composition of adjacent habitat, Smallwood [7] estimated fatalities of 267,732 birds and 11,418 bats (Table 1). Extrapolating from these values to the total installed solar energy capacity globally [6,7], and assuming that only 1 % of this is represented by CSP solar [107] (but see [25]), mortalities at solar facilities around the globe are estimated to total 17.3 million birds per annum. Geographic bias in the mortality figures means that these data could be vastly different for mesic habitats.
4. Unanswered questions and research needs
Lovich and Ennen [19] recognised many areas where there was missing data around the wildlife impacts of utility scale solar facilities.
Despite a decade of science since their publication, there are still many knowledge gaps, especially in regard to the specific landscapes in which solar facilities are being developed. For example:
• There has been insufficient empirical data collected on the biodiversity impacts of solar facilities. Most of the knowledge on PV impacts comes from North American contexts (48 % of studies reviewed) for desert biomes [21], limiting generalisation of these findings to other environments like farmland, where most of the PV capacity is sited. We need further before-and-after studies collecting data for birds and bats across a range of habitats.
• Mapping and quantifying ecological and polarised light pollution impacts for solar facilities in different locations and with respect to migratory pathways for birds and bats will inform potential risks. A large proportion of migratory bird species (80 %) migrate under the cover of darkness [108], when light polarisation is minimal, raising questions about their navigation cues. In addition to celestial and magnetic sources of information, there is evidence that animals can use polarisation of moonlight to navigate [109]. Diehl, Robertson and Kosciuch [14] note that bird fatalities at solar facilities could not be attributed to a particular time of day, but Kosciuch et al. [82] noted the absence of large-scale mortality events of nocturnal migrants at PV facilities. Presumably all bat mortality events are taking place at night.
Table 4
Summaries of Annual Reports for Ivanpah bird mortality monitoring.
Year % heliostat area
surveyed
Mortalities recorded
(% at towersb
)
Causes of mortalitiesb Small unident.
birds
Warblers &
swallows / swiftse
Waterbirds Ref.
Singed
feathers
Collision Other Unident.
2013–2014 24.1 % a 703 (30.6 %) 47.4 % 51.9 % 0.7 %c 57.4 % 8 % 29 % 4.1 % [30] 2014–2015 24.1 % 1070 (60.3 %) 41.3 % 10.3 % 1.3 %d 47.9 % 6 % 26 % 2.1 % [33] 2015–2016 8 % 706 (88.5 %) 64.4 % 5.1 % 1.1 %c 29.3 % 10 % 43 % 4.4 % [99] 2016–2017 (~4 %) 499 (96.2 %) 69.7 % 4.4 % 1.4 %c 24.4 % 7 % 43 % 3.2 % [100] 2017–2018 0 % 531 (97.7 %) 76.9 % 0.8 % 1.7 %c 20.6 % 8 % 53 % 1.1 % [101] 2018–2019 0 % 358 (97.2 %) 65.2 % 2.3 % 1.4 %c 31.0 % 14 % 45 % 2.8 % [102] 2019–2020 0 % 737 (98.5 %) 61.3 % 1.9 % 2.3 %c 34.6 % 6 % 48 % 2.4 % [103] 2020–2021 0 % 296 (98.3 %) 72.5 % 1.4 % 2.7 %c 23.4 % 8 % 59 % 0.3 % [104] 2021–2022 0 % 265 (97.7 %) 71.8 % 0 % 1.9 %c 26.3 % 7 % 46 % 0.8 % [105] a Plus fenceline surveyed.
b Heliostat area surveyed varied between annual surveys; only incidental mortalities were recorded after spring 2016. The proportion of mortalities at the tower are therefore not directly comparable with subsequent years. From 2017 to 2018 onwards, only percentages as a proportion of the tower mortalities are reported. c Entrapment.
d Including electrocuted, struck by vehicle and predated. e Calculated from raw data presented as a percentage of identified mortalities. This represents a minimum for these insectivores, as the large percentage of small unidentified birds could also be within this category.
Fig. 6. Differences in waterbird and small insectivore mortality records according to distribution of monitoring surveys. Over the last 9 years, there has been a shift towards recording less of the heliostat area for bird mortalities.
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 12 269
• The scale of land surface under solar panels is increasing rapidly.
This raises a question about the cumulative landscape impacts of solar facilities [110], and whether large numbers of dispersed, or smaller numbers of concentrated, facilities are likely to have the greatest impact? Understanding animal movements is required to address this question and maximise solar energy generation benefits while minimising negative effects on wildlife [19].
• Other indirect effects of solar facilities also need consideration. For example, water consumption as part of operations is an important consideration, especially for solar facilities sited in arid landscapes [19]. Additionally, any system that produces electricity and heat increases risk of wildfire [111].
• Finally, the decommissioning and recycling of solar panels at their end of life also needs to be accounted for in consideration of total environmental impact [112]. Solar panels have an average lifespan of 20–30 years [20]. They contain potential contaminants (e.g., for example lead, aluminium, arsenic, cadmium and copper, depending on the type of panel) that need appropriate disposal or recycling [62].
5. Conclusions
In this study, we describe five key mechanisms to explain attraction to or avoidance of solar facilities by insects, birds and bats (Table 5).
Habitat loss, fragmentation, and the disruption of animal movement is inevitably detrimental for fauna. However, other aspects of solar facilities can be attractive to some animals. For example, solar facilities may offer additional foraging and scavenging opportunities, while the presence of water (evaporation ponds) or the appearance of water (the ‘Lake Effect’) can mislead and lure animals to entrapment. While some of these opportunities are likely to be benign, other aspects have potentially lethal consequences for birds and bats, increasing risk of collision or burn injuries, as well as exposure to toxic chemicals. For such species, Fig. 7. Causes of mortality identified at Ivanpah CSP over 9 years of monitoring. Over time, there has been a move away from monitoring the heliostats (percentages under x-axis).
Table 5
Summary of the five broad mechanisms to explain attraction or avoidance of solar facilities by insects, birds and bats, and the potential ecological costs associated with each of these mechanisms. Example references supporting these points are indicated.
Potential mechanisms: Costs:
1. Lost, altered, and novel habitat • Loss and fragmentation of habitat [9,15,19,45] • Barrier effect of solar panels and fencing [3,15,16]
• Microhabitat changes [48]
• Altered temperature (‘Heat Island Effect, or ‘Cool Island Effect’) and soil moisture [49–52]
• Modified soil microbiome [51,53] and plant growth [9,51–56] • Creation of novel habitats alter behaviour e.g., perching and nesting sites, reflective surfaces [12,16,34]
• Loss of habitat and population connectivity
• Increased risk of collision and injuries [3,28]
• Increased risk of entrapment [3]
2. Evaporation ponds • Attracts waterbirds [19,20,65] • Entrapment and drowning [3,16,34] • Exposure to toxic chemicals [63–65]
3. Increased foraging opportunities • Plant growth, flowering, and seed set can increase insect activity [8,9, 32]
• Insect presence attracts insectivores [3,68]
• Carcasses can attract scavengers [3,18,33,57,58]
• Altered food webs and altered species
communities [11,13,16,33]
• Increased risk of collision and injuries [3,28]
• Increased predation risk [3,33]
4. Concentrated solar energy • Attracts insects [3,67] and insectivores feeding on these insects [3,68] • Burn risk for animals flying through the solar flux [3,28]
• Glint and glare blinding [7,34]
• Increased risk of collision and injuries [3,28]
5. Solar panels represent large expanses of
smooth, flat surfaces
• Solar panels polarise light [14] and mimic water surfaces ‘Lake Effect’ [3,14]
• Attract diurnal aquatic insects [68,69,76]
• Waterbirds alter flight paths [14]
• Bats may attempt to drink [85]
• Reflective surfaces can elicit aggressive behavioural responses [7] • Clutter confuses echolocating bats [36,37]
• Increased risk of collision and injuries [14,86]
• Stranding [3,59,82]
• Diversion from flight paths [14]
• Wasted reproductive effort [68,69,76]
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 13 270
solar facilities can therefore act as environmental traps.
While mortality rates of birds at solar power plants have been substantial, this needs to be considered in context of other threats. Climate change is taking a significant toll on long-term survival of wildlife – e.g. through megafires and hurricanes; harmful algal outbreaks; habitat loss; and the spread of disease, pests, and invasive species [5] – and as such, there are dire costs to wildlife of not making the transition to sustainable energy sources. Deaths recorded at solar facilities have also been reported to be significantly lower compared to other anthropogenic landscapes and objects such as highways, buildings, or traditional energy sources [4,31,82]. For example, Walston Jr et al. [4] compared published mortality data for three solar facilities against other anthropogenic causes of avian mortality, and concluded that estimated annual avian mortality at solar facilities was far less than predicted from wind energy, fossil fuel power plants, communication towers, roadway vehicles, or bird strike at buildings and windows. Even the loss of habitat due to solar facilities has been identified as secondary to other anthropogenic changes, such as urbanisation [113], and the biodiversity costs of solar facilities need to be balanced out with the benefits of switching from fossil fuel to solar power generation.
However, despite these comparisons, it is still important to be cognisant that not all species are affected by solar facilities in the same way, and we need to monitor impacts appropriately to determine such effects.
Smallwood [7] makes a strong case for the need to account for bias in mortality estimates (e.g., carcass disappearance due to decomposition or removal by scavengers), and here I present data showing that the methods and location of monitoring also influences the interpretation of potential impacts (see Section 3.3, Fig. 7). We also need to understand the ecological and conservation significance of mortality impacts, which depends on quantifying implications of mortality on populations (i.e., size and trends) and life-history traits (e.g., pace of life and reproductive strategy) for threatened species [21]. For example, a recent study found that of 23 priority species colliding at wind and solar facilities, 11 (48 %) were vulnerable to population-level effects [114], especially non-local, nocturnal migrant species.
There is an urgent need to understand how ground-mounted solar farms affect biodiversity, as the exponential growth of this renewable energy source is resulting in large-scale land-use conversion throughout the world. At the end of 2023, an estimated 37,900 km2 of the earth’s surface was covered by solar facilities, which are likely to be killing an estimated total 17.3 million birds per annum. The vast expanses of solar panels as part of utility-scale solar facilities are a new type of anthropogenically transformed landscape. Understanding the potential risks to wildlife will help planning to ensure that we do not mitigate greenhouse gas at an avoidable cost to biodiversity conservation.
Credit author statement
Conceptualisation PAF; Data curation PAF; Investigation PAF; Roles/ Writing PAF.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:
Patricia A. Fleming reports financial support and article publishing charges were provided by Murdoch University. Patricia A. Fleming reports a relationship with Fortescue Ltd that includes: consulting or advisory and funding grants.
Acknowledgements
Murdoch University for salary and meeting publishing charges.
Damien Cancilla, Lazaro Roque-albelo and Todd Edwards (Fortescue Ltd.) for comments and financial support.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
References
[1] Maka AOM, Ghalut T, Elsaye E. The pathway toward decarbonisation and netzero emissions by 2050: the role of solar energy technology. Green Technologies and Sustainability 2024;2:100107.
[2] Hernandez RR, Easter S, Murphy-Mariscal ML, Maestre FT, Tavassoli M, Allen EB, et al. Environmental impacts of utility-scale solar energy. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews 2014;29:766–79.
[3] Kagan RA, Viner TC, Trail PW, Espinoza EO. Avian mortality at solar energy facilities in southern California: a preliminary analysis. National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Laboratory 2014;28:1–28.
[4] Walston Jr LJ, Rollins KE, LaGory KE, Smith KP, Meyers SA. A preliminary assessment of avian mortality at utility-scale solar energy facilities in the United States. Renew Energy 2016;92:405–14.
[5] Brennan B, Murphy J, DeGennaro D. A guide to responsible development of wind and solar resources on public lands and waters. Washington, DC: National Wildlife Federation; 2023.
[6] Energy Institute. Statistical review of World Energy Data. 2024. https://www. energyinst.org/statistical-review/resources-and-data-downloads. [7] Smallwood KS. Utility-scale solar impacts to volant wildlife. J Wildl Manag 2022; 86:e22216.
[8] Montag H, Parker G, Clarkson T. The effects of solar farms on local biodiversity: a comparative study. Clarkson and Woods and Wychwood Biodiversity. 2016. [9] Graham M, Ates S, Melathopoulos AP, Moldenke AR, DeBano SJ, Best LR, Higgins CW. Partial shading by solar panels delays bloom, increases floral abundance during the late-season for pollinators in a dryland, agrivoltaic ecosystem. Sci Rep 2021;11:1–13.
[10] DeVault TL, Seamans TW, Schmidt JA, Belant JL, Blackwell BF, Mooers N, et al.
Bird use of solar photovoltaic installations at US airports: implications for aviation safety. Landsc Urban Plann 2014;122:122–8.
[11] Copping JP, Waite CE, Balmford A, Bradbury RB, Field RH, Morris I, Finch T.
Solar farm management influences breeding bird responses in an arabledominated landscape. Bird Study 2025:1–6. [12] Golawski A, Mitrus C, Jankowiak Ł. Increased bird diversity around small-scale solar energy plants in agricultural landscape. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2025;379:
109361.
[13] Szabadi KL, Kurali A, Rahman NAA, Froidevaux JSP, Tinsley E, Jones G, et al. The use of solar farms by bats in mosaic landscapes: implications for conservation.
Global Ecology and Conservation 2023;44:e02481.
[14] Diehl R, Robertson B, Kosciuch K. Investigating the “Lake Effect” influence on avian behavior from California’s utility-scale photovoltaic solar facilities. Energy research and development Division. California Energy Commission; 2024. Final Project Report.
[15] Kaplan G. Human-caused high direct mortality in birds: Unsustainable trends and ameliorative actions. Animals 2024;15:73.
[16] Visser E, Perold V, Ralston-Paton S, Cardenal AC, Ryan PG. Assessing the impacts of a utility-scale photovoltaic solar energy facility on birds in the Northern Cape, South Africa. Renew Energy 2019;133:1285–94.
[17] Jarˇcuˇska B, G´alffyov´a M, Schnürmacher R, Bala´ˇz M, Miˇsík M, Repel M, et al. Solar parks can enhance bird diversity in agricultural landscape. J Environ Manag 2024;351:119902.
[18] Karban CC, Lovich JE, Grodsky SM, Munson SM. Predicting the effects of solar energy development on plants and wildlife in the Desert Southwest, United States.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2024;205:114823.
[19] Lovich JE, Ennen JR. Wildlife conservation and solar energy development in the desert southwest, United States. Bioscience 2011;61:982–92. [20] Anderson CM, Hopkins AP, Anderson JT. Assessing the impact of solar farms on waterbirds: a literature review of ecological interactions and habitat alterations.
Conservation 2025;5:4.
[21] Gomez-Catasús J, Morales MB, Giralt D, del Portillo DG, Manzano-Rubio R, Sol ´ ´eBujalance L, et al. Solar photovoltaic energy development and biodiversity conservation: current knowledge and research gaps. Conserv Lett 2024;17:
e13025.
[22] Rudman J, Gauch´e P, Esler KJ. Direct environmental impacts of solar power in two arid biomes: an initial investigation. South Afr J Sci 2017;113:1–13. [23] World Bank Group. World - photovoltaic power potential (PVOUT) GIS data.
Global Solar Atlas) 2024. https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/search/dataset/ 0038641.
[24] Global Energy Monitor. Global solar power tracker, global energy monitor and TransitionZero. February 2025 release. 2025. https://globalenergymonitor.or g/projects/global-solar-power-tracker/download-data/.
[25] Lilliestam J, Ollier L, Labordena M, Pfenninger S, Thonig R. The near-to mid-term outlook for concentrating solar power: mostly cloudy, chance of sun. Energy Sources B Energy Econ Plann 2021;16:23–41.
[26] Roser M. Why did renewables become so cheap so fast?. 2020. Published online at OurWorldinDataorg Retrieved from: https://ourworldindataorg/cheap-renewabl es-growth [Online Resource]. Global Change Data Lab, UK: Our World in Data. [27] IEA. Solar PV; latest findings. International Energy Agency (IEA); 2020. [28] McCrary MD, McKernan RL, Schreiber RW, Wagner WD, Sciarrotta TC. Avian mortality at a solar energy power plant. J Field Ornithol 1986;57:135–41.
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 14 271
[29] Bechtel. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System. California, USA. Reston, Verginia, USA: Bechtel Corporation; 2024.
[30] Harvey HT, Associates. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System Avian & Bat Monitoring Plan 2013-2014 Annual Report (Revised). Fresno. 2015. California:
Report Number TN#204258, 07-AFC-05C.
[31] Ho CK. Review of avian mortality studies at concentrating solar power plants. In:
AIP Conference Proceedings. AIP Publishing; 2016.
[32] Blaydes H, Potts SG, Whyatt JD, Armstrong A. Opportunities to enhance pollinator biodiversity in solar parks. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2021;145:
111065.
[33] WEST. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System Avian & Bat Monitoring Plan.
June. Nipton, California: Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST); 2016. 2014-2015 Annual Report and Two Year Comparison. Prepared for Solar Partners I, II, and vol. III.
[34] Jeal C, Perold V, Ralston-Paton S, Ryan PG. Impacts of a concentrated solar power trough facility on birds and other wildlife in South Africa. Ostrich 2019;90:
129–37.
[35] Kitazawa M, Yamaura Y, Senzaki M, Kawamura K, Hanioka M, Nakamura F. An evaluation of five agricultural habitat types for openland birds: abandoned farmland can have comparative values to undisturbed wetland. Ornithol Sci 2019;18:3–16.
[36] Tinsley E, Froidevaux JSP, Zsebok S, Szabadi KL, Jones G. Renewable energies ˝ and biodiversity: impact of ground-mounted solar photovoltaic sites on bat activity. J Appl Ecol 2023;60:1752–62.
[37] Barr´e K, Baudouin A, Froidevaux JSP, Chartendrault V, Kerbiriou C. Insectivorous bats alter their flight and feeding behaviour at ground-mounted solar farms.
J Appl Ecol 2024;61:328–39.
[38] Valera F, Sˇalek M, Bolonio L, V ´ ´aclav R. Comment on “Solar parks can enhance bird diversity in agricultural landscape” by Jarˇcuˇska et al. J Environ Manag 2024; 366:121781.
[39] Smith JP, Lenihan CM, Zirpoli JA. Golden Eagle breeding response to utility-scale solar development and prolonged drought in California. J Raptor Res 2020;54:
154–65.
[40] Zaplata MK, Dullau S. Applying ecological succession theory to birds in solar parks: an approach to address protection and planning. Land 2022;11:718. [41] Tsafack N, Fang W, Wang X, Xie Y, Wang X, Fattorini S. Influence of grazing and solar panel installation on tenebrionid beetles (Coleoptera Tenebrionidae) of a central Asian steppe. J Environ Manag 2022;320:115791.
[42] Suuronen A, Munoz-Escobar C, Lensu A, Kuitunen M, Guajardo Celis N, ˜ Espinoza Astudillo P, et al. The influence of solar power plants on microclimatic conditions and the biotic community in Chilean desert environments. Environ Manag 2017;60:630–42.
[43] Wikipedia. List of photovoltaic power stations Wikimedia Foundation. Inc.; 2025. a non-profit organization.
[44] Gaughan R. How much land is needed for wind turbines?. 2022. [45] Saul-Gershenz L, Kimsey L, Williams NM, Zavortink T, Thorp R, Davis CA, et al.
Characterization of the impact on native bees from utility scale solar development in the desert (BLM Grant 2015-2016). 2018.
[46] Tinsley E, Froidevaux JSP, Jones G. The location of solar farms within England’s ecological landscape: implications for biodiversity conservation. J Environ Manag 2024;372:123372.
[47] Valera F, Bolonio L, La Calle A, Moreno E. Deployment of solar energy at the expense of conservation sensitive areas precludes its classification as an environmentally sustainable activity. Land 2022;11:2330. [48] Wynne-Sison T, Devitt DA, Smith SD. Ecovoltaics: maintaining native plants and wash connectivity inside a Mojave Desert solar facility leads to favorable growing conditions. Land 2023;12:1950.
[49] Barron-Gafford GA, Minor RL, Allen NA, Cronin AD, Brooks AE, PavaoZuckerman MA. The Photovoltaic Heat Island Effect: larger solar power plants increase local temperatures. Sci Rep 2016;6:35070.
[50] Guoqing L, Hernandez RR, Blackburn GA, Davies G, Hunt M, Whyatt JD, Armstrong A. Ground-mounted photovoltaic solar parks promote land surface cool islands in arid ecosystems. Renew Sustain Energy Transit 2021;1:100008. [51] Lambert Q, Bischoff A, Gros R. Effects of habitat restoration and solar panels on soil properties and functions in solar parks. Appl Soil Ecol 2024;203:105614. [52] Martin JC. Ecosystem enriching and efficient solar energy facilities: exploring the effects of pollinator-friendly solar facilities on ecological function and solar panel efficiency [MSc]. The College of William and Mary; 2022. [53] Adeh EH, Selker JS, Higgins CW. Remarkable agrivoltaic influence on soil moisture, micrometeorology and water-use efficiency. PLoS One 2018;13:
e0203256.
[54] Uldrijan D, Cerný M, Winkler J. Solar park: opportunity or threat for vegetation ˇ and ecosystem. Journal of Ecological Engineering 2022;23:1–10. [55] Tanner K, Moore K, Pavlik B. Measuring impacts of solar development on desert plants. Fremontia 2014;42:15–6.
[56] Tanner KE, Moore-O’Leary KA, Parker IM, Pavlik BM, Hernandez RR. Simulated solar panels create altered microhabitats in desert landforms. Ecosphere 2020;11:
e03089.
[57] Cypher BL, Boroski BB, Burton RK, Meade DE, Phillips SE, Leitner P, et al.
Photovoltaic solar farms in California: can we have renewable electricity and our species, too. California Fish and Wildlife 2021;107:231–48. [58] Visser E. The impact of South Africa’s largest photovoltaic solar energy facility on birds in the Northern Cape, South Africa. Cape Town, South Africa: University of Cape Town; 2016.
[59] Kosciuch K, Riser-Espinoza D, Moqtaderi C, Erickson W. Aquatic habitat bird occurrences at photovoltaic solar energy development in Southern California, USA. Diversity 2021;13:524.
[60] Riker S. Wildlife-friendly solar energy in the Mojave desert. Case study by the conservation and Adaptation resources Toolbox (CART). 2019. [61] Vargas-Bernal R. Nanocoatings for energy generation and conservation of solar cells. Sustainable approach to protective nanocoatings. IGI Global 2024:88–112. [62] Tammaro M, Salluzzo A, Rimauro J, Schiavo S, Manzo S. Experimental investigation to evaluate the potential environmental hazards of photovoltaic panels. J Hazard Mater 2016;306:395–405.
[63] Herbst DB. Salinity controls on trophic interactions among invertebrates and algae of solar evaporation ponds in the Mojave Desert and relation to shorebird foraging and selenium risk. Wetlands 2006;26:475–85.
[64] Tan LC, Nancharaiah YV, van Hullebusch ED, Lens PNL. Selenium: environmental significance, pollution, and biological treatment technologies. Biotechnol Adv 2016;34:886–907.
[65] Spallholz JE, Hoffman DJ. Selenium toxicity: cause and effects in aquatic birds.
Aquat Toxicol 2002;57:27–37.
[66] Nemtzov SC, Olsvig-Whittaker L. The use of netting over fishponds as a hazard to waterbirds. Waterbirds 2003;26:416–23.
[67] Diehl RH, Valdez EW, Preston TM, Wellik MJ, Cryan PM. Evaluating the effectiveness of wildlife detection and observation technologies at a solar power tower facility. PLoS One 2016;11:e0158115.
[68] Horvath G, Kriska G, Malik P, Robertson B. Polarized light pollution: a new kind ´ of ecological photopollution. Front Ecol Environ 2009;7:317–25. [69] Horvath G, Blah ´ o M, Egri ´ A, Kriska G, Seres I, Robertson B. Reducing the ´ maladaptive attractiveness of solar panels to polarotactic insects. Conserv Biol 2010;24:1644–53.
[70] Jenkins AR, Ralston-Paton S, Smit-Robinson HA. Birds and solar energy best practice guidelines; Best Practice Guidelines for assessing and monitoring the impact of solar energy facilities on birds in southern Africa. South Africa: BirdLife South Africa2015.
[71] Ho CK, Sims CA, Yellowhair J, Wendelin T. Tools to address glare and avian flux hazards from solar energy systems. Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA: Sandia National Lab. (SNL-NM); 2018.
[72] Mostafa MF, Aleem SHEA, Zobaa AF. Risk assessment and possible mitigation solutions for using solar photovoltaic at airports. 2016 eighteenth international middle east power systems conference (MEPCON). IEEE; 2016. p. 81–8. [73] Sreenath S, Sudhakar K, Yusop AF, Cuce E, Solomin E. Analysis of solar PV glare in airport environment: potential solutions. Results Eng 2020;5:100079. [74] Wang H, Guo L, Soares L. Energy Harvesting on New Jersey roadways. New Jersey: Department of Transportation. Bureau of Research; 2023. [75] Wehner R. Polarization vision–a uniform sensory capacity? J Exp Biol 2001;204:
2589–96.
[76] Kriska G, Malik P, Sziv´ak I, Horv´ath G. Glass buildings on river banks as “polarized light traps” for mass-swarming polarotactic caddis flies.
Naturwissenschaften 2008;95:461–7.
[77] Upton J. Solar farms threaten birds. Sci. Am. 2014;27:717–46. [78] Åkesson S. Polarization vision in birds. In: Horvath G, editor. Polarization vision ´ and environmental polarized light. Springer Series in vision research. third ed.
Switzerland: Springer; 2024. p. 299–306.
[79] Bernath B, Szedenics G, Moln ´ ´ar G, Kriska G, Horvath G. Visual ecological impact ´ of a peculiar waste oil lake on the avifauna: dual-choice field experiments with water-seeking birds using huge shiny black and white plastic sheets. Arch Nat Conserv Landsc Res 2001;40:1–28.
[80] Able KP. Skylight polarization patterns and the orientation of migratory birds.
J Exp Biol 1989;141:241–56.
[81] Tak´acs P, Szaz D, Bern ´ ath B, Pomozi I, Horv ´ ath G. Polarized light pollution of ´ fixed-tilt photovoltaic solar panels measured by drone-polarimetry and its visualecological importance. Remote Sens 2024;16:1177. [82] Kosciuch K, Riser-Espinoza D, Gerringer M, Erickson W. A summary of bird mortality at photovoltaic utility scale solar facilities in the Southwestern US. PLoS One 2020;15:e0232034.
[83] Greif S, Siemers BM. Innate recognition of water bodies in echolocating bats. Nat Commun 2010;1:107.
[84] Russo D, Cistrone L, Jones G. Sensory ecology of water detection by bats: a field experiment. PLoS One 2012;7:e48144.
[85] Horvath G. Polarization Sensitivity and insensitivity in bats. In: Horv ´ ´ath G, editor.
Polarization vision and environmental polarized light. Springer Series in vision research. third ed. Switzerland: Springer; 2024. p. 307–12. [86] Kuczek AB. Avian attractiveness to vertically polarized light. Annandale-onHudson. New York: Bard College Senior Projects Spring Thesis; 2021. p. 205. [87] Hager SB, Craig ME. Bird-window collisions in the summer breeding season.
PeerJ 2014;2:e460.
[88] Kahle LQ, Flannery ME, Dumbacher JP. Bird-window collisions at a west-coast urban park museum: analyses of bird biology and window attributes from Golden Gate Park, San Francisco. PLoS One 2016;11:e0144600.
[89] Greif S, Zsebok S, Schmieder D, Siemers BM. Acoustic mirrors as sensory traps for ˝ bats. Science 2017;357:1045–7.
[90] Ingeme Y, Bush A, Lumsden L, van Harten E, Bourne S, Reardon T. Hit or miss could mean life or death for juvenile southern bent-wing bats. Australasian Bat Society 2018;50:59.
[91] Salata F, Dell’Olmo J, Ciancio V. Agri-voltaics near airport facilities. Reconciling the risk of solar glare with power generation. Sol Energy 2024;275:112653. [92] Kandt A, Romero R. Siting solar photovoltaics at airports. Solar 2014. San Francisco, California: National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL); 2014.
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 15 272
[93] Szaz D, Mih ´ alyi D, Farkas A, Egri ´ A, Barta A, Kriska G, et al. Polarized light ´ pollution of matte solar panels: anti-reflective photovoltaics reduce polarized light pollution but benefit only some aquatic insects. J Insect Conserv 2016;20:
663–75.
[94] Shanmugam N, Pugazhendhi R, Madurai Elavarasan R, Kasiviswanathan P, Das N.
Anti-reflective coating materials: a holistic review from PV perspective. Energies 2020;13:2631.
[95] Horv´ath G. Polarized light pollution and ecological/evolutionary traps Induced by it for polarotactic aquatic insects. In: Horvath G, editor. Polarization vision ´ and environmental polarized light. Springer Series in vision research. third ed.
Switzerland: Springer; 2024. p. 477–560.
[96] Black TV, Robertson BA. How to disguise evolutionary traps created by solar panels. J Insect Conserv 2020;24:241–7.
[97] Abdul Rahman NA, Firtha G, Szabadi KL, Jones G, Zsebok S. Mitigating the ˝ deceptive effects of smooth surfaces: subtle surface modifications can eliminate maladaptive drinking attempts by bats. Anim Conserv 2024;27:788–801. [98] Abmmp Ivanpah. Avian & bat monitoring and management plan. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System Revision 2020;14.
[99] WEST. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System Avian & Bat Monitoring Plan. 2015-2016 annual report. Prepared for solar partners I, II, and VIII. July. . Nipton.
California: Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST); 2017. [100] WEST. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System Avian & Bat Monitoring Plan. 2016-2017 annual report. Prepared for solar Partners I, II, and VIII. January.
Nipton, California: Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST); 2018. [101] WEST. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating S. Ystem avian & bat monitoring plan.
Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST); 2019. 2017-2018 Annual Report.
Prepared for Solar Partners I, II, and VIII. January Nipton, California. [102] WEST. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System Avian & Bat Monitoring Plan. 2018-2019 annual report. Prepared for solar Partners I, II, and VIII. Nipton.
California: Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST); 2020. [103] WEST. Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System Avian & Bat Monitoring Plan. 2019-2020 annual report. Prepared for solar Partners I, II, and VIII. Cheyenne.
Woyoming: Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST); 2021. [104] WEST. Ivanpah solar electric generating system avian & bat monitoring plan. 2020–2021 annual report. Year 8. Cheyenne, Wyoming: Western EcoSystems Technology Inc.; 2022.
[105] WEST. Ivanpah solar electric generating system avian & bat monitoring plan. 2020-2021 annual report. Year 8. Prepared for Solar Partners I, II, and VIII.
Cheyenne, Wyoming: Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST); 2023. [106] Gruppi C, Sanzenbacher P, Balekjian K, Hagar R, Hagen S, Rayne C, et al. Genetic identification of avian samples recovered from solar energy installations. PLoS One 2023;18:e0289949.
[107] Hamed TA, Alshare A. Environmental impact of solar and wind energy-a review.
Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems 2022;10:1–23.
[108] Horton KG, Nilsson C, Van Doren BM, La Sorte FA, Dokter AM, Farnsworth A.
Bright lights in the big cities: migratory birds’ exposure to artificial light. Front Ecol Environ 2019;17:209–14.
[109] Dacke M, Nilsson D-E, Scholtz CH, Byrne M, Warrant EJ. Insect orientation to polarized moonlight. Nature 2003;424:33.
[110] Moore-O’Leary KA, Hernandez RR, Johnston DS, Abella SR, Tanner KE, Swanson AC, et al. Sustainability of utility-scale solar energy–critical ecological concepts. Front Ecol Environ 2017;15:385–94.
[111] Vaverkov´a MD, Winkler J, Uldrijan D, Ogrodnik P, Vespalcov´a T, AleksiejukGawron J, et al. Fire hazard associated with different types of photovoltaic power plants: effect of vegetation management. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2022;162:
112491.
[112] Toussaint DC. Chiropteran specialist report for phase 3 of the proposed soventixsolar Africa solar PV facility. Hanover, Northern Cape. 2022. [113] McCoshum SM, Geber MA. Land conversion for solar facilities and urban sprawl in southwest deserts causes different amounts of habitat loss for Ashmeadiella bees. J Kans Entomol Soc 2020;92:468–78.
[114] Conkling TJ, Vander Zanden HB, Allison TD, Diffendorfer JE, Dietsch TV, Duerr AE, et al. Vulnerability of avian populations to renewable energy production. R Soc Open Sci 2022;9:211558.
P.A. Fleming Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 224 (2025) 115995 16 273
Main Office Phone:
310 - 798-2400
Direct Dial:
310-798-2412
Carstens, Black & Minteer LLP
700 North Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 200
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
www.cbcearthlaw.com
Michelle N. Black
Email Address:
[email protected]
February 6, 2026
Via Email [email protected]
Mr. Shaun Temple
Planning Manager
City of Seal Beach
Community Development Department
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
City Council of City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Re: Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Agenda Item H, City Council Agenda of February 9, 2026
Supplement to Comments of September 14, 2025
Dear Mr. Temple and Honorable Members of the City Council, The Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust (LCWLT) has advocated for the protection and restoration of Los Cerritos Wetlands for over twenty years. LCWLT continues this advocacy by renewing its concerns with the Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project (Project), last discussed by the Council in December 2025. In short, although LCWLT appreciates that the City may consider reducing the size of the Project, these potential changes will not eliminate or fully mitigate the Project’s potential environmental impacts raised in our comments of September 19, 2025. We hereby incorporate these comments by reference. They are attached as Exhibit 1.
Even if reduced, the Project will adversely impact biological resources, especially birds that mistake reflecting solar panels for water, subject recreational users of the area to glint/glare, and affect a known tribal cultural landscape. LCWLT supports the use of renewable solar energy where it is appropriate and environmentally friendly. A project sited within the wetland complex and within a tribal cultural landscape does not meet these criteria. Accordingly, LCWLT respectfully requests that the Council reject this City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
Project, and any reduced-size alternative, unless harm to the wetlands and its sensitive inhabitants can be eliminated.
LCWLT has attempted to review the new Project information posted by the City on February 4 and to respond by the City’s deadline of 5 p.m. on February 6. However, given the sheer volume of pages posted, the short timeline, and the fact that the City’s website was inaccessible on February 6, LCWLT reserves the right to supplement its comments prior to the conclusion of the Project’s public hearing scheduled for February 9, as permitted by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Given this, the City Council should also provide additional time for the public to comment and withhold its decision on the mitigated negative declaration (MND) and Project for at least one week.
The proposed reduction to the Project would eliminate one array, reducing the number of solar panels from 3,100 to 2,028. However, the system would still require concrete foundations and hundreds of 18-inch-diameter piers to be drilled 6 feet into the ground. A transformer pad will be required, as will the excavation of hundreds of feet of underground trenches. Construction would require “removal of the vegetative cover” and all organic matter “from the limits of the construction area.” (MND p. 12.) Even if reduced, Project construction will require significant disruption of a sensitive location.
Moreover, the purpose of the solar installation is not to provide green power for offsite use, but to “reduce the overall operating cost” of the oil facilities. (Staff Report, p. 2.) The California Legislature enacted CEQA to ensure environmental protection through governmental transparency. (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Bd. of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564.) CEQA requires full disclosure of a project’s significant environmental effects so that decision-makers and the public are informed of these consequences before the project is approved, to ensure that government officials are held accountable for these consequences. (Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n of San Francisco v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 392.) When substantial evidence supports a fair argument that a project may have a significant impact on the environment, an environmental impact report is required. (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 75.) Under the CEQA Guidelines, “‘Substantial evidence’ means enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from this information that a fair argument can be made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached.” (Guidelines § 15384(a), emphasis added; League for Protection of Oakland's etc. Historic Resources v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 896, 905.) LCWLT continues to believe the Project crosses this threshold.
The fair argument standard is a “low threshold” test for requiring the preparation of an EIR. (No Oil, supra, 13 Cal.3d 68, 84.) Review is de novo, with a “preference for City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
resolving doubts in favor of environmental review.” (Architectural Heritage Assn. v.
County of Monterey (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1095, 1110; Quail Botanical Gardens Foundation, Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1602-1603.) The MND continues to inadequately disclose and analyze the Project’s potential environmental effects. As there is substantial evidence of a fair argument the Project may have significant impacts on biological resources, glint and glare, and tribal cultural resources, an EIR is required.
I. The Project, Even if Reduced, May Have Significant Impacts on Biological Resources.
The Project site consists of 4.66 acres in the existing Hellman Ranch Oil and Gas Production Facility, east of the San Gabriel River and north of Pacific Coast Highway.
The Project site is within and surrounded by Los Cerritos Wetlands. The solar facility would be constructed immediately north of 100 acres owned by the Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority, east of an additional 71 acres of wetlands owned by the Authority, south of 43 acres zoned open space-natural that serve as a County of Orange retention basin, and west of the Hellman Ranch Trail. (MND p. 2.) Both the Project site and surrounding lands contain sensitive habitats hosting special-status species. These species include, but are not limited to, southern tarplant, Least Bell’s Vireo, Belding’s Savannah Sparrow, and the Western Burrowing Owl. As solar panels often resemble water bodies from the air, and as the Project will require clearing the site of vegetation, the Project’s potential impacts on these birds and on rare plant species must be thoroughly evaluated and carefully mitigated.
A. The MND’s Biological Resources Surveys are Outdated.
The Response to our September 2025 letter asserts that the wetland delineation relied upon by the MND is not outdated because such delineations are valid for five years, “provided the site conditions haven’t changed. There have been no significant changes to the site area since the delineation.” (Response p. 1.) While less than five years has elapsed, site conditions have not remained the same since August 2022 and March 2023. As described in our previous letter, aerial imagery from 2024 indicated substantial ponding and flooding.
The Response further claims that botanical and Least Bell’s Vireo surveys did not need to be current because the Project includes mitigation for impacts to Southern Tarplant, Coulter’s goldfield, and the Least Bell’s Vireo. (Response p. 1.) However, mitigation is different from avoidance. The Project should be designed to avoid City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
populations of rare plants altogether. Outdated surveys prevent this from occurring.
Mitigation through replanting or transplantation is far less effective, often results in extirpation of rare species from a site, and is disfavored by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife when avoidance is possible.
The Response fails to explain how reliance on outdated surveys for the Least Bell’s Vireo permits informed decision-making about the Project’s impacts on a listed endangered species. Least Bell’s Vireo populations and nesting locations fluctuate annually. It does not. An EIR should be prepared that includes missing 2025 breeding season surveys.
B. The Project Site Contains Wetlands Not Disclosed in the MND.
During the record rainy seasons of the winters of 2022-23 and 2023-24, many depressional wetlands across Los Cerritos Wetlands held water for upwards of 6 months, allowing wetland indicators to present themselves. However, the MND’s jurisdictional wetlands assessment includes four photos taken in August 2022. The photos predate these record rains and do not accurately capture current site conditions. On the contrary, aerial imagery from February 2024 indicates substantial ponding and flooding of the Project area, which should be analyzed in the Technical Report and MND. Thus, substantial evidence demonstrates the area has recently been wetland, a fact not disclosed in the MND. Any wetlands designations or potential ramifications of the Project to wetlands or wetland-dependent species must be disclosed, analyzed, and mitigated in an EIR.
City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
Figure 1. Aerial imagery from February 2024 with areas of flooded outlined in red.
The Response claims that the plant community onsite does not indicate wetlands, but these statements appear to be based on the 2022 assessment of the site. (Response p.
1.) The Response later claims that the ponding mentioned in our September comments was addressed in the Wetland Delineation Report, but our comments included the above 2024 photo. The Response never claims to have assessed the plant communities present after the 2023-2024 rainy season.
Southern California’s wetlands are notoriously ephemeral. The environmental review cannot ignore that the site’s hydrological fluctuations.
C. Least Bell’s Vireo Both Forage and Nest Near the Project Site.
LCWLT has performed surveys of the Least Bell’s Vireo population in the Heron Pointe Bioswale, nearly adjacent to the Project site, for the last 5 breeding seasons.
Individuals of this endangered species have been observed nesting, each year, within 100 feet of the project boundary and have also been observed foraging within the area the MND discloses would be subject to permanent Project impact. The MND acknowledges that 96-decibel noise is expected at the Heron Pointe Bioswale. Foraging habitat for Least Bell’s Vireo is protected by state and federal law. Impacts to this species could be considered a “take,” and warrant a mandatory finding of significant impact under CEQA.
City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
An EIR must be prepared to thoroughly disclose, analyze, and mitigate impacts to Least Bell’s Vireo.
The Response asserts that the Project will not affect Least Bell’s Vireo nesting due to limits on construction during the nesting season. However, the Project’s construction may also affect Least Bell’s Vireo behaviors beyond nesting. Foraging habitat does exist on and near the Project site, and disturbance of Vireo foraging through either construction or operation of the Project remains “take” under the Acts.
D. An EIR Must Evaluate Fuel Modification and Type Conversion Impacts.
Without support, the Response asserts that the fuel modification zones discussed in the IS/MND are required by the Orange County Fire Authority and part of the baseline.
However, even if true, the IS/MND does not address whether these fuel modification zones must be expanded if the Project is constructed.
Any fuel modification zones overlapping with the locations of special status plant populations require a coastal development permit. In order to ensure fuel modification occurs within a comprehensive plan, and that all fuel modification impacts are considered cumulatively, we renew our request for the incorporation of a mitigation measure requiring preparation of a permitted plan that covers all fuel modification practices throughout the property.
“Distichlis spicata – annual grasses” is a vegetation type that overlaps with fuel modification areas. Removal of this vegetation promotes invasion of annual grasses, causing “type conversion,” a significant impact on biological resources that is not disclosed, analyzed, or mitigated in the MND.
City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
Figure 2. Aerial imagery from September 2025 indicating recent mowing of the Distichlis spicata - annual grasses herbaceous alliance.
E. The Project’s Mitigation Measures Fail to Ensure Project Impacts Will Be Reduced Below Significance.
LCWLT thanks the City for removing “To the extent feasible” from the language of BIO-2. (Response p. 3.)
The Project should incorporate a mitigation measure requiring a pre-construction jurisdictional wetland assessment be performed during the wet season most proximal to future construction.
The Project should also incorporate a mitigation measure requiring preconstruction surveys for Least Bell’s Vireo and consultations with both the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. While the Staff Report indicates this has occurred, we cannot independently confirm these conditions given the current technical difficulties with the City’s website.
LCWLT continues to believe that Project mitigation fails to eliminate the potential for significant impacts to listed plant and wildlife species and that an EIR is required.
II. The MND Fails to Disclose, Analyze, and Mitigate Glint and Glare Impacts.
A. The Project, Even if Reduced, May Cause Glare to Recreational Trail Users and the Tribal Gathering Area.
The LCWA-owned Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project is located immediately south of the Project site. The restoration project – scheduled to begin construction in October 2025 – will contain a 6-foot earthen perimeter berm on its northern boundary. This berm will separate the Hellman property from the LCWA parcel.
As discussed above, the MND assumes implementation of that berm to justify its conclusion that flooding impacts from sea level rise will not occur. (MND p. 51.) Accordingly, implementation of said berm – and all its functions – should be incorporated throughout the analysis, including that of glare. We appreciate that the City looked into glare in an attempt to respond to our comments. However, we disagree with the conclusion that 18 minutes of sunrise glare from April to August (Response p. 4) is necessarily insignificant. Recreational walkers, cyclists, and other users are especially active at sunrise between April and August when days are longer. The same goes for recreational birders. The Project’s likely significant glare impacts should be analyzed in an EIR.
City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
As the perimeter berm/trail are irregularly shaped, and the selected observation points are located on portions of the future trail where the recreational user is walking east/west (parallel to the panels), we request an EIR with analysis of OP on the northsouth portions of the trail where the user is looking directly at the panels along that trail stretch as they otherwise enjoy their walk of the restored wetlands.
The Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project will include two public outlooks and one tribal gathering area on its southern boundary. It is unclear if the Response addresses these locations. An EIR glare analysis should analyze potential glare impacts to the public and to tribes who will use these outlooks and tribal gathering area.
The Response also fails to clear up the confusion about MND Table 3-1, which identifies OP1-8 and OP26 as “no glare with existing vegetation screening” whereas the other OPs are described as “no glare with or without existing vegetation screening.” We request the revised analysis include a “without vegetation” scenario for OP1-8 and OP26.
B. The MND Fails to Adequately Consider Glint and Glare Impacts on Birds, Which May Mistake the Panels for Water in Los Cerritos Wetlands.
The Response to our September letter confirms LCWLT’s concern that birds may mistake solar panels as water, increasing the likelihood of injury and mortality. (Response pp. 5-6.) LCWLT previously noted that solar arrays reflect light that, at certain angles, makes the panels appear to birds as bodies of water. This “lake effect,” can injure or kill birds that try to land in these nonexistent bodies of water. If affected birds include listed species known to inhabit Los Cerritos Wetlands, including state and federally-listed birds, the Project may “take” birds under the Acts. (Attachment 2, pp. 9-10.) Solar facilities may also interfere with songbird migrations for species relying on polarized light for orientation. (Attachment 2, p. 10.) A review of studies of solar facilities reported:
By the time a bird may realise the panels are not water, it may be too late for the bird to stop its dive from the sky and fly away. Birds that collide with the panels are also likely to be disoriented or injured and more vulnerable to predation.
As well as increasing the direct risk of collision and injuries, diversion off flight paths will increase depletion of energy reserves, potentially stranding animals and leading to mortality from starvation.
Obstruction from panels and fencing can also hinder birds from taking-off. For example, water-obligate birds that require water for take-off (ensu) – including loons (Gaviiformes), grebes (Podici-pediformes), cormorants (Suliformes), coots (Gruiformes) and some ducks (Anseriformes; e.g., Ruddy duck Oxyura City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
jamaicensis) – and those that use water for some aspect of their life history (e.g., family Chara- driidae) are amongst the mortalities at solar facilities. Stranding of these birds would contribute to the disproportionate number of waterbirds represented amongst the cases where starvation has been identified as cause of death.
(September 19, 2025 letter, Attachment 2, p. 10.) Given the presence of a large wetland complex surrounding the Project, and the higher prevalence of birds in the area, the Project’s location near water may exacerbate the Project’s potential harm to avian species. The potential Project size reduction will not mitigate these impacts.
In August, the City’s Environmental Quality Committee recommended that the Project be required to track, report, and mitigate adverse impacts to birds. It further recommended that the Project be required to terminate when oil operations end onsite.
We renew the Committee’s reasonable requests here. The Staff Report indicates these conditions have been incorporated into the Project. LCWLT is unable to confirm this incorporation at this time and asserts that these conditions must be concrete and enforceable. We further request that the one-year term for bird monitoring be extended beyond one year.
An EIR must be prepared to disclose, analyze, and fully mitigate these potentially significant undisclosed impacts on biological resources. Any mitigation must include conditions requiring the tracking and reporting of harm to birds at the Project.
III. The MND Fails to Adequately Disclose, Analyze, and Mitigate the Project’s Potentially Significant Impacts on Tribal Cultural Landscapes.
The Project’s Cultural Resources assessment fails to recognize the Traditional Cultural Landscape that has been identified for this area in previously-approved environmental documents. The Los Cerritos Wetland Authority’s 2021 Program EIR and the 2024 Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project both indicate that consultations with local tribal groups identified a Traditional Cultural Landscape throughout the current extent of the Los Cerritos Wetlands complex. The potential for this Traditional Cultural Landscape was first described by consultations performed by Coastal Commission staff regarding the Los Cerritos Wetlands Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project. The LCWA’s 2023 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project (Cogstone, 2023) includes an evaluation of what is called the Puvungna Traditional Cultural Landscape (PTCL). This evaluation determined that “The PTCL meets the criteria of eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places and has City of Seal Beach
Hellman Solar PV Electrical System Project
Supplemental Comments
February 6, 2026
sufficient integrity to justify being regarded as eligible for the Register. The area is recommended eligible for the National Register as a Traditional Cultural Property. Since it is recommended for the National Register, it is automatically recommended as eligible for the CRHR.” (Attachment 2.)
The proposed project’s assessment of Tribal Cultural Resources makes no mention of the PTCL and therefore does not consider potential impacts or offer mitigation measures to avoid or minimize any such impacts. Impacts generated by the proposed Project to this Traditional Cultural Landscape would be considered significant and unavoidable based on the LCWA’s previous CEQA determinations in the area.
We note that the Response states the Project completed AB 52 consultation and proposed a modification to the Project to satisfy tribal representatives. (Response p. 7.) Given that tribal representatives objected to the Project in December 2025, we await confirmation that affected tribal interests are satisfied with the potentially-reduced Project.
Conclusion
LCWLT again thanks the City for its consideration this solar project, sited within the Los Cerritos Wetlands complex in an area inhabited by endangered species. If action must be taken on February 9, we urge you to please reject this Project, even at the reduced size proposed just this week, until it has been fully vetted through preparation of an environmental impact report, or unless conditioned to ensure the protection of wetland species and habitats.
Sincerely,
Michelle Black
Enclosures
1. September 19, 2025 Comment Letter of Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust, with attachments
a. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Southern Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project, Cogstone (2023).
b. P.A. Fleming, All that Glitters: Review of solar energy impacts on fauna, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (2025).
Special status species (rare, threatend or imperiled)
occurring in the Los Cerritos Wetlands include:
Belding’s Savannah sparrow,
California least tern,
Western snowy plover,
Least Bell’s vireo
and others.
Agenda Item A
AGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 23, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: Patrick Gallegos, City Manager
FROM: Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Approval of the City Council Minutes
________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
That the City Council approve the minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held on February 9, 2026.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
This section does not apply.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
There is no environmental impact related to this item.
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
No legal analysis is required for this item.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact for this item.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
This item is not applicable to the Strategic Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held on February 9, 2026.
SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED:
Gloria D. Harper Patrick Gallegos
Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk Patrick Gallegos, City Manager Prepared by: Brandon DeCriscio, Deputy City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Minutes - Regular Session, February 9, 2026
Seal Beach, California
February 9, 2026
The City Council met in Regular Session at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
Council Member Steele led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Landau
Council Members: Kalmick, Wong, Senecal, Steele
Absent: None
City Staff: Nicholas R. Ghirelli, City Attorney
Patrick Gallegos, City Manager
Michael Henderson, Police Chief
Barbara Arenado, Director of Finance
Iris Lee, Director of Public Works
Shaun Temple, Interim Director of Community Development Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk
Nick Nicholas, Police Captain
Mike Ezroj, Police Captain
Brian Gray, Police Sergeant
Tim Kelsey, Recreation Manager
Lauen Barich, Management Analyst
Michael Peterman, Human Resources Manager
Mayor Landau announced that the Public Hearing has been moved to the February 23, 2026 City Council meeting.
City Manager Gallegos noted that the Public Hearing was rescheduled in an abundance of caution due to a website outage in the days leading up to the meeting.
PRESENTATIONS / RECOGNITIONS
• Orange County Fire Authority Division 1 Update
This presentation was rescheduled to the February 23, 2026, meeting. • Seal Beach Baseball Automated External Defibrillator (AED) Donation • Starlink Presentation
• Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) Presentation
PUBLIC HEARING
A. Staff recommends the continuance of the public hearing to the February 23, 2026, Regular Meeting of the City Council. A staff report will not be given, and the City Council will take no action, on this appeal during the City Council’s February 9, 2026 meeting.
Appeal Request of the Planning Commission Approval for an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Minor Use Permit 22-03 to allow the Installation and Operation of a 1.5 Megawatt Fixed-Tilt Ground Mounted Solar Photovoltaic System at the existing Hellman Ranch Oil and Gas Production Facility - That the City Council: 1. Hold a de novo public hearing, allow public testimony, and at the conclusion of the hearing, consider all testimony, comments and evidence; and, 2. Adopt Resolution 7736 Denying the Appeal and Upholding the Planning Commission Decision, Adopting the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and Approving Minor Use Permit (MUP) 22-03, limited to the scope as presented in the Design 2026-Reduction dated January 24, 2026, and Subject to Conditions of Approval, to Allow the Installation and Operation of a 1.5 Megawatt (MW) FixedTilt Ground Mounted Solar Photovoltaic (PV) System at the Hellman Ranch Oil and Gas Production Facility (OGPF) (SCH #2025080495) (the Project); and, 3. Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination.
Mayor Landau opened the public hearing. Speaker: Ken Seiff. Mayor Landau closed the public hearing.
Council Member Senecal moved, second by Mayor Pro Tem Wong to continue the item to February 23, 2026.
AYES: Kalmick, Senecal, Steele, Wong, Landau
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion carried
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Landau opened oral communications. Speakers: Chad Berlinghieri, Ken Seiff addressed the City Council. Mayor Landau closed oral communications.
Thirty-one Supplemental Communications were received after posting the agenda; they were distributed to the City Council and made available to the public.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA & WAIVER OF FULL READING OF RESOLUTIONS AND
ORDINANCES
Council Member Senecal pulled item G for separate consideration.
Mayor Pro Tem Wong moved, second by Mayor Landau, to approve the agenda.
AYES: Kalmick, Senecal, Steele, Wong, Landau
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion carried
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
City Attorney Ghirelli had nothing to report.
CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Gallegos reported that the application period for the Business First Ad-Hoc Committee and the Olympics Ad-Hoc Committee are open and will remain open until February 20, 2026. He noted that several applications have already been received.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council Member Steele reported his attendance at the Golden Rain Foundation (GRF) Board meeting, the Leisure World Town Hall, the GRF President’s Council, and the Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce Coffee with Senator Strickland.
Council Member Kalmick reported his attendance at the Seal Beach Chamber of Commerce Open House, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) meeting, and the Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce Coffee with Senator Strickland.
Additionally, Council Member Kalmick announced that Senator Min’s office informed him that $1,000,000 has been appropriated to the San Gabriel River Trash Mitigation project.
City Manager Gallegos called upon Public Works Director Lee, who reported that in addition to the $1,000,000 allocated for the San Gabriel River Trash Mitigation project, Senator Min has allocated funds to resolve stormwater drainage issues in College Park East. She noted that the Public Works Department will be working with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to start the design and mitigation process.
Council Member Senecal reported her attendance at the Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce Coffee with Senator Strickland, and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) meeting.
Mayor Pro Tem Wong reported his attendance at the Audit Committee meeting, the Chamber of Commerce Open House, the Leisure World First Tuesday event, and the College Park West (CPW) Preserve Group First Saturday cleanup event. He thanked Lions Club member Ray Longoria for his assistance with the graffiti cleanup.
Mayor Landau reported her attendance at the Orange County Sanitation District Board Meeting. She noted that construction continues on the Seal Beach Pump Station Replacement project.
Additionally, Mayor Landau announced that the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) Open House is scheduled for March 14, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m., at the OCFA Headquarters. She noted that TJ McGovern was appointed Interim Fire Chief.
COUNCIL ITEMS
There were no Council Items.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Senecal moved, second by Mayor Pro Tem Wong to approve the recommended actions on the consent calendar with the exception of Item G.
B. Approval of the City Council Minutes - That the City Council approve the minutes of the Closed Session and Regular City Council meetings held on January 26, 2026.
C. Demand on City Treasury (Fiscal Year 2026) - Ratification.
D. City of Seal Beach Annual Audit Reports for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025 - That the City Council receive and file the following documents for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2025:
A. Audit Communication Letter
B. 2025 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
C. Appropriations Limit Final Report
E. Letter of Support for Senate Bill 758 - Substance Control and Retail Integrity Act - That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute a letter of support for Senate Bill 758 (SB 758), the Substance Control and Retail Integrity Act, which would prohibit all licensed Cigarette and Tobacco retailers (except grocery stores) from selling nitrous oxide to prevent misuse of the chemical.
F. Application for Water Recycling Funding Program Planning Grant through the State Water Resources Control Board - That the City Council adopt Resolution 7733: 1. Approving the Financial Assistance Grant Application related to the Water Recycling Funding Program Planning Grant through the State Water Resources Control Board for the Seal Beach Recycled Water Feasibility Study, and authorizing and directing the City Manager, or designee, to sign and file for and on behalf of the City, said Financial Assistance Grant Application for the grant; and, 2.
Designating and directing the City Manager, or designee, to execute all necessary documents to apply for, accept, receive, recognize, provide for the assurance, certifications, and commitments required for the Financial Assistance Grant Application, including executing a financial assistance agreement with the State Water Resources Control Board, and any amendments or changes thereto, and to recognize and amend the City’s budget to incorporate funding, and utilize the grant funding pursuant to the grant program; and, 3. Designating the City Manager, or designee, to represent the City in carrying out the City’s responsibilities under the grant agreement, including certifying disbursement requests on behalf of the City and compliance with applicable state and federal laws.
G. Approving and Awarding a Public Works Agreement with Garland/DBS, Inc., and Approving Expenses Related to Testing, Abatement, and Repairs for the Marina Community Center Roof Replacement, CIP BG2506 - That the City Council adopt Resolution 7734: 1. Approving the scope of work, plans, specifications and other contract documents for the Marina Community Center Roof Replacement, CIP BG2506 (Project); and, 2. Approving and awarding a Public Works Agreement with Garland/DBS, Inc., in the not-to-exceed amount of $307,489 for the Project; and, 3.
Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve additional work requests up to $30,800 (approximately 10%) and inspection services up to $10,000 in connection with the Project, in the cumulative not-to-exceed amount of $40,800; and, 4. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve expenses up to the amount of $15,000 for Moisture Assessment and Building Materials Testing and $25,000 for Abatement Services, in connection with the Project; and, 5. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve expenses for building repair up to $50,000, in connection with the Project.
H. Approving an Amendment to the Classification Plan and Designating the Pay Grade and Status of the Human Resources Specialist Classification - That the City Council adopt Resolution 7735: 1. Authorizing an amendment to the Classification Plan to add the Human Resources Specialist position, and designating this job classification to Grade 20 on the Seal Beach Full-Time Pay Schedule; and, 2.
Amending the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Position Allocation Plan to include one (1) fulltime Human Resources Specialist.
The vote below is for the Consent Calendar Items with the exception of Item G.
AYES: Kalmick, Senecal, Steele, Wong, Landau
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion carried
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
G. Approving and Awarding a Public Works Agreement with Garland/DBS, Inc., and Approving Expenses Related to Testing, Abatement, and Repairs for the Marina Community Center Roof Replacement, CIP BG2506 - That the City Council adopt Resolution 7734: 1. Approving the scope of work, plans, specifications and other contract documents for the Marina Community Center Roof Replacement, CIP BG2506 (Project); and, 2. Approving and awarding a Public Works Agreement with Garland/DBS, Inc., in the not-to-exceed amount of $307,489 for the Project; and, 3.
Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve additional work requests up to $30,800 (approximately 10%) and inspection services up to $10,000 in connection with the Project, in the cumulative not-to-exceed amount of $40,800; and, 4. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve expenses up to the amount of $15,000 for Moisture Assessment and Building Materials Testing and $25,000 for Abatement Services, in connection with the Project; and, 5. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve expenses for building repair up to $50,000, in connection with the Project.
City Manager Gallegos called upon Public Works Director Lee to provide an overview of the staff report.
Council Member Senecal stated she would support the motion but expressed concern regarding the lack of communication about the fund transfer associated with the item.
Council Member Senecal moved, second by Mayor Landau to adopt Resolution 7734: 1.
Approving the scope of work, plans, specifications and other contract documents for the Marina Community Center Roof Replacement, CIP BG2506 (Project); and, 2. Approving and awarding a Public Works Agreement with Garland/DBS, Inc., in the not-to-exceed amount of $307,489 for the Project; and, 3. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve additional work requests up to $30,800 (approximately 10%) and inspection services up to $10,000 in connection with the Project, in the cumulative not-to-exceed amount of $40,800; and, 4. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve expenses up to the amount of $15,000 for Moisture Assessment and Building Materials Testing and $25,000 for Abatement Services, in connection with the Project; and, 5.
Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to approve expenses for building repair up to $50,000, in connection with the Project.
AYES: Kalmick, Senecal, Steele, Wong, Landau
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Motion carried
UNFINISHED/CONTINUED BUSINESS
There was no unfinished/continued business.
NEW BUSINESS
There were no new business items.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Landau called upon Police Captain Nicholas, who reported on the Yosa Valentine Coloring Contest.
Mayor Landau adjourned the City Council at 8:01 p.m. to Monday, February 9, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. to meet in closed session, if deemed necessary. __________________________
Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk
City of Seal Beach
Approved:___________________________
Lisa Landau, Mayor
Attested:____________________________
Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk
Agenda Item D
AGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 23, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: Patrick Gallegos, City Manager
FROM: Iris Lee, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Approving and Authorizing Amendment 3 to the
Professional Services Agreement with Yunex, LLC for
Traffic Signal Maintenance Services
________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
That the City Council adopt Resolution 7737:
1. Approving Amendment 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with Yunex, LLC dated March 13, 2019, as previously amended by Amendment 1 dated May 13, 2024, and Amendment 2 dated July 28, 2025, authorizing an increase in compensation for the fourth extension (Fiscal Year 2025- 2026) by $55,000 for the total compensation of $135,000 through June 30, 2026, and a revised total not-to-exceed contract amount of $605,000; and,
2. Authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute Amendment 3 on behalf of the City.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
The City of Seal Beach owns and maintains twenty-three (23) traffic signals and five (5) flashing beacons. This does not include the eight (8) Caltrans-owned signals along Pacific Coast Highway and the I-405 ramps. Maintenance associated with these traffic signals includes a broad range of services, such as routine inspection of traffic signal and operations equipment, emergency and non-emergency repairs, new equipment and software upgrades.
On May 13, 2019, City Council approved Resolution 6915, awarding a Professional Service Agreement to Yunex, LLC (Yunex) (previously Siemens Mobility, Inc.) for Traffic Signal Maintenance Services for an annual amount of $75,000, and the total not-to-exceed amount $225,000 for a three-year term. The agreement also included two (2) optional one-year extensions with a not-to-exceed amount of $75,000 for the first extension and $95,000 for the second extension.
After the agreement was approved in 2019, the City exercised the allowable two (2) optional one-year extensions, thereby extending the term to May 13, 2024.
On May 13, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution 7515 approving Amendment 1 (third extension) of the Agreement which extended the term through June 30, 2025, and increased compensation by $65,000 for the third extension for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $460,000 for the extended term.
On July 28, 2025, City Council adopted Resolution 7673, approving Amendment 2 (fourth extension) to the existing agreement for an additional one-year term to cover FY 2025-2026, authorize compensation of $80,000 for FY 2025–26, and to increase FY 2024–25 compensation by $10,000 for a total of $75,000 for the third extension. The revised total not-to-exceed contract amount is $550,000.
The City relies heavily on this consultant for traffic signal services and does not have the in-house resources to perform this specialized work. Given the increased necessary traffic signal upgrades and ongoing maintenance service needs, the requested increase will allow the City to maintain uninterrupted traffic signal operations while staff prepares and releases a Request for Proposals (RFP) for future services. Staff recommends approval of Amendment 3 to increase compensation for the fourth extension (FY 2025-26) by $55,000 for the total compensation of $135,000 through June 30, 2026. This increase results in a revised total not-to-exceed contract amount of $605,000 for the original term and all extensions.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
This Agreement complies with all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is categorically exempt under Section 15301, Class 1.
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
The City Attorney has approved the agreement and resolution as to form.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The contract has two components – (1) Routine Maintenance, and (2) Extraordinary Maintenance. Routine Maintenance generally comprises regular inspection and adjustments of the traffic signal system. Extraordinary Maintenance generally includes emergency/non-emergency traffic signal repairs.
For the fourth extension, covering FY 2025-26, Routine Maintenance was originally estimated to be $26,513. As the number of Extraordinary Maintenance repairs is generally unpredictable, Staff recommends allocating an additional $55,000 for a revised total not-to-exceed contract amount of $605,000.
The Traffic Signal Maintenance Services contract is budgeted in the FY 2025-26 Street Maintenance Account and CIP O-ST-6.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
This item is not applicable to the Strategic Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt Resolution 7737:
1. Approving Amendment 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with Yunex, LLC dated March 13, 2019, as previously amended by Amendment 1 dated May 13, 2024, and Amendment 2 dated July 28, 2025, authorizing an increase in compensation for the fourth extension (Fiscal Year 2025- 2026) by $55,000 for the total compensation of $135,000 through June 30, 2026, and a revised total not-to-exceed contract amount of $605,000; and,
2. Authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute Amendment 3 on behalf of the City.
SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED:
Iris Lee Patrick Gallegos
Iris Lee, Director of Public Works Patrick Gallegos, City Manager Prepared by: Wendy Ha, Assistant Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Resolution 7737
B. Amendment 3 to PSA with Yunex, LLC
C. Amendment 2 to PSA with Yunex, LLC
D. Amendment 1 to PSA with Yunex, LLC
E. Agreement with Yunex, LLC (previously Siemens Mobility Inc.) RESOLUTION 7737
A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE AMENDMENT 3 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH YUNEX, LLC FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL
MAINTENANCE SERVICES
WHEREAS, on May 13, 2019, City Council adopted Resolution 6915 approving a three (3) year Professional Services Agreement (Agreement) with Yunex, LLC (Yunex) (previously known as Siemens Mobility, Inc.) to provide traffic signal maintenance services for an annual amount of $75,000, or $225,000 for the three-year term, and authorizing the City Manager to extend the Agreement for up to two additional one-year extensions; and,
WHEREAS, after approval of the Agreement, the City exercised the Agreement’s two (2) allowable one-year extensions and thereby extending the term to May 13, 2024; and, WHEREAS, on May 13, 2024, City Council adopted Resolution 7515 approving Amendment 1 to the Agreement to extend the term through June 30, 2025, and increasing the total not-to-exceed contract amount to $460,000; and, WHEREAS, on July 28, 2025, City Council adopted Resolution 7673 approving Amendment 2 to the Agreement to extend the term through June 30, 2026, and increasing the total not-to-exceed contract amount to $550,000; and, WHEREAS, City desires to further amend the Agreement to increase the compensation by $55,000 through June 30, 2026, and a revised total not-to-exceed contract amount of $605,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Seal Beach City Council does resolve, declare, determine and order as follows:
Section 1. The City Council hereby approves Amendment 3 to the Professional Services Agreement dated May 13, 2019, as previously amended by Amendment 1 dated May 13, 2024, and Amendment 2 dated July 28, 2025, increasing the compensation by $55,000 through June 30, 2026, and a revised total not-to-exceed contract amount of $605,000.
Section 2. The City Council hereby authorizes and directs the City Manager to execute Amendment 3.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Seal Beach City Council at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of February 2026 by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members
NOES: Council Members
ABSENT: Council Members
ABSTAIN: Council Members
Lisa Landau, Mayor
ATTEST:
Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
I, Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution 7737 on file in the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of February 2026.
Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk
AMENDMENT 3 TO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
for
Traffic Signal Maintenance Services
between
City of Seal Beach
211 - 8th Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
&
Yunex, LLC
2250 Business Way
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 784-6600
This Amendment 3, dated February 23, 2026, amends that certain Professional Services Agreement (“Agreement’) dated May 13, 2019, as previously amended by Amendment 1 dated May 13, 2024 and Amendment 2 dated July 28, 2025, by and between the City of Seal Beach (“City”), a California charter city, and Yunex, LLC (“Contractor”), a limited liability company (collectively, “the Parties”).
S7296-0001\3214433v2.doc
RECITALS
A. City and Contractor are parties to the Agreement, pursuant to which City retained Contractor to provide certain professional traffic signal maintenance services.
B. Effective May 13, 2019, City and Contractor entered into an Agreement for Contractor to provide traffic signal maintenance services with Original Term ending May 13, 2021, with two optional one-year extensions at the discretion of City.
C. The Agreement was extended by extension letter pursuant to City’s election for an additional one-year (“first extension”) to May 13, 2022; and the Agreement was also extended pursuant to City’s election for a second extension to May 13, 2024.
D. Effective May 13, 2024, City adopted Resolution 7515 to further extend the contract term to and including June 30, 2025 (third extension), and to increase Contractor’s compensation to $75,000 for the third extension, for a revised total not-toexceed amount of $460,000.
E. Effective July 28, 2025, City adopted Resolution 7673 to further extend the contract term to and including June 30, 2026 (Fiscal Year 2025-26) (fourth extension), to authorize compensation of $80,000 for the services to be provided during the fourth extension, and to increase Contractor’s FY 2024-25 compensation by $10,000 to $75,000, for a revised total not-to-exceed amount of $550,000.
F. City and Contractor desire to amend the Agreement by this Amendment 3 to increase Contractor’s FY 2025-26 compensation by $55,000 to $130,000 for services to be provided during the fourth extension, for a revised total not-to-exceed amount of $605,000, as provided herein.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Parties’ performance of the promises, covenants, and conditions stated herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows.
AMENDMENT 3
Section 1. Section 3.0 (Contractor’s Compensation) of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
“3.0 Contractor’s Compensation
3.1. City will pay Contractor in accordance with the following provisions, but in no event will City pay more than the total amount of Six Hundred Five Thousand Dollars and no/100 ($605,000), as follows:
3.1.1 Original Term. City will pay Contractor in accordance with the rates shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A for Services but in no event will the City pay more than Two Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars
S7296-0001\3214433v2.doc
($225,000.00) for the Original Term of the Agreement; and in no event shall the City pay more than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000) for each year of the Original Term.
3.1.2 First Extension and Second Extension. For the First Extension (as defined by Section 2.1.1, above) City will pay Contractor in accordance with the hourly rates as shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A, but in no event will the City pay more than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000) for the First Extension of the Agreement. For the Second Extension (as defined by Section 2.1.1, above) City will pay Contractor in accordance with the hourly rates as shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A, but in no event will the City pay more than Ninety-Five Thousand Dollars ($95,000) for the Second Extension of this Agreement.
3.1.3. Third Extension. For the Third Extension (as defined by Section 2.1.2, above) City will pay Contractor in accordance with the hourly rates as shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A-1, but in no event will the City pay more than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000) for the Third Extension of this Agreement.”
3.1.4. Fourth Extension. For the Fourth Extension (as defined by Section 2.1.3, above) City will pay Contractor in accordance with the hourly rates as shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A-2, but in no event will the City pay more than One Hundred Thirty Thousand Dollars ($130,000) for the Fourth Extension of this Agreement.”
Section 4. All references to the term “Agreement” throughout Sections 1.0 through 29.0, inclusive, of the Agreement are hereby modified to include the Agreement dated May 13, 2019, Extension Letter 1 dated February 22, 2022, Extension Letter 2 dated March 13, 2023, Amendment 1 dated May 13, 2024, Amendment 2 dated July 28, 2025, and this Amendment 3 dated February 23, 2026, as if all terms are fully set forth therein.
Section 5. Except as expressly modified or supplemented by this Amendment 3, all other provisions of the Agreement shall remain unaltered and in full force and effect. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this Amendment 3 and the provisions of the Agreement, the provisions of this Amendment 3 shall control.
Section 6. This Amendment 3 shall be effective as of February 23, 2026.
Section 7. The persons executing this Amendment 3 on behalf of Contractor each warrant that he or she is each duly authorized to execute this Amendment 3 on behalf of said Party and that by his or her execution, Contractor is formally bound to the provisions of this Amendment 3.
S7296-0001\3214433v2.doc
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto, through their respective authorized representatives have executed this Amendment 3 as of the date and year first above written.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
By:____________________________
Patrick Gallegos, City Manager
Attest:
By:____________________________
Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
By:____________________________
Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney
CONTRACTOR: Yunex, LLC, a limited
liability corporation
By: __________________________
Name:
Its:
By: __________________________
Name:
Its:
(Please note, two signatures required
for corporations pursuant to California
Corporations Code Section 313 from
each of the following categories: ( i) the
chairperson of the board, the president
or any vice president, and ( ii) the
secretary, any assistant secretary, the
chief financial officer or any assistant
treasurer of such corporation.)
Michael Hutchens Western Operations Manager Joshua Ferras Regional Project Manager Digitally signed by Josh
DN: C=US,
[email protected], O=Yunex
LLC, OU=Customer Service, CN=Josh
Date: 2026.02.10 09:30:11-08'00'
Digitally signed by Hutchens Michael
safhumc1
DN: cn=Hutchens Michael safhumc1,
ou=Users,
[email protected]
Date: 2026.02.10 10:58:21 -08'00'
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
for
Traffic Signal Maintenance Services
between
OF SEA/ BN
JpPOggjFo' , 11
i*
OUNTy,.••-
City of Seal Beach
211 - 8th Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Yunex, LLC
2250 Business Way
Riverside, California 92501
951) 784- 6600
This Amendment No. 1 , dated May 13, 2024, amends that certain Professional Services Agreement (" Agreement') dated May 13, 2019, by and between the City of Seal Beach City"), a California charter city, and Yunex, LLC (" Contractor"), a limited liability company collectively, " the Parties").
RECITALS
A. City and Contractor are parties to the Agreement, pursuant to which City retained Contractor to provide certain professional traffic signal maintenance services.
B. Effective May 13, 2019, City and Contractor entered into an Agreement for Contractor to provide traffic signal maintenance services with Original Term ending May 13, 2021, with two optional one- year extensions at the discretion of City.
C. The Agreement was extended by extension letter pursuant to City' s election for an additional one- year (" first extension") to May 13, 2023; and the Agreement was also extended pursuant to City' s election for a second extension to May 13, 2024.
D. City and Contractor desire to amend the Agreement by this Amendment No. 1 to extend the contract term to and including June 30, 2025, as provided herein, and to increase Contractor' s compensation, for a revised total not-to-exceed amount of 460,000, as provided herein.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Parties' performance of the promises, covenants, and conditions stated herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows.
AMENDMENT NO. 1
Section 1 . Subsection 1. 1 of Section 1. 0 ( Scope of Services) of this Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
1 . 1. For the Original Term and the First and Second extensions ( as defined in Section 2. 0), Contractor shall provide those services (" Services") set forth in the attached Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by this reference. 1 . 1. 1 For the Third Extension ( as defined in Subsection 2. 1. 2), Contractor shall provide those services (" Services"), set forth in Exhibit A, as modified by Exhibit A- 1 which is incorporated herein by this reference.
1. 1. 2. To the extent that there is any conflict between this Agreement, on the one hand, and Exhibit A or Exhibit A- 1, on the other hand, this Agreement shall control."
Section 2. Section 2. 0 ( Term) of this Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
2. 0 Term
2. 1. Original Term. This Agreement originally commenced as of the Effective Date and continued for a term of three (3) years through and including midnight on May 13, 2022 (" Original Term").
S7296- 0001\ 2958637v2. doc
2. 1. 1 First Extension and Second Extension. This Agreement was extended for one additional one- year term from May 13, 2022 via extension letter to and including at midnight on May 13, 2023 (" First Extension"); and was thereafter extended for one additional one-year term by extension letter from May 13, 2023 to and including at midnight on May 13, 2024 (" Second Extension").
2. 1. 2 Third Extension. This Agreement is hereby extended from May 13, 2024 through and including June 30, 2025 ("Third Extension"), unless sooner terminated or extended as provided by this Agreement." Section 3. Section 3. 0 ( Contractor' s Compensation) of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
3. 0 Contractor' s Compensation
3. 1. City will pay Contractor in accordance with the following provisions, but in no event will City pay more than the total amount of Four Hundred Sixty-Thousand Dollars and no/ 100 ($ 460, 000), as follows:
3. 1. 1 Original Term. City will pay Contractor in accordance with the rates shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A for Services but in no event will the City pay more than Two Hundred Twenty- Five Thousand Dollars 225, 000. 00) for the Original Term of the Agreement; and in no event shall the City pay more than Seventy- Five Thousand Dollars ($ 75, 000) for each year of the Original Term, unless otherwise approved by City.
3. 1. 2 First Extension and Second Extension. For the First Extension ( as defined by Section 2. 1. 1, above) City will pay Contractor in accordance with the hourly rates as shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A, but in no event will the City pay more than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars 75, 000) for the First Extension of the Agreement. For the Second Extension as defined by Section 2. 1. 1, above) City will pay Contractor in accordance with the hourly rates as shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A, but in no event will the City pay more than Ninety-Five Thousand Dollars ($ 95, 000) for the Second Extension of this Agreement.
3. 1. 3. Third Extension. For the Third Extension ( as defined by Section 2. 1. 2, above) City will pay Contractor in accordance with the hourly rates as shown on the fee schedule set for in Exhibit A- 1, but in no event will the City pay more than Sixty- Five Thousand Dollars ($ 65, 000) for the Third Extension of this Agreement."
Section 4. Section 28. 0 is hereby added to the Agreement to read as follows:
28. 0 Government Code Claim Compliance
S7296- 0001\ 2958637v2. doc
In addition to any and all requirements of this Agreement pertaining to notices of and requests for compensation or payment for additional services, disputed work, claims and/ or changed conditions, Contractor must comply with the claim procedures set forth in Government Code Section 900 et seq. prior to filing any lawsuit against City. Such Government Code claims and any subsequent lawsuit based upon the Government Code claims shall be limited to those matters that remain unresolved after all procedures pertaining to additional services, disputed work, claims, and/ or changed conditions have been followed by Contractor. If no such Government Code claim is submitted, or if any prerequisite contractual requirements are not otherwise satisfied as specified herein, Contractor shall be barred from bringing and maintaining a lawsuit against City."
Section 5. Section 29.0 is hereby added to the Agreement to read as follows:
29. 0 Non- Appropriation of Funds
Payments to be made to Contractor by City for any Services performed within the current fiscal year are within the current fiscal budget and within an available, unexhausted fund. In the event that City does not appropriate sufficient funds for payment of Contractor' s Services beyond the current fiscal year, this Agreement shall cover payment for Contractor' s Services only to the conclusion of the last fiscal year in which City appropriates sufficient funds and shall automatically terminate at the conclusion of such fiscal year." Section 6. All references to the term " Agreement" throughout Sections 1. 0 through 29. 0, inclusive, of the Agreement are hereby modified to include the Agreement dated May 13, 2019, Extension Letter No. 1 dated February 22, 2022, Extension Letter No. 2 dated March 13, 2023, and this Amendment No. 1 dated May 13, 2024, as if all terms are fully set forth therein.
Section 7. Except as expressly modified or supplemented by this Amendment No. 1, all other provisions of the Agreement shall remain unaltered and in full force and effect. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this Amendment No. 1 and the provisions of the Agreement, the provisions of this Amendment No. 1 shall control.
Section 8. This Amendment No. 1 shall be effective on May 13, 2024.
Section 9. The persons executing this Amendment No. 1 on behalf of Contractor each warrant that he or she is each duly authorized to execute this Amendment No. 1 on behalf of said Party and that by his or her execution, Contractor is formally bound to the provisions of this Amendment No. 1.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto, through their respective authorized representatives have executed this Amendment No. 1 as of the date and year first above written.
S 7296- 00011295 8637 v 2. d oc
CITY • SAL ' H CONTRACTOR: Yunex, LLC, a limited
T' liability corporation
B 014^ s grretl by Varga Sasha Y 050 = Vargas$ ashy ID04amer.
Ingram, City Man r By: varas„,° a. da cc° m
off» 2104 00 0] 00. 00 41- 00115
Name: Sasha Vargas
Attest: Its: Commercial Service Manager
itik 4. e,
4174t , • By: p 4 0, saw n,
By: Name: Joshua Ferras
Gloria D.' ar:"" rity Clerk Its: Protect Manager
Approved
Please note, two signatures required for
PP as orm: corporations under Corp. Code§ 313, unless
corporate documents authorize only one person
to sign this Agreement on behalf of the
By: corporation.)
Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney
S7296- 0001\ 2958637v2. doc
Y
I I \ I
EXHIBIT A- 1
TRAFFIC
City of Seal Beach
Traffic Signal Maintenance Services
Project Cost Schedule
I. Routine Maintenance
Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price Annual Total Monthly Traffic Signal Maintenance EA 22 85. 00 1, 870. 00 $ 22, 440. 00 Monthly Flash Beacon Maintenance EA 5 55. 00 275. 00 $ 3, 300. 00 Total $ 25, 740. 00
II. Direct Labor Rates
Item Description Unit Regular Time Overtime Premium Time Operations Superintendent HR 70. 00 70. 00 70. 00
Foreman HR $ 130. 00 160.00 185.00
Traffic Signal Technician HR $ 125. 00 150. 00 175.00
Streetlight Technician HR $ 115. 00 135. 00 155. 00
Utility Technician HR $ 125. 00 150. 00 175.00
Groundsman HR $ 115. 00 150. 00 150. 00
Lab Technician HR $ 130.00 130. 00 $ 130.00
Engineering/ Systems Technician HR $ 130. 00 160.00 185. 00 Regular time hours are Monday- Friday 7: 30AM- 4: 30PM ( excluding Holidays) Overtime hours are Monday to Friday 4:30PM- 07: 30AM, Weekends and Holidays Ill. Equipment Rates
Item Description Unit Rate
Service Truck HR 30. 00
Bucket Truck HR 35. 00
Crane Truck HR 65. 00
Towable Air Compressor HR 5. 00
Towable Arrow Board HR 5. 00
IV. Extraordinary Maintenance
Item Description Unit Unit Price
Underground Services Alert( USA) Locate/ Markout Services HR $ 150. 00 Install 6' Dia Circular Type E Loop( 1- 4 loops) EA $ 525.00 Install 6' Dia Circular Type E Loop( 5 or More loops) EA $ 480. 00 Cabinet Testing EA $ 1, 200.00
V. Material
Item Description Unit Unit Price
Material Mark- up will be Invoice Cost Plus 15%
l ®
DATE( MM/ DD/ YYYY)
A 0
CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 10/ 02/ 2023
THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS
CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER( S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.
IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy( ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.
If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement( s).
PRODUCER CONTACT
MARSH USA, LLC. PHON:
9830 Colonnade Blvd, Suite 410 A//C No, Extl:
FAX
No):
San Antonio, TX 78230 E- MAIL Austinsanantonio. Certrequest@marsh. com ADDRESS:
INSURER( S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC 1i
CN467144012- STND- GAWUE- 23- GAWP _ INSURER A: HDI Global Insurance Company 41343 INSURED INSURER B: Federal Insurance Company 20281
Yunex Corp.
9225 Bee Cave Road INSURER C: Chubb Indemnity Insurance Company 12777 Building B, Suite 201 INSURER D:
Austin, TX 78733
INSURER E:
INSURER F:
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: HOU- 003940847- 08 REVISION NUMBER: 0
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS
CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.
INSR
TYPE OF INSURANCE
ADDL SUBRI POLICY EFF POLICY EXP
LIMITS LTR'' 1NSD WVD POLICY NUMBER MM/ DD/ YYYY) ( MM/ DD/ YYYY) A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY GLD5853501 10/ 01/ 2023 10/ 01/ 2024 EACH OCCURRENCE 1, 000, 000 1 DAMAGE TO RENTED
CLAIMS- MADE X OCCUR PREMISES( Ea occurrence) $ 500, 000 MED EXP( Any one person) $
10, 000
PERSONAL& ADV INJURY $ 1, 000, 000
GEN' L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 1, 000, 000 X POLICY JECT PRO- LOC PRODUCTS- COMP/OP AGG $ 1, 000, 000 OTHER:
B AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY 23) 7362- 88- 13 06/ 30/ 2023 10/ 01/ 2024 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $ 2, 000, 000 Ea accident)
X ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY( Per person) $
OWNED SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY( Per accident) $
AUTOS ONLY AUTOS
x
HIRED XNON- OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE
AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY Per accident)
UMBRELLA LIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE
EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS- MADE AGGREGATE
DED RETENTION$
C WORKERS COMPENSATION 70441231 06/ 30/ 2023 06/ 30/ 2024 X PER OTHI AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
STATUTE ER
ANYPROPRIETOR/ PARTNER/ EXECUTIVE
Y/ N
E. L. EACH ACCIDENT 1, 000, 000
OFFICER/ MEMBER EXCLUDED? N/ A
Mandatory in NH) E. L. DISEASE- EA EMPLOYEE $ 1, 000, 000 If yes, describe under 1, 000, 000
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E. L. DISEASE- POLICY LIMIT $ A Professional Liability E0D6199600 10/ 01/ 2023 10/ 01/ 2024 Limit 5, 000, 000 Deductible 100, 000
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/ LOCATIONS/ VEHICLES ( ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) RE: ALL OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH, ITS ELECTED OFFICIAL, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS ARE INCLUDED AS ADDITIONAL INSURED WHERE REQUIRED BY WRITTEN CONTRACT WITH RESPECT TO GENERAL AND AUTO LIABILITY. COMPLETED OPERATIONS COVERAGE IS INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY. WAIVER OF SUBROGATION IS APPLICABLE WHERE REQUIRED BY WRITTEN CONTRACT.
CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
CITY OF SEAL BEACH SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE 211 8TH STREET THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN SEAL BEACH, CA 90740 ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
of Marsh USA LLC
1988- 2016 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.
ACORD 25( 2016/ 03) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
for
Traffic Signal Maintenance Services
Between
City of Seal Beach
211 - 8th Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
0 Siemens Mobility, Inc.
1026 E. Lacy Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92805
714) 456- 9902 — Phone
714) 456-9905 - Fax
This Professional Service Agreement (" the Agreement") is made as of May 13, 2019 the " Effective Date"), by and between Siemens Mobility, Inc. (" Contractor'), a Delaware corporation, and the City of Seal Beach (" City"), a California charter city, collectively, " the Parties").
RECITALS
A. City desires certain professional traffic signal maintenance services.
B. Pursuant to the authority provided by its City Charter and Government Code § 37103, if applicable, City desires to engage Contractor to provide professional traffic signal maintenance services in the manner set forth herein and more fully described in Section 1. 0.
C. Contractor represents that the principal members of its firm are qualified traffic signal maintenance professionals and are fully qualified to perform the services contemplated by this Agreement in a good and professional manner; and it desires to perform such services as provided herein.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Parties' performance of the promises, covenants, and conditions stated herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. 0 Scope of Services
1. 1. Contractor shall provide those services (" Services") set forth in the attached Exhibit A, which is hereby incorporated by this reference. To the extent that there is any conflict between Exhibit A and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control.
1. 2. Contractor shall perform all Services under this Agreement in accordance with the standard of care generally exercised by like professionals under similar circumstances and in a manner reasonably satisfactory to City.
1. 3. In performing this Agreement, Contractor shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local law.
1. 4. As a material inducement to City to enter into this Agreement, Contractor hereby represents that it has the experience necessary to undertake the Services to be provided. In light of such status and experience, Contractor hereby covenants that it shall follow the customary professional standards in performing all Services. The City relies upon the skill of Contractor, and Contractor' s staff, if any, to do and perform the Services in a skillful, competent, and professional manner, and Contractor and Contractor' s staff, shall perform the Services in such manner. Contractor shall, at all times, meet or exceed any and all applicable professional standards of care. The acceptance of Contractor' s work by the City shall not operate as a release of Contractor from such standard of care and workmanship.
2of12
1. 5 Contractor will not be compensated for any work performed not specified in the Scope of Services unless the City authorizes such work in advance and in writing. The City Manager may authorize extra work to fund unforeseen conditions up to the amount approved at the time of award by the City Council. Payment for additional work in excess of this amount requires prior City Council authorization.
2. 0 Term
2. 1 This term of this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and shall continue for a term of three ( 3) years (" Original Term") commending on the Effective Date and shall expire thereafter at midnight on May 13, 2022, unless sooner terminated or extended as provided by this Agreement.
2. 2 The City, at its sole option, may elect to extend the Original Term of this Agreement, upon the same terms and conditions, for up to two ( 2) additional terms of one year each (" extension"), by providing written notice to Contractor at least one month prior to the expiration of an existing term. If timely elected by the City, the first extension shall have a term extending from May 13, 2022 through and including May 13, 2023, unless sooner terminated or extended pursuant to this Agreement. If timely elected by the City, the second extension shall be from May 13, 2023 through and including May 13, 2024, unless sooner terminated pursuant to this Agreement. Any extension shall not be effective except upon execution of a written amendment to this Agreement signed by the City Manager and Contractor' s authorized representatives.
3. 0 Contractor' s Compensation
3. 1 City will pay Contractor in accordance with the rates shown on the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit A for Services but in no event will the City pay more than Two Hundred Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($ 225, 000. 00) for the Original Term of the Agreement; and in no event shall the City pay more than Seventy -Five Thousand Dollars ($ 75, 000. 00) for each year of the Original Term.
3. 2 Contractor will not be compensated for any work performed not specified in the Scope of Services unless the City authorizes such work in advance and in writing. The City Manager may authorize extra work to fund unforeseen conditions up to the amount approved at the time of award by the City Council. Payment for additional work in excess of this amount requires prior City Council authorization. Any additional work authorized by the City Council pursuant to this Section will be compensated in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit A.
3. 3 In the event that the City exercises its option to extend the Original Term of this Agreement in accordance with Section 2. 2, any 3of12
Services performed by Contractor during the first or second extension shall be compensated according to the rates shown on the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit A for Services, but in no event will the City pay more than 75, 000. 00 for any such first or second extension without prior approval of the City Council
4. 0 Method of Payment
4. 1. Contractor shall submit to City monthly invoices for all services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Such invoices shall be submitted within 15 days of the end of the month during which the services were rendered and shall describe in detail the services rendered during the period, the days worked, number of hours worked, the hourly rates charged, and the services performed for each day in the period. City will pay Contractor within 30 days of receiving Contractor' s invoice. City will not withhold any applicable federal or state payroll and other required taxes, or other authorized deductions from payments made to Contractor.
4.2. Upon 24- hour notice from City, Contractor shall allow City or City's agents or representatives to inspect at Contractor' s offices during reasonable business hours all records, invoices, time cards, cost control sheets and other records maintained by Contractor in connection with this Agreement. City' s rights under this Section 4.2 shall survive for two years following the termination of this Agreement.
5. 0 Termination
5. 1. This Agreement may be terminated by City, without cause, or by Contractor based on reasonable cause, upon giving the other party written notice thereof not less than 30 days prior to the date of termination.
5. 2. This Agreement may be terminated by City upon 10 days' notice to Contractor if Contractor fails to provide satisfactory evidence of renewal or replacement of comprehensive general liability insurance as required by this Agreement at least 20 days before the expiration date of the previous policy.
6. 0 Party Representatives
6. 1. The City Manager is the City' s representative for purposes of this Agreement.
6.2. Michael J. Hutchens is the Contractor's primary representative for purposes of this Agreement. Contractor may not change its representative without the prior written approval of City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
4of12
7. 0 Notices
7. 1. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed 48 hours after deposit in the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at the following addresses, or to such other addresses as the parties may, from time to time, designate in writing pursuant to the provisions of this Section:
To City: City of Seal Beach
211 - 8th Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
Attn: City Manager
To Contractor: Siemens Mobility, Inc.
1026 E. Lacy Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92805
Attn: Michael J. Hutchens
7. 2. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.
8. 0 Independent Contractor
8. 1. Contractor is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. All services provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed by Contractor or under its supervision, and all personnel shall possess the qualifications, permits, and licenses required by State and local law to perform such Services, including, without limitation, a City of Seal Beach business license as required by the Seal Beach Municipal Code. Contractor will determine the means, methods, and details of performing the services. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the satisfactory work performance of all personnel engaged in performing the services and compliance with the customary professional standards.
8. 2. Any additional personnel performing Services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall also not be employees of City and shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Contractor shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law.
Contractor shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: Social Security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.
8. 3. Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless City and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants, designated volunteers, and agents 5of12
serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials, from any and all liability, damages, claims, costs and expenses of any nature to the extent arising from Contractor's personnel practices. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Contractor under this Agreement any amount due to City from Contractor as a result of Contractor' s failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this Section.
9. 0 Confidentiality
Contractor covenants that all data, documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by Contractor or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Contractor without prior written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if applicable law requires disclosure. All City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Contractor's covenant under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
10.0 Subcontractors
No portion of this Agreement shall be subcontracted without the prior written approval of the City. Contractor is fully responsible to City for the performance of any and all subcontractors.
11. 0 Assignment
Contractor shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement whether by assignment or novation, without the prior written consent of City. Any purported assignment without such consent shall be void and without effect.
12. 0 Inspection and Audit of Records
Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all services and other matters covered under this Agreement, including but expressly not limited to, all services performed, salaries, wages, invoices, time cards, cost control sheets, costs, expenses, receipts and other records with respect to this Agreement. Contractor shall maintain adequate records on the services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of all services in connection therewith. All such records shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. At all times during regular business hours, Contractor shall provide City with free access to such records, and the right to examine and audit the same and to make copies and transcripts as City deems necessary, and shall allow inspection of all program data, information, documents, proceedings and activities and all other matters related to the performance of the services under this Agreement. Contractor shall retain all financial and program service records and all other records related to the services and performance of this Agreement for at least three ( 3) years after expiration, termination or final payment under this Agreement, whichever occurs later. City' s rights under this 6of12
Section 12. 0 shall survive for three ( 3) years after expiration, termination or final payment under this Agreement, whichever occurs later.
13. 0 Safety Requirements
All work performed under this Agreement shall be performed in such a manner as to provide safety to the public and to meet or exceed the safety standards outlined by CAL OSHA. The City may issue restraint or cease and desist orders to Contractor when unsafe or harmful acts are observed or reported relative to the performance of the Services. Contractor shall maintain the work sites free of hazards to persons and property resulting from its operations. Contractor shall immediately report to the City any hazardous condition noted by Contractor.
14. 0 Insurance
14. 1. Contractor shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that Contractor has secured all insurance required under this Section. Contractor shall furnish City with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the City. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf, and shall be on forms provided by the City if requested. All certificates and endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
14.2. Contractor shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A. M.
Best's rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the City. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: ( 1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ( occurrence form CG 0001); ( 2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 ( any auto); and, if required by the City, ( 3) Professional Liability. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: ( 1) General Liability: $ 2, 000, 000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage and if Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; ( 2) Automobile Liability: $ 1, 000, 000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and ( 3) Professional Liability:
1, 000, 000 per claim/ aggregate.
14. 3. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Contractor shall provide endorsements on forms supplied or approved by the 7of12
City to state: ( 1) coverage shall not be suspended, voided, reduced or canceled except after 30 days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City; ( 2) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its directors, officials, officers, ( 3) coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Contractor' s scheduled underlying coverage and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it; ( 4) for general liability insurance, that the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the services or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and ( 5) for automobile liability, that the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor or for which the Contractor is responsible.
14. 4. All insurance required by this Section shall contain standard separation of insureds provisions and shall not contain any special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.
14. 5. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions shall be declared to and approved by the City. Contractor guarantees that, at the option of the City, either: ( 1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self- insured retentions as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers; or (2) the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses.
15. 0
Indemnification, Hold Harmless, and Duty to Defend
15. 1. Indemnity for Desiqn Professional Services. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, indemnify and hold harmless the City agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials ( collectively " Indemnitees" in this Section 15. 0), from and against any and all damages, costs, expenses, liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, proceedings, judgments, penalties, liens, and losses of any nature whatsoever, including fees of accountants and other professionals, and all costs associated therewith, and reimbursement of attorneys' fees and costs of defense collectively " Claims"), whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to, in whole or in part, the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Contractor, and/ or its officers, agents, servants, employees, 8of12
subcontractors, contractors or their officers, agents, servants or employees ( or any entity or individual that Contractor shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of design professional services under this Agreement by a " design professional," as the term is defined under California Civil Code § 2782. 8( c).
15.2. Other Indemnitees. Other than in the performance of design professional services, and to the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, protect, defend, hold harmless and indemnify the Indemnitees from and against any and all damages, costs, expenses, liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, proceedings, judgments, penalties, liens and losses of any nature whatsoever, including fees of accountants, attorneys and other professionals, and all costs associated therewith, and the payment of all consequential damages ( collectively " Damages"), in law or equity, whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the acts or omissions of Contractor, its officers, agents, servants, employees, subcontractors, materialmen, suppliers, or contractors, or their officers, agents, servants or employees ( or any entity or individual that Contractor shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of this Agreement, including the Indemnitees' active or passive negligence, except for Damages arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees, as determined by final arbitration or court decision or by the agreement of the Parties. Contractor shall defend the Indemnitees in any action or actions filed in connection with any Damages with counsel of the Indemnitees' choice, and shall pay all costs and expenses, including all attorneys' fees and experts' costs actually incurred in connection with such defense. Contractor shall reimburse the Indemnitees for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by the Indemnitees in connection therewith.
15. 3. Subcontractor Indemnification. Contractor shall obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those in this Section 15. 0 from each and every subcontractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Contractor in the performance of this Agreement. If Contractor fails to obtain such indemnities, Contractor shall be fully responsible and indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Indemnitees from and against any and all Claims in law or equity, whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, are claimed to arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the acts or omissions of Contractor' s subcontractor, its officers, agents, servants, employees, subcontractors, materialmen, contractors or their officers, agents, servants or employees ( or any entity or individual that Contractor' s subcontractor shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of this Agreement, including the Indemnitees' active or passive negligence, except for Claims or Damages arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees, as determined by final arbitration or court decision or by the agreement of the Parties.
15. 4. The obligations of Contractor under this or any other provision of this Agreement shall not be limited by the provisions of any workers' 9of12
compensation act or similar act. Contractor expressly waives any statutory immunity under such statutes or laws as to the Indemnitees. Contractor' s indemnity obligation set forth in this Section 15. 0 shall not be limited by the limits of any policies of insurance required or provided by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement.
15. 5. Contractor' s covenants under this Section 15. 0 shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
16. 0 Equal Opportunity
Contractor affirmatively represents that it is an equal opportunity employer.
Contractor shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, or age. Such non- discrimination includes, but is not limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff, or termination.
17. 0 Labor Certification
By its signature hereunder, Contractor certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code that require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services.
18. 0 Prevailing Wage and Payroll Records
If this Agreement calls for services that, in whole or in part, constitute " public works" as defined in the California Labor Code, then Contractor shall comply in all respects with all applicable provisions of the California Labor Code, including those set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.
19. 0 Entire Agreement
This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings, or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties.
20. 0 Severability
The invalidity in whole or in part of any provisions of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of the other provisions of this Agreement. 10 of 12
21. 0 Governing Law
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
22. 0 No Third Party Rights
No third party shall be deemed to have any rights hereunder against either party as a result of this Agreement.
23. 0 Waiver
No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a party shall give the other party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.
24. 0 Prohibited Interests; Conflict of Interest
24. 1. Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which may be affected by the Services, or which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the Services.
Contractor further covenants that, in performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it. Furthermore, Contractor shall avoid the appearance of having any interest, which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the Services. Contractor shall not accept any employment or representation during the term of this Agreement which is or may likely make Contractor " financially interested" ( as provided in California Government Code §§ 1090 and 87100) in any decision made by City on any matter in connection with which Contractor has been retained.
24. 2. Contractor further warrants and maintains that it has not employed or retained any person or entity, other than a bona fide employee working exclusively for Contractor, to solicit or obtain this Agreement. Nor has Contractor paid or agreed to pay any person or entity, other than a bona fide employee working exclusively for Contractor, any fee, commission, gift, percentage, or any other consideration contingent upon the execution of this Agreement. Upon any breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right, at its sole and absolute discretion, to terminate this Agreement without further liability, or to deduct from any sums payable to Contractor hereunder the full amount or value of any such fee, commission, percentage or gift.
24. 3. Contractor warrants and maintains that it has no knowledge that any officer or employee of City has any interest, whether contractual, non - contractual, financial, proprietary, or otherwise, in this transaction or in the 11 of 12
business of Contractor, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of Contractor at any time during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall immediately make a complete, written disclosure of such interest to City, even if such interest would not be deemed a prohibited " conflict of interest" under applicable laws as described in this subsection.
25. 0 Attorneys' Fees
If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party all of its attorneys' fees and other costs incurred in connection therewith.
26. 0 Exhibits
All exhibits referenced in this Agreement are hereby incorporated into the Agreement as if set forth in full herein. In the event of any material discrepancy between the terms of any exhibit so incorporated and the terms of this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall control.
27. 0 Corporate Authority
The person executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants that he or she is duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said Party and that by his or her execution, the Contractor is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto, through their respective authorized representatives have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written.
12 of 12
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
Ingram, City M2F" . 0-
Attest:
Approved as to F
LIM
Attorney
S7296- 000112292797v3. doc
CONTRACTOR: Siemens Mobility_ toc.,
a Delaware corpo io
By: _
Michael J. Hutchens
Operations Manager, ITS
By: _
Steve - Ral
Director, IT'S-SernrcePlease note,
for corporations
Corporations
two signatures required
pursuant to California
Code Section 313.)
EXHIBIT A
Contractors Proposal
SIEMENS
Helping Our Communities Become Vibrant,
Growing & Green
Proposed to:
Ms. Iris Lee
Deputy Public Works Director
Department of Public Works
City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Table of Contents
COVERLETTER------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2
WORKPLAN----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ----- - - - ------ V. ROUTINE MAINTENANCE------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 MonthlyInspection--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 Quarterly Maintenance ( Every Three Months)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 Semi -Annual Maintenance ( Every Six Months)------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 YearlyMaintenance --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 STAFFINGPLAN------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11 CONTRACTMANAGEMENT TEAM----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 FIELDMAINTENANCE TEAM------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 12 MANAGEMENTCONTACTS:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 13 Additional Resources available to the City ofSeal Beach--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14 ORGANIZATIONAL INFORMATION----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 EXCEPTIONS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- L;
COMPANY QUALIFICATION
ABRIEF OVERVIEW OF SIEMENS------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17 OURDISTINCT QUALIFICATIONS------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 18
KEYCONTACT--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROOF OF CONTRACTORS LICENSE AND DIR REGISTRATION-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19 PRIMARY FACILITIES AND STAFF SUPPORTING THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH:------------------------------------------------------------------------ 20 FINANCIALINFORMATION-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21 PROJECTAPPROACH--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22 WhatSets Siemens Apart------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 22 MaterialInventory ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22 Reporting and Record Keeping--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 TestingServices------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 Fiber Optic Repair Installation, Maintenance Services-------------------------------------------------------------------------------24 USADig Alert----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 Customer Portal ( Traffic Signal Service Management System)-------------------------------------------------------------------- 25 IndustrySpecific Tools---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26 Vehicles& Equipment---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27 WHYCHOOSE SIEMENS?----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------) Q REFERENCES------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33 SEALED FEE PROPOSAL------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34 SIEMENS DELEGATION OF APPROVAL AUTHORITY----------------------------------------------------------------------- 35 April 23` d, 2019
Ms. Iris Lee
Deputy Public Works Director
Department of Public Works
City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
RE: Proposal for: Traffic Signal Maintenance Services
Ms. Lee,
SIEMENS
I" ICAnNi -( or (Afe..
Siemens ITS would like to express our sincere appreciation for the opportunity to participate in the proposal process for providing maintenance, emergency response and repairs for the City' s traffic signal system. The prices and terms stated in our proposal package will remain in effect for 90 days from the date of submission, April 23` d, 2019.
Siemens Mobility, Inc. is a corporation, incorporated in the State of Delaware on November 29` h 2017. Siemens Intelligent Traffic Solutions ( ITS) is a business unit within Siemens Mobility, Inc. a subsidiary member of the Siemens AG corporate group. Our federal tax employer I. D. number is 30- 1018552 and our corporate address is One Penn Plaza Suite 1100, New York, NY 10119.
Siemens ITS is an electrical contracting firm who is a California licensed A and C- 10 contractor CA License # 1042278) and is also a registered Public Works Contractor ( DIR No. 1000059880), who provides leading edge traffic technology for the fast -paced Intelligent Transportation Systems world. Whether providing maintenance services, local controllers, controller firmware, central systems, system analysis, design, or integration, Siemens brings innovative and reliable solutions to customers.
During the evaluation, if there are any questions regarding this proposal please, feel free to contact either of us using the contact information listed below. We look forward to continuing to serve the needs of the City of Seal Beach and would like to thank you in advance for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Siemens Industry, Inc.
Steven M. "Tea[ -
Director of Service
2250 Business Way
Riverside, CA 92501
951) 784- 6600 office
951) 784- 6700 fax
steven. teal@siemens. com
Siemens Ind s
Mi ael . Hutchens
Operations Manager
2250 Business Way
Riverside, CA 92501
951) 784- 6600 office
951) 784- 6700 fax
michael. hutchensgsiemens. com
Work Plan
Scope of work
V. ROUTINE MAINTENANCE
Siemens will provide a continuing, comprehensive, routine maintenance program designed to eliminate or reduce the incidents of malfunctions, operational complaints and extend the useful life of the existing traffic signal control equipment. Siemens will inspect, clean, and if necessary, adjust all traffic signal control equipment to meet manufacturer' s original specifications at each signalized intersection once each calendar month. The monthly inspection and cleaning of all cabinets shall include the repair/ replacement of parts in controller cabinet, detector loop patching, cleaning and realignment of signal indications, continuity checks, testing of the City' s communication system, testing and repair of battery back- up systems, LED and pedestrian indication replacements, rewiring, concrete and foundation repairs, and lamping to maintain existing operation.
Failure of Siemens to provide the services outlined in its Routine Maintenance list that requires the City or its agent to make corrections, shall be billed back to Siemens plus markup.
Monthly Inspection
Siemens will inspect, clean, adjust and make a routine inspection of each traffic signal location once per month. Siemens agrees that it will maintain a record in each controller cabinet showing the date and time checked. Controllers shall not be replaced, except for repair, without prior approval of the City.
Siemens will submit a standard checklist for inspections and tasks that are conducted at each intersection, which will include, but not limited to the following:
1. Clean the inside and outside of all controller cabinet assemblies, electrical service, battery backup cabinets, interconnect cabinets, removing any foreign material, including graffiti. Tighten all electrical termination and check all communication connections. Inspect/ protect all related facilities for/ from insect/ bug/ rodent infiltration. Rust and water damage shall be reported to the City in the monthly report.
2. Check the timing of individual signal phasing and integral timing circuits for the correct operation per the timing sheet. Traffic signal timing changes will only be made by Siemens with the City' s approval. The City will be notified of these changes as soon as the change has been made. All changes will be documented in the necessary Contract records.
3. Check and verify timing of yellow (clearance) interval on all phases per the timing sheet.
4. Check and set, if necessary, all real- time digital clocks to the National Bureau of Standard Time.
S. Check detector units and systems including, but not limited to, inductive loops, video detection, and pedestrian/ bicycle push buttons for correct detection of various modes of transportation, and adjust or repair as necessary to restore intended operation. This includes splicing ( or re - splicing) of detector loops and the replacement of pedestrian/ bicycle push buttons.
6. Inspect all load switches, Battery Backup Units ( BBU' S), photo -cells, dials, controller cabinet switches, relays, clocks, cabinet locks, cabinet mechanisms, cooling fans, etc., and make routine adjustments or minor repairs, if necessary.
7. Walk all approaches of the intersection and visually inspect all signal poles, mast arms, signal head and indications ( including programmed visibility indications), traffic control signs, pedestrian signals, illuminated street name signs, loop sealants, pull box covers, and any other devices to verify the correct condition, placement, and/ or operation. Any traffic signal or illuminated indication that is burned out or has reached eighty percent ( 80%) depletion curve will be replaced. All traffic heads and pedestrian heads found out of alignment will be properly aligned and secured. Check all traffic signal indication visibility at approach distances, remedy, and report visibility deficiencies to the City immediately. Missing signs including pedestrian/ bicycle push button plates will be replaced. Cracked or damaged loop sealants will be re -sealed. All other equipment found loose, missing or damaged shall be secured, replaced, or repaired.
8. Immediately correct all safety deficiencies found during routine inspection and submit work authorization request to the City to schedule non -emergency work.
9. Check all traffic signal controller communication equipment for proper operation, verify correct IP addresses ( controller) and adjust or repair, as needed. Replacement of Ethernet switches will be coordinated with the City and subject to its approval. Siemens will verify the grounds and connections of the copper twisted pairs at those locations using this communication system.
Siemens will test and make any repairs or adjustments. The City reserves the right to contract this work out to others, without compensation to Siemens. Siemens may be required to provide assistance to the City, or other firms selected by the City, to troubleshoot Ethernet connections, as requested.
10. Check battery back- up systems for proper operations and connections including checking and recording operational voltage range of all batteries, and adjust or repair, as needed. The date of new battery installations will be recorded in the traffic signal cabinet and in the monthly status reports to track the frequency of their required maintenance. Siemens will notify the City of nonoperable or low -output batteries within twenty- four ( 24) hours. The replacement of batteries will be considered extra work and will require approval by the City. If batteries are found to be damaged ( i. e., " exploded" or " cracked"), Siemens may be responsible for the cost of the replacement if it is determined that they have not been properly inspected or maintained.
11. Inspection of illuminated street name signs and safety lights will include at least one nighttime inspection each month with replacement lamps as required in addition to the timely replacement of burned -out or dim lamps as reported or observed. Siemens will notify the City of any sign panels or housing in need of refurbishment or replacement.
12. Inspection of flashing beacon operation and make any repairs or replacement of lights, as required. For some locations, Siemens will be responsible for updating the programming on an annual basis on local school bell schedule. Siemens will also update the programming for daylight savings twice per year.
13. Inspect the operation of speed radar signs and make any repairs as required Quarterly Maintenance (Every Three Months)
The following tasks required quarterly ( every three months) will be included in the established monthly fees for routine maintenance:
1. Cabinet door locks and padlocks will be lubricated with graphite lubricant, or equivalent, and maintained in good working order. Any missing or damaged locks will be replaced and/ or repaired.
Semi -Annual Maintenance ( Every Six Months)
The following tasks required semi- annually ( every six months) will be included in the established monthly fees for routine maintenance:
1. Air Filters — Siemens will replace the air filter elements in all cabinets so equipped.
2. Battery Back- up System — Traffic signal battery back- up systems will be checked by electrical bypass for appropriate operation per the manufacturer' s specifications. The City shall approve the schedule prior to the commencement of work. Siemens will also review and prepare a report of annual replacement of batters by location and submit to the City.
Yearly Maintenance
The following tasks required once a year shall be included in the established monthly fees for routine maintenance:
1. Conflict Monitor — Siemens will test conflict monitors. Siemens will supply a report for each test conducted. The test will be conducted utilizing a replacement monitor ( like kind) to monitor the intersection while the test is being conducted. The testing will take place on a schedule approved by the City. Any conflict monitor that does not pass the test will be repaired or replaced and billed as Extraordinary Maintenance.
2. Emergency Vehicle Pre- Emption ( EVP) — The optical detector lens will be cleaned according to the manufacturer' s specifications at all signalized intersections and fire station installations throughout the City. Siemens will supply a report for testing of EVP system at each intersection.
Testing will take place on a schedule approved by the City. Any EVP equipment will be repaired or replaced and billed as Extraordinary Maintenance.
3. Traffic Signal Controller Software — Siemens will verify and update records of current controller software or firmware. This includes the spare controllers that Siemens maintains for emergency replacement of failed traffic signal controllers. All updates of controllers that require shut -down of a traffic signal will be coordinated with the City and may be required to be conducted at night. Software updates may be required more frequently than once a year.
4. Painting — Siemens will prepare and submit an annual work authorization request to the City listing cabinets ( i. e., controller, splice pedestals, service) and signal head equipment that need painting as identified during the monthly maintenance reviews. Special notification will be provided regarding rusting or water damage. Authorization for Siemens to proceed on the painting will be subject to authorization per the terms of Extraordinary Maintenance. Painting to remove graffiti will be performed by Siemens within twenty- four ( 24) hours of the observation or report, whichever is earlier. Siemens will use the City' s current paint standard color and apply the appropriate paint type to provide uniform coverage and color on the equipment.
Repair and Replacement
Siemens will replace or repair any and all defective parts of the traffic signal system which cause signal failure or malfunction, as the occasion arises per the routine maintenance, such as the signal controller, flashers, burned - out lamps, detector loops, video detection cameras and/ or units, push buttons, sensing units and wiring system, communication internal modems and/ or interface units, unless the failure or malfunction falls in the category of Extraordinary Maintenance.
Siemens will complete all work in a timely manner notifying the City within twenty-four (24) hours of the next working day when any equipment is replaced with temporary replacements pending permanent repairs.
Loop Detector Replacement
Once it is determined by the City that the sawcut has deteriorated to a point that applying more sealant is insufficient, the loop detector will be replaced and billed as Extraordinary Maintenance.
Lamps and Lighting
Siemens will furnish and replace all illuminated street name sign lamps and safety lighting lamps at all traffic signals and flashers based upon an eighty percent ( 80%) depletion curve ( or fall outside acceptable levels), but not to exceed twenty- four ( 24) months, in accordance with the time schedule contained in the specifications. All traffic signal lamps must conform to the standards of the N. E. M.A., U. L., E. I.A., A.S. T.M., A.N. S. I., and any ordinance that may apply.
Siemens agrees to use only standard traffic signal LED' s equivalent in performance, reliability and durability to those manufactured to California Department of Transportation' s ( Caltrans) standards.
Siemens agrees to supply all labor and equipment to perform the re- lamping function, with the cost of the LED' s to be invoiced to the City.
Siemens will clean, polish and inspect all lenses and reflectors at the time the traffic signals are relamped. At this time, all broken or deteriorated parts will be replaced or changed, as necessary, signal heads aligned, mast arm mounted, street name signs adjusted, and optically -programmed signal heads adjusted.
If incandescent lamps are present and are in need of replacement based upon the above criteria, Siemens will replace the lamp to an approved manufacturer LED.
The monthly Routine Maintenance bid price will include lamp replacement of burned- out/ dimmed lights, as needed. LED modules and pedestrian indication replacement modules ( material only) will be billed under Extraordinary Maintenance.
Emergency Service
Siemens will maintain a 24 -hour -per -day emergency service per the provision of Routine Maintenance for the replacement of burned - out lamps, turned heads, and controller malfunctions. Siemens will make the required repairs to restore or maintain the traffic signal in good working condition. Temporary repairs may be required in the event of an accident or failure that may be covered under Extraordinary Maintenance. The intersections where said traffic signals are located will be regularly patrolled by Siemens.
Siemens will make immediate service calls on an emergency basis , responding within one ( 1) hour of notification during normal working hours of the Contract, and within two ( 2) hours during non -working hours of the Contract, including Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays in the event of any traffic signal system malfunction. Siemens is required to provide the reporting party, if different than the City, with an estimated time of arrival. The replacement of burned -out lamps need not be on an emergency basis provided there are at least two ( 2) indications still in good operation for each direction of travel. Such replacements will be handled as soon as possible under Routine Maintenance.
Payment for Routine Maintenance
Siemens will submit separate monthly billings for Routine Maintenance at the Contractor lump sum price per flashing beacon, per speed radar sign, and per signalized intersection, which will include safety lights and illuminated street name signs, per month. Said compensation will include all labor, materials, equipment, overhead, and profit for routine services in the price bid per intersection, per month, and no extra compensation will be allowed.
VI. EXTRAORDINARY OR EMERGENCY MAINTENANCE
Extraordinary/ Emergency Maintenance involves the repair or replacement of equipment damaged by collisions, vandalism, civil disorder, windstorm, natural disasters, street construction or excavation.
Extraordinary/ Emergency Maintenance also includes replacements based on obsolesce, required MUTCD updates, or other unusual factors when labor and materials necessary to ensure safe and efficient operation of the City' s traffic signal system goes beyond Routine Maintenance.
Siemens will provide Extraordinary/ Emergency Maintenance for the traffic signal system and related equipment. Siemens will prepare and submit a work order to the City providing a detailed justification for the needed repairs. The work shall be subject to the City' s authorization. City reserves the right to separately bid Extraordinary Maintenance work to other firms, without compensation to Siemens.
Siemens may be required to assist or support other City -retained firms, as requested.
Siemens will be advised that all work will be schedule for normal working hours unless, but not limited to:
1. A completely blacked out intersection
2. Less than two (2) indications per lane is inoperative
3. Conflicting signal timing
4. City request
Extraordinary/ Emergency Maintenance will generally include, but not limited to:
1. Repair and/ or replacement of failed or malfunctioning equipment
2. Modifications to traffic signal equipment, such as, but not limited to, upgrades of controller cabinets and controller components. Any replacement controller shall be adjusted to reflect the timing and settings according to the timing chart.
3. Replacement of battery back- up system components
4. LED module replacements
5. Pedestrian indication replacements
6. Painting of cabinets and signal heads
7. New lenses and framework
8. Loop detector replacements
9. Video detection camera repair/ replacement
10. Interconnect installation, repair, terminations, and testing of same ( excludes Routine
11. Maintenance testing)
12. Replacement of equipment that becomes obsolete or deteriorated equipment that is beyond its serviceable life.
Other Extraordinary/ Emergency Scope of Work
Siemens response to all Underground Service Alert ( USA) requests/ notices relating to traffic signals, interconnect, and communication infrastructure will be billed as Extraordinary Maintenance.
Siemens may be required to assist in the final inspection of new installations or provide interim emergency response or repairs not currently owned by the City, as authorized by the City.
Notifications
Siemens will report to the City the condition and provide satisfactory evident that replacements/ repairs are necessary, and provide cost estimates, including labor, equipment and material, to perform said work. Siemens will also submit to the City photographic records of damaged equipment requiring replacement/ repair. No work will proceed without the City' s written authorization, except in emergencies and/ or when immediate replacement/ repair is needed to ensure public safety.
All Extraordinary Maintenance work orders will be completed by Siemens to the City' s satisfaction within ten ( 10) calendar days, unless otherwise agreed upon with the City. The completion of final repairs subsequent to Siemens temporary repairs shall be subject to the same ten ( 10) calendar day' s completion requirements. Should Siemens be unable to complete said work within the specified time, Siemens will submit a written explanation of the delay and an anticipated completion date for said work for the City' s review and approval.
Siemens will notify the City within 24 hours of the alteration of the operation of any signal or the installation or removal of any substitute controller or component. Siemens will also provide a schedule for completion of any Extraordinary Maintenance work, and an estimated completion date.
Emergencies
Siemens will maintain a 24- hour per day emergency service for the replacement of burned -out lamps or LED' s, turned heads and controller malfunctions, or any damage that may pose a public hazard. The intersections where said traffic signals are located will be regularly patrolled by Siemens. Siemens will repair parts, replace parts and lamps or LED' s, and otherwise keep the traffic signals in good working condition. Siemens will maintain a local telephone number where representatives of Siemens can be reached 24 hours per day. This telephone number is to be made available to all persons designated by the City.
Siemens will respond immediately to emergency calls and dispatch qualified personnel and equipment to reach the site within one ( 1) hour under normal circumstances. The follow traffic control procedures for emergency repairs will apply:
1. Siemens vehicle will carry sufficient and appropriate traffic control equipment to direct traffic during an emergency and/ or when deemed necessary by the City.
2. If no police officers are present and temporary STOP -signs have been set up upon Siemens arrival, Siemens will survey the site and provide additional traffic control devices, as necessary, then proceed to repair traffic equipment. Once the signal is back in operation, Siemens will remove all of the temporary traffic control devices and return City -owned devices.
3. If a police officer is present upon Siemens arrival, Siemens will immediately examine the signal, evaluate the situation, and report to the police officer to determine the next course of action.
4. If Siemens must leave a blacked - out signal location that has STOP - signs in place, Siemens will consult with the police and set the signal to flash operation if power is available. Siemens will follow- up to restore normal traffic signal operations as soon as possible.
Underground Service Alert
Siemens will be responsible to respond to all Underground Service Alert ( USA) requests/ notices/ tickets or at the request of the City for all marking and protection of traffic signal unground facilities/ infrastructure including, but not limited to, traffic signal and electrical conduit, interconnect and communication facilities, loops, and other appurtenant equipment.
Siemens will be responsible for properly locating noted facilities/ infrastructure and maintaining an upto- date inventory and as- builts for said purpose. All updates shall be transmitted to the City in a format adequate for its records.
In the event said facilities/ infrastructure is damaged due to Siemens failure to properly mark the facilities/ infrastructure per the records, the costs for repairs will be the sole responsibility of Siemens for areas that were not properly marked. It shall also be Siemens responsibility to coordinate, clarify, and/ or verify with the requesting party.
Painting
Siemens will repaint all metal standards, signal heads, back plates, visors, controller housings, and appurtenances, as directed by the City. Repainting will be conducted by spray painting methods with colors, sheen, types consistent with traffic signal standards, and as approved by the City. Siemens will annually inspect and prepare a list of locations as part of Routine Maintenance, and submit to the City for work authorization.
Street Light Maintenance
Siemens will repair/ replace all equipment associated with City -owned streetlights as directed and approved by the City. City -owned streetlights and all associated components will be repaired or replaced as Extraordinary Maintenance. City -owned streetlights are limited to ( 1) Main Street, and ( 2) 1st Street Parking Lot.
Method of Payment
An itemized invoice will be submitted within thirty ( 30) days of completion of the work. City will compensate Siemens for Extraordinary Maintenance work as follows:
1. Materials — City will pay to Siemens for materials used in Extraordinary Maintenance Siemens cost plus a percentage mark- up as specified in Siemens bid proposal, but in no case more than 15 percent ( 15%). All parts and materials shall be new. Used parts will not be used, unless explicit written authorization was provided by the City. The City reserves the right to inspect all Siemens records to verify material cost.
2. Direct Labor — Siemens will present with its monthly itemized invoice a record of hours spent under Extraordinary Maintenance. Siemens hourly rates will include compensation for wage, profit, overhead, fringe benefits, health and welfare, worker' s compensation insurance, pension/ retirement benefits, vacation/ sick leave, union tax, assessment, and any applicable local/ state/ federal/ union related costs.
3. Equipment — City will pay Siemens for equipment use under Extraordinary Maintenance on a per -hour basis, as specified under Siemens bid proposal. No additional payments of any kind shall be paid for equipment, unless otherwise noted.
No additional compensation will be paid for transporting the equipment to/ from the job site.
Other
1. Labor Strike — It will be Siemens responsibility to provide continuous maintenance services, without any interruption, of all traffic signals. In the event of a labor strike, Siemens will provide other means, at its sole expense, to provide comparable services. City reserves to right to take any necessary actions to provide such services should Siemens fail to fulfill these terms. All costs plus mark- up will be borne by Siemens.
2. Permits and Licenses — Siemens will obtain all necessary permits and licenses ( including City business license) to perform the Contract work at its sole expense. Siemens will give all notices necessary and incidental to the due and lawful prosecution of the RFP.
3. Patents — Siemens will assume all responsibilities arising from the use of patented materials/ equipment/ devices/ processes/ technologies.
Staffing Plan
Contract Management Team
If selected, Jeffrey Pierce will be the Account Manager serving the City of Seal Beach. Jeff, his service coordinator, Jennifer Hall, and the area supervisor, Henry Graves, will be responsible for maintaining communication with the City regarding daily operation and maintenance of all traffic signal equipment.
Our account management team as well as our field staff will work closely with you and your team in order to ensure that all of your requests are being effectively addressed. We make every effort to make certain that the City' s staff is always aware of issues that are in need of attention.
Jeffrey Pierce, Service Account Manager
Jeff has over 31 years of extensive experience in the traffic signal maintenance industry. He is extremely knowledgeable with all aspects of traffic signal maintenance, repair, and construction. He has served in multiple roles from field technician to field supervisor and is currently a Service Account Manager. Jeff is accountable for the overall performance of contracts in the San Diego and Orange County territory, manages 10 field employees and will be the primary Siemens representative responsible this contract.
Experience:
e
j
Service Account Manager, Siemens - October 2012 to Current YParton ow m PUWC WETY
Service Operations Supervisor, Siemens - 2010 to 2012
IMSA Work Zone Safety
Project Manager, Republic ITS - 2004 to 2010
IMSA Level I, 11, III Certified Traffic Signal
Lead TrafficSignal Tech, Signal Maintenance - 1992 to 2004 Technician
Utility Technician, Lekos Electric - 1991 to 1992
Traffic Signal Technician, Southwest Signal Service - 1988 to 1991 Other Industry Certifications:
ATSSA Traffic Control Technida n
ATSSA Traffic Control Supervisor
Jennifer Hall, Service Coordinator
Jeri has over 7 years of experience maintaining customer contracts and providing support to the management and field execution team. She is well versed in many software applications and systems including, but not limited to, Microsoft Excel, Word, Outlook, Live Meeting, SAP ERP systems, Mcompanion, and SharePoint. Jen is responsible for day to day coordination, dispatching, Customer billing, and support for Jeff and the field technicians with all other topics.
Experience:
Service Coordinator, Siemens - 2014 to Present
Administrative Support, Siemens - 2012 to 2014
Other Certifications:
Licensed Notary
Henry Graves, Maintenance Field Supervisor
Henry has 33 years of experience maintaining and repairing traffic signal and streetlight systems. He is extremely knowledgeable with all field elements including, but not limited to, traffic signal rewiring, underground conduit installation, traffic signal modifications, pole foundation removal and installation, complete traffic signal installation, and routine/ emergency maintenance response. Henry will be responsible for supporting the Service Account Management Team with monitoring maintenance field activities, site inspections, and scheduling maintenance technicians.
Experience: mogsz
Field Supervisor, Siemens - 2010 to Present Yaw Part onto PUBEKSAHT- YMaint. Superintendent, Republic ITS - 2004 to 2010 IMSA Work Zone Safety Utility Supervisor, Signal Maintenance, Inc. - 2000 to 2004 Utility Lead, Signal Maintenance, Inc. - 1995 to 2000
Utility Worker, Superior Signal Services - 1986 to 1995 Field Maintenance Team
Siemens will assign one primary IMSA certified Level III traffic signal technician, who will be responsible for responding to calls within normal business hours. We will assign two secondary IMSA certified Level III traffic signal technicians to provide back up support in the event your primary technician is unavailable ( i. e. vacation, sick days, jury duty, etc.).
Primary Technician:
Naim Yanie, Traffic Signal Technician
Yanie has 10 years of experience with all facets of traffic signal maintenance and repair. He is extremely knowledgeable with all traffic signal control equipment, specifically Econolite controllers ( ASC/ 2070) and Econolite software systems. He also has a vast understanding of the field elements such as traffic signal wiring, loop detection, video detection, emergency vehicle and railroad preemption, etc.
Experience:
ur j Traffic Signal Technician, Siemens - 2016 to Present rm,. P_ m PUBLIC WET Traffic Signal Specialist, City of Irvine — 2014 to 2016 IMSA Work Zone Safety Traffic Signal Technician, Siemens - 2010 to 2014 IMSA Level 1, II, III Certified Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Technician, Republic ITS - 2009 to 2010 Technician Other Industry Certifications:
NEC Certified
Cert No. 157902
Expires 06/ 09/ 2020
Econolite ASC3 Controller Certified
Econolite Autoscope Certified
Iteris Video Detection Certified
Bucket Truck Certified
ATSICMU/ MMUTest Equipment
Certified
i
Back- up Technicians:
Kevin Daxon, Traffic Signal Technician
Kevin has 18 years of experience with all facets of traffic signal maintenance and repair. He is extremely knowledgeable with all traffic signal control equipment, specifically Econolite controllers ( ASC/ 2070) and Econolite software systems. Kevin also has a vast understanding of the field elements such as traffic signal wiring, loop detection, video detection, emergency vehicle and railroad preemption, etc.
I
Experience:
caXsz
Traffic Signal Technician, Siemens - 2010 to Present yw y- n PUBLIC SAfEiY Traffic Signal Technician, Republic ITS - 2007 to 2010 ' IMSA Work Zone Safety Traffic Signal Technician, Team Econolite — 2004 to 2007 IMSA Level I, II, 111 Certified Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Technician, Signal Maintenance, Inc. - 2001 to 2004 Technician Other Industry Certifications:
NEC Certified
Cert. No. E - 149693- G
Expires 08/ 19/ 2019
Econolite ASC3 Controller Certified
Econolite Autoscope Certified
Bucket Truck Certified
ATSI CMU/ MMU Test Equipment j
Certified
I MSA Certified Signal Inspector j
Management Contacts:
Michael Hutchens is the Southwest Area Operations Manager and is responsible for all operations in California and directly manages the service team that, if selected, would be managing the day to day traffic signal maintenance activities in the City of Seal Beach. Steven Teal, the Director of Service for Siemens Mobility Inc., is heavily involved in the operations and is available as an escalation point if ever necessary. Both Michael and Steven have signatory authority and are able to execute documents/ contracts on behalf of Siemens Mobility, Inc.
Steven M. Teal, Director of Service ( U. S.)
Steven has had a long, productive, and successful career in the traffic signal maintenance and repair j industry. Currently he assumes the accountability for overall profits and losses for the complete Customer Service ( CS) business nationwide with responsibility for 60 office employees, management of 250 field employees and over 250 municipal traffic signal and street lighting maintenance contracts. Steven is involved in the local operations and will provide technical support to the local contract management team.
We feel it' s important that Customers have the ability to voice opinions, concerns, and compliments to our senior managers, therefore Steven will be available to you as a top level escalation point.
Experience:
z
Director of Service ( U. S.), Siemens - October, 2015 to Present Y- v. v. m wxx WM Southwest Operations Manager, Siemens - 2012 to 2015 IMSA Work Zone Safety Regional Manager, Republic ITS - 2007 to 2012 > .. IMSA Level 1, II, III Certified Traffic Operations Manager, Republic ITS - 2006 to 2007 Signal Technician Project Manager, Republic ITS - 2004 to 2006 IMSA Associate Member Maint. Manager, Signal Maintenance, Inc. - 2003 to 2004 Other Industry Certifications:
Lead Traffic Signal Technician, Signal Maintenance, Inc - 2001 to 2003 Microprocessors Traffic Signal Technician, Signal Maintenance, Inc - 1998 to 2001 Iteris Video Detection Michael Hutchens, Area Operations Manager
Mike has over 25 years of extensive experience in both the technical and construction related aspects of the traffic signal and streetlight maintenance industry. He has served in many different capacities with increasing responsibility as he has shown himself to be thorough, professional and competent through the years from field laborer to project management, and most recently Operations management. Mike is responsible for overall profits and losses for the Southwest US territory with responsibility for 30 office employees, management of 70 field employees and 115 traffic signal and street lighting maintenance Customers. Mike is directly involved in the day to day operations. Mike will support the contract management team and also serve as the Cis first point of escalation, if necessary.
Experience: IP- MPU
n
Operations Manager, Siemens - November, 2015 to Present Y - RUC SME" Senior Service Account Manager, Siemens - 2010 to 2015 - IMSA Work Zone Safety Sr. Project Manager, Republic ITS- 2006 to 2010 - IMSA Level I, II, III Certified Traffic Signal Maintenance Operations Manager, Team Econolite - 2003 to 2006 Technician Chief Estimator, US Traffic Corporation - 1998 to 2003
Utility Technician, Signal Maintenance, Inc. - 1994 to 1998 Additional Resources available to the City of Seal Beach In addition to the previously mentioned technicians, Siemens has over 20 additional traffic signal technicians ( mostly IMSA III certified) located in Orange, Los Angeles, Ventura, and Riverside / San Bernardino County areas. We also employ over 20 key construction personnel for major repairs. These include certified crane operators, dedicated utility locators for ( USA) Dig Alert service, Corning certified fiber optic technicians, and our own in- house loop crew. Siemens ITS has the largest workforce of IMSA level III Certified Traffic Signal Technicians and NEC Certified Electricians in the industry.
For your reference and to outline the strength of our team, we have listed additional personnel below:
SOUTHERN GUFORNIA ROSTER I lC
Ni: harlH. rt: la. rx
SieYM Teal ClrK: or at Se" ke.-
Nea Cprr, xl, nc Nan a•J"' e e e
s ir* M Fierce Serer Account Wars"
uk Clvi,:uyln. Slocum hikk S.rµrita ' Cur,>truura• Nulrt•t e lieray
Claves Feld Supervisor ( NainManQl a
iy, Ga•: ah_ TrauiSynalTctimiciar e
e e e d KF -
4 r:arnn raffir * a l T.+,", e d e O e Niam'
tarie Traffic Signal TmHidar e
e e e e Francnrn
Alvarar_, raffir 5ynal , Klxriar a
e o JMy `•;
amlidmwm Traffic SgralTKhrt: dar e
e e T,
T Rua, v Fad Swrc . arnraa: arn'rchnnim, e Oasid
lbs Traffic Signal TrrNidar Reardo
Fern v+c^_z Trettic Signal TKhrriar e
e e e w
atw 777:
TNrryiara,
FFlp< Tniothy
Kosrrwn wffrtgrtallKhnrar
Hirt
Signal Foreman e
e
e
O
e
O
r
Y_.... aaphad LIP= Surr• Igh•tnhriian e
Samson
bkrve Lead " ra* Signal' e: hrkiar e
e e e e irwdry
Wales Ir• ad ra• rn Sinal w. hers e
e e e A
wto Ramirez ra i Sgrsi tr. Ime far e
e e orgeLiviao '
ra• rSignal Tcchmoar e
e e e Neale
Ramal Trask * ral' mN idar e
e e e a .
T
C. abeialLrulsor Trax SigralTKhru- Jar e
e e e NramSa,
W dl r *,. I I.1, ni r• a e e GeKtlo
Aryuiaro re" c Sgrel Technidar 5
Ii—,
m, will R Srpsrl rsiawiin• e
e e e e fmwio
Cmarx, Trak Signal TKhnidar e
e 0 e hshi
dt: rry. m• Sc• r+drrlmrrm, e
e e e Orr
loner Trak Sgral TKhniciar e
e e e rolarda "
w, w - k Signal Tech - 4dsr e
e acob
Ganboa Tw' k Signa0veel Light CvordmN Wirt '
w bglaw ll TadrNklaySpulahrte e e Nathra.
sauNa• NMhaniel
Baler r.
Synal Slr•ciahe:, laL tclmrwr Trak
Sgnal, 41dwr Opdn Tachakhn e
e e e e Sunlc•
Sua•• 4y1•.,'mffn Signal cth• iian e
e e e e rNirnphn
Franco S4nr: 4jb!!4alfn Sgnol alw irar e
e 0 10 e Coli
Landis Slrrethg+ vTrane Signal TKft i an e e e rid
Nnhnn Tla-, SL, na1 Conttnrni: nn Fnrmrar e
e CecN
TKry:r, Trex Sgnal Conslruaionfwmar ee v ^.
craiy - vanc> Trax Signal rorrntan. Loop Crelr Laad i
wgo Nuroz Tw' k Signal rorernan. Carr Cprratorv”
Willie 4. Sgnel,+ Sucet lg1•t GroarvJinar e
e e Char:
r4whr TraaS: Sgral : rrnnr n C . rr C:m—, 0 O David
lalrnwn a•• r. Siynal Grua. . C m Cytya: ai u
lC, hl. s Nn r ra' Sr, ral, nnrrt lr h. fr,, udmar ChM
GaKis rn" ir %i, nal' m: Kcman Leap Crena i:
1 -
rhna: hnn N. ugrcc rati: Si, nal• StrretIiyh• W—'
Lacas optin TKhnkiaa e RanUaaiy
actSryrwbSucclLyl: Grow Jmar e 1,
man Noriega Trak SigrabSvrel light Graurdmar Narl
Netlina Tian, Sgral, SvemLgh: GrouMmar e
aces :
iarna USA Udergrouad Ufiky Locator e t°'
Raphaca Vegas Street UqM outage Chechen
Proposed sub -consultants/ sub -contractors
All services as outlined in the RFP will be provided and performed by Siemens as the Prime contractor.
With that stated, we at Siemens do maintain relationships with numerous specialty contractors throughout the industry in order to be able to respond to our customer' s needs as a complete one stop solution for all things traffic signal and street lighting related.
Organizational Information
Steven Teal
Director of Service
Michael Hutchens
Operations Manager
Shenoa Townsend
Service Account Mana
Debra McVay- Manzo Jennifer Dalby
Service Coordinator Dispatcher
Naim Yanie
Minh Tran Christopher Slocum
IMSA Level III
Traffic Signal Technician
Engineering Technician Field Supervisor
Kevin Daxon
IMSA Level III
Traffic Signal Technician
David Elias
IMSA Level I
Traffic Signal Technician
21 Additional
Signal Technicians
23 Const./ Auxiliary
Employees ( Foreman,
Crane Operators,
Groundsman, etc.)
Exceptions
At this time, Siemens takes no exceptions or has any deviations to the RFP or contract documents.
Furthermore, by submitting this proposal, Siemens acknowledges concurrence with the terms of the City' s sample contract agreement, which was included in the RFP documents.
Company Qualification
A Brief Overview of Siemens
Our Past
Founded by Werner Von Siemens ( pictured right) in 1847, Siemens has become a global powerhouse in electronics and electrical engineering,. operating in the industry, energy and healthcare sectors. Siemens AG Berlin and Munich) entered the traffic industry market in 1924 with the implementation of the first signal system with red, yellow and green in Berlin, Germany. Innovation continued when Siemens introduced the first centrally controlled light signal system in 1926 and a tradition of developing ground -breaking technology in the traffic industry began.
With its many years of presence in the world markets, Siemens Traffic Solutions possesses extensive international know- how and proven technical platforms in the areas of traffic management and guidance.
Siemens entered the US transportation market in 1995 through the acquisition of two industry leaders in the United States; Eagle Traffic Control Products and Gardner Transportation Systems. In 2010 Siemens acquired Republic ITS, a U. S. leader in traffic signal and street light maintenance services in order to enhance its presence in the intelligent traffic solutions ( ITS) market in the USA. With these business acquisitions, along with our extensive dealer network, Siemens Intelligent Traffic Solutions (ITS) business unit has the ability to solve traffic problems throughout the country and around the world.
Our Present
Siemens currently services over 10,000 traffic signalized intersections and 400, 000 streetlights under long- term maintenance agreements nationwide. We are dedicated to meeting and exceeding the challenging public safety requirements associated with our industry. Siemens has been in the traffic signal maintenance industry worldwide for over 50 years. Locally, Siemens ( formerly Republic ITS & Signal Maintenance, Inc.) has been in business for over 40 years servicing numerous contracts throughout the state of California. Currently, in California alone Siemens maintains intersections for over 140 agencies encompassing over 4,000 locations of various sizes from full function intersections to in - pavement flashing crosswalks and rapid flashing beacons.
Our Future
At Siemens, we are always looking to the future and for our ITS division, the future is bright. With infrastructure improvement being the focus for many municipal governments these days, it is imperative that Siemens stays on the cutting edge of technology in order to remain relevant. Whether the agency is looking for connected vehicle, smart street lighting solutions, service/ support contracting, ITS software and controllers or complete infrastructure management, Siemens is constantly evolving the industry. We look to the future with the foresight that can only be gained through 170 years of experience and more importantly, we aim to shape it.
Our Distinct Qualifications
We feel that Siemens is uniquely qualified to achieve the goals and targets that have been established by the City of Seal Beach in this RFP. There are numerous advantages to having Siemens as a partner.
Among some of the most beneficial:
Siemens has the largest workforce of IMSA level III Certified Traffic Wft Signal Technicians and NEC Certified Electricians in the industry.
Siemens has strategically positioned local field offices with an !` abundance of inventory and technical resources.
Our ability to complete entire projects in- house. Although we have many valuable external partners, we do not have to rely on consultants, outside subcontractors, or sourced project management. This improves communication, streamlines work, and eliminates unnecessary costs or delays.
Siemens is able to partner with numerous manufacturers and i
distributors to provide leading technologies that will deliver a product that exceeds the City of Seal Beach' s expectations at an economical rate.
Being part of a large, multi -national corporation provides us with the ability to finance specific strategic opportunities for our customers.
We give our Customers the access to effectively track progress and manage service orders and the ability to review historical intersection information using our web -based Customer Portal. All technicians wirelessly update the street light and traffic signal database as work is performed making all information available virtual real- time.
In summary, Siemens ITS is focused on delivering what cities need most today, safe, reliable infrastructure solutions. Whether you choose to commute by foot, bike, car, bus or light rail, Siemens traffic management solutions help you arrive safely, more efficiently and with less impact on the environment.
Key Contact
During the evaluation, if the City should have any inquiries regarding this proposal please, feel free to contact:
Michael J. Hutchens
2250 Business Way
Riverside, CA 92501
Office Phone ( 951) 784- 6600
Fax ( 951) 784- 6700
Email: michael. hutchens@siemens. com
Proof of Contractors License and DIR Registration
httos:// www2. csl b. ca. aov/ onli rieservices/ CheckLicense I I/ LicenseDetai I. asox? LicNum= 1042278 Contractor's License Detail for License # 1042278
SIEMENS MOBILITY INC
1026 E LACY AVE
ANAHEIM, CA 92805
Business Phone Number(714) 458- 1534
Entity Corporation
Issue Date 07/ 25/ 2018
Expire Date 07/ 31/ 2020
This license is current and active.
All information below should be reviewed.
r: 1n - FI Fr` TPl1' AI
Details Legal Name Registration County City License TypeMumbels) Current Status Registration Expiration Number Date Date
Vie, SIEMENS M06iL11Y LNC. 1000059880 ORANGE ANAHEIM CSLI3. 1042278 Active 07: 30! 2018 06730, 2019 Primary Facilities and Staff Supporting the City of Seal Beach:
Ifselected, all contract management, coordination and field technicians will be based out ofthis office:
Siemens ITS Anaheim, CA
Invoicing, Contract Administration and Warehouse
1026 E. Lacy Ave
Anaheim, CA 92805
Phone ( 714) 456- 9902
Fax ( 714) 456- 9905
Our Anaheim location is located 20 miles from Seal Beach City Hall near Anaheim Stadium. The warehouse at this location stocks over $ 500, 000. 00 in inventory including new controllers, cabinets, signals, luminaries and most necessary ancillary devices. Though most of our staff keeps plenty of equipment on their trucks, if the need arises, this location can be easily accessed around the clock 365 days a year as a source of additional inventory that is readily available. We also have our Riverside Test and repair facility east of the city near the intersection of the 91 and 60 freeways, which houses another 550, 000. 00 in readily available equipment as an additional resource.
Other Local Siemens ITS facilities. -
Siemens ITS' Riverside Office
Warehouse, Office, & % sting Facility
2250 Business Way
Riverside, CA 92501
Phone ( 951) 784- 6600
Fax ( 951) 784- 6700
Siemens ITS' San Diego, CA Office
Warehouse & Office
1820 John Towers Ave., Suite A
EI Cajon, CA 92020
Phone ( 619) 562- 1104
Fax ( 619) 562- 1125
Financial Information
Siemens Mobility, Inc. is a corporation, incorporated in the State of Delaware on November 29th, 2017.
Siemens Intelligent Traffic Solutions ( ITS) is a business unit within Siemens Industry, Inc. a subsidiary member of the Siemens AG corporate group, a multinational, multi -billion dollar company listed on the New York Stock Exchange. As such, Siemens AG files consolidated financial reports with the US Securities & Exchange Commission. A copy of Siemens, A.G. most recent annual report can be found at www. siemens. com through " Investor Relations". All required financial reports and filings are available at the SEC' s website http:// sec.goy/edqar.shtml. SMI and its subsidiaries are not publicly traded companies and do not release separate annual financial statements.
SIEMENS
I,/ - for-tife-
Project Approach
Our approach is simple; we work diligently with our cities to develop and evolve the systems of communication and to hone in on their needs as a customer. It is always the goal of Siemens ITS to structure our service around each individual Customer' s needs. We understand that throughout the term of a contract of this type, those needs may change so we approach all of our contracts with the same simple vision; build a partnership with the City' s staff and work towards achieving common goals set forth through that partnership. This is an ever evolving process and that is why we believe that the only successful route is through establishing these common goals. Our methodology and a commitment to service will be applied to every aspect of our services for the City of Seal Beach and we strive to continually evolve this concept.
Response times as requested in the RFP are easily met due to the City of Seal Beach' s central location to our territory here in Southern California. We have a large staff and a customer base that allows us to be near or even in the city at all times. Response times of less than one hour are commonplace with our service group and are what we strive for. These times would simply not be possible if not for the fact that we have numerous highly qualified technicians, all equipped with bucket trucks and a rolling stock of materials, working throughout the territory. In a nutshell, if we aren' t already there, we are always nearby which makes the one hour as requested in the RFP very easy to accommodate.
As stated above, response times are not an issue; this pertains to after- hours calls as well. All of our staff live throughout the area and take their vehicles home daily. We have numerous on- call technicians working/ available 24 hours a day. Both our standard phone lines and our toll free 1 ( 800) 229- 6090 are answered around the clock 365 days a year. We also encourage direct contact with individuals responsible for the contract such as the technician or superintendent in the event that the city believe that information can more easily transferred.
What Sets Siemens Apart
Though there are many reasons we feel that we are the best choice, listed in the following pages are just some of the remaining highlights that we feel we make us the better prepared and more qualified service provider to serve the needs of the City of Seal Beach.
Material Inventory
Siemens maintains an extensive inventory of traffic signal and streetlight equipment including controllers, cabinets, load switches, signal heads, poles, LED indications, luminaries HPS, MH, MV LPS and LED), service enclosures, controller cabinets and other miscellaneous parts. This extensive
inventory combined with our vast experience and testing facilities enable Siemens to repair or replace damaged
equipment expeditiously and professionally.
Siemens employees will be equipped with all spare parts necessary to place a signal system back in operation for all trouble calls, including sensing devices for induction loop detectors. No permanent or temporary change of controller mechanisms will be done without prior approval of the City except in case of an emergency. Siemens will notify the City that the equipment was removed and replaced with approved spare equipment. Inventory levels are maintained in order to accommodate each individual Customer' s needs. Siemens continually monitors and modifies inventory levels as required by current maintenance and repair.
Reporting and Record Keeping
Detailed Billing/ Activity Reports
In addition to our Customer Portal, Which will be outlined in the coming pages, the City will receive a detailed billing report on or before the
15th
day for the prior month. Each invoice will lists the
description, response, caller information, and the labor, equipment and materials billed for each location.
tiO' I OrYA1AOYrr I rwwaw
Dab C001pleteM F0. 14AR/ 1E12M6 01: 00 Work Older IF 600276410E DeW MOW Req. 3601177167
DesalpUW IEC POLE KD ' CALLER PD
Re$W—: REMOVED DAMAGED E0IUPIENT. DRLUM a MSTALUW MEIN W POLE.
TM. TM 3 EEC. PV HEAD E VbTT H AMWIN LENEE6. 2 R. 2 Y a 2 a PV I=& COUNT -DOWN COMO IM LED. RE -USM PEDIEAD iPM ASW. RMACED PPB AND DMECTIONAL PIJITE OLD EM VAROff PROGRAM YELL FOLOw UP WRN sALL LHIEEE a PROGRAM som F CRY wAnT THEM PRoaRAIB6I: D. lion: Oty and Unet Cost Extra Routrw
Marx
ELECTRICIAN RT 12 000 H it PeF H S $ 0.00
ELECTRKUN OT 8.000 H a pet H $ SO -00
ELECTRICIAII PT 6 000 H a pef H $ $ 0.00
SERVICE SOCKET TRUCK 26 000 H M oer H S 90.00
Trial S i 0.00
rnear a s o 0o11 s
Intersection Records
We will maintain permanent service records at each signalized intersection documenting all preventative maintenance visits, as well as all ongoing work, operations and hardware malfunctions, repairs and configuration work. An example of our cabinet log ( intersection record) is below:
SIEMENS CABINET LOO
Testing Services
Our laboratories specialize in controller and cabinet system testing and support services including, but not limited to conflict monitor testing and certification. Siemens' local testing facility is located in Riverside, California. Our facility have the ability to test and certify more than five ( 5) TS -1 or TS -2 Type control cabinet assemblies simultaneously. Our
laboratory has all tools and spare parts available to
allow our lab technicians to troubleshoot, test and
repair typical traffic signal controllers and apparatus as long as it' s found to be both economically and
time wise beneficial to the City.
Our facilities service all types and brands of traffic
signal control equipment including Caltrans
Standard, NEMA TS - 1 and TS -2 and ITS equipment. Siemens' s laboratory personnel include degreed IMSA certified traffic signal technicians and certified Electricians. Our Field technicians perform all traffic signal related tasks with decades of cumulative traffic signal test and repair experience.
Fiber Optic Repair, Installation, Maintenance Services
Siemens has a dedicated fiber optic placement, troubleshooting, and emergency repair team available for the City of Seal Beach. The team is fully equipped to perform OTDR testing, troubleshooting, fusion splicing, and any documentation needs for the City. Siemens' fiber optic team was responsible for successfully upgrading all CCN cameras and bringing in the fiber optic infrastructure into the new Caltrans District 8 Traffic Management Center in San Bernardino.
USA Dig Alert
Siemens has in- house underground utility locators that will respond to all Underground Service Alert USA) requests/ notices or at the request of City staff for the marking and protection of traffic signal underground facilities such as traffic signal and electrical conduits, interconnect facilities, loops, street light conduits, and other appurtenant equipment which may conflict with other right- of- way construction or repairs. Our technicians are equipped and certified with the proper locating devices provided by Metrotech.
Communication and Teamwork
At Siemens, we are your partner. Our project management team as well as our field personnel will be constantly communicating with the City representatives and we will follow all communication/ notification requirements as set forth and agreed upon. Routine monthly meetings will be key to ensure that everyone is on the same page, not only for system status but to make sure that we are on track with the City' s budget and that we are serving the citizens of the City of Seal Beach to the highest level possible.
Siemens employees working for the City will be equipped with any necessary communication devices in order to keep our City liaison( s) informed at all times. Currently, all of our staff is outfitted with an Android device that will enable them to send, and receive real- time information as well as text, email and phone capabilities.
Siemens recognizes that speed, efficiency, and comprehensive service are the keys to customer satisfaction in our industry. With this in mind, we are constantly seeking innovative ways to improve our service delivery. We have developed an in- house suite of applications that represent what we believe to be the forefront of customer account management and maintenance tracking in our industry.
Customer Portal ( Traffic Signal Service Management System) Another form of communication is our web -based management system where our technicians transmit all service information in real time. This is included with all of our maintenance offerings at no additional charge.
D The Siemens Customer Service Portal gives our Customer access to tyl lm reel- brne status u( routine meintenanee and servicr' dit, I ncalmn hictoty Isnrt/ iltrr by data. Iptatinn all type Mc.) Overall histfnicat n— itelance end el data.
R- I- b- eywpruenl urven( oiic s. map, event iepu 9,
AM nuoag— ot ( includes dr9dal phnhxjr.g)hs. GIS data. Googly S1- 0 viryr application Mc )
IWpY" r111r1WY
I f•( ttrllf IAllt hie lihit, millur9 IeslNllt\ t• Arlt) MI IP n dlnl llhn( e dein' III Iedl- tom
bad( to ouv order management system
usinq tablets/ chrome books.
p
Mhiuge Irialmdl (lm' Is distill warehnlne
M- stock availability.. material ordering. truck
to truck transfers. etc.)
G
This software also allows us to monitoi
many key performance items such as time
arrived onsite. time or completion.
y._
nihterials used. and vehicle/ equipment
used.
The contractual scope or work and all
nalllterid( Ke activities are also avallable
for le( I u rdn, to revim Ill oidel til
rmulr all tasks die, ( trupletHl wdthn liw
specified timeframe.
Technician Facing Application " mCompanion"
Siemens utilizes a proprietary management system that we refer to as mCompanion. This software is used to dispatch work orders and to track the progress of all work. Our technicians are now transmitting service response items ( preventative maintenance, emergency calls, scheduled extraordinary repairs, etc.) in real- time back to our traffic signal maintenance and management system using a handheld device. This allows our customers to view all work orders in real time through our Customer Portal. This software also allows us to monitor many key performance items such as time arrived onsite, time of completion, materials used, and vehicle/ equipment used. This information is then pulled into our internal processing system which features a secure web portal that the City can access in order to obtain progress on technician work for call outs and maintenance activities as well as a list of assets, asset map, real- time status of scheduled maintenance and service request calls, history per functional location, real- time equipment inventories, maps and event reporting as well as digital photographs of equipment. Detailed training of our management system is available anytime.
Industry Specific Tools
Siemens owns the following equipment used for various ITS components:
Two ATSI PCMT 8000 Conflict Monitor ( CMU) and Malfunction Certification Unit
Two ATSI PCMT 2600 Conflict Monitor ( CMU) and Malfunction Certification Unit
Fiber Optic Fusion Splicer w/ Cleaver
OTDR Tester
LED lumens Testers/ various brands
Multiple Metrotech Underground Locators ( USA Dig Alert) Monitor ( MMU) Test and
Monitor ( MMU) Test and
Vehicles & Equipment
Siemens owns and operates approximately 100 service vehicles of various types and sizes in the State of California. The bulk of which is located in Southern California. All technicians are assigned vehicles which are taken home daily in order to ensure rapid response in case of emergency. To help ensure safety, Siemens uses hydraulic bucket trucks with aerial lifts which are OSHA approved, inspected and certified as required by law. All drivers are trained through the Sentry Program for Insulated Devices. In addition to bucket trucks, Siemens also owns many construction vehicles towable arrow boards, towable air compressors, towable changeable message signs, Bobcat with auger & backhoe attachments, all required hand tools, and many other items for maintenance and construction. The list below shows our fleet in Southern California and its respective proximity from the city of Seal Beach.
Siemens Vehicles and Equipment
Minh Tran V3051 aD71 fiord WKkup
Matthew HLAs V061 2114 Ram Pid w
Kevin Duan V079 2017 ford 45' 7nealatied Bucket Trick
7 . Francisco Akrarado V078 2117 ford 45' Insulated Bucket Truk a
ax, s w Flom Vane S7- 4157 0586 3= 7 Ford 45' kwJiamed Bucket Truckk Rodrigo Gonzalez V050 2013 Ford Eaandene Val
u ': '` Benpimn P%fts 77- 34297M 20r,, Fail Q Imudaeed Bucket Truck Wlilk am Extunaun W4 2117 Fwd 45' kmAaWd Bucket Truk
a David Elias S7 -167U 358 2011 Cadge 40' taped Bucket Truck s Alberto Rarnir¢ VW 3117 Fwd 45' Bnsuiaeed Bucket Truck OwiskWher Franco V083 3112' Ford 45' IrWated Bucket Trus.
J „ Jorge L ora tiano V0B1 3117 Ford 4S' Lrs flamed Bucket Truk NeWe Ramos
g,
47- 22406942 2ri2 Ford 4Z' 7nsulaeed Bucket Truck
Samson Monte VW 2117 Fwd 45' kwuiamed Bucket Truck
Tmnadny % APaBkw V075 ZM7, Ford 45' Irisuitotad Bucket True Brandon Mddt S7 -1617U-7362111 Dodge 40' Non- Irmilamed Bucket Truck GabrW Knutson VOBS 3117 Ford 45' Lreuhoed Bucket Truck
Ben tnkken 47- 193223. 99 2111 Ford 40' Marr9rmallaeed Bucket Truck:
i
Gerardo Anguiano V0 Ci 3117 Fwd 45' Irrs<Aaoed Bucket Truck En>K) dwCdvsrpes S7, 211r Fard 40' NanllretfaoedBucketTruck Bucket Linda Mcneill S7- 20910286 2012 Fwd 42' Ireurlamed Bucket Truck e
Micheal Ortega V0T 2017 Ford 45' Ir" ned Bucket Truck
Dennis Kyle 57- 1671. 1733 2111 Dodge 40' Non4mullated Bucket Truck Yolanda Begarano V197PK 2009 Ford Eaonoline Van
Qnistophet Slocum V019 2017o Ford 45' ?reulated Bucket Truck Cow Landis V059 3117 Ford 45' Insulated Bucket Truck
Son Le S7- 20910.90 2117 Ford 41. Irtudaoed Bucket Truk Nadory Baker 57- 27077547 4713 Ilam 41. IrtsulatedBucket Tack W Willis 57- 41570570 2016 ford 42' ln% Aated Bucket Truck Tmodry Kasman V070 2017 lard 45' rWated Bucket Truck
David MoGno V037 2112 Ford Utiky Cormuction Service Truck Pedro Yanez V3060 2011 Ford Wky/Consnuction Service Truk Cecil Terry Jr. V034 2012 Ford UnkyiConsuucdon Service Truck Crag Yanes V015 2011 Fwd Uuity/ Carntrkcoon Service Truck Hugo Munoz V026 2012 Ford Utikty/ Conkstrucoon Service Truck Chad Newton V036 2012 Ford UOlityr' Conmkuowr Service Truck 1ohnadwn Burgess VW22 2009 Cher Utiiityl Cost Truck
Jose Robles Herrera 57- 39702400 2016 Ram 45' Insulated Bucket Truck Olsen Garcia V031 2012 Fwd Utility/ Construction Service Truck Casey GarciaV251SZ 2012 Chev Service Truck
Mark Medina V3054 2011 Ford Pickup
Michael De La Riva V3052 2109 Ford 40' Non4nsulated Bucket Truck Additional/ Pooled Vehicles
is • No. Nr Mak*_
CA NRFl- 0915
rrsr
VO93 2016 Ford 4 Yard Dump Truck CA 37946C2
VO52 2014 Freightliner Crane Track CA 41167M1
V3O63 2011 Ford Pickup Truck CA 89537C1
V3O64 2011 Ford Pickup Truck CA 449321- 1
VO23 2005 Ford 3 Yard Dump Truck CA 7R94547
V1O33 2002 GMC 7 Yard Dump Trick CA 7A5254S
57- 20910295 2012 Ford 42' Non Insulated Bucket Truck CA NRF1- 0915 47- 11832323 2008 Ford Utility/ Construction Service Truck IN 1093034 Available Constriction Equipment
ABS88 2014 Arrow Board ( Towable) CA NRFl- 0915
CC51 2011 GP Concrete Saw ( Circle Saw) N/ A
TR311 2004 MLBLT Trailer CA 4KE1864
ABS84 2014 Changeable Message Sign ( Towable) TBD
ABS87 2014 lChangeable Message Sign ( Towable) TBD
HM341 2000 Crafco Hot Melt Machine TBD
AC313 1999 Ingersoll Rand DP Air Compressor CA SE618O73 AB321 1999 Allmand 25 Lamp SP Arrowboard ( Towable) TBD TR511 1980 Cable Trailer CA 2FL48O3
M311 2009 Cimline Loop Sealing Hot Melt Machine CA SE56O124 VAC311 2009 Ditch Witch 8OO9al Vacuum ( Towable) CA 4LE8242 AC312 2008 Airman DP Air Compressor ( Towable) TBD
TR315 2007 Zieman 1170 Tilt Deck Trailer CA 4JE2941
ACO6O131 2007 Sullair Air Compressor ( Towable) CA SE6O0037 TR312 2007 Individual Conductor ( Wire) Trailer CA 4FU2198 AC29OO18 2007 Sullair Air Compressor ( Towable) CA SE6O0038 AC321 2006 Sullair Air Compressor ( Towable) CA SE6O0034 AB312 2006 Allmand 25 Lamp SP Arrowboard ( Towable) CA SE613989 AC341 2005 Ingersoll Rand DP Air Compressor CA SE6OOO22 gid'
VS 1800- LiGHTS ON I
Why Choose Siemens?
At Siemens ITS, we feel that we are uniquely qualified to achieve the goals and targets that have been established by the City of Seal Beach in this RFP. There are numerous advantages to having Siemens as a partner. Among the most beneficial:
Our experience,
a
GLLIFORMA REPUKIC
Siemens ITS continues to successfully execute long term service agreements in over 200 communities nationwide, which include maintenance programs for:
10,000 Signalized Intersections.
400,000 Streetlights.
600 callboxes.
In California, Siemens ITS maintains traffic signals and street lighting for 115 communities, encompassing:
4,000 signalized locations
40, 000 streetlights.
As the leader in the private traffic signal and streetlight maintenance industry in the United States, Siemens ITS is able to provide unparalleled expertise and outstanding value in traffic signal and street lighting related services. Among the most beneficial:
Siemens has the largest workforce of IMSA level III Certified Technicians and NEC Certified Electricians in the industry. In addition, Siemens employs a wealth of key construction personnel for major repairs, dedicated utility locators for underground service alert ( USA) Dig Alert service and Corning certified fiber optic technicians.
Siemens has strategically positioned local field offices with an abundance of inventory and technical resources.
Our ability to complete entire projects in- house. Although we have many valuable external partners, we do not have to rely on consultants, outside sub -contractors, or sourced project management.
This improves communication, streamlines work, and eliminates unnecessary costs or delays.
We give our Customers the access to effectively track progress and manage service orders and the ability to review historical intersection information using our web -based Customer Portal. All technicians wirelessly update the street light and traffic signal database as work is performed making all information available virtually real time.
In conclusion, Siemens ITS is focused on delivering what your city needs the most today; safe, reliable infrastructure solutions that help decrease costs, increase revenue, and have a positive environmental impact for the city of Seal Beach and its residents. Whether you choose to commute by foot, bike, car, bus or light rail, Siemens traffic management solutions can help you arrive safely, more efficiently and with less impact on the environment.
References
References/ Recent Project History
Siemens has been extremely successful in retaining traffic signal, streetlight, and engineering customers due to our desire to offer the best possible customer service. We have an exemplary customer service track -record highlighted by our well- qualified field personnel, knowledgeable customer service representatives, and proprietary detailed monthly reports. We understand what is required to maintain a community' s infrastructure and strive to exceed our customer' s expectations. 201 1 -
CA 91w
CA Wolf
31 3231 21 iIS( II
M.
TA F1 CA 92—
E -- A11111
CA I—
A 9- 13 1 Dj- a- gart 1 — 1 84
71- 411- 1. C.
Add— To.. Cw.* Amb"
0` 11 . i
l—, C. — 33
1. N— i. (,
y If
15900 f M— S,,--
I Ile
1 OF
L, %- 1, CA 911-
491 1 0 1- 1 0 C, 1— o s,",
I. Qll.— 1 — 2— MAP Ien— e
5 1 1- 17 All
10 111 C- 1 V , Pk
I g—, N W y w
A 12617
9- 9
A W26S
M., 11,
d A, I
M77-7 A-- I
M— ml, CA 910 16
1— W— —, —
M.— a—, CA ;—
I
7. ...- N A..
M-- 1 11
I A iio? I
81 33W N plq 8 A
C l, 11 — W4
W.— 9— h CA 92 3
0- o- 9 S28U X
N,.—' — 0, C ly f
I 1 Aq 91 1121
N— I 1A ?— 11. 1 W, ", — 11. .; I
AT H, & Y- C— B 110 567. S25 X
N— CA 428( Z
IM F 8 --,
111- 2-
I.— CA 11—
1 195 2612 1 mi x
CA I —
C, - w C 1. 1- TI 1 Ap,
q CA 92867
S. — 71, M— I—
A
P CA 92—
A,
Tl- J.: % 1w, w
P— 91 1
P— , x
I A il.-
g
r, M T--, S,,— M.
R - c- CA 91 11
69 . 25 111 160i ?. 1 — 1 1.,
I A 1— i,
1 C 121 11 E — 1-- j5 1
11- M, p 11, CA 91lM
11- 19. 1
F— u
A 1 Sltl 13-
c
3 35 W A
91 L- 11- 1 M., 11 9_ 9 1 4
Pd- D,,—
c, C- 1 11! W! 91., --
9 1, C A . 1? 4
222
CA 9Z415
SW C—' - d A— , 270
W—
S— — 9, ( A 92 ll I
C M-- 8181 5 11" M--- . 111 TI
C
CA 1 1
19- 01— — W9
q7o V'"" S' 117
x
P.. , CA 930. Ev 3C7
Tr-, .......
9- 04 9- 9 S- 761 S- 1. CA 9C74C E- 331
Y
11. 1--, A- 1— 71C IM2
91ll!
S I V, Ily C ly
5 V.:" CA 13. 3
M-- A. 9 9—, S1. 1,
Y
8- 1 C 92V
1, 11 ---, IT— SS. 121, 2.. l.' r,,.,.",,
e—. 1 C
I-- — CA 9110 11
8581120 1410 0- 9- S231WX
1111 I' ll A, 11 A1- 11 F T 11 A., I
E CA il 133
C,
S—_ T
0 ft - 11- 111- 1---- MI, 4 1,0C
P— d,—.
S" I N- 1 11
C.:
A ll"
01 2 5CO
y , o
10 11
S,— .. --, - — P- 1— 11— 11, 1114
LA 11,711
11" - Y 1 1 11 1" 1 1
71. T.. 1 824 1% 7
d Is, I—,
I A, A- M, 2 9- 9
OF
XNAff US
I Owl"
220
81 T
OF
XNAff US
Insurance Requirements
Siemens Mobility, Inc. plans to fully intend to comply with the insurance requirements set forth in the RFP, should we be awarded the contract.
Please see sample Insurance Certificate below:
Sealed Fee Proposal
As requested in the RFP, we have placed the Sealed Proposal Fee in a separate sealed envelope, which is clearly labeled " Sealed Fee Proposal" with our company' s name and project title.
SIEMENS
City of Seal Beach
Traffic Signal Maintenance Services
Project Cost Schedule
1. Routine Maintenance
Item Description: unit amwitkV Ufa TOW Pift T
Monthly Traffic Signal Maintenance EA 22 $ 75. 50 $ 1, 661. 00 $ 19, 932. 00 Monthly Flash Beacon Maintenance EA 5 $ 35. 00 $ 175. 00 $ 2, 100. 00 Total $ 22, 032. 00
U. Direct Labor Rates
Item **$ Cdoon unit RqwA0fWe
Service Truck HR
Operations Superintendent HR 70.00 70.00 70. 00
Foreman HR 120.00 150.00 178. 00
Traffic Signal Technician HR 115. 00 140.00 167. 00
Streetlight Technician HR 105. 00 124.00 143. 00
Utility Technician HR 115.00 140.00 167. 00
Groundsman I HR 100.00 140.00 140. 00
Lab Technician HR 85. 00 1 85.00 85. 00
Engineering/ Systems Technician HR 120. 00 1 150.00 178.00 Regular time hours are Monday - Friday 7: 30AM- 4: 30PM ( excluding Holidays) Overtime hours are Monday to Friday 4: 30PM- 07: 30AM, Weekends and Holidays 111. Equipment Rates
IV. Extraordinary Maintenance
1 Unit.' U
Service Truck HR 25. 00
Bucket Truck HR 28. 00
Crane Truck HR 55. 00
Towable Air Compressor HR 5. 00
Towable Arrow Board HR 5. 00
IV. Extraordinary Maintenance
1 Unit.' U
Underground Services Alert ( USA) Locate/ Markout Services HR 132. 12 Install 6' Dia Circular Type E Loop ( 1- 4 loops) EA 500. 83 Install 6' Dia Circular Type E Loop ( 5 or More loops) EA 427.43 Cabinet Testing EA 880. 83
V. Material
Item oet6riptkm Unit . Unitl:]
Material Mark- up will be Invoice Cost Plus 15%
SIEMENS
I CSL- LGATTON ONLY APPI_ IE: S T' O SIFMH: NS MOBILITY, INC. ALI GONTRAGT' S, BIDS, CERTIFICATES, AFFIDAVITS OR ANCILLARY DOGUMENTS ' 1' 0 BE SIGNED ON BEHALF OF SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC. MUST BE SIGNED BY MARC BUNCHER AND
MARSHA SMITH WITHOUT EXCEPTION
DELEGATION OF APPROVAL AUTHORITY FROM
CEO MARC BUNCHER AND CFO MARSHA SMITH
Mobility Management
Rolling Stock
Intelligent Traffic Systems
Turnkey Projects & Electrification
Customer Services
SIEMENS MOBILITY, INC.
A. The undersigned Marc Buncher, CEO and Marsha Smith, CFO of the Siemens Mobility, Inc. ( the Corporation"), a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, by virtue of the authority vested as CEO and CFO to sign or countersign and otherwise execute in the name, or on behalf of the Corporation, any bids, projects, contracts, agreements and any certificates, affidavits or ancillary documents in connection therewith to the extent the foregoing instruments and are consistent with the limits of authority granted under LoA guidelines and grants of release for and on behalf of the Corporation, do hereby delegate to and acknowledge that the following person( s) may exercise such authority for and on our behalf up to $ 10 million.
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES
Business Operations
Name/ Position
Finance/ Central Support Function
Name/ Position
John Paljug
VP— MM
Stefan Heckrath
Senior Director, FBA — MM
Michael Cahill
VP — RS
Christopher Halleus
Senior Director, FBA — RS
Robin Stimson
VP — RS MK& S
James Thornton
Head of Procurement — MO
Andreas Thon
VP — TPE
Michael Tyler
Senior Director, FBA — CS
Marcus Welz
VP — ITS
Miriam Scheer
Senior Director, FBA — TPE
David Buchfuehrer
Senior Director, FBA — ITS
SIEMENS
B. It is further acknowledged that the following individuals are hereby authorized to sign or countersign and otherwise execute in the name or on behalf of the Corporation the same documents as referenced in paragraph A, up to and including a transactional limit of $5 million. Any such delegation extends to but is limited to the same scope, documents and subject matter as referenced and granted in paragraph A, limited to the monetary amount stated in this paragraph.
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES
Business Operations Finance/ Central Support Function
Name/ Position Name/ Position
Douglas Dreisbach Nick D' Alessandro
Director, Projects — MM Controller, Products & Freight Engineering Carrie Hernandez
Director, RS SPR
MM
Stephan Klein, Jessica Shaiegan
SeniorProjectDirector — MM Director Procurement — MM
Steve Gitkin Valerie Conway
Sales Director - ITS Senior Director, RS SPR
David Gutierrez Thomas Wiechert
Director, RS LR Director RS LR
Luis Tondi Resta Dariusz Chrominski
Director Products — MM Director RS LM
Armin Kick Thomas Glafenhein
VP — LM & HI Director, RS SC BG & RS TD
Omid Akbarzadeh- Paydar Kim Swain
Director, RS SC BG Director, RS CRC & LM
Raymond Ginnell Angel Acuna- Siler
VP — RS CRC Director FBA Projects — MM
Mike Nolan Matthew Rumbold
Director, Sales — MM Manager, Procurement — CS
Laura Coates
General Manager, RS TD
C. It is further acknowledged that the following individuals are hereby authorized to sign or countersign and otherwise execute in the name, or on behalf of the Corporation, the same documents as referenced in paragraph A, up to and including a transactional limit of $3 million. Any such delegation extends to but is limited to the same scope, documents and subject matter as referenced and granted in paragraph A, limited to the monetary amount stated in this paragraph.
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES
Business Operations
Name/ Position
Finance/ Central Support Function
Name/ Position
Tony Ritter
Director, CS
Nikki Bassi
Director RS
Reiner Martin
Director CS
Cathie Steele
Director, CS LR & MM
Mark Bennett
VP, Operations RS
Carrie Hernandez
Director, RS SPR
David Hart
Manager, TPE
Michelle Picard
Director, RS
Cesar Losada
Director, CS
Matthaeus Decker
Manager, RS SPR
Goutham Lingannagari
Director, Bid & Project Management — ITS
Craig Debevoise
Projects Commercial, ITS
Simon Davidoff
Director, Data Services — CS
David Anderson
Project Procurement Manager, TPE
Steve Teal
Director, ITS Service
Rudolf Wagner
Performance Controlling, MO
2 SIEMENS
Jeb A. Echols Warren Openshaw
Manager, Project Estimating — MM Director, Plaffqtiqns BA, RS Paul Aichholzer Natalie Liggett
Director, Projects, RS CRC & LM Sr. Commercial Project Manager, MM Rodrigo Resende Astig Arakelian
Business Development Professional, TPE Real Estate, MO
Benjamin Kotze Angela Maria De Paiva Delicado
Head of Engineering, TPE Finance Manager, REM Americas
Gary O' Brien
Constanze Kutschki
Head of REM Americas
Manager, RS SPR
D. It is further acknowledged that the following individuals are hereby authorized to sign or countersign and otherwise execute in the name, or on behalf of the Corporation, the same documents as referenced in paragraph A, up to and including a transactional limit of $1 million. Any such delegation extends to but is limited to the same scope, documents and subject matter as referenced and granted in paragraph A, limited to the monetary amount stated in this paragraph.
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES
Business Operations Finance/ Central Support Function
Name/ Position Name/ Position
Paul Eliea, Tommy Charurat
Director, MM Director, Performance Controlling
RS
David Costello, Gisela Kaufmann
Director MM Controller MM
Dave Jeanette Constanze Kutschki
Manager, MM Manager, RS SPR
Jim Lyons Ronald Staggs
Sr. Manager, MM Commercial Project Manager, RS LR
Jeff Balogh Mary Matos
Sr. Director MM Commercial Project Manager, RS LR
George Long Christine Jaw
V Engineering RS Commercial Project Manager, CS
Robert Martner Kavita Patel
Senior Project Manager, RS LM Commercial Project Manager, CS Jeffrey Curran Christopher Smith
Project Manager, RS LR Commercial Project Manager, RS LR Duane Kopp Adam Huey
Project Manager, CS Commercial Project Manager, RS CRC & LM
Ron VanHuuksloot Thomas Koprowski
Project Manager, RS LR Commercial Project Manager, RS SC BG Thomas Stehlik David Spence
Project Manager, RS ME Commercial Project Manager, ITS
Viorel Aninoiu Solomon Lee
Project Manager, RS LR Commercial Project Manager, MM
Carsten Nebe David Sarles
Project Manager, RS CRC Procurement Commodity Manager, MM Mark Anderson Stuart Adler
Project Manager, CS Project Procurement Manager, MM
Aaldrik Metting Joel Nielsen
Project Manager, RS LR Commercial Project Mana er RS LR Chander Khanna, James Hryniewicz
Sr. Director, Manufacturing Processes Commercial Bid Manager, TPE RS
Ibrahim Kalender Darla Lesnykh
Project Manager, RS SC BG Commercial Project Manager, CS 3 f
SIEMENS
Barry Sidler Donna Lam
Program Manager, CS Commercial Project Manager, RS CRC
Luis Correia Noureann Mitchell
Project Manager, CS Procurement Project Manager, ITS
Michael Hutchens Rosa Baquero
Operations Manager, ITS Commercial Project Manager,
Field Services RS
William Tucker Sarah Jenik
Operations Manager, ITS Commercial Support, CS
Gerhard Leitner David Michna
Field Engineering Management, CS Commercial Project Manager, CS Ivan Bukin Peter Silberhorn
Project Manager, CS Commercial Project Manager, RS CRC & ME
Kevin McGrew Lars Volger
Director, Quality RS Commercial Project Manager, MM
Jamil Nasr Tien Pham
Engineering Director MM Commercial Project Manager, CS
Ben Linden Liam Nelson
Senior Director Carborne Engineering, Commercial Project Manager, TPE MM
Christopher Hammett Marcin Szczapa
Project Manager, TPE Commercial Project Manager, CS
Abhinav Mitra Clive Lepper
Project Manager, TPE Commercial Project Manager, RS LR
Matthew Thomas Michael Keats
Project Manager, CS Commercial Project Manager, TPE
Mason Boswell Noe Padilla
Project Manager, RS LR Commercial Project Manager, TPE
Mark Godsey Nishant D' Sa
Project Manager, TPE Commercial Project Manager, MM
Shawn McCuaig Lauren Westfall
Director, Field Services RS Commercial Project Manager, MM Evgeny Inozemtsev Lisa Cams
Project Manager, RS SC BG Commercial Project Manager, MM Francois -Xavier Beau Angela Hunter
Project Director, MM Commercial Project Manager, MM
Jacob Street Michelle Hillen
Project Manager, MM Commercial Project Manager, MM
Michael Carlo Anchal Bansal
Project Manager, RS LR Commercial Project Manager, ITS
Rolf Neuhaus Claudia Thiele
Project Manager, RS CRC Commercial Project Manager, ITS Hany Gadalla Karlene Keene
Project Manager, TPE Controlling, RS TD
Dave Kost Rogerio Lavieri
Production Manager, TPE Commercial Project Manager, RS LM Nicholas Corley Varnnaphapar Mekwattana
Warehouse Manager, TPE Commercial Project Manager, RS SC BG Tony Abboreno Olga Fedorov
Project Manager, TPE Commercial Project Manager, CS
Eddie Urioste Stefan Brown
Project Manager, TPE Commercial Project Manager, TPE
Erik Schildknecht Yasmine Forghani
Project Manager, CS Commercial Project Manager, RS LM _ Jon Aliason Tatiana Simonchik
Project Manager, CS Commercial Project Manager, RS LM
SIEMENS
Malte Schierwater Charles Hollman
Project Manager, RS LM Commercial Project Manager, RS LR Timothy Ferguson Stefan Hagl
Head of Operations, RS TD ____ Project Procurement Manager, TPE Clint Schuckel
Operations Manager, ITS
Laryssa Parker
Head of Digital Lab, ITS
Charles Bell
Project Manager, RS LR
Nathan Kalesnikoff
Project Manager — Bids & Proposals, TPE
Jonathan Vann
Project Manager, TPE
Alejandro Sierra
Project Manager, TPE
Nils Soyke
Head of Bid Management, ITS
Del Nichols
Director, PLM/ R& D — ITS
Bryce Dudgeon
Project Manager, RS CRC
E. It is further acknowledged that the following individuals are hereby authorized to sign or countersign and otherwise execute in the name, or on behalf of the Corporation, the same documents as they are referenced in paragraph A, up to and including a transactional limit of $250 thousand. Any such delegation extends to but is limited to the same scope, documents and subject matter as referenced and granted in paragraph A, limited to the monetary amount stated in this paragraph.
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES
Business Operations
Name/ Position
Finance/ Central Support Function
Name/ Position
Diana Johnson
Bid Manager, ITS
John Billings
Bid Manager, ITS
David Love
Sales Manager, ITS
Robert Paquette
Sales Manager, ITS
Stefan Kraemer
Business Developer, RS TD
F. It is further acknowledged that each of the signatures of the persons referred to in paragraphs A, B, C, D, and E are binding upon the Corporation.
G. It is further acknowledged that any document shall require the signature of two ( 2) of the above Authorized Signatories, one each from Business Operations and from Finance/ Central Support Functions, whom shall have the requisite signature authority to be legally binding upon the Corporation.
H. It is further acknowledged that each of the persons referred to herein is authorized to delegate such person' s authority hereunder to additional members of his or her management team up to the limit of such person' s delegation of authority, provided that such delegation is in written form signed by the delegator and filed with the Legal Department.
I. It is further acknowledged that the Secretary or an Assistant Secretary of the Corporation is authorized to issue certifications attesting to the incumbency, authority and status of any of the persons referred to in this resolution.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto subscribed our names and affixed the corporate seal of the said Corporation, as of the 1s' day of March, 2019.
Marc Buncher
CEO
Siemens Mobility, Inc.
Marsha Smith
CFO
Siemens Mobility, Inc.
SIEMENS
EXHIBIT B
TERMS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA LABOR LAW REQUIREMENTS
1. This Agreement calls for services that, in whole or in part, constitute " public works" as defined in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 ( commencing with Section 1720) of the California Labor Code (" Chapter 1"). Further, Contractor acknowledges that this Agreement is subject to ( a) Chapter 1 and ( b) the rules and regulations established by the Department of Industrial Relations (" DIR") implementing such statutes. Therefore, as to those Services that are " public works", Contractor shall comply with and be bound by all the terms, rules and regulations described in 1( a) and 1( b) as though set forth in full herein.
2. California law requires the inclusion of specific Labor Code provisions in certain contracts. The inclusion of such specific provisions below, whether or not required by California law, does not alter the meaning or scope of Section 1 above.
3. Contractor shall be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations in accordance with California Labor Code Section 1725. 5, and has provided proof of registration to City prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement. Contractor shall not perform work with any subcontractor that is not registered with DIR pursuant to Section 1725. 5. Contractor and subcontractors shall maintain their registration with the DIR in effect throughout the duration of this Agreement. If Contractor or any subcontractor ceases to be registered with DIR at any time during the duration of the project, Contractor shall immediately notify City.
4. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771. 4, Contractor' s Services are subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. Contractor shall post job site notices, as prescribed by DIR regulations.
5. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773. 2, copies of the prevailing rate of per diem wages for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to perform the Agreement are on file at City Hall and will be made available to any interested party on request.
Contractor acknowledges receipt of a copy of the DIR determination of such prevailing rate of per diem wages, and Contractor shall post such rates at each job site covered by this Agreement.
6. Contractor shall comply with and be bound by the provisions of Labor Code Sections 1774 and 1775 concerning the payment of prevailing rates of wages to workers and the penalties for failure to pay prevailing wages. Contractor shall, as a penalty to City, forfeit 200. 00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker paid less than the prevailing rates as determined by the DIR for the work or craft in which the worker is employed for any public work done pursuant to this Agreement by Contractor or by any subcontractor.
7. Contractor shall comply with and be bound by the provisions of Labor Code Section 1776, which requires Contractor and each subcontractor to: keep accurate payroll records and verify such records in writing under penalty of perjury, as specified in Section 1776; certify and make such payroll records available for inspection as provided by Section 1776; and inform City of the location of the records.
8. Contractor shall comply with and be bound by the provisions of Labor Code Sections 1777. 5, 1777. 6 and 1777. 7 and California Administrative Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 200 et seq. concerning the employment of apprentices on public works projects.
Contractor shall be responsible for compliance with these aforementioned Sections for all apprenticeable occupations. Prior to commencing work under this Agreement, Contractor shall provide City with a copy of the information submitted to any applicable apprenticeship program. Within 60 days after concluding work pursuant to this Agreement, Contractor and each of its subcontractors shall submit to City a verified statement of the journeyman and apprentice hours performed under this Agreement.
9. Contractor shall not perform Work with any Subcontractor that has been debarred or suspended pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1777. 1 or any other federal or state law providing for the debarment of contractors from public works. Contractor and subcontractors shall not be debarred or suspended throughout the duration of this Contract pursuant to Labor Code Section 1777. 1 or any other federal or state law providing for the debarment of contractors from public works. If Contractor or any subcontractor becomes debarred or suspended during the duration of the project, Contractor shall immediately notify City.
10. Contractor acknowledges that eight hours labor constitutes a legal day' s work.
Contractor shall comply with and be bound by Labor Code Section 1810. Contractor shall comply with and be bound by the provisions of Labor Code Section 1813 concerning penalties for workers who work excess hours. Contractor shall, as a penalty to City, forfeit $ 25. 00 for each worker employed in the performance of this Agreement by Contractor or by any subcontractor for each calendar day during which such worker is required or permitted to work more than eight hours in any one calendar day and 40 hours in any one calendar week in violation of the provisions of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to Labor Code sSection 1815, work performed by employees of Contractor in excess of eight hours per day, and 40 hours during any one week shall be permitted upon public work upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight hours per day at not less than one and one- half times the basic rate of pay.
11. California Labor Code Sections 1860 and 3700 provide that every employer will be required to secure the payment of compensation to its employees. In accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code Section 1861, Contractor hereby certifies as follows:
I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake selfinsurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract."
12. For every subcontractor who will perform work on the project, Contractor shall be responsible for such subcontractor' s compliance with Chapter 1 and Labor Code Sections 1860 and 3700, and Contractor shall include in the written contract between it and each subcontractor a copy of those statutory provisions and a requirement that each subcontractor shall comply with those statutory provisions. Contractor shall be required to take all actions necessary to enforce such contractual provisions and ensure subcontractor' s compliance, including without limitation, conducting a periodic review of the certified payroll records of the subcontractor and upon becoming aware of the failure of the subcontractor to pay his or her workers the specified prevailing rate of wages.
Contractor shall diligently take corrective action to halt or rectify any failure.
13. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend ( at Contractor' s expense with counsel reasonably acceptable to City) City, its officials, officers, employees, agents and independent contractors serving in the role of City officials, and volunteers from and against any demand or claim for damages, compensation, fines, penalties or other amounts arising out of or incidental to any acts or omissions listed above by any person or entity ( including Contractor, its subcontractors, and each of their officials, officers, employees and agents) in connection with any work undertaken or in connection with the Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages, attorneys' fees, and other related costs and expenses. All duties of Contractor under this Section shall survive the termination of the Agreement.
a coRO® CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DA/ DD/ YYYY) os/ 05/ osnols 20/
THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS
CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER( S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.
IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy( ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.
If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement( s).
PRODUCER
MARSH USA, INC.
445 SOUTH STREET
MORRISTOWN, NJ 07960- 6454
CONTACT
P
NE. Iac No):
ADDRESS: E- MAIL
INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC #
X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
CLAIMS - MADE OCCUR
INSURER A: HDI Global Insurance Company 41343 100129- MOBI- 18/ 19 REPUB Sachs 1185
INSURED
SIEMENS MOBILITY, INC. INSURER B : Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America 25674 INSURER C : The Travelers Indemnity Company 170 WOOD AVENUE SOUTH 25658 ISELIN, NJ 08830
INSURER D:
INSURER E:
INSURER F:
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NIJMRFR- NYC- 00903f139R- 31 RFVICIAN NIIMRFR•
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS
CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.
INSLTR
TYPE OF INSURANCE
AD L U R
POLICY NUMBER MM/
EFF M° D/
LIMITS
A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
CLAIMS - MADE OCCUR
Manashi Mukhedee -_ 1A. oLuok0"
GLD11101- 10 10/ 01/ 2018 10/ 01/ 2019 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1, 000, 000
MAGE TO RENTE
PREMISES Ea occurrence $
DA
1, 000, 000
MED EXP ( Any one person) $ 100, 000
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 1, 000, 000
GEN' L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER:
X POLICY F—] JEOT [::] LOC
GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 10, 000, 000
PRODUCTS - COMP/ OP AGG $ INCL
OTHER:
B AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY T= - CAP -7440L30- 18 10/ 01/ 2018 10/ 01/ 2019 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $ 2000 000 Ea accident X ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY ( Per person) $ N/A
X OWNED SCHEDULED
AUTOS ONLY AUTOS BODILY INJURY Per accident) $ N/ A
X HIRED X NON - OWNED
AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY
PROPERT' YDAMAGE $ N/ A Per accident
UMBRELLA LIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $
EXCESS LiAB CLAIMS -MADE AGGREGATE $
DED I I RETENTION $
B
C
B
WORKERS COMPENSATION
AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY Y / N
ANYPROPRIETOR/ PARTNER/ EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/ MEMBEREXCLUDED?
Mandatory in NH)
If yes, describe under
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below
N / A
TC2J- UB- 8049X508- 18 ( AOS)
TRK- UB- 8049X51A- 18 ( AZ, MA, OR, WI)
TWXJ- UB- 744OL338- 18 ( OH & WA)
5500K LIMIT/ $ 500K SIR""'
10101/ 2018
10/ 01/ 2018
10101/ 2019
10/ 0112019
10/ 01/ 2019
X PER OTHSTATUTE ER
E. L. EACH ACCIDENT $ 1, 000, 000
E. L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ 1, 000,000
E. L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $ 1, 000, 000
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES ( ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached If more space is required) RE: ALL OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH, ITS ELECTED OFFICIAL, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS ARE HEREBY ADDITIONAL INSURED AS OBLIGATED UNDER CONTRACT UNDER THE REFERENCED GENERAL LIABILITY AND AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICIES. COMPLETED OPERATIONS COVERAGE IS INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY. WAIVER OF SUBROGATION IS EFFECTUAL 1, 000, 000 PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY IS INCLUDED UNDER THE GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY.
CERTIFICATE HOLDER (_ AWCFI I ATInW
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
211 8TH STREET SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE SEAL BEACH, CA 90740
THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
of Marsh USA Inc.
Manashi Mukhedee -_ 1A. oLuok0"
1988- 2016 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.
ACORD 25 ( 2016/ 03) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD POLICY NUMBER: GLD11101- 10 COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CG 20 10 11 85
THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.
ADDITIONAL INSURED - OWNERS, LESSEES OR
CONTRACTORS - ( FORM B)
This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following:
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART.
SCHEDULE
Name of Person or Organization:
Any Person or Organization Required by a Written Contract If no entry appears above, information required to complete this endorsement will be shown in the Declarations as applicable to this endorsement.)
WHO IS AN INSURED ( Section ll) is amended to include as an insured the person or organization shown in the Schedule, but only with respect to liability arising out of 'Your work" for that insured by or for you.
It is agreed that this insurance maintained pursuant to the written contract agreements shall be primary to, and not contribute with any insurance or self- insurance maintained by the above, but only with respect to work performed by or on behalf of the Named Insured.
CG 20 10 11 86 Copyright, Insurance Services Office, Inc., 1984 Page 1 of 1
TRAVELERS WORKERS COMPENSATION
AND
EMPLOYERS LIABILITY POLICY
ENDORSEMENT WC 00 0313 ( 00) -
POLICY NUMBER: ( TC2JUB- 8049XSo- 8- 18)
WAIVER OF OUR RIGHT TO RECOVER FROM OTHERS ENDORSEMENT
We have the right to recover our payments from anyone liable for an injury covered by this policy. We will not enforce our right against the person or organization named in the Schedule. ( This agreement applies only to the extent that you perform work under a written contract that requires you to obtain this agreement from us.) This agreement shall not operate directly or indirectly to benefit any one not named in the Schedule.
SCHEDULE
DESIGNATED PERSON:
DESIGNATED ORGANIZATION:
ANY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION FOR WHOM A WAIVER OF
SUBROGATION IS REQUIRED BY CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT OR
PERMIT, BUT COVERAGE IS LIMITED TO THE SCOPE OF THE
WORK PERFORMED BY THE INSURED UNDER SUCH CONTRACT,
AGREEMENT OR PERMIT.
DATE OF ISSUE: 09- 07- 18 ST ASSIGN:
COMMERCIAL AUTO
POLICY NUMBER: TC2J- CAP- 7440L34A- TIL- 18 ISSUE DATE: 09- 07- 18 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.
DESIGNATED INSURED FOR
COVERED AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE
This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following.- AUTO
ollowing:
AUTO DEALERS COVERAGE FORM
BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM
MOTOR CARRIER COVERAGE FORM
With respect to coverage provided by this endorsement, the provisions of the Coverage Form apply unless modified by this endorsement.
This endorsement identifies person( s) or organization(s) who are " insureds" for Covered Autos Liability Coverage under the Who Is An Insured provision of the Coverage Form. This endorsement does not alter coverage provided in the Coverage Form.
SCHEDULE
Name Of Person( s) Or Organization( s):
ANY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION WHOM YOU HAVE
AGREED TO ADD AS ADDITIONAL INSURED, BUT
ONLY TO COVERAGE AND MINIMUM LIMITS
REQUIRED IN A WRITTEN CONTRACT
Information required to complete this Schedule, if not shown above, will be shown in the Declarations.
Each person or organization shown in the Schedule is
an " insured" for Covered Autos Liability Coverage, but only to the extent that person or organization qualifies as an " insured" under the Who Is An Insured provision contained in Paragraph A.I. of Section II - Covered Autos Liability Coverage in the Business Auto and Motor Carrier Coverage Forms and Paragraph
D.2, of Section I - Covered Autos Coverages of the
Auto Dealers Coverage Form.
CA 20 4810 13 0 Insurance Services Office, Inc., 2011 Page 1 of 1 Agenda Item E
AGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 23, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: Patrick Gallegos, City Manager
FROM: Iris Lee, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Approving and Authorizing Amendment 1 to the
Professional Services Agreement with Silsby Strategic
Advisors, Inc. for the San Gabriel River Trash Mitigation Initiative
________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
That the City Council adopt Resolution 7738:
1. Approving Amendment 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Silsby Strategic Advisors, Inc. for additional San Gabriel River Trash Mitigation Initiative strategic support services, increasing compensation for such additional services by $65,000 for a revised total not-to-exceed amount of $209,000, and extending the Agreement term to June 30, 2027; and,
2. Authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute Amendment 1 on behalf of the City.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
The City of Seal Beach has been experiencing significant trash accumulation on its public beach with recent data reflecting an impact of approximately 500 tons annually, not counting trash already collected from area bins and dumpsters. In response to this growing concern, Assemblymember Diane Dixon’s office convened a San Gabriel River Working Group comprised of key regional stakeholders, including:
• State Assemblymembers, 69th District and 72nd District • State Senator, District 36
• County of Orange (1st District)
• County of Los Angeles (4th District)
• City of Seal Beach
• City of Long Beach
• Surfrider Foundation (North Orange County & Long Beach Chapters)