HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-322 `�*
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO WORK ORDER NUMBER 2
This Amendment Number 1 to Work Order Number 2 ("amendment') is entered into as of the �73 day
of 2007, ("effective Date") pursuant to that certain Continuing Contract Agreement for
Profess onal Seryices entered into as of April 6, 2004, by and between Indian River County, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, (COUNTY), and Post, Buckley, Schuh, & Jernigan, (PBS&J), the
CONSULTANT.
The COUNTY has selected the CONSULTANT to perform the professional services set forth in
Attachment 1 , SCOPE OF WORK , attached to this Work Order, and made part hereof by this reference.
The professional services will be performed by the CONSULTANT for the fee schedule set forth in
Attachment 2, and made a part hereof by this reference. The CONSULTANT will perform the
professional services within the timeframe more particularly set for in Attachment 3 , attached to this
Work Order, and made a part hereof by this reference, all in accordance with the terms and provisions set
forth in the Agreement. Pursuant to Paragraph 1 .4 of the Agreement, nothing contained in any Work
Order shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to
be incorporated in each individual Work Order as if fully set forth herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Work Order as of the date first
written above.
CONSULTANT: BOARD OF COUNTY-COMMISSIONERS
PBS&J OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By: By: Jam/
Kim S. fer Gary C heeler
Title: Project Manager
Date: 1
Date: 9 l, 31 z' 7 Attest: JK Barton Clerk of Court
By. ��Weee�4"—��
Deputy Clerk
App ved:
By:
seph A Baird, County Adminis ator
ov to Fo g S iciency:
aria Fell, st. County ttorney
Page 1 of 5
Attachment 1
Scope of Services
Indian River County
Department of Utility Services
Professional Service Support to Address Comments of the Request for Additional Information #1
dated August 17. 2006 for CUP Application No. 10524
General
PBS&J on behalf of Indian River County (IRC) submitted and application to the St. Johns River Water
Management District (SJRWMD) for modification of CUP No. 10524 to increase groundwater
withdrawals at the Hobart Park (HP) Water Treatment Plant (WTP) . SJRWMD requested additional
information including an analysis of the drawdown and water quality changes in the Floridan and surficial
aquifers due to proposed withdrawals at the North (HP) and South WTPs plus all existing legal users
within five miles of the WTPs .
Scope of Work
PBS&J will provide professional services to respond to comments from the SJRWMD RAI letter dated
August 17, 2006. In response to the questions above PBS&J will be performing work beyond the original
scope of work under this assignment. The three main areas where additional work is being performed are :
• the construction of groundwater withdrawal model and saltwater intrusion analysis
• the addressing of demand projections based on expected population, and
• the preparation of a water conservation plan.
This additional scope of work outlines these efforts .
Certain assumptions have been made in preparing this Scope of Work (SOW). To the extent possible,
they are stated herein, and are reflected in the budget for services. If the scope of work required is
different than that stated herein, the resultant changes in scope of work would serve as a basis for
amending the CSA as agreed to by both IRC and PBS&J. This SOW includes preparing up to two
responses to follow-up request for clarification or additional information that the District might request in
the future. The tasks for this SOW are :
TASK 1 : The Construction Of Groundwater Withdrawal Model And Saltwater Intrusion Analysis
TASK 1 - 1 : Geographic Information System Set-up
To construct a proper groundwater model that best represents "real world" conditions PBS&J proposes to
use Geographic Information System (GIS) based on data from definitive studies within the modeled
region. PBS&J proposes to compile available data on aquifer characteristics and existing legal uses into a
GIS from the following sources :
• US Geological Survey (USGS);
• Florida Geological Survey (FGS);
• SJRWMD; and
• Readily available reports from previous consultants.
The GIS will be used in Task 1 -2 and 1 -8.
Page 2 of 5
This SOW does not include conducting site inspections or contacting well owners to verify the presence,
condition, or location of the existing legal uses including domestic supply wells or permitted wells
identified from the District ' s database.
TASK 1 -2 : Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model and Groundwater Model Configuration
Prior to groundwater model construction, PBS&J proposes the design of a hydrogeologic conceptual
model . A hydrogeologic conceptual model of an aquifer system is a simplified, qualitative description of
the physical system. The conceptual model may include , but is not limited to, a description of the
aquifers and confining units that make up the aquifer system, boundary conditions, flow regimes. sources
and sinks of water, and general directions of groundwater flow. The site hydrogeologic conceptual model
is based on information collected for Task 1 - 1 .
To accomplish the second half of Task 1 -2, PBS&J proposes to evaluate the hydrogeologic system with
MODFLOW 2000(Harbaugh et. al, 2000) . MODFLOW 2000 (Harbaugh et. al, 2000) is a three-
dimensional, finite difference-modeling program which is cell or grid based and calculates flow in three-
dimensions using finite difference techniques. Upon completion of the hydrogeologic conceptual model ,
a groundwater model grid will be assigned such that the aspects discussed and presented in the
hydrogeologic conceptual model are adequately evaluated. This would require assigning the physical and
hydraulic boundaries of the hydrogeologic conceptual model within MODFLOW 2000 (Harbaugh et. al ,
2000) . Examples of physical boundaries include impermeable layers ( i.e., clay deposits), surface water
bodies, or man made structures. Examples of hydraulic boundaries include groundwater divides and flow
lines.
TASK 1 -3 : Groundwater Model Calibration
PBS&J proposes to calibrate the groundwater model in steady-state and transient conditions. The
difference between the two techniques is that transient simulations are needed for time dependent
analyses. Transient simulations produce a data set of hydraulic heads for every time step ( I through nTn)
while steady-state simulations produce only one hydraulic head data set. For groundwater modeling,
steady-state simulations are less complicated in terms of data management and, for this reason, are the
first calibration step .
The model will be calibrated by altering model input parameters until simulated hydraulic heads
approached hydraulic heads in the unconfined and leaky confined aquifer(s) . This is accomplished
through manual alterations of the parameters and/or the use of inverse modeling codes such as PEST
(Watermark Numerical Computing, 2000), UCODE (Hill et . al , 1998), or MODFLOWP (Hill et. al,
2000) . The final steady-state calibrated model generates the predicted heads numerically through
MODFLOW 2000 (Harbaugh et. al, 2000) and will be used as the basis for the transient model. If the
transient model does not mimic observed conditions, the model will be re-evaluated and re-calibrated.
TASK 1 -4: Groundwater Model Sensitivity Analysis
PSB&J proposes a sensitivity analysis after model calibration. The analysis involves repeating model
predictions after systematically modifying the model input parameters and calculating the sum of the
squared residuals of the simulated hydraulic heads. This is then compared to the calibrated model to
determine which model input parameters are the most sensitive to change ( Le . , greater uncertainty) and, in
turn, an area of focus for future investigation.
Page 3 of 5
TASK 1 -5 : History Matching/Groundwater Model Validation
Post sensitivity analysis, PBS&J proposes to conduct a history matching/validation study based on data
collected in Task 1 - 1 . Generally, Task 1 -5 will be used to evaluate how suitable the constructed model
will be in predicting groundwater flow patterns and groundwater transport based on available data within
a time period that was not used during model calibration . Task 1 -5 is intended to evaluate how robust or
rigid the calibrated model is .
TASK 1 -6: SEAWAT Configuration
SEAWAT-2000 is the latest release of the U. S . Geological Survey SEAWAT computer program for
simulation of three-dimensional , variable-density, transient ground-water flow in porous media.
SEAWAT-2000 was designed by combining a modified version of MODFLOW-2000 and MT3DMS into
a single computer program. The model is typically used to evaluate systems which have the potential for
saltwater intrusion. PBS&J proposes to design a SEAWAT model based on the results of Tasks 1 - 1
through 1 -5.
TASK 1 -7: MODFLOW/SEAWAT Simulations
PBS&J proposes to use SEAWAT to simulate and evaluate potential impacts from existing groundwater
withdrawals and proposed groundwater withdrawals on an individual and cumulative basis.
TASK 1 -8 : Reporting
Tasks 1 - 1 through 1 -7 will be documented as a single report and presented to the client for draft review
prior to submission to SJRWMD. The report will address each task individually and thoroughly explain
the process and/or findings . PBS&J will provide the data input files for the models used to respond to the
District ' s request for information upon request. This task will answer question 8 of the RAI.
TASK 2 : The Addressing Of Demand Projections Based On Expected Population
PBS&J will review the projections presented in the original application in comparison of the BEBR
growth rates. PBS&J will contact the District to address the specific concerns and recalculate both
population and demand for the County for the expected permit life until 2017. In this effort, PBS&J will
address question 9 by resubmitting Tables 1 and 2 of the original application along with a Technical
Memorandum explaining how the new demand projections were made. Finally, PBS&J will meet with
IRC Staff including the Planning Division to have them review the projections.
TASK 3 : The Preparation Of A Water Conservation Plan .
PBS&J will prepare the Water Conservation Plan Form for Public Supply, including the requisite water
audit. PBS&J will meet with County staff to gather appropriate information with regards to facilities and
billing. It is assumed that the County ' s billing system will be able to provide a majority of the required
information. However, some additional effort has been assumed in case said billing system cannot
provide the required information in a timely fashion.
PBS&J will prepare a summarized request for information to the County with regards to the Water
Conservation Plan so that an efficient means of gathering the information from appropriate County staff
can be determined and then implemented . Wherever possible, PBS&J will use available public data from
the County' s website and PBS&J ' s files to identify programs for the completion of the Plan.
Page 4 of 5
This task will provide the response to Question 4 of the RAI .
TASK 4 : Miscellaneous
PBS&J proposes to attend two meetings in regards to this effort. The purpose of these meetings will be to
discuss with IRC staff the results of the modeling and application submittal effort and/ or discuss
Requests for Additional Information (RAI) with the SJRWMD and IRC before formal submittal of RAI
response.
This task will be used to respond to questions 1 , 2, 3 , 5 , 6 and 7 of the RAI. PBS&J has already received
significant information from the County 's other consultant to prepare the response to question 5 . The
County prepared a wellfield management plan in response to question 7b that will require review and
enhancement by PBS&J prior to submittal to the District.
PBS&J will prepare a complete response to the RAI for the County ' s review and comment. Upon receipt
of the County 's comments, PBS&J will finalize the response for submittal by the County to the water
management district.
TASK 5 : Follow-Up to Additional Requests from the Water Management District
PBS&J proposes to provide the County with assistance in addressing up to two additional requests from
the Water Management District with regards to the pending CUP. This task assumes up to three weeks per
request for accumulation of necessary information, preparation in submittal format and attendance at up
to two meetings with the District and two additional meetings with the County.
Schedule
Time to complete this SOW from the notice to proceed (NTP) is estimated to be 10 weeks. PBS&J may
perform work under this authorization for the next 6 months from the NTP, allowing for requests for
additional information from the SJRWMD.
Compensation
Compensation for this amendment will be on a not to exceed basis for $ 102, 157 .
Page 5 of 5
POST, BUCNLEY, SCHUH, 8 JERNIGAN, INC. ,
ARachment2
Clienk Indian River County
Activity RAI Response
Project: IRC WON2
Phase:
Date of Estimate: 13-Aug4)7
Multipliers: Labor: 3.00
Subcons: 1 .00
Other Directs: 100
TOTAL HOURLY Multiplied TOTAL
Labor Cate Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 HOURS RATE Rate LABOR
Npener
Secreta III 50 ] 20 25 29
N11 1 1 - CA126 §20.00 60.00 $7,560
DD a
0 $25.011 7500 So
510 - TechnicalProlessionall 0 $ 19.50 58.50 $0
N10 - CADD DesirinerrTechrecian
Lip - Techniw0 $16.00 48.00 Ell
Technical Protessionall 24 q0 24 12 100 $20.00 60.00 $6,000
E11 - En ineer 11 86 86 $ .00 87.00 $7,482
5122 - Sr. Engineer )
E1GIS Anal II 16 B 24 $2926.00 78,00 $1 ,872
Etb - Sr En II
0 $33.00 99.00 EO
0 $35.00 105.00 $0
E1 - Sr. Pro ect Professional
r e 41 19 24 66 40 190 $49.00 14T00 $27,930
5144 - Sr. Technicalal Profess sional 11 300 12 40 352 $33.00 99.00 $34,898
514 - GIBSpecialist 20 8 48 $35.00 105.00 $5,040
E155r. Technical Professional III 20 24 24 68 $47.00 141 .00 $9,588
515 - Sr. Engineer 111
516 - Sr. En ineerN
0 $36.00 taboo $0
0556.00 168.00 $0
o $o.o0 0.00 $0
0 $0.00 0.00 $0
66 154 143
o $0.00 0.00 $0
Total Hours 475 156 - 994
Total Multi lietl Labor , $ $4],18] $5,613 $15,594 §15,0]8 $16.848 §0 $0 So $100,320
SubConsultants Raw
Subconsultant TOTAL
So =Raw
Total Raw Subcon3ullanL $ $0 §0 $O $0 $0 $0 b0 $0 Total Raw =
Total Burdened SubconsullanL $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 Tofal MUWietl=
gNer Direct Costs Subconsultant TOTAL
0
Telephone (.05% of Fee $75 $84 180
copies 1% ot Fee $472 $56 $156 $151 $168 1163
Travel (3% of Fee $165 $505 674
0
0
0
Total Raw Subconsultant $/Task $472 $225 N56 $226 $759 $0 EO b0 T =41836
Tolat MUltl ied Su0consultent, E 4]2 25 $156 $226 $750 $0 0 $0 T $1 ,837
Tot21 Multi lied E 54],659 5,838 $15750 $15,304 §17,606 $0 $0 SO $102,157
JIF PBS Attachment 3
Proposed Schedule
Professional Service Support to Address Comments
of the Request for Additional Information #1 dated August 17 2006 for CUP Application No 10524
o `fl
0 o 0
C?
Q c4 O0 Z m �' `m a m c m n 0 0 0
d U O U C
Task 1 - Additional Modelin 2! a a w O z 0 LL
Task 2- Additional Pro'ections
Task 3- Water Conservation Plan
Task 4- Miscellaneous
Task 5- Follow-u to Requests
Submittal to County
Submittal to SJRWMD