HomeMy WebLinkAboutG-1 - 208/SCAG Cooperative Agreement, Upper Newport Bay Sedimentation Control PlanningAUG 1 1 1580
City Council Meeting August 11, 1980
Agenda Item No. G - I
ly the CITY COUNCIL CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY OF NE1 P"T "N
August 6, 1980
TO: Ci ty Co un ci 1
FROM: Planning Department
SUBJECT: 208/SCAG Cooperative Agreement, Upper Newport Bay
Sedimentation Control Planning
Suggested Action
If desired, take the following actions:
(a) Adopt Resolution No.�� authorizing the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute a Cooperative Agreement
between the City of Newport Beach and SCAG.
(b) Adopt Resolution No. qs5L authorizing the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute an agreement between the City
of Newport Beach and Boyle Engineering for consultant
services in connection with the 208 Studies.
(c) Authorize the Staff to negotiate a Memorandum of
Understanding with the City of Irvine for the
administration of the 208 Program.
Background
Substantial sediment deposition has occurred in Upper Newport Bay in
recent decades. The extensive sedimentation that has occurred has
adversely affected the Upper Newport Bay State Ecological Reserve
due to loss of tidal prism. In addition, large amounts of suspended
material present in Bay waters can adversely affect wildlife and
recreational users in the Bay.
Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (Section 208),
funds have been allocated for water quality management planning.
With the approval of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has designated the South-
ern California Association of Governments (SCAG) as the 208 fund
disbursement agency for the region.
r
City Cou'nci 1 - 2.
208/SCAG Cooperative Agreement
With SWRCB approval, SCAG has allocated $317,000 in,2,'08"funds 'to the
Cities of Newport Beach and Irvine to conduct a joint study which will
result in the definition of a comprehensive, effective and practical
system of sediment control for the San Diego Creek drainage system,
as described in the draft cooperative agreement. The study is to
be conducted over a twenty-eight month period and will consist of
three parts:
1. Early Action and Interim Plan for Sedimentation Control.
2. Sedimentation Analysis.
3. Comprehensive Stormflow and Sedimentation Control Plan.
The Cities will retain a consultant to conduct the technical study
for a fee not to exceed $317,000.
The Cities of Newport Beach and Irvine will be required to provide
additional services equal to approximately forty-six percent of the
amount expanded for the consultant up to $145,000 or $72,500 per
City.
The Cities will provide contract management, legal services, and
public liaison as a part of meeting this requirement.
Consultant Selection
Requests for proposals to perform the study were sent to ten firms
on July 7, 1980. After the receipt of written proposals, four con-
sultants were interviewed by Staff representatives of Newport Beach,
Irvine, and SCAG. The firms interviewed were:
• Born Barrett & Associates
• Boyle Engineering
• Camp Dresser & McKee
• Woodward -Clyde Consultants
Consultants were evaluted on their technical abilities, project manage-
ment, and local experience as presented in their written proposals
and interviews. On this basis, the firm of Boyle Engineering is recom-
mended, subject to some refinements in the Scope of Services and Cost
Estimates (attached), as follows:
1) That a specific time commitment for Mr. Leslie Clayton
should be allocated to the project; and
2) That Phillips, Brandt, and Reddick be retained as the
subconsultant for Environmental Review.
TO: City Council - 3.
Agreement With City of Irvine
The Cities of Newport Beach and Irvine have been working in coopera-
tion to perform the early stages of the required services, including
solicitation and selection of the consultant; however, no formal
agreement between the Cities has been adopted. It is therefore
necessary for the Cities to adopt a formal understanding. Staff
is in the process of negotiating a Memorandum of Understanding with
the City of Irvine.
Respectfully submi tted,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director
by 6Fe&
ROBERT P. LENARD
Advance Planning Administrator
RPL/kk
Attachments for City Council Only
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
AND
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND CITY OF IRVINE
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into as of this day of ,
19 by the City of Newport Beach and the City of Irvine herein called
the Agency) and the Southern California Association of Governments (herein
called SCAG, which agreement does hereby incorporate by reference the
contract(s) between SCAG and the United States of America whereby this
project is funded,
WITNESSETH THAT:
WHEREAS,
SCAG desires to engage the Agency to render certain technical or pro-
fessional services hereafter described in connection with an undertaking
which is to be financed in part by the Environmental Protection Agency:
NEITHER the United States nor the Environmental Protection Agency is a
party to this contract.
NOW THEREFORE: The parties hereto do mutually agree as follows:
1. Employment of Agency. SCAG hereby agrees to engage the Agency
and the Agency hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth
in this contract.
2. Incorporation of Federal Guidelines. The terms of all relevant
Federal and State grant provisions and guidelines, as presently written
or as changed during the life of this agreement, bearing on this agreement
are hereby wholly incorporated by reference herein and made a part of
this agreement and take precedence over any inconsistent terms of this
agreement.
3. Scope of Services. The Agency shall do, perform, and carry out,
in a satisfactory and proper manner, as determined by SCAG, the services
indicated in Appendix A. This obligation shall be contingent upon the
final approval of such services by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). In the event any amendments are necessary, they shall be made in
accordance with provision 16 of this Agreement.
4. Data to be Furnished to Agency. Where available at SCAG, all
ifformation, data, reports, records, and maps as are existing, available,
and necessary for the carrying out of the work shall be furnished to the
Agency without charge by SCAG. SCAG shall cooperate with the Agency in
every way possible in the carrying out the services set forth in this
agreement.
-1-
5. Submission of Reports
a. All reports specified in Appendix A must be submitted to
the SCAG 208 Program Manager for review by SCAG.
b. No final copy shall be prepared in form for publication prior
to approval by SCAG.
c. Manuscripts produced by the Agency or SCAG shall be in
accordance with the United States Government Printing Office's Style
Manual (available through the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402). The Agency, in typing the final
manuscript, shall be responsible for all corrections prior to acceptance
of the final manuscript. Proper credit will be given to sources through
commonly accepted methods of documentation such as footnotes or other
means. The Agency shall furnish a list of material referred to in the
preparation of reports. The authority on spelling and usage of words
shall be Webster's Third New International Dictionary Unabridged.
d. Progress reports (per attached format) including verbal
presentations shall be provided to SCAG on a monthly basis. The SCAG
208 Program Manager shall set the time and place for these meetings, as
described in the special provisions to this contract. Based, upon the
statement of progress provided to SCAG any findings made by the SCAG
program manager indicating deviation from the Scope of Services (Appendix
A) shall be outlined and given to the Agency at the meeting for remedy.
e. Task outputs are deemed acceptable under the terms of
this cooperative agreement when submitted and approved by SCAG. Agency
shall be notified by SCAG of acceptance of the task outputs at the time of
the progress meeting. Unless otherwise advised in writing the Agency
shall continue work in accordance with schedule as contained in the Scope
of Services (Appendix A). Final approval of the task outputs shall be
provided in writing by SCAG.
6. Personnel.
a. The Agency represents that he has, or shall secure at his
own expense, all personnel required in performing the services under this
agreement. Such personnel shall not be employees of or have any con-
tractual relationship with SCAG.
b. All of the services required hereunder shall be performed by
the Agency or under its supervision, and all personnel engaged in the work
shall be fully qualified and shall be authorized under State and local law
to perform such services.
c. All personnel identified in Appendix A, I. to be listed by
Agency at time of agreement execution, shall not be replaced by any other
persons except with the written notification of SCAG.
-2-
7. Evaluation, Selection and Approval of Third Party Contract
a. SCAG shall be permitted participation in the evaluation and
selection of any Third Party contractors, or any other Agency sub -contract
proposals, which are solicited to carry -out task assignments, or any
portion thereof, as approved herein, and specified in Appendix A (Scope or
Work). None of the work or services covered by this agreement shall be
sub -contracted without the prior approval of SCAG and the appropriate
funding agency (as may be required).
b. The Agency shall prepare a Request For Proposal (hereinafter
referred to as RFP) for review by SCAG before distribution of the RFP
by the Agency to prospective consultant firms, individuals, or other
entities.
c. RFP's shall be sent to at least three (3) prospective
clients. Minority-owned consultant firms should have maximum opportunity
to compete for Agency sub -contracts.
d. Evaluation of Proposals by Agency shall be conducted in
ac:ordance with a Selection Criteria format, as approved by SLAG..
e. Sole Source contract arrangement will be evaluated and
approved by SCAG, subject to any special provisions attached hereto.
f. Agency shall prepare the appropriate federal Price Analysis
forms (EPA 5700-1)(copy attached) and.make this sub -contract cost alloca-
tion and burden rate documentation a part of the proposed contract
submitted to SCAG for review and approval.
g. Agency shall submit with the proposed contract documentation
the RFP process and criteria used for selection of the consultant
(sub -contractor) firm, individual or entity.
8. Time of Performance. The services of the Agency are to commence
as soon as practicable a ter the execution of the agreement and shall be
undertaken and completed in such sequence as to assure its expeditious
completion in light of the purposes of this agreement, but in any event
all of the services required herein shall be completed not later than
September 30, 1982.
9. Compensation. SCAG agrees to pay the Agency an amount not to
exceed $317,000 for the above services. It is expressly understood and
agreed that said sum constitutes the "maximum" compensation for the
services required in Appendix A.
10. Method of Pa ment/Reimbursement Requirements. In performing the
tasks set forth in Appendix A, I ., Work Tasks to be Accomplished, the
Agency may incur costs set forth by expense category and work tasks in the
budget attached hereto, labeled Appendix A,III. Budget, and incorporated
herein by this reference. Said costs (hereinafter referred to as eligible
costs) shall be the only costs for which Agency shall have the right to
-3-
3�
reimbursement by SCAG hereunder. Agency may incur said eligible costs
up to a maximum of $317,000. Payment shall be made according to the
following:
a. The participant shall submit to SCAG, attention Finance
Officer, a Request for Payment and Progress Report in narrative format not
later than 15 days following the end of each calendar quarter. The
participant has the option to submit a monthly Request for Payment and
narrative Progress Report. In addition, a monthly Progress Report will be
submitted per paragraph 5e. The request for payment shall allocate costs
incurred by subtask and by the City performing the work.
b. Pursuant to Federal Management Circular 74-4; Attachment A,
Agency shall prepare and submit to SCAG for approval prior to the first
requisition for payment a plan for the allocation of costs which is
required to support the distribution of indirect overhead related to
the Scope of Services under this agreement. Such cost allocation plan,
once approved by SCAG, will become attached to this agreement and to be
available for audit purposes.
c. All costs charged to this agreement by Agency shall be
supported by properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices, and
vouchers, evidencing in proper detail the nature and propriety of the
charges, and shall be costs allowable as determined by Federal Manage-
ment Circular 74-4 and Code of Federal Regulations, Title 41 (Public
Contracts and Property Management) Part 1-15 Contract Cost Principles and
Procedures, Subpart 1-15.7 Grants and Contracts with State and Local
Governments.
d. Agency shall establish and maintain a separate account within
its existing accounting system specifically for and limited to all
fiscal activities required to perform the services under this agreement.
Agency's accounting system shall comply with the regulations and standards
of the Cost Accounting Standards Board. All accounting records shall
readily provide a breakdown of costs charged to this contract. Such
records, together with supporting documents, shall be kept separate from
other documents and records shall be kept available for inspection by SCAG
and other authorized agencies during the period of performance of the
agreement, and for four years thereafter.
e. In the event that any of the expenses for which SCAG re-
imburses the Agency are later disallowed by the Environmental Protection
Agency, pursuant to paragraph 31, Examination of Records/Audits, Agency
expressly agrees to reimburse SCAG an amount equal to that disallowed.
SCAG agrees to assert any appeal for a disallowed expense on behalf of
Agency.
f. Agency is hereby expressly put on notice that no employee of
SCAG has authority to authorize in writing or otherwise any additional
work which would increase the cost of this agreement without the written
approval of the SCAG Executive Committee.
-4-
4-
g. As expeditiously as possible, SCAG shall pay Agency the re-
imbursable portion of total eligible costs. Said reimbursable portion
shall be calculated by subtracting "from the total eligible requisitioned
costs 25% for project retention purposes." SCAG shall pay Agency the 25%
which has been withheld when the agreement has been completed to SCAG's
satisfaction in accordance with the terms of the agreement, and upon
requisition for final payment.
h. The agency agrees to perform additional work in support of
the 208 continuing planning program having a cost of not less than
$145,000. Said costs shall not be reimbursable and shall constitute an
in-kind contribution. The agency shall provide to SCAG within calendar 30
days following the execution of this agreement by both parties, a descrip-
tion, budget, and schedule for the work to be performed as an in-kind
contribution. All in-kind contributions shall meet the criteria set forth
in the Federal Management Circular 74-7 Attachment F dated 9/13/74, and
shall be consistent with the adopted FY 1979-80 OWP for the 208 Continuing
Planning Program.
Reports on progress of such work including both description of work
completed and a statement of costs incurred shall be included as part of
the progress reports required in section 10 of this agreement.
11. Hold Harmless. The Agency and SCAG agree to hold each other
mutually harmless from and on account of any and all liability, whether
property damage or personal injury, arising from each party's negligent
performance of this agreement.
12. Acceptance. Acceptance of the terms of this Agreement shall be
by the signing of this agreement in the space provided by the respective
parties and their counsel.
13. Rebud2eting of Funds. Prompt notification of all rebudgeting in
excess of is required. Such notification may be accomplished
by submission of a revised copy of the budget forms. Approval of minor
adjustments to an approved budget is not required. A minor adjustment
will constitute reallocation of the dollar sum of $1,000.
14. Prohibition Against Contingent Fees. The Agency warrants that
no person or company has been employed or retained to solicit or secure
this contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, per-
centage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees; nor
has the Agency paid or agreed to pay any person, company, corporation,
individual or firm, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission,
contribution, donation, percentage, gift, or any other consideration,
contingent upon or resulting from award of this Agreement. For any
breach or violation of this provision, SCAG or the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without
1 fabi 1 ity and, at his discretion, to deduct from the Agreement price, or
otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage,
gift or consideration and any other damages, and shall be responsible for
reporting the details of such breach or violation to the proper legal
authorities, where and when appropriate.
1161!
15. Termination of Agreement for Cause_. If, through any cause the
Agency shal l fail to ful fill in timely and proper manner its obl igations
under this contract, or if the Agency violates any of the covenants,
agreements, or stipulations of this agreement, SCAG shall thereupon
have the right to terminate this agreement by giving written notice to the
Agency of such termination and specifying the effective data thereof. In
that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys,
drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other materials prepared
by the Agency under this agreement shall, at the option of SCAG, become
SCAG's property, and the Agency shall be entitled to receive just and
equitable compensation for :any satisfactory work completed on such docu-
ments and other materials.
Notwithstanding the above, the Agency shall not be relieved of liability
to SCAG for damages sustained by SCAG by virtue of any breach of the
contract by the Agency, and SCAG may withhold any payments to the Agency
for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact amount of damage
due to SCAG from the Agency is determined.
16. Termination of Convenience of SCAG. SCAG may terminate this
agreement at any time by giving written notice to the Agency of such
termination and specifying the effective date thereof. In that event, all
finished or unfinished documents and other materials as described in
Appendix A, at the option of SCAG, become its property. If the agreement
is terminated by SCAG as provided herein, the ;agency shall be paid
an amount which bears the same ratio to the total compensation as the
services actually performed bear to the total services of the Agency
-covered by this agreement less payments of compensation previously
made. Provided however, that if less than sixty (60) percent of the
services covered by this agreement have been perfomed upon the effective
date of such termination, the Agency shall be reimbursed (in addition to
the above payment) for the portion of the actual out-of-pocket expenses
(not otherwise reimbursed under' this agreement) incurred by the Agency
during the agreement period which are directly attributable to the un-
completed portion of the portion of the services covered by this agree-
ment. If this contract is terminated due to the fault of the Agency,
Paragraph 15 hereof relative to termination shall apply.
11. Agreement Changes. SCAG may, from time to time, require
changes in the scope of the services of the Agency to be performed herein.
Such changes, including any increase or decrease its the amount of the
Agency's compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between
SCAG, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Agency, shall be
incorporated in written amendments to this agreement. No oral under-
standing or agreement not incorporated herein shall be binding on any of
the, parties hereto. Amendments inconsistent with the provisions and
intent of this Agreement may not be utilized.
18. Equal Employment Opportunity. In connection with the execution
of this agreement,the Agency shall not discriminate directly or in-
directly against any employee or applicant for employment because of race,
color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Agency shall take affirma-
tive action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are
treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion,
sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, !gut not limited to
the following: Employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment
or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other
forms of compensation; and selection of training, including apprentice-
shi p. The Agency agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to
employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the pro-
visions of the Equal Opportunity clause.
Nondiscrimination.
a. In connection --with the execution of this agreement, the
Agency shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against any employee
or applicant for employment because of race, color,'religion, sex, or
national origin. The Agency shall take affirmative action to ensure
that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during
employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin. Such action shall include, but not limited to the
following: Employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or
recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other
forms of compensation; and selection of training, including apprentice-
ship. The Agency agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to
employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the pro-
visions of the Equal Opportunity clause.
b. The Agency shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for
employees placed by or on behalf of the Agency, state that all qualified
-applicants shall receive consideration for employment without regard to
race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
c. The Agency shall send to each labor union or representative
of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other
agreement or understanding, a notice advising the labor union or workers
representative of the Agency's commitments under this Equal Opportunity
clause, and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous place available
to employees and applicants for employment.
d. The Agency shall comply with all provisions of Executive
Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, as amended and of the rules;
regulations, and relevant order of the Secretary of Labor.
e. The Agency shall furnish all information and reports
required by Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965 as amended,
and by the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or
pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to his books, records, and
accounts by SCAG and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investi-
gation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders.
f. In the event of the Agency's non-compliance with the Equal
Opportunity clause of this agreement or any of the said rules, regula-
tions, or orders, this agreement may be cancelled, terminated, or sus-
pended, in whole or in part, and the Agency may be declared ineligible for
-7-
7
further government contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in
Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965 as amended, and such other
sanctions may be imposed and remedies involed as provided in Executive
Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965 as amended, or by rule, regulation,
or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law.
g. The Agency shall include the provisions of paragraphs (a)
through (g) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted 'by
rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to
section 204 of Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965 as amended,
so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontract or vendor.
The Agency shall take- such action with respect to any subcontract or
purchase order' as SCAG may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions,.
including sanctions for noncompliance. Provided, however, that in the
event the Agency becomes involved, in, or is threatened with, litigation
with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by SCAG, the
Agency may request the United States to enter into such litigation to
protect the interests of the United States.
19. Affirmative Action for Handicapped Workers
a. The Agency will not discriminate against any employee or
applicant for employment because of physical or Trental handicap in regard
to any position for which the employee, or applicant for employment is
qualified. The Agency agrees to take affirmative action to employ,
advance in employment and otherwise treat qualified handicapped individ-
uals without discrimination based upon their physical or mental handicap
In all employment practices such as the following: employment, upgrading,
demotion or transfer, recruitment, advertising, layoff or termination,
rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training,
including apprenticeship.
b. The Agency agrees to comply with the rules, regulations,
and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to the Act.
(29 USC 706)
c. In the event of the Agency's noncompliance with the require-
ments of this clause, actions for noncompliance may be taken in accordance
with the rules, regulations and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor
issued pursuant to the Act.
d. The Agency agrees to post in conspicuous places, available
to employees and applicants for employment, notices in a form to be pre-
scribed by the Director, provided by or through the Agency. Such notices
shall state the Agency's obligation under the law to take affirmative
action to employ and advance in employment qualified handicapped employees
and applicants for employment, and the rights of applicants and employees.
e. The Agency will notify each labor union or representative of
workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other
contract understanding, that the Agency is bound by the terms of Section
503 of theRehabilitation
employ land advance 9i n ,employme t is phys ical physically take
and mentally
tive ac
handicapped individuals.
61
f. The Agency will include the provisions of this clause in
every subcontract or purchase order of $2,500 or more unless exempt by
rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary issued pursuant to Section
503 of Act, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontrac-
tor or vendor. The Agency will take such action with respect to any.
subcontract or purchase order as the Director of the Office of Federal
Contract Compliance Programs may direct to enforce such provisions,
including action for noncompliance.
20. CivilRights. During the performance of Appendix II Scope of
Services 6T—M's greement, the Agency shall comply with Title 49, Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 21, promulgated to effectuate Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is made a part of this agreement by
reference.
21. Political Activity. No portion of the funds received by the
Agency under t is agreement shall be used for any political activity or to
further the election or defeat of any candidate for public office.
22. Prohibited Interest. During his tenure and for one year
thereafter, no officer, member, or employee of SCAG and no member of a
local governing body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this
contract or the proceeds thereof.
23. Assi nabilit . The Agency shall not assign any interest in this
agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or innovation), without the prior written consent of SCAG.
24. Interest of Contractor. The Agency agrees that he presently has
no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct and indirect, which
could conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of services
required to be performed under this agreement. The Agency further agrees
that in the performance of this agreement no person having any such
interest shall be employed.
25. Responsibility for Claims and Liability. The Agency shall save
SCAG, the Environmental Protection Agency, or any government agency from
all claims and liability due to his negligent acts or the negligent acts
of his subcontractors, agents, or employees.
26. Interest of Members of or Delegates to Congress. No Member of
or Delegate to the Congress of the United States of America, and no
Resident Commissioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of this
agreement or to any benefit arising therefrom.
27. Disclosure of Information. SCAG has the right to reveal infor-
mation concerning this project in compliance with the Freedom of Informa-
tion Act, 5 USC 552. if the Agency desires that certain information not
be disclosed to others, the Agency must insure that at the time the
information is first received by SCAG it is accompanied by a clear and
prominently written claim, consisting of a cover sheet, stamp, type of
legend or other suitable form of notice on (or attached to) the document
or other record containing the information, employing such language as
10
"trade secret", "confidential," or "proprietary." Wnere only one or more
portions of a submission. are claimed to be entitled to nondisclosure, each
such portion shall be identified. Information received by SCAG which is
not accompanied by a claim in accordance with the above stated regulation
may be made available to the public without prior notice to the Agency.
28. Identification of Documents. All reports, maps, and other
documents completed as a part of this agreement, other than documents
exclusively for internal use within SCAG, shall carry the following
notation on the front cover or a title page, (or in the case of maps, in
the same block) containing the name of SCAG:
The preparation of this report, map, document, etc., was
financed in part through a Planning Grant rP0091909-01-0 from
the United States Environmental Protection Agency, under the
provisions of Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act of 1972, as amended, together with the date (month and year)
the document was prepared and the name of the municipality,
metropolitan area, or other planning area concerned.
29. Copyright. The Agency shall be free to copyright material
developea under t e agreement with tie provision that the (name of funding
agency) and SCAG reserve a royalty -free, non-excl usi.ve and irrevocable
license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and to authorize others
to use, the work for government purposes. The Agency is subject to the
duties of agency relating to rights in data and copyrights as set forth in
40 CFR 30.530. If this agreement involves experimental research or
- demonstration work, the Agency is subject to the duties of agency relating
to rights to inventions and patents contained in 40 CFR 30.515.
30. Notice of Assistance Regarding Patent and Copyrights Infrin e-
ment. The Agency agrees to report to SCAG, and name of funding agency
promptly and in reasonable written detail, each notice or claim of patent
or copyright infringement based on the. performance of this agreement of
which the Agency has knowledge. In the event of any claim or suit, against
SCAG or Environmental Protection Agency on account of any alleged patent
or copyright infringement arising out of the performance of this agreement
or out of the use of any supplies furnished or work or services performed
hereunder, the Agency agrees to furnish to SCAG and Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, when requested by SCAG and Environmental Protection Agency
all evidence and information in possession of the agency pertaining to
such suit or claim. Such evidence and information shall be furnished at
the expense of SCAG and Environmental Protection Agency except where the
Agency has agreed to indemnify SCAG and Environmental Protection Agency.
. 31. Audits. At any time during normal business hours, and as often
as SCAG, Environmental Protection Agency, the Comptroller General of the
United States or Department of Labor may deem necessary, the Agency shall
make available for examination all of its records with respect to all
matters covered by this contract for purposes of audit, examination, or to
make copies or transcripts of such records, including, but not limited to
contracts, invoices, material, payrolls, personnel records, conditions of
-10-
employment and other data relating to all matters covered by this agree-
ment. Such records and access to facilities and premises shall be made
available during the period of performance of this agreement, and for four
years thereafter.
32. Small and Minority Business Enterprise. In connection with the
performance of this agreement, the Agency will cooperate with SCAG in
meeting its commitments and goals with regard to the maximum utilization
of small and minority business enterprises and will use its best efforts
to insure that small and minority business enterprises shall have the
maximum practicable opportunity to compete for subcontract work under this
agreement.
33. Disputes. Except as otherwise provided in this agreement, any
dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this agreement which
is not disposed of by mutual agreement shall be decided by a court of
competent jurisdiction.
34. Noncompliance. In addition to such other remedies as provided
by law, in the event of noncompliance with any grant condition or specific
requirement of this Agreement, this agreement may be terminated.
35. Clean Air Act and Federal Water Pollution. Agency must comply
with the Clean Air Act (42 USC 1857h-4) and .the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 USC 1251).
36. Special Provisions. The five clauses in Special Provisions in
Attachment 1 are hereby incorporated by reference into this contract.
37. Notice. Any notice or notices required or permitted to be
given pursuant to this agreement may be personally served on the other
party by the party giving such notice, or may be served by certified mail,
return receipt requested, to the following addresses:
Director of Programming and Evaluation
Southern California Association of Governments
600 South Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 1000
Los Angeles, California 90005
-11-
1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF.the Southern California Association of Governments
and the Agency have executed this agreement as of the date first above
written.
Agency Southern California
Association of Governments
By BY City of Irvine W. 0. Ackermann, Jr.
Director of Programming Evaluation
By
City of Newport Beach
ATTEST:
Adaiinistr&tive Office
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND LEGAL ADEQUACY
r
Attorney for SCAG
-12-
[ON'
Attachment I
Special Provisions
1. Task/Contract Manager: The City of Irvine and City of Newport
Beach.shall assign one contract manager to this work. This person
shall be a registered Civil Engineer in the State of California,
with academic training and at minimum 5 -years of experience in
water resources and/or soils engineering with specialization in
flood control and/or sedimentation control engineering.
Additionally, the City of Irvine and City of Newport Beach shall
assign one agency as the lead agency for handling Reimbursement
Requirements and requisitions for payment.
2. Technical Review Committee: An outside "experts" technical review
committee shall be established to assist in the review of technical
work products. This committee shall be composed of specialists who
have the following expertise: engineering and flood control hydrology,
sedimentation engineering, erosion processes, geomorphologic processes,
sedimentation processes in salt marshes, sediment delivery, flood control
engineering, soil protection and watershed treatment and biological/
ecological sciences in tidal wetlands.
3. Public Participation: Public participation assistance shall be provided
to augment s overall 208 Public Participation program.
4. Final SCAG acceptance and approval of the requirements of this
Agreement between SCAG and the Agency is conditioned upon the prior
written approval from the "Oversight Committee" to be formed by the
California State Water Resources Control Board.
5. It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that work on task
8015.01, Newport Bay Watershed: San Diego Creek Storm flow Sedimentation
Control Plan, has occured prior to the date of execution of this agree-
ment which was necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient accom-
plishment of the above cited task, and that such work shall be reimbursable
pursuant to Section 10 of the agreement. Such charges, which are consistent
with the terms of this agreement, and which are incurred on or after
May 1, 1980, are eligible for reimbursement.
(3
Appendix A.I.
AGENCY NAME
PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO
THIS CONTRACT
City of Irvine and 1.
City of Newport Beach 2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Appendix A.II
Scope of Work
Appendix A.II,
Scope of Services
SCAG FY 79/80 OWP and SCAG FY 80/81 OWP
Task 8015.01 Newport Bay Watershed: San Diego Creek Stormflow
and 8113.03 Sedimentation Control Plan
Time Schedule:
This task is divided into three parts: I: Early Action
and Interim Plan, II: Sedimentation Analysis, and III:
Comprehensive Stormflow Sedimentation Control Plan. Parts
I and II are funded under the FY 79/80 OWP. Part III is
funded under the FY 80/81 OWP. The overall time schedule
for these tasks is (from start of work):
Part I: Month 1 thru 6
Part II: Month 1 thru 8
Part III: Month 4 thru 28
Start of work is anticipated to commence at the time of
A-1 W.
award of the sedimentation engineering subcontracts.
Subtask Schedule: Technical memoranda on each subtask shall be released
to SCAG for review at the end of the scheduled
period.
Part I:
Early Action and Interim Plan (8015.01 Part)
Month
SUBTASK I -A
Feasibility Investigation of Alternatives
1-2
I -B
Develop Early Action and Interim Plan
2-3
I -C
Secure Implementation Commitments
3-4
Part II:
Sedimentation Analysis (8015.01 Part)
SUBTASK II -A
Hydrologic Analysis
1-2
II -B
Geomorphologic Analysis
1-3
II -C
Sediment Source Analysis
1-7
II -D
Sediment Delivery Analysis
1-7
II -E
Sediment Transport, Deposition and
1-7
Scour in Newport Bay
II -F
General Audience Report (Summary)
6-8
Part III:
Comprehensive Stormflow Sedimentation (8113.03)
Control Pan
SUBTASK III -A
Development and Performance Analysis of
4-13
of Alternatives
III -B
Cost Analysis of Alternatives
10-13
III -C
Institutional/Financial Analysis of Alternatives
10-13
III -D
Environmental Assessment of Alternatives
9-13
III -E
Technical Review of Subtasks III -A thru D
14
III -F
Draft Report on Alternatives
12-16
III -G
Public Review of Alternatives
17-18
III -H
Review Comments, Prepare Responses and
19
Document
III -I
Prepare Recommended Plan and Environmental
20-22
Documentation
III -J
Assist in Securing Implementation Commitments
26-27
A-1 W.
,verall Objectives: This task has three overall objecLives.
1. To develop an early action and interim sedimentation control plan
for Upper Newport Bay and San Diego Creek and its tributaries which
can be approved for implementation in December 1980 and implemented
in the ensuing months of 1981 prior to the onset of the 1981/82
rainy season.
2. To analyze and characterize the causes, nature, and extent of the
sedimentation problems adversely affecting Upper Newport Bay.
3. To develop a comprehensive watershed erosion and stormflow sediment
control plan, with emphasis as a downstream desilting system along
San Diego Creek, that can be implemented in the near-term.
Methodology: Acceptable -flood control engineering, hydrologic and sedimenta-
tion engineering techniques shall be utilized in the conduct of this work.
A study team shall. be formed and composed of persons with expertise in
the following scientific and engineering fields: (1) sediment yield and
sediment -flow mechanics,.(2) soils, soil erosion and soil conservation,
(3) geomorphology, (4)'flow and sedimentation mechanics in coastal,
estuaries, (5) flood control engineering and desilting basin technology
for stormflows, (6) flood hydrology and frequency analysis, (7) chemistry
and physical properties of sediment in stormflows and coastal waters, (8)
engineering economics, (9) wetland and freshwater biology, and (10)
nuisance control in sedimentation basins (mosquito, flies, odors, algae,
and other nuisance abatement).
Description of Work: Following is the description of required work, outputs
and estimated ]eve1 of effort for the three parts and their subtasks to
accomplish the objectives of this contract. The area covered .under this
work is the San Diego Creek drainage basin and Newport Bay.
A-2
Part I: Early Action and Interim Control Plan (801_5.01 Part)
This task shall be conducted, at minimum, by accomplishing the following
work:
SUBTASK I -A: Investigate the feasibility of and estimate of the effective-
ness of the following sedimentation control measures for
implementation as part of an Early Action and Interim
Control Plan: (1) dro structures along the lower reaches
of San Diego Creek, (2� use of a portion of the sediment
desilting site (as zoned) located between McArthur Boulevard
and Jamboree Road, (3) clearing of accumulated sediments in
the Upper Bay near the mouth of the San Diego Creek, (4)
clearing of accumulated sediments in the San Diego Creek
channel, (5) construction of diversion works to deflect the
San Diego Creek flow and dike structures to contain sediments
therein the old salt evaporation works area or portion
thereof, and (6) appurtenant works.
SUBTASK I -B: Based upon the investigation conducted in (1) develop a
plan that can be implemented before the on -set of the
1981-1982 rainy season (approximately November 15, 1981)
which would provide a high degree of temporary protection
for the Upper Bay. The relative impact on existing habitat
in the Ecological Reserve will be a major consideration in
the final temporary plan selection. The plan is to be
developed in conjunction with the Orange County Environ-
mental Management Agency and California Department of Fish
and Game.
SUBTASK I -C: Secure implementing agency approvals and commitments to
complete the implementation of the plan before November 15,
1981.
Output: (1) Feasibility Report and Recommended Early Action and Interim
Control Plan Report
(2) Implementing Agency Agreements to Complete the Implementation
of the Plan by November 15, 1981.
Estimated Leyel'of Effort:
A-3
Part II: Sedimentation Analysis (8015.01 Part)
This task would analyze the sedimentation problem in the Bay and
its watershed. Specifically, five major areas of analysis are
required: (1) hydrologic, (2) recent geomorphologic (formational
process), (3) sediment sources, (4) sediment delivery, and (5)
sediment.transport, deposition and scour in Newport Bay. Since
the recognition of the sedimentation problem in Upper Newport Bay,
no definitive scientific investigation of the sedimentation
problem has been undertaken. The intent of this task is to
commission a team of recognized experts in each of the required
analytical areas who will prepare an authoritative analysis of
the problem, relying upon existing data and procuring additional
data where necessary and funds permitting.
SUBTASK II -A: H drolo is Analysis. This task would (1) provide a data
summary and statistical ana ysis.of historical streamflow and
precipitation records, -(2) develop appropriate drainage maps, (3)
provide a frequency analysis of stormflow events and the 10 -year,
25 -year, 50 -year and 100 -year recurrence interval stormflows for
the, 1 -hour, 6 -hour and 24-hour duration storms for foothill
canyon-, major tributaries and at the San Diego Creek at Campus
Drive gaging station, and (4) calculate channel flow capacities
at different sections of the system.
This task shall be conducted, at minimum, by accomplishing the
following work:
1. Compile existing data
a. Historical precipitation and streamflow data
available through the OCEMA and USGS.
b. Precipitation and streamflow data available
through other sources (Catalog available through
the State Department of Water Resources and NOAA).
c. Prepare drainage basin map at 1" = 2000', showing all
principal drainages, reaches, length, slopes and
appropriate cross sections and profiles.
d. Flood Plain Insurance studies, flood plain studies of
the U. S. Corps of Engineers.
e. Other appropriate data.
2. Develop frequency versus peak Q relationships for measured
gauging stations.
3. Prepare a regional runoff frequency analysis for use at
ungauged locations, including at base of foothill canyons.
Calculate bulk flow proportions at foothill sites.
4. Calculate channel flow capacities at relevant sections of the
system.
A-4
r
Output.
Technical memorandum documenting study including:
1. Historical Measured hydrographs
2. Runoff frequency relationships at gauging
stations for 10, 25, 50 and 100 -year stormflows
3. Regional runoff frequency analysis for use at ungauged
locations, including at base of foothill canyons.
4. Channel flow capacities.
SUBTASK II -B: Geomorphologic Analysis. This task would provide a description
of the formational history of We Upper Newport Bay area and its
watershed. This task would also estimate the characteristics of
sediment production under historical conditions and areas of
sediment deposition. Historical conditions to be investigated include
pre -settlement, pre -1890, and major human development stages that
affected sedimentation''I n Upper Newport Bay. This task shall be
conducted, at minimum, by accomplishing the following work:
1. Compile Available Data.
a. Geological reports and records; soils data, including boring
data in Upper Newport Bay and area (U.C. Irvine, others).
b. Historical topographic maps, especially early editions of
USGS quadrangle maps.
c. Historical aerial photographs.
d. Historical land use development records.
e. Previous drainage district records.
f. Other records and data.
2. Summarize the formational history of the Upper Newport Bay area
and its watershed
Both the geologic evolution which resulted in the formation of the
bay and the significant developments which influenced the
sedimentation processes into and within the bay would be described
by utilizing the following steps:
a. Research geologic records and reports to ascertain the
geologic history of the bay.
b. Identify recent geological setting of the bay.
c. Identify the general land use characteristics of the watershed
from the arrival of European culture that may have impacted the
sedimentation processes in the bay.
A-5
�p
3. Estimate the characteristics of sediment production under wholly
natural conditions in the San Diego Creek Watershed.
From existing data and information gained from previous steps, an
estimate of the probable effects that large scale human developments
have had on sediment yield and delivery to Newport Bay. The
following steps would be used to accomplish this: .
a. From existing topographic maps, especially early editions of
USGS quadrangle maps, and aerial photographs, identify the natural
drainage patterns for San Diego Creek prior to alteration by man.
b. Based on probable native vegetation, soil maps,
and surficial geology estimate sediment erosion and and deposi-
tional areas within the natural flowpath of San Diego Creek.
c. Estimate the general characteristics of the natural sediment
production rates using regional data and applicable local data.
d. Evaluate using where possible existing information, the
sedimentation impact on Upper Newport Bay and effects of tidal
mixing on fine grain sediment deposition.
Output:
1. Development map showing the evolution of (1) land use of the
San Diego Creek watershed and (2) Upper Newport Bay watershed
basin change (size and location).
2. General sediment delivery analysis describing the changes in the
sediment production process and depositional areas in the watershed
and to the bay.
3. Prepare technical memorandum describing the formational history
of the bay. Include maps and historical photographs at a scale
of 1" = 2000'.
4. Hydrologic map showing flow paths and estimated percent runoff
from San Diego Creek to the Santa Ana River and to the Upper Newport
Bay and historical maps/photographs of hydrography change,
especially San Diego Creek.
5. Watershed map showing natural depositional areas for historical
sediment production.
6.' Quantification of sediment budget under natural conditions.
7. Sedimentation in Upper Newport Bay, including particle size
distribution.
A-6
a,
SUBTASK II -C• Sediment Source Analysis - Existing and Projected. This
task would estimate the sediment production rates.from the major
sediment source areas (foothills, unstable channels, agricultural
areas, and construction sites, et.al.) in the watershed for year
1980, 1990, 2000 and ultimate land use for the 10, 25, 50 and 100 -
year recurrence interval stormflows for the 1 -hour, 6 -hour and
24-hour duration storms. The task would also evaluate the effects
of flooding on valley erosion processes (i.e., across agricultural,
urban and other lands) and provide an estimate of the sediment
characteristics (i.e. particle size, etc.) from the different source
areas under the various hydrologic conditions. This task shall be
accomplish, at minimum by conducting the following work:
1. Compile existing data
a. Sediment discharge data for suspended and bedload
measurements at gaging sites measured by USGS
b. Sediment accumulation or erosion in Upper Newport Bay
and primary flood control channels
c. Sediment yield data in the form of reservoir surveys
for upland watersheds
d. Regional long-term sediment yield data in similar,
nearby catchment areas
e. Soil survey's
f. Erosion estimates from various land areas that may be
avai"fable from the Orange County Resource Conservation District.
2. Collect Watershed data
a. Survey established reservoirs in watershed where
historical or original surveys exist.
b. Survey natural and manmade channels and estimate historical
channel erosion/deposition.
c. Survey potential soil loss from ongoing construction
activity.
d. Survey and collect as necessary water and soil samples from
various areas in the watershed.
3; Collect and map existing and projected land -use data
a. Map existing land use utilizing available information,
including use of orthophoto quadrangle sheets of the USGS.
b. Estimate future land use change for the year 1990, 2000 and
ultimate build out utilizing the SCAG-78 grov;th forecast policy
as translated to the San Diego Creek Watershed, and as
appropriate, use of local general plans and development plans.
A-7
a
4. Compute 10 -year; 25 -year, 50 -year and 100 -year stormflow, average
annual sediment production potentials and estimate particle size
distribution for the following source areas:
a. Mountains/hills using streamflow, reservoir, regional
sediment yield data, and soils data.
b. Agricultural areas using the following procedure:
(1) Utilizing Soil Conservation Service Soil Surveys, prepare
soils and erodibility map for agricultural field subareas
by supplementing and interpreting soils data and calculating
sheet erosion and field sediment delivery rates for the
1 -year, 10 -year, 50 -year and 100 -year storm rainfall
intensity for type of field condition (i.e. barren disked,
barren ridge and furrow, cover cropped, etc.).
(2) Map agricultural subarea drainages and assess erosion
potential for the 1 -year, 10 -year, 25 -year, 50 -year and
100 -year stormflows.
c. Channel erosion by conducting field surveys of channel size
and evidence of streambank and bed scour.
d. Construction site erosion using field surveys and Soil
Conservation Service Studies if available, or other appropriate
technique.
Output:
1. Data compilation and summary report
2. Land Use Maps for Source Areas including drainages and other
pertinent information
3. Sediment yield technical report for the various source areas,
showing methods utilized in arriving at the estimate of sediment
yield, including a frequency - yield - particle size distribution
analysis.
4. General audience report summarizing the analytical work in
"plain english".
SUBTASK II -D: Sediment Delivery Analysis. This task would determine the
sediment flow at the major gaging sites in the basin for the same
recurrence intervals stormflows described in II -C. In addition, an
estimate of the volume and particle size distribution in the channel
system would be made through field investigation and calculation.
Estimates of sediment delivery by major sub -area would also be made.
(Note: Sediment delivery ratio as defined is the "percentage of the
onsite eroded material that reaches a given measuring point over time).
This task shall be accomplished, at minimum by conducting the
following work:
03
1. Compile Existing Data
a. Sediment discharge data for suspended and bedload measurements
at gages measured by the USGS, including all instantaneous
measurements, particle size breaks, and methods utilized.
b. Sedimentation surveys and studies for discharges into Upper
Newport Bay, including reviews and evaluation of work conducted
by the University of California, Irvine.
c. Sediment removals from channels in the watershed, especially
the lower reaches of San Diego Creek and near the Woodbridge
Development.
d. Other data as appropriate to this task.
2. Collect Watershed/Channel Data
a. Collect supplementary field samples and analyze for paricle
size distribution and estimate volume of sediment in channels
at various locations in the watershed through reconnaissance
level surveys.
b. Other data as appropriate.
3. Analyze Historical Gaging Station Flow and Sediment Discharge
Records
a. Evaluate and prepare appropriate graphs and analyses describing
the relationship of streamflow with sediment discharge for
suspended and bed load, with and without sand breaks
for data from USGS gaging stations in the watershed (San Diego
Creek at Sand Canyon Avenue, San Diego Creek at Campus Drive,
E1 Modena -Irvine Channel at Myford Road).
b. Supplement historical depth -integrated sampling measurements
of suspended load for the above stations by analyzing the re-
lationship of automatic sampling suspended solids concentrations
with depth -integrated data for 1978 for the San Diego Creek at
Campus Drive station and then extend/adjust the automatic
sampling record for the 1979/80 storms.
4. Compute grain size distribution for sediment from existing discharges
for the gauging stations.
51 Develop Sediment Discharge-streamflow rating curves at the San
Diego Creek gauging station at Campus Drive, at Sand Canyon and on
the El Modena -Irvine Channel.
a. Utilizing analyses and data from the previous sediment
production and streamflow steps, develop sediment discharge=
streamflow rating curves for the 10, 25, 50 and 100 -year
recurrence internal flows for recent land -use conditions.
b. Repeat above for year 2000 and ultimate land -use conditions.
A-9
6. Investigate and describe the sediment delivery processes in the
watershed and estimate the sediment delivery characteristics (ratios,
etc.) for the important channel locations (includes San Diego Creek
at confluence of Peters Canyon Wash and San Diego Creek, San Diego
Creek at Jamboree Road, San Diego Creek at or near Sand Canyon Road).
Output:
1. Data Compilation and Review Memoranda
2. Technical Memoranda on Historical gaging station flow and sediment
discharge analysis.
3. Technical memoranda on sediment discharge - streamflow rating curves
to the 100 -year event for San Diego Creek at Campus Drive, San
Diego Creek at Sand Canyon Avenue, and on the E1 Modena -Irvine Channel
at Myford Road for 1980, 1990, 2000 and ultimate land use
conditons.
4. Technical memoranda on the analysis of grain size distribution and
bed load for measured flows. (automatic samplers and manual depth -
integrated sampling).
5. Technical memoranda providing monthly and annual sediment yield
graphs for USGS measured flows.
6. Technical memoranda describing the sediment delivery process of the
watershed and its drainage channels.
SUBTASK II -E: Sediment Transport, Deposition and Scour in New ortBa .
This task would provide'an ana ysis of the transport of flow and
sediment discharged to Upper Newport Bay by San Diego Creek, an
analysis of the depositional characteristics of the sediment load
as a function of particle size, flow rate and sediment load of the
discharge, an analysis of scouring in the upper bay as a function
of flow rate and sediment load, and an analysis of the transport
by grain size of sediment transport through Newport Bay and its
depositional areas. It is anticipated that this task will require
sediment coring in Newport Bay, principally in the Upper bay. The
purpose of this task is to determine sediment discharge objectives
in terms of particle size and criteria to minimize scouring.
This task would be accomplished at minimum by conducting the
following work:
I. Compile existing data
_A. Collect available data from the University of California, Irvine,
Water Resources Laboratory on sediment cores, depositional
survey -data in the bay and particle size water column data.
b, Collect California Department of Fish and Game data on
sedimentation, if available.
c. Collect historical and other related data/studies on deposition
and scour sediment in tidal flat salt marshes.
A-10
2. Collect Supplementary Data
a. Collect water column samples and run particle size analyses
if necessary to supplement existing data for estimating sediment
flow through the bay as a function of particle size.
b. Collect, if necessary, additional sedimentation data in the bay
to determine depositional areas and particle size distribution.
c. Collect any other data deemed necessary for this task.
3. Evaluate the Sediment Deposition, Scour and Transport
characteristics of sediment discharges in Newport Bay entering via
the San Diego Creek Channel.
a. Describe the relationship of sediment and water inflow into the
Bay with sediment deposition, scour and transport for varying
hydrologic conditions and land use conditions described
previously.
b. Evaluate the significance of fine grain -:.sediment flocculation
and deposition due to the influence of fresh water sediment
inflow mixing with sea water in Upper Newport Bay.
Output: -
1. Data compilation and review report
2. Technical memoranda describing the sediment deposition, scour and
transport characteristics of San Diego Creek discharges for
various hydrologic conditions and existing and projected watershed
land use ,into and through Newport Bay.
SUBTASK II -F: General Audience Resort. This task would prepare a
summary on t -he Sedimentation Proocesses .(Task II) for general audience
readership. The report is to be written in "plain english" and is
to contain appropriate charts showing sediment yield by sources for
the different land use and hydrologic conditions, sediment rating
curves for the major stream sites, sediment delivery processes, and
deposition, scour and transport of sediment laden discharges into
Upper Newport Bay. The report is to also :Contain appropriate land
use maps at 1" = 2000' for the watershed showing principal drainages,
mountain/hill areas, land use and political boundaries for 1980,
2000 and.ultimate land use.-
A- 1.1
se.
A-11
I
Part III: Comprehensive Stormflow and Sedimentation Control Plan (8113.03)
This task shall be conducted, at minimum, by accomplishing the following
work:
SUBTASKS III -A thru III -D: Development and Performance Analysis of
Alternatives and Assessments. This task is to develop the erosion
and sediment control alternatives, perform detailed engineering
feasibility analyses and assessments on the alternative systems
developed. Alternatives to be evaluated would be developed and
defined by preparing descriptions, concepts, locations, layouts,
sediment reduction effectiveness, cost analysis, institutional
financing analysis and environmental assessments of the alternative
components. These would include the following system components,
either separately or in combination:
1. Downstream Engineering
a. Sedimentation basin adjacent to the San Diego Creek northeast
of Campus Drive around the IRWD sewage treatment plant, with
necessary protection works for the IRWD facility. Alternative
to consider joint use with IRWD for stor3ge/treatment of waste-
waters.
b. In -channel sedimentation basin in the lower reaches of San
Diego Creek for bed load control for large storm flows.
c. An interim sedimentation basin in the old salt evaporation
plant area in Upper Newport Bay.
d. Other possible sites, including the area between Jamboree Road
and McArthur Boulevard.
2, Valley Engineering
a. Desilting basin on San Diego Creek in the vicinity of old
Laguna Canyon Road or other nearby area suitable for control
of bedload and suspended sand load.
b. Sedimentation Basin(s) in series/parallel with or within
improved and/or existing channels.
c. Other sites for des'ilting basins
d. Channel stabilization utilizing concrete, gabion or 'other
technique for severely eroded or potentially severely eroded
channels. Areas to be included are: Channels below Sand
Canyon Reservoir, Bonita Canyon, channels below foothill
control basins, and other valley channels.
A-12
3. Valley Land Management Practices
a. Additional agricultural erosion/sediment delivery
controls (BMP's)
b. Additional construction source controls
c. Other land management practices to reduce watershed erosion.
4. Upstream Engineering
a. Sediment/debris control.basins in foothills
b. Flow regulation/sediment control basi-rls in foothills
(larger capacity than (a).
c. Foothill channel/source: stabil ization:..Program
Note: Foothill basins studies are currently being proposed to be
undertaken under a joint arrangement by the Orange County
EMA and The Irvine Company through. a Multi -Purpose
Watershed Project oder the Federal eater and Power Resources
Service program. The initial studies on the basins (Hicks
Canyon 1 & 2, Borrego. Canyon, Aqua Chinon Canyon, Round
Canyon 1 & 2, and Bee Canyon) are proposed to be conducted
by the County and The Irvine Company. EPA and the State
have required that "-..All 208 Planning Tasks that relate
to the foothill flood control structures proposed by the
Orange County will be coordinated with this work program to
ensure consistency and to avoid duplication of effort. The
review under the 208 program will�be limited to their sedi-
ment reduction capabilities." Following this granticondition
all Upstream Engineering for the canyons proposed for
control by the County - Irvine Company program shall be
incorporated into this report. No substantiative or duplica-
tory work shall be undertaken on these basins, excepting
for evaluations determining the sediment reduction and
downstream erosion control benefits of the projects.
Source watershed treatment control programs in the foothills
or other basins not part of the County study but necessary
for sediment control evaluation (Peters Canyon channel, others)
may be studied as appropriate.
5. Based on the above effectiveness and feasibility analyses of the com-
ponent alternatives (1-4),. Combinations shall be developed into
system alternatives. At least three system alternatives shall be
developed and evaluated including ow that contains a downstream
sedimentation basin at the site adjacent to the IRWD wastewater treat-
ment facility and one that is the no project alternative.
A-13
Engineering fear ility, erosion/sediment reduc* i capabilities,
costs and finan,-.gig, environmental assessments 4..d implementation/
maintenance features of each alternative system shall be analyzed
and described clearly. A comparison is then to be made between
each alternative system, showing features (different or common),
costs (total capital and annualized cost by year), effectiveness
in reducing sediment delivery to Upper Newport Bay (quantity
delivered/controlled by stormflow conditions for recurrence
intervals up to the 100 -year event for 1980, 1990, 2000 and
ultimate land use and by particle size distribution), environmental
impacts, constraints or other limitations affecting siting or
design, year system element is to be on line, responsible
agency, and financing method. This comparison shall also be
shown in summary matrix form. Costs should be shown in 1982 pro-
jected dollars with estimated Engineering News Record Construction
Cost Index. Project capital requirements for the year of scheduled
implementation shall also be shown. Governing factors on sizing
facilities shall either be the physical site limitation, or alter-
native sizes to control a 25 -year, 50 -year or 100 -year stormflow
event. Water and sediment stormflow at the desilting basins shall
have been developed from Part II Sedimentation Analysis, which is to
be coordinated with this Part III. Particle size control factors for
desilting basins or source controls shall also be obtained during .
Part II.
Output:
1. Technical Memoranda describing the alternative components and their
effectiveness and costs. This shall include general descriptions,
operational concepts, layouts and locations, quantitative considera-
tions, costs, and environmental considerations.
2. Technical memoranda describing the basis and description of the
system alternatives developed. This shall include an analysis and
clear description of the system, how it works and maintenance re-
quirements, when it can be implemented, its costs, effectiveness
in reducing sediment discharge to Upper Newport Bay, financing of
the system alternatives components and sources of funds, and en-
vironmental impacts. This memoranda shall be a detailed technical
analysis of the system alternatives.
3. Draft General audience report to be used for public review purposes
for selection of the preferred alternative. This report shall be
written in "plain english" and shall clearly describe and present
the system alternatives and their comparison. Sufficient graphics
and charts are to be prepared which show the elements of each
alternative, costs and effectiveness of each component and of the
overall system by 5 -year period from 1985 through 2000 and for
the ultimate land use (general plan), including environmental
impacts, and a section on financing of the alternative system,
and agencies responsible for its implementation and maintenance.
Fold out 1" = 2000' scale maps of the watershed on a-USGS topographic
base map shall be included in a pocket in this report presenting
land use, political boundaries, drainages and plan location by
alternative, including quantitative data for each alternative com-
ponent (i.e., costs, size, control effectiveness, etc.).
In addition, a public review summary - comment package
A-14
\1
CIN
(less than 5 pages) shall be prepared for inclusion into the
report for the public to provide. comments thereon for return to
the Participating Agency/Contractor.
SUBTASK III -E: Technical Review and Refinement. This task would provide
for the technical review of draft products prepared under Subtasks
III A -D and refinement of the Technical Memoranda and draft reports
prior to public release. This task is to be accomplished by
conducting the following work:
1. Provide Technical Memoranda and other outputs to the Technical
Review Committee and SCAG 208 Program Manager (10 copies)
consistent with the approved project schedule.
2. Based upon the comments received a meeting will be held with the
consultant offering the comments and determining necessary refine-
ments. The contractor will then finalize these memoranda and
reports.
Outputs.
1. Comments on Technical Memoranda and Reports
2. Finalized Technical Memoranda and Reports to be made available to
the public and interested agencies.
SUBTASK III -F: Report on Alternatives. Utilizing the Draft General
u fence report prepare on t e alternatives developed in Subtask
III -A -D and comments made by the Technical. Review Process of Subtask
III -E, a General Audience Report on the Alternatives including and
environmental assessment of each alternative is to be prepared and
400 copies reproduced. This report shall include those elements
described in Subtask III -A -D, Output 3, and shall be limited if
possible to 50 pages. Distribution of the reports to interested
agencies and the public shall be coordinated with the SCAG public
participation tasks. The contractor may be required to distribute
the reports to a mailing list to be developed by SCAG and the
Participating Agencies.
Output:
General Audience Report on Stormflow Sediment Control. Alternatives
with appropriate fold -out maps (1" = 2000'), photographs, and
public review summary -comment attachment. (400 copies).
SUBTASK III -G: Public Review of Alternatives. The public will be
encouragea to review, comment and recommend their choice of the
best alternative or combination thereof from the described sediment
control alternatives (for a 60 -day ,period).
Presentations will be made to the South Coast Water Quality Advisory
Committee, its Coastal Wetlands Subcommittee, the SCAG Energy and
Environment Committee, and before the local elected officials and
A-15
management level personnel in the Newport Bay
requesting presentations of the alternatives.
supportive to the public participation effort
Press releases shall be prepared to assist the
of the alternatives. A public hearing will be
alternatives.
Output:
1. Public and Agency presentations
2. Public and Agency comments
3. Press Releases and other informational aids
4. Public Hearing on Alternatives,
area, and to groups
This task will be
provided by SCAG.
media in coverage
held on the
SUBTASK III -H: Review Comments and Prepare Responsiveness Document. This
task will review a - -comments received, prepare a.responsiveness
summary and make recommendations based upon these comments.
Output:
1. Compilation report of all comments received
2. Responsiveness Summary to comments
3. Recommendations Based upon the comments.
SUBTASK III -I: Prepare Recommended Plan and Environmental Documentation.
A recommended plan shall be prepared based upon the alternatives
developed and output of Subtask III -H. This plan shall be more
detailed than the alternatives, specifying the specific project
proposals and management practices, their implementation schedule,
costs and financing/implementation/management plan. An
accompanying environmental impact report shall be prepared utilizing
the alternatives previously prepared and describing the effectiveness
of the recommended plan and alternatives.
Output:
1. Recommended Plan (400 copies plus original)
2. Environmental Impact Report (400 copies plus original).
SUBTASK III -J: Assist in Securihq Imalementation Commitments. The
participating agencies shall assist SCAG in securing implementation
commitments from the responsible agencies designated in the plan
as implementing -management agencies. This task shall also include
development of any joint powers agreements and financial arrangements
necessary to assure implementation, maintenance, monitoring and
management of the plan.
Output:
1. Implementation Commitments
2. Management Agency Agreement.
A-16 3l
17
''r",,:THLY PRCGP.ESS P.E?ORT FORiIAT
1. AGEI;CY NAME,
2. SUBCONTRACTOR.
3. PRODUCT (TASK)
a. IWORK CU4P*LETED DURING. THIS PERIOD
5. WIORK OFF SCHEDULE
5. CH.AINGES REQUIRED IN SCOPE OR SCHEDULE
7. BUDGET RE ADJUSTMENT
8. COSTS THIS PERIOD
9. COSTS TO DATE
10. REMAINING BUDGET
m
PROJECT APPROACH AND GENERAL SCOPE
PROJECT APPROACH
Boyle Engineering Corporation, with a team of recognized experts, proposes
to key its entire project effort toward the accomplishment of the principal
objectives of the study, which will include the following:
1. The development of an early action and interim control plan to provide
a high degree of temporary protection for Upper Newport Bay and
secure implementation agency approval and commitments to complete
the implementation of the plan before November 15, 1981.
2. An authoritative analysis of the sedimentation problem in the bay
and the watershed. The five major areas of analysis required are:
- (1) hydrologic; (2) recent geomorphologic (formational process);
(3) sediment sources; (4) sediment delivery; and (5) sediment trans-
port, deposition, and scour in Newport Bay. A general audience
report will be prepared, summarizing the results of this analysis
for general audience readership.
3. The development of alternatives for erosion and sediment control
and an assessment of their relative merits. A general audience re-
port will be prepared to encourage the public to review, comment,
and recommend their choice as the best alternative or combination.
After public and agency reviews, the recommended plan and environ-
mental documentation will be prepared.
Boyle Engineering Corporation approach is based upon the following:
Extensive Use of Computer
We propose to make extensive utilization of Boyle Engineering Corporation's
modern computer system for data synthesis, analysis, and simulation.
Close Coordination with City and SCAG Staff
We feel studies of this nature can best be done with close coordination and
cooperation with the Task/Contract Management Staff. Our experience in
management of multi -discipline, multi -agency projects will facilitate frequent
and timely communications.
Quality of Work
Boyle Engineering Corporation takes pride in the excellence of our work.
Our commitment to quality is the guiding principle in our efforts .
- GENERAL SCOPE
The general scope of services to be provided by Boyle Engineering Corpo-
ration are in accordance with the request for proposal to quantify existing
sedimentation problems, to evaluate alternative solutions to the problems,
and to determine the best solution to the problem of sediment deposition in
- Upper Newport Bay.
_ To meet these study objectives, Boyle Engineering Corporation will conduct
appropriate investigations and make evaluations and determinations to provide
the required output for each of the study parts.
-2-
Part 1 - Early Action and Interim Plan
Alternative sedimentation control measures will be investigated and their
feasibility determined to provide effective interim control of sediment depo-
sition in Upper Newport Bay.
The following output will be provided:
Feasibility Report and Recommended Early Action and Interim
Control Report.
Part II - Sedimentation Analysis
~ The sedimentation problem in the bay and its watershed will be analyzed
specifically within the five areas of analysis required.
Subtask II. A. Hydrologic Analysis
- This task requires investigations, analyses and evaluations, and a technical
memorandum documenting the study to include the following:
1 . Historical measured hydrographs .
2. Runoff frequency relationships at gauging stations for 10-, 25-,
50-, and 100 -year stormflows .
3. Regional runoff frequency analysis for use at ungauged locations,
including at base of foothill canyons .
4. Channel flow capacities .
Subtask II. B. Geomorphologic Analysis
This task will provide a description of the formational history of the Upper
Newport Bay area and its watershed. It will also provide an estimate of the
characteristics of sediment production under historical conditions and the
areas of sediment deposition.
-3-
r
The required output for this task includes the following:
1. Development map showing the evolution of (1) land use of the San
Diego Creek watershed, and (2) Upper Newport Bay watershed basin
changes (size and location).
2. General sediment delivery analysis describing the changes in the
sediment production process and depositional areas in the watershed
and to the bay.
3. Prepare technical memorandum describing the formational history of
the bay. Include maps and historical photographs at a scale of
1" = 2 , 000' .
4. Hydrologic map showing flow paths and estimated percent runoff from
San Diego Creek to Upper Newport Bay and historical maps/photographs
of hydrographic change, especially San Diego Creek.
5. Watershed map showing natural depositional areas for historical sedi-
ment production.
6. Quantification of sediment budget under natural conditions.
7. Sedimentation in Upper Newport Bay, including particle size distribution.
Subtask II. C. Sediment Source Analysis: Existing and Projected
This task will provide estimates of sediment production rates from the major
sediment source areas in the watershed for the years 1980, 1990, 2000, and
for ultimate land use conditions for the 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100 -year recurrence
interval floodflows for the 1-, 6-, and 24-hour duration storms. This will in-
clude an evaluation of the effects of flooding on valley erosion processes and
provide an estimate of the sediment characteristics from the different source
areas under the various hydrologic conditions. The following will be provided:
1. Data compilation and summary report.
2. Land use maps for source areas including drainage areas and other
pertinent information.
3. Sediment yield technical report for the various source areas,
showing methods utilized in arriving at the estimate of sediment
yield, including a frequency - yield - particle size distribution
analysis .
4. General audience report summarizing the analytical work in "plain
English. "
Subtask II. D. Sediment Delivery Analysis
This task will determine the sediment flow at the major gauging sites in the
basin for the same recurrence interval floodflows specified in Subtask II. C.
In addition, an estimate of the volume and particle size distribution in the
system will be made by field investigations and calculations . Estimates of
sediment delivery by major subareas will be determined.
The following output from this subtask will be prepared:
1. Data compilation and review memoranda.
2. Technical memoranda on historical gauging station flow and sediment
discharge analysis .
� f �
3. Technical memoranda on sediment discharge - streamflow rating
curves to the 100 -year event for San Diego Creek at Campus Drive,
San Diego Creek at Sand Canyon Avenue, and on the El Modena -
i
Irvine Channel at Myford Road for 1980, 1990, 2000, and ultimate
land use conditions .
4. Technical memoranda on the analysis of grain size distribution and
bed load for measured flows (automatic samplers and manual depth -
integrated 's ampling) .
5. Technical memoranda providing monthly and annual sediment yield
graphs for USGS measured flows.
6. Technical memoranda describing the sediment delivery process of
the watershed and its drainage channels.
Subtask II. E. Sediment Transport, Deposition and Scour in Newport Bag
This task will provide an analysis of the transport of flow and sediment dis-
charged to Upper Newport Bay by San Diego Creek, an analysis of the depo-
sitional characteristics of the sediment load as a function of particle size,
flow rate and sediment load of the discharge, an analysis of scouring in the
upper bay as a function of flow rate and sediment load, and an analysis of
the transport by grain size of sediment transport through Newport Bay and
its depositional areas.
The following output will be developed from this subtask:
1. Data compilation and review report.
2. Technical memoranda describing the sediment deposition, scour,
and transport characteristics of San Diego Creek discharges for
various hydrologic conditions and existing and projected watershed
land use into and through Newport Bay.
Subtask II. F. General Audience Report
Prepare a summary on the sedimentation processes as determined by the
sedimentation analyses included in Task II for general audience readership.
Part III - Comprehensive Stormflow and Sedimentation Control Plan
Subtasks III. A. through III. D. Development and Performance Analysis of
Alternatives and Assessments
These subtasks are to develop the erosion and sediment control alternatives
and perform detailed engineering feasibility analyses and assessments on the
alternative systems developed. Alternatives to be evaluated will be developed
and defined by preparing descriptions, concepts, locations, layouts, sediment
reduction effectiveness, cost analysis, institutional financing analysis, and
environmental assessments of the alternative components.
The output from the performance of these subtasks will include the following:
1. Technical memoranda describing the alternative components and their
effectiveness and costs. This will include general descriptions, op-
erational concepts, layouts and locations, quantitative considerations,
costs, and environmental considerations.
2. Technical memoranda describing the basis and description of the
system alternatives developed. This will include an analysis and
-7- 3?
clear description of the system, how it works and maintenance re-
quirements, when it can be implemented, its costs, effectiveness
in reducing sediment discharge to Upper Newport Bay, financing of
the system alternatives components and sources of funds, and en-
vironmental impacts . These memoranda shall be a detailed technical
analysis of the system alternatives.
3. Draft general audience report to be used for public review purposes
for selection of the preferred alternative. This report shall be
written in "plain English" and shall clearly describe and present the
system alternatives and their comparison. In addition, a public re-
view summary - comment package, shall be prepared for inclusion
in the report for the public to provide comments thereon.
Subtask III. E. Technical Review and Refinement
This task will provide for the review of draft products prepared under Sub -
tasks III. A -D, and refinement of the technical memoranda and draft reports
prior to public release.
This subtask will produce the following output:
1 . Comments on technical memoranda and reports.
2. Finalized technical memoranda and reports to be made available to
the public and interested agencies.
Subtask III . F. Report on Alternatives
A general audience report on the alternatives, including an environmental
assessment of each alternative, will be prepared and reproduced. It will in-
clude appropriate fold -out maps (1" = 2,0001), photographs, and public review
summary - comment attachment (400 copies) .
Subtask III. G. Public Review of Alternatives
_ The public will be encouraged to review, comment, and recommend their
choice of the best alternative or combination thereof from the described sedi-
ment control alternatives.
The performance of this task will produce the following output:
1. Public and agency presentations. '
2. Public and agency comments.
3. Press releases and other information aids.
4. Public hearing on alternatives .
Subtask III. H. Review Comments and Prepare Responsiveness Document
The following will be prepared:
1. Compilation of all comments received.
2. Responsiveness summary to comments.
3. Recommendations based upon the comments .
Subtask III. I. Prepare Recommended Plan and Environmental Documentation
A recommended plan will be prepared based upon the alternatives developed
and the output of Subtask III. H. An accompanying environmental impact re-
port shall be prepared utilizing the alternatives previously prepared and de-
scribing the relative effectiveness of the recommended plan and alternatives.
The output from this subtask will be:
1. Recommended Plan (400 copies plus original) .
2. Environmental Impact Report (400 copies plus original) .
-10-
PROJECT EXECUTION
ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION
The recommended plan for the control of sediment deposition in Upper New-
port Bay will be developed by Boyle Engineering Corporation with a team of
recognized experts in the various technical fields associated with the special-
ized facets to this problem.
A technical review committee composed of outside experts will be established
to assist in the review of technical work products. This committee will be
composed of specialists who have the following expertise: engineering and
flood control, hydrology, sedimentation engineering, erosion processes,
geomorphologic processes, sedimentation processes in salt marshes, sedi-
ment delivery, flood control engineering, soil protection, watershed treat-
ment and biological/ ecological sciences in tidal wetlands.
Public participation assistance shall be provided to augment SCAG's overall
208 Public Participation program.
The project scope of work will be initially established by an activity diagram
with milestones and a time -frame reference as shown on the Activity Diagram
and Schedule. This diagram will develop into a CPM network schedule which
can incorporate changes to the activities which may become apparent as field
data is analyzed and developed.
The entire resources and facilities of Boyle Engineering Corporation will be
available for assistance to the project team as may be required. Boyle
Engineering Corporation has a division office in Newport Beach and the Water
PART III
COMPREHENSIVE
SEDIMENTATION
CONTROL PLAN
MONTHLY REPORT A A A
O BEGINNING AND ENDING AT A SUBTASK
• TECHNICAL MEMORANDA
V AUDIENCE REPORT
A MONTHLY REPORT
,n, DRAFT AND FINAL REPORT
5 6
Analyze Sediment
Transport
(II -D)
ACTIVITY DIAGR, A
NEWPORT BAY WATERSHED:
STORMFLOW SEDIMENTATIO
MONTHS
7 8 9 10 ll 12
stuarine
Estuarine"
ollec
1 2 3
4
Estuarine
Audience
PART 1
Feasibility Interim
As
EARLY ACTION
Report
Investigatio
Plan
Analysis
Implementation
AND
(I -A)
(I
-B)
(1-C)
INTERIM PLAN
Develop E Screen
Hydrologic
Alternatives
Analysis
(111-A)
Collect Sediment
Estimate
Source Data
Sediment
Yields
(II -C)
PART 11
Collect Sediment
SEDIMENTATION
Transport Data
ANALYSIS
(II -D)
Geomorp Mlogic
Analysis
(II -B)
PART III
COMPREHENSIVE
SEDIMENTATION
CONTROL PLAN
MONTHLY REPORT A A A
O BEGINNING AND ENDING AT A SUBTASK
• TECHNICAL MEMORANDA
V AUDIENCE REPORT
A MONTHLY REPORT
,n, DRAFT AND FINAL REPORT
5 6
Analyze Sediment
Transport
(II -D)
ACTIVITY DIAGR, A
NEWPORT BAY WATERSHED:
STORMFLOW SEDIMENTATIO
MONTHS
7 8 9 10 ll 12
stuarine
Estuarine"
ollec
Estuarine
Audience
Sedi
Sediment Data
Sediment
Report
(11-E)
Analysis
(II -F)
(II -E)
Develop E Screen
Alternatives
(111-A)
Institutional /Financial
Data Collection. and Review
(III -C)
Environmental Setting
(III -D)
A A
erformance Analysis of
Screened Alternatives
(III -A)
CostAnalysis
(111-B)
Institutional /Financial
Analysis
(III -C)
Environmental
Assessment
(III -D)
A
ACTIVITY GRAM AND SCHEDULE
NEWPORT BAY WATERSHED: SAN DIEGO CREEK
STORMFLOW SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN
MONTHS
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Performance Analysis of
Screened Alternatives
(III -A)
1
Cost Analysis
(III -B)
i
Institutional. Financial
Analysis
(III -C)
Environmental
Assessment
(III -D)
i • • • •
18 19
20
21
22,
23
24
25
26
27 28
technical Review Audience Review
And Refinement Report Public Review Comments
(III -E) (111-F) (III -G) (III -H)
Prepare Recommended
Plan and EIR
(111-1)
♦ ♦ ♦
•
Assist
Implementation
(III -J)
�j 0
Resources Division of the corporation is located in San Diego. The person-
nel and facilities resources of these two offices in combination with the spe-
cialized technical specialists will be used in accomplishing the objectives of
this project.
PART I - EARLY ACTION AND INTERIM CONTROL PLAN
This plan will be developed using the planning/design capabilities of our proj-
ect
roj-ect team. The feasibility of obtaining effective sediment control by the use of
the following specified alternatives will be determined: (1) drop structures
along the lower reaches of San Diego Creek, (2) use of a portion of the sedi-
ment desilting site (as zoned) located between MacArthur Boulevard and
Jamboree Road, (3) clearing the accumulated sediments in the upper bay near
the mouth of San Diego Creek channel, (4) clearing of accumulated sediments
in the San Diego Creek channel, (5) construction of diversion works to deflect
the San Diego Creek flow and dike structures to contain sediments in the old
salt evaporation works area or portion thereof, and (6) appurtenant works.
This will be accomplished by investigating to determine the range in volumes
of sediment that could be contained by developing one or several of the speci-
fied alternatives to be considered. For those alternatives that would contain
significant volumes, preliminary plans will be developed to determine esti-
mated installation costs and probable annual maintenance costs. On the basis
of the interpretation of available information, the trap efficiences of these
alternatives will be determined for removing sediment from the floodflows
that could be routed through them. The selection of one or more of these
alternatives that appear to be potentially effective in removing sediment and
economically feasible on the basis of costs and benefits will be made. A fea-
sibility report and recommended early action and interim control plan report
will be prepared. The evaluations of alternatives and the selection of struc-
tures) for implementation will be accomplished in conjunction with the Orange
County Environmental Management Agency and the California Department of
Fish and Game. The relative impact on existing habitat in the ecological pre-
serve will be a major consideration and will be evaluated by our team member
specialist in ecology. Team members will also evaluate the other technical
aspects of these alternatives largely on the basis of available information as
the output from additional investigations within this study will not be available
at the time that this interim plan is being developed.
PART II - SEDIMENTATION ANALYSIS
A. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS
In order to obtain the desired information from the hydrologic analysis for
the frequencies of occurrence and storm durations specified and for the
various locations required within the watershed, we recommend that this
be accomplished with the use of a hydrologic computer model of the
watershed.
The hydrologic computer model considered best suited for analysis of
hydrologic problems in this watershed is the Soil Conservation Service
hydrologic computer model for watershed planning (TR -20). Other
models may be used, but this model has the flexibility and sophistica-
tion for including floodwater retarding reservoirs and other variable con-
siderations in a practical manner. It is anticipated that this model can
be developed so that the criteria for hydrologic analysis specified by the
Environmental Management Agency of Orange County may be met. The
development of this computer model and the hydrologic parameters used
-3- 4
would be accomplished in close cooperation with appropriate representa-
tives of the Environmental Management Agency.
The general watershed input parameters for this model are storm pattern
(time -accumulated rainfall within the storm relationship); antecedent
moisture condition (index of soil moisture content at beginning of storm);
and the storm duration (1, 6, or 24 hours, as specified for this project).
The input parameters for each subdrainage area within the watershed
are: drainag(' area (square miles); curve number, CN (an index number
based on the combined infiltration characteristics of the soil and land use),
which determines the amount of runoff that will occur with each increment
of precipitation within the storm pattern specified; total precipitation in
inches for the storm duration and average return period (frequency of
occurrence) specified; and time of concentration (hours) . The computer
calculates the amount of runoff (acre-feet) and the peak flow (cfs) for each
subdrainage area. It will produce a hydrograph (time -flow relationship
-- for the runoff duration) on request. This hydrograph is routed to the next
concentration point with runoff from another subdrainage area on the basis
of distance and flow velocity that are input to the computer. At this con-
centration point, the computer output provides similar runoff information
for the other subdrainage area and the combined flow from the two sub -
drainage areas. This process is continued throughout the watershed add-
ing the runoff from individual subdrainage areas or larger tributaries for
which this accumulation process has been carried out.
When the model has been established, one run will provide runoff informa-
tion (peak flows, volume, and hydrographs, as requested) for all concen-
tration points within the watershed and at the outlet of San Diego Creek
-4- tj�
into Upper Newport Bay. Each run will be based on a specified storm
duration (1, 6, or 24 hours) and the precipitation intensities for a speci-
fied frequency of occurrence (10-, 25-, 50-, and 100 -year recurrence
intervals) .
Changed land -use conditions from those of 1980 in 1990, 2000, and ultimate
land -use conditions can be input by changing the curve numbers, CNs (in-
dices of infiltration based on soil and land -use characteristics). Improved
channel conditions can be input by changing the times of concentration and
travel times to conform with the velocities that will be obtained in these
channels.
In the event that it is desired to consider the hydrologic effects of a flood-
water retarding reservoir at the base of the foothills or at any other con-
centration point within the watershed, the inflow -outflow characteristics
of the reservoir can be input to the computer and the outflow hydrograph
from the reservoir will be routed to the next concentration point.
This model can be developed in conformance with the Orange County
Environmental Management Agency specifications for storm pattern, pre-
cipitation intensities for the durations specified, and infiltration rates
(this is essentially what the curve number index reflects) .
The results from this model can also be compared with frequency versus
- peak flow relationships determined at gaging station locations. Appro-
priate parameters within the model can be modified so as to calibrate the
model to gaging station frequency data if it is determined as appropriate .
On this basis, the storm peak flows and volumes for all concentration
points within the watershed can be adjusted on a consistent basis.
The use of a hydrologic model of the watershed appears to be the most
practical way to obtain runoff information at the desired locations for
the various storm durations (three) , frequencies of occurrence (four) ,
and land -use conditions (four) . Consideration of all of these variables
would require 48 combinations.
B. GEOMORPHOLOGIC ANALYSIS
Dr. Trimble will research available information relative to Upper
Newport Bay and the San Diego Creek watershed and summarize the for-
mational history of the Upper Newport Bay area and its watershed. He
will estimate the characteristics of sediment production under pristine
conditions in the San Diego Creek watershed and the probable effects
of large-scale human developments on the sediment problem in Newport
Bay.
With the use of existing topographic maps, he will identify the natural
drainage patterns of San Diego Creek. On the basis of probable native
vegetation, soils maps, and surficial geology, he will estimate the
erosion and deposition areas within these natural drainage patterns.
He will evaluate the impact of sediment deposition on Upper Newport
Bay and the effects of tidal mixing on fine-grain sediment deposition.
- This will be accomplished with the use of existing information with addi-
tional investigations as appropriate within the scope of this study.
C. SEDIMENT SOURCE ANALYSIS
From among the various methods available for estimating sediment pro-
duction rates, the method proposed for use in this study is the Universal
Soil Loss Equation (USLE) developed by the U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture . This approach is chosen because of its capability of predicting the
erosion rate for each feasible alternative combination of crop system and
management practices in association with a specified soil type, rainfall
pattern, and topography. Widespread field use has substantiated its use-
fulness and validity for this Purpose. It is also applicable for such non-
agricultural conditions as construction sites.
The USLE grdups the numerous interrelated physical and management
parameters that influence erosion rate under six major factors: rainfall,
soil erodibility, slope -length, slope -steepness, ground cover, and prac-
tice factors. Numerical values for each of the six factors can be derived
from analyses of soil, topographic, land -use, and rainfall data. The
recently completed "Soil Survey of Orange County and Western Part of
Riverside County, California" includes soil types and erodibility factor
for San Diego Creek watershed. Estimations of the other factors can be
made in accordance with the recent U.S. Department of Agriculture hand-
book "Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses - A Guide to Conservation
Planning."
The USLE is developed to estimate the sediment generated by sheet and
rill erosion that is usually, but not always, the major portion of a water-
shed's gross erosion. Sediment from gully, streambank, and streambed
erosion and from uncontrolled roadsides must be added to the USLE esti-
mates. The composition of sediment derived from these sources will
usually differ substantially from that derived from sheet and rill erosion.
Methods for estimating sediment yields from these sources will be in
accordance with the SCS National Engineering Handbook.
-7- (D
The above analysis will yield annual average erosion losses and soil loss
potentials for 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100 -year floodflows for recent, years
1990 and 2000, and ultimate land -use conditions in accordance with the
RFP. Particle size distribution from each erosion source will also be
assessed within this task.
In accomplishing this task, the SCS may be able to provide considerable
assistance in providing information and recommendations. We have con-
firmed that Nfr. Walter Bunker at SCS., Davis can be made available in
providing consultation for this project by a request through SLAG. Another
consultant who will provide assistance for this task will be Mr. Daniel
Davis at the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. His experience
and familiarity with soil loss estimations in the Los Angeles County area
will be valuable assets for this task.
D. SEDIMENT DELIVERY ANALYSIS
This task will be performed in two phases: estimation of sediment yield
from each subbasin and sediment transport analysis in a major stream
system .
Eroded soil materials often move only short distances before a decrease
in runoff velocities causes their deposition. They may remain in the
fields where they originated or may be deposited on more level slopes
that are remote from the stream system. A conventional method to deter-
mine sediment yields is to use the concept of sediment delivery ratio.
The sediment delivery ratio is the ratio of sediment delivered at a given
location to the gross erosion from the drainage area above that location.
A general equation for computing a watershed delivery ratio is not yet
-8- 6_(
available and its estimation often requires engineering judgment. How-
ever, a modified version of the USLE, which is proposed for use in this
study, eliminates the need for a sediment delivery ratio by using a runoff
factor (runoff times peak rate) as the rainfall energy factor in the USLE .
This modification allows for prediction of sediment yield resulting from
individual storms as well as its long-term average value.
The above. approach will be used to estimate basin sediment load under
various conditions which will be entering into the stream system. The
characteristics of sediment transport in a stream substantially differ from
that of sheet and rill erosion.
For analyzing sedimentation and the erosion processes in a river system,
we propose to use a mathematical model developed by Dr. Daryl B. Simons
and Dr. Ruh -Ming Li at Colorado State University. This model simulates
the bed material discharge by size fractions and estimates degradation or
aggredation through reaches in the main streams, based on the hydraulic
parameters determined from HEC -2 analysis. The program contains sev-
eral versions of bed -load equations including Meyer -Peter and Muller bed -
load formula, Einstein bed -load function, and others. Selection of a proper
equation can be made which will best fit. the field data. The program also
includes the Einstein suspended load procedure to compute the suspended
portion of the bed material load. The input parameters required for the
stream sediment routing model are channel cross-section data, hydro -
graph in each reach, wash load, bed material size distribution, and
hydraulic roughness (Manning's "n") .
The results from the above approach will be compared with sediment dis-
charge records at the three U.S.G.S. gaging stations in the watershed
mentioned in the RFP. Appropriate parameters for the soil loss equation
and the bed material load equation will be adjusted so that the model
results are comparable with historical records.
The calibrated model will then be applied to develop annual average sedi-
ment discharges and sediment discharge streamflow rating curves by par-
ticle size fractions for the 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100 -year floodflows for
recent, years 1990 and 2000, and ultimate land -use conditions. The
model will also facilitate analyses of the sediment transport characteris-
tics, such as sediment transport rate and channel stability, throughout
the study reaches.
We have successfully used the above integrated approach of estimating
basin sediment yield and streamflow sediment transport on a number of
projects similar to this project, some of which are described .in the ex-
perience section of this proposal.
To effectively perform the task, we have associated with special consul-
tants, Dr. Daryl B . Simons and Dr. Ruh -Ming Li who are the originators
of the above model. Their familiarity with the model and experience with
other projects will be valuable assets for this task. Their background
and detailed resumes are included in the Project Organization section.
E. SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, DEPOSITION, AND SCOUR IN NEWPORT BAY
Sedimentation in Upper Newport Bay occurs because material eroded from
the lands in tributary watersheds, especially during storms, is trans-
ported to the bay by runoff waters where their transporting capabilities
are suddenly reduced. Two factors are important: currents in the bay
are much lower than the velocities of entering waters, and the change in
salinity from freshwater to that of the saline bay causes aggregation of
-10- �3
fine suspended particles that greatly enhances their settling velocities.
Estimates of future sedimentation rates in the bay will require that both
of these processes be considered.
An analysis on sedimentation and scouring in Newport Bay will require
streamflow data, size distributions, and volumes of sediment load. These
data will be generated from the previous tasks. Additional requirements
are wind data, historical hydrographic survey data, local tides, bed sedi-
ment and wat2r column samples, and particle size distribution. It is un
derstood that much of this information is available from the University
of California, Irvine, Water Resources Laboratory, and other government
agencies. Additional data as necessary for this task will be collected to
supplement existing data within the budget.
A detailed study on sediment transport, deposition, and scour in Newport
Bay would require mathematical models of water circulation and sediment
transport. Such a study would show the locations and shapes of shoals,
local sedimentation rates, and suspended solids concentrations for
selected conditions. A less detailed study, based on historical data and
simple calculations, would yield estimates of total volume of sediment
deposited per year and a qualitative description of the locations of shoals.
We propose to use the latter approach because it is simple, but practical,
and best fits the study objectives.
This task will be performed by Dr. Ray Krone, special consultant for
this project. His background and resume are included in the section on
Project Organization.
-11- 5
PART III - COMPREHENSIVE STORMFLOW AND
SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN
The two general categories of measures that may be used to control sediment
input into Upper Newport Bay are structural measures and land management
measures. Structural measures include debris basins, floodwater retarding
reservoirs, grade stabilization structures, and concrete -lined channel sec-
tions. Debris basins trap a portion of the sediment that is carried by the
floodflows. Floodwater retarding reservoirs reduce the peak floodflows and,
consequently, reduce the carrying capacity of the floodflows and reduce the
power of the floodflows to erode the channels. Grade stabilization structures
and concrete -lined channel sections reduce the potential for channel erosion.
Land management measures control the production of sediment by controlling
erosion on the land. These measures include contour farming, terraces,
cultivation practices, cover crops, improved irrigation practices, and others.
This category of measures would reduce the sediment content of the floodflows
and, consequently, the deposition in Upper Newport Bay.
The sedimentation analysis will provide information on sediment source areas,
sediment transport and delivery characteristics of the floodflows, sediment
deposition, and scour in Newport Bay. This information will provide an esti-
mate of the average annual rate of sediment delivery under existing conditions
and under changed land -use conditions anticipated at future points in time. It
will also provide the relative amounts of sediment delivery from the infre-
quently occurring large floodflows versus the frequently occurring smaller
flows.
Sediment source areas will probably include the foothill areas, the areas in
process of development, the lands in agricultural use, and actively eroding
l w� (11'� I II
drainage channels. The sedimentation analysis will indicate the relative
amounts of sediment production and delivery from each of these sources.
The first increment of a program will be to determine the practicability of
controlling erosion and sediment production from the agricultural lands
including forest and range areas. The extent of these opportunities can be
determined through the Orange County Resources Conservation District and
the SCS along with recommendations for improved land management measures.
Another major source of sediment production has been construction sites on
lands under development. Improved management of these sites has caused
reduction of sediment production from these areas. The sedimentation
analysis may indicate that further improvement in management measures is
appropriate .
Sediment delivery from the foothill areas may be controlled by debris basins
at the canyon mouths . They may be developed as a part of the capacity in
floodwater retarding reservoirs at these locations. In evaluating the effec-
tiveness of such debris basins, it must be determined if the floodwaters,
with the sediment all or partially removed, will tend to reestablish their sedi-
ment load by downstream channel erosion. The sedimentation analysis will
provide information on channel stability. Consideration of these foothill dam
structures will be coordinated with the anticipated separate study on the feasi-
bility of installing such structures.
The effects of floodwater retarding in reducing sediment production and de-
livery will be evaluated on the basis of the lower flows having less sediment
carrying capacity and weaker erosion forces.
13 Sk
The needs for channel improvements by concrete lining or grade stabilization
structures will be evaluated on the basis of determinations made in the sedi-
mentation analysis and with consideration of the effects of other improvement
measures, such as debris basins discharging flows with greater erosion
potential.
The opportunites for debris basins at various locations within the watershed
will be evaluated on the basis of various sizes and configurations to determine
their potential effectiveness for removing sediment. The feasibility of removing
accumulated sediment from Newport Bay will also be considered on the bases
of ecological consequences and disposal areas.
Preliminary plans will be developed for those measures that are determined
as potentially effective in reducing sediment deposition in Upper Newport Bay.
Their estimated installation costs and operation and maintenance costs will
be determined .
Combinations of these measures will be developed as system alternatives.
Technical memoranda will be developed describing the alternative components,
their effectiveness, and costs. Technical memoranda describing the bases for
selection and description of the alternatives will be developed.
A general audience report will be developed to explain the various alternatives,
their effectiveness, costs, financing, and other factors to serve as a basis for
selecting a desired alternative.
The technical memoranda will be provided to the technical review committee
and with consideration of their comments, these memoranda will be finalized.
-14- 6�
Participate in public review of alternatives and review comments and prepare
responsiveness document.
Prepare recommended plan and environmental documentation.
,eA
-15-
PROJECT COSTS
INTRODUCTION
Boyle Engineering Corporation will maintain flexibility in the determination
of professional engineering fees. In determining fees appropriate for a given
assignment of a project, or projects, a number of methods are available de-
pending upon the particular needs of a client. We have always been able to
select a fee structure compatible with the desires of the client and appropriate
to a particular contract and project requirements.
PROJECT COSTS
Table 1 presents the manpower requirement for Boyle Engineering Corpora-
tion, by task, based upon our interpretation of the scope of work. Table 2
presents the subcontractor's time and cost estimates. In addition, we esti-
mate printing costs to be $6,000 and computer costs $5,000. Also enclosed
is a cost summary on EPA Form 5700-41 (2-76) as requested in your Re-
quest for Proposal. Total study cost is estimated to be $311,996.
We are available at your convenience to further define the scope and negotiate
a contract.
-1-
- 5�1
_
N
Ln tD h N G1 h S m O N T b O a h h O� M i N 1p
m
N
N
O
z
u
-- O
�
Q
d
a
r
E
O
e
a
•�
O
b M
O
a
b
N to
rn
n
Z
�
5
J O
ly
m a
W
< m
Z_
F-
m
a
V
Z
v
v
W
n
0
LU
a
J
O
}
C
a
tl
Ln tD h N G1 h S m O N T b O a h h O� M i N 1p
m
N
m
N
M
b
N
a
r
to
e
I
N
O
b M
N
a
b
N to
rn
n
N
b
a+
..
N
�.
m
a
I-
T
l
1.1
m
M
Q
a
O
h
N
b
M
I^
b
h
?
N
M
_
IT
M
�
N
m
M
IA N
b
a
M
m
N
a
N
M
b
a
r
to
e
M
N
a
b
N to
rn
n
N
b
b m
..
N
�.
I-
l
M
Q
a
h
N
O
m
M
I^
b
M
M
N
M
M
IT
M
b
N
m
M
IA N
b
a
M
_
m M
O
O
m
N T
Vi
wi
b
a+
M
r`
o
C
v
E
3
o
c
d
N
N
C
.0
d
L
A
E
N
x
N
n
E
m
m
en J
a
s
c
>
a$
^,
<<
c
c
V
< O
OZ
i
E
c
m
c
v
O
W
C
O O
v
L
v
m m
EE
m
m
m¢
=
0.
C
m
m
J J
<<
E
.O .0
:•
d
L
u
v
�,
o
s
d
d
m
y
m
m
>
> v
c
m
to
O
to
O O
F- F
L
>
m
c
z
r
A m
u.
m
°
C
c
a
r
m
om
c
v
m
N
to
v
Lv L.
E
Oo
et
-
o
m
c<
Lo
v
v
E
v
a
..
<
c
"
o
.,
a
m
c
N
><
c<>
L
c
v
�
m
N;
<<
� N
c
v
M
C
m
q
v
o
m
u
v
u
v
C.a
o 3
u
c
y
9
c
o
c<
v
c
o r
E
i
a
>
>-
E
c
L.
c v
d
7O
m^
LL
>
o
v
d E
E
m
m
4
¢
u
o
p
p
a
d
O
iZ
F- C
e
C
C
"
?
m
C
L
$.
>
v
to
L
>
..
W
E
N
L
Q
E
io
m
c
C
v
E
m
v U
a v
c
C
y
m
E
E
E
L<
c
N
E
c
i
•N
u
d
m0.
m
>
d
u
<
>`
O
d
M
M
'O to
L
0
Q
H
>
A
d >
y O
H
N
C
m
61
LL
O
v
tn
=
0
v
In
v
Ln
W
In
u
> c
v
o
O
U_
�
c
W
W
I-
L
o
O 61
d w
L
n.
¢
c
c
C
N m
u
v o
¢�
v
L L
a�
¢
'0<
m
U
O
W
LL
O G
m
U
U
m)
_
_
_
rn
_
_
_
_
_
_
U
_
_
_
_
_
_
_ _
_
_
w
Y
Y
Y
to
N
V1
L
m
L
m
L
tl
�
a
a
in
a
voi
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF CONSULTANT COSTS
DAMES E MOORE
Part III: Comprehensive Stormflow Sedimentation Control Plan ( 8113.03)
Subtask III -D Environmental Assessment of Alternatives
70 days @ $400 /day = $28,000
Other Costs 250
Subtotal T28, 250
Subtask 111-1 Prepare Recommended Plan and Environmental Documentation
6 days @ $400 /day = $ 2,400
Other Costs 75
S ubtota l $ -2,475
Dames S Moore Total $30,725
- KERCHEVAL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Part III: Comprehensive Stormflow Sedimentation Control Plan ( 8113.03)
Subtask III -B Cost Analysis of Alternatives
18 days @ $400/day = $ 7,200
Other Costs 360
Subtotal -7,560
Kercheval and Associates, Inc.
Total $ 7,560
LLSC, INC.
Part I I : Sedimentation Analysis ( 8015.01 Part)
Subtask II -D Sediment Delivery Analysis
55 days @ $400/day = $22,000
Part I I 1 : Comprehensive Stormflow Sedimentation Control Plan ( 8113.03)
Subtask III -A Development and Performance Analysis of Alternatives
-- 4 days @ $400 /day = $ 1,600
LLSC, Inc. Total $23,600
TABLE 2 Continued
Summary of Consultant Costs - Continued
DR. STANLEY W. TRIMBLE
Part I I : Sedimentation Analysis (8015. 01 Part)
Subtask 11-13 Geomorphologic Analysis
20 days @ $240 /day = $ 4,800
Dr. Stanley Trimble Total $ 4,800
J. DANIEL DAVIS
Part I I: Sedimentation Analysis (8015. 01 Part)
Subtask II -C Sediment Source Analysis
5 days @ $240/day = $ 1,200
Part III: Comprehensive Stormflow Sedimentation Control Plan ( 8113.03)
Subtask III -A Development and Performance Analysis of Alternatives
12 days @ $240/day = $ 2,880
J. Daniel Davis Total $ 4,080
DR. RAY KRONE
Part I I : Sedimentation Analysis ( 8015.01 Part)
Subtask II -E Sediment Transport, Deposition and Scour in
Newport Bay
40 days @ $240/day = $ 9,600
Dr. Ray Krone Total $ 9,600
TOTAL CONSULTANTS $80,365
. 0.
6�1-
.................. ...... .
COST OR PRICE SUMMARY FORMAT FOR SUBAGREEMENTS UNDER U.S. EPA GRANTS Fo--
(See accompanying instructions before completing this form.) O'IB ."0. ISa-
PART I -GENERAL
I. GRANT:
City of Newport Beach and City of Irvine
2. GRANT NUMSEP
P0091909-01-0
1. NAME OF CONTRACTOR OR SUBCONTRACTOR
Boyle Engineering Corporation
4. DATE OF PROPOSAL.
IJuly 28, 1980
S. ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR OR SUBCON-RACTOR (Include LIP Code)
1501 Quail Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
6. TYPE OF SERVICE T O BE FURNIS-EC
Professional services in hydrology,
sedimentation and environmental analysis
for. the Upper Newport Bay -San Diego
Creek Storm Flow Sedimentation Control
Plan.
PART II -COST SUMMARY
—
7. DIRECT LABOR (SPecllr Leber eereSorlee) ESTI. HOURLY ESTIMATED
MATED RATE COST
HOURS
TOTALS
_
Princi al Senior En S S
:•
--
Associate /Assistant En ineer 2368 1
Drafter Technician 984 1 8.30
Clerical 496 6.49 3,219
DIRECT LABOR TOTAL:
S 83,42 0
—
B. INDIRECT COSTS (SPeellr indirect Qelt Peale) RATE • BASE s ESTIMATED
COST
Direct Labor Burden S S 7 q Q11A_
Corporate C & A 0.984 83 A7 ngg
INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL:'-"`"':' •�'�' -:°t"
S
—
—
—
f. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
_
�•~ . .
+
_ ..
ESTIMATED
a. TRAVEL. COST
(i TRANSn01•TATION
(2) PCR 01EM S
TRAVEL SUBTOTAL: f:�.:.� '•� :. I�.. ::: :.°.. , S
b. EOUIPMENT, MATERIALS. SUPPLIES (SPeelly eetgeNee) QTY COST ESTIMATED
COST
EQUIPMENT SUBTOTAL: "� ""�' ''�."~ w"'Y:�•-:'~
L*. SUBCONTACTS ESTIMATED
R
COST
See summary sheet $
SUBCONTRACTS SUBTOTAL: a= S
d. OTHER (Speelh eeleSerlee) ESTIMATED
COfT
Computer @ $5,000 Printing @ $6,000 S
Misc. 60 $11360-
OTHER SUBTOTAL:
e.' OTHER DIRECT COSTS TOTAL:r I
.
S 91,725
10. TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
1287, 178
_
11. P='Z►;T 12$ a lied
IL TOTAL PRICE
1
5311, 996
tT III -PRICE SUMMARY
1 COMPETITOR'S CATALOG LISTINGS, IN-HOUSE ESTIMATES. PRIOR OUOTSS
(indicate beat/• !or Pnc• comparison)^,•S PRICE
1
715
_ I
"' .•c:. '•rim � �iRJ[ xfif"-�r., w�. ...%�r�f'!F,"..'t'.T,tl•'R"', ,^:r•, is -.
PART IV -CERTIFICATIONS
14.1 INTRACTOR — I
14A.- AS A FEDERAL AGENCY OR A FEDERALLY CERTIFIED STATE OR LOCAL AGENCY PEPr=pwED ANY REVIEW OF YO'JP.
ACCOUNTS OR RECORDS IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER FEDERAL GRANT OR CONTRACT .ITr41K TME PAST TWELVE ►o.Ot:'w$'
NO (It •-Y..'• /in name addreee and telephone number of r»viRwina eific*)
EPA Western Audit Division, 215 Fremont St., San Francisco, CA 94102
Attn. Bob Foster (415)556-8060
1Ab .THIS SUMMARY CONFORMS WITH THE FOLLOWING COST PRINCIPLES
41 CFRI-15.4
. This proposal is submitted for use i connectio with and in response to (1) Request for Prnpnal- datpci_
Newport seach
_ my 7, 1980, from Cities of and Irvine. . This is to cer:if-.• to the best of my'Anowl-age
and belief that the cost and pricing data summarized herein are complete, cL-:rnt, and accurate as of
2) July 24, 1980 and that a financial management ca;ab::it:• exists to fully and accu-
rately account for the financial transactions under this project. I further cert' J the: I understand that the
subagreement price may be subject to downward renegotiation and/oi recoup^ent •: here the abcve cost and
pricing data have been determined, as a result of audit, not to have been cor..p:e•=. current and accurate as
of the date above.
{3) July 25, 1980
DATE OF EXECUTION
sl:NiT�RE Ci aiOPOS L>t ,
Leslie A. Clayton
Chairman of the Board
T TSE :F PROPOfsR
14. _RANTEE REVIEWER -
I certify that I have reviewed the cost/price summary set forth herein and the F:c;zse2 co..ts/price appear
acceptable for vibagreement award,
GATE OF EXECUTION s::nLT�r-E OV FE 0 EWE•
16. PA REVIEWER (11 rppikable)
GA -E OF EXECUTION
r��r
� PA --refm 570041 (2.761
--;.S -r ar. EVER