professional services agreement amendment 07 …

Dokken Engineering, Inc. of 3

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

AMENDMENT 07

Dokken Engineering, Inc. Public Works Consultant

Department

Environmental and Engineering Services Capital Improvement Program Description

Division

August 14, 2012 through December 31, 2020

Calaveritas Road and Monge Ranch Road Bridges

Agreement Term

Project

1200-1205 $675,368.00 12000010 9014 Agreement Number

Amount Org. Key Object Code

Effective April 1, 2019, the following terms and conditions shall be amended:

1: BASIC SERVICES

A. The services contemplated by this Agreement (Work) are funded, in whole or in part, by federal-aid

programs and are subject to supplemental program agreements to Administering Agency-State

Agreement for Federal-Aid Projects No. 10-5930. As such, the Work is subject to the supplemental

provisions for federal-aid projects included as Appendix A.

B. The Consultant shall furnish and perform the services described in “Appendix B: Work Plan” including,

but not limited to, environmental and engineering services as necessary to successfully complete the

environmental review process and secure project authorization to proceed with final design and right-

of-way acquisition as may be required to rehabilitate or replace existing bridges identified as follows:

Project Bridge No. Name

BRLO 5930 (059) 30C0021 Monge Ranch Road over Coyote Creek

BRLO 5930 (060) 30C0024 Calaveritas Road over Calaveritas Creek

C. The Consultant will provide all facilities, equipment, personnel, labor and materials necessary to

provide the foregoing services in accordance with this Agreement.


D. The Work shall be performed in a manner satisfactory to the Director of Public Works or his/her

designee (for the purposes of this Agreement, this individual shall be referred to as the “County

Contract Manager”).

E. All subcontracts shall comply with all provisions, conditions, appendices, references, and exhibits of

this Agreement.

F. In the event of any conflicts between the Agreement and other documents (including exhibits,

appendices, or references), the Agreement shall prevail. Otherwise, the provision that requires the

highest level of performance from the Consultant for the County’s benefit shall prevail.

2: COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES

A. The For the services described in Section 1 above, and subject to the condition that the specified

Work has been completed in a manner satisfactory to the County Contract Manager, Consultant shall

be compensated on a time and expenses basis at the rates as set forth in Appendix C provided,

however, that the total amount of compensation to be paid Consultant for the Work shall not exceed

six hundred seventy-five thousand, three hundred sixty-eight dollars ($675,368).

B. The Consultant shall not be entitled to reimbursement for any expenses other than those described

in Section 1 above and as identified in Appendix C.

C. The Consultant shall maintain complete and separate accounting for each bridge project. Invoices

for compensation and reimbursement shall be similarly separated.

19: AMENDMENT

Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Agreement, the parties may mutually agree to amend this

Agreement. No alteration or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing

and signed by the parties hereto. No oral understanding or amendment to said Agreement not incorporated

herein shall be binding on any of the parties hereto.

The Director of Public Works shall have the authority to approve modifications to the term, scheduling,

billing rates, and allocation of funds between the tasks and subtasks (if any) set forth above, provided there

is no increase to the total compensation as set forth in Section 2 of this Agreement. Any modification that

results in an increase to the total compensation may only be made upon approval of the appropriate

authority as determined by County Purchasing Code and by written instrument signed by both Parties.

All other terms and conditions shall remain unchanged.

[Remainder of page left intentionally blank. Signature page to follow.]


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the dates indicated

below.

County

Consultant

Chair

Richard Liptak, P.E.

Board of Supervisors

President

Date

Date

Calaveras County Counsel

Approved as to Legal Form:

Signature

Dokken Engineering, Inc. Page B-1

APPENCIX B: WORK PLAN


Department


Division



Agreement Term

Project



1 SCOPE OF SERVICES

AMENDMENT 07: SCOPE OF WORK CALAVERITAS ROAD BRIDGE PROJECT– BRIDGE RETROFIT/REHABILITATION PROJECT APPROVAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT The following tasks will be conducted to support the updated preliminary engineering and environmental approval of the bridge retrofit/rehabilitation alternative for the Calaveritas Road Bridge.

TASK 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT The additional tasks necessary to revise the existing environmental analysis to include the rehab alternative will result in the need for additional meetings, schedule tracking, general administration, and quality control.

TASK 1.1 MEETINGS AND COORDINATION Dokken Engineering will organize, attend, and facilitate additional meetings as needed to reestablish PA/ED funding, gain consensus from Caltrans on the environmental/technical rehabilitation scope, provide progress updates, coordinate between technical disciplines, and facilitate overall project communication. For each meeting, the Dokken will provide meeting notices, prepare meeting materials and agenda, attend and facilitate the meeting, and prepare meeting minutes. Approximately six additional meetings are anticipated to be needed to coordinate administrative, technical and/or environmental issues with the County/Caltrans and facilitate completion of the Project Approval/Environmental Document phase.

Deliverable(s): Meeting notices, agendas and minutes

TASK 1.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE Upon notice to proceed, Dokken will modify the current Microsoft Project schedule to reflect the updated project tasks and will maintain the schedule on a bi-weekly basis to reflect the progress of the project. A copy of the schedule will be provided monthly with the Progress Report and invoice.

Deliverable(s): Monthly Project Schedule

TASK 1.3 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION Dokken will continue to monitor and control the effort and progress of the project through the extended project schedule with the following tasks:

• Update the project accounting system to reflect updated tasks and budgets in accordance withthe County’s invoicing and tracking needs.

• Prepare and execute the subconsultant agreement with Mikesell Historic Consulting.

• Monitor subconsultant progress and review/approve invoices.

• Prepare monthly Progress Reports and client invoices to record the progress of the project andas supporting data for invoices presented monthly to the County. The Progress Report willinclude accomplished tasks for the month, anticipated progress for the next month, pendingissues and schedule completion target dates.

TASK 1.4 QUALITY CONTROL Dokken Engineering will continue to implement the quality control plan to ensure design calculations and technical studies/documents are independently checked and exhibits/plans are checked, corrected and back-checked for accuracy and completeness. Dokken Engineering will review internal and

2 SCOPE OF SERVICES

subconsultant submittals to ensure that appropriate background information, study methodology, interpretation of data, format and content are completed in accordance with current standards.

TASK 3.0 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

Task 3.6 Bridge Strengthening Report Based on the bridge strengthening analysis conducted for the feasibility phase, Dokken will assemble a Strengthening Report describing the analysis and recommended improvements for review by Caltrans. Dokken will coordinate with Caltrans Structures Local Assistance, Caltrans bridge rail expert, and, if needed, Caltrans Environmental to ensure that the proposed design addresses the structural and historical aspects.

Deliverables: Bridge Strengthening Report

TASK 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION

Task 4.4 Update Environmental Technical Studies Task 4.4.1 Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report Dokken Engineering will prepare a Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report (SHPSR) in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). This document will provide an update to the bridge being evaluated and ultimately listed on the National Register of Historic Places and will also include the updated project description of a historic bridge rehabilitation. This scope of work assumes that no changes to the Archaeological Survey Report will be needed and the cultural resources record search and Native American Consultation will not need to be updated from the efforts completed in 2013. A rendering of the proposed improvements will be prepared as part of this task.

Deliverable: Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report

Task 4.4.2 Finding of No Adverse Effect Report Dokken Engineering and Mikesell Historic Consulting (MHC) will prepare a Finding of No Adverse Effect (FNAE) Report which will document each element of bridge rehabilitation and state why it will not result in an adverse effect to the historic Calaveritas Road Bridge. The Finding of Effect Report will rely heavily on the findings and conclusions made in the Bridge Strengthening Report prepared by Dokken Engineering’s structures team. The FNAE will apply Secretary of Interior Standards where possible to the rehabilitation strategy to minimize impacts to the historic character of the structure, but non-standard conditions may also be needed, particularly for the vehicular guard rail, or other elements that will be obviously different compared to the current structure. Once Caltrans has reviewed and approved the SHPSR and FNAE, these documents will be sent to the State Historic Preservation Officer for concurrence.

Deliverable: Finding of No Adverse Effect Report, SHPO Concurrence Letter

Task 4.4.3 Visual Impact Assessment Dokken Engineering will update the Visual Impact Assessment previously prepared in 2013 with new analysis specific to a retrofit/rehabilitation alternative. The assessment will discuss the changes in the project description and how those changes might affect the existing visual environment. Changes in the visual environment are expected to be substantially minimized with this alternative compared to the replacement alternative, and no new or increased environmental impacts are anticipated.

Deliverable: Visual Impact Assessment Update Memorandum

3 SCOPE OF SERVICES

Task 4.4.4 Natural Environment Study A Dokken Engineering biologist will coordinate with Caltrans to provide a comprehensive update to the Natural Environment Study (NES) previously prepared for the Calaveritas Bridge Project. This effort will include updating the project description to document the retrofit/rehabilitation alternative, updating the NES figures to reflect the changes in preliminary design, and updating the biological resource impact analysis. Generally, impacts to biological resources should stay the same or be reduced due to a substantially smaller area of disturbance; however temporary impacts to the creek may increase due to the need for falsework footings placed in the creek bottom. The main reduction in the area of disturbance is due to the retrofit/rehabilitation alternative no longer needing to raise the profile of the bridge which would substantially reduce the amount of associated approach earthwork necessary to conform to the existing roadway profile.

Pursuant to Caltrans biologist instructions and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service guidance, the project area is no longer considered within the historic range of the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle. As such, a confirmation letter will be obtained from USFWS to document this change and it will be included in the updated NES. Additional assessment will be needed to identify if the project area provides suitable habitat for the Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog, which was recently listed as a Candidate Species on the California Endangered Species Act. If suitable habitat is present additional coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife will be necessary to identify suitable avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures, and to determine if the project is expected to result in take of the species. Dokken Engineering will review and update the avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to reflect the project changes and anticipated reduction in impacts to biological resources. The updated NES will be submitted to Caltrans for their review and approval.

Deliverable: Natural Environment Study

Task 4.4.5 Community Impact Assessment Memorandum Dokken Engineering will prepare a Community Impact Assessment Memorandum that will document the County’s public outreach efforts to date, concerns raised by the community, and the project background regarding why the project was changed from a bridge replacement to a retrofit/rehabilitation project. A brief summary of the potential impacts to the community and how they have been minimized through the public’s input will be provided. This memorandum will be submitted to Caltrans for their review and approval.

Deliverable: Community Impact Assessment Memorandum

Task 4.4.6 Section 4(f) Evaluation (Memo to File) Since the Calaveritas Road Bridge has been determined to be a historic resource eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places, it is also considered to be a Section 4(f) resource under the Department of Transportation Act. Dokken Engineering will prepare a memo to the Caltrans file documenting that the project would have “no use” of the Section 4(f) resource under CFR 774.13(a)(1) because 1) restoration, rehabilitation, or maintenance of the bridge would not adversely affect the historic transportation facility, and 2) SHPO did not object to the “no adverse effect” determination under Section 106.

Deliverable: Section 4(f) Evaluation

Task 4.4.7 Location Hydraulic Study

Dokken Engineering will update the Location Hydraulic Study Form and the Summary Floodplain Encroachment Report form for the project. A full update of the Location Hydraulic Study Report was determined unnecessary by Caltrans.

Deliverable: Location Hydraulic Study Form/Summary Floodplain Encroachment Report form

4 SCOPE OF SERVICES

Task 4.4.8 Environmental Update Memoranda Dokken Engineering will prepare various additional update memoranda for the Caltrans NEPA file including updates to the Construction Noise Memo, Water Quality Study, and Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment. These memoranda will include an updated project description, changes in the project design, and an updated Hazardous Waste Record Search from Environmental Data Resources (EDR). No new or increased noise, water quality, or hazardous waste related impacts are anticipated.

Deliverable: Environmental Update Memoranda

Task 4.5 Update CEQA Documentation Task 4.5.1 Prepare Revised Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Dokken Engineering will prepare a revised Draft IS/MND for the Calaveritas Bridge Project. This IS/MND will document the new build alternative (retrofit/rehabilitation) as well as the prior coordination under CEQA that lead the County to change the build alternative. Dokken Engineering will utilize the prior environmental research and analysis from the Draft IS/MND to prepare the revised IS/MND, incorporating changes based on the updated environmental technical studies discussed under Task 4.4. A comprehensive update to the discussion of public outreach will be prepared, as well as a record of all comments received by other agencies and the public from prior outreach efforts. The Draft IS/MND will be submitted to the County for review and approval.

Deliverable: Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

Task 4.5.2 Public Circulation and Public Meeting Dokken Engineering will produce the Draft IS/MND for public review. Dokken Engineering will coordinate with the County to prepare a public notice to be mailed to interested parties, hard copies of the document, and copies of the environmental technical studies to be made available for public review during the circulation period.

During circulation of the draft environmental document, Dokken Engineering and the County will hold a public meeting to update the public on the changes to the project and solicit addition comments on the new design strategy the two build alternatives. Dokken Engineering will prepare exhibits, facilitate the meeting, conduct set up/cleanup activities, and compile public comments received for inclusion in the Final MND.

Deliverable: Post card mailers, Exhibits, Comment Summary

Task 4.5.3 Responses to Public Comments At the close of the public review period for the Draft IS/MND, Dokken Engineering will work with County staff to review any comments on the draft document that were received and to discuss potential responses to these comments.

Dokken Engineering will then formulate responses to the comments on the IS/MND. Once a response to comments has been completed, it will be submitted to the County for review. The County’s direction will be incorporated into the response to comments document, which will become an appendix in the Final MND document.

Deliverable: Response to Comments IS/MND Appendix

Task 4.5.4 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration After all public comments have been addressed, Dokken Engineering will prepare a Final IS/MND document pursuant to CEQA guidelines. County staff will review and approve the Final IS/MND and recommend that the County Board of Supervisors adopt the environmental document. Once the environmental document has been approved by the County Board of Supervisors, Dokken Engineering

5 SCOPE OF SERVICES

will prepare a Notice of Determination to be filed with the County Recorder’s Office. Filing of this Notice of Determination will complete the CEQA process for this project. Dokken expects that the County will pay the CEQA filing fee at the time the Notice of Determination is submitted to the County Recorder’s Office.

Deliverable: Final IS/MND, Notice of Determination

Dokken Engineering, Inc.

APPENCIX C: BUDGET


Department


Division



Agreement Term

Project



Dokken Engineering, Inc.

Proposal Group 1 Bridge ‐ Calaveritas CONSULTANT COST PROPOSAL

CONSULTANT: Dokken Engineering

DIRECT LABOR

Classification Name Range Hours

Intial Hourly

Rate TotalPrincipal in Charge RICHARD LIPTAK, PE $75.00 ‐ $120.00 0 75.00$ ‐$ Project Manager Pamela Dalcin‐Walling, PE $50.00 ‐ $75.00 116 72.00$ 8,352.00$ QA/QC Engineer LIZ DIAMOND, PE $75.00 ‐ $120.00 0 75.00$ ‐$ Roadway Engineer STAFF $50.00 ‐ $70.00 16 55.00$ 880.00$ Structures Engineer Rob Burns, PE $50.00 ‐ $70.00 70 66.00$ 4,620.00$ Associate Roadway Engineer STAFF $40.00 ‐ $60.00 0 51.00$ ‐$ Associate Bridge Engineer STAFF $40.00 ‐ $60.00 40 55.00$ 2,200.00$ Lead Environmental Planner Tim Chamberlain $52.00 ‐ $60.00 104 52.00$ 5,408.00$ Associate Environmental Planner/Archaeologist STAFF $35.00 ‐ $5200 176 44.00$ 7,744.00$ Environmental Planner/Biologist STAFF $20.00 ‐ $38.00 260 35.00$ 9,100.00$ Assistant Roadway Engineer STAFF $31.00 ‐ $42.00 32 36.00$ 1,152.00$ Assistant Bridge Engineer STAFF $31.00 ‐ $42.00 100 38.00$ 3,800.00$ Engineering Technician STAFF $18.00 ‐ $40.00 17 38.00$ 646.00$ Senior CAD Detailer STAFF $40.00 ‐ $60.00 32 59.00$ 1,888.00$ Admin/Clerical STAFF $19.00 ‐ $35.00 0 18.00$ ‐$

963

Subtotal Direct Labor Costs 45,790.00$

Anticipated Salary Increases ‐$

TOTAL ‐ Direct Labor 45,790.00$

Rate

Fringe Benefit 22.00% 10,073.80$

TOTAL ‐ Fringe Benefits 10,073.80$

Indirect Costs Rate Total

General and Administrative 125.00% 57,237.50$

Overhead 8.00% 3,663.20$

133.00%

TOTAL ‐ Indirect Costs 60,900.70$

FEE ( 10.00% ) TOTAL ‐ Fee 11,676.45$

OTHER COSTS (ACTUAL COSTS) Total

• None anticipated ‐$

TOTAL ‐ Other Costs ‐$

Total ‐ Dokken Engineering 128,440.95$

SUBCONSULTANT COSTS Total

• Mikesell Historical Consulting 8,751.60$

TOTAL ‐ Subconsultants 8,751.60$

TOTAL COST ‐ NOT TO EXCEED* 137,192.55$

* Note: Original contract budget of $34,578 remaining at the time of Amendment 07 execution. These funds have been

reallocated between tasks as necessary for a total Amendment 07 Agreement cost increase of $102,614, and a total

contract cost of $402,695 for BRLO 5930(060).

January 18, 2019

COST PROPOSAL

Calaveras County Bridge Projects Phase 1 Group 1 ‐ Calaveritas

Calaveras County

ATTA

CHM

ENT

B: S

UPPL

EMEN

TAL C

OST

PRO

POSA

L Ca

lave

ritas

Roa

d -

Brid

ge R

etro

fit/R

ehab

ilita

tion

PA/E

D

Mar

ch 1

4, 2

019

Pamela Dalcin-Walling, PEProject Manager

Roadway Engineer

Rob Burns, PEStructures Engineer

Associate Bridge Engineer

Tim ChamberlainLead Environmental Planner

Associate Environmental Planner/Archaeologist

Environmental Planner/Biologist

Assistant Roadway Engineer

Assistant Bridge Engineer

Engineering Technician

Senior CAD Detailer

TOTAL HOURS

OTHER DIRECT COST

TOTAL COST

FUL

LY B

URDE

NED

RAT

E

$

2

01.9

6 $

154

.28

$

1

85.1

3 $

154

.28

$

1

45.8

6 $

123

.42

$

98.1

8 $

100

.98

$

1

06.5

9 $

106

.59

$

1

65.5

0 TA

SK 1

.0 P

RO

JEC

T M

ANAG

EMEN

T31

,005

$

7216

1210

0-

$

19,2

54$

Ta

sk 1

.1 M

eetin

gs a

nd C

oord

inat

ion

18,4

71$

308

1250

-$

9,29

0$

Ta

sk 1

.2 P

roje

ct S

ched

ule

2,13

8$

8

8-

$

1,

616

$

Task

1.3

Pro

ject

Adm

inis

tratio

n 6,

160

$

2626

-$

5,25

1$

Ta

sk 1

.4 Q

ualit

y C

ontro

l 4,

237

$

88

16-

$

3,

097

$

TASK

2.0

SU

RVE

Y AN

D R

IGH

T O

F W

AY17

,375

$

-$

-

$

Task

2.1

Fie

ld S

urve

yTa

sk 2

.1.1

Est

ablis

h Su

rvey

Con

trol

4,73

5$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 2

.1.2

Top

ogra

phic

Sur

veys

& B

ase

Map

ping

6,94

1$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 2

.2 R

ecor

ds R

esea

rch,

Mon

umen

t Rec

over

y an

d Bo

unda

ry R

esol

utio

n5,

026

$

-$

-$

Task

2.3

Rig

ht-o

f-Ent

ry L

ette

rs67

3$

-$

-$

TASK

3.0

PR

ELIM

INAR

Y EN

GIN

EER

ING

36,0

35$

8

1632

4010

032

228

-$

32

,134

$

Task

3.1

Res

earc

h an

d D

ata

Col

lect

ion

2,64

8$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 3

.2 G

eote

chni

cal I

nves

tigat

ion

Task

3.2

.1 L

itera

ture

revi

ew a

nd R

econ

nais

sanc

e30

2$

-$

-$

Task

3.2

.2 F

ield

Exp

lora

tion

-$

-$

-$

Task

3.2

.3 L

abor

ator

y Te

stin

g60

1$

-$

-$

Task

3.2

.4 G

eote

chni

cal D

esig

n R

epor

t12

,258

$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 3

.2.5

Pre

limin

ary

Foun

datio

n R

epor

t (PF

R)

1,44

6$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 3

.3 H

ydra

ulic

Stu

dies

Ta

sk 3

.3.1

Hyd

rolo

gy S

tudy

2,14

5$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 3

.3.2

Hyd

raul

ic A

naly

sis

10,2

13$

-$

-$

Task

3.4

Pub

lic O

utre

ach

3,43

5$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 3

.5 T

raffi

c D

ata

Col

lect

ion

2,98

9$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 3

.6 B

ridge

Stre

ngth

enin

g R

epor

t-

$

8

1632

4010

032

228

-$

32,1

34$

TASK

4.0

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

DO

CU

MEN

TATI

ON

122,

978

$

36

2292

176

260

3217

635

-$

77

,053

$

Task

4.1

Pre

limin

ary

Envi

ronm

enta

l Stu

dy (P

ES) F

orm

4,

635

$

-$

-$

Task

4.2

Tec

hnic

al S

tudi

es

Task

4.2

.1 H

azar

dous

Was

te In

itial

Site

Ass

essm

ents

/Inve

stig

atio

ns

5,65

9$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 4

.2.2

His

toric

Pro

perty

Sur

vey/

Arch

aeol

ogic

al S

urve

y R

epor

t 24

,081

$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 4

.2.3

Vis

ual I

mpa

ct M

emor

andu

m

8,09

5$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 4

.2.4

Wat

er Q

ualit

y As

sess

men

t4,

920

$

-$

-$

Task

4.2

.5 N

oise

Stu

dy R

epor

t2,

226

$

-$

-$

A07

Task

Desc

riptio

n

DOKK

EN E

NGIN

EERI

NG

CONTRACT BUDGET THOUGH A06

Page

1 o

f 4

ATTA

CHM

ENT

B: S

UPPL

EMEN

TAL C

OST

PRO

POSA

L Ca

lave

ritas

Roa

d -

Brid

ge R

etro

fit/R

ehab

ilita

tion

PA/E

D

Mar

ch 1

4, 2

019

Pamela Dalcin-Walling, PEProject Manager

Roadway Engineer

Rob Burns, PEStructures Engineer

Associate Bridge Engineer

Tim ChamberlainLead Environmental Planner

Associate Environmental Planner/Archaeologist

Environmental Planner/Biologist

Assistant Roadway Engineer

Assistant Bridge Engineer

Engineering Technician

Senior CAD Detailer

TOTAL HOURS

OTHER DIRECT COST

TOTAL COST

FUL

LY B

URDE

NED

RAT

E

$

2

01.9

6 $

154

.28

$

1

85.1

3 $

154

.28

$

1

45.8

6 $

123

.42

$

98.1

8 $

100

.98

$

1

06.5

9 $

106

.59

$

1

65.5

0

A07

Task

Desc

riptio

n

DOKK

EN E

NGIN

EERI

NG

CONTRACT BUDGET THOUGH A06

Task

4.2

.6 N

atur

al E

nviro

nmen

t Stu

dy26

,230

$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 4

.2.7

End

ange

red

Spec

ies

Act S

ectio

n 7

Con

sulta

tion

21,8

25$

-$

-$

Task

4.3

NEP

A/C

EQA

Doc

umen

tatio

nTa

sk 4

.3.1

NEP

A C

ateg

oric

al E

xclu

sion

(CE)

2,91

0$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 4

.3.2

Dra

ft C

EQA

Initi

al S

tudy

and

Miti

gate

d N

egat

ive

Dec

lara

tion

(IS/M

ND

)9,

479

$

-$

-$

Task

4.3

.3 P

ublic

Circ

ulat

ion

and

Publ

ic M

eetin

g6,

472

$

-$

-$

Task

4.3

.4 R

espo

nses

to C

omm

ents

1,48

2$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 4

.3.5

Fin

al IS

/MN

D4,

962

$

-$

-$

Task

4.4

Upd

ate

Envi

ronm

enta

l Tec

hnic

al S

tudi

es

Task

4.4

.1 S

uppl

emen

tal H

isto

ric P

rope

rty S

urve

y-

$

2

848

129

79-

$

9,

632

$

Task

4.4

.2 F

indi

ng o

f No

Adve

rse

Effe

ct R

epor

t-

$

2

88

1230

-$

4,53

3$

Ta

sk 4

.4.3

Vis

ual I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t-

$

2

832

42-

$

4,

421

$

Task

4.4

.4 N

atur

al E

nviro

nmen

t Stu

dy-

$

8

1664

88-

$

9,

425

$

Task

4.4

.5 C

omm

unity

Impa

ct A

sses

smen

t Mem

oran

dum

-$

420

1236

-$

4,23

0$

Ta

sk 4

.4.6

Sec

tion

4(f)

Eval

uatio

n (M

emo

to F

ile)

-$

28

10-

$

1,

077

$

Task

4.4

.7 L

ocat

ion

Hyd

raul

ic S

tudy

-$

416

20-

$

2,

424

$

Task

4.4

.8 E

nviro

nmen

tal U

pdat

e M

emor

anda

-$

412

2440

-$

4,42

1$

Ta

sk 4

.5 U

pdat

e C

EQA

Doc

umen

tatio

nTa

sk 4

.5.1

Pre

pare

Rev

ised

Dra

ft In

itial

Stu

dy/M

itiga

ted

Neg

ativ

e D

ecla

ratio

n (IS

/MN

D)

-$

424

3260

120

-$

14,1

48$

Task

4.5

.2 P

ublic

Circ

ulat

ion

and

Publ

ic M

eetin

g-

$

16

816

1616

880

-$

11,0

85$

Task

4.5

.3 R

espo

nses

to P

ublic

Com

men

ts-

$

8

68

1216

50-

$

6,

945

$

Task

4.5

.4 F

inal

Initi

al S

tudy

/Miti

gate

d N

egat

ive

Dec

lara

tion

-$

816

1640

-$

4,71

2$

TA

SK 5

.0 U

TILI

TY C

OO

RD

INAT

ION

804

$

-

$

-$

Ta

sk 5

.1 U

tility

‘A’ P

acka

ge60

7$

-$

-$

Task

5.2

Con

flict

Iden

tific

atio

n an

d Po

thol

ing

196

$

-

$

-

$

TA

SK 6

.0 P

REL

IMIN

ARY

DES

IGN

91

,885

$

-$

-

$

Task

6.1

Pre

limin

ary

Brid

ge D

esig

n76

,297

$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 6

.2 P

relim

inar

y R

oadw

ay D

esig

n13

,153

$

-

$

-

$

Ta

sk 6

.3 E

ngin

eers

Est

imat

e 2,

435

$

-$

-$

Tota

l Hou

rs11

616

7040

104

176

260

3210

017

3296

3To

tal C

ost

300,

081

$

23,4

27$

2,46

8$

12,9

59$

6,17

1$

15,1

69$

21,7

22$

25,5

26$

3,23

1$

10,6

59$

1,81

2$

5,29

6$

-$

128,

441

$

Page

2 o

f 4

ATTA

CHM

ENT

B: S

UPPL

EMEN

TAL C

OST

PRO

POSA

L Ca

lave

ritas

Roa

d -

Brid

ge R

etro

fit/R

ehab

ilita

tion

PA/E

D

Mar

ch 1

4, 2

019

FUL

LY B

URDE

NED

RATE

TA

SK 1

.0 P

RO

JEC

T M

ANAG

EMEN

TTa

sk 1

.1 M

eetin

gs a

nd C

oord

inat

ion

Task

1.2

Pro

ject

Sch

edul

eTa

sk 1

.3 P

roje

ct A

dmin

istra

tion

Task

1.4

Qua

lity

Con

trol

TASK

2.0

SU

RVE

Y AN

D R

IGH

T O

F W

AYTa

sk 2

.1 F

ield

Sur

vey

Task

2.1

.1 E

stab

lish

Surv

ey C

ontro

l

Task

2.1

.2 T

opog

raph

ic S

urve

ys &

Bas

e M

appi

ng

Task

2.2

Rec

ords

Res

earc

h, M

onum

ent R

ecov

ery

and

Boun

dary

Res

olut

ion

Task

2.3

Rig

ht-o

f-Ent

ry L

ette

rsTA

SK 3

.0 P

REL

IMIN

ARY

ENG

INEE

RIN

GTa

sk 3

.1 R

esea

rch

and

Dat

a C

olle

ctio

n Ta

sk 3

.2 G

eote

chni

cal I

nves

tigat

ion

Task

3.2

.1 L

itera

ture

revi

ew a

nd R

econ

nais

sanc

e

Task

3.2

.2 F

ield

Exp

lora

tion

Task

3.2

.3 L

abor

ator

y Te

stin

g

Task

3.2

.4 G

eote

chni

cal D

esig

n R

epor

t

Task

3.2

.5 P

relim

inar

y Fo

unda

tion

Rep

ort (

PFR

)

Task

3.3

Hyd

raul

ic S

tudi

es

Task

3.3

.1 H

ydro

logy

Stu

dy

Task

3.3

.2 H

ydra

ulic

Ana

lysi

s

Task

3.4

Pub

lic O

utre

ach

Task

3.5

Tra

ffic

Dat

a C

olle

ctio

nTa

sk 3

.6 B

ridge

Stre

ngth

enin

g R

epor

tTA

SK 4

.0 E

NVI

RO

NM

ENTA

L D

OC

UM

ENTA

TIO

NTa

sk 4

.1 P

relim

inar

y En

viro

nmen

tal S

tudy

(PES

) For

m

Task

4.2

Tec

hnic

al S

tudi

es

Task

4.2

.1 H

azar

dous

Was

te In

itial

Site

Ass

essm

ents

/Inve

stig

atio

ns

Task

4.2

.2 H

isto

ric P

rope

rty S

urve

y/Ar

chae

olog

ical

Sur

vey

Rep

ort

Task

4.2

.3 V

isua

l Im

pact

Mem

oran

dum

Ta

sk 4

.2.4

Wat

er Q

ualit

y As

sess

men

tTa

sk 4

.2.5

Noi

se S

tudy

Rep

ort

Task

Desc

riptio

n

Stephen MikesellSenior Historian

TOTAL HOURS

OTHER DIRECT COST

TOTAL COST

$

13

4.64

-

$

-

$

10

0-

$

19

,254

$

2,55

5$

16

,698

$

47,7

03$

-

$

-$

50

-$

9,

290

$

1,31

6$

7,

975

$

26,4

46$

-$

-

$

8-

$

1,61

6$

19

2$

1,42

3$

3,

561

$

-$

-

$

26-

$

5,25

1$

37

8$

4,87

3$

11

,032

$

-

$

-$

16

-$

3,

097

$

669

$

2,

428

$

6,66

5$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-$

-

$

17,3

75$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

4,

735

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

6,

941

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

5,

026

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

67

3$

-$

-$

228

-$

32,1

34$

-

$

32,1

34$

68

,169

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

2,

648

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

30

2$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

-$

601

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

-$

12,2

58$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

1,

446

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

2,

145

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

10

,213

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

-$

3,43

5$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

-$

2,98

9$

-

$

-$

22

8-

$

32,1

34$

-$

32,1

34$

32,1

34$

6565

-$

8,75

2$

70

0-

$

85

,805

$

20,6

32$

65

,173

$

188,

152

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

4,63

5$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

5,

659

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

5,

670

$

(5,6

70)

$

18

,412

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

1,34

9$

(1

,349

)$

6,74

6$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

1,03

7$

(1

,037

)$

3,88

4$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

1,08

8$

(1

,088

)$

1,13

9$

CONTRACT GRAND TOTAL

A07

Mik

esel

l Hist

oric

al C

onsu

lting

Contract Budget Remaining

TOTAL AMENDMENT REQUEST

GRAND TOTAL HOURS

GRAND TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS

GRAND TOTAL COST

Page

3 o

f 4

ATTA

CHM

ENT

B: S

UPPL

EMEN

TAL C

OST

PRO

POSA

L Ca

lave

ritas

Roa

d -

Brid

ge R

etro

fit/R

ehab

ilita

tion

PA/E

D

Mar

ch 1

4, 2

019

FUL

LY B

URDE

NED

RATE

Task

Desc

riptio

n

Task

4.2

.6 N

atur

al E

nviro

nmen

t Stu

dyTa

sk 4

.2.7

End

ange

red

Spec

ies

Act S

ectio

n 7

Con

sulta

tion

Task

4.3

NEP

A/C

EQA

Doc

umen

tatio

nTa

sk 4

.3.1

NEP

A C

ateg

oric

al E

xclu

sion

(CE)

Task

4.3

.2 D

raft

CEQ

A In

itial

Stu

dy a

nd M

itiga

ted

Neg

ativ

e D

ecla

ratio

n (IS

/MN

D)

Task

4.3

.3 P

ublic

Circ

ulat

ion

and

Publ

ic M

eetin

gTa

sk 4

.3.4

Res

pons

es to

Com

men

tsTa

sk 4

.3.5

Fin

al IS

/MN

DTa

sk 4

.4 U

pdat

e En

viro

nmen

tal T

echn

ical

Stu

dies

Ta

sk 4

.4.1

Sup

plem

enta

l His

toric

Pro

perty

Sur

vey

Task

4.4

.2 F

indi

ng o

f No

Adve

rse

Effe

ct R

epor

tTa

sk 4

.4.3

Vis

ual I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

tTa

sk 4

.4.4

Nat

ural

Env

ironm

ent S

tudy

Task

4.4

.5 C

omm

unity

Impa

ct A

sses

smen

t Mem

oran

dum

Task

4.4

.6 S

ectio

n 4(

f) Ev

alua

tion

(Mem

o to

File

)Ta

sk 4

.4.7

Loc

atio

n H

ydra

ulic

Stu

dyTa

sk 4

.4.8

Env

ironm

enta

l Upd

ate

Mem

oran

daTa

sk 4

.5 U

pdat

e C

EQA

Doc

umen

tatio

nTa

sk 4

.5.1

Pre

pare

Rev

ised

Dra

ft In

itial

Stu

dy/M

itiga

ted

Neg

ativ

e D

ecla

ratio

n (IS

/MN

D)

Task

4.5

.2 P

ublic

Circ

ulat

ion

and

Publ

ic M

eetin

gTa

sk 4

.5.3

Res

pons

es to

Pub

lic C

omm

ents

Task

4.5

.4 F

inal

Initi

al S

tudy

/Miti

gate

d N

egat

ive

Dec

lara

tion

TASK

5.0

UTI

LITY

CO

OR

DIN

ATIO

NTa

sk 5

.1 U

tility

‘A’ P

acka

geTa

sk 5

.2 C

onfli

ct Id

entif

icat

ion

and

Poth

olin

gTA

SK 6

.0 P

REL

IMIN

ARY

DES

IGN

Ta

sk 6

.1 P

relim

inar

y Br

idge

Des

ign

Task

6.2

Pre

limin

ary

Roa

dway

Des

ign

Task

6.3

Eng

inee

rs E

stim

ate

Tota

l Hou

rsTo

tal C

ost

Stephen MikesellSenior Historian

TOTAL HOURS

OTHER DIRECT COST

TOTAL COST

$

13

4.64

CONTRACT GRAND TOTAL

A07

Mik

esel

l Hist

oric

al C

onsu

lting

Contract Budget Remaining

TOTAL AMENDMENT REQUEST

GRAND TOTAL HOURS

GRAND TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS

GRAND TOTAL COST

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

4,

208

$

(4,2

08)

$

22

,022

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

-$

21,8

25$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

2,

910

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

1,

736

$

(1,7

36)

$

7,

743

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

-

$

-

$

6,

472

$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

1,

146

$

(1,1

46)

$

33

7$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

4,

398

$

(4,3

98)

$

56

4$

-$

-

$

79-

$

9,63

2$

-

$

9,

632

$

9,63

2$

65

65-

$

8,75

2$

95-

$

13,2

84$

-$

13,2

84$

13,2

84$

-$

-

$

42-

$

4,42

1$

-

$

4,

421

$

4,42

1$

-

$

-$

88

-$

9,

425

$

-$

9,42

5$

9,

425

$

-$

-

$

36-

$

4,23

0$

-

$

4,

230

$

4,23

0$

-

$

-$

10

-$

1,

077

$

-$

1,07

7$

1,

077

$

-$

-

$

20-

$

2,42

4$

-

$

2,

424

$

2,42

4$

-

$

-$

40

-$

4,

421

$

-$

4,42

1$

4,

421

$

-$

-

$

120

-$

14

,148

$

-

$

14

,148

$

14

,148

$

-

$

-$

80

-$

11

,085

$

-

$

11

,085

$

11

,085

$

-

$

-$

50

-$

6,

945

$

-$

6,94

5$

6,

945

$

-$

-

$

40-

$

4,71

2$

-

$

4,

712

$

4,71

2$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-$

-

$

804

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

-$

607

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

-$

196

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

11,3

91$

(1

1,39

1)$

80,4

93$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

9,32

4$

(9

,324

)$

66,9

73$

-$

-

$

-$

-

$

2,

067

$

(2,0

67)

$

11

,086

$

-

$

-$

-

$

-$

-$

-$

2,43

5$

65

651,

028

-$

-

$

8,

752

-$

8,

752

$

-

$

137,

193

$

34,5

78$

102,

614

$

402,

695

$

Page

4 o

f 4

professional services agreement amendment 07 …

Documents