Loading...
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