HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGRMT NO KRGSA16-002(2)AGREEMENT NO. KRGSA 16-002(2)
AMENDMENT NO. TWO [2] TO
AGREEMENT NO. KRGSA 16-002
THIS AMENDMENT NO 1021 TO AGREEMENT NO. KRGSA 16-002 is made
and entered into on U U8 Z iB by and between the KERN RIVER
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY (referred to herein as "KRGSA"), and
TODD GROUNDWATER, a small business enterprise (referred to herein as
"CONTRACTOR").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on August 4, 2016, KRGSA and CONTRACTOR entered into
Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002, to develop and implement a strategic approach
to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014
("SGMA") by preparing a Groundwater Sustainability Plan ("GSP") as outlined in
a "Scope of Work I "; and
WHEREAS, in April 2017 the parties entered into Amendment No. One (1) to
Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002, to expand the Scope of Work in the original
contract to include developing a Subbasin-wide water budget utilizing the
C2VSim referred to as "Scope of Work 2" and also agreed to provide for
additional compensation above the original compensation to perform Scope of
Work 2; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to Amend Agreement No. 16-002 again to
add additional compensation to cover tasks associated with Scope of Work 1;
and
WHEREAS, the additional compensation is needed to address
coordination with the KGA (task 7 in the original proposal), budget overages on
technical analyses (tasks 1 and 2 in the original proposal) and future costs for
GSP development, such as analysis of climate change scenario now being
required by DWR (task 5 in the original proposal).
NOW, THEREFORE, incorporating the foregoing recitals herein, KRGSA and
CONTRACTOR mutually agree to amend Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002 as
follows:
1. Section 1 of Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002 entitled "Scope of Work"
is hereby amended to read as follows:
Amendment 1 to Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002
S:\WATERXRGSA\Agm\ToddAmd 2 To Agr KRGSA16-002. Do"
August7,2016
-- Page 1 of 3 Pages --
1. SCOPE OF WORK. The scope of work is
described as: assisting the KRGSA in developing and
implementing a strategic approach to comply with the
SGMA and as further described in Exhibit "A" and
Exhibit "B," attached and incorporated to Agreement
No. KRGSA 16-002 and Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002
(1) and Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated
by reference herein. The scope of work shall include all
items and procedures necessary to properly complete
the task CONTRACTOR has been hired to perform,
whether specifically included in the scope of work or
not.
2. Section 2 of Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002 entitled "Compensation"
is hereby amended to read as follows:
2. COMPENSATION. Compensation for all work,
services or products called for under this Agreement
shall consist of a total payment not to exceed Three
Hundred Sixty Thousand Dollars ($360,000) to perform
Scope of Work 1, Four Hundred Thirty -One Thousand
Nine Hundred Fifty Seven Dollars ($431,957) to perform
Scope of Work 2, and One Hundred Ninety Thousand
Dollars ($190,000) to perform the additional Task work
described herein, for a total amount not to exceed
Nine Hundred Eighty One Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty
Seven Dollars ($981,957). The compensation set forth in
this section shall be the total compensation under this
Agreement including, but not limited to, all out-of-
pocket costs and taxes. KRGSA shall pay only the
compensation listed unless otherwise agreed to in
writing by the parties.
3. Except as amended herein, all other provisions of Agreement No.
KRGSA 16-002 shall remain in full force and effect.
Amendment 1 to Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002 AGENCY
s:\WATERWRGSA�Agm\Todd.Amd 2 To Agr KRGSA16-002.Do"
August 7, 2018 ORIGINAL
-- Page 2 of 3 Pages --
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment
No. Two [2] to Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002 to be executed the day and year
first above written.
KRGSA
KERN RIVER GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY
By:
ROD PALLA
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
CITY OF BAKE SFIELD
By:
KAREN K. GOH
Mayor
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
By: (RR /
ART CHIANELLO
Water Resources Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
VIRGINIA 90NARO
City Atto y
By: aIL-0
VIRGINIA 6ENNARO
City Attorney
COUNTERSIGNED:
By:
NELSON SMITH
Finance Director
vG:du
Attachment: Exhibit C - Scope of Work
Amendment 1 to Agreement No. KRGSA 16-002
S:\WATERXRGSA\Agrs\ToddAmd 2 To Agr KRGSA1&002. Door
August], 2018
CONTRACTOR
TODD GROUNDWATER
By: �&A�
PHYLLIS STANIN
Vice President
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
G NE R. McMURTREY
Attorneys for Kern Delta Water
District
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By' . T
AMELIA T.MINAqERIYGARAI
General CounseKW
Kern County Water Agency/
Improvement District 4
-- Page 3 of 3 Pages --
EXHIBIT C
SCOPE OF WORK 3
FGENCYIGINAL
TODD=
GROUNDWATER
July 2, 2018
& A 11�.
To: Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agency(KRGSA)
Mark Mulkay, David Beard, Art Chianello
From: Phyllis Stanin
Re: Request for Budget Amendment
Preparation of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP)
As Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agency (KRGSA) embarked on one of the first
Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) in the state, member agencies knew that there
would be challenges associated with breaking new ground. But they also recognized that, as
the largest subbasin in the state and a critically-overdrafted basin, the Kern County Subbasin
would be a focal point for the new Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
With a high reliance on groundwater, active conjunctive use programs, and numerous large
groundwater banking projects, the subbasin is the most dynamic and complex in the state.
Further, the KRGSA is a highly complex GSA in terms of sources of water and exchanges of
water sources; the mix of agriculture, industrial and large-scale municipal use; the
occurrence of tens of small public water systems; and integration of long-term banking
programs. Todd Groundwater has been assisting the KRGSA as they navigate the GSP
landscape.
Because of these challenges, the GSP process is costing more than anticipated — for
completed tasks, ongoing work, and future analyses. In order to complete a defensible GSP
and coordinate Its contents with the numerous additional GSPs for timely submission to
DWR, Todd Groundwater is requesting a budget adjustment. KRGSA managers had
suggested holding such a request until the final GSA boundary adjustments were completed.
Currently no additional significant changes are envisioned and a request can now be made
with more certainty regarding funding needed for GSP completion.
1 BACKGROUND -CURRENT GSP BUDGET AND STATUS
On July 26, 2016, Todd Groundwater provided the KRGSA with a scope and budget for
preparation of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). At that time:
• GSP regulations had not yet been finalized,
• DWR guidance documents and best management practices had not yet been
published,
• the KRGSA had not yet been designated as an Exclusive GSA,
2490 Mariner Square Loop, Suite 2151 Alameda, CA 945011510 747 6920 1 toddgroundwater.com
AGENCY
ORIGINAL
• it was unclear which agencies would be joining the KRGSA GSP,
• the Kern Groundwater Authority (KGA) had not yet approved the envisioned
supporting technical work,
• a regional groundwater modeling approach had not been developed,
• Coordination Agreements were being developed internally using a White Paper
approach,
• the complexity of tracking the numerous sources of water had not been fully
realized, and
• the time needed for past, current, and future coordination with the KGA and others
regarding technical consistency was under-estimated.
Our total approved budget for the GSP development was $360,000. As noted in our 2016
proposal, these unknowns introduced uncertainty with respect to the cost estimate.
Through June 2018, we have expended approximately $290,000 of our $360,000 budget,
approximately 80 percent. With additional significant work to be completed, a budget
adjustment is required. The details of the budget amendment request are summarized in
the following sections.
2 NEED FOR BUDGET AMENDMENT
The explanation for the budget amendment request has been divided into the following
categories:
• Coordination with KGA (Task 7)
• Budget Overage on Technical Analyses (Tasks 1 and 2)
• Future Costs for Plan Development
2.1 Coordination with KGA (and other GSAs) (Task 7)
A Task 7 budget of $10,771 was included in our 2016 contract for review and comment of
White Papers being developed by the KGA to support basin-wide Coordination Agreements.
After concerns were expressed regarding the initial KGA documents, KRGSA managers
requested preparation of KRGSA-specific White Papers. Todd Groundwater developed Draft
and Revised Draft White Papers on six key technical topics addressed in the GSP
requirements for Coordination Agreements. This task was not included in the original
budget and required review of DWR framework documents, research on basin-wide data
sets that might be applicable to others, and descriptions of methodologies that could be
coordinated with KGA. Approximately $23,277 was spent on White Paper development,
resulting in an overage of $12,506 for this task as of March 2017.
Since that time, there has been a continuing need to coordinate with technical consultants
of adjacent GSAs and the KGA. This work has included in-person meetings with KGA
consultants, one in-person meeting with Arvin-Edison Water Storage District (AEWSD), one
Southern San Joaquin Regional Group conference call (coordination with adjacent
Budget Amendment
Request/KRGSA GSP 2 TODD GROUNDWATER
AGENCY
ORIGINAL
subbasins) and several additional in -basin conference calls. These efforts have cost about
$14,000 to date.
None of these efforts were in our original scope. When we were initially being asked to
participate by the KGA and others, we emailed the Managers regarding this request; the
managers agreed that the coordination would be helpful and directed us to provide a
budget amendment request when the costs of the required ongoing coordination efforts
could be better estimated. For this budget request, we have included $26,500 to cover the
out -of -scope costs expended to date.
There will be a future need to review analyses and written GSP sections developed by others
when available. The level of effort required for this work is currently unknown. Given that
the GSPs are estimated to be approximately 60% complete, we estimate that an additional
$15,000 may be needed.
2.2 Budget Overage on Technical Analyses for Tasks land 2
The first two tasks of the GSP process, Task 1 Administrative Information (also includes Plan
Area) and Task Basin Setting, represent the compilation of data and scientific analyses on
which the GSP must be based. Task 2 is composed of the Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model,
Groundwater Conditions, and Water Budget analysis and represents the task with the
largest level of effort in the project. When we developed our scope and cost estimate, we
had made assumptions about use of existing data sets to support the multi -faceted analyses
of these tasks.
Since that time, existing data sets have been found to be inadequate for GSP purposes, and
additional key data sets have been developed by DWR and others that require incorporation
into the analyses. In addition, the Plan Area has been adjusted over time, changing the local
areas. These conditions have resulted in continual modification of previously -completed
analyses. Specifically, the under -estimation of effort for these tasks can be linked primarily
to the following:
• Need to re -work and develop new data sets rather than rely on those previously
developed by our firm for the Kern Fan Model and recent Kern Delta Water District
projects
• Need to update analyses as new DWR-developed data sets are made available
• Revised analyses associated with GSA boundary adjustments
• larger number of parties to include in the water budget than anticipated.
Extra work conducted overthe last few months has resulted in an overage of about $70,000.
In addition, several of the analyses require significant revisions for completion.
Use of Previously -Developed Data Sets: Our original budget assumed numerous efficiencies
in our cost estimate for Task 2, including use of existing data sets developed by our firm for
the Kern Fan Model and Kern Delta Water District projects. Those data sets proved
inadequate for the complex water budget analysis needed to comply with final GSP
Budget Amendment
Request/KRGSA GSP 3 TODD GROUNDWATER
AGENCY
OR161NAL
regulations. In particular, previous data sets developed for the City of Bakersfield had been
over -simplified and did not incorporate numerous complexities associated with tracking of
Kern River recharge within KRGSA boundaries, wastewater facilities, groundwater recharge
and recovery operations, and non -member -agency production in the KRGSA. Although initial
data sets were helpful in establishing the framework for the water budget, previous data
had to be both replaced and expanded.
Continual Development of Data Sets for the GSP by Others: When analyses began in 2016,
DWR had not yet completed the online SGMA Portal that now provides numerous data sets
to be considered and incorporated into the GSP process. Prior to the KRGSA contract, Todd
Groundwater had completed an analysis of historical and recent subsidence in the KRGSA
area and assumed that recent analysis would be sufficient for GSP purposes. Within the last
year, DWR has provided additional subsidence data sets for use in GSPs, along with more
recent analysis along the California Aqueduct. In addition, more recent work has been made
available from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) on subsidence in the southern Central
Valley, extending into Kern County. These data sets could affect the Sustainable
Management Criteria for subsidence and need to be incorporated into the GSP.
As another example, the Nature Conservancy has recently published vegetation maps on the
DWR online portal, Natural Communities Commonly Associated with Groundwater.
Incorporation of these data will be required for the Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem
analysis. Recent data provided by the City of Bakersfield are being used to incorporate this
mapping into the water budget.
GSA Boundary Adjustments and Changes in Number of Parties: The GSA boundary has
required several adjustments during the project to coordinate with boundaries of adjacent
agencies. Although these adjustments have been relatively minor with respect to the altered
area, they have resulted in modifications to previously -completed figures and analyses that
rely on the number of acres. Given that every square inch of the subbasin must be included
in consistent analyses without overlap, the number of acres is an important factor. As a
criticallyaverdrafted subbasin, the groundwater analysis in Task 2 required an estimate of
annual changes in groundwater in storage for each year of the 21 -year Study Period. Now
that the boundary has been finalized, the existing groundwater in storage analysis must be
re -done.
A potential boundary modification by Olcese Water District was reviewed to determine the
changes to the KRGSA boundary and potential impacts on the GSP analysis. Although a
relatively minor level of effort was needed for this task, it was unanticipated and not in the
original budget. Several additional analyses similar to this out -of -scope review have been
required for this project.
The number of parties for inclusion in the water budget analysis has changed slightly and
was also under -estimated in the original scope. The inclusion of Greenfield County Water
District and Lamont Community Services District in 2017 required additional data collection
and analysis. In addition, the existence of 45 water purveyors (including about 32 small
water systems), two county wastewater facilities, and additional industrial groundwater
Budget Amendment
Request/KRGSA GSP 4 TODD GROUNDWATER
AGENCY
GRIG(NAL
users required more data collection and analysis than previously envisioned in the scope of
services.
2.3 Future Costs for Plan Development
DWR is developing new scenarios and criteria for Climate Change modeling to be included in
the GSP. There may be efficiencies in conducting these analyses on a subbasin basis and the
KGA may pursue this option for the entire subbasin. However, an analysis of the KRGSA
management actions under the climate change scenario will need to be incorporated into
the KRGSA GSP. The details of this work are currently unknown, but will likely include
several modeling scenarios for the KRGSA with a DWR-defined decrease in available water
supplies over the planning horizon. This analysis is not in the current scope of services and
can either be incorporated now or after the final DWR guidance is available. The extra
scenarios may add about $22,000 to the current Task 5 budget.
Except for the Climate Change analysis, the original Task 5 budget is viewed sufficient to
complete the GSP modeling analysis of KRGSA management actions for the GSP. The
ongoing work on the subbasin model and the detailed water budgets should provide a more
technically credible analysis to support Sustainable Criteria.
3 BUDGET AMENDMENT SUMMARY
The table below presents the total budget amendment request of $189,150 on a task basis
and summarizes the need for each request as described above.
Additional future coordination $15,000
Task 1 Man Area Under -estimated subtasks $12,538
Task 2 Basin Setting Under -estimated subtasks, newly -developed
GSP data sets (by DWR and others), boundary $113,114
adjustments, larger number of parties, and
more complex water budgets
Task 5 Management Future climate change analysis $22,003
Actions
$189,152
Budget Amendment
Request/KRGSA GSP 5 TODD GROUNDWATER
AGENCY
ORIGINAL
Given the amount of the budget amendment request, the KRGSA may wish to approve the
requested amount in phases. In particular, the estimated budget for future coordination in
Task 7 and the additional analysis associated with climate change (future guidance from
DWR) in Task 5 could be deferred until more is known about these costs.
The outreach and communications component of the GSP is being handled by others. Given
that we have only expended approximately one-third of our estimated budget for support
on this component (Task 6), we assume that future support can be covered by our
remaining budget. If additional meetings or needs for outreach support are identified, an
additional budget request can be supplied at that time.
4 BUDGET STATUS ON SUBBASIN MODELING
The contract with Todd Groundwater also includes a budget of $431,957 to conduct the
subbasin-wide modeling. Costs for that project are shared among others in the Subbasin and
are being tracked separately. The subbasin model development is moving forward on an
expedited schedule to meet project deadlines. As of May 2018, approximately $175,936 of
the subbasin modeling budget has been expended with about 59 percent of the budget
remaining. The model project is currently on track with respect to the budget expended for
the work completed.
Budget Amendment
Request/KRGSA GSP 6 TODDGROUNDWATER
AGENCY
IORIG!NAL