Loading...
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