orth c resource partnership 2018/19 irwm project … · the project includes the design,...

North Coast Resource Partnership 2018/19 Project Appl icat ion 1

NORTHCOASTRESOURCEPARTNERSHIP 2018/19 IRWM Project Application

The North Coast Resource Partnership (NCRP) 2018/19 Project Application Instructions and additional

information can be found at the NCRP 2018/19 Project Solicitation webpage

(https://northcoastresourcepartnership.org/proposition‐1‐irwm‐round‐1‐implementation‐funding‐solicitation/).

Please fill out grey text boxes and select all the check boxes that apply to the project. Application responses

should be clear, brief and succinct.

Project Applications will be accepted until 5:00 pm, March 8, 2019 March 15, 2019. It is important to save the

application file with a distinct file name that references the project name. When the application is complete,

please email to [email protected]

If you have questions, need additional information or proposal development assistance please contact:

Katherine Gledhill at [email protected] or 707.795.1235

Tribal Projects: Sherri Norris, NCRP Tribal Coordinator at [email protected] or 510.848.2043

Project Name: Fieldbrook Glendale Community Services District Water Tank Seismic

Retrofit Project

A. ORGANIZATION INFORMATION

1. Organization Name: Fieldbrook Glendale Community Services District

2. Contact Name/Title

Name: Richard Hanger Title: District General Manager Email: [email protected] Phone Number (include area code): 707‐443‐3316

3. Organization Address (City, County, State, Zip Code): PO Box 2715 McKinleyville, Humboldt County, California, 95519


4. Organization Type Public agency

Non‐profit organization

Public utility

Federally recognized Indian Tribe

California State Indian Tribe listed on the Native American Heritage Commission’s California Tribal

Consultation List

Mutual water company

Other:

5. Authorized Representative (if different from the contact name) Name: Rebecca Crow Title: District Engineer Email: [email protected] Phone Number (include area code): 707‐443‐8326

6. Has the organization implemented similar projects in the past? yes no Briefly describe these previous projects. The District has implemented several similar projects. The District implemented a project to protect the tank through installation of a Hypalon liner in 2005. In approximately 2008 the original wood roof was replaced with an aluminum dome roof. For this projects, the District worked with I‐Bank to obtain a loan and the District administered the projectsfunding. More recently, seismic tie‐downs were installed in early 2018 to mitigate a catastrophic failure due to seismic hazards.

7. List all projects the organization is submitting to the North Coast Resource Partnership for the 2018/19 Project Solicitation in order of priority. FGCSD Water Tank Seismic Retrofit Project

8. Organization Information Notes:

B. ELIGIBILITY

1. North Coast Resource Partnership and North Coast IRWM Objectives GOAL 1: INTRAREGIONAL COOPERATION & ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

Objective 1 ‐ Respect local autonomy and local knowledge in Plan and project development and implementation

Objective 2 ‐ Provide an ongoing framework for inclusive, efficient intraregional cooperation and effective, accountable NCIRWMP project implementation

Objective 3 ‐ Integrate Traditional Ecological Knowledge in collaboration with Tribes to incorporate these practices into North Coast Projects and Plans

GOAL 2: ECONOMIC VITALITY


Objective 4 ‐ Ensure that economically disadvantaged communities are supported and that project implementation enhances the economic vitality of disadvantaged communities by improving built and natural infrastructure systems and promoting adequate housing

Objective 5 ‐ Conserve and improve the economic benefits of North Coast Region working landscapes and natural areas GOAL 3: ECOSYSTEM CONSERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT

Objective 6 – Conserve, enhance, and restore watersheds and aquatic ecosystems, including functions, habitats, and elements that support biological diversity

Objective 7 ‐ Enhance salmonid populations by conserving, enhancing, and restoring required habitats and watershed processes GOAL 4: BENEFICIAL USES OF WATER

Objective 8 ‐ Ensure water supply reliability and quality for municipal, domestic, agricultural, Tribal, and recreational uses while minimizing impacts to sensitive resources

Objective 9 ‐ Improve drinking water quality and water related infrastructure to protect public health, with a focus on economically disadvantaged communities

Objective 10 ‐ Protect groundwater resources from over‐drafting and contamination GOAL 5: CLIMATE ADAPTATION & ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

Objective 11 ‐ Address climate change effects, impacts, vulnerabilities, and strategies for local and regional sectors to improve air and water quality and promote public health

Objective 12 ‐ Promote local energy independence, water/ energy use efficiency, GHG emission reduction, and jobs creation GOAL 6: PUBLIC SAFETY

Objective 13 ‐ Improve flood protection and reduce flood risk in support of public safety

2. Does the project have a minimum 15‐year useful life? yes no

If no, explain how it is consistent with Government Code 16727.

3. Other Eligibility Requirements and Documentation

CALIFORNIA GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT SUSTAINABILITY COMPLIANCE a) Does the project that directly affect groundwater levels or quality?

yes no b) If Yes, will the organization be able to provide compliance documentation outlined in the

instructions, to include in the NCRP Regional Project Application should the project be selected as a Priority Project?

yes no CASGEM COMPLIANCE a) Does the project overlie a medium or high groundwater basin as prioritized by DWR?

yes no b) If Yes, list the groundwater basin and CASGEM priority: c) If Yes, please specify the name of the organization that is the designated monitoring entity:


d) If there is no monitoring entity, please indicate whether the project is wholly located in an economically disadvantaged community.

yes no URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN a) Is the organization required to file an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)?

yes no b) If Yes, list the date the UWMP was approved by DWR: c) Is the UWMP in compliance with AB 1420 requirements?

yes no d) Does the urban water supplier meet the water meter requirements of CWC 525?

yes no c) If Yes, will the organization be able to provide compliance documentation outlined in the

instructions, to include in the NCRP Regional Project Application should the project be selected as a Priority Project?

yes no

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN a) Is the organization – or any organization that will receive funding from the project – required to file

an Agricultural Water Management Plan (AWMP)? yes no

b) If Yes, list date the AWMP was approved by DWR: c) Does the agricultural water supplier(s) meet the requirements in CWC Part 2.55 Division 6?

yes no

SURFACE WATER DIVERSION REPORTS a) Is the organization required to file surface water diversion reports per the requirements in CWC Part

5.1 Division 2? yes no

d) If Yes, will the organization be able to provide SWRCB verification documentation outlined in the instructions, to include in the NCRP Regional Project Application should the project be selected as a Priority Project?

yes no

STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN a) Is the project a stormwater and/or dry weather runoff capture project?

yes no b) If yes, does the project benefit a Disadvantaged Community with a population of 20,000 or less?

yes no e) If No, will the organization be able to provide documentation that the project is included in a

Stormwater Resource Plan that has been incorporated into the North Coast IRWM Plan, should the project be selected as a Priority Project?

yes no


C. GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION

1. Project Name: FGCSD Water Tank Seismic Retrofit Project

2. Eligible Project Type under 2018/19 IRWM Grant Solicitation

Water reuse and recycling for non‐potable reuse and direct and indirect potable reuse Water‐use efficiency and water conservation Local and regional surface and underground water storage, including groundwater aquifer

cleanup or recharge projects Regional water conveyance facilities that improve integration of separate water systems Watershed protection, restoration, and management projects, including projects that reduce

the risk of wildfire or improve water supply reliability Stormwater resource management projects to reduce, manage, treat, or capture rainwater or

stormwater Stormwater resource management projects that provide multiple benefits such as water quality,

water supply, flood control, or open space Decision support tools that evaluate the benefits and costs of multi‐benefit stormwater projects Stormwater resource management projects to implement a stormwater resource plan Conjunctive use of surface and groundwater storage facilities Decision support tools to model regional water management strategies to account for climate

change and other changes in regional demand and supply projections Improvement of water quality, including drinking water treatment and distribution,

groundwater and aquifer remediation, matching water quality to water use, wastewater treatment, water pollution prevention, and management of urban and agricultural runoff

Regional projects or programs as defined by the IRWM Planning Act (Water Code §10537) Other:

3. Project Abstract

The proposed seismic retrofit is to install a new 400,000 gallon bolted steel water tank. The problem this project is attempting to solve is potential loss of Potable and Wastewater services to the Fieldbrook Glendale Community Services District due to earthquake hazards, as well as potential loss of water for emergency fire fighting for the surrounding areas.

4. Project Description

The proposed Project will protect essential services, including water, wastewater, and fire protection in Fieldbrook and Glendale. The goal of the Project is to improve the stability, reliability, and seismic resilience of the water storage tank to prevent structural failure and extreme water losses and to withstand at least a magnitude 9.0 earthquake. The objectives include protecting public health, protecting the economy of the area, and reducing damage from fires after an earthquake occurs.

The problem with the existing redwood tank is that the wood staves that form the structural support for the tank are degrading and the tank is not built to modern seismic standards. A Hypalon liner was installed in the tank in 2005. To keep the redwood in good condition, the tank should be overflowed to keep the redwood staves saturated. This is very difficult given the current telemetry system for the site, and over time the redwood staves have deteriorated at the base of the structure and have recently shown more rapid deterioration due to the presence of dry rot.

In addition, the FGCSD is located in a seismically active area of Humboldt County, as identified by Cal OES and the Humboldt County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Update Plan Update (2014). The tank is


vulnerable to earthquakes as it was built in the early 1970’s under the California Building Code at the time, for which seismic provisions were not mandatory.

The proposed Project is to retrofit the existing redwood tank through replacement with a new 400,000 gallon bolted steel water tank. The tank would be constructed to modern seismic standards, including ASCE 7 code for a critical facility. This Project will eliminate the risk of the tank and foundation failing and the associated damage and loss of water, wastewater, and fire service.

The Project includes the design, permitting, and construction of the new tank. The existing tank site allows for a new tank to be built next to the existing tank which allows the old tank to be kept in service, which reduces the impacts to water customers. No property acquisition is required for construction or access to the site. All tank materials can be staged at the existing tank site. The Project is expected to be categorically exempt from CEQA. Anticipated permits include a county building permit and possibly a grading permit. Minimal excavation is anticipated to be necessary and no off site hauling of material is anticipated. The site has previously been disturbed. The ground disturbance area is estimated to be less than 7,000 square feet and 155 cubic yards in volume. 5. Specific Project Goals/Objectives

Goal 1: Improve water supply reliability Goal 1 Objective: Retrofit through replacement, the existing water storage tank Goal 1 Objective: Design the new tank to the current California Building Code Goal 1 Objective: Goal 1 Objective: Goal 2: Continue regional coordination Goal 2 Objective: Support the regional water system by protecting the District's storage capacity which supports the other wholesale customers by allowing FGCSD to rely only on stored water during emergencies. Goal 2 Objective: Continue to reliably supply water to the Fieldbrook Volunteer Fire Department. Goal 2 Objective: Goal 2 Objective: Goal 3: Support Disadvantaged Communities Goal 3 Objective: Obtain grant funding to offset rate payer costs for major infrastructure projects Goal 3 Objective: Goal 3 Objective: Additional Goals & Objectives (List)

6. Describe how the project addresses the North Coast Resource Partnership and North Coast IRWM

Plan Goals and Objectives selected. Objectives 1 & 2. The goal of the Project is to improve the stability, reliability, and seismic resilience of the water storage tank to prevent structural failure and extreme water losses and to withstand at least a magnitude 9.0 earthquake. This allows the FGCSD to independently serve its customers, while also supporting the wholesale water system, by being self‐reliant during emergencies. Objectives 4, 8, & 9. This project is located within an economically disadvantaged census tract, and it will protect water supply, public health, and the economy of the area, which are all benefits to the residents Objective 12. Project will promote local water/energy use efficiency as it will allow for off peak pumping.


7. Describe the need for the project. The existing 400,000 gallon redwood water tank needs to be replaced to ensure water supply reliability. The redwood tank was built in 1973 under the California Building Code at the time, for which seismic provisions were not mandatory. Construction of the tank, foundation, and pad were prior to both the 1975 lateral force requirement additions and the amendment of the Uniform Building Code in 1994 to include seismic safety provisions. In the tank's current condition a moderate to strong earthquake will likely generate significant damage to an extent that renders the tank unsafe to store water. In approximately 2008 the original wood roof was replaced with an aluminum dome roof. A Hypalon liner was installed in the tank in 2005. The District has implemented seismic upgrades to the existing tank, however, the upgrades are only anticipated to prevent a catastrophic failure.

8. List the impaired water bodies (303d listing) that the project benefits:

N/A

9. Will this project mitigate an existing or potential Cease and Desist Order or other regulatory compliance enforcement action? yes no If so, please describe?

10. Describe the population served by this project. The Fieldbrook Glendale Community Services District (FGCSD) includes the two communities of Fieldbrook and Glendale, the population served is 1,605.

11. Does the project provide direct water‐related benefits to a project area comprised of Disadvantaged Communities or Economically Distressed Communities?

Entirely

Partially

No List the Disadvantaged Community(s) (DAC) Fieldbrook, California and Glendale, California

12. Does the project provide direct water‐related benefits to a project area comprised of Severely Disadvantaged Communities (SDAC)?

Entirely

Partially

No List the Severely Disadvantaged Community(s)

13. Does the project provide direct water‐related benefits to a Tribe or Tribes?

Entirely

Partially

No List the Tribal Community(s) If yes, please provide evidence of support from each Tribe listed as receiving these benefits.


14. If the project provides benefits to a DAC, EDA or Tribe, explain the water‐related need of the DAC, EDA or Tribe and how the project will address the described need. This project will improve the resiliency of the Fieldbrook Glendale Community Services District (FGCSD) water system by providing the District with a reliable water storage tank. The existing storage tank was installed in 1973 and, in its current condition, a moderate to strong earthquake will likely generate significant damage to an extent that renders the tank unsafe to store water. If this tank were to fail, the District would not be able to provide adequate potable and emergency fire fighting water services. The District recently raised sewer rates, which resulted is financial hardships for many in the Glendale area. of the District. FGCSD is pursuing grant funds to keep overall customer utility rates low. Rate increases to fund the tank match would be a financial burden for many of the District's customers.

15. Does the project address and/or adapt to the effects of climate change? Does the project address the

climate change vulnerabilities in the North Coast region? yes no If yes, please explain.

16. Describe how the project contributes to regional water self‐reliance. The expected outcome is a resilient water tank built to modern building code that will reliably serve the Fieldbrook and Glendale communities' need for Potable, and emergency fire fighting water for at least 50 more years. The retrofit will ensure that the District has its own potable water storage to address community needs and provides time to get the regional water system back on line.

17. Describe how the project benefits salmonids, other endangered/threatened species and sensitive habitats. N/A

18. Describe local and/or political support for this project.

FGCSD Board of Directors and the community.

19. List all collaborating partners and agencies and nature of collaboration. Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District (HBMWD) as the regional wholesale water provider and as the District's operations staff will be a partner in the project. FEMA is a funding partner.

20. Is this project part or a phase of a larger project? yes no

Are there similar efforts being made by other groups? yes no If so, please describe?

21. Describe the kind of notification, outreach and collaboration that has been done with the County(ies) and/or Tribes within the proposed project impact area, including the source and receiving watersheds, if applicable. None. The project will be implemented within the existing FGCSD tank site property boundary. The project is not anticipated to have negative environmental effects.

22. Describe how the project provides a benefit that meets at least one of the Statewide Priorities as defined in the 2018 IRWM Grant Program Guidelines and Tribal priorities as defined by the NCRP? The Fieldbrook Glendale Community Services District (FGCSD) is provided water by the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District (HBMWD), the regional wholesale water supplier. The HBMWD has been


working over the last several years to improve the resiliency of the regional water system. This project is designed to improve the resiliency of the local water system by retrofitting the District’s water storage tank; thus, addressing the state priority to increase regional self‐reliance and integrated water management across all levels of government. The project promotes the priority to provide safe water for all communities. The project also increases the operational efficiency of the system by preventing service loss due to a seismic event. The project is sustainable though its promotion of regional coordination on system storage, prevention of loss

23. Project Information Notes:

D. PROJECT LOCATION

1. Describe the location of the project

Geographical Information Lat: 40.962619 , Longitude: ‐124.026567

2. Site Address (if relevant): 233 Red Rock Ln, McKinleyville, CA 95519

3. Does the applicant have legal access rights, easements, or other access capabilities to the property to implement the project?

Yes If yes, please describe No If No, please provide a clear and concise narrative with a schedule, to obtain necessary access. NA If NA, please describe why physical access to a property is not needed.

Project is on District owned property

4. Project Location Notes: See "AttachmentB‐FGCSDWaterTank‐ProjectMap.pdf" for a map showing the project site and staging

areas, and access routes to the site.

E. PROJECT TASKS, BUDGET AND SCHEDULE

1. Projected Project Start Date: 7/1/20

Anticipated Project End Date: 1/31/2022

2. Will CEQA be completed within 6 months of Final Award? Yes State Clearinghouse Number: NA, Project is exempt from CEQA NA, Not a Project under CEQA NA, Project benefits entirely to DAC, EDA or Tribe, or is a Tribal local sponsor. [Projects providing a

water‐related benefit entirely to DACs, EDAs, or Tribes, or projects implemented by Tribes are exempt from this requirement].


No

3. Please complete the CEQA Information Table below Indicate which CEQA steps are currently complete and for those that are not complete, provide the estimated date for completion.

CEQA STEP COMPLETE? (y/n) ESTIMATED DATE TO COMPLETE

Initial Study

Notice & invitation to consult sent to Tribes per AB52

Notice of Preparation

Draft EIR/MND/ND

Public Review

Final EIR/MND/ND

Adoption of Final EIR/MND/ND

Notice of Determination

N/A ‐ not a CEQA Project

If additional explanation or justification of the timeline is needed or why the project does not require CEQA, please describe. Project will qualify for exemption from CEQA. FGCSD to file Notice of Exemption with County by Fall 2020.

4. Will all permits necessary to begin construction be acquired within 6 months of Final Award? Yes NA, Project benefits entirely to DAC, EDA, Tribe, or is a Tribal local sponsor No

5. PERMIT ACQUISITION PLAN

Type of Permit Permitting Agency Date Acquired or Anticipated

Grading Permit Humboldt County 11/1/2020

For permits not acquired: describe actions taken to date and issues that may delay acquisition of permit.

6. Describe the financial need for the project. The District has spent funds on maintaining the existing tank. However, structural deficiencies require replacement of the tank, which is an economic hardship for the Community. In January 2019, the District raised sewer rates to meet rising treatment costs resulting in a 56% increase in sewer rates ($40/mo increase on average). Additional utility rate increases would be hard on the community. The District is close to securing a 75% grant and needs a 25% match to make the project possible.


7. Is the project budget scalable? yes no

Describe how a scaled budget would impact the overall project. The District is requesting the full 25% match needed to make the project complete. If the full request is not feasible to award at this time the District could apply for loans to make up the difference. However, that would result in increased application costs, increased costs for project administration and reporting and increased complexity for project management.

8. Describe the basis for the costs used to derive the project budget according to each budget category. Task A costs presented are based on the level of effort that has been required on behalf of similar

entities and their consultants from previous projects. Task B costs are not applicable as the land is already owned by the district. Task C costs are based on the level of effort for tasks of similar projects, and required special studies. Task D costs are based on previous construction projects. It is anticipated that the construction of the

project will take approximately 6 months.

9. Provide a narrative on cost considerations including alternative project costs. Three alternative were considered for this mitigation project; 1) no action, 2) steel tank construction, or

3) deconstruction, component refurbishment and selective replacement, followed by reconstruction. Each alternative was evaluated on the basis of constructability, right of way requirements, environmental permit considerations, and cost. The final selected alternative had the greatest benefit for the least cost.

10. List the sources of non‐state matching funds, amounts and indicate their status.

Federal Funds (FEMA) Requested Amount: $956,250

11. List the sources and amount of state matching funds.

N/A

12. Cost Share Waiver Requested (DAC or EDA)? yes no Cost Share Waiver Justification: Describe what percentage of the proposed project area encompasses a

DAC/EDA, how the community meets the definition of a DAC/EDA, and the water‐related need of the

DAC/EDA that the project addresses. In order to receive a cost share waiver, the applicant must

demonstrate that the project will provide benefits that address a water‐related need of a DAC/EDA.

While the FGCSD qualifies as a disadvantaged community, a cost match waiver is not being requested as

the District is providing an approximately 75% match for the project through federal funds.

13. Major Tasks, Schedule and Budget for NCRP 2018 IRWM Project Solicitation Please complete MS Excel table available at https://northcoastresourcepartnership.org/proposition‐1‐irwm‐round‐1‐implementation‐funding‐solicitation/; see instructions for submitting the required excel document with the application materials.

14. Project Tasks, Budget and Schedule Notes:


F. PROJECT BENEFITS & JUSTIFICATION

1. Does the proposed project provide physical benefits to multiple IRWM regions or funding area(s)?

yes no If Yes, provide a description of the impacts to the various regions.

2. Provide a narrative for project justification. Include any other information that supports the justification for this project, including how the project can achieve the claimed level of benefits. List any studies, plans, designs or engineering reports completed for the project. Please see the instructions for more information about submitting these documents with the final application. This Project was developed after a review of existing site conditions, evaluations of the tank structure, analysis by civil engineers, and discussions with tank manufacturers. The benefits were developed from a review of water system and population served. Included in Attachment A are the preliminary tank design plans for the project which were used in the development of costs. Attachment B lays out the project construction areas, staging areas, and access to the site.

3. Does the project address a contaminant listed in AB 1249 (nitrate, arsenic, perchlorate, or hexavalent chromium)? yes no If yes, provide a description of how the project helps address the contamination.

4. Does the project provide safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes consistent with AB 685? yes no If Yes, please describe. This project will create a storage tank for Potable water, which ensure clean reliable water for the communities of Fieldbrook and Glendale. The Glendale area in particular had many economically disadvantaged residents, and this project helps control utility costs while providing water for the community.

5. Does the project employ new or innovative technologies or practices, including decision support tools that support the integration of multiple jurisdictions, including, but not limited to, water supply, flood control, land use, and sanitation? yes no If Yes, please describe.

6. For each of the Potential Benefits that the project claims complete the following table to describe an

estimate of the benefits expected to result from the proposed project. [See the NCRP Project

Application Instructions, Potential Project Benefits Worksheet and background information to help

complete the table. The NCRP Project Application, Attachment B includes additional guidance, source

materials and examples from North Coast projects.]

PROJECT BENEFITS TABLE


Potential Benefits Description Physical Amt of Benefit

Physical Units Est. Economic Valueper year

Economic Units

Water Supply

Increased Water Supply Reliability 400,000 gallons of storage

$64,521 (1) USD

Water Conservation 52,000 gallons $130/year USD

Avoided costs of Emergency Repairs

Water Quality

Other Ecosystem Service Benefits

Other Benefits

Increased Water Supply Reliability to a Disadvantaged Community

400,000 gallons of storage

Same value as above

Reduced Fire Damage After an Earthquake 1% of structures

Structures $56,611 (3) USD

Enhanced Fire Fighting Capabilities

Reduced risks from wildfires

7. Project Justification & Technical Basis Notes: 1) Value of Water Supply Reliability estimated based on economic values for loss of water and

wastewater service if the tank were to fail due to structural degradation or an earthquake. Loss of water service was estimated at $93/person/day and wastewater service at $41/person/day (BCA Reference Guide, Federal Emergency Management Agency, June 2009). The water system serves 1,500 people. Thus the value per day of loss of service is ($93 + $41)*1605 = $215,070/day. It is estimated that at a minimum during a failure the community would be out of water for 3 days before a temporary system could get in place, for a total value of $645,210. The probability of failure is difficult to determine and increases over time. Thus 10% of the loss of service value, $64,521, was estimated for the annual benefit.

2) Water Conservation saving were estimated based on the cost of water paid by FGCSD $150,000 per year/60.59 million gallons per year = $0.0025/gallon. It is estimated that to keep the redwood staves


saturated approximately 1,000 gallons would need to be wasted per week, for an annual cost of 1,000 gallons * 52 weeks * 0.0025/gallon = $130.

3) Avoided structural property losses were estimated from the FEMA Benefit Cost Analysis model (ver4.5) developed for the FGCSD and Blue Lake systems. The model was adjusted to reflect only losses from FGCSD system and potential structural damage was reduced from 3.9% of structures damaged to 1% of structures. The model incorporates recurrence intervals of potential earthquakes and damages to calculate a present worth value of the avoided costs of fire damage after an earthquake that would take out the storage tank, which was $230,445. The present worth value is difficult to translate into an annual benefit. For the purposes of this application, it was estimated at 25% of the present worth value, $56,611.

MajorTasks,ScheduleandBudgetforNorthCoastResourcePartnership2018/19IRWMProjectSolicitation

Project Name: FGCSD Water Tank Seismic Retrofit Project

Organization Name: Fieldbrook Glendale Community Services District

Task

#

Major Tasks Task Description Major Deliverables Current

Stage of

Completion

IRWM Task

Budget

Non‐State

Match

Total Task

Budget

Start Date Completion Date

A1 Administration In cooperation with the County of Humboldt sign a sub‐grantee agreement for

work to be completed on this project. Coordinate with project partners,

develop invoices with support documentation.

Invoices, audited financial statements and other deliverables as

required0% $4,670.00 $14,010.00 $18,680.00 7/1/2020 1/31/2022

2 Monitoring Plan Develop Monitoring Plan to include goals and measurable objectives Final Monitoring Plan 0% $885.00 $2,655.00 $3,540.00 7/1/2020 9/30/20203 Labor Compliance Program Execute service agreement with Labor Compliance Program company Submission of Labor Compliance Program 0% $3,600.00 $10,800.00 $14,400.00 1/1/2021 10/31/20214 Reporting Develop monthly reports describing work completed, challenges, and strategies

for reaching remaining project objectives. Develop Final Report

Quarterly Reports, Reimbursement Requests, and Grant Closeout

Documentation0% $8,150.00 $24,450.00 $32,600.00 7/1/2020 1/31/2022

B 0% $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

C1 Environmental Compliance Complete special studies required for completion of NEPA and CEQA Biological Technical Memorandum

Cultural and Archeological Resources Survey 0% $3,300.00 $9,900.00 $13,200.00 1/1/2020 6/30/2020

2 CEQA Compliance Project is anticipated to be eligible for a CEQA Categorical Exemption (CE).

Under this task, the CE would be prepared and filed with Humboldt County and

the state clearinghouse. Compliance with AB 52 would also be conducted under

this task.

CEQA CE stamped by Humboldt County and the State Clearinghouse

AB52 Compliance documentation.0% $973.00 $2,917.00 $3,890.00 1/1/2020 6/30/2020

3 Geotechnical Investigation Complete geotechnical work needed for project design Final Geotechnical Investigation Stamped by a Licensed Geotechnical

Engineer0% $5,385.00 $16,155.00 $21,540.00 7/1/2020 8/31/2020

4 Surveying Complete land/topographic survey work needed for project design Final Survey Stamped By a Licensed Land Surveyor 0% $4,250.00 $12,750.00 $17,000.00 1/1/2020 6/30/20205 Grading Permit The only permit anticipated for this project is a grading permit. Under this task,

the District will develop the application package and submit to the County.

Humboldt County Grading Permit 0% $590.00 $1,770.00 $2,360.00 9/1/2020 11/30/2020

6 Preliminary Project Design Develop sufficient design to support applicable Environmental Compliance

studies, documentation and permits

Preliminary geotechnical investigations, topographic surveys, and

preliminary designs0% $4,393.00 $13,177.00 $17,570.00 3/1/2020 7/31/2020

7 Final Project Design Complete geotechnical investigations, and surveying. Complete final

engineering design

Geotechnical investigations report, topographic surveys, and

preliminary (100%) designs0% $14,645.00 $43,935.00 $58,580.00 9/1/2020 12/31/2020

D1 Construction Contracting/ Bid

Period Services

Develop advertisement for bids and contract documents; conduct pre‐bid

contractors meeting; perform evaluation of bids; award contract

Summary of Bids and Contract Award 0% $3,780.00 $11,340.00 $15,120.00 1/1/2021 3/31/2021

2 Construction Implementation Equipment mobilization, clearing, grubbing, minor site grading, erosion control.

Temporary signage. Develop and enforce traffic control plan. Installation of site

piping, tank foundation construction, tank erection, tank disinfection and

installation of cathodic protection and telemetry. Water tank shop drawing

approval, manufacture, and delivery.

Notice of completion filed with Humboldt County Clerk 0% $239,400.00 $718,200.00 $957,600.00 4/1/2021 10/31/2021

3 Construction Administration/

Inspection

Complete tasks necessary to administer construction contract. Keep daily

records of construction activities, inspection, and progress. Conduct project

construction photo‐monitoring, respond to requests for information, develop

work directives, develop contract change orders, conduct regular construction

site meetings and conduct invoice reviews.

Monthly progress reports submitted to the City including

construction status, change orders, and pay recommendations 0% $15,188.00 $45,562.00 $60,750.00 4/1/2021 10/31/2021

4 Project Performance Monitoring The performance of the project will be monitored in accordance to the

Monitoring Plan using the following measurement tools and methods: Annual

water loss reports from FGCSD, annual site photos showing site stability.

Annual Monitoring Report for three years after construction

completion.$810.00 $2,430.00 $3,240.00 10/31/2021 10/30/2024

5 Project Close Out Inspect project components and establish that work is complete. Verify that all

project components have been installed and are functioning as specified will be

conducted as part of construction inspection and project closeout. Conduct

project completion photo monitoring. Prepare record drawings.

Record Drawings

Pre‐project site photos

Construction Photos

Post‐project site photos

0% $4,725.00 $14,175.00 $18,900.00 9/1/2021 10/31/2021

$314,744.00 $944,226.00 $1,258,970.00

$236,058.00 $708,169.50 $944,227.50

$157,372.00 $472,113.00 $629,485.00

Is Requested Budget scalable by 25%? If yes, indicate scaled totals; if no delete budget amount provided.

Is Requested Budget scalable by 50%? If yes, indicate scaled totals; if no delete budget amount provided.

Category (a): Direct Project Administration

Category (b): Land Purchase/Easement

Category (c): Planning/Design/Engineering/Environmental Documentation

Category (d): Construction/Implementation

Total North Coast Resource Partnership 2018/19 IRWM Grant Request

1

BudgetDetailforNorthCoastResourcePartnership2018/19IRWMProjectSolicitation



Budget Detail

Row (a) Direct Project Administration Costs Major Task Name Personnel by Discipline Number of Hours Hourly

Wage

% of Cost (if applicable) *

Total Admin

CostA.1 Administration Project Manager 80 $165 $13,200

A.1 Administration Staff Engineer 14 $120 $1,680

A.1 Administration Administrative Assistance 10 $80 $800

A.1 Administration Community Service District GM 60 $50 $3,000

A.2 Monitoring Plan Project Manager 4 $165 $660

A.2 Monitoring Plan Staff Engineer 24 $120 $2,880

A.3 Labor Compliance Program Labor Compliance Consultant 120 $120 $14,400

A.4 Reporting Project Manager 120 $165 $19,800

A.4 Reporting Staff Engineer 40 $120 $4,800

A.4 Reporting Administrative Assistance 100 $80 $8,000

Total $69,220

* What is the percentage based on (including total n/a

* How was the percentage of cost determined? n/a

Row (b) Land Purchase/Easement

Personnel (Discipline) Major Task Name Number of Hours Hourly

Wage

Total Cost

Biological Technical Memorandum (Average rate for

Environmental Scientists)

C.1 Environmental Compliance 60 120 $7,200

Cultural and Archaeological Resources Survey C.1 Environmental Compliance 40 150 $6,000

CEQA Categorical Exemption/ AB 52 Compliance C.2 CEQA Compliance 32 120 $3,840

CEQA Categorical Exemption filing fee C.2 CEQA Compliance ‐ ‐ $50

Senior Geologist C.3 Geotechnical Investigation 24 165 $3,960

Staff Geologist C.3 Geotechnical Investigation 80 120 $9,600

Technician C.3 Geotechnical Investigation 24 95 $2,280

Principal C.3 Geotechnical Investigation 4 175 $700

Geotechnical Testing and Equipment C.3 Geotechnical Investigation ‐ ‐ $5,000

Survey: Survey Team (2 people) C.4 Surveying 40 250 $10,000

Survey: Lead Surveyor C.4 Surveying 40 175 $7,000

Grading Permit C.5 Grading Permit 18 120 $2,160

Gradign Permit Fee C.5 Grading Permit ‐ ‐ $200

Project Manager C.6 Preliminary Engineering Design 20 165 $3,300

Electrical Engineer C.6 Preliminary Engineering Design 45 150 $6,750

Staff Engineer C.6 Preliminary Engineering Design 60 120 $7,200

Administrative Assistant C.6 Preliminary Engineering Design 4 80 $320

Senior Engineer C.7 Final Engineering Design 60 180 $10,800

Structural Engineer C.7 Final Engineering Design 150 150 $22,500

Staff Engineer C.7 Final Engineering Design 200 120 $24,000

Administrative Assistant C.7 Final Engineering Design 16 80 $1,280

Total $134,140

Personnel (Discipline) Work Task and Sub‐Task

(from Work Task Table)

Number of Hours Hourly

Wage

Total Cost

Construction Contracting/ Bid Period Services Team

average hourly rate

D.1 Construction Contracting/ Bid Period

Services

112 $135 $15,120

Construction Administration/ Inspection Team

average hourly rate

D.3 Construction Inspection /Administration 450 $135 $60,750

Row (d) Construction/Implementation

Row (c) Planning/Design/Engineering & Environmental Documentation

BudgetDetailforNorthCoastResourcePartnership2018/19IRWMProjectSolicitation



Project Performance Monitoring Team average hourly

rate

D.4 Construction Project Closeout 24 $135 $3,240

Project Close Out Team average hourly rate D.5 Project Performance Monitoring 140 $135 $18,900

Sub‐Total $98,010

Materials and Equipment Work Task and Sub‐Task

(from Work Task Table)

Number of Units Units Unit Cost Total Cost

Bonds and Insurance/ Mobilization / Demobilization D.2 Construction Implementation 23 DAY 3800 $87,400

Traffic Control D.2 Construction Implementation 16 DAY 500 $8,000

Clearning and Grubbing D.2 Construction Implementation 2 DAY 1200 $2,400

Subgrade Preparation, Grading, and Drainage D.2 Construction Implementation 8 DAY 2500 $20,000

Telemetry/Electrical Permitting D.2 Construction Implementation 8 DAY 2000 $16,000

Sediment and Erosion Control D.2 Construction Implementation 1000 LF 12 $12,000

Class II Aggregate Base D.2 Construction Implementation 120 CY 70 $8,400

Concrete Foundation D.2 Construction Implementation 275 CY 750 $206,250

Steel Reinforcement D.2 Construction Implementation 10 TON 1300 $13,000

Cathodic Protection D.2 Construction Implementation 1 EA 10000 $10,000

Site Piping D.2 Construction Implementation 250 EA 90 $22,500

Site Valves and Appurtenances D.2 Construction Implementation 6 EA 2500 $15,000

Seismic Shutoff Valve D.2 Construction Implementation 1 EA 11150 $11,150

Disinfection D.2 Construction Implementation 0.65 MGAL 20000 $13,000

Electrical Conduits and Cabling D.2 Construction Implementation 30 LF 300 $9,000

Electrical Panel D.2 Construction Implementation 1 EA 3500 $3,500

New Steel Water Tank D.2 Construction Implementation 1 EA 500000 $500,000

Sub‐Total $957,600

Total Construction/Implementation Costs $1,055,610

Total $1,258,970

H U M B O L D T

L

RI A

N

FO

IC

A

C O U N T Y

COVER SHEET

LOCATION, AND SHEET INDEX

G-001

J. BURROWS J. BURROWS

R. CROWR. CROW

AS SHOWN

1

AREA MAP LOCATION MAP

PREPARED BY

SHEET INDEX

PROJECT

LOCATION

NOT TO SCALE

718 Third Street Eureka California 95501 USA

T 1 707 443 8326 F 1 707 444 8330

W www.ghd.com

GHD STANDARD A1 ATTRIBUTE BLOCK CAD File No.: GHD_G_0045_T Updated: 08-07-03 Version: 1.1

This Drawing shall not be used

for Construction unless Signed

and Sealed For Construction

GHD STANDARD A1 SHEET CAD File No.: GHD_G_0045 Updated: 08-07-03 Version: 1.1

Check

Drafting

DateDrawnRevisionNo

Rev:

Drawing No:

Original Size

Title

Project

Check

DesignerDrawn

Scale

Design

Plot Date: CAD File No:24 August 2018 - 9:04 AM G:\111\11179843 FGCSD-HMG Water Tank\06-CAD\Sheets\11179843_G-001.dwg

Ansi D

GHD Inc.

(Project Director)

Approved

Date

Job

Manager

Project

Director

Plotted by:

Jarred Burrows

Project No.

Sht of

Reuse of Documents

This document and the ideas and designs incorporated

herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the

property of GHD Inc. and shall not be reused in whole or

in part for any other project without GHD Inc.'s written

authorization. © GHD Inc. 2015

FGCSD WATER TANK

SEISMIC RETROFIT PROJECT

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

11179843

4- - - -

NN

NOT TO SCALE

N

FIELDBROOK GLENDALE

COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT

WATER TANK SEISMIC RETROFIT PROJECT

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

SEPTEMBER 2018

PROJECT

LOCATION

NOT TO SCALE

SHEET DRAWING DESCRIPTION

NO. NO.

1 G-001 COVER SHEET

2 C-101 SITE PLAN

3 C-102 WATER TANK PLAN

4 C-103 DETAILS

3

0

0

3

2

5

350

4

0

0

3

7

5

2

7

5

2

5

0

2

2

5

4

2

5

R

E

D

R

O

C

K

L

A

N

E

CLO

UD

WO

OD

S RO

AD

D

A

V

E

N

P

O

R

T

L

A

N

E

(E) 400,000 GAL

REDWOOD WATER TANK

3

5

0

ANKER LANE

J

O

H

N

S

O

N

L

A

N

E

APPROX PROPERTY

BOUNDARY

(N) 400,000 GAL

BOLTED-STEEL TANK

WITH ALUMINUM ROOF

(N) TANK FOUNDATION

AND COMPACTED

SUBGRADE, SEE

(E) GRAVEL

ACCESS ROAD

SITE PLAN

C-101


R. CROWR. CROW

AS SHOWN


T 1 707 443 8326 F 1 707 444 8330

W www.ghd.com






Check

Drafting

DateDrawnRevisionNo

Rev:

Drawing No:

Original Size

Title

Project

Check

DesignerDrawn

Scale

Design

Plot Date: CAD File No:14 August 2018 - 9:16 AM G:\111\11179843 FGCSD-HMG Water Tank\06-CAD\Sheets\11179843_C-101.dwg

Ansi D

GHD Inc.

(Project Director)

Approved

Date

Job

Manager

Project

Director

Plotted by:

Jarred Burrows

Project No.

Sht of

Reuse of Documents






FGCSD WATER TANK


CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

11179843

4- - - -

N

NOT TO SCALE

10

C-103

A

C-102

1

C-103

http://www.ghd.com/

POTABLE WATER STORAGE TANK

8" TANK

OUTLET PIPING

3' MIN BURIED

(E) TANK

INLET PIPING,

3' MIN BURIED = 10"

24" MANWAY WITH

SAMPLE TAP

(TYP OF 2)

ROOF VENT REQMTS

PER AWWA D103

ROOF HATCH

(TYP OF 2)

LADDER AND

PLATFORM

12" HDPE OVERFLOW/

DRAIN OUTFALL

8" DI OVERFLOW8" DI DRAIN

RESERVOIR DRAIN

AND OVERFLOW

VORTEX

BREAKER

8" BFV AND CV IN

UTILITY VAULT, MIN 12"

CLR AROUND ALL VALVES

AND FITTINGS (TYP)

DOUBLE BALL

EXPANSION

JOINT (TYP)

0 4'2'1'

1/2"=1'-0"

1

WATER STORAGE TANK PLAN

A

C-103

A

C-103

LEVEL INDICATOR

SEE DETAIL

FLOAT SWITCH

PRESSURE SENSOR

DOUBLE BALL

EXPANSION

JOINT

(N) GATE VALVE

AND VALVE BOX

INSTALLATION

6" Ø INLET

PIPING

A B C D

203 40 187 275DEGREES

E

252

WATER TANK PLAN

C-102


R. CROWR. CROW

AS SHOWN


T 1 707 443 8326 F 1 707 444 8330

W www.ghd.com






Check

Drafting

DateDrawnRevisionNo

Rev:

Drawing No:

Original Size

Title

Project

Check

DesignerDrawn

Scale

Design

Plot Date: CAD File No:14 August 2018 - 9:16 AM G:\111\11179843 FGCSD-HMG Water Tank\06-CAD\Sheets\11179843_C-102-C103.dwg

Ansi D

GHD Inc.

(Project Director)

Approved

Date

Job

Manager

Project

Director

Plotted by:

Jarred Burrows

Project No.

Sht of

Reuse of Documents






FGCSD WATER TANK


CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

11179843

4- - - -

N

http://www.ghd.com/

ELEV C

HWL

A

LOW RISE

ALUMINUM DOME

SEE

B

LWL

E

10

C-7

10'

DETAILS

C-103


R. CROWR. CROW

AS SHOWN


T 1 707 443 8326 F 1 707 444 8330

W www.ghd.com






Check

Drafting

DateDrawnRevisionNo

Rev:

Drawing No:

Original Size

Title

Project

Check

DesignerDrawn

Scale

Design

Plot Date: CAD File No:14 August 2018 - 9:16 AM G:\111\11179843 FGCSD-HMG Water Tank\06-CAD\Sheets\11179843_C-102-C103.dwg

Ansi D

GHD Inc.

(Project Director)

Approved

Date

Job

Manager

Project

Director

Plotted by:

Jarred Burrows

Project No.

Sht of

Reuse of Documents






FGCSD WATER TANK


CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

11179843

4- - - -

N

NOT TO SCALE

0 2'1'1/2'

1"=1'-0"

10

TANK FOOTING SECTION

15

TYPICAL ACCESS ROAD SECTION

A

WATER STORAGE TANK SECTION

http://www.ghd.com/

Lat: 40.962619Lat: 40.962619Lon: -124.026148Lon: -124.026148

PRIVATE DR

JOHNSON LN

ANKER LN

DAVE

NPOR

T LN

CLOUDWOOD RD

RED ROCK LN

PrimaryPrimaryStagingStagingAreaArea

SecondarySecondaryStagingStagingAreaArea

SecondarySecondaryStagingStaging

AreaArea

New TankNew Tank

360 ft

340 ft

320 ft

300 ft

280 ft

260 ft

240 ft

220 ft

FIGURE 2

0 30 60 90 120

Feet

Project No.Revision No. -

11179843Date August 2018

Fieldbrook-Glendale Community Services DistrictFGCSD Water Tank Seismic Retrofit Project

Map Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983

Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet

Paper Size ANSI A

Data source: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community. Created by: jclark2\\ghdnet\ghd\US\Eureka\Projects\111\11179843 FGCSD-HMG Water Tank\08-GIS\Maps\Deliverables\HMG\11179843_F02_ProjectMap.mxdPrint date: 20 Aug 2018 - 16:08

LegendProject BoundaryNew TankStaging AreaMain Site AccessRoadParcel Boundaries20 ft Contour

Project Map