Contract - Environmental Engineering & Contracting - 2015-07-01AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Agreement ("AGREEMENT") is made and effective as of July. 1, 2015,
between the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, a sanitary district ("DISTRICT"), and
Environmental Engineering and Contracting (EEC), Inc., a California Corporation
CONSULTANT"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth
herein, the parties agree as follows:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the California State Water Resources Control Board has adopted
Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements in Order No 2006 -0003, hereinafter
referred to as "GWDR ", which requires: "A proactive approach'that requires Enrollees
to ensure a system-wide operation, maintenance, and management plan is in place that
will reduce the number and frequency of SSOs (Sanitary Sewer Overflows) within the
state. This approach will in turn decrease the risk to human health and the environment
caused by SSOs"; and
WHEREAS, to comply with the GWDR, the District desires to continue its Fats,
Oil and Grease (FOG) Control Program; and
WHEREAS, the DISTRICT has determined that the CONSULTANT possesses
the professional skills and ability to provide said services for the DISTRICT;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM
This AGREEMENT shall be for three (3) years with two (2) one-year extensions
at the DISTRICT's option. Year one (1) shall commence on July 1, 2015, and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, unless sooner
terminated pursuant to the provisions of this AGREEMENT.
2. SERVICES
CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Bid No. CMSD-
030115 Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full.
CONSULTANT shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance
which is also set forth in Exhibit A.
3. PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall, at all times, faithfully, competently, and to the best of
his/her/its ability, experience, and talent perform all tasks described herein.
CONSULTANT shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and
practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of
CONSULTANT hereunder in meeting its obligations under this AGREEMENT.
4. DISTRICT MANAGEMENT
The General Manager shall represent DISTRICT in all matters pertaining to the
administration of this AGREEMENT, including review and approval of all products
submitted by CONSULTANT. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the General Manager's
authority to enlarge the tasks to be performed or change CONSULTANT's
compensation is subject to Section 5 hereof.
5. PAYMENT
a) The DISTRICT, upon presentation of an invoice, agrees to pay the
CONSULTANT one hundred eight thousand dollars ($108,000) for years 1 and 2 and
one hundred ten thousand, four hundred seventy-five dollars ($110,475) for year 3 and
subsequent years [in accordance with Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference OR upon completion of the task]. No other expenditures made by
CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed by DISTRICT.
b) CONSULTANT shall not be compensated for any services rendered in
connection with its performance of this AGREEMENT that are in addition to those set
forth herein, unless such additional services are requested in a written change order
and are approved in advance and in writing by DISTRICT. The written change order
requirement cannot be waived. The General Manager may approve change orders for
additional work not to exceed the cumulative value of ten percent (10%) of the total
contract sum. Any additional work in excess of this cumulative amount shall be
approved by the Board of Directors.
c) CONSULTANT will submit monthly invoices for actual work performed
upon task completion unless otherwise agreed. Invoices shall show work performed for
that month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as
to all non-disputed fees. If DISTRICT disputes any of CONSULTANT's fees, DISTRICT
shall give written notice to CONSULTANT within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice
of any disputed fees contained in the invoice.
6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE
a) The DISTRICT may, at any time, for any reason, with or without cause,
suspend or terminate this AGREEMENT, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the
CONSULTANT written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the CONSULTANT shall
immediately cease all work under this AGREEMENT, unless the notice provides
otherwise. If the DISTRICT suspends or terminates a portion of this AGREEMENT,
such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this
AGREEMENT.
b) In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated pursuant to this Section, the
DISTRICT shall pay to CONSULTANT the actual value of the work performed up to the
time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the DISTRICT.
CONSULTANT shall immediately turn over all work-product to DISTRICT in a readily
usable form. Upon termination of the AGREEMENT pursuant to this Section, the
CONSULTANT will submit an invoice to the DISTRICT pursuant to Section 5.
7. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT
a) The CONSULTANT's failure to comply with the provisions of this
AGREEMENT shall constitute a default.- In the event that CONSULTANT is in default
for cause under the terms of this AGREEMENT, DISTRICT shall have no obligation or
duty to continue compensating CONSULTANT for any work performed after the date of
default and can terminate this AGREEMENT immediately by written notice to the
CONSULTANT. If such failure by the CONSULTANT to make progress in the
performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the CONSULTANT's
control, and without fault of negligence of the CONSULTANT, it shall not be considered
a default.
b) As an alternative to the procedure for immediate termination for default set
forth in subparagraph (a), if the General Manager or his/her delegate determines that
the CONSULTANT is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of
this AGREEMENT, he/she may in his/her discretion cause to be served upon the
CONSULTANT a written notice of the default and demand to cure. The CONSULTANT
shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice to cure the default by
rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the CONSULTANT fails to cure
its default within such period of time, the DISTRICT shall have the right, notwithstanding
any other provision of this AGREEMENT, to terminate this AGREEMENT without further
notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in
equity or under this AGREEMENT.
8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
a) CONSULTANT shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect
to the professional services required by this AGREEMENT and will produce the work
product specified in Exhibit A and other such information required by DISTRICT that
relate to the performance of services under this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT shall
maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an
evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily
accessible. CONSULTANT shall provide free access to the representatives of
DISTRICT or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records; shall give
DISTRICT the right to examine and audit said books and records; shall permit
DISTRICT to make transcripts therefrom as necessary; and shall allow inspection of all
work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this AGREEMENT. Such
records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three
3) years after receipt of final payment.
b) Upon completion, termination, or suspension of this AGREEMENT, all
work product reduced to any medium and other documents prepared in the course of
providing the services to be performed pursuant to this AGREEMENT shall become the
sole property of the DISTRICT and may be used, reused, or otherwise disposed of by
the DISTRICT without the permission of the CONSULTANT. With respect to computer
files, CONSULTANT shall make available to the DISTRICT, at the CONSULTANT's
office and upon reasonable written request by the DISTRICT, the necessary computer
software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, and printing
computer files. Said software and hardware shall be made available to DISTRICT at
CONSULTANT's cost.
9. INDEMNIFICATION
a) Indemnification for Professional Liability. When the law establishes a
professional standard of care for CONSULTANT's services, to the fullest extent
permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless
DISTRICT and any and all of its officials, employees, and agents from and against any
and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses, including attorney's fees and
costs to the extent the same arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence,
recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, its officers, agents, employees, or
subconsultants (or any entity or individual that CONSULTANT shall bear the legal
liability thereof) in the performance of professional services under this AGREEMENT.
b) Indemnification for Other than Professional Liability. Other than in the
performance of professional services and to the fullest extent permitted by law,
CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless DISTRICT and any and all
of its employees, officials, and agents from and against any liability (including liability for
claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory
proceedings, losses, expenses, or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged, or
threatened, including attorney's fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs, and
expert witness fees), where the same arise out of, pertain to, relate to, are a
consequence of, or are in any way attributable to, in whole or in part, the performance of
this AGREEMENT by CONSULTANT or by any individual or entity for which
CONSULTANT is legally liable, including, but not limited to, officers, agent, employees,
or subconsultants of CONSULTANT.
10. INSURANCE
CONSULTANT shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this
AGREEMENT insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit B attached to and made part
of this AGREEMENT.
11. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT
a) CONSULTANT is and shall at all times remain as to the DISTRICT a
wholly independent consultant. The personnel performing the services under this
AGREEMENT on behalf of CONSULTANT shall at all times be under CONSULTANT's
exclusive direction and control. Neither DISTRICT nor any of its officers, employees, or
agents shall have control over the conduct of CONSULTANT or any of CONSULTANT's
officers, employees, or agents, except as set forth in this AGREEMENT.
CONSULTANT shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its
officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the
DISTRICT. CONSULTANT shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt,
obligation, or liability whatsoever against DISTRICT or bind DISTRICT in any manner.
b) No employee benefits shall be available to CONSULTANT in connection
with the performance of this AGREEMENT. Except for the fees paid to CONSULTANT
as provided in the AGREEMENT, DISTRICT shall not pay salaries, wages, or other
compensation to CONSULTANT for performing services hereunder for DISTRICT.
DISTRICT shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to CONSULTANT for
injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.
12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and
regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the
performance of its service pursuant to this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall at
all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The DISTRICT and its
officers and employees shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the
CONSULTANT to comply with this Section.
13. UNDUE INFLUENCE
CONSULTANT declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure has
been used against or in concert with any officer or employee of the DISTRICT in
connection with the award, terms, or implementation of this AGREEMENT, including
any method of coercion, confidential financial arrangement, or financial inducement. No
officer or employee of the DISTRICT will receive compensation, directly or indirectly,
from CONSULTANT or from any officer, employee, or agent of CONSULTANT in
connection with the award of this AGREEMENT or any work to be conducted as a result
of this AGREEMENT. Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of this
AGREEMENT entitling the DISTRICT to any and all remedies at law or in equity.
14. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES
No member, officer, or employee of DISTRICT, or their designees or agents, and
no public official who exercises authority over or has responsibilities with respect to the
project during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or
indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be
performed in connection with the project performed under this AGREEMENT.
15. RELEASE OF INFORMATION I CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
a) All information gained by CONSULTANT in the performance of this
AGREEMENT shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by
CONSULTANT without DISTRICT's prior written authorization. CONSULTANT and its
officers, employees, agents, or subconsultants shall not, without written authorization
from the General Manager or unless requested by the District Counsel, voluntarily
provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to
interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this
AGREEMENT or relating to any project or property located within the DISTRICT.
Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided
CONSULTANT gives DISTRICT notice of such court order or subpoena.
b) CONSULTANT shall promptly notify DISTRICT should CONSULTANT or its
officers, employees, agents, or subconsultants be served with any summons, complaint,
subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, requests for
admissions, or other discovery request, court order, or subpoena from any person or
party regarding this AGREEMENT or the work performed thereunder or with respect to
any project or property located within the DISTRICT. DISTRICT retains the right, but
has no obligation, to represent CONSULTANT and/or be present at any deposition,
hearing, or similar proceeding. CONSULTANT agrees to cooperate fully with DISTRICT
and to provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by
CONSULTANT. However, DISTRICT's right to review any such response does not
imply or mean that DISTRICT has a right to control, direct, or rewrite said response.
c) CONSULTANT covenants that neither he/she/it nor any officer or principal
of their firm have any interest in, or shall acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which
will conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of their services hereunder.
CONSULTANT further covenants that in the performance of this AGREEMENT, no
person having such interest shall be employed by it/them as an officer, employee,
agent, or subconsultant. CONSULTANT further covenants that CONSULTANT has not
contracted with nor is performing any services, directly or indirectly, with any
developer(s) and/or property owner(s) and/or firm(s) and/or partnership(s) owning
property in the DISTRICT or the study area and further covenants and agrees that
CONSULTANT and/or its subconsultants shall provide no service or enter into any
agreement or agreements with a/any developer(s) and/or property owner(s) and/or
firm(s) and/or partnership(s) owning property in the DISTRICT or the study area prior to
the completion of the work under this AGREEMENT.
16. NOTICES
Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this
AGREEMENT must be in writing and may be given by: (i) personal service, (ii) delivery
by a reputable document delivery service, such as, but not limited to, Federal Express,
which provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United
States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the
address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later
designate by notice:
To DISTRICT: Costa Mesa Sanitary District
628 West 19th Street
Costa Mesa, California 92627
Attn: District Clerk
To CONSULTANT: Environmental Engineering & Contracting, Inc.
EEC)
One City Boulevard West, Suite 1800
Orange, CA 92868
Attn: John Shaffer, President
17. ASSIGNMENT
The CONSULTANT shall not assign the performance of this AGREEMENT, nor
any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the
DISTRICT.
18. LICENSES
At all times during the term of this AGREEMENT, CONSULTANT shall have in
full force and effect all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services
described in this AGREEMENT.
19. GOVERNING LAW
DISTRICT and CONSULTANT understand and agree that the laws of the State
of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties, and liabilities of the parties to
this AGREEMENT and also govern the interpretation of this AGREEMENT. Any
litigation concerning this AGREEMENT shall take place in the superior or federal district
court with jurisdiction over the DISTRICT.
20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT contains the entire understanding between the parties
relating to the obligations of the parties described in this AGREEMENT. All prior or
contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, oral
or written, are merged into this AGREEMENT and shall be of no further force or effect.
Each party is entering into this AGREEMENT based solely upon the representations set
forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts
such party deems material.
21. CONTENTS OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND PROPOSAL
CONSULTANT is bound by the contents of Exhibit A, hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference. In the event of conflict, the requirements of DISTRICT's
Request for Proposals and this AGREEMENT shall take precedence over those
contained in the CONSULTANT's proposals.
22. MODIFICATION
No modification to this AGREEMENT shall be effective unless it is in writing and
signed by authorized representatives of the parties hereto. This written modification
requirement cannot be waived.
23. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT
The person or persons executing this AGREEMENT on behalf of CONSULTANT
warrant(s) and represent(s) that he/she/they has/have the authority to execute this
AGREEMENT on behalf of the CONSULTANT and has/have the authority to bind
CONSULTANT to the performance of its obligations hereunder.
24. INTERPRETATION
In the event of conflict or inconsistency between this AGREEMENT and any
other document, including any proposal or Exhibit hereto, this AGREEMENT shall
control unless a contrary intent is clearly stated.
25. BUSINESS LICENSE
CONSULTANT shall obtain a business license from the City of Costa Mesa
unless legally exempt.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this AGREEMENT to
be executed this day and year first above written.
COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Environmental Engineering &
Contracting, Inc. (EEC)
General Manager Sign.
ATTEST: J h ••a fc
Typed Name
O
Distric Cle
Title
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
District Counsel
SOLID WASTE AGREEMENT PERFORMANCE AUDIT
BEST" VALUE EVALUATION FORM
Choose weights within listed ranges. Recommend that sum of weights equal 100%.
For scoring, enter numbers from 1 through 5, 5 being the best. Totals on each line
equals score times weight.
EEC
MINMUM CRITERIA WEIGHT Environmental
Score Total Score Total Score Total
Cost 30% 5 150
Responsiveness to RFP 10% 5 50
Qualifications and 15% 5 75
Experience
References/Previous 10% 5 50
Performance
Ability to Provide Service 25% 5 125
Timeline for Completing 10% 5 50
the Services
TOTAL SCORES 500
Approved:
r
COST:
EEC was the only vendor to submit a bid. EEC Environmental's cost proposal is as
follows:
Year 1: $108,000
Year 2: $108,000
Year 3: $110,475 (and subsequent years as well, if applicable)
RESPONSIVENESS TO RFP:
EEC's proposal is clear, concise, complete, well organized, and easy to understand.
EEC's proposal included a cover letter, a bid cover sheet and a cost breakdown. The
proposal stated that the bid proposal is valid for 90 days.
QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE:
EEC is well qualified to perform Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) Control Program services.
EEC has successfully developed, implemented and managed the District's FOG Control
Best Value Evaluation Form
Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) Control Program
Program for the past 10 years and have also helped other agencies in California with
similar services.
EEC manages CMSD's Food Service Establishments (FSE) inventory and inspects
each FSE location to inventory cooking equipment, fixtures, floor sinks, drains, and
FOG control equipment. EEC also developed the FSE kitchen best management
practices (BMP) training materials which are shared with the FSE's. EEC is also a key
componenent of CMSD's sewer hotspot committee which eveluates and eliminates
sewer hotspots within CMSD's service area.
REFERENCES/PREVIOUS PERFORMANCE:
EEC has successfully managed the District's FOG Control Program for the past 10
years and they have done a great job. EEC is aslo currently assisting the following
agencies: City of Sanat Ana, City of Anaheim, Irvine Ranch Water District and the
Orange County Sanitation District.
ABILITY TO PROVIDE SERVICE:
EEC understands the District's needs and are highly experienced with regard to
managing a Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) Control Program. They have unique
experience with our program that there will be no learning curb associated with this
project.
TIMELINE FOR COMPLETING THE SERVICES:
EEC understands that this is a yearly program and have always completed such
services in a timely manner.
6
BID COVER SHEET
CONSULTANT’S BID TO PROVIDE SERVICES
Bid No. CMSD-030115
In compliance with the REQUEST FOR BID, Bid No. CMSD-030115, the undersigned hereby agrees to
furnish all labor, materials, and equipment to perform the services in the proposed CONTRACT, which is
enclosed herewith; and to do so in strict accordance with the provisions of the proposed CONTRACT.
ENCLOSURES:
A. A REQUEST FOR BID, dated and signed by the CONTRACTOR;
B. A sample CONTRACT with attachments prepared on the DISTRICT's form; and
C. Addenda: _________________________________________.
The undersigned CONSULTANT declares that the only persons or parties interested in this BID as
principals are those named herein; that the BID is made without collusion with any other person, firm, or
corporation; that CONSULTANT has carefully examined the locations therein referred to; and
CONSULTANT proposes, and agrees if this BID is accepted, that CONSULTANT will execute a Contract
with the Costa Mesa Sanitary District in the form annexed hereto to provide all necessary labor, machinery,
tools, and to do all work and provide materials required as specified in the Contract documents according to
the requirements of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District as set forth; and that the CONSULTANT will take as
payment at the price described in the Contract documents, as payment in full for the performed scope of
work.
The undersigned CONSULTANT certifies that CONSULTANT is aware of the requirements of the
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (8 USC §§ 1101-1525) and has complied and will comply
with these requirements, including but not limited to verifying the eligibility for employment of all agents,
employees, SUBCONTRACTORs and consultants that are included in this CONTRACT.
SIGNATURE OF CONSULTANT
This document is signed by an individual clearly authorized to bind the CONSULTANT.
CONSULTANT: ________________________________________________________
ADDRESS: ________________________________________________________
PHONE/E-MAIL: ________________________________________________________
by ________________________________________________________
SIGN DATE
________________________________________________________
TITLE
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services i July 31, 2014
Table of Contents
1.0 FIRM EXPERIENCE ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1.1 Company Details .................................................................................................... 1
1.1.2 Background ............................................................................................................ 1
2.0 PERSONNEL EXPERIENCE ................................................................................................................. 6
2.1 Staff Qualifications .............................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Project Management .......................................................................................................... 8
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK .............................................................................................................................. 8
3.1 Program Management ........................................................................................................ 8
3.1.1 FOG Control Program, FSE Data and GIS Data Management ................................ 9
3.1.2 FOG Control Program Annual Assessment ............................................................ 9
3.1.3 Additional Agency Support .................................................................................... 9
3.1.4 Value‐Added Program Management Services ....................................................... 9
3.2 Inspection ........................................................................................................................... 9
3.2.1 Permitting Inspections ........................................................................................... 7
3.2.2 Grease Removal Equipment (GRE) Inspections ..................................................... 8
3.2.3 Kitchen Best Management Practices (BMP) Inspections ....................................... 8
3.2.4 Combined BMP/GRE Inspections ........................................................................... 9
3.2.5 Compliance Inspections ......................................................................................... 9
3.2.6 Source Investigation Inspections ........................................................................... 9
3.2.7 Value‐Added Inspection Services ........................................................................... 9
3.3 Enforcement ..................................................................................................................... 10
3.3.1 Enforcement Management Support .................................................................... 10
3.3.2 Enforcement Inspection Support ......................................................................... 10
Tables
Table 1 Summary of Key Staff Qualifications .................................................................................. 4
Appendices
Appendix A Résumés
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 1 March 2, 2015
Section 1.0 – Firm Experience
1.1 Introduction
EEC Environmental (EEC) is pleased to submit this proposal to provide continued fats, oils, and grease
(FOG) program management services to the Costa Mesa Sanitary District (District). Based on our
extensive experience and successes in the development, implementation, and management of FOG
programs throughout the country, including the District, EEC is poised and prepared to assist the District
with the multifaceted tasks and services associated with its existing FOG control program. These services
include, but are not limited to, providing oversight and administration of a comprehensive FOG
program, which includes food service establishment (FSE) inspections, assisting with enforcement of the
District’s FOG control ordinance, public education and outreach, and FOG source investigation oversight
and support. This proposal was prepared in accordance with the requirements outlined in Bid #CMSD‐
030115.
1.1.1 Company Details
Number of Employees: 45
Years in Business: 20
Corporate headquarters: One City Boulevard West, Suite 1800
Orange, California 92868
Phone Number: (714) 667‐2300
Fax Number: (714) 667‐2310
Website: www.eecenvironmental.com
Firm Structure: Corporation
Certifications/Licenses: Class A General Engineering Contractor License
Hazardous Substances Removal Certification
Small Business Enterprise (California Department of General Services)
Small Business as prescribed by the Federal Acquisition Regulations
Tax Identification Number: 33‐0665828
Primary Project Contact: Mr. Jim Kolk
Project Manager / FOG Program Manager
Phone: (714) 667‐2300
Fax: (714) 667‐2310
E‐Mail: jkolk@eecenvironmental.com
Secondary Project Contact: Mr. Ramon Gallegos
GIS Supervisor
Phone: (714) 667‐2300
Fax: (714) 667‐2310
E‐Mail: rgallegos@eecenvironmental.com
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 2 March 2, 2015
KEY SERVICES
Engineering
FOG Program Management
FOG Program Inspections
NPDES Program Management
NPDES Program Inspections
SSMP Audits and Support Services
CIP Support
Wastewater Treatment & Water Reuse Design
Soil & Groundwater Remediation Design
Pumping System, Water/Wastewater Pipeline, Storage, and
Treatment Facility Design
Computer‐Aided Drafting and Design
Sewer System Elevated Maintenance Location
Investigations
SSO Response and Fog Inspection Training
Odor Investigations
Construction
Soil & Groundwater Remediation Systems
Wastewater / Stormwater Treatment Systems
Removal/Installation of Aboveground/Underground
Storage Tanks
General Construction
Mechanical/Electrical Installation
Technology Services
Database Management
Geographic Information Systems
Computerized Maintenance Management Systems
Modeling
Asset Management
Cloud Services and Support
Environmental
Phase I & II ESAs
Brownfield Assessments
Groundwater Monitoring Well Installations
Groundwater Monitoring and Sampling
Vapor Intrusion Investigations
Indoor Air Sampling
Lead/Asbestos/Formaldehyde Assessment and Abatement
Waste Management
Preliminary Endangerment Assessments
Removal Action Work Plans
Regulatory Compliance
Remediation Design and Construction
Remediation System Operation and Maintenance
1.1.2 Background
EEC is a national environmental consulting firm that specializes in wastewater, storm water, regulatory
compliance, and assessment and remediation of soil and groundwater. EEC is a privately held
corporation and was founded in 1995 to fulfill a need for technical excellence and professional service in
environmental consulting. EEC comprises a team of experts in engineering, environmental compliance,
environmental science technology and data management systems, chemistry, toxicology, hydrogeology,
geology, and industrial hygiene.
EEC comprises four main divisions: engineering,
environmental, construction, and technology. The
engineering division provides FOG control
services; SSMP development and internal audits,
wastewater treatment and reuse design;
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) / storm water management; soil and
groundwater remediation design; chemical
delivery system design; and operation and
maintenance of wastewater treatment systems.
The division also designs and implements plans
for remediation of soil and groundwater,
mitigation of lead and asbestos, treatment and
reuse of wastewater, and management of storm
water.
The environmental division routinely performs
Phase I/II Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs),
soil and groundwater investigations, air
monitoring, and asbestos and lead testing. The
division also prepares and implements site
assessment work plans, preliminary
endangerment assessments, remedial action
plans, and closure reports for regulatory
acceptance and approval. Finally, the division
undertakes coordination and negotiation with
regulatory agencies on behalf of clients
throughout a project’s duration.
The construction division supports projects
originating from the engineering and
environmental departments, but also undertakes
projects independently. This division removes
underground and aboveground storage tanks;
installs, operates, and maintains remediation
systems; designs and builds electrical
panels/control systems, and performs general
construction services, including operation of
heavy equipment.
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 3 March 2, 2015
EEC’s technology services division offers services for efficient collection, storage, QA/QC, graphical
display, and analysis of large data inventories. This department uses computer‐aided drafting and design
(AutoCAD), geographic information systems (GIS), and database technologies to support and manage
projects across the firm’s divisions. The department identifies the right technologies for the client’s most
critical needs and ensures that the chosen technologies will stay relevant and effective long after project
completion.
Some of EEC’s specialized projects have entailed customized database and geographic information
projects for municipal agencies; engineering services at one of the largest Superfund sites in the United
States (Stringfellow); environmental oversight at the largest privately funded development site in the
United States (Playa Vista development); comprehensive Phase I and Phase II site assessments for
national Fortune 500 companies for multiple sites throughout the United States in support of large
property acquisitions; Phase I ESAs for a leading financial institution in the United States; ocean‐water
and river‐water sampling investigations documenting the impact of contaminated groundwater to these
surface water bodies; design of a $4.5‐million wastewater treatment system design/build project in
China; and an environmental impact assessment of a 17‐million‐gallon free‐product plume beneath New
York City.
In addition, EEC employs an in‐house editor to ensure the consistency, accuracy, and readability of the
firm’s documents. Finally, the administrative team supports the entire firm with project‐related
activities, such as accounting and invoicing.
1.2 Related Experience
EEC has extensive experience in providing FOG control program services and has expertise with a broad
range of complementary services that have gained EEC an excellent reputation and working relationship
with federal, state, and local agencies. EEC has provided extensive FOG control and NPDES services to
more than 30 cities and sewer districts in Southern California, including the following:
City of Anaheim City of Santa Ana Garden Grove Sanitary District
City of Fullerton City of Stanton Irvine Ranch Water District
City of La Habra County of Orange Midway City Sanitary District
City of Orange Costa Mesa Sanitary District Orange County Sanitation District
Furthermore, EEC has developed a detailed understanding of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District’s FOG
control program database and comprehensive FSE inspection program. Through experience gained from
previous work for the City and the EEC team’s unique knowledge of the City’s FOG control program, EEC
will continue to provide a flexible and cost‐effective approach to meeting the City’s project goals and
needs. Following is a selection of short project descriptions that are representative of EEC’s FOG
inspection experience.
“EEC’s expertise and responsiveness was instrumental in helping our city meet
new stringent sewer regulations.”
Ray Burk, Former Principal Civil Engineer
City of Santa Ana
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 4 March 2, 2015
Section 2.0 – Personnel Experience
2.1 Staff Qualifications
EEC has assembled a team of highly qualified personnel to assist the District in achieving the goals of the
FOG Control Program and completing the requested scope of work. All key personnel have the
necessary availability, credentials, licenses, and relevant experience required to successfully complete
the proposed scope of work on schedule and within budget in accordance with the City’s requirements.
A summary of EEC key personnel, regulatory experience, registrations, and credentials is included in
Table 1, Summary of Key Staff Qualifications. Key personnel résumés can be found in Appendix A,
Résumés.
Table 1, Summary of Key Staff Qualifications
Key Personnel/ Role Years’
Exp. Registrations/Licenses/ Credentials Project
Commitment
Jim Kolk
Project Manager 22
B.S. Industrial Engineering
PACP/NASCCO Certification, CWEA SSO Reporting Certified, Co‐Author
and Researcher for the Orange County FOG Control Study – Phase II,
Performed/Managed over 5,000 FOG inspections
15%‐50%
(as needed)
John Shaffer
Principal‐in‐Charge 27
General Engineering Contractor
Co‐Author and lead researcher for the Orange County FOG Control
Study – Phase I and Phase II, WEF/EPA FOG Control Workshop
contributor & speaker, IAPMO FOG Task Group member
CWEA FOG inspector trainer
5%‐10%
(as needed)
Greg Arthur
Regulatory Advisor 30
M.S. Civil Engineering
30 years at EPA Region 9, Clean Water Act inspector and compliance
expert, NDPES compliance auditor, training and lectures for multiple
municipal and collegiate organizations
5%‐10%
(as needed)
Stan Steinbach, P.E.
Senior Project
Manager/ FOG
Control Enforcement
Support
29
M.S. Chemical Engineering
Professional Civil Engineer
NPDES regulatory expert, co‐author and researcher for the Orange
County FOG Control Study – Phase I and Phase II, CWEA FOG inspector
trainer
5%‐10%
(as needed)
Ramon Gallegos
Data Management /
GIS / Database
Design / FOG
Inspector
13
M.A., Geography
Environmental analysis emphasis, ESRI ArcEditor and spatial analyst,
GIS Graphical User Interface design, Access database integration, file
Geodatabase, AutoCAD, performed and managed over 15,000 FOG
inspections
25%‐60%
(as needed)
Joseph Jenkins
Compliance
Inspector/ FOG
Inspection Supervisor
8
B.A. Business Administration
OSHA 40‐Hour HAZPWOPER Certification, Pipeline Assessment And
Certification Program
FSE inspections management and training EEC inspectors and QA/QC
inspection procedures
20%‐50%
(as needed)
Angel Bambrick
FOG Inspector 3
Compliance inspector
Conducted over 3,000 inspections
SSO investigation and response development
40%‐80%
(as needed)
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 5 March 2, 2015
2.2 Project Management
Jim Kolk has served as the primary project manager for the District’s FOG Control Program projects for
the past 10 years and will continue to serve in this role (for a minimum of 1 year). Mr. Kolk will provide
overall management and leadership that will include maintaining an effective team, ensuring availability
of technical staff, maintaining quality of work, and resolving project issues. While many tasks can and
should be handled directly by technical staff, all project communication will be routed through Mr. Kolk
to ensure continuity of project tasks and control of project resources. In the event that Mr. Kolk is
unavailable, Mr. Ramon Gallegos will serve as the secondary project manager.
A quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) process will continue to be implemented throughout the
project and will include periodic reviews during the planning and execution phases. The project manager
will ensure that all the required elements are effectively incorporated into the project and the principal‐
in‐charge will ensure that the project manager is routinely performing this verification.
All reports and presentations are reviewed by the project manager and, where appropriate, the
principal‐in‐charge for content and format. In addition, draft and final reports as well as presentations
are edited by an in‐house technical editor. For technical tasks, including intermediate calculations and
determinations of key parameters, verification by technically qualified team members with no prior
involvement in the particular task is conducted for accuracy and completeness.
“EEC has played a significant role in helping our
City protect the environment and our citizens.”
Jake Wager, City Manager
City of Stanton
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 6 March 2, 2015
Section 3.0 – Scope of Work
3.1 FOG Program Management
3.1.1 FOG Control Program, FSE Database and GIS Management
EEC currently manages FOG programs for four Southern California agencies, utilizing complex databases
and GIS tools to collect, organize, analyze, and manage FOG data. Having been closely involved in the
development and implementation of key FOG program tools and processes, EEC’s technical and field
staff is thoroughly knowledgeable with the field data acquisition systems and work flows currently
employed by the District.
EEC will: identify and prioritize food service establishments (FSE) for inspections, including review and
utilization of OCHCA FOG inspection data, review and update FSE inspection results into the FOG
database and GIS; and will develop database forms and reports, as appropriate, to summarize the
findings of these inspections.
On a monthly basis, EEC will report the activities conducted during the month, identify any findings, and
will provide recommendations to the FOG Control Program Manager.
3.1.2 FOG Control Program Annual Assessment
At the end of the fiscal year period, EEC will conduct a FOG control program assessment and provide
recommendations for program enhancement and resource management. This will include hot spot
mitigation, FSE compliance status, and grease‐related SSO status.
For the previous 10 years, EEC has served on the Districts Sewer System Sub‐Committee (SSSC), and has
worked with the District to identify FSEs that are contributing to hot spot locations. As part of the FOG
Control Program Assessment, EEC will assess hot spots to identify FSEs that are discharging FOG to the
sewer collection system utilizing the District’s CCTV staff or subcontractor. It is projected that 4 days of
CCTV Source Inspections will be conducted during the next 12 months of the program.
3.1.3 Additional Agency Support
EEC will provide the following additional agency support services under this task:
SSO investigation support
Assist in preparation for and/or attending quarterly Hot Spot and other Sewer System issue
resolution meetings
Manage the FOG geodatabase and GIS files such as map documents
Review FSE inspections results for quality assurance and quality control
Develop reports to summarize inspection results and compliance efforts
Establish inspection schedules, and coordinate and assign tasks
Conduct regular meetings with District staff to evaluate the FOG Control Program, provide
recommendations, and prioritize project efforts
Provide follow‐up documentation assistance and expertise to the FOG Program Manager
Develop residential FOG educational/guidance materials and plan to address residential grease
discharge and disposal practices
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 7 March 2, 2015
As needed, develop and coordinate evaluation of the new and emerging grease control
technologies. including GRE and chemical/biological additives
Monitor the Orange County Health Care Agency’s (OCHCA’s) inventory of restaurants and
append any updates, changes, or additions to the District’s FSE inventory
Obtain data and information to keep the FSE inventory up to date
Assist in training agency or other agency staff on the District’s FOG Program
Provide the District with experienced and knowledgeable professional staff
3.1.4 Value‐Added Program Management Services
Based on its recognized FOG expertise, EEC is afforded the opportunity to work with agencies across the
country, exposing the team to a variety of innovative ideas and concepts that can be shared with the
District. EEC also works with some of the District’s neighboring agencies and can share field intelligence
regarding sewer investigations and FSE issues that might impact the District’s programs.
3.2 Inspections
EEC inspectors are fully trained on procedures for conducting FOG inspections and regulations specific
to the District. EEC will monitor inspection progress using the District’s GIS tools to ensure the FOG
control program tasks are on track to meet inspection and follow‐up targets. EEC routinely performs
QA/QC, from the work order initiation phase to project completion, of FOG inspectors as well as the
data entered into databases and submitted to the District. EEC will also work with the District’s FOG
Program Manager to evaluate continued implementation of FOG‐risk–based inspection prioritization
processed to further optimize the City’s inspection resources.
3.2.1 Permitting Inspections
EEC will physically inspect and educate FSEs within the
District that are new to the FOG Program. These FSEs
include new FSEs, existing FSEs that have a change in
ownership or a name change requiring re‐permitting’, and
FSEs that have a change of operation. For the sake of this
proposal, from July 2015 to June 2016, EEC will plan to
perform 35 permitting inspections (quantity based on an
estimation of approximately 7% of the total FSEs [~490] in
the program). The inspection will include a full inventory
of cooking equipment, fixtures, and floor sinks and drains.
Inspectors will also take documentation photographs and
gather interviewee signatures.
For those FSEs that have been identified in the vicinity of hot spots or identified as FOG sources, EEC will
discuss, with the FSE management, the enforcement options that are available to the District and the
steps that the FSE can take to avoid additional enforcement.
3.2.2 Grease Removal Equipment (GRE) Inspections
EEC will conduct GRE inspections for FSEs with a grease interceptor or grease trap to ensure each device
is in good operating condition and confirm that appropriate maintenance practices are implemented.
Permitting Inspection Inventory Photo
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 8 March 2, 2015
The inspections are comprehensive and thorough to support potential enforcement efforts in the
future. It is estimated that approximately 100 GRE inspections will be required per year.
Specifically, EEC inspectors will conduct the following:
Measure the layer of floating FOG and settable
solids
Determine conformance with compliance
criteria
Inspect the mechanical condition of the GRE
Review the maintenance logs and record the
last pump‐out date
Review GRE pumping record‐keeping
Document and capture photographic evidence
of all violations
3.2.3 Kitchen Best Management Practice (BMP) Inspections
Having conducted over 20,000 kitchen BMP inspections, EEC understands the importance of educating
FSEs on proper BMPs. EEC will conduct BMP inspections to evaluate compliance with all required kitchen
BMPs, including employee education and training practices. These inspections also provide an
opportunity to provide new program educational materials. It is estimated that approximately 150 BMP
inspections will be required per year.
Specifically, EEC inspectors will assess the following:
Removal of food grinder
Drain screens installed/maintained
Kitchen signage (BMP poster) posted
Scraping practices
Food waste disposal practices
Emergency spill response materials
Utilization of drainage additives
Segregation and proper storage of waste cooking oil
Grease collection log maintained
Employee training log maintained
Lateral cleaning and spill log maintained
3.2.4 Combined BMP / GRE Inspections
EEC will physically conduct combined kitchen BMP and GRE inspections for FSEs and is projecting to
perform approximately 170 inspections. During these inspections, EEC inspectors will discuss the
implementation of proper kitchen BMPs and GRE maintenance EEC will educate the FSEs on how
implementing efficient kitchen BMPs can reduce expensive GRE maintenance costs and ensure their
GREs are functioning as efficient as possible.
Inspection of interceptor sample box
Identification of BMP violation
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 9 March 2, 2015
3.2.5 Compliance Inspections
ECC will conduct follow‐up inspections for non‐compliance issues as required by the District’s FOG
Control Manager. This may include issuance of notices of violation (NOVs) to FSEs that are found to be in
non‐compliance of the FOG control regulations. Although it is difficult to estimate the amount of non‐
compliance at this time, EEC will plan to perform compliance inspections at 75 FSEs due to non‐
compliance issues or on‐going hot spot source identification.
EEC will assist the District in managing enforcement actions for violations of the District’s ordinance. For
any FSE or critical source facility identified with deficiencies, EEC will meet with FSE managers/owners or
property owners to discuss violations and enforcement and to help develop an appropriate corrective
action plan to achieve and maintain compliance. Based on the results of follow‐up inspections and
issued notices of non‐compliance, EEC will review, provide recommendations, and assist the District
with any enforcement actions required as a result of violations of the ordinance.
3.2.6 Source Investigation Inspections
Having assisted the District with the reduction of key Hot Spot locations over the previous 10 years, EEC
is intimately familiar with the goals of the District and known FOG problem sewer areas. EEC will work
with District staff and CCTV contractors to identify the sources of excess FOG being discharged into the
sewer system. Once identified, EEC will conduct in‐depth inspections of the FSEs to identify the
processes/compliance issues that are contributing to the FOG discharge. EEC will work with these FSEs
to mitigate the level of FOG discharge in order to alleviate the FOG related Hot Spot in that area.
3.2.7 Value‐Added Inspection Services
EEC understands the District’s FSE inventory database and key FSE details necessary to determine each
FSE’s potential to discharge FOG into the sewer system (e.g., cooking equipment). Additionally, EEC
inspectors are proficient users of the District’s inspection software and will not require any additional
training. Recently for District FOG inspections, EEC has implemented mobile inspection tables that allow
inspection results collected in the field to be automatically entered into the FSE database. This allows
EEC to efficiently conduct inspections and accurately manage FSEs’ compliance and follow‐up in a timely
manner.
Finally, EEC inspectors are extensively trained in inspection safety and have an impeccable safety track
record. EEC inspectors also receive training in SSO response procedures and are readily familiar with the
SSO emergency response procedures implemented by the District.
3.3 Enforcement
3.3.1 Enforcement Management Support
Based on the results of the CCTV Source Inspections and continued NOVs, EEC will review, EEC will
continue to provide recommendations, and assist District staff and the FOG Control Program Manager in
the FOG Control Program enforcement process. These services will be provided on a‐needed basis;
however, it is anticipated that enforcement management activities will be required for 3 FSEs (per year).
EEC Proposal to Provide FOG Program Services 10 March 2, 2015
3.3.2 Enforcement Inspection Support
EEC will coordinate with District staff and schedule and perform enforcement follow‐up inspections of
FSEs associated with source investigation activities and escalated FOG Control Program compliance
issues. Due to the serious nature of these inspections, EEC will attempt to meet with the FSE manager or
property owner to discuss the deficiencies and assist the FSEs in developing corrective action plans to
achieve compliance. These services will be provided on a‐needed basis; however, it is anticipated that 8
enforcement inspections will be required (per year).
“EEC’s expertise and responsiveness was instrumental in helping
our city meet new stringent sewer regulations.”
Ray Burk, Principal Civil Engineer
City of Santa Ana
Task NameCity of Santa Ana FOG Control ProgramNotice to ProceedFOG Control Program ManagementMonthly Status ReportQuarterly SSSC MeetingsFSE Inspections and EnforcementInspections6/30May '15Jun '15Jul '15Aug '15Sep '15Oct '15Nov '15Dec '15Jan '16Feb '16Mar '16Apr '16May '16Jun '16Jul '16TaskSplitProgressMilestoneSummaryProject SummaryExternal TasksExternal MilestoneDeadlinePage 1Project: Project ScheduleDate: Thu 2/26/15
CONSULTANT’S BID FORM
Bid No. CMSD-030115
1 of 2
Based on the scope of work delineated in Exhibit-A of Bid No CMSD-030115, and EEC’s understanding
of the level of effort required for such a scope (approximately one (1) full-time equivalent (FTE)), EEC
proposes annual FOG Control Program Services costs for Year 1 (2015/2016), Year 2 (2016/2017) and
Year 3 (2017/2018) as follows:
Year 1 (2015/2016) FOG Control Program Services Cost
Year 1
Task Description Cost Basis Projected
Quantity
Rate Annual Task
Sub‐Total
FOG Program Management Tasks
FOG Program, FSE, Data and GIS Management Unit 12 $3,500 $42,000
FOG Program Annual Assessment Unit 1 $2,500 $2,500
Additional Agency Support T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,000 $2,000
FSE Inspection Tasks
Permitting Unit 50 $120 $6,000
GRE only Unit 100 $80 $8,000
BMP only Unit 150 $80 $12,000
Combined BMP/GRE Unit 170 $100 $17,000
Compliance Follow‐up Unit 75 $120 $9,000
CCTV Source Follow‐up T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$4,500 $4,500
Enforcement Tasks
Enforcement Management T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,500 $2,500
Enforcement Inspection Support T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,500 $2,500
Year 1 Total (NTE) $108,000
Year 2 (2016/2017) FOG Control Program Services Cost
Year 2
Task Description Cost Basis Projected
Quantity
Rate Annual Task
Sub‐Total
FOG Program Management Tasks
FOG Program, FSE, Data and GIS Management Unit 12 $3,500 $42,000
FOG Program Annual Assessment Unit 1 $2,500 $2,500
Additional Agency Support T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,000 $2,000
FSE Inspection Tasks
Permitting Unit 50 $120 $6,000
GRE only Unit 100 $80 $8,000
BMP only Unit 150 $80 $12,000
Combined BMP/GRE Unit 170 $100 $17,000
Compliance Follow‐up Unit 75 $120 $9,000
CCTV Source Follow‐up T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$4,500 $4,500
Enforcement Tasks
Enforcement Management T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,500 $2,500
Enforcement Inspection Support T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,500 $2,500
Year 2 Total (NTE) $108,000
CONSULTANT’S BID FORM
Bid No. CMSD-030115
2 of 2
Year 3 FOG Control Program Services Cost
Year 3
Task Description Cost Basis Projected
Quantity
Rate Annual Task
Sub‐Total
FOG Program Management Tasks
FOG Program, FSE, Data and GIS Management Unit 12 $3,500 $42,000
FOG Program Annual Assessment Unit 1 $2,500 $2,500
Additional Agency Support T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,000 $2,000
FSE Inspection Tasks
Permitting Unit 50 $120 $6,000
GRE only Unit 100 $85 $8,500
BMP only Unit 150 $85 $12,750
Combined BMP/GRE Unit 170 $105 $17,850
Compliance Follow‐up Unit 75 $125 $9,375
CCTV Source Follow‐up T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$4,500 $4,500
Enforcement Tasks
Enforcement Management T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,500 $2,500
Enforcement Inspection Support T&M (NTE)T&M (NTE)$2,500 $2,500
Year 3 Total (NTE) $110,475
Unit based tasks will be conducted at the rates identified in the tables above. Time and Material (T&M)
based tasks will be conducted on an as-needed basis pursuant to EEC’s latest Fee Schedule (2015 Fee
Schedule included below).
Additional details in support of EEC’s thorough understanding of the District’s scope and needs for FOG
Control Program support efforts, as well as EEC’s ability to provide such services, are included in
Attachment 1.
10
CONSULTANT’S STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE
Bid No. CMSD-030115
The names, addresses, and telephone numbers of four references for which the CONSULTANT has
performed, within the past 8 years, services that are similar in nature and scope to those described
herein.
1.
NAME AND ADDRESS OF REFERENCE
NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF REFERENCE CONTACT FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT
CONTRACT AMOUNT TYPE OF WORK DATE COMPLETED
2.
NAME AND ADDRESS OF REFERENCE
NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF REFERENCE CONTACT FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT
CONTRACT AMOUNT TYPE OF WORK DATE COMPLETED
3.
NAME AND ADDRESS OF REFERENCE
NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF REFERENCE CONTACT FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT
CONTRACT AMOUNT TYPE OF WORK DATE COMPLETED
4.
NAME AND ADDRESS OF REFERENCE
NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF REFERENCE CONTACT FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT
CONTRACT AMOUNT TYPE OF WORK DATE COMPLETED
CONSULTANT may attach additional pages, if needed. Label any such pages “STATEMENT OF
EXPERIENCE - Additional Information” along with the appropriate title(s) corresponding to this
form.
CONSULTANT’S STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE – Additional Information
Bid No. CMSD-030115
1 of 2
Additional Project Descriptions
Following is a selection of short project descriptions representative of EEC’s FOG inspection experience
and ability to provide similar FOG services to the District.
Costa Mesa Sanitary District: FOG Program Management and Inspection Services
EEC developed, implemented, and currently manages the Costa Mesa Sanitary District’s (CMSD) FOG
program and conducts on‐site facility inspections. EEC manages CMSD’s FSE inventory and inspects each
FSE to inventory cooking equipment, fixtures, floor sinks and drains, and FOG control equipment. EEC
developed FSE kitchen best management practice (BMP) training materials and distributes training
materials to FSEs during each inspection while also providing FOG program education and outreach. In
addition to FOG inspection services, EEC also serves on the CMSD internal sewer hotspot evaluation
committee, and works with CMSD to evaluate and eliminate sewer hotspots within CMSD’s service area.
EEC has been providing the following services to CMSD for the past decade:
Enforcement project development and
management
FOG program development and management
FSE database creation and management
GIS development and management
FSE FOG inspections and follow‐up
CCTV source identification inspections
Training services
Hotspot analysis
City of Santa Ana: FOG Program Management and Inspection Services
EEC developed, implemented, and supported management of
the City’s FOG program and conducted on‐site FSE
inspections. EEC compiled and maintained an exhaustive list
of FSEs within the City’s boundaries and inspected each FSE to
inventory cooking equipment, fixtures, floor sinks and drains,
and grease‐removal equipment (GRE), as well as evaluate
compliance with FOG program regulations. EEC developed a
FOG program database that stores the kitchen equipment
inventory and created inspection frequencies based, in part,
on an FSE’s potential to release FOG into the sewer system.
EEC used the City’s GIS to determine an FSE’s potential to
impact sewer line elevated maintenance locations (EMLs).
EEC has been inspecting FSEs in Santa Ana for the past
decade. Project highlights include:
FOG program development and management support
Permitting inspections
Inspector Using Mobile
Device to Gather FSE Data
Manhole elevation analysis
CONSULTANT’S STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE – Additional Information
Bid No. CMSD-030115
2 of 2
FSE kitchen BMP inspections
GRE inspections
FSE noncompliance notifications
Compliance inspection and follow‐up efforts
Sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) response and support
Mobile FOG inspection deployment
Irvine Ranch Water District: FOG Program Management and Inspection Services
EEC conducted a FOG characterization study that included over 800 initial inspections within the Irvine
Ranch Water District’s (IRWD’s) service area and continues to support FOG program efforts, including
FSE inspection services. GREs are inspected to evaluate their size, operational status, and structural
condition. EEC also provides FOG program information and education to FSEs in the IRWD service area.
To enhance analysis of the data collected, EEC developed a geodatabase. FSE and GRE data was further
analyzed with SSOs and sewer hotspots. Inspection data was instrumental in developing IRWD’s FOG
program; analysis of the data provided a basis for prioritizing FSE permitting and inspections as well as
optimizing IRWD resources. The project scope included the following elements:
Program creation and management
Permitting inspections
BMP and GRE inspections
Compliance inspections
Nonroutine customer support
Hydrogen sulfide testing and monitoring
FSE plan submittal program development and management
City of Anaheim: FOG Program Management and Inspection Services
EEC has provided FOG program services for the City of Anaheim since 2008. Services have included FSE
inspections, development of the City’s FOG program manual, and guidance on analysis of FSE
contributions to sewer line hotspots and SSOs. EEC provided support services during private and public
SSO events, including follow‐up inspections, corrective action tracking, and GIS development to aid in
analysis of FSE and SSO relationships. EEC has supported review of FSE variance and waiver requests,
including site inspections, to verify site limitations or identify alternatives to preclude the need for a
variance. The project scope included the following
elements:
Compliance/enforcement inspections
New FSE permitting inspections
New FSE plan review
SSO response support
FSE NPDES inspections
FSE BMP inspections
GRE inspections
GIS development
SSO response support
11
CONSULTANT’S ORGANIZATION
Bid No. CMSD-030115
In submitting this BID, the CONSULTANT represents that the CONSULTANT has established an
organization including an office or offices, communications, administrative staff, and the like; and
that the CONSULTANT’S organization is fully adequate to conform to the requirements of this
BID.
In support of these representations, CONSULTANT shall set forth in herein:
A. A description of the CONSULTANT’S organization, showing basic relationship hierarchy
and responsibilities, and including ADMINISTRATORs, departments, managers, key
support staff, supervisors, foremen, technicians and the like. Information provided below
may be supplemented by attaching an organization chart.
CONSULTANT’S ORGANIZATION (cont.)
Bid No. CMSD-030115
Project Staffing
Regulatory Advisor
Greg Arthur
FOG Control Management
Jim Kolk
John Shaffer
Ramon Gallegos
Joe Jenkins
Database / GIS
Ramon Gallegos
Steven Shaffer
Ariana Wilfley
Abraham Navarro
Costa Mesa Sanitary District
FOG Control Manager
Project Manager
Jim Kolk
Principal‐in‐Charge
John Shaffer
FOG Inspectors
Joe Jenkins
Angel Bambrick
Robert Schubert
Ramon Gallegos
12
CONSULTANT’S STATEMENT OF ABILITY TO PROVIDE SERVICE
Bid No. CMSD-030115
The CONSULTANT is required to make a statement of how services will be provided. Include:
Time period between award and start of service, experience of personnel and any other information
you can offer that will help determine your ability to provide auditing services. Attachments may
be used.
13
CONSULTANT’S STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH INSURANCE
REQUIREMENTS
[Note: Insurance may not be required. Check the agreement to be signed the successful bidder.]
As a required part of the Bidder’s proposal the Bidder must attach either of the following to this
page.
1) Certificate of insurance showing conformance with the requirements herein for each of:
Comprehensive General Liability
Automobile Liability
Workers’ Compensation
OR
2) Statement with an insurance carrier’s notarized signature stating that the carrier can, and
upon payment of fees and/or premiums by the Bidder, will issue to the Bidder Policies of
insurance for Comprehensive General Liability, Automobile Liability, and Workers’
Compensation in conformance with the requirements herein and Certificates of insurance
to the Agency showing conformance with the requirements herein.
All certificates of insurance and statements of willingness to issue insurance for auto policies
offered to meet the specification of this contract must:
1) Meet the conditions stated in paragraph 10 of the included agreement for each insurance
company that the CONSULTANT proposes.
2) Cover any vehicle used in the performance of the contract, used onsite or offsite, whether
owned, non-owned or hired, and whether scheduled or non-scheduled. The auto
insurance certificate must state the coverage is for “any auto” and cannot be limited in
any manner.
14
CONSULTANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND
CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT AND SPECIFICATIONS TO THE
COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT’S FOG CONTROL PROGRAM, BID NO CMSD-
030115.
____________________________________
CONSULTANT’S Signature
____________________________________
Print Name and Title
PERSONNEL CHARGES Travel
Labor Classification Hourly Rate
Staff Engineer/Geologist/Scientist $115
Sr Staff Engineer/Geologist/Scientist $125 Field Equipment
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist - I $150
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist - II $160
Sr Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist - I $180
Sr Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist - II $200
Principal Geologist $225 Subcontractors and Reimbursables
Principal $225
Project Assistant $90
Technician $90
Drafter $110
Sr Technician $105
Compliance Inspector $105 Other Project Charges
Analyst GIS/Technology $95
Sr Analyst GIS/Technology $105
Specialist GIS/Technology $115
Sr Specialist GIS/Technology $125
Supervisor GIS/Technology $145
Director/GIS Technology $160
Construction Technician $75
Construction Field Supervisor $95 Shipping and Postage
Construction Manager $100
Sr Construction Manager $125
Technical Editor $95
Interest Charges
Payment Terms
Vehicles used on project assignments will be
charged at $50 per day. Mileage is billed at the
current rate established by the Internal Revenue
Service plus mark up. Per Diem is billed at a unit
cost of $50 per day. Airfare, lodging, rental cars and
associated expenses are billed at cost plus mark up.
Field Equipment is billed at standard unit costs.
Rate schedules are available upon request.
This Fee Schedule is adjusted each subsequent year to reflect the economic changes for the new year. The new schedule will apply to existing
and new assignments.
The costs of subcontractors, materials, equipment
rental and costs incurred will be charged at cost
plus 15%.
Shipping charges include couriers and the postage
necessary will be charged at cost plus markup.
Interest on late payments will be charged at the rate
of 1.5% per month.
Net 30 days apply to all work performed and
invoiced unless superseded by a specific executed
contract.
2015 Fee Schedule
Emergency response and client requested work during
non-standard business hours will be charged at a rate
of 1.25 times the standard hourly rate.
The charge for all time required for the performance of
the Scope of Work, including office, field and travel
time, will be billed at the hourly rate according to the
labor classifications set forth below:
The cost of additional report reproduction and
special project accounting will be billed as
appropriate. Plotting plans are charged by size,
black and white or color, and by the number of
copies supplied.
When EEC Staff appear as expert witnesses at court
trials, mediation, arbitration hearings and depositions,
their time will be charged at 2.0 times the standard
rate. All time spent preparing for such trials, hearings,
and depositions, will be charged at the standard hourly
rate.