HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-19-18 City Commission Packet Materials - C6. Amendment 2 with RESPEC for Sports Park Well Siting
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Brian Heaston, Project Engineer
Craig Woolard, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Authorize the City Manager to sign Amendment No. 2 to Professional Services Agreement with Respec, Inc. to provide $190,102 for Groundwater Investigation Services – Phase 3 – Well Siting Feasibility and Test Well Design, Permitting and Monitoring Program.
MEETING DATE: March 19, 2018
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Consent
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager to sign Amendment No. 2 to
Professional Services Agreement with Respec, Inc. to provide $190,102 for Groundwater Investigation Services – Phase 3 – Well Siting Feasibility and Test Well Design, Permitting and Monitoring Program.
BACKGROUND: The City’s Integrated Water Resources Plan, adopted by the City Commission in 2013, recommends development of a municipal groundwater supply source to help meet the City’s long-range water supply needs. A groundwater source will not only
increase the City’s available water supply, but will provide resiliency and redundancy for the
water system as groundwater is less susceptible to drought impacts and is generally immune to wildfire, which is important considering the current surface water sources are susceptible to these natural phenomena.
The City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with the firm of Respec on August 24,
2015 for the groundwater supply project following a qualifications-based procurement action. A valley-wide groundwater model was developed as Phase 1 of the project. The model was prepared utilizing existing available information to identify locations suitable for high-yield groundwater development. Amendment No. 1 to the PSA was approved by the Commission on
April 11, 2016, which authorized Phase 2 of the project to transition the steady-state model to a
transient model. The transient model incorporates the variable of time into the modeling environment, which is key for balancing system interactions between groundwater withdrawals and surface water mitigation in order to not adversely affect existing water rights. The transient model is a necessary and critical tool that will be highly leveraged to ultimately attain a water
right from the DNRC for the municipal groundwater source. Phase 2 of the project was funded
entirely by a Reclamation and Development Grant awarded to the City by the DNRC.
163
Amendment No. 2 to the PSA, attached to this memo, authorizes Phase 3 of the groundwater
project, which is for a well siting feasibility and test well design, permitting and monitoring program. The scope of work for Phase 3 includes a feasibility evaluation and alternatives analysis for municipal well siting within the Sports Park property and due diligence of possible mitigation strategies and water right availability for a well field at Sports Park. A test well
program will be implemented to provide design and permitting framework for test well drilling,
pumping, and monitoring. Test well results will be utilized to evaluate specific production well location(s), including the ability to mitigate predicted stream depletions to offset adverse effects to existing water rights.
FISCAL EFFECTS: The City’s adopted FY18 Water Impact Fee CIP, which is reflected in the
adopted FY18 budget, contains $400,000 for project WIF21 – Groundwater Test Well. Adequate budget is available to cover the PSA’s $190,102 cost, leaving a healthy balance to cover the costs of construction test wells, which are not accounted for in the PSA. Well drilling costs are anticipated to be in the range of $50,000 - $75,000 and will be funded by the WIF21
project budget. Additional obligations to the remaining project budget are to be expected in
order to provide additional mitigation scenarios analysis. Mitigation scenario planning is crucial to ultimately obtaining a legal right to use groundwater. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the Commission.
ATTACHMENTS: Amendment No. 2 to Professional Services Agreement Report compiled on: March 2, 2018
164
165
166
167
168
EXHIBIT A - SCOPE OF SERVICES
(TO AMENDMENT NO. 2 OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF BOZEMAN AND RESPEC FOR GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION)
169
EXHIBIT A – SCOPE OF SERVICES
City of Bozeman, Montana 1
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION
PHASE 3
CITY of BOZEMAN, MONTANA
February 2018
1. INTRODUCTION
In fall 2017, the RESPEC‐NewFields Team completed Phases 1 and 2 of a Groundwater Investigation for
the City of Bozeman (“COB”). Phase 1 identified nine preliminary locations for potential well field
development. Multiple pumping simulations were completed to assess location and magnitude of
associated stream depletions. Subsequent mitigation scenarios were simulated utilizing a steady‐state
groundwater model to evaluate the effects on spatial distribution of stream depletions when mitigation
water is infiltrated at certain locations at a constant flow rate. Phase 2 proceeded with development of a
transient groundwater model designed to improve model functionality as a planning tool throughout its
domain in the Gallatin Valley. Additional detail was incorporated into the model to enhance its predictive
capabilities with respect to timing and location of stream accretion/depletion that could result from
groundwater development and/or mitigation.
The calibrated transient model was further modified to illustrate how the model could be used to evaluate
a specific area, or Focus Area, in greater detail. For this example, an area was identified to the southwest
of the City of Bozeman to further evaluate potential impacts from pumping a proposed well. The Focus
Area was identified based on drawdown contours from a previous steady‐state simulation of pumping
from two of the nine potential well locations identified in Phase 1. The two well locations, PW‐11 and PW‐
16, were identified as preferred locations by COB. Well PW‐11 has been proposed for siting at COB’s
Sports Park near the current northwest extent of city limits. This location will be the primary focus for a
test well and related mitigation options explored in the next phases of the project.
2. WORK SCOPE – PHASE 3
Phase 3 of the project includes a feasibility evaluation and alternatives analysis for well siting within the
Sports Park property and due diligence of possible mitigation strategies and water right availability for a
well field at this location. A kickoff meeting with COB Engineering and Parks staff is proposed at the outset
of Phase 3 to discuss well siting at the Sports Park in context of the current master plan for site
development. A meeting with DNRC is also proposed early in this phase of the project to discuss mitigation
strategies. Additional dialogue and meetings with DNRC are proposed as more information from the well
field testing program becomes available and a preferred mitigation approach is developed. The Focus Area
groundwater model will be refined to support specific pumping simulations and mitigation scenarios.
Development of a preliminary draft Source Water Delineation Assessment Report (SWDAR) and Source
Water Protection Plan (SWPP) will be completed. A test well program will be implemented that will: 1)
provide a design framework for the test wells, 2) provide guidelines and specifications for well pumping,
3) identify monitoring well locations for use during well pumping, 4) install and pump test wells, and 5)
specify protocols for water quality sampling and testing. Test well results, including maximum sustainable
yield estimates and water quality parameters, will be utilized to evaluate specific well location(s),
including an evaluation of the ability to mitigate predicted stream depletions
170
City of Bozeman, Montana 2
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
General Assumptions
1. Based on recent correspondence between COB and RESPEC‐NewFields, future water demand for COB
is projected using an ‘ultimate build out’ (UBO) approach, which uses the total area of undeveloped
land in the City’s planning area to arrive at expected water demand within this geographic area. COB’s
UBO peak demand is calculated at 54 MGD. According to COB, a total of 34 MGD of this is sourced
from the Sourdough Water Treatment Plant (WTP), 4 MGD is delivered from Lyman Creek, and the
remaining 16 MGD will be developed from new groundwater sources. Long‐range capital planning
needs for groundwater supply infrastructure are based on this 16 MGD peak figure, and COB is aiming
for 4 MGD capacity for an initial groundwater development project. Depending on the locations of
new wells installed by COB, the location(s) of available mitigation water rights, the timing of predicted
depletions associated with new wells, and the period of use associated with mitigation water rights,
COB will likely need to acquire sufficient water rights for mitigation to offset between 65% and 100%
of the volume of water pumped from the new wells.
Multiple stages of groundwater modeling have been completed thus far in support of this project.
These models comprise the foundation for future modeling efforts and refinements that will occur as
part of Phase 3 of the project. The steady state groundwater flow model of the Gallatin Valley
described in the Groundwater Investigation Report ‐ Phases 1 and 2 (RESPEC‐NewFields, 2017) has
been modified to simulate monthly seasonal conditions. The modified model was then used to
support an evaluation of potential pumping impacts and mitigation approaches. The model is
structured in a manner such that additional detail can be incorporated into specific areas within the
valley. In summary, groundwater modeling work completed thus far includes:
Conversion of the Gallatin Valley Steady‐State model to a Transient Model, which facilitates the
simulation of seasonal conditions;
The model was also converted to MODFLOW‐USG. The unstructured grid version of MODFLOW
facilitates the incorporation of greater detail in areas of interest while retaining relative simplicity
in areas where this level of detail is unnecessary and/or unknown;
The transient Gallatin Valley model was calibrated to groundwater levels and stream fluxes; and,
An example was provided illustrating the approach to creating a Focus Area, adding more detail
into that area, and using the model in the Focus Area to simulate pumping and quantify resulting
impacts on groundwater and surface water.
2. RESPEC‐NewFields will lead procurement of right‐of‐entry permissions as may be necessary for
private property access during the project. Public properties will be prioritized for site access and
monitoring activities to the extent practicable. COB responsibilities include:
a. Assist with landowner negotiations for rights‐of‐entry on private lands, as needed.
b. Development of easements as may be necessary for test well access, pumping, and
monitoring of pumping effects.
3. COB staff, or designated representatives, will continue to lead dialogue with members of ditch and
canal companies, individual water right owners, and other interested groups (e.g., AGAI, MARS) and
parties regarding the progress of this project. In particular, negotiations with said groups/parties
171
City of Bozeman, Montana 3
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
regarding potential water right purchases/transfers, conveyance rights, land acquisitions or other
matters relevant to this project. RESPEC‐NewFields will be available to participate in these discussions
as needed.
4. Out‐of‐scope items will be identified as soon as possible by RESPEC/NewFields’ project managers.
These items will be negotiated with COB for inclusion in the contract, as needed. We encourage open
dialogue about this and will actively seek opportunities to increase efficiencies throughout the course
of the project to avoid budget overages.
Staffing
RESPEC will be the prime consultant for purposes of contracting with COB and will be the primary firm for
communication between COB and the RESPEC/NewFields team. However, we encourage open
communication during the project and support direct contact between representatives of both RESPEC
and NewFields and COB staff, as appropriate. Primary contact persons at each company, and their roles
within this project, include:
RESPEC: Michael Rotar, PE Project Manager: primary contact (Bozeman) for all
administrative matters and team coordination;
engineering co‐lead
Troy Benn, PE Assistant Project Manager: secondary contact
(Bozeman); engineering co‐lead; water rights lead
Bill Dreyer, PE Site Civil Engineer: well drilling and aquifer testing design
and oversight
Alan Leak, PE Principal‐in‐Charge: municipal water supply
planning/design lead
NewFields: Cam Stringer, P.G. Hydrogeologist: public water supply development;
aquifer characterization; groundwater modeling
Adam Perine, P.G. Hydrogeologist: public water supply development;
water rights/mitigation planning
Gary Andres, P.G. Hydrogeologist: groundwater modeling lead
The following specific work tasks are designated to complete Phase 3 of the project:
Phase 3: Well Siting Feasibility and Test Well Design, Permitting and Monitoring Program
3.1: Well Siting Feasibility Evaluation and Alternatives Analysis
3.2: Preliminary Source Water Delineation Assessment (SWDA) & Source Water Protection Plan (SWPP)
3.3: Mitigation Options / Water Rights Evaluations
3.4: Coordination / Meetings with DNRC
3.5: Test Well Design/Permitting
3.6: Test Well Drilling ‐ Construction Services
3.7: Test Well ‐ Aquifer Testing and Analysis
3.8: Water Quality Testing / Analysis
3.9: Groundwater Model Refinements
3.10: Documentation / Reporting
172
City of Bozeman, Montana 4
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
PHASE 3 – DETAILED WORK TASK DESCRIPTIONS
Task 3.1 Well Siting Feasibility Evaluation and Alternatives Analysis
Objective:
Determine feasible locations for siting of test well and production well(s).
Engineer Services:
1. Review Sports Park Master Plan and identify potential locations for test well and/or production
well(s) that would meet source water protection requirements found in Montana DEQ Circular
PWS‐6. Complete an alternatives analysis for test/production well siting considering other factors
related to the Sports Park property (i.e., master plan, adjacent parcel facilities and land uses, etc.).
2. Conduct meeting(s), as may be necessary, with COB Engineering and Parks staff to discuss
potential locations for test/production wells within the Sports Park property.
Considerations for well siting will include the following:
Review of plans and specifications for facilities at the Bozeman Sports Park, including athletic fields,
irrigation, utilities, restroom facilities, and public access (roads, trails, etc.).
Review of the Water Facilities Plan Update (AE2S, 2017), and proposed water distribution
infrastructure in vicinity of the Sports Park (e.g., future phases of west Transmission Main, etc.).
Review of the Wastewater Facilities Plan Update (Morrison‐Maierle, HDR, 2015), and proposed
infrastructure in vicinity of the Sports Park (e.g., Norton East Ranch Outfall Diversion, etc.).
Proximity and distance from existing and proposed facilities and structures located on adjacent
parcels or within public right‐of‐way (e.g., existing roads and ditches, pending extensions of Oak St.
and Cottonwood St.). This will include residential subdivisions, the new high school to be built
immediately south, and the NorthWestern Energy substation located directly east, across Flanders
Mill Road.
Potential noise impacts from equipment operations and maintenance.
Maintenance access.
Aesthetic considerations.
Engineer Deliverable:
Technical Memorandum providing Executive Summary and detailed narrative of the well siting feasibility
evaluation and alternatives analysis results. A preferred or recommended alternative will be presented.
Graphics, including schematic drawings of conceptual well field location and configuration will be
provided.
Summary of Scoped Meetings with COB Engineering and Parks Staff:
Two (2) meetings with COB Engineering and Parks staff. Duration of the meetings is expected to be
2 hours or less. Also includes attendance at City Commission meeting, as necessary.
173
City of Bozeman, Montana 5
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
Task 3.2 Preliminary Source Water Delineation Assessment (SWDA) & Source Water
Protection Plan (SWPP)
Objective:
Evaluate the source water to be produced by the well field to identify potential contaminants.
Engineer Services:
Well designs will be subject to Public Water Supply requirements provided by MDEQ in Circulars PWS‐5
(Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water ‐ GWUDISW) and PWS‐6 (Source Water
Protection Delineation). Steps to be followed in preparation of a Source Water Protection Plan (SWPP)
include:
1. Preparation of a Source Water Delineation and Assessment Report (SWDAR), which includes
assessment of potential and existing contaminant sources, a source water susceptibility assessment,
and management activities to be implemented to protect the source water.
Engineer Deliverable:
1. Complete preliminary drafts of SWDAR and SWPP for new groundwater source (Note: Submittal of
these documents to DEQ, and subsequent coordination, as required, to support DEQ approvals for
development of a PWS are not included as part of this task).
Task 3.3 Mitigation Options / Water Rights Evaluations
Objective:
Develop two or three mitigation strategies to discuss with DNRC.
Background:
RESPEC and COB have identified water rights and shares within the COB water portfolio that would be
appropriate for mitigation. In general, any water rights or shares currently owned by COB but not currently
being used would be ideal candidates to provide mitigation. Specifically, the Sourdough Creek storage
water reservation (41H 70118‐00) and the Bozeman Creek Reservoir Company (41H 30459‐00) could
provide mitigation from the Sourdough Creek source. Privately‐owned domestic purpose water rights
within the COB distribution area may have mitigation potential. All these water rights need to be
thoroughly investigated to determine their relative value for mitigation. Several potential mitigation
scenarios have been discussed at a preliminary level with COB. Table 1 provides a synopsis of these
mitigation scenarios and their potential advantages (pros) and disadvantages (cons).
174
City of Bozeman, Montana 6
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
Table 1. Summary of potential mitigation scenarios.
Engineer Services:
1. Conduct Cost‐Benefit Analysis of eight potential mitigation scenarios in Table 1 (and potentially
others that may be identified). Complete a qualitative risk/uncertainty evaluation between
scenarios and assign a risk factor to modify the cost‐benefit of mitigation scenarios accordingly.
Eliminate scenarios with lower cost‐benefit values.
a. Document analyses to further evaluate specific scenarios.
Scenario Pro Con
1) Acquire GW Rights Might be cheap water to
acquire. Historic Consumptive
Use analysis would be easy. No
diversion needed for mitigation.
Many owners to negotiate with.
Flow/Volume may not fully
mitigate.
2) Canal/Ditch Shares In some cases, City already owns
the water. Ditch may be used as
an infiltration gallery. Potential
for mitigation by comparison of
claimed acreage with current
irrigated acres via aerial
photography/GIS analyses.
Potential conflicts with other
ditch users. Hard to
verify/quantify actual recharge.
Separate recharge infrastructure
may be necessary. Ditch shares
do not include mitigation as a
beneficial use.
3) Acquire Irrigation Right(s) Water is likely available for
purchase.
Expensive. Transactions set
market for water right value.
Need to find senior water rights.
Potential loss of ag. production
and open space. DNRC Change
process is difficult.
4) Water Bank Theoretical ease of operation. Negotiation between
stakeholders. Long timeline.
5) Mystic Lake Right No operational change
necessary to mitigate Bozeman
Creek/E Gallatin. Put an unused
right to use.
Hard to mitigate depletions on
Hyalite Creek? DNRC Change
process is difficult (period of non‐
use).
6) Aquifer Conveyance of
Existing Rights
Argument may avoid Change
Application challenges with
Mitigation purposes.
This option has not been tried yet
with DNRC.
7) Utilize Basin Closure
Exceptions at MCA 85‐2‐
343(2)(d) & (2)(c)(iii)
New municipal surface water
claims for spring high flows
allowed by exception to basin
closure.
Junior priority date. Overcoming
hydropower water rights
objections.
8) Purchase Canyon Ferry
Storage Shares from BOR
Might be able to purchase a
small spring flow (~ 2 ‐ 3 cfs)
from BOR for mitigation.
May have to work with DNRC
State Projects for any adverse
effects at Toston.
175
City of Bozeman, Montana 7
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
2. Evaluate acquisition of groundwater rights within the COB distribution area.
a. Determine potential options for COB to acquire privately‐owned groundwater rights (for
example, offer discount on water bill or offer set fee per water right, etc.).
b. Estimate cost to acquire ownership. Filing DNRC water right ownership update. Analysis
to include two scenarios: a) allowing lawn/garden use to remain; b) 100% groundwater
right to mitigation.
c. Determine cost in Change Application for changing “domestic” purpose to “mitigation”.
d. Determine cost to convert from individual well to municipal supply. Evaluate impact on
municipal water supply to serve demands previously supplied by individual wells.
Determine costs to supply that municipal water.
e. Consult DNRC on how historic flow/volume will be evaluated and whether more detailed
modeling is necessary. Discuss concept of using a single, centralized recharge well in
model simulations.
f. Locate potential groundwater rights and map in GIS.
g. Adjust groundwater model to show effectiveness of mitigation. Model two scenarios: 1)
keep the well for lawn/garden use; 2) convert all well water to mitigation.
3. Evaluate using canal/ditch shares as mitigation.
a. Evaluate a location for recharge. For example, utilize a section of the Farmers Canal and
measure rate of recharge (Note: data from MBMG’s ongoing study of the Farmer’s Canal will
be used to the extent practicable). Similarly, evaluate a section of the Mystic Lake Ditch to
recharge Bozeman Reservoir Co. shares. Alternatively, find and test land for a recharge basin
(see 18.5‐acre COB parcel off Mystic Lake ditch [Geocode: 06‐0698‐01‐4‐01‐01‐0000]).
b. Evaluate the annual cost of using ditch shares for mitigation.
c. Determine whether water rights (Farmers, Middle Creek Ditch Co., West Gallatin Canal)
need a change to “mitigation” or “sale/marketing”.
4. Evaluate using Mystic Lake water right for mitigation/conveyance through aquifer.
a. Quantify the flow rate/volume to be left instream to provide mitigation. Adjust the
groundwater model to shift depletions from ditches/canals/spring creeks to East Gallatin
and/or Bozeman Creek.
b. Ask DNRC about challenges to Change to “mitigation” or a restart of the use of the right.
c. Talk with FWP about mitigation of instream rights on Bozeman Creek and East Gallatin.
d. Evaluate potential for a recharge basin (see 18.5‐acre COB parcel off Mystic Lake Ditch).
e. Measure Mystic Lake Ditch for recharge potential. May have to measure ditch loss three
times from May‐October.
5. Evaluate the potential of Lichtenberg right (41H 154136‐00) to provide mitigation on Hyalite Creek
and/or elsewhere.
a. Quantify COB’s historic use flow and volume.
b. Evaluate period of non‐use/possible “intent to abandon” evidence.
c. Evaluate potential objections to re‐starting use.
d. Estimate cost of changing to “mitigation”.
176
City of Bozeman, Montana 8
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
6. Evaluate using the Bozeman Fan aquifer as a conveyance of existing water rights/shares.
a. Adjust modeling to show connectivity of recharge location and PW‐11. Determine
necessary recharge rates for scenarios that include: (1) no surface water (Hyalite or
Sourdough Creek) being diverted during portions of the winter; and (2) use of COB’s
stored water in Hyalite Reservoir for aquifer recharge via diversion/conveyance in the
Hyalite transmission main(s).
b. Measure recharge capability of Farmers Canal (using MBMG’s ongoing study to extent
practicable) and/or other recharge locations (e.g., Mystic Lake Ditch).
7. Investigate GW recharge locations if recharge is identified as a component of the mitigation
strategy.
NOTE: Evaluate Farmers Canal, West Gallatin Canal, Middle Creek Ditch, and Mystic Lake Ditch
for recharge opportunities. We suggest investigating one recharge location off each of these
conveyances. COB currently owns an 18.5‐acre parcel off the Mystic Lake Ditch which could offer
an effective recharge location. RESPEC and COB will need to identify locations adjacent to West
Gallatin (a.k.a. Kleinschmidt) Canal, Middle Creek Ditch and Farmers Canal suitable for recharge
gallery testing.
a. Identify potential recharge locations off West Gallatin Canal, Farmers Canal, Middle Creek
Ditch and Mystic Lake Ditch.
b. Conduct percolation tests at one or more locations.
c. Use hydraulic conductivity rates to calculate irrigation season recharge capacity.
d. Conceptual design of recharge galleries.
8. Evaluate potential to apply an exception to the basin closure rule that allows for storage of water
during high spring flows [MCA 85‐2‐343(2)(d)] or the use of surface water by or for a municipality
[MCA 85‐2‐343(2)(c)(iii)].
9. Evaluate the potential purchase of storage shares in Canyon Ferry Reservoir from the Bureau of
Reclamation (BOR).
Summary of Scoped Meetings: Meetings with COB staff and water rights attorney
One (1) kickoff meeting with COB staff. Duration of the meeting is expected to be 2 hours or less.
Two (2) interim meetings with COB staff. Duration of the meetings is expected to be 2 hours or less.
Task 3.4 Coordination / Meetings with DNRC
Objective:
Meet with DNRC to discuss mitigation strategies and determine viability, and adequacy of groundwater
model for impact/mitigation evaluation of water right applications.
Engineer Services:
1. Work with COB staff and COB’s water rights attorney (Peter Scott) to define mitigation strategies for
discussion with DNRC. Prioritize/rank mitigation approaches and determine preferred approach.
177
City of Bozeman, Montana 9
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
2. Meet with DNRC early in Phase 3, including Bozeman Field Office staff and Russell Levens,
Hydroscience Section Supervisor/Ground Water Hydrogeologist. Discuss mitigation options, including
a preferred approach, and potential viability going forward.
3. Conduct additional meetings with DNRC staff, as needed, during Phase 3 of the project to vet
mitigation options as more data are collected or information becomes available. Utilize this
information in cost‐benefit analyses to better inform risk or uncertainty in given mitigation scenario.
Summary of Scoped Meetings with DNRC:
Up to three (3) meetings with various DNRC staff. Duration of the meetings is expected to be 2 hours
or less.
Task 3.5 Test Well – Design/Permitting
Objective:
Complete a basic design and provide field parameters and drilling requirements for well field testing in
the general vicinity of PW‐11 (i.e., COB Sports Park property).
Engineer Services:
1. Work with COB staff to determine locations for test wells at Sports Park property.
2. Identify proposed drilling depth(s).
3. Determine appropriate size (diameter) for production test wells.
4. Determine drill sequencing and steps for test well development.
5. Permitting:
a. Complete/submit Notice of Intent Form (NOI‐07) of the Construction Dewatering General Permit
(MTG070000) to Montana DEQ. The purpose of this form is to notify MDEQ of the proposed
discharge of water from pumping tests, however effect of the permit really applies only to
discharge of produced water to a receiving surface water body.
Engineer Deliverables:
1. Engineering drawings and specifications for the test well that are sufficient for a drilling contractor
to bid the project and utilize for drilling/development of the test well.
Task 3.6 Test Well ‐ Drilling
Objective:
Install two test wells within the boundaries of the Sports Park property to evaluate lithology, aquifer
thickness, and preliminary groundwater yield and water quality. Engineer to provide construction services
during test well drilling.
NOTE: Obtain available test data and well logs from the new high school’s geothermal system.
178
City of Bozeman, Montana 10
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
Engineer Services:
Contractor Procurement
Prepare bid package to be distributed to contractors. Bid package to include:
Coordinate and lead a pre‐bid conference/field review of the project. Record meeting notes; record
all questions and requests for additional information, and issue copies of the meeting notes.
As necessary, prepare and issue Addenda to the Contract Documents.
Recommend award of a contract for construction of the project by providing the following services:
1. Tabulate the bids received after reviewing them for responsiveness.
2. Determine by reasonable investigation, the known financial condition and performance history of
the low bidder and second low bidder.
3. Prepare a letter documenting the bid review and including a recommendation for award of the
contract for construction.
4. Prepare and transmit Notice of Award and Notice to Proceed.
Construction Administration
Coordinate and lead Pre‐Construction conference with contractor. Establish a working relationship
between the parties; discuss schedule, work activities, submittals, payment processing, and record
keeping.
Review submittals from the contractor.
Maintain file for correspondence, meeting notes, work change directives, and field orders.
Review and approve contractor pay applications. Recommend modifications as appropriate.
Notify COB of potential changes to scope or schedule.
Field Observation and Quality Assurance
Oversee test well drilling, including documentation of lithology encountered during drilling and the
depth/character of water‐bearing zones encountered.
Observe contractor’s work on a regular basis. Prepare reports to COB informing them of work status.
Provide clarifications, interpretations and Field Orders (as needed) for efficient completion of the work.
Task 3.7 Test Well – Aquifer Testing and Analysis
Objective:
Complete aquifer test and monitoring of the well field to determine reliable yields and drawdown effects
in vicinity of the wells.
Engineer Services:
The testing and monitoring program will contain the following important components:
Perform a constant‐rate aquifer test of the more productive of the two test wells, while monitoring
drawdown in both the pumping well and the other test well.
179
City of Bozeman, Montana 11
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
Evaluate aquifer response in existing nearby wells and/or within a localized network of installed
groundwater monitoring wells.
Conduct surface water flow monitoring, as necessary, to satisfy DNRC aquifer testing requirements.
Pressure transducers with dataloggers and analog pressure gages will be used in conjunction with flow
meters to collect accurate data during the tests and during recovery periods. On‐site supervision protocols
will be prepared to ensure that tests are adequately monitored to collect accurate, defensible data that
can be used by COB to make go‐forward decisions.
Test results will be analyzed to determine aquifer characteristics within the area of influence of the well
field including transmissivity, storativity, specific capacity, boundary conditions, and safe yield. We will
also review impacts to other groundwater or surface‐water users that may result from long‐term
groundwater production. Predictive analysis will be conducted to estimate the zone of influence at 1, 5,
10, and 20 years into the future under maximum safe yield and design discharge (if different). Analytical
methods, assumptions used in these calculations, and the results will be presented in a final report.
Aquifer test results will be incorporated in the project groundwater model (described in Task 3.9).
Task 3.8 Water Quality Testing and Analysis
Objective:
Evaluate water quality produced from the well field to determine suitability as a public water supply and
potential water treatment methods that may be required.
Engineer Services:
Collect water samples during the pump testing program for lab analyses. Evaluate biological and chemical
character of groundwater within the source and recharge areas of selected wells through review of
available water quality data. Anticipated sources for water quality data include: COB reports; MT‐DNRC;
Montana Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ); MBMG; Gallatin Local Water Quality District (GLWQD);
and other locally available data sources.
Water samples collected from the wells will be analyzed by an EPA‐certified commercial laboratory for
standard drinking water quality parameters associated with a public water supply. Data will be reviewed
to assess any need for water treatment to mitigate existing water quality impairment (Note: Include Jill
Miller, COB Assistant Water Treatment Plant Superintendent, in data review and discussion). The
groundwater source will be evaluated for its suitability as a public water supply per DEQ rules/regulations.
Task 3.9 Groundwater Model Refinements
Objective:
Add detail to the Focus Area groundwater flow model such that supply well pumping simulations and
mitigation strategies can be effectively modeled in support of a Beneficial Use Permit Application and
associated mitigation plan.
180
City of Bozeman, Montana 12
Groundwater Investigation – Phase 3
Scope of Services
Engineer Services:
The existing Focus Area groundwater model provides a reasonable prediction of potential well pumping
impacts and the effectiveness of mitigation scenarios. However, it is likely the DNRC will require some
additional detail in support of a Beneficial Use Application.
Pending the results of the DNRC coordination and meetings (Task 3.4) we anticipate the following
additional refinements will be necessary:
Irrigation ditches/canals: Revise current model where irrigation channels all have common
specifications to include more ditch‐specific information (where available) including elevation,
size, and period of use;
Streams: Potentially add additional relevant streams to model within proposed well zone of
influence based on existing surface water rights;
Layering/geology: Update as necessary based on test well installation;
Model calibration: Calibrate to test well pumping data; and
Existing wells with water rights: Add to model for impact evaluation.
Following refinement, the model will be recalibrated, which will include simulating the test well pumping
test, and to evaluate potential pumping impacts and mitigation scenarios.
Task 3.10 Documentation / Reporting
Objective:
Document the results of Tasks 3.1 through 3.9 and present conclusions regarding the suitability of the
test well locations with respect to physical groundwater availability and the feasibility of mitigating the
effects of proposed groundwater pumping.
Engineer Services:
Complete a comprehensive, bound report that includes all text, figures, tables, appendices and
documentation of analyses used to present a sound basis for the conclusions and recommendations
provided. The report will discuss findings of the well field testing and recommendations for final siting and
production well development and include documentation of model refinements and simulation results.
The report will also be furnished electronically in a searchable PDF format.
Engineer Deliverables:
1. Provide three (3) bound hard copies of the report, and one (1) electronic copy in searchable PDF
format. Provide all hydrogeologic modeling files developed during the project.
3. ESTIMATED COST OF THE WORK
The total estimated cost for this Scope of Services is $ 190,100.00. A detailed cost summary for each task
is provided under separate cover as Exhibit B to the Professional Services Agreement.
181
EXHIBIT B - COST SUMMARY
(TO AMENDMENT NO. 2 OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF BOZEMAN AND RESPEC FOR GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION)
182
Exhibit B - PSA Amendment No. 2Cost SummaryCOST SUMMARYDate2/26/2018(PSA Amendment No. 2)Project TitleCity of Bozeman - Groundwater InvestigationFirm NameRESPEC / NewFieldsRESPEC Labor CostsNameProject Role 2018 Rate/Hr HrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHours CostA. LeakPrincipal-in-Charge $170.0012$2,040 2$34012$2,0406$1,0204$6802 $340 2 $340 0 $0 2$340 2 $34044 $7,480M. RotarProject Manager $150.0030$4,500 8$1,20080$12,00016$2,40012$1,80016 $2,400 16 $2,400 16 $2,400 8$1,200 20 $3,000222 $33,300W. DreyerProject Engineer II$135.0024$3,240 32$4,32016$2,1600$016$2,16024 $3,240 30 $4,050 20 $2,700 0$0 10 $1,350172 $23,220M. JohnsonProject Engineer I $115.000$0 0$00$00$00$00 $0 10 $1,150 8 $920 0$0 0 $018 $2,070T. BennEngineer IV $105.0040$4,200 40$4,200100$10,50036$3,78024$2,52048 $5,040 32 $3,360 20 $2,100 20$2,100 40 $4,200400 $42,000E. EllwoodEngineer I / CAD Technician $80.0024$1,920 16$1,2800$00$012$9600 $0 8 $640 8 $640 0$0 0 $068 $5,440J. WilbanksAdministrative Asst. $65.00 2 $130 2$1304$2600$02$1300 $0 2 $130 4 $260 0 $0 16 $1,040 32 $2,080132 $16,030 100$11,470212 $26,960 58 $7,200 70 $8,250 90 $11,020 100 $12,070 76 $9,020 30 $3,640 88$9,930 956 $115,590Percent of RESPEC Labor Total 13.87% 9.92% 23.32% 6.23% 7.14% 9.53% 10.44% 7.80% 3.15% 8.59%NewFields Labor CostsNameProject Role 2018 Rate/Hr HrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCostHrCost Hr CostHours CostC. StringerAsst. PM / Hydrogeologist$145.00 4 $580 4 $580 20 $2,900 16 $2,320 4 $580 2 $290 2 $290 4 $580 8 $1,160 4 $580 68 $9,860A. PerineAsst. PM / Hydrogeologist$130.00 16 $2,080 12 $1,560 64 $8,320 20 $2,600 16 $2,080 12 $1,560 12 $1,56012 $1,560 32 $4,160 10 $1,300 206 $26,780G. AndresHydrogeologist$145.00 4 $580 4 $580 20 $2,900 6 $870 0 $0 0 $0 2 $290 0 $0 120 $17,400 12 $1,740 168 $24,360S. FoxGIS Analyst$100.00 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0.00 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $00 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0NewFields Labor Subtotal 24 $3,240 20 $2,720 104 $14,120 42 $5,790 20 $2,660 14 $1,850 16 $2,140 16 $2,140 160 $22,720 26 $3,620 442 $61,000Percent of NewFields Labor Total 5.31% 4.46% 23.15% 9.49% 4.36% 3.03% 3.51% 3.51% 37.25% 5.93%SUBTOTAL LABOR 156 $19,270 120 $14,190 316 $41,080 100 $12,990 90 $10,910104 $12,870 116 $14,210 92 $11,160 190 $26,360 114 $13,550 1,398 $176,590Percent of Labor Total 10.91% 8.04% 23.26% 7.36% 6.18% 7.29% 8.05% 6.32% 14.93% 7.67%Other Direct CostsItem 2018 Rate Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost UnitsCost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units CostReproductionB&W Copies $0.10 200 $20.00 100 $10.00 500 $50.00 200 $20.00 200 $20.00 50 $5.00 100 $10.00 200 $20.00 200 $20.00 1,000 $100.00 2,750 $275Color (8.5 x 11) $1.50 20 $30.00 20 $30.00 50 $75.00 20 $30.00 20 $30.00 10$15.00 20 $30.00 20 $30.00 100 $150.00 50 $75.00 330 $495Color (11 X 17) $2.50 20 $50.00 20 $50.00 50 $125.00 10 $25.00 20 $50.00 10$25.00 20 $50.00 20 $50.00 50 $125.00 50 $125.00 270 $675Color Plots $5.00 20 $100.00 10 $50.00 20 $100.00 10 $50.00 10 $50.00 0 $0.00 10 $50.00 20 $100.00 10 $50.00 20 $100.00 130 $650Postage $25.00 0 $0.00 2 $50.00 0 $0.00 2 $50.00 2 $50.00 0 $0.00 2 $50.00 2 $50.00 2 $50.00 2 $50.00 14 $350Mileage $0.535 420 $224.70 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1000 $535.00 0 $0.00 450 $240.75 0$0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1,870 $1,000Per diem - hotel$99.00 2 $198.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 $99.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.000 $0.00 3 $297Per diem - meals $64.00 4 $256.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 2 $128.00 0 $0.00 4 $256.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 10 $640Airfare$600.00 1 $600.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 $600.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 2 $1,200Rental car - per day$65.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 2 $130.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0$0.00 2 $130Survey $500.00 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 $1,000.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 2 $1,000Lab workVaries 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 $5,000.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 $5,000Historic aerialsVaries 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0Misc. supplies$100.00 2 $200.00 2 $200.00 0 $0.00 1 $100.00 2 $200.00 5 $500.00 4 $400.00 2 $200.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 18 $1,800SUBTOTAL ODC's $1,679 $390 $350 $1,767 $1,400 $1,042 $590 $5,450 $395 $450 $13,5127.1% ODC % of Project TotalWORK TASK TOTALS$20,949 $14,580 $41,430 $14,757 $12,310 $13,912 $14,800 $16,610 $26,755$14,000 $190,102Task Percent of Total Project Cost 11.02% 7.67% 21.79% 7.76% 6.48% 7.32% 7.79% 8.74% 14.07% 7.36% GRAND TOTAL = $190,100.00TOTALSRESPEC Labor SubtotalTask 3.1: Well Siting Feasibility Evaluation and Alternatives AnalysisTask 3.2: Prelim. Source Water Delin. Assess. & Source Water Protection PlanTask 3.5: Test Well Design/PermittingTask 3.6: Test Well Drilling - Construction ServicesPHASE 3: Well Siting Feasibility and Test Well Design, Permitting and Monitoring ProgramTask 3.7: Test Well - Aquifer Testing and AnalysisTask 3.8: Water Quality Testing / AnalysisTask 3.9: Groundwater Model RefinementsTask 3.10: Documentation / ReportngTask 3.3: Mitigation Options / Water Rights EvaluationsTask 3.4: Coordination / Meetings with DNRCCity of Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Investigation Phase 31February 2018183