Loading...
IGA; several entities; Rocky Mountain Greenway; Exp 12/31/2017 Contract Tracking IGA > Thank You , Page 1 of 2 OULDER THE CITY ATTORNEY N 0 8 2017 f CONDITIONAL Document Routing Cover Sheet Please print and attach to your document. ay You can view the status of your contract using the Contract Tracking Status Page. CJ'I Qn Routing Number 20170607-3080 Originating Dept Open Space/Mtn Parks Routing Contact Person Lauren Kilcoyne Phone Number 720-564-2015 Project Manager/ Contract Mark Gershman Email gershmanm@bouldercolorado.gov Administrator Counter Parties Multiple Contract Title /Type Rocky Mountain Greenway IGA Number Description IGA between City of Boulder,County of Boulder, City and County of Broomfield, City of Arvada, City of westmins r,and County of Jefferson regarding evaluation and f- u�of a Rocky Mountain Greenway Trail, Action Items Date Note (1) ' 'fii Y NYVyr'y'. v /i (Z) 1 1 (3) Expiration Date 12/31/2017 Amount ) 9. M, • Dept. Head Signature v NOTE;Originating Department: Identif with a check mark all areas document needs to be routed. t • Purchasing7V �C�l.L • Budget �l '&tL Q_4 GL'Gt7tA u."� L • Sales Tax ru ctk � file , 11 RFP r- ')l:�l•`l a'k LX City Manager , e �ti e`'K C -�7S (. "'k �/C_--yvfUzL Central Records nN�� r�Jl%� A link to the electronic copy of the document(s)will arrive via e-mail tie-ye-mail addresses on the routing form https://work.bouldercolorado.gov/ContraetTracking/servlet/Controller 6/7/2017 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR EVALUATION AND FUNDING OF A ROCKY MOUNTAIN GREENWAY TRAIL RADIONUCLIDE SOIL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ("IGA"), dated for reference purposes this 12 day of U U qu, ' 2017, is by and between the City of Boulder, a home-rule municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado ("City of Boulder"), County of Boulder, a body politic and corporate and political subdivision of the State of Colorado ("Boulder County"), City and County of Broomfield, a Colorado municipality and county ("Broomfield"), City of Arvada, a home-rule municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado ("Arvada"), City of Westminster, a home-rule municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado ("Westminster"), and County of Jefferson, a body politic and corporate and political subdivision of the State of Colorado ("Jefferson County"). The above parties may be individually referred to herein as a "Party" and collectively as the"Parties." RECITALS A. Section 18(2)(a) of Article XIV of the Colorado Constitution and C.R.S. §§ 29-1-201, et seg., and 29-20-105 authorize and encourage governments to cooperate with each other for purposes of planning and development and to provide for the joint exercise of functions and services to which each is individually authorized. B. The governing board of each Party has adopted a resolution supporting, or conditionally supporting, Jefferson County's submission of an application for a Federal Lands Access Program Grant ("FLAP Grant") to fund a project ("Project") for the design and construction of grade-separated trail crossings entering the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge. C. Jefferson County expended $40,000.00 to retain Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. to prepare the FLAP Grant application ("Application Costs"). D. Jefferson County's FLAP Grant application was one of ten applications selected by the Colorado FLAP Programming Decisions Committee for consideration of Colorado FLAP funding. E. Jefferson County will provide, or has provided, $10,000.00 ("Scoping Costs") to the FHWA to develop a scoping summary, scoping report, and preliminary estimate for design, construction, and construction engineering to verify the scope and cost of the Project. F. The Parties' support of the Project is contingent on a radionuclide soil sampling and analysis plan ("SAP"), SAP sampling results, and SAP final report that independently verify the conclusions of the CERCLA cleanup efforts that the levels of Americium, Plutonium, Uranium, and their related isotopes at the Project sites are in a state protective I of human health and the environment. G. Jefferson County will issue, or has issued, a Request for Proposals ("RFP") for the design of the SAP and preparation of a final SAP and report. The scope of work ("SOW") for the contract ("SAP Contract") Jefferson County will enter into for this work is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference. As set forth in the SOW, the Parties will be provided the opportunity to review and comment on the draft SAP. H. The Parties desire to enter into this IGA to address the Parties' participation in the RFP selection process,joint review of the SAP, and funding of the SAP Contract. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, promises, covenants, and undertakings hereinafter set forth, the Parties agree as follows: 1. RECITALS. The Recitals set forth above are incorporated into and made a part of this IGA. 2. REQUISITION PROCESS. Following approval by its Board of County Commissioners, Jefferson County shall enter into the SAP Contract with the selected consultant ("Consultant"). It is anticipated the SAP Contract price ("Contract Price") will not exceed $100,000.00; however, the final SAP Contract Price will not be determined until the Consultant is selected and the SAP Contract is executed. Upon its approval of the Consultant's work Jefferson County shall compensate the Consultant in accordance with the terms of the SAP Contract. 3. REVIEW OF PROPOSALS AND SAP. Jefferson County shall consult with and provide each Party the opportunity to evaluate, discuss and rank the proposals submitted in response to the RFP. In addition, Jefferson County shall distribute the draft SAP to the other Parties and provide each Party the opportunity to discuss and evaluate the draft SAP. Each Party may request that the Consultant present the findings and conclusions of the final SAP to its governing board. 4. FUNDING CONTRIBUTION. a. Within 30 days of receipt of an invoice from Jefferson County, each Party shall reimburse Jefferson County a percentage of the Contract Price as set forth below: i. City of Boulder: 10% ii. Boulder County: 10% iii. Broomfield: 12.5% iv. Westminster: 22.5% v. Arvada: 22.5% 2 b. As a result of these contributions, Jefferson County's final share of the Contract Price is 22.5%. Provided the FLAP Grant is awarded, in a later Intergovernmental Agreement among the Parties, Jefferson County shall be reimbursed for its Application Costs and Scoping Costs from the FLAP Grant proceeds and based on the same reimbursement ratios as set forth in Paragraph 4.a. above.. 5. NOTICES. Communications pertaining to this IGA shall be directed to each Party as follows: City of Boulder County of Boulder Mark Gershman,Planning Supervisor Megan Davis, Policy Analyst City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks Boulder County PO Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306 5201 St Vrain Rd, Longmont, CO 80503 Phone:720-213-6390 Phone: 303-441-3562 Email:gershmanm@bouldercolorado.gov Email: mdavis@bouldercounty.org Broomfield Arvada Kristan Pritz, Director of Open Space Sarah Washburn, Senor Landscape Arch. City and County of Broomfield City of Arvada One DesCombes Drive 8101 Ralston Road Phone: 303-438-3665 Phone: (720) 898-7391 Email: kpritz@broomfield.org Email: sashburn@arvada.org Westminster Jefferson County Heather Cronenberg Open Space Superintendent Andrew Valdez, Open Space Planner City of Westminster 700 Jefferson County Parkway 4800 West 92nd Avenue Golden, CO 80401 Phone: 303.658.2142 Phone: 303-271-5983 Email: hcronenb@CityofWestminster.us Email: avaldez@jeffco.us 6. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This IGA is intended as the complete integration of all understandings among the Parties. No prior resolution, and no prior or contemporaneous addition, deletion, or other amendment to this IGA shall have any force or effect, unless embodied herein in writing. No subsequent amendment shall have any force or effect unless contained in a written agreement executed by the Parties. 7. ENFORCEMENT. The enforcement of this IGA and all rights of action relating to such enforcement, are reserved to the Parties. 8. NO ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITIES. By entering into and performing under this IGA no Party is assuming any liability for the acts or omissions of any other Party or third parties. 9. GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY. Nothing contained in this IGA shall give or allow any claim or right of action by any other third person, nor shall anything contained in this 3 IGA be construed as a waiver of any provision of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. §§ 24-10-101, et. seq., as amended. The Parties intend that any person or entity other than the Parties be deemed an incidental beneficiary only. 10. OFFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT. No elected or employed member of any Party shall be paid or receive, directly or indirectly, any share or part of this IGA or any benefit that may arise therefrom. 11. NON-APPROPRIATION. This IGA shall not be interpreted to impose a multi-year obligation on the Parties. Financial commitments of the Parties under this IGA payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for this IGA being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available by a Party. If funds for this IGA are not budgeted and appropriated in any year subsequent to the fiscal year of execution of this IGA, a Party may immediately terminate its participation in this IGA by giving the other Parties notice of such non-appropriation. 12. NO EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP. By entering into and performing under this IGA no Party is acting as an agent, servant or employee of any other Party. 13. EXECUTION BY COUNTERPARTS; ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES. This IGA may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and shall constitute one and the same instrument. The Parties approve the use of electronic signatures for execution of this IGA. Only the following two forms of electronic signatures shall bind the Parties: (1) Electronic or facsimile delivery of a fully executed copy of a signature page; or (2) The image of the signature of an authorized signer inserted onto PDF format documents. All use of electronic signatures shall be governed by the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, C.R.S. §24-71.3-101 through §24-71.3-121. 14. EFFECTIVE DATE. The Effective Date of this IGA is the date on which it has been fully executed by the Parties. 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this instrument to be duly executed. CITY OF BOULDER By:CT-- w 5 c y Manager Date: a az, 2 D l� ATTEST: By: �— Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: .� Cit Attorney COUNTY OF BOULDER By: Chair Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By. County Attorney s CITY AND COUNTY OF BROOMFIELD By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: CITY OF ARVADA By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: CITY OF WESTMINSTER By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: 6 COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, a body corporate and politic By: Libby Szabo, Chairman Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Steven L. Snyder Assistant County Attorney 7 Exhibit A INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND In May of 2016, Jefferson County Open Space (JCOS) along with the City and County of Broomfield, City of Arvada, City of Westminster, Boulder County and City of Boulder (collectively referred to as the `Partner Group') submitted a Federal Lands Access Program (or FLAP, a funding source administered by the Federal Highway Administration or FHWA) grant to construct two grade separated trail crossings with the intent of linking planned trail improvements at Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge)with the existing trail infrastructure adjacent to the Refuge (see map). This project is part of the broader initiative known as the Rocky Mountain Greenway (RMG), a regional trails project that aims to connect the four Front Range federal lands (Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge, Two Ponds National Wildlife Refuge, Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge and Rocky Mountain National Park) to each other via a grade-separated, multi-use path. Support for this project among the six partners was contingent upon additional soil sampling confirming the safety of the site for construction activities and public usage (see attached resolutions). In August of 2016, FHWA notified Jefferson County of approved funding status (https://fIh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/flap/co/) and requested that the six partners satisfy their respective jurisdiction's requirement for soil sampling and testing before project scoping, design and construction begin. This statement of work is to solicit proposals consultants specialized in radionuclide analysis to develop the Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) for this effort. The project will be broken into two phases: Phase I (design of a radionuclide soil Sampling and Analysis Plan) and Phase II (execution of final SAP and report). PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK Each member of the Partner Group will designate a single point of contact for the winning Offeror to coordinate with. PHASE I: Design of a Radionuclide Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) The following provides the requested elements (or scope) of the SAP. Element 1: Independent Confirmatory Analysis This site and surrounding area has been studied extensively by numerous federal, state and independent agencies, notably Kaiser-Hill for US Department of Energy the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment(See reference footnotes below). Sampling protocols have produced 1.3M soil data points in over 7,000 surface soil sample locations and over 15,000 subsurface soil samples and have determined that the Peripheral Operable Unit(or OU3, coincident of the Refuge) is currently in a state protective of human health and environment and requires no remedial action .This element of the scope will require a review and report of this work, specifically regarding improvements that can be made to the methodologies used for sampling and analysis, to date. The outcome of this effort is intended to be the independent validation of the conclusions in the US Department of Energy Kaiser-Hill study, the US Fish and Wildlife Service Pre-acquisition Study and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment/Chem-Risk study, specifically that the sites proposed in the FLAP grant are within the legal and regulatory guidelines for construction activities and public usage related to the proposed facilities and structures. Risk thresholds will be consistent with current state and federal guidance. Element 2: Contaminants of Concern The full panel of radionuclides known to be or have been detected at the Peripheral Operable Unit (OU3), namely Americium, Plutonium, Uranium (and their related isotopes) are the contaminants of concern (COCs) for this project and will be the subject of the SAP. The SAP will identify the standards that will be applied to the analytical results, and identify the corrective actions and responsible party if a result is above standards. Element 3: Site Specific The project location(s) of the SAP will be determined in consultation with the partner group and, in general, will be consistent with areas around the crossing locations identified in the FLAP application and presented in the Rocky Mountain Greenway Feasibility Study . The sampling is anticipated to take place both on federal land as well as partner group jurisdictional lands and will be done with authorization from the respective landowner. A map of the proposed trail alignment and basis for sample locations will be provided in the SAP. Element 4: Media Specific The media for the SAP will be limited to surface and sub-surface soil with depths and intensities relevant to the proposed construction disturbance and consistent with the methodology in the Industrial Area and Buffer Zone Sampling and Analysis Plan (IABZSAP) for surface and sub- surface soil sampling (sections 4.9.2 and 4.9.3). Element 5: Methodology Consistency Methodology for the SAP will be consistent with the methodologies used in the Industrial Area and Buffer Zone Sampling and Analysis Plan and will include justification and rationale for the methodologies used if the methodologies differfrom the IABZSAP(section 4.2,table 3—Sampling Decision Matrix). The SAP will also include all conditions, assumptions and caveats for the results of the analysis. Element 6: Quality Assurance (QA) Requirements QA requirements will be defined in the SAP and will be consistent with applicable standards as defined by DOE and EPA. Element 7: Investigation into Applicability of Land Development Regulations (LDR's) and other Relevant Permitting Requirements The consultant will investigate the applicability of the subject jurisdiction's land development regulations (and other pertinent regulations including the National Historic Preservation Act) as they pertain to this project and will make recommendations for securing required permits and clearances. Consultant Duties and Deliverables: • This element of the scope will require a review and report of previous sampling and analysis done at the project location, specifically regarding improvements that can be made to the methodologies used for sampling and analysis, to date. • Draft SAP for review by the Partner Group. Background above. • Ongoing consultation with the partner group as the draft is reviewed and commented upon by the public. • If requested, public presentation(s) and/or testimony to elected boards and commissions as to approach and methodology rationale for the SAP. The consultant will be expected to justify the plan's approach to the public. • Revisions to draft SAP. • Final SAP. PHASE It: Execution of Final SAP and Report Once the final SAP is developed, the consultant will execute the protocol as outlined. This requires field work and the physical delivery of the samples to an EPA approved laboratory. Split samples of all the extracted material will be stored for potential further verification. The final report will provide results of the analysis that will independently validate the conclusions of the CERCLA cleanup efforts that the sites identified in the FLAP grant are in a state protective of human health and environment, The report will also include: • Summary of exposure risks to visitors • Summary of applicable laws and regulations as they pertain to this project • Summary of potential pathways for transport and fate of radionuclides in the effective environment(eg: bioturbation, natural disasters, wind, etc.)and their likeliness of changing the findings of the sampling and analysis • Methodology rationale • Summary of all caveats, qualifications and exceptions