R-86-895 - 7/10/1986ATTEST:
9 N 21/row NE LAND, City Secretary
RESOLUTION NO. "
WHEREAS, the City of Round Rock wishes to have a Feasibility Study
done for the Regional Water Facilities; and
WHEREAS, professional engineering services are required in connection
with said Study; and
WHEREAS, Haynie & Kallman, Inc., submitted a proposed letter agreement
to provide the required engineering services; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to enter into said agreement with
Haynie & Kallman, Inc., Now Therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROUND ROCK, TEXAS
That the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute on
behalf of the City of Round Rock a letter agreement for engineering
services with Haynie & Kallman, Inc., for a Feasibility Study performed
in conjunction with the Regional Water Facilities, a copy of said letter
agreement being attached hereto and incorporated herein for all purposes.
RESOLVED this 10th day of July, 1986.
MIKE ROBINSON, Mayor
City of Round Rock, Texas
0 U
otte,6/1-e-,;_ ge.ti-e-2d
d)
Cedar Park, Leander, High Gabriel and SCB Corporation have declined
participation in the Stillhouse Hollow Regional Water System as it was
originally contemplated. They will not be involved in the BRA Raw Water
Line Contract or future treatment plant facilities with Georgetown,
Round Rock, and Jonah Water Supply Corporation. Informal discussions with
the City of Georgetown representatives indicate a willingness to jointly
investigate water resource and facilities to maximize the effectiveness of
Georgetown and Round Rock systems and to forestall construction of the
raw water line as long as possible.
Implementation of the proposed study is conditioned upon joint
acceptance by the two cities. Costs would be Georgetown $20,000, Round
Rock $20,000 and Texas Water Development Board Grant $40,000.
The regional water subcommittee and staff recommend approval.
DATE: July 8, 1986
SUBJECT: Council Agenda, July 10, 1986
ITEM: 9H - Consider a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a letter
agreement with Haynie & Kallman, Inc. for a Feasibility Study
for Regional Water Facilities.
o 5k
NO.
COPIES
REVISION
DATE
DESCRIPTON
3
Proposal for a Feasibility Study for Regional Water
Facilities hatweQn the Cities of Georgetown and Round Rock
TRANSMITTAL
TO: City of Round Rock
214 E. Main St.
Round Rock, TX 78664
ATTN. Mr. Jack Harzke
WE ARE SENDING YOU THE FOLLOWING:
ATTACHED
— COPY OF LETTER
— SUBMITTAL DATA
REMARKS:
Haynie E Kallman, Inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS M
1106 SOUTH MAYS
ROUND ROCK. TEXAS 78664
(512) 255 -7861
— SPECIFICATIONS
_...ORIGINAL DRAWING
— PRINTS
Copies to: From:
DATE•
July 2, 1986
PROJECT- Reginnal Water Facilities
PROJECT NO. 1nn7 -1533
VIA:
Courier
- FIELD NOTES
— OTHER
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW:
For Your Files _ For Approval _ For Corrections
X As Requested — Approval as Noted _ For Distribution
For Review and Comment Approval as Submitted _ Other
Scott Linden, P.E.
Haynie & Hallman, Inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
July 1, 1986
Mayor Jim Colbert
City of Georgetown
P. O. Box 409
Georgetown, TX 78627 -0409
RE: Feasibility Study for Regional Water Facilities
Dear Gentlemen:
Haynie & Kallman, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal for
conducting a feasibility study for regional water facilities
to be used by your two communities. After your review of
this draft proposal, we would be available to meet with you
and discuss any comments or suggestions which you or your
staff may have.
Our firm's combination of local experience, planning and
engineering will assure a quality study product in this
important joint use planning effort.
We appreciate this opportunity to present this study proposal
for your consideration.
Upon receipt of your signed authorization, we will proceed
immediately with preparation of the grant application.
Sincerely,
HAYNI .& LLMAN, INC.
/cla
Enclosure
Kallman, P.E., R.P.S.
1106 Soutb Mays • Ruuud Rock, Texas 78664 • (512) 255.7861
Mayor Mike Robinson
City of Round Rock
214 E. Main Street
Round Rock, TX 78664
CIVIL ENGINEERING • CONSULTANTS • MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING
ACCEPTED BY: ACCEPTED BY:
CITY OF GEORGETOWN CITY OF ROUND ROCK
Page 2
July 1, 1986
Feasibility Study for
Regional Water Facilities
Mayor Jim Colbert Mayor Mike Robinson
Date
ATTEST:
Date
ATTEST:
Haynie & Kaltman Inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
PROPOSAL FOR
A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR
REGIONAL WATER FACILITIES
BETWEEN THE CITIES OF
GEORGETOWN AND ROUND ROCK
June, 1986
Project No. 1002 -1533
Prepared by:
Haynie & Kaltman. Inc.
Consulting Engineers
1106 South Mays
Round Rock, Texas 78664
(512) 255 -7861
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2.0 PURPOSE 3
3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 4
3.1 TASK 1 - INVESTIGATION OF COMPLETED
WATER STUDIES AND DATA FROM BOTH
COMMUNITIES 4
3.2 TASK 2 - APPLICATION FOR TEXAS WATER
DEVELOPMENT BOARD GRANT ASSISTANCE
3.3 TASK 3 - FORECASTING WATER NEEDS OF
GEORGETOWN AND ROUND ROCK
3.4 TASK 4 - DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES FOR THE
BEST UTILIZATION OF GROUND AND SURFACE
WATER AND THE REQUIRED TREATMENT AND
DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES 6
3.5 TASK 5 - CONSERVATION MEASURES 7
3.6 TASK 6 - FINANCING ALTERNATIVES 7
3.7 TASK 7 - PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES 8
3.8 TASK 8 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTING 8
4.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 9
FIGURE 4 -1 - PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART 10
5.0 SCHEDULING 11
FIGURE 5 -1 - PROJECT SCHEDULING 12
6.0 ESTIMATED COSTS 13
APPENDIX
APPENDIX A - RESUMES
APPENDIX B - TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD
APPLICATION OUTLINE
REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER PLANNING
APPENDIX C - TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD
RESEARCH AND PLANNING FUND
i
5
5
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Cities of Georgetown and Round Rock have simi-
lar water situations. Both communities rely heavily on the
Edwards Aquifer. Round Rock has been utilizing Lake George-
town for its surface water needs since 1982 and Georgetown
has begun construction on its surface water treatment plant.
The cities have also contracted for Lake Stillhouse Hollow
water rights located some 30 miles north of Lake Georgetown
in Bell County. Although Round Rock and Georgetown are both
dependent on the same sources of water, the timing of the
actual use of these water supplies could be quite different.
Since both cities have contracted for Stillhouse
Hollow water, it is assumed that both cities would partici-
pate in the construction of the raw water transmission main
to Lake Stillhouse Hollow. In a recent study, this line was
estimated to cost $19,000,000.00 and could be needed as early
as 1990, depending on the management by the cities of their
current water resources. Through cooperative regional
efforts of optimizing water resources and facilities, the
construction of this major line might be postponed a few
years later than 1990. The actions of one city could have a
significant fiscal impact on the other. The cities must
jointly manage their water resources in order to delay the
Stillhouse Hollow transmission main as long as possible and
thereby avoid unnecessary early capital expenditures.
-1-
In order to accomplish this task, an investigation
is required to study potential alternatives for joint use of
existing facilities and other measures which could further
delay the construction and use of the transmission main from
Lake Stillhouse Hollow. This study will develop alternatives
so that the communities can make the most efficient use of
their existing facilities.
Haynie & Kallman, Inc. has contacted the staff of
the Texas Water Development Board about potential grant
assistance for the study and has received optimistic indica-
tions from them. With the large amount of funds each commun-
ity will be investing in their future water system improve-
ments, a study such as this can be used by the cities as a
tool for investing capital facility funds in the most effec-
tive manner.
-2-
2.0 PURPOSE
Haynie & Kallman, Inc. proposes to conduct a study
that will generate a cooperative plan on how to prolong the
use of current ground and surface water supplies and also
maximize water treatment capacity. Alternatives such as
treatment of existing ground water facilities and sharing of
plant capacity will be thoroughly addressed. A portion of
the study will also include water conservation measures and
how they can be implemented.
-3-
3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES
The proposed work would be accomplished by means of
the following tasks.
3.1 TASK 1 - INVESTIGATION OF COMPLETED WATER STUDIES
AND DATA FROM BOTH COMMUNITIES
Both cities have recently funded studies to not
only expand their water systems, but also investigate the
impact on existing ground water resources and plan for future
growth and development.
So as not to duplicate existing studies, but rather
to assimilate existing information, a review of existing
studies is required to coordinate the recommendations of this
new study.
Both cities are presently constructing surface
water treatment plants. Since revenues are required from the
sale of water to retire the debt associated with this con-
struction, a cooperative effort would seem to make economic
sense. So that rational alternatives can be investigated, a
complete inventory of existing facilities needs to be accom-
plished so costs of additional construction for various
alternatives can be compared.
This task will include field as well as office
investigation of existing facilities and a determination as
to how well the facilities are functioning.
-4-
3.2 TASK 2 - APPLICATION FOR TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT
BOARD GRANT ASSISTANCE
Once the required information is gathered to inven-
tory each water system, an application for grant assistance
will be prepared. Appendix B includes the application out-
line. This application will then be approved by each city so
that the application can be submitted for review by the
State.
3.3 TASK 3 - FORECAST WATER NEEDS OF GEORGETOWN AND
ROUND ROCK
Population projections for both cities will be
reviewed. It is anticipated that new population projections
will be required. The new projections will be done for both
cities' service areas and will encompass a 10 -year period.
An historic trend method and a market demand method will be
used to project the population. High, low and most likely
population curves will be constructed for both cities.
Water consumption by classes of customers such as
industrial, commercial and residential will be investigated
in order to determine the impact that the individual classes
of customers have on each cities' water system and to deter-
mine the focus the conservation plan must have. The classes
of customers investigation will detail how much water is con-
sumed by each customer class and the yearly cycle of consump-
tion. This information will be critical to the formulation
of the water conservation plan.
-5-
Information concerning per capita water consumption
will be gathered and water accountability percentages will be
derived. This information will be critical to water demand
forecasting. If accountability is low due to system loss or
accounting practices, methods to increase accountability will
be recommended.
Water forecasts will be done on a yearly basis and
will cover 10 years. Forecasts will be tied to the high, low
and recommended population curves and explicit assumptions on
industrial and commercial water use will be made.
3.4 TASK 4 - DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES FOR THE BEST UTILIZA-
TION OF GROUND AND SURFACE WATER AND THE REQUIRED
TREATMENT AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES
After grant approval, Haynie & Kallman, Inc. and
both cities' staffs will conduct a project meeting to outline
the various alternatives to be investigated. In order to
evaluate the alternatives, computer water modeling will be
required to simulate actual conditions. The University of
Kentucky water model will be used so that affected water dis-
tribution lines can be modeled and a plan developed of how
best to integrate them.
William F. Guyton & Associates has been selected to
analyze ground water alternatives and ground water quality
impacts.
-6-
3.5 TASK 5 - CONSERVATION MEASURES
This task will consist of various conservation sce-
narios and their expected effect upon both household and com-
mercial water consumption and wastewater discharge. The
study will encompass alternatives ranging from a no conserva-
tion scenario to an advanced conservation scenario realizing
significant water savings. A drought water management plan
will also be formulated.
The financial impact of conservation measures on
the cities' utility fund will be presented.
This study will recommend the most feasible conser-
vation approach given proven technology in use today and
technology that can meet current regulatory standards for
utility design. Wastewater reuse will be addressed where
practical.
3.6 TASK 6 - FINANCING ALTERNATIVES
For each of the various alternatives' costs in Task
4, alternative methods of financing needed for treatment
facilities will be identified by financing type, financing
cost and ultimate financed dollar amount. In addition to
standard municipal financing methods, the study will assess
the political and funding viability of obtaining loan funds,
grant funds, oversize funds or a combination thereof, from
the Texas Water Development Fund.
-7-
3.7 TASK 7 - PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES
The costs of alternatives will be analyzed to
determine recommendations based on economic impact to each
city. A present worth analysis will be performed to allow
each community to determine the best alternative.
3.8 TASK 8 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTING
Finally, recommendations will be developed so that
both communities can coordinate their water resources and
facilities in the most cost effective manner for the public
good.
Printed and bound documentation will be supplied i
an amount of 15 copies to each city.
-8-
4.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION
Since the personnel involved are the key to admin-
istrative and technical performance of the project, an organ-
ization chart has been developed (Figure 4 -1). Haynie &
Rallman, Inc.'s experience in the area and the qualifications
of the project team, give us the capability to accomplish the
study in an orderly and timely manner.
The resum4s of the proposed project staff are also
provided in Appendix A.
-9-
MN MN • =1 UN • MO MI — NM MN • OM = NM MN OM • MN
CONSERVATION PLAN
MIKE PERSONNETT
PROJECT MANAGER
PLANNING
BOB BENNETT
DEMOGRAPHICS
PAUL GAMBREL
PROJECT PRINCIPAL
STEVEN D. KALLMAN
FINANCE ALTERNATIVES
PAT LACKEY
TECHNICAL REVIEW
TIM HAYNIE
STEVE KALLMAN
ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS
JIM COULTER
PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART
PROJECT MANAGER
ENGINEERING
SCOTT LINDEN
WATER RESOURCES
TED HARRIGER
WILLIAM F GUYTON
a ASSOCIATES
FIGURE 4 -1
5.0 SCHEDULING
Upon receipt of the signed Proposal, we will com-
mence with the study efforts.
The first task will be to develop an application to
submit to the Texas Water Development Board for grant fund-
ing. Appendix B includes an outline of the required applica-
tion and the Texas Water Development Board Criteria for
Eligibility. Haynie & Kallman, Inc. will include the prep-
aration of this application in the fixed fee amount.
PROJECT ACTIVITY
MONTHS
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
NOTICE TO PROCEED
-�
GRANT APPLICATION
■
STUDY COMPLETION
COMMENTS
-,,,„
REVISION
-+
PRESENT FINDINGS
-•
NM OM NM - MN M EM - MN M - - I • E I
PROJECT SCHEDULING
FIGURE 5 -1
6.0 ESTIMATED COSTS
Haynie & Kallman, Inc. proposes that services be
compensated based on hourly rates, with the total fee not to
exceed $80,000. Each city will be responsible for a maximum
of $20,000 each, with grant assistance from the Texas Water
Development Board covering the remaining $40,000.
-13-
APPENDIX A
i
RESUMES
Steven D. Kallman, P.E., R.P.S.
Principal
Mr. Kallman has fifteen years of experience in civil engi-
neering and project management with master utility planning
for municipalities; planning, design and specifications for
various projects including water distribution and wastewater
collection systems, treatment plants, and street and drainage
improvements; rate studies; utility mapping; aerial mapping
and engineering between many municipalities and various state
and federal agencies. These include administration and per-
formance of grants through the Environmental Protection
Agency and H.U.D., bond reports for water districts through
the Texas Department of Water Resources, and loan applica-
tions through the Farmers Home Administration and the Water
Development Board. Specific examples of his experience in-
clude:
- Management responsibility for the 1975 Public Facility
Plan, 1980 Master Water and Wastewater Plan, and 1984
Master Water and Wastewater Plan, for the City of
Round Rock.
- Management responsibility for the preparation of the
1980 Preliminary Engineering Report which was utilized
to acquire a $6 million low interest loan from the
Texas Water Development Board to construct the City of
Round Rock's 6 MGD surface water treatment plant, raw
water line and associated facilities.
- Management responsibility for the preparation of the
Preliminary Engineering Report which was utilized to
acquire a $2.78 million low interest loan from the
Texas Water Development Board to construct a 3 MGD
expansion to the City of Cedar Park's existing 2 MGD
water treatment plant and associated facilities.
- Joint management responsibility for the City of Round
Rock Capital Improvement Program from 1977 to 1984;
- Management responsibility for the Georgetown Street
Bridge and Thoroughfare Improvements, for the City of
Round Rock;
- Management responsibility for the City of Round Rock's
Capital Improvements Program. The program includes
approximately $4 million of major thoroughfare
improvements to expand the City's ability to convey
transportation;
A -1
Steven D. Kaltman, P.E., R.P.S.
Principal
- Management responsibility for the Chandler Road
Improvements for the City of Round Rock.
Mr. Kaltman earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Engineer-
ing from the University of Texas at Austin in 1971 and is
Registered as a Professional Engineer in the State of Texas.
He is also Registered as a Public Surveyor in the State of
Texas. He is a member of the Texas Society of Professional
Engineers, Texas Surveyors Associations, the Austin Associa-
tion of Builders, Round Rock Chamber of Commerce, Georgetown
Chamber of Commerce, and Austin Chamber of Commerce.
A -2
Timothy E. Haynie, P.E., R.P.S.
Principal
Mr. Haynie has over 20 years experience in large scale engi-
neering projects, including master planning, design and con-
struction coordination. Since 1977 he has been acting Presi-
dent of Haynie & Kallman, Inc., in charge of municipal engi-
neering, design of water and wastewater treatment facilities,
water pumping and storage, transmission and collection sys-
tems. Included in these projects were several assignments
which required coordination and administration of either low
interest loans or construction grants.
Included in his wide range of experience are:
- Joint management responsibility for the City of Round
Rock Capital Improvement Program from 1977 to 1984;
- Design responsibility for the City of Round Rock 6.0
MGD Surface Water Treatment Plant;
- Design responsibility for the City of Round Rock 3.0
MGD Wastewater Treatment Plant;
- Design responsibility for the Travis County M.U.D. No.
1 (Lago Vista) Water Treatment Plant and Wastewater
Facilities;
Mr. Haynie is a Registered Professional Engineer and Regis-
tered Public Surveyor in the State of Texas and a member of
the Texas Society of Professional Engineers and the Texas
Surveyors Association.
A -3
Robert L. "Bob" Bennett, AICP
Director of Planning
Mr. Bennett has twelve years of planning and management
experience. He has served as City Planner for the cities of
San Antonio and Houston, Director of Planning for Round Rock,
and was City Manager of Round Rock for six years. Mr. Ben-
nett has worked as a project manager for a development com-
pany and was an environmental specialist for Gulf Interstates
Trans Alaska Pipeline Project. Specific examples of his
expertise include:
- Management of a rapidly growing community with a bud-
get of $10,000,000 and 150 employees;
- Responsibilities and involvement in the City of Round
Rock Comprehensive Plan, Capital Improvement Program,
Drought Management Plan, Five -Year Financial Forecast,
Chamber of Commerce Population Projections, five bond
elections, $20,000,000 capital facilities;
- Land Use Conflict Study for the City of Houston;
- Investigation of Land Subsidence, Air Pollution Impact
of Houston Ship Channel, and Denver Harbor Neighbor-
hood Plan;
- Transportation Plan for Urban Mass Transportation
Authority and San Antonio, Investigation of Edwards
Underground Aquifer;
- Environmental Impact Statement for Gulf Interstates
Alaska Pipeline Section 8.3 Energy Alternatives and
their environmental impact;
Mr. Bennett holds the Master of Urban Planning Degree from
Texas A & M and a Bachelors Degree from Southwest Texas State
University in Geography. Mr. Bennett is a member of the
American Institute of Certified Planners.
A -4
Walter V. "Scott" Linden, P.E.
Manager, Municipal Projects
Mr. Linden has eleven years of experience in civil engineer-
ing and project management with a specialization in the plan-
ning, design, and specifications for water, sanitary sewers,
municipal waste treatment, and street and drainage projects.
His experience has included population projections and
environmental considerations, hydraulic and instrumentation
design, street and bridge design and project management. Mr.
Linden was project manager of the $100 million City of Hous-
ton East Water Purification Plant. Specific examples of his
expertise include:
- Management responsibility for the City of Houston 100
MGD East Water Purification Plant Expansion;
- Project Manager on the Brushy Creek Regional Sewer
Project which includes an ultimate 50 MGD Wastewater
Treatment Plant and approximately $40 million of col-
lection lines;
- Design and management of the City of Round Rock's
Capital Improvements Program. The program includes
approximately $4 million of major thoroughfare
improvements to expand the City's ability to convey
transportation.
- Responsibility for automation design of the 100 ton
per day treatment and disposal facility at the North -
side Sewage Treatment Plant in Houston, Texas;
- Studies and design work involved in the 69th Street
Sludge Plant in Houston, Texas, a major 100 ton per
day facility utilizing the design of centrifuges. It
was constructed to serve the City based on population
projections and needs through the 1990's;
- Design responsibilities for the Ponderosa Central
Wastewater Treatment Plant in Houston, which involved
a 3.5 MGD activated sludge system and sludge dewater-
ing;
- Management responsibility for the City of Round Rock's
1986 6.0 MGD Water Treatment Plant Expansion and asso-
ciated facilities;
- Management responsibility for the developer sponsored
$4 million Southeast Round Rock Improvement Project,
including a 750,000 gallon torospherical tank and a
5000 GPM booster pump station and associated line
work.
A -5
Walter V. "Scott' Linden, P.E.
Manager, Municipal Projects
Mr. Linden earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engi-
neering from Lowell Technological Institute, is a Registered
Professional Engineer in the State of Texas, and is a member
of the American Water Works Association and the Texas Society
of Professional Engineers.
A -6
Michael L. Personett
Consultant
Mr. Personett has worked in the water conservation field for
more than eight years. His experience with the City of Aus-
tin made him responsible for the development and implementa-
tion of a comprehensive, long range water conservation pro-
gram with an annual budget of $630,000 and a staff of eight
professionals. From 1981 to 1983 he worked for the Texas
Energy and Natural Resources Advisory Council as a Water
Policy Specialist, where he prepared draft legislation to
implement the recommended water conservation policies. Some
specific examples of his experience are:
- City of Round Rock, Texas - Water Conservation Consul-
tant, responsible for the successful implementation of
an emergency drought management contingency plan;
- U. S. Water Resources Council - Prepared a supplement
to the Water Resources Council State Planning Guide
for Water Conservation;
- City of Austin, Texas - Developed a long range water
management plan which included a detailed five year
action plan for eight existing water demand management
programs, including public information and education,
distribution system leak detection and repair, four
residential water conservation retrofit programs and
plumbing code standards for water conservation.
Mr. Personett received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Poli-
tical Science from the University of Tulsa in 1978 and a Mas-
ter of Public Affairs Degree from the University of Texas at
Austin in 1980.
A -7
Mr. Gambrel's experience includes:
Paul Jay Gambrel, AICP
Land Planner
Mr. Gambrel has nine years of municipal planning experience,
including formulation of policy proposals, general plans and
community development. He was the Director of Planning and
Community Development for the City of Round Rock from 1979 to
1982, after serving as Assistant City Planner from 1977 to
1979.
Mr. Gambrel's experience has included planning and zoning for
all Haynie & Kallman, Inc. projects from 1983 to the present,
including preparation of conceptual plans, preliminary and
final plats, formal presentation of respective development
concepts, processing of any required annexation and /or zoning
actions and securement of necessary approvals.
- Formulation of "Round Rock Frontiers: A Comprehensive
Plan for Round Rock ", author of subdivision regula-
tions, zoning ordinance, sign ordinance, utility
extension policy and park land dedication ordinance;
- Administrator of flood plain management program,
building code, subdivision ordinance, zoning ordi-
nance;
- Formulated transportation plan for Round Rock;
- Successfully implemented all phases of planning pro-
gram;
- Responsible for base mapping program and land use
forecasting.
Mr. Gambrel holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree from Stephen F.
Austin State University in Public Administration and a Master
of Science Degree in Community and Regional Planning from the
University of Texas in Austin. He is a member of the Ameri-
can Institute of Certified Planners, the American Planning
Association, and Alpha Chi, Honorary Fraternity for Scholas-
tic Achievement.
A -8
Mr. Lackey has seven years of experience in municipal engi-
neering and project management with a specialization in the
planning and design of water and wastewater treatment, pump-
ing, collection and distribution projects. His experience
has included preliminary and feasibility engineering, office
design, construction administration and plant operational
assistance.
Mr. Lackey has been involved in various engineering phases of
numerous municipal treatment facilities to include prelimi-
nary engineering, design, construction administration and
start -up. Specific examples of his expertise include:
- 100 MGD Tertiary Wastewater Treatment Plant for
County, Nevada;
- 20 MGD Water Treatment Plant
Texas;
- 10 MGD Wastewater Treatment
Brownwood;
- 10 MGD Wastewater Treatment
Water Control and Improvement
and Milani Counties, Texas;
Patrick A. Lackey, P.E.
Clark
for the City of Temple,
Plant for the City of
Plant for Brushy Creek
District of Williamson
- 6 MGD Water Treatment Plant Expansion for the City of
Round Rock, Texas;
- 2.5 MGD Wastewater Treatment Plant for the City of
Round Rock, Texas;
- 1 MGD Water Treatment Plant for Travis County Water
Control and Improvement District No. 17;
- 1 MGD Water Treatment Plant for Travis County Water
Control and Improvement District No. 18;
- Office coordinator for 1.5 million L.F. Sanitary Sewer
Evaluation Survey and Collection System Facility Plan-
ning for Waco, Texas;
- Design Engineer for 85 acre Type 1 Municipal Landfill
in Brownwood, Texas. Total project cost was
$600,000.
- District Engineer for Travis County Water Control and
Improvement District 17 and District 18. Completed
approximately $4 million bond and developer funded
water system improvements for each District.
A-9
Patrick A. Lackey, P.E.
Mr. Lackey has a Bachelor of Science Degree in Microbiology
and Civil Engineering, and also a Master of Science in Civil
Engineering. All of his degrees were earned at Texas A & M
University. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in the
State of Texas and also has a Grade A License in Water and
Wastewater from the Texas Department of Health.
A-1 0
James B. Coulter Jr., P.E.
Manager, Land Development Projects
Mr. Coulter received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil
Engineering from the University of Oklahoma in 1980. His six
years of experience since that time include work related to
all aspects of design and construction of water and waste-
water systems, roadways, detention and water quality basins,
along with on -site wastewater disposal systems.
Specific examples of his experience include:
- Management responsibility for the City of Georgetown,
San Gabriel Wastewater Service Study, including reve-
nue projections of service alternatives and master
planning of wastewater lines;
- Management responsibility for The Meadows at Chandler
Creek M.U.D. in Round Rock, Texas, including land
planning, Preliminary Engineering Report for M.U.D.
creation, and all water and wastewater lines, deten-
tion systems and roadways;
- Design responsibility for Brodie Oaks Shopping Center
in Austin, Texas, including on -site water, wastewater
systems and site grading plans and erosion and sedi-
mentation controls in the Barton Creek Watershed.
Mr. Coulter is Registered as a Professional Engineer in the
State of Texas and is a member of the American Society of
Civil Engineers and the Texas Society of Professional Engi-
neers.
A -11
APPENDIX B
TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD
APPLICATION OUTLINE
REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER PLANNING
I Louis A. Reecherl. Jr.. Chairman
George W. McCloskey, Vice Chairman
Glen E. Roney. Member
Mr. Bob Bennett
Haynie Kaltman & Gray, Inc.
12303 Technology Blvd., Suite J
Austin, Texas 78727
Be-4
Dear Mr�ersaett''
Sincerely,
T. James Fries
Enclosure (1)
Charles E. \emir
Executive Administrator
June 4, 1986
As a follow -up to our May 29, 1986, meeting, a copy of the application outline
for regional water supply and wastewater treatment grant assistance is en-
closed. Please feel free to contact me if you should have any questions about
the outline or the Section 355 rules.
8 -1
P. 0. Box 13231 Capitol Station • Austin, Texas 78711 • Area Code 512'4637847
1700 N. Congress Avenue
Lab' 1tt.k.tIVED JUN 0 5 s8f,
Louie Welch. Member
Stuart S. Coltman. Member
Charles W. Jcnness, Member
1836.1986
1
1
1
III
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Section 15.406 of the Tema (later Code authorizes the Taw assistance Neter Develap.eot Board to provide grant assistan tram the State's Research and Plan -
ning Fund to political subdivisions to develop plane for regional water supply and wastewater collection and treatment facilities. Political sate
n ne
ivisio are listed and regional facilities axe defid In 31 Tee 355.101.
Regional planning an
ing greets n be made for is to 50 percent of the cost of developing or updating regional facility pls. In the event that a hard-
ship is demonstrated by an applicant, a state grant of up to 75 percent of peening costs can be requested (Section 355.103(2) and (2)(A)).
Regional water suply facility planning grant applications will be considered (a) for developed areas with a history of water evailebility or raw
ter quality problems or converting from grmadwater to surface water, (b) for developed or developing areas where operation of a regional system
may substantially extend the life of existing or planned supply sources, (c) for areas where develoFaent of a regional system omm may be mote cost -ef-
fective than individual or separate community systems, and (d) to prevent water supply problems in potential high or rapid growth areas [Section
355.103(2)(D)).
IRegi
ol wastewater collection and treatment facility planning grant applications will he considered (a) for developed areas with a history of water
quality problems, (b) for areas where development of a regional system may to more cost -effective than individual or separate c runity syst®s, end
(c) to prevent water quality problems in potential high growth areas [Section 355.103(2)(E)).
Al 1 assistance applications must amply with 31 TAC 355.101 -110 and ahead follow the attached format. Ten copies of each application cut be sate
tted to ear. 0arles E. Hoer, Executive Administrator, Texas Water Development Board, P. O. Box 13231, Capitol Station, Austin, Texas 78711 -3231.
1. Project Cetagory:
Regional Water Supply
' II. General Information:
A. Applicant's Legal Name and Address [Section 355.106(c) (2) (A));
B. Applicant's Director, manager, or Official Representative;
C. Statute(.) Creating Applicant or legal Authority [Section 355.106(0)(2) B)];
D. Legal Authority Citations for Regional Facilities [Section 355.106(c((2)(B)),
G.
To Plan :
To Develop:
To Operate:
APPLICRTION OUTLINE
atgimel Nato Ripply and Ia m
stswater ,laing
Regional Wastewater Regional Water and Wastewater
I;. Financial Infomtion:
A. Total Project Cost;
B. Local Matching Contribution (hardship justification required if less than 508) (Section 355.103)2)(11));
C. Requested State Assistance [Section 355.106(c)(2))C));
D. Potential Sources 11x3 Amounts of Funding for Implementation [Section 355.106(e)(2)03));
E. Dem and d
natrated Reed for the Project a Funds [Section 355.106(0)(2)).
IV. Project Deeeiption (Attach supporting data and narrative):
A. Geographical Area for Planning [Section 355.106(c)(2)(0)(1)) (Specify river basins, counties, cities, districts, etc., and provide ex-
planation for eelecting planning boundaries.);
B. Description and Assessment of Existing Facilities Serving the Planning Area 'Section 355.106).)(2)(0)(iii));
C. Description of Existing and Projected Weeds [Section 355.106(c)(2) (0/(in)] (Include data on existing and projected population ed
economic development);
D. Evaluation of Legal Availability (Water Rights) and Physical Adequacy of Existing and Propose'' Raw Water Sources (Section
355.106)c)(2)(0)(v)J;
E. Effect on State and Regional Planning, Development, and Operation and on Other Regional Entities [Section 255.104).)(6) B) and
355.106(c)(2)(12)(li));
F. Scope of fork, Schedule, and Budget 'Section 355.106(c) (2) (0) (v11) and (viii) and Section 355.107(c) (2),(3), and (7)):
1. Detailed List of lurk Tasks, Including Budget for Each,
2. Time Schedule for Corpleting the fork, by Task,
3. Project Budget, by Salaries and Wegea, Fringe Benefits, Travel, Supplies, Printing and Postage, and Capital Equipment (Direct
Costs) and indirect Coats, with all costs divided by state and local shares,
4. Project Staff Qualifications and Direct Experience;
Specific Application of the Planning Project to Meeting Identified Service Neale [Section 355.104(1)(1));
R. Any Other pertinent Data Necessary to Explain the Project (Section 355.106(c)(2)10)].
55tif1®t1 ... coos (Attach supporting narrative):
A. Notification: A copy of the certified latter sent to political suhllvisims in the planing area indicating that they have been
mtifled of the planing prapceal and a list of names and addresses of recipients of the letter sat sonmpany the application [Section
35 5.1040.)(6( (C)1;
B. Assurance: The applicant must dsnnetrate or provide written assurances that (1) the planing does not deplicate existing projects
[Section 355.104(.)(6)1. (2) i ple'entstion of viable solutions identified through the planing will to diligently pursed (Section
355.106(c)(2101)1 and local source. of funding required for ioplsentstlon will le provided (Section 355.104(1) (3) ), and if the ptopasal
is for • regional rst.weter project. (3) the wastewater planing proposal conforms to the approved state water quality management 040
plan ere confotmilg iqn plan amendment is being promassd (Section 355.106 (0)12)12) (vi)) and a lead water quality planning agency has
been or 1s being designated [Section 355.104(1)(6)(D)].
B -2
APPENDIX C
TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD
RESEARCH AND PLANNING FUND
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 w
1
1
1
Research and Planning Fund
RESEARCH AND PLANNING FUND
5355.101 - Definitions
5355.102 Purpose
5355.103 - Applicability
5355.104 - Criteria for Eligibility
5355.105 - Procedures, Priorities, and Criteria for
Selection of Candidate Projects
5355.106 - Request for Submission of Proposals
5355.107 - Evaluation and Selection of Proposals
5355.108 - Contract Project Reporting
5355.109 - Disbursement of Contracted Funds and
Cost Accounting
5355.110 - Dissemination of Results
Effective
4/18/86
C-1
INDEX
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Research and Planning Fund
RESEARCH AND PLANNING FUND
55355.101- 355.110
The amendments to the following sections are promulgated under
the authority of the Texas Water Code, Sections 6.101 and 15.403.
5355.101. Definitions. The following words and terms, when
used in this chapter shall have the following meanings, unless the
context clearly indicates otherwise:
Applicant - Any person(s) or political subdivision(s)
that apply(ies) for financial assistance from the research and
planning fund.
Flood control planning - Developing mechanisms to provide
the most cost - effective flood protection by means of structural and
nonstructural measures to abate flood hazards.
Fund - The Research and Planning Fund authorized and
described in the Texas Water Code, Chapter 15, Subchapter F.
Political subdivision - A city, county, district, or
authority created under the Texas Constitution, Article III, 552,
or Article XVI, 559, any other political subdivision of the State,
any interstate compact commission to which the state is a party,
and any nonprofit water supply corporation created and operating
under Texas Civil Statute Article 4413(33), V.A.C.S.
Reconnaissance -level or feasibility investigation - The
level that normally only requires prelirr.inary evaluation using
currently available data and short -cut methods to reach a conclu-
sion. It may include office activities sufficient to support the
preparation of cost estimates within reasonable accuracy. Some
field work may be required, but it should be held to the minimum
possible to accomplish the reconnaissance -level results.
Regional facility - A water supply, wastewater collection and
treatment, or other system which incorporates multiple service
areas or drainage areas into an areawide service facility thereby
reducing the number of required facilities, or any system which
serves an area that is other than a single county, city, special
district, or other political subdivision of the state the
specified size of which is determined by any one or combination of
population, number of governmental entities served, and /or service
capacity.
5355.102. Purpose. It is the intent of the board to estab-
lish a general policy for the processing of applications for
funding of research into the proper planning, management, conserva-
tion, and development of the state's water resources and for
funding of planning relating to flood control and regional water
supply and wastewater collection and treatment facilities by
political subdivisions. Funding of research projects shall be at
the discretion of the board from funds in the research and planning
fund created in the state treasury.
C -2
rage 1 or 11
'Texas Water Development Board Page 2 of 11
Research and Planning Fund
")55_10 a ni icability oarifiv 1i'-COnsider7 applicatio
titil•.undiiig from sthe esearch` and pinning °fund 0ahich come tender
rtht WirT61161fitr "categories:'
(1) Research contracts. The board may enter into a
contract with any person for research into the
proper planning, management, conservation, and
development of the state's water resources.
(2) a nnning` contracts. The board may enter into
contracts with political subdivisions to provide
funding from the research and planning fund for up
to 50% of the cost of developing or updating plans
for flood control, a regional water supply facility,
and a regional wastewater collection and treatment
facility for specific areas.
(A) Hardship cases for flood control, regional
water supply, and regional wastewater planning
will be considered individually, and in these
instances, local participation will be a
minimum of 25% of the planning costs.
(B) Applications for funding to develop flood
control plans will be considered for developed
areas with a history of flooding. Applications
for funding of flood control plans require
justification by the applicant as to the
relevance of the proposed plans as a component
of regional and /or statewide flood control
plans and programs.
(C) Flood control plans shall be of a reconnais-
sance -level or feasibility nature and consist
of, but not be limited to, the following types
of structural and nonstructural projects:
(i) reduction of peak flow by use of reser-
voirs;
(ii) confinement of flood flows by levees,
flood walls, or closed conduits;
(iii) reduction of flooding by channel improve-
ments which increase channel capacity and
flow velocity;
(iv) diversion of water through bypasses or
floodways;
(v) temporary or permanent evacuation of the
floodplain;
(vi) flood proofing of structures;
(vii) reduction of flow runoff by land manage-
ment;
(viii) flood forecasting; or
(ix) a combination of clauses (i)- (viii) of
this subparagraph.
(D) ►pplicati.ons for funding o- tdeveiop- regional
wat iupply piAii llApe -for
'evelop`ed areas with a history= f water_ _
C -3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1-
1
1
1
• rexas water Development Board Page 3 of 11
Research and Planning Fund
Il t or raw aaater • qua tp problems ,
eveloped that ! n
coverting -from the
se of"grodndii ter =#o t he .0
-se of surface water
r
eveloped or eveloping areas_.where he 7.
_peration o£ a -. xegiona3 water supply:„system may
« sabstant1ally extend the life of existing or
*planned supply sources, areas where development
,-.of a regional supply system may be - more
Lost- effective than separate'systems - or
potential high or rapid growth areas to prevent
water-_supply problems. -
(E) Applications for funding to develop regional
wastewater collection and treatment plans will_
be considered for developed areas with a
history of water quality problems, areas where
development of a regional system may be more
cost - effective than separate systems, or for
potential high growth rate areas to prevent
water quality problems.
§355.104. Criteria For Eligibility.
(a) To be eligible for money from the research and planning
fund, the applicant must demonstrate:
(1) a specific application of the proposed research or
planning proposal to the water planning, management,
conservation, and development of the state's water
resources or flood control, regional water supply,
or regional wastewater planning needs;
(2) a need for funds;
(3) a willingness to assure, insofar as possible,
availability from local sources of the required
funds for plan implementation;
(4) an indication that the project does not duplicate
existing projects with the exception that revising
out -of -date flood control and_ regional water supply
`and wastewater plans would be eligible;
(5) for flood control planning, as far as practicable:
(A) the applicant has the legal authority to plan
for and control flooding;
(B) the consideration of the flood protection needs
of the entire watershed in which the project is
located as opposed to a piecemeal consideration
of a flooding problem; and
(C) all affected political subdivisions in the
planning area have been notified by certified
mail that an application for planning
assistance is being filed with the board. The
notification shall include a brief description
of the planning area and the purposes of the
planning project, and shall state that any
comments must be filed with the board and the
C -4
.Texas water Development noara Page 4 of 11
Research and Planning Fund
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
applicant within 30 days. Evidence of this
notification must be provided to the board
within the application;
(6) for regional water supply or wastewater planning:
(A) the applicant has the legal authority to plan,
develop, and operate regional facilities;
(B) the effect on overall regional planning,
development, and operation in the state and
within the study area;
(C) li « affected politivartubd Vininns n the
4Planning area - have-been - notified - by-certified
=pail that - an application `for planning - ..
- * assistance to develop regional- water - supply or
. wastewater plans - for the area is being filed
,:with the board. The notification shall include
a brief description of the planning area and
the purposes of the planning project, and shall
state that any comments must be filed with the
board and applicant within 30 days. Evidence
of this notification must be provided to the
board with the application; and
(D) in the case of wastewater planning, information
on the designation of a lead water quality
planning agency.
(b) In addition to these general criteria, funding of
specific research proposals will be contingent upon
meeting the standards set forth with regard to §355.107
of this title (relating to Evaluation and Selection of
Proposals).
§355.105. Procedures, Priorities, and Criteria for Selection
of Candidate Proposals.
(a) Procedure.
(1) The selection of research or planning proposals is
based on consideration of the following:
(A) the kinds of problems being encountered in
Texas which the research or planning proposal
would address;
(B) the levels of funding for proposed work neces-
sary to obtain significant results;
(C) the potential for stimulating participation,
including funding, by other agencies, organiza-
tions, or individuals; and
(D) the need of political subdivisions of the state
for planning assistance.
(2) Procedures for awarding contracts to private consul-
tants will comply with Texas Civil Statutes, Article
6252 -11c, Title 110A, concerning use of private
consultants by state agencies.
(b) Priorities. Priorities will be established by assessment
of the planning, management, conservation, and
C -5
v
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
. naa naiei Leveiopment roars Page 5 of 11
Research and Planning Fund
development needs of Texas through, as appropriate,
consultation with identified experts and concerned
citizens in the research and, planning areas of interest
to the board.
(c) Criteria.
(1) Proposals will be selected for consideration on the
basis of the following factors:
(A) significance to Texas;
(B) technical, economic, and environmental merit of
proposal;
(C) probability that the research or planning will
result in significant water conservation, water
quality protection, or flood protection within
]5 years;
(D) relevance to at least one of five major re-
search priority areas that include:
(i) water supply;
(ii) water quality;
(iii) hazardous waste management;
(iv) water finance;
(v) flood control, both structural and non-
structural approaches;
(E) measure of the economic ramifications of
proposed research results;
(F) measure of ramifications as to public safety
and welfare; and
(G) documentation indicating the proposal does not
duplicate previous or current research, with
the exception that revising out -of -date flood
control and regional water supply and
wastewater plans would be eligible.
(2) Proposal having statewide or regional application
generally will be given higher priority when con-
sidered than those having exclusively local impacts.
(d) Comments. For flood control and water supply or
wastewater planning applications, the board will allow a
minimum of 30 days from the date the application is filed
to receive comments from affected political subdivisions.
5355.7 Request for Submission of Proposals.
(a) Proposal Solicitation Process. The Texas Water Develop-
ment Board will specify the subjects and topics for which
research and planning proposals are being requested. The
specified list of research and planning subjects will be
published in the Texas Register and will be distributed
to state depository libraries and to those who indicate
interest in receiving it. Notice of the availability of
the list of research and planning subjects will be
communicated by news release through the capitol press
and other appropriate media. Each announcement of a
C -6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Texas Water Development Board Page 6 of 11
Research and Planning Fund
request for.proposals for research and planning will
include the following:
(1) description of project objectives;
(2) description of funding considerations;
(3) explanation of review criteria and procedures;
(4) deadline and address for proposal submission;
(5) target date for contract award;
(6) guidelines for proposal contents;
(7) designation of contact person for additional infor-
mation;
(8) statement of contract terms and required completion
date; and
(9) statement regarding proprietary information and
patents.
(b) Award of funds. Release of a list of research and
planning subjects in no way guarantees that all or any of
the funds designated will be awarded. The board retains
the right to make no award in the event that no accept-
able proposal is submitted in a given area.
(c) Application requirements. Any person or applicant
seeking financial assistance pursuant to the Texas Water
Code, Chapter 15, Subchapter F, shall file an application
for research and planning funds with the executive
administrator. The application shall include the
information required by §355.104(A) of this title
(relating to Criteria for Eligibility) together with a
written proposal. '!Ten copies of the full proposal must
lbe.filed. The application may be in response to board
solicitation.
(1) The following information shall be included in a
research contract proposal:
(A) proposal classification:
(i) proposal title and number as listed in the
specific request for proposal; or
(ii) category title, if not addressing a
specific identified project, in which case
the proposal should include a statement of
how the project meets the fund criteria
stated in §355.104 of this title (relating
to Criteria for Funding);
(B) discussion of how the applicant intends to
fulfill the requirements of the proposal,
including an identification of the potentials
for or plans to incorporate and use proprietary
information and any subcontracts planned;
(C) availability of matching funds and services
indicating amount and sources;
(D) resumes of principals, subcontractors, and
principal investigators (including names,
addresses, and phone numbers) and a summary of
pertinent experience of proposing organization;
C -7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
• acAaa naicr uevelopmenc Doara
Research and Planning Fund
Page 7 of 11
(E) site(s) of proposed project;
(F) time schedule for work to be performed by
principals and subcontractors;
(G) plans for:
(i) implementing research results, and
(ii) identification and involvement of poten-
tial users;
(H) itemized total budget, including fringe benefit
costs, overhead costs, profit margin, and
indication of availability of matching funds;
(I) list of products (reports, plans, or other
products) the board will receive and a schedule
for completing the work;
(J) suggested monitoring procedures;
(K) other information as indicated by specific
project description; and
(L) any other pertinent data as deemed necessary by
the executive administrator.
(2) The following information shall be included in a
planning contract proposal:
(A) the legal name of the political subdivision;
(B) a citation of the laws under which the
political subdivision was created and is
operating, including specific citation of all
laws providing flood control authority or the
authority to plan, develop, and operate
regional water supply or wastewater facilities;
(C) the total amount of money requested from the
fund;
(D) potential sources of funding for project
implementation;
(E) documentation by the applicant that if a viable
solution to its problem is found, then imple-
mentation of the solution will be diligently
pursued;
(F) for flood control planning contracts:
(i) a detailed description of the existing or
potential flood hazard for which the
planning is to be conducted;
(ii) a brief description of methods and
procedures to be used in development of
the flood protection plan, including clear
demonstration that the planning will give
results showing the economic viability of
the flood control project and the effects
of the flood control project being planned
on overall flood control within the area
in which the applicant is located;
(G) for regional water supply and wastewater
planning contracts:
C -8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Texas water Development Board Page 8 of 11
Research and Planning Fund
(i) - - e xleogiaphical" ,area- tarbe'1.TWiu"3ed:
e plan and the -justification' - for
Iseiecting- specific - area - boundaries:'
(ii) the .relationship "to and` effect-on other
`iregional_entities in the study - area, if
any ", and -the state;
(iii) gi-rlescription and -assessment_of_ the
1adequacy of _eXisting facilities
10erving -- the -area;
(iv) a; -- description-- of-the- existing-and
- projected water supply or wastewater
follection and_t..reatment needs,_based on
existing and projected populations-and
ievels- of- economic. development;
(v) for a regional water supply facility,.an
evaluation of the legal availability and
physical adequacy of existing, proposed,
and potential supply sources;
(vi) for a regional wastewater collection and
treatment facility, a description of
conformance with the state water quality
management plan or evidence that
appropriate and necessary actions to amend
the plan are underway;
(vii) a detailed scope of work to be performed
_ and a schedule for completing the work;
and
(viii) _a statement on the non -state share of the
planning costs; and -
(H) any other pertinent data necessary_by
*he executive` administrator.
(d) Eligible proposers. In order to assure equitable distri-
bution of the funds and to avoid conflict of interest,
the following criteria are established for acceptability
of proposers:
(1) Texas -based proposers will be given priority consi-
deration, and only in unusual circumstances will
this priority be disregarded;
(2) Research projects to be conducted in Texas will be
given priority consideration, and only in unusual
circumstances will this priority be disregarded;
(3) Flood control, regional water supply, and regional
wastewater collection and treatment planning
proposals will be considered only for areas within
Texas and only for political subdivisions as defined
in the Texas Water Code, 515.001(4);
(4) Individual members of the Texas Water Development
Board, board staff members, or their immediate
families are not eligible;
(5) A member of the technical advisory committee is
eligible to submit a research proposal, in which
C -9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1�
1
1
1
Research and Planning Fund
rage 9 of 11
case he or she will not participate in the
evaluation process for that proposal.
(e) Unsolicited proposals. Any proposal which is not respon-
sive to a specific solicitation as described in sub-
section (a) of this section will be received as an
unsolicited proposal provided it satisfies the general
requirements of subsections(c) and (d) of this section.
Vnsoiicited- proposals-will- receive- appropriate
gonsideretion within time and funding limitations in
accordance with S355.107 of this title - (relating to
.Evaluation and Selection of Proposals).
(355.107. Evaluation and Selection of Proposals.
(a) Board staff review. Upon receipt, proposals will be
referred to the board staff member responsible for the
specific problem area in which the proposal is submitted.
The responsible board staff member will review each
proposal and will forward the proposals to an impartial
advisory committee (as described in subsection (b) of
this section) for evaluation.
(b) Committee review. A technical advisory committee(s) will
be appointed by the executive administrator to assist in
the review and evaluation of research and planning
proposals. Technical advisory committee members will be
selected so as to minimize conflicts of interest while
maintaining the highest available level of expertise in
the proposal area. Technical advisory committee members
will be required to indicate potential conflicts of
interest so that evaluations can be weighed accordingly.
(c) Proposal rating. In addition to providing specific
comments, each of the evaluators will rate the proposals
in the following categories, where appropriate:
(1) degree to which the proposal is responsive to the
overall purpose and funding criteria and /or the
specific purpose of an individual solicitation;
(2) qualifications of project staff;
(3) reasonableness of proposed budget and time schedule;
(4) availability of matching funds or services, if any
(5) project organization and management including
project monitoring procedures;
(6) adequacy of proposed technical scope of work;
(7) directly - related project and staff experience; and
(8) other information as may be required for a specific
project.
(d) Staff summary. Each responsible board staff member will
prepare for the executive administrator a summary of all
proposals submitted in his project area, a summary of the
evaluations, and identification of potential conflicts of
interest, if any.
(e) Recommendations., On the basis of this information and
his /her own investigation, the executive administrator
C -10
Research and Planning Fund
C -11
rage iv of 11
shall make recommendations to the board of those pro-
posals that meet requirements for funding. Notice of the
application will be approved under 5341.12 of this title
(Relating to Applications Filing and Notice) and hearing
will be conducted as provided in 5341.4 of this title
(Relating to Public Participation). Upon approval of the
board, the executive administrator will be authorized to
negotiate and finalize a contract with the applicant.
5355.108. Contract Project Reporting. The executive
administrator will monitor the progress of the contract through a
contract manager to assure satisfactory performance by the
contracting party. Progress reports, including work performed and
expenditures related to the project budget, shall be submitted
periodically by the contractor. The contractor will be required to
submit a draft of a final report for review and evaluation on or
before the termination of the contract. Upon satisfactory
completion of the final report, the executive administrator shall
issue a written authorization for final payment to the contractor.
5355.109. Disbursement of Contracted Funds and Cost
Accounting.
(a) Contracts. Two vehicles for contracting will be used.
An interagency contract prepared pursuant to Texas Civil
Statute Article 4413(33), will be used for contracting
with state agencies and state universities and
institutions. For political subdivisions and for private
contractors, a professional services contract between the
contractor and the board will be used. In both
instances, contracts entered into shall contain terms and
conditions considered appropriate to protect the
interests of the state and the contractor.
(b) Method of payment. State of Texas contractors will be
paid on an actual cost reimbursement basis provided for
by the State Purchasing and General Services Commission's
rules and regulations. Private contractors will be paid
on a fixed contract amount basis. All contracts shall
provide that 10% of the contract amount shall be retained
for final payment until after receipt and acceptance of
all required reports and documentation.
(c) Records. Contractors shall maintain satisfactory finan-
cial accounts, documents, and records, and shall make
same available for examination and audit by the staff of
the board. Accounting by contractors shall be in a
manner consistent with generally accepted accounting
procedures.
(d) Capital equipment. Purchase of capital equipment neces-
sary for research or planning purposes shall be included
in contracts as separate and specific budget items. All
capital equipment purchased with contract funds becomes
property of the board.
. " ' Texas water Development Board Page 11 of 11
Research and Planning Fund
WO
(e) Computer programs. All computer programs and /or models
that are developed are to be installed on the board's
computer for use by board staff and others, as appro-
priate.
5355.110. Dissemination of Results.
(a) Reports. Results of all research or planning completed
under contract with the board will be submitted by the
contractor in the form of a written report, which will
then become public information. Contractors shall be
available for brief presentations of results as required
by the board. Specific provisions will be made in each
contract to establish eventual ownership of results and
potential patents, copyrights, and licenses at the
conclusion of the research or planning project.
(b) Cooperative funding. If federal, private, university, or
other state agency funding is also used for completion of
the research or planning project, public availability of
results, patent application authority, and terms of
project monitoring, project inspection, and ownership of
results and potential patents, copyrights, and licenses
will be negotiated with all the parties involved in
accordance with applicable federal and state regulations.
(c) Patents. In the absence of statutory or contractual
limitations, the contractor may apply for patents on any
discoveries made through the research or planning
project. If the contractor does not wish to make the
application, the state may request and receive title to
the discovery. If the contractor receives a patent, the
State of Texas and its political subdivisions shall be
entitled to an irrevocable, nonexclusive, royalty -free
license to use the discovery(ies) for governmental
purposes.
C -12