Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-188-E Solid Waste - SCS Engineers, PC for preparation of Solid Waste Financial Plan DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A [Departmental Use Only] TITLE FY NORTH CAROLINA SCS CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT UNDER $90,000 ORANGE COUNTY This Agreement, made and entered into this 7 day of March, 2016, ("Effective Date") by and between Orange County, North Carolina a body politic and corporate of the State of North Carolina(hereinafter, the "County") and SCS Engineers, PC, (hereinafter, the "Consultant"). WITNESSETH: That the County and Consultant, for the consideration herein named, do hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE I SCOPE OF WORK 1.1 Scope of Work 1.1.1 This Services Agreement ("Agreement") is for professional consulting services to be rendered by Consultant to County with respect to (insert type of project)Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan for Orange County's Solid Waste Enterprise Fund. 1.1.2 By executing this Agreement, the Consultant represents and agrees that Consultant is qualified to perform and fully capable of performing and providing the services required or necessary under this Agreement in a fully competent,professional and timely manner. 1.1.3 Time is of the essence with respect to this Agreement. 1.1.4 The services to be performed under this Agreement consist of Basic Services, as described and designated in Article 3 hereof. Compensation to the Consultant for Basic Services under this Agreement shall be as set forth herein. ARTICLE 2 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CONSULTANT 2.1 Services to be Provided. The Consultant shall provide the County with all services required in Article 3 to satisfactorily complete the Project within the time limitations set forth herein and in accordance with the highest professional standards. 2.2. Standard of Care 2.2.1 The Consultant shall exercise reasonable care and diligence in performing services under this Agreement in accordance with the generally accepted standards of this type of Consultant practice throughout the United States and in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations applicable to the performance of these services. Consultant is solely responsible for the professional quality, accuracy and timely completion and submission Revised 1/16 1 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A of all reports, drawings, specifications, plans, documents and services (hereinafter "Deliverables")related to the Basic Services. 2.2.2 The Consultant shall be responsible for all errors or omissions, in the deliverables prepared by the Consultant. 2.2.3 The Consultant shall correct at no additional cost to the County any and all errors, omissions, discrepancies, ambiguities, mistakes or conflicts in any Deliverables prepared by the Consultant. 2.2.4 The Consultant shall assure that all Deliverables prepared by it hereunder are in accordance with applicable laws, statutes, and that any necessary or appropriate applications for approvals are submitted to federal, state and local governments or agencies in a timely manner so as not to delay the Project. 2.2.5 The Consultant shall not, except as otherwise provided for in this Agreement, subcontract the performance of any work under this Agreement without prior written permission of the County. No permission for subcontracting shall create, between the County and the subcontractor, any contract or any other relationship. 2.2.6 Any and all employees of the Consultant engaged by the Consultant in the performance of any work or services required of the Consultant under this Agreement, shall be considered employees or agents of the Consultant only and not of the County, and any and all claims that may or might arise under any workers compensation or other law or contract on behalf of said employees while so engaged shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the Consultant. 2.2.7 Consultant agrees that Consultant and its subcontractors, if any, shall be required to comply with all federal, state and local antidiscrimination laws, regulations and policies that relate to the performance of Consultant's services under this Agreement. 2.2.8 If activities related to the performance of this agreement require specific licenses, certifications, or related credentials Consultant represents that it and/or its employees, agents and subcontractors engaged in such activities possess such licenses, certifications, or credentials and that such licenses certifications, or credentials are current, active, and not in a state of suspension or revocation. ARTICLE 3 BASIC SERVICES 3.1 Basic Services 3.1.1 The Consultant shall perform as Basic Services the work and services described herein and as described in Exhibit A (Proposal) as Tasks 1, 2 and 3. Tasks 4, 5 and 6 shall only be performed and compensable upon Consultant receiving written notice to perform said tasks from the County. ARTICLE 4 DURATION OF SERVICES Revised 1/16 2 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A 4.1 Scheduling of Services 4.1.1 The Consultant shall schedule and perform its activities in a timely manner. 4.1.2 Should the County determine that the Consultant is behind the agreed upon schedule, it may require the Consultant to expedite and accelerate his efforts, including providing additional resources and working overtime, as necessary, to perform his services in accordance with the approved project schedule at no additional cost to the County. 4.1.3 The Commencement Date for the Consultant's Basic Services shall be March 7, 2016. ARTICLE 5 COMPENSATION 5.1 Compensation for Basic Services 5.1.1 Compensation for Basic Services shall include all compensation due the Consultant from the County for all services under this Agreement except for any authorized Reimbursable Expenses which are defined herein. The maximum amount payable for Basic Services is Thirty Four Thousand Seven Hundred and fifty Dollars ($34,750). The maximum amount payable for each individual task shall be as set forth in Appendix C of Attachment A (Task 1, $4,750; Task 2, $4750; Task 3, $10,250; Task 4, $7,500; Task 5, $5,000; and, Task 6, $2,500). Payment for Basic Services shall become due and payable in direct proportion to satisfactory services performed and work accomplished. ARTICLE 6 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COUNTY 6.1 Cooperation and Coordination 6.1.1 The County has designated Gary Donaldson to act as the County's representative with respect to the Project and shall have the authority to render decisions within guidelines established by the County Manager and the County Board of Commissioners and shall be available during working hours as often as may be reasonably required to render decisions and to furnish information. 6.1.2 The County shall be solely responsible for determining whether Consultant as satisfactorily completed Tasks. It is agreed that County shall not unreasonably withhold its determination of satisfactory completion of any Task. In the event the amount of an invoice is disputed County may withhold payment until the dispute is resolved by the parties. County may also withhold payment on an invoice until the satisfactory completion of a Task by Consultant. ARTICLE 7 INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY 7.1 General Requirements 7.1.1 Consultant shall obtain, at its sole expense, Commercial General Liability Insurance, Automobile Insurance, Workers' Compensation Insurance, Professional Liability Insurance, and any additional insurance as may be required by Owner's Risk Manager as such insurance requirements are described in the Orange County Risk Transfer Policy and Orange Revised 1/16 3 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A County Minimum Insurance Coverage Requirements (each document is incorporated herein by reference and may be viewed at http://www.orangecountync.gov/departments/purchasing division/contracts.php). If Owner's Risk Manager determines additional insurance coverage is required such additional insurance shall be designated here (if no additional insurance required mark N/A as being not applicable). Consultant shall not commence work until such insurance is in effect and certification thereof has been received by the Owner's Risk Manager. 7.2 Indemnity 7.2.1 The Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the County from all loss, liability, claims or expense, including attorney's fees, arising out of or related to the Project and arising from bodily injury including death or property damage to any person or persons to the extent caused in whole or in part by the negligence or misconduct of the Consultant except to the extent same are caused by the County. It is the intent of this provision to require the Consultant to indemnify the County to the fullest extent permitted under North Carolina law. ARTICLE 8 AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT 8.1 Changes in Basic Services 8.1.1 Changes in the Basic Services and entitlement to additional compensation or a change in duration of this Agreement shall be made by a written Amendment to this Agreement executed by the County and the Consultant. The Consultant shall proceed to perform the Services required by the Amendment only after receiving a fully executed Amendment from the County. ARTICLE 9 TERMINATION 9.1 Termination for Convenience of the County 9.1.1 This Agreement may be terminated without cause by the County and for its convenience upon seven (7) days prior written notice to the Consultant. 9.2 Other Termination 9.2.1 The Consultant may terminate this Agreement based upon the County's material breach of this Agreement; provided the County has not taken all reasonable actions to remedy the breach. The Consultant shall give the County seven (7) days'prior written notice of its intent to terminate this Agreement for cause. 9.3 Compensation After Termination 9.3.1 In the event of termination, the Consultant shall be paid that portion of the fees and expenses that it has earned to the date of termination, less any costs or expenses incurred or anticipated to be incurred by the County due to errors or omissions of the Consultant. Revised 1/16 4 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A 9.3.2 Should this Agreement be terminated, the Consultant shall deliver to the County within seven(7) days, at no additional cost, all Deliverables including any electronic data or files relating to the Project. 9.4 Waiver 9.4.1 The payment of any sums by the County under this Agreement or the failure of the County to require compliance by the Consultant with any provisions of this Agreement or the waiver by the County of any breach of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any claim for damages by the County for any breach of this Agreement or a waiver of any other required compliance with this Agreement. 9.5 Suspension 9.5.1 County may suspend the work at any time for County's convenience and without penalty to County upon three (3) days' notice to Consultant. Upon any suspension by County, Consultant shall discontinue the work and shall not resume the work until notified to proceed by County. ARTICLE 10 ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS 10.1 Relationship of Parties 10.1.1 Consultant is an independent contractor of the County. Neither Consultant nor any employee of the Consultant shall be deemed an officer, employee or agent of the County. Consultant's personnel shall not be employees of, or have any contractual relationship with, the County. 10.2 Limitation and Assignment_ 10.2.1 The County and the Consultant each bind themselves, their successors, assigns, and legal representatives to the terms of this Agreement. Neither the County nor the Consultant shall assign or transfer its interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 10.3 Governing Law 10.3.1 This Agreement and the duties, responsibilities, obligations and rights of respective parties hereunder shall be governed by the laws of the State of North Carolina. Consultant shall at all times remain in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal laws, rules, and regulations including but not limited to all anti-discrimination laws. By executing this Agreement Provider affirms that Provider and any subcontractors of Provider are and shall remain in compliance with Article 2 of Chapter 64 of the North Carolina General Statutes. 10.4 Dispute Resolution 10.4.1 Any and all suits or actions to enforce, interpret or seek damages with respect to any provision of, or the performance or non-performance of, this Agreement shall be brought in the General Court of Justice of North Carolina sitting in Orange County, North Carolina and it is Revised 1/16 5 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A agreed by the parties that no other court shall have jurisdiction or venue with respect to such suits or actions. The Parties may agree to nonbinding mediation of any dispute prior to the bringing of such suit or action. Under no circumstances shall any dispute be addressed through binding arbitration. 10.5 Extent of Agreement 10.5.1 This Agreement, together with the Request for Proposals together with attachments distributed by the County and the Consultant's submitted Proposal, all of which constitute the Contract Documents, represents the entire and integrated agreement between the County and the Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. In the event of a conflict among the terms of the Contract Documents, the priority of documents shall be This Agreement, the County's Request for Proposals, attachments to the County's Request for Proposals, the Consultant's Proposal. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both parties. Modifications may be evidenced by facsimile signatures. 10.6 Severability 10.6.1 If any provision of this Agreement is held as a matter of law to be unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall be valid and binding upon the Parties. 10.7 Ownership of Deliverables 10.7.1 Upon payment in full for services rendered, all Deliverables, together with all supporting materials, source documentation, data collected, field notes, and working drafts, developed in the performance of this Agreement shall become the property of the County and may be used on any other project without additional compensation to the Consultant. The use of the Deliverables by the County or by any person or entity for any purpose other than the Project as set forth in this Agreement shall be at the full risk of the County. 10.8 Non-Appropriation 10.8.1 Consultant acknowledges that County is a governmental entity, and the validity of this Agreement is based upon the availability of public funding under the authority of its statutory mandate. In the event that public funds are unavailable and not appropriated for the performance of County's obligations under this Agreement, then this Agreement shall automatically expire without penalty to County immediately upon written notice to Consultant of the unavailability and non-appropriation of public funds. It is expressly agreed that County shall not activate this non-appropriation provision for its convenience or to circumvent the requirements of this Agreement, but only as an emergency fiscal measure during a substantial fiscal crisis. In the event of a change in the County's statutory authority, mandate and/or mandated functions, by state and/or federal legislative or regulatory action, which adversely affects County's authority to continue its obligations under this Agreement, then this Agreement shall automatically terminate without penalty to County upon written notice to Consultant of such limitation or change in County's legal authority. Revised 1/16 6 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A 10.9 Notices and Signatures 10.9.1 This Agreement together with any amendments or modifications may be executed electronically. All electronic signatures affixed hereto evidence the intent of the Parties to comply with Article 1 I and Article 40 of North Carolina General Statute Chapter 66. 10.9.2 Any notice required by this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested to the following: Orange County Consultant's Name & Address Attention: Gary Donaldson SCS Engineers, PC P.O. Box 8181 15521 Midlothian Turnpike Hillsborough,NC 27278 Suite 305 Midlothian, VA 23113 [SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW] Revised 1/16 7 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties, by and through their authorized agents, have hereunder set their hands and seal, all as of the day and year first above written. COUNTY: Orange County CONSULTANT: SCS Engineers, PC DocuSigned by: DocuSigned by: !991RnE IVUR, RMKAVS� 3/17/2016 ° ' � 3/14/2016 � sae sae County Manager Robert E. Dick, Vice President Printed Name and Title Revised 1/16 8 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A �� � i r �. J/i �% //iii � ii i� !�1"��'N ✓Ji "%'a II mi A mi E 7,. nn„ tl Proposal Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan for Orange County' s Solid Waste Enterprise Fund Presented to: ORANGE COUNT11Y H CA]4 Solid Waste Management Department 200 South Cameron Street Hillsborough, NC 27278 Attn: Gary Donaldson Presented by: SCS ENGINEERS, PC 15521 Midlothian Turnpike Suite 305 Midlothian, VA 23113 (804) 378-7440 Revised March 1, 2016 File No. 02208216 Offices Nationwide www.scsengineers.com DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Table of Contents Section Page 1 Firm Description...................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Relevant Experience and Similar Projects......................................................................................... 1 3 Key Personnel Qualifications...............................................................................................................4 4 Scope of Work —Approach................................................................................................................4 Objectives of the Proposed Study.......................................................................................................5 Scopeof Services...................................................................................................................................5 Task 1 — Project Kickoff Meeting and Collect Background Data.......................................b Deliverablesfor Task 1 ..................................................................................................b Task 2 — Current System Assessment........................................................................................7 Deliverablesfor Task 2.................................................................................................. 8 Task 3 — Cost for the Department to Provide Services.........................................................8 Deliverablesfor Task 3................................................................................................1 1 Task 4 — Comprehensive Report and Additional Presentations (Optional)................... 12 Task 5 — Alternative Scenario Iterations (Optional)........................................................... 12 Task b — Model Training (Optional)...................................................................................... 12 5 Budgetary Fee Estimate.....................................................................................................................13 bProject Schedule...................................................................................................................................13 7 Sample Work Products.......................................................................................................................13 List of Exhibits No. Page Exhibit 1. Selected SCS Solid Waste Financial Projects........................................................................ 2 Exhibit 2. Locations of Selected SCS Solid Waste Financial Analysis and Rate Study Projects....3 Exhibit 3. Typical Data/Information Requests.........................................................................................7 Exhibit 4. Illustrative Pro Forma Model Concept....................................................................................9 Exhibit 5. Examples of Types of Scenario Outputs From SCS Assignments.....................................10 Exhibit b. Orange County Solid Waste Financial Plan Cost Estimate.............................................0-1 Exhibit7. Project Schedule........................................................................................................................14 Appendix A Resumes B Project Profiles C Cost Estimate and Fee Schedule DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan 1 FIRM DESCRIPTION S C S E n g i n e e r s, P C (S C S) is an independent, employee-owned environmental engineering, planning, construction, and operation and maintenance (O&M) services firm. Founded in 1970, SCS has focused on all aspects of solid waste management, including facility design,permitting, engineering, construction and operations. The firm has grown to a staff of nearly 800 engineers, geologists, scientists, constructors, and technicians with 69 offices located throughout the United States. We specialize in solid waste consulting services for local government and private industry clients, and are recognized worldwide for our work. This recognition is the result of successfully completing thousands of complex and innovative solid waste and materials management projects. SCS has been consistently ranked by Engineering News Record for the past 11 years as one of the nation's top solid waste consulting firm. 2 RELEVANT EXPERIENCE AND SIMILAR PROJECTS SCS has completed thousands of solid waste projects for municipal clients throughout the United States. More specifically, SCS has performed the full range of consulting services for solid waste programs, including rate studies, financial assurance cost estimates, financial pro forma modeling, Pay-As-You-Throw(PAYT)program evaluations, recycling program funding and market studies, escrow account analyses, and tipping fee analyses. Our staff has the ability to offer an independent evaluation of solid waste rates and charges that will allow municipal solid waste departments to meet their financial obligations, capital funding needs for system expansion, renewal and replacements, and to set aside appropriate reserve fund balances. Our financial consulting experts have assisted more than 100 clients in the development of solutions for administering solid waste and recycling programs resulting in financial stability. By crafting innovative solutions to our client's problems, we have made formal and information presentations to county commissions, city councils, authority boards, and citizen's advisory boards to gain acceptance of proposed new or revised rate and financial recommendations. Some of SCS' recent projects in the field of solid waste program financial planning are presented in Exhibit 1. A map showing the locations of recent projects within the last 5 years is presented in E xh i b it 2. Project profiles for the most similar project assignments pertaining to solid waste financial plans, which highlight our firm and team's experience with providing these types of services, are provided on the following pages. These projects demonstrate that SCS has the capabilities and personnel to provide a wide range of services relative to complex pro forma modeling, financial analysis and development of financial plans. We have substantial experience working on solid waste planning and facility projects for numerous clients throughout North Carolina including Orange County(County) and Town of Chapel Hill. t DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Exhibit 1 . Selected SCS Solid Waste Financial Projects 1i !� oo1i1i i 1.1'. �,.1. � 1'.1.'•1.'•1.'• 1.1 i1 i 1.1!..'•`•1.'•1.'•1.'•1.'', 1i1f.1!..'.1.'.1.'.1.'.1.'.� 1' Eii ®Vi'I�If1® �1�1,�lllll,��� um�lil,i�!'aly'4'��i rrrrr rrrrrrrrr,,,,,,,,/„„.,,,, r, ,,,,,,,,�, r,,,///////////////////////////////////////Im rrrrrrrrr rrrrr,ric ro;;,,, L�%������������/G� Escambia County, FL Solid Waste Rate Conducted cost of service study which Pro Forma Model to calculate Study included development of long-term plan user rate impacts to City, for system operations and potential cost Authority and countywide savings residents ,rrrrr,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;; „rrr rr r rr rr ,rrrrrrrrr / rrrrry ,. ,ri // / ✓i ,,,- „ -�I�a �5� „"s�a�ii,;:> (�L, e��u�,A✓' r rrrrr,, ,;; rrrrrrrrr rrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rr /////////, �. ,rrrrrrr: /iii ,,,, � rrrrrrr rr ,r r r r,r r rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrvi;;;; r„/ /// //..., r /i r r, rr/r rr r, /r r ,r r rr r rrr, r r c r a a / / vv// 7;�rrrrrrr, r r r r , rr, / ....rrr. Hardee County,FL Infrastructure Comparison of landfilling and out of Comprehensive evaluation of Management Plan county disposal; Review of cost savings CIP; Pro Forma Model for options to county operations and estimating impacts to evaluation of privatization opportunities countywide assessments ,r rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr� I'll';,,,,,rrr.rrr r of aU/ii,,,,,///,„ r , „,,”i,,,, ,,;„,, '„ ,,, 111;[:,rrr,rrr, ,,,[[[[[[[[[ ,,, ...rrr ,„i ,, , ,[t �///%/%/////������������//;iv li7// �"'9////`�//��/ %7%/% ii„v li// /// /�// ��//%�/l/////�//��//i/l//%� %/i City of Springfield, Solid Waste Plan Comprehensive assessment of long-term Economic analysis of PAYT MA collection and disposal alternatives program and development of variable cost structure for City rr ..rrr ,rrr ,rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr /r ///rrrrrrr //// rrrrrrr// ,rrrrr / rr r /iiiiiiiii rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrric rrrrrrrrr / / rr ,r rrr// / rr, r, ,rrrr mono= „r / rr // r/ � rrrrrrrrrv� r / � ao rr rr ooi r rim / r r r / e,nr„ rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr� r r vvvvvori ,rrr/r h /�2 rr r rr „,rrrrr/ r r Rockingham County, Solid Waste Financial assessment of required tip fee Comprehensive Pro Forma VA Management to support County's collection,transfer, Model to evaluate proposed Alternatives Study recycling, and disposal system costs modifications to integrated solid waste program ,rrrrrrr ,rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.. rrrrrrrrr rr 0 000�� 000� DOW vi �y r -„ liiiiiiiiiiii e�laihe�>I? r ,rrr r � r / r ri iii„ (/i r ///////// rr,rrr r/ ,, rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr .rrrrry//;;//////, rrr, r r r r rrr„ rr r,,oi o000 / t r , r. ,rrr rrrrrrrrrrrr, � , r / rrr ,rrrrr /rrr r rr �. oil�///� Island County,WA Operational Detailed assessment of the County's Evaluated County rate model; Assessment and existing operations; Prepared review of CIP and Benchmarking Study recommendations for costs savings and recommendations on reserve benchmarking requirements rrrrr rrrrrrr,/Iwo yr r ,r, riin�,/���..,�,..,,0000ii :;; „ ..� �rrrrr„� r/r 2 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Exhibit 2. Locations of Selected SCS Solid Waste Financial Analysis and Rate Study Projects Wastech,Vancouver,BC# Island County! _ cireciter Upper Valley C ti # M District #R #-_ of Springfield R a Contra Costa County S :�ento� Ci,� o #Cumberlond County City of Pleasanton # improvement Authority City of Oakland a# P ## egham County Santa Clara County Hampton Roads City of Santa Maria! Planning Commission City of Santa Barbara # \ \ � H�II City of Pasadena # Nom# A City of Newport Beach• arcf # w - \ # d Martin AR 3 r UWE ; 0 Y City, a # City of Brooksville # Lake County City of Madeira Beach# Palk County City of Dunedin # City of Riviera Beach Charlotte Count y# # City of Lighthouse Point #Red River Rio Bravo,Tamaulipas,Mexico Borough Marshall Islands # 1 #Borough of °-- Skagway Guantanamo NAS June ®� American Samoa s _ r ro i1v -i♦ ° e go Pogo inset map detail not to scale 3 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan 3 KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS The key personnel for SCS' project team for this assignment will consist of Ms. Stacey Demers, Mr. Bob Dick, PE (Project Manager), Mr. Bob Gardner, PE (Principal Reviewer/Senior Financial Analyst), and Mr. Marc Rogoff, PhD (Project Director). Other SCS solid waste program planning experts who may provide technical support, if warranted, include Ryan Duckett and Josh DeGayner. Brief resumes for the key personnel are presented in Appendix A. SCS can readily provide full professional resumes for each of the professionals that may support the project to the County upon request. We believe these fully demonstrate that our team credentials are outstanding and fully capable of meeting any particular challenges for this assignment. 4 SCOPE OF WORK - APPROACH The Orange County Solid Waste Management Department(Department) is responsible for operating the Orange County Landfill, Orange County Solid Waste Convenience Centers and Orange Community Recycling Programs. The Orange County Solid Waste Department consists of the following four divisions: • Landfill Services Division • Recycling Services Division Sanitation Services Division • Environmental Support Services Division The County's Solid Waste Enterprise Fund (Fund) accounts for revenues and expenses related to the provision of solid waste disposal and recycling activities for the residents of Orange County. The mission statement of the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund is as follows: Mission: To operate public facilities and services receiving and processing various types of inaterials including Municipal Solid Waste, Construction and Demolition Waste, vegetative debris, hazardous waste and recyclable materials in a high quality, reliable, regulatory compliant, cost-effective manner while ensuring the protection of the environment and the health and safety of all County residents. The Fund was previously funded by various fees, such as the basic fee, convenience center fee, urban and rural curbside fees, and multifamily fee, as well as other revenue streams. During the last fiscal year(FY 14-15), the Fund's expenditures exceeded revenues by approximately $4.7 million. Beginning in the tax year 2015, each improved property in Orange County was assessed an annual Solid Waste Programs Fee (SWPF) to fund recycling, waste management, and waste reduction services offered by the County. The fee is included on the annual property tax bill, and is levied by the Orange County Tax Office. This annual single fee for FY 15-16 is $107. SCS understands the fee is levied on each habitable residence, apartment, business or non-profit and funds all the County operated recycling programs as well as about one-third of convenience center costs. This fee is charged to all improved properties in all jurisdictions, including that part of the Town of Chapel Hill within Durham County. SCS understands that this fee is billed to approximately 61,000 parcels within the County. 4 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan The County anticipates that the SWPF, along with additional sources of revenues from the Department's operations and facilities, will not be adequate to cover the expenditures during the current fiscal year(FY 15-16). The amount of the SWPF would need to be escalated in order to fully cover the direct and indirect costs of recycling programs (including curbside, multifamily, commercial recycling, drop-off sites, electronics recycling), household hazardous waste collections,yard waste processing, clean wood waste processing, large appliance and scrap tire management, cardboard and scrap metal recycling. An increase in the fee would be necessary to support approximately 35 percent of the costs of operating Solid Waste Convenience Centers. OBJECTIVES OF THE PROPOSED STUDY The County seeks to retain an experienced solid waste consulting firm to complete a fee study to ensure an appropriate pricing policy to recover operating and capital costs, depreciation, and debt service consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for municipal solid waste enterprise funds. To enable the County to answer specific questions on the SWPF, a Financial Plan(Plan)needs to be developed to further identify, evaluate, and assess the appropriate annual fee amount which is sufficient to manage the County's existing programs over a I0-year planning horizon or so. In essence, the County desires to develop a Pro Forma Financial Model (Model), which will look at operating revenues and costs, as well as any potential debt/loans (as applicable) for the Department's long-term capital improvement plan. It is our understanding that the Model will need to address all programs and facilities included in the Enterprise Fund, and track waste disposal quantities at the Orange County Landfill and provide estimates of revenues back to the County. Furthermore, the County's Chief Financial Officer has developed a financial model for the Enterprise Fund that is used in the roll-up into the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. At the outset of this assignment, SCS will validate this existing Model and see if it can be modified or adapted, or used as input model for the larger Model constructed by SCS. The objective is that the Model should be designed to be flexible enough to enable the Department to evaluate "what if' scenarios and financial analysis of the various options relative to potential operating efficiencies, changes in the assessment of the SWPF upon different user groups (municipal and unincorporated residents), changes in population growth, waste characteristics, Solid Waste Ordinance modifications,potential changes in State regulations, future solid waste disposal options, and future Department programs. The output of the Model will enable the Department to help quantify potential risks of these possible changes to its overall financial plan. SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services will require a well-planned and detailed approach in order to establish current system costs and expected future costs. Based on our extensive experience in conducting cost evaluations of similar solid waste systems, SCS has developed a standard process, which has been successfully applied on more than 50 solid waste cost evaluations and rate studies nationwide. A proposed scope of services is described in the following paragraphs. 5 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Task 1 — Project Kickoff Meeting and Collect Background Data The objective of this "Kickoff Meeting" is to position both SCS and the Department's project team on the "same page." Several deliverables from this meeting include the following: • Meet with Department staff at the start of the project to review the project scope, schedule,project team, and project management approach. SCS will prepare a summary memorandum of the discussion from the kickoff meeting. • Establish a project website using Central Desktop, which is a secure, collaborative workspace that can be accessed by SCS and County personnel from any internet- connected computer or mobile device. Central Desktop is a web-based project file sharing/collaboration site that allows for the storage and dissemination of project information such as background information,project reports, and other deliverables, and project management such as invoices,progress reports, and schedule updates. • Obtain from the Department and review key background financial documents associated with the history of solid waste management in the County and a copy of the County's Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures for the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund. • SCS will gather additional current information on the Department's solid waste facilities and operations as required to supplement the information maintained in SCS' existing project files. The additional information will be provided by both public agencies and private sector service providers (refer to Exhibit 3). This information and data will be gathered during onsite interviews of facility operators and agency managers and supplemented by email surveys and research of published sources of information. The objective of Task 1 is to provide a baseline of information for Tasks 2 and 3. Deliverables for Task 1 Based on our extensive solid waste industry experience, we will evaluate current collection, landfill, and recycling operations and other non-landfill programs in light of trends and proposed changes. We will use pertinent demographic data, solid waste generation statistics, and financial data in order to create an Orange County Pro Forma Financial Model, which can serve as the basis of the cost impact analysis of alternative waste management scenarios under Optional Task 5. Notes from the meeting, as well as an overview of the Pro Forma Model approach, will be summarized in a Task 1 Interim Report and distributed for review and approval. 6 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Exhibit 3. Typical Data/Information Requests IMEMEMEN 1 //, r/" FY Monthly Expenses and Year End Projections Underlying Budget Assumptions that Reflect Agency's Policies Refuse Rate History Account Totals and Comparisons Organizational Chart and Staff Allocations Trial Balance Reports Capital Improvements and Fleet Management Plans Prior Rate Audit Reports Task 2 — Current System Assessment This task is designed to clearly summarize the Department's recent financial operating performance. Therefore, an important step in the process is to gather and analyze financial and operational information(refer to Exhibit 3). The financial information needed will include: • The general ledger trail balance for the most recently completed two fiscal years. The general ledger trail balance includes detailed line item revenues and expenditures for the Department, as well as the beginning and ending reserve balances. • Fiscal year-to-date revenues and expenditures. Year-to-date amounts will be annualized to project the operating results for the current year. • Debt and loan service schedules, if any. • Operating and capital improvement project budgets. • Countywide financial policies and procedures (fund balance requirements, coverage to meet operating costs, emergency reserve funds (Acts of God), etc. 7 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan The operational information needed will include: • Quantities of solid waste, recyclable materials, white good, HHW and other similar materials collected at the various Department solid waste facilities. We will use data supplied by the Department in its fiscal year budgets, but work with the Department to estimate the number of customers and tonnages delivered by customers. • Estimated costs for non-routine operational expenses for active and closed landfill units (e.g., emergency repairs to the cap, groundwater remediation, etc. for the Orange County Landfill. • County population and demographic data that would impact potential waste and recyclables flows to Department facilities. • Estimates of other State "landfill bans" as well as organic diversion initiatives and their impact on waste deliveries to Department facilities. Once this historical information has been gathered, SCS will analyze it to evaluate its reasonableness. This will be done by calculating operating and cost statistics for each respective service operations and measure it against benchmarking data collected by SCS in other similar solid waste system assignments. These data and information will be summarized in a series of diagrams and graphs. Deliverables for Task 2 A Task 2 Interim Report will be issued summarizing the results of the current system assessment, which will include: • A list of all landfill and non-landfill related services provided by the Department; • The approximate labor devoted to the services provided; • Evaluation of"indirect costs"which are paid by the Department to the County; • The extent to which Department personnel deliver other services not enumerated; • The total cost of providing landfill and non-landfill related services; • A review of the existing Solid Waste Program Fee ($107 per year); and, • A comparison of the best management practices related to optimizing revenue and expenses of peer jurisdictions. Task 3 — Cost for the Department to Provide Services Based on the current system assessment, SCS will estimate the costs for the Department to provide solid waste and recycling program services, administer non-landfill programs, and fund the other expenditures that the Enterprise Fund serves. The cost estimate will consider a 10-year term and will include labor and equipment that is necessary to provide the current service. The Pro Forma Model(refer to Exhibit 4)will provide a means to evaluate these costs. The cost-benefit analysis will include an estimate of the "revenue requirement"required to be paid by the assessment of the annual SWPF. It is the total amount of money the Department 8 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan must collect to pay expenditures needed to provide its targeted levels of service while meeting its financial requirements (e.g., funding debt service obligations, maintaining coverage ratios, and maintaining fund balance requirements). The revenue requirement also will include capital expenditures that are paid out of current SWPF Assessments and not paid by cash or loan proceeds. The revenue requirement for the current year will be established by annualizing the fiscal year- to-date cash expenditures. Additionally, adjustments will be made by SCS for any significant non-recurring expenditure (e.g., one-time payments at the end of the fiscal year). Revenue requirements for future years would then be projected by applying anticipated changes in the Department's expenditures to the current revenue requirement. These changes may include such items as: inflation, increases in worker' wages, fuel adjustments, and tipping fee adjustments. They may also include expected costs for new projects and new programs. In addition to projected cash expenditures, any adjustments will be made to account for required increases, if any, in the Fund balance or debt service ratios. Exhibit 4. Illustrative Pro Forma Model Concept GIP COLLECTION UNRESTRICTED CASH SYSTEM TRANSFER/DISPOSAL RESERVES REQUIREMENTS RECYCLING ANNUAL Revenues FINANCIAL Less: O&M Expanses SYSTEM MANAGEMENT Less' Existing Debt Service REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM Less: New Debt Service =ANNUAL NET CASH COST OF SERVICE &RATE STUDY PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS RATE STRUCTURE REVENUE/RATE PLAN RECOMMEND RATE STRUCTURE COST OF SERVICE !PROGRAM AN FULLY ALLOCATED COST OF SERVICE STUDY RATESTRUCTURE ALTERNATIVES RATES&CHARGES CUSTOMER IMPACT ' SPECIFIC RATES, IMPACT ON CUSTOMERS' CHARGES&FEES MONTHLY BILL 9 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan The process of allocating the revenue requirement is simply a matter of seeking to identify the cause and effect relationship between various types of cost, and the activities and use of resources that cause those costs to be incurred. Those activities and use of resources that cause cost to be incurred are cost drivers. For example, the waste quantities collected is the cost driver for disposal expense. Direct costs are those types of cost which can be obviously and directly associated with a particular type of service. Facility wages and disposal expenses are examples of direct costs because they can often be attributable to a particular type of service. For example, the wages paid to operators of these facilities can be readily assigned to those customers. The disposal expense incurred when those waste quantities are sent to their ultimate disposal point can also be readily assigned to customers. However, this cause and effect relationship is not always obvious for all types of cost. Indirect costs are those types of costs that are shared among different types of operations and are not readily linked to a particular type of service. Examples of indirect costs include overhead such as building rents, utilities, management salaries, and allocation of cost from other departments. The process of allocating the revenue requirements by SCS is typically a two-step process. First, we assign direct costs to each customer sector based on the appropriate cost driver for each type of cost. Second, the remaining indirect costs are assigned to each customer sector based on each sector's proportionate amount of direct costs. For each customer sector, the combination of direct and indirect costs comprises the revenue requirement. Once the preceding steps are completed, SCS will finalize the Pro Forma Model. SCS will then work with the Department to utilize the Pro Forma Model,which will be constructed specifically for this project, to construct a series of sensitivity analyses to evaluate the fund balance implications of various critical parameters such as changes to the consumer price index (CPI), fuel costs, changes in State laws, changes in population, cash versus debt financing, and alternative levels of services at the Department facilities, etc. Exhibit 5 presents examples of alternative scenario outputs from completed SCS assignments. Exhibit 5. Examples of Types of Scenario Outputs From SCS Assignments COMPARISON OF ENDING FUND BALANCES WITH RATE SCENARIOS W $6,000,000 Z $4,000,000 No Rate change Q $2,000,000 CPI Adjustment Z $0 _ 10.4%Annual Adjustment+Cash Vehicle U_ FY2T" w° X12009 f Y2010 FY2011 Financing Z -10.4%Annual Adjustment+Loan Vehicle G ($4,000,000) Financing Z W ($6,000,000) FISCAL YEAR 10 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan 30-year Net Pre5erit Value,$ at 5% Discount Factor $120 $71- - - - mn a20 mui ............ .......... XI 4P Deliverables for Task 3 A Task 3 Preliminary Report will be issued summarizing the input parameters and results of the financial modeling performed under this task. The Report will include the following: • Recommendations for a methodology for determining the appropriate Solid Waste Program Fee; • Projections of Program Fee to cover anticipated costs over the next 5-year period; • Additional potential solid waste and recycling program markets and revenue streams; • Recommendations for recovering full program costs using the user fee or addressing the deficit within the County tax rate. SCS will prepare a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation of the findings and recommendations and conduct formal presentations at two meetings: • The SCS Project Manager and/or other Project Team members will make a presentation to the Solid Waste Advisory Group and County leaders (i.e., County Manager, Chief Financial Officer, etc.); • SCS will deliver a presentation during a scheduled workshop or agenda meeting with the Board of County Commissioners. tt DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Task 4 — Comprehensive Report and Additional Presentations (Optional ) If desired by the County, at the conclusion of Task 3, SCS can combine the interim and preliminary reports from Tasks 1 through 3 into a Draft Comprehensive Report for review and comment by the Department and County staff. After receipt of final comments, SCS will issue a Final Report. This task will cover additional PowerPoint presentations of any alternative scenario iterations and any additional meetings with County leaders to make additional presentations, if requested by the County. Finally, three (3) copies of the Final Comprehensive Report will be transmitted to the Department for its use along with an electronic copy. Task 5 — Alternative Scenario Iterations (Optional) The process of developing a Solid Waste Financial Plan will likely yield recommendations for alternative funding scenarios, which involve additional iterations that vary the input parameters of the Pro Forma Financial Model. As part of our analysis under this Task, SCS will perform subsequent iterations of the Model as directed by the County, such as estimating how much of the revenue required should come from each customer sector(e.g., municipal residents, unincorporated residents). The purpose of allocating the revenue requirements among customer classes is two-fold. First, it enables the Department to compare the revenue requirement for each customer class with the revenue generated by that customer sector. This comparison enables SCS to help determine the extent to which the Department is achieving the goal of rate equity among its customer classes. Second, it provides a target revenue amount for use in implementing adjustments to the annual SWPF or establishing new rates, if any. Task 6 — Model Training (Optional ) At the conclusion of Task 3 (or Task 5, if authorized), SCS can also provide detailed training for Department and County staff on the use of the Model, including full documentation of the Model. We have found on past projects that the training has been well-received and enables client staff to fully utilize the Models we have developed for future budgeting purposes and to answer questions from County decision-makers in a timely manner without our assistance. This training has been given in a number of different ways, either face-to-face in a workshop or conducted using Webinar software like WebEx, Lync, GoToMeeting, or similar software. This varies from client to client based on available IT resources and desires for additional training. 12 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan 5 BUDGETARY FEE ESTIMATE SCS proposes to perform the tasks associated with development of the Solid Waste Financial Plan on a time-and-materials basis in accordance with SCS' standard rates in effect at the time of performance (refer to Appendix Q. A budgetary fee estimate presenting a breakdown of costs by task is presented in Exhibit 6 (refer to Appendix C) and a summary of the subtotals for Tasks 1 through 3, as well as Optional Tasks 4 through 6, is presented below. SCS proposes to invoice the County on a monthly basis. • Tasks 1 —3 $19,750 • Optional Tasks 4— 6 $15,000 Total Fee $34,750 6 PROJECT SCHEDULE SCS is available to commence work on the project upon receiving the County's authorization to proceed. We anticipate conducting the Kick-Off teleconference under Task 1 on 3/2/16. The proposed project schedule is presented on Exhibit 7. 7 SAMPLE WORK PRODUCTS SCS can provide the following project deliverable documents that are illustrative of our experience on similar financial assessment projects, as well as highlighting similarities to the financial plan assignment proposed by the County: • Comprehensive Review of Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Options, Town of Chapel Hill,NC, October 2012. • Update to Solid Waste Management for Southside Hampton Roads Planning Horizon 2011-2047, Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, VA, October 2011. • Solid Waste Rate Study, Matanuska-Susitna Borough, AK, May 2010. • Solid Waste Rate Study, Perdido Landfill, Escambia County, FL, September 2007. Solid Waste Rate Setting and Financing Guide, APWA, August 2007 (Marc Rogoff, PhD of SCS Engineers served as lead author). 13 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Solid Waste Financial Plan for County's Solid Waste Enterprise Fund Orange County, North Carolina ID Task Name Duration Start Finish March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June 20 2/28- 3/6 3/13.3/20 3/27-4/3 -4/10 4/17-4/24 5/1 _ 5/815/15 5/22.5/29 6/5 -6/12_ 1 Project Kick-Off 0 days', Wed 3/2/16', Wed 3/2/16: 3/2 2 Task 1 -Collect Background Data 10 days', Wed 3/2/16', Tue 3/15/16 3 Develop Pro Forma Financial Model 1 wk Wed 3/2/16 Tue 3/8/16 4 Develop Task 1 Interim Report 1 wk Wed 3/9/16' Tue 3/15/16 5 Task 2-Current Solid Waste System Assessment 10 days', Wed 3/16/16', Tue 3/29/16 6 Analyze Finanical and Operational Information 1 wk'' Wed 3/16/16', Tue 3/22/16: 7 Develop Task 2 Interim Report 1 wk' Wed 3/23/16' Tue 3/29/16 8 Task 3-Cost of Service Evaluation 50 days', Wed 3/30/16', Tue 6/7/16 9 Develop Cost-Benefit Analysis 1 wk' Wed 3/30/16', Tue 4/5/16 10 Finalize Pro Forma Model 2 wks' Wed 4/6/16' Tue 4/19/16: 11 SCS Develops Draft Report 8 days' Wed 4/20/16' Fri 4/29/16 12 Submit Draft Report to County 0 days', Fri 4/29/16', Fri 4/29/16 13 County Review&Comment of Draft Report 2 wks'' Mon 5/2/16'' Fri 5/13/16_ 14 Incorporate County Comments 1 wk', Mon 5/16/16', Fri 5/20/16 15 Submit Final Task 3 Report 0 days Fri 5/20/16 Fri 5/20/16 ♦� 16 Presentation to Solid Waste Advisory Group 0 days Fri 5/27/16 Fri 5/27/16 17 Presentation to Board of County Commissioners 0 days' Tue 6/7/16' Tue 6/7/16 Task Project Summary Manual Summary Rollup Milestone ♦ Group By Summary Manual Summary Summary Inactive Task Start-only Project:02216201.00 Rolled Up Task Inactive Milestone Finish-only Date:Tue 3/1/16 Rolled Up Milestone O Inactive Milestone External Tasks Rolled Up Progress Inactive Summary „ „ External Milestone Split Manual Task Progress External Tasks Duration-only ���� ,���� - Deadline Page 1 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Appendix A Resumes DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan ROBERT E. DICK, PE Education B.S.— Civil Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1989 Professional Licenses Professional Engineer-Virginia and North Carolina Professional Affiliations American Society of Civil Engineers National Society of Professional Engineers Virginia Waste Industries Association, Past Chapter Chair Solid Waste Association of North America Southwest Virginia Solid Waste Management Association International Solid Waste Association Virginia State Advisory Board on Air Pollution Professional Experience Mr. Dick joined SCS in 1990 and works on civil and environmental engineering projects related to solid and hazardous waste management and is a Vice President responsible for SCS' operations in the Richmond, Virginia office. He has performed landfill and landfill gas (LFG) engineering projects (design,permitting, and construction) in more than 15 states and several foreign countries. He has worked on over 25 major landfill multi-task assignments involving new landfill cell construction, vertical and lateral expansion, closure,post-closure care, groundwater monitoring, phasing operations, and financial assurance, and has performed over 150 landfill gas projects involving landfill gas migration control, odor control, emissions control and Clean Air Act compliance, energy recovery/utilization, and carbon credit monetization. Other project assignments have involved work related to material recovery facility permitting and operations, solid waste management planning, air permitting at industrial facilities, stormwater management, storage tanks, brownfields projects, and wetlands. Examples of his project experience include: Solid Waste Collections and Disposal Options Study 2012 Town of Chapel Hill, NC Department of Public Works Project Director for a conduct a comprehensive review of the Town's solid waste collections and disposal systems, and to evaluate and identify options for enhancing and improving these systems to assist the Town's solid waste management planning efforts considering immediate and future regional solid waste management challenges. Project tasks involved review of existing solid waste collections and costs for residential and commercial programs (MSW,yard waste, and recycling), evaluate solid waste collection efficiency improvement options (collections routing and scheduling, automated collection, single-stream recycling, Pay-As-You- Throw, privatization/franchising), evaluate waste disposal options (transfer stations, MRFs, landfills), evaluate Waste-to-Energy/Waste Conversion Technologies, and financial analysis. Hanes Mill Road Landfill —Winston-Salem, NC 1997 — Present City of Winston-Salem / Forsyth County Utilities Commission Project Director for economic analysis of landfill gas-to-energy (LFGE) facility involving development of pro forma financial model to assist City's negotiations to modify Landfill Gas A- 1 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Rights Agreement with LFGE developer. Evaluation included assessment of historical and future expenditures and revenue associated with LFGE project including sales rate, royalty payments, tax credits, and license fees. North Wake, East Wake, Feltonsville, and South Wake Landfills: 1999 - Present Wake County, NC Solid Waste Management Division Wake County, NC Facilities Design & Construction Project Director for multi-task projects involving landfill redevelopment and end use planning, landfill post-closure planning, LFG remediation and migration control, LFGE, air quality permitting and compliance, GHG emission reductions, erosion and sediment control plans, and implementation of environmental management programs at the closed North Wake, East Wake, and Feltonsville landfills, and the active South Wake Landfill. Specific assignments include: • Responsible for air quality permitting and compliance, including development of air permit applications,participation in NCDEQ inspections, compliance reporting,NSPS Design Plan. Prepared the Facility's annual emissions statement and supporting calculations for submittal to NCDEQ in accordance with the air permit requirements. Developed the Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Plan for the LFGE project. • Directed design of proposed LFG collection and control system for the closed and active landfills involving construction drawings and specifications, developed construction cost estimates,provided bid assistance services, and construction administration. Project activities included permit documentation for wastewater industrial discharge permit, solid waste permits, air modeling and permitting, and erosion/sedimentation control plan. • Directed multiple efforts related to existing and proposed LFGE projects, including feasibility studies, economic analyses, communications with third-party developers and industrial end users, assistance during RFP solicitations and contract negotiations. Due Diligence for LFGE Project Financing Project Manager for multiple independent engineering assessments and financial analyses in support of due diligence activities for financing of landfill gas-to-energy facilities throughout the US. Clients for these assignments have been financial institutions (John Hancock, Paribus) as well as LFGE developers (Gas Recovery Services, ZAPCO) and the LFG utilization projects have been located in MA,NH,New Jersey,New York, Pennsylvania, VT, and VA. Specific tasks included review of the project cash flows and underlying revenues attributed to energy sales and tax credits as well as capital and operational expenses. Financial Assurance Project Assignments Project Director for assignments at multiple landfills, MRFs, and other solid waste management facilities to develop closure and post-closure cost estimates for purposes of negotiating financial assurance mechanism amounts with regulatory agencies and compliance with financial assurance regulations. Specific facilities involving financial assurance task assignments include: • NRRA Cloyd's Mountain Landfill, Dublin, VA 2006—Present • Shoosmith Sanitary Landfill, Chester, VA 2004—Present • AMRF Materials Recovery Facility, Culpeper, VA, 2011 A-2 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan ROBERT B. GARDNER, PE, BCEE Education ME— Civil Engineering (Environmental), University of Virginia, 1980 BS—Civil Engineering, University of Virginia, 1979 Professional Licenses Professional Engineer—Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi,New Jersey,New York, South Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, Puerto Rico Specialty Certifications Board Certified Environmental Engineer (BCEE), Solid Waste Management Professional Affiliations American Academy of Environmental Engineers American Society of Civil Engineers Solid Waste Association of North America National Society of Professional Engineers National Solid Waste Management Association Professional Experience As a Senior Vice President, Mr. Gardner is responsible for overseeing SCS's nationwide solid waste management practice, which includes landfill engineering, landfill gas management, solid waste studies, landfill environmental systems, operation and maintenance, and construction. Mr. Gardner works closely with SCS's national and regional clients. Since joining SCS in 1980, he has completed solid waste, hazardous waste, environmental assessment, facility design, compliance audit, and other environmental study projects. Several relevant rate study and financial analysis projects are summarized below: Page County, VA, Pro Forma Cost Model for County's Landfill and Other Solid Waste Operations, Luray, Virginia. Project Director responsible for development of a pro forma cost model for the County's Battle Creek Landfill and other solid waste operations. The cost model included projections for remaining service life as a function of incoming solid waste quantities, and operational expenses such as labor and associated overhead, equipment, materials, miscellaneous items, capital expenses for cell expansion, equipment, and closure construction, and post-closure care expenses. The pro forma model was developed to provide a tool for the County to track and project future expenses and establish appropriate tip fees to fund its solid waste program. Rockingham County, VA, Pro Forma Analysis of Solid Waste Management Alternatives. Project Director responsible for preparing a pro forma analysis of the County's existing landfill operations and proposed modifications to its collection, transfer, recycling, and disposal systems, A-3 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan including alternative strategies for maximizing the service life of the Rockingham County Sanitary Landfill, out-of-county hauling and disposal, and construction of a transfer station and material recovery facility in conjunction with the with the City of Harrisonburg's Waste-to- Energy facility. The pro forma model projects labor, equipment, capital construction, closure, post-closure care, and other miscellaneous operational costs through the active life of the landfill; estimates the remaining service life of the landfill under various disposal scenarios, and provides a tool for assessing the required tip fee to support the estimated County solid waste collection, recycling and disposal costs. Sistemas Ambientales del Noreste, LLC (SANO), Pro Forma Evaluation of Landfill Development and Operations. Project Director responsible for development of a pro forma model to evaluate the projected capital, operation, and maintenance costs for new landfill located in a rural area in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas to serve customers in Mexico and southeast Texas. The pro forma cost and revenue model also provided projections of waste flows, cell depletion, closure and post-closure costs, capital sequencing for new cell development, closure, and equipment, and pricing strategies to assist SANO in financial planning for the continued development of the SANO Landfill. The model allows for estimating the financial performance of the landfill and remaining service life under various disposal and market rate scenarios. Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, VA, Development of a Solid Waste Management System for 2010 and Beyond (Update of the 2018 and Beyond Initial Study). Project Director responsible for the update of the evaluation of alternatives and recommendations for managing solid waste in the south Hampton Roads Region after 2018, when the current agreements between Chesapeake, Franklin, Isle of Wight County,Norfolk, Portsmouth, Southampton County, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and the Southeastern Public Service Authority (SPSA) expire. This updated study builds off the work study completed in November 2008 and accounts for the significant changes in the solid waste system that occurred between 2008 and 2010 (e.g., sale of RDF WTE Facilities to Wheelabrator, significantly reducing landfill operations, and terminating recycling services to the Region). A major task was the development of pro forma models to evaluate alternatives, facilitation with the Chief Administrative Officers from each City and County involved in the process, and preparation of final recommendations and report. The pro forma modeling task including detailed cost and revenue projections for the entire solid waste system. The system costs included capital and operating expenses for the solid waste system, including equipment purchases for the transfer station, transfer fleet, and landfill, new cell and closure construction, transfer station upgrades, and operating expenses for the landfill, transfer station, and transfer fleet. Year by year system tip fees, debt service, depreciation and amortization expenses, accruals, and other expenses were estimated. Town of Chapel Hill, NC, Town of Chapel Hill, Comprehensive Review of Solid Waste Collections, Transportation, and Disposal Options. Reviewing Principal responsible for development of the pro forma financial model to evaluate various solid waste scenarios for the Town, which were evaluated as a part of planning efforts in anticipation of the closure of regional solid waste disposal facility, Orange Co. Landfill, in June 2013. A major task of the project was developing a detailed pro forma cost and revenue model for the entire solid waste system and projecting system costs and revenues for various alternative system configurations. A-4 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan MARC J . ROGOFF, PH . D. Education M.B.A.,University of Tampa, Finance, 1986 Ph.D., Michigan State University, Resource Development, 1979 M.S., Cornell University, Soil Science, 1975 B.S., Cornell University, Environmental Science, 1973 Professional Licenses Certified Environmental Professional, CEP No. 322 Qualified Environmental Professional, QEP,No. 4970062 Professional Affiliations American Public Works Association(APWA) International Solid Waste Association(ISWA) Recycle Florida Today Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) Professional Experience Dr. Rogoff is an expert in the evaluation of solid waste rates, cost allocation studies, system valuations, and the development of master and financial plans for solid waste enterprises. His efforts have included the development of detailed spreadsheet rate models establishing the financial feasibility of each project, long-term economic forecasts, and projected rate impact upon project users and customers. During the course of his governmental and consulting career, Dr. Rogoff has directed or conducted more than two dozen solid waste rate analyses as well as engineer's feasibility reports resulting in$1.2 billion in solid waste financings. Some of his most recent financial analysis projects include the following: Town of Chapel Hill, NC, Town of Chapel Hill, Comprehensive Review of Solid Waste Collections, Transportation, and Disposal Options. Task Manager for development of the Pro Forma Financial Model to evaluate various solid waste scenarios for the Town,which were evaluated as a part of planning efforts in anticipation of the closure of regional solid waste disposal facility, Orange Co. Landfill, in June 2013. A major task of the project was developing a detailed pro forma cost and revenue model for the entire solid waste system and projecting system costs and revenues for various alternative system configurations. Charlotte County, FL, Tipping Fee and Assessment Study, Project Manager for conducting a detailed cost of service study for the county's solid waste system, including an evaluation of the CIP, labor, O&M, and energy costs for a five year planning period. Developed a cost allocation model for municipal, commercial and unincorporated customers for use of system assets. A Pro Forma Model was constructed to project various kinds of"what if' analysis for county decision makers. Hardee County, FL, Feasibility Study of Solid Waste Infrastructure Needs, Project Manager for development of a strategic business plan to address the County's solid waste infrastructure needs. The study determined the technical and economic feasibility of several major alternatives such as: A-5 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan developing a new landfill infrastructure,transfer solid waste out of county, and expand the existing landfill footprint. A Pro Forma model was constructed to analyze the feasibility of these three options. Center for Clean Air Policy, D.C., Task Manager for assessment of greenhouse gas reductions with recycling of municipal solid waste into fuel (RDF) for use by major cement manufacturers in Colombia. Constructed a detailed Pro Forma Model which allowed the clients to evaluate six different sized RDF, in-vessel composting, and windrow composting alternatives. City of Springfield, MA, Solid Waste Collection Master Plan, Task Manager for assessment of long- term solid waste collection and disposal system improvements. Crafted a detailed rate model to assist the clients in analyzing the impacts of various plan alternatives on customer rates. The model incorporated the potential application of PAYT or variable rate options for use in their automated collection program. City of Lawton, OK, Recycling Feasibility Study. Project Manager for analysis of City options for solid waste collection and recycling, including operation of the City citizens drop-off centers. The project will entail development of a Pro Forma Model to help the City evaluate private vendor proposals for design, construct, and operation of a mixed-waste MRF. Escambia County, FL, Solid Waste Rate Study and Landfill Valuation Study. Project Manager for performing a solid waste rate and cost of service study for the County's solid waste system. This study required a detailed evaluation of the long-term revenue requirements of the system, including an analysis of the CIP, changes in State law, economic conditions, and solid waste flow. As an outgrowth of the rate study, conducted an economic valuation study calculating the income stream of the facility as well as the replacement value of fixed assets (land,buildings, and facilities). Island County, WA. Operational Assessment and Benchmarking Study. Project Manager of an assessment of County's solid waste transfer system. Study involved benchmarking of staffing and financial areas (operations costs,required reserves)with similar facilities nationally. City of Lakeland Collection Study, FL, Project Manager for a comprehensive evaluation of the City's solid waste collection system. Helped develop a Pro Forma Model to analyze customer fee impacts with the proposed transition to automated collection and single-stream recycling and away from alley collection. Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, VA, Development of a Solid Waste Management System for 2010 and Beyond (Update of the 2018 and Beyond Initial Study). Task Manager for the development of pro forma models to evaluate alternatives, facilitation with the Chief Administrative Officers from each City and County involved in the process, and preparation of final recommendations and report. The pro forma modeling task including detailed cost and revenue projections for the entire solid waste system. The system costs included capital and operating expenses for the solid waste system, including equipment purchases for the transfer station,transfer fleet, and landfill,new cell and closure construction,transfer station upgrades, and operating expenses for the landfill,transfer station, and transfer fleet. Year by year system tip fees, debt service, depreciation and amortization expenses, accruals, and other expenses were estimated. Cumberland County Improvement Authority, NJ, Engineer's Feasibility Report for Bond Issue, Project Manager for conducting an engineer's feasibility report for expansion of the Authority's solid waste system. This report resulted in the issuance of$25 million of development bonds for several major capital projects. A-6 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Appendix B Project Profiles DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Tipping Fee and Sanitation Assessment Study Charlotte County, Florida Client Charlotte County,Florida(County)retained SCS Engineers (SCS)to Charlotte County conduct a tipping fee and sanitation district assessment study for the Public Works—Solid Waste County's solid waste system. Based on data and information Division provided by County staff, a Pro Forma rate model(Model)was 25550 Harbor view Road, Unit 2 developed,which enabled SCS to make projections of financial Port Charlotte,FL 33982 performance of solid waste collection and disposal for the upcoming Contact planning period(FY 2014-2018) and model different possible rate Richard Allen structures. 941 764-4393 Richard.Allen @charlottefl.com The over objective of the rate study was to determine the solid waste Contract Amount fees and assessments required to adequately recover the costs of $31,000 providing those services to the customers. In the this case, SCS first evaluated the costs of the various Department cost centers (landfill, convenience center station operations,management of illegal Dates dumping and household hazardous waste programs,recycling 2012- education and outreach, and environmental monitoring). We then Key Personnel analyzed programmed and projected capital outlays for equipment Marc Rogoff, Ph.D. replacement and capital projects and the use of the existing solid waste fund balance or reserves. A test year was then developed to project annual revenue requirements. We then worked with County staff to project changes in anticipated costs due to inflation, labor Highlights increases, facility and vehicle maintenance,waste flows,planning • Development of Pro Forma costs, and projected changes in State regulations. Lastly,we Model projected these costs for the countywide non-ad valorem solid waste • Complete Analysis of Existing assessment for residential units in the unincorporated areas. and Proposed Economic Drivers ✓ Detailed Financial Plan SCS' final financial plan and report provides a discussion of the methodology used to conduct the analysis, the revenue requirements of the Program as determined by the analysis, and proposed three Pp options of tipping fees and non ad valorem assessments to be considered by the Charlotte County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC): irr' u� • Option I was a"no change" option assuming that estimated deficits in tipping fees would be met by using available funds in the Department's reserves. Mid-County Convenience Center • Option 2 was a"full recovery"option assuming a full recovery of estimated landfill revenue needs. 0 Option 3 was a"CPI adjustment" option that assumes an annual estimated 2 percent CPI adjustment would be made in the landfill tipping fee for a partial recovery of the estimated landfill revenue needs. B- 1 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Comprehensive Review of Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Options Town of Chapel Hill , North Carolina Client The Town of Chapel Hill (the Town) contracted SCS Engineers Town of Chapel Hill, NC (SCS) to provide professional engineering services for this Contact Comprehensive Review of Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Ms.Wendy Simmons Options (the Study). The purpose of the Study was to examine SW Superintendent the Town's current solid waste collections and disposal 91 9.969.5123 programs to identify opportunities to enhance these services, wsimmons@townofchapelhill.org improve efficiencies, and evaluate the applicability of Contract Amount innovative technological developments in the solid waste $1 35,000 industry, including: recycling, automated collection, re-use, Dates organics diversion, waste conversion, and waste-to-energy 2012 (WTE). The results of this evaluation was used by Town Council, Solid Waste Services Division(SWSD) staff and other Key Personnel Robert Gardner, PE Town staff to guide decision making when considering current Robert Dick, PE and future solid waste management issues. This study also Stacey Demers reviewed opportunities for collaborative partnership to assist in Marc Rogoff enhancing the solid waste management system. Lastly, when Highlights (optional) evaluating identified options, the Study considered the Town's • Solid waste planning organizational values, and commitment to sustainability social • Recycling analysis equity, economic vitality and environmental stewardship. ✓ collections SCS evaluated a series of issues and alternatives relative to the ✓ Automated/Manual Town's solid waste collection (automated versus manual), ✓ Transfer station analysis disposal, and recycling functions. A major task of the project ✓ Disposal analysis was developing a detailed pro forma cost and revenue model ✓ Pay as you throw(PAYT) for the entire solid waste system and projecting system costs ✓ Pro forma analysis and revenues for various alternative system configurations. ✓ Alternatives analysis The costs included capital and operating expenses for the solid waste system, including solid waste collection, transfer and ✓ conversion technologies disposal, siting and developing a new landfill, siting and ✓ waste-to-energy developing a new transfer station, contracting for transfer ✓ organics diversion operations, and optimizing the residential and commercial collection fleet. Year by year system tip fees, debt service, depreciation and amortization expenses, accruals, and other expenses were estimated to estimate residential and commercial rates for solid waste services. The major findings, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from these evaluations were summarized in the final report. Background information on the Town's demographics, solid waste generation, current solid waste system and budget, and operational practices was presented. SCS made several presentations to the Town Council. B-2 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Rate Modeling for Solid Waste Management System Southside Hampton Roads , Virginia Client SCS assisted the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission (HRPDC) and its member local governments (Chesapeake, Franklin, Hampton Roads Planning District Norfolk, Portsmouth, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach and the Counties Commission 723 Woodlake Drive g Southampton)and of Isle of Wi ht develop and evaluate a solid Chesapeake,VA 23320 waste management system for the Southside of Hampton Roads. SCS was specifically tasked with evaluating and recommending the Contact most cost-effective,technically and institutionally feasible, sustainable, and environmentally responsible approach to solid John Carlock waste management for the 30-year period beyond 2018,when (757)(757) 420-8300 420-8 dcva.gov contracts between SPSA and the eight participating communities expire. Contract Amount The Southeastern Public Service Authority of Virginia(SPSA) $383,000 currently manages the integrated regional solid waste management system,which includes a regional landfill,waste-to-energy plant, Dates transfer stations, composting facilities,recycling operations, and other specialized facilities. 2007-2008 (Initial Report) 2010-201 1 (Updated Report) The project included a review of existing solid waste facilities and systems, evaluation of future needs and facilities, consideration of Key Personnel institutional models, and coordination with the regional Robert Gardner, PE, BCEE communities. SCS completed the initial study in November 2008. Keith Matteson, PE At that time the Chief Administrative Officers (CAOs) of the Michelle Leonard region elected to defer action on the report until it could resolve Marc Rogoff, Ph.D. other financial issues associated with the Southeastern Public Bruce Clark, PE, BCEE Service Authority, which was accomplished in 2009-2010. The Lisa McDaniel CAOs then asked SCS to re-evaluate the its previous study in light of the changes in the solid waste system and provide information and recommendations that could be used to guide their decisions regarding the management of solid waste after 2018. The revised analysis was presented in September 2011. P $ SCS conducted to following tasks: Flnul Info rlm Repo-rlQ Solid we:e nnnnnge"'en fe.✓ s 'i.9 H gn. 2 a°2047 A major task of the project was developing a detailed pro forma Planning Nerizen 2018-2061¶ cost and revenue model for the entire solid waste system and projecting system costs and revenues. The system costs included ,Paoa.µ9 capital and operating expenses for the solid waste system, including equipment purchases for the transfer station, transfer fleet, and landfill, new cell and closure construction, transfer station upgrades, and operating expenses for the landfill, transfer station, and transfer fleet. Year by year system tip fees, debt service, depreciation and amortization expenses, accruals, and other expenses were estimated. B-3 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan Appendix C Cost Estimate and Fee Schedule DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A KESUMMEEM EXHIBIT 6.ORANGE COUNTY SOLID WASTE FINANCIAL PLAN COST ESTIMATE Opti_i Optional Optional TASK 1 TASK 2 TASK 3 TASK 4 TASK 5 TASK 6 Kick-Off Meeting& Current Programs Cost-of-Service Analysis SUBTOTAL _ Final Report& Alternative Model TOTAL SCS ENGINEERS,PC Rate Review Background Assessment &SWPF Modeling TASKS 1-3 _ Additional Presentations Scenario Iterations Training TASKS 1-6 LABOR CATEGORY $/hr Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost - Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Principal Reviewer $ 215 $ - $ - 4 $ 860 4 $ 860- $ - 2 $ 430 $ - 6 $ 1,290 Project Director $ 195 12 $ 2,340 12 $ 2,340 36 $ 7,020 60 $ 11,700- 24 $ 4,680 16 $ 3,120 10 $ 1,950 110 $ 21,450 Project Manager $ 170 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - Project Advisor $ 145 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - _ $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - Senior Project Professional $ 120 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - - $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - Project Coordinator $ 110 3 $ 330 3 $ 330 4 $ 440 10 $ 1,100_ 2 $ 220 2 $ 220 2 $ 220 16 $ 1,760 Project Professional $ 105 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - - $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - Staff Professional $ 95 12 $ 1,140 20 $ 1,900 16 $ 1,520 48 $ 4,560- 16 $ 1,520 12 $ 1,140 2 $ 190 78 $ 7,410 Assoc.Staff Professional $ 80 $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - - $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - TOTAL LABOR 27 $ 3,810 35 $ 4,570 60 $ 9,840 122 $ 18,220- 42 $ 6,420 32 $ 4,910 14 $ 2,360 210 $ 31,910 OTHER DIRECT COSTS Travel Expenses $ 500 $ $ $ 500_ $ 500 $ $ $ 1,000 Per Diem $ 200 $ $ $ 200_ $ 200 $ $ $ 400 Telephone/Facsimile $ 10 $ 10 $ 25 $ 46- $ - $ - $ 22 $ 68 Postage/Freight $ - $ - $ - $ - _ $ - $ - $ - $ - Reproduction/Printing $ 15 $ 26 $ 100 $ 142- $ 100 $ - $ - $ 242 Computer $ 90 $ 120 $ 230 $ 441 _ $ 140 $ 78 $ 100 $ 759 TOTAL ESTIMATED CDCs BY TASK $ 817 $ 157 $ 356 $ 1,330_ $ 940 $ 78 $ 122 $ 2,470 Administrative(15%) $ 123 $ 24 $ 53 $ 200- $ 141 $ 12 $ 18 $ 370 TOTAL 4,750 4,750 10,250 $ 19,750 7,500 5,000 2,500 $ 34,750 2/11/16 DocuSign Envelope ID:8A735669-3D2F-468A-BF99-3DF97688146A Proposal for Preparation of a Solid Waste Financial Plan FEE SCHEDULE January 1, 2016 Rate Hour ProjectDirector....................................................................................................................$195 SeniorProject Advisor.........................................................................................................$175 ProjectManager...................................................................................................................$170 ProjectAdvisor....................................................................................................................$145 ProjectSuperintendent ........................................................................................................$125 Senior Project Professional..................................................................................................$120 ProjectCoordinator..............................................................................................................$110 ProjectProfessional ............................................................................................................$105 StaffProfessional...................................................................................................................$95 Designer.................................................................................................................................$90 SeniorTechnician..................................................................................................................$85 Associate Staff Professional ..................................................................................................$80 Technician..............................................................................................................................$65 Administrative........................................................................................................................$60 General Terms: 1. The hourly rates are effective through December 31, 2016. Work performed thereafter is subject to a new Fee Schedule. 2. The above rates include salary, overhead, administration, and profit. Costs for outside consultants, laboratory and subcontractors and for job related travel (current automobile mileage rate is $0.54 per mile, or current IRS rate) and subsistence, computer and administration fee ($4.00 per billable hour for non-field work), equipment, supplies, etc., are billed at actual cost plus 15 percent. 3. Charges for equipment usage will be invoiced in accordance with SCS' Equipment Rates schedule,plus 15 percent. 4. Invoices will be prepared monthly for work in progress, unless otherwise agreed. Invoices are due and payable upon receipt. Invoices not paid within 30 days are subject to a service charge of 1.5 percent per month on the unpaid balance. 5. Payment of SCS invoices for services performed will not be contingent upon the client's receipt of payment from other parties, unless otherwise agreed to in writing. Client agrees to pay legal costs, including attorney's fees incurred by SCS in collecting any amounts past due and owing on client's account. 6. Rates for Senior Executives and Principals of the firm and special situations, such as litigation support and expert testimony, are negotiated on a project-specific basis. C-2