No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-05-23 88-248 ORDERDate 5-23'L'� - Hem No. 88-248 Authorizing City Manager to Enter into a Contract Amendment with Nem/Subject Woodard A Curran, Inc. - secondary Treatment Plant Process Selection Responsible Department: Engineering Commentary: We have reached a point in our evaluation of secondary treatment process alternatives where we have narrowed it down tothree processes. We propose to have Woodard E Curran develop general schematic layout Alone for, eech.proceae, prepare preliminary cost estimates, together with the cost of future operation and maintenance. Their assessment w111 also include a pro and con description of each process. We anticipate that Chia phase of the project will be completed by late August, and w will then hopefully be in a position to solicit design-build proposals from onwor two manufacturing processes. The work covered by this proposal is beyond the scope of the existing Woodard 6 Curran, Inc, contract as negotiated to date; however, it does fall within the scope for work for which they were originally hired, i.e., to help us select a secondary treatment process. Departmum Hu Manager's Comments: a.h &NeJ i e akkU. [iry Mmegrr Associated lnfermaHon: Qagrn da.d 1 Budget Approval $a- 60-a6 C5a44 11010 £smote Dico, Legal Approval: umv Csx soiicimr Introduced For ©Passage - 0 First Reading Paga_of_ ❑ Referral 88-248 Introduced by Councilor Tilley, Nay 23, 1988 w y CITY OF BANGOR R�Tt6) WII�H% Authorizing 1 g City, Manager to Enter Into Contract Amendment with Wp d d 6 0 cert, I £x ..S.W.£OPdary Treatment _Plant Process „Selection BY the City Cownaff of the City Of Sewer. THAT , WHEREAS, the City Council by Council Order No. 86-368 passed September. 8, 1986 authorized a contract with Woodard 6 Curran, Inc. of Portland for consulting engineering services pertaining to the development of a plan for secondary sewage treatment facilities, including the develop- ment Implementation a schedule of progress for various phases of the Implementatiof the project, the negotiating of a consent decree with the gains Department of Environmental Protection, the completion of a preliminary financial capability analysis, assistance in sewer system evaluation, and assistance in sewage treatment process selection; and WHEREAS, m of the work contained in the original agreement as amended has been completed[ and WHEREAS, numerous processes forsecondary- treatment have been reviewed and analyzed, with the narrowed tofour processes which require further evaluation before the selection of a specific process can be made: NOW, THEREFORE, Be It ORDERED, THAT the City Manger be and hereby is authorized to enter Into n agreement with Woodard 6 Curran. Inc. of Portland dated April 25. 1988 for an amendment to their existing contract identified as Task VI - Alternative Treatment Process Review, a copy of said agreement being an file in the City Clerk's Office: and be it further ORDERED, THAT the additional cost,: dstimeted tobe.$21,080.00/"be paid for out of existing capital account no. 52-60-20 (5244). IM CITY COUNCIL nay 23, 1988 Passed aL S /AtC� CITY LES 88-248 O ROER Title, EL4Y20 A74i Authorising City Manager to EnterLG:... .............••...•.••.•..•..... 21iY Of oANSC( -. CITY CLERK Into a Contract Amendment with Woodard 6 .............. 4....................... Curran, Inc - Secondary Treatment Plant - Process Selection Introduced and filed by ...,..ry'f .. ....... Councilman AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF BANGOR AND WOODARD & CORRAN INC. ATTACHMENT 6 SCOPE OF SERVICES - TASK 6 PHASE I Task 6 - Alternative Treatment Process Review Scope of Services Woodard 4 Curran will review three alternative secondary treatment processes: conventional activated sludge, trickling filters and activated -bio -filter (ABP). Each of three processes will be ..compared based on the following assumptions: 1. Effluent quality to be 30 mg/l for total suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) on a monthly average. 2. Average daily flow rate to be 30 MGD with a diurnal peaking factor of 2.5. 3. Current influent quality in terms of TBS, BOD and. temperature. 4. The use of standard design criteria for conventional activated sludge and trickling filters, and the collection of design criteria from operating ABF plants and discussions with the manufacturer. From the above review a report will be prepared that summarises the following items foreach of the three processes: 1. Design criteria for major treatment process units 2. Sizing selections for major treatment process units 3. Brief discussions of the advantages and disadvantages for each of the three processes in regards to the City's particular application 4. Process Flow Diagrams 0632A - 1. - S. Plan view of each process arranged on the available land in the vicinity of the existing treatment facility 6. Estimated capital, operation a maintenance and lifecycle costa 7. A description of preliminary, primary and post treatment modifications required for each treatment process. In addition, we will prepare a description of the proposed sludge handling scheme for the future facility and the expansion requirements to the existing administration building necessary for a secondary treatment facility. The summary report will also include a description of a scheme for expansion of the primary treatment system to provide primary treatment and disinfection of the excess. inflow (i.e. greater than the peak design flow rate of the ss ondary treatment facility) to the treatment facility during rainfalland s owmelt events. Project Team I will remain Principal -In -Charge for the project. Mr. John Riordan, P.E. will act as project manager/project engineer and will be largely responsible for the performance of this process review. Other principals and project managers on staff, including Frank Woodard, PhD, P.E. and Peter Wagner, P.E., will serve as the technical advisory team lox this project and critique the project, team's efforts as a quality assurance check. Budget and Schedule. We estimate a fee of $21,080 to complete the alternative treatment process review as described above. We will invoice voice you o a four week cycle for the work performed during the invoicing .period as stipulated in our original .agreement. We will complete this review within twelve weeks of your authorisation -to -proceed. Other Work Items (Not Part of This Attachment) In the appendix of this proposal we have included the comprehensive work plan for the City's ongoing upgrade of the Wastewater Collection and Treatment System. This work plan was the result of the efforts of Woodard E Curran and the City's Staff in April 1987 to define the work necessary to prepare a comprehensive facilities plan by August 1989, as required by the existing consent agreement with the State of Maine. 0632A - 2 - while a traditional Facilities Plan incordance with PPA s Construction Grants Program guidelines not required for this project (because of the absence of federalor state funding) nearly all of the studies and comparisons required in the traditional facilities planning process should be undertaken to anappropriate e level of detail. In general, those necessary studies and comparisons are described andcalled for in the appended Work Plan document. i Concurrent with, or subsequent to, the completion of the above alternative treatment process review,work should begin on the following items to ensure completion of facilities plan by August 1989. A discussion between us to agree on the level of detail for each work effort should preened the start of any of the following. items: 1. Preparation of the Sewer System Master Plan, including a oat -effectiveness analysis of future infiltration/ inflow reduction projects 2. Urban Hydrology Study, to identify inflow sources and elimination schemes 3. User Study, to characterize the existing user base and project future make-up to allow sizing of the treatment facility 4. Evaluation of the Existing Facility, to determine the plant's condition, site constraints and plant performance S. Revision of the Financial, Capability Analysis, to allow the establishment of future sewer rates 6. Review of Development options, to identify viable development optionsncluding design -build, conven- tional design and construct, and contract operations ). Preparation of a: Comprehensive Facilities Plan that documents the study of the wastewater treatment and collection system in the City The other ongoing work item is the negotiation with the EPA concerning another consent agreement. We have begun work on this item in preparation for the May 1988 negotiation meeting to be scheduled. 0632A - 3 - City of Bangor, Maine Secondary Treatment Evaluation Alternative Treatment Process Review Fee Estimate Labor - Mandays Expenses - $ Task PIC PM E D C Travel Office Meetings(3) 3 3 150 ABF Review 2 2 CAS Review 2 - T.P. Review 2 Sludge Handling 1 Report • Test 1 10 2 4 50 • Figures 1 5 TAT Review 2 _ Mondays: S 21 4 5 4 Rate $/day: 800 600 370 240 200 Labor $: 4;800 12,600 1,480 1,200 800 150 50 Total Labor: $20,880 Total Expenses: 200 21,08 0632A - 4 - TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND WORK PLAN ATTACHMENT 4 -APRIL 1987 Prepared by: Woodard fi Curran Inc. Consulting Engineers 41 Hutchins Drive Portland, ME 04102 0522A - 3 - TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT The City of Bangor is in the process Of negotiating a consent .agreement with the DER and the EPA. An integral part of that agreement is the schedule of compliance. The compliance schedule will detail the timeframe by which the City will achieve secondary wastewater treatment in the coming years. A major portion of the compliance plan and schedule is the Facilities planning process. The Facilities Plan Report will address not only secondary wastewater treatment but the need for sewer system rehabilitation and infiltration/inflow removal. Both rehabilitation of the collection system and the removal of infiltration/inflow will reduce the size and cost and improve the performance of the new facility. At this point it appears that approximately two years. will be scheduled to complete the Facilities planning process. The issues ofondary wastewater treatment process selection, facility sizing, funding and development must be addressed. As well, a parallel 'effort towards the study of the collection system and implementing rehabilitation and replacement construction projects must be undertaken. To accurately and completely address these issues will require a massive increase in both in-house and outside engineering study, design and construction efforts on the City's behalf. The following Work Plan Outlines the necessary effort to complete a comprehensive facilities plan within two years as mandated by the present compliance schedule agreement. The first objective is to address all the issues involved, ranging from sewer system rehabilitation needs to secondary wastewater treatment process selection. The second objective is t0 ensure that the City's resources are most efficiently spent towards secondary treatment, collection system rehabilitation and upgrade, and other environmental protection needs. 0522A - 4 - WORE PLAN Basedon the preceeding Technical Assessment for this project, the following is an outline of the Work Plan to prepare a comprehensive Facilities Plan for the City's wastewater collection and treatment system. I. Infiltration/Inflow - Combined Sewer Overflow Monitoring Program II. Sewer System Evaluation Survey III. Initial Inflow Reduction Construction Project ($2.5 million) IV. Annual Collection System Structural Rehabilitation ($1.0 million) V. Secondary Wastewater Treatment Process Selection VI. Secondary Wastewater Treatment Facility Sizing. VII. Evaluation of,Existing Pollution Abatement Facility VIII. Financial/Development Options Review IX. Preparation of. Facilities Plan Report A description of each of the above items of the Work Plan follows. 0522A - 5 - I. INFILTRATION/INFLOW COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW MONITORING PROGRAM A detailed description of the two-year I/I - CSO Monitoring Program was givenr Appendix 6 of the Options Report dated January 1987. TheCity is currently implementing the first year of the field program. The following work items remain to complete the program.. A. Data Reduction: 1. Update of sewer system drawings. 2. Graphs, plots, spreadsheets, etc. Of collected data. 3. Summary report of field program. _ B. Data Evaluation: 1. Graphs of precipitation vs. inflow, infiltration, CSO discharge.' 2. Graphs of groundwater elevation vs. infiltration. 3. Quantify domestic wastewater flow rates and diurnal patterns. 4. Quantifycommercial/industrial flow rates and peak flow rates. S. Evaluate sample analysis data. 6. Establish characteristics of wastewater, CSO discharges, infiltration and inflow. C. Feasibilitv Studies: 1. Identify problem subsystems. - 2. Identify high priority inflow reduction projects for -1987 and 1988. 3i Identify high priority collector sewer rehabilitation projects for 1987 and 1968. 4. Establish cost-effectiveness of high priority projects. 5. Select high priority projects within budget constraints for implementation. D. water Quality Sampling/CSO Inspections 1. Perform daily CSO inspections during wet weather period. 2. Perform in -stream sampling as required by NPDES permit to determine existence of water quality impacts in Eenduskeag Stream and Penobscot River. 3. Evaluate sample analysis results for water quality impact and public health hazards. 0522A I - 6 - E. Re-evaluation of Priority Status: 1. Document existing water quality impacts or public health hazards due t0 CSO discharges. 2. Perform additional sampling and analysis as necessary lot presentation to regulatory officials. 3. -Update appropirate subsystem feasibility studies to form a preliminary remedial action plan for the elimination or treatment Of CSO discharges to the Eenduskeag Stream or Penobscot River. 4. Present remedial action plan to regulatory officials as grant funding request. F. 1988 Monitoring Program: 1. Select "problem" subsystems from 1987 program results. 2. Concentrate monitoring and sampling efforts in problem" subsystems. 3. Analyze data for relationships between precipitation, inflow, infiltration and groundwater table elevations. 4. Inspect C5O's for frequency of discharge and flow rate. 5. Model existing interceptor, collection and transfer system by computer to understand and optimize performance. 6. Identify source control projects to cost effectively reduce/eliminate infiltration, inflow and CSO discharges. 7. Prepare Sewer System Rehabilitation Master Plan Report for I/I Reduction and CSO Elimination. This report will form the basis of the ongoing inflow reduction projects and the sewer system structural rehabilitation projects. G. Urban Hydrology Studv: 1. Complete mapping of City storm drain system. 2. Perform aerial photography of entire City. Generate updated topographical maps of entire City. 3. Analyze individual "problem" subsystems for inflow reduction/diversion schemes. 4. Survey City for roof drain and foundation drain connections to sewer system. Notify Owners of need to remove improper connections. 5. Develop cost effective inflow control strategies for individual subsystems. 6. Input strategies to the Master Plan Report. 0522A - 7 - H. 1989 Monitoring Program 1. Continue the ongoing program in the Spring of 1989. 2. Identify more coat -effective inflow reduction. construction projects. 3. Measure accomplished reduction in infiltration/inflow through 1987 and 1988 projects. 4. Update the Sewer System Rehabilitation. Master Plan Report. 5. Update Facilities Plan Report. 0522A - 8 - II. SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION SURVEY (SEES) A complete survey of the problem areas in the City's sewer system, as identified in the first year of the I/I study, will be completed over the next 2 years. The objective is to inspect the system and identify coat -effective collection system rehabilitation work such as manhole and sewer repair by. lining, grouting or replacement that can be accomplished by the City crews or outside contractors within the $1.0 million collection system rehabilitation annual budget. A. Manhole Inspection: 1. Complete manhole log sheets for all manholes within the "problem" subsystems. 2. Identify -"problem" manholes by type of deficiency; prioritize deficiency in the field. 3. Create manhole numbering system throughout City. a. T.V. Inspections: 1. Use T.V. camera to inspect sewer lines identified during manhole inspection or the I/I study program. 2. View tapes and identify locations for repair, cleaning or rehabilitation. C. Data Analvsis and Evaluation: .. 1. Update Sewer System maps based on SSES data. 2. Identifym anholes requiring rehabilitation or replacement. 3. Identify sewer lines -requiring rehabilitation, cleaning or replacement. 4. Prioritize projects " based on field data and cost-effectiveness of repair. 5. Input recommendations to Sewer System Rehabilitation Master Plan Report. 0522A - 9 - III. INITIAL INFLOW REDUCTION CONSTRUCTION PROTECT (S2.5 Million) It is anticipated that a number of cost-effective opportunities for inflow reduction construction projects will be identified after the first year of the I/I - CSO Monitoring Program. $2.5 million has been budgeted by the City to be spent over the next two years. A. Phase I (Summer of 198]): The projects to be completed this season include those which clearly represent situtions which are coat -effective removal options and include the following projects: o - Meadowbrook Bag Diversion o Woodlawn Trunk Replacement o Hancock Street Separation o Penjajawoc Interceptor Extension 1. Geotechnical field work and analysis. 2. Topographic and utility survey. 3. Interceptor and collector sewer design. 4. Preparation of bid documents. 5. Contract bidding and Contractor selection. 6. Construction administration and resident inspection. B. Phase II (Summer of 1988 and 1989): The projects to be completed in 1988-1989 will result from engineering study completed in 1987-1988. Subsystems to be considered include: • Baiketsville (DOT Pond Diversion) • Dow Trunk o Industrial Trunk Mill Street o Blanchard Street o Arctic Brook o Capehart o Woodlawn (BMHI) - 1. Geotechnical field work and analysis. 2. Topographic and utility survey. 3. Interceptor and collector sewer design. 4. Preparation of bid documents. 5. Contract bidding and Contractor selection. 6.. Construction administration and resident inspection. 0522A - 10 - IV. ANNUAL COLLECTION SYSTEM REHABILITATION ($1.0 Million) A City is in the process of establishing a $1.0 million annual budget for ongoing collection system rehabilitation and replacement to commence as of 1989. $1.0 million annually will allow the City to replace, rehabilitate and separate the 408 of the sewer system that will exceed 75 years of age in the next 20 years. A. Review of Master Plan and SEES: 1. Review Master Plan annually for coat -effective collection system projects to be undertaken. 2. Review the results of the ongoing SEES for cost-effective M.R. rehabilitation work to be undertaken. B. Replacement Proiects: 1. Geotechnical field work and study. 2. Topographic and utility survey. 3. Collection sewer design. 4. Preparation of bid documents (if necessary). 5. Contract bidding and Contractor selection (if necessary) 6. Construction administration and resident inspection. C. Rehabilitation Projects: 1. Perform sewer line cleaning. 2. Contract with sewer lining service. 3. Perform pressure grouting of sewer lines. 4. Perform grouting and sealing of manholes. 5. Contract administration and resident inspection. 0522A - 11 - V. SECOND INFLOW REDUCTION CONSTRUCTION PROJECT (Grant Funded) Upon demonstration that adverse water quality impacts or public health hazard exists in the Renduskeag Stream due to the CSO discharges, a remedial action plan will be proposed to regulatory agencies. The remedial action plan Will propose to regulatory agencies. The remedial action plan will propose to treat or eliminate all applicable CSO discharges. As well, application would be made for additional priority points to - increase the City's changes for grant funding. A. Review of Earlier Feasibility Studies: 1. Review of earlier feasibility studies for applicability to elimintion of CSO. discharges .along. the Renduskeag Stream. 2. Update, as necessary, earlier feasibility studies to reflect concerns along the Renduskeag. 3. Investigate impacts of inflow reduction/diversion on urban hydrology in subject subsystems. B. Reevaluation of Prioritv List Standing: Performed as part of Item I.E. C. Decision Point: 1. Pursue remedial action if grant funding is indicated. Proceed with D. below. OR 2. Pursue remedial action as part of annual collection system rehabilitation if grant funding is not indicated. OR 3.- Remedial Action Plan: Do not pursue remedial action until regulatory policy is established and priority 'given to CSO discharge elimination. D. Remedial Action Plan: 1. Geotechnical and survey field work. 2. Design. 3. Preparation of bid document (if necessary). 4. Contract bidding and Contractor selection (if necessary). 5. Construction administration and inspection. 0522A - 12 - VI. SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT - PROCESS SELECTION A. Estimate Facility Size Rance: 1. Review existing flow data and past report data. 2. Incorporate results of first year of I/I study program. B. Prepare Vendor Reauest for Information: 1. Describe design criteria, project schedule, piloting needs, etc. 2. identify form of information requirements, minimum requirements for proposals in terms of cost data, references, installation lists, etc. 3.. Hold a pre -submittal meeting to discuss RFI, respond to questions, clarify responsibilities, etc. 4. Receive and review information. Perform comparative analysis of various treatment technologies and their life cycle, costs, reliability, etc. S. Narrow prospective treatment processes to three for review with City staff. C. Detailed Study of Three Candidate Treatment Processes: 1. Research actual performance data from operating installations. 2. Perform site visits, as necessary, with City staff. 3. Develop preliminary cost estimates for construction, labor, utilities, chemicals and solids processing and disposal. 4. Prepare comparative matrix of advantages and disadvantages and prioritize feasible options. 5. Final selection of processes for piloting study. D. Piloting Studies: 1. Prepare conceptual design, operating procedures and data collection procedures for pilot plants. Review with City staff. 2. Design pilot plant for conventional and nonconven- tional treatment processes. Where available, contract with equipment manufacturers, vendors, etc., to supply necessary piloting apparatus. 3. Contract for construction' of pilot plants. 4. Staff pilot plants with City personnel. .5. Perform pilot plant studies during Winter -Spring 1988. 6. Collect data and reduce into spreadsheet format, graphs, charts, etc. 7. Analyze resultant data for ability to meet effluent quality criteria as conventional secondary treatment or treatment equivalent to secondary treatment. 0522A - 13 - E. Finalize Comparative Analysis: 1. Use piloting data and case history information to revise life cycle cost estimates and comparative matrix of advantages and disadvantages. 2. Final choice of most cost-effective secondary wastewater treatment processes. F. Establish Effluent Quality Limits: 1. If preferred alternative requires treatment equivalent to secondary treatment status designation begin discussions with state and EPA officials to establish less stringent permit limits. 2. Document case histories, performance data from actual installations and pilot plant results for submittal to regulatory officials. 3. Finalize effluent quality limits. 0522A - 14 - VII. SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY SIZIMG A. User Study: 1. Review Assessor's Office data. 2. Review other City records (water department, etc.) 3 Establish make-up of user base and division of flow between residential, commercial, .industrial, and governmental. B. Estimate Service Populations: 1. Analyze existing service area development densities. 2. Analyze City zoning and building restrictions. 3. Assess future service are development potential. 4. Assess City policies on future expansion. S. Review information on current population projections from City, regional planning and State agencies. C. Project Future Populations and Flow: I. Perform population projections. 2. Project domestic flow from past records for Bangor user categories. 3. Project future industrial/commercial/governmental flows by using specific zoning and planning information. 4. Discuss City philosophy toward allowances for growth with City staff, City Manager, and City Council. 5. Input flow information generated from two-year I/I - CSO Monitoring Program. - 0322A - 15 - VIII. EVALUATION OF EXISTING POLLUTION ABATEMENT FACILITY A. Review Plant Capacity: 1. Review unit process hydraulic capacities. 2. Revgiew unit process physical and chemical processing capacities. 3. Review residuals handling and disposal capacity. B. Review Plant Condition: 1. Review equipment and structural condition of all unit processes. 2. Review condition of electrical and instrumentation components. - C. Review Plant Layout and Site Constraints: 1. Review site utilization and layout relative to future expansion. 2. Perform initial alternative siting study to ensure that nearby feasible sites do not exist. B. Review Plant Performance Data: 1. Review facility operating data for additions or modifications to existing preliminary, primary or post-treatment processes necessary for secondary treatment facility. 2. Review residuals handlingand disposal for future needs. 3. Review operational data for operation and maintenance modifications to optimize performance of existing processes. 0522A - 16 - I%. EVALUATION OF FINANCIAL/DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS A. Financial Evaluation: 1. Revise Financial Capability Analysis based on user base evaluation and selected facility size,. process and development option. 2. Review rate structure and recommend new rates to finance upfront costs of study, design, sewer rehabilitation, etc. 3. Inventory known funding sources. B. Development Options Review: 1. Fully describe various options including advantages and disdvantges to City Staff, City Manager and City Council. 2. Evaluate proposals farm various alternative format developers. 3. Recommend one or two approaches for final review with City staff and for Bidding by designers/developers. 4. Preparation of RFP for distribution to designers/ developers. RFP to describe Facilities Plan and development formats available for bidding. 0522A - 17 - X. PREPARATION OF FACILITIES PLAN REPORT The Facilities Plan Report will culminate the two-year study process and document the various studies, analyses and comparisons used to develop a comprehensive Collection system and treatment facility plan. 0522A is -