The URL can be used to link to this page

2022-01-11 - Agendas - FinalCITY OF 9im FAYETTEVILLE 4VARKANSAS MEETING AGENDA Water, Sewer, and Solid Waste Committee 11 January 2022 5:30 P.M. (Or immediately following City Council Agenda Session) This is a Virtual Meeting Committee: Council Member Sloan Scroggin, Council Member Teresa Turk, Council Member D'Andre Jones, Copy to: Mayor Lioneld Jordan, Paul Becker, Kara Paxton, Susan Norton, Chris Brown, Alan Pugh, Terry Gulley, Peter Nierengarten, Jeff Coles, Brian Pugh, Andrea Foren, Mark Rogers, Corey Granderson, Aaron Watkins, Greg Weeks, Monty Sedlak, Shannon Jones From: Tim Nyander, Utilities Director CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL UPDATES OLD BUSINESS: NEW BUSINESS: 1. Temporary Drying Solution at BMS The biosolids dryer suffered a catastrophic failure on December 13, 2021. The dryer suffered an explosion at the bearing housing like the failure experienced on September 11, 2021. The second failure was more damaging. We are waiting for the manufacturer's representative to come to the site to evaluate the damage. Given the number of breakdowns the existing dryer has experienced, and the safety hazard associated with any explosion, the Department is not heavily considering repairing the unit. For that reason, we are looking into a temporary drying option until a permanent solution can be selected. We have been in contact with a company that has offered a short-term solution to drying that is a less expensive alternative to sending our solids to the local landfill. This process will be discussed. The City and the drying contractor are writing a Letter of Intent for consideration. The Letter of Intent will be discussed. STAFF REQUESTS THIS BE FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL 2. Budget Adjustment for Landfill Tipping Fees As we consider temporary drying options for the Biosolids Management Site, we will have no choice at this time but to take our partially dried biosolids to the landfill. On average, the Biosolids Management Site produces 1,321 dry tons of partially dried solids per month. We will discuss the funding we will need for this temporary solution. STAFF REQUESTS THIS BE FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL 3. 2022 Cured In Place Pipe Sewer Rehab. — Insituform Technologies Staff recommends approval of a one-year extension of the contract with Insituform Technologies, Inc., as amended by Resolutions 144-18 and 81-19, in an amount not to exceed $528,693.55 for City of Fayetteville sewer rehabilitation in 2022 using cured -in -place sanitary sewer linings. On March 7, 2018, the City of Fayetteville accepted sealed competitive bids for sanitary sewer main line and service lateral lining services. Insituform Technologies, Inc. submitted the lowest bid (Resolution 84-18, Bid #18-22). The bid schedule includes unit pricing for various items of work to complete the annual rehabilitation program. Direct contracting with Insituform Technologies, Inc. allows the City to execute its sanitary sewer rehabilitation program efficiently. Pipes being repaired with liners under this contract are either identified through normal City maintenance operations or by consultants during Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Studies (i.e., Smoke Testing). Engineering and administrative costs are minimized as these services are handled by city staff. This work is an integral part of the City's ongoing program to maintain its sewer system in the most long-term yet cost effective fashion, with cured -in -place linings being by far the lowest cost strategy for applications where it is appropriate. 2022 will be the 51" and final year of a 5-year renewable contract with Insituform. The project will need to be publicly bid again in 2023. Funds are available for this project in the Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation account. STAFF REQUESTS THIS BE FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL 4. Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Update On June 12, 2018, the City of Fayetteville formally selected RJN Group, Inc. via RFQ 18-01 to perform routine updates and analyses of the City's Wastewater Collection System Master Plan. Staff has worked with RJN to verify the accuracy of the hydraulic model and re -asses changes in service area due to population and development increases. The Arkansas Department of Health, and industry best practices, recommend updating master plans every 5-years for systems like Fayetteville experiencing significant change and growth. The last update to this plan was completed in 2014. A wastewater hydraulic model is only accurate when field -verified and calibrated using both dry and wet -weather flow monitoring (measuring the actual flow in the pipes). A large portion of the effort in this model update was placing and maintaining flow monitors in strategic locations throughout the City in the Spring of 2020. The model was also updated to include all changes and additions in the wastewater system due to new developments and capital improvement projects. RJN Group will present the findings and recommendations of the updated plan. INFORMATION ONLY 5. Overview of WWTP Monthly Report Discussion of November's Monthly WWTP Report PRESENTATIONS ATTACHMENTS Landfill ing/Drying Cost Comparison Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Update Presentation November WWTP Monthly Report ADJOURN Next Water, Sewer, Solid Waste Committee meets on Tuesday, February 8, 2022, at 5:30 p.m. Monthly Hauling Annual Revenue Wet Tons DryTons Loads To Landfill Total Dry Tons Average Monthly Monthly Cost $296 Cost Per Temporar Monthly Sold Per From Year 18%From From Landfill If Tip Landfilling Year From Tons Adjusted Cost Landfill Cost Per Load Ton y Dryer Drying Cost Ton Fertilizer Presses Solar No Dryer Fee/Ton Cost Solar produced of Drying (From) Fee/Ton Produced (Fleet) for Resale 2020 21,620 13,983 608 $ 44.00 $ 615,252 $ 179,968 $ 795,220 $ 56.87 2020 13,983 $ 55.00 $ 769,065 2,256 $ 20.00 $ 45,120 $ 723,945 2021 23,824 15,408 670 $ 44.00 $ 677,963 $ 198,297 $ 876,260 $ 56.87 2021 15,408 $ 55.00 $ 847,454 2,256 $ 20.00 $ 45,120 $ 802,334 2-Year Total 45,444 29,391 1,278 $ 1,293,215 $ 378,265 $ 1,671,480 Annual Average 22,722 14,696 639 $ 646,607 $ 189,133 $ 835,740 $ 56.87 Truck Costs = $3.52/Mile Round Trip to Landfill = 34 miles Trailer Costs = $5.18/ Mile Total Cost = $8.70/Mile 34 x $8,70 = $296 per trip (load) Costs Include: Fuel Insurance Replacement 2-Year Total 29,391 $1,616,519 4,512 Annual Average 14,696 $ 808,259 2,256 Annual Savings Using $ 90,240 $ 1,526,279 $ 45,120 $ 763,139 $ 72,601 87 Design Storm (in/hr) -------------------- ---------------------- .......... ------------- ............. ............. ........... ��T-9944499 .. 99 .. 99 .. 9993.9993.999-999.. WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN UPDATE 17 19 City of Fayetteville, AR CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS January 11, 2022 Shannon Jones, PE rjn roup enge.wet >V frastructure for tomorrow Hydraulic Modeling - Flow Monitoring RG-06 125 W Mountain St Courts Building Peak 60-Minute Total Dail- Rainfall Rainfall Intensity Table ?-B RAINFALL SUMMARY RG-07 123 N Block Avenue Lift Station #46 Peak 60-Minute Total Dail• Rainfall Rainfall Intensity RG-08 1813 E Mission Blvd Tim's Pizza East Peak 60-Minute Total Daily Rainfall Rainfall Intensity RG-09 3010 N College Ave Phillios 66 Gas Peak 60-1%linute Total Daily Rainfall Rainfall Intensity RG-10 3896 N Gregg Ave Lift Station #5 Peak 60-Minute Total Dail Rainfall Rainfall Intensity Date fin in/hr in in/hr in in/hr in in/hr in in/hr 21 0.03 0.02 0.2 0.26 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.0' 0.01 22 0.53 0.36 0.68 0.62 0.56 0.50 0.65 0.48 0.64 0.33 24 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ 0.11 0.07 0.01 0.01 1/ 1/ 25 1.11 0.36 1.18 0.73 1.375 0.87 1.79 0.72 1.77 0.63 26 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.05 0.20 0.16 0.24 0.18 0.24 0.20 27 0.16 O.OS 0.18 0.12 0.16 0.13 0.25 0.20 1.38 1.30 28 1/ 1/ 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 1/ 1/ 0.01 0.01 June 1 1/ 1/ 0.04 0.03 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ 2 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ 11 1/ l/ 1/ 11 1/ 3 1/ 1/ 0.02 0.02 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ 1 11 4 1.01 0.60 1.10 0.68 1.24 0.75 1.44 0.81 1.50 0.89 5 1/ 1/ 0.02 0.02 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ 11 11 7 1/ 1/ 0.03 0.03 1l 11 1/ 1! 1/ 1/ 8 0.205 0.065 0.10 0.03 0.13 0.05 0.15 0.06 0.15 0.06 Total 16.09 17.55 16.92 18.63 21.47 1/ No rainfall recorded. ■ Information uploaded into InfoWorks ICM ■ Connectivity and slope check ■ Field visits conducted ■ All data sources tracked within model (color coded) ■ Notes and information stored ■ Quality control checks User Defined Flag, Name display Colour I Obsolete 4A = ❑ ............................... 4D = ❑ _ G ❑ #! _ ❑ #S = ❑ ;cV ❑ AC ❑ IAR ❑ ICA ❑ CD ❑ Cp . ( ❑ DM ❑ :.! EJ ❑ _ ES ❑ FG ❑ FS ❑ FU ❑ iFV ❑ GI ❑ IF IF Impart.., I I Export... l}elete Description Asset Data System Default Data From GeoPlan Model Import System Calculated CShcmport From CttyAs Built Plans Awaiting Confirmation Assumed raised manhole Catibration Adjustment 2GIG Census Data Curedln Place Pipe (CIPP) Input From Previous Detailed Models Enainee€ina ludoement Estimated Future Grawth Raw Survey Data Future Upgrade Fierd Verified From GIS Inferred Data lJ ' t7K Cancel Dry leather Residential Profiles 2.5 —Profile I —Profile 2 Profile 3 2 — 1.5 L 0 i.l LL 1 0.5 0 0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 0:00 Time 45 2 1.5 O 1 0.5 0 Dry leather Commerical/Industrial Profiles fi]I�I�i�[�i�=l;[�I�=�[�I��[�I�� A�Ii� �►�I�I�� [�I�� :�[fl�� :�[�I��►��AfIii�'�[fI��A�If] Time Design Storm (in/hr) 2.00 1.80 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 h. 0.00 O N M 0 N 00 O -N RV to lD I, 00 OO N O N M 0 N 00 O -N 4 to lG I, 00 OO N O 0 O O O O 0 0 O 0 c-I c-I c-I a -I '-I N N N N O 0 O O O O 0 0 O 0 c-I c-I c-I r-I '-I '-I '-I '-I N N N N m m rn rn rn rn rn rn m m m m m m rn rn rn rn rn rn m m m m m rn rn rn rn rn rn m m m m m m rn rn rn rn rn rn m m m m m m m rn rn rn rn rn rn m m m m m m rn rn rn rn rn rn m m m m m rn rn rn rn rn rn m m m m m m rn rn rn rn rn rn m m m m m ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N N N N ti ti ti ti ti O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ci c-I c-I c-I c-I .--I ei ei c-I c-I c l c l c l c l � q 'i 'i '-I r-I -q c-I c-I c-I c-I rV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rV rV " N N N N N N N N N N N fV rV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N �412211996 00:00:0 3 4z 1225.0 — 0 C 122D.0 1215.0 -- 1210.0 -- iK}i41J 1200.0 1< 0 262 567 975 1292 1546 1941 2036 2277 2445 2547 2757 1 Link W,*;188!C;101AA W(188'C)186P.1 WpBft(C;185R.1 W.OSOIC18512.1 W.,1881C)i$4P.1 w.(188JQ183P.1 W418BJC;180P.1 w;15',029C.1 length (R) 2624 305A 407.7 317.1 254.1 3%71 241.0 AIM 1195 101.7 21 U width (in) 1&0 1SA 15.0 73A_ 190 1t1A 18.0 1SA 18.0 us Inv (R AD) 1231350 1225Ao0 1220.950 is! 1208.720 CIS Inv (R AD) 1225DW ® 1214A90 1206.720 1203.122 2A97 1.328 1 5 ;4 0.173 0.126 0.137 0 QA54 0.109 3366 2.655 pk (MGD) 7.92 5.78 6 31 2A9 1.78 125 1.14 1.16 323 1AS 21AS 8.17 IDS flow (MGD) 0.9817 0.9819 0.9792 tA139 1A109 1A226 1044 1.0307 1.24M 12438 12115 Node W [18WQ186P W.(188/Q185R W418WQ185P W-(18WQ184P W-OK/0183P W-(18B/C)181P W{15)029C ground (ti AD) 1232Ao0 1219m - 1215.720 Tr 1240.0 - ------- - ----------------- -- -- - --------------....... ........................ 4 1215A - ----- ------ 1210A - 1205A - P o P 12000 R 0 271 576 964 1301 1555 1950 2045 2236 2454 2555 2766 Unk W-(188/C;101p.f W,186/C]186P.1 W-(t86lC;185R.1 4V-18151C,188P.1 5Y4188/C)184P.1 W-f1881C,`183P.1 W(188'Cy180P.f - W-0 5?029C.1 iengtn(n) 262A 305.0 407.7 377.1 2541 394a 955 241.0 46.11 119.5 141.7 210,8 width (in) 18A 18.0 18A 18A 18.0 18.0 18A 18.4 16.01 18.4 24,0 18A us imr (R AD) 123155/1 1225.OD0 122(�gSB 1213940 1213b20 12731M 121A3 30 - 121L700 121L570 1208.720 ds irn� (R AD) 1225A00 1220.950 12'I4i496), �b20 1213A80 1213A30 121L900 1 1208.720 1203.722 grad (%) 2A97 1.328 1.684 0.173 0.12fi C,157 0.052 O.054 0.109 3.786 2.655 WC (MGD) 7.92 5.78 631 2.09 178 155 1.14 1.16 323 1.65 21.15 6.17 D5 flow (MGD) 3.53t2 35387 3.5384 3b279 3.6220 3.6557 3.678- 3.6897 3.9568 3.9588 3.9813 Node - W-(18B/CCj186P Wd188/C)18SR W-(188JC)18SP W-(188/C)184P W-(18B/C)783P 66". f61P - - - LY-(15;029C ground(R AD) 1232A00 1219A30 1218310 1216.000 - = 1215.720 Hydraulic Model- 2030 Improvements Capital Improvements Through 2030 Fayetteville Wastewater Master Plan Project Estimated ConsumcnonCost P-opose3 Budget feat 202_ 'd' 2024 2025 1016 Line Rork ':,W Creek oatfau S 1.029.930 S 1.029.930 )IallyWagnonomfall 2.720.266 S 1,72026S S 1.000.000 Aom North PS maw line 1.337.040 S 1.337.040 StonenoodPSinterceptor S 1253,61E 1,253,64S Croon Creek outf LU - mtreau to 15- S 1.134,000 S 719,624 S 414,376 Dot Tipton PS elimiwtim S s s2,OSO S 222,090 Deadhorse to NfOy Wagnon outfall at S11rte Ri-er bridge S 1.983,600 Stonebndge Meadows BPS ehmmat en S 399.376 399.376 Crescent Lake PS eb-imtion S 136,SSO 136.SSO Stonebridge Meadon-s V PS *hmtmnm 60.S00 S 60.S00 Stonebndge )leadon: s PS elim=tion 10.11S S M44S Stanms Upgrades Stone,00dPS 666.624 Airpon North PS 611.072 S 611.072 Greenland PS 416,610 S 416.640 Industnal Park PS S 1.666.560 S 933.290 S S33.260 0- 1Creek- PS 144.41E S =4•»:6 Total S 140 3 8: 1 S :,OF7.611 S 1.698.061 5 1. 86,.1E 5 1.9-3.4% 5 1.7:0,:68 S 1.000.MO S 1,993,00 S 1,140.-94 1 5 833 :80 TABLE 6-D Questions ? CITY OF WA FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS .;acobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 December 20, 2021 City of Fayetteville Ml,a hea conservation 8th Annual Blue -Green Infrastructure Fall Event Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs Contents ExecutiveSummary..................................................................................................................................................ii 1. Plant Operations.........................................................................................................................................3 1.1 Process Control........................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Biosolids Process........................................................................................................................................................3 1.3 Compliance..................................................................................................................................................................4 1.4 Successes...................................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.5 Issues/Resolutions.................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.6 Revenue.........................................................................................................................................................................5 Table 1-1: Revenue generated from the BMS............................................................................................................... 5 Figure 1-1: Revenue generated from the BMS via hay, fertilizer, and WTR.......................................................6 2. Maintenance................................................................................................................................................7 2.1 West Side....................................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Noland............................................................................................................................................................................7 2.3 Lift Stations..................................................................................................................................................................8 2.4 BMS Maintenance......................................................................................................................................................8 2.5 Key Performance Indicators/Measures.............................................................................................................9 Figure 2-1: Labor Hours by Work Order Type................................................................................................................9 Figure2-2: Work Order Count by Type.............................................................................................................................9 2.6 Capital Improvement Projects(CIP)................................................................................................................ 10 3. Laboratory/Industrial Pretreatment...................................................................................................11 Table 3-1: Revenue generated from the Industrial Pretreatment Program(IPP)........................................ 12 Figure 3-1: IPP revenue total from surcharges, fees, and fines........................................................................... 12 Figure 3-2: Loads of hauled waste -by hauler and cumulative loads per month .......................................... 12 4. Woolsey Wet Prairie................................................................................................................................13 5. Community Outreach.............................................................................................................................14 6. Sustainability............................................................................................................................................15 7. Health & Safety/Training.......................................................................................................................19 Appendix A. Additional Information.................................................................................................................20 A.1 Effluent & Influent Data....................................................................................................................................... 20 A.2 White River Effluent Characteristics................................................................................................................ 20 Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Executive Summary ,jacobs As we are winding down for the year, we have realized a savings in labor costs through the month of November. The current run -rate puts us at a labor expenditure of $20,233 under budget. The costs for non - labor have continued to increase because of landfill costs. These costs were averted for about a month, from mid -November to mid -December. The November budget is over by $71,981 as non -labor continued to grow due to the landfill fees. We do expect the budget to be over at year's end by $115,000. This number could grow because of the recent dryer failures. The graph below shows the state of the budget through November. Budget Performance $71,981 $58,102 $60,101 $44,573 $32,123 i L . $16,797 $7,957 � � a e P � $(27,204) $(113,194) �o �J Jy- e e� e, � ■ Labor a Non -Labor ■ Budget - Over (Under) Labor Non -Labor Budget - Over (Under) March $ 10,470 $ (123,664) $ (113,194) April $ 35,404 $ (62,608) $ (27,204) May $ 36,558 $ (19,761) $ 16,797 June $ 37,208 $ 7,365 $ 44,573 July $ 20,719 $ (12,762) $ 7,957 August $ 25,275 $ 6,848 $ 32,123 September $ 24,910 $ 33,192 $ 58,102 October $ 13,262 $ 46,839 $ 60,101 November $ (20,233) $ 92,214 $ 71,981 Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs 1. Plant Operations The Noland and West Side Water Resource Recovery Facilities (WRRF's) effluent discharges were 100% in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Details of effluent quality and influent loadings are shown in Appendix A. 1.1 Process Control Noland The annual ozone channel inspection and clean -out was completed during the seven-day period that discharge was halted for filter cell bleaching. The ozone channel's structural integrity and all submerged ozone assets were in good condition and no issues were found. Noland Ozone Channel West Side Decreasing temperatures in the biological units required adjustments to the RAS (return activated sludge) and WAS (wasted activate sludge). The adjustments increased the MLSS (mixed liquor suspended solids) concentration and met the new target of 2200 mg/L. These changes will help ensure proper treatment and the production of a high -quality effluent. 1.2 Biosolids Process During the month of November, the WRRF's produced 1,957 wet tons of biosolids with approximately 1,277 wet tons of biosolids applied into the solar houses prior to the thermal dryer and 599 wet tons processed directly through the thermal dryer. Final repairs were made to the thermal dryer mid -November. Approximately 81 wet tons were washed to the Noland WRRF for reseeding the microorganism population. Prior to thermal dryer operation, a total of 493 tons of belt filter pressed, partially dried biosolids were transferred to area landfills due to dryer down time for bearing replacement. The total cost of landfill Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs biosolids disposal was $23,762. The biosolids drying operation saved an estimated $34,122 in disposal costs this month, compared to if all biosolids were landfill disposed. 1.3 Compliance BMS staff collected the 60-day fertilizer compliance samples on November 22" d with all samples passing all analytical criterion. The samples are tested for MPN/fecal, percent dry solids, and 503 regulated metals content. The results of these tests demonstrate compliance to the State and Federal regulations governing biosolids processing and the continued classification of Exceptional Quality Class A fertilizer for the City of Fayetteville customers. 1.4 Successes During the month of November, the Noland WRRF stopped discharge to the White River for a total of 7 days for the quarterly preventive maintenance filter cell bleaching. A total of 3800 Gallons of 12.5% bleach was fed to the filter cells over a 2-day period. Filter cell efficiency increased after bleaching, resulting in lower turbidity in the filter cell effluent and enhanced ozone disinfection. The Parshall Flume was also cleaned for aesthetic improvements and to ensure the optical accuracy of instrumentation used for state reporting. Parshall Flume Cleaning On November 12", Jacobs IT programmers completed the installation of new thermal temperature sensors. The new sensors monitor the temperature of the thermal dryer's drive and discharge ends. Specifically, the sensors monitor the temperature of the thermal dryer bearings, inlet transfer fluid plumbing, and outlet transfer fluid plumbing. They are programmed to shut the equipment down if temperature set points are exceeded. The goal of the sensors is to prevent operating equipment to the point of overheating. The new Scada software program also gives the operator the ability to operate the thermal dryer remotely. Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Thermal Dryer Temperature Sensors AM 1.5 Issues/Resolutions ,jacobs A weld repair was performed on a fracture of the #1 biosolids screw -type fill auger and normal operation was resumed. BMS Biosolids Fill Auger 1.6 Revenue Product Hay Fertilizer Table 1-1: Revenue generated from the BMS Water Treatment Residuals Tons Sold/Received 119 142 215 Revenue Generated $9,498.28 $2,835.60 $6,875.14 Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Figure 1-1: Revenue generated from the BMS via hay, fertilizer, and WTR ,jacobs Revenue Generated Biosolids Management Site $160,000 $140,000 $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 n $20'000 I-1k ,aF, �epc P PJ� Q�O&o o z 2'0 he o O O Monthly 2020 O Monthly 2021 Cumulative 2021 Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 6 Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 2. Maintenance 2.1 West Side ,jacobs A perforated roller and new belts were installed on the damaged West Side belt filter press before returning the equipment to service. A routine inspection of the West Side inlet facility dumpster bay revealed a broken grating over the drains. The grating was replaced and proper draining was resumed. West Side Inlet Facility Dumpster Bay r - - 2.2 Noland New bearings were installed in the Noland biosolids sludge feed pump. Noland Biosolids Sludge Feed Pump Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs 2.3 Lift Stations The new lift station 57 was put into service after successful test operation was performed on all equipment. New Lift Station 57 Put Into Service = _ Lift Station 7 f Hamestring Repairs were made to broken curb 2.4 BMS Maintenance The thermal dryer bearing replacement was completed by the BMS staff on November 1211 and normal thermal dryer operation resumed. Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 2.5 Key Performance Indicators/Measures ,jacobs Figure 2-1: Labor Hours by Work Order Type El0.00, OP. 121.29, 6% 148.50, 8% r ❑ 22.50, 1% 487.18, 25% ❑ 171.05,' ❑ administrative ❑ corrective maintenance emergency corrective maintenance non emergency corrective maintenance from pm/pdm preventive maintenance project ❑ safety ❑ administrative ❑ corrective maintenance emergency ❑ corrective maintenance non emergency corrective maintenance from pm/pdm preventive maintenance ❑ 975.22, 51% project Figure 2-2: Work Order Count by Type 1697,90% 2, 0% ❑ 0, 0% n II ❑ safety ❑ 25, 1% ❑ 5, 0% 103, 6% T 47, 3% Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 9 Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs 2.6 Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) A purchase order was issued to replace effluent pump 3 at the Noland facility. This purchase was the final encumbered project from 2020. A rebuild of Hamestring lift station pump 3 was added as a break-in project. A purchase order was issued for new strainers at the Noland headworks. This project was presented as a non -agenda item after receiving administrative approval. Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 10 Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs 3. Laboratory/Industrial Pretreatment West Side Goose Creek samples were collected and sent to Ramboll US Consulting to complete the Whole Effluent Toxicity Screening (WET) test as outlined in the Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) Plan. The test passed, showing no toxicity for survival to the fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas. Samples were collected for the White River (WR) outfall at the Noland facility and sent to American Interplex Corporation (AIC) for WET testing. The samples passed WET testing for both species; Ceriodaphnia Dubia, water flea, for survival and reproduction and the Pimepholes promelas, fathead minnow, for growth assessment showing neither lethal nor sublethal effects in the dilution series 97%, 73%, 55%, 41 %, 31 %, and 0%for WR. This completes the third and final re -test required for the failed toxicity testing from August. An ammonia retest for the DMR-QA41 study was completed and submitted to the ADEQ Quality Assurance coordinator. This retest became necessary after shipping delays with ammonia equipment resulted in a rescheduled analytical test. DMR-QA is an ungraded study required by the USEPA for NPDES permit holders. All permitted industries had shutdowns during the Thanksgiving holiday. Annual compliance inspections were completed for significant industrial users Marshalltown Tools and Hiland Dairy to determine compliance status with the industrial waste discharge permit, City of Fayetteville Code, and 40 CFR Part 433 and 403 respectively. Both were found in compliance. Quarterly surcharge sampling for BOD, TSS, T-Phos, and pH was performed for the three food industries: ConAgra, Hiland Dairy, and Tyson. Data reports from this sampling event are sent to the industries to use for their daily and monthly average calculations in the verification of compliance. Monthly surcharge and waste hauler reports were completed and sent to the City for billing. For revenue generated from the IPP, see Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1. Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 ,jacobs Table 3-1: Revenue generated from the Industrial Pretreatment Program (IPP) Revenue $91,930.81 Surcharges on October data $2,200.00 Fees from hauled waste accepted in November $0.00 Other fees paid in November $0.00 Fines assessed in November Zero violations for all industrial users Violations on October data Figure 3-1: IPP revenue total from surcharges, fees, and fines Revenue Generated Industrial Pretreatment Program $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $20,000 Ile '3 ❑ 2020 Monthly Surcharge Fees plus Hauled Waste Fees ❑ 2021 Monthly Surcharge Fees plus Hauled Waste Fees Figure 3-2: Loads of hauled waste -by hauler and cumulative loads per month Hauled Waste Summary 60 50 40 30 b 20 10 n 0 n II n H fl I n n ❑ I III ,a <<e�� coe � O ❑ 2020 Arkansas Portable Toilets ❑ 2020 Best Jet 2020 White River Enviro. Services 2020 TOTAL 2021 Arkansas Portable Toilets ❑ 2021 Best Jet ❑ 2021 White River Enviro. Services ❑ 2021 TOTAL Jacobs - Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs 4. Woolsey Wet Prairie November project activity largely focused on prescribed burn preparations. More than 1.5 inches of rainfall at 3 inches less than the normal average, provided plenty of good weather and cooperative site conditions for removing standing dead vegetation from around structures and establishing bare soil burn area containment lanes. This level of safety becomes especially important when considering the proximity of infrastructures for the West Side WRRF and nearby solar arrays. The Jacobs team anticipates being complete with all burn preparations early next month. November's unseasonably warm, dry weather also provided an ideal opportunity for the Jacobs team to target Japanese Honeysuckle with herbicide applications within Woolsey Wet Prairie. Vine honeysuckle can be especially difficult to treat within the growing season as it intertwines itself within surrounding, desirable native vegetation. Mild winters can provide an ideal treatment window as the invasive honeysuckle retains its green foliage against dormant vegetation. Bare Soil Burn Containmen -Op . • • 1 y r r r Sarah Garrison, Jacobs Engineering Intern, attended and helped promote the Watershed Conservation Resource Center (WCRC) native grass collection event at the Woolsey Wet Prairie, as well as a Project Wingspan collection event for Smooth Blue Aster at Cricket Creek in North Central Arkansas. "ry WATERSHED CONSERVATION PE -11 [fniER Jacobs assisted WCRC with their Native Seed Collection Event Volunteer Native Seed Collection At Woolsey Wetlands Prairie Jacobs — Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 5. Community Outreach Thanksgiving Food Drive for Life Source International ,jacobs The Jacobs team collects enough food items to feed several families during the Thanksgiving season. Alone we can do so little, Together we can do so mush.. Hellen Keller Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 14 Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs 6. Sustainability The Jacobs Fayetteville team hosted the 811 Annual Blue -Green Infrastructure Fall Event at the West Side WRRF and Woolsey Wet Prairie Sanctuary. In partnership with numerous regional organizations, this event focuses on environmental education, nature conservation and blue-green infrastructure development. Attendees were educated on the facility's water recovery process, environmental health, native plant species, and harvesting methods. Additionally, volunteers learned how they could get more engaged with their educational and volunteer opportunities in Northwest Arkansas. Throughout the morning, nearly 120 local volunteers and 30 support staff from Jacobs and partnering organizations worked together to collect and broadcast seeds from a variety of native species, such as Common Boneset, Slender Mountain Mint, Sweet Black -Eyed Susan, Rattlesnake Master, Ironweed Big Bluestem, Stiff -Leaf Goldenrod, and more. The native seeds help enhance the rain gardens, bioswales, and wildlife corridor spaces, which work to improve storm water quality, enhance habitat ecology and biodiversity, safeguard native pollinators, and multiple mammal populations to increase climate resiliency. This event originally started in 2013, with only a handful of volunteers, as a Saturday morning roadside collection of native grasses along Broyles Avenue for use in local streambank restoration projects. The event has grown to include collection and planting of seeds for improvement of the WRRF rain gardens and bioswales. In recent years, this event has significantly grown from a few dozen to 120+ volunteers and has developed into an opportunity for education through the inclusion of environmental groups with interests in natural resource conservation, wildlife ecology, and native plant biodiversity. As a thank you to our participants for their efforts that morning, in addition to wanting to provide them with tangible resources to practice what they learned about sustainable BGI practices, they were provided with twenty varieties of locally collected native seed for each person to take with them as well as information on how to turn their own property into mini native BGI gardens. Additionally, a large portion of the harvested seeds were also donated to the WCRC that specializes in the design and implementation of streambank restoration sites in NWA as a best management practice for source -water protection. To support their ongoing BGI efforts, check out the team's Facebook pag and Instagram account which were created to further promote their initiatives! https://facebook.com/nwa.blueQreeninfrastructures/ https://www.insta(iram.com/nwa bluegreeninfrastructures/ Jacobs — Fayetteville Project is Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 16 Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs MTURATUmTe Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 17 Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs More high-pressure sodium lights were replaced with LED's to reduce consumption of electricity. Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 18 Jacobs Fayetteville Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Jacobs 7. Health & Safety/Training The facilities have attained a safe working record of 748 days without a recordable incident. The Jacobs Area Safety Professional, Wes Cloud, hosted multiple training sessions focusing on OSHA standard 1910.212 Machine Guarding, while also introducing the Jacobs safety culture flagship "Beyond Zero". The training is an ongoing process within the function of safety providing value for the staff and client while also teaching the employees to work safer and healthier. The safety committee completed weekly safety inspections throughout the facility and continues to work with the maintenance staff to get issues corrected within a timely and efficient manner. The future goals of the safety committee will be discussed in the upcoming month. The committee will always look at innovative ways to provide value for the staff and client. John Byrd attended Jacob's IPP webinar reviewing EPA's "Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Guidance Manual". He also completed the "Advanced Industrial Pretreatment" course through South Arkansas University in preparation for license testing next month. Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 19 Jacobs Fayetteville - Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Appendix A. Additional Information A.1 Effluent & Influent Data A.2 White River Effluent Characteristics .;acobs 2021 Monthly WR WR WR Average CBOD CBOD TSS Flow (mg/L) (lbs/d) (mg/L) (MGD) Permit 5.5 578 5.0 Limit November WR WR WR WR WR D.O. pH TSS Phos Phos Ammonia Ammonia Avg Min (lbs/d) (mg/L) (lbs/d) (mg/L) (lbs/d) Min (s.u.) (mg/L) 525 1.00 105.0 2.4 252 7.5 6.0 pH Fecal Max Coliform (s.u.) (MPN/ loom[) 9.0 1,000 January 5.8 2.7 128 2.8 131 0.14 6.3 0.2 8 15.0 7.0 7.5 77 February 5.1 4.3 174 4.4 181 0.19 7.7 0.5 22 16.6 6.9 7.4 174 March 6.3 3.7 199 3.0 166 0.15 7.9 0.2 12 14.9 7.3 7.4 22 April 5.1 3.4 188 1.1 62 0.09 4.9 0.3 15 12.8 7.3 7.6 54 May 10.0 3.8 308 1.6 133 0.11 9.3 0.2 13 12.3 7.4 7.6 17 June 7.4 3.5 214 1.5 94 0.31 17.8 0.1 6 12.3 7.2 7.5 35 July 5.1 3.3 136 2.1 85 0.37 15.4 0.2 8 13.1 7.2 7.8 74 August 4.4 3.3 113 1.1 41 0.42 14.7 0.3 12 15.5 7.1 7.7 73 September 4.2 2.7 90 1.3 45 0.24 8.3 0.1 4 17.6 7.1 7.5 110 October 5.0 2.8 103 1.8 68 0.26 10.0 0.1 4 18.2 7.4 7.5 198 November 5.7 4.0 199 4.0 200 0.27 13.7 0.1 4 16.4 7.4 7.7 244 December Average 5.8 3.4 168 2.3 110 0.23 10.6 0.2 10 15.0 7.2 7.6 98 White River Effluent Characteristics- Minerals 2021 WR WR WR TDS TDS Sulfate (mg/L) (lbs/d) (mg/L) Permit 500 52,542 119 Limit November WR WR WR Sulfate Nitrate Nitrate (lbs/d) (mg/L) (lbs/d) 12,505 report report January 342 15,871 62 3,154 4 204 February 351 14,818 67 3,392 5 253 March 347 18,845 72 3,741 6 291 April 335 18,124 72 3,609 3 135 May 320 26,059 56 3,167 4 221 June 338 20,861 50 4,391 6 483 July 347 15,391 61 2,478 7 292 August 400 14,214 66 2,064 10 310 September 378 12,889 47 1,740 12 444 October 380 13,820 55 1,738 10 316 November 375 18,470 53 2,794 11 580 December Average 356 17,215 60 2,933 7 321 Jacobs - Fayetteville Project 20 MI Jacobs Fayetteville - Client Monthly Report for November 2021 oaco S Goose Creek Effluent Characteristics 2021 Monthly Average Flow (MGD) GC CBOD (mg/L) GC CBOD (Lbs/d) GC TSS (mg/L) GC TSS (lbs/d) GC Phos (mg/L) GC Phos (lbs/d) GC Ammonia (mg/L) GC Ammonia (lbs/d) D.O. Avg Min (mg/L) pH Min (s.u.) pH Max (s.u.) Fecal Coliform (MPN/100ml) Permit Limit November 6.6 550.4 10.0 834 1.00 83.4 2.3 191.8 7.5 6.0 9.0 1,000 January 10.8 2.0 174.3 1.1 95 0.08 7.2 0.2 18.4 10.7 7.0 7.4 8 February 9.7 2.0 161.9 1.0 81 0.08 6.4 0.1 8.1 11.1 7.0 7.4 5 March 11.8 2.1 202.0 1.0 101 0.13 12.8 0.1 13.3 10.4 7.1 7.5 7 April 12.1 2.0 202.1 1.0 101 0.08 7.6 0.1 13.5 9.9 7.2 7.5 6 May 14.2 2.0 236.1 1.0 118 0.06 7.2 0.1 13.6 9.7 7.3 7.5 5 June 10.9 2.0 188.4 1.0 94 0.06 5.9 j 0.11 10.2 9.3 7.1 7.6 6 July 9.1 2.4 177.9 1.0 75 0.22 19.9 0.2 19 9.0 7.3 7.7 10 August 7.4 2.1 129 1.0 62 0.06 3.9 0.1 9 8.7 7.5 7.7 6 September 7.0 1.9 113.7 1.0 59 0.05 3.1 0.1 7.8 8.8 7.4 7.6 6 October 8.9 2.0 149.4 1.0 75 0.06 4.6 0.28 25.5 9.2 7.2 7.6 9 November 8.0 2.4 162.7 1.0 69 0.06 3.8 0.03 1.7 9.9 7.4 7.6 5 December Average 10.0 2.1 172.5 1.0 85 0.09 7.5 0.1 12.7 9.7 7.2 7.5 7 Paul R. Noland Influent Characteristics Noland I Monthly Hydraulic WRRF Average Loadings Flow Percent of (MGD) Design Designed 12.6 (Annual Avg.) BOD Organic TSS TSS Loading Loading Loading Loading (Lbs/d) Percent (lbs/d) Percent of of Design Design 29,666 23,198 PO4 PO4 NH3 NH3 Loading Loading Loading Loading (lbs/d) Percent (Lbs/d) Percent of of Design Design 765 2,250 January 6.3 49.9% 16,471 55.5% 8,150 35.1% 192 25.1% 699 31.1% February 5.1 40.1% 11,850 39.9% 7,368 31.8% 175 22.9% 720 32.0% March 6.7 53.2% 14,260 48.1% 7,846 33.8% 196 25.6% 826 36.7% April 7.1 56.6% 17,335 58.4% 9,693 41.8% 209 27.3% 939 41.7% May 7.7 60.8% 15,173 51.1% 9,797 42.2% 222 29.0% 788 35.0% June 5.7 45.1% 13,062 44.0% 8,110 35.0% 176 23.0% 543 24.1% July 5.0 39.7% 13,984 47.1% 7,746 33.4% 207 27.1% 559 24.8% August 4.1 32.5% 14,698 49.5% 9,221 39.7% 187 24.4% 789 35.0% September 4.2 33.1% 16,082 54.2% 9,571 41.3% 215 28.1% 881 39.1% October 5.3 42.1% 19,869 67.0% 12,089 52.1% 232 30.3% 956 42.5% November 5.1 40.3% 17,970 60.6% 9,899 42.7% 220 28.8% 843 37.5% December Average 5.7 44.9% 15,523 52.3% 9,045 39.0% 203 26.5% 776 34.5% Jacobs - Fayetteville Project 21 I Jacobs Fayetteville - Client Monthly Report for November 2021 oaco S West Side Influent Characteristics West Side Monthly WRRF Average Flow (MGD) Hydraulic Loadings Percent of Design Boo Organic TSS TSS PO4 PO4 NH3 NH3 Loading Loading Loading Loading Loading Loading Loading Loading (lbs/d) Percent of (lbs/d) Percent (lbs/d) Percent (lbs/d) Percent Design of Design of Design of Design 14,595 14,595 584 1918 Designed (Annual Avg.) 10.0 January 10.8 107.6% 12,508 85.7% 12,331 84.5% 218 37.4% 1,605 83.7% February 9.6 95.9% 13,110 89.8% 12,291 84.2% 160 27.4% 1,406 73.3% March 11.8 118.1% 15,216 104.3% 12,918 88.5% 252 43.1% 1,850 96.4% April 12.1 121.0% 12,799 87.7% 13,164 90.2% 219 37.5% 1,917 100.0% May 14.1 141.2% 12,171 83.4% 14,193 97.2% 194 33.2% 1,448 75.5% June 10.8 108.3% 11,669 80.0% 12,705 87.0% 195 33.4% 1,760 91.8% July 9.1 91.1% 12,941 88.7% 15,103 103.5% 176 30.2% 1,443 75.2% August 7.4 74.0% 16,394 112.3% 14,720 100.9% 153 26.2% 1,612 84.0% September 7.0 69.8% 17,354 118.9% 18,155 124.4% 181 31.1% 1,626 84.8% October 8.9 89.0% 13,940 95.5% 13,892 95.2% 188 32.2% 1,696 88.4% November 8.1 80.7% 12,741 87.3% 11,814 80.9% 195 33.4% 1,509 78.7% December Average 10.0 99.7% 13,713 94.0% 13,753 94.2% 194 33.2% 1,625 84.7% Jacobs - Fayetteville Project 22 7 oaco S Jacobs Fayetteville - Client Monthly Report for November 2021 Labor Status Department Job Title Employee Name Fayetteville /o FTE Admin Project Manager Monty Sedlak 95.00% Admin Assistant Project Manager Leonides Moreno 100.00% Admin - Operations Operations Manager Tim Luther 100.00% Admin Environmental Specialist Jeff Hickle 100.00% Admin Health, Safety, Compliance Professional Wes Cloud 70.00% Admin Project Coordinator Brandi Miller-DeWeese 90.00% Admin Administrative Assistant Christy Taylor 100.00% Admin Administrative Assistant Kassandra Foster 100.00% BMS BMS Supervisor Peter Burrow 100.00% BMS Lead Operator Jerry Genz 100.00% BMS Lead Operator John Tenberge 100.00% BMS Equipment Operator Charlie Boger 100.00% BMS Equipment Operator Rick Witherspoon 100.00% BMS Equipment Operator Vacant 100.00% BMS Operator I David Dajani 100.00% BMS Operator In Training Ben Shondelmyer 100.00% BMS Operator In Training Vacant 100.00% BMS Operator In Training Robert Donnell 100.00% BMS Operator In Training Matthew Goud 100.00% BMS Mechanic Mike Reed 100.00% Admin Admin-Ops Supervisor Thom Vinson 90.00% LAB Laboratory Director Donna McChristian 90.00% LAB Industrial Pretreatment Coordinator John Byrd 100.00% LAB Lead Laboratory Analyst Matt Benton 60.00% LAB Laboratory Analyst Walter Choder 100.00% Maint Maintenance Supervisor Joshua Apeman 100.00% Maint Lead Mechanic Brian Daniels 95.00% Maint Lead Electrician Tim Marr 70.00% Maint Mechanic Robert Ingram 100.00% Maint Mechanic Buddy Carter 100.00% Maint Mechanic Steve Cook 100.00% Maint Mechanic Michael Spohn 100.00% Maint Mechanic Rick Dollarhide 100.00% Maint Mechanic in Training Abram Gibson 100.00% Maint Mechanic in Training Nathan Eastwood 100.00% Operations Operations Supervisor Austin Ramsfield 100.00% Operations Operator II Shawn Santellanes 100.00% Operations Operator I Anthony Ramsfield 100.00% Operations Operator I Travis Patton 100.00% Operations Operator Justin Sweeney 100.00% Operations Operator In Training Tom Meunier 100.00% Operations Operator In Training Paul Goolsby 100.00% Operations Operator In Training Chandler Smothers 100.00% Operations Operator In Training Jeremy Johnson 100.00% Operations Operator In Training Brittney Doyle 100.00% SCADA SCADA Supervisor Mayo Miller 100.00% Jacobs - Fayetteville Project Jacobs Fayetteville - Client Monthly Report for November 2021 SCADA SCADA Instrument & Control Tech Instrument & Control Tech .;acobs Pat Cooley 95.00% Mark Gleber 100.00% Authorized Positions = 48.0 Filled Positions = 46.0 Filled FTE's= 44.6 TEMPS BMS Engineering Intern, U of A Vacant 100.00% Admin Engineering Intern, U of A Sarah Garrison 100.00% Maint Engineering Intern, U of A Vacant 100.00% SPECIAL PROJECTS (Performed in scope) Area Reason Name Hours SCADA Maintenance Maintenance Network Upgrade Campos, Edgar 3.5 Asset Manager Support Bass, Edward Lee 2.1 Asset Manager Support Turley, Johnny D (JD) 50.5 Jacobs — Fayetteville Project 24