Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout242-25 RESOLUTIONPage 1 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Resolution: 242-25 File Number: 2025-2140 A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT #1 TO THE ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RJN GROUP, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $814,113.00 FOR WATERLINE CONDITION ASSESSMENTS, AND TO APPROVE A CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,000.00. WHEREAS, because of increasing failures of aging large-diameter water transmission liners, on October 1, 2024, the City Council passed Resolution 245-24 authorizing an agreement with RJN Group, Inc. for Waterline Condition Assessment Pre-planning services; and WHEREAS, the initial scope has identified the highest critical water transmission mains that should be targeted for field testing and further data collection; and WHEREAS, Amendment #1 will provide for ‘smart-ball’ inspection of about 10 miles of the 36-inch diameter waterline from Beaver Water District as well as vibroacoustic inspection of approximately 8.7 miles of additional aging waterlines in town with diameters from 24-inch to 30-inch. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby authorizes Mayor Rawn to sign Amendment #1 to the engineering services agreement with RJN Group, Inc., in the amount of $814,113.00 for Waterline Condition Assessments and further approves a project contingency in the amount of $120,000.00. PASSED and APPROVED on November 4, 2025 Approved: _______________________________ Molly Rawn, Mayor Attest: _______________________________ Kara Paxton, City Clerk Treasurer Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov CITY COUNCIL MEMO 2025-2140 MEETING OF NOVEMBER 4, 2025 TO: Mayor Rawn and City Council THRU: Keith Macedo, Chief of Staff FROM: Tim Nyander, Utilities Director SUBJECT: RJN Group, Inc. - Amendment No. 1 for Waterline Condition Assessments RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Amendment No. 1 to the Engineering Services Agreement with RJN Group, Inc. in the amount of $814,113.00 for Waterline Condition Assessments, and approval of a project contingency in the amount of $120,000.00. BACKGROUND: In response to historical failures on aging large-diameter waterlines in the Fayetteville system, the West Transmission Main project was expedited to install a critical third feed of treated water from Beaver Water District to Fayetteville. One goal of that project was to allow critical shut-downs and repairs on other water transmission lines that currently cannot be taken out of service due to demands for water usage in the system. Construction is progressing on-time and on-budget for the West Transmission line to be operational by Summer 2026. During this time, desktop review and planning for condition assessments of other aging large diameter waterlines has been underway with RJN Group (Resolution 245-24; October 1, 2024). This initial scope has identified the highest critical water transmission mains that should be targeted for field testing and data collection using various technologies. DISCUSSION: The proposed amendment with RJN Group will provide for ‘smart-ball’ inspection of the 36-inch diameter waterline from Beaver Water District (approximately 9.8 miles) as well as vibroacoustic inspection of approximately 8.7 miles of additional aging waterlines in town with diameters from 24-inch to 30-inch. The aim of these inspections is to further refine the areas of highest risk in our water transmission mains so that targeted repairs, rehabilitation, and replacements can proceed in the most cost-effective manner. The proposed contract amendment will allow for final planning, field coordination, preparation, and deployment of each scanning technology. It will also provide the subsequent detailed data analysis, reports, and recommendations for repair, rehab, and/or replacements along these alignments. Furthermore, a contingency is built into the fee to allow flexibility for additional field scans or other data collection if determined to be beneficial for the project to give actionable results. For example, if large portions of the 36-inch waterline from Beaver Water District are determined to have significant wall-loss using the ‘smart-ball’ technology, the team may elect to further investigate this line with additional deployment of the vibroacoustic analysis. Having contingency allows the project to only deploy the secondary scans in most-critical areas, thereby reducing scope and cost. Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov The existing contract was able to omit soil testing that was part of the project scope, resulting in project savings in the amount of $44,000.00. Staff recommends approval of Amendment No. 1 to the Engineering Services Agreement with RJN Group for waterline condition assessments. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: Funds are available in the Water System Rehabilitation/Replacement account. ATTACHMENTS: 3. Staff Review Form, 4. Amendment #1 - Agreement for Professional Engineering Services Page 1 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Legislation Text 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 File #: 2025-2140 A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT #1 TO THE ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RJN GROUP, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $814,113.00 FOR WATERLINE CONDITION ASSESSMENTS, AND TO APPROVE A CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,000.00. WHEREAS, because of increasing failures of aging large-diameter water transmission liners, on October 1, 2024, the City Council passed Resolution 245-24 authorizing an agreement with RJN Group, Inc. for Waterline Condition Assessment Pre-planning services; and WHEREAS, the initial scope has identified the highest critical water transmission mains that should be targeted for field testing and further data collection; and WHEREAS, Amendment #1 will provide for ‘smart-ball’ inspection of about 10 miles of the 36-inch diameter waterline from Beaver Water District as well as vibroacoustic inspection of approximately 8.7 miles of additional aging waterlines in town with diameters from 24-inch to 30-inch. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby authorizes Mayor Rawn to sign Amendment #1 to the engineering services agreement with RJN Group, Inc., in the amount of $814,113.00 for Waterline Condition Assessments and further approves a project contingency in the amount of $120,000.00. City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2025-2140 Item ID 11/4/2025 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non-Agenda Item Tim Nyander 10/15/2025 WATER SEWER (720) Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Amendment No. 1 to the Engineering Services Agreement with RJN Group, Inc. in the amount of $814,113.00 for Waterline Condition Assessments, and approval of a project contingency in the amount of $120,000.00. Budget Impact: 5400.720.5600-5314.00 Water and Sewer Account Number Fund 12009.1 Water System Rehabilitation/Replacement Project Number Project Title Budgeted Item?Yes Total Amended Budget $9,528,818.00 Expenses (Actual+Encum)$8,462,632.30 Available Budget $1,066,185.70 Does item have a direct cost?Yes Item Cost $934,113.00 Is a Budget Adjustment attached?No Budget Adjustment $- Remaining Budget $132,072.70 V20221130 Purchase Order Number:2024-915 Previous Ordinance or Resolution #Res. 245-24 Change Order Number:1 Approval Date: Original Contract Number:2024-51 Comments: DCN: OP-CON-02-20-R2 Page 1 of 15 R1605-CAC CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH RJN GROUP. INC. In accordance with the AGREEMENT for Professional Engineering Services dated October 1, 2024, between the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas (hereinafter called OWNER) and RJN GROUP, INC. (hereinafter called ENGINEER), OWNER hereby authorizes ENGINEER to proceed with the following services: Section I - Project Description Under the AGREEMENT, the OWNER retained RJN Group to provide professional engineering services. The Project involved planning, ascertaining methods of inspection, determining the level of effort, and developing cost estimates for assessing the condition of thirteen sections of critical waterlines, totaling approximately 47.3 miles of pipes. It has since been determined that additional services will be needed. Specifically, the additional services consist of certain condition assessment tasks, for certain waterlines, stemming from recommendations generated in the original scope of work. Section II - Scope The ENGINEER shall perform professional services utilizing the procedures identified in the original Scope of the AGREEMENT and as described in Exhibit A herein. Section III - Time of Service ENGINEER will proceed with providing the services set forth herein immediately upon execution of this Authorization and as described in Exhibit B herein. Section IV - Compensation OWNER shall compensate ENGINEER for providing these additional services a total sum not-to- exceed $814,113.00, as provided in the Compensation Table (Exhibit C) herein provided. All prices will remain firm for the initial term of the Agreement period. Any de- escalation/escalation in prices will be made on an annual basis thereafter at the sole discretion of the OWNER. Requests for price adjustments must be made by the ENGINEER in writing at least 60 days in advance. The baseline for determining price adjustments will be based upon the closing date of the solicitation. All requests for price increase or decrease are subject to review and approval by the ENGINEER. The maximum increase will have a ceiling of 10% annually and a net decrease of 10% annually. Changes in prices shall be based on the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Cost Index, average increase or decrease for the most recent calendar year (see http://www.bls.gov/ECI; update with the appropriate ECI Index, CIU1010000100000A and Management, Professional, and Related). In consideration of the mutual covenants and Agreements herein contained, the OWNER and ENGINEER stipulate and agree that the Agreement for Professional Engineering Services dated October 1, 2024, is hereby amended as described in Exhibits A and B, attached hereto and made part of this agreement. All other provisions of the original Agreement remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed this day of ,20 . AUTHORIZED BY: CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, Arkansas By: ___________________________________________________ Name: _______________________________________________ Title: _________________________________________________ Date: _________________________________________________ ACCEPTED BY: RJN Group, Inc. By: ___________________________________________ Name: _______________________________________ Title: _________________________________________ Date: _________________________________________ END OF AMENDMENT Daniel Jackson Sr. Vice President 10/15/25 4th November 25 Molly Rawn Mayor 11/04/2025 EXHIBIT A – SCOPE OF SERVICES RJN is proposing the following scope of services for the Water Main Assessment for the City of Fayetteville. A.Project Management and Meetings 1.Provide project management services including invoicing, scope, schedule, and fee tracking, and closeout services. 2.Provide monthly updates to City staff through the duration of the project. 3.Meet with City staff as necessary to discuss progress of the project. B.Pipeline Section 2 1.Preparatory Work, Data Review, and Planning a.Conduct a kickoff meeting with the City to discuss the project. b.Finalize determination of Pipers® launch and retrieval locations. c.Perform mock deployment planning. This may include planning for strategies/provisions such as a “dummy” Pipers multi-sensor, a clamp-on flowmeter, and/or other measures to finalize the preparation of the Pipers deployment and ensure its success. d.Prepare for a field planning visit. e.INGU Data Preparation i.Kickoff Meeting – RJN and INGU ii.INGU Deliverables iii.KMZ File of Water Main Paths 1.Mapping grade locates 2.Excel Elevation Profile(s) 3.Questionnaire(s) 2.Field Reconnaissance Visits and Equipment Preparation a.Meet with City staff on-site for site visit inspections. During visit, discuss any questions that arose during the data review process. b.Observe pump operations and take steps to measure travel time. c.Field assessment: i.Observe valve exercising by City staff to confirm operation, if possible. ii.Finalize methodology for inserting and catching Pipers. d.Discuss results of preliminary assessment with City. e.Following installation of valved taps by City, provide equipment and personnel to perform internal inspection of the water main and retrieval of the inspection tools. Customize catching devices as necessary. 3.Internal Inspections a.Contract with INGU on the rental of Pipers multi-sensors. b.Work with the City to assist in the Pipers launching. c.Perform up to three Pipers deployments, with a minimum of two successful capture and retrievals. Being that the Pipers ball is carried through the pipeline with the flow of water, the duration of time it stays within the pipeline is a function of the water velocity. We understand from the City that typical velocities in this pipeline are 2.5 fps to 3.7 fps. Thus the Pipers ball would likely need to stay in this pipeline for approximately four hours per deployment. 4.Data Evaluation and Technical Memorandum (TM) a.Review and analyze inspection results and recommendations. i.Pipers’ technology includes the following results: 1.Acoustic leak detection 2.Air and gas pocket detection 3.High resolution pressure sensing 4.Deposit, debris, and blockage locating 5.Magnetometer survey to detect variations in bulk wall thickness and internal corrosion, with a minimum wall loss threshold of 30%. The Pipers ball will ONLY be able to state “yes/no” for wall loss of 30% or greater at all points along the pipe. It does not give precise info about wall loss. (Pipes having wall losses of 30- 45% can be considered to be in “marginal” condition; beyond 45%, they can be considered to be in “distressed” condition.) The Pipers ball uses microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) magnetometers to measure the passive magnetic field within ferromagnetic pipelines. Metal loss has a significant impact on the magnetic structure of the pipeline, thereby influencing the passive magnetic field detected by the Pipers ball. Research has shown that metal loss features with a minimum depth of 30% of the nominal wall thickness consistently reduce axial and radial magnetic flux density (MFD). The average total MFD within each pipe segment is calculated and compared with the average total MFD of the parent pipeline. If the disparity exceeds an empirically determined threshold, the pipe segment is flagged as a potential candidate for containing a “metal loss” anomaly with a depth exceeding 30% of the nominal wall thickness. b.Include a summary of the work completed and results of the internal screening. c.Prepare a GIS map of the water main system, including findings from the site inspections, document review, and internal screening. d.Provide recommendations for further inspections, rehabilitation/repair, and/or maintenance of the water main. “Recommendations for further inspection”, if any, would likely entail Broadband Electro-Magnetic (BEM) inspection. This would likely be recommended in certain areas if Pipers detects wall loss of at least 30%. The BEM assessment is a non-destructive testing method of measuring wall thickness. Wall conditions are recorded along the area at which the hand scanning tool is placed. These recordings are converted using software and a calibration database to develop an apparent wall thickness. The original pipe wall thickness (“reference wall thickness”) is determined using industry handbook information that was current at the time the pipeline was constructed. Subtracting the measured wall thickness from the reference wall thickness yields a determination of wall loss. Although the BEM assessment can detect where internal and/or external wall loss has occurred, it cannot distinguish between internal and external wall loss. Compared with Pipers, the BEM would provide much more precise wall loss data at the point(s) where it is applied on the excavated pipe. It would also be appropriate during BEM inspection to make use of the excavated trench and perform soil corrosivity testing and visual inspection of the external pipe wall. The BEM and related tasks constitute the “Step 2” Condition Assessment action presented in the Water Line Condition Assessment Planning & Prep Report; “Step 2” would likely cost approximately 80% of the Pipers work (“Step 1”) proposed herein. This is based on the assumption that ten BEM excavations would be conducted for Pipeline Section 2. e. Include budgetary pricing and recommended timing (urgency) for implementation of recommendations. f. Technical Memorandum (TM) Submittal: i. Provide a digital draft of TM, ii. Revise draft based on City comments and submit a digital and two hard copies (if desired) of final TM. iii. Provide digital copies of all data, results, and photographs from inspections. iv. Submit a digital and two hard copies (if desired). C. Pipeline Sections 7, 8, 9A and 12 RJN is proposing the following scope of services for the “Advanced Vibroacoustic Analysis” (AVA) Condition Assessments: Water Transmission Pipeline Sections 7, 8, 9A, 12” project in the City of Fayetteville: 1. Preparatory Work & Data Review a. Conduct a kickoff meeting with the City to discuss the project scope, objectives, roles, and establish lines of communication for the duration of the work. b. Discuss project approach, schedule of work, and set expectations for the project. c. Share follow-up questions with the City for discussion. d. Visit the project area and investigate the access points. e. Prepare a confirmation list for the City to check accessibility to fire hydrants, valves, and vaults to meet project objectives. f. Ensure selected sites are acceptable and provide suitable locations concerning safety and equipment performance, adjust segment plans accordingly based on access availability and site conditions. 2.AVA powered by DRI™ Inspections 3.Provide all necessary AVA inspection equipment and a three-to-four-person crew to complete field work. a.Use external vibroacoustic sensors and data acquisition units at predefined access points (e.g., hydrants, valves, or hydro-excavated “potholes”) along each pipeline segment to enable AVA testing. b.Introduce Vibroacoustic signals into the water column using a centrally positioned wave generator between the sensors to excite the pipeline and capture its dynamic response. (AVA instrumentation contacts the metallic pipe/appurtenances, but does not contact the water column directly.) c.Measure the distance between access points to ensure appropriate resolution and segment coverage. d.Perform on-site and remote QA/QC of field data before demobilization to confirm data integrity. 4.Data Analysis, Report and Recommendations a.Determine if any leaks are present on the testing segments and inform the City of the location within three working days. b.Post-process the inspection data to assess localized pipe wall stiffness and identify structural anomalies using both time and frequency domain analyses. Correlate wall stiffness to wall loss averaged over the available resolution length. Post-inspection analysis in the time-frequency domain identifies and locates leaks and pipe wall distress and reports residual wall thickness for most iron pipes with a resolution of 20 to 30 feet, when access points are spaced at 1,000 feet or less. This capability will ensure that sub pipe stick levels defects are both detected and located, not lost in an average result over a longer resolution length. The AVA/Kenwave analysis is such that average pipe wall loss over the resolution length (20 to 30 feet) can be calculated to quantify and characterize wall loss as follows: “Good (Less than 5%)”, “Satisfactory (5% to 20%)”, “Sufficient (20% to 30%)”, “Marginal (30% to 40%)”, or “Distressed (Greater than 40%)”. We will use the calculated wall loss data and follow AWWA M28 guidelines to craft a recommended scope of improvements. c.Include a summary of the work completed and results of the AVA inspections delivered in a draft report including: i.A GIS map of the water main system, including findings from the AVA inspections. ii.Engineering recommendations for further inspections, rehabilitation/repair, and/or maintenance based on the inspection data. “Recommendations for further inspection”, if any, would likely entail Broadband Electro-Magnetic (BEM) inspection. This would likely be recommended in certain areas if AVA detects significant wall loss. While AVA provides precise wall loss data averaged across the entire circumference of the pipe along a resolution segment, BEM provides precise wall loss data at the exact point(s) on the pipe circumference where it is applied on the excavated pipe. It would also be appropriate during BEM inspection to make use of the excavated trench and perform soil corrosivity testing and visual inspection of the external pipe wall. The BEM and related tasks constitute the “Step 2” Condition Assessment action presented in the Water Line Condition Assessment Planning & Prep Report; “Step 2” would likely cost approximately 20% of the AVA work (“Step 1”) proposed herein. This is based on the assumption that four BEM excavations would be conducted for Pipeline Section 9A and two each would be conducted for Pipeline Sections 7, 8, and 12. iii.Budgetary pricing and recommended timing (urgency) for implementation of recommendations. d.Meet with City Staff to discuss findings and recommendations and revise draft accordingly. e.Submit a digital and two hard copies (if desired) of the final report. The basic inspection deliverable includes a condition assessment report with residual wall thickness, identified leaks, location of both leaks and pipe wall distress along the inspected watermain, and structural integrity grading 1-3 based on percent wall loss with supporting Excel tables and color-coded GIS shapefile. The report will include recommendations based on these findings. The recommendations may entail some combination of additional analysis (likely consisting of BEM and related tasks, as described above), repairs, rehabilitation, and/or replacements; all identified at specific portions of the pipeline. f.Provide digital copies of all inspection data, analysis results, and photographs from inspections, including GIS databases and shapefiles g.Upload final report and supporting documents to Clarity®. Clarity is RJN’s digital platform that unites powerful data analytics, smart AI automation, and GIS data management tools to deliver a single resource for monitoring and assessing system conditions and performance. D.Contingency This represents an allowance for unexpected issues that may arise during the course of the work and would necessitate appreciable additional effort. RJN would promptly notify the City if any such issues arise, and their related cost impact. Contingency funds could be used for subsequent AVA inspection of portions of Segment 2 should additional inspection data become necessary. In the Water Line Condition Assessment Planning & Prep Report, $44,000.00 was allocated for soil condition testing. However, as work on the report advanced it was determined that, all things considered, soil condition testing would not yet be a cost-effective expenditure, and RJN recommended that it not be performed as part of the Report. Thus, those related funds have not been, and will not be, spent as part of the Report contract. E.Items Requested from the City 1.Updated GIS geodatabases and/or shape files for the water distribution system. 2.Facilitating coordination with Beaver Water District. 3.Access to pipeline for inspection. Assistance locating and operating (i.e. opening and closing valves) facilities as required. 4.Excavation of pipes at Pipers launch and retrieval stations, sufficient for valved taps as described below. Related trench safety, backfill, compaction, and site restoration. 5.One valved pipeline tap at Pipers launch station and another one at retrieval station. Based on recent conversations with INGU, it is anticipated that a tap as large as 6” may be needed at the launch location (within BWD site) and a tap as large as 8” may be needed at the retrieval location (near Joyce Blvd. valve vault). Both locations are unpaved. These taps will need to be made at the 12 o’clock position on the pipe, a gate valve (full tap size) will need to be installed at the tapping flange, and a riser assembly projecting above the ground surface must be installed. (RJN will furnish and install the additional equipment needed for Pipers insertion and retrieval, as discussed above.) 6.Operation of valves as necessary for isolating the pipeline and launching the Pipers multi-sensor. 7.Assistance with traffic control in high traffic areas, as necessary. 8.Hydro-excavating (“potholing”) as necessary such that AVA equipment can access the pipe sufficiently. It is anticipated that a total of 22 potholes will be necessary (5 for Pipeline Segment 7, 7 for #8,10 for #9A, and 0 for #12). Further description, including cost projections, is provided in the Waterline Condition Assessment Planning & Prep Report. F.Map of All Involved Pipeline Sections G.Maps of Each Pipeline Section EXHIBIT B– PROPOSED SCHEDULE RJN is prepared to start work immediately upon an Agreement. Task Timeline Pipeline Section 2 Field Reconnaissance Visit To be completed within one month of NTP. Internal Inspections To be completed within two months of a successful Field Reconnaissance Visit. Technical Memorandum To be completed within three months of successful Internal Inspection. Pipeline Section 7, 8, 9A, 12 Site Investigation and Planning To be completed in early 2026 AVA Inspections To be completed within two months of site investigations, weather permitting (anticipated for Feb & March 2026) Preliminary Analysis Results To be completed within two months of successful inspections. Draft Report To be completed within two months of completion of analysis. EXHIBIT C – COMPENSATION SCHEDULE Pricing Terms for Invoicing: Lump Sum Original Contract Value: $267,380.00 Amendment Value: $814,113 Not-to-Exceed Total Project Cost: $1,081,493 This project will be invoiced on a lump sum, percent complete basis based on the Cost Schedule on the next page. Task Unit Price Units Fee Project Management $56,790 Pipeline Section 2 Preparatory Work, Data Review, and Planning $25,940 Field Reconnaissance Visits and Equipment Preparation $40,110 Internal Inspections $51,010 Data Evaluation and Technical Memorandum $30,450 Subtotal $147,499 Pipeline Section 7, 8, 9A, 12 Site Investigation and Planning Lump Sum $71,530 AVA Inspection $9/ft 45,417 ft $408,753 Analysis and Reporting Lump Sum $129,530 Subtotal $609,813 Total $814,113 Proposal Option This Proposal can be amended to include additional work upon joint approval by the City and RJN.