HomeMy WebLinkAbout37-99 RESOLUTIONRESOLUTION NO 37-99
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 IN THE AMOUNT
OF $94,370 TO THE CONTRACT WITH CH2M HILL FOR
NPDES PERMITTING ASSISTANCE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,
ARKANSAS*
Section 1 That the City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
Amendment No. 2 in the amount of $94,370 to the contract with CH2M Hill for NPDES permitting
assistance. A copy of the contract amendment is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and made a part
hereof.
rPASSED AND APPROVED this2 day of March 1999.
' 7 r.
APPROVE/
Y.I••11a° % Y !j
rp
ATTEST:
B
Heather Woodruff, City C
Fred Hanna, Mayor
•
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
To: Don Bunn, Public Works
From: Heather Woodruff, City Clerk
Date: March I I, 1999
Attached is a copy of the resolution authorizing amendment no. 2 to the contract with CH2M Hill
for NPDES permitting. 1 am also returning two original contracts for you to distribute. The
original will be microfilmed and filed with the city clerk.
cc. Internal Auditor
File
• EXHIBIT A
Contract Amendment No. 2
NPDES Permitting Assistance
February 1999
The City of Fayetteville, as OWNER, and CH2M HILL, INC., as ENGINEER, have entered
into an AGREEMENT dated October 1995, to furnish engineering services in connect -ion
with the preparation of a Wastewater Facilities Plan.
WHEREAS, under Article 1 of the AGREEMENT the OWNER is allowed to amend
engineering services, this Amendment modifies the work scope to reflect.
Now, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree that the following provisions shall be
added and to modify the original AGREEMENT:
Purpose
The purpose of this Amendment is to authorize additional services to:
• Provide necessary engineering services to prepare an NPDES application for submittal
to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Two permits will be
submitted one for revision to the existing Noland permit and the other for the proposed
new wastewater treatment plant in the Illinois River basin.
• Additionally, this ammendment will provide support to Fayetteville in the area of
providing public information relative to the permitting process.
Scope of Services
These additional services are described in detail in Attachment A, Scope of Work, dated
February 1999.
Compensation
The work covered in this Amendment No. 2 will be provided for a not -to -exceed budget of
Ninety-four Thousand Three Hundred seventy Dollars ($94,370). Actual reimbursement to the
ENGINEER will be according to the original AGREEMENT with a Cost Budget of Eighty-
three Thousand Three Hundred eleven Dollars ($83,311) and a Fixed Dollar Profit of Eleven
Thousand Fifty -rune Dollars ($11,059). A summary breakdown of the estimated costs is shown
in Attachment B.
Effective Date and Authorization to Proceed
Receipt of this signed Amendment No. 2 will serve as authorization from the OWNER for
the ENGINEER to proceed.
TUU1380471CA_1LOC
•
•
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties execute below:
CITY OF F YETTEV LLE, a public trust
By
Date
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
Oklahoma
Tulsa
1
CI -12M HILL, INC., Engin
By
Date
Murry L. Fleming of lawful age, being first duly sworn, on oath says that (s)he is the agent
authorized by the Engineer to submit the above contract to the City of Fayetteville.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1� day of February, 1999.
,1 VLtACita... Lad
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: 2-6 -7'9
TUU130047ICA_I .DOC
2
•
Attachment A
Scope of Work
Fayetteville NPDES Permitting Assistance
February 8, 1999
The following scope of work describes tasks needed to make application for both a revised
NPDES permit for Fayetteville's Noland WWTP and to prepare and submit an NPDES
application for the new WWTP within the Illinois River basin. Preparation of this
application includes conducting projection modeling in both the White River and
Goose/Illinois River basins. The previously developed and approved stream models will be
used as the basis for development of the required NPDES projection runs.
This NPDES permitting process is only one area that will require a permit. Arkansas
requires a separate construction permit with submittal of plans and specifications prior to
beginning construction. This includes review and approval of the plans and specifications by
the Arkansas Department of Health (ADH). Time requirements for this and other permits will
need to be developed by Fayetteville and incorporated into the project's overall schedule.
Task 1 - Permitting Approach & Application
Task 1.1 — Develop Permitting Approach In order to determine the optimum
permitting approach for the new WWTP, CH2M HILL proposes to meet with
representatives of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Water
Division as the initial step in the process. Given the contentious nature of the permitting
proceedings, it is important to have concurrence from ADEQ prior to submitting a
document for public review. The meeting is anticipated to include Chuck Bennett, Water
Division Chief, and members of his staff to discuss and reach agreement on the following
items:
• Determine the status of the new plant in reference to NEPA requirements.
Specifically, is the plant a new source or a new discharge? If the plant is a new
discharge, as we suspect, an Environmental Assessment (and potentially an
Environmental Impact Statement) will not he required.
• At this stage in the planning a decision on solids management has not been made.
For example will the solids all be handled in one facility, will private lands be
used for land application, etc. Since ADEQ does not have 503 authorization, some
details bear discussion. The target approach will be to obtain an NPDES permit
with a specific condition that requires the submittal of a solids management plan
prior to beginning operation. This will enable Fayetteville to continue to assess
biosolids management options while the permitting process proceeds. A separate
503 permit or NPDES permit amendment may be required in 3-5 years.
Notification to adjacent landowners is also required if land application of sludge
is part of the City s plan.
FAY NPOES SOW.000
• Currently, two different discharge scenarios are anticipated which include average
day flow or 9.7 mgd to the White River and 11.8 mgd to the Illinois River basin.
The two basic discharge scenarios to be evaluated arc as follows:
1. One on the White River and the other just down stream of the
Owl/Goose confluence. This model run will also be used to evaluate a
combined discharge in the Illinois at Owl/Goose and a reduced discharge
into Mud Creek. No projection modeling is anticipated for the Mud Creek
discharge since it would involve a reduction of the existing discharge.
2. One to the White River and the other at the confluence of the Lower
Illinois and Goose Creek.
• Identify requirements for the final Water Quality Model submittal and the 208
Plan update.
• Discuss thc specific requirements for inclusion of process codes and analytical
data in the permit. Develop basic treatment process requirements and flow
schematic to meet the proposed permit limits.
As a part of accomplishing the above tasks a meeting will be held with ADH to advise them
and provide information relative to Fayetteville's wastewater plans and NPDES permitting
approach. A Technical Memorandum will be prepared summarizing the discussions with
ADEQ and the recommended permitting approach.
Task 1.2 -Prepare NPDES Application CH2M HILL will prepare the final permit
application for execution by the City and submittal to thc ADEQ. It is assumed that 10 copies
will be prepared.
Task 1.3 - Public Information Support
This scope includes providing assistance in preparing for and participating in the two public
hearings that are anticipated as a part of the NPDES approval process. A public hearing will
likely be required as a part of the 208 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
modification as well as one for the issuance of the NPDES permit itself. This effort is
envisioned to include attendance by two individuals and the associated presentation
preparation and follow-up response that would be anticipated.
It is anticipated that an increase in the permitted discharge flow will be opposed by the
Beaver Water District as well as various interests in Oklahoma. Included in this task is a
meeting with BWD, ADEQ and Oklahoma representatives prior to submittal of a permit
application. By doing this, the goal is to keep all interested parties fully informed of the
logic and purpose of the permitting approach.
An effort has also been included in providing support and briefings with Fayetteville staff
and council and other possible interest groups. Actual use of the budgeted effort will be as
directed in advance by the City of Fayetteville. If further support beyond this budgeted
amount becomes necessary or desired by the City it may be authorized as an additional
service.
FAY NPQE$ SOW.DOC 2
•
Task 1.4 - Determine Noland WWTP Capacity
Currently, the Noland WWTP s NPDES permit is based on as discharge flow of 12.4 mgd.
This was based on the previous stream modeling that supported a discharge of 6.2 mgd to
the White River and the remaining 6.2 mgd to Mud Creek in the Illinois River basin. The
modeling and projection runs identified in Task 2 of this scope of work will address the
White River's capability to handle an increase from 6.2 mgd to 9.7. mgd. This along with the
6.2 mgd to Mud Creek suggests that the plant must be able to treat a maximum month flow
of 15.9 mgd.
Currently, the Noland's NPDES permit corresponds to its 12.4 mgd average day treatment
capacity. ADEQ will require that the plant's capacity be justified and documented since the
15.9 mgd exceeds the treatment capacity recognized by ADEQ. Utilizing existing data from
the WWTP, CH2M HILL will assess the unit process capacities of the plant. This assessment
is aimed at documenting the operating capacity of the facility in order to support an
increased flow as a basis for permitting. It is anticipated that a technical memorandum will
be prepared and submitted to ADEQ for the purpose of documenting treatment plant
capacity.
In order to document the plant's treatment capability and its ability to meet permit limits at
an increased flow of 15.9, it is anticipated that additional operational steps will become
necessary including the use of additional chemicals. Subjecting the plant to this level of flow
and loading is a short term approach to provide time for additional treatment capacity to be
brought on line at the proposed new WWTP in the Illinois River basin. Fayetteville will not
require long term treatment of 15.9 mgd at the Noland WWTP in the White River Basin. The
purpose of this task is to gain an increased White River discharge from 6.2 to 9.7 +/-mgd for
a total plant flow of 15.7 +/-mgd. This level of discharge is supported by the water quality
modeling (discussed in Task 2) and will be necessary for the 2020 design year flow at both
plants, i.e. 11.8+/- mgd at Illinois and 9.7+/- mgd at White River. Stress testing the process
units in the Noland WWTP is not budgeted in this task but may become necessary to
support the permit modification.
Task 2 - NPDES Projection Modeling
It is assumed that there will be no substantive modification needed to the
calibrated/verified models for these basins based upon EPA review and approval that has
been received to -date. It is also assumed that any future discharges to Mud Creek will result
in equal or lower loadings of BOD and ammonia than are currently permitted, meaning that
modeling will not be needed.
Task 2.1 - Develop Hydraulic Conditions - Equations will be developed that relate
stream flow to velocity, depth and width for each reach of the White River and
Goose/Illinois models. Because actual data were available for calibration and verification
runs, these relationships were not necessary for that phase of model development. Similarly,
the preliminary projection runs were made at river/stream conditions that closely matched
calibration data collected either during this study or previous modeling investigations.
Because final projection runs will be made for a wider range of flow conditions, the
hydraulic equations will be required as a part of that process. These are simple equations
FAV 18DES SOW.DOC 3
and will be developed from existing data collected for this and other modeling efforts for
these streams.
Task 2.2 - Develop List of Project Runs - Together with the City, CH2M HILL will
develop a list of alternative discharge conditions in the White River and Goose/Illinois
Basins. These will include various design flow and effluent quality combinations. Given the
number of different temperature/seasonal conditions that must be investigated for each
projection scenario, this task is essential so that optimum discharge scenarios can be
identified with a reasonable number of model runs
Task 2.3 - Define Model Runs Needed for Each Scenario - CH2M HILL will confer
with ADEQ to define the model runs that are needed for each discharge scenario. This is
needed because of the complexity of Arkansas regulations concerning seasons of the year,
temperatures, and dissolved oxygen requirements (see Section _ of the calibration report).
Task 2.4 - Conduct Model Runs - Using the calibrated/verified MULTI-SIMP models,
and the additional information developed in Tasks 2.1-2.3, CH2M HILL will run the
projection scenarios. Model output/input will be saved for each run as text files and model
files. Plots of dissolved oxygen, BOD, and ammonia will also be printed and saved.
Task 2.5 - Projection Modeling Report -Gum HILL will prepare a draft report
detailing the results of the projection runs. The report will be submitted to the City for
review and comment, and revised as appropriate prior to submittal to ADEQ and EPA. The
report will provide support of 208 Plan WQMP revision and the NPDES permitting process.
Additional Services
Due to the nature of the project needs, other work items may be required in the future but
their scope cannot be determined at this time. Therefore, the City may choose to amend this
contract for additional assistance on such items as plant stress testing, additional public
information assistance, updating of the wastewater Facilities Plan, regulatory assistance, etc.
Any additional service will be specifically identified and scoped at the request of the City of
Fayetteville.
FAY_NPDES SOW.DOC 4
Attachment e
Fayetteville, Arkansas
NPDES Penrol Application & Projection Modeling
Labor -tour Breakdown
8 -Feb -99
Taal
Classification or Employee P.M. Sr. Project Project Stan Senior Design Labor
Sr. Consultan Engineer Engineer Engineer Reviewer Technician Clerical Total Costs (1)
(Labor &
Salary Costs 570 S58 540 531 $64 532 520 G&A)
Task 1.1 - Permitting Approach
Assess NEPA / EA requirements 1 1 8 2 12 51265
Solids Management / 503 permit - N.A. 0 0 50
Confirm Effluent Discharge Scenario 2 2 2 1 7 5774
WO Model / 208 requirements 2 2 4 8 16 51.250
Basis Treatment Process Requirements 4 1 12 6 3 26 52,414
Summary Memorandum 2 1 4 4 1 2 14 51,276
Task 1.1 Subtotal 11 7 16 0 24 5 12 75 58,979
Task 1 2 - NPDES Applications
Prepared Submit 8 4 40 0 12 8 12 84 56,800
Meet / present to ADEO 6 4 10 $1,257
0 50
Task 1 2 Subtotal 14 4 40 0 16 8 12 94 $8,058
Task 1 3 - Public Information Support
Prepare 6 Attend Pudic Hearings (2) 32 32 16 16 96 59.523
Special Interest Meetings (BWD, ADEO 6 Oklahorn 24 16 40 55.029
General Status Repremirg 8 requested bnefings 40 24 8 8 80 $8,839
0 50
Task 1.3 Subtotal 96 0 0 0 72 24 24 216 523 391
Task1 4 -Determine Noland NNWTP Capaaty
Review available plant data for capaaty deteminatK 6 40 40 3 16 4 109 57 522
Prepare revised NPDES Application 4 11 18 33 52,500
0 50
Task 1.4 Subtotal 10 0 40 40 14 16 22 142 510.022
Task 2 - Projection Modeling
2.1 - Develop Hydraulic Conditions 3 4 24 3 34 52,719
2 2 - Define List of Model Runs 19 6 2 8 8 43 $4,520
2.3 - Devetp Lista Projection Runs 3 8 2 6 19 51,626
Task 2 4 - Conduct Model Runs 7 8 80 12 3 110 $8,530
2.5 - Prepare Projection Modeling Report 11 8 40 8 16 19 102 57,883
Task 2 Subtotal 43 34 148 12 16 16 39 308 525277
LABOR SUBTOTAL 174 45 244 52 142 69 109 835 573,727
DIRECT PROJECT EXPENSES 59.584
LABOR/EXPENSE SUBTOTAL 583,311
PROFIT $11,059
TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT 594.370
•
•
XX AGENDA REQUEST,
FROM: Don Bunn
Name
ACTION REQUIRED:
COST TO CITY:
$ 94,370.00
Cost -This Request
5400-5700-5314-00
Account Number
98047
Project Number
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
City Council meeting of 2 March 1999
Public Works Admin
Division
CH2M HILL
A.6.1
)2e5 37- 4y
Public Works
Department
Approval of Contract Amendment No 2, NPDES Permitting
Assistance, with CH2M Hill in the amount of $94,370.00
$ 1,000 000.00
Category/Project Budget
Funds Used To Date
$ 1,000,000.00
Funds Remaining
BUDGET/CONTRACT REVIEW:
udget Coordinator
Acco inq an cr
it Atto e
Purchasing Officer
XX Budgeted Item
Date
Date
2-7o-cr9
Date
Wastewater Plant Eng.
Category/Project Name
Program Name
Water and Sewer
Fund Category
Budget Adj. Attached
Administrative Services Director
ADA Coor. i . t
Internal Auditor
ICp
Date
Date
42-/!-97J
Date
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
ion Head
.par.. t Director
AAI 44
Admi. Series Director
Ma
or
The staff recommends approval of Contract
Amendment No. 2 with CH2M Hill in the amount of
$94,370.00 for NPDES Permit Assistance.
2/12/99
Date
Z -!G -f9
Date
Date/
Date
Cross Reference
New Item: Yes No
Prev Ord/Res n:
Oriq Contract Date: Nov 1996
CA2M HILL
A.6.2
CEVILLE
INC CITY OF FAYETTEVIESE. ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
February 8, 1999
To: Fayetteville City Council
From• Don Bunn, Ass't Public Works Director
Thru• Charles Venable, Public Works Director
Fred Hanna, Mayor
Subject: Engineering Contract Amcndmcnt
Permitting Assistance
CI -12M Hill
Attached for your review and approval is Contract Amendment No. 2 to the Sewer
Study Contract (dated October 1995). The purpose of the Amendment is to provide the
necessary engineering scrviccs to prepare an NPDES Permit application for submittal to
the Arkansas Departinent of Environmental Quality (ADEQ. Two permit applications
will be submitted, one for the revision to the existing permit for the Noland \Wastewater
Facility and the other for the proposed new wastewater treatrnent plant in the Illinois
River basin. In addition, this Amendment will provide support to Fayetteville in the arca
of public information relative to the permitting process.
The specific scrviccs and their costs are described in Attachment A, Scope of Services
dated February 1999. A brief description of each of'the tasks involved and the cost of
each is given below.
Task 1.1 - Permitting Approach and Application: 1 his task involves meeting with
ADE'Qto obtain concurrence with there as to the approach to take in developing and
submitting applications for new permits, to confirm the two basic discharge scenarios, and
to discuss the specific requirements for inclusion of'process codes and analytical data in
the permit. Cost - $ 6,979.00
•
CH2M HILL
A.6.3
Task 1.2 - Prepare the NPDES Permit Application: This task involves the
preparation and submittal of the NPDES Permit Applications and meetings with the
ADEQ Cost - S8,058.00.
Task 1.3 - Public Information Support. This task involves preparing for and
participating in two public hearings, one on the permit applications and another on the
revision to the 208 Water Quality Management Plan. Also included are various meetings
with the City staff and City Council and other interest groups. Cost - 523391.00
Task 1.4 - Determination of the Noland Capacity: The design capacity of the
Noland Plant is 11.4 million gallons per day (mgd) based on an average day over a one
year period. We have suggested that we feel comfortable with assuming a design flow of
12.4 mgd since we have successfully treated those flows and the present permit is based
on that limit. This task will focus on determining if a design flow of greater than 12.4 mgd
can be justified as a basis for permitting in the short term. Cost - $10,022.00
Task 2 - NPDES Projection Modeling: This task involves the work connected with
making modeling runs for the various discharge alternatives to provide a basis for
technical discharge limitations to be included in our permit application. It includes
development of alternative discharge conditions, determining (with ADEQ) the exact
model runs required for each discharge scenario, conducting the model runs, and
providing the City and ADEQwith a Projection Modeling Report. Cost - 525,277.00
A summary of the costs is:
Task 1.1
Task 1.2
Task 1.3
Task 1.4
Task 2
Direct Expenses
Subtotal
Fixed Fee
Total Contract Amt.
$ 6,979.00
8,058.00
23,391.00
10,022.00
25,277.00
9384.00
S 83,31 1.00
1 1.059.00
$ 94,370 00
The approval of this contract will allow us to go fonvard with our project at this time. It
should be noted that while the submittal of the permit applications does not specifically
assume constructing a plant on the property on which we have options, it does assume a
west side plant discharging into the Goose Creek/Illitiois River basins.
It is the recommendation of the Staff that the Council approve Contract Amendment
No. 2 for Permitting Assistance in the amount of 594,370.00.
• CH2M HILL
Contract Amendment No. 2
NPDES Permitting Assistance
February 1999
The City of Fayetteville, as OWNER, and CI-I2M HILL, INC., as ENGINEER, have entered
into an AGREEMENT dated October 1995, to furnish engineering services in connection
with the preparation of a Wastewater Facilities Plan.
WHEREAS, under Article 1 of the AGREEMENT the OWNER is allowed to amend
engineering services, this Amendment modifies the work scope to reflect.
Now, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree that the following provisions shall be
added and to modify the original AGREEMENT:
Purpose
The purpose of this Amendment is to authorize additional services to:
• Provide necessary engineering services to prepare an NPDES application for submittal
to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Two permits will be
submitted one for revision to the existing Noland permit and the other for the proposed
new wastewater treatment plant in the Illinois River basin.
• Additionally, this ammendment will provide support to Fayetteville in the area of
providing public information relative to the permitting process.
Scope of Services
These additional services are described in detail in Attachment A, Scope of Work, dated
February 1999.
Compensation
The work covered in this Amendment No. 2 will be provided for a not -to -exceed budget of
Ninety-four Thousand Three Hundred seventy Dollars ($94,370). Actual reimbursement to the
ENGINEER will be according to the original AGREEMENT with a Cost Budget of Eighty-
three Thousand Three Hundred eleven Dollars ($83,311) and a Fixed Dollar Profit of Eleven
Thousand Fifty-nine Dollars ($11,059). A summary breakdown of the estimated costs is shown
in Attachment B.
Effective Date and Authorization to Proceed
Receipt of this signed Amendment No. 2 will serve as authorization from the OWNER for
the ENGINEER to proceed.
ruU13e047/t&1.00C
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties execute below:
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, a public trust
By
Date
STATE OF Oklahoma
COUNTY OF
CH2M HILL
A.6.5
CI -12M HILL, INC., Engineer
Tulsa
)ss.
Murry L. Fleming, of ]awful age, being first duly sworn, on oath says that (s)he is the agent
authorized by the Engineer to submit the above contract to the City of Fayetteville.
XX-
Subscribed and swom to before me this �� day of February, 1999.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
TUU 1790 MA_ I.DOC
2
CIH2M HILL
4.6.6
•
Attachment A
Scope of Work
Fayetteville NPDES Permitting Assistance
February 8, 1999
The following scope of work describes tasks needed to make application for both a revised
NPDES permit for Fayetteville's Noland WWTP and to prepare and submit an NPDES
application for the new WWTP within the Illinois River basin. Preparation of this
application includes conducting projection modeling in both the White River and
Goose/Illinois River basins. The previously developed and approved stream models will be
used as the basis for development of the required NPDES projection runs.
This NPDES permitting process is only one arca that will require a permit. Arkansas
requires a separate construction permit with submittal of plans and specifications prior to
beginning construction. This includes review and approval of the plans and specifications by
the Arkansas Department of Health (ADH). Time requirements for this and other permits will
need to be developed by Fayetteville and incorporated into the project's overall schedule.
Task 1 - Permitting Approach & Application
Task 1.1 — Develop Permitting Approach In order to determine the optimum
permitting approach for the new WWTP, CH2M HILL proposes to meet with
representatives of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Water
Division as the initial step in the process. Given the contentious nature of the permitting
proceedings, it is important to have concurrence from ADEQ prior to submitting a
document for public review. The meeting is anticipated to include Chuck Bennett, Water
Division Chief, and members of his staff to discuss and reach agreement on the following
items:
• Determine the status of the new plant in reference to NEPA requirements.
Specifically, is the plant a new source or a new discharge? If the plant is a new
discharge, as we suspect, an Environmental Assessment (and potentially an
Environmental Impact Statement) will not be required.
• At this stage in the planning a decision on solids management has not been made.
For example will the solids all be handled in one facility, will private lands be
used for land application, etc. Since ADEQ docs not have 503 authorization, some
details bear discussion. The target approach will be to obtain an NPDES permit
with a specific condition that requires the submittal of a solids management plan
prior to beginning operation. This will enable Fayetteville to continue to assess
biosolids management options while the permitting process proceeds. A separate
503 permit or NPDES permit amendment may be required in 3-5 years.
Notification to adjacent landowners is also required if land application of sludge
is part of the City's plan.
FAY _NPDES SOw DOC
•
CH2M HILL
A.6.7
• Currently, two different discharge sccnarios are anticipated which include average
day flow or 9.7 mgd to the White River and 11.8 mgd to the Illinois River basin.
The two basic discharge sccnarios to be evaluated arc as follows:
1. One on the White River and the other just down stream of the
Owl/Goose confluence. This model run will also be used to evaluate a
combined discharge in the Illinois at Owl/Goose and a reduced discharge
into Mud Creek. No projection modeling is anticipated for the Mud Creek
discharge since it would involve a reduction of the existing discharge.
2. One to the White River and the other at the confluence of the Lower
Illinois and Goose Creek.
• Identify requirements for the final Water Quality Model submittal and the 208
Plan update.
• Discuss the specific requirements for inclusion of process codcs and analytical
data in the permit. Develop basic treatment process requirements and flow
schematic to meet the proposed permit limits.
As a part of accomplishing the above tasks a meeting will be held with ADH to advise them
and provide information relative to Fayetteville's wastewater plans and NPDES permitting
approach. A Technical Memorandum will be prepared summarizing the discussions with
ADEQ and the recommended permitting approach.
Task 1.2 —Prepare NPDES Application CH2M HILL will prepare the final permit
application for execution by the City and submittal to the ADEQ. It is assumed that 10 copies
will be prepared.
Task 1.3 — Public Information Support
This scope includes providing assistance in preparing for and participating in the two public
hearings that are anticipated as a part of the NPDES approval process. A public hearing will
likely be required as a part of the 208 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
modification as well as one for the issuance of the NPDES permit itself. This effort is
envisioned to include attendance by two individuals and the associated presentation
preparation and follow-up response that would be anticipated.
It is anticipated that an increase in the permitted discharge flow will be opposed by the
Beaver Water District as well as various interests in Oklahoma. Included in this task is a
meeting with BWD, ADEQ and Oklahoma representatives prior to submittal of a permit
application. By doing this, the goal is to keep all interested parties fully informed of the
logic and purpose of the permitting approach.
An effort has also been included in providing support and briefings with Fayetteville staff
and council and other possible interest groups. Actual use of the budgeted effort will be as
directed in advance by the City of Fayetteville. If further support beyond this budgeted
amount becomes necessary or desired by the City it may be authorized as an additional
service.
FAY NPDE$ SOW.DOC
2
CH2M HILL
A.6.8 • •
Task 1.4 - Determine Noland WWTP Capacity
Currently, the Noland WWTP s NPDES permit is based on as discharge flow of 12.4 mgd.
This was based on the previous stream modeling that supported a discharge of 6.2 mgd to
the White River and the remaining 6.2 mgd to Mud Creek in the Illinois River basin. The
modeling and projection runs identified in Task 2 of this scope of work will address the
White River's caprbility to handle art increase from 6.2 mgd to 9.7. mgd. This along with the
6.2 mgd to Mud Creek suggests that the plant must be able to treat a maximum month flow
of 15.9 mgd.
Currently, the Noland's NPDES permit corresponds to its 12.4 mgd average day treatment
capacity. ADEQ will require that the plant's capacity be justified and documented since the
15.9 mgd exceeds the treatment capacity recognized by ADEQ. Utilizing existing data from
the WWTP, CI -12M HILL will assess the unit process capacities of the plant. This assessment
is aimed at documenting the operating capacity of the facility in order to support an
increased flow as a basis for permitting. It is anticipated that a technical memorandum will
be prepared and submitted to ADEQ for the purpose of documenting treatment plant
capacity.
In order to document the plant's treatment capability and its ability to meet permit limits at
an increased flow of 15.9, it is anticipated that additional operational steps will become
necessary including the use of additional chemicals. Subjecting the plant to this level of flow
and loading is a short term approach to provide time for additional treatment capacity to be
brought on line at the proposed new WWTP in the Illinois River basin. Fayetteville will not
require long term treatment of 15.9 mgd at the Noland WWTP in the White River Basin. The
purpose of this task is to gain an increased White River discharge from 6.2 to 9.7 +/-mgd for
a total plant flow of 15.7 +/-mgd. This level of discharge is supported by the water quality
modeling (discussed in Task 2) and will be necessary for the 2020 design year flow at both
plants, i.e. 11.5+/- mgd at Illinois and 9.7+/- mgd at White River. Stress testing the process
units in the Noland WWTP is not budgeted in this task but may become necessary to
support the permit modification.
Task 2 - NPDES Projection Modeling
It is assumed that there will be no substantive modif cation needed to the
calibrated/verified models for these basins based upon EPA review and approval that has
been received to -date. It is also assumed that any future discharges to Mud Creek will result
in equal or lower loadings of BOD and ammonia than are currently permitted, meaning that
modeling will not be needed.
Task 2.1 - Develop Hydraulic Conditions - Equations will be developed that relate
stream flow to velocity depth and width for each reach of the White River and
Goose/Illinois models. Because actual data were available for calibration and verification
runs, these relationships were not necessary for that phase of model development. Similarly,
the preliminary projection runs were made at river/stream conditions that closely matched
calibration data collected either during this study or previous modeling investigations.
Because final projection runs will be made for a wider range of flow conditions, the
hydraulic equations will be required as a part of that process. These are simple equations
FAY NPOES SOW,000
3
CH2M HILL
A.6.9
and will be developed from existing data collected for this and other modeling efforts for
these streams.
Task 2.2 - Develop List of Project Runs - Together with the City, CH2M HILL will
develop a list of alternative discharge conditions in the White River and Goose/Illinois
Basins. These will include various design flow and effluent quality combinations. Given the
number of different temperature/seasonal conditions that must be investigated for each
projection scenario, this task is essential so that optimum discharge scenarios can be
identified with i reasonable number of model runs
Task 2.3 - Define Model Runs Needed for Each Scenario - CH2M HILL will confer
with ADEQ to define the model runs that ire needed for each discharge scenario. This is
needed because of the complexity of Arkansas regulations concerning seasons of the year,
temperahucs, and dissolved oxygen requirements
Task 2.4 - Conduct Model Runs - Using the calibrated/verified MULTI-SIMP models,
and the additional information developcd.in Tasks 2.1-2.3, CH2M HILL will run the
projection scenarios. Model output/input will be saved for each run as text files and model
files Plots of dissolved oxygen BOD, and ammonia will also be printed and saved.
Task 2.5 - Projection Modeling Report - CH2M HILL will prepare a draft report
detailing the results of the projection runs. The report will be submitted to the City for
review and comment, and revised as appropriate prior to submittal to ADEQ and EPA. The
report will provide support of 208 Plan WQMP revision and the NPDES permitting process.
Additional Services
Due to the nature of the project needs, other work items may be required in the future but
their scope cannot be determined at this time. Therefore, the City may choose to amend this
contract for additional assistance on such items as plant stress testing, additional public
information assistance, updating of the wastewater Facilities Plan, regulatory assistance, etc.
Any additional service will be specifically identified and scoped at the request of the City of
Fayetteville.
FAY NPOES SOW.DOC
CHIM RILL.
4.6.10'
Attachment B
Fayenevdle, Arkansas
NPOES Pernut Application 8 Projection Modeling
Laborhour Breakdown
8 -Feb -99
Total
Classificalkln of Employee P.M. Sr. Project Project Slag Senior Design Labor
Sr. Consultan Engineer Engineer Engineer Reviewer Technician Clerical Total Coils (1)
(Labor &
Salary Coils 570 558 540 531 564 532 520 GSA)
Task 1.1 • Pemuning Approach
Assess NEPA/EA requirements 1 1 8 2 12 51.265
Solids Management / 503 permit • N.A. 0 0 f0
Contkm Elnuent dscharge Scenario 2 2 2 1 7 5774
WO Model / 208 requirements 2 2 4 8 10 51 250
Basis Treatment Process Requirements 4 1 12 8 3 20 52.414
Summary MemoraMum 2 1 4 4 1 2 14 51276
Task 1.1 Subtotal 11 7 18 0 24 5 12 75 50.979
Task 1.2 - NPOES Applications
Prepare & Submil 0 4 40 0 12 8 12 64 50.800
Meet / presenl l0 ADEO 6 4 10 51.257
0 50
Task 1.2 Subtotal 14 4 - . 40 0 16 8 12 94 58.058
Task 1.3 - Public Information Support
Prepare & Aaend Public Hearings (2) 32 32 16 16 96 59,523
Special Interest Meetings (BWD, ADEO & Okiahom. 24
General Status Reproving S r 16 40 58.839
equested briefings 40 24 8 8
80 58.839
0 50
Task 1.3 Subtotal 96 0 0 0 72 24 24 216 523.391
Task14 Determine Noland WWTP Capacity
Review available plant data lot capacity detemdna:k 6 40 40 3 16 4 109 57.522
Prepare revised NPDES Appbcatdn 4 11 18 33 52.500
0 50
Task 1 4 Subtotal 10 0 40 40 14 16 22 142 510022
Task 2 - Projection Modeling
2.1 - Develop Hydraulic Conditions 3 4 24 3 34 52.719
2.2 - Dctine List of Model Runs 19 6 2 8 8 43 54.520
2.3 - Develop List of Projection Runs 3 8 2 6 19 51.626
Task 2 4 - Conduct Model Runs 7 8 80 12 3 110 58.530
2.5 - Prepare Projection Modeling Report 11 8 40 8 16 19 102 57 883
Task 2 Subtotal 43 34 148 12 16 16 39 308 525.277
LABOR SUBTOTAL 174 45 244 52 142 69 109 835 573.727
DIRECT PROJECT EXPENSES
LABOWEXPENSE SUBTOTAL 59.584
PROFIT 583.311
TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT 511 059
594.370