Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout22-02 RESOLUTION• A. RESOLUTION NO, 22-02 A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO.1 WITH MCGOODWIN, WILLIAMS, AND YATES, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $580,296.00 WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas after a public hearing determined that the 5% fixed fee should be deducted from the previously requested amount of the proposed contract amendment for that portion applicable to the cost overruns of Hanifin Associates, and ECO, Inc. prior to approval of the City Council; and WHEREAS, representatives of McGoodwin, Williams, and Yates, Inc. agreed to such reduction which resulted in a total reduction of $15,495.00. 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 approves Contract Amendment No. 1 with McGoodwin, Williams, and Yates, Inc. in the amount of $580,296.00 (attached as Exhibit A); and authorizes the Mayor to execute said contract amendment. PASSED and APPROVED this the 5th day of February, 2002. 11 14 Woodruff, City C - k APPROVED: • NAME OF FILE: CROSS REFERENCE: Resolution No. 22-02 • 02/05/02 Resolution No. 22-02 Amendment No. 1 to City of Fayetteville Contract Agreement for Engineering Services Westside Wastewater Treatment Facility with McGoodwin, Williams, and Yates, Inc. 01/15/02 Copy of the Budget Adjustment Form 02/11/02 Letter to Greg Boettcher, PW Director, from James C. Ulmer, Vice President, McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. 02/11/02 Memo to Mayor Coody from Greg Boettcher, PW Director, CC: Kit Williams, Steve Davis, Jim Beavers, Heather Woodruff, regarding Engineering Contract Amendment No. 1 02/05/02 Staff Review Form 02/26/02 Memo to Greg Boettcher, Public Works Director, from Heather Woodruff, City Clerk News Release from Greg Boettcher regarding Historical/Archaeo- logical Field Study NOTES: • ORIGffiAL V az AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES WESTSIDE WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY WHEREAS, on March 21, 2000, the City of Fayetteville (the Owner) and McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. (the Engineer) entercd into an Agreement for Engineering Services in connection with the construction of the new Westside Wastewater Treatment Plant to serve the Illinois River Basin. The scope of these services included preliminary studies and preliminary design, resulting in a Preliminary Engineering Report setting forth the findings; and WHEREAS, the Engineer has completed those services required under the original scope including preparation and submittal of the Preliminary Design Report; and WHEREAS, the overall prQlect (hereinafter referred to as "the Overall Project") being developed by the Owner includes an upgrade of the existing Paul Noland Wastewater Treatment Plant on the cast side of the city and the sewer system collection and transmission facilities work for both the east and west sides. This work is being accomplished by three other engineering consultants; and WHEREAS, the Owner requested that the Engineer's and its subconsultants' original scopc be expanded to include services relating to the Overall Project; and WHEREAS, the Engineer agrees to provide the requested services; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the Owner and the Engineer, the parties hereto, stipulate and agree that the Agreement for Engineering Services dated March 21, 2000, is hereby amended in the following particulars: Section IV. Services to be Furnished by the Engineer During Design Phase 1. Section A - Study, Preliminary Desibm and Report, is amended by adding the following paragraphs under Section IV -A. Environmental Permitting. The environmental work in the original scope being provided by subconsultant ECO, Inc. shall be expanded from only the Westside Treatment Plant to include all four elements of the Overall Project, thus allowing continuity of activities and eliminating duplicated efforts by the other engineering consultants. This work includes: • Corps of Engineers 404 permitting; • Initiating the work on the NPDES storm water permit; • Participating in the public information program including attendance at public meetings; providing environmental information justification for the Overall Project and assisting in the dissemination of accurate environmental information about the Overall Project; Amend 1 to Fy-296 - 1 of 5 A R • 411 • Assisting in the evaluation of and development of Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) to address prospective and endangered species concerns; • Providing specialized environmental guidance regarding the environmental issues surrounding the planned Westside sewer line construction at the former Research and Technology Park to include preliminary evaluation of site conditions, site issues, and possible mitigation measures. The Engineer shall coordinate the work between ECO and the other engineering consultants for the Overall Project, and provide specific data regarding the Westside Treatment Plant. Public Education and Involvement. The public education and information work being conducted by Hanifin Associates for the Westside Treatment Plant shall be expanded to include all four elements of the Overall Project, thus allowing continuity of activities and eliminating duplicated efforts by the other engineering consultants. This additional work includes: • Increasing the public informational meetings from three to 16; • Formalizing the public involvement program to meet specific requirements for Facility Planning/State Revolving Loan Fund under the regulations of the Arkansas Soil & Water Conservation Commission; • Providing written information/graphics/handouts to inform the public on the proposed work; • Expanding the scope of the public information program to include the use of web -site and media mediums; • Development of communication resources, tools, and criteria to improve the effectiveness and clarity of the information presented to the public; • Assist in the conduct of a Public Hearing regarding the final selected alternative in the Facility Plan and Environmental Information Document. The Engineer shall coordinate the work between Hanifin Associates and the other engineering consultants, and provide specific data regarding the Westside Treatment Plant. 3. Wastewater System Improvement Project Facility Plan. The Engineer will prepare an amendment to the Facility Plan for the Overall Project previously prepared by another consultant and presented in February of 1997. The plan will utilize the preliminary engineering work completed by each of the four engineering consultants. The plan will be completed in accordance with requirements as set out by the State of Arkansas for projects utilizing the Revolving Loan Fund. This Facility Plan will be submitted to ASWCC in the final version (following the September 20, 2001 public hearing) in November, 2001. The Engineer will coordinate the review of the Facility Plan by the state and federal agencies until final approval. Amend 1 to Fy-296 - 2 of 5 • • 4. Environmental Information Document. The Engineer will prepare an Environmental Information Document for the Overall Project to accompany the Facility Plan which evaluates and presents the environmental issues and program documents required to reflect work proposed by the four project consultants. The Engineer will work with ECO, Inc. to produce this document and coordinate the review of the EID until final approval. 5. Revolving Loan Fund Coordination. The Engineer shall assist the Owner by providing project coordination, preparation of Revolving Loan Fund documents, and necessary engineering services as required to complete the RLF program requirements. 6. Biosolids Management System Coordination. The Engineer shall expand investigations into the biosolids management planning for the Overall Project, including investigations of additional alternatives and the coordination of a recommended strategy. 7. Industrial Loadings. The Engineer shall provide the necessary services to determine the impact of a prospective industrial plant on the Westside Treatment Plant. 8. Broyles Road Extension. The Engineer shall develop and implement preliminary planning for the Broyles Road extension in Farmington. This extension, if constructed, would provide access to the new Westside Treatment Plant. The study shall be conducted jointly for the Owner and the City of Farmington. 9. Additional Services. The Engineer shall conduct other studies and analyses as required to facilitate the production and approval of the Facility Plan, environmental permitting, and public involvement as required. These services to be furnished by the Engineer shall be subject to the agreed cost ceiling set out in Section XII.5 as amended. Section X. Subcontracting Add the following paragraph: "The Engineer shall furnish copies of all sub -agreements if requested by the Owner." Section XII. Fees and Payments I. Section A is amended as follows: The fixed fee set out in this section is increased to $130,505. Amend 1 to Fy-296 - 3 of 5 • • 2. Section A is amended by adding the following: Compensation for the Broyles Road Extension Study shall be a lump sum amount of $12,900. The cost of this study is to be shared equally with the City of Farmington. Thus, the Owner's portion is $6,450. 3. Scction B, the estimate of cost for ECO, Inc., shall be increased to $343,868, including expenses. 4. Scction C, the estimate of cost for Hanifin Associates, Inc., shall be increased to $187,166, including expenses. 5. Section D, second paragraph, first line, is amended to read as follows: ' The estimated total compensation for the services set out under Section IV.A as amended is $1,535,598, including the fixed fee of $130,505 and reimbursable expenses, and Fayetteville's share of the lump sum fee for the Broyles Road Extension Study." 6. Attachment A to this Amendment sets out a summary of the original budget and requested changes. 7. After the last paragraph under Section D, add the following: "The Engineer shall furnish copies of invoices, billing information, and other materials as the Owner may request, to verify the accuracy of invoices and the nature of the work being performed." Section XVI. Miscellaneous Provisions Add paragraph H as follows: H. Arkansas Freedom of Information Act. The Engineer agrees that it will provide to the Owner, at a cost to be agreed upon, all documents in its possession that are, under this Agreement, the property of the Owner and which the Owner believes to be subject to an Arkansas Freedom of Information Act request made to it, or, in anticipation of such a request, which it believes necessary for it to possess. The Engineer further agrees that it will request of all subconsultants, retained by the Engineer to perform services under this Agreement, to provide to the Owner, at a cost to be agrecd upon, all documents in the possession of such subconsultants that are, under this Agreement, the property of the Owner and which the Owner believes to be subject to an Arkansas Freedom of Information Act request made to the Owner, or, in anticipation of such a request, which it believes necessary for the Owner to possess. The Engineer will produce all documents or material in the format that are kept by the Engineer, or at the option of the Engineer, in some other format. If a specialized format is requested by the Owner, the cost of conversion, if that additional responsibility is accepted by the Engineer, will be borne by the Owner at the then prevailing rates for the parties actually performing the conversion. Production of requested items will be done with reasonable diligence, but cannot in some circumstances be within the time frame established by the Act. Amend 1 to Fy-296 - 4 of 5 • • • The above and foregoing provisions apply only to work performed from this date forward and does not apply retroactively. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute an acceptance of the Engineer or its subconsultants to the application of the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act to the Engineer or its subconsultants or to the Engineer's or subconsultant's books, records, drawings, or other items not constituting the property of the Owner under this Agreement, nor a waiver of its rights to object to any requests made to it pursuant to the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act by any person or entity not a party to this Agreement. All other provisions of the original agreement remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be duly executed this day of 74 , 2002. CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS McGOODWIN, WILLIAMS AND YATES, INC. By: By Dan Coody, Mayor ATTE arl Yates, Pre ATTEST: rk del CO\• oodruff, City Cle s C. Ulmer, Vi 'resident Amend 1 to Fy-296 - 5 of 5 NOTE: All cost figures include expenses. o o v •= CO `� m ..- T<'22o m -( d 0 F-• ?55Q0 ,2338 m o(7om =4 m 3 nm CD CD 3 a m O O S 03co Cr a 3 m 3 3 0 n C C n f) y 0 > > m Qo (D Cn a • m 0 • (n 3 0 S (A EA 01 �COCO CP CO 0) W N (071 - EA 01 C0 O▪ CO—sCAO CO CO V CO -I V O — . N C00 CR b cn tP Co co CO A O N CP0C)A m 2a6png lew6u0 E0 R EA CD X) 1N -S N CA O CCD 0 A.A Co CCO00) ON(0l1 Cr = 3 N v 6M(7)O) Of -•(A0 N ry m NAcoWd0 OO CoCA C)t0 EA -4 CO (0 O Co EA W 0000 a))a)coo 000 NA A A -co ' 000 N co W 000)v v N EA EA oA O NCO r co 0. O 0A O' 0 0 Co 0 Co 0 0 EA EA EA (n 01 W-• CoCR N co tAT CO 03 COOTCA 0N) Cr CO 0 CO 00IV A ID -4). -Co CO CO Co O 0) O CO 00°A ACIN(0 u W (D N_ 0. 0 73 3 CD CD N A C (7 N n as 9 co n (^ f0 CO C a (0 o •0 2 z m a m cn O. N CCD n 3a CO EA EA (,. EA W co o A Apo AODW N O -I W V1 O (J1 W W CO v O N W W 13 C O_ C O N (P O O N 0 O) - (b W n 0 co 0 CO (P CO O 0 0a) � U1 CO W a fn` (^ .0.. SUMMARY OF REQUESTED BUDGET V1N3WHOVlld • City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Budget Adjustment Form • Budget Year 2002 Department: Division: 'Program: Public Works Sewer Construction Date Requested January 15, 2002 45.22 oz Project or Item Requested: $579,000 in the Professional Services account in the Wastewater Treatment Plant - Expansion capital project. Project or Item Deleted: $579,000 from the Use of Fund Balance account in Water & Sewer Fund. Justification of this Increase. The funding is needed for the City to contract with McGoodwin, Williams, and Yates Inc. for consultant services as related to the construction of the Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion. Justification of this Decrease: The fund balance is from remaining funds not spent in 2001. Increase Expense (Decrease Revenue) Account Name Amount Professional Services 579,000 Account Name Use of Fund Balance Account Number 5400 5700 Decrease Expense (Increase Revenge) Amount 579,000 Project Number 5314 00 98047 10 Account Number 5400 0940 4999 99 Project Number Approval Signatures Requ ed By B getaX 6146( t Director Date OZ JfieoZ Utile 0/7o 2.. Date ky% Date Budget Office Use Only Type: A B C Date of Approval Posted to Genual Ledger Posted to Project Accounting Entered in Category Log RJ.., r.....,- n..ana. x. Ra..s...r. r V n,.... �,...... o__....., E • • McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. Consulting Engineers 909 Rolling Hills Drive Fayetteville. Arkansas 72703 Telephone 501/443.3404 FAX 501/4434340 February 11, 2002 Re: Contract Amendment No. 1 Westside Wastewater Treatment Plant Fayetteville, Arkansas MWY Project No. Fy-296 Mr Greg Boettcher, P E Public Works Director City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Dear Greg: Enclosed herewith are three copies of executed Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Engineering Services for the Westside Wastewater Treatment Facility. We trust you will find this document in order and can forward it to the Mayor and City Clerk for a date and signatures. If you will notify our office when the signatures are complete, we will send someone to pick up one copy for our files. We appreciate very much the city's willingness to go forward with this contract amendment, and look forward to continued service to the city in this very important wastewater treatment facilities project. JCU:sc Enclosure Cordially yours, /mes C. Ulmer, P. E. ce-President 2-12 2 :✓ &o0&EOJnfl TD 7716 &#J4/, it- zSc21 j/.t/lo ,Z € ?m 43cDS— ZE /LJe Att t ratnis Tom' Pes,G,tc C'cwniliMT- 1 c • • FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE TO: Mayor Coody COPY: Kit Williams, Steve Davis, Jim Beavers, Heather W FROM: Greg Boettcher, Public Works Director DATE: February 11, 2002 RE• Engineering Contract Amendment No. 1 McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. Wastewater system Improvement Project West Side Wastewater Plant Attached please find a copy of the professional fee calculations that have been developed by McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. (Memorandum dated February 8, 2002). This communication outlines the methodology for the elimination of professional fees on the labor costs for ECO and Hannifin and Associates. The Fayetteville City Council, at its February 5, 2002 meeting, approved this contract amendment provided that the 5% fixed fee estimated at $15,000.00 to $17,000.00, be deducted from the amount requested. I have reviewed the information presented, that computes a fixed fee reduction of $15,495.00, and find said amount to be both in order and in accordance with City Council approval. The resulting value of Contract Amendment No. 1 is $580,296.00, bringing the not -to -exceed total contract value to $1,535,598.00. A revised contract amendment shall be provided for signature on Monday, February 11,2002 GB:ks 2- S-02;,i:48AM;MC000OWIN WILLIAMS ;479.443.4340 0 1/ 2 • • McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. Consulting Engineers 909 Rolling Hills Drive Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703 Telephone 479/443-3404 FAX 479/443-4340 MEMORANDUM To: Mr. Greg Boettcher, P E , Public Works Director City of Fayetteville, Arkansas From: James C. Ulmer, P. E., Vice -President Date: February 8, 2002 Re: Wastewater System Improvement Project Contract Amendment No. 1 Fayetteville, Arkansas MWY Project No. Fy-296 Attached is a table showing the labor cost and expense calculations for ECO, Inc. and Hanifin Associates through December 9, 2001, as shown on our original cost figures presented to you as a part of the worksheets accompanying Contract Amendment No. 1. At the bottom of this table, we have calculated our allowable fee for labor for both ECO and Hanifin Associates in order to determine the amount of fee reduction as required by the Council at their meeting of February 5, 2002. The original fee request for Contract Amendment No. 1 was to increase the fee to $146,000. However, the fee reduction requested by the City Council on February 5 was $15,495, which represents five percent of the ECO and Hanifin costs (over and above the original scope) through December 9, 2001. Therefore, our revised total fee to be reflected in Contract Amendment No. 1 shall be $130,505, as shown on the attached table. We trust you will find this explanation acceptable for the purposes of establishing the amount of fee in Contract Amendment No. 1. Attachment Post -n• Fax Note 7671 -1 O E pT 0 a 0 M M N 4 elD9 a • • 2 5 N $ 9L'OEY'BiZ s a Ul N Z /Z • OpEr•EIVeSLt1 M M P A co m O N suonhIn,lp pd co CO co 0 mmm(m�flcmiclOOq c acg m o spm �c3 -4 a ma m a. 8 w V 0 m O mm b A a O Q -• A+ N N V Al N 0m N N mNm V O N N O N O bY O + • 0 pqA n + o t{�m a M u -saoI A N+ca o O N N N V OqI tpl1l m • o ,iowwa(a-- 4§ 8 a 2m 3 t7 O 3 D 3 J 2y 3 3 3 0 $WYI1 IM NIMOOOOOrl tVIVO? . t!ZO-6 -Z • • McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. Consulting Engineers 909 Rolling Hills Drive MIC OIFELPID Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703 Telephone 501/443-3404 FAX 501/443-4340 January 25, 2002 Re: Wastewater System Improvement Project Proposed Contract Amendment between City and Engineer Fayetteville, Arkansas MWY Project No. Fy-296 Mr. Greg Boettcher, P E Director of Public Works City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Dear Greg: Thanks for your letter of November 13 requesting a contract amendment. We're pleased to answer your questions and provide whatever detail you require to move our work forward. I've summarized relevant information below and attached a more comprehensive memorandum to this letter. Project History Our original contract with the City was executed March 21, 2000. It called for MWY to complete the Preliminary Engineering Design for the proposed Westside WWTF, including a written Preliminary Design Report. We completed this report in May 2001 and enlisted the services of subconsultants whose special expertise was critical to complete the work. They are listed in the attached memorandum. MWY successfully completed contract scope requirements approximately $200,000 below budget. Along the way, the City made several decisions which resulted in the expansion of MWY's role in work related to the wastewater system improvement project. They are summarized as follows: Revolving Loan Fund Concurrent with the preliminary design process, the City elected to pursue Arkansas' Revolving Loan Fund program. This was an excellent decision, because it would provide a low-cost source of capital for all facets of the total project. In Apnl 2000, at the City's request, Don Bunn, Assistant Public Works Director and Jim Ulmer, Vice - President of MWY, met with officials of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality to assess the program requirements to enter the RLF program and learned: Mr. Greg Boettcher January 25, 2002 Page 2 • • 1. The 1997 Facility Plan created by CH2M Hill did not meet ADEQ requirements and the City would be required to produce a new Facility Plan Amendment. Later, at the City's direction, in May through November 2001, MWY created a new Facility Plan Amendment which required approximately 2,800 manhours to complete. A new Environmental Information Document (EID) was required that would address all known environmental issues and program requirements. 3. A formal public hearing on the selected plan was also required. This meeting was supplemental to the numerous public meetings conducted during the preliminary design process. As you are aware, planning, organizing, facilitating and following-up a formal public hearing that conforms to state requirements is a time -intensive process. MWY also assumed responsibility for this activity. Environmental Permitting 1. Early in this process, consultation with environmental regulatory agencies determined that the project would require one 404 and NPDES storm water permit rather than one for each part of the project. At this point, the project team agreed that ECO would develop the single 404 and NDPES storm water permit for the total project, a less cumbersome way to proceed. While this decision reduced work for each of the subconsultants, it significantly increased ECO's work, which accounts in large part for its higher billing. 2. ECO participated in nearly all public meetings to provide environmental overview, requirements and to answer public concerns regarding environmental issues. ECO also prepared the EID required for the Facility Planning process. In an attempt to reduce costs, much of the information developed during the 404 permitting process was used to develop the EID This also allowed us to address the difficult environmental issues the City would have to overcome to successfully complete the projects. Public Education 1. The City's decision to pursue RLF financing intensified the need to develop clear and effective information for voters who would be asked to approve a %-percent sales tax on November 6, 2001. And it resulted in significant additional support from our public information consultant, Hanifin and Associates. Instead of the planned three public meetings, sixteen were held before the election. Hanifin and Associates planned, coordinated and followed-up on all sixteen of these meetings. Mr. Greg Boettcher January 25, 2002 Page 3 • • 2. In a public opinion survey, Hanifin and Associates learned a significant number of voters felt they had insufficient information about the overall wastewater treatment system improvements. This was a major concern, as voters won't approve issues they don't understand. As work moved forward, odor control issues at Noland, property value concerns and environmental matters took on paramount importance. Public education took on new importance and resulted in additional cost from our public information consultant. Expanded Responsibilities As you know, the RLF application process is complex and time-consuming. In the absence of clearly defined project leadership responsibility, the dearth of long-term experience with RLF as well as numerous regulatory agencies, and the absolute necessity of voters approving the 'As -percent sales tax, MWY became the de facto project manager. We did so with the implicit consent of the City to help ensure the compatibility of each project aspect and success of the total project. While the choice resulted in significant additional responsibility, we saw a significant benefit to the City. MWY and its consultants helped the people of Fayetteville save over $38 million in interest costs related to these projects by successfully completing the RLF Program requirements to qualify for the 3 percent RLF loan. In an August 8, 2001 memo, Don Bunn informed the public works director, the mayor and city council that MWY was: ...currently in the process of Facility Plan revision and EID preparation, working with ADEQ and the Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission in connection with securing RLF funding and has attended several city related public meetings on the protect. In addition, they have been working with the City in the investigation of the possible construction of a fertilizer plant in the Northwest Arkansas area which would utilize sewage sludge from the area cities and poultry litter. Contract Amendment No. 1 for the above activities will be presented to the Council for review and approval at a later date. Unquestionably, these activities went beyond the scope of work in our original contract and we accept responsibility for our decisions. We made them with the City's best interests at heart and the interests of the project we have an obligation to complete in a timely manner and at the lowest possible cost. At the same time, we fully understand the importance of keeping clients informed about our activities and the cost of services that exceed the scope of our contract. As this letter is written, we are reviewing internal processes to identify what changes we can make to better accomplish this objective. Prior to their implementation, we will discuss these changes with you to ensure they meet the City's objectives. Mr. Greg Boettcher January 25, 2002 Page 4 • • The attached memorandum provides detail and explanation of costs incurred by us and our subconsultants in the performance of our contract responsibilities. We trust you will find this information adequate and that you will forward our request for payment to the Council with your recommendation for approval. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please do not hesitate to call us. We are at your disposal. LCY:sc Attachment cc: Mayor Dan Coody Board of Aldermen Cordially yours, L. Carl Yates McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. Consulting Engineers 909 Rolling Hills Drive Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703 Telephone 501/443-3404 FAX 501/443-4340 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Dan Goody Mr. Greg Boettcher, Public Works Director Fayetteville City Council From: McGoodwin, Williams and Yates, Inc. Date: January 25, 2002 Re: Wastewater System Improvement Protect Proposed Contract Amendment between City and Engineer Fayetteville, Arkansas MWY Project No. Fy-296 On March 21, 2000, McGoodwin, Williams and Yates (MWY) entered into a contract with the City of Fayetteville to provide engineering services through preliminary design, final design, and the construction of facilities for the Westside Wastewater Treatment Facility. The contract provided for fees through the necessary studies, preliminary design and completion of a preliminary design report, with the fees for subsequent work to be negotiated at a later, unspecified date. At about the same time, the City entered into engineering contracts with the RJN Group for collection and transmission system engineering for the west side, with Garver Engineers for the same type of services on the east side, and with Black & Veatch to provide the required services for necessary upgrades to the existing Paul Noland Plant. We completed our work under our original scope in May, 2001, at a cost approximately $200,000 below the estimated cost set out in the contract. Our contract provides for the utilization of several subconsultants to assist us in our work. Two of these subconsultants and their scope of work are as follows: 1. ECO, Inc. — ECO's original scope provides for general environmental guidance to us as we developed the project and to provide services required for the filing of a Section 404 permit based on the assumption that the treatment facility could be permitted under the Nationwide permit rather than filing for an Individual 404 permit. The services proposed to be provided were for the Westside Treatment Plant only. Hanifin Associates, Inc. — Hanifin Associates' charge was to develop a strategic communications program to inform the general public about January 21, 2002 Page 2 • • issues concerning the new proposed Westside Plant. Because of known opposition to constructing this facility, it was believed that a compre- hensive program to inform the public about the issues related to their concerns was critical to the success of the project. Soon after the work commenced on the project, the City decided that the services ECO, Inc. and Hanifin Associates, Inc. were providing for the Westside Treatment Plant should be expanded to include the total project, and in the case of ECO, Inc., to provide services necessary to obtain a 404 permit for the total project (including both plants and all line work). This decision was based on regulatory mandates that a single Individual 404 permit would be required. ECO was further directed to work closely with all project consultants and Hanifin Associates in the public involvement processes. Although these two subconsultants would then be working with the City and all consultants, we agreed that these expanded services would be invoiced to our firm and then passed on to the City for reimbursement. The 400 -page 404 permit application with documentation has been completed in draft format and will be finalized shortly after work has been re -authorized on the project. It is anticipated that once the final application is submitted it will take approximately six months for completion of review by the Corps of Engineers and the issuance of the permit. Consequently, in order to avoid delay of construction, when plans and specifications have been completed, environmental permitting work should proceed with all due haste. The cost to -date for the environmental management and permitting (over and above that accomplished under the original scope) is approximately $160,000, of which $154,000 is for work accomplished by ECO, Inc. and $6,000 by us. Please note that approximately 75 percent of the cost for work accomplished by ECO is for line work projects on both the east and west sides of the City and not part of our contract for the Westside Facilities. A brief summary of the 404 permit work elements is shown in Attachment A. The cost of the additional work performed by Hanifin Associates, Inc. was due to its involvement in the entire project rather than just the Westside Treatment Facility, and for educational assistance during the development of the Facility Plan and the AutumnFest exposition in early October. Additional costs involved relate to odor problems at the existing Noland Plant, i.e., several meetings with attendant preparation were held to discuss this matter. The added cost for Hanifin Associates over the original budget is $88,426. Hanifin's original budget assumed three public meetings, whereas 16 were finally held. The need for additional public education was noted in Hanifin's summary of written comment presented in the Public Opinion Survey (Attachment B). A summary of Hanifin's work is shown in an October 15, 2001, letter included as Attachment C. From the very beginning of the project, the City began evaluating the best method of funding for the project. At the City's request, we provided assistance in this evaluation. By May of 2001, the City had decided to utilize the State of Arkansas Revolving Loan Fund and at that time asked us to provide the necessary services to January 21, 2002 Page 3 • • amend the Facility Plan which had been prepared in 1997 by CH2M Hill. This work was not included in our original contract. The Draft Facility Plan Amendment (including the required Environmental Information Document) was completed in August. A summary of significant meetings conducted relevant to the total project effort is presented in Attachment D. The entire Draft Facility Plan Amendment includes 10 separate volumes and was submitted to the Arkansas Sod & Water Conservation Commission in August for review and approval. The Draft Facility Plan was revised and has become the Final Facility Plan and incorporates the comments of the public at the formal public hearing and reviewing agency comments, and was resubmitted for final review and approval on November 2, 2001. By letters dated December 3 and 4 (Attachments E and F) to Mayor Goody from the ASWCC, they indicate that the Facility Plan had been reviewed and it appears to be "approvable." However, they cannot give final approval until certain programmatic events have occurred. Specifically, the City of Fayetteville must have officially entered into the Revolving Loan Fund program and environmental review processes must have been completed with closure on several environmental issues which should be resolved with the completion of the 404 permit process. Final Facility Plan and Environmental Information Document approval will come in the form of the issuance of a Finding Of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the project. Thus, final approval may take some period of time, as all agencies having interest in the project must be given opportunity to comment on the draft 404 permit. Consequently, the City is "ahead of the curve" on receiving facility plan approval so that it will not delay start of construction. Additionally, the environmental issues that affect the design will have been identified and resolved early in the design process, so that costly redesigns will be avoided. The cost to -date on this facility planning part of the work (including RLF coordination) is approximately $245,000, with $190,000 being for work performed by us and approximately $55,000 for work performed by ECO, Inc. in the development of the Environmental Information Document. A graph showing the dates of our effort in manhours by payroll date is shown in Attachment G. In addition to extra services detailed above, the City requested that we assist in the following tasks: 1) Broyles Road Extension study; 2) preliminary work on the Candidate Conservation Agreement involving not only the "Westside line protect" but also the research and technology park; 3) evaluating the possible impact of potential industry on the Westside Plant; and 4) coordination of the effort to utilize the "waste -to - energy -to -fertilizer" process for the biosolids (DukeSolutions/Harmony). There is still work to be completed in the facility planning process and securing approvals of preliminary environmental issues. This work will basically be completed by us, ECO, Inc., and by the Arkansas Archeological Survey, with some consultation with the other three engineering consultants on the project. Our work will include working with ECO, Inc. in the environmental permitting (including a wetlands mitigation plan, if required), coordinating final review and making any changes required in the Facility Plan Amendment, RLF coordination, and coordination of the effort to finalizing the definitive contract between the City and DukeSolutions/Harmony for the utilization of the waste -to -energy -to -fertilizer process for biosolids treatment and disposal. We estimate the cost of our effort to be approximately $57,500.