HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/30/2003, BUS 1 - PHASE I IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY MASTER PLAN Council .
MJan .
Jan. 30 2003
acEnda nEpoRt „®N�. i
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: John Moss, Utilities Directoo
Prepared By: David Hix, Wastewater Division Manager
SUBJECT: PHASE I IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WATER RECLAMATION
FACILITY MASTER PLAN
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1) Approve contract with Brown and Caldwell Engineers for Phase I services for the
implementation of the Water Reclamation Facility Master Plan in an amount not to exceed
$189,974 and
2) authorize the Mayor to execute the contract and authorize the transfer of$90,000 from the
sewer fund general carry over to the project account.
DISCUSSION
Background
In October of 2000, the Wastewater Master Plan, in conjunction with the Airport Area Specific
Plan, was completed by Brown and Caldwell Engineers. The Master Plan had been prepared to
identify required Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) capacity and collection system
improvements that would be needed to correct known deficiencies and meet the anticipated
growth per the City's General Plan. The Master Plan provided general recommendations and
proposals for the WRF on meeting future growth, improving efficiency and correcting
deficiencies. The Plan also provided project and cost information for development of the
Facility Financing Plan and updating our wastewater impact fees. Council was presented with
the plan during a study session on March 12, 2002.
Request for Proposals
On September 3, 2002, Council approved the Request for Proposals (RFP) for Analysis and Design
Services for the Water Reclamation Facility Improvements, Spec. No. 90341 also known as the
Water Reclamation Facility Master Plan. The RFP's scope of work consisted of two phases; the
scope of work for phase I was the preparation of a preliminary design report to analyze and study
three major work components identified in the previous Wastewater Master Plan. Those issues are
listed below.
1. Review, analyze and prepare recommendations- for expansion and addition of processes
required for future capacity.
2. Review, analyze and prepare recommendations for current deficiencies and/or needed
improvements to enhance operations.
� � I
Council Agenda Report—Phase I Water Reclamation Facility Master Plan
Page 2
3. Review, analyze and prepare recommendation for improvements based upon current or
proposed discharge requirements, regulations and the WRF's recently adopted National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)permit.
Proposals were advertised on September 7, 2002, and were received and opened on October 17,
2002. Two proposals were received and reviewed by four members of the Utilities Department.
Brown and Caldwell Engineering were unanimously selected based upon the detail of their
proposal, understanding of the issues and expertise in the wastewater treatment field.
Scope of Services
Brown and Caldwell thoroughly examined and analyzed the RFP's scope of work and presented
discussion and recommendations to address a wide range of AW operational, capacity and
regulatory requirements. Exhibit A of the Agreement provides a comprehensive list and description
of Brown and Caldwell's Phase I Scope of Services. Below is a brief synopsis:
Review and analyze recommendations from the Master Plan. The Master Plan contains a priority
list of projects that will require review and evaluation to determine if they are still viable because of
changes in technology or compatibility with the water reclamation project and/or present
operational strategies.
Prepare analysis and recommendations of the WRF's Hydraulic Flow Scheme. This includes the
analysis of flow equalization, modification and/or replacement of some 'process equipment and
simplifying the WRF's overly complicated current flow scheme.
Prepare analysis and recommendations of the WRF's current trickling filters. The WRF's current
trickling filters are very old and lack control flexibility. Analysis will determine if the existing
trickling filters need to be removed, rebuilt or modified and how they may fit into the future
treatment requirements.
Analysis and Recommendations regarding solids treatment and handling (Biosolids). Currently
the WRF has only one sludge thickening process and an older digestion process that does not
destroy pathogens to levels consistent with the most stringent EPA and State requirements.
Analysis will determine the most effective and efficient dewatering and treatment methods for these
biosolids issues.
Analysis of WRF's current disinfection systems and use of chlorine for reduction of
Trihalomethanes (THMs). Presently the WRF's NPDES permit has a requirement to investigate
methods to reduce the amount of THMs in its discharge to San Luis Obispo Creek. THMs are a
regulated by-product of chlorine disinfection and the WRF may be faced with very stringent and
difficult limits to meet in the future. This task is a mandatory requirement placed in the WRF's
NPDES permit by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Analyze Removal of Nutrients. The WRF has been identified as a significant source of nutrients,
(nitrogen and phosphorus), in the Total Mass Daily Load (TMDL) study for San Luis Obispo
I -a
Council Agenda Report—Phase I Water Reclamation Facility Master Plan
Page 3
Creek. Currently the RWQCB is developing limits for these constituents. This portion of the work
program begins preliminary investigation into this issue. Although not a mandatory requirement at
this time, studies and analysis concerning nutrients will become a permit requirement in the very
near future. This study will place the City in a strong position to evaluate the RWQCB's TMDL
study,feasibility of future discharge requirements and costs.
Recommendations for WRF improvements based upon current or proposed requirements and
recommendations. Other requirements and issues may be forthcoming that involve nutrients,TIM
and other pollutants that may need to be addressed for future and upcoming state and/or federal
water quality regulations.
Coordination with the energy project. Staff has asked Brown and Caldwell to review the energy
project plans and specifications prepared by Kinetics, Inc. for the WRF for feasibility and to ensure
compatibility and consistency with operations.
Following the completion of Phase I, staff will return to Council with the findings of the studies and
analysis for the needed improvements and request approval of Phase II design services based upon
those recommendations. Phasing the study and design portions of the WRF Master Plan allows for
better definition of the work scope and costs for the design phase. Preparation of plans and
specifications and construction costs will be revised to reflect the level of effort required by the
consultant after the completion of the analysis and design.
Summary
Implementation of the recommended improvements identified in the WRF Master Plan will ensure
the City is able to meet its future wastewater capacity and compliance requirements while operating
the most efficient manner possible.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed analysis and design services for this project are estimated at a cost not to exceed
$189,974. Funding for the study portion of the Water Reclamation Facility Master Plan
Implementation has been identified as $100,000 during the 2001-2003 Financial Plan, Appendix B
pg. 142-143. An additional $90,000 will need to be appropriated from the Sewer Fund General
Carryover to support the Phase I contract. There is sufficient funding in the Sewer Fund General
Carryover to support this request.
State mandated water quality requirements have contributed to the majority of the increased costs
for this project. These requirements have been translated into the design and construction costs,
which are only preliminary and may change, based upon the Phase I studies, other information and
possible regulation changes. Phase I also contains a review of the design and plans for the WRF
energy project which was not anticipated during preparation of the 2001-2003 WRF Master Plan
Implementation CIP Request.
1 - 3
i
Council Agenda Report—Phase I Water Reclamation Facility Master Plan
Page 4
Brown and Caldwell have provided Table 1 - WRF Master Plan Project. Estimated Costs
the City preliminary estimates for Phase I $190,000
the design (Phase In and Phase II $1,608,400
construction of the recommended Construction Administration $1,747,300
improvements based upon their Subtotal Desi and Administration $3,5459700
Phase I Work Scope. These Project Construction $159888,400
estimated costs are shown in
Table 1. Phase II will involve initial environmental assessment and preparation of plans and
specifications. Construction administration costs include office engineering support during
construction.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Agreement for Consultant services with Brown and Caldwell
�r
Attachment 1
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this
day of , by and between the CITY OF SAN
LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation and charter city, hereinafter referred to as "City", and Brown and
Caldwell,hereinafter referred to as"Consultant."
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS,on September 3,2002, the City requested proposals for analysis and design services
for water reclamation facility improvements per Specification No.90341;and
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2003 the City received proposals for analysis and design services for
water reclamation facility improvements per Specification No. 9034;and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said request, Consultant submitted a proposal that was accepted by City
for said services.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants
hereinafter contained,the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and
entered,as first written above, until acceptance or completion of said services.
2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No. 90341 and
Consultant's scope of work submitted November 8, 2002, identified as Exhibit A are hereby incorporated
in and made a part of this Agreement.
3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this Agreement, City
will pay and Consultant shall receive compensation in a total sum not to exceed$189,974.00 for phase I of
the project work scope as identified in Exhibit A.
4. CONSULTANT'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and
agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Consultant agrees with City to
provide consultant services for phase I work scope as described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated into this agreement.
5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the Utilities Director of the City
of San Luis Obispo.
6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings
specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties
hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or representation not reduced to writing and specifically
incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or
representation be binding upon the parties hereto.
7. NOTICE. All written notices to the patties hereto shall be sent by United States mail,
postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
City Pam King
Public Works Department
City of San Luis Obispo
955 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Consultant Steven E.Esmond
Brown and Caldwell Engineers
16735 Von Karmen Avenue
Irvine,CA. 92606
8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Consultant do covenant
that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and
empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day
and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By:
Lee Price,City Clerk David F.Romero,Mayor
eTOF BROWN AND CALDWELL ENGINEERS
By:
Gilbert A. ity Attorney Steven E.Esmond
I ' I
Exhibit A
EXHIBIT A
Scope of Services
Water Reclamation Facility Improvements: Analysis and Design Services
Specification No. 90341
Task 1.0—Project Management
Coordinate the day-to-day needs of the project. Monitor the progress being made toward
fulfilling the contract goals and objectives. Ensure that the project team meets the scope, quality,
cost, and schedule commitments made to the City.
Task 1.1 - Review and Analyze Recommendations from the Wastewater Master Plan
Review the recommendations and priorities in the current Wastewater MasterPlan. Compare the
recommendations and priorities with current issues and needs. Develop a matrix of key issues to
be addressed in the workshop meeting.
Task 1.2 - Review, Analyze, and Provide Recommendations for the WRF Priority 1 and 2
Projects Listed in the Wastewater Master Plan
Single out project priorities contained in the current Wastewater Master Plan that warrant further
study. Combine this task with Task 1.1 so that all relevant issues involving wastewater treatment
will be considered. The relevant issues include:
1. In-plant relationships of wastewater treatment and reclamation,
2. Identify the technologies needed to achieve treatment versus reclamation,
3. Hydraulic considerations, both seasonal and diurnal, that affect treatment and
reclamation, and
4. Permit conditions that significantly influence the City's planning process.
Task 1.3 - Prepare Analysis and Recommendations of the WRF's Hydraulic Flow Scheme
Develop the historical background and projections of the plant's future hydraulic flow regime,
defined by average daily flow, duration and frequency of peak flow daily flows, and seasonal
flow variations. Prepare a hydraulic analysis of the WRF to include hydraulic grade lines,
velocities, head losses, and relevant hydraulic properties within individual unit processes and
conveyances throughout the WRF. Develop an understanding of the current flow equalization
operations and how these respond to various hydraulic conditions. Use this information to
analyze alternatives for enhancing process operational efficiency. These alternatives will address
the main wetstream as well as minor streams including supernatant, recycle, and draining and
washdown operations. This analysis will evaluate options involving management of peak flows
and metering of minor streams to provide better process control.
Task 1.4 -Prepare Analysis and Recommendations of the Future Use(s) of the WRF's Trickling
Filters
The goal of this task will be to determine the fate of all or a portion of the plant's trickling filters.
Evaluate the mechanical condition and treatment process benefits of the existing trickling filter
facility. The evaluation will address process control flexibility, identify the needs for upgrading
the filters, retrofit with synthetic media, identify options to retrofit the filters, and calculate
R 0
1&03-97053-105
1
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
associated costs. Determine the impacts associated with eliminating all or a portion of the
trickling filters and costs associated with providing replacement treatment capacity.
Task 1.5-Prepare Analysis and Recommendations for Enhancement of the WRF's Solids
Treatment, Dewatering and Handling Operations
Evaluate sludge dewatering technologies, including the installation of a second DAFT. Evaluate
comparable alternatives including gravity belt thickener(GBT).
Evaluate the existing anaerobic sludge digestion facilities and equipment. Perform a general
condition assessment to address mechanical, structural, and hydraulic needs and associated costs.
Evaluate the sludge digestion process. Evaluate alternatives, including conversion of secondary
digestion to a mixed digester. Investigate the costs and benefits associated with converting to
thermophilic digestion, as well as other options related to producing exceptional quality (EQ)
biosolids through anaerobic digestion and/or other technologies.
Task 1.6-Analyze the WRF's Current Disinfection System and Use of Chlorine in Other
Processes and Provide Recommendations for the Reduction of THMs in the WRF's Effluent
Investigate commercial alternatives to chlorine disinfection as a means of controlling THMs,
particularly ultraviolet (UV) disinfection. Make recommendations on other means of controlling
THM formation in the plant, consistent with the need for general housekeeping and plant water
uses.
Address compliance issues related to California Title 22 reuse applications, as well as facilities
having the operational flexibility to accommodate both diurnal cycles as well as peak storm water
flows,combined with variable discharge volumes diverted for beneficial reuse and for stream
discharge.
Task 1.7-Analyze Modification or Construction of Treatment Process(s)for the Reduction of
Nitrates in the WRF's Effluent
Evaluate the practical limit on the available technology for achieving reduction of nitrates in the
WRF's effluent. Determine the approximate costs required to produce effluents with monthly
average TN levels in the range of 3.0 mg/l. Evaluate the NILE process with methanol addition to
achieve this reduction. Analyze and determine best method of phosphorus removal.
Utilize BIOWIN, a process design simulator that accounts for multiple inputs, changing flows
and loadings, and looks at key process variables. With information gained from calibrating and
running the BIOWIN process simulator, develop specific process designs for future
implementation, and in addition, provide City staff a more complete understanding of some of
the operating issues that can be learned from this numerical simulation tool.
Evaluate the costs of alternatives necessary to achieve TN levels less than 3 mg/l, using tertiary
treatment steps such as reverse osmosis or activated carbon treatment.
Task 1.8- Provide Recommendations for WRF Improvements Based Upon Current and/or
Proposed Requirements and Regulations
Engage the issues involved in the ongoing TMDL study and its implications to the WWTP
related to pathogens and nutrients. Address the impact on current operations if planned limits on
THMs are put into place, resulting in conversion to another disinfection process to ozone, UV or
RO, to provide disinfection and color removal. Evaluate these considerations as they pertain to
effluent discharge versus reuse.
1603-91053105 2
Exhibit A
-- Scope of Services
Task 1.9-Discussions and Interaction Between the Consultant and City Staff is Critical to
Project Success
The scope of this task consists of two workshops. Conduct an initial workshop meeting in San
Luis Obispo with City staff, involving active participation and free interaction with key members
of our process design group. The issues and priorities discussed in the Master Plan, as well as all
the items identified in the RFP and this proposal, will be put up for discussion. A Technical
Memorandum (TM) will be developed through this evaluation process and delivered to the City.
After a period of internal review, we expect to re-convene the workshop to narrow the focus and
range of options. Perform further evaluation as necessary to resolve any remaining alternatives
into a single set of recommendations, which will decide the scope of the Phase II project for
environmental review and contract document preparation. Other than the two workshops
indicated in this task, no other formal site meetings are planned.
Task 1.10-Present Recommendations in a Phase I Study Session to the City Council
Prepare capital cost estimates and time lines for construction of the final selected plant
improvements. Prepare a preliminary engineering report including the cost and schedule
analysis, a discussion of advantages/disadvantages of the narrow range of options developed as
part of Task 1.9, and recommendations. Submit copies to City staff for review and comment,
and develop the final report.
Task 1.11 — Coordination with Energy Study.
Coordinate with Kinetics to the extent of sharing key process information and process variables
necessary to investigate the costs and feasibility of energy utilization and methane gas
production.
Task 1.12—Assist in Ongoing Negotiations with RWQCB.
Assist the City and when appropriate, represent the City before the RWQCB in matters
pertaining to effluent quality.
1e-03-91053-105 3
1� 1