Search

City of Nashua City-Wide Pedestrian Infrastructure Conditions Assessment and Ranking

Phase 3: Public Outreach

NRPC will use an on-line public engagement platform to “ground truth” field survey results. This effort
will focus on an interactive map component that would allow the public to pinpoint areas of concern
and provide comments, particularly on a more granular level such as sidewalk segment, crosswalk, etc.
For those participants not inclined to use a map tool, a simple form can help capture feedback. Public
outreach would also include a final on-line presentation in a webinar format. This work will build upon
the pilot project results available at https://www.publicinput.com/NashuaBikePed. Final deliverables
will include map input, survey results and public presentation materials.

STAFFING:

To accomplish field work in a single season, two crews consisting of two persons will be needed. In the
field, one individual will run the iPad and the other will conduct field observations and measurements.
In the back-office, the team will complete post-processing, address QA/QC issues, and schedule the field
work. NRPC will staff one of the two-person crews, and the City will provide another two-person crew.
NRPC will be responsible for training and general oversight of both crews to ensure quality control
during the project, however the hiring and general management of the City’s crew, including any
disciplinary matters, remains the responsibility of the City.

Coordination of training, data quality control, analysis and mapping will be the responsibility of NRPC’s
Senior GIS Planner. NRPC will work closely with the City’s Division of Public Works (DPW) and
Community Development Department (CDD) staff on public outreach efforts.

EQUIPMENT:

Both NRPC and the City will be responsible for supplying their crew the following equipment:

e Use of a vehicle
e iPad with ArcGIS Collector (cellular-equipped)
e Bad Elf GPS receiver
e Misc. small equipment totaling less than $100: (iPad case, measuring tape, laser level, etc.)
e Safety vests and other gear as required by the respective organizations
TIMELINE:

The project timeline is largely dependent on the scheduling and progress of the field crews. Assuming
Nashua’s crew is working 4-5 days a week and NRPC’s is working 3-4 (largely dependent on vehicle
availability), field work is expected to take approximately 16 weeks.

Field Work begin: June 15, 2022

Field Work End: October 15, 2022

Final Data post processing, QA/QC, and relative conditions assessment mapping: December 2022
Spreadsheet Rankings: March 1, 2023

Public Outreach: April 15, 2023

Final deliverables: June 30, 2023

pg. 5

City of Nashua City-Wide Pedestrian Infrastructure Conditions Assessment and Ranking
COSTS:

Phase 1: Field Work

$40,000

This phase will be conducted on a time-and-materials basis. NRPC will invoice the city for field crew
costs and related oversight and project management according to staff salaries, indirect costs at NRPC’s
123% federally-approved indirect rate. If total project expenses reach $40,000, NRPC will cease work
and notify the City, who, at their discretion, may authorize additional budget to continue field work. It
is expected with the labor offset by a City-supplied crew of two persons, NRPC will remain within this
budget.

Phases 2: Data Analysis, Mapping, and Ranking
NRPC Labor: No Charge (Estimated Value: $5,000)

Phase 3: Public Outreach
Fixed Cost: $2,500 (Publicinput.com software single-use charge)
NRPC Labor: No Charge

ASSUMPTIONS:

e NRPC and the City will jointly specify the geographic plan and schedule for data collection. It is
expected that the City will desire that ADA priority areas such as those that support government
operations, transit and principal commercial areas would be completed earlier in the schedule.

e Field crew members must complete SADES pedestrian module training (expected to be
scheduled in early June).

e All fieldwork is weather permitting.

e Public input will be primarily virtual in nature.

pg. 6

City of Nashua

Purchasing Department
Administrative Services Division (603) 589-3330
229 Main Street - Nashua, NH 03060 Fax (603) 594-3233

February 23, 2022
Memo #22-244

TO: Mayor Donchess
Finance Committee

SUBJECT: Evaluation and Preliminary Design of Class A Biosolids Management Upgrade in the
amount not to exceed $199,886.60 funded from 53107 Architect & Engineering
Services/Wastewater Fund

Please see attached communications from David Boucher, Superintendent of the Wastewater Department,
dated February 24, 2022 for project specific details related to this purchase. Below please find a summary
of the purchase approval request:

Item: Evaluation of Preliminary Design to Upgrade of Biosolids Management from Class
B to Class A

Value: not to exceed $199,886.60

Vendor: Wright Pierce

Department: 169 Wastewater
Source Fund: 53107 Architect & Engineering Services/ Wastewater Fund

Ordinance: Pursuant to NRO § 5-83 Professional Services (A) In the purchase of accounting,
architectural, auditing, engineering, legal, medical and ambulance services and
purchases of independent professional consultant services for personnel, data
processing, actuarial, planning, management and other comparable purchases
competitive bidding shall not be required.

The Board of Public Works (2/24/22 BPW meeting), Division of Public Works: Wastewater, and the
Purchasing Department respectfully request your approval of this contract.

Regards,
Kelly Parkinson

Purchasing Manager

Ce: D Boucher
C O'Connor

To:

From:

Re:

E. Motion:

Attachments:

Discussion:

City of Nashua, Public Works Division

Board of Public Works Meeting Date: February 24, 2022

David L. Boucher, Superintendent
Wastewater Department

Class A Biosolids Upgrade - Preliminary Design Phase Services

To approve the contract with Wright Pierce to provide a Class A Upgrade
Evaluation Preliminary Design Plans and Specifications in an amount not to
exceed $199,886.60. Funding for this contract will be through Department: 169
Wastewater; Fund: Wastewater; Activity: WW Class A Biosolids Upgrade.

Wright Pierce Scope of Work and Fee Schedule

The Nashua Wastewater Treatment Facility currently produces Class B biosolids
which are beneficially reused on farmland throughout New Hampshire, and has
been used in Massachusetts as well.

Regulations have been evolving, resulting in communities making rapid decisions
to limit or ban Class B biosolids for beneficial reuse. This results in the market
changing, and significant price increases are projected. Our current biosolids
management contract will expire at the end of this fiscal year and our expectations
are that the bids will be significantly higher.

With these factors in mind, moving to a Class A product will reduce the volume
hauled, by more than half. The cost should also decrease, and our disposal options
will increase.

Wright Pierce did an initial evaluation of wastewater’s solids during the Facility
Plan project, completed in 2021. Since Wright Pierce has already started the
evaluation, this project becomes a continuation of their work, allowing for a faster
design and lower overall cost of the project.

Wright Pierce’s proposal covers the full evaluation and preliminary design of the
Class A upgrade and will be able to move quickly to a final design. This approval
is for an amount not to exceed $199,886.60.

Exhibit A
Scope of Services

The City of Nashua currently utilizes anaerobic digestion to produce Class B biosolids for land application; reduce
the total quantity of dry solids; and to create biogas for beneficial use. The digested sludge is dewatered with one
of three inclined screw presses and then disposed of through a 3-year contract with RMI. The current contract is
scheduled to expire on June 30, 2022. The City is currently paying $62/wet ton and this rate is anticipated to
increase significantly with the next contract due to significant changes in the biosolids/sludge disposal market
related in great part to the emergence of PFAS compounds as a critical concern.

The City has also experienced capacity concerns with the current level of raw solids production in the primary egg-
shaped digester but have been able to maintain the necessary detention time required for Class B criteria by
adjusting the digester feed schedule and holding more solids in the digester tanks.

Until there are clear regulatory criteria for PFAS compounds in wastewater sludges, there will be uncertainty with
any plan to continue with beneficial use. However, current indicators appear to favor processing biosolids to meet
Class A criteria. Likewise, reducing the wet weight of the final product will reduce ultimate disposal costs whether
the biosolids are beneficially used, landfilled, or incinerated. As such, the City would like to implement sludge
drying of the anaerobically-digested sludge to meet Class A criteria. This will include an investigation of drying
technology alternatives to determine the preferred approach based on product quality characteristics and
preliminary design development to assess overall project requirements and costs.

Based on our understanding of the needs of the City, we propose to perform the following tasks to identify the
preferred drying technology, develop a detailed facility design concept including capital and operational costs, and
assess the impact on future biosolids disposal /beneficial use costs. Once the preferred technology has been
selected, preliminary design documentation (report, plans and cost estimate) will be developed.

A. Initial Kick-off Meeting and Preliminary Planning Session.

B. Validate Existing and Future Sludge Quantities. The sludge generation numbers developed for the Facility
Plan will be updated using data from 2020 and 2021. The updated existing sludge quantities will be used to
estimate future quantities using the methodology developed for the 20-Year Facility Plan.

C. PFAS Assessment.

1. Collect existing PFAS monitoring data for the digested solids and conduct two additional rounds of
PFAS testing on the digested sludge.

2. Compare PFAS levels in Nashua’s digested sludge to available benchmarks (Maine’s screening
standards, Michigan’s land application guideline, available international standards for land
application). Compare results for Nashua’s digested sludge with monitoring data for other
biosolids in New England and beyond.

3. Identify potential impacts of anticipated PFAS regulations on disposal options, based on current
levels in Nashua’s digested solids.

4, The budget for this scope item includes a $5,000 allowance for contract testing services.

D. Baseline conditions assessment.

1. Based on the continued use of the existing anaerobic digesters and the existing and projected
future sludge quantities, assess the technical feasibility of continuing to meet Class B criteria over
the 20-year planning period.

WRIGHT-PIERCE = 1 of 3

Engineering a Beller Environment

Identify regulatory and product market considerations with “no improvements” alternatives over
the 20-year planning period. Meet with representatives of NHDES to assess regulatory concerns.
Meet with RMI and Casella to assess agronomic end-user concerns.

Summarize the necessary capital improvement needs to maintain the existing digester facilities
over 20-year planning period for this “no improvements” alternative.

Identify beneficial use and disposal options over the 20-year planning period with the “no
improvements” alternative.

E. Preliminary Screening of Drying Alternatives:

F.

1.

Determine desired throughput capacity, operating regime. Assess requirements for dewatered
cake storage and feed, drying process throughput, post-processing (finished product
characteristics), and dried product storage requirements.
Conduct a screening level evaluation of drying technology alternatives to process dewatered sludge
for disposal including:

i. Belt Dryer

ii. Rotary Drum Dryer (triple pass type)

iii. Indirect Dryer
Meet with firms that market dried biosolids (RMI, Casella, Synagro, New England Fertilizer) to
assess desirable and minimum acceptable product characteristics for each drying technology.
Obtain input on potential markets for the product from each technology and product storage
requirements. Meet with City landfill staff to assess characteristics to allow land filling and/or use
as daily cover.
Arrange site visits for City staff for 2 days to nearby drying facilities (rotary drum - GLSD, MWRA-
Quincy; paddle-type: Naugatuck, Waterbury, Springfield, other). Arrange one overnight site visit to
remote location to visit belt dryer installation(s}. The budget for this scope item shall include
$4,000 for non-labor travel expenses for Wright-Pierce and City staff.
Develop order of magnitude life-cycle costs for each drying technology option and assess options
for using hot water from CH&P generators and/or biogas as the hot source for the drying process.
A list of non-monetary factors will also be developed for these options as part of the cost-benefit-
risk analysis. Non-monetary factors will include regulatory requirements, equipment footprint,
public acceptance (odors, etc.}, characteristics of dried product, and impact on beneficial use and
disposal options.
Determine recommended technology based on cost and non-cost factors.
Evaluate beneficial use and disposal options with dried Class A product versus continuing with
existing facilities (Class B or less). Develop life cycle biosolids management cost comparison for
most likely beneficial use/disposal option with drying facility versus existing.
Summarize findings in a technical memorandum and submit to City staff for review. Hold meeting
with City staff to review comments and finding. Update technical memorandum based on
comments from City staff.

Preliminary Design Development

1.

Develop preliminary design documents (basis of design technical memorandum and process
drawings) for the recommended technology that includes sizing of drying system; sludge cake
conveying and storage; post processing and storage; and product off-loading.

Develop plan for providing an adequate level of odor control to avoid off-site odor impacts from
drying facility.

WRIGHT-PIERCE = 2 of 3

ing a Better Envi

3. Assess operating costs for drying facility. Evaluate cost-benefit of utilizing hot water from existing
CH&P generators and/or biogas to drive the drying process versus use of natural gas. Assess hot
water needs and impact on operation of 1 versus 2 CH&P generators.

4. Develop site layout plan to determine impact on facilities adjacent to the Sludge Processing
Building at the Nashua WWTF. In particular, assess impacts on facilities to north of Sludge
Processing Building including maintaining access to existing primary sedimentation tanks and scum
well and Maintenance Facility. Assess space requirement for potential future processing options
like subsequent pyrolysis of the dried biosolids.

5. Assess space requirements for a new Maintenance Facility if this proves necessary. Develop
concept plan including site layout plan for new Maintenance Facility as well as the planned Vehicle
Garage. Assess cost impact of relocating Maintenance Facility.

6. Identify required scope elements for building system improvements (architectural, structural,
mechanical, instrumentation and controls, and electrical) and document in discipline-specific
technical memoranda. Develop preliminary cost estimates for each discipline.

G. Prepare Draft Preliminary Design Report and Drawings

1. Prepare draft Preliminary Design Report (PDR) package that includes all technical memoranda, final

design criteria, preliminary drawings and an outline of technical specifications.
i. Prepare a permitting plan for the proposed drying facility including any federal, state, and
local requirements.
ii. Identify the sequence of construction for the facility, assess the necessary construction
duration, and develop an overall project schedule.
iii. Submit a full construction cost estimate for the recommended plan.

2. Submit a draft of the PDR documents to the City for review and comment. Meet with the City to
review comments. The draft preliminary design package will be completed within 180 days of
receiving authorization to proceed.

H. Prepare Final Preliminary Design Report

1. Review City and NHDES comments and provide a memorandum with written responses to all
comments to the satisfaction of the City, including updating drawings, cost estimate and report
sections as necessary.

2. Submit the final PDR package to NHDES for review and comment.

WriGHT-PIERCE = 3 of 3

Engineering a Better Environment

SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED STAFF EFFORT (HOURS) AND COSTS

SLUDGE DRYING STUDY AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN
CITY OF NASHUA, NH

TOTAL DIRECT LABOR
TASK DESCRIPTIONS HOURS NON-LABOR SUBS cost TOTAL SUB-TOTALS|
Typical Salary Rate
A_ Preliminary Planning
1 Meet with City 16 $200.00 $0.00 $840.80 $2,734.17 $2,734.17
B Existing and Future Sludge Production
64 $0.00 $0,00 $2,632.64 $7,934.78 $7,934.78
C PFAS Assessment
1 PFAS Testing on Digested Sludge 13 $0.00 $5,000.00 $525.84 $6,584.88
2 Compare Nashua PFAS Levels with available Benchmarks 24 $0.00 $0.00 $972.16 $2,930.09
3. Identify impacts of PFAS on disposal options 5 $0.00 $0.00 $224.08 $675.38 $10,190.35
D / E Screening & Evaluation of Alternatives
1 Baseline comparison 36 $0.00 $0.00 $1,468.56 $4,426.24
21 Sludge Drying - belt dryers 60 $0.00 $0.00 $2,341.84 $7.058.31
2u Sludge Drying - rotary drum dryer 44 $0.00 $0.00 $1,619.68 $4,881,72
2i1 Sludge Drying - indirect drying 44 $0.00 $0.00 $1,619.68 $4,881.72
3 Meet with Dned Biosolid Firms 40 $0.00 $0.00 $1,792.64 $5,403.02
4 Site Visits (up to 2 days of local visits, one overnight visit) 88 $4,000.00 $0,00 $3,733.76 $15,253.55
5/6 Lifecycle Cost Analysis 28 $0.00 $0.00 $1,287.84 $3,881.55
7/8 Develop Technical Memo and Meet with City 60 $200.00 $0.00 $2,647.68 $8,180.14 $53,966.20
F_ Evaluate Beneficial Use/Disposal Options
1 Identify disposal options and costs 18 $0.00 $0.00 $717.84 $2,163.57
2. Sensitivity analysis of disposal options 15 $0.00 $0.00 $640.16 $1,929.44 $4,093.01
G Develop C pt Plan for R ded Technology
41 Basis of Design Memos, Process Drawings 212 $0.00 $0.00 $9,062.24 $27,313.59
2 Odor Control Basis of Design 40 $0.00 $0.00 $1,705.60 $5,140.68
3 O&M Cost Analysis/Hot Water/Biogas Option 72 $0.00 $0.00 $3,020.64 $9,104.21
4/5 Site Layout Plan, Maint. Facility Layout Plan 196 $0.00 $0.00 $9,048.32 $27,271.64
6 Building System Tech Memos 104 $0.00 $0.00 $5,376.00 $16,203.26 $85,033.38
H_ Prepare Draft PDR and Drawings
1 Prepare Draft PDR Package 210 $0.00 $0.00 $8,526.72 $25,699.53
2 Meet with City to Review 18 $200.00 $0.00 $859.20 $2,789.63
0 $0.00) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $28,489.16
G Finalize POR Package
1 Address City Comments 68 $0.00 $0.00 $2,360.32 $7,114.00
2 Submit to NHDES 4 $0.00 $0.00 $110.00 $331.54
0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,445.54
TOTAL HOURS 1,479 $4,600.00 $5,000.00 $63,134.26 $199,886.60 $199,886.60
Direct Labor $63,134.24
Indirect Labor $109,853.58
Non-Labor $4,600.00
Subcontractor $5,000.00
Sub Markup $0.00
Fixed Fee $17,298.78
Total Fee $199,886.60

City of Nashua

Purchasing Department
Administrative Services Division (603) 589-3330
229 Main Street - Nashua, NH 03060 Fax (603) 594-3233

February 23, 2022
Memo #22-245

TO: Mayor Donchess
Finance Committee

SUBJECT: Digester Coating in the amount not to exceed $339,500 funded from 54210 Construction
Services/Wastewater Fund

Please see attached communications from David Boucher, Superintendent of the Wastewater Department,
dated February 24, 2022 for project specific details related to this purchase. Below please find a summary
of the purchase approval request:

Item: Primary and Secondary Digester Coating at the Wastewater Treatment Facility
Plant

Value: not to exceed $339,500

Vendor: John W Egan Company

Department: 169 Wastewater

Source Fund: 54210 Construction Services/ Wastewater Fund

Ordinance: Pursuant to § 5-78 Major purchases (greater than $25,000) A. All supplies and
contractual services, except as otherwise provided herein, when the estimated
cost thereof shall exceed $25,000 shall be purchased by formal, written contract
from the lowest responsible bidder, after due notice inviting bids.

A competitive bidding IFB1092-010522 for this project was issued on 12/22/2021 and the following bids
were received:

Vendor Location Amount Note
John W. Egan Newton MA, $339,500
RJ Forbes Attleboro, MA $347,040
Soep Painting Corp Lawrence, MA $634,950

We recommend this bid to be awarded to the lowest total cost vendor who met the RFP specified
requirements.

The Board of Public Works (2/24/22 BPW meeting), Division of Public Works: Wastewater, and the
Purchasing Department respectfully request your approval of this contract.

Regards,
Kelly Parkinson

Purchasing Manager

Ce: D Boucher
C O'Connor

To:

From:

Re:

C. Motion:

Discussion:

City of Nashua, Public Works Division

Board of Public Works Meeting Date: February 24, 2022

David L. Boucher, Superintendent
Wastewater Department

Bid Award for Primary and Secondary Digester Coating Project

To approve the award of the Primary and Secondary Digester Coating project to
John W. Egan Company, Inc. from West Newton, MA in the amount of $339,500.
Funding will be through Department: 169 Wastewater; Fund: Wastewater;
Activity: Digester/Gas Tank Coating.

The digester complex consist of a primary digester, secondary digester, gas tank
and energy recovery building, constructed in 1999. Recent upgrades have been
made to the gas tank and energy recovery building. The primary and secondary
digester have the original coating and outer coatings need to be upgraded. The
primary digester has an outer foam coating that needs to be reapplied at certain
location where the existing foam has degraded. That will be followed by a new
exterior coating. The secondary digester has corrosion showing which will be
removed prior to recoating the entire structure. New coatings will also be applied
to the center stairwell between the structures and the bridges from the stairwell to
each structure.

Quotes for this project were obtained from several vendors who specialize in
industrial coatings. The following bids were received:

Company Base Bid Bid Alt A,B,C Total Bid
John. W. Eagan Co. | $301,900 $37,600 $339,500
R.J. Forbes $299,130 $47,910 $347,040
Soep Painting Corp | $605,000 $29,950 $634,950

The award will be given to combined base bid plus bid alternates since the low
bid quote came in significantly less than the estimated and budgeted cost.

Egan Company is the lowest qualified bidder. They have done satisfactory work
previously at the NWTF as a subcontractor on the primary tank upgrades. Several
other references were checked and found that their work to be satisfactory too.