Search

CSO Long-Term Control Plan Update/Integrated Plan

The existing collection system model will be updated using recent sewer data to be provided by
the City, including but not limited to as-built drawings, GIS data, and staff observations. This may
include refining tributary area delineations, updating invert or rim elevations, and/or updating
connectivity/configuration of the sewer system. The model’s parameters will be updated if needed
based on calibration/validation with temporary flow data collected in this task. Rainfall data will
be collected via permanent City gauges (3 total) and used in the calibration process.

Task 4 — Alternatives Analysis

Consultant will identify and evaluate a range of CSO reduction alternatives, including system
optimization, storage, treatment, sewer separation, and source controls. A range of CSO
alternatives will be evaluated between 0% and 100% CSO reductions (on an annual average basis)
using the sewer model. Knee of the curve evaluations (including costs) will be performed for the
alternatives.

Task 5 — Integrated Plan Framework

Consultant will perform Integrated Planning in accordance with the Water Infrastructure
Improvement Act which codified the 2012 EPA framework for integrated planning into the Clean
Water Act.

The overall purpose of the IP will be to assist Nashua in prioritizing and programming capital
improvements based on criteria most important to the municipality and the community. The IP
approach will result in a proposed capital schedule for a specified future planning horizon that
seeks to maximize benefits as early as possible based on the criteria, while also meeting all
requirements within the respective regulatory spectrum, including the Clean Water Act. The IP
will also result in integration and prioritization of capital projects for all applicable infrastructure
elements (wastewater and stormwater, and drinking water), thus eliminating a siloed approach to
capital project implementation.

Consultant will schedule workshops with City personnel to 1) facilitate the selection of preliminary
ranking criteria to be used for the triple bottom-line analysis, 2) develop guidelines and rules to be
used for inclusion and scoring of projects, 3) perform a preliminary importance ranking of selected
criteria, and 3) determine the preliminary list of projects and planning horizon timeframe from
which to base the integrated plan on.

Consultant will prepare a broad list of ranking criteria organized by environmental, social, and
economic categories as a first step. This list will serve as a reference only in the development of
the City’s criteria. An initial workshop will focus on environmental criteria and benefits to the
City, and then follow the same procedures for social and economic criteria. The result of the
workshop will be a working list of criteria to be used for the eventual scoring of capital projects.
This workshop will also include the preliminary discussion and development of project scoring
methods to be employed as the basis of the LTCP/IP. Consultant will describe the different
methods used and describe the preferred method (score-based quantification) in more detail.

An additional workshop will be conducted to determine the list of preliminary capital improvement
projects to be included in the integrated plan. Our understanding is that the list will include
wastewater, stormwater, and drinking water projects. The initial list will include those projects

August 2019 Page 3 of 7

CSO Long-Term Coniro] Plan Update/Integrated Plan

already identified by the City in its existing CIP, including, but not limited to, projects already in
design and construction. In addition to this base list of projects, the team will discuss and identify
other prospective projects that had previously not been considered because of funding constraints
or more pressing regulatory compliance schedules. In cases where discreet projects cannot be
identified, the team will identify recurring programs with funding allocations (such as annual
wastewater improvements) and those will be included as projects in the preliminary list. The intent
will be to identify a portfolio of projects that will benefit the City and satisfy regulatory
requirements.

Deliverables:

e Preliminary list of integrated plan ranking criteria, organized by environmental, social, and
economic categories

e Preliminary project scoring methodology and project inclusion guidelines

® Preliminary list of capital projects and/or recurring programs to be included in the planning
horizon

Task 6 — Financial Capability Analysis

Consultant will conduct an FCA for the purpose of providing the City with a “snapshot
picture” of its financial strength and the residential affordability relative to its current and
future CWA expenditure obligations. The USEPA issued guidelines for performing
FCAs in 1997 which established a two-step process to assess:

° Residential Ratepayer Affordability; and
° Municipal Financial Strength

Residential affordability is determined by the ratio of the cost per household of the CIP
compared to Median Household Income. EPA’s standard metric for measuring a “high
economic impact” is 2 percent of MHI. Municipal financial strength is based on a six
metrics that consider the municipality’s level of indebtedness, socioeconomic conditions,
and taxing capacity. Any additional guidelines specific to the state of New Hampshire
will be considered in these assessments. The results from the two assessments are then
combined to yield a numerical score that indicates the level of financial burden on the
municipality and its ratepayers attributable to current and planned future expenditures.

The FCA output is a high level and static depiction of the municipality’s financial
capacity to implement its CIP under its currently planned schedule. EPA has
acknowledged the deficiencies of the metrics established by the 1997 guidelines and
issued a revised set of guidelines in 2014. The 2014 guidelines allow permittees to
provide supplemental socioeconomic data that could better characterized the local
conditions of the permittee. Examples of socioeconomic data that could be provided
include but are not limited to:

Quintile Household income Data

Poverty Levels

Fixed income population

Demographic Trends

Housing characteristics (renter versus home ownership)
Cost of Living

August 2019 Page 4 of 7

CSO Long-Term Control Plan Update/Integrated Plan

e Required expenditures for other regulatory programs including SDWA
expenditures

These supplementary data should provide a much more detailed and accurate perspective
of the financial impacts of EPA’s CWA mandates on the City’s municipality and its
ratepayers.

To perform the FCA, Consultant will collect socioeconomic data from the American
Community Survey (ACS) and other open source data from the Census Bureau and other
official state and Federal sources as needed. Consultant will also obtain detailed
financial data from the City including its latest CAFR, its bond ratings, and budget
information on the operation of its wastewater utility. Sources of debt by type and annual
payment obligations will also be obtained. These data will then be used to generate the
metrics that comprise the FCA scorecard. Consultant will use the supplemental data to
adjust the scorecard as applicable and provide a detailed evaluation on how the
supplemental data demonstrates the true economic impact of the CWA mandates.

Deliverables:
e Draft and Final FCA

Task 7 — Public Participation

City will conduct public workshops to inform the community of the LTCP Update/Integrated Plan
and encourage residents to participate in the process. Workshops will be conducted at key
milestones during the development of the LTCP/IP. While Consultant will not lead this task,
Consultant will be available for questions/support for the City in their preparation/execution of
these meetings.

Task 8 ~ Permit/Regulatory Requirement Assessment

MS4 Permit needs, and any new NPDES requirements, will be addressed and evaluated such that
the implications of this work will be incorporated into the LTCP/IP.

Task 9 — Project Identification and Ranking

Consultant will coordinate a workshop with the City to rank the final criteria by applying
importance weights. This will be done using an iterative process with City staff. Staff will
individually rank the benefit categories and criteria in order of importance to them based on their
own judgement, then staff will perform a pair-wise comparison, which consists of comparing two
criteria at a time to each other for all pairing scenarios. This will be repeated and reviewed until
there is agreement on the relative importance of all criteria to each other.

The final project list to be included in the LTCP/IP analysis will be developed. This list will
incorporate any projects identified as a result of the above investigation and study-phase tasks, as
well as any other projects defined since development of the initial list. Other project constraints
will be determined, such as “mission critical” projects that must be done and are therefore not to
be subject to optimization scheduling. Project cost estimates and required life cycle durations will

August 2019 Page 5 of 7

CSO Long-Term Control Plan Update/Integrated Plan

be included in the final list. In the event that estimated costs and durations are not defined,
Consultant will provide conceptual estimates and timelines.

With the final scoring methodology complete and all! projects identified, designated City staff will
score each project to determine its raw score. Consultant will provide the City with options for
how to conduct scoring, i.e. whether a City group leader should score themselves, or have a number
of staff conduct scoring and then calculate a representative score. Once raw scores are complete,
the final ranked (incorporating the criteria rankings) scores for each projects can be calculated.
This will represent the final list of ranked projects to be used for development of the
implementation schedule.

Deliverables:

e Final criteria rankings, including an Excel chart, the pair-wise comparison results, and
other associated documentation

e Final project list, including estimated costs and project life cycle duration, to be used for
the LTCP/IP scoring, optimization scheduling, and implementation

e Raw score and weighted scores for all projects

Task 10 — Scenario Development, Optimization Model Runs, and Implementation Plan

Consultant will work with the City to develop different infrastructure implementation scenarios to
be used for the schedule optimization model and implementation plan. Possible scenarios include
1) the status quo — City’s current situation and current planned wastewater CIP based on current
regulatory compliance deadlines, 2) an unconstrained scenario with all projects (including water
treatment and water distribution projects) with no financial constraints including budgetary and
affordability constraints. The Consultant will work with the City to incorporate expenditure
scenarios into the City’s Rate Model to estimate impacts on sewer rates over the planning period.
Affordability of future rates will allow the City to demonstrate to EPA which compliance
schedules are the most affordable to the City while still meeting its regulatory obligations.
Additional scenarios relevant to the City may be discussed and evaluated.

Depending on the scenarios developed, capped annual capital outlays (i.e., funding limits) will be
incorporated into the schedule. For each scenario, Consultant will develop the schedule, a list of
projects and estimated costs to be completed within the planning period, and any projects which
are deferred to years beyond the planning period. Charts showing annual cost by project type over
time and spending limits, if applicable, will be produced as well. In addition, the benefits
distribution charts will be produced for each scenario.

Deliverables:

e Technical memorandum defining the scenarios to be used

e Optimization schedules, lists of projects to be implemented within the planning horizon,
list of deferred projects, annual costs over time charts, and benefits distribution charts for
each scenario

August 2019 Page 6 of 7

CSO Long-Term Control Plan Update/Integrated Plan

Task 11 — Draft and Final Report

A Draft Report (LTCP/IP Update) will be prepared, including all text, graphs, tables, analyses, and
encompassing the body of work contained in all tasks herein. Comments received on the draft
report will be incorporated into a final version.

August 2019 Page 7 of 7

ENGINEERING REPORT PHASE
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
FOR
TREATMENT WORKS

CITYFOWN OF NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE

This AGREEMENT made and entered into at Hillsborough County, New Hampshire, this
day of 2019, by and between City‘Fewn of Nashua, New Hampshire, hereinafter
called the OWNER, and Hazen and Sawyer, hereinafter called the ENGINEER.

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, the OWNER intends to examine the need, alternatives and cost of constructing
Treatment Works including
City of Nashua’s CSO Long-Term Control to be updated_and projects identified to reduce or eliminate
CSO’s under a “Phase 2” CSO program. In addition, currently the City is also is subject to the 2017 New
Hampshire Small MS4 General Permit that allows stormwater drain pipes to discharge to local
waterways. The EPA allows municipalities like Nashua with multiple permits to use an integrated
planning approach to prioritize and schedule wastewater and stormwater projects based_on the financial
capability. This study will develop recommend projects to comply with the EPA’s CSO Policy
requirement for LTCP development, and development_of an Integrated Plan consistent with EPA
guidance and CWA requirements, meeting the goal of improved water quality that is affordable and

practical.

hereinafter called the PROJECT, and

WHEREAS, professional sanitary engineering services are required to prepare an engineering
report, and

WHEREAS, such services are of a distinct professional nature and hence not subject to the
bidding process,

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of these premises and of the mutual covenants herein set
forth, the OWNER hereby retains the ENGINEER to furnish the following engineering services in
connection with the proposed PROJECT; and it is agreed by and between the OWNER and the
ENGINEER as follows:

Hazen CSO Long Term Control Plan Update Contract.docx 02/08/06

i.

Ii.

Services to be performed by the ENGINEER

A. The ENGINEER agrees to produce a complete
and definitive Engineering Report to meet current
division requirements and to perform any and all
engineering incidental thereto. The detailed scope of
the work is as outlined in the attached Exhibit A
“Scope_of Work, CSO Long Term Control Plan

Update/ Integrated Plan”.

C. Furnish TBD copies of the Engineering
Report to the OWNER. Additional copies to be avail-
able at cost.

E. Provide the OWNER with one copy of design
calculations, work sheets, field notes, estimates and
other data generated in preparing the Engineering Re-
port in a form satisfactory to the OWNER.

The OWNER'S Responsibilities

A. Assist the ENGINEER by placing at his dis-
posal all available information pertinent to the PRO-
JECT, including previous reports and other data rela-
tive to the reports.

B. Make provisions for the ENGINEER to enter
upon public and private lands, municipal facilities and
industrial establishments as required to perform work
under this AGREEMENT.

Time of Completion

A. The ENGINEER agrees that he will submit to e
OWNER a draft report no later than TBD and that a
final report will be submitted within TBD_ days
following approval of the draft report by OWNER.

B. It is agreed by the parties to this contract that
failure by the ENGINEER to complete the work
within the time stipulated under IIT, A, above may be
considered sufficient basis for the debarment of the

Hazen CSO Long Term Control Plan Update Contract.docx

IV.

Vv.

ENGINEER from the DIVISION'S Roster of Preq-
ualified Engineers as provided for under New Hamp-
shire Code of Administrative Rules Env-Wq 603.08,
or the Assessment of liquidated damages as provided
for under RSA 485-A: 4, XT.

Compensation to be Paid the ENGINEER
A. Method of Payment - Amount of Fee

1. Payment to the ENGINEER, for services
rendered, shall be according to the following
schedule:

Monthly billing based on hours and rates
by labor category with mark-up and
incidental expenses in accordance with
the attached fee schedule.

2. The OWNER agrees to pay and the
ENGINEER agrees to accept for all services
under this AGREEMENT, a fee not to exceed

FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-SEVEN THOUSAND
SEVEN HUNDRED SIXTY DOLLARS

($___487.760.00 )s

and the ENGINEER agrees that the work pro-
posed is sufficient to satisfactorily complete the
study and that the monies to be paid are ade-
quate. The attached fee schedule with labor
category, hours, hourly rate, markup, incidental
expenses, and fees for special services, shall be
the basis for billing for engineering services.

a. The ENGINEER agrees that prior
to submitting the report to the DIVISION
for formal approval he shall make revi-
sions in the report as recommended by
the DIVISION and agreed to by the
ENGINEER without additional com-
pensation. After formal approval if it be-
comes necessary to update the report for
reasons beyond the contro! of the ENGI-
NEER, payment for such revision or revi-
sions shall be made to

the ENGINEER on a basis to be ne-
gotiated with the DIVISION.

Additional Covenants

A. The ENGINEER agrees to assign in active
charge of this PROJECT for the life of the con-
tract a Project Engineer who is a permanent
employee of the ENGINEER and who a
“qualified sanitary engineer” is as defined under
the DIVISION'S “Rules and Regulations for the
Prequalification of Consulting Engineers.” The

02/08/06

B. Project Engineer shall be*

Charles Wilson

Hazen and Sawyer

* See appended resume describing the candidate's qualifica-
tions for the assignment.

Any proposed change in identity of the Project
Engineer on the PROJECT shall first be approved by
the DIVISION before transfer of responsibility is
made. Failure of the ENGINEER to abide by the
above covenant is agreed to be sufficient basis for de-
barment of the ENGINEER from the DIVISION'S
Roster of Prequalified Consulting Engineers as pro-
vided for under New Hampshire Code of Administra~
tive Rules Env-Wq 603.08.

B. The ENGINEER agrees to be solely responsible
for all bills or claims for payment for services
rendered by others and for all services and materials
employed in his work, and to indemnify and save
harmless the OWNER, and all of the OWNER'S
officers, agents and employees against all suits,
claims or liability of every name and nature arising
out of or in consequence of the negligent acts or fail-
ures to act of the ENGINEER or others employed by
him in the performance of the work covered by this
AGREEMENT.

C. The ENGINEER further agrees to procure and
maintain at his expense such workmen's compensa-

IN WITNESS WHEREOPF, the parties hereto have affixed

tion insurance as is required by the statutes and public
liability insurance in amounts adequate to provide
reasonable protection from claims for bodily injury,
death or property damage which may result from his
performance and the performance of his employees
under this AGREEMENT.

D. All documents, including original drawings, de-
sign calculations, work sheets, field notes, estimates,
and other data shall remain the property of the OWN-
ER and shall be transmitted to the OWNER in clean
and orderly condition on demand; however, these may
be left in the possession of the ENGINEER at the
OWNER'S discretion.

E. The ENGINEER shall not sublet, assign or
transfer any part of the ENGINEER'S services or
obligations under this AGREEMENT without the
prior approval and written consent of the OWNER
and the DIVISION, and the contract shal! be binding
upon and inure to the benefit of the parties, their
successors and assigns.

OWNER’S Terms and Conditions
Exhibit B City of Nashua Professional Services -
General Terms and Conditions are hereby

incorporated by reference as if fully set forth
herein.

their hand and seals at Hillsborough County, New Hampshire, the day, month, and year first above written.

ENGINEER: APPROVED: **
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
B Water Division
ry
(Authorized Representative*) By:
Date: (Authorized Representative)
Date:
OWNER:
* Signatures should be supported by appropriate document.
ee ft is agreed that as an act in furtherance of its statutory authority
to approve engineering agreements for treatment works, the
By: DIVISION's approval does not impose any contractual obligation

(Authorized Representative*)

Date:

Hazen CSO Long Term Control Plan Update Contract.docx

or liability on the State of New Hampshire, the Department of
Environmental Services or the Division.

02/08/06

CERTIFICATION OF VOTE

At a meeting of the Partners/Directors of Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. held on LY i Les eer/, &
* a

at which all the Partners/Directors were present, except n/a

it was
VOTES: That all contracts may be signed by any one of the following:

Officers of the Firm, including Chairman of the Board, the President and all Vice Presidents.

A true copy
Attest: Richard E. Peters

Place of Business: 498 Seventh Avenue. 11" Floor, New York, NY 10018

Date: sss ¥Y/ 9/09

[hereby certify that [ am the Clerk/Secretary of Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. and that the above vote

has not been amended or rescinded and remains in full force and effect as of this

Date: “y by / 7

¥ . e
Glerk/Secretary

COST OR PRICE SUMMARY FORMAT FOR SUBAGREEMENTS UNDER NH SAG & SRF Form Approved.
DES 02/06
PART I- GENERAL

1. GRANTEE / LOANEE 2. GRANT/LOAN NO.
CITY OF NASHUA, NH

3. NAME OF CONTRACTOR OR SUBCONTRACTOR 4. DATE OF PROPOSAL
HAZEN & SAWYER
5, ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR OR SUBCONTRACTOR (Include ZIP) 6. TYPE OF SERVICE TO BE FURNISHED
1750 ELM STREET, SUITE 402, MANCHES NH 03101 Professional Engineering Services
PART Il - COST SUMMARY

HOURLY ESTIMATED
7. DIRECT LABOR labor HOURS RATE COST TOTALS

ject Director 100 $77.23 $7,723
Project 422 $65.09 $27,468
Project Engineer 1110 $33.03 $36,663
Assistant Engi 336 $30.00 $10,080
IP Lead 186 $87.94 $16,357
R Lead 72 $62.74 $4,517
FCA Lead 194 $81.63 $15,836
Modeling Lead . 410 $55.68 $22,829
Cost Estimator 56 $60.10 $3,366

DIRECT LABOR TOTAL:

ESTIMATED
8. INDIRECT COSTS ify indirect cost ls X BASE= COST

$144,839
INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL: $257,234

9. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
a. TRAVEL ESTIMATED
COST
(1) TRANSPORTATION $3,970
2) PER DIEM
TRAVEL COSTS TOTAL:

b. EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS, SUPPLIES ESTIMATED
COST

7 Flow Meters , 12 Weeks $41,510

EQUIPMENT SUBTOTAL:

SUBCONTRACTS ESTIMATED
COST

SUBCONTRACTS SUBTOTAL:

d. OTHER (Specify categories) ESTIMATED
COST

OTHER SUBTOTAL:
e. OTHER DIRECT COSTS TOTAL: $45,480
10. TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $447
11. PROFIT $40
12. TOTAL PRICE $487,760

Page | of 3