Search

ENGINEERING DESIGN PHASE CONTRACT Page 3 of 5
For Professional Services for Treatment Works

B.

It is agreed by the parties to this contract that failure by the ENGINEER to complete the work within the time
stipulated under Ill, A, above may be considered sufficient basis for the debarment of the ENGINEER from the
DIVISION'S Roster of Prequalified Engineers as provided for under New Hampshire Code of Administrative Rules Env-
Wq 603.08, or the Assessment of liquidated damages as provided for under RSA 485A: 4, XII.X

COMPENSATION TO BE PAID THE ENGINEER

Method of Payments Amounts of Fees

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.

The OWNER agrees to pay and the ENGINEER agrees to accept for all services under this AGREEMENT, a fee not
to exceed Thirty-Nine Thousand Five Hundred and 00/100 Dollars ($39,500).

If separate documents are required for additional construction contracts on this PROJECT, an additional fee as
approved by the DIVISION shall be paid to the ENGINEER.

Prior to formal approval of contract documents by the DIVISION, the ENGINEER shall make such revisions in
them as recommended by the DIVISION and agreed to by the ENGINEER without additional compensation. After
formal approval, if it becomes necessary to revise the contract documents for reasons beyond the control of the
ENGINEER, payment for such revision or revisions shall be made to the ENGINEER subject to approval by the
DIVISION.

Limits of All Payments

1.

The ENGINEER hereby assures the OWNER and agrees that the following fee for his services (exclusive of
surveys, borings, and certain special services which follow) in connection with the preparation of final plans,
specifications, and contract documents and other work as generally described under I(A) is adequate to
complete the assignment and shall not exceed Thirty-Nine Thousand Five Hundred and 00/100 Dollars

($39,500)

It is also agreed that payment to the ENGINEER for services in relation to engineering surveys, including layout
and logging of borings, probings or seismic surveys, together with plats and project related special services shall
be at actual cost. Actual cost shall include compensation to the ENGINEER for his work performed on these
services. The ENGINEER further agrees that the work proposed under this item is enough to satisfactorily
complete the contract documents and that the moneys to be paid under this item are adequate for the work
proposed and shall not exceed Not Applicable.

It is again agreed that payment to the ENGINEER for services in relation to subsurface exploration, including
borings, probings or seismic surveys, shall be at actual cost as defined in IV (B) 2. The ENGINEER further agrees
that the work proposed under this item is enough to satisfactorily complete the contract documents and that
the moneys to be paid under this item are adequate for the work proposed and shall not exceed Not Applicable.

It is also agreed that payment to the ENGINEER for services in relation to cadastral surveys and other work
associated with the acquisition of lands, easements, and rights-of-way essential to the construction of the
PROJECT shall be at actual cost as defined in IV (B) 2. The ENGINEER further agrees that the work proposed
under this item is enough to provide adequate sites, easements, and rights-of-way to permit the unencumbered
construction, operation, and maintenance of the completed project without interference in any way. The
ENGINEER also assures the OWNER that the moneys to be paid under this item are adequate for the work
proposed and shall not exceed Not Applicable.

Rev.2020-09

ENGINEERING DESIGN PHASE CONTRACT Page 4 of 5
For Professional Services for Treatment Works

V.
A.

ADDITIONAL COVENANTS

The ENGINEER agrees to provide in active charge of this PROJECT for the life of the contract a Project Engineer who
is a permanent employee of the ENGINEER and who is a “qualified sanitary engineer” as defined under the
DIVISION'S “Rules and Regulations for the Prequalification of Consulting Engineers.” The Project Engineer shall be’

Jason Jancaitis, Woodard and Curran, 40 Shattuck Road - Suite 110, Andover, Massachusetts 01810

(name and address)

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 may be
considered basis for debarment of the ENGINEER from the DIVISION'S Roster of Prequalified Consulting Engineers as
provided for under New Hampshire Code of Administrative Rules Env-Wq 603.08.

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 failures to act of the ENGINEER or others employed by him in the
performance of the work covered by this AGREEMENT.

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

All documents, including original drawings, design calculations, work sheets, field notes, estimates, and other data
shall remain the property of the OWNER, 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.

The ENGINEER shall not sublet, assign or transfer any part of the ENGINEER's services or obligations (except surveys
and borings and other special services) under this AGREEMENT without the prior approval and written consent of
the OWNER.

It is further agreed that the ENGINEER will assist the OWNER or his authorized agent in providing the DIVISION with
clear documentation certifying that the necessary easements, options or outright purchases of land have been
secured to provide for location of treatment works and other associated structures and equipment as shown on the
contract plans or described in the specifications. Similar documentation will be submitted on approvals from the
State Department of Transportation and/or other state agencies regarding location of treatment works within
rights-of-way and other lands under their jurisdiction.

* Resume clearly describing the candidate’s qualifications for the assignment is appended for convenience of reference.

Rev.2020-09

ENGINEERING DESIGN PHASE CONTRACT Page 5 of 5
For Professional Services for Treatment Works

Vi. OWNER’S Terms and Conditions

Exhibit B - City of Nashua Professional Services General Terms and Conditions is hereby incorporated by reference as if fully
set forth herein.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have affixed their hand and seals at County, New
Hampshire, the day, month, and year first above written.

ENGINEER:
Woodard and|Curran
By: . Dat

(Authorized Representative’)

°: 01/26/2021

OWNER:
City of Nashua, New Hampshire
By: Date:

(Authorized Representative’)

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES: Water Division
By: Date:

(Authorized Representative’)

2 Signatures should be supported by appropriate document.

Rev.2020-09

_
a

A CERTIFICATION OF CORPORATE AUTHORITY

WOODARD & CURRAN, INC.

WOODARD
S&.CURRAN

The undersigned, Rebecca Talbert, Secretary of Woodard & Curran, Inc. (the “Company”), HEREBY
CERTIFIES as follows:

She is the duly elected Secretary of the Company, a Maine corporation.

At a meeting of the Board of Directors of the Company on November 12, 2020, the following resolution was
adopted:

RESOLVED: That any Officer of this corporation, acting singly, be and hereby is authorized at any time and
from time to time, to enter into written contracts, including for the provision of services by the Company to
clients; subcontracts or purchase orders issued by the Company; confidentiality agreements; teaming
agreements; letters of intent; memoranda of understanding; construction contracts; or any other document or
agreement which creates an obligation, commitment or is binding on the Company, only as follows:

1. Senior Principals are authorized up to the amount of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000), or
as delegated.

2. Vice Presidents are authorized up to the amount of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000), or
as delegated.

3. Senior Vice Presidents are authorized up to the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000), or as
delegated.

4. Executive Vice Presidents are authorized up to the amount of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000), or as
delegated.

5. The Chief Executive Officer is authorized up to the amount of Fifteen Million Dollars ($15,000,000).

6. The Company’s Board of Directors must authorize contracts over the amount of Fifteen Million Dollars
($15,000,000).

The dollar thresholds above are established for the contract value and applies to the annual value of a multi-
year agreement.

RESOLVED: That the Chief Executive Officer is authorized at any time to execute surety bonds in connection
with the conduct of the Company’s business, whether alone, or in joint venture with others not named herein.
Furthermore, that the Chief Executive Officer is also authorized at any time prior or subsequent to the
execution of any such bonds, to execute any and all indemnity agreements, subordination agreements or any
other associated agreements relating to such bonds or to any collateral that may have been or may be
required to be deposited with the surety in connection with said bonds. The Chief Executive Officer's signing
authority with respect to surety bonds is limited to the current levels of bonding as set forth in the Company’s
approved bonding agreement. Bonds above this approved amount must be authorized by the Board of
Directors.

According to the records of the Company in my possession as of this date, the above is a true and correct

copy of said resolution, said resolution has not been amended or repealed, and is in full force and effect. A
list of the current Officers will be maintained in a schedule on file with the Secretary.

DATED: November 13, 2020 (Cel2tocn Cobbaet

Rebecca Talbert, Secretary

NHDES-W-09-024

Cost or Price Summary Format for Sub-agreements Under NH SAG and SRF

Part I: General

Grantee/Loanee Name: City of Nashua, New Hampshire

Grant/Loan #: CS-330158-32

Contractor/Subcontractor Name: Woodard and Curran

Proposal Date: January 15, 2021

Contractor/Subcontractor Address:

40 Shattuck Road - Suite 110
Street name and number

Andover
City/Town

MA 01810
State ZIP

Services Furnished:
Professional Design Engineering

Part Il: Cost Summary

Direct Labor (Specify labor categories) Hours Hourly Estimated Totals
Rate (Est.) Cost
Principle in Charge 6 $75.00 $450
Project Manager 22 $62.00 $1,364
Project Engineer A8 548.00 $2,304
Specifications Review 30 540.00 $1,200
Electrical Engineer 40 $57.00 $2,280
Structural Engineer 40 $49.37 $1,975
CADD Technician 30 $38.00 $1,140
Admin 10 $26.00 $260
Direct Labor Total $10,973
Indirect Costs (Specify indirect cost pools.) Rate X Base = Est. Cost
$10,973 1.85 $20,300
Indirect Costs Total $20,300
Other Direct Costs Est. Cost
Travel $100
Transportation
Per Diem
Travel Costs Total $100
Equipment Materials, Supplies (Specify categories.) Qty. Cost Est. Cost
Equipment Subtotal
Subcontracts Est. Cost
$5,000
Subcontractors Subtotal $5,000
Other (Specify categories.) Est. Cost
Other Subtotal $5,000
Other Direct Costs Total $5,100
Total Estimated Cost $36,373
Profit $3,127
Total Price $39,500
2020-11 **Profit not permitted by City of Nashua on all Other Direct Costs, including subcontractors

Board of Aldermen Page 18
July 12, 2016

Alderman Dowd
Since there seems to be some division, roll call.
Alderman Schoneman

The motion to postpone is largely based on the comment from the fire department that said it is not
necessary to do it tonight.

Yea: Alderman Deane, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Schoneman, 6
Alderman McGuinness, Alderman LeBrun, Alderman McCarthy

Nay: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron, 8
Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman Moriarty,
Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez

MOTION FAILED

President McCarthy

The motion is for final passage of R-16-043.
MOTION CARRIED
Resolution R-16-043 declared duly adopted.

R-16-046
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman June M. Caron
RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF AN ADDITIONAL $39,862 FROM
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION INTO GRANT
ACTIVITY “TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM (TAP) GRANT” AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER OF MATCHING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,972.40
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN MELIZZI-GOLJA FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-046
ON THE QUESTION
Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

If we were to delay this to the August meeting, is there a problem with that?

Mayor Donchess

Of course | was thinking about that as you were discussing the last one. I’m not sure if there’s a time
problem. | can’t say that there is, but | didn’t ask that question specifically. The project is really a
fantastic project which will link the rail trail and improve Everett Street and break through the fence along
the canal for the first time in decades and create a bridge crossing into Mine Falls Park. It will enable
another entrance and will make the park more accessible to people in the tree streets and surrounding
neighborhoods. Is it time sensitivity? | suspect not, but I’m not sure of that. | expect not. If it was
delayed and it was time sensitive, | would call a special meeting to address it because it is such an

Board of Aldermen — 9/12/17 Page 20

and spending by audiences was $13 million. | heard people complain that it would cost over $1 million a year
in carrying the bond. Greater Concord had $13 million. When you look at Portsmouth who does have the
largest economic impact because they have really worked at bringing tourists to their city, they have $58
million in economic impact and of that $58 million, $36.5 million was spending by audiences. The rest was of
course what the organizations themselves spent and the economy. It’s not an insignificant thing that will bring
to this city in revenue that will affect not only the overall economic impact to the city but to all the other places
that audiences go before and after and bring more people into finding out why Nashua really is New
Hampshire’s gateway to the arts. | thank you for your time and | urge you all to support this proposal. Thank
you.

Michael Reike, 35 Lock Street

Hi my name is Michael Reike. I’m a property owner at 35 Lock Street. Unfortunately | didn’t grow up in
Nashua. | actually grew up in a town about 40 miles west of here, 30 miles south of Keene. I’m speaking here
in favor of the arts proposal because | have experience in two cities. One is a city that | went to high school in.
The town | grew up in was too small so they shipped us to a town on Millers River which travels west unlike the
Nashua River is traveling east but in many ways it was very similar. It was a mill town. We made tools but we
didn’t invest in anything that would draw people there. Today if you travel down the main street of the town |
went to high school in, you’d see main street dotted every other store front by closed businesses. Nobody
goes there. The kids that grew up and high school there they move away and they never come back.

The other city | had a chance to visit is Belfast, Maine. Belfast, Maine is doing quite well today. Its property
values in Belfast are twice what they are in other similar communities in Maine. They have a vibrant farmer's
market. They have a great arts festival in Belfast. You might think well maybe they were just born with a silver
spoon in their mouth but that’s actually far from the case. Forty years ago, Belfast, Maine, in Waldo County
was actually the poorest county in all of the United States. They made shoes there. They processed chickens.
Like many New England towns what they did with the refuge it was just tossed in the water. It was not a place
where people wanted to visit but something changed. There’s a lot of people that made that happen but one
thing in particular that | think speaks out is that 15 years ago they were faced with a decision. You see back in
1926, they built US1 over the harbor from West Belfast to East Belfast. Then about 20 years ago they built a
new bridge and they were faced with the question what do we do with the old bridge. There were many folks in
town, good New Englanders just like | am who said there are costs associated with any bridge. You just don’t
have a bridge. You have to repair it. You have to maintain it. What we should do is we should just demolish
the bridge. There is the serious number of people in town that said let’s just demolish it and then we won't
have to worry about that as an expense. But there were other people forward thinking who said you know
what this could be an anchor for our community. They actually passed the money and several million dollars to
repair and maintain the bridge which is now the anchor of a footpath in Belfast that just doesn’t link West
Belfast to East Belfast but the entire river and the harbor walk. So that has become one of the main things that
has drawn people and made Belfast what it is today a place that’s vibrant, a place that has restaurants
reviewed on the front page of the New York Times. Let this be our bridge to the future of Nashua. Let this be
the place that brings people from Boston, from New York, from other places that say when we think about New
England we want to go to Nashua because that’s a place we want to be. Thank you.

Billy Fokas, 185 Main Street

l’ve been a member of this community and lived and worked in downtown Nashua for the past 57 years. | like
others before me did not plan on speaking this evening but after what I’ve been hearing, | just felt compelled to
get up and say a few words. I’m going to make it short and sweet. My family has been a part of downtown
since 1936. We've lived and reside and done business in Nashua all of our lives. We've dedicated our lives to
the success of this great city. | personally, like my cousin Philip said, have seen many businesses come and
go in the past 57 years in downtown Nashua. | think with the performing arts center that this is very important
to our entire city to look forward to something and to grow and to get people to stay rather than leave our great
community. | just wish and urge everybody to think the long-term greatness of our city to consider this and
let’s move forward for once. Thank you very much.

Part III Price Summary

Competitors Catalog Listings, In-house Estimates, Prior Quotes
(Indicate basis for price comparison)

Market
Price(s)

Proposed
Price

Total

Part IV Direct Labor by Category

14. Insert the appropriate work category in the table below. Work categories would include but not be limited to those
categories shown in the Contract Documents such as design, survey, subsurface, cadastral, O&M Manual, administration,
inspection, record drawings, start-up, special services etc.

Work Update Total Rate Cost
i Hours
Category Design Bidding
Documents/ Services
NHDES
Coordination
Principle in A 2 6 $75.00 | $450
Charge
Project 16 6 22 | $62.00 | $1,364
Manager
Project
rojec 40 8 4g | $48.00 | $2,304
Engineer
Specificati
peamicanions 30 30 | $40.00 | $1,200
Review
Electrical
. 40 40 $57.00 | $2,280
Engineer
Structural AO 40 $49.37 | $1,975
Engineer
CADD 30 30 $38.00 | $1,140
Technician
Admin 10 10 $26.00 $260
TOTALS 210 16 226
Total Direct Labor Costs: | $10,973

Rev.2020-09

COMMITMENT & INTEGRITY 40 Shattuck Road | Suite 110 T 866.702.6371

DRIVE RESULTS Andover, Massachusetts 01810 T 978.557.8150
www.woodardcurran.com F 978.557.7948
EXHIBIT A
A PHASE 2 BIDDING SERVICES
a= PUMP STATIONS UPGRADE PROJECT
NASHUA, NH
a A

WOODARD
& CURRAN BACKGROUND

The City of Nashua has thirteen pump stations of different sizes, types and ages. Like many other cities
Nashua decided to review and upgrade all pump stations for reasons including but not limited to: ensure
proper and reliable operation to limit sanitary sewer overflows, address failing force mains, meet current
safety standards, improve ease of maintenance and accessibility for staff at each station, and take
advantage of new technology for the betterment of the community. In many stations, the pumping and
controls equipment is beyond its expected life. After an RFQ process and interviews, Woodard & Curran
was selected to complete this project to review and upgrade the City’s pump stations.

PREVIOUSLY COMPLETED WORK

The first investigation phase of the project was approved by the Board of Public Works in October 2015
and a multiday investigation took place with Woodard & Curran engineers and plant management and
staff in November. The summary report for this investigation was delivered in January 2016 and
presented to city management and wastewater treatment plant staff on March 9, 2016.

The preliminary design phase of the project was approved by the Board of Public Works in July 2016
and a Design Basis Report (DBR) was delivered to the City and presented to city management and
wastewater treatment plant staff in January 2017. The DBR presented the City with recommended
upgrade options and estimates of probable construction cost for each station based on preliminary
engineering analysis of layout, mechanics, hydraulics and constructability.

The City and Woodard & Curran entered into an agreement for final design services in June 2017. As
part of this scope of work, detailed plans and specifications were prepared for the pump station upgrades.
These documents were reviewed and approved by New Hampshire Department of Environmental
Services (NHDES). The project was advertised for bidders in late 2018 and bids were received on
December 4, 2018. The bids received were in excess of the City’s budget allocation for this work, so the
City wishes to re-bid the project with a reduction in scope in a staged approach. This will require the
previously prepared plans and specifications to be updated for the revised project. The project will need
to be re-submitted to NHDES for review, followed by a new bid period.

The City of Nashua undertook a similar approach for Phase 1 of the re-bidding scope. This project was
re-bid in early 2019 and completed in 2020.

BIDDING SERVICES - DETAILED SCOPE OF SERVICES

The scope of work generally consists of two phases:
1. Update of Design Documents; and
2. Bidding Services

Update of Design Documents

As directed by the City, the design documents will be updated to remove the pump station work which is
no longer part of the project. This will include removing unused drawings and specification sections and
updating the Table of Contents and Index of Drawings to reflect the changes. Detail call-outs and cross-

_
a. =<,
WOODARD
GCURRAN

references in the specifications will be reviewed and items which are no longer applicable to the project
will be removed, struck out or otherwise noted to be “not in contract’. An updated “front end” will be
prepared, to include an updated bid form, bid dates, measurement and payment, and summary of work
to reflect the revised project.

The updated “Phase 2” bid package will include the previously designed work at the following stations:
Northgate, Blackstone, Santerre, Spalding, Harris Preserve, Maurice, and Bridge Street. Designers will
review and update the contract documents as needed for the following disciplines:

Civil

Architectural

Structural

Mechanical

HVAC

Plumbing

Electrical

Instrumentation & Controls

As part of the updates to the design documents, we will verify that the existing designs meet current
building code. New Hampshire changed the version of the International Building Code used statewide in
2019. The 2018 design for the buildings at Northgate, Blackstone & Santerre pump stations will be
reviewed against the current code for wind load and other electrical and structural code requirements to
verify compliance.

Design of the force main replacement at Northgate will be based on geotechnical data obtained during
the previous design work. Brierly Associates will review the previous design and incorporate any updates
to the design as necessary.

The design of Marshall Street Pump Station will be revised to abandon the pump station and replace it
with a new PVC gravity sewer. These modifications are dependent on the results of a hydraulic model
and flow monitoring being performed by others. This work will be included as a bid alternate to the
contract.

At Bridge Street CSO station, the incoming service will be modified per the City’s comments received in
December 2020, as well as a manual transfer switch and portable generator connection. Design of a
new switchgear, or permanently installed generator/automatic transfer switch is not included in the
design efforts at this time. The City may wish to upgrade these components of the facility when the
incoming electrical service is upgraded.

After the revised Contract documents have been prepared, the documents will be submitted to NHDES
for review and approval.

Bidding Services

Bidding service assistance will be provided to the City on an “as-needed” basis and as directed by the
City. This assistance could take the form of response to bidder questions or attendance at a pre-bid
meeting. The City of Nashua will be responsible for all advertising for the project, opening of bids, and
bid evaluation.

Nashua Pump Station 2 Woodard & Curran
2021 re-bid agreement January 15, 2021