1-Attachment 12 - Method of Approach.pdf

Attachment 12 - Method of Approach Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 1

Attachment 12 Garver’s experience has led to a proven approach to serving small system’s water needs

QUESTION 1

How would your approach for a project differ working for a very small community or utility as opposed to a medium or large city or utility?

Regardless of its size, a public water system is required to deliver water to its customers that meets or exceeds the minimum required standards. Additionally, water systems strive to deliver water that is aesthetically pleasing to both taste and smell. The difference between the large systems, small systems, or very small systems often comes to the availability of resources and the level of skills among the water system operators and managers.

We recognize the importance of working closely with the operators and managers every step of the process to understand and consider appropriate treatment solutions needed for their system. Consequently, our approach for smaller systems is to dedicate more time educating staff members about quality and quantity requirements along with the treatment process limitations, capital costs, and operational costs.

This includes operations training and workshops, providing operations and maintenance manuals for their systems, and providing assistance in the startup and commissioning phases. This helps bring the system operators and the engineers onto the same page, facilitating the subsequent steps of evaluation and selection of alternatives as well as completing design of the selected alternative. Smaller systems also often struggle with financial resources to build and maintain various components of their water systems. Therefore, we prioritize offering assistance to these systems to obtain State and Federal grants and loans.

Communication is also key when it comes to small systems. Educating these communities of the issue and solution is important to get their input and answer any concerns.

Design simplicity would also be considered. Often small systems will have remote operators that may only visit the system once a month. It is important to have a robust design that an on-site person can troubleshoot with the oversite of an operator.

QUESTION 2

What is your process when designing and permitting a drinking water treatment system?

Garver begins each project with scope and fee development along with a site visit to understand the need of the client as well as the area for treatment installation. We will obtain water parameters to best evaluate the different types of treatment technology available. We will recommend the best treatment technology available after considering, cost, availability, complexity, and waste disposal.

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 2

After working with the client to select the treatment, Garver will conduct a pre-application meeting with ADEQ or delegated review authority to confirm if the treatment option can be permitted. We will then work with our design center to draft construction drawings and develop a basis of design report. Workshops will be conducted with the water system to ensure all requirements are met.

After 100 percent design, we will submit all the required permits and work with the permitting agencies to ensure that all the required documents are correct.

How would you approach the design & permitting of a treatment system for a small public water system?

This will be achieved through one or more collaborative workshops involving key stakeholders from the owner side as well as Garver’s key design team members. At Garver, substantial portions of engineering and design work is performed at centralized design centers where every needed design discipline are housed in the same facility, giving efficiency to the design process. While a majority of the actual design work is performed at the design centers, engineers in the Arizona office will be responsible for leading the design effort as well as liaising with the owner. Seeing that the owner and the design engineer are communicating effectively and efficiently.

Describe the steps that you take to select the best treatment technology.

1. Conduct water parameter testing to determine the concentration of the targeted contaminant, potential competing contaminants, and limiting factors.

being utilized.

disadvantages, cost, operation and maintenance description, waste disposal, etc.

6. Conduct a workshop with the client and present each treatment technology and provide

Garver’s recommendation.

7. Determine treatment sizing, operational and maintenance requirements, capital and O&M cost, and training requirements.

QUESTION 3

How will you ensure your proposed solution to the assigned task is practical, cost-effective, and sustainable for the small water system?

At Garver, we highly value the protection of public health and consider it to be an unalienable goal for water treatment. As such, relying on tried-and-true treatment processes is the first priority in selecting treatment processes; however, it is important to recognize innovations around proven technologies to achieve cost and operational efficiency. Garver will work collaboratively with the owner of the small system to understand their financial and physical limitations and identify the best option for treatment. For small systems, we advocate for treatment processes that require fewer operator interventions and generally less complicated operation. To address this small

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 3 system operational limitation, Garver will focus on preferentially selecting less operator-intensive treatment processes.

Our Arizona team subject matter experts will lead the project’s technical direction. Dr. Zaid Chowdhury is our Arizona team’s lead expert on treatment technologies and can perform evaluations and studies on the treatment processes that will best suit each small water system’s needs. The treatment system selected will then go through our design team, where they will further evaluate the practicality and footprint of the system to be implemented for the small water system. Garver ensures that every step of the design will be presented to the owner and operators of the small system to receive their input and work together to ensure the appropriate treatment process is selected and implemented. In addition to design, Garver will ensure that local vendors will be considered to ensure faster service and availability of material.

QUESTION 4

When designing a treatment system that modifies water chemistry, how do you ensure this treatment won’t cause or exacerbate other water quality problems?

At Garver, we consider water treatment plants and their distribution systems as an integral system. The preservation of water quality in the distribution system is of utmost importance, and it starts inside the water treatment plant. Therefore, we will focus on the impact of any treatment changes to the finished water, particularly with respect to chemical stability (i.e. corrosion and scaling control) and maintenance of disinfectant residuals in the distribution system.

We have conducted dozens of these assessments in the last five years as part of water quality studies to help water utilities prepare for compliance with the Lead and Copper Rule Improvements, water system master plans, and water treatment plant evaluations and designs.

We will follow our proven process, which starts with reviewing historical water quality to develop a baseline understanding of conditions within the distribution system. During these evaluations, we review historical lead and copper data from tap sampling and historical water quality complaints.

We assess pH, alkalinity, nuisance metals, chloride to sulfate mass ratios, and calcium carbonate stability indices because they impact the formation of scales that could be destabilized by water quality changes. We also look at historical disinfectant residual levels, because areas with lower residuals can have microbial growth that impacts the corrosivity of the water. If needed, we can assist with scale analyses.

Next, we will review the finished water quality expected following implementation of treatment changes. We use water treatment and water quality models, such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) Water Treatment Plant Model to assess treatment changes, the American Water Works Association (AWWA ) Rothberg, Tamburini, and Winsor (RTW) model to calculate simple calcium carbonate stability indices, and the USEPA lead solubility model as starting point to assess the impact of the new treatment process on finished water stability. We will strengthen our analyses with any bench-scale or pilot-scale data available.

Based on the results, we will identify gaps in treatment that could produce or exacerbate water quality problems.

After treatment gaps are identified, we will evaluate techniques such as adjustments to treatment, disinfectant residual or pH adjustment, or addition of a corrosion inhibitor to address

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 4 the issue. We start with water quality modeling, and we will also review case studies of these techniques applied to similar waters and systems with similar water age and distribution system materials. We will then identify the most suitable techniques for implementation, or if needed, further testing.

We can design and conduct bench-top, pilot-scale, or full-scale tests to optimize treatment to avoid unintended consequences of treatment changes. For example, we recently piloted a novel treatment train for a water system planning to add a second water supply and treatment plant to feed into their existing distribution system. As part of the pilot, we conducted bench-top immersion (also called coupon or fill-and-dump) studies to assess the corrosivity of the new water relative to the existing water, and we conducted parallel simulated distribution system testing to assess disinfectant residual stability and disinfection byproduct formation. This study helped set finished water pH targets for both the new and existing water treatment plants.

QUESTION 5

How will you ensure that project(s) stays on schedule and is(are) completed on-time as per the task order offer/award?

We understand how critical schedule and budget are to the projects that will come from this contract. As such, we’re committed to delivering these projects on time and within budget.

We successfully deliver projects through careful coordination and management of staff hours, resource allocation, budget, and project schedule. To manage these factors, we use customized enterprise resource planning (ERP) software and project controls that we’ve developed over the years. ERP software provides a central repository of data that enables staff to easily track project progress, allocate resources, and manage budgets.

Garver’s project controls measure project performance and keep projects within budget. We complete a critical path analysis at project kickoff and update it monthly, which identifies the tasks that are critical to the project’s completion and what’s necessary to complete them on time. Additionally, throughout design, we hold weekly meetings with internal and external team members to review the project schedule that includes all phases of the project.

If a project is not on schedule, describe what steps will be taken to get the project back on track.

Garver understands the need for flexibility and adaptability working under an on-call agreement.

Garver will implement agile project management methodologies that consider the ever-changing environment of retrofit utility projects. Our local project management team has a diverse background in water treatment and infrastructure, from conceptual design, through permitting, and onto construction services support during delivery.

To achieve our project management success goals, we will rely on our Project Management Plan (PMP) to hold teams and leaders accountable for their deliverables. The PMP oversees contingencies for unforeseen challenges that may arise in the design or construction process. In conjunction with the PMP, a Quality Control Plan (QCP) is drafted and maintained by the design phase manager (DPM). This document serves as a road map for the quality control checkpoints and procedures that will be implemented throughout various design phases and stages.

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 5

To best align with Project Management Institute (PMI) standards and Garver’s risk assessment model, a Risk Register will be developed at the onset of the project to enhance the forecasting and prevention of critical path impediments before they arise. The Risk Register is a component of the PMP and is a living document along with the QCP, which allows for iterative updates as problems arise and solutions are implemented. Along with the Risk Register is a Lessons Learned log which will be updated at every weekly progress meeting with all stakeholders to provide transparency for all solutions. Progress meetings can be held virtually or in-person as needed by the City stakeholders.

If your team is backed up or unavailable to finish a job, describe what steps will be taken to get the project delivered on time.

Throughout the project lifecycle, multiple team members between the regional office and WDC will have day to day knowledge of the project as determined by the PMP. The PMP is a robust document that dictates the contingency plan in the event a project manager or multiple project staff are unavailable either temporarily or permanently. The steps taken for timeline recovery are as follows:

1. Triage: This step brings the next in line internal project stakeholders to determine the immediate needs of the project from a scope and schedule standpoint.

2. Resource Reallocation: Reassign tasks to available team members, considering their skills and availability. If necessary, bring in additional resources or cross-trained team members who can contribute to the project.

3. Outsourcing Options: If the robust design and project management staff at Garver cannot immediately accommodate these needs, Garver has existing relationships with local consultants that can be relied upon to assist when needed.

4. Prioritization and Streamlining: Prioritize tasks identified in Step 1 and eliminate non-essential processes to expedite recovery.

5. Regular monitoring and communication: This will require an increased frequency of touchpoints with ADEQ stakeholders.

6. Contingency Planning: This iterative step is required in the PMP, and can be changed as needed based upon project conditions and success.

If your subcontractor is falling behind stated deliverable, describe what steps will be taken to get the project on track and delivered on time.

Communication is the key to problem resolution. Garver understands that unforeseen changes of conditions may occur. Our experience and expertise allow us to flexibly manage these potential issues with minimal conflict. Garver will continue to show that we are committed to preventing problems before they arise.

Our approach is to identify and resolve issues before they become significant. In addition to regular meetings during evaluation and design, open and regular communication between the City staff and Garver’s project team will include, at a minimum, a brief weekly phone call from our Project Manager discussing project schedule and potential issues with proposed resolution. Our plan is to “Partner” with the City during the entire process.

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 6

During construction, we can work with the contractor to mitigate any issues that may occur. Our team has recent experience with JOC and CMAR, along with DBB contracts, and can assist the City throughout the process.

QUESTION 6

Describe your company’s review process to ensure that technical documents are complete and accurate prior to submission to ADEQ. What documents can ADEQ review to verify if the review was completed? If ADEQ finds an issue, who, other than the PM, is the point of contact for resolution?

STEP 1: IDENTIFY PROJECT DELIVERABLE (QA TEAM):

This step involves the deliverables for the project and identifying associated risks and cost constraints at each deliverable phase.

STEP 2: COMPLIANCE CHECK (QC TEAM)

This is the first iterative step in the QCC process, which requires a check against both internal and City of Goodyear compliance requirements. At this stage, items such as general document layout, cover sheet compliance, pay-app and invoice assembly/submission, and other compliance related items will be reviewed.

STEP 3: AUDIT DELIVERABLE (QC TEAM)

Deliverable audit will follow a checklist and line by line audit review that will result in either a Rejected (Revise Deliverable) or Accepted (Forward to Technical Review) status. This second iterative stage certifies that the overall structure and content of the deliverable is intact and accounted for before going to a more refined technical review stage. Examples of review at this stage would be a P&ID review for complete process connections, or an invoice review for accurate billing information and rate application.

STEP 4A: REJECTED/REVISE DELIVERABLE (QC TEAM)

This deliverable task is a direct outcome of Step 3. If the Audit team discovers compliance issues, then it is returned to Step 2 for further compliance review.

STEP 4B: ACCEPTED/TECHNICAL REVIEW (QA TEAM)

The acceptance outcome from Step 3 will forward the deliverable through the process and onto the Technical Review team. This stage is the most time intensive and will require the most resources to complete. Examples of technical review would be calculation back-ups, permit documentation accuracy, scope and fee document review for appropriate bill rates and scope language, cost, and invoicing calculation, so proper billing codes and billing rates are applied.

STEP 5: INTERNAL REVIEW (QA TEAM)

The QA manager or project manager performs this final review and acceptance stage. This is the last iterative step which can result in identifying improvements that will return the deliverable to Step 4a for further revision. This multi-step and multi-resource process allows for fine control on behalf of the project manager to best utilize resources and control project costs. At this stage, the QA manager can implement the changes themselves or delegate to the proper team members if deemed necessary. Examples would be detail line work on design drawings, misplaced or missing

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 7 information in design reports and specifications, or incorrect billing rates that were not caught in the technical review.

STEP 6: DELIVERY TO STAKEHOLDERS (QA TEAM)

The last step in the Six-Step process is delivery of the documents to the stakeholders. Through the previous process the documents are assured to arrive with an elevated level of accuracy and detail. Although no review process will be a 100% level of accuracy, Garver has implemented its lessons learned from years of reviews and we are confident that we achieve near 100% accuracy.

QUESTION 7

Describe a time where obstacles faced during a project resulted in a change to your methodology of approach. What were the obstacles, the impact to the project, and what did you do to overcome them?

Throughout the life of a project, our teams remain diligent in their response to changes and challenges. A recent challenge our team overcame was improper valve and actuators for a 15 MGD lift station in Phoenix, AZ.

During the construction bidding phase, it became apparent that the proposed style of valves and actuators would not be compatible with current operating requirements. The result of an improper equipment specification meant that construction phase services would be impacted and that the schedule for delivery would be extended. Not due to any one party, a change in owner specifications, operations teams, and capacity of the lift station resulted in an oversight during the final design document review period. Luckily, due to the proactive working relationship of both the owner and Garver, the problem was caught, and a solution was started.

Over the following six months, Garver, the owner, and selected contractor worked to identify three major concerns:

With the help and collaborative efforts of all stakeholders, Garver was able to implement a methodology change with the following actions taken:

• Immediate assessment and collaboration: Upon discovering the issue, we immediately conducted a thorough assessment of the installed equipment in collaboration with the suppliers and the project team. We identified the root cause of the discrepancy and determined the necessary specifications for replacement equipment.

• Expedited replacement: To minimize delays, we worked closely with the contractor to expedite the manufacturing and delivery of the correct valves and actuators. We negotiated priority production slots and fast-tracked shipping to ensure the new equipment arrived as quickly as possible.

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 8

• Enhanced quality control: To prevent similar issues in the future, we implemented more stringent quality control measures, including double-checking equipment specifications before delivery and conducting on-site inspections before installation. This approach was integrated into our project management processes to ensure greater accuracy and adherence to specifications.

• Revised project schedule: While awaiting the replacement equipment, we adjusted the project schedule to focus on other critical tasks that could be completed in parallel. This allowed us to maintain progress and minimize the impact of the delay on the overall timeline.

By swiftly addressing the issue with the improper valves and actuators, we were able to overcome the challenge without significant delays or cost overruns. The lift station was successfully completed with the correct equipment, ensuring its reliable operation. This experience reinforced the importance of proactive quality control and effective collaboration with suppliers, leading to improved processes in future projects.

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 9

SCENARIO 1:

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND ALTERNATIVES

Regardless of the demographic characteristics of population served by this system, the system must comply with all primary drinking water standards including meeting the Uranium MCL. The water system should also strive to meet as many of the secondary water quality standards as possible. The water system may achieve these goals by following several different approaches including:

Garver will systematically evaluate alternatives and complete the design, permitting, and construction of a new treatment facility for this community.

TASKS TO DETERMINE RECOMMENDATION

Task 1: Obtain and Analyze Historical Data

Task 2: Perform Additional Sampling to Fill Data Gaps

Task 3: Alternatives Analysis

Task 4: Treatment Process Selection Workshop

Task 5: Complete Design

Task 6: Permitting

Task 7: Coordination During Construction and Startup

Task 8: Record Drawings and Close out

ADDRESSING WATER QUALITY

Discuss the purpose of each task relevant to water quality: why are we doing it, what information will be obtained from it, how does it benefit the client.

Task 1: Obtain and Analyze Historical data Garver will prepare a data request memo identifying water quality, and capacity information for the existing source as well as the alternative source. The data request memo will identify the parameters and classify them as must have, and good to have category. Once the existing data is received, Garver will summarize the data to understand the quality of source water in the context of primary and secondary water quality standards as well as the available quantity of source water at the existing versus the alternative source. This analysis of the data will reveal any gaps in the data that may or may not be critical for completing the design.

Task 2: Perform Additional Sampling to Fill Data gaps Based on the results of Task 1, Garver will determine if additional sampling and data collection will be necessary. If additional critical data gaps need to be filled, Garver will assist the owner in collecting and analyzing these samples.

Capacity Development / Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems 10

Task 3: Alternatives Analysis We will work with the owner to lay out different alternative approaches to solve the water treatment challenge faced by the community. The initial development of the alternatives will be done in collaboration with the owner in a meeting where all the available information about the alternative water sources, water quality, regulatory requirement will be brought in.

As the discussion progress, we will guide the discussion regarding the pros and cons of each of the alternatives and possible high-level cost implications. After the initial identification and prioritization of alternative approaches, Garver will select the top three alternatives. Garver engineers will develop these alternatives in order to estimate conceptual lay out as well as planning level costs for the alternatives including new conveyance system that may be needed to utilize the alternative water source. A Power Point presentation will be developed summarizing these alternatives.

Task 4: Treatment Process Selection Workshop The results of Task 3 will be the primary content for this workshop with the owner. After detailed discussion of these alternatives with the owner, Garver will assist selecting the most preferred alternative.

Task 5: Complete Design Garver will complete six deliverables: design schedule, design report, 30% design, 60% design, 90% design, and final construction drawings. Each deliverable will be sent to the client for review.

Following client review, a workshop will be set up with Garver and the client to discuss comments or design/field changes to incorporate into the following design phase. Some deliverables may be eliminated if the design is not complicated. We conduct internal QC for each deliverable and will incorporate comments from the client.

Task 6: Permitting Garver will contact the appropriate permitting agencies and determine all the proper permits for the projects. Garver will conduct a pre-application meeting with the permitting agency if necessary to understand all the permit requirements. Then, Garver will complete the permit application and compile all the proper documents for submittal.

Task 7: Coordination during Construction and Startup Garver can provide construction support by including pre-construction meetings, site visits, and construction coordination. Once construction is completed, we will see that all testing requirements are conducted and provide support and training for startup.

Task 8: Record Drawings and Close Out Garver will coordinate with the surveyor to compile as-built plans. As-built plans will be submitted to the water system for review and to the permitting agency for Approval of Construction (AOC) application. Garver will close out the project by conducting a final walk through and creating a punchlist for tasks that need to be completed before operation.