Attachment 3 - PDB Agreement for Services (Overaa) — Manteca City Council, April 21, 2026 (part 2 of 2)

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
October 17, 2024
To: Bill Sotirakos, P. Eng.

Carollo Engineers
Re: Aquaray HiCAP® Ultraviolet Disinfection System
Manteca, CA
Veolia is pleased to submit our preliminary budget proposal for the Aquaray HiCAP® Vertical Lamp ultraviolet disinfection system for the above referenced project. The proposed design is based on our Aquaray HiCAP® System which features vertically mounted, high output 1,000 watt amalgam lamps with variable output for greater power conservation
Some of the proposed Aquaray HiCAP® Vertical Lamp UV System’s features include:
• 1000 watt LPHO Amalgam UV lamps to reduce lamp count and equipment footprint • Third Party Validated
• Easy maintenance without the need to remove equipment from channel for lamp and ballast replacement.
• Automatic dose control is achieved by turning on/off lamps row by row in combination with dimming each lamp in response to a flow signal, ensuring that the plant is operated economically while still providing the required performance.
• IP68 Rated for Submergence
For a peak flow of 31.08 MGD and a UV transmittance of 60%, Veolia proposes to furnish three (3) UV disinfection channels. The proposed UV system will have UV modules, each with 36 lamps, mounted one (1) across by seven (7) UV banks in series for a total of twenty-one (21) UV modules. The UV system will deliver a minimum UV MS2 RED of 102 mJ/cm2 at the peak flow with one (1) UV bank out of service per channel.

If you have any questions or require any additional information, please don’t hesitate to contact our local representative or the undersigned.

Sincerely,
For VEOLIA Water Technologies Treatment Solutions USA, Inc.

George Vrachimis
ATTACHMENT 3

Page 3 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
I. AQUARAY® HiCAP VERTICAL LAMP SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
• The Aquaray® HiCAP’s vertical open channel type configuration, unique staggered lamp array and perpendicular flow enables the plant operators to service the system with ease and simplicity. • The UV lamps are mounted vertically and perpendicular to the flow, where all electrical connections are made out of the water. All the lamps are easily accessed through the lid of the top enclosure.

This makes routine service such as lamp changes, performed without having to remove the lamp modules from the channel.
• Electronics, such as ballasts and communication cards, are all located in a remote enclosure away from the UV channel
• The UV lamps are mounted in a uniform staggered array. This ensures a semi-tortuous path for the effluent that avoids discharge of undisinfected wastewater. • Flow pacing is achieved by a combination of dimming each row of lamps from 100% down to 40% output and turning lamp rows on and off in relation to a plant flow signal. Each UV module has four (4) rows of lamps arranged asymettrically to assure a tortuous flow path that enhances overall dose applied while insuring significant backmixing that yields better inactivation than other designs. • Each UV module has a dedicated electric motor that powers a simple mechanical wiper plate mounted on an acme screw drive. No failure of one wiping system component will result in the loss of wiping capability for the entire UV system.
• All UV modules are completely removable from the UV channel, allowing for regularly scheduled channel cleaning to remove algae or debris.

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 4 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
HIGH OUTPUT LAMP ARRANGEMENT:

The ultraviolet lamps are mounted vertically so that all electrical connections are made out of the water and within the protection of an IP68 stainless steel enclosure. Unlike other designs, all the lamps are easily accessed through the lid of this enclosure. Therefore, routine service such as lamp changes can be made without having to remove the lamp modules from the channel.

The lamps are also mounted in a uniform staggered array, This ensures a semi-tortuous path so that every particle of water will come into intimate contact with the most intense point of lamp output.

MODULE ARRANGEMENT:

The number and layout of the modules within the channel is determined based on the required UV dosage and a UV path for the water that eliminates any possibility of hydraulic short-circuiting. See “DESIGN BRIEF” for details of module arrangement for this project ATTACHMENT 3

Page 5 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
CONTROL AND MONITORING:

Each HiCAP module in the disinfection system receives its power from the Power Supply Unit via power cables provided by Veolia. A separate MCP (Main Control Panel) houses the PLC and Operator Interface (OI/HMI). The system operates in the fully automatic mode and the HMI displays up-to-date information about the status of the equipment. It requires no previous computer experience and includes easy to understand on-screen instruction to assist the operators.

The HMI shows the number of modules in service and the number of lamps within the modules that are in use. Information that is used to determine the number of lamps required can be taken from a modified flow signal. The modified flow signal (by owner) for control over each channel can be calculated from the overall plant flow.

A representative UV intensity reading is displayed continuously on the OI based on information being received from a sensor mounted in each bank of modules.

Should it become necessary, the
operator can assume manual
control of the system. In this
mode, he or she has the ability to
check all the system functions
and to control the lamp array.

Other system information, such
as channel flow and individual
module status, can also be
accessed.

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 6 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
FLOW PACING:

Due to the wide variety of flows that occur in a wastewater treatment plant, the Aquaray HiCAP Vertical Lamp System is designed to minimize energy consumption and extend lamp life by accurately controlling the number and outputs of lamps in service. The Aquaray® HiCAP System incorporates a unique way of conserving energy via a combination of turning on/off and dimming of UV lamps.

This feature allows the system to switch on or off lamps and vary between lamp output power levels in response to the flow pattern of the wastewater treatment plant via the 4-20mA signal received from the plant flow meter and UVT analyzer.

During the diurnal flows described, the UV system will respond to the change in flows by turning on/off lamps on a row-by-row basis then dimming each row as needed from 60-100% lamp power.

SYSTEM CLEANING:

Any UV system gradually accumulates a coating on the
quartz sleeves housing the lamps. This routine fouling
must be removed periodically.

The Aquaray® HiCAP System offers a fully automatic,
in-channelcleaning system which reduces maintenance.

The automatic wiping system is usually operated once
daily and the wipers are then replaced once every two
years. This system is included in our proposal.

The wipers are individually replaceable split nylon
brushes with adjustable compression rings to allow for
optimum wiper contact as the brush wears over time.

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 7 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
SERVICE:

Every piece of equipment within a wastewater plant requires service. The Aquaray® HiCAP System has been developed to permit easy troubleshooting and quick replacement of components. The majority of maintenance activities can be carried out while the equipment is still located within the channel. The recommended spares included in this proposal will ensure that the system can be maintained efficiently and brought back to full operation in the shortest possible time.

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 8 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
II. DESIGN BRIEF
Parameter Value Units
Peak Hour Flow 31.08 MGD
Average Daily Flow 9.87 MGD
Design UV Transmittance 60 % UVT
Average UV Transmittance 65 % UVT
TSS, sample maximum <5 mg/L
Total Coliform, 7-day median <2.2 MPN/100 mL
Total Coliform, more than once in any 30-day period <23 MPN/100 mL Total Coliform, at any time <240 MPN/100 mL
MS2 RED 102 mJ/cm2
III. PROPOSED AQUARAY® HiCAP SUBMERSIBLE VERTICAL LAMP SYSTEM DESIGN:

Description Phase 1
System Designation Aquaray® HiCAP
Number of Channels 3
Number of Modules Across (Modules per Bank) 1
Number of Modules in Series (# of Banks) 7 (6 duty + 1 standby) Channel Width, in. 47.5”
Channel Length, ft. 43’ – 2”
Minimum Channel Depth, in. 91”
Nominal Water Depth, in. 74-82”
Aquaray® Modules/Channel 7
Total Number of Modules 21
Number of Lamps/Module 36
Total Number of Lamps 756
Headloss at 31.08 MGD 1.89 in.

Power Consumption per Lamp, W 1000 watts
Power Consumption at 31.08 MGD and 60% UVT, kW 637.2 kW Power Consumption at 9.87 MGD and 65% UVT, kW
Through 1 channel
150.4 kW
Max Operating Power, kW (All Equipment) 818.7 kW
Power Feed Requirement 480V/3ph/60Hz
ATTACHMENT 3

Page 9 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
IV. SCOPE OF SUPPLY
UV System Component Quantity
Number of Aquaray® HiCAP Modules
• IP68
• 316SS
21 Total Number of UV Lamps (Excluding Spares) 756
Number of UV Intensity Sensors (One per bank) 21
Number of Power Supply Units (PSUs)
• NEMA 12, Painted Steel
6 Number of UV Main Control Panels
(UMCPs)
• Schneider Electric Modicon M340 PLC and
Schneider Electric HMI
• NEMA 12, Painted Steel
1 Number of Remote HMI Panels 1
Number of Power Cables 126
Number of Data Cables 63
Number of Cable Trays 3
Number of Stepdown Transformers 6
Number of Mounting Rails/Eye Shields 24
Number of Conductivity Level Switches 4 (1 per channel and 1 for the inlet basin)
Number of Online UVT Analyzers 1
Number of Level Control Weirs
• 316 SS
1 set
Number of Motorized Inlet Isolation Gates 3
Number of Inlet Baffle Plates 3
Spares • 10% lamps
• 10% sleeves
• 1 UV sensor
• 10% Wipers
• 5% Ballasts
• Citric acid
• Operators Kit
• (UV goggles, UV warning signs,
gloves)
Field Service 10 days in 2 trips
Freight to job site Included
ATTACHMENT 3

Page 10 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
V. ITEMS PROVIDED BY OTHERS
Note that the following items are to be provided by others (unless indicated otherwise above):
• UV channel construction
• Channel grating
• Any Piping and Channel Drains
• Remote computer system
• Removal of existing equipment
• Installation of the equipment
• Integration with the SCADA system
• Pulling of all cables and interconnecting of cables at the PSUs • 4-20 mA Signals
• Embedded conduits
• The cost for the laboratory analysis during the performance testing, including the cost of collection, transportation, laboratory analysis of effluent samples, materials, and equipment, is the responsibility of the contractor
• Power feed 480V/3ph/60Hz
• 1/2-Ton Jib or Overhead Crane
VI. PRICING, TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Budget Price See RFQ Form
Taxes Not included
Payment Terms • 10% Net Cash, Payable in thirty (30) days from date of submittal of initial drawings for approval;
• 85% Net Cash, Payable in progress payments thirty
(30) days from dates of respective shipments of the
Products;
• 5% Net Cash, Payable in thirty (30) days from
Product installation and acceptance or Ninety (90)
Submittals 8-10 weeks
Equipment Delivery 22-24 weeks after submittal approval Freight INCOTERMS DAP
Warranty 1 year after start-up or 18 months after delivery, whichever occurs first
ATTACHMENT 3

Page 11 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
Typical Aquaray Vertical Lamp
Ultraviolet Disinfection System Installations
Plant Location: Auburn, NY
Peak Flow: 25 MGD
Number of Channels: 1
Number of Modules: 3
ATTACHMENT 3

Page 12 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
Aquaray HiCAP Vertical Lamps
Ultraviolet Disinfection System Installations
Plant Location: Doha I, Qatar
Peak Flow: 40 MGD HLD for Reuse
Number of Channels: 1
Number of Modules: 3 per bank (24 total)
ATTACHMENT 3

Page 13 of 13 ends

Mateca, CA
Date: October 17, 2024
Aquaray HiCAP Vertical Lamps
Ultraviolet Disinfection System Installations
Plant Location: Doha II, Qatar
Peak Flow: 60 MGD
Number of Channels: 3
Number of Modules: 10 per channel (30 total)
ATTACHMENT 3

SIDESTREAM TREATMENT AND UV REHABILITATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPORT OCTOBER 2025 / FINAL / CAROLLO

CITY OF MANTECA

MANTECA WQCF SIDESTREAM TREATMENT AND UV REHABILITATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN

APPENDIX C UV HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT : Manteca UV Rehabilitation Preliminary Design
UV Hydraulic Analysis from Tertiary Filters to Effluent Pump Station CHECKED : BY :

JOB # : 203331 REVISION: 1 DATE : DATE :

DOWNSTREAM CONTROL
EGL = 33.20 Just below High alarm (33.3) in Effluent Pump Station 33.20 33.20 per 2011 Set: Sheet G1.23

31.08 Flow = 31.08 mgd = 48.08 cfs
UV Effluent Pipe from UV Effluent Channel to Existing Effluent Pump Station Wet Well [PIPE FRICTION LOSSES (DARCY-WEISBACH / COLEBROOK )] { 4 }

31.1 Flow 31.1 mgd = 48.1 cfs
Pipe Diameter, D 48 inch
Pipe Length, L 35 ft
Absolute Roughness, e 0.00040 ft
Pipe velocity, v 3.83 fps
Kinematic Viscosity 1.000E-05 ft2
/sec
Reynold's Number, R 1530458
Friction factor, f 0.0130 0.013 Equivalent Hazen-Williams "C" = 143.1158 Friction Energy Loss, hL 0.03 ft

MINOR PIPE LOSS HEADING

31.1 Flow, Q 31.1 mgd = 48.1 cfs
Dia Dia Vel Vel Vel Minor
Flow Flow Up Down Up Down Head Loss
No. (mgd) (cfs) K (in) (in) (fps) (fps) (ft) (ft)
1 Entrance Loss - Flush 31.08 48.08 0.50 ---- 48 ---- 3.83 0.23 0.11 0 Mitre Bend - 45 º Deflection 31.08 48.08 0.32 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.00 1 Outlet Loss - Still Water 31.08 48.08 1.00 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.23 Sum = 0.34
Total Energy Loss = 0.37 ft
Upstream Condition 33.57 33.57
UV Effluent Channel downstream of UV Channel effluent weirs [CHANNEL FRICTION LOSSES] { 5 }

31.08 Flow, Q 31.08 mgd = 48.1 cfs
Channel Width 8.00 ft
Total Channel Length 30.00
Downstream Invert El 29.34
Channel Slope 0.50%
Manning Coeff, n 0.013
Hydr. Friction
Invert Invert Depth Vel. Radius Avg. Loss
Station Up Down (ft) (fps) (ft) Sf Sf (ft) HGL EGL

0.0 29.34 29.34 4.19 1.433 2.05 0.000 ---- ---- 33.53 33.57

6.0 29.37 29.34 4.16 1.443 2.04 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.53 33.57

12.0 29.40 29.37 4.13 1.454 2.03 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.53 33.57

18.0 29.43 29.40 4.10 1.464 2.03 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.53 33.57

24.0 29.46 29.43 4.07 1.475 2.02 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.53 33.57

30.0 29.49 29.46 4.04 1.486 2.01 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.53 33.57 TOTAL ENERGY LOSS 0.00 ft
Condition at Upstream End of Channel 33.53 33.57
ARL
1/9/2025
Description
®
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Filename: Manteca UV Hydraulics, Sheet: Calculation Sheet 1 1 of 6 1/9/2025, 4:08 PM ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT : Manteca UV Rehabilitation Preliminary Design
UV Hydraulic Analysis from Tertiary Filters to Effluent Pump Station CHECKED : BY :

JOB # : 203331 REVISION: 1 DATE : DATE :

FLOW SPLI

31.1 Downstream Flow 31.1 mgd = 48.1 cfs

10.4 New Flow 10.4 mgd = 16.0 cfs
[STRAIGHT EDGED SHARP CRESTED WEIR]

10.4 Flow 10.4 mgd = 16.0 cfs
WSE Downstream of Weir 33.53 ft
Weir Crest Elevation 33.70 ft
Downstream head, Hd -0.17 ft
Length of Weir, L 42.00 ft
Free Discharging Weir Computation { 6 }
Head on Weir, H 0.24 ft
Upstream WSE 33.94 ft
Submerged Weir Computation { 7 }
K NA
M NA
Increment NA ft
Upstream Head, Hu1 NA ft
F(H1) NA
F'(H1) NA
Upstream Head, Hu2 NA ft
Upstream WSE NA ft
Head over Weir 0.24 ft
Condition Upstream of Weir 33.94 33.94
Individual UV Channel
[CHANNEL FRICTION LOSSES] { 5 }

10.36 Flow, Q 10.36 mgd = 16.0 cfs
Channel Width 4.75 ft
Total Channel Length 52.00
Downstream Invert El 27.00
Channel Slope 0.00%
Manning Coeff, n 0.013
Hydr. Friction
Invert Invert Depth Vel. Radius Avg. Loss
Station Up Down (ft) (fps) (ft) Sf Sf (ft) HGL EGL

0.0 27.00 27.00 6.93 0.487 1.77 0.000 ---- ---- 33.93 33.94

10.4 27.00 27.00 6.93 0.487 1.77 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.93 33.94

20.8 27.00 27.00 6.93 0.487 1.77 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.93 33.94

31.2 27.00 27.00 6.93 0.487 1.77 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.93 33.94

41.6 27.00 27.00 6.93 0.487 1.77 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.93 33.94

52.0 27.00 27.00 6.93 0.487 1.77 0.000 0.000 0.00 33.93 33.94 TOTAL ENERGY LOSS 0.00 ft
Condition at Upstream End of Channel 33.93 33.94
UV Banks

MINOR CHANNEL LOSS HEADING

10.4 Flow, Q 10.4 mgd = 16.0 cfs
Width Width Vel Vel Vel Minor
Flow Flow Up Down Depth Up Down Head Loss

WEIR IS FREE-DISCHARGING
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Filename: Manteca UV Hydraulics, Sheet: Calculation Sheet 1 2 of 6 1/9/2025, 4:08 PM ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT : Manteca UV Rehabilitation Preliminary Design
UV Hydraulic Analysis from Tertiary Filters to Effluent Pump Station CHECKED : BY :

JOB # : 203331 REVISION: 1 DATE : DATE :

10.4 Flow, Q 10.4 mgd = 16.0 cfs
Gate Width 4.75 ft
Full Height of Opening 6 ft
Gate Percent Open 100%
Discharge Coefficient, C 0.61
Velocity through gate, v 0.56 fps
Energy Loss thru Gate, hL 0.01 ft
Condition Upstream of Gate 34.18 34.18
Combined UV Inlet Box upstream of UV Channels, with even flow split for all 3 channels.

FLOW SPLIT

10.4 Downstream Flow 10.4 mgd = 16.0 cfs

31.1 New Flow 31.1 mgd = 48.1 cfs
[CHANNEL FRICTION LOSSES] { 5 }

31.08 Flow, Q 31.08 mgd = 48.1 cfs
Channel Width 8.00 ft
Total Channel Length 15.00
Downstream Invert El 27.00
Channel Slope -0.50%
Manning Coeff, n 0.013
Hydr. Friction
Invert Invert Depth Vel. Radius Avg. Loss
Station Up Down (ft) (fps) (ft) Sf Sf (ft) HGL EGL

0.0 27.00 27.00 7.17 0.839 2.57 0.000 ---- ---- 34.17 34.18

3.0 26.99 27.00 7.18 0.837 2.57 0.000 0.000 0.00 34.17 34.18

6.0 26.97 26.99 7.20 0.835 2.57 0.000 0.000 0.00 34.17 34.18

9.0 26.96 26.97 7.21 0.833 2.57 0.000 0.000 0.00 34.17 34.18

12.0 26.94 26.96 7.23 0.832 2.57 0.000 0.000 0.00 34.17 34.18

15.0 26.93 26.94 7.24 0.830 2.58 0.000 0.000 0.00 34.17 34.18 TOTAL ENERGY LOSS 0.00 ft
Condition at Upstream End of Channel 34.17 34.18
NEW 48" FTE From Plant Split (Existing tert filters and future membrane) through UV Meter and to UV Structure Inlet [PIPE FRICTION LOSSES (DARCY-WEISBACH / COLEBROOK )] { 4 }

31.1 Flow 31.1 mgd = 48.1 cfs
Pipe Diameter, D 48 inch
Pipe Length, L 125 ft
Absolute Roughness, e 0.00040 ft
Pipe velocity, v 3.83 fps
Kinematic Viscosity 1.000E-05 ft2
/sec
Reynold's Number, R 1530458
Friction factor, f 0.0130 0.013 Equivalent Hazen-Williams "C" = 143.1158 Description
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Filename: Manteca UV Hydraulics, Sheet: Calculation Sheet 1 3 of 6 1/9/2025, 4:08 PM ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT : Manteca UV Rehabilitation Preliminary Design
UV Hydraulic Analysis from Tertiary Filters to Effluent Pump Station CHECKED : BY :

JOB # : 203331 REVISION: 1 DATE : DATE :

MINOR PIPE LOSS HEADING

31.1 Flow, Q 31.1 mgd = 48.1 cfs
Dia Dia Vel Vel Vel Minor
Flow Flow Up Down Up Down Head Loss
No. (mgd) (cfs) K (in) (in) (fps) (fps) (ft) (ft)
0 Mitre Bend - 90 º Deflection 31.08 48.08 1.27 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.00 4 Mitre Bend - 45 º Deflection 31.08 48.08 0.32 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.29 2 Reducer 31.08 48.08 0.25 42 48 5.00 3.83 0.23 0.11
0 Wye - Thru Side Outlet 31.08 48.08 1.35 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.00 1 Butterfly Valve (Open) 31.08 48.08 0.50 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.11 2 Wye - Thru Straight Run 31.08 48.08 0.45 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.20 0 Tee - Thru Straight Run 31.08 48.08 0.60 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.00 1 Outlet Loss - Still Water 31.08 48.08 1.00 48 ---- 3.83 ---- 0.23 0.23 0 Entrance Loss - Flush 31.08 48.08 0.50 ---- 48 ---- 3.83 0.23 0.00 Sum = 0.95
Total Energy Loss = 1.04 ft
Upstream Condition 35.22 35.22
(EXISTING) 42" FTE from Filter Effluent Header to Plant Split. Peak flow from filters per 2011 set sheet G1.21 [PIPE FRICTION LOSSES (DARCY-WEISBACH / COLEBROOK )] { 4 }

19.1 Flow 19.1 mgd = 29.6 cfs
Pipe Diameter, D 42 inch
Pipe Length, L 55 ft
Absolute Roughness, e 0.00040 ft
Pipe velocity, v 3.08 fps
Kinematic Viscosity 1.000E-05 ft2
/sec
Reynold's Number, R 1077145
Friction factor, f 0.0136 0.0136 Equivalent Hazen-Williams "C" = 144.1528 Friction Energy Loss, hL 0.03 ft

MINOR PIPE LOSS HEADING

19.1 Flow, Q 19.1 mgd = 29.6 cfs
Dia Dia Vel Vel Vel Minor
Flow Flow Up Down Up Down Head Loss
No. (mgd) (cfs) K (in) (in) (fps) (fps) (ft) (ft)
1 Reducer 19.14 29.61 0.25 42 48 3.08 2.36 0.09 0.02
0 Wye - Thru Side Outlet 19.14 29.61 1.35 42 ---- 3.08 ---- 0.15 0.00 0 Wye - Thru Straight Run 19.14 29.61 0.45 42 ---- 3.08 ---- 0.15 0.00 1 Tee - Thru Side Outlet 19.14 29.61 1.80 42 ---- 3.08 ---- 0.15 0.26 0 Tee - Thru Straight Run 19.14 29.61 0.60 42 ---- 3.08 ---- 0.15 0.00 Sum = 0.29
Total Energy Loss = 0.32 ft
Upstream Condition 35.54 35.54
(EXISTING) 30" Filter Effluent to 42" FTE

FLOW SPLIT

19.1 Downstream Flow 19.1 mgd = 29.6 cfs

9.6 New Flow 9.6 mgd = 14.8 cfs
Description
Description
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Filename: Manteca UV Hydraulics, Sheet: Calculation Sheet 1 4 of 6 1/9/2025, 4:08 PM ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT : Manteca UV Rehabilitation Preliminary Design
UV Hydraulic Analysis from Tertiary Filters to Effluent Pump Station CHECKED : BY :

JOB # : 203331 REVISION: 1 DATE : DATE :

9.6 Flow 9.6 mgd = 14.8 cfs
Pipe Diameter, D 30 inch
Pipe Length, L 19 ft
Absolute Roughness, e 0.00040 ft
Pipe velocity, v 3.02 fps
Kinematic Viscosity 1.000E-05 ft2
/sec
Reynold's Number, R 754002
Friction factor, f 0.0145 0.0145 Equivalent Hazen-Williams "C" = 143.4087 Friction Energy Loss, hL 0.02 ft

MINOR PIPE LOSS HEADING

9.6 Flow, Q 9.6 mgd = 14.8 cfs
Dia Dia Vel Vel Vel Minor
Flow Flow Up Down Up Down Head Loss
No. (mgd) (cfs) K (in) (in) (fps) (fps) (ft) (ft)
1 Reducer 9.57 14.80 0.25 42 30 1.54 3.02 0.14 0.04
2 Tee - Thru Straight Run 9.57 14.80 0.60 30 ---- 3.02 ---- 0.14 0.17 Sum = 0.20
Total Energy Loss = 0.22 ft
Upstream Condition 35.76 35.76
24" Filter Effluent to 30" FTE

FLOW SPLIT

9.6 Downstream Flow 9.6 mgd = 14.8 cfs

3.2 New Flow 3.2 mgd = 4.9 cfs
[PIPE FRICTION LOSSES (DARCY-WEISBACH / COLEBROOK )] { 4 }

3.2 Flow 3.2 mgd = 4.9 cfs
Pipe Diameter, D 24 inch
Pipe Length, L 40 ft
Absolute Roughness, e 0.00040 ft
Pipe velocity, v 1.57 fps
Kinematic Viscosity 1.000E-05 ft2
/sec
Reynold's Number, R 314167
Friction factor, f 0.0162 0.0162 Equivalent Hazen-Williams "C" = 145.5242 Friction Energy Loss, hL 0.01 ft

MINOR PIPE LOSS HEADING

3.2 Flow, Q 3.2 mgd = 4.9 cfs
Dia Dia Vel Vel Vel Minor
Flow Flow Up Down Up Down Head Loss
No. (mgd) (cfs) K (in) (in) (fps) (fps) (ft) (ft)
1 Tee - Thru Side Outlet 3.19 4.93 1.80 24 ---- 1.57 ---- 0.04 0.07 1 Reducer 3.19 4.93 0.25 30 24 1.01 1.57 0.04 0.01
Description
Description
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Filename: Manteca UV Hydraulics, Sheet: Calculation Sheet 1 5 of 6 1/9/2025, 4:08 PM ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT : Manteca UV Rehabilitation Preliminary Design
UV Hydraulic Analysis from Tertiary Filters to Effluent Pump Station CHECKED : BY :

JOB # : 203331 REVISION: 1 DATE : DATE :

This sheet calculates HGL and EGL from the tertiary filter effluent weirs, throug a new flow meter vault, Equation through a new 3 channel UV structure, over UV weirs, and into the existing pump station Ref. HGL EGL All values are based on the 2011 Record Set
ARL
1/9/2025
®
1 Butterfly Valve (Open) 3.19 4.93 0.50 24 ---- 1.57 ---- 0.04 0.02 1 Entrance Loss - Flush 3.19 4.93 0.50 ---- 24 ---- 1.57 0.04 0.02 1 Mitre Bend - 90 º Deflection 3.19 4.93 1.27 24 ---- 1.57 ---- 0.04 0.05 Sum = 0.17
Total Energy Loss = 0.18 ft
Upstream Condition 35.94 35.94
See the 2011 Set, sheet G1.23 for filter effluent weir elevation and discharge elevation Filter Weir 35.82 Target 35.21
-0.73
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Filename: Manteca UV Hydraulics, Sheet: Calculation Sheet 1 6 of 6 1/9/2025, 4:08 PM ATTACHMENT 3

SIDESTREAM TREATMENT AND UV REHABILITATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPORT OCTOBER 2025 / FINAL / CAROLLO

CITY OF MANTECA

MANTECA WQCF SIDESTREAM TREATMENT AND UV REHABILITATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN

APPENDIX D UV COST ESTIMATES
ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT SUMMARY Estimate Class:

Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation - Trojan PIC: Ryan Sellman Client: City of Manteca PM: Stephen Caswell
Location: Manteca, CA Date: January 9, 2025
Zip Code: 95337 By: ARL
Carollo Job # 203331 Reviewed:

NO. DESCRIPTION TOTAL
01 Demolition $3,716
02 Civil $247,481
03 Structural $1,458,073
04 Mechanical $3,590,011
05 Electrical $1,309,024
TOTAL DIRECT COST $6,608,304
General Conditions 15.0% $991,246
Subtotal $7,599,550
Contingency 30.0% $1,982,491
Subtotal $9,582,041
General Contractor Overhead, Profit & Risk 18.0% $1,724,767 Subtotal $11,306,809
Escalation to Mid-Point 11.9% $1,343,370
Subtotal $12,650,179
Manteca Sales Tax (50% on Material only) 8.3% $272,593
Subtotal $12,922,772
Bid Market Allowance 0.0% $0
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $12,922,772
Engineering, Legal & Administration Fees 0.0% $0
Owner's Reserve for Change Orders 0.0% $0
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $12,922,772
The cost estimate herein is based on our perception of current conditions at the project location. This estimate reflects our professional opinion of accurate costs at this time and is subject to change as the project design matures. Carollo Engineers have no control over variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means and methods of executing the work or of determining prices, competitive bidding or market conditions, practices or bidding strategies. Carollo Engineers cannot and does not warrant or guarantee that proposals, bids or actual construction costs will not vary from the costs presented as shown. f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Trojan-PROJECT SUMMARY Page 1 of 6 Printed: 03/16/2018 ATTACHMENT 3

DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation - Trojan Format: MASTER FORMAT 17 Client: City of Manteca Date : January 9, 2025
Location: Manteca, CA By : ARL
Element: 02 Demolition Reviewed:

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02220
12" Concrete Pipe Rem From An Open
Trench 60 LF $5.45 $327
02220 Demo Concrete Walls, Heavy Rebar, 12" 40.5 SF $26.45 $1,071 02220 Remove 4"-6" Asphalt Pavement 3000 SF $.77 $2,318 Total $3,716
Grand Total $3,716
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Trojan-02 Demolition Page 2 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation - Trojan Format: MASTER FORMAT 17 Client: City of Manteca Date : January 9, 2025
Location: Manteca, CA By : ARL
Element: 03 Civil Reviewed:

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02260
Solid Shoring, 16' D, Wood Planks, Stringers
& X-Bracing 400 LF $123.50 $49,399
02300
Native Pipe Bed & Zone/Confined Structure
Backfill, Class B Material 296.3 CY $37.72 $11,176
02300
Imported Pipe Bed & Zone/Confined
Structure Backfill, Class A Material 88.89 CY $59.07 $5,250 02300
Cat 225 Trackhoe, 2Cy Bucket, Class B
(Medium Digging), 0-16' D 385.19 CY $2.75 $1,058
02580 48" Precast Manhole, Xtra Depth Over 8' 10 VLF $328.10 $3,281 02580
48" X 8' Deep Precast Manhole, No Ring,
Cover, Earthwork, Top Or Bottom Slab 2 EA $3,247.92 $6,496 02742 4" Ac Paving On 8" Abc 666.67 SY $62.09 $41,392
Total $118,052
Division 15 - Mechanical
15249 18" Sdr-26 Pvc Sewer Pipe, In Trench 200 LF $170.61 $34,121 15252
48" C200 1/4" Wall Wld Cs Pipe In Open
Trench 80 LF $794.23 $63,538
15252
48" C200 1/4" Wall Wld Cs Pipe In Open
Trench 40 LF $794.23 $31,769
Total $129,429
Grand Total $247,481
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Trojan-03 Civil Page 3 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02000 Piles 1.00 LS $151,100.00 $151,100
Total $151,100
Division 03 - Concrete
03300 24" Structural Flat Mat On Grade 191.85 CY $1,275.51 $244,706 03300 18" Straight Wall, To 8' High 27.11 CY $1,714.78 $46,488 03300 18" Straight Wall, To 8' High 73.78 CY $1,714.78 $126,516 03300 12" Straight Wall >8' High 10.37 CY $2,287.26 $23,719 03300 12" Straight Wall >8' High 96 CY $2,287.26 $219,577 03300 12" Structural Flat Mat On Grade 16 CY $1,483.15 $23,730 Total $684,737
Division 05 - Metals
05000 UV Metal Building 1.00 LS $438,840.00 $438,840
05140
Structural Aluminum Shapes & Plates - Sub
1,267.11 LB $6.41 $8,121
05500
Aluminum Stairs, Including Railing And
Supports 40.00 RSR $736.15 $29,446
05500 Checkered Aluminum Plate 520.20 SF $46.61 $24,244 05500 Aluminum Osha Handrail 218.00 LF $101.18 $22,058
05500 Aluminum Grating, 2" 608.00 SF $102.03 $62,032
05500 Aluminum Grating, 2" 367.50 SF $102.03 $37,495
Total $622,236
Grand Total $1,458,073
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Trojan-04 Structural Page 4 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 11 - Equipment
11000 Trojan UV 1 LS $2,980,000.00 $2,980,000
11000 UV Installation 1 LS $447,000.00 $447,000
11000 Stainless Steel Slide Gate 3 EA $39,441.35 $118,324 11293 Slide Gate, 48" X 48" 1 EA $44,687.05 $44,687
Total $3,590,011
Grand Total $3,590,011
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Trojan-05 Mechanical Page 5 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 04 - Masonry
04000 Electrical Building 1 LS $637,024.00 $637,024
Total $637,024
Division 16 - Electrical
16000 Electrical Equipment 1 LS $672,000.00 $672,000
Total $672,000
Grand Total $1,309,024
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Trojan-06 Electrical Page 6 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT SUMMARY Estimate Class: 5
Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation PIC: Ryan Sellman
Client: City of Manteca - Wedeco PM: Stephen Caswell
Location: Manteca, CA Date: January 9, 2025
Zip Code: 95337 By: ARL
Carollo Job # 203331 Reviewed:

NO. DESCRIPTION TOTAL
01 Demolition $3,716
02 Civil $247,481
03 Structural $1,955,822
04 Mechanical $4,518,061
05 Electrical $1,503,779
TOTAL DIRECT COST $8,228,859
General Conditions 15.0% $1,234,329
Subtotal $9,463,188
Contingency 30.0% $2,468,658
Subtotal $11,931,845
General Contractor Overhead, Profit & Risk 18.0% $2,147,732 Subtotal $14,079,577
Escalation to Mid-Point 11.9% $1,672,805
Subtotal $15,752,382
Manteca Sales Tax (50% on Material only) 8.3% $339,440
Subtotal $16,091,823
Bid Market Allowance 0.0% $0
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $16,091,823
Engineering, Legal & Administration Fees 0.0% $0
Owner's Reserve for Change Orders 0.0% $0
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $16,091,823
The cost estimate herein is based on our perception of current conditions at the project location. This estimate reflects our professional opinion of accurate costs at this time and is subject to change as the project design matures. Carollo Engineers have no control over variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means and methods of executing the work or of determining prices, competitive bidding or market conditions, practices or bidding strategies. Carollo Engineers cannot and does not warrant or guarantee that proposals, bids or actual construction costs will not vary from the costs presented as shown. f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Wedeco-PROJECT SUMMARY Page 1 of 6 Printed: 03/16/2018 ATTACHMENT 3

DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation Format: MASTER FORMAT 17 Client: City of Manteca - Wedeco Date : January 9, 2025 Location: Manteca, CA By : ARL
Element: 02 Demolition Reviewed:

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02220
12" Concrete Pipe Rem From An Open
Trench 60 LF $5.45 $327
02220 Demo Concrete Walls, Heavy Rebar, 12" 40.5 SF $26.45 $1,071 02220 Remove 4"-6" Asphalt Pavement 3000 SF $.77 $2,318 Total $3,716
Grand Total $3,716
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Wedeco-02 Demolition Page 2 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation Format: MASTER FORMAT 17 Client: City of Manteca - Wedeco Date : January 9, 2025 Location: Manteca, CA By : ARL
Element: 03 Civil Reviewed:

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02260
Solid Shoring, 16' D, Wood Planks, Stringers
& X-Bracing 400 LF $123.50 $49,399
02300
Native Pipe Bed & Zone/Confined Structure
Backfill, Class B Material 296.3 CY $37.72 $11,176
02300
Imported Pipe Bed & Zone/Confined
Structure Backfill, Class A Material 88.89 CY $59.07 $5,250 02300
Cat 225 Trackhoe, 2Cy Bucket, Class B
(Medium Digging), 0-16' D 385.19 CY $2.75 $1,058
02580 48" Precast Manhole, Xtra Depth Over 8' 10 VLF $328.10 $3,281 02580
48" X 8' Deep Precast Manhole, No Ring,
Cover, Earthwork, Top Or Bottom Slab 2 EA $3,247.92 $6,496 02742 4" Ac Paving On 8" Abc 666.67 SY $62.09 $41,392
Total $118,052
Division 15 - Mechanical
15249 18" Sdr-26 Pvc Sewer Pipe, In Trench 200 LF $170.61 $34,121 15252
48" C200 1/4" Wall Wld Cs Pipe In Open
Trench 80 LF $794.23 $63,538
15252
48" C200 1/4" Wall Wld Cs Pipe In Open
Trench 40 LF $794.23 $31,769
Total $129,429
Grand Total $247,481
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Wedeco-03 Civil Page 3 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02000 Piles 1.00 LS $224,800.00 $224,800
Total $224,800
Division 03 - Concrete
03300 24" Structural Flat Mat On Grade 285.48 CY $1,275.51 $364,132 03300 18" Straight Wall, To 8' High 25.64 CY $1,714.78 $43,967 03300 18" Straight Wall, To 8' High 59.94 CY $1,714.78 $102,784 03300 12" Straight Wall >8' High 8.43 CY $2,287.26 $19,282 03300 12" Straight Wall >8' High 106.89 CY $2,287.26 $244,486 03300 12" Structural Flat Mat On Grade 21.93 CY $1,483.15 $32,525 Total $807,175
Division 05 - Metals
05140
Structural Aluminum Shapes & Plates - Sub
1,267.11 LB $6.41 $8,121
05500
Aluminum Stairs, Including Railing And
Supports 40.00 RSR $736.15 $29,446
05500 Checkered Aluminum Plate 908.55 SF $46.61 $42,344 05500 Aluminum Osha Handrail 270.00 LF $101.18 $27,319
05500 Aluminum Grating, 2" 608.00 SF $102.03 $62,032
05000 UV Metal Building 1.00 LS $717,090.00 $717,090
05500 Aluminum Grating, 2" 367.50 SF $102.03 $37,495
Total $923,847
Grand Total $1,955,822
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Wedeco-04 Structural Page 4 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 11 - Equipment
11000 Wedeco UV 1 LS $3,787,000.00 $3,787,000
11000 UV Installation 1 LS $568,050.00 $568,050
11000 Stainless Steel Slide Gate 3 EA $39,441.35 $118,324 11293 Slide Gate, 48" X 48" 1 EA $44,687.05 $44,687
Total $4,518,061
Grand Total $4,518,061
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Wedeco-05 Mechanical Page 5 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 04 - Masonry
04000 Electrical Building 1 LS $771,779.08 $771,779
Total $771,779
Division 16 - Electrical
16000 Electrical Equipment 1 LS $732,000.00 $732,000
Total $732,000
Grand Total $1,503,779
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Wedeco-06 Electrical Page 6 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3
PROJECT SUMMARY Estimate Class: 5
Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation - Veolia PIC: Ryan Sellman Client: City of Manteca PM: Stephen Caswell
Location: Manteca, CA Date: January 9, 2025
Zip Code: 95337 By: ARL
Carollo Job # 203331 Reviewed:

NO. DESCRIPTION TOTAL
01 Demolition $3,716
02 Civil $247,481
03 Structural $1,729,732
04 Mechanical $2,980,511
05 Electrical $1,865,908
TOTAL DIRECT COST $6,827,348
General Conditions 15.0% $1,024,102
Subtotal $7,851,450
Contingency 30.0% $2,048,204
Subtotal $9,899,654
General Contractor Overhead, Profit & Risk 18.0% $1,781,938 Subtotal $11,681,592
Escalation to Mid-Point 11.9% $1,387,899
Subtotal $13,069,491
Manteca Sales Tax (50% on Material only) 8.3% $281,628
Subtotal $13,351,119
Bid Market Allowance 0.0% $0
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $13,351,119
Engineering, Legal & Administration Fees 0.0% $0
Owner's Reserve for Change Orders 0.0% $0
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $13,351,119
The cost estimate herein is based on our perception of current conditions at the project location. This estimate reflects our professional opinion of accurate costs at this time and is subject to change as the project design matures. Carollo Engineers have no control over variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means and methods of executing the work or of determining prices, competitive bidding or market conditions, practices or bidding strategies. Carollo Engineers cannot and does not warrant or guarantee that proposals, bids or actual construction costs will not vary from the costs presented as shown. f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Veolia-PROJECT SUMMARY Page 1 of 6 Printed: 03/16/2018 ATTACHMENT 3

DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation - Veolia Format: MASTER FORMAT 17 Client: City of Manteca Date : January 9, 2025
Location: Manteca, CA By : ARL
Element: 02 Demolition Reviewed:

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02220
12" Concrete Pipe Rem From An Open
Trench 60 LF $5.45 $327
02220 Demo Concrete Walls, Heavy Rebar, 12" 40.5 SF $26.45 $1,071 02220 Remove 4"-6" Asphalt Pavement 3000 SF $.77 $2,318 Total $3,716
Grand Total $3,716
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Veolia-02 Demolition Page 2 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
Project: Manteca UV Rehabilitation - Veolia Format: MASTER FORMAT 17 Client: City of Manteca Date : January 9, 2025
Location: Manteca, CA By : ARL
Element: 03 Civil Reviewed:

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02260
Solid Shoring, 16' D, Wood Planks, Stringers
& X-Bracing 400 LF $123.50 $49,399
02300
Native Pipe Bed & Zone/Confined Structure
Backfill, Class B Material 296.3 CY $37.72 $11,176
02300
Imported Pipe Bed & Zone/Confined
Structure Backfill, Class A Material 88.89 CY $59.07 $5,250 02300
Cat 225 Trackhoe, 2Cy Bucket, Class B
(Medium Digging), 0-16' D 385.19 CY $2.75 $1,058
02580 48" Precast Manhole, Xtra Depth Over 8' 10 VLF $328.10 $3,281 02580
48" X 8' Deep Precast Manhole, No Ring,
Cover, Earthwork, Top Or Bottom Slab 2 EA $3,247.92 $6,496 02742 4" Ac Paving On 8" Abc 666.67 SY $62.09 $41,392
Total $118,052
Division 15 - Mechanical
15249 18" Sdr-26 Pvc Sewer Pipe, In Trench 200 LF $170.61 $34,121 15252
48" C200 1/4" Wall Wld Cs Pipe In Open
Trench 80 LF $794.23 $63,538
15252
48" C200 1/4" Wall Wld Cs Pipe In Open
Trench 40 LF $794.23 $31,769
Total $129,429
Grand Total $247,481
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Veolia-03 Civil Page 3 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 02 - Site Construction
02000 Piles 1.00 LS $169,400.00 $169,400
Total $169,400
Division 03 - Concrete
03300 24" Structural Flat Mat On Grade 215.11 CY $1,275.51 $274,374 03300 18" Straight Wall, To 8' High 25.33 CY $1,714.78 $43,435 03300 18" Straight Wall, To 8' High 68.44 CY $1,714.78 $117,360 03300 12" Straight Wall >8' High 8.3 CY $2,287.26 $18,984 03300 12" Straight Wall >8' High 120.89 CY $2,287.26 $276,507 03300 12" Structural Flat Mat On Grade 20.15 CY $1,483.15 $29,885 Total $760,546
Division 05 - Metals
05000 UV Metal Building 1.00 LS $524,700.00 $524,700
05140
Structural Aluminum Shapes & Plates - Sub
1,267.11 LB $6.41 $8,121
05500
Aluminum Stairs, Including Railing And
Supports 40.00 RSR $736.15 $29,446
05500 Checkered Aluminum Plate 570.00 SF $46.61 $26,565 05500 Aluminum Osha Handrail 242.00 LF $101.18 $24,486
05500 Aluminum Grating, 2" 480.00 SF $102.03 $48,973
05500 Aluminum Grating, 2" 367.50 SF $102.03 $37,495
Total $699,786
Division 14 - Conveying Systems
14000 Bridge Crane 1.00 LS $100,000.00 $100,000
Total $100,000
Grand Total $1,729,732
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Veolia-04 Structural Page 4 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 11 - Equipment
11000 Veolia UV 1 LS $2,450,000.00 $2,450,000
11000 UV Installation 1 LS $367,500.00 $367,500
11000 Stainless Steel Slide Gate 3 EA $39,441.35 $118,324 11293 Slide Gate, 48" X 48" 1 EA $44,687.05 $44,687
Total $2,980,511
Grand Total $2,980,511
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Veolia-05 Mechanical Page 5 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SPEC. NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL Division 04 - Masonry
04000 Electrical Building 1 LS $875,908.00 $875,908
Total $875,908
Division 16 - Electrical
16000 Electrical Equipment 1 LS $990,000.00 $990,000
Total $990,000
Grand Total $1,865,908
f/n: Manteca New UV Cost Estimate_Veolia-06 Electrical Page 6 of 6 Form Rev: 2008June ATTACHMENT 3

SIDESTREAM TREATMENT AND UV REHABILITATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPORT OCTOBER 2025 / FINAL / CAROLLO

CITY OF MANTECA

MANTECA WQCF SIDESTREAM TREATMENT AND UV REHABILITATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN

APPENDIX E SIDESTREAM TREATMENT SITE VISIT
NOTES
ATTACHMENT 3
1 CITY OF MANTECA
Site Visit to DC Water December 2024
Prepared By: Komal Rathore / John Witter
Location: DC Water
Subject: Meeting Notes
Attendees: Manteca:Dustin Valiquette, Cody Robinson, Tim Carroll Carollo: Ryan Sellman, John Witter, Komal Rathore, Andrew Freitas, Xiao Guo This memorandum summarizes the discussion and lessons learned about the DEMONÆ sidestream treatment process during the site visit to Blue Plains AWWTP in Washington, DC.

Agency: DC Water
Facility: Blue Plains Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant Address: 5000 Overlook Ave SW, Washington DC, 20032
Contacts:

Miguel Miranda, PE, Senior Process Engineer
[email protected]
(202) 787-4718 (office)
(401) 261-2013 (cell)
Shawna Martinelli, PE
Director of Operations and Process Engineering
[email protected]
(202) 787-4180 (office)
(508) 942-0448 (cell)

MAINSTREAM TREATMENT
▪ Average design flow of 384 mgd wet weather flow of 555 mgd, and current average flows around 290 mgd.
▪ Produces Class A biosolids
▪ Secondary treatment consists of an A/B process, which is two stage activated sludge processes (bioreactors and clarifiers) in series. First stage for BOD removal, short SRT ~2 days. Second stage for nitrification/denitrification, longer SRT.

SIDESTREAM TREATMENT ñ DEMONÆ
▪ Filtrate Treatment Facility, DEMON based that achieves deammonification of dewatering filtrate was commissioned in 2017.
▪ Demon process receives flow from belt filter presses ~0.8 to 1 mgd and is designed to treat ~27,000 lbs/day of NH3. Phosphoric acid and dilution water is added before sending flow to the DEMONÆ process. Total flow is ~1-1.4 mgd with dilution. Only need 3 DEMONÆ reactors in service.

ATTACHMENT 3
2 ▪ Six basins with 1 MG volume each. 5/6 basins operate in SBR, 1/6 operates in continuous flow (started in 2023). They will be converting the other 5 basins to continuous flow with microscreens in the near future.
▪ Biosolids treatment includes facilities consisting of CAMBI thermal hydrolysis process (THP) followed by digestion and combined heat and power (CHP). CAMBI centrate is inhibitory. Some inhibition to filtrate from THP digestion can occur. Therefore, dilution water is added. ▪ NH3 concentrations before dilution are typically 1,800 ñ 2,000 mg/L and reduce to 1,600 mg/L or less after dilution. They were as low as 1,000 mg/L but they have been reducing the dilution water. ▪ DEMONÆ process provides ~85% NH3 removal and achieves 100 ñ 150 mg/L NH3 in sidestream treated effluent without any alkalinity addition. Centrate alkalinity of about 4,500 mg/L and sidestream treated effluent alkalinity of about 300 mg/L. ▪ They were not a fan of the SBR process.
▪ Continuous mode is able to treat higher TSS compared to SBR mode. ▪ Operating in continuous mode removes the need for decanter but requires baffle walls and built in clarifier.
▪ DO range of 0.3 ñ 0.5 mg/L, pH typically around 7, Hydrocyclone ñ 1 hr/cycle ▪ Operations Feedback: Requires a process champion with full understanding of the process Mechanical
▪ 2 blowers / basin ñ neuros blowers with 3 operating modes (DO, airflow, constant speed) ▪ 4 mixers / basin ñ invent mixers with VFDs
▪ 1 hydrocyclone / basin for SBR mode
▪ 1 microscreen / basin for continuous mode
▪ Microscreen is gentler on biomass and canít shear. 150 um pore.

Instrumentation
▪ Instrumentation includes pH, temperature, DO, and conductivity probes ▪ pH based control strategy with high and low setpoints. ▪ Initially had HACH probes but were difficult to remove and calibration needed to be performed outside. It was very difficult to calibrate probes in the field in cold temperatures. Tested between Endress+Hauser and Knick probes. Knick can be taken inside for cleaning / calibrating. Ended up changing the probes to Knicks.
▪ Installed Cerlic TSS analyzers.
▪ They donít have any nitrogen probes in the basin, they take samples for lab analysis and use nitrite test strips, and grab samples for spectrophotometer to understand nitrogen trends. ▪ Sampling: 2-3 times / week analysis of influent and effluent ñ NH3, NO3, NO2, and TSS Chemicals
▪ Overdosing polymer caused foaming issues and anammox popping / coating issues. To avoid foaming, half a cup of antifoam agent is sprayed. Hydrocyclones help with retaining anammox and waste AOBs / NOBs. Also use hydrocyclones to shear excess polymer. ▪ DEMONÆ process requires addition of micronutrients, such as phosphoric acid.

ATTACHMENT 3
3 Process Issues
▪ Sinking and floating solids observed. Could be due to too many solids in the centrate. The CAMBI process likely produces a higher concentration of inert solids due to additional cell lysis (TSS 1600 ñ 2400 mg/L). No anammox bacteria in the floating sludge. Bioreactors are not designed to remove or flush this floating sludge.
▪ Floating solids have caused issues with level sensors and other probes. Once a month staff need to clean and calibrate the probes
▪ Too much hydrocyclone operation results in overshearing the anammox which causes issues with biomass settling and therefore accidental loss of biomass. ▪ Initially added lamella pretreatment to treat and remove excessive solids, lamella donít work anymore.

Current project to convert primary clarifiers to provide equalization and remove solids.

ATTACHMENT 3
1 CITY OF MANTECA
Site Visit to Howard County, MD December 2024
Prepared By: Komal Rathore / John Witter
Location: Little Patuxent WRP
Subject: Meeting Notes
Attendees: Manteca:Dustin Valiquette, Cody Robinson, Tim Carroll Carollo: Ryan Sellman, John Witter, Komal Rathore, Chrissie Swann This memorandum summarizes the discussion and lessons learned about the ANITAô MOX sidestream treatment process during the site visit to Little Patuxent WRF in Howard County, MD.

Agency: Howard County, MD
Facility: Little Patuxent Water Reclamation Plant
Address: 8869 Greenwood Pl, Savage, MD, 20763
Contact:

Justin Myers, Plant Superintendent
[email protected]
(410) 313-1211 (office)

MAINSTREAM TREATMENT
▪ 29 mgd enhanced nutrient removal (ENR) plant, average influent flows of around 20 mgd. ▪ Need to meet TN of 3 mg/L and TP of 0.3 mg/L.

SIDESTREAM TREATMENT ñ ANITAô MOX
▪ Overall, very happy with the process. Not much oversight needed, can mostly set it and forget it. ▪ Have a magprex P removal process upstream of ANITAô Mox. ▪ Design flow of 0.176 mgd with NH3 concentration of 1,100 mg/L. ▪ Retrofitted into existing tanks with shallow side water depth. ▪ Basins are covered but the reactors get too hot in the summer. Dilution water is added for heat control.
▪ Reactors occasionally operate in intermittent aeration mode automatically based on pH or DO setpoint.
▪ Achieves about 80% removal.
▪ Process started in 2019 and hasnít been offline since. They have not had to take a basin offline to do any maintenance or remove media.
▪ Submerged hot water loop in reactor with 3-way valve that operates to maintain a temperature setpoint. No heat exchanger dedicated to sidestream treatment process.

ATTACHMENT 3
2 Mechanical
▪ Kaiser compressor / blowers
▪ PHI bubble mixing in the EQ basin works well, no issues with it. Havenít taken an EQ basin offline. ▪ Air lift foam suppression pumps are ok but arenít very effective. Some foam/media/solids buildup often clogs the discharge orifice of the pump and needs to be wiped clean. ▪ LobePro Rotary lobe influent pumps (2+1) work well but need to be taken offline to clear struvite.

Gate valves on pump discharge manifold get quite a bit of struvite buildup.

Instrumentation
▪ Calibrate HACH probes monthly
▪ Sample influent and effluent nitrogen species and alkalinity for lab analysis daily ▪ Instrumentation includes DO / pH probes, donít have nitrogen probes.

Chemical
▪ Alkalinity addition (caustic) dosed with Watson Marlow peristaltic pumps. ▪ No anti foam or micronutrient chemical addition. No foaming issues unless polymer is overdosed ATTACHMENT 3
1 CITY OF MANTECA
Site Visit to Pierce County, WA December 2024
Prepared By: John Witter
Location: Chambers Creek WWTP
Subject: Meeting Notes
Attendees: Manteca:Dustin Valiquette, Cody Robinson, Tim Carroll Carollo: Stephen Caswell, Ryan Sellman, John Witter, Alison Payauys, Meghna Prasad This memorandum summarizes the discussion and lessons learned about the DEMONÆ sidestream treatment process during the site visit to Chambers Creek WWTP in Pierce County, WA.

Agency: Pierce County, WA
Facility: Chambers Creek WWTP
Address: 10311 Chambers Creek Rd W, University Place, Washington, 98467 Contacts:

Jeremy Carnahan, Wastewater Manager
[email protected]
(253) 798-2567 (office)
(253) 328-1093 (cell)

MAINSTREAM TREATMENT
Mainstream process is a 5 stage Bardenpho. No effluent P limit but they achieve P removal to improve the marketability of the biosolids product. They sell dried product (5-5-0) (centrifuge to thermal dryer) in winter and produce dewatered cake (centrifuge) in the winter.

SIDESTREAM TREATMENT ñ DEMONÆ
DEMONÆ 1.0 SBR process.

There are two parallel treatment trains and they canít evenly split flow between them.

Achieve about 80% TIN removal and close to 90% NH3 removal when operating well.

Centrate is 200 mg/L TSS, which goes to a sludge holding tank upstream of EQ that has a rake and chain primary clarifier mechanism for solids separation.

Centrate NH3 is 3000 mg/L. Mesophilic digestion ran at 62 d SRT. Digester feed is 10% TS from RDT.

Pump a portion of DS to mix with digester feed to improve pumpability.

Old aeration basins were converted to EQ and DEMONÆ reactors.

Centrate flow is around 250 kgpd in the summer when they run the dryer and around 40-60 kgpd in the winter.

ATTACHMENT 3
2 There is no centrate heating but they have a storage digester upstream of dewatering that they can heat to 110 F. Still, reactor temperature can get down to low 20ís C during the winter, causing ìnitrite lockî where they build up nitrite and DMX bacteria canít convert to nitrogen gas. Nitrite concentrations could be as high as 150 mg/L. Foam buildup (several feet) is indicative that the process is going into nitrite lock.

PROCESS / I&C
Operate at a DO around 0.5 ñ 0.7 mg/L and a pH between 6.5 and 7.2.

YSI nitrogen probes in the secondary process, which they donít like because the concentrations are lower than the reporting threshold.

DEMONÆ has proprietary controls of the system that the owner is not allowed to change the programming of.

Overdosing polymer causes the granules to get coated in polymer and performance decreases. They switched from DAFT to RDT and kept the same polymer, which caused them to overdose polymer. Once they went to a different polymer optimized for RDT, they didnít have any more polymer overdose or polymer related process issues.

Decant cycle every 8 hrs.

The instruments are located in different locations in each reactor so the trends between the two reactors arenít consistent. Use nitrite test strips to monitor process and spectrophotometry for nitrogen trending.

Have Hach DO, conductivity, and pH probes in each basin. They want pH and conductivity to trend in the same direction. Increasing feed flow increases pH. Increasing air flow reduces pH.

MECHANICAL
Decanter came loose during startup and wasted a lot of biomass and had to reseed the process. Added more structural support to the decant mechanism and havenít had issues since.

Messner panel aeration havenít had any issues with performance or maintenance except one time when a nut on the all thread rod came loose and floated the panel. Had to pump granules from one basin to the other to drain it and secure the panel.

Two hydrocyclones of different sizes per reactor, smaller one to shear granules to control polymer buildup and recirculate back to reactor and bigger one to waste flocs and NOBs. Flygt submersibles feed hydrocyclones, no issues with them.

Aerzen positive displacement blowers, no issues with them.

Wilo submersible mixers, 2 per reactor and EQ. Struvite will build up on the blades of the mixer.

Vogelsang rotary lobe feed pump. Load and liner swelled up early on due to material incompatibility but havenít had issues since they replaced it.

CHEMICAL
No alkalinity addition.

Dose micronutrients and EDTA that they purchase from WWW. They tried to just dose generic iron salts (cheaper) instead of micronutrients but after a couple weeks/months the performance dropped off and they switched back to proprietary micronutrients. Each tote costs about $10k and will last 3-4 months.

They pour a couple liters per day in a carboy and manually dump it into the reactor, no chem feed system.

ATTACHMENT 3
1 CITY OF MANTECA
Site Visit to Central Valley WRF December 2024
Prepared By: John Witter
Location: Central Valley WRF
Subject: Meeting Notes
Attendees: Manteca:Dustin Valiquette, Cody Robinson, Tim Carroll Carollo: Stephen Caswell, Ryan Sellman, John Witter, Randy Zollinger, Jade Echard This memorandum summarizes the discussion and lessons learned about the ANITAô Mox sidestream treatment process during the site visit to Central Valley WRF in Salt Lake City, UT.

Agency: Central Valley WRF
Facility: Central Valley WRF
Address: 800 Central Valley Rd, South Salt Lake, UT, 84119 Contacts:

Phil Heck, General Manager
[email protected]
(801) 9173-9100
Dustin Gloor, Process Coordinator
[email protected]
(801) 973-9100 ext: 134 (office)
(336) 410-1611 (cell)

MAINSTREAM TREATMENT
Currently have trickling filters and a solids contact basin but new P regs, converting to West Bank process (PS fermentation and centrifuge feeds anaerobic zone, PE to anoxic zone with IMLR, similar to Kelona BC).

They have MagPrex (dosing MgCl) upstream of ANITAô Mox but they still have struvite buildup issues 2 stage mesophilic digestion. Main digesters are two large egg shaped.

SIDESTREAM TREATMENT ñ ANITAô Mox
ANITAô Mox startup in August 2023 with 5% seed media from Durham, NC.

Currently have BFPs with washwater dilution (NH3 500-600). In the future they will run BFPs and centrifuges. Future BFPs will have washwater separated from filtrate. Cake is 16-19% TS. Polymer dose is 12-15 lb/DT, which they track closely.

ANITAô Mox was a $21M project bid in 2021 as part of a larger $500M plant upgrade.

ATTACHMENT 3
2 Showed that by adding ANITAô Mox they could reduce secondary process sizing by about 20% and save millions of dollars.

During analysis, they visited DEMONÆ, ANITAô Mox, and AnammoPAQ facilities in Europe. Thought that ANITAô Mox had the lowest operational complexity. Had an evaluated bid process with various evaluation criteria. Only AnammoPAQ and ANITAô Mox submitted bids and they went with ANITAô Mox.

Converted an old digester from the 1950s to a pre-treatment, heated, insulated EQ tank. Cone bottom that they let solids settle out and pump out. TSS is 500-100 going into the EQ and 40-50 going to the reactor.

They achieve around 80% NH3 removal, effluent NH3 around 150 mg/L and NO3 <50.

Reactors are circular because they were cheaper to construct and offers better seismic resistance. Reactors and EQ are both insulated.

They have a screened mud valve if they need to drain a tank and a standpipe for overflow.

They can pump media from one reactor to another if they needed to.

They have a mesh screen at the water surface level so they can spray foam through it but they donít run it too often and doesnít seem to be too effective.

The facility was designed for buildout of a third reactor.

PROCESS / I&C
Operates at a DO around 1.5 and a pH around 7.0
They discharge treated sidestream to the head of the secondary process, which has shown to improve the secondary process performance.

Suggest having an SME that operates the facility.

Try to maintain constant feed flow rate around 190 gpm.

They have Hach nitrogen probes and are currently converting to YSI probes in their mainstream. The probes are just used for trending and they run based on DO and temperature.

Currently running based on air flow setpoint. Looking into being able to run based on pH. The effluent NH3 and pH trend together.

MECHANICAL
They have Niron pipe to prevent struvite buildup. Similar to HDPE with fiberglass additive with fused fittings.

Tube in tube heat exchanger maintains temperature for the reactor. They havenít seen scaling of the centrate in the HEX.

Gorman Rupp centrifugal feed pumps, donít have any issues with and donít see struvite buildup.

Atlas Copco PD blowers, no issues with them
Submersible pump in the effluent channel pumps to foam suppression nozzles within the reactor. Pump runs on a timer.

Invent vertical impeller mixer, one per reactor, first installation of its kind. Used only during startup, havenít had issues with it. Process has run in continuous aeration since.

CHEMICAL
ATTACHMENT 3
3 Have two different types of anti foam chemical that they dose manually (100 mL at a time) with BlueWhite pumps. They have not gone through one drum of anti foam chem (since startup in Aug 23). Anti foam chem will inhibit the oxygen transfer and reduce DO.

They have pretty hard source water, so no additional alkalinity or micronutrient feed. Thinks need for micronutrient would be based on source water quality, not which treatment technology you have.

ATTACHMENT 3
Progressive Design Build Agreement for Services
43 EXHIBIT “X”
City of Manteca Conflict of Interest Policy
ATTACHMENT 3
§ 2.36.020. Conflict of interest code for design-build City projects.

A) This establishes the organizational conflict of interest guidelines applicable to City projects procured pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22185, et seq.

B) This applies to all vendors that have entered into or wish to enter into contracts with the City.

C) Vendors participating as proposers ("Proposers") on a project or joining a team shall not have an organizational conflict of interest. Organizational conflicts of interest are created by circumstances arising out of Proposers’ existing or past activities, business or financial interests, familial relationships, contractual relationships, or organizational structure (e.g., parent entities, subsidiaries, affiliates) that could result in any of the following:
(i) impairment or potential impairment of proposers’ ability to render impartial assistance or advice to the City or of their objectivity in performing work for the City.
(ii) an unfair competitive advantage for any Proposer with respect to the City’s procurement process, or
(iii) a perception or appearance of impropriety with respect to any of the City’s procurements or contracts or perception or appearance of unfair competitive advantage with respect to a procurement by District (irrespective of whether such perception is accurate).

D) Proposers having any actual, apparent, direct or indirect, or potential conflict of interest that may exist with respect to the Proposer, any employees of the Proposer, any team member(s), or any other person relative to the services to be provided, must immediately make a full written disclosure of the conflict to the City. If a Proposer determines that a potential conflict of interest exists, the Proposer's disclosure will not necessarily disqualify the Proposer from being awarded a contract. The Proposer shall submit proposed measures to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate all potential or actual conflicts. The City, at its sole discretion, shall determine whether an organizational conflict of interest exists and whether the proposed measures are sufficient to overcome the conflict or potential conflict and whether the Proposer may continue with the procurement process.

E) The successful Proposer has an ongoing obligation to monitor and disclose conflicts or potential conflicts of interest. The City has the right to ongoing enforcement of this.

If an organizational conflict of interest is:
(i) Discovered after the contract has been awarded, the Proposer must make an immediate and full written disclosure to the City in writing and detail the action(s) that the Proposer has taken or proposes to take to avoid or mitigate the conflict. The City may, at its sole discretion, terminate the contract.

ATTACHMENT 3
(ii) Determined to exist and the Proposer was aware of the organizational conflict of interest prior to award and did not disclose the conflict, or if a Proposer provides false or misleading information in response to an inquiry from the City, the City may, at its sole discretion, terminate the contract. (iii) Arises after the award and the Proposers’ proposed measures to avoid or mitigate the conflict are determined by the City to be inadequate, the City may, at its sole discretion, terminate the contract.

If the contract is terminated, the City assumes no obligation, responsibility or liability to reimburse all or part of the costs incurred or alleged to have been incurred by the Proposer, and the City shall be entitled to pursue any and all appropriate legal remedies.

F) This shall be incorporated by reference into all procurement packages as well as any contract for the engineering/design services, inspection, or technical support in the administration of projects executed by the City.

G) This does not derogate from any obligation of “Consultant” under the Fair Political Practices Act, Regulations and the District’s Conflict of Interest Code. For reference, “Consultants” are defined in FPPC Reg. 18700.3 and includes persons who make a government decision whether to authorize the agency to enter into, modify or renew a contract, grant agency approval to a contract or specification for such a contract, or grant agency approval to a plan, report or design.

ATTACHMENT 3
Progressive Design Build Agreement for Services
44 EXHIBIT “Y”
DB Firm Conflict of Interest Statement
ATTACHMENT 3
March 17, 2026
Attn: Mr. Kyzen Nicolas
Associate Engineer
City of Manteca – Engineering Department
1001 West Center Street, Suite E
Manteca, CA 95337
Re: RFP – Progressive Design-Build Services for Sidestream Treatment and UV Rehabilitation Project (CIP 25004 & 25005)
Dear Mr. Nicolas,
Overaa has completed numerous projects for the City of Manteca under a variety of delivery methods. As the selected proposer for the Sidestream Treatment and UV Rehabilitation Project, we recognize our responsibility to identify, disclose, and monitor any actual or potential conflicts of interest in accordance with the City’s policy. At this time, Overaa is under contract with the City on two projects procured through the traditional design-bid-build process, Capacity Improvements Project, anticipated completion July 2026, and Sludge Thickening & Dewatering Unit No. 3, anticipated completion July 2027.

These projects were competitively bid and are unrelated to the procurement and evaluation process for the Sidestream project.

In California, conflicts of interest in public contracting are governed by Government Code § 1090, which prohibits public officials, or private parties acting in a public or quasi-public role, from having a financial interest in contracts they help “make.”Courts interpret “making” broadly to include planning, advising, drafting specifications, or influencing the procurement process (People v. Superior Court, 3 Cal.5th 230, 237 (2017)). Municipal guidance confirms that § 1090 applies to participation in the contracting process itself, not merely to prior projects with the same agency (League of California Cities, Navigating Conflict Issues in Engaging Consultants & Government Code § 1090 Overview, City Attorneys’ Annual Conference paper, 2018).

Applied here, Overaa’s prior projects with the City do not, by themselves, create a conflict.

The key question is whether the design-builder participated in “making” the current ATTACHMENT 3
contract in a public or quasi-public capacity. Overaa was selected through a competitive design-build process and did not help draft the solicitation, set evaluation criteria, or influence the agency’s decision. Under the case law and municipal guidance, this makes Overaa a repeat vendor rather than a conflicted participant, so § 1090 does not apply.

Throughout the RFP process, Overaa and PACE took reasonable steps to avoid any impropriety or the appearance of an unfair competitive advantage. Our team conducted a single pre-proposal site visit, documented through the City’s sign-in procedures, and all time on site was spent in the presence of City Engineering and Operations staff. This confirms that the design-builder did not participate in making the contract and had no opportunity to influence the procurement process, reinforcing that § 1090 is not implicated.

Based on the above, Overaa is not aware of any actual or potential conflict of interest associated with this project. Should any circumstance arise that could present a conflict, Overaa will promptly disclose it to the City in accordance with the City of Manteca’s Conflict of Interest Policy.

Sincerely,
Ryan James
Sr. Project Manager, Water Group
Overaa Construction

ATTACHMENT 3

Manteca City CouncilApril 21, 2026

Manteca City Council
April 21, 2026