Hydromax: Odessa valve assessment about 63% complete; frozen and paved‑over valves are largest problems

Hydromax USA representatives reported to the Odessa City Council on Feb. 25 that the contractor has completed roughly 63% of the city’s valve assessment and that about 66% of inspected valves were operable on a first pass.

That assessment matters because the information will let the city target capital and rehabilitation work, improve water quality and pressure in parts of town, and help staff decide whether to repair valves or replace them. Hydromax and city staff said the data are being delivered in a live dashboard the city owns while the contract is in force and will receive monthly data exports for integration into city systems.

Hydromax project manager Austin Jordan and Hydromax operations director Russ Jackson walked council members through the dashboard during a presentation. Jackson said the firm classifies nonoperable valves into several categories: frozen (cannot be actuated up to the contractor’s torque limit), “spins free” (the stem turns but the valve does not open or close), missing operator nuts (no mechanism to turn the valve), and valves that could not be located in the field. “The largest portion” of nonoperable valves the team has found are frozen, Jackson said.

Jackson and Jordan demonstrated filters on the dashboard that show where specific categories of problem valves are located and details about pipe size, number of turns and other attributions acquired during inspection. Jordan said Hydromax’s deliverables “give you exactly that capability” to prioritize sections of the system if the city has a fixed capital budget.

Hydromax gave several quantitative updates as part of the presentation: the contractor said it is “roughly 63%” through the mapped assets provided by the city, reported about “66% operable” on inspected valves on a first pass, and cited an inoperable‑assets count in the 300s (the speaker alternated between figures presented as “about 320” and “327”). The team also identified smaller counts of specific subcategories during the live demonstration (for example, the contractor highlighted roughly 83 assets that appeared to be unable to be turned and about 33 valves missing an operator nut on the map filters during the presentation). Hydromax cautioned these figures are first‑pass counts and that some locations flagged as “cannot locate” may be operable once pavement or obstructions are removed.

Jackson described Hydromax’s operating procedures for frozen valves: crews ramp torque in stages, typically stopping at a pre‑set limit (Hydromax described machines with typical arm torque up to 750 foot‑pounds and a slide‑out unit rated to 1,500 foot‑pounds). If Hydromax reaches the agreed torque limit without success, staff will notify the city to decide whether to continue attempts on safety or service‑impact grounds. Jackson said attempts to free valves beyond the standard limit are usually charged hourly and that some valves can take prolonged effort to restore operation.

City utilities staff and Hydromax also discussed repair and budgeting options. Alex (utilities staff) said Hydromax’s deliverables will be integrated into an interactive map for field crews and into the city’s MGO planning system. City staff noted the council previously set aside funds for valve work: speakers described an account “a little bit over $9 million” and later referenced $9.5 million in a valves account during the meeting. City staff also said the current assessment contract was projected to come in under the originally budgeted million‑dollar line for the inspection phase, with the in‑house replacement work to be planned strategically.

Council and staff discussed operational benefits they have already observed: opening closed valves and locating problem valves has reportedly improved chlorine residuals and leveled tower supplies in some pressure planes. Utilities staff said plant chlorine residuals are currently being run at a “4” and that the department expects to reduce that setting to 3, which the presenter estimated could save “somewhere between $200,000 to $300,000 a year” at the treatment plant.

City staff outlined next steps: finish the remaining inspections, export and integrate Hydromax data into the city’s Esri‑based systems, and use the dashboard to prioritize repairs. Staff said they plan to maintain an in‑house crew to exercise valves going forward, and they have a new valve truck and mobile exercising trailers placed at city facilities. Hydromax said the city will own the inspection data; the dashboard remains live while Hydromax is under contract and monthly shapefile exports will be provided for the city to integrate.

Council members asked about costs for replacement versus repair; Hydromax and staff gave example orders of magnitude from the presentation — the speakers described a rough replacement‑cost example of about $10,000 for an 8‑inch valve and “30 plus” thousand dollars for a 24‑inch valve — and reiterated that smaller repairs or operator replacements can be much less expensive than full excavation and replacement.

Hydromax representatives emphasized that the principal value the firm delivers is the data about valve condition: “All of our clients basically pay us for information,” Jackson said, adding that the dashboard enables strategic capital planning and quicker, lower‑impact responses to line breaks.

The council did not take formal action on the presentation; staff said they will return with integrated map access, a plan for prioritized repair and a report on how remaining repair work will be scheduled within existing valve funds.

Ending: City staff said the assessment will continue through the summer and that the Hydromax dashboard and data exports will be used to guide both short‑term repairs and longer‑term capital projects. If the council wants to pursue repair or replacement beyond what staff can perform in‑house, staff said they will bring cost options back to council for approval.