achieving a balance: economical, technical, public … · 2013-12-10 · why black & veatch?...

PROPOSAL FOR

SMITH MOUNTAIN LAKE WTP AND LAKES TO FOREST WATERLINE EXTENSION PROJECT PROGRESSIVE DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT

Bedford Regional Water Authority 18 November 2013

ACHIEVING A BALANCE: ECONOMICAL, TECHNICAL, PUBLIC AND SCHEDULE

©Black & Veatch Holding Company 2013. All rights reserved.

David Kinchen Project Manager, Water Division

50 HURT PLAZA SUITE 1150 ATLANTA GEORGIA 30303 USA +1 678.575.4411 P [email protected]

www.bv.com

18 November 2013 Rhonda B. English, P.E. Engineering Manager Bedford Regional Water Authority 1723 Falling Creek Road Bedford, Virginia 24523 Subject: Proposal for Smith Mountain Lake WTP and Lakes to Forest

Waterline Extension Progressive Design-Build Project (SMLWTP)

Dear Ms. English,

Black & Veatch remains excited about the SMLWTP project, continuing the journey as the Authority’s business partner. We have listened to you throughout the selection process and gained additional insight during our recent workshops. Our integrated team of engineering and construction professionals is prepared to deliver viable options for stakeholder consideration in this highly visible project. We offer a comprehensive approach that will allow the Authority to achieve the right balance between its economical, technical, public and schedule priorities, over the short-term and the long-term. As part of this proposal, we have included a more in-depth discussion of some of these key points, and they can be found in the Project Approach section of this proposal.

In Black & Veatch, you have access to the resources of one of the preeminent engineering and construction companies in the world in the area of water treatment and conveyance facilities. Our expertise in the delivery of design-build projects has been recognized with awards from the Design-Build Institute of America. We are complemented by our primary local subconsultant CHA Consultants, who will make significant contributions and add value to the project.

The key benefits that our team offers are: competitive pricing through transparent bidding process; optimal water quality that conforms to state regulations while meeting the standards to be established by the Authority; informed stakeholders; and a project that addresses the Authority’s priorities and meets the established budget. To demonstrate how we’ll do what we have promised, we have included a detailed scope of work as part of Attachment A to the draft contract. In addition to the scope, we have provided a marked-up draft of the Phase 1 contract for consideration, and our proposal price for Phase 1 services is included in that section of this proposal in a separate envelope as requested.

BEDFORD REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY PROPOSAL FOR SMITH MOUNTAIN LAKE WTP AND LAKES TO FOREST WATERLINE EXTENSION PDB PROJECT

In addition to, and as part of this proposal, please find the following certificates included in Proposal Appendix C (Updated Forms for Affirmation of Compliance):

n Certification of Compliance with Prohibition of Political Contributions and Gifts During Procurement Process

n Submittal Certification

Our signatory for this contract is:

Mark A. Prenni Managing Director/Vice President Overland Contracting Inc. 587 Sigman Road, NE, Conyers, GA 30013 (913) 458-4122 –phone, [email protected]

We submit this proposal as a personal statement of our team’s commitment to advance your project from concept through construction. We look forward to discussing our approach in more detail with you. Please direct all correspondence to Dave Kinchen using the information at the top of this letterhead, who will serve as the Responder’s Contact.

Very truly yours, Black & Veatch Corporation

David E. Kinchen, II Project Manager

mailto:[email protected]�

Bedford Regional Water Authority | SMITH MOUNTAIN LAKE WTP AND LAKES TO FOREST WATERLINE EXTENSION PROJECT

BLACK & VEATCH | Table of Contents i

Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 1 Detailed Project Understanding and Approach ...................................................... 5

Phase 1 Delivery Approach - Design .................................................................................... 5 Phase 2 Execution Approach................................................................................................. 20 Finalizing the Project ............................................................................................................... 26 Black & Veatch: A Leader in Progressive Design-Build.............................................. 27

Innovation or Value-Added Suggestions ................................................................. 31 Membrane System-Value Added Services ....................................................................... 31 Technical Advisory Team ....................................................................................................... 32 Construction of the Immediate DBP Solution ................................................................ 32 Hand-Held GPS Tagging Asset Management System .................................................. 32 Noise Study ................................................................................................................................... 33 Smart System Infrastructure ................................................................................................ 34 Alternative Funding Assistance and Grant Applications ........................................... 35 Interconnections between Franklin County Systems and Providing Adequate Gravity Sewer Capacity for Lake Vista ......................................................... 36 Outside Public Communications Assistance ................................................................... 37

Updated Statement of Qualifications ........................................................................ 39 Appendices A. Draft Progressive Design-Build Agreement B. Updated Resumes C. Updated Forms for Affirmation of Compliance

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. List of Potential Workshops to Promote Rapid Decision-

Making ....................................................................................................................... 5 Table 2. Permitting Tasks ................................................................................................... 9 Table 3. Membrane Experience ...................................................................................... 12 Table 4. Promoting Budget Certainty: Getting a head start on pricing

packages ................................................................................................................. 17

LIST OF TABLES Figure 1. Intake and screen similar to what is proposed for BRWA with

intake pipe to be buried from view. From: Nacimiento WTP; Paso Robles, CA .................................................................................................... 10

Figure 2. Black & Veatch has developed viable intake concepts, such as the conceptual design shown here for the SMLWTP project, to achieve the best design for the GMP. ..................................................... 10

Figure 3. Schedule Approach Diagram .......................................................................... 23


BLACK & VEATCH | Executive Summary 1

Executive Summary The Bedford Regional Water Authority (Authority) is in a great position. You’ve done the legwork required to gain the most robust, reliable water system possible, and you’re on the cusp of making it happen. The Authority has its choice of qualified teams to deliver the Smith Mountain Lake Water Treatment Plant and Lakes to Forest Waterline Extension Project (SMLWTP). However, the question is which team is best positioned to help the Authority achieve the balance between all of the project’s priorities and objectives?

Why Black & Veatch? The Authority has heard much about the individual parts and pieces about how this process will work. You’ve heard about Phase 1, Phase 2, design, construction, guaranteed maximum price (GMP), pipeline, intake and membranes. Black & Veatch will bring all of these individually segmented elements together. Based on a complete understanding of the project and a keen insight to balance the Authority’s priorities, we will provide you with confidence in the sum of the parts and help to advance the Authority from where it is now to where it needs to be in just three short years.

For nearly a year, Black & Veatch has listened to you to better understand the issues, and your goals and expectations. As a result, we have studied the Authority’s priorities and objectives for the SMLWTP project, and in our view, the project’s success comes down to these core success factors:

ECONOMICAL PRIORITIES

TECHNICAL PRIORITIES

PUBLIC PRIORITIES

SCHEDULE PRIORITIES

Maximize the Authority’s investment. We deliver a best-value approach, taking into account construction costs weighed out against important design features. Our systematic approach will help the Authority to understand where best to invest its money now, while providing an expandable water system for the future.

Produce the high quality water with cost effective and easily expandable facilities. Our efficient approach will allow the Authority to make the best decisions with the optimum balance of solutions to the established priorities.

Effective and accurate information. We will provide proven resources and a strong support system to deliver the best information and education about the project to the local constituents and ratepayers to advance support for the project.

Interconnectivity by November 2016. Our integrated team not only has the demonstrated experience in designing and building entire water systems, but can facilitate rapid decision-making during Phase 1. We offer the appropriate phased approach to balance short-term goals while considering the long-term vision of the region’s water supply.

SMITH MOUNTAIN LAKE WTP AND LAKES TO FOREST WATERLINE EXTENSION PROJECT | Bedford Regional Water Authority

2 NOVEMBER 2013

Making the Most Informed Decisions The Authority will be faced with a number of important decisions that will have significant cost impacts both now and into the future. As detailed in our Project Approach section, the Black & Veatch menu-driven approach will guide the Authority through a series of workshops, as outlined in our scope of services in the Cost Proposal. Each workshop will provide the best tools—with the right people involved—to assist the Authority as it makes the important individual decisions it faces, taking into account the perspective from a holistic approach. Each decision has an impact on the sum of the parts. Our detailed process during Phase 1 includes an analysis of each decision, taking into account O&M considerations, operational ease, reliability, permitability, compliance, schedule, costs and construction. More detail regarding the progression of Phase 1 decisions is discussed in our proposal and outlined in the scope of services. Our approach will provide the best way to blend and balance each of the necessary elements, and the workshops we have designed will prove instrumental in achieving a balance.

Execute the Plan While the execution of Phase 2 is a continuation of the Phase 1 planning, our construction management capabilities, balanced with our competitive self-perform approach to the “heart of the plant” process construction will create tremendous value for the Authority. Additionally, while we intend to self-perform certain portions of the work, we are committed to operating in a transparent manner by pricing our construction services against the local market. To that end, we have already engaged local vendors and subcontractors, and will continue to foster local participation as an important part of our execution plan. This ensures that the Authority gets the most competitive pricing possible and is not restricted to a budget set by a contractor without true validation. This approach also limits the required contingency, which also maximizes the Authority’s investment.

Our construction management method includes a comprehensive quality, safety and schedule approach as detailed in the Project Approach section of the proposal, and provides further confidence to the Authority that what has been designed and agreed to on paper gets properly constructed in the field.

Right People, Right Resources Black & Veatch has been involved as a team with boots on the ground in Bedford since our first meeting in December 2012. We’ve been listening all along the way.

We’ve come to know the project, the personalities and the critical success factors. It is clear from our discussions with Brian Key and Rhonda English, the Authority needs a partner that understands the objectives and can address each of SMLWTP project’s priorities. Prior to the RFP being issued, we were given the opportunity to meet with Gary Robertson and Bob Benninger to learn more about their immediate disinfection byproduct (DBP) concerns and interest in interconnection

Black & Veatch self perform arm, OCI. Our approach balances each of the necessary elements – accounting for impacts on operational ease, reliability, permitting, compliance, and cost and schedule – to guide the Authority to the most informed decision possible.

We will validate the cost of our construction services by pricing them against the local market. This also will help limit the required contingency.


BLACK & VEATCH | Executive Summary 3

Our approach is based on being able to understand and resolve every issue or concern, from interconnectivity and water quality to operations and stakeholder acceptance.

between separate systems in Franklin County. Through our most recent dialogue with Dennis Wood and Elmer Handy on October 25th, we gained more insight into the operational concerns with the membrane system and shared our approach to addressing the DBP concerns in the short-term. We also appreciate Elmer Hodge’s desire to gain consensus and acceptance from stakeholders and further involve the local businesses to create a positive economic impact in the area. Bob Flynn’s concerns for cost certainty and maximizing efficiencies continue to be key considerations in our project approach. We also fully understand our role as a key supporter in Megan Rapp’s public outreach and education effort for the benefit of stakeholders and community groups.

In the Updated SOQ section of this proposal, we have included some additional information regarding our key team members. Our team’s experiences do not just include individual parts and pieces; our team has extensive background in designing and building entire water systems. That experience is underpinned by highly specialized professionals with expertise in specific areas required on this project.

Our resources will help you to make the most informed decisions at the right time. Black & Veatch brings not only global resources but local ones, too. We have gained a deep understanding of the local resources available to design, supply and provide construction capabilities as necessary. Our key local subconsultant, CHA Consulting, remains committed as our specialist in local coordination, permitting guidance, laboratory services and pipeline design and discipline support. CHA has already initiated conversations with key permitting agencies, which further exemplifies our team’s commitment to the project and to meeting the schedule set forth in the RFP.

Local suppliers and construction subcontractors—English Construction, Hughes Supply, Griffin Pipe Products, and Sunapsys—will assist our design-build team by providing constructability input for trade-specific work where local trade practices can be incorporated into the design. This work will provide preliminary pricing and market validation of the budget and GMP, ensuring the Authority the best-value resources for the project.

Black & Veatch envisions a project that is success not only because it meets the tangible factors that must be delivered and achieved, but also due to intangible elements that our team brings to the table. These intangibles hinge both on our familiar team members who know the project and its goals and our integrated approach that facilitates informed, efficient decision making without communication gaps.

That’s why your best choice is Black & Veatch.


BLACK & VEATCH | Detailed Project Understanding and Approach 5

Detailed Project Understanding and Approach PHASE 1 DELIVERY APPROACH - DESIGN Phase 1 of the progressive design-build process sets the stage for the construction of the overall project. The most important component of Phase 1 is the active communication between the Bedford Regional Water Authority (Authority) and the Black & Veatch Team. This interaction will promote the rapid decision-making required to reach the guaranteed maximum price (GMP) within the proposed schedule as well as promote a “best-value” solution, and our approach to the design ensures this interaction is consistent and beneficial to the overall process.

While we presented our overall approach in our previously submitted Statement of Qualifications (SOQ), the following sections summarize a few differentiators in our Phase 1 Delivery Approach that warrant discussion. A detailed Phase 1 Scope of Services is provided in Attachment B for your consideration.

Decision-Making Workshops To assist with decision-making and ensure that the entire team is moving forward in a collaborative manner, a number of workshops (covering multiple topics) are proposed for the first month and at subsequent points during Phase 1. These workshops will be hosted and moderated by the Black & Veatch which will use decision-making tools that have previously been shared with some Authority staff to gain consensus.

Table 1. List of Potential Workshops to Promote Rapid Decision-Making

WORKSHOP PURPOSE/GOAL Project Kickoff • Confirm roles and responsibilities

• Affirm proposed schedule • Affirm priorities and risk allocation • Determine Authority-defined critical deadlines or meetings • Review long-term facility design/layout

Alternative Funding (optional)

• Identify and quantify likelihood of potential alternative funding grant and low-interest loan programs

Immediate Disinfection Byproduct (DBP) Improvements

• Review and confirm proposal for DBP control at the existing SMLWTP

Public Communications • Develop and refine Public Communications and Outreach Plan • Confirm roles and responsibilities

RSPS/Intake and Membrane and Process Selection

• Confirm intake and RWPS configuration • Assess and confirm DBP control technology • Assess and confirm membrane technology selection • Discuss piloting approach, roles and responsibilities • Consider reuse of existing facilities and phasing of new facilities

Permitting • Discuss and confirm the permits required for all proposed facilities

Pipeline • Review and determine scope and alignment of pipeline • Confirm pipe diameter versus future pumping stations

Monthly Interim Design and Pricing

• Review interim designs and pricing • Revise interim designs per Authority input/comments and revise pricing prior to next

workshop • Anticipate three of These Workshops Prior to GMP

Our team understands your project in its entirety, and our approach to Phase 1 reflects that comprehensive understanding, which means a simpler way forward for BRWA.


6 NOVEMBER 2013

Upon completion of the workshops, the Authority and Black & Veatch will proceed with interim designs through a clear understanding of the Authority’s expectations for its facilities. This will promote initial intake, raw water pumping station, water treatment plant and pipeline designs that are much closer to the final product than what would otherwise occur.

Value Engineering While our engineering team dedicated to this project prides itself in the ability to design cost-effective, value-oriented facilities, value engineering at the correct time can either enhance and optimize a design or simply confirm that the proposed layout is actually cost effective.

To this end, we are preparing to bring forward a two-phased value engineering effort, one of which is value-added. That value-added option will include our Technical Advisory Team (TAT), comprised of Dr. Bill Knocke of Virginia Tech and Dave Reckhow of University of Massachusetts. Once we have developed our proposed treatment train for the Smith Mountain Lake WTP, we will present it to the TAT for comments and potential value engineering opportunities. However, the Authority will have the option to move ahead without using this value-added option.

Once we have confirmed a process and have a building layout and conceptual design, we will set up a value engineering session with three experienced Black & Veatch professionals representing our company’s technology and construction expertise. At this point, we will also engage local vendors and subcontractors and introduce their involvement into the design concepts. These professionals would not be directly involved in your project, but they will bring extensive experience on other similar projects. We will solicit their input on cost-saving measures with a focus on materials and constructability (means and methods), more so than process design. This will ensure that all design concepts that may result in cost savings or increase value will be considered.

The Authority’s staff will be invited to participate in any of the value engineering sessions, and we will share all recommendations for your input and consideration.

Public Communication and Outreach We conveyed our public communication and outreach in our SOQ; however, we want to re-emphasize that our approach is to primarily support Megan Rapp and her activities. Our team leaders have all been involved in similar projects and can offer ideas/concepts for the Authority’s consideration. Additionally, we have teamed with Carolina PR, a public relations firm with which we have worked on very similar projects in the past, to be available to the Authority as you deem fit. However, we have not included any efforts on their part in our Phase 1 Scope of Services; Carolina PR’s services are offered as a value-added component, made available at the choice of the Authority.

Achieving Balance: Economical Your team is your expert. However, we will have a formal VE workshop with experienced Black & Veatch staff not directly involved with your project to ensure we capitalize on all cost-saving measures. We will also offer our Technical Advisory Team for a formal VE and process confirmation as a value-added service.

Achieving Balance: Public Our core team members offer extensive public communication and outreach experience bolstered, if deemed necessary by the Authority, by the local expertise of Carolina PR.



Achieving Balance: Technical

GAC provides the most assured compliance approach to address immediate DBP issues, and we believe, with some planned operation, the carbon would not require replacement / regeneration during the period prior to the start-up of the new facility.

For the purposes of Phase 1, we anticipate four public meetings attended by two members of our Project Team in addition to 40 hours of general support to Megan, above and beyond duties that we are conducting concurrently as part of other tasks.

Short-Term DBP Solution During the SOQ, our team provided a recommended solution to the DBP issue currently plaguing the Highpoint Water Treatment Plant. We selected granular activated carbon (GAC) primarily because it’s proven, can be implemented quickly and has less downside risk than other options (other than chloramines, which both the Authority and West Virginia Water Authority [WVWA] have stated repeatedly is an alternative to avoid if at all possible). Further, by optimizing the flow through the GAC contactor and targeting “just low enough” distribution system DBP levels, we believe the initial carbon can be used conservatively such that no GAC replacement or regeneration would be required during the 2-3 years of short-term operation. Additionally, GAC offers the opportunity for equipment rental, lease-to-own and/or moving the contactor to the permanent facility should it be deemed as the most appropriate long-term solution following our decision-making workshops.

As discussed in our SOQ, other options such as a coagulant, powdered activated carbon (PAC) and ion exchange have viability. However, coagulant will result in significant solids production and reduce performance of the backwash recovery membranes, resulting in more sludge blow-down and likely requiring hauling. PAC would be an effective DBP control mechanism, but would likely adversely affect the membrane integrity, especially the backwash recovery membranes. Ion exchange would be significantly more expensive than GAC over the 2-3-year period.

To this end, our team met with Authority representatives (Dennis Wood and Elmer Handy) in a short workshop on October 25th to present these options and work through the alternatives that showed that GAC was the most assured and value-oriented short-term DBP solution for the Highpoint WTP. However, the WVWA indicated, in meeting with us since the SOQ, that a recent effort to incorporate aeration into its most remote Franklin County tank appeared to help limit Total Trihalomethane (TTHM) production. Therefore, these recent WVWA strategies of tank aeration may provide an adequate compliance buffer to manage the next few years without any additional violations and should be considered as a viable option. This is another example of how we listen to you, the Owner, and can adjust our approach based on the latest information available.

As with all of our recommendations and approaches, during the Short-Term DBP Control Workshop, we will work with the Authority to define the exact approach to be taken in addressing the short-term DBP issue.


A workshop with BRWA staff outlined how GAC appears to be the optimum short-term DBP solution.

0 50 100

GAC

PAC

Chloramines

Coagulant

Increase …

MIEX/Ion …


8 NOVEMBER 2013

Properly located isolation valves could reduce town WTP demands by up to 50%, thereby securing the water supply for industrial customers, all located north of the railroad, for decades.

Water Quality in Bedford One of the key priorities for the overall project is to ensure similar water quality within the Town of Bedford (Town) to key industrial customers. The most obvious ways to do this include point-of-use softeners or to soften all of the water at the new Smith Mountain Lake WTP. However, point-of-use softeners require regular maintenance by the users, so they may not be reliable. Further, the additional cost of adding a softening process at the WTP is extensive with limited value. The Smith Mountain Lake hardness is in the 80 to 100 mg/L range, which is not overly hard; therefore, all of the non-industrial customers would not realize a true benefit from this expense.

As we mentioned in our RFP, properly located isolation valves at the railroad crossings would effectively ensure that the Town’s industries, all located north of the railroad, would receive only Town-supplied water. Considering this would reduce daily demands within the Town limits by approximately 50%, it would subsequently increase the drought capacity of the historic Town water system and ensure these industries would receive Town water throughout any significant drought. If the drought was so extreme that it required the use of SML water north of the railroad, a short-term solution could include a point-of-use softeners approach for the industries requiring softer water. This would significantly limit the costs of ensuring the quality of water requested by the local industries as compared to other, more obvious options. This is an example of how our team will work with the Authority to develop value-oriented solutions that address your specific issues. These solutions balance the risks with the corresponding cost—the true definition of best value.

Achieving Balance: Schedule Permitting for the new facilities is critical to keeping the SMLWTP project on schedule and will involve various stages of agency engagement throughout Phases 1 and 2. Our team has initiated a variety of permitting efforts, and others will begin shortly after initial workshops are complete. Table 2, on the following page, summarizes the permitting areas that have already been completed and/or initiated.

Conceptual Designs will be used for Decision-Making and Pricing A key to our approach is to develop conceptual designs based on the Authority’s requirements, goals and objectives as quickly as possible and provide corresponding estimated construction costs. Since we do much of our conceptual pricing from a BIM (i.e. 3D CAD) platform, it will work well in terms of offering a realistic price for proposed facility layouts that will be user-friendly for both viewing and in gathering comments.



Table 2. Permitting Tasks

PIPE

LIN

E

WTP

INTA

KE

Norfolk and Southern Pipeline Crossing – This permitting has already been completed by the Authority and will facilitate up to a 20” pipeline under the existing Norfolk and Southern Railroad just north of the intersection of Routes 608 and 122 in the Moneta area. Permitting for this task is often time consuming and extensive, so having this already complete is a significant benefit to the project schedule.

n

Environmental Report – In early 2011, our team members had direct involvement with placing an Environmental Report into motion for the Route 122 and 460 corridors. This was in conjunction with the Preliminary Engineering Report that was developed to initially evaluate this project for financial and technical feasibility. The area of potential impact will be expanded to include all possible project areas and the map, along with a narrative explaining the project will be re-submitted to nine different regulatory agencies that we previously contacted. Permitting duration for the task is approximately 90 days.

n n n

Stream Crossings (Joint Permit Application) – We have already completed an initial evaluation of each potential stream crossing along various pipeline alignments. Our evaluation of the existing regulatory databases indicate the following species present in the Big Otter, Little Otter, Goose, Hunting, and Mattox Creeks: Roanoke Logperch, Atlantic Pigtoe, Peaks of Otter Salamander, Bigeye Jumprock, and Smooth Coneflower. The permitting associated with the stream crossing will immediately follow our alignment selection as this particular process is location sensitive. Permitting duration for this task is approximately 180 days.

n

Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) – This permitting will include the preparation of a Land Use Permit in accordance with the VDOT requirements. The permit will be accompanied by a traffic management plan outlining the impact that the work will have on various portions of the VDOT roadways. The Bedford Residency will make the final decision on all roadways with the exception of the limited access area along Route 460 just south of the Town of Bedford. This area will require approval from Richmond. Areas that are not heavily traveled will be permitted for work from 7 am to 6 pm with consideration of school bus travel. A performance bond will be issued to the Authority for the project. Permitting duration for this task is approximately 120 days.

n

Special Use Permit – A special use permit will need to be prepared early in the project based on a general understanding of the project components. The permit will need to address the water treatment plant site in the greatest detail based on Appendix A – Zoning with particular emphasis on Article V. Development Standards. We have already developed the WTP base site plan including adjacent property owners, nature of land use, zoning district designation, etc. The intake structure will need to be included with this permit as an existing facility to be improved as part of the overall project. In addition, the pipeline will need to be approved under a blanket process with much less detail required due to the lack of visual impact that the buried pipeline will have on the surrounding property owners. The permitting process duration for this task is approximately 120 days.

n n

Virginia Department of Health (VDH) – Our meeting with the Danville VDH staff has set the stage for this permitting process. VDH staff has agreed that an initial document will be prepared that outlines the project schedule and phasing plan. This initial document will include minimal technical information and will serve as the guide for the permitting process. As each phase is progressed through workshops with the Authority and VDH staff, individual letter reports will be developed for review and full approval so that portions of the project can go to construction while others are being forwarded. This will provide the flexibility that we need to embrace the progressive design build process and allow VDH to minimize project delays associated with review and approval. Permitting duration for this task will occur in phases based on the direction of the project. Individual phases can be reviewed and approved in 30-45 days. Further, we have invited VDH representatives to our decision-making workshops so they can provide input and guidance at an earlier stage, promoting greater permitability.

n n n

American Electric Power – The permitting required for AEP is currently in the public comment period. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) permitting process will cover the intake construction phase as it is related to AEP. The BRWA is performing this permitting effort.

n n

County Erosion and Sediment Control – Permitting through the County will require the submission of a Land Disturbance Permit Application accompanied by a plan for inlet/culvert protection and a completed Joint Permit Application. The County will most likely waive the fee and surety requirements. This will be one of the final permits obtained and will take approximately 60 days.

n n n


10 NOVEMBER 2013

Figure 1. Intake and screen similar to what is proposed for BRWA although the intake pipe would be buried as part of the SMLWTP project. From: Nacimiento WTP; Paso Robles, CA

Intake Schemes Our team has a long history of designing and constructing intake structures—from small and simple to large and complex. The Smith Mountain Lake facility must be structurally unobtrusive and simple due to the proximity of homes in the immediate area and a need for the intake site to be “resident-friendly.” To address this, our team has developed a few conceptual designs that would work well at the current intake location. Each of our proposed layouts includes the same common themes with infrastructure that doesn’t alter the “scenery” of the location:

n Simple intake with screens at two different levels, but all new facilities and pipeline are below the water line.

n Pumps located in a buried, pre-cast vault to simplify construction, reduce visibility of the structure and minimize noise during operations.

n Locating any buildings (generator and compressor) on an Authority-owned property away from the intake location. There are two locations on Authority-owned property up the hill from the current location and away from the waterfront.

n Maintain operations of the existing intake and pumping station throughout construction.

Our team has a number of different concepts to be considered. Figure 1 shows the actual installation of a similar type intake for a previous Black & Veatch design, and Figure 2 presents conceptual design of one option that would be particularly applicable for the SML intake and raw water pumping station.

Additionally, as mentioned above, we recommend the raw water pumps be installed in a pre-cast manhole or vault, similar to what a few of our team members helped design for the WVWA’s Crystal Spring WTP raw water pumping station. This allows for simple, timely construction and easy expandability, and results in a facility that’s out-of-view.


Figure 2. Black & Veatch has developed viable intake concepts, such as the conceptual design shown here for the SMLWTP project, to achieve the best design for the GMP.



pSMLWTP Facility

p Administration Facilities

p Process Equipment 3D conceptual drawings will be utilized to make decisions and develop pricing.

Our team’s collaborative approach to the intake will result in a design and finished product that gains public approval. Our background as designers and constructors means we’ll consider construction issues in our design and ensure that we minimize impacts on local residents throughout the construction period and into operations.

We anticipate reviewing potential design concepts (while considering constructability issues) with the Authority during the early project workshops to develop the most viable intake and raw water pumping station approach for your application through our “menu”-style approach. At that point, we’ll begin our design for the GMP. The Authority will have numerous formal and informal opportunities to comment prior to the final GMP design and as pricing is received for the construction.

Treatment Facility A key benefit of our team is that our design-team leaders—with whom you will work on a day-to-day basis—have significant, proven membrane experience on successfully operating facilities. Many of these facilities are located throughout the state of Virginia and operate under similar circumstances. A number of those projects are shown in the table on page 12.

As a result and based on our background with membrane facility design, we have proposed workshops to build on this experience focusing on long-term DBP control, proposed WTP layout and membrane selection. Coupled with our decision-making workshops, we anticipate generating conceptual designs for initial pricing purposes within the first 6-8 weeks after Notice-to-Proceed.

While during the SOQ we referred to several membrane options that would help reduce overall costs, our team will not force any idea on the Authority. Our approach with the membrane system will be our most appropriate recommendation in terms of balancing risk and costs with long-term operability. We will ultimately construct what the Authority prefers, but we will present options and concepts for your consideration.

For example, to facilitate the decision-making process and generate sound cost estimates, we will apply 3D modeling and have developed renderings (shown at right) of a potential built-out facility for the SMLWTP. This prospective layout features all process equipment required to meet the 12 MGD demand in addition to the administration facilities that you desire.

By using this tool, our team can quickly implement your wishes in the 3D model, allowing you to better visualize the facility layout and provide feedback to our designers. Because our preliminary pricing is done in a 3D interface (BIM), it also allows for rapid and accurate cost estimation. Thus, the pricing used for decisions will be reflective of the layouts considered.

Achieving Balance: Technical Black & Veatch has several membrane options that meet the Town’s reserve capacity needs in balance with its risks and costs.


12 NOVEMBER 2013

Our team’s membrane experience will allow quick, rapid and informed decision-making for the SMLWTP process. Table 3. Membrane Experience

PROJECT NAME/ DESCRIPTION

SUMMARY RELEVANCE TO BRWA KEY TEAM MEMBERS

Crystal Spring WTP Roanoke, VA 5 MGD Siemens/Memcor

As a subconsultant to Wiley & Wilson, members of our team were responsible for the design of the largest membrane system in the state at the time. This included procurement, piloting (pilot-to-prove), and design of this award-winning WTP.

• VDH permitting • Competitive procurement • Pilot-to-prove • System design

• Paul Delphos • Alan Edwards

Vinnicum WTP Swansea, MA 1.1 MGD Pall Corporation

Replaced an existing iron and manganese removal groundwater plant. Facility included aeration and NaMnO4 pretreatment. Membrane system included a “swing” rack that was the redundant rack for this and the Palmer WTP facility, saving the Owner from purchasing two redundant membrane racks.

• Direct feed Pall membrane system • Iron and manganese removal • Competitive procurement • Pilot-to-prove • Zero-liquid discharge facility


Palmer River WTP Swansea, MA 1.2 MGD Pall Corporation/ Toray

This is the second surface water brackish/ desalination facility in the Eastern U.S. Membrane system included a “swing” rack that was the redundant rack for this and the Vinnicum WTP facility.

• Direct feed Pall membrane system w/alum-ferric blend

• Surface water source • Competitive procurement • Pilot-to-prove


Charles Town WTP Charles Town, WV 5.5 MGD Siemens/Memcor

Clarified feed membrane plant that involved competitive procurement followed by piloting. Significant facility retrofit and use of existing plant during first phase. Negotiated a shorter piloting period with WV DNR to minimize costs to the Owner.

• Winter/summer design criteria • Phased installation to follow demands • New solids handling facilities • Competitive procurement • Pilot-to-prove

• Paul Delphos • Pete Baskette • Alan Edwards • George Budd • Brent Reuss

Susquehanna WTP Lancaster, PA 24 MGD GE-Zenon

Retrofit of an aging conventional WTP. Involved direct feed of river water with PACl pretreatment. Determined that process enhanced thickening followed by centrifuges was best dewatering combination for membrane reject water. Included both raw and finished water pumping improve-ments. Conducted comprehensive pilot study (five systems) followed by competitive procurement.

• Direct-feed membrane w/ coagulant • Membrane backwash thickening w/

DensaDeg process • New raw water PS • New finished water PS • Retrofit that remained operational

throughout construction

• Paul Delphos • Pete Baskette • Alan Edwards • Doug

Brinkman • Brent Reuss

Conestoga WTP Lancaster, PA 12 MGD GE-Zenon

Retrofit of an aging conventional WTP. Involved direct feed of river water with PACl pretreatment. Utilize UV disinfection for Second-Stage permeate disinfection to send directly to clearwell. Conducted comprehensive pilot study (three systems) followed by competitive procurement.

• Direct-feed membrane w/ coagulant • Membrane backwash thickening w/

DensaDeg process • New raw water PS • New finished water PS • Remained operational throughout

construction retrofit

• Paul Delphos • Pete Baskette • Alan Edwards • Doug


East Chicago WTP East Chicago, IN 16 MGD Siemens/Memcor

New 16 MGD summer/10 MGD winter membrane facility to replace aging conventional facility. Project included summer/winter design criteria using Lake Michigan water supply. Involved competitive procurement followed by a pilot-to-prove.

• Winter/summer design criteria • New raw water PS • Large lake source • Significant facility retrofit • Competitive procurement • Pilot-to-prove

• Paul Delphos • Pete Baskette • Scott Freeman • Doug


Brandywine WTP Wilmington, DE 10 MGD Pall Corporation

Replaced existing conventional WTP with membrane system. Membranes were installed in the existing filter building. Project included significant preliminary work to identify the best retrofit plan prior to initiating piloting or membrane selection.

• Winter/summer design criteria • Membrane system installed inside

an existing building • Surface water source • Competitive pilot and procurement • Grant funding

• Paul Delphos • Pete Baskette

Lyman WTP SJWD, SC 6 MGD Pall Corporation

Replaced existing conventional WTP with membrane system. Membranes were installed in a new filter building. Project also involved pre-clarification as well as competitive membrane procurement with a subsequent pilot-to-prove.

• Competitive procurement • Pilot-to-prove • System design • Future expandability • Variable source water

• Paul Delphos • Brent Reuss • George Budd



Pipelines The pipeline approach closely follows our theme of finding the right balance between initial capital investment, demand needs and management of public perception. All of these components carry varying levels of weight, and each will need to be considered when deciding how to develop a phasing plan that maximizes the overall benefit and the initial capital investment delivered to the Authority. Over the past year, we have listened to the Authority staff, Board members, local residents, business owners, regulatory agencies and local contractors familiar with the area to develop a concept that will allow us to immediately begin making the decisions that are critical to project success. The scale of this project is significant, and our team will provide guidance and clarity for manageable decision-making packages that can ultimately be combined to develop the total project. Our approach includes outlining key issues and project pieces that need to be considered, keeping the “minimum needs” in mind and letting these portions drive the baseline development for the project. To that end, our team will work with the Authority to arrive at a pipeline solution that meets the short-term needs for the project, but is expandable as needed for future demands, based on the current set of priorities. As part of the best solution, it may be decided that only part of the pipeline is necessary, especially in consideration of ongoing negotiations with the City of Lynchburg. We are prepared to help develop the best plan for the Authority based on what is truly in the Authority’s best interest, both long term and short term.

Town of Bedford Supply The Town of Bedford requires a redundant water source by November 1, 2016. We consider this a minimum requirement and have considered several options to facilitate this:

n Provide interconnectivity from Smith Mountain Lake (SML) to the Town via a transmission main along Route 122. This alternative has been the most obvious point of discussion over the past year, and there are certainly benefits to immediately building a transmission main along this direct route. Doing so will facilitate existing and future demand needs in the Town and in the community of Forest. However, this is the most expensive option from an initial capital investment evaluation, and there will be construction challenges that must be considered when weighing this option.

n Provide interconnectivity from Forest (City of Lynchburg as source) to the Town via Route 460. This option should be considered in the event that the City of Lynchburg offers a purchase agreement that provides significant annual savings. This option is simpler than the Route 122 option but also doesn’t provide long-term flexibility to use the newly upgraded SML treatment system. This option should be considered as a phasing approach that will bridge to an ultimate system build-out.

n Provide interconnectivity from Forest (City of Lynchburg as source) to the Town via Route 221. This option provides connectivity between the Forest and

Achieving Balance: Technical We have considered several pipeline options to provide redundant water supplies that meet Bedford’s requirements by the November 2016 deadline.


14 NOVEMBER 2013

the Town and follows a less traveled corridor when compared to Route 460. This route is more complex than the Route 460 option and could also be part of a phasing approach that will ultimately deliver demand needs for the region.

Raw Water Pipeline The raw waterline is a crucial part of the system expansion both in the short and long term. The alignment options for this portion of the project are limited, and the disruption to the lake residents associated with the construction of the raw waterline needs to be limited to a single occurrence. Options to consider could include the construction of multiple smaller-diameter pipelines in the same trench to allow for increased flows over time.

Forest Supply The Forest area, in combination with the required connectivity to Bedford, is a significant driving force for this project. The development of a connection between the SML treatment system and the Forest community is critical and must be part of the project approach regardless of phasing considerations. Some of the options to be considered are as follows:

n Provide connectivity from the SML treatment facility to the Forest system by constructing a transmission line along Route 122 and Route 460. This option uses the main corridors in the area and provides connectivity to the Town of Bedford and the Forest area. Considerations for this option include initial capital cost, constructability and the ability to create flexibility for long-term demand needs in the future.

n Provide connectivity from the SML treatment facility to the Forest system by constructing a transmission main along Routes 626, 43 and 24. This provides a connection by a more direct route and is more straightforward than the Route 122/460 options. Considerations for this option include not having a pipeline along a major corridor and not having connectivity to the Town of Bedford. This option would require an additional connection to facilitate the alternative source requirement for the Town.

Constructability Reviews While the above Phase 1 approach was focused on the design considerations and provided a closer look at the project from a conceptual standpoint, the bridge between the design considerations and execution in Phase 2 is the development of the construction approach and the final pricing of the GMP. The segmentation of Phase 1 activities is no doubt important. However, our ability to integrate design decisions with construction approaches—and conversely shape the design of the project with true constructability and seamless pricing—is pivotal from an efficiency standpoint.

Our approach will provide the greatest benefit to the Authority by:

n Allowing for a more efficient, informed and rapid decision-making process.



n Allowing the Authority to make the most informed decisions with all necessary key team members at the table.

n Facilitating continuity in the decision-making process. The key team members you will meet during the proposal and preconstruction phase won’t change once Phase 2 is initiated.

Why does this matter? Segregated key team members cobbled together from multiple organizations, as found in the typical contractor-engineer model, mean more inherent gaps in the communication and decision-making process. Because we are a truly integrated design-builder, those gaps do not exist.

As part of our Phase 1 approach, our construction professionals will be fully engaged in the design considerations, providing valuable input and insight to each design decision with constructability, pricing, means and methods, supply chain and scheduling advice to help the Authority make the most informed choices.

One of the key aspects in the delivery of Phase 1 design is to design with construction in mind by performing Constructability Reviews. As portions of the project advance in level of design detail, a review is performed by the construction operations portion of the project team. The design is analyzed from both the constructor’s and operator’s point of view. Attention is given to “how will it be built,” “ease of construction,” and “how will we operate/maintain it” while preserving quality and design integrity.

Drawings will be issued for review and a Constructability Review meeting date established. Team members from Black & Veatch, the Authority, and the Authority’s operations/maintenance staff will meet to provide input on a wide variety of topics, such as: concrete construction joint locations; keyway details; backfill materials; handrail anchorage; piping and support layout; ease of installation; start-up requirements; access for maintenance, cleaning and repairs; operational redundancy; and operator access and safety, just to name a few. All input generated from this meeting will be evaluated and the design altered as necessary. The constructability review is a valuable step to ensure the final project is a reflection of the needs of the entire team.

We will ask subcontractors to help shape some specific scope packages. For example, if a pre-stressed concrete tank is selected for finished water storage, specialty organizations such as Crom and PreCon may be asked to review preliminary designs for constructability issues. As portions of the pipeline are being detailed, our team will ask local pipeline contractors, such as English Construction, E.C. Pace and Jack St. Clair, to review the design and provide comments to reduce difficulty, risk or cost of construction. In particular, the major creek crossings along Route 122 will provide significant opportunities for cost savings, and our team will engage local companies with local experience and an understanding of the local conditions to provide their valuable input into the design process in order to provide the most competitive approach for these

Achieving Balance: Schedule Our team analyzes design from our perspective as a constructor—focusing on constructability, quality and ease of operations—in this valuable step to ensure the final project meets the objectives.

Achieving Balance: Economical As portions of the pipeline are being detailed, our team will engage local pipeline contractors, such as English Construction, E.C. Pace and Jack St. Clair, to review the design and provide comments to reduce difficulty, risk or cost of construction.


16 NOVEMBER 2013

areas. The same supply chain constructability will be performed with respect to the raw water intake and pump station, the electrical design, and instrumentation and controls.

Development of Initial Budget Successful development of the initial budget is paramount to the overall success of the project. If the initial budget is inaccurate, some of the key priorities of the Authority may go unaddressed, or the potential for budget creep and unexpected cost issues later in the project may jeopardize the budgetary success. Our proven approach to development of the initial budget ensures the Authority that the budgetary success of the project is highly probable due to the cost certainty created through our process.

As indicated in the above sections, the proper development of the schedule and the constructability review during this initial step are key priorities in developing the budget with a high level of confidence. One of the first steps in this process will be to prepare pricing packages and engage the supply chain for the various trades. Our team has already begun the engagement process with the local supply chain in order to maximize its involvement early in the process.

We currently envision general pricing packages, as outlined in Table 4 on the following page, to be developed in order to maximize local participation where reasonable. While this list does not fully define the total number of pricing packages, it is generally representative of Black & Veatch’s subcontractor/ vendor procurement approach to competitively price out the construction cost of the project.

As part of the solicitation process, each sub/vendor will undergo an initial screening process to identify the safety, financial and performance concerns. Each will be required to complete the information in Black & Veatch’s subcontractor database as part of our Oracle Supplier Lifecycle Management System, and this information will be used to develop the most appropriate business partners to participate in the process. In similar fashion to the Authority’s desire to hire its design-builder from a best-value perspective, Black & Veatch as the design-builder will extend the spirit of true best value down through the trade level participants by selecting not just the lowest price, but by identifying and working with the companies that promote the highest quality, fiscal responsibility, and a high level of budget, safety and performance certainty for the benefit of the project.

Once the subcontractors are screened and shortlisted, they will be given the opportunity to provide input into the design, and the initial design packages will be developed with the initial budget pricing packages in mind with input from the shortlisted subcontractors. The pricing packages will include preliminary design data developed during the initial workshops, outlined in Table 1 on page 5, and will be further refined to assist the solicited subs and vendors with the appropriate information relative to their scope of work.

Achieving Balance: Economical Our process addresses each of the Authority’s priorities within the constraints of the budget.

Achieving Balance: Economical We will incorporate local trade practices into our constructability analysis to deliver the most value for the Authority’s budget.



Table 4. Promoting Budget Certainty: Getting a head start on pricing packages

PACKAGE GENERAL SCOPE SUBS/VENDORS Geotechnical Borings for pipeline, treatment and RW site Schnabel

Surveying Alignment, facility site and RW intake site Provided by CHA using local survey consultants

RW intake structure(s), including wet pipe work

Excavation, setting and backfill of precast structures, flexible piping and hold down

English, Crowder, Garney, Montvale, EC Pace

RW intake pumps, electrical and mechanical

Furnish and install pumps and piping, controls, gensets, compressors

BV*, English, Montvale, EC Pace

RW buildings Architectural building work for PS electrical, compressor building

English, Montvale and local building trade contractors

RW transmission line Pipeline work from RW intake to treatment facility

English (through its pipeline subsidiaries), Garney, Jack St. Clair, EC Pace

Civil/sitework – treatment plant

Rough grading and finished grading, paving, and site concrete, below ground piping for process interface

English, other local civil/site contractors

Concrete foundations and tankage

Spread footings, strip footings, cast-in-place process tankage

BV*, English, local trade contractors and suppliers

Building structure Pre-Engineered metal buildings, steel Local trade contractors

Building electrical Building services, lighting, outlets, tie-in to HVAC

FL Showalter, H&M, Littleton

Building HVAC Building HVAC and controls Local HVAC contractors

Building finishes To include drywall, CMU (where required), metal studs, painting, doors, windows, building finishes, accessories

English, Local trade contractors and suppliers

Process electrical All process related electrical (HV and MV, also to include 4-20 MA service for process controls, setting PLCs and cabinets, MCCs, termination and coordination with process integration

*BV, FL Showalter, H&M, Littleton

Process mechanical All process membranes, chemical feed installation, above ground piping, setting of devices

*BV, English, Montvale, EC Pace

Process integration PLC supply, integration of processes, tie-in to existing system

Sunapsys with other integrators to be considered

Finished water transmission Multiple FW pipeline packages, installation of piping, jack and bore or directional drilling where required, clearing of ROW

English (through its pipeline subsidiaries), Garney, Jack St. Clair, EC Pace

Chemical feed DBP long term solution, coagulant, chlorination, etc.

Multiple packages for various vendors

*Denotes Black & Veatch’s intent to self-perform work while bidding packages out for market cost validation. As part of this process, the sub and vendor scopes will include pricing breakouts for constructability alternatives consistent with the input developed from the above constructability process. Our experience indicates that the local service providers know best when it comes to certain regional trade practices, and those local trade practices must be incorporated into the overall constructability analysis for the Authority to obtain the most value for its budget. Providing design documents and pricing packages irrespective of local trade preferences fails to achieve the highest value.


18 NOVEMBER 2013

While Black & Veatch typically self-performs process-related work, such as process mechanical equipment installation, above-ground process piping, process electrical and even some concrete work, our pricing will be competitive with the local supply chain. Therefore, on the above-noted “self-perform” preferences, our procurement team will solicit pricing from other subcontractors to provide the Authority with the highest level of confidence that the pricing we provide for our construction work is competitive with the local market.

Additionally, the Authority, through its state status, is eligible for significant savings associated with sales and use tax. As part of the State of Virginia’s program, the State offers a partial manufacturing exemption applicable to the SML project, and allows permanent materials and/or equipment as follows: “the products must first undergo some form of treatment rendering them more marketable or useful and that second, the products must be for sale or resale.” The exemption does not apply to any “structural construction materials or any other materials that will not be used directly in processing.” “Furthermore…the exemption will not be available unless the preponderance of an item’s use (more than fifty percent) is in exempt processing activities. For instance, if fifty percent or more of the water processed by the treatment facility is used by the municipality and not sold to residential or other customers, the exemption will not apply.” The law states that tax does not apply to “machinery or tools or repair parts therefore or replacements thereof, fuel, power, energy, or supplies, used directly in processing, manufacturing, refining, mining or converting products for sale or resale”.

As a result, we will be allowed to hand down this exemption to the subcontractors and vendors on Black & Veatch contracts; therefore, the purchasing does not have to be on owner’s paper. The process would allow the Authority to provide form ST-11, Virginia’s Sales and Use Tax Exemption Certificate. As the contractor, Black & Veatch would hand down form ST-11A to the subcontractors and vendors for their use, thus saving the Authority significant funds on sales and use tax for the applicable materials. We currently envision major process equipment, major commodities (piping, electrical, steel) and possibly concrete as key areas of focus for this program.

Once we have solicited and received feedback from the subcontractor and vendor community, the pricing information will be assessed, and the appropriate budget for each element of work will be detailed into our Timberline Estimate, which will include the schedule approach, constructability approach (including alternatives for consideration), and an initial assessment of the cost of risks, contingency, overhead and profit on the work. Additionally, the initial estimate will include an assessment of the cost savings associated with the sales and use tax-savings program.

Following the initial budget and prior to the development of the GMP, the greatest opportunity for cost reduction, or cost growth, is during the period from approximately 30% design to 60% design. At this point, the Black & Veatch team, in conjunction with the Authority, will identify the Basis of Design (BOD)

Achieving Balance: Economical Our pricing will be competitive with the local supply chain and validated in a competitive bidding process.

Achieving Balance: Economical Regularly scheduled checkpoints ensure the design-to-budget approach is maintained.



and design freeze at approximately 30%, and outline the potential alternatives, where appropriate, through the workshop process described in Table 1 on page 5. This is where our team’s consistent and ongoing design/pricing validation process provides the highest level of cost certainty during this critical period.

As part of the design/budget process up to GMP, regularly scheduled checkpoints will allow the Phase 1 delivery team to backcheck design with the pricing to ensure the “design-to-budget” approach is maintained. Formally, these checkpoints occur at approximately 40% and 50% design to determine if any significant changes have occurred during the design process. As part of this ongoing budget validation process, the Authority will be provided with updates by the Phase 1 delivery team of the current status of the design and budget so decisions can be made early in the process and budgetary surprises eliminated.

Additionally, our discipline estimators will be in consistent contact with appropriate design leaders to verify that design changes have been identified. Moreover, prior to design changes being made outside of the agreed concept at 30%, discipline design leaders validate concept and/or design changes with the estimating team to identify cost implications of the change.

As part of this process, a trending log will be established to document changes and keep a running scorecard of the positive and/or negative cost impact to the overall budget of the project. This allows the team to evaluate the potential design changes holistically with respect to the budget constraints and provide the Authority with the best decision-making tools if, and when, design changes occur after the BOD freeze.

Finalizing the GMP Due to the ongoing budgetary process from the initial BOD at 30% and throughout the development of the design from 30%-60% as described above, the final GMP development and ultimate deliverable becomes a formalization and extension of the budgetary process above. At this stage, the BOD will be locked, and the final element of the GMP process is validation of the initial pricing from the supply chain and from our internal self-perform construction estimates, including market pricing for all pricing packages.

As outlined in Table 4 above, each of the shortlisted suppliers and subcontractors will be given an opportunity to review the design packages throughout the budget validation process and ultimately finalize their GMP estimates to Black & Veatch for their respective package. Our estimating team will finalize its GMP to the Authority, taking into account the best value for each of the described work packages, subcontractor and vendor pricing, and consolidate into a single GMP estimate. The GMP will include a breakdown of the price, a detailed estimate of the anticipated quantities, subcontractor and vendor scoping and price comparisons, and this information will be assembled through an open-book offer to the Authority.

Achieving Balance: Economical Our process for validating and finalizing the GMP takes into account the best value for each work package.


20 NOVEMBER 2013

As we have previously discussed with the Authority, appropriate risk-balancing will be applied during the initial preliminary pricing development and will be finalized during the development of the GMP. This will include finalization of the Phase 2 scope of work, an updated term sheet based on the discussions between Black & Veatch and the Authority during the budget validation process, and a draft contract with reflecting the outcome of those discussions. In particular, items such as limits of liability, warranty and extended warranty periods for certain items, close out documentation, training, startup and commissioning will be finalized. Additionally, the risk associated with unforeseen site conditions, geotechnical concerns, unclassified (or classified) excavation clauses and other construction-related risks will be identified and finalized at this point, and will be reflected in the draft contract and GMP offering.

Our approach to finalizing these elements of risk with the Authority is very simple. Because we will have been forthright and open in our discussions with the Authority during the preliminary pricing effort and the pricing checkpoints leading up to the GMP, the final GMP offering should come as no surprise. That is our goal and our commitment to the process.

Once the GMP is submitted and the final terms and conditions agreed upon, the contract will be finalized and will act as the stepping stone to actual execution of the work in Phase 2. At the Authority’s options, Black & Veatch is also prepared to convert the GMP into a lump sum offering, further reducing the Authority’s risk for cost growth within the limits of the contract.

In the unlikely event that a satisfactory set of terms and conditions can’t be reached, or if an agreement to the GMP can’t be met, we will prove a price to finalize the design to 100% for the Authority’s benefit, which will allow the Authority to exercise the option of an off-ramp to Phase 2 and move into a design-bid-build delivery.

PHASE 2 EXECUTION APPROACH As mentioned above, the GMP development delivers the true best-value product on paper, when integrated with the design process in a collaborative environment. However, the project must still be physically constructed during Phase 2 based on the plan established in Phase 1. Because our construction professionals will be integral to the Phase 1 process, our model doesn’t allow for the “we’re done, now it’s up to you Mr. Contractor” mentality. Our approach allows for true ownership of the design and pricing developed during Phase 1 by our Phase 2 professionals—because we are one and the same. It’s important to understand that our pre-mobilization planning, safety and quality approach, and other construction-centric activities are initiated during Phase 1 by the same professionals who actually execute the work.

A key part of the initial planning and the bridge from “project planning on paper” to “shovels in the ground” is the Project Execution Plan, which is described in more detail below. Additionally, our management approach,

Achieving Balance: Economical Risk factors will be reflected in the draft contract and GMP offering.

Achieving Balance: Economical Our goal and commitment to the process will make the final GMP offering no surprise to the Authority.



scheduling during construction, safety, startup and commissioning during Phase 2 is more fully described in the below sections.

Why is your understanding of our Phase 2 approach so important now? Many “cobbled together” organizational structures can provide a good design, then provide the appropriate construction delivery. But what happens when the contractor part of the organization says “this isn’t what we priced” when given the Released for Construction documents? Again, this gap is inherent in multi-organizational teams where the designer and the builder are two distinct, separate companies. With Black & Veatch, an integrated team, there is no gap. Our understanding of the Authority’s desires, provided through Phase 1 efforts, priced as part of the GMP and then bridged into Phase 2, is seamless, and the below elements of construction are a continuation of that integrated effort—not a separate and segregated element with inherent decision gaps, confusion and blaming.

Project Execution Plan During the Phase 1 portion of the project, team members responsible for the execution of the project will develop the Project Execution Plan (PEP). The PEP documents details about the scope of work and the strategies, means and methods for the carrying out the work. The PEP describes how we will perform the overall project (design, procurement, construction, commissioning and hand-over) and what scope and methods form the basis of the entire work.

The PEP will address project-specific topics such as project organization and communication between the stakeholders, document control, QA/QC procedures, public relations, material submittals, changes in the work, and project controls. Once the PEP is drafted, it will be presented to the Authority through the workshop process. With input from the various stakeholders, the PEP will be edited and amended as needed to produce the working document.

However, the PEP is intended to be an evolving, living document developed during the course of the overall project. It shall summarize the team’s plan to design, procure, construct and commission the Smith Mountain Lake WTP within the Authority’s budget and priorities. The PEP is intended to be revised, expanded and updated throughout the duration of the project with final project-specific management procedures and plans incorporated as they become available.

As part of our preparation of the pricing for Phase 1, we have begun developing the initial version of our Project Execution Plan, which describes how we will manage and/or perform the preliminary design through Phase 1, and in part outline the initial concept for the final design and construction portion of the project during Phase 2. It contains the design scope and further outlines general construction methodologies that form the basis of the project approach. Though the contents will evolve as the various parts of the project are more clearly defined, the minimum requirements for an effective Project Execution Plan for the project will contain the following:


22 NOVEMBER 2013

n Project definition and scope n Permitting plan n Phase 1 design scope, schedule and

division of responsibilities n Definition of workshops n Construction strategy/execution

methodology n Project administration n Constructability n Field staffing n Temporary facilities n Construction utilities

n Construction equipment and tools n Craft labor requirements n Safety and security n Quality n Cost control n Schedule control n Procurement n Material control n Labor relations n System startup, commissioning and

handover n Closeout

The project-specific Project Execution Plan will summarize the overall project execution strategy and will be based on project-specific needs and requirements, taking into account the Authority’s needs along with the requirements for successful execution of the project.

Schedule Approach As part of the initial development of the Phase 1 pricing, a high-level Phase 1 schedule was developed in order to understand the schedule constraints for the project and ensure the project could be delivered within the timeframe allotted. Through these efforts, we have determined that the project can be delivered within the schedule constraints, although—as with any project—there are several areas that will require careful management and concentration to minimize potential schedule impacts and/or time-related risks. Those areas include long lead procurement items, permitting and significant pipeline crossings. Our team has a proven track record of managing through challenges such as these, and our systems and tools will facilitate our ability to work through these same challenges on the SMLWTP project.

As part of that coordination effort, the team will manage project coordination among the parties using Black & Veatch’s project schedule policies and procedures. Following the Notice-to-Proceed, the project team will further refine the high-level schedule developed during the proposal stage and establish the Final Baseline Schedule for the Project. As part of this development, key stakeholders will be involved to coordinate their activities with the overall project schedule and to achieve buy-in and ownership to the committed schedule. The key stakeholders will include the design team, design subconsultants, vendors, subcontractors and construction personnel (both Phase 1 and Phase 2 stakeholders). Additionally, governmental agency input will be incorporated, including permitting activities.

For detailed coordination, our project team will use Primavera P6 as the tool of choice to manage the baseline schedule and to establish detailed near-term coordination schedules (NTS) that will be distributed across the project team to manage specific activities and outputs on a week-to-week—and even day-to-day—basis.

Achieving Balance: Schedule Based on the initial development of the Phase 1 pricing, our team has determined that the project can be delivered within the schedule constraints.



For example, in the case of design engineering, the baseline P6 plan will contain activities for initial design preparation and the Authority’s review of the 30% and 60% design submittals for each of the major work packages during the Phase 1 work. For the next level, we will prepare a more granular, three-month planning and three-week working schedule of design activities and detailed workshops necessary to achieve the timeframes outlined in the overall project schedule (OPS). We will establish target dates for specific discipline completion, internal constructability and QC reviews, internal comment resolution, formal submission to the Authority, review meetings with Authority, and final comment resolution. With this approach, all team members clearly understand the dates for completing their specific activities, which keeps each of us focused on the task at hand. The NTS will be developed by the project scheduler, updated weekly and reported to the project management team.

A flow diagram of this concept is illustrated below.

Figure 3. Schedule Approach Diagram

Phase 1 design and GMP development and Phase 2 final design and construction will be coordinated and managed as one single project throughout with one point of contact and accountability (Dave Kinchen). However, each of the individual phases will be sub-managed by the phase delivery managers reporting up through Mr. Kinchen. The Phase 1 deliverables will be closely managed by Paul Delphos as the Phase 1 Delivery Manager using the above scheduling approach to drive deliverables and key decisions. The Phase 2 delivery manager, Roger Smith, will be involved in key decisions during Phase 1 in order to understand potential impacts and offer guidance where greater constructability can be achieved and time savings can be gained.

Key material deliveries, subcontractor mobilization and work, resource planning, and other elements will be incorporated into the overall schedule so each of these elements can be monitored independently, but with the understanding of how each element affects the overall project schedule. In the event that a single element of the project falls behind, via forecasted late delivery of key material, or if labor falls behind, our project controls approach will identify these potential issues early in the process and develop a recovery plan to minimize or completely mitigate the schedule impact. Mitigation plans may include work-around strategies so that adjacent construction can be completed while waiting on a


24 NOVEMBER 2013

critical component (e.g. setting up “makeup” piping spools if pumps are delivered late or providing leave-out panels in the building if skid components are delivered later than scheduled), or added temporary works in the event key construction activities do not occur when scheduled (e.g. if the pour schedule can’t be met because of late rebar deliveries, night pours may be required). In the event subcontractors are later on activities than planned in the schedule, Black & Veatch may determine that supplementing the work force with other subcontractors or with its own forces may be necessary to recover lost schedule time or reduce the impact of late construction activities. Our construction management team is well versed in monitoring activities, understanding proper resource planning, and addressing potential schedule problems as early as possible in advance of an issue so the overall impact is minimized or mitigated in full.

Quality Management Approach One of the key challenges during any design-build project is the threat of design change and the ability of the team to monitor and implement that design change early so its affects do not impact construction. Design change management procedures are a key element of the quality management approach, in particular during Phase 1. We will follow the project design change procedures for change control documentation, with the project-specific design quality and change controls to be implemented as follows:

Phase 1 Quality Management n Change approval will be documented by adding the change information to a trend

form and obtaining signed approval by key design and management personnel. It will be the responsibility of the individual requesting the change to complete the form and obtain approval signatures prior to implementing the change.

n Any changes that require coordination with other disciplines will be signed off by the discipline lead prior to submitting the design change for approval.

n Changes to the P&IDs used for the BOD that occur prior to Issue for Construction/Procurement will be identified by the designer on the drawing and approved by the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Delivery Managers prior to implementation, with final approval by the overall DB Project Manager.

n Changes to the design that may impact cost or schedule for the engineered equipment scope for procurement contracts will be reviewed and approved by the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Delivery Managers prior to implementation, with final approval by the overall DB Project Manager.

n Changes to the design that may impact cost or schedule for the subcontracts will be will be reviewed and approved by the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Delivery Managers prior to implementation, with final approval by the overall DB Project Manager.



Phase 2 Quality Management As part of the overall quality management plan, the Phase 2 approach will focus not only on potential design changes, but also quality management as design draws to completion and actual field implementation takes place. As part of the overall quality action plan, the project team must ensure that potential design changes during construction are a real possibility. The team’s challenge is to understand the possibility in advance, then plan for it accordingly with the proper procedural guardrails. Additionally, it is incumbent upon the Phase 2 delivery team to ensure that what has been designed is properly constructed and the proper testing and quality action plan must be applied with proper monitoring and testing procedures during construction. The following represent some of the controls and measures employed by our team during Phase 2 delivery:

n Any changes to any issued-for-construction documents will be reviewed and approved by the Phase 2 Delivery Manager and the Project Superintendent prior to being implemented in the field.

n Procurement quality control will consist of having an inspection and test plan to cover shop inspections and progress visits to be allowed for, covering design documents compliance, shop progress and quality.

n Field quality control will consist of having an inspection and test plan to cover compliance with specified requirements, material testing, suitable documentation of inspections, testing, and specification compliance.

n The project quality plan will incorporate our standard quality procedures and specifications. All subcontractors will be required to follow the quality management plan that meets or exceeds the entire requirement indentified in the project quality plan. Subcontractors will be required to submit all testing requirements and necessary reports prior to starting work.

n Witness and hold points will be incorporated into the subcontractors work plan where the Black & Veatch superintendent or discipline field engineer will be required to inspect the works before allowing the contractor to proceed.

n The field engineers and construction supervisors will be responsible for the quality on the project. Periodically throughout the project, Black & Veatch field engineers will conduct an audit on site ensuring the quality plan is being followed.

n A detailed Site-Specific QA/QC Plan/Overall Quality Plan will be located in the field office to include: Site Quality Manual, Construction Integrated Procedures, Quality Observation Program, QC Resources, Direct Hire Role and Responsibility Considerations, Integration of QA/QC in Task Planning, Management of Final QA/QC Documentation, Non Conformance Reporting (NCR), Inspection and Testing Plan, and Third Party/Owner Requirements.


26 NOVEMBER 2013

Safety Approach As indicated in the SOQ, our safety record and approach is simple: get the guys home at night in equal or better shape than they arrived to work. Our Comprehensive Project-Specific Loss Control Manual, used for each project we undertake, is a key tool that goes beyond simple safety awareness; it engages every individual on the project site as safety professionals. Our workforce looks out for one another. Our safety record doesn’t just happen, but is rather a well thought-out Behavioral-Based Safety Program with the following key aspects:

n A safety incentives program is used to include recognition and reward for craft employees.

n Ongoing Site-Specific Unique Hazard Identification that addresses and educates employees to the hazards at the point of installation where the individuals are working.

n All subcontractors are required to meet Black & Veatch’s safety standards and must submit their corporate safety manuals for review by our safety department prior to implementation.

n Safety plans (both Black & Veatch and subcontractor plans) must adequately address security, environmental control, construction lock-out/tag-out, commissioning lock-out/tag-out, operations lock-out/tag-out, PPE, and standard safety procedures for all work envisioned using Hazard Analysis Reports.

n Site-Specific Communications Plan.

n Each employee and site visitor will partake in an orientation which will be heavily focused on safety.

n Handouts and signs will be used. Various safety signs will be displayed in the work areas as well.

n Accident-Free Process Implementation (Root Cause Analysis), Industry Safe (Real-Time Reporting Software) tools will be used.

n Drug/Alcohol/Background Screening is mandatory.

FINALIZING THE PROJECT A close working relationship with the Authority’s operations staff is essential during the startup & commissioning phase of the project. Coordination will be led Black & Veatch startup manager, and systems will be packaged into traditional turn-over packages for handover to the client. Each turn-over package will contain a construction completion certificate and a startup completion certificate with the supporting documentation for acceptance by the client.

The startup procedure for the project will be developed jointly between the Authority and Black & Veatch during Phase 2, based on design specifications that will be submitted and approved during the Phase 1 process. The detailed procedures will identify a step-by-step approach to successful performance



testing, startup and commissioning, and will incorporate owner training, project documentation and responsible personnel assigned to each activity. Vendor(s) engagement in this process will occur early during the planning process to ensure the most comprehensive approach can be developed.

Also important to the startup & commissioning process is the chemical usage. Chemical needs will be identified during Phase 1 initially, and the chemical supply will be outlined. In addition to chemical needs, the appropriate utility requirements for startup will be identified in advance to ensure the proper service support is available. The testing and startup plan, when completed, will address the below listed elements:

n Provision for startup chemicals and consumables

n First fills n Fuel notices, if applicable n Provision for startup spares n Disposal of startup waste (process

water, oils, etc.) n Potable water needs n Supplier technical advisor

management n Sign-off procedure - to be

determined n Construction/Startup coordination

plan

n Walkdowns n Construction substantial

completion n Package transfer n Functional checkout n Initial system commissioning n Integrated system

commissioning/operations n Startup exception resolution n Operator training n Operator supervision n Performance test plan n O&M support n System turnover to operations

BLACK & VEATCH: A LEADER IN PROGRESSIVE DESIGN-BUILD While our approach to progressive design-build and the development of a GMP is somewhat unique, it isn’t new or untried by Black & Veatch. Our company has been highly successful in developing preliminary budgets during the very early stages of design, validating those budgets throughout the evolvement of design, and finalizing the GMP for successful transition and delivery into design-build delivery. Also, though our business excellence approach, Six Sigma implementation and continuous improvement techniques, Black & Veatch has evolved its approach to provide clients with a high level of confidence that we do what we say, and the proof is in the outcome of the project that is delivered on (or ahead of) schedule, with minimal change order impacts, and within the owner’s project budget.


28 NOVEMBER 2013

Where We’ve Done it, and Where We’re Doing It

BioKyowa Membrane Facility, Cape Girardeau, Missouri

Black & Veatch’s Role: Prime Contractor Type of Delivery: Progressive Design-Build Technical Elements: Design and build of MBR facility, aeration basins, membrane tankage, blower, and chemical feed facilities. Phase 1 Schedule: Started June 2013, with September 1, 2013 mobilization to site, procurement concurrent. Phase 2 Schedule: Substantial completion August 4, 2014, currently on schedule. Current Status of Project: Phase 1 completed, final price agreed and converted to lump sum, final design and construction under way.

Self-Perform Elements: Black & Veatch is self-performing structural concrete, underground piping, process mechanical, process electrical, instrumentation and controls through its non-union contracting entity, Overland Contracting Inc. Subcontract Elements: Black & Veatch is subcontracting drilled rock pile foundations, structural steel, building trades and finishes, and site civil work. Preliminary Budget: $9,800,000 including MBR. Final GMP (or Lump Sum): Open Book GMP converted to Lump Sum, $9,750,000 including MBR.

Progressive design-build allowed for fast tracked delivery of a project to restore a crucial well field as a viable drinking water source for the City of Santa Monica.

Charnock Well Field Restoration Project, Santa Monica, California

Black & Veatch’s Role: Prime Contractor Type of Delivery: Progressive Design-Build Technical Elements: Two treatment facilities including 6 MGD and 10 MGD membrane plants, chemical feed and other ancillary support processes in existing facilities, including well field development for raw water supply. Phase 1 Schedule: Started June 2008, including design, permitting and GMP development. Phase 2 Schedule: December 2010, on-time completion. Current Status of Project: Project 100% completed.

Self-Perform Elements: Black & Veatch self-performed all design elements, major equipment procurement and overall management of the project, including cost control, scheduling and site superintendence. Subcontract Elements: Black & Veatch subcontracted all installation of the work to union forces through its union contracting entity, BVCI. Preliminary Budget: $54,163,851, includes preliminary engineering. Final GMP (or Lump Sum): Open Book GMP converted to Lump Sum, $54,242,161, including preliminary engineering.



T-Bar Well Field Development, Midland, Texas

Black & Veatch’s Role: Prime Contractor (in Joint Venture with Garney Construction for pipeline work) Type of Delivery: Progressive Design-Build Technical Elements: Well field water supply, well pumps and appurtenances, 60 miles of 48” transmission main, surge facilities, storage facilities, chlorination facilities, high-service pump station. Phase 1 Schedule: Started February 2012, with concurrent pipe and pump procurement, completed July 2012. Phase 2 Schedule: Mobilization June 2012 with substantial completion May 2013, 17 days ahead of schedule. Current Status of Project: Project 100% completed.

Self-Perform Elements: Black & Veatch self-performed structural concrete, precast concrete panel building erection, process mechanical, process electrical, and instrumentation and controls through its non-union contracting entity, Overland Contracting Inc. Subcontract Elements: Black & Veatch subcontracted well field drilling, underground piping (through its JV partner) building trades and finishes, site civil work, and pre-stressed concrete tankage. Preliminary Budget: $156,900,742. Final GMP (or Lump Sum): Open Book GMP converted to Lump Sum, $155,492,749.

Southwest Ozone Replacement Project, Orlando, Florida

Black & Veatch’s Role: Prime Contractor Type of Delivery: CM at Risk Technical Elements: Replacement of existing Ozone Generators and LOX system, including other balance of plant operations, preconstruction phase services and phase 2 construction, includes owner sales and tax use savings. Phase 1 Schedule: Started February 2012, with preconstruction phase services completed February 2013. Phase 2 Schedule: Mobilization staged at September 2013 following delivery of major equipment, substantial completion May 2014, currently on schedule. Current Status of Project: Phase 1 completed, GMP agreed and converted to lump sum, construction under way.

Self-Perform Elements: Black & Veatch is self-performing major equipment procurement (owner furnished sales and use tax savings program), overall management of the project, including cost control, scheduling and site superintendence. Subcontract Elements: Black & Veatch subcontracted all installation of the work including site civil and underground piping, process mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation and controls. Preliminary Budget: $10,365,000 including ozone equipment (owner furnished). Final GMP (or Lump Sum): Open Book GMP converted to Lump Sum, $9,121,100 including owner furnished equipment.


BLACK & VEATCH | Innovation or Value-Added Suggestions 31

Our Virginia-based membrane team has overseen competitive membrane procurement for the bulleted clients, assuring BRWA we can quickly prepare a fair and competitive procurement effort for the SMLWTP. · Roanoke, VA · Lancaster, PA · Swansea, MA · Hummelstown, PA · Wilmington, DE · Charles Town, WV · SJWD, SC

Innovation or Value-Added Suggestions Our proposed Scope of Services is based on nearly 12 months of continuous interaction with Authority staff in addition to periodic discussions with WVWA. Our approach will deliver an exceptionally high-quality product for the Authority and its customers at the greatest value possible. However, based on our experience with the Authority over the past 12 months, we see several innovative or value-added services that may be of benefit during Phase 1. We have including a potential range of costs for each of these services; however, should the Authority wish to employ any of these services, we would need to finalize a scope for these elements prior to initiating work.

MEMBRANE SYSTEM-VALUE ADDED SERVICES Our base scope of services includes negotiations directly with Pall Corporation for the new SMLWTP. Further, should the Authority be interested in sole-sourcing Pall Corporation, our long-term experience with Pall (e.g. Swansea, MA; Wilmington, DE; SJWD, SC; Johnson County, KS; Los Angeles, CA; Cottage Grove, OR; Bakersfield, CA; East Bay MUD, CA; Charlotte, NC; Fountain Hills, AZ; Chandler, AZ; San Luis Obispo County, CA) assures the Authority we understand their pricing and can obtain a fair price and contract terms for any purchased equipment.

While not necessarily innovative, should the Authority choose to consider other membrane system suppliers (MSS), our team has a proven competitive procurement and piloting approach.

Our competitive procurement approach has been used in communities such as Roanoke, VA; Lancaster, PA; Charles Town, WV; Wilmington, DE; Swansea, MA; and Hummelstown, PA. For the Authority to be successful, timeliness is the key for a competitive procurement. With our team’s experience in the region, we can provide a competitive procurement document in a timely manner and have the experience of working with each of the major MSSs on similar projects with no contested procurements. As such, the Authority can be assured that a competitive procurement approach, should it choose to do so, will not impact the overall project schedule. In general, a typical, competitive membrane procurement effort costs between $50,000 and $75,000 and often results in savings greater than the cost of the procurement effort itself.

While the VDH does not mandate piloting—only Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) approval of a membrane system—it is often recommended where insufficient data from a similar facility is available. Furthermore, considering schedule and budget are a major concern with this project, our team has proposed to undertake a “pilot-to-prove” approach. Due to our team’s extensive experience with all major membrane manufacturers, we can conduct a procurement effort without pilot information beforehand, saving significant time and money. The selected vendor would then “pilot” that design criteria after selection “to prove” they can meet the proposed design criteria. With our


32 NOVEMBER 2013

proven team, this approach is an effective way to select a membrane system with limited process and/or schedule risk.

The benefits include: n Current schedule can be maintained without delays for procurement or piloting. n Any changes to the design are borne by the membrane supplier. n Building design would incorporate potential membrane modifications. n Piloting can be conducted at no additional cost to the Authority since piloting

cost is included in the scope of work. Pre-procurement piloting often requires an equipment rental fee paid to all participants.

n Consultant and Authority costs are reduced by limiting the number of systems being piloted.

TECHNICAL ADVISORY TEAM As mentioned on our SOQ as well as our base proposal, our team will conduct both formal and informal value engineering efforts throughout the course of the project. However, as part of our approach, we have secured the exclusive assistance of two renowned professors known for their expertise in DBPs and water treatment processes: Dr. Bill Knocke of Virginia Tech and Dr. Dave Reckhow of the University of Massachusetts.

While not necessary for our team to develop the best solutions for the Authority, having outside experts who are well recognized in the industry and in academia support of the treatment process and project approach could lend additional credibility to the Authority in terms of public outreach and communication. Therefore, should the Authority desire this type of assistance and outside verification of processes and approach, we will work with Drs. Knocke and Reckhow to provide this service for your project.

CONSTRUCTION OF THE IMMEDIATE DBP SOLUTION As mentioned on our SOQ as well as our base proposal, our team has developed a number of potential alternatives for short-term DBP control. Our base scope of services includes a workshop to identify the best and most immediate DBP solution for Highpoint WTP in addition to the development of procurement and design documents to determine a GMP for this solution. Our base scope of services also includes the submittal of the proposed improvements to VDH for approval.

However, our base proposal does not include the implementation costs of the ultimate, immediate DBP solution. Once the GMP is determined and accepted by the Authority, we will construct the proposed improvements and provide startup and training support.

HAND-HELD GPS TAGGING ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Long-term operation and maintenance related to all of the Authority’s utility assets will continue to be a critical part of successfully managing the financial and technical aspects of the overall water system. Our team has successfully

Our team’s membrane procurement history has demonstrated a consistent ability to reduce original system proposal prices by 15-20%.

02468

1012141618

Roanoke, VA Swansea, MA Lancaster, PA

$ (

millio

ns)

Original Proposal

Bid Price



implemented an asset management system that is user-friendly for the public works staff and can be used by the management staff to create budgets, develop work orders, track repair history, store equipment information, etc. Information can be collected by using a small, hand-held tablet. The pre-developed (by the Authority) pull-down menus for various activities allow for consistency of information regardless of who is collecting the information. For example, a pipe repair menu would be used to document where a leak is located, type of leak, repair method, repair time, type of pipe material, approximate rate of loss, and any other data that would be helpful to the Authority. This information would be immediately uploaded to the Authority GIS on the layer of choice. This tool can be used for management of any asset under the Authority’s responsibility, including pump stations, tanks, buildings, etc. Black & Veatch is already using it to document areas of constructability concerns and location of possible permitting. We plan to make it an integral part of the construction inspection and work documentation process.

NOISE STUDY As an engineering firm with a history of implementing challenging projects located in publicly-sensitive areas, we offer acoustical design and engineering services for power generation facilities, electrical substations, water and wastewater treatment plants, refineries, manufacturing plants, military complexes, construction and transportation projects, and commercial and residential developments. Considering the proximity of the new SMLWTP intake and raw water pumping station, noise could be a major concern for local residents, and we plan, if requested, to address any of these concerns.

The Black & Veatch acoustical consulting team includes specialists and registered professional engineers who are members of the Institute of Control Engineering (INCE) and the Acoustical Society of America (ASA). Our acoustical professionals collaborate with Black & Veatch’s wide range of engineering, scientific, technical, construction and procurement professionals to develop innovative, practical and cost-effective acoustical design solutions tailored to each project.

Our noise evaluation is designed to produce an acoustical design solution focused on supporting a project’s compliance with regulatory and/or permit limits and compatibility with the surrounding community. While the elements of the evaluation can be customized, the typical components often include an ambient sound level survey, a thorough regulatory review, detailed project noise modeling (per ISO 9613), noise control optimization, and acoustical design implementation. Our clients have found that prioritizing the project’s acoustical design during early development avoids the negative consequences of later implementing costly retrofits to remedy impacts on neighbors that only surface after the project is complete.

A typical noise study ranges in cost from $10,000 to $70,000 and can be completed in 1-5 months, depending on the overall scope.

Our noise experts can run iterative noise simulations, as shown above for a power plant, to ensure off-site noise levels will be at acceptable levels along Smith Mountain Lake and other critical neighborhoods.


34 NOVEMBER 2013

Black & Veatch’s Smart Water Analytics provides real -time, actionable, operational data to assist utilities in optimizing their facilities.

At Lubbock’s new membrane South WTP, Smart Water Analytics helps operators recognize issues before they arise and optimize operational parameters such as CIP composition, backwash frequency and EFM durations.

SMART SYSTEM INFRASTRUCTURE

Smart Water Analytics to Assist in Operations While the Authority has operated its Highpoint WTP for more than 10 years with solid success, the new facility will be larger and, likely, more complex. Further, with the constant pressure for utilities to keep rates as low as possible, doing more with less is the new normal. One way our firm is helping our clients operate in this new era includes leveraging data with analytics to turn data into action and make effective and efficient decisions.

Our Smart Water Analytics takes real-time and other business system data, performs advanced calculations and analytics and then uses a web-based interface to provide data visualization and dashboard screens to help you optimize operations. Connecting to the live data streams means information in the web-interface is always up to date. Further, your staff and our team can collaborate on issues that are happening in the present, not issues that happened in the previous month and have already been resolved. Also, since the smart water analytics are connected to the data, the blogging feature can be used to share trends and data analysis, meaning issues can be collaboratively resolved in days, not weeks. Finally, the interface also has the ability log and track the back and forth discussion with your and our staff so anyone can get an update on the status of issues or go back and search past issues to help solve current ones. All this means timely and efficient collaboration on your system’s performance.

Of particular relevance to the Authority, Black & Veatch is providing remote monitoring and Smart Water Analytics for the microfiltration system at Lubbock’s new South WTP. The new 15 mgd facility has pre-oxidation with chlorine dioxide, coagulation and sedimentation with plate settlers and microfiltration with Siemens’ membranes. The membrane “app” focuses on the current daily production of the membrane system, including the energy efficiency (kW/MG) and cost to produce water ($/1000 gallons). The cleaning efficiency section has event-based calculations that use data to identify when maintenance washes have been conducted and even track the membrane permeability before and after the event so operators can view and assess performance.

As this is an already proven and beneficial tool being used by our clients on membrane water treatment facilities, should the Authority be interested, we can incorporate this feature into your project anytime during Phase 1 or Phase 2.



ALTERNATIVE FUNDING ASSISTANCE AND GRANT APPLICATIONS The budget for this project is $30 million based on a variety of factors, most notably ratepayer sensitivity. While it has been noted by others that this budget may be too tight, our team disagrees. The impact of alternative funding may increase the budget or lower the local cost share by decreasing the life-cycle cost and maximizing the local funding resources. We will aggressively explore alternative funding opportunities to expand the budget to deliver all scope items to provide a return on the Authority’s investment.

We have a dedicated Alternative Funding Services (AFS) Team that focuses on obtaining federal and state grants and low-interest loans. An initial assessment suggests the SMLWTP project has some unique elements that might match agency expectations for allocating those funds. Some key components we’ve identified that could serve as a basis for grant funding are identified in green in the figure below. The areas identified in blue are often ignored but may also be a source of funding.

Figure 1. Alternative Funding Opportunities

To determine the viability and feasibility of grants and low-interest loans, Black & Veatch would host an Alternative Funding Workshop with the Authority during the initial weeks of the project. Alternative funding is not guaranteed. The design will move forward and consider the potential additional funds. The design will be scalable in the event funding does not materialize. Our team and approach will deliver a project that balances with your ultimate budget, ideally supplemented by grants and/or low-interest loans to maximize local dollars.

Green Initiatives§ Improved pumping efficiencies.§ Drought contingency planning.§ Potential industrial reuse in

Bedford to minimize drought supply requirements.§ High recovery membrane

system optimizes raw water use.

Public Health Improvements§ Immediate and future DBP

control.Operations & Maintenance§ Better facility design to improve

operational efficiency.§ I&C for remote operations.§ Regional water treatment

improves economies of scale.New Technologies§Membrane technology

(perhaps include a new application).§MIEX technology, if selected.

$30 M

NEW TECHNOLOGIES

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE

PUBLIC HEALTH IMPROVEMENTS

“GREEN” INITIATIVES

$$TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET

Gra

nt C

onsi

dera

tions

+

Inter-local Regional Agreements§ Project includes Bedford County, Town of

Bedford, WVWA and potentially Lynchburg.Surface Water Improvement and Management Plans§ Potentially include Smith Mountain Lake

water supply issues and improvements.Alternative Technologies Solutions§Membranes and MIEX, if selected, may be

applicable as alternative technologies.§With high recovery with the membranes,

could consider that as well.P3 Initiatives§With a PDB approach, this might qualify.§ Bringing industries into the project for water

supply may increase the project viability.Job Creation§ Potentially tying the project to more job

creation potential in the region could make the project grant eligible.

Community and Neighborhood Revitalization§ If we can show revitalization needs in lower

income areas, there may be the potential for grants with certain federal agencies

$30 M

GRANT CONSIDERATIONS

REVITALIZATION

JOB CREATION

P3 INITIATIVES

Alte

rnat

ive

Gra

nt C

onsi

dera

tions

+

$$$TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET

ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES

SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT

INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENTS

Our AFS Team has secured over $1.5 billion in grants and low-interest loans over the past 5 years.


36 NOVEMBER 2013

In parallel, cost estimates will be developed for the new facilities. The costing effort will focus initially on the pipeline as the remaining budget would be used to balance the priorities and improvements for the intake and SMLWTP.

Some particular areas of focus for our Alternative Funding Services Team would include: n Synergies of Regionalization/Consolidation – More customers means

reliability and lower cost. n FLGA – Federal Legislative Grant – We can assist in preparation and

presentation of Federal Legislative Grant n DOT – JPA agreement on roadway improvements and replacement of curbs/

gutters/stormwater/sidewalk. n SRF – Need to describe GREEN elements as benefit to meet GPR requirements

of the program. This allows participation in the subsidy pool and may provide a lower interest rate or principal forgiveness if available.

n The approach should be phased to incorporate the available funding resources.

n US DOI - Resiliency grant - Available to assess, restore, enhance or create systems to better protect communities from future storms and naturally occurring events.

While our Alternative Funding Services scopes can range significantly in detail depending on the project and proposed funding agencies, the associated costs often range from $25,000 to $75,000 for roughly 1 to 5, respectively, grant application efforts.

INTERCONNECTIONS BETWEEN FRANKLIN COUNTY SYSTEMS AND PROVIDING ADEQUATE GRAVITY SEWER CAPACITY FOR LAKE VISTA

Windtree to Lakewood Interconnection The Lakewood area is currently served with wells, and residents there have expressed interest in being served by the WVWA distribution system. WVWA has proposed a 1,100-foot lake crossing from the existing WVWA water system near Rhonda Drive to the Lakewood system that runs along Lakewood Forest Road. The approach to this installation will involve the same evaluation matrix discussed in the earlier sections of the approach. Some of the methods to be evaluated include:

1. Floating the water line across the top of the lake before fully submerging and anchoring to the lake bottom.

2. Pulling the line across the lake partially submerged to allow boat traffic during construction before anchoring to the lake bottom.

3. Directional drilling under the lake floor to avoid “wet” construction.



Scruggs Road 2 to Contentment Island Interconnection This lake crossing would provide Contentment Island a connection to the existing WVWA distribution along Dudley Amos Road. The evaluation for this lake crossing will be handled similarly to the Windtree to Lakewood crossing but executed in four separate sections between the islands that exist between the two connection points.

Lake Vista Pump Station Retirement Project The average operation and maintenance costs for the Lake Vista Pump Station ranges between $50,000 and $60,000 per year, assuming no unplanned disruption in operation. When service disruptions occur, hauling costs raise the annual operation and maintenance costs to nearly $100,000. By including the SMLWTP project, the anticipated $2 million project cost could be reduced by as much as 20% by taking advantage of construction related economies-of-scale of the larger project. This savings would likely support much of, if not all, the debt service associated with this improvement.

Upon the development of the GMP for the SMLWTP Intake, WTP and pipelines, should there be additional construction budget remaining, our team will work with the Authority to develop a scope and fee for these projects, as well as any others that can be incorporated into the overall program.

OUTSIDE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ASSISTANCE As we mentioned in our SOQ and base scope of services, we are offering our support to Megan Rapp and the Authority for Public Communication and Outreach. We see ourselves in a support role to the Authority and will offer our key team leaders on a regular basis to assist Authority on any Public Communications assistance. However, should the Authority desire to have a more formal Public Communications, we will offer Carolina PR, our exclusive subconsultant, as needed to provide these services.


BLACK & VEATCH | Updated Statement of Qualifications 39

Updated Statement of Qualifications As confirmation of our core team, the key team leaders presented during the SOQ remain committed to the project as requested in section 5.3.6 of the RFP. As a follow up to not only their commitment to the Authority, but as further evidence of their relevant experience to the SML project, Black & Veatch would like to re-introduce the Authority to its leaders for the project.

David Kinchen – DB Project Manager and Overall Team Leader

As the overall team leader, Dave Kinchen brings more than 27 years of design-build and construction experience to the team. As stated in the RFQ, Dave will be responsible for directing the efforts of the Black & Veatch team, and will provide overall leadership and direction for the project. He will be responsible for managing cost and schedule, facilitating meetings and ensuring conformance with the Authority’s objectives. Dave will also be the primary point of contact for the project.

Some of Dave’s more notable projects have been design-build and construction of major water resource facilities. As an example, the $28 million Bear Creek Water Treatment Facility (21 MGD Surface Water) included most of the major elements of the SML project, including construction of a 21 MGD Raw Water Intake and Pump Station, which included 6 vertical turbine pumps. The 36” RW main extended some 14,000 LF up to the water treatment plant, which included treatment, chemical feed, sludge handling facilities and finished water storage. The project also included administrative and laboratory facilities similar to the SML project.

Another project completed under Dave’s leadership is the Tussahaw WTP Facility, which included 13 MGD of surface water treatment. The system included a 13 MGD raw water intake and pump station (expandable to 26) with approximately 3000 lf of 54” DIP RW transmission piping, with 13 MGD of treatment, chemical feed, MIOX and 20,000 sf of administrative, meeting space, and laboratory. The plant is expandable to 26 MGD, and included some 6,000 LF of 48” DIP RW piping from the plant to the tie-in point of the overall transmission and distribution system. The project also included sludge handling facilities.

Dave’s most recent accomplishment was completion of the T-Bar Wellfield and Pipeline Project in Midland, Texas. As the Project Executive over the joint venture for this $155M water resource project, he was the hands on leader for the initial development of the preliminary budget, and was instrumental in successful development of the GMP for the project while working with his Phase 1 team. He was also instrumental in leading the Phase 2 team to completion of this critical water resource project 17 days ahead of schedule, and $ 1.4 million dollars below the original preliminary budget for the original scope of work. As discussed during the interview with the BV team during the SOQ, the Midland project included some 60 miles of 48” piping from the water source to the terminus storage facilities, multiple storage tanks, chlorination facility, surge facilities and a high service pump station.

Dave Kinchen Black & Veatch Project Manager Overall project leadership and conformance with Authority objective

There have been no material changes to our SOQ since submission on Aug 29, 2013.


40 NOVEMBER 2013

Stevie Steele – Local Project Coordination

As Local Project Coordinator, Stevie Steele brings more than 10 years of experience working with the Authority, Town, and Western Virginia Water Authority. The relationships that he has developed with and local staff and regulatory agencies will provide project value in the form of accelerated permitting delivery and enhanced Phase 1 services that build on the relationships that have been developed with the local contracting and supply markets

Stevie has more than 15 years of experience providing fully comprehensive services for water projects including preliminary planning, funding procurement, design, and project startup. His direct experience with the preliminary planning of this project will provide continuity of knowledge that has already been invested in by the Authority. The following outlines project specific experience related to this project:

n Covington Water System Improvements, Covington, VA – The aging water system was comprehensively evaluated and a phasing approach was developed to increase system efficiency. Stevie worked with the City staff to procure grant and loan funding and develop a phasing plan that worked both technically and financially. The project included waterline construction, raw water intake improvements, CSX railroad permitting, water treatment plant expansion, pump station construction, and finished water storage.

n Glen Heather Farms Area Waterline Replacements, Roanoke, VA – Stevie worked with Western Virginia Water Authority staff to develop a water replacement plan that would minimize system disruption and seamlessly mesh with the Authority budget and Virginia Department of Health funding. This project included hydraulic planning to serve existing and future demand needs as well as creative alignment solution to reduce pavement rehabilitation costs.

n Town of Narrows Phase II Water System Improvements, Narrows, VA – A system wide system evaluation was completed that included hydraulic and operational improvements to the existing water system. Stevie assisted the Town with successful procurement of grant and loan funding for the project. This project included extensive VDOT and Norfolk Southern Permitting, waterline replacement phasing to minimize system disruptions, pumps station construction, and the development of full scale telemetry controls.

Stephen Steele, PE CHA Companies Local Project Coordinator Registered Virginia PE, providing local project coordination and lead design of the pipeline.



Paul Delphos – Phase 1 Design Delivery Leader

As the Phase 1 Design Delivery Leader, Paul Delphos brings more than 20 years of water treatment permitting, piloting, design and construction experience to the team. As stated in the SOQ, Paul will be responsible for all of the efforts during Phase 1 in developing a Guaranteed Maximum Price for facilities that the Authority approves of and can fund. He will also be a secondary point of contact for this project.

Much of Paul’s career has been spent working with utilities across the Eastern United States in evaluating, designing and implementing low-pressure membranes. With these experiences, he has led industry-leading concepts and designs with membranes, many of which have been integrated into operating facilities totaling more than 150 MGD. Some of these experiences are noted as follows:

n Conestoga WTP, Lancaster, PA – To address an undersized sewer system, Paul worked with the PA DEP to permit a UV disinfection system to be added after the second-stage membrane system. This would allow nearly 90% of the primary membrane system backwash water be routed directly to the clearwell for distribution.

n Susquehanna WTP, Lancaster, PA – To address a little-known fact that membrane backwash water does not thicken effectively, Paul and his team incorporated an Ondeo DensaDeg system for a thickener to treat membrane backwash water. This assured compliance with an NPDES permit for the overflow and effective dewatering by centrifuges.

n Palmer River WTP, Swansea, MA – This is the first surface water desalination facility in the country to be treated directly with pressure-driven, low-pressure membranes. A proprietary coagulant blend was identified to balance both TOC removal and membrane fouling. Further, a low-tide withdrawal and high-tide discharge approach to the brackish river water optimized raw water quality, thereby improving membrane quality, and minimized discharge impacts to the estuary.

In addition to the engineering experience, Paul has been a co-author of industry design manuals including M46 and M53 (Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis; Microfiltration and Ultrafiltration in Drinking Water Treatment) and the ASCE/AWWA Water Treatment Design Manual, Fourth and Fifth Editions. Paul has also given more than 30 presentations at state and national conferences on membranes and has been a regular speaker at the Annual Virginia Senior Water Operators Forum in Charlottesville, discussing membrane technology and UV disinfection.

Paul Delphos, PE Black & Veatch Phase 1 Design Delivery Manager Registered Virginia PE, leading all technical aspects of the work.


42 NOVEMBER 2013

Roger Smith – DB Phase 2 Construction Delivery Manager

As the leader of the GMP development and construction activities, Roger brings more than 26 years of construction experience to the Smith Mountain Lake Team. As stated in the RFQ, Roger will be responsible for directing the efforts of the Black & Veatch construction organization team from constructability reviews of the initial design, to development of the GMP through to construction, commissioning and turnover of the project. In addition, Roger has worked with other key SML team members to successfully complete previous projects. These personal relationships will promote smooth transitions from one phase to the next in the progress of the Smith Mountain Lake program.

Throughout the course of his career, Roger has grown in experience and responsibility from field surveyor to foreman to Superintendent to Project Manager in the water industry. Some of the more notable projects Roger has guided include design-build and construction of large water resource facilities. As an example, the $26 million Rockdale County Water Treatment Plant (22 MGD Surface Water) which included treatment, chemical feed, sludge handling facilities, and finished water storage and high-service pumping station. A two-mile discharge pipeline including river crossing was also included. Much of the work was self-performed including site civil, cast-in-place concrete, underground piping, above-ground process piping and treatment equipment installation. The project also included system-wide monitoring capabilities, administrative and laboratory facilities similar to the SML project.

Another project completed under Roger’s management is the Tobacco Road WTP Facility (15 MGD Surface Water). The system included a 30 MGD raw water river intake and pumping station with cast-in-place concrete tankage, GAC filters, chemical feed and high-service pumping station. Much of the work was self-performed including site civil, cast-in-place concrete, underground piping, above-ground process piping, chemical treatment systems and water process equipment installation.

Other projects Roger has completed include the Bear Creek Raw Water Intake and Pumping Station, a design-build plant upgrade for the St. Simon’s Island Utility Department, and the F. Wayne Hill WRF including a pilot study of high-pressure Micro-, Nano- and Ultra-filtration. Roger’s most recent projects include the Southwest Water Treatment Plant Ozone Upgrades D-B in Orlando, Florida and the BioKyowa Treatment Facility Progressive D-B Membrane Filter project. Roger led both of these projects through constructability reviews, GMP development, procurement of subcontractors and process equipment and into construction. Both the Southwest WTP and BioKyowa are currently under construction with scheduled completion dates in early 2014.

Roger Smith Black & Veatch Construction, Commissioning and Startup Manager Management and oversight of all procurement and construction activities.



Chris Hogsed – Phase 2 Construction Superintendent

As an experienced construction professional with more than 32 years in the industry, Chris Hogsed will bring a wealth of real-life problem solving experience to the Smith Mountain Lake Team as Project Superintendent. Chris brings a wide circle of experience to the SML project including a long history of self-perform construction activities, constructability reviews performed with any eye on efficiency and quality, an intimate understanding of construction critical path scheduling, and management of subcontractors. In addition, Chris has worked on previous projects with Dave Kinchen and Roger Smith. The relationships Chris has built will prove very effective during the project with communications critical to the success of the Team.

Throughout his career, Chris has gained a deep understanding of mechanical and civil construction processes and techniques. He has grown in experience and responsibility from craftsman in the field through foreman to the highest levels of site management. Chris has proven experience in personnel and project management skills, the ability to coordinate complex construction activities in and around ongoing operations with minimum disruption, and he possesses practical problem-solving skills under stressful conditions.

One of the notable projects Chris has guided to completion is the T-Bar Well Field and Pipeline Project in Midland, Texas. Chris was responsible for the completion of $58M of self-perform and subcontracted work for this water resource project. The project included 60 new wells connected to multiple storage tanks, chlorination facilities, high-service pumping stations, surge facilities and terminus storage facilities. Chris was instrumental in the construction completion of this critical water resource project 17 days ahead of schedule and $8 million below original budgets.

Another project completed under Chris’ supervision is the Shoal Creek Filter Plant in Buford, Georgia. Chris was the General Mechanical Superintendent for the construction of this 75 MGD water treatment facility. The project included nearly 6 miles of buried ductile iron and welded steel piping ranging from 108-inch and less. Process improvements included two 4-million gallon equalization basins, pre-ozone facilities, two-stage rapid mix basins, flocculation basins, six gravity filters a high-service pump station, bulk chemical storage and operations center.

Chris’ most recent project is the BioKyowa Treatment Facility Progressive D-B Membrane Filter Project in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. Chris performed constructability reviews, assisted with GMP development, procurement activities, and is currently on-site leading the construction effort of 25 self-perform craftsmen and other subcontractors. The BioKyowa project is currently scheduled for completion in early 2014.

Chris Hogsed Black & Veatch Construction Superintendent Site supervision and contractor coordination.


BLACK & VEATCH | Appendices A-1

Appendices APPENDIX A. DRAFT PROGRESSIVE DESIGN-BUILD AGREEMENT The information in this section is considered proprietary. Volume 2 contains our response to this section.


BLACK & VEATCH | Appendices B-1

APPENDIX B. UPDATED RESUMES There have been no material changes to the resumes in our SOQ since submission on Aug 29, 2013.


BLACK & VEATCH | Appendices C-1

APPENDIX C. UPDATED FORMS FOR AFFIRMATION OF COMPLIANCE This section includes the following updated certificates:

n Certification of Compliance with Prohibition of Political Contributions and Gifts During Procurement Process

n Submittal Certification

KYL57795

Stamp

ris17490

Typewritten Text

[email protected]

achieving a balance: economical, technical, public … · 2013-12-10 · why black & veatch?...

Documents