priest rapids turbine upgrade project - grantpud.org · – turbine bearing ... – kaplan pipes,...

41
Priest Rapids Turbine Upgrade Project May 26 th , 2015 1

Upload: hadang

Post on 11-Apr-2018

227 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Priest Rapids Turbine Upgrade Project

May 26th, 2015

1

Agenda

• Project Update

• Change Order #1• Schedule & Next Steps

2

PROJECTUPDATE

3

Project UpdateScope of Work

4

Project UpdateMajor Components

• Contract is structured to provide engineering analysis and field inspection of parts to be reused to ensure 50 year life extension. Possible outcomes include:– reuse as is– modify & reuse– replace

• New components– turbine runner– inner headcover– wicket gates (originally planned for reuse)

• Stress concentrations• Fatigue life• Material properties• Unacceptable for 50 yr. life extension

5

Project UpdateMajor Components

• Refurbished components– intermediate head cover– stay ring and stay vanes– bottom ring– wicket gate linkage, operating ring, & servomotor– turbine bearing– packing box– Kaplan pipes, oil head and governor oil pressure system– turbine shaft (originally planned for reuse as is)

• Stress concentrations• Fatigue life• Acceptable for  50 yr. life extension with modifications

6

SHOP ASSEMBLY Voith York (PA) or Voith Sao Paulo (Brazil)

Major Part Manufacturing

CASTING/FABRICATION MACHINING

HUB & INTERNALS China Erzhong (China) Voith Shanghai (China)

BLADES Voith Sao Paulo (Brazil)  Voith Sao Paulo (Brazil)

7

CHANGE ORDER #1

8

Change Order #1

• Housekeeping changes (no cost)– Modifies the Milestone Schedule to match awarded project scope– Adjusts the Payment Schedule to match the Milestone Schedule– Adjusts the liquidated damages to match the Milestone Schedule– Clarifies the timing for making price adjustments per the escalation clauses

9

Description of Change COST Increase to Voithcontract?

Increase to project cost?

Changes location and shifts responsibility for lead abatement and painting for intermediate headcover refurbishment to Voith.

$120,000/unit  yes no

New inner headcover deck plates $12,000/unit yes no

Adds bottom ring facing plates $113,027/1st unit 106,690/2nd‐10th unit

yes yes

Modifies methodology for site assembly of the runner

$184,471 yes no

Adds design of modifications of certain parts to be reused

Turbine shaft ‐ $62,272Wicket gates ‐ $119,401Wicket gate mechanism ‐ $5,560

yes yes

Change Order #1 Costs

• Cost for changes included in Change Order #1– Increase in Voith contract costs – $ 2,764,941– Increase in project costs – $1,260,470

• New total Contract Price – $64,363,818

10

SCHEDULE& NEXT STEPS

11

Schedule

• One unit per year• Initial unit outage planned for Aug 2016

12

Next Steps

230‐2583 PR Turbine Upgrades

Approval of Change Order #1 June 9, 2015Resolution of shaft, wicket gates and other misc. items ‐ potential Change Order 2

June 23, 2015

Potential approval of Change Order #2 July 14, 2015

13

Other Related Contracts General NDE services 3rd quarter 2015Lead abatement & painting 4th quarter 2015Site labor 1st quarter 2016Discharge & bottom ring refurbishment 1st quarter 2016

Priest Rapids Dam Generator Rehabilitation Contract 230‐3737

2

Project Timeline/HistoryDESCRIPTION DATE

Commission Action: Prequalification of Voith, Alstom, Andritz

June 10th, 2014

Draft technical specifications provided to bidders for comment.

Oct 10, 2014

Andritz notifies District their Canadian bar shop was moved, Andritz required to re‐qualify a facility that meets the pre‐qualification criteria

Oct 22, 2014

Commission Report: Pre‐Qual update, GE request to reconsider their pre‐qual status, and bars vs coils discussion

Dec, 9th 2014

Staff approves Andritz’s Austrian bar manufacturing facility.

Dec 18th 2014

Contract Released for Bid Jan 29, 2015

Contract Bids Opened April 23, 2015

3

Contract Scope of Work

Monitoring System

Excitation System

Thrust Bearing

Thrust bearing scope likely to increase   

Bids Received

*Engineer’s Estimate developed from 2008 Wanapum Generator Contract bids and

escalated to 2015. Confirmed by Independent estimate by MWH at $98,978,000. • Close Competitive Bids, 2.8% between Base Bids

Bidder Base BidAlternate Bid No. 

1Alternate Bid No. 

2

Voith Hydro $85,351,900  $83,935,300  $90,760,100 

Andritz Hydro $87,491,100  $85,763,400 

Alstom Power $87,775,000 

Engineer’s Estimate* $98,660,000

4

Commercial & Technical Evaluation Criteria per Contract

• Total Bid Price• Efficiency Evaluation• Temperature Evaluation• Schedule Evaluation• Bidders Data

– Sub‐Contractors– Project and site managers– Technical/commercial exceptions– Equipment data, descriptions, and drawings

• Other Elements that may affect cost or benefits to the District

5

6

Existing11,199 

Alstom11,064 

Voith,  11,687 

Andritz11,340 

10,700

10,800

10,900

11,000

11,100

11,200

11,300

11,400

11,500

11,600

11,700

11,800Kilowatts

Total Generator Losses, 10 units

Lower Losses = Better Efficiency

Over ½ Megawatt Spread Amongst Bidders

Andritz Hydro Base & Alt Bids• Commercially Compliant• Technically Non‐ Compliant• Major Technical Exceptions

– Bar installation method is not one of the two defined methods.  Not “equal or better than” the two methods.

• Does not provide a zero clearance on both sides of Bar• Does not meet wedging system requirements to provide 150% preload on the bar

– Excitation System has numerous exceptions• Alternate Bid 1 could not be considered according to ITB‐2, since Base Bid was non compliant 

7

Voith Hydro Base Bid

• Commercially and Technically Compliant• Least efficient of all bids

8

Voith Hydro Alternate Bids• Alternate Bid 1

– Commercially Non‐Compliant, Technically Compliant– Commercial Exception: Alternate payment schedule with 

progress payments resulting in $1.4M price reduction, However;• Forward cash flow of progress payments results in reduced value of $2.4M compared to their base bid

• $2.4M added to evaluated bid price • Additional risk added with progress payments vs payment for on‐site material delivery or on‐site assembly completion 

• Alternate Bid 2 – Commercially Non‐Compliant– Uses same sub contractors for excitation and monitoring 

systems as Wanapum Dam resulting in a $5.4M price increase. Also includes progress payments. No additional value to District over their Base Bid and not considered.

– No further technical evaluation completed

9

Alstom Power Bid• Commercially & Technically Compliant• Best efficiency of all Bidders• Only bidder to improve the efficiency of the Units

– Achieved by tightening baffle clearances & sealing leakage paths

– Optimized rotor pole connection system that does not negatively impact the efficiency

• Stator bars, Exciter, and Monitoring System all manufactured in Canada. Same supply as Wanapum – Reduced internal labor resources – Many Interchangeable spare parts between plants  

• Lowest Evaluated Bid

10

Evaluated Bid Prices

11

$85,351,900

$83,935,300

$87,775,000

$3,395,350

$3,395,350

$0 Most Efficient

$2,414,679 

$81,000,000

$82,000,000

$83,000,000

$84,000,000

$85,000,000

$86,000,000

$87,000,000

$88,000,000

$89,000,000

$90,000,000

$91,000,000

Voith Voith alt 1 Alstom

Bid Price Efficiency Adjustment Progress Payments

$87,775,250

$88,747,250

$89,730,650

Alstom Optional Bid Items• 19 Optional Bid Items for: replacement parts, additional field work, or additional spare parts. – Future Engineering analysis and field inspection will determine the need for replacement parts 

– We expect to replace thrust bearing at $1M per Unit• Spare Power Potential Transformer for Excitation System.  Alstom’s price is $128,400– Significantly reduced down time in case of failure – Significantly reduced pricing when purchased with other 10 Units and not in an emergency condition

• Recommend award of Optional Bid Item No. 9 for Spare Power Potential Transformer

12

Staff’s Recommendation

Award Contract 230‐3737 for the Priest Rapids Dam Generator Rehabilitation 

to:Alstom Power Inc. in the amount of 

$87,903,514 *

*Includes price of Optional Bid Item for spare transformer

13

Public Affairs Quarterly Report May 2015

2 Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report

Targeted,

easy-to-define

metrics to

determine

effectiveness

of campaigns

3 Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report

Results of High Speed Network campaign:

Through March 31, 2015

• 508 new fiber subscribers, 5% growth in Q1, (17.9% growth since ‘13.)

• $158,496 in additional annual revenue

– $569,400 in additional annual revenue since Jan. 1, 2014

• In Q1, take-rate goal gap closed from 2.97% to 1.38%

• Fastest growing hubs – Mattawa +68, Larson +48, Soap Lake +36

• Implementing Wireless marketing plan

4 Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report

Wireless Network postcard:

Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report 5

Results of Q-1 ePay campaign

New ePay

customers in Q1

2015:

• 549 new ePay

customers –

9.7% growth

• $9,882 in

annual mailing

savings

– $41,000

since July

2013.

Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report 6

Share the Warmth

• Record-breaking donations of $63,000 for the 2014-2015

campaign, (Feb. 2014-Jan. 2015)

Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report 7

Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report 8

Saving Energy

• 20,132 MWh saved in 2014 (I-937 reporting)

Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report 9

Public Outreach plans for 2015

Public Affairs Q1-2015 Report 10

• Sunglass Selfie Social Media Contest

– Highlights recreation upgrades and drives social media

interaction

• Grant County Fair

– Tuesday main advertiser, partnering with 811 and Wanapum

• Summer library hydropower demonstration

– Engagement with community and youth to explain hydropower

and electrical safety

• Recreation and High Speed Network campaigns

– New video and print ads for recreation and High Speed Network

• Visitor centers development and promotion

– Working with project managers to help develop content and also

promote Wanapum and Hydro visitors centers.

Copyright ©2013 Grant County Public Utility District. CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY

Customer Satisfaction Survey2015

Purpose

• Strategic Plan Objective 3 “Provide Outstanding Service to Our Customers”.– Metric: Retail Customer Satisfaction

Surveys » (every other year)

• Gauge effectiveness of customer education and outreach

Satisfaction Survey 12

Instrument

• Vendor: Strategies 360• Survey portion of population with a 5.7%

margin of error and a 95% confidence level.

• Sample size of 300 (Eng & Sph) representing every community.

• 10-11 min. in length

Satisfaction Survey 13

Instrument

• Previous years satisfaction levels:– ‘12=88% satisfaction– ’07=95% satisfaction– ’08=91% satisfaction

• Survey conducted in June results presented in July/Aug timeframe

• Questions designed to gather actionable data

• Requesting board input on proposed questions today

Satisfaction Survey 14

grantpud.org

Thank you.

Public Affairs

[email protected]