1 Joel Kostelac, PE BCEE | GHD PMAA – August 2016 Utilizing systematic planning and innovative technologies for a cost effective project Image placeholder Outline • Project planning - Assembling the team - Drivers - Tasks and timeline • Facility overview • Design overview - Alternative analysis and selections - Phases - Detailed design • Bid overview - Setting the stage - Bid results - Value engineering - Re-bid results • Summary and way forward
29
Embed
Utilizing systematic planning and innovative technologies … · Utilizing systematic planning and innovative technologies for a cost effective project ... - Value engineering ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Joel Kostelac, PE BCEE | GHDPMAA – August 2016
Utilizing systematic planning and innovative technologies for a cost effective project
Image placeholder
Outline
• Project planning
- Assembling the team
- Drivers
- Tasks and timeline
• Facility overview
• Design overview
- Alternative analysis and selections
- Phases
- Detailed design
• Bid overview
- Setting the stage
- Bid results
- Value engineering
- Re-bid results
• Summary and way forward
2
Introduction
3
Project planning
4
Project drivers
Primary project driver- Exceeded the permitted maximum capacity three consecutive months in
2011 resulting in a CAP (Feb, Mar, April)
- CAP, approved August 2012 required submission of Act 537 Revision to address overload
- Submission originally required by June 20, 2014
- Set Cranberry on path to upgrade project
Assembling team
• Previous comprehensive planning indicated a need for increased capacity and provided a small indication of the project costs
• Township understood importance of selection of consultant, program management and third party review
• Necessary to keep all project stakeholders on board- Administrative and operations staff
- Board of Supervisors
- PA DEP
- Contributing municipalities
- Public
- Consultants
5
Assembling team
• Developed RFP for design consultant – charged with development of a Basis of Design (BOD)
• BOD to be used in submission of Act 537 revision
• Selection process began in late 2012, concluded in April 2013
• Direct Township link – Waterworks Coordinator
• Program Manager
• Design Consultant
Getting underway
Stakeholder Involvement
• Project chartering – late April 2013- Involves all stakeholders- Defines project mission,
critical success factors, communications plan, etc.
- Included BOD kickoff workshop
• DEP workshop May 2013
6
Project drivers – NEW
• Preliminary limits received in February 2013 to be revised to mass-based limits
• Influent Pumping TM• Preliminary Treatment TM • Biological Process TM• Sedimentation and
Filtration TM• Disinfection and reuse TM• Schematics, Product
literature
TASK 2:LIQUID PROCESS
ALTERNATIVES
2.1 Pumping Station –Influent Pumping and Screening - Complete
2.2Headworks – Grit: 9/6Primary Clarifiers: 9/20
2.3 Biological Process 9/20
2.4Sedimentation and Filtration 9/20
2.5Disinfection and reuse 9/20
• Digestion Alternatives TM with Energy Recovery
• Dewatering / Disposal TM
• Schematics, Product Literature
TASK 3:SOLIDS HANDLING
ALTERNATIVES
Deliver in parallel with Task 2
3.1 Digestion 9/13
• HVAC TM• Electrical and SCADA
TM• Health and Safety TM• Admin, Lab, Pretreatment
TM• Schematics, Product
Literature
TASK 4:CONDITIONS
ASSESSMENT
Weeks 15 - 18
4.1 Other Unit Processes, equipment – Includes odor control, conditions assessment - underway
• Preliminary Cost Estimates
• Risk, Criticality Matrix• Phasing Alternatives
Plan• Workshop meeting
minutes
TASK 5:PROJECT COSTS
AND PHASING
5.1Unit Process Alternatives and Cost Estimates
• Recommended Process Alternatives, Costs, Phasing
• Site Plant, Schematics• Product Literature,
Funding methods• PA DEP Pre-application
meeting and minutes• Public meeting handouts
TASK 6:BASIS OF DESIGN
REPORT
6.1 Recommended Process Alternatives
Weeks 1 - 6
1.4Existing plant hydraulic evaluation
RFP Tasks: 3,12,13
Weeks 7 - 14
RFP Tasks: 4,6,12,13
3.2 Dewatering, Disposal 9/13
3.3 Energy Recovery 9/13
RFP Tasks: 7,10
4.2 HVAC analysis
4.3Electrical / SCADA analysis
4.4Health and Safety
4.5Admin / Lab / Pre-treatment assessment
Weeks 19 - 21
RFP Tasks: 8,9
5.2 Risk, Criticality Assessment
5.3 Phasing Alternatives
Weeks 22 - 24
RFP Tasks: 11,12,1314,15,16
6.2 Recommended Phasing Plan
6.3 Preliminary Site Plan
6.4 Define Construction Permits
6.5 Economic benefits and funding analysis
8/26
–10
/1 (
5 w
eeks
)
9/23
–11
/1 (
5.5
wee
ks)
11/1
–11
/21
(3 w
eeks
)
Workshop 3/4 – 10/1 –10/2 (as needed)
Workshop 5 – 11/7
Notes items that were in development during interim period (6/7 – 8/26)
Workshop 6 – BOD 11/21
10
Design flow conditions for upgrade
Flow conditionDesign raw
influent flow, mgd
Internal plant recycles,
mgd
Design flow with recycles,
mgd
Minimum day flow 2.17 0.60 2.77
Minimum month flow 4.87 1.20 6.07
Average day flow 6.00 1.20 7.20
Maximum month flow 8.73 1.56 10.29
Peak day flow 14.76 1.35 16.11
Peak hour flow 23.00 1.35 24.35
Expandable to 30.4 mgd peak hour flow in futurePhase 2 expansion
Levels of treatment considered
Cu
rren
t le
vel Effluent limits
2/5 (1.5/3.5) mg/L ammonia
2 mg/L TP
Continue bypass of secondary treatment
Lev
el 1
Effluent limits
<10 mg/L TN
1 - 2 mg/L TP
No bypass allowed
Lev
el 2
Effluent limits
<6 mg/L TN
< 0.6 mg/L TP
No bypass allowed
11
Short-listed alternatives
Alternatives for <6 mg/L TN and <0.6 mg/L TP
CAS
4-stage bardenpho
w/ effluent filters
CAS
MLE
w/ denitefilters
MBR
4-stage bardenpho
BioMag®
4-stage bardenpho
MBBR
w/ Denite Filters
IFAS
4-stage bardenpho
w/ effluent filters
High-rate carbon removal
w/ biologically active filters & denitefilters
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
• Alternatives for <6 mg/L TN and <0.6 mg/L TP
Recommended approach – MBR
Advantages
• Proven technology
• No additional bioreactors required
• Eliminates the impact of sludge settleability
• Eliminates the need for separate effluent filters
• Existing SCs can be re-used for flow equalization
• Excellent water quality (water reuse potential)
• Easily expanded for future growth
• Smallest footprint
12
Anaerobic digestion
• Lowest capital / operating
• Possible energy production
• Not a current process
• Large footprint (impacts liquid end selection)
• Gas handling concerns
2nd Generation ATAD
• Smallest footprint
• Current process
• Class A
• High capital / operating
Solids treatment alternatives
Selected alternative and phasing
• Phase 1
- Sitework, demo, yard piping
- PE flow distribution
- Influent pumping and screening
- Grit handling
- Aeration tank modifications
- RAS distribution
- RAS/WAS PS
- Fine screen facility
- MBR facilities
- Thickener replacements
- ATAD facilities
- Odor control
- Electrical, SCADA, I&C
- Misc. HVAC, plumbing
• Approx. $45M (2013 dollars)
13
Selected alternative and phasing
• Phase 2
- Sitework, demo, yard piping
- PC No. 5
- Additional membrane cassettes/equipment
- Nutrient removal modifications
- Disinfection upgrade
- Electrical, I&C
- Misc.
• Approx. $20M (2023 dollars)
Detailed design
14
Project mission statement
“The project team will work together using effective communication and coordination to develop the preliminary and final design for a cost-effective, maintenance-friendly wastewater treatment facility, that retains flexibility for both the progress of future growth and potential future regulation while minimizing the impact on treatment plant operations and local neighbors.”
Critical success factors
Critical success factor
Approach
Design is completed in accordance with the project schedule
• GHD, the Township, and the Program Manager (Pr.M), HRG, will meet at regular intervals to review progress and make decisions to facilitate meeting project milestones.
• The preliminary CPM schedule will be reviewed with the Township and PrM to establish an approved baseline schedule during the project planning period. The approved schedule will be used as the project baseline for monthly schedule updates and cost control plan
Open communication is maintained between the Township and GHDthroughout the project
• Joel Kostelac, will be the primary point of contact for the engineering team, the Township, and the PrM. Bill LaDieu, Kristi Perri, Howard Butler, and Rulison Evans will also be available when project efficiencies dictate
• Maintain and improve upon established communication systems.
15
Critical success factors
Critical success factor
Approach
Completed design accounts for maintenance of plant operations and permit compliance throughout
• Develop phasing diagrams to outline in detail to the contractor how the new and upgraded facilities are to be integrated into the plant
• Delineate bypass pumping requirements for short and long term unit process bypasses
• Conduct pre-bid “rehearsals” to identify potential issues
Achieve the required treatment performance
• Identify acceptable offline time, with input from the Township, for unit processes and equipment.
• Develop a robust, flexible design
Maximize odor control at the site
• Engage Bowker & Associates to assist with design of the odor control facilities
Maintain project costs as described in the Basis of Design
• Conduct cost estimate updates in conjunction with design reviews, at minimum 30%, 60% and 90%
FIGURE 4.1Brush Creek WPCF preliminary & final design phases work plan
Deliverables• Chartering Documents• Baseline Schedule and
Updates• Meeting Handouts,
Minutes, Updates (as needed)
• Site Survey• Geotech Report• Hazardous Conditions
Report
TASK 1:PRE-DESIGN
RFP Tasks: P1, P2, P3, P4
P1AProject Chartering
P2Survey and Base Mapping
P1BPM/Design Schedule
• BioWin Process Model and Report
• Revised Liquid Process TM
• Revised Solids Process TM
• Revised Odor Control TM• Vendor
Recommendations, Site Visit Schedule
TASK 2:PRELIM.
LIQUID PROCESS DESIGN
P5ALiquid Process Kickoff
P5C Preliminary Liquid Process DesignRevised Liquid Process TM
• 30% Design Drawings and Specs
• 60% Design Drawings, including SCADA Scope and Integration Plan
• Appropriate Permit Applications
P5DPreliiminary Solids Process DesignRevised Solids Process Design TM
TASK 5:90% and 100%
DESIGNDRAWINGS
F2A90% Design Drawings
• 90% Design Drawings• 100% Design Drawings• Final Design Drawings
(paper and electronic)• Final Project Manual, CSI
16-17 Division Format (paper and electronic)
• Final Probable Construction Cost
F3 and F5Final Project Manual including Technical Specs and Front End Documents