HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-10-17 Packet - Special CITY OF UKIAH
CITY COUNCIL JOINT MEETING WITH
THE
UKIAH VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT
AGENDA
CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
October 17, 2005
4:30 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL- CITY COUNCIL
g
1
w
m
Sm
CURSORY REVIEW BY DAVID EWING OF VALUE ENGINEERING OPPORTUNITIE~
RELATED TO THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT'DESIGN
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE AWARD OF BID TO KIEWIT PACIFIC COMPANY FOR
..THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY'S WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
PRESENTATION BY DAVID EWING OF VALUE ENGINEERING DETAILED
OPPORTUNITIES RELATED TO THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DESIGI"
PUBLIC EXPRESSION
a. Announcements/Other Business
ADJOURNMENT
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City'of
Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours
prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda..
Dated this 14th day of October, 2005.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. 2
DATE: October 17, 2005
REPORT
SUBJECT: CURSORY REVIEW BY DAVID EWING, EWING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES,
ON THE VALUE ENGINEERING OPPORTUNITIES RELATED TO THE CITY OF UKIAH
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (WWTP)IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Mr. David Ewing, Ewing Construction Services, will provide the Council with his "Pre-
Construction Phase" City contract for preliminary information on possible value engineering
opportunities related to the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1) Discuss and provide comments on preliminary information
provided by Ewing Construction Services. No further action required.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Redirect Staff
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
Bernie Ziemianek, Director of Public Utilities
Ann Burck, Project Engineer/Manager
Candace Horsley, City Manager
N/A
APPROVED:: ~ /'x~~ L--.
Candace Horsley, City Mana§~,x~
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. 3
DATE: October 17, 2005
REPORT
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DECISION ON THE AWARD OF BID TO KIEWIT PACIFIC
COMPANY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $56,538,000 AND IF APPROVED,
AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT
At the September 14, 2005 Special Joint Meeting of the City of Ukiah and Ukiah
Valley Sanitation District, there was a discussion to award the construction contract for the
Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project to Kiewit Pacific Company. A District
member stated that considering the magnitude of the Project, all members of the City and
District needed to be present to make a decision on the award of the construction contract.
Since two members were absent, it was the consensus of the City and District to consider the
contract award at a future Joint Meeting and encourage all Councilmembers and District
members to attend. In addition, the Joint Boards agreed a "Pre-Construction" Value
Engineering Review by Ewing Construction Services and up-to-date Prop 218 feedback
information will better prepare the Boards for making a Go/No Go decision.
The agenda from the previous meeting is attached for background information only.
Additional information will be provided in a brief oral presentation during the previous agenda
item #1.
(Continued on Page 2)
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Discuss and decide the bid award direction to Kiewit
Pacific Company for the construction of the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant
Improvement Project in the amount of $56,538,000 and authorize the City Manager to
execute the agreement.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine award of bid requires further consideration and provide staff with direction.
2. Determine award of bid is inappropriate at this time and move to reject all bids and
provide direction to Staff.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
Bernie Ziemianek, Director of Public Utilities
Ann Burck, Project Engineer/Manager
Candace Horsley, City Manager
Previous Joint Meeting (September 14, 2005) agenda information.
Candace Horsley, City Man'~er
Staff recommends an Award/No Award decision be given to Kiewit Pacific Company for
the Construction of the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project for the
amount of $56,538,000 and recommends to the City Council that if such an Award is decided
to authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement.
ITEM NO. 3
AGENDA
SUMMARY
DATE: September 14, 2005
REPORT
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE AWARD OF BID CONTRACTS TO KIEWIT PACIFIC
COMPANY AND EWING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES RELATED TO THE
REHABILITATION AND CAPACITY ADDITION OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PLANT FACILITY ("IMPROVEMENT PROJECT")
On April 25, 2005, a Request for Bids was issued for the construction of the City of Ukiah
Wastewater Treatment Plant ("WWTP") Improvement Project. 51 sets of plans and
specifications were distributed to plan rooms, contractors, subcontractors and suppliers. On
June 2, 2005, bids were received from two contractors, Kiewit Pacific Company ("Kiewit") and
Slayden Construction Company ("Slayden"). Kiewit's bid was the apparent Iow bidder at
$56,538,000 compared to Slayden's bid at $57,910,000. Brown and Caldwell's ("Engineer's
Estimate") was approximately $46,000,000.
Although Kiewit's bid was the lowest, it was about 25.6 percent above the Engineer's
Estimate. Because the bids were higher than estimated, a City Council ("City") and Ukiah Valley
Sanitation District ("District'3 subcommittee was formed to investigate specific information
relevant to the bid by considering the overall design elements, and construction costs, relative to
borrowing construction funds.
(Continued on Page 2)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: After thorough discussion, award bid to Kiewit Pacific Company for
the construction of the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant Rehabilitation and Capacity
Addition Project in the amount of $56,538,000 and Ewing Construction Services in the amount of
$38,366.25 by authorizing the City Manager to execute the individual agreements.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
1. Determine award of bid requires further consideration and remand to staff with direction.
2. Determine award of bid is inappropriate at this time and move to reject all bids and
provide further direction to Staff.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
Bernie Ziemianek, Director of Public Utilities
Bernie Ziemianek, Director of Public Utilities and Ann Burck, Project
Engineer/Manager
Candace Horsley, City Manager
1. Ewing Construction Services Proposal
APPROVED: ~--~ ~~,
Candac[ Horsley, C~]~nager
On July 14, 2005, a Special Joint Meeting of the City and District was held for
consideration and possible action on Kiewit's bid. The subcommittee recommended to the full
City and the District members a number of specific options related to the bids. Concern was
expressed that construction costs/materials would likely increase if the project were delayed and
whether a delay would be the most cost effective approach. The subcommittee had evaluated
the risk in delaying the project and determined that overall there was greater benefit in waiting.
However, it was the consensus of the City and the District not to reject the bid, but to
request a 60-day extension from Kiewit on their bid to allow for further value engineering and
design change options. On July 25, 2005, Kiewit agreed to extend its bid for an additional 60
days for a total of 150 days to November 2, 2005. A similar request was presented to Slayden
who also agreed to an additional 60 day extension.
During this time, Staff recommended Ewing Construction Services ("ECS") to the
subcommittee as a highly regarded neutral third party to provide value engineering in support of
both pre- and post-award review emphasis on developing ideas to reduce the cost of the project.
The subcommittee met with Mr. David Ewing, owner of ECS, to discuss his ability to assist the
City and District. The subcommittee discussed the proposed scope of services that included
both a pre-award and post-award plan. Mr. Ewing discussed his previous assignments,
activities, and successes involving cost reduction ideas on wastewater treatment projects. The
subcommittee recommended to Staff to follow up with the appropriate project Scope, timelines,
milestones and costs associated with services from ECS. Staff did follow-up as directed and is
presenting to the City and District a proposal by ECS in the amount of $38,366.25 for a cost
reduction review. This is a sole source bid and is recommended as a result of the background
and previous experience ECS has for review of Brown and Caldwell project designs and with
very similar wastewater treatment plant designs.
However, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina's devastation of the Gulf Coast, Staff
has received a number of telephone calls from various suppliers, contractors, and
consultants inquiring about the schedule for the WWTP project. Their calls were more of an
"inform" nature that as a result of Hurricane Katrina their company's and shop's attention will
be turning to providing primary service to the needs of the three southern States hit with the
disaster. As an example, on August 31,2005 Brown and Caldwell Corporate sent their Staff
a "heads-up" internal email message ....
"Hurricane Katrina is sure to have an impact with future construction costs,
especially materials. There will be a major need for steel, concrete, wood,
masonry and other construction materials. Them may also be a labor shortage
as many contractors may head to the area for work. This could have notable
impacts to costs and should be considered in current and future cost estimates."
Since this note various segments of the construction industry have been analyzing the
economic impact of Hurricane Katrina on construction costs. According to an article from the
Associated Press, 'q'he expected economic hit from Hurricane Katrina keeps growing and likely
to top $100 billion and could go much higher. Most of that -$100 billion- is damage to homes
and businesses plus roads, bridges, levees, telecommunications, water and sewer systems
and other public Infrastructure." Ken Simonson, chief economist of The Associated General
Contractors of America stated, "the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina will have varied
impacts on construction markets for the rest of 2005 and into 2006. A large run-up has already
"occurred in the cost of cement, steel, copper, gypsum, and petroleum-based inputs.
Unfortunately, Katrina will push many of these costs much higher."
In July, how much, or even if construction costs would continue to escalate was not
known. At that time, the subcommittee was trying to assess the impact of building materials and
energy escalations against the loss of these materials to the Asian markets. According to
construction industry analysts, there is now little doubt this latest incident will continue to
increase and bear down on domestic prices and material access. It is no longer a chess game
on where future construction prices will be.
In addition, Staff discussion with ECS as late as Monday, September 12, 2005 regarding
their read of such impacts disclosed recent price swings in material delivery charges (i.e. fuel
surcharges), 18% increase in plastic pipe and conduit, and stiff increases in copper related
materials. They further stated cement prices are on the rise as a result of the loss of a major
material distribution point at the New Orleans ports. (A subsequent conversation with cement
industry personnel indicated to Staff that up to 60% of the Nation's cement is brought through
the New Orleans ports. Albeit, most of this is probably destined for the east and mid-west but will
no doubt have an impact on west coast product price and availability)
According to the City Attorney, State law requires the bids be put out in a prescribed
manner where the lowest bid from a responsible bidder is accepted or, all bids are rejected and
re-bid. State law is clear in that renegotiation of a change order before entering into a contract or
to expect a contract be awarded with the implied understanding that it is not the project being
awarded is not an option, since the project is to be significantly modified in order to get cost
reductions after the award. The City and District have two options, 1) accept the bid or 2) reject
it and re-bid. Staff suggests that if the bids are rejected, the previous subcommittee's prescribed
timeline of re-bidding in the December/January timeframe will have a high probability of an
additional increase of some $15 to $20 million or perhaps higher. One factor for this is due to
the already existing extension of the project for 150 days. This by itself will no doubt render an
increase if re-bid given the circumstances.
Therefore, Staff believes this project needs to go forward or the City and District will face
a huge increase in costs resulting from both uncontrollable market drivers and potentially a "band
aid" fix approach to plant deficiencies with higher long term costs and increased likelihood of
discharge permit violations. Based on the bid and evaluation by Harris, current and past
discussions with ECS and other external references, Staff recommends that after a thorou.qh
City and District discussion, to award the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant
Improvement Project contract to Kiewit Pacific Company for the bid amount and to award a
contract for the services of ECS for their proposal amount to help uncover potential cost savin.qs
items and to aid in minimizin.q any future cost increases.
As stated in a previous Agenda Summary Review, the project construction manager,
Harris and Associates (Harris) reviewed the bids and found no inconsistencies. Harris contacted
the California State Contractors License Board and found the licenses for both bidders to be in
good standing.
Ingenuity' from Concept ~rough Completion
ATTAINT
August 22, 2005
Mr. Bernie Ziemianek, Public Utilities Director
City of Ukiah
411 Clay Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
Re: Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project- Cost Reduction Review
Dear Bernie:
It was a pleasure meeting with you, Mayor Ashiku, Councilman Crane and City Manager
Horsley last Thursday to discuss the Ukiah WWTP project. As a result of this meeting and our
previous discussions, Ewing Construction Services (ECS) offers the services outlined below to
assist the City in developing ideas to reduce the cost of this project. ECS will utilize Mr. Frank
Dryden, Process Engineer and Mr. Thomas Frisch,.Electrical Engineer, in completing the
proposed scope of work. As we discussed, the proposed scope of work is broken down into pre-
award and post-award phasing.
Proposed Scope of Services
Pre-Award
Review of Contract Documents with emphasis on developing ideas to reduce the cost of the
project without adversely impacting the necessary project and process elements. This review
will include a review of the current construction schedule and milestones. Following this review,
ECS will deliver a written report via email to the City no later than October 15, 2005. The level
of effort devoted to Pre-Award services is as follows:
Consulting Time:
David Ewing-
Franklin Dryden-
Thomas Frisch-
64 hrs @ $100/hr
40 hfs @ $125/hr
52 hrs @ $! 15/hr
$ 6,400.00
5,000.00
5,980.00
Expenses:
Site Visit by Tom Frisch-
Misc. expenses
ECS 5% mark-up on Subconsultants-
200.00
50.O0
559.00
Total Pre-Award Phase costs
$18,189.00
417 Mace Boulevard, Suite J-336 · Davis, CA 95616-6053 · Phone: 530-304-0972 · Fax: 530-756-7657
City of Ukiah Proposal
Page 2
Post-Award
Post Award services will include the following:
1. ECS will meet with the Contractor individually at their office to further develop cost
reduction ideas and give Contractor a timeline and outline for a cost reduction summit
meeting at City offices.
2. ECS will meet with the Brown &Caldwell (B&C) design team individually at their office
in Walnut Creek to further develop cost reduction ideas and give B&C a timeline and
outline for a cost reduction summit meeting at City offices.
3. ECS, Dryden and Frisch will study initial cost reduction ideas provided by Contractor,
B&C and the City in preparing for the cost reduction meeting at City offices.
4. ECS, along with its subconsultants, Frank Dryden and Tom Frisch, will facilitate an all-
day cost reduction meeting to held at the Ci(y offices no later than 2 weeks following the
contract award date. Invitees will include appropriate City staff and elected officials,
B&C Design team, Harris & Associates, Contractor, appropriate subcontractors and
appropriate major suppliers. ECS will prepare an agenda for this meeting. City will
provide a person to take meeting minutes and distribute following to meeting attendees.
5. Following this meeting, ECS will prepare an outline of cost reduction ideas that warrant
further review and consideration. This will be the last deliverable to the City and it is
expected that City staff, Contractor, B&C and Harris will continue forward with this
process which will conclude with the appropriate deductive change orders to the
Contract.
The level of effort devoted to Post-Award services is as follows:
Consulting Time:
David Ewing-
Franklin Dryden-
Thomas Frisch-
76 hrs @ $100/b.r
40 hfs @ $125/hr
50 hfs @ $115/hr
$ 7,600.00
5,000.00
5,750.00
Expenses:
Dave Ewing travel costs-
Frank Dryden travel costs-
Tom Frisch travel costs-
Misc. expenses-
ECS 5% mark-up on Subconsultants-
275.00
500.00
275.00
200.00
576.25
Total Post-Award Phase costs
$20,176.25
ECS and its subconsultants will not exceed the above hours or costs as outlined above without
first receiving the City's approval.
City of Ukiah Proposal
Page 3
The City will provide the following to ECS as part of this review process:
1. Three copies of Contract Document and all addenda.
2. Three CD copies of Contract Documents.
3. One copy of complete bid form submitted by apparent low-bidder.
4. One copy of any relevant post bid communications pertaining to project design and cost.
In addition, the City will provide meeting space and catered lunches for the post award cost
reduction meeting.
This proposal is contingent upon ECS review and approval of the City's standard professional
services agreement. Any agreement executed must recognize that any cost reduction ideas
proposed by ECS, its subconsultants and others must be thoroughly evaluated, approved and
stamped by B&C since they are the engineer-of-record for this project. ECS and its
subconsultants will not accept any design responsibility for ideas generated during this cost-
reduction process. Our job is to develop, promote and facilitate cost reduction measures that will
be given final design review and cost estimates by your Engineer and Contractor respectively.
Thank you for requesting a proposal for these services. Please do not hesitate to contact me
should you have questions or want to discuss further. We look forward to helping you meet your
objectives on this project.
Sincerely,
David B. Ewing
Owner
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. 4
DATE: October 17, 2005
REPORT
SUBJECT: PRESENTATION BY DAVID EWING, EWING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES,
ON VALUE ENGINEERING DETAILED OPPORTUNITES RELATED TO THE CITY OF
UKIAH WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (WWTP)IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
On September 14, 2005, at a Special Joint Meeting of the Ukiah City Council (City) and
the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District (District), a contract was awarded to Ewing Construction
Services (ECS) to conduct a cost reduction review of the WWTP Improvement Project
(Project).
ECS, in conjunction with Mr. Frank Dryden, Process Engineer and Mr. Thomas Frisch,
Electrical Engineer, reviewed the drawings, specifications, and technical reports for the
Project with emphasis on developing ideas to reduce the cost of the project without adversely
impacting the necessary project and process elements. Numerous ideas were generated and
are presented in the "Cost Reduction Review" report (or value engineering detailed
opportunities) submitted by ECS.
Mr. Ewing, Ewing Construction Services, will make a presentation to the City Council
based on the findings of the report. A copy of this report will be distributed during the Special
Joint Meeting of the City and District on October 17, 2005.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Discussion and acceptance of report from ECS on "Ukiah
Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements - Cost Reduction Review" (or value engineering
detailed opportunities).
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
1. Request additional information.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
Bernie Ziemianek, Director of Public Utilities
Ann Burck, Project Engineer/Manager
Candace Horsley, City Manager
N/A
APPROVED:
Candace Horsley; City Manag~
To:
From:
Mr. Bernie Ziemianek, Public Utilities Director
City of Ukiah
David Ewing
Ewing Construction Services
CONSTRUCTION
SERVICES
tt'-~r'o~21'-~ C~on'~L)let~or~
,
C1TY OF
. CtTM ('~
Date: October 10, 2005
Subject:
Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements- Cost Reduction Review
The following material was received from City of Ukiah for use in the study and preparation of
this report:
Volume 1 of 5- Specifications Division 0 to Division 11 for Ukiah Wastewater
Treatment Plant Improvement Project- April 2005 prepared by Brown and Caldwell.
Volume 2 of 5- Specifications Division 12 to Division 17 for Ukiah Wastewater
Treatment Plant Improvement Project- April 2005 prepared by Brown and Caldwell.
· Volume 3 of 5- General/Civil/Landscape/Architectural/Structural Drawings for Ukiah
Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project- April 2005 prepared by Brown and
Caldwell.
· Volume 4 of 5- Process/Mechanical/HVAC Drawings for Ukiah Wastewater Treatment
Plant Improvement Project- April 2005 prepared by Brown and Caldwell.
· Volume 5 of 5- Electrical/Instrumentation Drawings for Ukiah Wastewater Treatment
Plant Improvement Project- April 2005 prepared by Brown and Caldwell.
· Related Geotechnical, Environmental, Asbestos and Lead Reports on CD.
· Ukiah City Standards on CD.
· Sections 00430 and 00450 of the Bid Form as completed by the two Contractors who
submitted bids on the Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements project.
Ewing Construction Services (ECS) retained the following subconsultants in the study and
preparation of this report:
1. Process Review- Mr. Franklin D. Dryden, P.E., Pasadena, CA
2. Electrical and Instrumentation Review- Mr. Thomas Frisch, P.E.- Frisch Engineering,
Inc., Folsom, CA
Page 1 of 14
ECS and its subconsultants will not accept any design responsibility for ideas generated during
this cost reduction process. All cost reduction ideas must be thoroughly reviewed by City Staff,
City Design Consultants, City's Construction Manager and City Attorney as may be required
before a change is made to the Construction Contract.
Nothing in any ECS Deliverable to the City as described above and nothing in any ECS or its
subconsultant's communication with the City should be construed as a promise or guarantee of
the outcome of a specific City project or of ECS services. ECS and its subconsultants can make
no such promises or guarantees. ECS or its subconsultant's comments about the outcome of a
City project or resulting from our services are expressions of opinion only. These opinions are
limited by ECS and its subconsultant's knowledge of the facts and are based upon their
respective knowledge of the industry at the time that they are made.
# Spec or Suggested Changes to the Contract Documents
Dwg No.
Specifications
1. 00100 Aside from the two-day partnering workshop, the City should re-evaluate the City's
Article 25 current partnering intentions as currently written in the contract documents based
upon the key people assigned to the project from the City, Contractor, Engineer and
Construction Manager. Partnering is very expensive and the cost may not be
warranted once the key people on the project meet each other. Your Construction
Manager alone has allocated 1128 hfs to partnering at a cost of $163,920. If you add
the City, Engineer and Contractor's staff time, you can see how expensive this
process is. The partnering money saved could be used to help pay for the WWTP
improvements.
The two-day workshop may even be shortened to one-day if the project stakeholders
have all experienced formal partnered workshops on past projects. This one day
savings would be appreciable.
2. 00800 Should there be a contract award for this project, the City and the Contractor's Risk
Addendum Managers should jointly review the Builder's Risk requirements for this project as to
Item 2.03 deductible amounts, insurance limits and coverages. There is likely some potential
savings resulting from this review.
3. 01014 Brown and Caldwell did a good job with the WORK SEQUENCE spec section.
However, with more emphasis on reducing project cost and a delayed Notice to
Proceed date, all Milestones and their respective work items should be thoroughly
discussed as the total impact of cost reduction ideas are evaluated.
Significant savings can be realized by reducing the time to complete this project
when the daily direct Contractor job overhead/supervision costs and Construction
Manager's costs are calculated. All cost reduction ideas which reduce contract time
should be evaluated for merit and cost savings inclusive of the savings in the
Page 2 of 14
overhead, supervision, inspection and CM costs. The City's Construction Manager's
average monthly cost is approximately $97,000 just in personnel cost. This does not
include the field office and other direct job overhead costs to support the CM staff.
So, you can see that any reduction in Contract time is a tremendous savings to the
City.
4. 01300- Except in the cases of complicated submittals involving multiple design disciplines,
5.0(B)(1) reduce the review time for submittals to 15 calendar days for all procurement
activities that have 10 days or less float time on the Contractor's approved baseline or
updated schedule. Once again, time savings will reduce cost of the project.
5. 01380 Reduce the commercial photography requirements. 1500 each 8xl 0 glossies along
with aerial photos every three months should be reduced given that we are in the
digital age where the City, Contractor and Construction Manager can archive
countless photos on CD's for a fraction of the cost. You might consider taking the
savings from the commercial photography to purchase a video camera for
documentation and training.
6. 01590 The City and the Construction Manager each require a double-wide 24x60 field
office space for the entire duration of project. Depending on the Contractor's
approved baseline schedule and the cost reduction ideas associated with the
Operations Building, this field office space might be reduced after newly defined
milestones are met.
7. 01664 Training is expensive. Suggest that the City and Engineer discuss the training and
video recording requirements as specified for each equipment item to see if current
staff really needs the training. If staff already has experience with items such as slide
gates, why pay for unnecessary training and commercial video taping?
Part 3 of this spec section limits training to 6 hrs. per day. Several equipment spec
sections require 8 hrs of training. That will cause the manufacturer to include
additional per diem expenses just to retum the next day for 2 hrs of training. I would
encourage the City to accommodate the manufacturers in cases like this to reduce the
cost of training.
8. 03300- Consider changing the allowable concrete shrinkage to what is practical and
2.02(C)(4) commercially available by reputable ready-mix concrete suppliers in the local area to
reduce the cost of concrete.
Hopefully, local suppliers can meet drying shrinkage that is in accordance with
ASTM C157, as modified by SEAONC recommendation of 7 day moist cure before
base measurement. Suggest a limit of either 0.040% at 21 days of drying, after 7 day
moist cure, or 0.045% at 28 days of drying, after 7 day moist cure. These numbers
are for mix/aggregate qualification, using lab trials only. No control samples should
be taken in the field, as field samples are unable to represent concrete in place, due to
differences in mass and curing conditions.
The Contractor's approved construction joint layout and pour sequence may also
Page 3 of 14
come into consideration when evaluating allowable shrinkage in certain structures.
The Engineer should also request other specification input from local concrete
supplier quality control managers that might reduce the cost of concrete without
compromising the design objectives of the Engineer. This job has over 5000 cyds of
concrete which spans a long period of time. So, this is an important spec discussion.
9. 09877 Allow the use of 100% High Build Solid Epoxy as a substitute for HDPE Embedment
Liner. Epoxy products such as Hydro-Pox have proven capabilities to protect
concrete from chemical attack at a much lower cost.
10. Division 11 Re-evaluate all factory and offsite witness testing by the City and Engineer. Possibly
a factory certified test will suffice. Delete all witness testing not needed.
11. 11002-1.02 Delete all special inspection requirements of epoxy grouting. Harris field inspection
( C ) should suffice here.
12. 11005 Change this entire spec section to simply read that all equipment shall be aligned in
accordance with the approved manufacturer's alignment requirements. Delete any
products furnished to City in this spec section.
13. 11015-1.01 Find out if the 85 dbA at 3 feet noise requirement appreciable increased the cost of
any equipment item. If it did, then re-evaluate the noise requirement at that location
or explore less costly means to suppress noise in that area.
14. 11015-3.03 Delete requirement for field noise survey and depend solely on factory certified tests.
Only do field noise tests of equipment that does not have factory certified tests.
15. 11050 Discuss the requirements of this spec section with the Contractor's listed pump
manufacturers to see if other methods of quality assurances could be employed which
reduces the equipment cost without jeopardizing design criteria and minimum
requirements.
16. 11069-1.01 Remove requirement for DV/DT output filter on all drives where motor leads are
(E)(9) short.
17. 11069-1.01 VFD efficiency at 96% including input filters is not realistic. Not sure what cost
(E)(5) impacts this might have since it may be impossible to meet regardless. Possible
impact may just be that VFD suppliers add money just in case.
18. 11069-1.01 Remove requirement for VFD to sense motor overtemperature since it is shown in
(F) (6a) elementary diagram anyway. This additional componentry requirement is not
necessary.
Page 4 of 14
19. 11069- 2.01 Remove requirement for 18 pulse drives or change horsepower requirement for 18
pulse to a higher number. Suggest 75hp min. Perform harmonic mitigation by change
order if required by Utility or if noise problems arise. Specifications require 5% line
reactors above drives and those should be kept.
20. 11069-2.01 Allow other VFD manufacturers to bid work. Elimination of VFDs from ControlNet
network will allow this to happen.
21. 11069-2.01 Allow use of less cost Allen Bradley VFDs if communications is eliminated. Suggest
Allen Bradley Powerflex 4 or Powerflex 40 for small motors.
22. 11069-2.04 Remove requirement for DC buss ammeter. Cost benefit is low.
(A)(1)
23. 11069-2.05 Remove ControlNet communications requirement. Hard wire control is already
(D) specified.
24. 11069-3.03 Change VFD training from 8 hours per VFD size to 1 hour for 6 pulse units and 4
hours for 18 pulse units. Or possibly less as desired. Unless Ukiah plans on repairing
the VFDs themselves, most technician level VFD information can be demonstrated
within 2 hours for entire project. This would eliminate 76 hours of training.
25. 11080-2.07 Allow carbon steel pipe for generator exhaust in lieu of 316 stainless steel.
26. 11080-1.02 Remove overload testing for generator. This requirement would likely require
(C)( 3) manufacturer to pro vide larger generator than specified.
27. 11080 Make the generator an outdoor rated totally self contained unit with subbase fuel tank,
integral control panel and eliminate day tank, pumps and control system.
28. 11195 Defer the furnish and installation of Secondary Clarifier Automatic Spray Algae
Cleaning System.
The City staff could install this at a later date.
29. 11447 Defer the furnish and installation of DAF Thickener Air Compressor No. 3. The City
staff could install this at a later date.
30. 15050- 3.06 Allow the use of PVC C905 and Steel AWWA C200 pipe/fittings as two additional
System 9 pipe material options for the buried 14" and larger pipe.
31. 15050- 3.06 Allow the use of PVC C905 and Steel AWWA C200 pipe/fittings as two additional
System 10 pipe material options for the buried 14" and larger pipe.
Page 5 of 14
32. 15050- 3.06 Allow the use of PVC C905 and Steel AWWA C200 pipe/fittings as two additional
System 13 pipe material options for the buried 14" and larger pipe.
33. 15050- 3.06 Allow the use of PVC C905 and Steel AWWA C200 pipe/fittings as two additional
System 14 pipe material options for the buried 14" and larger pipe.
34. 15050- 3.06 Allow the use of PVC C905 and Steel AWWA C200 pipe/fittings as two additional
System 15 pipe material options for the buried 14" and larger pipe.
35. 15050- 3.06 Allow the use of carbon black steel as an additional pipe material option.
System 15
36. 15103 Allow the use of Bray Butterfly valves in certain applications. Bray is not an AWWA
rated valve, but the City has Bray valves on site now and the savings for each valve is
significant.
37. 15185 Allow the use of IQM/IQTM Rotork Electric Motor Valve Operators as an option to
the specified Rexa Electric-Hydraulic Valve Operators. In 1993, Rotork introduced a
true Solid State Electric Motor Operator. Position feedback is via Solid State Hall
Encoder. Force Feedback was now via a Solid State Load Cell. All functions are
externally programmable with calibration and diagnostics software provided with the
hardware. Modulating is done with Solid State Thyristor Reversers which replaces
electro-mechanical contactors. Rotork incorporates DC Injection Braking to eliminate
position overshoot, Zero Backlash gearing, and specially rated motors. With these
modifications in place, the IQM and IQTM Electric actuators achieve .25% position
accuracy, while rated for 1200 starts per hour continuous duty. These time-tested
Rotork valve actuator improvements were made over 10 years ago and result in a
valve operator that is much lower cost and relative maintenance free. There is also a
local factory direct service facility located in Petaluma.
38. 16110 Revise all horizontal underground conduit to utilize PVC schedule 40 only. If
necessary, use PGRS in ductbank where necessary only.
39. 16120 2.03 Review requirement for 2000 volt cable for all VFD driven motor feeders.
(A)(2)
40. 16310 Generator paralleling switchgear necessity should be reviewed as it may not be critical
to be installed at this time. Revise to simple transfer switch and defer paralleling
switchgear.
41. 16440 Consider removing power quality meter IQ 6000 model.
42. 17000-1.05 Remove requirement for system integrator drawings on 22 x 34 mylar or velum media.
(B) Allow 11 x 17 on bond.
Page 6 of 14
43. 17000-1.05 Remove loop diagrams from requirement to reduce cost.
44. 17000-2.02 Remove requirement for all final drawings full size on Mylar. Revise to bond, PDF
(D) and ACAD on CD.
45. 17130-2.02 Remove requirement for voltage regulators if UPS is already in panel.
46. 17600-2.02 Remove system redundancy modules and redundant PLCs.
(c)
47. 17600-2.07 Remove fault tolerant Ethernet fiber optic module and use simple fiber optic Ethernet
switches such as N-TRON 508TX instead.
48. 17600-2.08 Remove SCADA network cards with direct fiber connections. Connect SCADA
machines to simple Ethernet Switches.
49. 17600-2.11 Remove 19" racks and patch panels at all but one hub location and utilize spider fan-
out kits with direct buffer tube transition at each PLC panel.
50. 17600-2.12 Remove Control Net cards from SCADA computers.
(B) and (F)
51. 17600- 2.12 Eliminate two of three programming computers. One laptop may be able to perform
(D) all three functions. Also, most SCADA programming is not done on laptop.
52. 17600 2.12 Remove Control Net Card from Laptop. Laptop can interface to PLCs via Ethernet
(G) network.
53. 17600-2.12 Delete dot matrix printer. Alarm logs remain on the SCADA machines. Operator can
(I) print on demand on laser report printer.
54. 17600-2.13 Remove RSNETWORX software from project. Software is used for control net.
55. 17600-3.05 Review training courses and remove training as desired. Insist that SCADA system
screens be developed to be intuitive and consistent such that new operators can learn
the system quickly just by using it. Possibly move training to Ukiah and conduct
training during as systems come on line.
Drawings
56. 01-C-105 The location ofthe field offices is undesirable, inefficient and expensive. Field
offices should be at the front of projects and closer to the work. A different location
and sizing of trailers should be discussed with the Contractor. There may be room
Page 7 of 14
where the future solids contact tanks, clarifier and trickling filter to place field
offices.
Or possibly the City can obtain a temporary construction easement on adjacent
property on the north side of project towards the front of project.
57. 01-C-105 Depending on soils and groundwater conditions, the Contractor may have to shore
part of the new secondary clarifier excavation due to the location of the clarifiers in
relation to the northerly construction limits. Once again, if the City can obtain a
temporary construction easement on adjacent property on the north side of project
this could potential reduce the cost of the clarifier excavation. Shoring is expensive.
58. 01-C-112 You require a great deal of buried piping to be removed that may not conflict with
thru new construction. Removal of buried piping at some of the depths and locations will
01-C-115 be expensive. Suggest that you re-evaluate the pipe removal requirements and
possibly abandon in place per spec section 01046.
59. 01-C-121 Reduce the footage of rolled curb & gutter and replace with redwood header in those
thru areas. Where you have curb DI's, pour a local approach apron or move DI to center
01-C-126 of road with changed asphalt sloping.
Reduce the footage of sidewalks. Simply gravel all open areas which carry foot
traffic or light wheel loads. Use a geotech fabric under gravel areas for stabilization
and weed control.
Possibly gravel areas that are currently shown as paved if those areas see limited
traffic. Areas such as the road adjacent to Washwater Recovery Pond 2.
Re-evaluate required road AC/AB cross section to see if thicknesses of either can be
reduced. Use of geotech fabrics might be considered in this evaluation.
Asphalt is experiencing significant inflation and any reduction in asphalt will be an
appreciable savings to the project.
60. 01-C-132 Relocate Trickling Filter Pump Station to north side of Trickling Filter Electrical
and Building.
30-M-101
thru The trickling filter pump station is currently proposed to be located next to the solids
30-M-104 contact tanks. This location was apparently chosen to assure a straight alignment of
the inlet pipe in accordance with Hydraulic Institute design standards. Although
meeting such standards is desirable and consistent with responsible engineering
design, it appears that the station could be moved adjacent to the electrical power and
control building that serves it with a significant savings in the PE and TFE piping.
The inlet would be shortly after a 90 degree elbow and a baffle and/or straightening
vanes should be included to assure that there is no significant turbulence thereby
minimizing the reduction in efficiency associated with the less desirable entry
conditions. The Engineer has indicated that they would need to design and test an
energy dissipation system to be sure it performed satisfactorily and that the cost of
Page 8 of 14
testing a model might exceed the potential savings. This hydraulic condition has
already been addressed in other situations, and that a reasonable baffle could be
designed without testing if the City is willing to accept that the station may have
some reduced pumping efficiency and reduced bearing life on the pumps.
There is also the concern about keeping the existing 42" PE line from the existing
primary sedimentation basins operational while constructing the Trickling Filter
Pump Station at its present location.
61. 01-C-134 Defer construction of 30" RCW line until later when there is a need for reclaimed
and water.
01-C-135
62. 0 l-C- 161 Delete all work shown on this drawing that has been already completed by another
Contractor.
63. 01-L-101 Reduce the scope of landscaping. Simply gravel open areas over geotech fabric for
thru dust and weed control. Allow shrubs and some low maintenance landscaping around
0 l-L- 106 new operations building only.
Installation of PVC chases for future irrigation lines can be run at this time for future
landscaping project.
64. 1 l-A- 101 The current design for the new Operations Building is very good, but can be
thru constructed with less cost.
11-A-134
Suggest building a new Operations Building of similar size in the area where the
existing Maintenance Building is located. This will allow construction of the new
Operations Building to begin at the begilming of the project until waiting for
Milestone 3 or the third year.
This will be less disruptive to staff and plant operations, because they would simply
move into a new Operations Building rather than occupy temporary office/lab space
during the demolition and construction of Operations Building in its current location.
Once the new Operations Building is completed in the suggested area above, all City
and Construction Management staff might be able to move into the old Operations
Building and move the double-wide field offices off site.
To further reduce cost of the new Operations Building, the City could go with a metal
building. Metal Buildings are pretty much a design-build package on the structure
once the design criteria are established. There should be a reasonable amount of re-
design by the City's consultants with a Metal Building option.
If you stay with a masonry building, it is suggested that you keep the building design
very simple with wood trusses and a 40-year composition shingle roofing system.
The City and Engineer can also revisit interior finishes, cabinet schedules, building
specialties to possibly reduce costs by changing material selections and
Page 9 of 14
deferring/deleting items.
As far as the existing Operations Building, the City could keep the building for other
uses or demo the building, remove equipment below, properly abandon existing lines,
demo the top concrete portions and backfill for additional parking or open space.
65. 12-A-101 The Power Generation Building might possibly be reduced in size or eliminated by
requiring an outdoor generator. Additionally, if all power suggestions in this report
are incorporated, the motor control centers that were for support of the indoor
generator and building would be eliminated and the main plant switchboard would be
downsized and simplified and provided in a NEMA 3R outdoor enclosure.
66. 22-A-201 Change the Headwork's Electrical Building to a pre-fab metal building or a modular
building designed for this application.
67. 3 l-A-201 Change the Trickling Filter Electrical Building to a pre-fab metal building or a
modular building designed for this application.
68. 40-A-401 Change the Aeration Blower Building to a pre-fab metal building.
69. 50-A-401 Change the Secondary Clarifiers Electrical Building to a pre-fab metal building or a
modular building designed for this application.
70. 75-A-101 Allow Spray Foam insulation of digesters as an option to rigid insulation and metal
rib siding.
71. 00-S-013 As stated in prior spec. suggestion, allow the use of 100% High Build Solid Epoxy as
a substitute for HDPE Embedment Liner.
72. 20-S-112 Eliminate stairwell at new Influent Pump Station and replace with SS ladder and
access hatch to gain access to pumps.
73. 22-S-102 Raise grades on west side ofinfluent screening facility to reduce the amount of
handrail, stairs and concrete decking.
74. 22-S-105 Delete metal canopies at two dumpsters. Design drop-chutes to shed rain away from
dumpsters.
75. 25-S-103 Redesign mechanical equipment locations to be at grade level and eliminate below-
25-M-103 grade equipment gallery part of structure. The City of Woodland has a similar
Aerated Grit Removal tank and all pumps and aeration equipment are at grade level.
76. 27-S-127 Allow FRP as an option to 304 Stainless on launder trough and weir plates.
77. 30-S-103 Defer cost of slide gate until future project. Install only gate guides at this time.
Page 10 of 14
78. 3 l-S-112 Defer cost of snail collection pits and related equipment pipe until a future project.
and Run gdt pipe chases under paved areas at this time for ease of future installation.
31-M-112
79. 40-S-202 If the City needs to take extreme interim measures to reduce cost, then consideration
and might be given to deferring the solids contact tanks at this time. It is suggested that
40-M-202 this item only be considered for initial capital cost reasons and at~er the other VE
ideas have been evaluated with potential savings totaled.
The solids contact tanks are being provided to enhance the settling characteristics of
the trickling filter sludge solids. At present, the solids do not settle well in the
existing secondary settling tanks. B&C has designed two new secondary clarifiers of
an improved design that include a flocculating zone and a rapid sludge withdrawal
system. It seems likely that these tanks will perform better than the existing tanks
and that the addition of polymers in the pipes leading to them should permit enhanced
removal of solids even without the benefits of the solids contact tanks. The
secondary tanks will have substantial surplus capacity during the summer months
(May 15 to September 30th) when flows are not impacted by rainfall events.
Therefore, it is suggested that deferring the demolition/conversion of the primary
clarifiers to solids contact tanks and all related equipment, piping, building and
structures would be a substantial savings.
As part of the review of this possible deferral, the Design Team would need to
consider process redundancy which might cause discharge issues should a trickling
filter go down unexpectedly.
80. 50-S-202 Delete two short catwalks to launder and related structural supports to center column.
81. 50-S-205 Allow FRP as a material option to SS and galvanized steel on clarifier launder and
weir plate.
82. 75-S-114 Change digester roof construction from the concrete options listed to a fixed steel
dome cover. This will reduce the cost and downtime of the digester modifications.
Companies such as EIMCO have a good track record with fixed steel digester covers.
With proper coating and installation, they will last a very long time.
83. 75-S-115 Change the exterior perimeter footing collar shown in detail A to an interior ring
beam or simply thicken the entire bottom slab. The excavation for the perimeter
collar design will be very expensive and cause problems keeping one Digester
operational as required in Milestones.
84. 93-S- 101 Delay the repairs to the washwater recovery pond liner. The structural engineers
thru must evaluate how long these repairs can wait.
93-S-103
85. 0 l-P-103 Defer components of the reclaimed water pump station, storage tanks and distribution
pipeline and consider using potable water supply in lieu of reclaimed water within the
plant site.
Page 11 of 14
86. 25-M-102 Delete one grit cyclone at Preaeration Grit Removal Tank. Require all piping
associated with this grit cyclone as designed, but delete the cyclone.
87. 25-M-105 Delete one grit blower at Preaeration Grit Removal Tank. Require all piping
associated with this blower as designed, but delete the blower.
88. 27-M-126 Delete one Scum Pump at new Primary Clarifiers. Require all piping associated with
all four pumps as designed, but delete one of the pumps.
89. 27-M-121 During the 2004 VE Team review, suggested Alternative No. M-O9 related to the
thru inlet arrangement for the pri~nary clarifiers to achieve better flow distribution and
27-M-127 performance by placing a baffle over each of the three entrance openings per tank to
dissipate longitudinal flows and generate enough head loss to obtain a reasonable
distribution of flow among the three openings. In the response, it was claimed that
there was already a baffle in place that would do the job. However, a review of the
plans does not show any such baffle and the suggestion is resubmitted even though it
will result in a slight increase in cost. The cost is justified by improved performance.
90. 3 l-M-122 Defer replacement of the flow distribution arms for the trickling filters. The Engineer
indicates that the existing mechanisms can last 10 years. The reason for replacing
them is to provide greater process control of the trickling filter media sloughing and
because they have a maximum hydraulic capacity of about 17 mgd when plant data
shows that peaks can exceed 20 mgd and the plant is being designed for peaks of 25
mgd. In reviewing the flow data, it does appear that flows can have short term peaks
of greater than 20 mgd during a wet winter but that those peaks last only a few hours
and that the wastewater is extremely diluted at such times. When the hydraulic
capacity of the existing distribution arms is exceeded, it is assumed that the excess
water will overflow the center column of the trickling filter and spill through the
media. This should not be a problem from a treatment standpoint and has obviously
occurred in the past when flows exceeding 17 mgd were experienced. Little will be
lost be deferring their replacement until they are worn out since the ADWF is only
projected to be 3.1 mgd in 20 years.
91. 60-M-202 Defer the 4" AA piping and related equipment in the chlorine contact pipes.
92. 70-M-102 Defer DAFT No. 2 and related equipment until a later date.
thru
7-0-M- 106
93. 75-M-111 During the 2004 VE Team review, it was suggested in Alternative No. DS-O5 to
thru providing a passive J-tube pressure relief system in the tops of the digesters. The
75-M-116 response was that emergency pressure relief was provided by a U-tube gas trap and
primer arrangement for each digester. However, a review of the final drawings
appears to show that system connected to a sludge overflow line and discharging to a
drain line rather than the atmosphere. The purpose of an emergency J-tube pressure
relief system is to protect the tank when the mechanical pressure relief systems fail
and emergency overflows are plugged. It is therefore recommended that a dedicated
emergency J-tube relief system be included in the final design for construction.
Page 12 of 14
94. 93-M- 101 The washwater recovery ponds do not work well because they must currently handle
and more flow than they are designed for and because the inlet to the tank is at the end
93-M-102 where the accumulated solids are withdrawn. As previously discussed, it would be
helpful to have the inlet directed to the other end of the tank and baffled to maintain a
quiescent zone in the main portion of the tanks so that solids can accumulate and
concentrate without being eroded away. The cost of making such a change may be
more than the budget can currently manage, and the engineers have proposed a flat
plate baffle over the end of the washwater inlet pipe to dissipate the energy. The
problem is that the plate will direct half of the flow downward into the accumulated
solids and continue the same problem that is now occurring. It is suggested that the
inlet pipe be baffled so that all of the flow is directed upward and forward to
minimize the impact on the solids in the tank.
Another option with the Washwater Recovery Ponds would be to construct all safety
related improvements at this time and defer other structural and operational
improvements to a later date.
95. 01-I-101 Remove ControlNet network from project. Revise Ethernet to star topology and
remove fault tolerant ring. Use less expensive and commercially available Ethernet
fiber optic switches in lieu of fault tolerant fiber optic transceivers. Revise VFDs to
communicate with Ethernet rather than ControlNet if communications to VFDs is
desired. Utilize local switches at PLCs to connect VFDs to PLCs and keep network
traffic localized.
96. 01-I-101 Remove VFDs from communications network. Re-evaluate cost benefit of having
VFDs on network as the hardware and resulting PLC and SCADA software increases
cost.
97. 01-I-101 Remove all power monitoring and communications to PLCs. Replace with PFR
relays.
98. Allow other VFD manufacturers to bid work. Elimination of VFDs from ControlNet
network will allow this to happen.
99. 00-E-003 Delete concrete and steel in ductbank, make backfill slurry or sand with concrete cap
instead.
100. 01-E-027 Remove all 52-Bx breakers and transfer logic. Revise to make 52-G1 and 52-M
breaker to be traditional transfer switch style.
101. 01-E-027 Remove redundant switchboards SWB22282, SWB31282, SWB40482, SWB70282,
SWB50482
102. 01-E-027 Utilize PLC load shedding program to maintain load within generator limits as
necessary. Load calculations not performed during VE analysis.
Page 13 of 14
103. Various E Remove feeders from/to redundant switchboards.
drawings
104. Various E Remove ground fault from breakers unless needed for personnel safety or required by
drawings Utility.
105. 0 l-E-194 Discuss with Contractor and their electrical subcontractor other routing for the 12kv
thru buried conduits to reduce cost.
01-E-198
Page 14 of 14
Ii
W
0
~ ~~ Oo o'~o
C) m~ O~ 0-o O_aO
0
0
~, o o o '~"~
o o '~ '~ '~ ~
0
· · · · · ·
>
0
(D
>
O,
cO 0
(D ~
0 C~
0 '0
0 0 ~-
·
> E E~
0 __
a:i .' .- ~.-
-- (:!.) (1.) ~
g 0 g o-~. o ,----
0 )., 0 a.) ~--
'~- ~-~ c cr
mmm
0
~ 0
0
0 ~