Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-082E AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR WATER PLANT AND WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING SERVICES RFQ2019070 WORK ORDER 5 Indian River County Utilities Department Wellfield and Alternative Water Supply Evaluation This Work Order Number 5 is entered into as of this 8th day of June , 2021, pursuant to that certain AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR WATER PLANT AND WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING SERVICES RFQ2019070 entered into as of this 5th day of November, 2019 (collectively referred to as the "Agreement"), by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida ("COUNTY")and Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., ("Consultant"). The COUNTY has selected the Consultant to perform the professional services set forth on Exhibit A (Scope of Work), attached to this Work Order and made part hereof by this reference. The professional services will be performed by the Consultant for the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B (Fee Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference. The Consultant will perform the professional services within the timeframe more particularly set forth in Exhibit C (Time Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference all in accordance with the terms and provisions set forth in the Agreement. Pursuant to paragraph, 1.4 of the Agreement, nothing contained in any Work Order shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to be incorporated in each individual Work Order as if fully set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Work Order as of the date first written above. til/S�''. CONSULTANT: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION, ••• OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY �^ �, :• � : By: By: I • ��� `z_ _ b I� Jose/EChairman `` '' : Flescher, P;, 7 ` Brian Good • Print Name: ' F900UI7Ty.�� + Title: Director!Principal BCC Approved Date: June 8, 2021 Attest: Jeffrey R.Smith, lerk of Court and Comptroller BY: � 1.1 A,60.10 Deputy Clerk Approved: 6Lf .ar ; Jason . Bro n, County ' •ministrator Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Dylan T. Reingold, County Attorney EXHIBIT A Welifield and Alternative Water Supply Evaluation PROJECT UNDERSTANDING Indian River County Utilities (IRCU) owns and operates two (2)regional Water Treatment Plants (WTPs), Hobart(North) and Oslo (South),that provide potable water to IRCU customers. Each WTP has a wellfield that supplies groundwater from the Upper Floridan Aquifer(UFA)to the WTP. Groundwater withdrawals for treatment are monitored as part of IRCU's Consumptive Use Permit(CUP)through the St. Johns River Water Management District(SJRWMD). IRCU's CUP allows for average daily withdrawals of up to 12.838 MGD. IRCU anticipates that expected water demands over the next 20-30 years will require an increase in the CUP allocation to 23.18 MGD,which may change based on population growth, service area boundaries or other factors such as unaccounted for water losses, etc. IRCU desires to obtain this additional allocation from sources meeting all of the SJRWMD's CUP criteria. As such, the following conceptual options need to be explored to achieve additional permittable source water supply to the WTPs: 1. Expand IRCU's wellfields in a way that does not impact ELUs 2. This may include a third and/or separate wellfield located to the west of the existing Hobart(North)and Oslo (South). This third or separate wellfield may connect to either North County and/or South County WTP's. Or a new WTP may be constructed to accompany this new wellfield. 3. Possible deepening UFA wells to APPZ(Avon Park Permeable Zone), or Lower Floridan Aquifer(LFA) at Hobart and Oslo Wellfields Considered: i. North (Hobart)existing UFA wellfield ii. South(Oslo) existing UFA wellfield iii. North(Hobart) offsite new UFA/LFA/APPZ wellfield iv. South(Oslo)offsite new UFA/LFA/APPZ wellfield Each of these concepts carry impact to IRCU water system, including capital costs, operating costs, impacts to existing treatment equipment,ability to blend for stabilization, concentrate disposal options, etc. Accordingly, IRCU has requested Kimley-Horn prepare a scope of services to provide evaluation of these options with respect to the IRC water and potentially wastewater systems;IRC desires a report that outlines these options,presents conceptual costs, describes significant changes to their system, and provides a hierarchy for IRC to utilize moving forward. The report is to be concluded with recommended hierarchy to achieve desired increase in CUP capacity consistent with regulatory requirements. Consultant will utilize the services of JLA Geosciences to provide hydrogeological professional services for this project. The following scope of services is provided below for this Water Supply Evaluation. F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope fh MDM_vb.docx Page 1 of l 1 SCOPE OF SERVICES Task 1—Wellfield Expansion and New Wellfield Evaluation Consultant will evaluate potential expansion of existing Hobart and Oslo UFA wellfield(s)to include new UFA wells,wellheads,piping, and pumping stations as required as long as this expansion does not impact ELU's. Consultant will evaluate feasibility of a third UFA wellfield for the Hobart WTP and/or expansion of the existing Oslo WTP wellfield. Consultant will also evaluate the need to potentially site a third/western wellfield and potential separate third WTP if that is the only option for use from an ELU standpoint if the wellfield expansion or deepening at the existing WTP's is not feasible. Consultant will prepare conceptual costs and timelines for this option if needed to be included in the evaluation matrix. Consultant will evaluate potential well sites and raw water supply based on the following: • IRC owned land • ELU impacts • Potential large landowners and developments • Accessibility for drilling, formation water disposal • Power supply availability • Setback requirements (sanitary, surface waters, contaminants) • Raw watermain routing& looping potential • Conceptual sizing of well, well pumps, electrical Consultant will prepare GIS maps that delineate countywide ELUs, respective capacities, and aquifer from which water is withdrawn. The GIS data will be queried to delineate type and capacity of each use, and potential impact from IRCU wells in the vicinity of the ELU's. The GIS information will also be used to overlay existing IRC owned land, zoning maps,rights-of-ways, and setbacks for new wells(i.e.,contaminated sites, sanitary setbacks,etc.). It is assumed that IRCU staff can provide some of this GIS information. Consultant will prepare conceptual costs for new wells,wellheads and pumps,raw watermain,booster pumping stations. Site costs will not be included,but if IRC owned sites are selected,they will be assumed to be negligible. Consultant will prepare a map of proposed wellsites, and conceptual piping arrangement and alignment to supply raw water to both Hobart WTP and Oslo WTP. Multiple maps may be used to depict multiple layers of information. Up to six(6)different map types may be provided in both electronic and hard copy format(24 x 36 size). Task 2—Test Well Evaluation of LFA and APPZ @ Oslo and Hobart Consultant will investigate the potential use of the Avon Park Permeable Zone (APPZ) which his part of the lower Upper Floridan Aquifer(UFA),and the Lower Floridan F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope fh MDM_vb.docx Page 2 of 11 Aquifer,part of the boulder zone (>10,000 mg/L TDS) as an alternative water supply to supplement the existing UFA via test well evaluation. This task is intended to confirm which of the assumptions made regarding impacts to water quality is most likely to occur. This work will consist of drilling pilot hole through the existing borehole and logging water quality and yield data. Test well evaluation will provide the following information: • Determine confinement between APPZ, LFA and UFA • Define source water quality(and Quantity?) • Understand differences in yield/production between UFA, LFA, and APPZ • Define potential leakance between both UFA,LFA, and APPZ Consultant will prepare documents for test well deepening of existing wells N-7(Hobart) and S-1 (Oslo) and provide coordination with potential well drillers to conduct the work. Consultant will assist IRC purchasing department to solicit price proposals to perform the work. Consultant will respond to reasonable number of questions from prospective bidders. Consultant, along with subconsultant JLA Geosciences, Inc.will review price proposals/bids from contractors and prepare bid review letter. Consultant will review schedule prepared by the Contractor,provide coordination with IRCU operations and subconsultant, JLA Geosciences, and provide oversight of the well deepening procedures and activities. Consultant will provide hydrogeological support and observation services during Upper Floridan Aquifer well deepening, including pilot hole drilling and reaming, geophysical logging,completion interval drilling and associated testing,preliminary well development, acid treatment,pumdevelopment and testing, ost rehabilitation development testing and specific capacity testing. Consultant will also provide well performance testing, including water level measurements, specific capacity analysis,and basic water quality testing(conductivity, chlorides, silt density indices—SDI's and sand testing). Consultant will provide up to 140 hours of on-site hydrogeological services(JLA)for well deepening. Consultant will review data and prepare supporting information and technical evaluation into merits of deepening the wells,consisting of the following: • Reverse Air Drilling and field testing for 2 UFA Wells • Geophysical logging and video for 2 wells. • Pump Testing AAPZ/LFA? • Pumping test UFA(data partially available from North County APT testing— Task 6) • Data review and recommendation for rehabilitation including backfill depth, acid F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope fh MDM vb.docx Page 3 01'11 treatment plan N7&S1. • Acidization and/or backfill oversight • Development • SDD Testing • Final Video Consultant will respond to contractor questions,provide written responses for IRC to process for the findings from the deepening activities. Consultant will meetings and make onsite site visits for each of the two (2)existing wells to be deepened;provide coordination during construction, review of individual well geophysical and video logging,review contractor's submittals including acid treatment plan,onsite hydrogeologic observation during critical elements of deepening,well logging. Consultant will prepare a summary technical memorandum including lithologic logs and review of findings. consultant will prepare draft copies of the technical memorandum and prepare and submit a final version based on review comments provided by IRCU and stakeholders involved with the study. Task 3—Evaluate Impacts to Operations Changes in raw water supply are expected to occur through additional wells, inclusion of a third wellfield, and/or deepening of existing UFA wells. The changes in source water supply will impact operations including raw water pumping,treatment, and disposal of membrane concentrate flows. Consultant will produce reasonable assumptions for impacts from raw water quality that can be expected through deepening and verify assumptions through work conducted under Task 2. Consultant will evaluate source water quality impacts to Hobart and Oslo WTP treatment process through well deepening. Following completion of Task 2, Consultant will review water quality data acquired to confirm which assumptions most closely aligns with the water quality data observed. Consultant will evaluate impacts to the treatment plants consisting of the following: • Pretreatment • Membrane treatment process • Post-treatment(degasification& off-gas scrubbers) • Electrical system • Chemical and support systems • Plant capacity increase, such as storage,HSP capacity, support systems • Concentrate disposal Consultant, utilizing the services of sub-consultant EW Consultants,will evaluate impacts to concentrate disposal with deepening of the supply wells and the impacts on concentrate water quality. Consultant will evaluate expansion of the North WTP and F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope th MDM vb.doex Page 4 of I 1 impacts to the Spoonbill permit with current disposal capacity limited to 2.0 MGD up to 3.0 MGD, including a potential change in water quality that will occur if the determination to use the LFA for raw water is feasible . Consultant will evaluate the potential of increasing the South WTP capacity and impacts to the 1.5 MGD permit concentrate discharge to the ATS and freshwater disposal, including a potential change in water quality if the determination to use the LFA for raw water is feasible and what impacts this has to the regulatory permit.. Consultant will review the existing demineralized concentrate(DC)permits for Oslo and Hobart to determine the potential and necessity for deep injection well disposal. Consultant will review IRC service area to determine optimal location for deep injection well. It is desired to locate DIW in feasible location for WWTP treated effluent,DC, and potentially leachate disposal. Consultant will evaluate the dual use of the well,costs to construct a new DIW and dual zone monitor well(DZMW)that will be required as part of the DIW. Conceptual costs for a new pipeline will be provided. Pipeline routing study is not included with this evaluation. Task 4—Indirect Potable Reuse Consultant will evaluate conceptually aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) and indirect potable reuse(IDPR) at the regional wastewater treatment plant to provide additional source water for potable treatment. The desktop study will evaluate the anticipated treatment and associated cost required to recharge the Upper Floridan Aquifer with reclaimed water from the wastewater treatment plant and include potential options for advanced treatment and associated costs to utilize this water resource for potable water treatment either at the Oslo Plant or at a new water treatment plant. Evaluation will consist of ASR feasibility; expected aquifer characteristics for the ASR application;the likely permitting requirements and timeframes to permit, number of ASR wells required,expected flows and associated costs for construction and operations;deep injection well requirements for concentrate disposal potential other applications; water treatment options;water transmission requirements; and estimated costs. Consultant will also review current and prospective future regulations, establishing water quality goals/parameters for the reclaimed water and advanced treated water, identification of advanced water treatment alternatives,and analysis of site conditions to ascertain the feasibility of integrating advanced treatment of-reclaimed water at the either the West WWTP(6 MGD rating)or the Central WWTP(4 MGD rating). This evaluation will be used to develop conceptual alternatives for the implementation of advanced treatment at either facility. Consultant will review existing and historical direct and indirect potable reuse projects throughout the United States.The treatment technologies currently used, and respective F:\Utilities\UTILrfY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope th MDM_vb.docr Page5of11 results will be summarized and reviewed for consideration in developing alternatives for WUD's evaluation for pilot and full-scale applications. The Consultant will evaluate up to three (3)treatment options as follows: o description of each process train and process units, o advantages and disadvantages of each option, o regulatory requirements, o public health and water quality criteria, o experience within the industry, o managerial best practices topics o number of installations, o lessons learned from past and existing facilities, o technical and operational components, Consultant will prepare a draft and final summary report including summary of findings, recommended alternative for treatment consideration, and implementation plan for the selected alternative for a 2.0 and 4.0 MGD treatment process facility. IRCU will provide current reuse agreements with bulk customers that will need to be offset from the IDPR capacity. CONSULTANT will submit six(6) copies(draft and final)of each report to IRCU for review. Review comments will be assimilated into the final report. Task 5—Preparation of Options Matrix Consultant will review existing previously prepared reports regarding water supply studies. Consultant will tabulate information from the hydrogeologic modeling scenarios. Consultant will identify locations and capacity limitations for additional UFA wells within the respective Hobart and Oslo wellfields. Consultant will identify locations and capacity limitations associated with options for a third and/or fourth,standalone wellfield. These options will consist of: • .UFA wellfield expansion(Hobart and/or Oslo) • Deeper(LFA/AAPZ) aquifer supply wellfield/supply • IDPR Consultant will establish preliminary criteria for the third/fourth UFA wellfield to transfer raw water to the Hobart WTP or Oslo WTP. Consultant will review and evaluate each of these options in whole or as supplements that lead up to a combined total 10.5 MGD of capacity allocation that would replace UFA capacity from the North Hobart WTP UFA wellfield. F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope fh MDM_vb.docx Page6ofll Consultant will present high level costs, estimated impacts to treatment and treatment equipment, operational impacts associated with feasible scenarios. Consultant will summarize findings in a tabulated format and include graphs,tables, and maps as necessary. Consultant will prepare a brief technical memo supporting the Well Options Matrix, along with high level recommendations that support the matrix. The matrix table will include options with the following criteria: • Advantages/disadvantages • Impacts to treatment • Intangibles such as permitting, operating cost impacts, long-term sustainability,etc. • Impacts to distribution system • Capital costs • Schedule impacts Consultant will attend two(2)review meetings with IRC staff to discuss the findings from the Options Matrix. The first meeting is intended to discuss the draft matrix prior to completion of Task 2 and the second meeting is intended to finalize the matrix following completion of Task 2. Consultant will prepare and distribute meeting minutes to project team. Consultant recognizes that CDM is assisting IRCDU in this analysis by performing groundwater modeling of various potential wellfield locations and depths. Consultant will provide information and assistance to CDM to ensure such groundwater modeling is performed accurately and timely. Task 6—North County Upper Floridan Aquifer Performance Testing(APT) & Analysis Consultant will conduct groundwater modeling evaluation of the Hobart wellfield APT with CDM Model and Reporting, consisting of a review and evaluation of the existing CDM model and modification of the CDM Model to simulate the Hobart APT during the same time period and pumping conditions as used for the previous JLA model and APT evaluation. Following model simulations, Consultant, along with JLA' support generate a brief technical memorandum to be submitted electronically summarizing the evaluation procedure, and results. F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope th MDM_vb.docx Page 7of11 TIME SCHEDULE Consultant will conduct all tasks in a mutually agreed upon schedule with the following assumptions: TASK Time Frame from NTP Task 1—Wellfield Expansion and New Wellfield Evaluation 4—6 weeks Task 2—Test Well Evaluation of LFA and APPZ @ Oslo and Hobart 2—4 weeks (Well Driller Activity by others) 6—8 months Final Report 7—9 months Task 3—Evaluate Impacts to Operations 6—10 weeks (Update with APPZ water quality) 6-8 months Task 4—Indirect Potable Reuse 8—10 weeks Task 5—Preparation of Options Matrix 8-12 weeks (Update with APPZ data,Final Report) 7—9 months Task 6—North County UFA Wellfield APT 4 weeks FEE SCHEDULE We will provide these services in accordance with our Agreement for Professional Services for Water Plant and Water Resources Engineering Services—RFQ 2019070, dated November 5, 2019,by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,a political subdivision of the State of Florida("COUNTY")and Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc., ("Consultant"). The Consultant will provide professional services for Task 1 through Task 6 on a lump sum fee basis as follows: Task No. Task Task Fee Task 1 Wellfield Expansion and New Wellfield $50,576 Evaluation Task 2 Test Well Evaluation $62,224 Task 3 Evaluate Impacts to Operations $58,862 Task 4 Indirect Potable Reuse Evaluation $37,708 Task 5 -Preparation of Options Matrix $25,316 Task 6 North County UFA Wellfield APT $11,744 Total Lump Sum Fee= $246,430 F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope th MDM_vb.docx Page 8of11 ADDITIONAL SERVICES The following services are not included in the Scope of Services for this project, but may be required depending on circumstances that may arise during the execution of this project. Additional services include, but may not be limited to the following: • Pilot Testing of treatment options • Design document preparation • Meetings beyond what is described herein • Additional permitting support and responses to agencies • Groundwater modeling to be provided by others F_\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021.5.1-FINAL AWS Eval Scope th MDM vb.docx Page 11 EXHIBIT B ESTIMATE FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES ! _ PROJECT:IRCUWater Supply Evaluation ! ! I ! I I 4.15.21 CLIENT: Indian River County Utilities FSTIMATORMDM DESCRIPTION: i DIRECT LABOR (MAN -HOURS) & WaterStrpply Ev_aluahon SEN _RE_G_ _-DES _...__ _._. __ _ _ ...__ .-._ _..�. uNE _ ,Wellfield - PRINC PROF PROF PROF 1/2 CLK EXP SUB TOTAL _(SS O. TASK 1 WELLFIELD EXPANSION & NEW WELLFIELD EALUATION - Collect data on e:&tina potenfitdwellsites 6 8 8 2 $3,874 Evaluate wellsites 8 18 4 $5,064 -- GIS data input and map prepatim 4 8 16 30 1 6 $10,274 Raw watermain routing, 6 8 12 4 6 $6,070 _ Generate ma 6) 6 6 16 4 6 $5,794- HYDROGEO (JLA) 19,500 $19,500 $50,576! 2 TEST WELL EVALUATION @ Oslo and Hobart Coordination with well drillers 6 .16 20 $500 56,036 - Prepare documents for dee nig testing 6 24 In 12 $7,688 HYDROGEO (JLA) 48500 .$48,500 $62,224! 3 EVALUATE IMPACTS TO OPERATIONS Evaluate im Is to exist a treatment 6 24 30 6 6 $12,834 A__I Prepare list of costs, changes too rations 12 24 30 8 8 $14,724 DIW Siting, costin_- vale description 4 12 12 4 $500 $6,304 Elecvical'(CW) 10,000 ° $10,000 --------- EW Consultants - -',. - '' 15,000 .$15,000 862 4 INDIRECT POTABLE REUSE EVAL -__� Site review oft WWTP for potential table reuse 6 12 8 $500 $4,456 Review treatment 8 20 40 12 $13,572 Prepare brief memo & recommendations 8 12 16 12 $7,180 HYDROGEO (JLA) 12,560 $12,500 537,708 i 5 OPTIONS MATRIX AND MEMO I Prepare matrLx of'Opfians table 12 24 8 $500 $7,780 j Meetings 6 101 8 $3,640 _ 1 Prepare brief mem & recommendations 12 20 16 12 $9,396 HYDROGEO (JLA) 4,500 ', $4,500 _$25,316 i 6 INORTH COUNTY UFA APT Meetings 6 4 $1,744 - -- - HYDROGEO (JLA) 10,000 $16,006 11,744 j TOTALHOURS1 122 96 290 102 16 138 $2.000 $120,000 $246,4301 S246,430' LABOR ($/HOUR)I 238 220 158 152 128 79 $o $D _ SUBTOTAL! 29036 21120 45820 15504 2048 10902 2000 $126,43 90 F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\WATER\CUP-10524\Admin\KHA\2021,5,1 -FINAL AWS Eval Scope thMDM vb.doex Page 10 of 11