HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-041ENGINEERING SERVICES WORK ORDER 4
This Work Order Number 4 is entered into as of this 11 day of FeIrLYry , 2025,
pursuant to that certain Continuing Contract Agreement, dated May 2, 2023, ("Agreement"), by and
between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida ("COUNTY") and
Tetra Tech ("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 mutually agreed upon lump sum or
maximum amount not -to -exceed professional fee. Any additional costs must be approved in writing,
and at a rate not to exceed the prices set forth in Exhibit B of the Agreement (Rate Schedule) for RFQ
2023015, made a part hereof by this reference. The Consultant will perform the professional services
within the timeframe more particularly set forth in Exhibit A (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.
CONSULTANT:
By: UK11
Name: o Bundy, P.E.
Title: Vice President
•�;niss�
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSONEJ�11� �'✓F9
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY:
By
oseph E. Flescher, Chairman `: Ao,L ,
. �✓��✓ER C0 �.1�y�:
BCC App oval Date:
By:
John A. Ti kanich, Jr., County Administrator
Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency:
By:
J& fifer V%oShuler, County Attorney
Ryan L. Butler, Clerk of Court and Comptroller
Attest:
Deputy le k
(SEAL)
OTETRA TECH
November 12, 2024
Mr. Howard Richards, PE
Capital Projects Manager
IRC Department of Utility Services
180127th Street — Building A
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Subject: Hobart WTP Post Filtration Improvements, Alternatives Analysis
Tt # 200BP Indian River County Department of Utility Service
Dear Mr. Richards:
Please find the attached proposal for the Hobart WTP post filtration improvements alternatives analysis
technical memorandum in response to your request for proposal. Our evaluation will focus on the existing
configuration of the Hobart WTP and integrating the operation of the north and south systems into one,
integrated WTP. This includes evaluating different alternatives that can be presented to the County for
consideration for final design. The evaluation will also include a review of the efficiency of the existing
scrubber system and recommendations for improvement, as well as recommendations for
instrumentation and control improvements for four (4) chemical feed systems (carbon dioxide, lime,
caustic, and sulfuric acid).
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services to the County and let us know if there is any
additional documentation that you require.
Very truly yours,
Tetra Tech
Jennifer Ribotti, P.E.
Project Manager
Attachments:
JCR/pt/IRCDUS Post Filtration Improvements/Richards—Cover Letter
Tetra Tech, Inc.
ATTACHMENT A
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
HOBART WTP POST FILTRATION IMPROVEMENTS, ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
IRCDUS PROJECT ID 12.24.504
I. BACKGROUND
Indian River County Department of Utility Services (County) operates the Hobart Water Treatment Plant
(WTP) to provide potable water service to its customers. The WTP has a capacity of 11.4 MGD and an
average daily flow of approximately 7.0 MGD. The raw water source for the WTP is groundwater from the
Upper Floridian Aquifer. At the Hobart WTP, it undergoes pretreatment, membrane treatment
(nanofiltration), degasification and the addition of chemicals for stabilization, disinfection,
remineralization, and pH and alkalinity control of the treated water.
The Hobart WTP is configured such that there are two (2) sets of process equipment which mirror each
other ("north" and "south" systems). Each set consists of four (4) nanofiltration skids, dedicated to a
specific clearwell, for a total of eight (8) nanofiltration skids and two (2) clearwells at the WTP. A
bottleneck has been created with the operation of the Hobart WTP when maintenance or downtime of
one of the clearwells is required. The transfer pumps for the Hobart WTP are all situated on the south
clearwell, which does not allow individual operation of the north system if the south system requires
maintenance. Individual clearwells cannot be cleaned if required without impacting operation and system
downtime.
Another operational concern with the existing configuration of the Hobart WTP is that the north and south
systems do not allow for individual operation of nanofiltration skids on either side of the system without
having to run the entire post treatment system, including the degasifiers, transfer pumps, chemical feed
systems and other related equipment.
The County has a desire to combine the operation of the north and south systems into one, integrated
WTP. This includes, but is not limited to, simplifying maintenance (clean either clearwell without having
to shutdown the entire system), operating all nanofiltration skids together as one WTP, and having the
ability to control both systems from SCADA. The County would also like to optimize the efficiency of the
existing scrubbers and add instrumentation and control improvements to the chemical feed systems
(carbon dioxide, lime, caustic and sulfuric acid).
The County has requested an alternatives analysis from Tetra Tech, where different alternatives will be
presented in a technical memorandum format to the County for consideration of implementation at the
Hobart WTP. The alternatives analysis will include evaluations from different disciplines including civil,
process, structural, electrical and instrumentation and controls.
The professional services described herein will be performed in accordance with the Continuing Contract
Agreement for Engineering Services, dated May 2nd, 2023 between Indian River County and Tetra Tech,
Inc.
JCR/pt/IRCDUS Project ID 12.24.504
Tt #200613 Indian River 1 11/12/24
OTETRATEGH
II. SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1— Project Management
This task consists of overall management of the project services during the alternatives analysis
technical memorandum development. Tasks include QA/QC, budget management, monthly
invoicing, tracking and status of project, schedule monitoring and coordination with the County.
Task 2 — Proiect Kickoff and Site Visit
Attend a project kickoff meeting with the County to establish goals and outline of the alternatives
analysis technical memorandum. Following the meeting, perform a site visit with operations staff.
Task 3 — Data Review and Workshop
1. Review of existing data and initial development of the conceptual alternatives.
2. Attend a workshop with the County to discuss priorities for plant operations and support facilities
and discussion of preliminary alternatives with County staff. It is anticipated that 2 to 3
alternatives will be identified for the County's consideration for integrating both the north and
south systems at the Hobart WTP into one. Each alternative will evaluate life cycle cost, impact to
plant operations, overall feasibility of implementation, and anticipated phasing for implementing
the improvements at the WTP. The timing of the workshop will be coordinated with the County.
Task 4 — Alternatives Analysis Evaluation
The objectives of the Alternatives Analysis will generally include the following for each alternative
proposed:
a. System hydraulic evaluation. The evaluation will include 1) reviewing the existing system
hydraulics and 2) proposed system hydraulics with each alternative. A summary of each
alternative and the impact it will have on the existing system hydraulics will be provided.
Proposed plan for demolition and removal of equipment and structures. Each alternative
will include a proposed plan for demolition of any identified equipment that is necessary
to demolish or remove in order to implement the proposed alternative. This will require
evaluation of site/civil constraints and additional space as needed, structural
impacts/modifications to existing structures, and demolition or removal of existing
equipment.
Proposed project phasing. Each alternative will have a proposed project phasing plan in
order to assist the County in evaluating the timeline anticipated for implementing the
proposed improvements. The proposed project phasing will include considerations for
minimizing plant downtime.
d. Design criteria including any preselection of equipment. If an alternative requires the
addition of new equipment, such as pumps, a new clearwell and associated
appurtenances, degasification, scrubbers, chemicals or other equipment, the design
criteria will be preliminarily established.
JCR/pt/ IRCDUS Project ID 12.24.504 O TETRATECH
Tt #200BP Indian River -2- 11/12/24
e. Review of existing scrubber system and improvement recommendations. The County also
requested 1) a review of the existing scrubber system and the efficiency in an effort to
provide recommendations for optimization to the County, and 2) instrumentation and
control improvements for the carbon dioxide, lime, caustic and sulfuric acid systems.
f. Design criteria and recommendations for instrumentation and control improvements.
Each alternative will include preliminary design criteria and recommendations necessary
to implement instrumentation and control improvements. This includes any
modifications necessary to the existing SCADA system.
The evaluation will also include review of the existing instrumentation and controls for
chemical storage and feed systems (carbon dioxide, lime, caustic and sulfuric acid) and
recommendations for improvement.
g. Proposed site layout and plans. Each alternative will include a proposed site layout
generally detailing where the proposed improvements or modifications will be on the
existing site. Any site constraints will first be identified through discussions with the
County.
h. Revised process flow and instrumentation diagrams. Each alternative will include revised
process flow and instrumentation diagrams, detailing the modifications necessary to
implement the alternative.
Discussion of considerations and/or risks for continuity of operations. A section in the
report will include discussion on considerations for each alternative in order to establish
the minimum downtime for the Hobart WTP during construction. It will also include
discussion on how each alternative will help improve continuity of operations in regard
to operating the WTP as an integrated plant, maintenance, cleaning, bypass, etc. once the
improvements are implemented.
j. Planning level cost estimate. A planning level cost estimate will be developed for each
alternative presented. The cost estimate will include contingency.
k. Life cycle cost of each alternative to assist the County with decision making. After a
planning level cost estimate is developed for each alternative, the life cycle cost, or
assessing the total cost of the alternative over the course of its life cycle will be presented.
The analysis will include evaluating capital, operation and maintenance and disposal
costs. The analysis will also include considerations for a discounted cash flow and the net
present value.
Summary of recommendations. A summary of recommendations for the different
alternatives will be presented, including a recommendation of the most feasible
alternative relative to cost, timeframe, operational flexibility and feasibility.
Task 5 —Technical Memorandum
1. Prepare a Draft Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum that presents the different
alternatives summarized above under Item No. 1 and most feasible alternative recommendation.
Provide the County with one (1) hard copy of the Draft and a PDF format copy for review.
JCR/pt/ IRCDUS Project ID 12.24.504
Tt #200I3P Indian River -3- 11/12/24
OTETRATECH
2. Attend a review meeting with the County to discuss the draft technical memorandum, modify the
report per the County's direction, and develop concurrence regarding the alternatives and
proposed recommendations prior to finalizing the report.
3. Provide the County with two (2) copies of the Final Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum
and a PDF format copy.
III. PROJECT REPRESENTATIVES
Indian River County: Howard Richards, P.E.
Tetra Tech: Jennifer Ribotti, P.E.
IV. OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
The County will provide all pertinent information needed for evaluating existing plant operations and
treatment goals. The County shall also provide historical operations and maintenance records that should
be taken into consideration by Tetra Tech for the design of the new equipment or systems to replace
existing.
V. DELIVERABLES
1. Draft Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum (PDF Format/1 hard copy)
2. Final Alternatives Analysis Technical Memorandum (PDF Format/2 hard copies)
VI. COMPENSATION SUMMARY
Attachment B presents a more detailed breakdown of the estimated compensation defined in the Scope
of Services. The total lump sum compensation for this proposal is $245,585.15. The County will be invoiced
monthly for charges incurred during the previous month and submit the invoice by the 15' of the
following month.
JCR/pt/ IRCDUS Project ID 12.24.504 O TETRATEGH
Tt #200613 Indian River -4- 11/12/24
Scope
Task 1 — Project Management
$18,600.00
Task 2 — Project Kickoff and Site Visit
$11,032.00
Task 3 - Data Collection and Workshop
$41,844.00
Task 4 — Alternatives Analysis Evaluation
$141,713.00
Task 5 —Technical Memorandum
$31,923.00
Task 4 — Other Direct Costs
$473.15
Total
$245,585.15
JCR/pt/ IRCDUS Project ID 12.24.504 O TETRATEGH
Tt #200613 Indian River -4- 11/12/24
VII. SCHEDULE
Task
Days
Estimated
Duration
Cumulative
Schedule
(Days)
Cumulative
Schedule
(Months)
Project Kickoff, Site Visit and Data Collection
30
1
30
1.0
Alternatives Workshop
30
1
60
2.0
Draft AA Technical Memorandum
90
3
150
5.0
Draft AA Review Meeting
15
0.5
165
5.5
Final AA Technical Memorandum
30
1
195
6.5
JCR/pt/ IRCDUS Project ID 12.24.504 O TETRATECH
Tt #200I3P Indian River -5- 11/12/24
f
� A
d p n
3
— f i
a a
0
= m
m =
L
kct1lsa
8s8s
e ssassgassaa's�'.s`s
; I�
a P;a0
3
0 obi �
O
3 3
G
n �
iii
v y
A
m
3 ,I^•
g
T
3 ct
r+
9
O
p o
g
1
�
N
2.
o
Ae
3
fD
a 3
D
O
-a
3
O
3
vi
N
N
x �
i
Sr. project Manager
�
,�
Prejeet Managed
Yg
ai
B
wi
_ Sr Englneer llPrxess)
X
Engineer I lPrxess)
8
Sr E%1-1(CMI)
8
Englnaar�Icmp
8
g
r
5, Erigl—r l
O
,, ISlrunurrl
B
c �
m �
Erymeer l lstruauraq
J
6
5, E%ineer2
(El—mlpul
G
g
Sr E,i—r 1116E)
8
'
Projea Engineer l
w (ElMripl)
CAD Desi(ne
`
7?
prPjecl Atlministrata i
8