Request for Proposals. Agreement No. CS-389. Planning and Engineering Services Southeast Plant New 250 MGD Headworks Facility. Date: July 23, 2014

Transcription

1 SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE DIVISION Request for Proposals Agreement No. Planning and Engineering Services Southeast Plant New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Date: July 23, 2014 Contract Administration Bureau SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 525 Golden Gate Avenue, 8 th Floor San Francisco, California 94102

2 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Infrastructure Division San Francisco Sewer System Improvement Program Agreement No. CS Planning and Engineering Services Southeast Plant New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Table of Contents PAGE I. INTRODUCTION... 1 II. BACKGROUND... 6 III. SCOPE OF SERVICES IV. QUALIFICATIONS V. PROPOSAL VI. EVALUATION AND SELECTION CRITERIA VII. AWARD OF AN AGREEMENT VIII. TERMS AND CONDITIONS IX. CONTRACT MONITORING DIVISION (CMD) REQUIREMENTS X. ADDITIONAL CITY REQUIREMENTS XI. PROTEST PROCEDURES SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page i

3 Appendices: A. Professional Services Proposal Checklist B. Overhead and Profit Schedule C. Professional Services Agreement (P500) D. Schedule of Estimated Number of Hours Per Task E. Contract Monitoring Division (CMD) Forms Form 2A - CMD Contract Participation Form Form 2B - CMD Good Faith Outreach Requirements Form Form 3 - CMD Non-Discrimination Affidavit Form 5 - CMD Employment Form F. Equal Benefits Ordinance (12B) Quick Reference Guide CMD Form 12B San Francisco Administrative Code Chapters 12B & 12C Declaration: Non-Discrimination in Contracts and Benefits G. Business Registration Certificate Requirement H. Business Tax Declaration I. Insurance Requirements J. Release of Liability K. Minimum Compensation Ordinance (MCO) Declaration L. Health Care Accountability Ordinance (HCAO) Declaration M. Consultant Commitment Matrix N. Environmental Justice Policy Link: O. Community Benefit Policy Link: P. Community Benefits Program - Examples of Commitments Q. Technology Policy Link : R. Sustainability Plan and Program Link: S. Site Visit Information SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page ii

4 Acronyms and Abbreviations AAR ACI ADC AGM ASCE BAAQMD BDFP BEM BFS BIM BOE CB CDFW CEQA CFD CER CIP CM/GC CMB CMD COR CPI CPM CSD CSI CSPE DB DBB DM DPW Alternative Analysis Report American Concrete Association Alternative Daily Cover Assistant General Manager American Society of Civil Engineers Bay Area Air Quality Management District Biosolids Digester Facilities Project Bureau of Environmental Management Bruce Flynn Pump Station Building Information Modeling Bureau of Engineering Community Benefits California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Environmental Quality Act Computational Fluid Dynamics Conceptual Engineering Report Capital Improvement Program Construction Manager/ General Contractor Construction Management Bureau Contract Monitoring Divisions Change Orders Requests Consumer Price Index Critical Path Method Combined Sewer Discharge Construction Specifications Institute Consultant Services Performance Evaluation Design-Build Design-Bid-Build Design Manager Department of Public Works SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page iii

5 DW EIC EMB EJ EOPR EPM FOG FSHP GBR GDR GIR HCAO HRC HSW IRS JV LBE LOS M MGD MCO NAR NEPA NHPA NPF NTP ODC OPS OSP P&IDs PCSB PE Dry Weather Earned Income Credit Engineering Management Bureau Environmental Justice Effective Overhead and Profit Rate Environmental Project Manager Fats, Oils and Grease First Source Hiring Program Geotechnical Baseline Report Geotechnical Data Report Geotechnical Interpretive Report Health Care Accountability Ordinance Human Rights Commission High Strength Waste Internal Revenue Service Joint Venture Local Business Enterprise Level of Service Million Million Gallons per Day Minimum Compensation Ordinance Needs Assessment Report National Environmental Policy Act National Historic Preservation Act North Point Facility Notice to Proceed Other Direct Cost Overhead and Profit Schedule Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant or Oceanside Plant Process and Instrumentation Diagrams Program Controls and Support Bureau Project Engineer SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page iv

6 PM PMB PMC QA/QC QBD RFC RFI RFP RFQ ROW RPD RWQCB SE SEP SFDBI SFDPH SFDPW SFPUC SSIP SSMP TI/YBI TPC T/S USACE USEPA USFWS WBS WW WWE Project Manager Project Management Bureau SSIP Program Management Consultant (AECOM/Parsons Joint Venture) Quality Assurance/Quality Control Question on Bid Documents Request for Clarification Request for Information Request for Proposals Request for Qualifications Right-of-Way San Francisco Recreation and Parks Department Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region Structural Engineer Licensed in the State of California Southeast Water Pollution Control Plant or Southeast Plant San Francisco Department of Building Inspection San Francisco Department of Public Health San Francisco Department of Public Works San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Sewer System Improvement Program Sewer System Master Plan Treasure Island/Yerba Buena Island Total Project Cost Transport/Storage United States Army Corps of Engineers United States Environmental Protection Agency United States Fish and Wildlife Service Work Breakdown Structure Wet Weather Wastewater Enterprise SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page v

7 I. INTRODUCTION 1. Summary The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), a department of the City and County of San Francisco, seeks to retain the services of a qualified Proposer to assist the SFPUC with planning and engineering services for the proposed Southeast Plant New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project. The term Proposer shall refer to any legal entity(ies) submitting a proposal in response to this Request for Proposals (RFP). Proposers responding to this RFP must have proven expertise and extensive experience in the latest technologies and trends in wastewater treatment, as it relates to the pumping of raw influent wastewater, fine screening technologies, grit removal technologies for fine grit particles, hydraulic modeling of complex influent flow structures with self cleaning design features, and odor control. Proposers responding to this RFP shall also have proven expertise and recent experience in the design of large wastewater treatment headworks facilities and general knowledge of the various complex issues that may be associated with sewer system infrastructure located in a major urban residential area. The SFPUC anticipates awarding to the selected Proposer a six (6) year Agreement for a total amount not to exceed $14,000,000 inclusive of all reimbursable costs. The SFPUC reserves the right to commence, close, reduce or extend Proposer services at any time in response to changing needs. Please take notice: By participating in this competitive process, Proposer agrees that any agreement resulting from this process may be utilized by other public entities to procure the commodities and/or services on the same terms. It should also be noted that, at the sole discretion of SFPUC, the Task Descriptions (see Section V.3.D) may be incorporated into the scope of services and the Overhead and Profit Schedule s (OPS) billing rates (see Section V.4.B) to be provided by the Proposer as part of its proposal may be directly incorporated into the Agreement (see Appendix C) as the applicable scope of services and billing rates, respectively. Additional information relating to the RFP may be posted on the SFPUC Contract Administration Bureau webpage ( as needed after issuance of the RFP. Proposers should therefore consult the SFPUC website regularly for these updates. SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 1

8 2. Tentative Schedule The SFPUC has established the following target dates for issuance, receipt and evaluation of proposals in addition to award of an Agreement in response to this RFP. The following dates are tentative, non-binding, and are subject to change without prior notice: Advertisement of RFP... July 23, 2014 Pre-Submittal Conference*... July 30, 2014 Site Visit**... July 31, 2014 Deadline for Proposers to Submit Questions... August 8, 2014 Deadline for Proposers to Submit Proposals... August 22, 2014 Short-Listing and Notification for Oral Interviews... September 16, 2014 Oral Interviews... September 24, 2014 Posting of Proposer Ranking... September 29, 2014 Public Utilities Commission Consideration... October 28, 2014 Deadline for Proposer to Achieve Vendor Compliance & Execute Agreement***... November 12, 2014 Board of Supervisors Consideration... November 25, 2014 Notice of Award of Agreement... January 2, 2015 * The SFPUC will make available to all Proposers at the pre-submittal conference one or more CD-ROMs containing electronic copies of a portion of the background documents listed under Task 3 in Section III.4 of this RFP. To obtain a free copy of the CD-ROM(s) at the pre-submittal conference, please send a written request to Grace Tang at rfp@sfwater.org before July 28, ** See Appendix S. for Site Visit Information *** Failure by the Proposer to obtain compliance with City requirements and execute an Agreement within two (2) weeks of the date of Public Utilities Commission s authorization to execute the Agreement may result in the General Manager s executing an Agreement with the next highest ranked Proposer. 3. Conflict of Interest The successful proposer will be required to agree to comply fully with and be bound by the applicable provisions of state and local laws related to conflicts of interest, including Section of the City's Charter, Article III, Chapter 2 of City s Campaign and Governmental SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 2

9 Conduct Code, and Section et seq. and Section 1090 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of California. These sections are available for review at the following internet links: tcode?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:sanfrancisco_ca$anc=jd_campaign, and The successful proposer will be required to acknowledge that it is familiar with these laws; certify that it does not know of any facts that constitute a violation of said provisions; and agree to immediately notify the City if it becomes aware of any such fact during the term of the Agreement. Individuals who will perform work for the City on behalf of the successful Proposer might be deemed consultants under state and local conflict of interest laws. If so, such individuals will be required to submit a Statement of Economic Interests, California Fair Political Practices Commission Form 700, to the City within ten calendar days of the City notifying the successful Proposer that the City has selected the Proposer. A. OBLIGATIONS It is the obligation of the Proposer as well as their Subconsultants to determine whether or not participation in that contract constitutes a conflict of interest. While the SFPUC staff maintains records regarding award and execution of contracts, it does not have access to specific information concerning which entities, partners, subconsultants or team members perform specific work on these contracts. A conflict of interest or an unfair advantage may exist without any knowledge of the SFPUC. The database of our records concerning work performed by various sub-consultants is available for reference to consultants making their own determination of potential conflicts. This information should not be relied upon as either comprehensive or indisputable. Final determination of the potential for conflict must be made by the Proposers. A court makes the final determination of whether an actual conflict exists. The guidelines below address conflicts under the aforementioned laws but there are other laws that affect qualifications for a contract. WORK There are many phases of work pertaining to SFPUC contracts. Potential conflicts arise out of progressive participation in various phases of that work. Set forth below are general guidelines regarding when participation in a specific phase of work may create a conflict. Because an actual determination regarding whether a conflict exists depends upon the specific facts of each situation, the general guidelines set forth below should be treated only as a starting point. A Proposer should consult with their legal counsel to determine whether a potential conflict exists. Note that the general guidelines set forth below apply to the award of Agreements under this RFP. i. RFI/RFQ/RFP/Bid Documents. Any entity that participates in the development of any of these documents has participated in making the contract for the work. SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 3

10 For these purposes participating in making has the same meaning as under Government Code Section 1090 and the term entity includes any parent, subsidiary or other related business. ii. General Program Management Services. Since these advisory services necessarily assist in general definitions of the program and projects, conflict would likely exist in participation in the design or construction management phase of any project. iii. iv. Preplanning. Participation in preplanning work, which may include the needs assessment report, since it is an initial phase, would likely be limited only by previous participation in preparation of RFI/RFQ/RFP or bid documents. Planning and Final Engineering Design (performed under single contract). The planning phase of any project establishes the facts pertaining to the project and possible options for consideration, and includes preparation of the Alternative Analysis Report and the Conceptual Engineering Report for the project. Documents produced as part of the Final Engineering Design constitute the definition of the construction contract for the project. Participation in the Planning and Final Engineering Design for a project (under a single contract) would likely be in conflict with participation in any subsequent phases, such as construction management or general construction. v. Environmental Review. Similar to the planning phase, this phase of work gathers information from other sources resulting in a definition of the project for the purposes of reviewing the environmental effects of the work. Firms participating in environmental review would likely not have a conflict in participating in subsequent phases. vi. vii. viii. Construction Management. This work consists of review, assessment and recommendation for actions based on interpretation of contract documents. No firm under one contract can review any of its own work performed under another contract. Conflicts would likely arise had any firm participated in either preparation of final engineering design or any documents enumerated in a contract for construction or documents the SFPUC requires a Proposer to rely on in the preparation of their bid. Construction. It is unlikely that participation in construction contracts would result in conflicts on subsequent contracts. Restrictions on participation in construction contracts may be stipulated in other federal, state or local laws. General. Work associated with gathering, assessing, or reviewing technical data such as geotechnical investigations, site surveys, condition assessments, or cost estimating would likely have conflicts with other work only if the firms were in a position to review their own work. SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 4

11 ix. Administrative Services. Any subconsultant or vendor providing general administrative services such as communications, reprographic, janitorial or security services during one phase of a project will not be precluded from providing similar services during later phases of the same project. B. COMPLIANCE WITH SAN FRANCISCO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 6.40 This RFP is subject to Administrative Code Section Section 6.40 requires that applicable professional services be procured through a competitive, impartial process under which all Proposers are treated fairly. Actions by a Proposer that provide it with an actual or apparent unfair competitive advantage jeopardize the integrity of the competitive process and may be grounds for disqualifying a Proposer. In addition to the conflict of interest principles summarized above, actions which may give rise to an actual or apparent unfair competitive advantage include a Proposer's unequal access to nonpublic information gained through its performance (or the performance by any entity on Proposer's team) of an existing City contract where such information may provide Proposer with a competitive advantage in the current RFP process. Proposers are strongly encouraged to investigate and manage any potential unfair competitive advantage situations in advance of forming teams and when considering whether or not to participate in the RFP process. A determination regarding whether an unfair competitive advantage situation exists depends upon the specific facts and circumstances of each situation. Proposers are strongly advised to consult with their legal counsel to determine whether or not an unfair competitive advantage may exist. C. CONSULTATION WITH COUNSEL The SFPUC strongly advises any proposing firm to consult with their legal counsel to determine whether or not a conflict of interest exists. It is the responsibility of the proposing/bidding firm to make that determination. The SFPUC will not advise consultants on conflict of interest matters. D. OTHER GENERAL RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO THIS RFP A firm cannot be a Prime Consultant or JV Partner on more than one (1) proposing team. In addition, if a designated Prime Consultant or JV Partner (Lead or Non-lead) intends to be listed as a subconsultant on another competing proposal, the Prime Consultant or JV Partner must fully disclose such intent to the affected parties 30 days prior to the due date for Proposal submittal. Failure to comply with these restrictions may result in the rejection of one or more affected Proposals. SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 5

12 A Prime Consultant or JV Partner cannot participate in more than one interview. A subconsultant or individual on more than one (1) proposing team cannot participate in the interview. II. BACKGROUND 1. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) The SFPUC is a City department that provides retail drinking water and sewer services to San Francisco, wholesale water, and hydroelectric power to San Francisco s municipal operations and other retail customers. The SFPUC operates and maintains 3 treatment facilities, approximately 1,000 miles of collection system, and treats an average of 40 billion gallons of wastewater and stormwater annually. Headquartered at 525 Golden Gate Avenue in San Francisco, the SFPUC has approximately 2,300 employees with a combined annual operating budget of approximately $700 million. The mission of the SFPUC is to: Serve San Francisco and its Bay Area customers with reliable, high quality, and affordable water, while maximizing benefits from power operations and responsibly managing the resources entrusted to its care; Protect public health, public safety and the environment by providing reliable and efficient collection, treatment and disposal of San Francisco s wastewater and stormwater; Conduct its business affairs in a manner that promotes efficiency, minimizes waste, and ensures rate payers confidence; and Promote diversity and the health, safety, and professional development of its employees. The SFPUC is comprised of three (3) separate enterprises. The SFPUC Water Enterprise is responsible for managing the transmission, treatment, storage and distribution of potable water to San Francisco s wholesale and retail customers, and the production of hydroelectric power. The SFPUC Wastewater Enterprise is responsible for managing the collection, treatment and disposal of San Francisco s wastewater. The SFPUC Power Enterprise is responsible for managing retail power sales, transmission and power scheduling, energy efficiency programs, street lighting services, utilities planning for redevelopment projects, energy resource planning efforts and various other energy services. SFPUC Infrastructure Division Within the SFPUC, the Infrastructure Division is responsible for providing internal resources for SFPUC capital projects. Organizational capacity and in-house capabilities continue to expand and increase. When the Infrastructure Division does not have the expertise, or chooses to supplement staff, Consultants with specialized expertise need to be hired. The Infrastructure SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 6

13 Division, which is managed by the Assistant General Manager (AGM) for Infrastructure, is organized into operations and programs. Operations consist of: Project Delivery, which include the Engineering Management Bureau (EMB), Construction Management Bureau (CMB) and Bureau of Environmental Management (BEM); Project Management Bureau (PMB) and Contract Administration Bureau (CAB). Programs consist of, Sewer System Improvement Program (SSIP), Water System Improvement Program (WSIP) and Hetchy System Improvement Program (HSIP). A. Commission Policies The SFPUC has adopted several policies that reflect the agency s commitment to sustainability and environmental stewardship, community benefits, environmental justice and innovative technologies. Proposers must demonstrate an ability to comply with and advance the following policies: 1) Sustainability Plan and Program Developed in 2008, the Sustainability Plan provides the SFPUC with a system for planning, managing, and evaluating SFPUC-wide performance that takes into account the long-term economic, environmental, and social impacts of our business activities. Please see Appendix R for a complete copy/link of the Plan. 2) Environmental Justice Policy On October 13, 2009, the SFPUC adopted a comprehensive set of environmental justice guidelines for use in connection with its operations and projects within the City, as required by Charter Section 8B, by Resolution Please see Appendix N for a complete copy/link of the Resolution. 3) Community Benefits Policy On January 11, 2011, the SFPUC adopted a Community Benefits Policy, by Resolution No that seeks to achieve positive community outcomes including: workforce and economic development (such as contracting with local companies and hiring local workers); innovative environmental programs (i.e. those that minimize adverse impacts); stakeholder and community involvement; arts and cultural programming; educational programs; responsible land use; sustainability; improvements in community health; diversity; and inclusionary initiatives that reflect the SFPUC s values, volunteerism, and monetary or inkind contributions to the community. Please see Appendix O for a complete copy/link of the Resolution. Please see Appendix P for examples of firm community benefits commitments. 4) Technology Policy On September 11, 2012, the SFPUC adopted a Technology Policy, by Resolution No that seeks to take advantage of innovative technologies to benefit ratepayers in a manner that is consistent with the Commission s Budgetary and Ratepayer Assurance policies, practices and endorsed Level of Service (LOS) goals. The key principles and criteria SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 7

14 shall be consistent with Triple Bottom Line principles that include economic, environmental, social, and leadership and transparency. Please see Appendix Q for a complete copy/link of the Resolution. 2. Wastewater Enterprise The Wastewater Enterprise (WWE) manages, operates and maintains San Francisco s sewer system (Figure 1). FIGURE 1 SFPUC MAJOR FACILITIES AND TREATMENT CAPACITIES SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 8

15 The WWE is responsible for the conveyance, treatment and discharge of the majority of the City s wastewater and stormwater through a combined sewer system. The wastewater system currently meets all discharge permit requirements of the State of California and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Within the City of San Francisco, the sewer system collects the City s wastewater and stormwater (combined sewage) in a combined sewer system that consists of: 3 treatment facilities, 4 outfalls, 27 pump stations, 36 combined sewer discharge (CSD) structures (or near shore outfalls), force mains, tunnels, transport/storage structures, 23,000 catch basins, 30,000 manholes, and nearly 1,000 miles of sewers. The large box sewers and tunnels of the transport/storage system are located around the City s perimeter and are used to, capture, store and transport combined sewage for later treatment at one of the treatment facilities or provide a wet-weather primary equivalent (decant) treatment before discharging through CSD structures. Of the estimated total annual 40 billion gallons of combined sewage flow, approximately 34 billion gallons per year receive full secondary treatment; 4.5 billion gallons per year receive primary or decant treatment and are discharged to deep-water outfalls; and 1.8 billion gallons per year receive decant treatment and are discharged through the CSD structures. San Francisco s sewer system has undergone capital improvements over the years, but many facilities and substantial parts of the collection system continue to age and deteriorate, limiting the reliability and flexibility of the wastewater systems to provide public services. Of the 781 miles of local sewers in San Francisco (36 inches diameter or less), the average age of the sewers is 72 years with 173 miles being over 100 years old. In addition to the local sewers, there are 120 miles of major sewers (greater than 36 inches in diameter) and 86 miles of brick sewers, transport/storage structures, tunnels, and force mains, much of which are vulnerable due to age, condition, and potential seismic activity. Portions of the Southeast Water Pollution Control Plant (SEP) as well as the North Point Wet- Weather Facility (NPF) were built over 60 years ago. Many of the challenges facing these treatment plants are related to aging infrastructure, outdated technologies and reduced reliability due to poor facility conditions. In particular, several of the key process units at these facilities are in need of complete replacement. Some of the technologies employed by these processes are outdated, the structural integrity of some of the units are compromised, and the basic supporting infrastructure (controls, electrical, mechanical) are no longer reliable. The design standards that governed the construction of the SEP did not incorporate the current concepts and technologies now available for mitigating negative impacts on the surrounding community. Even the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant (OSP), which was commissioned in 1993 and is the most recently constructed treatment facility in the City, is experiencing the effects of wear and tear due to 20 years of 24 hours per day-7 days per week operation in a highly corrosive marine environment. In addition, the need to reduce energy consumption, protect natural resources and address potential climate change impacts requires that the SFPUC considers sewer system upgrades and improvements. SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 9

16 3. Sewer System Improvement Program (SSIP) The WWE has developed a comprehensive $6.9 billion Sewer System Improvement Program (SSIP). Managed by the Infrastructure Division, the SSIP is a series of major capital improvement projects to be implemented over two decades that will bring the City s combined wastewater and stormwater system into a state of good repair, meet the current and future challenges, and achieve the Commission endorsed Levels of Service (LOS). The SSIP will consider environmental benefits, sustainability, and community benefits in implementing the City s long-term wastewater needs. A consultant team led by a joint venture of AECOM and Parsons has been brought on to provide program-wide management services and support. This Program Management Consultant (PMC) supports the SFPUC s SSIP Director providing programmatic planning and review. The SSIP is the culmination of seven (7) years of wastewater system planning, public meetings and SFPUC workshops aimed at identifying proposed improvements to address the following challenges: 1. Aging infrastructure and the poor condition of existing facilities, many with little remaining useful life; 2. Seismic deficiencies and lack of structural integrity, which increases the system vulnerability during earthquakes and large storms; 3. Limited operational flexibility and lack of redundancy; 4. Compliance with operational permits at all times, including, but not limited to permits issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and San Francisco Department of Public Health; 5. Managing stormwater in San Francisco s eight urban watersheds; 6. Rebuilding the system to optimize the use of resources and avoid waste; and 7. Protecting public health, the environment, and conservation goals to safeguard the natural and human environments. SFPUC staff, with assistance from PMC and other technical experts, have developed SSIP goals and LOS (Table 1) and identified prioritized needs within the treatment plants and sewer collection system. On August 28, 2012, the Commission endorsed these SSIP goals and LOS, validated the scope and a three-phased implementation approach for the overall $6.9 billion SSIP Program (Figure 2 provides a proposed implementation schedule and Table 2 provides estimated costs). The Commission authorized SFPUC staff to move forward with planning and development of the proposed Phase 1 SSIP projects representing $2.7 billion. The implementation of Phases 2 and 3 of the SSIP projects will be dependent upon the outcome of Phase 1. The SSIP will be implemented by a City-led team maximizing utilization of City SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 10

17 resources. Consultant services will be sought to support the SSIP when there is support needed during construction, specialized work, peak workloads and/or unplanned work. The contracting strategy will be guided by the goals of creating opportunities for Local Business Enterprises (LBEs), building capacity, maximizing competitiveness and firm participation. SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 11

18 TABLE 1 SSIP GOALS, LEVELS OF SERVICE AND STRATEGIES Wastewater Enterprise Goals Wastewater Enterprise Levels of Service Provide a Compliant, Reliable, Resilient, and Flexible System that can Respond to Catastrophic Events Strategies Full compliance with State and Federal regulatory requirements applicable to the treatment and disposal of sewage and stormwater. Reduce the annual Central drainage basin (Islais Creek) combined sewer discharges (CSDs) by 88 million gallons (from 923 million gallons to 835 million gallons) and 3 occurrences (from 13 to 10). Increase the level of Biosolids treatment to Class A. Critical functions are built with redundant infrastructure. Construct redundancy for Channel, North Shore and Westside forcemains. Upgrade treatment plants with redundant electrical feeds. Add redundant pumps at major pump stations. Primary Treatment, with disinfection, must be on-line within 72 hours of a major earthquake. Integrate Green and Grey Infrastructure to Manage Stormwater and Minimize Flooding Design critical and new facilities for: Magnitude 7.8 earthquake on the San Andreas Fault; and, Magnitude 7.1 earthquake on the Hayward Fault. Maximize protection of the City during level of service storm. Control and manage flows from a storm of a three hour duration that delivers 1.3 inches of rain. Develop projects using an Urban Watershed Approach which employs the Triple Bottom Line. Develop Design Standards for Green Infrastructure that are informed by the performance of Early Implementation Projects. Evaluate and develop projects to reduce Combined Sewer Discharged on public beaches. Provide Benefits to Impacted Communities Limit odors to within the treatment facility's fence line. Construct state-of-the art odor control systems at facilities where treatment occurs. Make visual improvements at the Treatment Plants and Pump Stations. Be a good neighbor. All projects will adhere to the Environmental Justice and Community Benefits policies. Use operational controls to minimize Collection System Odor. Provide community benefits including job creation, workforce development, contracting opportunities, and greening. Work with other City and County agencies to coordinate capital projects to maximize multiple benefits. Modify the System to Adapt to Climate Change Achieve Economic and Environmental Sustainability New infrastructure must accommodate expected sea level rise within the service life of the asset. (i.e., 16 inches by 2050, 25 inches by 2070, 55 inches by 2100). Existing infrastructure will be modified based on actual sea level rise. Beneficial reuse of 100% Biosolids. Engage residents in locating green infrastructure where multiple benefits can be optimized using the Triple Bottom Line. Site new facilities to accommodate or adapt to expected sea level rise over their life. Develop and implement an adaptation plan for existing infrastructure to address expected sea level rise within the service life of the asset. Upgrade Biosolids Treatment to Class A. Use nonpotable water sources to meet 100% of WWE facilities nonpotable water demands. Incorporate conservation measures, stormwater, groundwater, recycled water, and/or graywater reuse facilities into projects. Maintain Ratepayer Affordability Beneficially use 100% of biogas generated by WWE treatment facilities. Stabilize lifecycle costs to achieve future economic stability. Combined Sewer and Water Bill will be less than 2.5% of average household income for a single family residence. Incorporate cogeneration or other beneficial methane reuse options into the Biosolids Digester Facility. Provide Triple Bottom Line (lifecycle analysis) review of projects. Plan and phase projects to ensure affordability and predictability for ratepayers. SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 12

19 FIGURE 2 SSIP PHASED IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY * Phases 2 and 3 have not been authorized by the SFPUC. The implementation of Phases 2 and 3 is dependent on the outcome of Phase 1. SFPUC/P-590 (4.11) Page 13

20 TABLE 2 PROPOSED SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL PROGRAM 2012 PROGRAM VALIDATION PHASED IMPLEMENTATION ($ Millions) Phase 1 Phase 2 * Phase 3 * Total TREATMENT PLANTS $2,233 $1,215 $407 $3,855 COLLECTION SYSTEM $354 $1,928 $476 $2,758 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT (City & Consultant staff) $125 $152 $43 $320 TOTAL SSIP $2,712 $3,295 $926 $6,933 * Scopes and schedules for Phases 2 and 3 are preliminary. The implementation of Phases 2 and 3 will be dependent upon the outcome of Phase 1. The SSIP will be implemented by the SFPUC Infrastructure Division for the WWE. An organizational structure representing the SEP New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project is shown in Figure 3. Key roles and responsibilities are as follows: PROJECT MANAGER Has overall project responsibility and is accountable for project execution, including the project work scope, schedule, and budget. The PM is the SFPUC s representative and spokesperson for the project and is also responsible for overall project communication and coordination. DESIGN MANAGER The DM is responsible to the PM for implementation of the planning, design, and design support during construction phases of work. The DM will manage all design efforts of SFPUC/City staff and consultants. WWE LIAISON The WWE liaison is assigned to the project at the start of each project and will provide criteria and input from divisions and bureaus of the WWE to the design team. SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 14

21 BEM ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT MANAGER The Environmental Project Manager provides environmental constraints and analyses for the Conceptual Engineering Report (CER), and specialized environmental competency to assist the PM in obtaining CEQA/NEPA and resource agency project compliance. The Bureau of Environmental Management (BEM) Environmental Project Manager will have overall project responsibility for leading the efforts for CEQA documentation and CEQA/permitting approvals for the project. FIGURE 3 New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project Organizational Structure SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 15

22 4. Project Background SOUTHEAST PLANT The Southeast Water Pollution Control Plant (SEP), located at 750 Phelps Street, occupies 39.9 acres bounded by Evans, Phelps, Quint, and Rankin Streets (Caltrain railroad tracks), with Jerrold Avenue separating the north and south sides of the facility (See Figure 4). SEP is located in San Francisco s Bayview-Hunters Point community (Supervisor District 10) in an area that is a mix of residential and light/heavy industrial zones. Residential single family homes are located directly across the street from the plant. SEP provides the wastewater treatment needs for nearly two-thirds of the City s residents in the Bayside Watershed (east side of City) and receives 80% of the City s total annual flow (Refer to Figure 1). SEP provides primary and secondary treatment using a high-purity-oxygen activated sludge process prior to effluent disinfection. Sludge treatment consists of gravity-belt thickening, anaerobic digestion, chemical conditioning and centrifuge dewatering with digester biogas being captured for onsite cogeneration and/or release via waste flares. See Figure 5 and Figure 6 for a SEP facility layout and process flow diagram, respectively. Plant effluent is discharged during dry weather into the San Francisco Bay through the Pier 80 outfall. During wet weather, effluent is discharged through the Pier 80 outfall and at an additional outfall at the shoreline of Islais Creek (Quint Street Outfall). The SEP was constructed in 1952 as a primary treatment facility with anaerobic digestion. In order to meet the mandates of the Federal Clean Water Act, SEP was expanded in the early 1980s to provide secondary treatment of all Bayside Watershed dry-weather flows with a daily average design capacity of approximately 85 MGD and peak-hour design flow of 142 MGD. In 1996, the plant s wet weather capacity was increased to 250 MGD. During wet weather, up to 150 MGD receives full secondary treatment with additional 100 MGD receiving primary treatment prior to disinfection and discharge. The SEP complies with all dry- and wet-weather discharge requirements. The 2013 daily average dry-weather flow was approximately 60 MGD. The North Point Facility (NPF) is located at 111 Bay Street, along the northern waterfront adjacent to the Embarcadero. NPF serves the northeast portion of the Bayside Watershed only during wet weather. NPF provides 150 MGD of primary treatment through screening, grit removal, sedimentation, disinfection and de-chlorination. At the conclusion of each wet-weather event, grit and solids are flushed out of the sedimentation tanks and directed to the Channel Pump Station, which pumps the collected solids to SEP for treatment. SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 16

23 FIGURE 4 Aerial View South East Plant RANKIN ST SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 17

24 FIGURE 5 SEP PLANT LAYOUT SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 18

25 FIGURE 6 SEP PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Originally constructed in the early 1950 s, portions of SEP are operating beyond their useful life and/or with outdated technology. The proposed SSIP SEP treatment projects will provide the major improvements needed to ensure that the SEP maintains State and Federal permit compliance, operates reliably and meets the Commission endorsed LOS. The proposed SSIP improvements at SEP will address aging infrastructure, outdated technology, and neighborhood impacts and will provide sustainability, energy efficiency, and operational efficiency. The proposed SEP improvements include: Headworks Facility (which is the focus of this RFP) New Southeast Lift Station (SELS) New digester and solids handling facilities Containment and treatment of odors, such that no noticeable odors are present beyond the facility's fence line; Mechanical, electrical, instrumentation, structural, seismic, corrosion, architectural, and landscape upgrades; Inclusion of systems that promote energy recovery and energy efficiency; Refurbishment or upgrade of the primary treatment, secondary treatment/aeration basin system, secondary clarifiers, and effluent pump station; SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 19

26 New secondary effluent disinfection; and New chemical feed facilities; EXISTING SEP HEADWORKS FACILITIES Headworks, also referred to as preliminary treatment, are the first treatment processes encountered by the liquid wastewater stream. It may contain an influent pump station and does usually include screening and grit removal processes. For SEP, the Bayside wastewater flow enters the plant through the Influent Control Structure (SEP 010). The wastewater comes from the Channel Pump Station, the Bruce Flynn Pump Station, and the Southeast Lift Station (SELS). It then flows from SEP 010 into the New Headworks (SEP 012) during dry weather and into both SEP 012 and Old Headworks (SEP 011) during wet weather. SEP 010 and SEP 011 were constructed in the 1950 s. The SELS is located in the north-east corner of SEP 011. The preliminary treatment processes at SEP 011 consist of ¾ fine screens followed by horizontal flow grit collector channels. SEP 012 was constructed in the 1980 s. Its treatment processes consist of ½ fine screens followed by vortex grit removal chambers. Flow from both SEP 011 and SEP 012 continues on to primary treatment. Figure 7 provides a schematic of the overall influent pumping and preliminary treatment processes at SEP. Figure 7 Existing SEP Influent Pumping and Preliminary Treatment Flow Schematic SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 20

27 The existing fine screening and grit removal processes are inefficient and significantly impact the performance of downstream processes at SEP. Since the City has a combined sewer system, SEP 011 and 012 can experience extremely intense screening and grit loading events during wet weather. The transport/storage structures located upstream of SEP have significant accumulation of debris and grit and this material can be conveyed to SEP in very high volumes during wet weather events, thereby overwhelming SEP 011 and SEP 012. The debris and grit that bypasses SEP 011 and SEP 012 impacts the performance of and causes premature wear and tear of downstream processes such as the sludge collection mechanisms in the primary clarifiers and the primary sludge pumps. In addition, nearly 20% of the existing digestion capacity is lost due to the accumulation of material that was not removed by SEP 011 and SEP 012. The grit impacts the ability of the digestion process to meet the time and temperature requirements to produce the regulated quality of biosolids. The sludge pumps, piping, and dewatering centrifuges downstream of the digesters also exhibit premature wear. The majority of the grit that has been found in the primary sludge and in the digesters is in the range of 100 to 150 microns in size. The current grit removal processes at both SEP 011 and SEP 012 are not designed to remove such fine grit sizes. SEP 010, SEP 011, and SEP 012 do not meet the current needs of the SEP and need to be replaced. A new, 250 MGD all-weather headworks facility must be built to protect all the downstream processes and reduce the premature wear and tear in all equipment downstream of the headworks. 5. Project Objectives and Approach PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objective of the proposed New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project is to build a new allweather headworks facility that can handle the high debris and grit loading scenarios that occur at the SEP during wet weather storm events and to provide better screenings and grit removal to minimize the impact to downstream processes. The layout of the facility should provide for even flow distribution under all flow conditions and should minimize and prevent any grit accumulation or settling in the influent channels to the screens, at the base of the screens, or in the distribution channels leading to the grit removal process. Design of the fine screens shall minimize blinding of the screens during a storm event. The SFPUC has collected information on the size of the grit particles entering the SEP and will be conducting side by side pilot testing of Eutek Headcell and Pista 360 grit removal units. The intent of the pilot testing is to evaluate the removal efficiencies and overall performance of both technologies for the fine grit particles that are present in the influent wastewater stream. The current target removal for the pilot units is 95% removal of 105 micron grit. Information collected from the pilot testing will be provided to the successful Proposer to assist the SFPUC in selecting a single grit removal technology to advance into the detailed design stage. The CER analysis will include the parallel analysis of two grit removal technologies. The Proposer will use results from the pilot along with background and historical data to establish the design criteria for the full scale system. SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 21

28 The New 250 MGD Headworks Facility will include fine screens (potentially down to ¼ screen size), screenings washer and compactors, grit removal units, grit washers, screenings and grit conveyance, screenings and grit hoppers and/or dumpsters, and odor control. The Proposer may also assist in the planning and design of the new SELS and the coarse screens associated with the SELS. Four sites near or at SEP are being considered for the location of the New 250 MGD Headworks Facility. It is anticipated that the New 250 MGD Headworks Facility will be constructed at the site of the existing SEP 011. Since SEP will need to continue its normal operations during the construction duration, the Proposer may need to design temporary facilities to meet NPDES permit compliance as defined by the SFPUC. PROJECT APPROACH The planning and design of the New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project will proceed in two distinct phases: Phase 1 Planning (CER Report) and Preliminary Engineering (35%) Phase 2 Detailed Design, Procurement, Engineering Construction, and Start-Up Support To the extent possible, the SFPUC intends to maximize utilization of City resources in an integrated team with the Proposer to perform activities from planning through start-up of the New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project. Having the project team present through all phases of the Project will offer continuity and efficiency. PHASE 1 PLANNING (CER) AND PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Phase 1 will focus on completion of the planning phase and starting the detailed design phase. Needs Assessment (NAR) and Alternatives Analysis (AAR) Reports will be provided by the SFPUC. The first milestone of Phase 1 will consist of developing the Conceptual Engineering Report (CER) followed by the second milestone which is the 35% design package or preliminary engineering. The AAR will identify a single location for the new facility and will identify the fine screening technology to be carried forward in the design. However, the AAR will not select a single grit removal technology to move forward. The successful Proposer of this RFP will develop two different headworks/grit layouts for analysis in the CER phase. It will be the Proposer s responsibility during CER to develop a decision analysis method to assist the SFPUC in selecting a single grit removal technology to move forward into detailed design. The decision criteria used in the analysis shall include financial (capital and O&M costs) and non-financial criteria that are important to the SFPUC. Data from the ongoing grit removal pilot and grit characterization studies will be shared with the successful Proposer as they become available to help with finalizing the preferred grit removal technology. Second milestone of Phase 1 is the 35% progress design package or preliminary engineering. This milestone will require the Proposer to submit 35% progress design of the preferred engineering alternative (including grit removal) per the SFPUC procedures and applicable design SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 22

29 codes. The Proposer may need to incorporate changes to the design and engineering alternatives depending on the results of the environmental review process. PHASE 2 DETAILED DESIGN, PROCUREMENT, ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, AND START-UP SUPPORT Phase 2 is the detailed design phase and will encompass the engineering aspects of the New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project from 35% (Phase 1 endpoint) through construction design support, facility acceptance, and start up. The Proposer s role(s) in Phase 2 is dependent on the outcome of Phase 1. The Proposer s specific scope of work in Phase 2 should be considered asneeded until the performance of the Proposer in Phase 1 is evaluated. The Proposer should be prepared to provide: Specialized expertise; Detailed design resources; Pre-construction services; Construction design support services; and Other resources that are considered necessary to augment the City s team. III. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Introduction The SFPUC Infrastructure Division, Engineering Management Bureau (EMB), and Project Management Bureau (PMB) have developed the enclosed scope of services for this RFP. The selected Proposer, under the direction of the SFPUC Design Manager, will provide planning and engineering services for the New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project. 2. Schedule Preliminary planning, to date, shows the Project extending approximately six (6) years. Due to the age and condition of the existing Headworks infrastructure and its inefficiency, replacement facilities are critically needed to ensure regulatory compliance and wastewater treatment reliability and must be operational by September The SFPUC intends to proceed with an approach and schedule that will expedite project completion. The SFPUC reserves the right to commence, close, reduce or extend Proposer services at any time in response to changing needs. Completion of the New 250 MGD Headworks Facility Project is tied to the Biosolids Digester Facilities project. Any delays on the Headworks schedule will be reflected on both projects. A preliminary schedule indicates Phase 1 (Planning (CER Report) and Preliminary Engineering) being completed within Twelve (12) months from Notice to Proceed (NTP). Phase 2 (through facility start-up and construction closeout), will be completed within 60 months from NTP. SFPUC/P-590 (8.09) Page 23