260131_CommentResponseForm.pdf
PDF 158 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Advanced Water Purification Demonstration Facility State and local contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 260131
- Issued by
- Pima County, Tucson City, Arizona
About this file
This document is a Quality Control (QC) Comment Response Form for the Tucson Water Advanced Water Purification (AWP) Demonstration Facility Conceptual Design project, involving Jacobs engineering firm and Tucson Water. The project involves developing a conceptual design for a water treatment demonstration facility, with comments and responses addressing various technical aspects such as construction schedule, treatment discharge, water quality, permitting, and design elements. The project number is W7Y51209, and the document contains 29 comments from various reviewers, primarily focusing on refining the conceptual design and preparing for detailed design phases.
Key discussion points include construction timeline (with a goal of completing within 24 months), water treatment methods, potential use of Job Order Contracting (JOC) and Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) delivery methods, and specific technical considerations like treatment discharge, water quality sampling, and facility design elements. Many comments are marked for further investigation or resolution in the detailed design phase, with response dates predominantly in September 2025. The project appears to be centered on developing an advanced water purification demonstration facility, with attention to technical details, permitting requirements (such as ADEQ permitting), and stakeholder input from various team members and reviewers.
View the file
Other files for this state and local contract opportunity
Show all 29
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
IB-TE-WI-3100-AE-F-03
QC Comment Response Form
Deliverable : TW AWP Demonstration Conceptual Design - TM
Project Number:
Comment Code:
Comment No. Section Page No. Reviewer Comment Assigned To Response Comment Code Date Addressed
1 Whole 1 John K.
Primary comment is timeframe. It is way too dragged out for construction. Construction should happen within 24 months and be ready for use for meetings. Katie/Dani Construction Schedule will be addressed/adjusted in Detail
Design. A 9/15/2025
2 Whole 1 KA KA is looking into JOC to reduce schedule. If Jacobs can identify long lead items, JOC can be used to procure equipment, and CMAR can still be used.
Kristen Client has decided to use CMAR A 9/9/202
3 2 2 KA
Will we put back all treatment discharge to reclaimed or will some go to sewer? If goes to sewer, we will need ADEQ permitting.
Joseph With current plan all should go to reclaimed system D 9/8/2025
4 2 2 KA The APP permit states Class A+ Joseph Revised as requested A 9/8/2025
5 Table 1 3 KA Provide reference sample point.
Joseph Footnotes have been provided described sample points used for each data point A 9/8/2025
6 Table 1 3 KA For Potable, ND is TW OG Joseph Revised as requested A 9/8/2025
7 Table 1 3 KA Nitrogen/ammonia/etc has diurnal and seasonal fluctuations. Please see ammonia example on this page.
Joseph This value was corrected to use a different data point for ammonia as only one data point was provided for the original sample point used
A 9/12/2025
8 Table 2 4 KA Can Jacobs take a closer look at existing water quality please. Katie
This is more applicable to full-scale design as it is in reference to the source the finished water will be blended into. It will further inform pipe rig testing and finished water stabilization
A 9/12/2025
9 Table 2 4 KA
Most of the year this area is primarily fed by recharged CAP water. In Oct, dates to be confirmed by Andrew D, that pipeline is shut down and we meet demand with well water. Points to note are SP-230 and SP-030 Katie Included footnote to address this A 9/12/2025
10 Table 2 4 KA Can you include treatment goal discussion in a meeting please. Katie This is a great idea and yes we should re-review this to inform additional testing/research on finished water quality A 9/12/2025
11 Table 2 4 KA Reference Sample Points in Table Joseph Included footnote to address this A 9/8/2025
12 Table 2 5 We have native groundwater TDS ~450 and recharged/current TDS - needs to be part of the treatment goal discussion
Katie Included footnote to address this A 9/12/2025
13 Figure 2 5 KA GAC added to TT? Joseph Not required per AWP rule D 9/8/2025 14 Figure 4 7 KA Do we also need Floc/Sed here? Joseph Not required per AWP rule D 9/8/2025 15 Figure 6 10 KA Relocate Equipment is not part of Scope Joseph A 9/8/2025 16 Figure 7 11 Please refer to hydraulic analysis email for design Joseph Will be addressed in Detailed Design A 9/12/2025
17 4.2.1 14 KA Please make request for SCADA online ammonia analyzer data. Katie Will be addressed in Detailed Design A 9/12/2025
18 4.2 25
TARP has done full scale testing of various GACs including F400. Would any of that data/breakthrough curves be helpful? Have data for PFAS as small as PFHxS.
Joseph The data would be helpful! Performance will likely be different since we're targeting different compounds in AWP, but it's still good data to have.
A 9/11/2025
Project Name: Tucson Water AWP Demonstration Facility Conceptual Design
W7Y51209 A = Accept Comment - Correct, Modify, or Clarify D = Disagree/Dismiss - Reasoning Noted in Response
IB-TE-WI-3100-AE-F-03
QC Comment Response Form
Project Number:
Comment Code:
Comment No. Section Page No. Reviewer Comment Assigned To Response Comment Code Date Addressed
W7Y51209 A = Accept Comment - Correct, Modify, or Clarify D = Disagree/Dismiss - Reasoning Noted in Response
19 4.2 25
Can you also solicit feedback from Drew/David/Cynthia on GAC selection choices. Maybe during a meeting? Do any of them have operational/maintenance benefits/drawbacks? Are there any that they would like to see in demonstration facility?
Joseph A 9/11/2025
20 Figure 14 26 Does ozone need floc/sed? If so, does it need to be in the research area? Joseph Not required per AWP rule D 9/11/2025
21 4.6 28
Who will be sourcing design elements? Do you have a designer or can you subcontract one? Ex: flooring type/color, paint color, Blue Amoeba lighting fixture, counter tops, etc). Do not want it left to contractor, most of the time they do a terrible job of these items.
Eric Z Will be addressed in Detailed Design A 9/12/2025
22 4.6 28 Can you make a rendering of the front entrance and add this discussion to a meeting/workshop with the whole group please.
Eric Z Will be addressed in Detailed Design A 9/12/2025
23 4.6 28 Can you work with Stephanie to see if there is an opportunity to incorporate storm to shade elements. Eric Z Will be addressed in Detailed Design A 9/12/2025
24 4.6 28 Detailed design - There are so many pipes on the walls, how will this be dealt with? Paint over? Eric Z Will be addressed in Detailed Design A 9/12/2025
25 4.6 28 I'm so curious if this will be an active pipe. If it is, will it mess with the pressure and operations? Katie
Will be addressed in Detailed Design. The pipe shouldn't be active, but can discuss overhead piping as aesthetic and have active piping be below grade.
A 9/12/2025
Conceptu al Design Drawings
CIP PRJ000431. Please work with Stephanie to get a PN
Jodi PN 7-104-2025. A 9/15/2025
Conceptu al Design Drawings consider relocating electrical panels.
Joseph Will be addressed in Detailed Design A 9/11/2025
Conceptu al Design Drawings
Relocate or salvage, please do not demo (Air compressors) Joseph Revised to note relocate or salvage on drawings A 9/11/2025
Conceptu al Design Drawings
Please see PN 102-1997 for containment area drawings.
There is an existing sump, please try to incorporate Joseph Will be addressed in Detailed Design A 9/11/2025
Review Sheet
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .