AE SOW with Supplements A-B - CHP Revised 2021-09-10.docx

A/E STATEMENT OF WORK

Project 608-21-207 Complete Combined Heat and Power Installation

1.0 INTRODUCTION:

In 2015, the VA Medical Center in Manchester, NH, suspended construction of a new Combined Heat and Power (CHP) system due to conflicts with another construction project.

The purpose of this project is to evaluate the feasibility of completing the CHP system.

2.0 SCOPE:

The scope of this project consists of Architectural and Engineer (A/E) services required to complete the project, as outlined in Supplements A and B below.

The period of performance for the design is 176 calendar days and shall begin upon issuance of the Notice to Proceed (NTP) by the Contracting Officer.

3.0 PROPOSALS:

Proposals shall utilize the attached schedule of fees worksheet (Attachment A), or equivalent. The details tab shall be utilized with descriptive line items that align with this scope of work.

4.0 REFERENCES:

The following link has guides and specifications that may be referenced in parts of the attached documents that have not been included as part of the solicitation:

http://www.cfm.va.gov/til/

The A/E shall thoroughly review the information at the link above and follow all guidance applicable to this project.

SUPPLEMENT A

A/E SCOPE OF WORK

I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

A. Original Project: The VA Medical Center in Manchester, NH, began construction of Project 608-12-301, Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Plant, in 2013. The project installed a Caterpillar 740 kW gas generator and heat recovery steam generator (HRSG). The project was approximately 90% complete when it was suspended in 2015 to allow Project 608-12-101, Replace Boiler Plant and Emergency Generators, to proceed. The equipment in both projects utilized much of the same infrastructure and it was not feasible for both to proceed simultaneously. The boiler and emergency generator replacement project was prioritized as more critical to facility operations.

After several delays to the boiler replacement project, the VA closed out the aging contracts for the CHP project. None of the original contractors (A/E, General Contractor, or Commissioning Agent) are currently under contract.

B. Existing State:

1. It was primarily controls work that remained to be completed when the CHP project was suspended.

2. The CHP system has not been used since the project was suspended in 2015.

3. The CHP generator was never started. It has been sporadically maintained with maintenance procedures generally following manufacturer’s recommendations, but occurring far less often than the manufacturer recommends.

4. The HRSG had been filled and was drained when the project was suspended. No other lay-up procedure was used. The HRSG has not had any other maintenance.

5. The remaining equipment has not had any maintenance.

C. Available Documentation:

1. The VA staff primarily involved with the original CHP project no longer work at the VA. There are VA staff with some knowledge of the project, but most information will need to be reconstructed from file documentation and review of existing conditions.

2. All submittals and operating & maintenance manuals from Project 608-12-301 (CHP) are available.

3. A pdf set of final construction drawings (Attachment B) and specifications (Attachment C) from the CHP project have been marked up to reflect all bid amendments, design bulletins, and some RFI responses. Note that the file documentation is missing several RFIs and/or RFI responses.

4. Photos from construction are available.

5. As-built drawings from the boiler replacement project, showing existing conditions in the rest of the boiler plant, are available.

D. Other considerations:

1. VA Manchester has recently started construction on a project to replace the campus switchgear and four transformers. If determined to be feasible to complete, the CHP design would likely need to be updated for the new switchgear installation.

2. The interconnection agreement with the electrical utility is several years old and would need to be reworked if the project were determined to be feasible to complete.

3. The natural gas service to Building 7 has been increased since the original design of the CHP project.

II. Task: Provide a report evaluating the existing CHP system and recommending whether to complete the installation or remove the system. The report shall include, but not be limited to, the items listed below. The A/E shall include all analysis and investigation necessary to provide a well-supported recommendation.

A. Evaluate the size of the existing CHP system and its appropriateness for the campus. Utilize current utility information, information about current/planned construction projects, and specifications of the installed equipment. The report should detail any assumptions made for the analysis and the calculations the analysis is based on.

B. Evaluation of existing system.

1. Have all equipment thoroughly evaluated by authorized manufacturer’s representatives or qualified experts. Equipment inspection shall include inspection of all internal components that are accessible (i.e. by removing covers). Equipment shall be appropriately locked and tagged out by the contractor before beginning the inspection. For each piece of equipment, provide:

a. A detailed description of the condition of the equipment. For more complex equipment, such as the generator and HRSG, further break this down to condition of various components.

b. Deficiencies, with a total estimated repair cost.

c. Potential deficiencies that would be expected based on the age and condition of the equipment but cannot be inspected or tested in the current state. Provide an estimated repair cost for each of these issues.

d. A recommendation of whether it would be more cost effective to repair/refurbish the equipment or replace it.

e. For equipment that is not recommended to be replaced, provide an estimated useful remaining life after repair/refurbishment.

2. Evaluate the condition of the infrastructure associated with the CHP system, including piping, wiring, and valves.

3. Describe recommended changes, if any, to the existing installation. Examples include changes to meet updated code or VA requirements, recommended best practices, and changes that will facilitate maintenance activities.

4. Estimate the remaining work and rework required to complete the installation.

C. Cost effectiveness analysis. The analysis shall include, but not be limited to:

1. The estimated cost to complete the installation and to provide contractor and designer support and adjustments during a break-in period. The cost should include A/E design and construction period services, construction, and commissioning services.

2. Operational costs, including any labor required that is in addition to the 24/7 boiler plant operators already in place and expected equipment maintenance costs. Assume that daily, weekly, and monthly maintenance tasks would be absorbed by existing VA staff and that any tasks occurring at longer intervals or requiring specialized knowledge or tools would be performed via contract.

3. Projected energy/utility savings.

4. The expected average number of days/year that it would be cost effective to run the CHP. Assume the facility will only utilize the equipment when cost effective to do so.

5. The estimated cost to remove the CHP system in its entirety. Cost shall include removing the room built for the generator, removing piping back to the source and all related patching and repairs.

D. Provide a recommendation regarding completing the installation or removing the equipment.

E. The report shall include an executive summary explaining in plain language how the system works, the recommendation, and the information supporting the recommendation.

III. EXPERIENCE REQUIRMENTS

A. The A/E firm shall have a minimum of 2 full time licensed Professional Engineers with their PE obtained in electrical engineering and a minimum of 2 full time licensed Professional Engineers, with their PE obtained in mechanical engineering.

B. The A/E firm shall have completed a minimum of 3 combined heat and power system projects that utilize a reciprocating internal combustion engine and a heat recovery steam generator, either as the designer or commissioning agent.

C. The proposed design team shall include a mechanical engineer and an electrical engineer who have each worked on at least three combined heat and power system projects utilizing a reciprocating internal combustion engine and a heat recovery steam generator. The design team members do not have to have worked on the same projects and the projects may have been completed while working for other firms. Provide a brief project description for any project that was not provided as part of the requirements of paragraph C above.

D. A/E shall supply references for at least 2 of the projects from paragraph C above.

IV. DUTIES OF THE A/E

A. The A/E shall provide complete investigative services and evaluations needed to provide all report requirements and fully support the report’s recommendation.

B. The work shall include:

1. Preliminary meetings and site survey investigations to define the necessary elements of the project scope of work.

2. A detailed analysis of the various options available, covering design constraints, access requirements and all applicable codes and standards.

3. All necessary investigations. The costs of such investigations shall be included in this task order. Examples include electrical metering, equipment inspections, video inspections, utility locating, etc.

4. Review Meetings:

a. Professional engineers and related design disciplines familiar with the work shall be provided to attend the VA design reviews at the VA Medical Center in Manchester, NH. Review meetings may be held virtually, depending on pandemic restrictions.

b. The A/E shall provide minutes of each review meeting to the Contracting Officer for review within 3 business days following the review meeting.

C. Provide all necessary engineering and design services. Each discipline shall document and investigate the relevant existing conditions, review the available building information, and verify all essential elements pertinent to their discipline.

D. At each submission, the VA will provide review comments. The A/E shall provide a response/resolution to each comment within one week of the review meeting. The VA and the A/E shall agree on the appropriate resolution of each comment before the design moves forward to the next stage.

E. Any submission that has not fully addressed the comments from the previous submission, or which is clearly not coordinated between disciplines, may be rejected by the VA, at the VA’s discretion. The A/E is responsible for correcting and resubmitting all rejected submissions before moving on to the next submission, at no added cost to the VA. No extensions to the period of performance will be granted for resubmission of rejected design submissions.

F. No work altering the scope of this contract shall be undertaken prior to receipt of written approval of the Contracting Officer. The COR/Project Engineer does not have the authority to modify the contract.

V. ATTACHMENTS

Attachment A, Schedule of Fees Worksheet Attachment B, Red-line Construction Drawings, Project 608-12-301, Combined Heat and Power Plant Attachment C, Red-line Construction Specifications, Project 608-12-301, Combined Heat and Power Plant

Supplement A, Page 11

SUPPLEMENT B

A/E SUBMISSIONS OF DESIGN REVIEW MATERIAL

FIRST REVIEW (Draft Report) Electronic submission only, PDF and/or MS Office formats.

SECOND REVIEW (Final Report) Electronic submission only, PDF and MS Office formats.

THIRD REVIEW (Corrected Final Report) Electronic submission only, PDF and MS Office formats.

SUBMSSION SCHEDULE

ID

Date

NTP + 97

Supplement B, Page 5