Scope_of_Work.pdf

SCOPE OF SERVICES

As part of this Project, the selected firm (Consultant) will be responsible for the preparation of the Feasibility Study for the MF Replacement at TRWRP. To be considered for the work, the Consultant shall demonstrate understanding and experience in microfiltration treatment facilities and be knowledgeable of the latest codes and industry standards, as well as considerations associated with the application in water recycling. The Consultant shall provide all staff and resources necessary to perform professional Design Engineering Services in all areas. The Consultant shall become familiar with all components related to the functioning of the existing MF System and related supporting facilities but should already be familiar with contemporary MF systems and designs. At a minimum, the following tasks shall be performed:

The selected Consultant shall prepare a Feasibility Study that evaluates the potential alternatives that could be considered for the replacement of the existing MF system at TRWRP. The objective is to evaluate a minimum of five scenarios and identify the corresponding cost estimate, work description and comparison that would enable a selected alternative or alternatives to be considered further. The overall description of the alternatives and factors to be evaluated include, but are not limited to:

1. No Project. No Project. Under this alternative, the existing MF system operations will continue to operate as normal with potable water supplementing the RO feed. Repairs will be limited to availability to repair or replace parts for the existing system. Membranes will continue to be replaced as part of their routine maintenance protocol requirements, but replacement frequency may increase. The assessment shall be performed to investigate the economics and considerations associated with continuing to operate the existing system along with supplementing the RO feed with potable water supply. Include at a minimum the cost per acre-foot to operate the existing system, as well as the cost to supplement potable water. Remaining life expectancy of the existing MF system should be estimated, limiting factors (upstream and downstream) identified, current system capacity, operations & maintenance (O&M) costs, potential risks, and other items as deemed necessary. Evaluate the replacement of MF effluent with potable water. Under this alternative, the MF system would be decommissioned. MF effluent would be completely replaced by potable water. There is an existing potable water pipeline that can be used to either: (1) supplement the boiler feed system, (2) partially refill the RO product water tank, or (3) refill the MF break tank. Evaluation of units to be decommissioned will be assessed.

2. Full replacement of the existing MF System. Under this scenario, new technology would need to be evaluated and replaced for installation (packaged units, proprietary, custom/open platform, ceramic, etc). An assessment shall include, at a minimum, description of the new equipment, any salvageable equipment from the existing MF system, piloting needs, system capacity, ability to produce more MF effluent, limiting factors (upstream and downstream), current system capacity, layout, supporting equipment, modifications at TRWRP, useful life, operations & maintenance (O&M) costs, potential risks, and other items as deemed necessary.

3. Evaluate the installation of a Portable Ultrafiltration (PUF) system at TRWRP.

West Basin owns a PUF system with a design capacity of approximately 1 MGD which is currently located at West Basin’s Juanita Millender-McDonald Carson Regional Water Recycling Plant in the city of Carson since 2014. The PUF system’s intention is to help supplement the feed for RO effluent. The PUF system requires it to be dismantled, relocated, and reinstalled at TRWRP. A design for the relocation was completed in 2022, but West Basin decided to forego the relocation. Additional factors to be included for this alternative scenario will be costs for the entire relocation, capacity as a standalone unit, combination with no project alternative, and other potential risks. The PUF system is currently not in use.

4. Evaluate the installation of MF trailers or other packaged MF systems.

Consideration of the purchase and installation of mobile trailers or packaged MF systems shall include pad setting, number of units, connections, supporting equipment, modifications to the site, capacity to produce MF effluent, identification of limiting factors, supplemental facilities for proper functioning, useful life, O&M costs, potential risks, and other items as deemed necessary. MF trailers at ECLWRF will not be relocated as part of this alternative.

5. The consultant can propose another alternative not listed herein for consideration.

All alternatives investigated will include a project schedule for implementation, a class 5 cost estimate including all aspects of the alternative (e.g. potable water usage), a summary of pros and cons associated with the alternative, and clear identification of any fatal flaws preventing the alternative’s further consideration. Site layouts and demolition costs of existing infrastructure should be included where appropriate.

Task 1: General Coordination, Meetings, and Project Administration

1.1 Conduct a “kick-off” meeting with West Basin staff to discuss the scope and parameters of the Project. The Consultant shall prepare and distribute a draft agenda before the meeting for review and comment by West Basin. Specific Project goals, identification of critical information, milestones, and strategies shall be identified during the kick-off meeting. The Consultant shall prepare and distribute meeting minutes within three (3) business days of the meeting. The Consultant shall assume two (2) hours for the “kick-off” meeting.

1.2 Meet with West Basin staff on a biweekly basis prior to submittals to discuss the

Project’s progress. Prepare meeting minutes for each meeting and distribute the draft meeting minutes for review and comment within three (3) business days of the meeting.

1.3 Develop a Project Schedule in Microsoft Project format detailing all phases and milestones of the Project work. The Baseline Schedule shall be presented at the kick-off meeting and updated periodically throughout the Project. The Baseline Schedule updates shall include actual start and finish dates, actual costs to date, completion percentages, remaining durations, and budgets for each task and subtask.

1.4 Coordinate the efforts of the Project Team and sub-Consultants, monitor the schedule and budget, and administer the contract with West Basin. PDF and electronic formats will be required to be submitted).

1.5 The Consultant shall research, obtain and review all documents available from

West Basin and other jurisdictional agencies or cities as required to design the Project, including, at a minimum, reports, as-built drawings, specifications, studies, and additional relevant information.

1.6 Prepare biweekly progress reports summarizing the Project status, including work performed during the reporting period, work planned for the next reporting period, potential Project issues, Project recommendations, and Project schedule and budget status. An earned value analysis shall be included in the report.

1.7 Submit monthly invoices with all supporting documentation in a format acceptable to West Basin. The Consultant’s invoices shall be broken down by the tasks and subtasks included in the RFP.

Task 2: Feasibility Study Phase

2.1 The Consultant shall perform a comprehensive utility search and investigation of the

Project site to depict the location of existing improvements accurately (i.e. ground radar, potholing, or similar). Research and review all documents including record drawings, reports, water quality, vendor’s equipment information and other relevant operational information available from West Basin and their contract operators as required to develop the feasibility study for the Project alternatives. All personnel visiting TRWRP shall adhere to West Basin’s and their contract operator’s safety requirements prior to entering the plant.

2.2 Prior to receiving the first draft submittal of the feasibility study, the Consultant shall conduct workshops between West Basin staff, Operators, Consultant, and other relevant parties as needed. This will allow collaboration between all parties, discuss findings and progress, and assist in decision making. This includes, but not limited to, the following:

• Preliminary workshop

• 2 technical MF workshops

2.3 The Consultant shall prepare a comprehensive Feasibility Study that includes evaluations of a minimum of five alternatives listed in the scope of work or suggested by the Consultant. At a minimum, the Feasibility Study shall include evaluations, findings and corresponding recommendations associated with each alternative:

• Refinery demands.

• Water quality goals

• Area footprint

• Layouts showing demolition/installations/relocations

• Preliminary design criteria for each alternative

• Ability to reuse existing support facilities (if possible)

• System hydraulics

• Cleaning/discharge requirements

• Production capabilities

• Limiting factors in production of product water

• Contaminant removal

• Environmental impact

• Energy requirements

• Needs for pilot testing

• Regulatory compliance

• Benefits and disadvantages

• Constructability and implementation

• Useful life

• O&M costs

• Life cycle costs

• Return on investment (ROI)

• Distributed control system integration

• Construction schedule

• Class 4 cost estimate

The Feasibility Study shall be submitted at draft, draft final, and final submittals.

Comments shall be incorporated after each submittal. The Feasibility Study shall include the following sections:

• Executive summary

• Introduction

• Background

• Evaluation of current MF system

• Evaluation of current treatment process

• Evaluation of alternatives

Descriptions and preliminary design criteria Pro and cons Life cycle cost comparison

• Recommendations

• Conclusions

The consultant shall incorporate comments for each submittal. Each submittal should include an electronic PDF version of the document for review. All word, excel, etc., versions of the document shall be submitted at the time that the finalized documents are submitted.

2.4 The Consultant shall include provisions in their proposal to attend one (1) 2-hour progress with West Basin, the Torrance Refinery, and the facilities contract operators to review and discuss the comments provided on each submittal.

Comments will be provided by West Basin at least one (1) week in advance of the meeting. All comments provided by West Basin shall be tabulated, formally acknowledged and/or addressed in the subsequent design package submittal.

2.5 After the final submittal is received by West Basin, the consultant shall perform a 2-hour presentation summarizing the conclusions of the Feasibility Study and an overview of the recommendations.

Task 3: Project Closeout Phase

3.1 Submit an electronic copy of the Final version of the Feasibility Study and all supporting documents.

3.2 Electronic copies of all Project-related documentation shall be transmitted to West Basin at the end of the Project. All CAD, GIS (shapefiles and geodatabases), PDF, and Microsoft documents shall be neatly organized.