A_01_23_SOW_-_Detroit_FSS_Final.docx

DRAFT: Revised 7 April 2017

STATEMENT / SCOPE OF WORK

Architect and Engineering Services for Detroit Floating Screen Structure Design Documentation Report Detroit Dam and Reservoir, Oregon Contract #W9127N-17-R-0055 057 April 2017

1. BACKGROUND. The Biological Opinion (BiOp) for the Willamette River (National Marine Fisheries Service 2008) identified a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) to avoid jeopardy of Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed fish. Measure 4.12.3 of the RPA (Detroit downstream passage) requires downstream fish passage at Detroit Dam by 2023. Measure 5.2 of the RPA requires the Action Agencies to minimize water quality effects associated with operations of Detroit and Big Cliff dams by making structure modifications or major operational changes. Further, measure 5.2 directs, “if feasible and more efficient to achieve both purposes through one construction project, the Action Agencies will include downstream fish passage in this effort, rather than delaying it until 2023, as stated in RPA measure 4.12.3.”

The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Portland District (CENWP) prepared an Engineering Documentation Report (EDR) titled “Detroit and Big Cliff Long-Term Temperature Control and Downstream Fish Passage Engineering Documentation Report”. The recommendation is to build a selective withdrawal structure with a weir box for phase 1 of downstream fish passage. A floating screen structure will be designed and constructed for phase 2 of downstream fish passage.

2. PURPOSE. The purpose of this contract is to develop a Design Documentation Report (DDR) for a floating screen structure (FSS). The purpose of this FSS is to attract and collect juvenile fish in the Detroit reservoir. CENWP is simultaneously designing a selective withdrawal structure (SWS) with a weir box to provide temperature control in the North Santiam River. The weir box will be used to provide downstream fish passage until the FSS is designed and constructed. It is CENWP’s intention for the flow to pass through the FSS, screen out the fish, pass through the SWS, and ultimately pass through the turbines and further down river. The fish that were separated from the flow and collected will be passed further downstream. The primary species of concern are: ESA listed Upper Willamette River spring Chinook salmon (hatchery and natural origin), ESA listed UWR winter steelhead, and resident fish.

It is anticipated that the FSS will need to be anchored to the SWS. These connections are required to maintain alignment of the system, withstand and allow vertical movement of the structure through pool fluctuations, and withstand wind and wave loads applied through the FSS. Flow entering the FSS will be passed through a v-screen. Mechanical equipment on the FSS will include dewatering screen cleaners, flow control devices through the dewatering screen, various pumps, fish separation systems, gates to divert fish to the desired holding tank, fish crowding systems, and hopper and lift details.

3. OVERVIEW. Detroit Dam is located at river mile 60.9 on the North Santiam River, approximately 50 miles southeast of Salem, Oregon. The floating screen structure will be located adjacent to a selective withdrawal structure on the upstream side of the Detroit Dam. Detroit Dam is a concrete gravity structure that is 450-feet high and 1,457-feet long. The dam has a gated spillway structure that is 28.0-feet high and 294.5-feet long, and has six spill bays each 42-feet wide. The spillway crest is at elevation 1,541.0-feet, full pool is at elevation 1,569.0-feet, and minimum conservation pool is at elevation 1,450-feet. Additionally, Detroit Dam has five regulating outlets (ROs), two with an invert elevation at 1265.3-feet, two at elevation 1340.0-feet, and two turbines with a penstock intake elevation at 1403-feet. The fifth RO is a test conduit that could potentially be used to pass juvenile fish downstream.

4. DESCRIPTION OF WORK. The scope of work covers the architectural and engineering services necessary for the development of a Design Documentation Report (DDR) for a downstream fish passage floating screen structure with an estimated maximum flow range of 2000 – 5,400 cubic feet per second (cfs) in the Detroit Dam and Reservoir. The work required to prepare the DDR for the FSS, in accordance with ER-1110-2-1150, is to include:

A. Design analyses and calculations B. Physical and numerical hydraulic modeling C. CADD Drawings and a 3-D model D. Quantity and cost estimates E. Proposed construction schedule

The maximum flow capacity range of the FSS is 2000 - 5400 cfs. The design life will be 50 years. It is anticipated that the FSS system will consist of:

A. 2 Intake weirs that are elliptically shaped on upstream side and with a maximum depth of 30 feet

1) Intake weirs draw inflow (from south) parallel to upstream face of dam

2) Intake weir capture velocity will be at least 7 feet per second (ft/s) B. Turning Channels to decelerate and turn flow 90 degrees C. Course trash rack (six-inch spacing) with assessable cleaning capability and access for removal D. 2 Floating screen systems (FSS)

1) Maximum velocity approaching screen velocity will be 0.4 ft/s

2) Sweeping velocity inside screens should be at least twice the screen velocity

3) Upstream FSS sections consisting of converging wall screens with a depth of 30 – 40 feet.

i. Reach capture velocity (8 ft/s) at downstream end of converging wall screens.

4) Downstream FSS sections consisting of narrow, adversely sloped channels with wall screens and limited floor screens

5) 1 narrow, 180 degree turning channel to connect upstream converging and downstream narrow sections for each FFS unit

6) 1 critical depth grade-break to control water level for each FSS unit

7) Porosity plates for screen uniformity and adjustable submerged weirs for dewatering flow control

i. Automated programmable logic controller (PLC) actuated weirs to maintain constant water surface level in converging section

ii. Set and leave weirs or sliding porosity plates in narrow sloping downstream FSS section

8) Screen cleaning systems

9) Dewatered flow conveyance channels to Temperature control tower

10) Constant screen outflow discharges of 50 cfs per FSS unit (100 cfs total)

11) Use methods incorporating spatially varied flow equations to develop hydraulic profiles through the FFS systems.

i. Water levels inside and outside of screens

ii. Screen velocities for each screen panel

iii. Longitudinal (or sweeping) velocities moving down screen channels.

E. Low depth sluice gates for bypass around FSS if needed to maintain system operations

A preliminary plan view of the FSS system is shown below in Figure 1.

Figure 1: FSS Plan View

5. REFERENCES.

5.1. Applicable Laws and Regulations. The Contractor shall perform all work in accordance with current Federal and State laws and regulations regarding personal safety, training, report requirements, and site investigation procedures.

5.2. Codes and Standards. Work under this Contract shall comply with the latest codes, standards and regulations applicable to the work requested including USACE engineering Regulations and Manuals, and Industry Codes and Standards.

a) National Marine Fisheries Service Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design (July 2011)

b) EM 385-1-1

c) ER 1110-2-1150

d) ER 1110-2-1806

e) ER 1110-2-2105

f) ETL 1110-2-584

g) U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, 46 CFR 170.173, Stability Criterion for Vessels of Unusual Proportion and Form.

5.3. Applicable Publications. The Contractor shall be provided with applicable Guide Specifications, Engineering Manuals, Engineering Technical Letters, Design Memoranda, and other technical reference materials when appropriate.

5.4. Professional Stamps or Seals and Signatures on Drawings. All design documents shall be stamped or sealed, and signed by a professional engineer who is registered in the United States of America. The documents shall include:

a) One set of properly signed, stamped, or sealed and dated drawings;

b) A certified cover document showing, for each discipline, the name and stamp or seal of the professional who supervised the work, and the date the stamp or seal was affixed.

6. REQUIRED A-E SERVICES.

6.1. Work Plan. The Contractor shall develop a Work Plan that includes, but is not limited to, the following:

a) Matrix of all Contractor and subcontractor personnel on this project, their roles and responsibilities, including all review personnel.

b) Project objectives and a plan on how to meet those objectives.

c) Information on project organization.

d) Project schedule based on completion date requirements. The schedule shall include all work items, milestones, durations, predecessors, source materials and study requirements, data delivery dates, completion dates, deliverables, review processes including all during requirements for responses, and all coordination activities. USACE will review and provide comments within three calendar days after receipt. The Contractor shall submit a final schedule within three calendar days after receipt of Government’s comments.

6.2. Quality Control Plan. The Quality Control Plan (QCP) is a management plan for producing a quality product or service, on schedule and within budget. The Contractor shall submit QCP(s) addressing each task above for approval prior to beginning any work. QCPs shall outline QC and QA procedures that shall ensure the stated accuracy specifications are met. The Contractor shall prepare and submit a QCP within 10 calendar days from award. For survey services, it is appropriate to combine the Work Plan and QCP in a single document. The QCP shall be in accordance with USACE Engineering Regulation 1110-1-12, “Quality Management.” USACE Engineering Regulation 1110-1-12 can be viewed at the following website: http://www.publications.usace.army.mil/USACEPublications/EngineerRegulations.aspx.

6.3. Design Documentation Report. The Contractor shall prepare a DDR in accordance with USACE guidelines for format and content, as specified in ER-1110-2-1150 Engineering and Design for Civil Works Projects.

a) 30% DDR. The 30% DDR report shall include the following:

i. 30% report including the 30% design details of the floating screen structure.

ii. 30% complete design calculations and assumptions. Computations including all hand calculations and modeling data shall be provided.

iii. 30% documentation, including 3D CADD drawings.

b) 60% DDR. The 60% DDR report shall include the following:

iv. 60% report including the 60% design details of the floating screen structure.

v. 60% complete design calculations and assumptions. Computations including all hand calculations and modeling data shall be provided.

vi. 60% documentation, including 3D CADD drawings.

c) 90% DDR. The 90% DDR report shall include the following:

vii. 90% report including the 90% design details of the floating screen structure.

viii. 90% complete design calculations and assumptions. Computations including all hand calculations and modeling data shall be provided.

ix. 90% documentation, including 3D CADD drawings.

d) Final DDR. The Final DDR submittal shall be accomplished by resolving any comments presented from CENWP review of the 100% report. All previous requirements from the 100% report submittal shall also be included.

6.4. Quantity and Cost Estimates. Cost estimating services provided under this Contract shall comply with USACE estimating polices of ER-1110-2-1150, ER 1110-2-1302, and ETL 1110-2-573. Cost Engineers shall have a minimum of five years of construction cost estimating experience. Cost Estimates shall be approved and signed by an individual certified in construction cost estimating. Reference http://www.nww.usace.army.mil/Missions/CostEngineering.aspx for cost estimate product templates, tools and samples. The Contractor shall prepare estimate products as specified below:

a) Prepare and Check Quantities. Provide quantity computations that reflect the design level scope of work. The quantities shall be provided in a single electronic file using Microsoft Excel. Spreadsheet tabs shall be used to separate the differing types of major work items or systems. The quantities shall use clear descriptive titles reflective of the plans. The quantities shall be traceable back to the supporting design documents. Each major quantity shall be neat-line developed as much as practical (no waste, excess or contingency). Major quantities shall include the major assumptions that support the quantities. Quantities and calculations within the spreadsheets shall show dimensions such as length, width, thickness, diameter, volume, weight, etc. Use or application of lump sum and/or allowances shall be kept to a minimum. Any lump sums or allowances used shall include assumptions, parametric basis or comparison backup and shall only represent minor elements of the work item or system.

b) MCACES Construction Cost Estimates. Prepare a current working estimate (CWE) for the 60% DDR, 90% DDR, and Final DDR deliverables using MCACES MII v4.3 software. The Contractor is responsible for purchasing the 2015 Cost Book.

c) Total Project Cost Summary Sheet (TPCS). The CWE shall be summarized on a TPCS and included in the report at 60%, 90%, and final. The contingency used on the TPCS shall be generated by a cost and schedule risk analysis (CSRA, will be completed by the Government).

d) Operations and Maintenance Costs (O&M). A detailed estimate for O&M shall be prepared. O&M can be calculated in excel and the CENWP Cost Engineer can provide an example. O&M shall be presented as an annual cost as well as the net present value over 50 years. The discount rate for the net present value will be provided. The Government will calculate any changes to hydropower production.

e) Summary Construction Schedule. A summary construction schedule shall be prepared for the 60% report, and updated for the 90% and final report. The summary construction schedule shall include a single line to represent each of the following; DDR, Plans and Specifications, contract award, and notice to proceed. The construction phase shall be represented by ten to twenty lines showing major activities. The construction phase shall also include information effecting construction such as the In-Water-Work period, interim operations, reservoir elevation timing, recreation impacts, etc. The intent of the summary construction schedule is to provide upper management with a single page schedule that is simple to read and contains only critical information.

f) Report Section for Cost and Construction. The intent of this report section is to describe the cost estimate and construction phase. The cost estimate report shall include at a minimum; a summary of the TPCS with Total Project Cost and the construction contract cost, how the estimate was developed, and cost risk. The construction phase report shall include at a minimum; how the project will be constructed, potential staging areas, identify the impacts of construction to Detroit Dam and Lake, and risks associated with the construction process. Examples of impacts would include road closures, boat ramp use or closure, noise, vibration, alterations to typical dam operations, and environmental impacts. In the event that a PDT member indicates that an impact is unacceptable the report shall state why the impact was determined unacceptable and how that decision affects construction and the construction schedule. Provide report text for the 60%, 90%, and final deliverables.

g) Deliverables. Include the report section in the main body of the report. Create a cost appendix for the TPCS, summary construction schedule, and CSRA. Email the MCACES MII file to the CENWP Cost Engineer.

6.5. Site Visits/Meetings/Conferences & Discussions.

a) Kickoff Meeting and Site Visit. The Contractor shall schedule a mutual date and time for a kickoff meeting and site visit with the Technical Lead (TL) prior to the start of the work. The purpose of the kickoff meeting is to clarify tasks and methods, set a schedule, and to minimize issues or problems that might arise over the course of the contract.

b) Bi-Weekly Check-in Meetings. The Contractor shall schedule a bi-weekly mutual date and time for a one-hour teleconference with the TL. The purpose of these bi-weekly meetings is to coordinate design issues with the Government team responsible for designing the selective withdrawal structure and weir box. These meetings shall occur bi-weekly through the duration of this contract.

c) 30% Design Review Meeting. The Contractor shall schedule a mutual date and time for a combined site visit and review meeting with the TL after the 30% Government review period. The purpose of the 30% design review meeting is to discuss the Government’s 30% review comments.

d) 60% Design Review Meeting. The Contractor shall schedule a mutual date and time for a combined site visit and review meeting with the TL after the 60% Government review period. The purpose of the 60% design review meeting is to discuss the Government’s 60% review comments.

e) 90% Design Review Meeting. The Contractor shall schedule a mutual date and time for a combined site visit and review meeting with the TL after the 90% Government review period. The purpose of the 90% design review meeting is to discuss the Government’s 90% review comments.

6.6. Other. Changes to design – In the event of a change during the course of the design see “Authorized Changes” section of this Statement of Work.

7. SUBMITTALS AND PERFORMANCE SCHEDULES.

7.1. Distribution of Submittals.

i. Quality Control Plan and Work Plan. Submit one pdf copy to the TL via email.

ii. 30%, 60%, 90% DDR Submittals. For each submittal, submit two (2) CDs to the TL.

iii. Final DDR Submittal. The final submittal shall include two (2) hardcopy and two (2) CDs of the DDR, appendices, calculations, and drawings.

7.2. Government Review and Comment Resolution. There will be a two-week Government review period after each submittal. The Contractor shall respond to Government review comments in Dr. Checks within two weeks of each milestone review meeting.

7.3. Performance Periods and Submission Schedule.

Submittals

The period of performance for this contract shall be from NTP through 02 November 2018.

8. REQUEST FOR PAYMENT. The Contractor shall include a progress report along with the Payment Estimate – Contract Performance, ENG Form 93, as justification for the amount of payment requested. The progress report shall include in narrative form a summary of activities, estimated percentage complete, project schedule evaluation, outlining any issues and recommended solutions. Invoices and payments shall be in accordance with the terms of the contract and sent to the Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer’s Representative, and Technical Lead. The Contractor must provide sufficient back-up information with each pay estimate to substantiate the proposed amount. This information must clearly show that the monies requested are proper and have been expended. Pay estimates that do not include this information will be sent back to the Contractor with no action taken.

9. AUTHORIZED CHANGES. The Contractor shall accept contractual change instructions only from the Contracting Officer. However, coordination of routine technical matters with USACE personnel will be accomplished through the CENWP Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) listed below. The COR authorities are outlined in the COR designation letter to be sent with the award of the contract. Direct requests from other agencies should be forwarded to the Contracting Officer. Changes in scope for level of effort, completion schedule, or deliverables can only be authorized by a Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer immediately if it has received direction to perform work outside the scope of the contract.

10. TRAVEL. The Contractor is responsible for arranging all travel for its employees and for all logistics to include airplane tickets, lodging, food, transportation, etc. The Government is not providing any travel assistance for this contract.

11. POINTS OF CONTACT.

Monthly Reports / Invoices

CENWP-AE-Reports@usace.army.mil

12. EXHIBITS.

12.1 Detroit and Big Cliff Long-Term Temperature Control and Downstream Fish Passage Engineering Documentation Report.

12.2 Detroit Bathymetric Data

12.3 Draft CFD Modeling Report: Detroit Dam Long Term Temperature Control Alternatives Study Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling. USACE Portland District, April 2012 (Draft)

12.4 DDR Formatting and Content Guidelines

image1.png