Back to the Agenda Next Agenda Item DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: SUMMARY: RECOMMENDATION COST/FUNDING SOURCE: DISCUSSION:

Transcription

1 AGENDA ITEM I1 DATE: August 4, 2014 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Matt Jordan, General Manager Alison Adams, Chief Technical Officer Professional Services for the Long Term Master Water Plan Feasibility Study and 2018 Long-Term Master Water Plan Update, Contract No: with Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. in the amount of $3,580,000- Approve. SUMMARY: Tampa Bay Water is required to update the Long-Term Master Water Plan every five years. The Feasibility Program is a part of the Long-Term Master Water Plan which was approved by the Board in December This new contract provides professional services to complete the Feasibility Program and update the Long-term Master Water Plan by December RECOMMENDATION: Approve negotiated scope of work and fee for contract number with top-ranked firm Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., for the Long Term Master Water Plan Feasibility Program and 2018 Long-Term Master Water Plan Update in the amount of $3,580,000. COST/FUNDING SOURCE: $3,580,000 Total Contract Value ($2,089,760 Bond Funds and $1,490,240 Uniform Rate For 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 Fiscal Years) DISCUSSION: Economic recovery is underway within Tampa Bay Water s service area. As population and business continue to grow, the need for additional water within the next planning horizon (through 2040) is likely. Staff is requesting professional services to complete the Feasibility Program and the Long-term Master Water Plan update. The Feasibility Program, further evaluates the seven potential new water supply projects identified in the 2013 Plan, in order to determine which project(s) could be feasible for implementation and construction, once the demand forecast determines new supplies are needed. The Feasibility Program is scheduled for completion by the end of fiscal year The completion of the Feasibility Program will transition into the 2018 Long-Term Master Water Plan update, which is scheduled to be completed by December The Long-term Master Water Plan update also includes several other projects which staff are conducting. These include the 2035 System Hydraulic and Emergency Scenario analysis, revising the Long-term Demand Forecasting models and updating the long-term regional water demands, updating the Agency s water use efficiency study, and defining levels of service required to maintain current regional system performance. Staff will incorporate results of these activities into the Long-term Master Water update. Staff will also be drafting many of the required sections of the Long-term Master Water Plan update. On May 7, 2014, Tampa Bay Water posted the Request for Proposals on Demandstar.com for the completion of the Long-Term Master Water Plan Feasibility Program, and the 2018

2 Matt Jordan August 4, 2014 Page 2 update of the Long Term Master Water Plan (Contract No ), starting in fiscal year On June 9, 2014, Tampa Bay Water received proposals from the following companies: Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., MWH Americas, Inc., and CH2MHill Engineers, Inc. The three consultants responded by submitting timely Requests for Proposals (RFPs) the completion of the Long-Term Master Water Plan Feasibility Program, and the 2018 update of the Long Term Master Water Plan. The selection committee, comprised of Tampa Bay Water technical staff rated all respondents in several categories including project manager and team qualifications; past performance; time and budget; projected work; water supply planning; public involvement; certified minority business; and water supply feasibility study experience and approach using the advertised technical scoring criteria. The committee conducted interviews and ranked the respondents by compiling written and presentation scores. The final ranking reflects the following: 1.Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. 2.MWH Americas, Inc. 3.CH2M Hill Engineers, Inc. The negotiated scope of work and fee for the Long-Term Master Water Plan Feasibility Program and 2018 Long-Term Master Water Plan Update are attached to this agenda item. The scope of services will start October 2014 and conclude December 2018; the project duration is 51 months. A copy of the professional services contract can be obtained from the Tampa Bay Water Records Department. The contract has been approved as to form by Tampa Bay Water s General Counsel. BACKGROUND: Section 2.09 of the Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement requires that the Master Water Plan be updated every five years. The most recent Long- Term Master Water Plan was completed and approved by the Board in December The Feasibility Program is one of the recommendations that resulted from the last update, and it serves as a planning tool to ensure that the agency is adequately prepared to meet future drinking water demands through the next planning horizon. Attachment

3 Tampa Bay Water Long Term Master Water Plan Feasibility Program and 2018 Master Plan Update Professional Engineering Services Background Section 2.09 of the Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement requires that the Long-Term Master Water Plan (LTMWP) be updated every five years. The most recent LTMWP was completed and approved by the Board in December The Feasibility Program is one of the recommendations that resulted from the last update, and it serves as a planning tool to ensure that the agency is adequately prepared to meet future drinking water demands through the next planning horizon (2040). The Feasibility Program will evaluate the 7 Board approved projects listed in the 2013 LTMWP. These seven projects were identified in the 2008 LTMWP. At that time, additional feasibility analyses were recommended. The current water demand forecast indicates that the Agency has enough supply to meet the member governments demands for at least 10 years. The Feasibility Program will help narrow down the project list to one or more projects that will meet the region s drinking water demand, once the demand forecast indicates more supply is needed. The conclusion of the Feasibility Program will lead into the 2018 LTMWP update, which is due to the Board for approval in December, This scope of work will commence on October 1, 2014 and continue through December 31 st, 2018 and will update both the Feasibility Program and the LTMWP. Detailed Scope of Work Task 1 Project Management and Coordination This task will involve overall project management by Hazen and Sawyer and coordination with Tampa Bay Water. Anticipated tasks include the following: Task Project Kick-off Meeting Meet with Tampa Bay Water Staff and key stakeholders to review project scope, deliverables, schedule, and other pertinent information. As part of this meeting, specific goals for the LTMWP will be discussed. A detailed agenda will be prepared and distributed before the meeting. Meeting minutes will be prepared and distributed. Certain sub-consultants will be included for input or scheduling purposes. Page 1 of 26

4 Task Manage Budget Manage the budget, schedule, and invoicing throughout the duration of project. This includes managing the sub-consultants and conducting monthly conference calls with the team to coordinate activities and work effort. Task 1.3 Project Coordination Coordinate with Tampa Bay Water s Project Manager throughout the project via meetings, and phone conversations to respond to questions, provide regular project updates, and discuss planning activities and other project requirements. Task Schedule Coordination Prepare a comprehensive schedule in Microsoft Project, which will incorporate all major current and proposed tasks related to the Feasibility Program and the LTMWP. The schedule will identify key deliverables and milestones throughout the project duration. The schedule will be updated monthly and distributed to the project team. Hazen and Sawyer will also prepare and maintain a quick glance overall schedule, which can be used for the public information program and updating the Board Members. Task Sharepoint Site Develop a sharepoint site or other web-based site to transfer files, provide project updates, track schedules, and exchange information. Hazen and Sawyer will maintain this site throughout the project duration. Task Overall Coordination Meetings Attend bi-monthly coordination meetings for the project duration with the key stakeholders to coordinate work activity, provide updates, review schedule, and discuss preliminary findings. Meeting minutes will be prepared and distributed after each meeting and uploaded to the Sharepoint site. This task will include up to 8 additional meetings for periods of time when more frequent meetings are required as agreed upon by the project team. Task 2 Coordination with On-Going Activities Tampa Bay Water is currently working on several projects either in-house or with other consultants to evaluate specific areas that will be relevant for development of the Feasibility Program and LTMWP. On-going activities include: System Hydraulic evaluations, including emergency scenarios System Performance and Reliability Modeling Page 2 of 26

5 Long Term Demand Forecasting Future Water Supply Needs Demand Management Climate Change Evaluation Source Water Allocation Program Capital Improvement Plan Recovery Assessment Analysis Tampa Bay Water Feasibility Study and LTMWP Update Hazen and Sawyer will monitor the above activities and provide relevant input as it pertains to the Feasibility Program and LTMWP, with the exception of the Capital Improvement Plan and the Recovery Assessment Analysis. Specific activities as part of this task include: Task 2.1 Team Leader Meeting Attend one meeting with the team leaders for each of the on-going activities identified above to determine status, deliverables, goals, and key milestones to incorporate into the overall schedule. Task 2.2 Meeting Summary Prepare brief summary of above meetings to document understandings, deliverables and milestones. Task 2.3 Review Reports/Memoranda Review one draft report/memorandum for up to 4 of the above projects and provide relevant comments and recommendations for additional work as it relates to the Feasibility Program and LTMWP. Task 2.4 Periodic Meetings Attend periodic meetings for the specific projects to review status and provide technical input to facilitate completion of the Feasibility Program and LTMWP. Areas that will impact the overall schedule will be discussed as well as opportunities to mitigate schedule concerns. Meeting minutes will be prepared after each meeting and distributed to the project team. The estimated meeting schedule is summarized below. Project Meeting Frequency Total Meetings System Hydraulic Evaluation Bi-Annual 4 System Performance Modeling Bi-Annual 2 Long Term Demand Forecast Bi-Annual 2 Future Water Supply Needs Bi-Annual 2 Demand Management Bi-Annual 2 Climate Change Bi-Annual 3 Source Water Allocation Program Annual 2 Page 3 of 26

6 Task 3 Feasibility Study As part of the 2013 LTMWP update, Tampa Bay Water identified 7 projects that require further analysis as part of the Feasibility Program. However, as part of this scope of work, the work effort will focus on 5 of the 7 projects identified in the 2013 LTMWP, including: o Gulf Coast Desalination o Seawater Desalination Expansion o Thonotosassa Wellfield o Aquifer Recharge Project o Surface Water System Expansion All the work on the Small Footprint Reverse Osmosis and Additional Potable Groundwater from Existing Northern Tampa Bay Wells projects will be performed by Tampa Bay Water staff. All updates and additional work on these projects will be documented by Tampa Bay Water in the 2018 LTMWP update. Any additional projects evaluated as part of the Feasibility Program will be completed under the Owner s Allowance or an Amendment to this scope of work. Work on any additional projects will not be performed unless directed by and agreed to by Tampa Bay Water. Specific tasks as part of the Feasibility Program are further described below. Task 3.1 Data Review Hazen and Sawyer will obtain and review recent studies and reports as it relates to the projects identified above. Key members of the team will meet with staff to discuss our understanding of work completed to date and areas to focus additional study. Any areas for additional study not already included in this scope of work will be identified during the feasibility study. Task 3.2 Confirm Level of Service and Required Supply and Demands Hazen and Sawyer will conduct a workshop with Tampa Bay Water staff to confirm the expected Level of Service (LOS) as it pertains to the LTMWP and the required supply and demands to be used as part of the Feasibility Program and LTMWP. Tampa Bay Water is currently developing the LOS as part of its Asset Management Program and will incorporate these concepts into the LTMWP to maintain consistency across the agency related to its LOS. The required yield and demands will be determined based on the ongoing work within Task 2. The associated risks and potential impacts associated with the selection of certain yields/demands will be discussed as part of the workshop to help narrow the selected ranges. Page 4 of 26

7 This task also includes an overall regulatory assessment, particularly related to future regulations to identify the ones that may have the most impact on Tampa Bay Water s system. In addition to Exhibit D standards, the future regulations that should be considered as part of the feasibility evaluation and planning process will be agreed to as part of this task. Task 3.3 Updated Yield and Reliability Analyses for Surface Water Supply Configurations Hazen and Sawyer will update yield and reliability analyses of selected surface water supply configurations listed in the 2013 LTMWP. Tampa Bay Water has requested that the Bullfrog Creek Water Supply option be eliminated from this analysis, resulting in 3 potential surface water supply configurations for re-analyses. The original analyses were performed by Hazen and Sawyer using models developed as part of the Surface and Recharge Water Projects work, and Hazen and Sawyer still has complete access to these models. However, the original analyses were based on multiple permit and infrastructure assumptions that may now be archaic. Hazen and Sawyer will work with Tampa Bay Water to establish new assumptions, then re-run these models with updated infrastructure and permit assumptions to evaluate yield and reliability. Task Establish Updated Configuration Assumptions Hazen and Sawyer staff will confer with Tampa Bay Water staff to identify changes that should be made to assumptions in the prior yield and reliability analyses for application in the new analyses. Potential assumption changes include, but are not limited to, the following. Alafia Bell Shoals withdrawal permit. Original analyses assumed a 19% permitted withdrawal rule from Bell Shoals, reflecting the acquisition of a permit modification in the future. Currently, however, the permit only allows 10% withdrawal as established by SWFWMD in the current water use permit. The need for this assumption change is already known; new analyses will revert to the existing withdrawal permit. Surface water production targets. Original analyses assumed that production targets remained constant at the maximum sustainable rates for all production facilities. This assumption may be re-examined in light of new operation policies and experiences. Infrastructure constraints. Sustainable operable constraints, as understood during the Surface and Recharge Water Projects work, were included for all components contained in the configuration models. If understanding of these constraints has changed since the earlier work, new constraint values will be identified. Page 5 of 26

8 Assumed attachments of new components to existing infrastructure. Models of expanded configurations assume specific ordinal locations within the existing infrastructure network where new components are attached, and model operational rules and mass balance relationships are specific to those attachment assumptions. If existing attachment assumptions are now known to be infeasible, new attachment assumptions will be developed and revised configuration diagrams will be produced. Hazen and Sawyer will meet with Tampa Bay Water planning and operation staff remotely or in person to come to agreement on such changes. If new assumptions require more than simple modification of numerical model settings, then Hazen and Sawyer will conceptualize methods for representing these new assumptions. Hazen and Sawyer will provide a brief Technical Memorandum describing all assumption changes. Task Modify Models to Incorporate New Assumptions Hazen and Sawyer will modify the existing configuration models to reflect new assumptions. This task will vary in complexity and effort based on the assumption changes in Task This subtask will minimally consist of changing the Alafia permitted withdrawal logic back to the original 10% withdrawal rule. Beyond this switch: If all other assumption changes consist of numerical changes to infrastructure limits or production targets, application may be as simple as changing model input values with no need for recoding. In this case, Subtask will require less effort. On the other hand, if changes are made to configuration structures (i.e. relocation of new components) or more complex operational constraints are needed, significant recoding would be required. In this case, Subtask will require greater effort. Task Perform Yield and Reliability Analyses using Updated Model Assumptions Hazen and Sawyer will use the updated models from Subtask to perform new yield and reliability analyses. At a minimum, the approaches and code developed for analyzing model output in the Surface and Recharge Water Projects will be applied to the new model results, allowing side-by-side configuration comparisons. Task Updated Yield and Reliability Analyses Report Hazen and Sawyer will produce a report documenting the results of the above tasks, including changes to model assumptions, implementation of assumption changes, updated yield and reliability results, and comparisons to prior results. Page 6 of 26

9 Task 3.4 Technical Evaluation Hazen and Sawyer will conduct a technical evaluation for each project to update recent work activity and to confirm the technical feasibility of each project. Conceptual layouts and configurations will be prepared or updated for each project as part of this task and agreed upon by the project team before proceeding with the detailed evaluations. Activities for each of these projects will be prioritized based on its impact on the project feasibility. After completion of the initial critical tasks for each project, Hazen and Sawyer will meet with Tampa Bay Water and other key stakeholders to determine if to move forward with the other tasks and/or recommend additional investigations/study to better determine the feasibility of a project. Any additional investigation/study will be authorized under the Owner s Allowance. Specific activities associated with each project include: Gulf Coast Desalination: Meet with Duke Energy to discuss overall concepts, coordination items, and property requirements to determine whether property is still available. Determine availability of water supply from power plant and plant capacity. Evaluate impact of power plant full or part-time operation on facilities required by Tampa Bay Water. Evaluate transmission main corridor and connection into Regional System, and define sizing requirements for pipelines and pump station and other potential infrastructure related to an optimized solution (including storage, chemical trim, booster pumping, blending stations, etc). Evaluate the finished water quality requirements against the various regional finished water blends at the connection to the Regional System, and define any additional treatment requirements and associated infrastructure and chemical and energy use to accommodate water quality and blending requirements. Define the range of seasonal and other potential variations in water quality to serve as the basis for evaluations of treatment requirements and concentrate disposal. Explore advances in seawater desalination technologies (including intake alternatives, pre-treatment systems, process design and controls, membranes, energy recovery systems, post-treatment systems, concentrate handling and disposal, membrane cleaning, etc) and apply to the conceptual plan. Identify discharge location(s) and evaluate the need for additional studies related to water quality impacts associated with the discharge, including salinity modeling and Page 7 of 26

10 analyses to confirm that the facility will not have any unacceptable impacts to the receiving body of water and neighboring areas. Existing/other discharges in the area will be considered in the evaluation. Confirm overall permitting requirements. Seawater Desalination Expansion: Evaluate concentrate dilution requirements and availability of water from TECO for dilution. Evaluate and confirm concentrate pipeline capacity. Obtain overall understanding of the reliability and condition of the existing facilities and pre-treatment system as a basis for evaluating future upgrades and incorporating operational lessons learned to the plant upgrade. On-going enhancements at the desalination facility will be reviewed and discussed with Tampa Bay Water. This activity includes up to 2 site visits to meet with the plant personnel and Tampa Bay Water. Explore advances in seawater desalination technologies and apply to the pre-treatment system rehabilitation and upgrade of the membrane system, including energy recovery systems. Review performance of membrane systems and determine if alternative blending strategies, chemical dosing strategies, membrane make/model use could result in operational savings for the existing and future expansion. Review energy consumption performance in terms of pump sizing/energy recovery system selection/management. Review chemical dosing strategies including pretreatment, antiscalant dosing and post treatment/stabilization strategies and performance. Evaluate potential for enhanced pre-treatment, enhanced process control (PLC/I&C impacts), additional treatment, additional solids handling, expanding cooling water pumping, additional process piping, chemical feed and storage systems, post treatment stabilization system, and intake/concentrate piping replacement. Evaluate reliability and redundancy of seawater supply associated with TECO supply tunnels and alternate/additional intake systems considered. Evaluate the potential for horizontal subsurface withdrawal (or other concepts) as an alternative intake and discuss with SWFWMD. Evaluate and confirm the RO cleaning solution for storage and disposal into Hillsborough County s wastewater system. Page 8 of 26

11 Evaluate finished water pump station for the increased capacity requirements, including reliability and redundancy. Assess site for potential stormwater system issues and impacts associated with facility expansion. Confirm overall permitting requirements. Thonotosassa Wellfield: Identify regulatory criteria that needs to be addressed. Consult with Tampa Bay Water staff on hydrologic modeling set-up and performance. Review model set-up, calibration and output from model runs. Evaluate groundwater quality for project area. Assist Tampa Bay Water in the following areas: o Well inventory for the project area. o Determining if offsets are needed to meet regulatory requirements and determine new quantities available. o Modeling and review of most favorable well field layout. o Modeling for cumulative impact analysis for potential effects on area wells, Hillsborough River Basin, SWUCA, Dover area and other regulatory requirements and issues. o Developing Water Use Permitting Schedule and well field development. o Consultation with the SWFWMD on permitting and well field development. Determine point of connection (POC) location. Complete preliminary route evaluation of 2 alternatives, which will include preliminary assessments of the following: o Existing Utilities Coordination: Gathering information from municipalities, power companies, etc. on their existing utilities within the proposed route corridor. o Route Study will assess impacts to and from the following: Environmental wetlands, sensitive habitat, protected species, etc Safety Considerations Maintenance Accessibility Utility Conflicts Existing and Proposed Traffic Impacts Use of existing Right-of-ways Property access Permitting Requirements o Site Visit to walk route & photographic documentation of conditions o Summarize evaluation, including figures illustrating routes. Page 9 of 26

12 Determine storage and pumping requirements. Identify options for well locations that minimize impacts to regulatory criteria. Determine most favorable well and well field operational conditions and yield. Determine estimated cost to implement Good Neighbor Policy requirements. Develop Well Field Management Plan including recommended monitoring. Determine need and schedule for the following: o Water quality modeling for potential contamination migration. o Installation of test wells to determine optimal yields and operations. o Aquifer tests to develop data for well field development Confirm overall permitting requirements. Aquifer Recharge Projects: Work with SWFWMD and FDEP to further define specific regulatory and treatment requirements for project concepts. Determine quantity of reclaimed water supply available for recharge, including meeting with member governments to discuss availability of reclaimed water. Determine net benefit and if offsets are needed to meet regulatory requirements and quantities for new groundwater development. Perform technical analyses to identify effluent quality and aquifer characterization. Assist in the identification of source water quality risks, and develop a register of risks to inform and support water treatment technology selection, operational approaches and regulatory/permitting. Consult with Tampa Bay Water staff on hydrologic modeling set-up and performance for recharge well system and basins. Review model set-up, calibration and output from model runs. Assist Tampa Bay Water in the following areas: o Property inventory in Pasco and Hillsborough County o Well inventory for the project area o Water quality/particle tracking modeling for potential migration effects o Modeling and review of most favorable recharge well field and/or basin layout o Model development for additional groundwater withdrawals Determine most favorable recharge well field and/or basin layout. Page 10 of 26

13 Determine most favorable recharge well and well field operational conditions. Determine most favorable basin operational conditions. Identify options for recharge well and basin locations that minimize impacts to regulatory criteria. This includes reviewing soil maps to determine the infiltration rates of the different basin locations. Determine need and schedule for the following activities: o Pilot testing and additional modeling o Aquifer tests to develop aquifer and groundwater water-quality data o Geotechnical investigations o Geochemical modeling to address potential for limestone dissolution and arsenic mobilization o FDEP Class V Injection Well Permit requirements, including the installation and testing of wells to determine optimal recharge rates o Aquifer Recharge Well Field Management Plan including recommended monitoring Determine point of connection (POC) location and size. Evaluate if Tampa Bay Water existing infrastructure could be used, particularly pumping and transmission facilities. Track and monitor legislative process related to aquifer recharge. Provide regular updates. Monitor progress of other municipalities that are implementing aquifer recharge, especially within Tampa Bay Water region. Develop recycled water operational management plan. Confirm overall permitting requirements. Surface Water System Expansion: Update estimates for infrastructure location and sizing based on updated TBW reliability assessment Evaluate treatment process alternatives and configurations to define appropriate/optimal solution. Determine optimal project (s) for implementation. Perform further reservoir siting evaluations to determine optimal site for potential second reservoir. Determine location and size of POC(s) based on treatment and reservoir location. Page 11 of 26

14 Update assessment of potential regulatory rules that would affect the regulated level of fluoride allowed in drinking water; and identify the potential treatment impacts. Evaluate current permitting requirements and potential feasibility versus need for downstream augmentation. Coordinate with City of Tampa regarding potentially increasing the capacity at the DL Tippin WTF. Confirm overall permitting requirements. Task 3.5 System Integration Hazen and Sawyer will support Tampa Bay Water Staff in developing and evaluating options for integrating the potential new water supply project configurations into the existing Tampa Bay Water System. The collaborative analyses will include an evaluation of potential affects that the new supply project configurations can have on the operations, hydraulics and water quality of Tampa Bay Water's existing system, including under emergency scenarios. Specific subtasks include: Preliminary System Analysis Support - Preliminary system analysis will be performed to define project configuration concepts for integrating the new water supply options with the Regional System. Summarize Project Configurations options to be modeled and define a list of the information required from the modeling analyses Work collaboratively with Tampa Bay Water Staff to develop model input information and details for up to 20 potential configurations. Tampa Bay Water Staff will perform the proposed hydraulic and water quality modeling work to define the information required. The information required will include: preliminary infrastructure sizing requirements, hydraulic constraints, potential operational concerns or operational flexibility issues, effects on existing facilities, impacts to emergency scenario planning and system reliability, required improvements to address any effects on existing facilities, and changes in the blend of delivered water supply throughout the system. Support Analysis of Project Configurations being modeled by Tampa Bay Water. Support Documentation of System Analysis Results Provide input and review on a draft and final technical memorandum developed by Tampa Bay Water Staff that will summarize the results of the system analysis and hydraulic modeling work. Page 12 of 26

15 Conduct regulatory assessment relevant to integration of the supply options into the Regional System, and define impacts and potential improvement options to address impacts. Support Tampa Bay Water Staff in defining impacts and benefits to overall Regional System and Member Governments associated with the location and capacity of the new supply sources and associated POC(s), including Regional System operational impacts (flexibility, pressure requirements, impacts/benefits to other facilities, etc) and the overall reliability of the system under normal and emergency scenarios. Task 3.6 Property Assessments Hazen and Sawyer shall provide project corridor or site preliminary property impact analysis for each of the alternatives identified in Task 3.2 and summarized below. Project Property to be Evaluated Gulf Coast Desalination Plant Duke Energy Property for WTP Finished Water Pipeline Route (~ 5-6 miles) Estimated 75 properties Seawater Desalination Expansion None Thonotosassa Wellfield 10, 1 acre sites from City of Tampa 1, 5 acre site for WTP Approx. 5-6 miles for pipeline/access Estimated 75 easements Surface Water Expansion Projects 20 acre site for WTP 500 acres for reservoir (limited to review of 3 previously identified sites) 2, 1 acre sites for interconnects Approx. 20 miles for pipeline Estimated 200 easements Aquifer Recharge Projects Several 1 acre sites for wells Approx. 50 acres for basins Approximately 30 miles for pipeline Estimated 300 easements Specific activities that will be performed as part of this task include: Develop cost estimates of necessary real estate interests to be acquired as part of the alternative analysis and prepare a written right of way cost estimate/report. Cost estimates will be based on general and customary factors, multipliers historical data, and generally accepted practices. Costs will include: Page 13 of 26

16 Land, Improvements & Severance Damages/Cost to Cure: The value of land, improvements, severance damages and cost to cure, including ponds/mitigation, temporary and permanent easements and all other land rights necessary to be acquired as part of the project. Settlements and/or Final Judgments: Costs to be paid for land, improvements, and damages, etc. that exceed the offer of just compensation through condemnation trial. Business Damages: Estimate of the loss of income to qualified businesses as a result of partial taking. Condemnor Fees & Costs: Fees and costs that may be incurred include, but are not limited to, appraisal and appraisal review fees through trial, specialty appraisals, engineer/land planning and expert witness fees/costs, business damage CPA fees through trial, litigation, mediation, court reporting fees, demolition, and any other miscellaneous contract fees and costs. Relocation Costs and Outdoor Advertising Signs (ODA) if applicable. Owner/Condemnee Fees & Costs: Fees and costs incurred by the property owner to include, but are not limited to, the condemnee s attorney fees, appraisal through trial, specialty appraisals, engineer/land planning and expert witness fees/costs, business damage CPA fees through trial, litigation, mediation and any other reasonable condemnation costs incurred and generally paid. Research public on-line data, or recent comparable sales, current listings and/or valuation data necessary to support the estimates. Conduct field inspection(s) of the project/parcels. The field inspection(s) will provide an opportunity to verify the accuracy of the maps/plans, the comparability of sales data, and the opportunity to adequately identify severance damages, cost to cure, site improvement and business damage estimation. Any unknowns or discrepancies that impact costs such as super elevations, limited access, grade separations, barrier walls, etc., will be factored into the cost estimate. Provide all essential supporting documentation that was used in the value analysis along with the cost estimate. This includes, but is not limited to, sales data, listings, cost service information, interviews, and any other data used as the basis and support for the values. Page 14 of 26

17 Hazen and Sawyer s sub-consultant (FLAA) shall consider and/or exercise appropriate due diligence concerning market factor and influence research such as zoning, eminent domain ordinances, comprehensive land use implications, property non-conformance codes, ODA sign ordinances. FLAA shall also consult valuation cost manuals/sources for the purpose of valuing costs to cure and acquired and/or impacted site and building improvements. Task 3.7 Environmental Assessments Hazen and Sawyer s sub-consultant (B&V) will perform preliminary environmental assessments of potential future pipeline route options (up to 8 total routes) and property sites (up to 5 property sites) that are being considered as part of future water supply projects. This would primarily be a desktop study to identify potential environmental concerns or impacts associated with the pipeline routes and property sites that are defined and evaluated as part of the technical evaluations for each option. This task will include up to 4 field visits. No field sampling and testing are included as part of these preliminary activities. Subsequent to the preliminary assessment, a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment will be performed for a potential future wellfield property (Thonotosassa Wells). A Phase 1 study was performed by Golder & Associates around The Phase II study incorporates the recommendations made in the Phase 1 study to further investigate four areas of the property: 1) Container Area Debris area containing creosote poles and 5-gallon containers with potentially y hazardous material in the southwestern portion of the site 2) Roll-Off Area Suspected burn area for waste collected in roll-off located north of the barn 3) Soil Berm Area Potential metals contamination at soil berm in southeast portion of site used for non-lead projectile target practice by police officers 4) Shed/Barn Area Supply room within barn where pesticides were stored and a shed north of barn where gasoline containers were stored. The Phase II assessment will include: Development of Health & Safety Plan and Field Sampling Plan Data compilation Report preparation Sampling and testing at each of the 4 locations to include: 1. Container Area Site Investigation: o Collect six (6) surface soil samples (0-2 ft bls). o Analyze soil sample analyses for EPA 8260 (VOCs), 8270 (SVOCs), and Target Analyte List (TAL) metals. Page 15 of 26

18 o Install two (2) borings using direct push technology (DPT) for collection of temporary groundwater samples, analyze groundwater samples for EPA 8260 (VOCs), 8270 (SVOCs), and Target Analyte List (TAL) metals. 2. Roll-Off Area Site Investigation o Collect two (2) surface soil samples (0-2 ft bls). o Analyze soil samples for EPA 8260 (VOCs), 8270 (SVOCs), and TAL metals. 3. Soil Berm Area Site Investigation o Collect two (2) surface soil samples (0-2 ft bls). o Analyze soil samples for TAL metals. o Install two (1) borings using direct push technology (DPT) for collection of temporary groundwater sample, analyze groundwater sample for TAL metals. 4. Shed Area Site Investigation o Collect four (4) surface soil samples (0-2 ft bls). o Analyze soil samples from shed for EPA 8260 (VOCs), and samples from barn for EPA 8081 (organochlorine pesticides), EPA 8141 (organophosphorus pesticides), and EPA 8151 (chlorinated herbicides). o Install two (2) borings using direct push technology (DPT) for collection of temporary groundwater samples, analyze groundwater samples for EPA 8260 (VOCs), EPA 8081 (organochlorine pesticides), EPA 8141 (organophosphorus pesticides), and EPA 8151 (chlorinated herbicides). Task 3.8 Sustainability Analyses The sustainability analysis will work to ensure that each of the potential future water supply options meet the needs of Tampa Bay Water, while minimizing or eliminating adverse impacts to the environment and providing the most cost effective solution. This task will entail coordinating information between an energy analysis, vulnerability assessment, and Envision sustainability rating system assessment to ensure that all aspects of the work are considered together in order to provide decision making support going forward. Specific activities as part of this task include: Conduct a review of each alternative to identify areas that will contribute most to the environmental footprint of these facilities. Obtain information on current energy use and future potential energy use associated with each alternative. Assess the six future water supply options based on the 5 main Envision sustainability rating categories (and associated applicable sub-categories) to provide Page 16 of 26

19 a score/ranking for the anticipated level of achievement under each category/subcategory. Coordinate and provide energy and environmental impact information to/from the Envision process to support points that could be claimed for each project. Provide a summary of the assessment under each of the Envision categories/subcategories, including statements regarding levels of achievement, highlighting significant negative or positive sustainability aspects identified for each option, and providing input on what features or changes to the project concept may be considered to address the identified sustainability issues. The summary will lay out comparisons between the different project alternatives compiled in a tabular format with supporting text. Task 3.9 Vulnerability Assessment Hazen and Sawyer will conduct a limited vulnerability assessment of the existing and planned water supply options based on climate change and storm surge data and maps provided by Tampa Bay Water. The vulnerability analysis will consider the following main activities: Determine scenarios to be assessed based on discussions with Tampa Bay Water Assess which facilities are located within a designated flood or impacted zone and identify the most critical facilities including potential water quality impacts of sea level rise to Alafia River intake. Perform site visits at select locations with critical assets, take photos, identify flood pathways/main conduits, and interview plant personnel regarding the history of flooding in plant locations. Use drawings and field notes to determine the elevations of critical assets in atrisk facility locations and identify critical assets that are at risk. Document major flood pathways below the critical surface water elevation for each at-risk location, along with the elevations and types of critical assets. Review planned or designed upgrades at these facilities and advise potential adaptations strategies based on above analysis. Determine the approximate value of each strategy by performing a basic (level 5) cost analysis comparing the risk avoided (benefit) to the cost of implementation for the most at risk facilities. Compile a final priority list of vulnerable assets and adaptation strategies. Estimate the preliminary costs for the affected facilities of plant-wide emergency response, including dewatering flooded areas, temporary electrical power, and Page 17 of 26

20 general cleanup following a catastrophic storm (for each at risk (vulnerable to flooding) facility). Identify ability to maintain service under various scenarios. Determine whether each adaptation strategy can be reasonably implemented at each at risk location. Record the logistical steps required for implementation, and the benefits and challenges of using the strategy in that location. A draft and final technical memorandum will be prepared summarizing the methodology, assumptions, flood pathways, and results from the vulnerability assessments. Task 3.10 Cost Analyses Hazen and Sawyer will support Tampa Bay Water in updating the existing Tampa Bay Water cost estimating tool currently being used by Tampa Bay Water. This task includes 40 hours of professional engineering services to support the update and enhancement of the existing tool and the remaining hours to develop the specific capital and O&M costs for each alternative based on the conceptual layouts that are updated as part of the Feasibility Study. Support for defining capital and O&M cost impacts associated with the integration of each alternative into the Regional System will also be provided as part of this task. Task 3.11 Technical Memoranda Hazen and Sawyer will prepare separate technical memoranda summarizing findings for each treatment alternative. Draft documents will be submitted to Tampa Bay Water for review and comment. Hazen and Sawyer will attend separate review meetings for each project to obtain comments on each submittal. Relevant comments will be incorporated and the final documents will be submitted to Tampa Bay Water for approval before completion of Task 4. Task 3.12 Progress Meetings Hazen and Sawyer will attended several progress meetings with Tampa Bay Water staff, Member Governments, and regulatory agencies at key milestones throughout Task 3 to review findings and receive input from key stakeholders. Estimated number of meetings for each project is summarized in the Table below. Page 18 of 26

21 Project Member Regulatory Misc Total TBW Govt Owner FDEP SWFWMD Other Meetings Gulf Coast Desal Desal Expansion Thonotosassa Surface Water Aquifer Recharge Additional Projects Task 4 LTMWP Update The Interlocal Agreement, Section 2.09 Master Water Plan states that within five years of the effective date of the Agreement, and not more than every five years thereafter, the Board shall revise the Master Water Plan to meet the needs of the Member Governments for the next 20 years. Upon completion of Task 3, Hazen and Sawyer will commence the development of the 2018 LTMWP update. One or more projects from the Feasibility Program list will be short-listed for potential development and implementation, based upon the Long-Term Demand Forecast and Future Water Needs Analysis, and the findings from Task 3. The update of the 2018 LTMWP will start in late 2017 with an anticipated Board approval in December Specific activities associated with this task include: Task 4.1 Decision-Making Framework Development To facilitate the selection of one or more projects from the Feasibility Program to move forward with implementation, Hazen and Sawyer along with the key project stakeholders, will develop a framework for decision making that will be used as part of this analysis. At the onset of this task, we will meet with the Tampa Bay Water Board Members to obtain their input on their preferences for the decision making process and the evaluation/ranking criteria. Evaluation criteria will include both cost and non-cost factors. Based on the Board s input, Hazen and Sawyer will develop a draft decision making framework, which will incorporate the LOS findings previously discussed as part of Task 3, associated risk assessment, and business case evaluation. The draft framework will be presented to the Board for review and input before being finalized and used as part of Task 4.3. This task will be completed early in the project to facilitate the evaluation process as part of Task 3. Task 4.2 Business Case Model Development This task involves serving in an advisory role and providing input to Tampa Bay Water in its development of a Business Case Evaluation (BCE) Model that incorporates risk assessment Page 19 of 26

22 and aspects of the decision making framework into the economic evaluation of the six potential water supply options. The advisory services may be requested to support Tampa Bay Water throughout the development of its BCE model, including efforts related to: Support Tampa Bay Water in its design of the BCE Model, including providing input on the development of a draft input template, calculations, and output module for the model. Provide input to Tampa Bay Water in its design of a Risk Assessment Module. Participation in a decision Support Framework Workshop to Review Draft Model Structure. Provide input to Tampa Bay Water to support its Water Supply Project Evaluations with the BCE Model: o Review of Cash Flow Analysis of Projects o Input and review of Analysis of Risk and other decision-making requirements incorporated into the BCE model. o Input and review on comparison of Business Cases for Alternatives The amount of effort associated with supporting Tampa Bay Water in its development and use of its Business Case Model is not defined at this time. This scope of services is limited to Technical Advisor support and expenses up to the budget identified under this task. Additional support related to this task beyond this level of effort can be provided as a supplemental service through the Owners Allowance. Task 4.3 Alternative Ranking Using the decision making framework and business case evaluation developed as part of Tasks 4.1 and 4.2, Hazen and Sawyer will preliminarily rank each of the alternatives evaluated as part of Task 3. The decision making framework will incorporate Tampa Bay Water Board s input, as well as public s input, which will be obtained through Task 5. The preliminary rankings will be presented to the Tampa Bay Water Board during a workshop to receive input and further direction on the ranking process. Based on feedback from the workshop, Hazen and Sawyer will finalize the ranking and present a recommendation to Tampa Bay Water for implementation. The recommendation will presented to Tampa Bay Water and other key stakeholders for any final input and comment before incorporating into the LTMWP update. Task 4.4 Implementation Requirements Hazen and Sawyer will determine the phasing requirements for the recommended alternatives and the associated capital and O&M costs for each phase based on the costs developed as part of Task If more detailed costs are required for input into Tampa Bay Water s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), additional effort will be required as part of Page 20 of 26

23 the Owner s Allowance. This task will also identify the maintenance of operations requirements and any system impacts. Task 4.5 Report Preparation Hazen and Sawyer will prepare a draft LTMWP update, which will summarize the results of Task 3 and 4 as required by the Interlocal Agreement. The Agreement states that to the extent deemed necessary or advisable by the Board, the Plan shall: Identify current customers, projects and future customers Review and generally inventory existing facilities Identify a Capital Improvement Program Review current Tampa Bay Water permits, existing and projected regulations Identify proposed water supply facilities Evaluate staffing Perform hydraulic analysis of both existing and proposed system Evaluate present and future sources and treatment requirements in terms of capacity, reliability and economy Update list of water supply facilities required to meet the anticipated water quality needs of the member governments for the next twenty years In addition to the required sections, following sections will be updated in the 2018 LTMWP Update: System Wide Reliability Source Water Assessment Program Climate and Weather Variability and Long-Term Climate Change Tampa Bay Water will lead the preparation of the draft sections for the highlighted areas above with input from Hazen and Sawyer. The development of the sections related to the System Analysis/Hydraulic Evaluation and the Customer Demands will be a joint effort between Hazen and Sawyer and Tampa Bay Water. The draft sections will be updated and incorporated into the overall LTMWP Update. A complete draft document will be submitted to Tampa Bay Water for review. Hazen and Sawyer will attend one review meeting to discuss questions or comments on the draft. Relevant comments will be incorporate into the final document before submitting to Tampa Bay Water. Board presentations, member government meetings, and public meetings associated with the LTMWP update are included under Task 5. Page 21 of 26