HomeMy WebLinkAboutH2OI Response Memo_20210420-Final (003)Memorandum
P:\12562\200-12562-20003\Docs\Reports\H2OI_Response_Memo\H2OI Response
Memo_20210420-Final.docx 1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Seattle, WA 98101
Tel 206.883.9300 Fax 206.883.9301 tetratech.com
Date: April 20, 2021
To: Robert Wheeler; Monte Reinders, P.E.
Cc: Kevin Dour, P.E.; Jim Santroch, P.E.
From: Candice Au-Yeung, P.E.
Project: Port Hadlock Water Reclamation Facility
Construction Project
Project Number: 200-12562-20003
Subject: Remarks on to H2O Innovations’ Letter in Response to Modular MBR Equipment Bid Evaluation
Technical Memorandum
PURPOSE
On April 14, 2021, Jefferson County (County) disseminated the “Modular MBR Equipment Bid Evaluation
Technical Memorandum” (hereafter referred to as technical memorandum) by Tetra Tech to bidders for the
modular MBR equipment of the future Port Hadlock Water Reclamation Facility, and notified them of the
County’s intention to award the bid to Ovivo. The County received a letter dated April 15, 2021 from H2O
Innovations, one of the bidders, seeking to clarify information in their submitted bid and respond to the technical
memorandum. This was followed by an email from Shayan Yaghoubi, Regional Sales Manager for H2O
Innovations to Bob Wheeler, Port Hadlock County Project Manager on April 19, 2021 reiterating points made in
their April 15, 2021 letter.
Tetra Tech, acting as Engineer on behalf of the County, assessed the comments from H2O Innovations in the
April 15, 2021 letter. No new information beyond what was included in the previously submitted bid will be
considered for determining bid award; only clarifications to the information submitted in the bid and suggested
corrections to evaluation in the technical memorandum will be considered. Tetra Tech’s remarks on the comments
in the letter are summarized in Table 1 regarding the bid differentiators, and Table 2 regarding the comparative
present worth analysis.
Memorandum Remarks on to H2O Innovations’ Letter in Response to Modular MBR Equipment Bid Evaluation Technical Memorandum/April 20, 2021
2
Table 1. H2O Innovation Letter – Bid Differentiator Comments
Bid Differentiators Report Findings H2O Innovation’s Response Tetra Tech Remarks on H2O Innovation’s Response
Weatherization Not included Per our proposal (section 5), all the ancillary
equipment including permeate/CIP pumps,
RAS/WAS pumps, chemical dosing systems, CIP
system, PLC and remote IOs are housed in a
modified 40 ft container with doors and lights.
Process and air scouring blowers are supplied in
enclosures designed for outdoor installation. The
proposed system is fully weatherized. As section 5.3
of our proposal suggests: unless noted otherwise,
design, supply and installation of any and all-weather
protection, buildings or sheds of any kind are by
others. For this project, as the proposal suggests, we
are providing a fully weatherized system.
H2O Innovation’s response
provides clarity on equipment
listed as containerized or
“housed within a sound
enclosure for outdoor
installation.” However,
weatherization of the
headworks equipment and
exposed piping are still not
clearly addressed; the
submitted bid package does
not make the explicit and
general statement that the
proposed MBR System is a
“fully weatherized system”.
Therefore, we can only
determine that weatherization
provided for the MBR System is
not all-inclusive.
Tetra Tech will revise its
statement regarding this
subject in the bid evaluation
technical memorandum to
acknowledge the containerized
and enclosed equipment.
Tank partitioning for reliability Not included Future expansion features 3 bioreactors, providing
adequate redundancy. Initial phase could be easily
designed with two half grids to accommodate
partitioning of the tanks, upon your request, at
minimal cost impact.
Noted. However, this is still a
modification that would require
an increase in bid price.
Without this modification, the
proposed MBR System does
not meet WAC 173-219 and
Washington State Department
of Ecology “Purple Book”
requirements for reliability
through redundancy and the
procurement specification
requirements.
Tetra Tech stands by its
statement regarding this
subject in the bid evaluation
technical memorandum, and
H2OI remains un-responsive
on this requirement.
Memorandum Remarks on to H2O Innovations’ Letter in Response to Modular MBR Equipment Bid Evaluation Technical Memorandum/April 20, 2021
3
Bid Differentiators Report Findings H2O Innovation’s Response Tetra Tech Remarks on H2O Innovation’s Response
Installed standby
process blowers and pumps
Not included, shelf
spare provided
H2OI supplied a shelf spare process blower as part
of the specified spare parts This shelf spare blower
can be supplied hardwired to comply with the
redundancy requirements.
Noted. However, this would be
a modification to the proposed
MBR System in the bid
package. Without this
modification, the proposed
MBR System does not meet
WAC 173-219 and Washington
State Department of Ecology
“Purple Book” requirements for
reliability through redundancy
and the procurement
specification requirements.
Tetra Tech stands by its
statement regarding this
subject in the bid evaluation
technical memorandum, and
H2OI remains un-responsive
on this requirement..
Spare PLC provided Not included Per section 5.1 of our proposal (page 46), redundant
Allen Bradley ControlLogix PLCs are included in our
scope.
This misinterpretation of the bid
is noted, and the bid evaluation
technical memorandum will be
revised accordingly.
ISO 9001 certification of Quality Management Systems
Not in compliance,
H2O Innovation has
own Quality
Management
System
H2OI's Quality Management System is compatible to
ISO 9001 QMS protocols and practices.
The degree to which alternative
quality management systems
provided by bidders is
equivalent to the ISO 9001
standard was not evaluated.
Because the three bids
evaluated in the bid evaluation
technical memorandum hold
current ISO 9001 certification
or have an alternative, this
specification requirement is not
a true bid differentiator. The bid
evaluation technical
memorandum will be revised to
acknowledge such.
MBR System Supplier warrants all equipment provided
Not in compliance Please note that H2OI is providing a fully compliant
warranty coverage for all the equipment per
specification requirements. All equipment supplied
by H2O Innovation is subject to the 24-month
mechanical warranty. Membranes and diffusers have
a warranty over and above the 24-month period, as
described in the proposal, in compliance with the
specification. For membranes and diffusers, H2OI
will be held responsible to meet warranty
requirements during warranty periods.
H2O Innovation’s response
differs from the mechanical
warranty description submitted
in the bid package. Tetra Tech
stands by its statement
regarding this subject in the bid
evaluation technical
memorandum, and H2OI
remains un-responsive on this
requirement..
Memorandum Remarks on to H2O Innovations’ Letter in Response to Modular MBR Equipment Bid Evaluation Technical Memorandum/April 20, 2021
4
Table 2. H2O Innovation Letter – Comparative Present Worth Comments
Comment from H2O Innovation Tetra Tech Remarks on H2O Innovation’s Response
With reference to Table 5 of technical memorandum, the quantity of
elements required for our system was 100 which is not correct. Our
system includes 25 elements per module, which translates into 50
elements for both modules. Please adjust present worth of
membrane module replacement and total operational present worth
value, accordingly.
The H2O Innovation bid package contained conflicting
information on the number of membrane elements and total
membrane surface area included in the proposed MBR
System. The quantity of 50 total elements is incongruous with
multiple criterion and data provided in the bid package,
including reported flux rates with one membrane train out of
service (as shown on PDF page 41/212) and the membrane
flux rates (PDF page 38/212 and page 193/212) and
membrane area as shown in the BioWin model report on
(PDF page 207/212).
Per Memstar specification sheet (MUSA-SS-TECH-
18006.106) for the SMM-1522 modules, a 25-element module
has 5,918 SF of membrane area. For an equalized peak hour
flow of 150,000 gpd as stipulated in the procurement
specifications, the operating condition with one membrane
train out of service yields a flux rate of 25 gfd, which is above
the manufacturer’s allowable range of 5-18 gfd for these
membranes. Thus, 25 elements per module (i.e. train) does
not provide the redundancy to satisfy reliability requirements
of the WAC 173-219 and Washington State Department of
Ecology “Purple Book”.
Furthermore, PDF page 33/212 suggests that the Memstar 50
Module Skid as opposed to a 25 module skid was proposed in
the bid for each membrane train; a total quantity of 100 total
elements.
Therefore, Tetra Tech stands by its evaluation of 100
elements for computing comparative operational present
worth.
With reference to Table 5 of technical memorandum, the present
worth of membrane replacement of Ovivo was presented as $0.00.
We believe the NPV shall be based on equal payments to put aside
for future costs. Regardless of membrane warranty period, we
believe the annual amount of money to put aside which needs to go
into the NPV is the total membrane cost divided by 20 years for
Ovivo. In our experience, facilities set aside annual maintenance
budget for future membrane costs. As such, we believe it is
representative to include a membrane replacement at the 20-year
mark in the vendor assessment.
The comparative operational present worth presented in the
bid evaluation technical memorandum assumed no
replacement of membranes at year 20, as the County may
transition to newer equipment and technology at that time.
Tetra Tech stands by its comparative operational present
worth values in the bid evaluation technical memorandum.
CONCLUSION
With the evaluation of responses from H2O Innovation’s April 15, 2021 letter to Jefferson County, the Engineer
(Tetra Tech) holds to the recommendation that the County pursue negotiations with Ovivo to be the MBR System
Supplier, as the lowest responsible, responsive bidder, and that the County Prosecuting Attorney review the terms,
conditions, and warranty terms proposed by Ovivo.