HomeMy WebLinkAbout03.b. Review draft Position Paper to (1) authorize the pre-selection of EnviroCare International, Inc. as the sole-source supplier for the wet scrubber air emission control equipment in the amount of $1,950,000 for the Solids Handling Facility Improvemen Page 1 of 9
Item 3.b.
,,eJkCENTRAL SAN CENTRAL SAN BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT DRAFT
MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 10, 2018
SUBJECT: REVIEW DRAFT POSITION PAPER TO (1)AUTHORIZE THE PRE-
SELECTION OF ENVIROCARE INTERNATIONAL, INCAS THE SOLE-
SOURCE SUPPLIER FOR THE WET SCRUBBER AIR EMISSION
CONTROL EQUIPMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,950,000 FOR THE SOLIDS
HANDLING FACILITYIMPROVEMENTS, DISTRICT PROJ ECT 7348; AND
(2)ADOPT A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND AUTHORIZING THE
GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ASOLE-SOURCE CONTRACT WITH
ENVI ROCARE I NTERNATI ONAL, I NC. I N AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$250,000 FOR SPECIALTY SERVICES RELATED TO FUTURE EQUIPMENT
INSTALLATION FOR THE PROJECT
SUBMITTED BY: INITIATING DEPARTMENT:
NATHAN HODGES, SENIOR ENGINEER ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES-
CAPITAL PROJECTS
REVIEWED BY: EDGAR J. LOPEZ, CAPITAL PROJECTS DIVISION MANAGER
JEAN-MARC PETIT, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL
SERVICES
ISSUE
Board of Directors (Board)approval is required for the General Manager to enter into a project contract in
an amount that exceeds $175,000 and to determine that it is in the best interest of Central San to select a
specialty equipment manufacturer.
BACKGROUND
The existing wet scrubber systems were installed in the 1980s and thus have been in operation for over 30
years. These systems are no longer supported by their manufacturer, parts have to be purchased from
third-party vendors, and they are well beyond their useful life. Most importantly, the existing wet scrubber
systems are unable to meet current and future anticipated emissions limits for multiple hearth furnaces
(MHF) as imposed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)and the BayArea Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD). This was recently demonstrated with the exceedance of the
hydrogen chloride (HCI) emissions limit set under the Clean Air Act Section 129 Regulations (Section
129), which came into effect on March 21, 2016. The existing scrubbers were not designed to remove
acid gases (HCI); therefore, a sodium hydroxide (caustic) injection system was recently added to control
HCI. I n addition, the existing wet scrubber systems are unable to capture or treat MHF exhaust gases
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 14 of 57
Page 2 of 9
during emergency bypass conditions, resulting in untreated gas discharging directly into the atmosphere,
which resulted in recent repeated air permit violations. Recently, it was discovered that the addition of
caustic reacts with the calcium contained in lime and causes excess scale formation within the Furnace No.
2 wet scrubber system. Due to operational and maintenance issues and temporary shutdowns to remove
the scale formation, the caustic system is not a sustainable long-term solution to meet the Section 129 wet
scrubber effluent potential hydrogen (pH) limit and HCI emission limit.As such, a reliable wet scrubber
system replacement is vital to meet near-term Section 129 operating limits and HCI emissions reduction.
Central San hired Black& Veatch (B&V) in 2017 to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the wastewater
treatment plant's (WWTP)solids handling and disposal processes under the Solids Handling Facility
Improvements, District Project 7438 (Project), and to thereafter complete a preliminary design.As part of
the evaluation process, B&V evaluated the existing MHF air pollution control equipment, reviewed
available control technologies, included a summary of the wet scrubber pilot project, conducted an
alternatives analysis, and provided three primary recommendations for future improvements to meet
regulatory requirements and minimize emergency bypass events. First, the existing wet scrubber systems
were recommended to be replaced with newer wet scrubber technology able to treat MHF exhaust gases
during emergency bypass conditions (thus eliminating direct untreated discharge into the atmosphere)and
meet current and future anticipated air pollutant control emissions limits, such as the Section 129 HCI
emission limit. Secondly, it was recommended to replace the existing, currently unused MHF afterburners
with newer technology afterburners to enhance control of the afterburners and nitrogen oxide (NOx)
emissions. This request to approve a sole-source procurement and authorize execution of a contract for
engineering services and purchase of a new wet scrubber system is driven by this recommendation.
B&V solicited questionnaire responses from four air pollution control equipment manufacturers evaluated
during pre-design (EnviroCare International Inc. (EnviroCare), Hitachi, Verantis, and MEGTEC).
Responses were received from three manufacturers; MEGTEC declined to participate given their inability
to meet the project's performance requirements without the addition of enhanced air pollution control
equipment in the form of a wet electrostatic precipitator(WESP).
B&V and Central San staff evaluated the remaining three (3) manufacturers' responses based on several
cost and non-cost criteria, including comparative life-cycle cost(including chemical and electrical
demands), experience in the sewage sludge incinerator(SSI) industry, equipment requirements, system
size and arrangement, system performance, performance guarantees, and service center locations.
Verantis was eliminated from further consideration given that the budgetary cost for their system was
approximately five times greater than that of the EnviroCare and Hitachi systems. This notable disparity
was primarily attributed to the additional W E S P equipment that Verantis needed in order to meet the
project's performance requirements.
The remaining two wet scrubber manufacturers were further evaluated by B&V based on above-cost and
non-cost criteria in order to provide a recommended approach to select a wet scrubber system
manufacturer.A summary memorandum was prepared by B&V in April 2018, which recommended
EnviroCare as most likely to meet performance requirements at the best value to Central San. Staff
concurred with the findings of this memorandum and offers the following justification in support of the
recommendation to enter into a sole-source contract with EnviroCare for the design, shop drawing
development, and the wet scrubber system manufacturer for the project.
Life-Cycle Costs - B&V generated a comparative life-cycle cost estimate based on initial capital costs
and estimated operations and maintenance (O&M)costs over 20 years for the EnviroCare and Hitachi wet
scrubber systems. Expressed in 2018 net present value (NPV), the life-cycle cost for the EnviroCare
systems is estimated at$1.78 million, while those for Hitachi were estimated at$3.30 million. While the
initial equipment capital costs of the wet scrubber systems were similar, the Hitachi wet scrubber system's
reliance on caustic addition to comply with the project's performance requirements significantly increased
the O&M costs associated with the Hitachi system. Note that a caustic injection and recirculation system is
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 15 of 57
Page 3of9
not required with the EnviroCare wet scrubber system to meet the project's performance requirements, as
demonstrated by recent pilot testing discussed below.
Pilot Testing -As part of the project pre-design effort, staff approached both EnviroCare and Hitachi to
conduct pilot testing of their wet scrubber systems. Staff identified pilot testing as a critical component of
selection and demonstration that a wet scrubbing system would meet the performance requirements.
Hitachi informed Central San that it does not offer a pilot system and thus would be unable to demonstrate
its wet scrubber system performance within the Central San WWTP solids handling process. EnviroCare,
on the other hand, did offer a wet scrubber system pilot that could be installed within the WWTP process
using a side stream of the MHF exhaust gases.As a result, Central San contracted with EnviroCare to
perform extensive pilot testing of its wet scrubber system over a number of operating conditions between
June and July 2017. These conditions included differing furnace auxiliary fuel types (i.e. landfill gas vs.
natural gas)and varying operating pressure and exhaust gas types (i.e. normal exhaust through the dry
scrubber and waste heat boiler vs. MHF emergency bypass exhaust). The total cost of the pilot test was
approximately$1 million.
A summary of the pilot testing results is provided below.
MACT 129 LIMITS @ Average Testing Results*
Pollutant o 0
7/0 02 (/o of allowable)
Cd 0.095 mg/dscm 4.8%
CO 3,800 ppmvd 14.5%
HCI 1.2 ppmvd 23%
Hg 0.28 mg/dscm 11.4%
NOx 220 ppmvd 82.1%**
Pb 0.30 mg/dscm 5.5%
PC D D/PCDF, 0.32 ng/dscm 0.88%***
TEQ
PC D D/PCDF, 5.0 mg/dscm 0.56%***
TMB
PM 80 mg/dscm 23.7%
SO2 26 ppmvd 3.9%
*Average of five pilot testing conditions (including emergency bypass
condition) in J une — J my 2017.
**The EnviroCare and Hitachi wet scrubber systems do not offer control of
NOx.As such, B&V has recommended an alternative method to assist in
achieving reliable NOx compliance under the project.
*** SSI MACT 129 only requires PCDD/PCDF, TEQ or PCDD/PCDF, TMB
to be tested (not both).
Central San's significant investment in pilot testing of the EnviroCare system over a number of operating
conditions (including the bypass condition), and the highly successful results of the testing as
demonstrated above, support the recommendation to enter into a sole-source agreement with
EnviroCare. Conversely, the inability to demonstrate the Hitachi wet scrubber system performance within
the Central San WWTP operating conditions, especially MHF emergency bypass conditions, presents
regulatory compliance uncertainty and operational risks with a Hitachi wet scrubber system.
As demonstrated by the scrubber pilot, the EnviroCare system will ensure compliance with existing and
anticipated future Title V and Section 129 emissions limits, and the new particulate matter limit under
BAAQMD Regulation 6, Rule 1 (Rule 6-1), which will become applicable in 2025.Additionally, the
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 16 of 57
Page 4 of 9
EnviroCare scrubber is expected to reduce toxic air contaminants emissions and associated cancer risk to
meet the recently adopted BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 18 (Rule 11-18) requirements, as predicted by
an internal health risk assessment study.
Experience in Sewage Sludge Incinerator Industry - EnviroCare offers installations in over 35
municipalities operating SS I s, for a total of 69 SS I s (fluidized bed and multiple hearth incinerators). This
includes over 20 municipalities operating MHFs, for a total of 46 MHF installations. I n comparison, Hitachi
offers installations of their wet scrubber system at seven (7) municipalities operating SS I s, for a total of 12
SS I s (fluidized bed and multiple hearth incinerators). This includes five (5) municipalities operating MHFs,
for a total of eight(8) MHFs. Given this disparity, EnviroCare is considered to be the technology leader for
wet scrubber systems in municipal SSI and MHF installations.
Central San's operational familiarity and experience with EnviroCare through the pilot is also an important
consideration. EnviroCare has been able to definitively demonstrate the ability of their wet scrubber
system to meet the specified performance requirements for project performance requirements. Lastly, it is
worth stating that the use of a waste heat recovery boiler is atypical of other SS I systems.Although bypass
events due strictly to waste heat boiler issues have largely been resolved because of the complexity and
reliance on our steam system, Central San's furnaces are more susceptible to bypass events, which adds
additional performance risk to this installation.
System Arrangement and Expandability -The EnviroCare wet scrubber system, similar to systems
offered by other manufacturers, is comprised of proprietary components which cannot be replicated by any
other supplier in the industry.As a result, EnviroCare is able to offer a wet scrubber system which does not
require ancillary components to meet the project performance requirements.As noted previously,
MEGTEC and Verantis each require a WESP to meet the performance requirements, while Hitachi
requires a caustic injection and recirculation system.
Based on the general arrangement drawings received for the EnviroCare and Hitachi wet scrubber
systems, both systems will fit within an open bay of the Solids Conditioning Building (SCB). However, the
EnviroCare system offers greater compatibility with the potential future addition of supplementary air
pollution control devices, such as a W ES P or a sorbent polymer composite (SPC) mercury removal
system, should more stringent air pollutant emissions limits be imposed in the future beyond the
performance requirements for the current project.
EnviroCare offers Central San a single-source supplier for both of these technologies, while Hitachi can only
directly supply a W ES P. The SPC mercury removal system is a proprietary technology offered only by
EnviroCare in partnership with W.L. Gore. Given this arrangement, EnviroCare is able to offer space for the
potential addition of future SPC mercury removal modules into their wet scrubber systems (integrated within
the scrubber shell), meaning that no additional space would need to be allocated for a future mercury
removal system. Hitachi cannot offer this capability, which in turn would present a challenge to install a stand
alone mercury removal system within the limited open building space should supplemental mercury removal
be needed. I n fact, it is expected that a Hitachi mercury removal system would be constructed outside the
SCB.
Manufacturer Support
EnviroCare's headquarters, engineering and manufacturing facilities, and service center are located
approximately 25 miles from Central San in American Canyon, CA. Hitachi, on the other hand, maintains its
U.S. engineering and service facilities in Georgia and Ohio. Given EnviroCare's extremely close proximity,
EnviroCare is able to offer unmatched responsiveness, especially for issues requiring immediate onsite
visits.
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 17 of 57
Page 5of9
ALT ERNAT IVES/CONSIDERATIONS
Earlier this year, staff presented for approval the final design agreement revision for the project. This was
presented to the Engineering and Operations Committee on March 13, 2018, and to the full Board on April
26, 2018, where project delivery options were presented. Equipment pre-selection was presented to the
Engineering and Operations Committee on June 20, 2018.At that time, the reasons for pre-selection were
presented and key pieces of equipment included the wet scrubbers. B&V and staff developed the pre-
selection process as an optimal approach to achieve the following advantages, namely:
• Efficient design based on known equipment
• Contractor savings based on well developed installation details
• Reduced risk of change orders
• Ability to quickly release equipment for fabrication
The wet scrubbers are recommended to be procured through a sole-source due to the specialty nature
and complexity of the system as stated previously, and EnviroCare provides the best-fit system that will
meet current and planned future needs.
Staff also worked closely with an outside contract consultant, who has a background of general contracting
and working with entities in the development of contract documents. This consultant added valuable insight
of a general contractor's perspective so that this equipment contract effectively balanced risk between the
parties.
Alternative 1 -The Board may elect to not approve the sole-source procurement of the wet scrubber,
which is not recommended. This equipment directly addresses one of the most important regulatory
issues facing Central San - namely compliance with air emissions regulations. The wet scrubber pilot
demonstrated that the EnviroCare wet scrubber would meet our existing regulatory requirements and
anticipated, upcoming regulations. This was demonstrated under a variety of operating conditions.Among
other reasons, not being able to pilot test a wet scrubber presents significant risk to Central San for
violating air emissions regulations.
Alternative 2 -The contract includes provisions to allow Central San to purchase the equipment directly
from the manufacturers. This is not recommended at this time since the current plan is to continue final
design of the project and reassign the purchase of the equipment to the installing contractor. However, if
complications occur during the bid of the Project, staff will have the ability to purchase this equipment at
the specified costs and install under a separate contract.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS
The contract for the wet scrubbers has been structured into two phases and costs for the procurement of
the equipment is as follows:
Phase 1 is for obtaining equipment engineering with detailed design, and shop drawings (mechanical,
structural, electrical, and controls)to be developed by EnviroCare. These detailed drawings will be
used by B&V in preparing the final drawings and will be incorporated and coordinated in the project bid
documents. This effort will not exceed $250,000. Phase 1 will be contracted and paid directly by Central
San.
Phase 2 consists of the procurement of the equipment including fabrication and installation of the wet
scrubbers. This Phase 2 of the contract will be assigned to the awarding general contractor. Payment
terms to EnviroCare are established in this procurement document and will be incorporated in the general
contractor's contract and payment terms. The value of Phase 2 is $1,700,000. This amount will be
assigned and included in the general contractor's bid price and paid during the construction phase of the
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 18 of 57
Page 6 of 9
work.
Additionally, pricing was submitted for maintenance service work after installation and acceptance of the
wet scrubbers. This cost will not be included in the construction costs; however, it will be provided to Plant
Maintenance staff to be used in establishing future service agreements, if needed.
The total cost for the wet scrubbers, including Phases 1 and 2, is $1,950,000. The Engineer's estimate for
the equipment was $2,000,000.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Engineering and Operations Committee reviewed this matter at its meeting on December 10, 2018,
and recommended
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION
Staff recommends the following for the Solids Handling Facility Improvements, District Project 7348:
1. Authorize the pre-selection of EnviroCare I nternational, I nc. as the sole-source supplier for the wet
scrubber air emission control equipment in the amount of$1,950,000; and
2. Adopt a resolution making findings and authorizing the General Manager to execute a sole-source
contract with EnviroCare I nternational, I nc. in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for specialty
services related to future equipment installation.
Strategic Plan Tie-In
GOAL TWO: Strive to Meet Regulatory Requirements
Strategy 1 - Strive to achieve 100%permit compliance in air, water, land, and other regulations
GOAL FOUR: Develop and retain a highly trained and innovative workforce
Strategy 3- Meet or exceed industry safety standards
GOAL FIVE:Maintain a Reliable Infrastructure
Strategy 1 - Manage assets optimally throughout their lifecycle, Strategy 2- Facilitate long-term capital renewal and
replacement
GOAL SIX:Embrace Technology, Innovation and Environmental Sustainability
Strategy 3- Encourage the Review and Testing of Promising and Leading Technology
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Resolution
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 19 of 57
Page 7of9
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
APPROVING A SOLE-SOURCE CONTRACT WITH ENVIROCARE INTERNATIONAL,
INC. FOR WET SCRUBBER EQUIPMENT AS PART OF THE SOLIDS HANDLING
FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS, DISTRICT PROJECT 7348
WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District's (Central San) Purchasing
Procedures Manual Section 12.7.c provides that, in exceptional factual circumstances
where competitive pricing does not produce an advantage, the Board of Directors
(Board) may determine that the best interests of Central San are served by approving a
sole-source procurement; and
WHEREAS, Central San has violated acid gas air emissions limits under the new Clean
Air Act Section 129 Regulations (Section 129), during certain air emission bypass
events that occur for the protection of downstream steam equipment result i
deviations; and
WHEREAS, the existing air emissions wet scrubber does not comply with Bay Area Air
Quality Management District Regulation 6, Rule 1 (Rule 6-1), which will become
applicable in the year 2025; and XqN 1%
WHEREAS, Central San recognizes the it is critical to move forward expeditiously with
the acquisition and installation of new wet scrubber equipment that will allow Central
San to comply with both the new Clean Air Act 129 Regulations and the pending Air
District Regulation 6, Rule 1; and
1W 1AMEENINUMM., , %
WHEREAS, EnviroCare International, Inc. (EnviroCare), is a proprietary and specialized
manufactur r of a Venturi section wet scrubber and pilot sized system; and
WHEREAS, Central San conducted a field pilot of the EnviroCare wet scrubber system
over varying operating conditions, which validated that an EnviroCare wet scrubber
system will enable Central San to meet existing and anticipated future Section 129
emissions limits, and the limits under Rule 6-1; and
WHEREAS, EnviroCare was the only company that had the ability to provide a field pilot
test at the Central San facility; and
WHEREAS, the EnviroCare wet scrubber does not require ancillary components to
meet performance requirements, and EnviroCare is a single source supplier for
additional air emissions equipment that may be required in the future, should more
stringent emissions limits be imposed; and
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 20 of 57
Page 8 of 9
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Resolution 2018-
Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, Section 3400(c) of the California Public Contract Code sets forth certain
conditions under which a particular material or product or service may be purchased
without the necessity of competitive bidding.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Central San as follows:
THAT the Board hereby adopts the recitals set forth above as the basis of its findings;
and
THAT, the Board finds that it is necessary to install new wet scrubber equipment in
Central San's treatment plant to replace the existing wet scrubber equipment in order to
comply with both the Section 129 Limits and the pending limits under Rule 6-1; and
THAT the Board finds the public interest is best served by approving�a`sole-source
procurement of EnviroCare wet scrubber air emission control equipment; and
t Ai I&
THAT the Board authorizes the General Manager to enter into asole-source equipment
procurement contract with EnviroCare in an amount estimated at $250,000 for Stage 1
engineering services, and Stage 2 fabrication, provision, delivery, and coordination of
the wet scrubber equipment for the Solids Handling Facility Improvements, District
Project 7348.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20t" day of December, 2018, by the Board of Directors of
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote:
AW —
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:,
ABSENT: Members:
James A. Nejedly
President of the Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 21 of 57
Page 9of9
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Resolution 2018-
Page 3 of 3
COUNTERSIGNED:
Katie Young
Secretary of the District
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
Approved as to form:
Kenton L. Alm, Esq.
Counsel for the District
®®z
a
December 10, 2018 EOPS Regular Committee Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 22 of 57