Introduction / Background - hanford.gov_Fire_Station_Design.docx · Web viewDocumentation shall be...

Statement of Work for Design ServicesRFP No. 311312, Rev. 0

Project L-888, 400 Area Fire Station

Statement of Work

For

Design Services for Project L-888, 400 Area Fire Station

Date: May 21, 2018Revision Number: 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction / Background......................................................72.0 Objective..............................................................................73.0 Description of Work - Specific................................................8

3.1 Task 1 – Pre-Conceptual Site and Building Optimization.........................................8

3.2 Task 2 – 30% Design Package...................................................................................9

3.3 Task 3 – 30% Design Package – Comment Incorporation........................................9

3.4 Task 4 – Construction Cost Estimate and Schedule..................................................9

3.5 Task 5 –60% Design Package (Bid Option 1)...........................................................9

3.6 Task 6 – 90% Design Package (Bid Option 1)..........................................................9

3.7 Task 7 – 100% Design Package (Bid Option 1)......................................................10

3.8 Task 8 – Engineering Support to Construction (Bid Option 2)...............................10

3.9 Task 9 – As-Built Drawings (Bid Option 2)............................................................11

4.0 Submittals...........................................................................115.0 Acceptance Criteria.............................................................116.0 Configuration Management and Standards...........................12

6.1 Design Team Task Lead Expectations....................................................................12

6.2 Design Process.........................................................................................................12

6.3 Design Interfaces.....................................................................................................12

6.4 Documentation.........................................................................................................13

6.5 Design Reviews.......................................................................................................14

6.6 Design Verification..................................................................................................14

of 26Updated January 9, 2018



6.7 As-Built Process......................................................................................................15

7.0 Requirements......................................................................157.1 Engineering Requirements.......................................................................................15

7.2 Environment, Safety, and Health (ES&H) Requirements.......................................16

7.3 Quality Assurance (QA) Requirements...................................................................16

7.4 Government Property...............................................................................................17

7.5 Commercial Off the Shelf Software........................................................................17

7.6 Sustainability Requirements....................................................................................18

8.0 Personnel Requirements......................................................188.1 Qualifications...........................................................................................................18

8.2 Security and Badging Requirements.......................................................................19

8.3 Work Location / Potential Access Requirements....................................................19

8.4 Site Access and Work Hours...................................................................................19

9.0 Meetings.............................................................................199.1 Subcontract Kick-Off Meeting................................................................................20

9.2 Design Progress Meetings.......................................................................................20

9.3 Design Review Meetings.........................................................................................20

9.3.1 60% Design Comment Review Meeting..............................................................20

10.0 Deliverables and Performance Schedule Requirements.........2110.1 Deliverables.........................................................................................................21

10.2 Schedule...............................................................................................................21

11.0 Special Requirements..........................................................21APPENDIX A – Submittal Register.................................................22APPENDIX B – Reliability and Design Checklist..............................26APPENDIX C - 30/60/90% Design Package......................................28




1.0 INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND

As cleanup operations continue at the Hanford Site, active operations will shrink from the Site’s initial 586 square miles down to an estimated 75 square miles centered on the Central Plateau Region. This concentrated focus will require the Hanford Fire Department’s (HFD) emergency response to hazardous materials events, fire suppression, technical rescue incidents, emergency medical situations, and fire alarms to adapt to the changing work locations, conditions, and worker population.

A major component of timely emergency response is fire station infrastructure and location. Fire station location is designed to optimize HFD response time to activities and worker populations on the Site. As the Hanford mission continues, diminished work activity and worker populations require repositioning of HFD assets to other locations to enable a more timely response to remaining, more active areas.

Department of Energy Order 420.1C, Change 1, Facility Safety, requires a Baseline Needs Assessment (BNA) be conducted every three years for each Department of Energy site that maintains a “staffed” fire department. The Order stipulates the BNA assess each department’s capability to provide fire suppression, emergency medical, hazardous material, rescue, and incident command response. Integral to each BNA is an assessment of the department’s staffing, apparatus, facilities, equipment, training, pre-plans, off-site assistance, and procedures. Consequently, fire station infrastructure and location are an integral component of the BNA.

In January, 2012, a technical evaluation of the 2009 BNA, HNS-SP-1180, Rev. 3 was performed. The purpose of the evaluation was to provide fire station infrastructure recommendations which could be applied to the existing four HFD fire stations in the 100, 200, 300 and 400 areas. The recommendations were based on an evaluation of projected area population, work activities, structures, hazards, associated risks and on the application of the fire service “Standards of Cover”.

In summary, the evaluation recommended that a new fire station be strategically positioned to respond in a timely manner to the Central Plateau East Area (CPE) and to facilities in and adjacent to the 400 Area was required. The location for the new fire station is across from the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) in the 400 area along the main access route.

2.0 OBJECTIVE

The goal of this subcontract is to perform a conceptual design for the 400 Area Fire Station. It is understood that various national Architectural/Engineering (A/E) firms have similar pre-existing modern fire station designs, which meet the needs of the HFD for supporting the Hanford Site and surrounding areas. It is recommended that these options be evaluated for cost effectiveness and construction completion timeliness.




3.0 DESCRIPTION OF WORK - SPECIFIC

The A/E shall provide support for the management, administration, coordination, and development of design documents required to support construction, installation, testing, and commissioning associated with the new 400 Area Fire Station in accordance with this Statement of Work (SOW), documents HNF-60670, Functional Requirements Document Hanford Fire Department Southern Area Operations Fire Station Project L-888 and HNF-60756, Functional Design Criteria, Project L-888, Hanford Fire Department, Southern Area Operations Fire Station.

This SOW includes eight (8) tasks described below in Table 1. Tasks four (4) through eight (8) are to be included as itemized bid options.

Table 1. Statement of Work – Task No. Breakdown

Task No. Description1 Pre-Conceptual Site and Building Optimization2 30% Design Package3 30% Design Package - Comment Incorporation4 Construction Cost Estimate and Schedule

Bid Option 15 60% Design Package6 90% Design Package7 100% Design Package

Bid Option 28 Construction Support9 As-Built Drawings

3.1 Task 1 – Pre-Conceptual Site and Building Optimization

The A/E shall submit pre-conceptual draft drawings and renderings for review and approval by Mission Support Alliance (MSA). The pre-conceptual draft drawings and renderings shall include:

Two proposed diagrammatic Fire Station building layouts with an attached Apparatus Facility in accordance with HNF-60670 and HNF-60756 including rough square footage and proposed building/layout configuration. The site and building shall consider optimizing natural light, building heat loads, road access, parking and avoiding land encumbrances and encroachments on existing structures.

o The proposed layouts should consider an option with the minimum square footage necessary for facility operations and maintenance, as well as an option considering best practices and usability by firefighters and all other personnel that will make the facility more functional and user friendly.




Two (2) proposed exterior building architectural styles/building profiles (e.g. brick exteriors, differing roof pitches, etc.). A/E shall submit architectural illustrations or three-dimensional renderings of both proposed designs.

3.2 Task 2 – 30% Design Package

A/E shall submit the 30% Design Package in accordance with Appendix C, 30/60/90 Design Package for the minimum deliverables expected.

A/E shall submit all Native Files (e.g. Word, Excel, AutoCAD, etc.) to MSA when the 30% Design Package is complete.

3.3 Task 3 – 30% Design Package – Comment Incorporation

The A/E shall disposition the MSA comments submitted on the 30% design package and submit to MSA for approval. The A/E shall incorporate comments and resubmit the final 30% design package.

3.4 Task 4 – Construction Cost Estimate and Schedule

The A/E shall provide a cost estimate to construct of the fire station with documented assumptions/basis for estimate. Assumptions will include expected number of interferences, Requests for Clarification or Information (RCI), major redesigns efforts based on potholing, submittal reviews, and general support per week of construction. The tentative schedule for the construction phase of L-888 can be found within the RFP, including the commissioning and facility owner acceptance.

3.5 Task 5 –60% Design Package (Bid Option 1)


The A/E shall disposition the MSA comments submitted on the 60% design package and submit to MSA for approval. If no resubmit is required, the A/E shall incorporate comments and submit with the 90% design package.

The 60% Design Package shall be sufficient to obtain any necessary Washington State Department of Health (WDOH) approvals/reports (e.g. for the septic system, sanitary water system, etc.).

A/E shall submit a Reliability Engineering Checklist which can be found in Appendix B.

3.6 Task 6 – 90% Design Package (Bid Option 1)





The A/E shall disposition the MSA comments submitted on the 90% design package and submit to MSA for approval. If no resubmit is required, the A/E shall incorporate comments and submit with the 100% Design Package.

The A/E shall update/revise the construction cost estimate and schedule with documented assumptions/basis for estimate. Include any revisions required to the assumptions in regards to the expected number of interferences, Requests for Clarification or Information (RCI), major redesigns efforts based on potholing, submittal reviews, and general support per week of construction, etc.

3.7 Task 7 – 100% Design Package (Bid Option 1)

Final design package shall include the following:

1. Refine and revise Task 6 per comment disposition.

2. Submit Washington State Professional Engineer (PE) stamped project documents.

3. The A/E shall submit all native files with the final design package.

3.8 Task 8 – Engineering Support to Construction (Bid Option 2)

The A/E shall provide engineering services during construction. This will include reviewing and approving submittals, responding to (RCIs, creating DCN’s, submitting WDOH Project Report updates to MSA if/when significant design changes are needed to be implemented, site visits to inspect construction and attend meetings. An Employee Job Task Analysis (EJTA) will be required to address potential issues/hazards related to construction site visits.

The basis for the cost of this work shall include:

Reviewing and approving submittals – Quantity of 50

Responding to RCIs from the construction subcontractor – Quantity of 15

DCNs – Quantity of 5

Site Visits – Quantity of 2

o These will include site reviews with MSA and construction subcontractor to identify any work that is incomplete or requires correction prior to achieving Substantial Completion.

The Engineer of Record shall be required to stamp and submit the WDOH Construction Completion Report in accordance with all applicable Washington Administrative Codes (WAC) including but not limited to; WAC 246-290-120(5), Construction Documents. The Report must also be submitted within 60 days of completion of the project and prior to use.




3.9 Task 9 – As-Built Drawings (Bid Option 2)

The A/E shall provide as-built drawings and specifications at the end of the project in accordance with MSC-PRO-ENG-8017, As-Built Verification Process. The drawings shall depict the final configuration of the work performed and the specifications shall be updated to reflect any changes made during construction. The as-built drawings and specifications shall be submitted in an Engineering Package (EP) format. The native files for the as-built drawings and specifications shall be provided to MSA.

4.0 SUBMITTALS

See Appendix A, Submittal Register for details related to submittal format, type, review cycles, etc. All submittals listed on the Submittal Register shall be submitted to MSA Project Document Control at [email protected] using the Subcontractor Document Submittal Form (Site Form A-6003-061) and carbon copy (CC) the Buyer’s Technical Representative (BTR) and Contract Specialist (CS).

Forms are available at the following web address under the “Subcontractor Document Forms” link: http://www.hanford.gov/pmm/page.cfm/ContractorForms

A/E information shall be submitted in either hard copy or electronic format. If electronic, files must be non-password protected in one of the following formats:

Microsoft® Office Compatible Primavera P6 (.XER) Adobe® Reader or Acrobat® (PDF) Mathcad Prime 3.1 AutoCAD® (DWG) – 2013 version (or later).

Native files for all deliverables shall be provided as noted in Section 3.0, the Submittal Register or as requested by the BTR at any point during subcontract performance.

Requests for Clarification/Information are to be provided to the BTR using the Request for Clarification or Information Form (A-6003-063).

5.0 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

A/E work products and services shall meet applicable standards as defined in this SOW, HNF-60670, and HNF-60756.

At the Buyer's discretion, design submittals that are not accepted may only require resubmittal of the Comment Response Form with acceptable comment dispositions to be incorporated into subsequent design submittals.


http://www.hanford.gov/pmm/page.cfm/ContractorForms

mailto:[email protected]



6.0 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT AND STANDARDS

6.1 Design Team Task Lead Expectations

The A/E shall establish a single point of contact to fulfill the role of TL (e.g., the A/E’s Project Manager). The Task Lead (TL) is responsible for coordinating the engineering efforts of the multi-disciplined team in the execution of this subcontract. The TL shall work closely with the MSA Engineering Manager (or their delegate) and the MSA Project Manager, as applicable, to monitor the design budget and schedule. The TL is responsible for preparation of work plans or assisting in preparation of the deliverables.

The TL is the point of contact for the effort and has overall responsibility for adequacy of design inputs, for establishing technical interfaces and integration of disciplines, and for ensuring that the job is completed in accordance with the specified engineering and quality requirements, procedures, and schedule.

The TL is accountable to:

The MSA Design Authority to ensure the design products are developed in accordance with the design requirements and criteria.

The MSA Engineering Manager and Project Manager for integration of technical work with the project or task scope, schedule, and budget and to ensure the design meets technical requirements, specifications, and quality requirements.

6.2 Design Process

The A/E shall develop design content in accordance with their internal, qualified engineering process and procedures, except where noted in this SOW. MSA has provided the functional requirements and design criteria in documents HNF-60670 and HNF-60756.

A Reliability and Design Checklist can be found in Appendix B for use to document the maintenance and reliability design considerations.

The A/E shall establish and control design interfaces in accordance with Section 6.3.

The design content shall be documented in accordance with Section 6.4.

The A/E shall perform an internal design review of their generated designs in accordance with Section 6.5.

6.3 Design Interfaces

Design interfaces shall be identified, documented, and controlled in a specification or on a MSA drawing and be uniquely identified.




6.4 Documentation

Work produced as part of this SOW shall be documented and meet the MSA standards listed in Section 7.1, Engineering Requirements, the statements below, and HNF-60670 and HNF-60756.

Technical Documents (including Specifications). New or revised Technical Documents shall be prepared in accordance with the A/E’s internal procedures. Appropriate editorial and presentation standards shall be employed. Technical documents received by MSA will be reviewed, approved and released using the Engineering Package (EP) process. Each document will have a unique document number obtained through the Hanford Document Numbering System (HDNS). The A/E shall submit a list of the technical documents and MSA can request and supply the document numbers.

NOTE: The EP process is in the final stages of pilot implementation. The procedures for final implementation are being prepared. MSA Central Engineering staff will work with the A/E to ensure they have the necessary training and access to use this process as necessary.

Design Analysis. The A/E shall develop design analyses in accordance with their own internal processes. Design analysis documentation shall include:

1. Definition of the objective of the analysis;

2. Definition of analysis inputs and their sources;

3. Results of literature searches or other applicable background data;

4. Identification of assumptions and indication of those that must be verified as the design proceeds;

5. Identification of any computer calculation including computer type, computer program (e.g., name), revision identification, inputs, outputs, evidence of or reference to computer program verification and validation and the bases (or reference hereto) supporting application of the computer program to the specific physical problem;

6. Review and approval.

Native files are submitted with the design package submittals for each analysis and subsequent revision.

Standalone design analyses received by MSA will be reviewed, approved, and released using the EP process. Design analyses incorporated into an EP shall use Form A-6007-113, Calculation Peer Review Checklist.

Engineering Calculations. New or revised engineering calculations shall be prepared and issued in accordance with MSC-PRO-ENG-8259, MSC Calculation Preparation and Issue.




Calculations will be assigned a document number from the HDNS and released using the EP process.

Engineering Drawings. New or revised Engineering drawings to be issued/released into MSA document control system shall be prepared in accordance with HNF-14660, Offsite Vendor Instructions for Preparation and Control of Engineering Drawings. Drawings submitted as vendor information are exempt from this requirement.

Facility Modification Packages (FMP). A FMP shall be used for the final as-built package. The FMP shall be prepared and submitted signed and releasable in accordance with MSC-PRO-ENG-2001, Facility Modification Package Process and the EP process into the Hanford Document Management Control System. Data for blocks other than those completed by the A/E will be provided by MSA for incorporation.

Design Change Notices (DCN). The DCN shall be used to issue new and authorize changes to engineering drawings to be “Approved for Construction.” New or revised DCNs shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with MSC-PRO-ENG-8016, Design Change Notice Process and Form A-6003-324, Design Change Notice. The form also includes instructions along with copies of the forms used for sketches supporting DCN (both portrait and landscape).

6.5 Design Reviews

MSA may conduct design reviews on design packages developed under this subcontract in accordance with internal MSA procedures and guides. MSA Engineering will conduct formal design reviews at the 30/60/90% design stages. The MSA-conducted design reviews are not be construed as design verification approval.

Each design product shall be checked, reviewed, and approved internally by the A/E prior to providing the design package to MSA for review, comment, and subsequent approval. Accuracy of the content and checking for technical adequacy should be appropriate for the stage of design unless otherwise requested by the MSA Design Authority and/or Engineering Manager. Design products submitted shall be so noted by watermark or stamp that clearly reflects the stage of design completion (e.g., “30% preliminary,” etc.). In all cases, the deliverable package shall include an index of the information provided, placeholders for “planned” additions, and be a complete, accurate, and quality conscious representation of the design effort conducted to date.

6.6 Design Verification

The A/E shall submit a design verification plan for all designs as part of the detailed work execution plan (see Section 7.0) to MSA for review and approval. The design verification plan shall describe the method of implementing and documenting reviews to the extent possible, understanding that the design has not yet been developed and refinement of the plan may be required as the design progresses.




The A/E shall fully check and verify final design stage (90%) products in accordance with their approved Quality Assurance Program (QAP) and internal implementing procedures. MSA considers 90% design products to be ready for final issue and/or construction. In addition to technical adequacy, checking shall address drafting standard compliance, editorial errors, and overall workmanship. Final design verification documentation shall be provided in accordance with MSC-PRO-ENG-8336, Design Verification.

6.7 As-Built Process

The A/E shall have a documented as-built process as part of their engineering program procedures that will ensure that as-building activities will depict the post-installation physical conditions. The as-built documentation shall be submitted to MSA in the form of an EP as described in Section 6.4.

7.0 REQUIREMENTS

The A/E shall provide a detailed work execution plan that includes design approach, design development description and rationale, conceptual design schedule, design verification strategy (see Section 6.6), and key support personnel. The design approach shall provide a detailed understanding of the entire scope of this SOW. The schedule shall include a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and associated WBS descriptions as necessary.

General

For any work performed on the Hanford Site or any MSA controlled facility, the provisions of the Special Provisions – On-Site, will apply to A/E personnel.

7.1 Engineering Requirements

The A/E shall follow the applicable engineering procedures listed below.

Table 2. Applicable Engineering Procedures

Number Title

1. MSC-STD-ENG-097 MSC Engineering Design Codes, Standards and Site Specific Design Parameters

2. HNF-14660 Off-site Vendor Instructions for Preparation and Control of Engineering Drawings

3. HNF-36174 DOE Fire Protection Handbook – Hanford Chapter

4. MSC-PRO-ENG-709 CAD and Drawing Development and Control Process for Engineering Drawings

5. MSC-PRO-ENG-16406 Vendor Information (VI) Process6. MSC-PRO-ENG-8016 Design Change Notice Process7. MSC-PRO-ENG-2001 Facility Modification Package Process


http://www.hanford.gov/pmm/page.cfm/Provisions



8. MSC-PRO-ENG-440 Engineering Document Change9. MSC-PRO-ENG-8529 MSC Calculation Preparation and Issue10. MSC-PRO-ENG-8336 Design Verification11. WSU-PRO-OP-60412 Equipment and Piping Labeling12. MSC-RD-FP-10606 Fire Protection Program Requirements13. MSC-RD-FP-9118 Fire Protection Design/Operations Criteria14. EU-PRO-ENG-60779 Equipment and Component Labeling15. EU-PRO-ENG-60788 Electrical Utilities Equipment and System Numbering16. DOE O 430.2B DOE – Renewable Energy and Transportation Management17. DOE-STD-1066-2012 DOE – Fire Protection18. DOE-O-420.1C, Change 1 Facility Safety

19. CRD-O-420.1C, Change 1 (Supplemented Rev. 0) DOE – Facility Safety

20. WAC 246-290-120 Construction Documents20. WAC 246-272B Large On-Site Sewage System Regulations

7.2 Environment, Safety, and Health (ES&H) Requirements

A/E personnel attending meetings or performing walk downs on the Hanford Site will be covered under the MSA General Hazards Analysis (GHA). The GHA covers hazards that are commonly encountered during the performance of daily routine activities.

MSA’s Safety and Health Procedures are available on the internet at http://www.hanford.gov/pmm/page.cfm/Construction. The documents on this site are kept current and are available for the A/E and lower-tier subcontractor use.

MSA does not anticipate A/E personnel to be on the Hanford Site for more than 30 days a year. Should A/E personnel meet or exceed 30 days on the Hanford Site, the A/E shall be required to meet additional requirements prior to that employee beginning work on the Hanford Site.

Under no circumstances shall A/E personnel and lower-tier subcontractors interact directly with regulatory agencies prior to notifying and obtaining the concurrence of the CS, the BTR, and the Director of Water and Sewer Utilities.

7.3 Quality Assurance (QA) Requirements

The work activities for this SOW have been designated as General Service, Quality Level 3.

The A/E shall have a QAP that utilizes a national or international voluntary consensus standard such as the ISO 9000, or equivalent. The QAP document and implementing procedures are required to be reviewed, evaluated, and approved by MSA Projects Quality Assurance and


http://www.hanford.gov/pmm/page.cfm/Construction



Engineering Organizations, upon award of the subcontract. The A/E shall, during the performance of this Subcontract, submit proposed changes to the QAP and implementing procedures to the BTR/Quality Assurance Engineer (QAE)/CS for review and approval prior to implementation.

The A/E shall be responsible for performing quality workmanship and shall conduct the quality control measures necessary to ensure that all work confirms to referenced codes, standards, and other requirements as defined by this SOW.

All A/E activities are subject to oversight by MSA’s QAE and/or Engineering representative(s) at the A/E’s facilities, including lower-tier facilities if applicable. MSA shall be allowed access to these facilities for oversight activities with a reasonable notification to the Subcontractor. These oversight activities shall be coordinated through the A/E’s contract representative and MSA’s CS.

If the A/E subcontracts any portion of this work scope to lower tier subcontractors, the A/E shall be responsible for the flow down of applicable portions of this SOW to their lower tier subcontractors, including quality assurance requirements pertaining to services and activities for which they are responsible.

7.4 Government Property

Government property is not required to be used by the A/E in the performance of this SOW.

7.5 Commercial Off the Shelf Software

The A/E shall submit the following documentation for all engineering analysis/design, data analysis/reduction, and engineering/environmental modeling commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) software (application) used in the performance of work activities. Documentation shall be provided even if the applications are verified through manual verification/independent calculations and/or analyses.

NOTE: If the same COTS product is utilized for a range of calculations this documentation only needs to be submitted once, but documents/calculations shall be traceable back to number 1 specified below and is subject to oversight activities.

1. Description of the COTS software including:

a. Manufacturer’s name and address.

b. COTS application’s title and version identifier.

c. Operating system and hardware platform that will be used.

d. Manufacturer’s Technical Specifications or other published description of the COTS.




2. Standard data set(s) used to verify operation of the COTS application

a. Data sets shall cover each function or mode of operation which will be used during the performance of the work activities.

b. When the COTS application’s range of operation cannot be verified by a single data set, the A/E shall submit, as a minimum, data sets covering the upper and lower thirds of its range.

3. A/E shall notify MSA of any software errors related to COTS deliverables.

7.6 Sustainability Requirements

The new 400 Area Fire Station shall meet the sustainable requirements in accordance with the Guiding Principles for Sustainable Federal Buildings and Associated Instructions issued by the Council of Environmental Quality in February 2016 (https://sftool.gov/Content/attachments/guiding_principles_for_sustainable_federal_buildings_and_associated_instructions_february_2016.pdf) per DOE Executive Order 13693, Planning for Federal Sustainability for the Next Decade and its companion document Determining Compliance with the Guiding Principles for Sustainable Federal Buildings issued February 2016 (https://sftool.gov/Content/attachments/determining_compliance_with_the_guiding_principles_for_sustainable_federal_buildings_february_2016.pdf).

8.0 PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

A/E personnel performing engineering services shall have, appropriate training, experience, qualification and/or certification(s) to perform the work required for this SOW. Documentation/certification of personnel qualifications shall be maintained by the A/E and provided to MSA upon request. A/E personnel qualifications/certifications may be verified by MSA prior to performing work in order to provide reasonable assurance that the A/E has assigned the personnel with sufficient documented training, education, and experience to satisfy the specified requirements.

It is expected that the A/E will identify and apply an appropriate mix of resources and experience to each task to ensure MSA is receiving the best value possible for the engineering services being requested.

8.1 Qualifications

A/E personnel performing engineering services shall have the appropriate training, experience, qualifications and/or certification(s) to perform the work required by this tasks requirements.

A/E shall have a current Washington State Professional Engineer for each discipline to stamp and sign the appropriate design documentation and WDOH Project Report.


https://sftool.gov/Content/attachments/determining_compliance_with_the_guiding_principles_for_sustainable_federal_buildings_february_2016.pdf

https://sftool.gov/Content/attachments/determining_compliance_with_the_guiding_principles_for_sustainable_federal_buildings_february_2016.pdf

https://sftool.gov/Content/attachments/guiding_principles_for_sustainable_federal_buildings_and_associated_instructions_february_2016.pdf

https://sftool.gov/Content/attachments/guiding_principles_for_sustainable_federal_buildings_and_associated_instructions_february_2016.pdf



8.2 Security and Badging Requirements

A/E personnel attending meetings, performing walk downs on the Hanford Site, or accessing a controlled access facility shall obtain a temporary badge. Temporary badges can be obtained through the MSA Central Badging Office by filling out a Badge Request Form and presenting two (2) forms of identification and should be coordinated with the CS.

A/E personnel attending meetings, performing walk downs on the Hanford Site, or accessing any Hanford facility shall be familiar with Hanford Site emergency management requirements and response expectations to Hanford Site Emergency Alerting System warnings or sirens. A/E personnel shall also participate in any emergency preparedness drill or exercise that may be taking place unless otherwise exempted by the Drill/Exercise Coordinator.

A/E employees will be required to submit to vehicle searches and not personally carry or transport certain prohibited articles.

8.3 Work Location / Potential Access Requirements

A majority of work activities will be performed at the A/E’s facilities. Project meetings and/or field walk downs may be performed on the Hanford Site. MSA anticipates the A/E will not access any radiological controlled areas for which additional radiological training is required.

8.4 Site Access and Work Hours

Hanford personnel at the Hanford Site work a standard 4/10 schedule. The standard work week consist of ten (10) hours of work between 6:00 am and 4:30 pm, with one-half hour designated as an unpaid period for lunch, Monday through Thursday.

Work performed outside normal operating hours shall be coordinated and/or approved through the BTR and/or the CS prior to performing the work.

9.0 MEETINGS

A/E shall participate in all meetings as required by the BTR.

The general purpose of meetings is for the coordination, control, and direction of the work. In addition to meetings addressed by this Section, the A/E may be required by other Sections and other Subcontract documents to conduct special-purpose meetings and various safety meetings and briefings.

MSA will issue meeting notices and prepare an agenda and minutes for each meeting addressed in this Section unless otherwise specified. When applicable, minutes will identify action items, assigned actionees, and due dates. Table 3 lists the breakdown of which meeting will require mandatory in person attendance and which meetings can be attended via webex and/or phone conference calls.




Table 3. Meeting Breakdown for Attendance

Mandatory Attendance

WebEx / Conference

CallMeeting Description

X Subcontract/Design Kick-Off MeetingX Site Walk-Down

X 30% Design Package ReviewX Design Progress MeetingsX Design Review Meetings

X 60% Design Comment Review (Bid Option 1)X Construction Completion / As-Built Drawings (Bid Option 2)

9.1 Subcontract Kick-Off Meeting

Prior to the start of work, a kick-off meeting will be held between MSA and the A/E at a time and location in the Tri-Cities agreed to by both parties. Invited attendees will include MSA, A/E, and others having an interest in the work. The purpose of the meeting is to coordinate the start or work, discuss the A/E’s scope, deliverable due dates, information transfer, reviews, meetings, reporting, etc.

9.2 Design Progress Meetings

MSA and the A/E shall meet on a regular basis to status progress at a time and location determined by MSA. Invited attendees will include MSA, A/E, and others having an interest in the work. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss issues and proposed resolutions, review schedule, discuss comments, and provide on-the-spot answers. The design progress meetings can take place via telecommunication.

9.3 Design Review Meetings

Design review meeting will be held to ensure the design objectives are achieved. The meeting will be held after the 30/60/90% design package has been received by MSA, and prior to MSA submitting comments. The design review meeting shall be included in the A/E’s Work Plan, including the proposed method of implementing and documenting the review meeting. The final time and location will be determined by MSA, but within the A/E’s Work Plan. Attendees will include MSA Project personnel and the A/E. Other invitees may include MSA personnel from Operations, Maintenance, Safety, Environmental, Quality Assurance, Facilities, and Engineering.

9.3.1 60% Design Comment Review Meeting

The A/E shall attend in person a post 60% design meeting with MSA to discuss all comments in detail. The 60% design package shall contain, at a minimum, drafts of all documents, calculations and drawings for the team to review and comment.




10.0 DELIVERABLES AND PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE REQUIREMENTS

10.1 Deliverables

All deliverables associated with this SOW have been identified in Appendix A, Submittal Register and Appendix C, 30/60/90% Design Package. The A/E shall maintain a project schedule to ensure completion of design deliverables. On a weekly basis, the A/E shall be prepared to report progress on the MSA Project Schedule maintained by the MSA Project Team. Status reporting is expected to include the completion date(s) and percent complete for each deliverable.

10.2 Schedule

The period of performance for this scope of work is established as:

Start Date: Date of Contract Award

A project schedule shall be submitted for approval by MSA covering activities for the duration of the subcontract (including bid options). The schedule shall be in the form of a bar chart (P3, P6, or Microsoft Project preferred, but not required) and shall identify logical sequence and relationship of activities for design, submittals, comment incorporation/disposition, and milestones. Activity durations shall be in working days (Monday through Thursday).

11.0 SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

Reporting Administration

Status reports shall be submitted at the request of the BTR. The A/E shall provide status at the progress meetings.




APPENDIX A – SUBMITTAL REGISTER

Submittal Register Definitions

1. Numerical submittal sequence number: Example: 1, 2, 3, 4 … (or organized by topics and project assigned coding structure).

2. Number of Copies and electronic and/or hard copy: Example: E (Electronic only), 6 (Six Hard Copies), or Hard, 1: E, 1 (One Hard Copy, and Electronic).

3. Format: Describes the type of submittal required:

DWG An AutoCAD drawing using the Hanford standard formatting

(See MSC-PRO-ENG-16406, Off-Site Vendor Directions of the Preparation and Control of Engineering Drawings).

MFC Microsoft Format Compatible application (Word, Excel, Access, PowerPoint)

P3 A Primavera Project Planner schedule

PDF Adobe Acrobat (Portable Document Format)

4. Submittal Type:

APW = Approval Required Prior to Work (Buyer must approve the A/E’s submittal prior to the A/E being authorized to proceed with any activity/work associated with the submittal).

AP = Approval Required (Buyer must approve the A/E’s submittal, however, work associated with the submittal may proceed prior to Buyer approval).

5. Description / Document Title: Title or general description of the document.

6. Submittal Date: Actual date or number of Work Days before or after a milestone that a submittal is due from the A/E: Example: June 1, 2005 or A + 24d [24 work days or 6 weeks after Award of the Subcontract]

A Date of AwardDP Design Package CompleteCC Construction Complete

7. Buyer Review Time (Work Days): Example: 8 Days

8. Subcontract Reference: Cross reference to the Subcontract requirement that defines this submittal: Example: SOW 3.1.2.

9. Insert name of submittal approvers (after subcontract award).




Master Submittal Register:The A/E shall meet the required schedule and provide the documents specified in accordance with the following submittals.

Subcontract Number and Name: TBD Revision: 0

1.No.

2.No. of

Copies* (See End

Note)

3.Format

4.Type

5.Description / Document Title

6.Submittal Date(Work Days)

7.Buyer Review Time

(Work Days)

8.Subcontract

Paragraph or Requirement

Reference

9.Approvers

1 1 PDF, MFC AP Quality Assurance Program A + 4 4 SOW 7.3

2 1 P3, PDF, MFC AP Design Schedule A + 8 4 SOW 10.2

3 1 PDF, MFC AP Personnel Qualifications A + 4 4 SOW 8.1

4 1 PDF, MFC AP Engineering Work Plan A + 8 4 SOW 6.6,

7.0

5 1 PDF, MFC AP Commercial-off-the-Shelf Documentation A + 8 4 SOW 7.5

6 1 DWG, PDF, AP Task 1 – Pre-Conceptual Site and Building

Optimization A + 12 8 SOW 3.1

7 1 DWG, PDF APW Task 2 – 30% Design Package including native

files A + 28 8 SOW 3.2

8 1 MFC, PDF AP Task 2 – 30% Reliability and Design Checklist A + 32 4 SOW 3.2

9 1 DWG, MFC AP Task 3 – Comment Incorporation 30%DP + 8 4 SOW 3.3

10 1 PDF, MFC AP Task 4 – Construction Cost Estimate 30%DP + 12 4 SOW 3.4

11 1 DWG, PDF,

APW **Task 5 – 60% Design Package including native files (Bid Option)

30%DP + 20 12 SOW 3.5





1.No.

2.No. of

Copies* (See End

Note)

3.Format

4.Type



7.Buyer Review Time

(Work Days)

8.Subcontract


Reference

9.Approvers

MFC

12 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 5 – 60% Reliability and Design

Checklist (Bid Option) 30%DP + 24 4 SOW 3.5

13 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 5 – Design Requirements Compliance

Matrix (Bid Option) 30%DP + 24 4 SOW 3.5

14 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 5 – HPSB Checklist (Bid Option) 30%DP + 24 4 SOW 3.5,

7.6

15 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 5 – Project Report (Bid Option) 30%DP + 24 8 SOW 3.5

16 1DWG, PDF, MFC

APW **Task 6 – 90% Design Package including native files (Bid Option) 60%DP + 20 8 SOW 3.6

17 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 6 – 90% Reliability and Design

Checklist (Bid Option) 60%DP + 24 8 SOW 3.6

18 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 6 – Design Requirements Compliance

Matrix (Bid Option) 60%DP + 24 4 SOW 3.6

19 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 6 – HPSB Checklist (Bid Option) 60%DP + 24 4 SOW 3.6,

7.6

20 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 6 – Revised Project Report (Bid Option) 60%DP + 24 8 SOW 3.6

21 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 6 – Revised Construction Estimate (Bid

Option) 60%DP + 28 4 SOW 3.6

22 1DWG, PDF, MFC

APW**Task 7 – Final Design Package (drawings in DCN format, calculations/specifications in EP format) including native files (Bid Option)

90%DP + 12 8 SOW 3.7





1.No.

2.No. of

Copies* (See End

Note)

3.Format

4.Type



7.Buyer Review Time

(Work Days)

8.Subcontract


Reference

9.Approvers

23 1 MFC, PDF APW **Task 7 – Construction Submittal Register

(Bid Option) 90%DP + 12 8 SOW 3.7

24 1 MFC, PDF AP **Task 7 – Final Project Report (Bid Option) 90%DP + 12 4 SOW 3.7

25 1 PDF, MFC APW **Task 8 – EJTAs (Bid Option) 100%DP + 20 4 SOW 3.8

26 1DWG, PDF, MFC

AP **Task 9 – As-Built Drawings in FMP format including native files (Bid Option) CC + 16 12 SOW 3.9,

6.4, 6.7

27 1 MFC, PDF AP **Final HPSB Documentation (Bid Option) CC + 12 8 SOW 7.6

* For electronic submittals, the number of hard copies can be negotiated with the Contract Specialist and approved by the BTR.

** Submittals not required until Bid Option is authorized for the A/E to proceed.




APPENDIX B – RELIABILITY AND DESIGN CHECKLIST

Criteria 30/60/90% Progress DescriptionAre reliability, maintainability, availability, and serviceability analysis performed?Is Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) performed during the design at 60% design review?Can fault free analysis be used to improve the design?Is fault-tolerant design considered?Are components interchangeabilities analyzed?Is modular design considered?Are redundancies considered to achieve desired reliability?Has the design been critiqued for human errors?Are designers familiar with the human engineering guidelines?Is Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) considered in the design?Is a throwaway type of design considered instead of repair?Has built-in testing and diagnostics been considered?Are self-monitoring and self-checking applicable?Are components and assets easily acceptable for repair?Are corrosion-related failures analyzed?Do components need corrosion protection?Is zero-failure design economically feasible?Is damage detection design needed?Is fault isolation capability needed?Do electronic circuits have adequate clearances between them?Is self-healing design required or feasible?




Criteria 30/60/90% Progress DescriptionAre the switches for back up devices reliable? Do they need maintenance?Are protective devices such as fuses, sprinklers and relief valves reliable?Does the asset need to withstand earthquakes and unusual loads?Can manufacturing/fabrication or maintenance personnel introduce any defects? Can they be prevented by design?Can the operator introduce wrong inputs – wrong switching or overloads, etc.? If so, can the asset be designed to switch to fail-safe mode?Can a single component cause the failure of a critical function? If yes, can it be redesigned?Is crack growth and damage tolerance analysis required?Are safety margins adequate?Are inspection provisions made for detecting cracks, damage and flaws?Are production tests planned and reviewed?How will reliability be verified and or validated?




APPENDIX C - 30/60/90% DESIGN PACKAGE

The items with a “X” in the box are the minimum deliverables expected with the corresponding design package.

30% Design Package 60% Design Package 90% Design PackageDRAWINGS

EP/DCN N/A

Identify/List of Existing Drawings Requiring Revision

Update List of Existing Drawings Requiring Revision

Complete Coversheets

Title Sheet N/A

Title Sheet/Drawing Index Revise 30% Title Sheet/Index Legend

Revise 60% Title Sheet/ Index/Legend

Demolition N/A

Demolition Plan Revise 30% Demolition Plan Demolition Details

Revise 60% Drawings

Civil N/A

Site Plan Grading/Drainage Plan Utility Plan

Revise 30% Drawings Utility Profiles Civil Details

Revise 60% Drawings

Structural N/A

Foundation Plan Slab Plan

Revise 30% Drawings Foundation Sections and

Details Framing Plan Framing Sections Framing Details Roof Framing Plan Roof Framing Details

Revise 60% Drawings

Architectural N/A

Floor Plan Exterior Elevations Roof Plan Interior Elevations Reflected Ceiling Plan

Revise 30% Drawings Building/Wall Sections Roof Sections and Details Door and Window Schedules Finish Schedule(s) Interior and Exterior Signage Architectural Details Stairs/Elevator Sections

Revise 60% Drawings




30% Design Package 60% Design Package 90% Design PackageElectrical

N/A One-Line Diagram Electrical Site Plan Equipment Schedule Power Plan Lighting Plan

Revise 30% Drawings Panel Schedules Electrical Equipment Labels Equipment Lists

Revise 60% Drawings

Mechanical/Piping/HVAC

N/A

Notes and Legend P&ID Equipment Schedule Process Flow Diagram Pump and Piping Elevations Fixture Schedule

Revise 30% Drawings Piping Isometric HVAC Air Flow Diagram HVAC Equipment Layout/List Ducting Layout

Revise 60% Drawings

Fire Systems N/A

Fire Alarm System Narrative Sprinkler System Narrative

Sprinkler Plans, Sections and Details

Alarm Drawings/Diagrams/ Matrices

Life Safety Plan Initial Fire Systems Equipment List

Revise 60% Drawings Final Fire Systems Equipment List

Telecommunications N/A

Telecommunications Plan Logic Diagram Initial Telecommunication Equipment List

Revised 30% Drawings and Logic Diagram

Finalized Telecommunication Equipment List

Revise 60% Drawings and Logic Diagram

Instrumentation & Controls

N/A

Sensor/Control Panel Locations Control Schematics

Revise 60% Drawings

Drafting N/A

Preliminary Drafting Review (submit native files)

Detailed Drafting Review (submit native files)

Equipment N/A

Identify Long Lead Items Identify Major Pieces of Equipment

Revise 30% List




30% Design Package 60% Design Package 90% Design PackageSPECIFICATIONS

Construction N/A

Specification Outline Draft Specification Final Specification Master Submittal Register

Procurement N/A

Identify/List of Specification(s)

Draft Specification(s) Final Specification(s)

CALCULATIONSCalculations(s)

N/A Identify/List of Calculation(s) Perform Calculation(s) Verify Calculation(s)

OTHERProject Report

N/A Draft Project Report according to WAC 246-272A Draft Project Report according to WAC 246-272B

Revise 60% Document including Final Appendices

High Performance Sustainable Building

N/A

Create Requirements Matrix Start to Populate Matrix

Revise 30% Document Initial Energy Model

Revise 60% Document including Final Energy Model

Reliability Engineering

N/A

Address Reliability Checklist Items

Revise 30% Checklist Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)

Revise 60% Checklist Revised FMEA

Design Requirements Compliance Matrix

N/A

Draft Matrix Revise Matrix Based on 30% Comments

Start to Populate Matrix

Completed Matrix

Native Files N/A

Native Files Native Files Native Files


Introduction / Background - hanford.gov_Fire_Station_Design.docx · Web viewDocumentation shall be...

Documents

Transcript of Introduction / Background - hanford.gov_Fire_Station_Design.docx · Web viewDocumentation shall be...