How to approach complex remediation projects
Transcription
How to approach complex remediation projects
Mid-Atlantic Contaminated Sediment/Soils Symposium March 24, 2010 Liberty Harbor Restaurant, Jersey City, NJ How to approach complex remediation projects: some European examples Guy Pomphrey – Area Manager USA Stany Pensaert – Research & Development Manager Procuring a Complex Remediation Project • Procurement of Complex Remediation Projects is often not given the attention it deserves • Badly thought through procurement can lead to: • • • • Unsafe execution Delays Poor workmanship Cost overruns • These outcomes can of course have far reaching consequences for you, your organisation and even the wider community 2 Procuring a Complex Remediation Project Corby children win High Court birth defects claim “A group of 18 young people born with deformed hands and feet after their mothers were allegedly exposed to toxic materials before their birth have won a group action lawsuit against Corby Borough Council.” Daily Telegraph Newspaper UK 29th July 2009 3 Content of this presentation • Contractor selection • New contract forms • Public Liaison • Case Studies 4 Contractor selection Preparing bids is costly – do not waste bidders’ time and money: • • • • • Preselect a shortlist of no more than 5 companies Only select companies with proven track record Try to use companies with experience and technologies available inhouse – too much subcontracting can lead to conflicts and lack of control Provide sufficient information – obvious isn’t it? Allow sufficient time for a meaningful proposal However money isn’t everything! Do not use price as the only factor in assessing proposals at least give the technical proposal a similar weighting or higher – 60% is common 5 Form of Contract The more risk you pass to the contractor the higher the average outcome price • Lump Sum Fixed Price – All risk on contractor and he will price accordingly unless he is desperate – then beware! • Remeasurable priced bill of quantities – quantity risk taken by client • Cost plus fee – all risk on client • Cost plus fee with target price and risk reward sharing – our recommendation – is the best approach Involve the contractor as early as possible in the remediation design – with his experience he is the best person to optimise the process 6 NEC Engineering and Construction Contract Design of a new contract form: • Simplified and clear structure to: • Framework for compensation events, avoiding open-ended claim situations. • Minimise incidence of disputes • Incentivisation: • Foresighted and cooperative management of the interactions between • • • parties: collaborative employers-designers-contractors Reduced risk to employer (cost and time overruns, poor performance) Reduced risk to contractors (losses) Mechanism: unforeseen events: “early warning system” and compensation events: contractor prices various options to the project manager at the time the problem is identified => certainty for cost implications and planning implications 7 Public Liaison Get the public onboard – what you are doing is good! • • • • • • Regular community liaison meetings Regular newsletters/press releases Good quality up to date website Contact person and appropriate respond if any complaints Visitor Centre including viewing Jobs for locals 8 CASE STUDY 1 Avenue Coking Works Site - United Kingdom Case Study 1 – The Avenue Coking Works, Chesterfield UK • Former coking works, located in Chesterfield (UK) • Operated from 1956 to 1992 • Production of smokeless fuels • Procession of by-products of coal carbonisation (sulphuric acid, ammonium sulphate, pure benzene and toluene, xylene, naphthalene and other acids and organic compounds) • Heavy contamination of site and adjacent river “Rother” • Surface of 98 ha around the former coking works: saturation with hydrocarbons and tar 10 Case Study 1 – The Avenue Coking Works, Chesterfield UK PLANT AREA 11 Case Study 1 – The Avenue Coking Works, Chesterfield UK NEC Target Price Contract: three Stages; Bid, design and execute. • Stage 1 Bid - Design was not fixed at time of RFP • • • • Contractors priced based on a best guess quantity of contaminated soil and sludge taking into account the Client’s assumptions. Contractors had to select appropriate remediation design Bids were assessed 60% technical quality Stage 2 Design - Successful bidder executed further site investigation and process design in order to establish the work scope and a target price in negotiation with Client. Risks to be covered by further site investigation and process design: • Impact of lagoons and waste tip • Depth of contamination • Preliminary remediation criteria • Complex pollutant mix and uncertainty on remediation technologies for soil and groundwater. • Final landscaping profiles • Planning applications Specialised joint venture consortium: DEC – SITA Remediation – Volker Stevin 12 Case Study 1 – The Avenue Coking Works, Chesterfield UK NEC Target Price Contract: three Stages; Bid, design and execute. • Stage 3 Execution - Payment of cost plus fees • “Open book” accounting • Contractor and client gain from savings • Savings split 50% Client – 50% Contractor • Client has small cost overrun risk • Cost overrun up to 10% of target Client pays 50% • Further cost overruns all paid by Contractor’s JV 13 Case Study 1 – The Avenue Coking Works, Chesterfield UK Stage 1: Design phase “Pragmatical” site investigation. 14 Case Study 1 – The Avenue Coking Works, Chesterfield UK Stage 1: Design phase Process design 15 Case Study 1 – The Avenue Coking Works, Chesterfield UK • 2.6 million yd³ of soils to be excavated • Logistical challenge: synchronisation excavations – stockpiling – treatment – reuse of various qualities • Treatment of the contaminated soil with mobile treatment plants: • Thermal desorption treatment: 350 000 yd³ • Separation and soil washing: 420 000 yd³ • Bioremediation: 100 000 yd³ • Treatment of the contaminated groundwater at 7500 gallons/h with a bespoke water treatment plant: • Aerobic biologic degradation • Chemical oxidation • Adsorption 16 CASE STUDY 2 TOTAL Site - Belgium Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Lagoon I: Liquid tars Lagoon II: Liquid-Paste tars and Filtercells Lagoon III: Solid and Paste tars, Filtercells 18 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Some boundary conditions for the remediation design: • • • • • • High potential SO2-emissions from acid tars Live piperack at the dykes of the lagoons High pressure hydrogen and natural gas along the lagoons Approximity of village at 100 meter 3 operational petrochemical plants within a radius of 500 m Last but not least… 19 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Result driven contract • Stage 1 Bid - Tendering based on preliminary design by Total and Haskoning: Stabilisation/Solidification and on-site storage • • Limited knowledge on variability and composition of materials in the lagoons. Limited knowledge on risks: UXO, sulphur dioxide emissions,… • Stage 2 Lot A Design – Further sampling in order to finetune process design and manage risks • Stage 3 Lot B Full Scale Performance validation • Stage 4 Lot C Full scale works 20 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Design phase: lot A contract: • Thorough sampling of the acid tars, surface water, groundwater,… • Bench-scale testing for optimal Stabilisation/Solidification mix formulation for acid tar treatment. Full-scale pilot testing on small amounts of lagoon materials for choice of equipment. • • • Bench-scale testing of various water treatment options. Pilot testing water treatment. • Assessment of emissions • Historical research on UXO Design of acid tar treatment process and plant Design of Water treatment process and plant Design of Excavation methodology and mitigation measures 21 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 2: Lot A Design Process design 22 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 2: Lot A Design Process design 23 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 2: Lot A Design Process design 24 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 2: Lot A Design Process design 25 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 2: Lot A Design Process design 26 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract 27 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 2: Lot A Design Process design 28 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 3: Lot B Full scale performance validation 29 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 4: Lot C Full scale works – April 2006 30 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 4: Lot C Full scale works – May 2007 31 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 4: Lot C Full scale works – March 2009 32 Case Study 2: Acid Tar Total – Belgium Design and Build contract Stage 4: Lot C Full scale works – September 2009 33 Conclusions • Complex remediations projects are a Pandora’s box: a good design however results in a flexible and safe working method. • The best design is made by an expert group gathering various disciplines and expertise. “Hands-on” expertise is important. • Contract forms do exist to formalize a flexible, cost-efficient, and optimal cooperation between CCC = Client + Consultant + Contractor CCC = Consolidated Competence Centre 34 Thanks for your attention ! 35