AGI requires the services of an Engineering Consultant to undertake a detailed feasibility study of potential enhancements to the Deadfish System. The study will include an investigation of enhancement options, including implementation considerations, and a benefits assessments of possible Deadfish pumphouse, pipeline, canal and reservoir modifications. The feasibility study requires the investigation, assessment, and evaluation of alternative design options for enhancing water supply within the Deadfish System. The scope of the study must provide the following:
1. Existing Deadfish System capacity and performance analyses;
• An assessment of the current storage and conveyance capacity of the Deadfish System and the current Water Act license conditions and operational strategy in place.
• Review of past operations to identify years when additional water was available but storage and/or pumping and conveyance capacity was inadequate for downstream needs.
2. Identification of enhancement options to increase water availability within the Deadfish System using infrastructure modifications and/or operational changes based on historical and projected water supply availability.
3. Technical, operational, and economic feasibility assessments of potential Deadfish System improvement options, or infrastructure modifications, to enhance water supply including, but not limited to:
• Increased pump capacity;
• River intake improvements;
• Pipeline expansion and enhancements to other mechanical components to increase the overall capacity and efficiency of the Deadfish System; and
• Structural improvements required throughout the Deadfish System to support any enhanced conveyance capacity.
4. Feasibility level designs of capacity enhancement options for consideration and evaluation.
5. Capacity enhancement options that must consider and evaluate the potential benefits of additional conveyance capacity and opportunities to maximize diversions within the existing licence.
The proponent’s scope of work must include:
6. Assessment and evaluation of all risks that could affect the schedule and budget for the completion of the services. The proponent will institute and maintain a program for risk management, cost control, schedule, and reporting for the scope of Services provided in this Terms of Reference.
7. Review of previous studies, drawings, and technical reports including construction records, previous geotechnical investigations, structural design and structural assessments of the Deadfish System infrastructure.
8. Schedule and conduct field inspections of the Deadfish System under operational and non-operational conditions.
9. Review and evaluate historical Deadfish System operations, performance and efficiency within the existing license conditions including diversion volumes and diversion rates.
10. Determine additional water supply requirements and propose at least three capacity enhancement options for the Deadfish System in order to support improvement of water security and agricultural opportunity as identified by the Special Areas Board.
o An option to double the existing pumping capacity (100% increase) must be considered.
o Consider additional capacity enhancement options based on hydrologic and hydraulic modeling, water availability, system performance, or other relevant metrics. These options may include, but are not limited to increases of 25%, 33%, 50%, or other appropriate increases as determined by the consultant, but are not to exceed the 100% capacity increase.
o Identify all infrastructure modifications required to support these options under the current license conditions including but not limited to: the pumps and pumphouse; the pipeline; the river intake; the conveyance canal; and all system reservoirs.
11. Provide conceptual engineering designs for at least three chosen potential options for the Deadfish System upgrades.
12. Complete a benefit-cost analysis of the chosen options considering the potentially increased water supply. The analysis must also consider the financial, social, and environmental performance including but not limited to:
• Potential water supply increase;
• Pumping costs;
• Upgrade and Construction costs;
• Any land acquisition and impact costs;
• Life cycle operation and maintenance costs;
• Operational plans;
• A range of flood and drought scenarios;
• Any additional costs or impacts.
Cost estimates should be developed per Volume 1 of Alberta Transportation and Economic Corridors’ Engineering Consultant Guidelines. A “B” Estimate (based on itemized quantities and unit prices) is required and should be sufficiently accurate to allow a reasonable comparison of viable options.
13. Determine environmental and regulatory requirements associated with each option.
14. Provide an options evaluation matrix that compares the elements of each potential option and provides justification for the recommendation of a preferred option, if any.
15. A final comprehensive report including all findings, analyses recommendations, drawings, maps, appendices and presentation materials.
