20160823AVU to Staff 96.doc

AVISTA CORPORATION
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

JURISDICTION: IDAHO DATE PREPARED: 08/12/2016
CASE NO.: AVU-E-16-03 WITNESS: Scott Kinney
REQUESTER: IPUC RESPONDER: Brian Vandenburg
TYPE: Production Request DEPARTMENT: GPSS
REQUEST NO.: Staff - 096 TELEPHONE: [phone]

REQUEST:

Please describe how the Company achieved the least cost solution for the Little Falls Powerhouse Redevelopment project. Discuss alternatives the Company evaluated and provide documentation used to achieve least-cost, such as request for proposals, list of potential bidders, submitted proposals, bid evaluations, and bidder pricing. Also, please provide a copy of the final EPC contract, construction organization charts, construction schedules (baseline vs. actual), project status reports, action item lists, and change orders.

RESPONSE:

The Little Falls (LF) Powerhouse Redevelopment is an 8 year, $54 million program that encompasses many projects. Currently, eight projects are completed and another seven projects are under design or construction. The program will have an estimated additional three to five more projects. The majority of the program centers around the four unit overhauls; the replacement of the generators, turbines, field poles, governor system, wicket gates, generator cables, and control & protection system. It is estimated that the unit work will consist of $42 million of the $54 million expected cost. The remainder of the program cost will be used for upgrading various plant systems necessary to support the unit overhauls (bridge crane, station service, warehouse, air system replacement, etc).

A baseline schedule for the program is included to give an overview of all the work at Little Falls, see Staff_PR_096 Attachment A, pages 1-5. One of the major changes to the project baseline was the “as found” conditions of the first unit overhauled, unit 3. The original duration of the unit overhauls was nine months, based on estimates by engineering and construction groups. Once into the unit 3 overhaul, significant unforeseen issues were encountered (a result of the 1912 construction drawings not matching the found field conditions) and changes were required. The total project outage was 18 months for the first unit. The next three units will be 12 months in length (instead of the original nine months), based on the findings during the first unit overhaul.

The LF project is unique in that Avista crews are being utilized to complete the unit overhauls. Because the project reuses much of the original mechanical components (instead of a complete replacement), the Avista crews are the most economical and efficient means of completing the unit work. An organization chart is included representing the Avista team working at Little Falls, see Staff_PR_096 Attachment A, pages 6-7.

All major equipment at LF did go through a competitive bid process. Included in this response is the justification memos for the major unit equipment procurement: generator, turbine, governor, 4kV switchgear, wicket gate bushings, exciter and station service equipment, see Staff_PR_096 Attachment A, pages 8-17.
The project governance for the Little Falls Program is similar to those of any other project. A project steering committee is used to approve or deny any proposed changes to the program scope, schedule or budget. Documentation is produced to track construction, issues, lessons learned, status reporting, etc. Included in this response is examples from the unit 3 work at Little Falls: Weekly construction meetings, monthly project status report, unit punchlist, change management, and lessons learned, see Staff_PR_096 Attachment A, pages 18-42. The unit 3 project was used as an example because it is the first completed unit project and has all project governance documentation requested.

Staff_PR_096 Attachment A
Attached Documentation

Project Schedule
Baseline Schedule
Actual Schedule
Project Organizational Chart
Equipment Justification Memos
Generator
Turbine
Governor
4kV Switchgear
Wicket Gate Bushings
Exciter
Station Service Equipment
Project Governance
Program Charter
Example weekly construction meeting notes
Example monthly project status report
Example project punch list
Example project issue tracker
Example of project lessons learned

Page 2 of 2

Page 1 of 2