RFP No. 00002641 Bull Run Dam 1 and 2 FERC Part 12D Study

1 of 28 RFP Information Packet

RFP Number 00002641 Goods + Services November 7, 2025

Request for Proposals (RFP) for

Bull Run Dam 1 and 2 FERC Part 12D Study

Project Information Packet

Section 1: Opportunity Overview

Section 2: How Your Proposal Will Be Evaluated

Section 3: Scope of Work

Section 4: Exhibits

Section 5: Sample Contract

Section 6: RFP Terms and Conditions

2 of 28 RFP Information Packet

RFP at a Glance

Proposals Due:

December 4, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time

Summary:

The City of Portland owns and operates the Portland Hydroelectric Project (PHP) Bull Run Dam No. 1 and No. 2 Developments under license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), FERC No. 2821-OR. PHP requires the services of an Independent Consultant Team to conduct the Part 12D Report as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 18, Part 12, Subpart D of the Commission’s Independent Consultant (IC) Inspection Program and in accordance with the FERC’s Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects (Guidelines).

Optional Pre-Proposal Meeting:

November 17, 2025 at 1:00 PM [Pacific Time] via Microsoft Teams

The Optional Pre-Proposal Meeting will be held via Microsoft Teams. Please RSVP to Destinee Strickland at destinee.strickland@portlandoregon.gov for the meeting link.

Please disable AI note taking apps before joining meeting as they will not be admitted.

Refer to Section 1.5: Mandatory Pre-Proposal Meeting for details.

Submit Your Proposal:

City of Portland Online Procurement Center:

https://procure.portlandoregon.gov/bso/

Refer to the Proposal Response Packet: Section 7: Submission Instructions for details.

Have Questions or Need Help? Single Point of Contact:

Send questions, requests for clarification, or requests for assistance by 7 calendar days before November 24, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time. Any questions received after November 24, 2025 may not be answered. Only the Single Point of Contact can answer questions about this

RFP.

Destinee Strickland Procurement Specialist Procurement Services 503-865-6155 Destinee.Strickland@portlandoregon.gov

3 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Section 1: Opportunity Overview

1.1 Background

Overview

The Portland Water Bureau (“PWB” or “Bureau”) serves water to nearly a quarter of all Oregonians. The Bureau is committed to maintaining water sources, public health, community relationships, and planning ahead. At the Bureau, we understand that water is life. We work tirelessly to build and maintain a water system that enhances public health and safety.

Needs Statement

See RFP Section 3: Scope of Work, below, for a complete list of the City’s anticipated professional, technical, and expert consultant services, and deliverables.

1.2 Outcome Goals

1. Coordination Call between the Licensee and FERC that discusses the Part 12D inspection process including the scope of the type of inspections to be performed.

2. Submission an Inspection Plan that describes the scope of the inspection, the proposed Independent Consultant Team and established the proposed schedule.

3. Preparation and submission of pre-inspection preparation report.

4. Period Inspection or Comprehensive Assessment will be conducted.

5. Submission of Periodic Inspection or Comprehensive Assessment to FERC for review.

1.3 Contract Details

The duration of the Contract shall be an initial term of 5 years with an option to extend for up to 5 additional years.

1.4 Estimated RFP Timeline

The timeline below is an estimate for the RFP and Contracting process.

Event Date

Optional Pre-Proposal Meeting November 17, 2025

4 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Deadline for RFP Questions November 24, 2025

Written proposals due at 5:00 p.m. (for Phase 1) December 4, 2025

Short list posted and Phase 2 instructions shared [if applicable] Mid December

Notice of Intent to Award Posted Early January

City will adjust the schedule as necessary.

1.5 Optional Pre-Proposal Meeting

There will be a pre-proposal meeting scheduled for this Project on November 17, 2025 at 1:00

PM.

The (Mandatory) Pre-Proposal Meeting will be held via Microsoft Teams. Please RSVP to Destinee Strickland at Destinee.Strickland@portlandoregon.gov for the meeting link.

Please disable AI note taking apps before joining meeting as they will not be admitted.

This meeting is mandatory. You must attend if you intend to submit a proposal.

The City of Portland will make reasonable accommodation for people with disabilities. Please notify the Official RFP Contact at least two (2) Business Days prior to the event, by the City’s TTY at 503-823-6868, or by the Oregon Relay Service at 1-800-735-2900.

1.6 Addenda

The City will share more information about this RFP if something is missing or unclear. The City will share this information as an addendum (or addenda, if more than one). The City will post addenda on the City’s Procurement Website BuySpeed.

Addenda issued seventy-two (72) hours or more before the due date are binding. The seventy-two (72) hour window excludes Saturdays, Sundays, and City-observed holidays.

You are responsible for complying with the addenda, even if you do not see it.

5 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Section 2: How Your Proposal Will Be Evaluated

2.1 Proposal Review and Selection

Evaluation Overview

The City will appoint an Evaluation Committee (Committee) to evaluate the proposals received.

To score proposals, the Committee will evaluate each proposal using the criteria below. The Committee may seek outside expertise. The Committee will require at least ten (10) Business Days to evaluate and score the proposals.

The City will decide how or when to proceed through the evaluation process. The City will also decide if additional clarifications are needed, when to begin or end negotiations, reasonable timelines, and whether to open negotiations with a lower scoring proposer.

The City can also decide to cancel the solicitation or reject all proposals.

Evaluation Process

Each proposal is evaluated using these criteria:

Responsiveness, Responsibility, and Mandatory Criteria

The City will determine if you are a Responsible Proposer who has submitted a Responsive Proposal (ORS 279B.005).

Refer to Portland Public Contracting Rules for details.

Evaluation Phase 1–Written Scoring

Proposals that meet the responsiveness, responsibility, and mandatory requirements will be evaluated in Evaluation Phase 1. The Committee will conduct a detailed review of the written proposals:

Phase 1 Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation Criteria Points Points for sub-criteria

Experience and Qualifications 25 — Project Approach and Methodology 20 — Project Team 20 — Pricing Proposal

15 —

6 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Corporate Responsibility 20 — Equal Employment Opportunity and Access in Subcontracting

Equal Opportunity Employer and Community Involvement

— 5

Sustainable Business Practices — 5 Total 100

Short Listing

At the end of any evaluation phase, the Evaluation Committee may focus on only a limited number of proposals by developing a “short list” based on the scores. The number of proposals on the short list depends on the number of proposals the Committee believes have a reasonable chance of leading to a contract award. If you are eliminated from further consideration, you will be notified by a Notice of Shortlisting posted on the City’s Procurement Website.

Subsequent Evaluation Phases

The City will proceed with subsequent evaluation phases as needed. These phases may include oral interviews, demonstrations, presentations, site visits, clarification of the proposals, or other activities.

If you are invited to participate in subsequent evaluation phases, the City will share additional information and instructions a reasonable amount of time before any further evaluation is held.

Evaluation Phase 2 – Interviews, Demonstrations, or Presentations

The scoring of Phase 2 generally will be as follows, however, further detail on specific criteria, weighting and point breakdown may be part of the information and instructions provided by the City at the conclusion of Phase 1.

Phase 2 Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation Criteria Allocation

Will be detailed in the Phase 2 Instruction Document 100

Additional Optional Evaluation Phases and Methods

In addition to the evaluation phases above, the City can use other methods like best and final offers, serial negotiations, and competitive simultaneous negotiations.

Proposers eliminated at any stage of the evaluation process will be notified.

Total Overall Score

At the end of each evaluation phase, the points from that phase will be added to your cumulative score to determine your Total Overall Score. The proposer with the highest Total Overall Score may be identified as the finalist.

7 of 28 RFP Information Packet

The selection of the finalist may also be based on negotiated costs and agreeing to the City’s terms and conditions within the City’s Sample Contract.

Negotiations will follow with the finalist. If successful, negotiations may result in a final award and Contract for the work. If the Contract with the finalist cannot be reached within a time that is reasonable to the City, the City may elevate the proposer with the next highest Total Overall Score to be the finalist.

2.2 Award Review and Protest

Review

The City will post a Notice of Intent to Negotiate and Award on the City's Procurement Website.

The Notice will identify the proposer(s) to which the City intends to award a contract.

Following the Notice of Intent to Negotiate and Award, the public may view proposal documents, in accordance with the Oregon Public Records Act.

If you were not awarded the Contract, you can ask for clarification or debriefing, request time to review the selection procedures, or discuss the scoring methods used by the Evaluation Committee.

Protests

Proposers can challenge the City’s decision to exclude the proposer from the next step in the evaluation process, and to award a contract. If you wish to protest your elimination, you must submit a protest within seven (7) Calendar Days of the City’s posting of the Notice of Short List or Notice of Intent to Award.

Proposers can read Portland Public Contracting Rules regarding protest procedures, all of which may be found online: https://www.portland.gov/policies/public-contracting-rules.

Proposers may also learn more about protests by reviewing ORS 279B.405 and ORS 279B.410.

Protesters may not use judicial appeal rights unless all protest and appeal rights are exhausted.

8 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Section 3: Scope of Work

1. General Scope

The purpose of the Request for Proposal (RFP) is to secure professional services from a qualified firm to conduct Part 12 Dam Safety inspections and prepare inspection reports suitable for submittal to and approval by the FERC.

The City of Portland’s Water Bureau (PWB) is seeking proposals from individuals, firms, or teams of consultants, hereafter called “Proposer”, with demonstrated experience in conducting Part 12 Dam Safety inspections and preparing inspection reports suitable for submittal to and approval by the FERC. For Development 1 and 2, FERC sent Reminder Letters to PWB on January 22, 2025, and January 16, 2025, respectively. These Reminder Letters are enclosed as Exhibit A.

The successful Proposer’s Independent Consultant (IC) Team will be responsible for ensuring that all FERC requirements are followed, including the changes to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and the FERC Engineering Guidelines for Evaluation of Hydropower Projects that were implemented by Order 880 and went into effect on April 11, 2022. The proposed team must demonstrate experience in conducting inspections and preparing inspection reports that meet FERC requirements specified in 18 CFR Part 12, Subpart D. Requirements included in the FERC Remind Letters (Exhibit A) must also be met.

Individuals within the successful Proposer’s IC Team will be responsible for demonstrating sufficient experience and expertise as required in 18 CFR 12.31 and approved by FERC in accordance with 18 CFR 12.34.

Introduction

The City of Portland owns and operates the Portland Hydroelectric Project (PHP) Bull Run Dam No. 1 and No. 2 Developments under license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), FERC No. 2821-OR. PHP requires the services of an Independent Consultant Team to conduct the Part 12D Report as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 18, Part 12, Subpart D of the Commission’s Independent Consultant (IC) Inspection Program and in accordance with the FERC’s Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects (Guidelines).

This RFP is to perform the Tenth Part 12D Report(s) for following PHP Developments:

Periodic Inspection (PI) for the Dam No. 1 Development and reported tasks as defined in 18 CFR § 12.31(e) and 18 CFR § 12.35.

Comprehensive Assessment (CA) for Dam No. 2 Development and reported tasks as defined in 18 CFR § 12.31(f) and 18 CFR § 12.37.

9 of 28 RFP Information Packet o The scope of the CA includes a Potential Failure Modes Analysis (PFMA) conducted in accordance with the guidance in Chapter 17 of FERC’s Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation for the Hydropower Projects (Guidelines).

o The scope of the CA includes a Level 2 Risk Analysis (L2RA) conducted in accordance with the guidance in Chapter 18 of FERC’s Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation for the Hydropower Projects (Guidelines).

Portland Water Bureau (PWB or Water Bureau) is required to submit the Tenth Part 12D Independent Consultant’s Safety Inspection Reports for PHP Development 1 (Bull Run Dam 1) and Development 2 (Bull Run Dam 2 and related structures) to the FERC by March 23, 2027.

Background

Descriptions of PHP’s two Developments are as follows:

Development 1:

A. Bull Run Dam 1 was constructed between 1927 and 1929 as the City of Portland’s first major water storage impoundment. During that time the dam was used solely for drinking water supply until the hydroelectric facilities were constructed in 1980-81.

Bull Run Dam 1 is a 194-foot tall, 970-foot long, curved concrete gravity dam with a maximum base width of approximately 155 feet. The dam has an 18-foot-wide crest, with a slight upstream batter and curved upstream face on a 600-foot radius. Dam 1 is constructed entirely on Columbia River Basalt, varying from closely fractured to widely fractured columnar rock. The dam crest elevation is 1050 feet with the exception of the raised bridge section over the three spillway bays at elevation 1060 feet. Talus material overlies the rock slopes downstream of the foundation of the dam, with the foundation material shown to have a low permeability. An interbed clay zone between lava flows was encountered during foundation excavation and treated by excavating two tunnels in the left abutment and backfilling them with concrete. A grout curtain was installed along the full length of the dam.

B. Spillway and Stilling Basin – The centrally located ogee spillway is 14-feet below the dam crest and has a total length of approximately 120 feet. The spillway is divided into three spans between piers and abutments. Each 40-foot-wide ogee shaped spillway is equipped with an 8-foot-high vertical lift gate added to the dam in 1954; these gates are scheduled for replacement in 2025 – 2027. The spillway gates are fitted with an 18-inch wooden splash board, designed to release should reservoir levels exceed maximum pool level. The stilling basin chute has a width of 106 feet, a length of 150 feet from the toe of the dam, and 15-foot-high training walls.

C. Reservoir – The drainage area above the reservoir is 74.6 square miles, where the surface area of the reservoir is 386 acres at 1036-foot elevation. The reservoir has a storage capacity of 33,760 acres-feet at the dam crest elevation of 1050 feet, 30,600 acre-feet at the top of the spillway gate flashboards, 1045.3 feet, and 26,640 acre-feet at the spillway crest elevation of 1036.0 feet, normal full pool. Surface area of the reservoir at normal full pool, 1036.0 feet, is 386 acres.

10 of 28 RFP Information Packet

D. Water Supply Intake and Outlet Works – The outlet works consist of three lined conduits, outfitted with an upstream butterfly valve to provide emergency shut-off capability. The steel conduits lead to three fixed cone valves, replaced in 2021. Two sluice ways located on each side of the spillway provide emergency reservoir releases.

E. Powerhouse and Penstock – The powerhouse was constructed in 1980 – 81, approximately 50 years after the completion of the dam. The hydroelectric powerhouse (PHP 1) is a separate structure and not integral with Dam 1; PHP 1 is operated as water supply and reservoir inflows allow. The single Kaplan turbine has a maximum discharge capacity of approximately 2,300 cfs; discharge from PHP 1 flow into the reservoir impounded by Bull Run Dam 2.

Development 2:

A. Bull Run Dam 2 and Saddle Dam - Bull Run Dam 2 is a zoned earth and rockfill embankment with a central impervious core that is protected on the upstream and downstream side by rockfill shells. The core is separated from the downstream rockfill section by a sand and gravel filter zone and a rock spall zone. The maximum height is 145-feet, a crest width of 25-feet, a maximum elevation of 875 feet and overall crest length of 900 feet. The Dam 2 embankment and both abutments are founded on ancient landslide material. Downstream drainage collection features at Dam 2 include a drainage audit on both abutments. Additional features include a seepage collection system under the downstream rockfill shell and pressure relief wells at the downstream embankment toe and along the right bank of the right channel.

B. Headworks Diversion Dam - The Headworks Diversion Dam is a 39-foot tall, 150–foot long uncontrolled overflow concrete gravity dam founded on basalt bedrock, with a crest elevation of 749.0 feet. This structure is located downstream of the tailwater pool of powerhouse at Bull Run Dam 2 and the west end of the diversion pool. Excess flow not diverted to the drinking water supply system spills over the Diversion Dam into the downstream river channel.

C. Powerhouse - The dam and spillway structures were constructed in the early 1960’s, with the powerhouse added to the Project in 1982. The powerhouse is located immediately downstream of the dam toe, where a single Kaplan unit with a 12-megawatt rated nameplate output capacity is housed. The penstock, connecting the powerhouse to the north outlet tunnel, is located below grade near the north-east corner of the powerhouse building.

D. Intake Towers, Tunnels and Penstock – Outlet works from the reservoir include two intake towers in the reservoir and connecting tunnels that discharge back into the downstream river channel below the dam. The towers are located at the upstream toe of the embankment with one outlet tunnel passing through each of the north and south abutments of the dam. The North tower and tunnel are used to supply water to the City’s water distribution system and distribution to the powerhouse penstock. The North Intake

11 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Tower was modified in 2013 with the addition of a selective gate structure that enables selecting water at different elevations.

The South Inlet Tower is used solely for municipal water supply and as a secondary low-level reservoir outlet. The South Tower has a single sluice gate used to isolate the south tunnel for required closures and maintenance.

The north tunnel is a steel lined and concrete encased tunnel in the north abutment that bifurcates upstream of the powerhouse to the penstock and to the steel pipe for the water supply. The penstock has a butterfly isolation valve located just upstream of the powerhouse. The north branch of the tunnel terminates at two Howell-Bunger valves used for downstream outlet flow control and outfalls to the Diversion Pool.

The south tunnel is a steel lined and concrete encased tunnel section that passes through the south abutment from the intake tower to the outlet end. A single Howell- Bunger valve discharges into the Diversion Pool.

E. Reservoir - The reservoir at Bull Run Dam 2 has a storage capacity of 20,990 acre-feet at the spillway crest elevation of 860.00 feet. The surface of the reservoir at this elevation is approximately 418 acres. The drainage basin area, including the basin above Bull Run Dam 1, is approximately 101.8 square miles.

F. Spillway, Approach Channel and Stilling Basin - The Bull Run Dam 2 Spillway structure is located 0.6 miles downstream from the embankment dam and is a 23-ft tall, 450-foot long, full width, ungated overflow weir structure. This weir is concrete lined upstream and downstream and is filled with well graded sand and gravel filter material. The approach channel to the spillway is an unlined that starts at the reservoir limits and ends at the spillway structure. A 500-foot length section of the approach canal was lined in 2000 with a geosynthetic composite liner system.

G. The stilling basin is approximately 2,500 feet downstream from the main dam. The spillway chute transitions from 450-feet wide at the weir crest to 150-foot width near the top of a steep slope section, to 100 feet directly above the stilling basin. The spillway chute is fitted with an underdrain system to relieve uplift pressures.

The FERC Part 12D Independent Consultant Inspection Program requires that each development must be inspected on a periodic basis by an independent consultant team to identify any deficiencies in the development related to current conditions, design, maintenance, safety, methods of operation and analyses. The inspection report must be prepared by the independent consultant team and submitted to FERC by the licensee.

On April 11, 2022, FERC Order 800 revised Title 18 Part 12D. The revisions were a result of the findings and recommendations of the Oroville Independent Forensic Team and FERC After- Action Panel. The revisions include periodic Comprehensive Assessments of original design and construction. This review should be based on complete records and need to be more in-depth than periodic general reviews, such as the previous FERC-mandated five-year reviews which are similar to the current Periodic Inspections (PI).

12 of 28 RFP Information Packet

The Part 12D process includes the following.

FERC sends the licensee (PHP) a Reminder letter. The reminder letters are attached for each of the Developments in Exhibit A.

An Initial Coordination Call between the Licensee and FERC that discusses the Part 12D inspection process including the scope of the type of inspections to be performed.

The Licensee submits an Inspection Plan that describes the scope of the inspection, the proposed Independent Consultant Team and established the proposed schedule.

After FERC has accepted the Part 12D Inspection Plan a Second Coordination Call occurs between FERC, the Licensee and the successful Proposer’s IC Team. The purpose of the call is to ensure that all parties know their roles and responsibilities for the scheduled successful Proposer’s IC Team activities. It is also an opportunity to discuss project-specific concerns that might help guide the successful Proposer’s IC Team review of supporting documents and planning for special access during the field inspection, etc.

The successful Proposer’s IC Team prepares and submits a Pre-Inspection Preparation Report.

The successful Proposer’s IC Team performs a Periodic Inspection (PI) or a Comprehensive Assessment (CA) of the development. For this Tenth Part 12D Development 1 will be a PI and Development 2 will be CA.

For both the PI and CA include a review of the Owner’s Dam Safety Program.

The licensee (PHP) submits the successful Proposer’s IC Teams PI or CA to FERC for review.

Service Requirements/Technical and Required Services

The City proposes to engage the successful Proposer for the following services:

Task 1: Project Management

This task covers the work required to provide overall management of work assigned to the successful Proposer. It also covers the expectations on how the successful Proposer will keep the PWB and stakeholders appraised of the project status. The successful Proposer will provide management expertise and assistance to PWB using industry best practices in the field of management.

The goal of the PWB is to maintain a high quality and consistent project team throughout the life of the project. Key personnel within the successful Proposer’s team will not be replaced without the written approval of PWB and an amendment to the contract. The successful Proposer’s Key personnel include the Project Manager and key technical leads (IC team members).

The successful Proposer’s Project Management will include but not be limited to the following items:

1. Monthly Progress Report: The Monthly Progress Report will highlight work progress during the previous month, work planned for the next month, and list unresolved outstanding issues.

The report will break down work by task and will compare percentage complete with percentage of budget spent;

2. Monthly Subconsultant Payment and Utilization Report: The Monthly Subconsultant Payment and Utilization Report will include information on all Subcontractors performing work on this project, including any COBID Certified Firm participation.;

13 of 28 RFP Information Packet

3. Schedule: Schedule updates will occur at the noted project milestones:

PWB submits Part 12D Inspection Plan to FERC PWB submits PI-PIPR and CA-PIPR to FERC Field Inspection PWB submits PIR and CAR to FERC PWB submits Plan and Schedule to Address IC Team’s recommendations to FERC;

4. Communication: Establish coordination and communication procedure among all parties including the PWB, stakeholders, successful Proposer (including subconsultants) and others. All project correspondence and documentation will be neatly organized in a project filing system and will be turned over to PWB at the conclusion of the project;

5. Monthly Invoice: The invoice will include a Project summary section which breaks the Project into tasks and provides the following information for each task: contract budget, prior billed fees, fees this month, total billed fees, fees remaining, percent complete, and percent remaining. The invoice will breakout invoiced amount for each subconsultant. The invoice must include the contract number, PWB Project Manager’s Name; and CAB Representative’s name (Andrew Urdahl);

6. Project Management Meetings: The successful Proposer will organize, conduct, prepare for, and attend the Project Management meetings. A total of Twenty (20) monthly meetings are anticipated;

Preparation of meeting agenda and minutes for all the meetings that occur throughout the project;

Track, respond to, and address review comments provided by the PWB throughout the project;

Preparation of the project management plan and the project communication plan.

Task 1 Deliverables Monthly Progress Report – This includes monthly progress updates, Subconsultant Payment and Utilization report, updated schedules, and Monthly Invoice for Work Performed by Contractor.

Task 2: Periodic Inspection Development 1

A. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will perform a Periodic Inspection (PI) as defined in 18 CFR § 12.31(e) and described in 18 CFR § 12.35.

B. Provide a Part 12D Inspection Plan including an successful Proposer’s IC Team Proposal and obtain written approval from the Director of the Division of Dam Safety and Inspections (D2SI) in advance of the Part 12D Inspection, as described in 18 CFR § 12.34.

1) PWB will submit the Plan to FERC. The successful Proposer will assist PWB in acquiring the approval from FERC.

2) Identifying the required technical disciplines for successful Proposer’s IC(s) and supporting team members,

3) Identifying the proposed successful Proposer’s IC(s) and demonstrate that they meet the requirements of 18 CFR § 12.31(a),

4) Demonstrating that the successful Proposer’s IC Team collectively has the required “experience and expertise with dam design, construction, and in the evaluation and assessment of the safety of existing dams, commensurate with

14 of 28 RFP Information Packet the scale, complexity, and relevant technical disciplines of the project and type of review, inspection, and assessment being performed,

5) Addressing any potential conflicts of interest that may exist, specifically in regard to the requirement in 18 CFR § 12.34(b)(3), which prohibits any member of the successful Proposer’s IC Team from reviewing their own previous work.

C. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will prepare a preliminary report, referred to as a PI- Pre-Inspection Preparation Report (PI-PIPR). The PI-PIPR must be submitted by PWB at least 30 days in advance of the field inspection, as described in 18 CFR § 12.42.

Appendix 16-C of the Engineering Guidelines provides an outline for the PI-PIPR.

D. The successful Proposer’s IC Team must “review and consider all relevant reports on the safety of the development made by or written under the direction of Federal or state agencies, submitted under Commission regulations, or made by other consultants,” and “must perform sufficient review to have at the time of the [inspection], a full understanding of the design, construction, performance, condition, downstream hazard, monitoring, operation, and potential failure modes of the project works.”

E. Review the 2022 Part 12 Reports for PHP Development 1 and the City’s related correspondence with the FERC.

F. Review the current Supporting Technical Information Documents (STIDs) for PHP Development 1, and the City’s related correspondence with the FERC. Provide recommendations for any needed changes to the STIDs.

G. The City will provide a quantitative analysis of the scour resistance of the Dam 1 foundation rock during an overtopping event. The results of the scour analysis will be provided for the successful Proposer’s IC to review.

H. A field inspection and review of instrumentation data and surveillance reports.

I. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will conduct a field inspection in accordance with 18

CFR 12.35 with FERC and PWB present. For PHP Development 1, this includes reservoir, dam, embankments, powerhouse and appurtenances; excluding associated generation, transformer, and transmission equipment.

J. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will document their findings in a final Part 12D Report, specifically a Periodic Inspection Report (PIR), which is described in 18 CFR §

12.36. Appendix 16-B of the Guidelines provides an outline for the PIR.

K. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will assist PWB in developing a plan and schedule for corrective measures that address the successful Proposer’s IC Team’s recommendations, within 60 days of submission of the PIR.

Deliverables

A. Draft and Final Part 12D Inspection Plan in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

B. Draft and Final Periodic Inspection – Pre-Inspection Preparation Report (PI-PIPR) in

Microsoft Word and PDF format.

C. Draft and Final Periodic Inspection Report (PIR) in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

D. Plan and Schedule to address successful Proposer’s IC Team recommendations E. Dam Safety Instrumentation Plan

15 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Work Performed by PWB

A. PWB will coordinate with FERC and is the point of contact between the IC Team and

FERC.

B. PWB will complete FERC submissions and distribute all official FERC correspondence.

C. PWB will provide all internally held information pertinent to the Project.

D. PWB will review and provide comments for each of the draft plans, reports, schedules and official correspondence to FERC.

Task 3: Development 1 Additional Inspections and Tasks

Work Performed by successful Proposer’s IC Team

A. Complete a field inspection of Dam #1 Foundation Drains and weirs, review the Dam Safety Surveillance & Monitoring Plan and Reports, review current instrumentation monitoring practices and provide an instrumentation analysis and recommendation plan.

B. Assist PWB dam safety staff in completing recommended updates to the STID.

Deliverables

A. Draft and Final Dam Safety Instrumentation Plan

A. Assist successful Proposer with field inspection of Foundation Drains and weirs, provide appropriate instrumentation needed for testing.

B. PWB will review and provide comments for each of the draft plans.

C. Dam safety staff to assist with recommended updates to the STID.

Task 4: Comprehensive Assessment - Tenth Part 12D Inspections and Reports for PHP Development 2 (Dam 2 and related structures)

A. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will perform a Comprehensive Assessment (CA) as defined in 18 CFR § 12.31(f) and described in 18 CFR § 12.37. The following project developments and all associated features require inspection:

1) Development No. 2 Dam

2) Spillway Dam

3) Headworks Diversion Dam.

B. Provide a Part 12D Inspection Plan, including an successful Proposer’s IC Team Proposal, and obtain written approval from the Director, D2SI in advance of the Part 12D Inspection, as described in 18 CFR § 12.34. This includes:

1) PWB will submit the Plan to FERC. The successful Propose will assist PWB in acquiring the approval from FERC.

2) Identifying the required technical disciplines for successful Proposer’s IC(s) and supporting team members,

3) Identifying the proposed successful Proposer’s IC(s) and demonstrate that they meet the requirements of 18 CFR § 12.31(a),

4) Identifying any facilitator(s) for the PFMA and L2RA

16 of 28 RFP Information Packet

5) Demonstrating that the successful Proposer’s IC Team collectively has the required “experience and expertise with dam design, construction, and in the evaluation and assessment of the safety of existing dams, commensurate with the scale, complexity, and relevant technical disciplines of the project and type of review, inspection, and assessment being performed,

6) Addressing any potential conflicts of interest that may exist, specifically in regard to the requirement in 18 CFR § 12.34(b)(3), which prohibits any member of the successful Proposer’s IC Team from reviewing their own previous work.

C. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will prepare a preliminary report, referred to as a CA-Pre-Inspection Preparation Report (CA-PIPR). The CA-PIPR must be submitted by PWB to FERC at least 30 days in advance of the first IC Team activity, as described in 18 CFR § 12.42. Appendix 16-E of the Engineering Guidelines provides an outline for the CA-PIPR.

D. Review the 2022 Part 12 Reports for PHP Development 2 and the City’s related correspondence with the FERC.

E. Review the current Supporting Technical Information Documents (STIDs) for PHP Development 2, and the City’s related correspondence with the FERC. Make necessary changes to the STIDs after submission of the Final CA report.

F. A field inspection and review of instrumentation data and surveillance reports. The City will read the three slope inclinometers on the right abutment landslide area and incorporate updated deflection plots of these readings in the STID.

G. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will conduct a field inspection in accordance with 18 CFR 12.35 with FERC and PWB present. For PHP Developments 2, this includes the reservoir, Bull Run Dam 2, Headworks Diversion Dam, Bull Run Spillway Dam, embankments, powerhouse and appurtenances; excluding associated generation, transformer, and transmission equipment.

H. Complete a Potential Failure Modes Analysis (PFMA) conducted in accordance with the guidance in Chapter 17 of the Engineering Guidelines.

1) The successful Proposer must lead a joint review of the current PFMs and consider any additional PFMs not previously identified. The Proposer must prepare required materials for and lead the joint review of the PFMs for PHP Developments 2. Participants in the joint review will include representatives from the FERC, the City, and the successful Proposer’s IC. The successful Proposer’s IC must provide recommendations for any needed changes to the PFMs.

2) Participate in a pre-inspection meeting with the FERC and the City to set requirements for the Potential Failure Modes (PFMs) review portion of the Part 12 Report.

3) The City will determine the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) for Dam 1 and Dam 2 prior to the PFMA.

I. A Probable Failure Mode Analysis (PFMA).

J. Complete a Level 2 Risk Analysis (L2RA) conducted in accordance with Chapter 18 of the Engineering Guidelines K. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will document their findings in a final Part 12D

Report, specifically a Comprehensive Assessment Report (CAR), which is described in

17 of 28 RFP Information Packet

18 CFR § 12.38. Appendix 16-D of the Engineering Guidelines provides an outline for the CAR.

L. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will present their findings to PWB staff during a CA Review Meeting, as described in Section 16-7.5 of the Engineering Guidelines.

M. The successful Proposer’s IC Team will assist PWB in developing a plan and schedule for corrective measures that address the IC Team’s recommendations.

Deliverables.

A. Draft and Final Part 12D Inspection Plan in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

B. Draft and Final Comprehensive Assessment – Pre-Inspection Preparation Report (CA-

PIPR) in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

C. Draft and Final Comprehensive Assessment Report (CAR) in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

A. PWB will coordinate with FERC and is the point of contact between the successful Proposer’s IC Team and FERC.

B. PWB will complete FERC submissions and distribute all official FERC correspondence.

C. PWB will provide all internally held information pertinent to the Project.

D. PWB will review and provide comments for each of the draft plans, reports, plans and schedules, and official correspondence.

Task 5: Development 2 Additional Inspections and Tasks

A. Complete a field inspection of Dam #2 piezometers and weirs, relief wells, manholes and other instrumentation associated with the project; review the Dam Safety Surveillance & Monitoring Plan and Reports, review current instrumentation monitoring practices and provide an instrumentation analysis and recommendation plan.

B. Complete an inspection of the Dam #2 spillway.

C. Make recommended updates to the STID.

D. Assessment and design of infrastructure necessary to access and inspect the spillway underdrain system.

Deliverables

A. Draft and Final Dam Safety Instrumentation Plan Work Performed by PWB

A. Assist successful Proposer’s IC Team with field inspection of Foundation Drains and weirs, provide appropriate instrumentation needed for testing.

B. PWB will review and provide comments for each of the draft plans.

C. Dam safety staff to assist with recommended updates to the STID.

18 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Task 6: Future Studies

At the City’s request, the successful Proposer must provide on-call engineering consulting service on other matters related to PHP Developments 1 and 2 not identified above. The Part 12D reports will likely have recommendations for further study. FERC may also request additional studies. These may include but would not be limited to inspection and evaluation of dam safety concerns, further assessment of an additional earthquake scenarios, assessment of particular piezometers, or polling others in the Dam Safety community regarding standard operating procedures. This item is optional, but the City will budget for 200 hours of additional engineering work.

A. This could include earthquake assessments, polls of Dam safety community regarding SOPs, assistance in addressing the Part 12D findings and recommendations and design of spillway underdrain inspection infrastructure.

2. Technical and Required Services

The City is required to submit the Tenth Part 12D Independent Consultant’s Safety Inspection Reports for Portland Hydro Project (PHP) Development 1 (Bull Run Dam 1) and Development 2 (Bull Run Dam 2 and related structures) to the FERC by March 23, 2027.

Descriptions of the four dams located at the PHP’s two Developments are as follows:

Development 1:

Bull Run Dam 1 is a 194-foot tall, 970-foot long, curved concrete gravity dam with a centrally located spillway section. The upstream face of the dam is curved on a 600-foot radius and the dam is founded on basalt bedrock.

Development 2:

A. Bull Run Dam 2 is a 136-foot tall, 900-foot-long zoned earth and rockfill embankment with a central impervious core and a separate side spillway. The Dam 2 embankment and both abutments are founded on ancient landslide material.

B. The Headworks Diversion Dam is a 39-foot tall, 150–foot long concrete gravity dam with a full width overflow spillway. This dam is founded on basalt bedrock.

C. The Bull Run Dam 2 Spillway Dam is a 23-ft tall, 450-foot long, full width, ungated overflow weir structure. This weir is concrete lined upstream and downstream and is filled with well graded sand and gravel filter material. As with Bull Run Dam 2, this weir is also founded on landslide material.

The FERC Part 12D Independent Consultant Inspection Program requires that each development must be inspected on a periodic basis by an independent consultant team to identify any deficiencies in the development related to current conditions, design, maintenance, safety, methods of operation and analyses. The inspection report must be prepared by the independent consultant team and submitted to FERC by the licensee.

On April 11, 2022, FERC Order 800 revised Title 18 Part 12D. The revisions were a result of the findings and recommendations of the Oroville Independent Forensic Team and FERC After-

19 of 28 RFP Information Packet

Action Panel. The revisions include periodic Comprehensive Assessments of original design and construction. This review should be based on complete records and need to be more in-depth than periodic general reviews, such as the previous FERC-mandated five-year reviews which are similar to the current Periodic Inspections (PI).

The Part 12D process includes the following.

FERC sends the licensee (PHP) a Reminder letter. The reminder letters are attached for each of the Developments in Exhibit A.

An Initial Coordination Call between the Licensee and FERC that discusses the Part 12D inspection process including the scope of the type of inspections to be performed.

The Licensee submits an Inspection Plan that describes the scope of the inspection, the proposed Independent Consultant Team and established the proposed schedule.

After FERC has accepted the Part 12D Inspection Plan a Second Coordination Call occurs between FERC, the Licensee and the successful Proposer’s IC Team. The purpose of the call is to ensure that all parties know their roles and responsibilities for the scheduled IC Team activities. It is also an opportunity to discuss project-specific concerns that might help guide IC Team review of supporting documents and planning for special access during the field inspection, etc.

The successful Proposer’s IC Team prepares and submits a Pre-Inspection Preparation Report.

The successful Proposer’s IC Team performs a Periodic Inspection (PI) or a Comprehensive Assessment (CA) of the development. For this Tenth Part 12D Development 1 will be a PI and Development 2 will be CA.

For both the PI and CA include a review of the Owner’s Dam Safety Program.

The licensee (PHP) submits the successful Proposer’s IC Teams PI or CA to FERC for review.

Critical requirements for service delivery The Proposer will meet the qualifications of Independent Consultant Team as defined by the FERC. This includes the following:

Professional Licensure – The IC(s) who sign and seal the report are required to be a licensed professional engineer in the state the Development is located (Oregon).

Dam Design and Construction Experience – The IC(s) must have 10 years of experience in dam design and construction, and in the evaluation and assessment of the safety of dams. This experience must be demonstrated in a detailed resume.

Relationship with Licensee – There are three limiting conditions, as defined by Title 18 CFR § 12.31(a)(3) through § 12.31(a)(5) on who may serve as an IC or supporting team member based on the current or previous working relationships between the proposed individual and the licensee or its affiliates.

o A current employee of the licensee or its affiliates cannot serve as an IC or supporting team member; and o A person who was an employee of the licensee or its affiliates within the previous two years cannot serve as an IC or supporting team member. This period is measured from the date of termination of employment to the date the proposed individual will begin performing any work as part of the IC Team on behalf of the licensee, including preparatory review for an inspection.

o Title 18 CFR § 12.31(a)(5) requires review and evaluation by the FERC on a case-by-case basis to determine the extent of the relationship between the

20 of 28 RFP Information Packet proposed individual and the licensee or its affiliates, and whether any restrictions are warranted. The intent of this restriction is to prevent an IC Team member from reviewing their own work.

Consecutive Inspections o No person will be approved as an IC, or as a supporting team member with the same role/responsibility, for more than two consecutive Part 12D Inspections for a given project.

o No person will be approved as an IC, or as a supporting team member with the same role/responsibility, for consecutive CAs for a given project.

The successful Proposer’s IC Team will be responsible for ensuring that all FERC requirements are followed, including the changes to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and the Guidelines that were implemented by Order 880 and went into effect on April 11, 2022. The proposed team will demonstrate experience in conducting inspections and preparing inspection reports that meet FERC requirements specified in 18 CFR Part 12, Subpart D. Requirements included in the two FERC letters to PHP dated January 22, 2025 (Development 1) and January 16, 2025 (Development 2) enclosed with Exhibit A must also be met.

General Requirements o Legal Requirements: specific requirements around City of Portland, State of

Oregon, or Federal rules and regulations o Staffing and Organizational Requirements: staffing model, staff location, supervision/management, pre-employment screening, training, credentials, or licensure

Project Team members must be licensed professional engineers in the State of Oregon; must have 10 years of experience in dam design and construction and in the evaluation and assessment of the safety of dams.

o Data and Technology Requirements: Computer hardware/software, email or

Internet capabilities, assessment of client satisfaction, program evaluation, record keeping, data collection, reporting.

Technology systems being used by the Portland Water Bureau include Microsoft SharePoint, Microsoft Office 365, and Adobe Acrobat.

o Financial and Compliance Requirements: Insurance requirements

These are from the Risk Assessment Tool General Liability: $2M Auto: $2M Worker’s Comp: $1M per incident Professional Liability: $1M / $3M aggregate o Budget Requirements: The estimated budget for services is $1,100,000.

Proposers interested in submitting proposals must present their cost information in Microsoft Word and/or Excel format, which should encompass the following: 1) Billing Rate Details. The annual billing rate information (for each year of the contract, currently estimated for 5 years) must specify the name, classification, and hourly billing rate for each employee who may be engaged under the contract (including subconsultants). Rates can be presented as ranges per

21 of 28 RFP Information Packet classification. 2) Cost Proposal Table. Proposers are required to submit a cost table that outlines the personnel classifications and types, along with the proposed hours necessary to complete each task (including subconsultants), as well as any reimbursable expenses. Compensation for subconsultants will be subject to the same billing restrictions and requirements as those of the selected Proposer. Proposers may use a calculation to bill their subconsultant services at cost plus a 2% mark-up and will not be subject to any cost increase.

Every obligation of the City under the awarded contract is conditioned upon the availability of funds appropriated or allocated for the fulfillment of the City’s obligations. If funds are not allocated and available for the continuance of the contract, the contract may be terminated by the City at the end of the period for which the funds are available.

The Portland Water Bureau has assigned a Project Manager to oversee the successful Proposer’s work and provide support as needed. Specific duties the City will perform include:

A. Review work products;

B. Maintain budget and schedule;

C. Provide previous reports and documents listed in the Part I, Section A, Background;

D. Provide access to existing relevant documents;

E. Assist successful Proposer with general City documentation requirements;

F. Attend site visits with the successful Proposer as applicable; and, G. Coordinate communications with contractors and Water Bureau staff.

3. Deliverables and Schedule

Deliverables and Schedule Deliverables will be considered those tangible resulting work products that are to be delivered to the PWB such as reports, draft documents, data, interim findings, drawings, schematics, training, meeting presentations, final drawings, and reports. Unless otherwise specified by the City, the successful Proposer will prioritize submitting applicable deliverables electronically.

Deliverables and schedule for this project will include:

1. Monthly Progress Report – Submit by the 15th of each month.

2. Draft Part 12D Inspection Plan for Development No. 1 in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

3. Final Part 12D Inspection Plan for Development No. 1 in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

4. Draft Periodic Inspection for Development No. 1– Pre-Inspection Preparation Report (PI-

PIPR) in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

5. Final Periodic Inspection for Development No. 1 – Pre-Inspection Preparation Report (PI-

PIPR) in Microsoft Word and PDF format.

6. Draft Periodic Inspection Report (PIR) for Development No. 1 in Microsoft Word and PDF format.