1-12_Attachment_12_Method_of_ApproachBPM006379_Solicitation_FINAL 09.04.24.docx

Request for Proposal

Solicitation No. BPM006379

Capacity Development/Technical Assistance to Small Public Drinking Water Systems Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) 1110 W. Washington Street Phoenix, AZ 85007

Attachment 12 – Method of Approach

The Offeror shall provide a narrative response to each question that demonstrates their understanding of the Scope of Work requirements and describes the company's overall method of approach for providing the Service(s) stated in this Solicitation. If there is a question that is not applicable to the Services required by the Scope of Work, you may mark it "N/A". The narrative should not contain language used for marketing purposes.

Offeror shall provide a response either after each question or in a separate document entitled: "Attachment 12 - Method of Approach." If a separate document is used, please clearly designate each section and double-check to ensure that each question has been answered. If any information provided is considered CONFIDENTIAL by Offeror, the information must be specifically included in the Confidential Information Designation Attachment and related documentation to be assessed for confidential treatment under A.A.C. R2-7-103. Response to Method of Approach shall not exceed ten (10) pages.

Question 1: How would your approach for a project differ working for a very small community or utility as opposed to a medium or large city or utility?

Offeror Response:

Having provided engineering services across Arizona since 1985, HDR is familiar with delivering projects both large and small. We currently have active on-going projects with the Towns of Marana, Prescott Valley, and Verde Villages, as well as the Gila River Indian Community. Many of our task orders, such as for Pinal County, routinely include task orders in small communities.

Based on our experience working with small utilities, the key difference is during the planning phase of a project to confirm that the project approach is commiserate with the overall project budget, noting that budget exceedances can make a disproportionate impact to that community and their ability to work with their Town councils to obtain that funding. In such instances, we may include a higher contingency during the project planning phase. Another key consideration for small utilities is the availability and certifications of the existing operations staff so that the facility operational requirements are consistent with actual operational capabilities. This often requires full SCADA automation and installation of emergency generators at remote facilities. HDR routinely finds that small utilities have difficulty recruiting and retaining operators, often requiring training or augmentation, especially during new facility commissioning and startup. HDR retains Grade IV water and wastewater operators to assist during startup and with training.

A recurring theme for small utility clients is keeping current with cybersecurity to facilitate safe but Virtual Private Network (VPN) accessibility for operations. Cybersecurity is continuously evolving and it often requires 3rd party of full-time employees just to stay current.

Offeror shall respond to question #2, if proposing to provide services for one or more of the following deliverables:

5 - Design of water system improvements 7 - Drinking water permit applications (e.g., ATC, AOC, APP, AZPDES) 11 - Preparing Corrosion Control Assessments & Treatment Recommendations Question 2: What is your process when designing and permitting a drinking water treatment system? How would you approach the design and permitting of a treatment system for a small public water system? Describe the steps that you take to select the best treatment technology.

Offeror Response:

Proactively managing the permitting process is a key component of successfully completing a project and avoiding delays between design and construction. Our permitting lead, Ty Morton, has worked with multiple jurisdictions in Arizona to permit and obtain agency approvals.

Approvals to Construct and Agency Review HDR will work with each County’s respective Department of Environmental Quality and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to obtain the Approvals to Construct (ATC) for pipelines, well equipping, and conveyance improvements, and treatment processes. By proactively working with each of the permitting agencies, especially ADEQ, HDR will ensure that their requirements are addressed early in the process so that there are no schedule hold ups. We can also prepare, submit, and conduct all permit coordination with local jurisdictions to obtain applicable encroachment permits for potholing and geotechnical investigations, building permits, and right-of-way. Another key treatment permit often overlooking is obtaining a sewer connection permit for backwash waste disposal to the sewer.

Environmental Permitting Our in-house environmental lead, Audrey Unger, and our Phoenix-based team routinely conduct EA/EIS services across the state for Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and many other clients. HDR will develop the documentation as required to comply with state and local jurisdictional requirement, as well as those of the funding agency, such as WIFA which also has its requirements. We have in-house cultural resources and biologists in Tucson and Phoenix to support any cultural resources surveys that may be required.

Question 3: How will you ensure your proposed solution to the assigned task is practical, cost-effective, and sustainable for the small water system?

Offeror Response:

Cost and Schedule Control Measures Effective project controls prevent problems, expedite resolution of issues, and eliminate misunderstandings through accurate record keeping that is available and quantifiable by all for real-time evaluation. Our Project Controls are outlined and defined in a Project Management Plan (PMP), which serves as a master reference document for the project and provides guidance to the entire team. Through project controls, we monitor the budget, cost, schedule, and scope of work changes.

Project Management Plan We are committed to meeting and exceeding your expectations, which are connected to the schedule and budget of your project. We take great care in defining and developing a proper management plan for your project, which is critical to successfully implementing the recommendations. Our project management approach is built on trust, a clear definition of shared goals, and a mutual understanding of the necessary steps to achieve those goals and exceed your expectations. Our team is custom-fit to your project, including experts in all aspects of water and wastewater planning, design, and construction, who are bound together by a commitment to be a true partner to the Community.

The successful tools we employ have been tried and tested in managing scope, schedule, and budget on past projects, which include:

· Project Management Plan (PMP)

· Management Reviews

· Team Meetings Once the project is awarded, a PMP is prepared by the Principal/Contract Manager, Steve Townsend. The PMP offers a road map for how HDR will complete the (sub)tasks required to evaluate your task order or project. Through management reviews and team meetings, the team will continually monitor their progress, ensuring they are on track and on budget. The PMP includes:

· Project background and description

· Team members

· Communication

· Scope of services

· Task assignments

· Schedule

· Document management

· QC plan/budget This document is distributed to all team members for an efficient start to the project and will also be submitted to ADEQ for review and comment. Management reviews are conducted for each project at key milestones. The reviews are performed by our department manager, principal/contract manager, task manager, key team members, and an accountant. The review focuses on the project's scope, schedule, and budget. The project guide, risk assessment, safety plan, and work plan are all evaluated during the reviews.

Team meetings in person or by conference calls will be conducted regularly with ADEQ and all relevant team members to coordinate and discuss your critical project elements. This open and honest communication greatly assists in communicating expectations and goals to make sure that project activities are completed on time and within budget. Including members of all disciplines facilitates efficient communication and prevents oversights that could impact the schedule and budget of a project.

Scope and Budget Tracking We record, project, and monitor costs throughout each task order or project. Budget control includes overseeing project quantities and making sure that "scope creep" and other elements that may influence costs are addressed before they become issues. We also establish cost metrics and review trends throughout the project to confirm material costs and productivity rates that may impact the task order or project.

Schedule Management In cooperation with the client, we develop a schedule to serve as a road map for each task order or project. The schedule identifies commitments, priorities, and sequence requirements, allowing us to efficiently outline the level of effort and resources for the project. Our proactive approach uses integrated Project Management Information System (PMIS) tools to enable us to identify and resolve critical risks earlier and mitigate potential program-wide impacts on cost and schedule.

Approach to Controlling Design Costs HDR uses earned value analysis for project status tracking. The earned value analysis is a means of integrating cost and schedule into a project status graph. The actual status of a project can only be assessed if both cost and schedule data are evaluated together. A task order project may appear to be under budget based on the amount of money spent to date compared to what was projected. However, this could be misleading: expenditures could be low because the project is behind schedule. Thus, it is important to assess how much work has been completed for the expended costs.

Approach to Construction Cost Estimating Over the last several years, significant supply chain issues and price volatility have resulted in price increases due to material and labor shortages, the Covid-19 Pandemic, natural disasters, and conflicts overseas. These issues have created a volatile bidding market, making cost estimating difficult, with bids coming in 25% or more above the Owner's budgets. Previous methods, such as contacting vendors, utilizing previous bid tabulations, and cost estimating guides, are no longer accurate as price changes occur frequently and, in some instances, happen overnight. In addition, contractors are busy and have to pay a premium for skilled labor, which drives costs even higher. Other factors include supply chain issues and price volatility.

Supply Chain Issues:

· Longer fabrication times

· Plant shutdowns and transportation issues

· Material delays due to transportation issues

· Price Volatility

· Drastic shortening of producers to hold prices

· Monthly price increases

· 1-day to 5-day price guarantee HDR has been monitoring construction costs throughout the country and comparing them to publications by the Associated General Contractors of America (AGC). The increase in costs vary from state to state and by project, as such, cost estimating has become difficult to accurately predict construction bids until the bids are opened. There is no indication of costs coming down, as the trend is still rising. AGC reports that this is not a short-term problem and that material costs and higher contractor pricing will likely persist for an extended period as manufacturing plants and fabricators struggle to get back to full capacity following the pandemic shutdowns. Previous material prices have lasted one to two years in the past. The current materials spike has resulted in projects being put on hold.

Recently, there has been a significant increase in costs, which differ in types of products, ranging from 23% up to 124% and continue to rise. Material costs are unpredictable and can only be accounted for by adding market volatility adjustment factors, ranging between 8% to 20%, to the overall cost estimates. Typically, smaller projects require a higher adjustment factor than larger ones.

The current price volatility has made it more challenging for Owners to complete projects within available budgets. Owners and Engineers are becoming more aware of the construction cost challenges and are being required to adapt to these changes and plan for the unpredictable costs. For some projects, this includes developing a plan to be prepared for high costs and identifying actions that can be taken once actual project costs are known following the receipt of bids. The current infrastructure bill will also create another challenge for Contractor's to secure materials and labor to build projects.

Efficient Document and Management Control We believe document control is essential for efficiently executing a project and minimizing risks. Establishing an efficient document management system prevents problems, expedites issue resolution, eliminates misunderstandings, and minimizes project risks. We will use a secure web-based environment to manage documents and promote accountability, transparency, and collaboration. We will verify team members are tracking and recording documents as an integral part of everyday work. Our project manager establishes project documentation and filing requirements (e.g., location, structure, specific processes, and usage expectations) in the PMP and communicates them to the project team. Through the PMP, we identify any special processes to be used interoffice when securing restricted files, or by subconsultants. We also verify that all project team members create, keep, and record documents as an integral part of their everyday work activities, scalable to each on-call task assignment.

Offeror shall respond to question #4, if proposing to provide services for one or more of the following deliverables:

5 - Design of water system improvements 7 - Drinking water permit applications (e.g., ATC, AOC, APP, AZPDES) 11 - Preparing Corrosion Control Assessments & Treatment Recommendations Question 4: When designing a treatment system that modifies water chemistry, how do you ensure this treatment won't cause or exacerbate other water quality problems?

Offeror Response:

With the heightened concern in the industry associated with Lead and Copper Rule Revision (LCRR) compliance, implementing corrosion controls is of paramount importance. HDR is at the forefront in guiding and assisting utilities nationwide, including in Arizona for Tucson Water and the Town of Gilbert, in their LCRR compliance. Our comprehensive experience and understanding of LCRR gives us an advantage when designing a treatment facility which also must meet the LCRR compliance requirements including, for instance, optimizing treatment acid and caustic dosing, noting that pH depression for treatment must be elevated for effective corrosion control. HDR water quality and treatment technologists are already developing corrosion controls for our clients distribution networks and understand the inter-relationship between these corrosion controls and effective drinking water treatment.

Questions 5: How will you ensure that project(s) stays on schedule and is(are) completed on-time as per the task order offer/award?

If a project is not on schedule, describe what steps will be taken to get the project back on track?

If your team is backed up or unavailable to finish a job, describe what steps will be taken to get the project delivered on time?

If your subcontractor is falling behind stated deliverable, describe what steps will be taken to get the project on track and delivered on time?

Offeror Response:

Managing Specific Task Orders to Ensure Timely Completion Developing a proper work plan is critical to the success of your on-call engineering tasks. We are dedicated to meeting your expectations while maintaining the schedule and budget for your projects. Valuable knowledge has been gained through previous and current on-call tasks with state and local agencies that required similar services. The HDR team will continue to provide ADEQ with a high level of service and quality deliverables.

We have carefully developed an efficient management approach for this contract. Our approach provides:

A primary point of contact, Steve Townsend, PE, will be accountable and focused on technical competence, cost and schedule control.

Senior professionals independently responsible for quality control (immediately available to provide input and technical review for each required discipline).

A flexible organizational work plan that can be refined and optimized based on actual contract requirements and task assignments.

Constant and continuous communication and collaboration with ADEQ staff.

On-call tasks typically have condensed budgets and expedited schedules. We can accommodate these challenges because we have developed a generalized work plan structured to utilize our staff and resources, locally and nationally, to achieve a responsive and professional result for you. The true service we offer is our talented staff.

Internally, our project managers and design teams utilize two valuable tools to ensure project schedules are met:

Pronto: A program used to schedule staff, QA/QC reviews, and client deliverables. This tool helps project managers identify which staff is available far in advance so that staff can be adjusted as needed.

Engaged Management Team: Our most powerful project management tool is our vast pool of management staff available to assist project teams in identifying critical paths for successfully meeting project schedules. Technical leaders from across the country work with project managers to make sure they have adequate resources and reviewers to supply you with quality deliverables on time. HDR develops solutions that support the growing needs of ADEQ and the areas you serve.

Adjusting Schedules and Resources No matter how carefully we plan, some changes are inevitable. Sometimes, incorporating changes in a project midstream can bring ADEQ additional value. The key to a successful project is to anticipate and manage change. When there is a potential change in scope, budget, or schedule, our project manager will meet with ADEQ’s project manager to discuss the issue and provide solutions. The five strategies that HDR uses to manage change are:

1. Identify creative and economical ways to achieve ADEQ’s goals.

2. Anticipate and identify issues early in the process and communicate these to ADEQ’s project manager.

3. Develop/apply practical, workable, and efficient solutions.

4. Bring the knowledge gained from each task to improve the next.

5. Make mid-course corrections to deliver continuous improvement.

Our deep resources (200+ staff in Phoenix, 240 in Arizona) allow our project managers to adjust quickly to meet changing conditions. As an example, we have worked on local projects that required quick additions to the team to adapt to changing schedules. We met the schedules by selecting the right staff (at the right levels), thus helping our clients meet their schedules and maintain funding.

Subcontractors Follow HDR's Quality Management Plan We make seamless integration possible by evaluating and selecting subconsultants based on past performance, technical abilities, cost, and ability to supply services on schedule in accordance with project requirements. Project Managers conduct subconsultant evaluations and, when appropriate, the Regional Group Director provides input on subconsultant selection.

Subconsultant fees and associated risks, including adherence to the schedule, are evaluated during a proposal and contract review. The evaluation and approval are documented and required before finalizing agreements and contracts. In addition to leadership subconsultant evaluations, HDR has an internal Third-Party Due Diligence Screening portal where potential third-party partners are screened to obtain risk evaluations and profiles.

If subconsultants do not meet the project schedule, HDR will initially try to work with the subconsultant to review underlying assumptions, technical challenges, or methodology to uncover the root cause of the project delay. Assuming a specific issue is identified, HDR can commit resources from our vast network of employees to step in and take control of the technical elements the subconsultant is unable to. In these circumstances, HDR will inform ADEQ of the changes in our project delivery and will keep such changes cost neutral, unless requiring a change to the overall project scope and schedule to consider a previously undetermined complexity. In rare circumstances, HDR may choose to void the contract with the intended subconsultant and enter into a new subcontract with a new subconsultant who has the technical capability and available resources to complete the work the original subconsultant was unable. HDR will keep ADEQ informed off all such project delivery issues and will seek your approval of any subconsultant replacement, including at the personnel level.

Question 6: Describe your company's review process to ensure that technical documents are complete and accurate prior to submission to ADEQ. What documents can ADEQ review to verify if the review was completed? If ADEQ finds an issue, who, other than the PM, is the point of contact for resolution?

Offeror Response:

Having successfully submitted multiple permit applications to ADEQ, we know that open communication and transparency is key to avoiding permit surprises. HDR typically requests a pre-application meeting with ADEQ after the basis of design, or preliminary engineering report, is complete and approved by the utility. This gives us the ability to provide tangible details of the project, including which treatment technologies will be employed, so that ADEQ can provide meaningful feedback to the project.

During project design, HDR uses design checklists that align with our delivery processes as well as adhering to specific technical requirements particular to the utility, such as their variations to the Maricopa or Pima County Association of Government standard details and specifications. We also are fully familiar with Engineering Bullet No. 10 – Guidelines for the Construction of Water Systems, which has guided our water system design practices since we started working in Arizona in 1985.

For approvals-to-construct permits (ATC), HDR will compile all checklists and supporting documentation, such as specifications and calculations, to support both the ATC and local building permit applications. These can be submitted electronically, or in the case of complicated treatment systems, we can schedule a permit submittal meeting to walk through the content. Depending on the complexity and schedule for the project, HDR may submit an agency review set at the 90% design milestone given the regulatory time to review.

To ensure completes and quality of our technical documents, HDR’s culture of continual improvement provides our clients with confidence that products and services are delivered efficiently and effectively. Our Quality Management System (QMS) is based on the principles and guidelines set forth by the ISO 9001:2015 international standard for quality management. The QMS includes programs, policies, and business processes that adhere to client and local, state, and federal guidelines. We perform quality reviews throughout the project to facilitate communication. Our QMS utilizes the data, reports, and figures captured through project controls and our project management plan. We believe managing the quality of deliverables is essential to minimizing cost and schedule overruns. QMS components that help us gather quality data include:

QMS Internal Audit. Provides internal monitoring of compliance with quality procedures.

Lessons Learned. Provide a course of action to learn from the past and improve in the future.

QC Reviews. Manages risk by verifying that project deliverables and supporting documentation are complete, are understandable, conform to applicable and reasonable standards relative to their intended purpose, and meet client and HDR requirements.

Feedback and Support. Provides PMs with direct feedback and support for proper implementation of QMS elements on their projects.

We develop a Quality Management Plan (QMP) for each project, resulting in a service or deliverable as part of a professional services agreement. The QMP identifies project reviews, QC reviews, and quality-checking processes that take place during the project's lifecycle and provides details on how those activities shall be performed.

Question 7: Describe a time where obstacles faced during a project resulted in a change to your methodology of approach. What were the obstacles, the impact to the project and what did you do to overcome them?

Offeror Response:

The Gilman wells in Issaquah, WA provide an excellent example for facing PFAS water treatment and regulatory obstacles. Although this project is not located in Arizona, the Gilman wells PFAS system was designed in 2016 under an emergency response and represents the first municipal PFAS treatment in the western US. The Issaquah design and lessons learned since then continue to inform our PFAS designs to this day.

The timeline for the Issaquah project reduced HDR’s ability to pilot ion exchange media prior to design, which would follow our normal practice and recommendations. The ion exchange PFAS treatment worked fine initially, but trace amounts of iron in the source water contributed to iron bacterial fouling. Since then, the Issaquah PFAS vessels have been replaced with granular activated carbon and the backwash frequency has been increased to significantly reduce fouling. HDR now routinely samples for trace levels of iron and integrate these results into our PFAS designs.

The Issaquah project timeline, i.e. design to completion in 77 days (!), required modifying HDR’s normal project delivery standards that allowed us to move directly to 90% design, work directly with a job order contractor to pre-order equipment based on early-out project specifications. In today’s environment of escalating construction costs and long-lead items for specialty equipment and electrical gear, the ability to develop early-out specifications and vendor procurement packages is almost required to keep projects on schedule and budget. The inflationary costs often make it more advantageous to oversize and conservatively order equipment rather than waiting to further in the design to rights-size everything.

Offeror shall respond to scenario #1, if proposing to provide services for one or more of the following deliverables:

4 - Construction Administration & Construction Management 5 - Design of water system improvements 7 - Drinking water permit applications 8 - Funding Assistance 9 - Legal assistance (e.g., forming corporate status, corporate documents) 10 - Median Household Income Surveys 12 - Preparing Environmental Documents/Archeological Surveys 13 - Preparing Preliminary Engineering Reports (PER) 14 - Rate studies, rate reviews, rate cases 16 - System Evaluations 19 - Water Quality Compliance Options Scenario 1: A small, rural public water system has multiple water quality issues. There are 20 current connections; the customers are low income and/or retirees. All the homes are on septic systems. The system consists of one well (located within the floodway of a major river), an elevated storage tank and distribution system.

The water system has maximum contaminant level (MCL) exceedances for uranium. In addition, chloride, sulfate, total hardness and total dissolved solids are well above the secondary MCLs. Sampling of private wells in the area indicated better water quality may be found away from the river. Outline at least three alternatives to address the water quality issues that are cost effective and sustainable for this very small water system. Provide your recommendation for the best alternative for the system.

For your recommendation, include the following information for this scenario:

A bullet list of tasks that your firm would conduct to address the water quality issues and implement a solution. The tasks should be presented in the order they would be conducted. Each task should include the purpose of the task (e.g., why are you doing it? What information will be obtained in doing the task? What other information would be included in your summary recommendation report to ADEQ?

Offeror Response (limit response for scenario #1 to two (2) pages):

Our response to this question focuses on the technical aspects only and assumes that our typical project management activities (e.g., quality control, meetings, budget, and schedule) would be implemented as previously described in this document. It is further assumed the primary emphasis of this scenario is water treatment focused and not the distribution and storage system.

Data Collection and Review To better understand the water quality supply, we recommend the following initial steps during data collection and review:

1. WQ sampling of the river including full suite of contaminants consistent with the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rules.

2. Evaluation of current treatment, e.g., disinfection and/or other process.

3. Seek approval to enter private property from landowners and collect WQ samples and depth to groundwater from their wells. Test groundwater samples for full suite of contaminants as outlined in the Arizona Administrative Code.

4. Locate public and/or private wells located further from the river.

Interim Solution If the system is confirmed to be above the MCL for uranium, then it is of paramount importance that each of the 20 customers is provided a point-of-use treatment device, such as an under-sink reverse osmosis unit, or furnished bottled water deliveries so that the customers have access to a safe water supply during the project investigation and design. If reverse osmosis units are furnished, a mechanism will be needed to track customers and send replacement filters at the prescribed replacement duration.

Treatment Feasibility and Technology Selection Based on the information collected, we believe the underlying groundwater quality in the vicinity of the river would be heavily influenced by the surface water quality. Additionally, groundwater sampling, if available, would have to be performed to at distances further from the river to ascertain if the groundwater quality is indeed better as you move away from the river. This will help understand the contaminant gradient from the river to nearby wells, which could be further informed through a hydrogeologic investigation if there is sufficient data or information regarding the underlying aquifer. Depending on the available budget, zonal sampling of existing wells in the area may provide some indication of whether there is WQ stratification, e.g. do total dissolved solids (TDS) increase with depth? Is it possible to blend groundwater with surface water?

Given that is uncertain whether a new well could be located with improved water quality, we can only assume that the treatment process will be based around uranium, chloride, sulfate, hardness, and TDS. There are several treatment options for uranium, including anion exchange, lime softening, enhanced coagulation/filtration, reverse osmosis (RO) activated alumina adsorption, and electrodialysis, for instance, but the RO option will effectively treat for uranium, chloride, and TDS. This would be confirmed by performing a desktop study of available treatment technologies based on actual water quality data collected in the field.

Alternatives Analysis For a 20-customer system, it is unlikely the community is going to be able to afford a centralized reverse osmosis facility that can meet their distribution demand needs, including fire flows. Based on the selected treatment technology, HDR would investigate three alternatives:

1. Centralized treatment, installed either at the river or at a new well location

2. Point-of-use (POU) treatment, e.g. installed under the sink at 1-2 faucets in each house

3. Point-of-entry (POE), e.g. an accessible unit at the property line or designated entry point to the house HDR recommends purchasing several types of POU devices and testing them with source water until breakthrough is achieved, both to understand treatment efficacy and the filter replacement cycle. For a centralized system, HDR recommends performing rapid small scale column testing (RSSCT) to measure treatment efficacy, breakthrough, and empty bed contact time to inform the design. HDR will provide capital costs, operations and maintenance costs, and ultimately life-cycle costs for each of the treatment options to allow the community to select a preferred path forward. Using this HDR completed a similar study for Tucson Water’s Silverbell West isolated system that had both 1,4-dioxane and PFAS contamination, and Tucson Water ultimately elected to furnish portable POU pitchers.

Preliminary Engineering Report and Funding Applications Once the community/utility/ADEQ have decided on a treatment option, HDR would prepare a preliminary engineering report (PER) that can be leveraged for funding applications. The PER would outline the project location, justification, design criteria, process flow diagram, process mechanical systems, electrical and emergency power supply, instrumentation and controls concepts and SCADA networking, civil and yard piping, structures and associated foundation requirements and building classifications, architectural codes (if required), fire and life safety systems, and a permitting plan. The PER would also provide a life-cycle cost evaluation of options and selection of the preferred alternative. It is important to note that availability of WIFA and/or other state/federal grant programs might provide an opportunity to offset the costs of a centralized treatment plant. HDR can work with the community to identify funding opportunities that they may wish to pursue.

Preferred Alternative Without the benefit of a cost analysis to compare alternatives, it’s impossible to say which alternative we would recommend. However, this is what we would propose as the best path forward:

· The cost of a centralized treatment system, whether at the river or a new well, is likely to be outside the cost range of a 20-person community, especially considering that it would likely require a certified operator and ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M) that would be outside the technical capability of the local community. This lends itself towards a POU solution, especially when considering that POE devices will be larger and require some amount of qualified O&M. The selection of a POU solution is also favorable when considering fire flows, typically 1,500 gallons per minute for two hours, that would dramatically oversize a centralized treatment process beyond meeting typical household demands. The impacts associated with fire flows would need to be further explored to see if there is adequate storage in the existing elevated tank, but this is doubtful given the size of the community. With a POU solution, the existing water supply and distribution system is assumed to be capable of meeting fire flow demands.

· Assuming a suitable POU device is shown to be effective for uranium and removal of secondary contaminants, the community would have to support this solution and be willing to allow a contractor into their homes to install the POU units. Having a licensed contractor install the units is important for making sure they were installed correctly. The community/utility/ADEQ would need to enter a services contract with a third-party firm to receive customer calls, respond to service requests, and provide routine maintenance and/or replacement cartridges. The costs associated with these activities would have to be negotiated with the customers/utility/ADEQ.

· The community could apply for federal or state funding to construct a centralized treatment system. If their funding request is successful, HDR could then complete the design while customers remain on POU supply.

Solicitation Attachment – Method of Approach | Revision No. 1 | Revised 11-22 1 image1.png image2.png image3.jpeg image4.jpg