1-INTERA_BPM006379_Attachment_12_-_Method_of_Approach.pdf

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

Solicitation Attachment – Method of Approach | Revision No. 1 | Revised 11-22

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:

We understand the unique challenges faced by very small utilities. The small number of customers served generates limited revenue to fund salaries and operating expenses, let alone necessary capital improvements. With minimal, generally part-time employees, small utilities do not have the same available staff time and resources that larger utilities have to collect data requested by engineers and other consultants, review and comment on technical documents, and prepare documentation and applications for much needed funding support. Our proposed Project Manager has first-hand utility engineering and management experience with water systems ranging in size from very small to very large. Many of these systems were small, formerly distressed systems with multiple challenges including failing infrastructure, poor water quality, and regulatory compliance issues. We understand the need for thoughtful, innovative solutions that are sustainable financially and operationally with the staff and resources available to a small utility.

Some of the specific steps that we would take in our approach to supporting small utilities are as follows.

We will first seek to understand the technical, managerial, and financial capacity of the utility’s operations and management staff to adapt our approach for the project to the capabilities and available time and resources of the utility’s staff.

We will favor practical, cost-effective solutions that are “right-sized” and appropriate for the utility’s technical expertise and financial capacity to operate and maintain.

We will be cognizant of limited staff, time, and resources when making requests to the utility for data.

For larger utilities, it may be reasonable to simply deliver draft technical documents for review and comment by the utility.

For smaller utilities with limited or part-time staff, we will facilitate review of technical documents with meetings and workshops to ensure understanding of the assumptions, designs, costs, operational requirements, and risks associated with each alternative to obtain high quality input from management and operations staff and to support confident decision making by the utility.

Every solution will be conceived and evaluated with emphasis on consideration of the requirements for reliable, sustainable operation by the utility. Requirements for additional operator training or licensure will be carefully considered and communicated.

Understanding that local representatives of other agencies and organizations may provide ongoing technical managerial and financial (TMF) assistance to the utility, we will seek their input and advice and will consider their ongoing role in ensuring the sustainability of proposed solutions.

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)

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 & permitting of a treatment system for a small public water system? Describe the steps that you take to select the best treatment technology.

N/A - INTERA Incorporated is only proposing to provide services in Service Categories 18 and 20.

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

Ensuring that a proposed solution is practical, cost-effective, and sustainable for any system starts with understanding the technical, managerial, and financial capacity of the utility. We will seek to minimize the technical complexity and operational requirements of alternatives considered as potential solutions. Small systems do not have the time or resources for multiple attempts to address their reliability and compliance challenges. To ensure selection of robust, no-regrets solutions we will work to anticipate risks, future regulations, and understand uncertainties in current and future conditions. Where feasible, we will look for opportunities to achieve multiple benefits with proposed solutions. To ensure the financial sustainability of the proposed solutions, we will utilize life-cycle cost analysis to evaluate the potential rate impact of capital expenditures and ongoing operating costs. The costs for supplies and services have increased dramatically in recent years and it is critical to account for uncertainty in future prices when evaluating the financial impact of a project. The financial impact of alternatives will be evaluated considering funding opportunities available to offset initial capital costs. Any proposed changes in technology will be carefully evaluated together with the utility to ensure understanding of the operational and maintenance requirements. As noted in our response to Question 1, we will facilitate review of technical documents with meetings and workshops to ensure understanding of the assumptions, designs, costs, operational requirements, and risks associated with each alternative to obtain high quality input from management and operations staff and to support confident decision making by the utility. After an alternative is selected, we will ensure that utility operations and management staff receive adequate initial training and will work to ensure that sources of on-going support, such as other agencies or organizations and equipment manufacturers are identified and coordinated.

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?

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)

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?

INTERA will manage and monitor activities using a system that focuses on an appropriate task and sub-task level structure in conjunction with procedures and tools designed to ensure quality and efficiency of project performance. Project management and control functions will be executed in accordance with a well-established web-based system, Deltek’s Ajera, which integrates time keeping, accounting, and accounts receivable. Ajera is currently being used on all INTERA projects. Since the system is web-based, it is accessible anywhere and by any device with an internet connection. Our Project Manager, Dan Haddock, will establish the budget for each project task and assign each element of work an appropriate task code designation. This information is then used by our administrative staff to set up the project in the Ajera system. Dan will monitor the performance of each work element and has access to real-time progress reports that provide various levels of information for each task, as well as for the entire project. This includes personnel hours and direct costs charged to date, current estimates to complete the project, and a comparison of the current estimated total with the previously established budget.

Mr. Haddock will be responsible for scope management and will work closely with the Technical Leads and Resources to successfully execute project tasks. Changes or deviations to the work orders that are deemed necessary as a result of information and data obtained during previous phases of the project will be immediately communicated to the AZ DEQ PM. These changes and/or deviations will not be made without approval from the client and will be documented per AZ DEQ’s preferred method. The work order proposal will include a detailed project schedule, which will serve as the primary means of tracking and managing the overall project progress. Task start and end dates will also be entered into INTERA's Ajera project management system to automate schedule tracking. Any deviations to individual task or sub-task durations (e.g., field work delays resulting from weather, etc.) that may impact the overall project schedule will be immediately communicated to the AZ DEQ. The INTERA Project Manager will ensure that all project activities are completed in accordance with the project schedule. The cost proposal developed early in the work order process and approved by the TCEQ PM as part of the Work Order authorization will be used to establish a cost baseline for the project. Budgeted costs for each project task will be entered into the project management system, enabling our Project Manager to manage and track costs on a real-time basis. Scope, schedule, and cost will be topics of discussion in every weekly project team meeting.

INTERA uses cost tracking and control procedures that provide timely and accurate information concerning the physical progress of work and the status of project budgets. INTERA monitors task activities using a system that focuses on an appropriate task and sub-task level structure in conjunction with procedures and tools designed to ensure quality and efficiency of project performance. Each work order we receive is assigned a unique project number that will be further subdivided by sub-task, as appropriate. Project charges are posted daily, and the Project Manager is provided with real-time summaries of costs, including labor costs and other direct costs.

Our Project Manager can compare the expended budget to work completed on a real-time basis.

The cost tracking and control procedures that will be implemented are designed to provide AZ DEQ with timely and accurate information concerning the physical progress of work and the status of task budgets. If variances to the baseline schedule or budget are identified, this information will immediately be communicated to AZ DEQ, and a plan will be developed with AZ DEQ to get the schedule back on track. This may include adding additional comparably trained technical staff to work on the project tasks and/or enlisting the support of our Senior Technical Advisor and Technical Leads, who can manage the work orders at any point, to address shortfalls in the schedule and ensure timely completion of the project tasks and work order. Since the Ajera system generates cost status reports in real time (i.e., the reports are updated with every hour entered on a timesheet or whenever other direct costs are approved by the Project Manager and entered into the system), we can provide project reports to AZ DEQ at virtually any time or at any frequency.

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)

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?

Providing our clients with the highest quality services and work products is of paramount importance to INTERA. For us, quality includes not only the ability to provide a technically accurate and superior work product, but also the ability to complete work safely, on schedule, and at the agreed-upon price. To ensure that our work is of the highest quality, we maintain a corporate Quality Assurance Plan (QAP). Project activities that affect quality are conducted in accordance with documented procedures that specify the actions to be taken, organizational responsibilities for such actions, and established criteria for determining when the actions are satisfactorily completed. Our major QA objectives are to: deliver products that meet INTERA’s and our clients’ expectations for technical excellence in clarity, content, style, and organization; execute a committed and comprehensive review plan designed to eliminate mistakes; actively observe and manage project costs to complete tasks on schedule and within budget; and engage experienced experts while executing the project. Several concepts drive our QA program. These include having the appropriate leadership and organizational structures in place, performing detailed reviews of our own work, and establishing a QC plan and data collection plan to guide our efforts under each contract Work Order (WO). Additional details on these are provided below.

Leadership and Organizational Structures. INTERA’s management approach provides for a streamlined response to project demands and facilitates communications between clients and the project staff. INTERA provides clients with ready access to our Contract Manager, Project Manager, and Project Technical Leads. Our policy is to encourage clients to communicate freely and without delay if and when any concerns arise. INTERA’s management structure promotes cooperation among offices and provides regional vice presidents the authority to allocate resources to ensure that high quality work products and deliverables are provided on schedule and within budget.

Peer Reviews. Before beginning an assigned task and in conjunction with preparing the overall work plan, we establish a comprehensive list of intermediate tasks—milestones, products, deliverables—necessary for successful project completion. Qualified reviewers from the project team will then be identified and assigned to check the results of each of these tasks as the work proceeds.

Quality Control. To ensure successful completion of quality, cost, and schedule requirements, INTERA executes tasks in accordance with an established corporate QC Plan. Upon a client’s approval of work plans, our Project Manager identifies and documents the critical milestones and tasks that require review checks, and identifies an appropriate reviewer.

INTERA’s Document Quality Assurance Process is described and shown below –

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)

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?

INTERA recently completed a project for a medium sized system in California that included the evaluation of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that had impacted existing supply wells and the development of a risk-based plan for managing the cost of PFAS mitigation in existing and future wells. The project involved multiple staff within the agency and involved discussion of technical information, development of an agreed-upon framework for evaluating risk, and identification of reliable mitigation measures that were feasible for utility operations to manage. Because utility staff were typically very busy with day-to-day business, the project team favored holding progress meetings virtually to more efficiently accommodate schedules. After the first few months, it became apparent that we, the INTERA Team, were not obtaining timely and thorough input from utility staff in engineering, operations, water quality, and management. Because this input was critical to ensure that the analysis and recommendations could be sustainably implemented, this resulted in multiple rounds of review and schedule delays.

To overcome this problem, INTERA took immediate and longer-term actions. In the short term, our Project Manager scheduled one-on-one meetings with critical utility staff to elicit input and feedback on important issues. We also determined that periodic in-person meetings in workshop settings were necessary to ensure engagement and attention on critical issues. The in-person meetings were substituted for select virtual meetings. The changes that we implemented to engage the project team helped to ensure that utility staff understood the analysis, risks, and proposed alternatives associated with the project, and also that we received the requisite input and feedback that were vital to ensuring the final recommendations were operationally feasible and sustainable.

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:

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)

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):