REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Mt. Olympus Improvement District Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, Impact Fee Facilities Plan, Impact Fee Analysis, and Rate Study

1. Introduction Mt. Olympus Improvement District (the District) is soliciting proposals from qualified consulting firms to prepare a comprehensive Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, Impact Fee Facilities Plan (IFFP), Impact Fee Analysis (IFA), and Rate Study.

This procurement is intended to obtain planning, engineering analysis, financial, and regulatory compliance services. The District anticipates that one consultant may serve as the prime consultant and may include qualified subconsultants, including a financial subconsultant, as part of the consultant team.

The need for this Work is twofold:

1. The District is experiencing significant redevelopment and increased development densities, which may require additional or upgraded infrastructure to adequately serve current and future demands, and second

2. It has been several years since the District’s last comprehensive wastewater rate, planning and impact fee update.

The primary objective of this eƯort is to ensure that the District’s wastewater collection system has adequate capacity to accommodate projected growth and redevelopment, and to update the District’s impact fees and rates consistent with the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan and applicable state law.

The District anticipates that this project will commence in 2026 and be completed by the end of the third quarter of 2027.

The District will award the project based on qualifications, technical approach, experience with similar projects, project team, schedule, and cost.

The RFP is available for review by interested Consultants online at https://utah.bonfirehub.com/portal/.

2. Scope of Services The selected Consultant shall provide the following services:

Task 1 – Project Management Overall project management and coordination

Regular communication with District staƯ via monthly progress meetings

Development and maintenance of project schedule

Quality Control / Quality Assurance (QA/QC) procedures

RFP – MOID Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, IFFP, IFA, and Rate Study

Task 2 – Stakeholder Engagement Develop a stakeholder contact list (including South Salt Lake City, Millcreek City, Holladay City, Murray City, and other relevant agencies)

Coordinate with stakeholders to obtain:

o Anticipated future densities o General Plan updates o Planned redevelopment areas o Infrastructure planning documents

Prepare meeting agendas and facilitate meetings as necessary

Summarize stakeholder input in a technical memorandum or report appendix

QA/QC

Task 3 – Flow Monitoring Prepare a flow monitoring plan identifying approximately 24 monitoring locations

Coordinate with District staƯ regarding use of District-owned meters (two large trunkline meters and two small diameter meters)

Conduct flow monitoring

Compile and analyze flow data

QA/QC

Task 4 – Flow Characterization Meet with District personnel to review known collection system characteristics and problem areas

Conduct a literature review and a review of historical data

Develop population growth projections and residential equivalent factors (incorporating stakeholder input)

Evaluate flow monitoring data and develop peaking factors

Review WWTP flow data

Present findings and recommendations to District staƯ

QA/QC

Task 5 – Inflow & Infiltration (I&I) Analysis Obtain and evaluate winter water data

Obtain precipitation data and compare to system flow rates

Review WWTP and collection system flow data for I&I

Correlate meter data to water use and precipitation

Prepare a technical memorandum summarizing findings and recommendations

Attend meeting to review results

QA/QC

Task 6 – Model the Existing System & Identify Deficiencies Review, update and optimize the District’s existing hydraulic model

Model shall be developed in the latest version of EPA SWMM

Establish collection areas and develop average and peak loading rates

Calibrate and validate the existing conditions model

Identify hydraulic deficiencies under current conditions

Conduct a workshop with District staƯ to review deficiencies

6A – Detailed Evaluation of Known and Potential Deficient Areas In addition to general system-wide deficiency identification, the Consultant shall:

Perform a detailed analysis of three known deficient areas identified by the District:

o A62-1 (3300 S 1300 E) o A15-1 (3161 S West Temple) o H2 (5124 S Highland Dr)

Evaluate whether additional deficient areas exist elsewhere in the system

For each deficient area, develop and evaluate alternatives, including, but not limited to:

o Rerouting flows o Upsizing infrastructure o Installation of parallel lines o Operational modifications

Provide cost estimates and implementation considerations for each alternative

6B – Collection System Bypass Evaluation The Consultant shall conduct a detailed evaluation of all known existing bypass locations (15 – 20) within the collection system, including:

Analysis of how flows are currently split at bypass structures

Evaluation of how these bypasses impact model calibration and existing conditions

Assessment of current and future deficiencies that may be mitigated by:

o Rerouting flows o Optimizing existing bypass operations o Installing new bypasses (preferred where feasible due to cost-eƯectiveness and constructability)

Identification of opportunities for low-cost system optimization through strategic bypass improvements

Conduct an alternatives workshop

QA/QC

Task 7 – Future Conditions Modeling & Growth Area Analysis Conduct planning workshop with District staƯ

Define future collection area boundaries, densities, and flow projections

Develop 10-year and 30-year future condition hydraulic models

Identify and evaluate capital improvements necessary to address future deficiencies

7A – Millcreek City Growth Area Study (1300 E / 3300 S) The Consultant shall perform a focused and detailed analysis of the Millcreek City area near 1300 East and 3300 South, where significant high-density redevelopment is occurring. This task shall include:

Coordination with Millcreek City to obtain detailed projections of:

o Approved and anticipated developments o Zoning changes o Planned densities o Infrastructure planning assumptions

Evaluation of projected flows under multiple growth scenarios

Identification of infrastructure improvements required to accommodate anticipated growth

Assessment of system impacts both locally and downstream

Development of phased improvement strategies

QA/QC

Task 8 – Capital Facilities Plan Develop a prioritized Capital Improvement list with associated costs in today’s dollars

Prepare estimated implementation schedule

Identify potential funding sources

Develop I&I reduction recommendations

Prepare a draft Wastewater Collection System Master Plan

Present draft to District staƯ

Present final plan to District staƯ and Board

QA/QC

Task 9 – Impact Fee Facilities Plan (IFFP) Conduct IFFP planning meeting/workshop

Identify impact fee-eligible capital projects

Allocate proportional share of costs based on 10-year growth projections

Prepare IFFP document consistent with state requirements

Present to District Board and revise as necessary

QA/QC

Task 10 – Impact Fee Analysis (IFA) & Rate Study The Consultant shall coordinate with and retain a qualified financial subconsultant to:

Prepare Impact Fee Analysis (IFA)

Conduct Rate Study

Coordinate all data required for financial analysis

Present findings and recommendations to District staƯ and Board

QA/QC

Task 11 – Fee Schedule Update (Residential Equivalent Schedule) The Consultant shall review and update the District’s existing Wastewater Fee Schedule, which assigns Residential Equivalents (REs) to various types of development. The Consultant shall ensure the approach remains equitable, defensible, and consistent with wastewater generation assumptions. Recent development trends have introduced new or evolving types of development that are not adequately addressed in the existing schedule.

The Consultant shall evaluate and recommend appropriate RE assignments for:

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)

Food trucks and Food Truck Commissaries

Single-family residents over certain square feet

Identify all fee schedule categories that rely on projected water consumption and recommend alternative, more administratively practical units of measure.

3. Proposal Requirements The tasks described above shall be addressed in the consultant’s proposal, in addition to any other items the consultant wishes to submit for evaluation and consideration. Please detail any other pertinent information that would be beneficial in making the selection.

Proposals shall be concise, legible, and provide all the information requested. Minimum font size shall be 11 point. Proposals shall be prepared on 8 1/2” x 11” paper. 11” x 17” sheets, folded to 8.5” x 11” size, may be used for organization charts, photos, and exhibits and will count only as one page. 11” x 17” sheets shall not be used for any written text. Page orientation may be either portrait or landscape. Proposals shall be limited to a maximum of 25 PDF pages, excluding only the materials expressly excluded below.

A “page” shall be defined as one page of the electronic PDF, whether formatted as an 8 1/2" x 11” page, or as an 11” x 17” page for exhibits.

Tabbed or other dividers used to organize the RFP shall carry only the appropriate section name. Dividers that include any additional information such as narrative, charts, tables, pictures, graphics, and/or diagrams shall be included in the page count.

The only documentation not included in the page count are (if any) the front cover of the Proposal; section dividers containing no substantive information; cover letter;

and appendices (specifically the resumes; proposer’s comments to the Preconstruction Services Agreement, and level of eƯort spreadsheet for preconstruction services scope of work).

Pages exceeding the specified page limit will be removed from the Proposal, beginning with the last page subject to the page limit, and will not be evaluated or considered for scoring.

This procedure will be applied uniformly to all Proposals. If the District chooses to accept, all pages in excess of the specified page limit will be removed. The last page will be removed first. This content will not be included in the evaluation or considered for scoring to meet the evaluation criteria. If the removal of excess pages results in the omission of a minimum mandatory requirement, the Proposal may be rejected as nonresponsive.

The following five items should be addressed in the proposal:

1. Approach and Scope of Work. An organized description of what the consultant will do on each item in the consultant’s scope of work shall be stated. A description of the consultant's approach by which the work will be performed shall be stated. Areas of the Scope of Work that the consultant believes should be modified or combined to maximize the work and cost eƯiciency of the consultant shall be stated.

2. Project Team. Key staƯ members of the consultant, sub consultants or special consultants that will be committed to this project shall be identified along with the following information:

a. Specific areas of key staƯ member’s responsibility on this project and extent of involvement in these areas.

b. Summary of key staƯ member’s specific experience and qualifications in the areas of responsibility for this project. List of past projects of similar work performed by key staƯ members detailing their responsibilities and extent of involvement on these projects (list year, project type, size, etc.).

c. A brief résumé of the proposed project manager and his/her experience in managing similar projects.

3. Location of OƯice. Location of oƯice(s) where the actual work will be performed;

including location of key personnel shall be stated. Preference will be given to consultants who are located within 50 miles of the District.

4. Schedule. The consultant shall include a schedule for completing the consultant's services showing a relative time frame from receiving a signed agreement from the District.

5. Fee Proposal. The consultant shall submit with the proposal, in a separate PDF document, a not-to-exceed fee for the services outlined by task with a total fee summed. Accompanying the consultant’s fee shall be a spreadsheet giving a breakdown of the consultant’s fee showing the estimated hours of key members and staƯ associated with each task, along with their hourly rates, fee extensions, and other costs.

4. Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Schedule The consultant's proposal will be evaluated based on the following factors:

1. The professional qualifications available through the consultant for performance of the services required (15%);

2. The extent of specialized experience of the proposed project manager, the project team, and the firm in the type of work required (15%);

3. Past performance of the proposed project manager, the project team, and the firm on similar projects (30%);

4. Whether the consultant maintains an oƯice and full-time personnel within the state of Utah and in proximity to the District (10%);

5. The capacity of the consultant to accomplish the work within an acceptable time frame (10%); and

6. The acceptability of the fee within which the consultant indicates it can accomplish the work (20%).

Each category except for Cost/Fee will be scored by the evaluation committee on a scale of 1 - 10, where 1 indicates that the proposal fails to address some or all of the requirements described in the RFP or fails to demonstrate that the oƯeror can perform the scope of work, and 10 indicates that the proposal addresses and exceeds all of the requirements or criteria described in the RFP. The category will then be given a corresponding percentage point. For instance, if a category is worth 20% of the overall score, a score of 10 will receive all 20 available points for that category. A score of 9 will receive 90% (9/10, in other words) of the available percentage points for that category, which, in this example, equals 18 points, and so on.

The cost/fee proposal will be reviewed separately by an individual not part of the evaluation committee using a scale of 0 - 20, and the cost score will be added in after the scoring of the proposal is complete. The oƯeror with the lowest proposed price will receive 100% of the pricing points (20 points). All other Proposers will receive a portion of the total pricing points based the lowest price divided by the Proposer’s price multiplied by the total possible points.

Cost Score Formula:

Cost Score = (L/P)*T

Where:

L - Lowest Price

P - Proposer Price

T - Total Possible Points for Pricing (20)

Examples:

Low Bid: $100 = 100/100*20=20.000

Mid Bid: $176 = 100/176*20=11.364

High Bid: $210 = 100/210*20=9.524

Other Considerations

1. All proposals in response to this RFP will be evaluated in a manner consistent with the District’s and Utah state procurement code and all applicable rules and policies.

In the initial phase of the proposal evaluation process, the evaluation committee will review all proposals timely received. First, non-responsive proposals (those not conforming to RFP requirements) will be eliminated. Second, the remaining proposals will be evaluated in a cursory manner to eliminate from further consideration those proposals, which in the judgment of the evaluation committee, fail to oƯer suƯicient and substantive provisions to warrant further consideration.

2. Each Respondent shall bear sole responsibility for the items included or not included in the response submitted by that Respondent. The District reserves the right to disqualify any proposal that includes significant deviations or exceptions to the terms, conditions, and/or specifications in this RFP.

3. After proposals are received, some consultants may be contacted to set up an interview where both the District and the consultant can ask and answer questions.

4. The District reserves the right to be the sole judge as to the overall acceptability of any proposal or to judge the individual merits of specific provisions within competing oƯers.

5. The District may award a contract resulting from this request to the responsible consultant who is most advantageous to the District based on the evaluation criteria.

6. The District may (1) reject the proposal and/or (2) waive informalities and minor irregularities in the proposal received.

7. The District may award a contract based on the initial proposal received, without discussions. Therefore, the initial proposal should contain the best terms from a technical and cost standpoint.

8. The District’s request for proposals does not obligate the District to award any contract or to pay any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal, interview or associated materials.

RFP Questions and Addenda

1. This RFP will be posted on the State of Utah’s Procurement portal (BonFire).

Questions regarding this request must be submitted online at:

https://utah.bonfirehub.com/portal/.

2. The District will review questions, requests for interpretation or correction, and at its discretion, amend or supplement the RFP by written addendum issued through BonFire. Statements or responses via any other means, either oral or written, made by the District, or its representatives shall not amend the RFP Documents.

3. This RFP is subject to revision after the date of issuance only by written addenda posted on BonFire. It is each Proposer’s responsibility, to obtain and review all RFP addenda prior to submitting its proposal.

4. By signing and submitting a Proposal, the Proposer acknowledges that it has registered on BonFire and has reviewed all materials on the website, including any addenda to this RFP.

5. In no event will the District be liable for any costs incurred by any Proposer or any other party in developing or submitting a Proposal.

6. Deadline for inquiries is Wednesday, September 30, 2026. Responses to inquiries will be provided by the close of business on Wednesday, October 7, 2026.

7. RFP’s must be submitted via the BonFire website as defined within the Submission Requirements. The District reserves the right to reject any and all Proposals in accordance with the Utah Procurement Code and the District’s Purchasing Policy and Procedures. Responsive Proposals submitted by responsible Proposers will be reviewed by the evaluation committee using the process and criteria stated in the RFP.

Communications

Proposers or their agents shall not contact evaluation committee members, District employees, or the Board of Trustees concerning this procurement, except through BonFire or as otherwise expressly authorized by this RFP. Proposers and their agents shall not attempt to manipulate or improperly influence the procurement process in any way. These restrictions apply from the date of release of this RFP to the date of execution of the Agreement resulting from this solicitation. A violation of this Section may result in disqualification, as determined by the Procurement Official in accordance with applicable law and the District’s Purchasing Policy and Procedures.

Submittal Place and Deadline

1. Proposals must be submitted electronically to the District through the BonFire website no later than 3:00 p.m. local time on October 14, 2026.

2. Proposer shall submit one ready-for-print electronic document in .pdf format, except that a Proposer claiming protection for confidential information shall submit the separate redacted and unredacted versions required by Section 5 below.

3. Proposer assumes full responsibility for timely delivery of its Proposal at the required location. Any Proposal received after the submittal deadline will be deemed nonresponsive. Proposers are responsible for allowing sufficient time to complete all BonFire forms and upload all required documents before the deadline.

4. Proposals shall remain effective for ninety (90) days beyond the submittal date.

5. Protected Information Under the Government Records Access and Management Act, Utah Code § 63G-2-101 et seq. (GRAMA), certain information in the proposal submitted may be open for public inspection. If the Applicant desires to have information contained in its proposal protected from such disclosure, the Applicant may request such treatment by providing a "written claim of business confidentiality and a concise statement of reasons supporting the claim of business confidentiality" with the proposal (See Utah Code § 63G-2-305 and 309). Pricing elements of any proposal will not be considered protected. A business confidentiality claim form is available on the Utah State Records Committee website at:

https://archives.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/GRAMA_claim_of_business_confidentiality.pdf

6. Contract Terms and Conditions The successful consultant will be required to enter into a written Professional Services Agreement with the District. A sample form of Professional Services Agreement is attached as Exhibit A and identifies material terms and conditions the District intends to be included in the final contract. The District reserves the right to negotiate revisions to the sample agreement, scope of services, schedule, and compensation with the highest-ranked oƯeror, or to use a contract form provided by the consultant, provided that any final agreement remains consistent with this RFP and applicable law.

Any exceptions to the sample Professional Services Agreement shall be clearly identified in the proposal. The District may consider proposed exceptions in evaluating responsiveness and responsibility, and the District may reject a proposal that contains material exceptions the District is unwilling to accept.

EXHIBIT A

SAMPLE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TERMS

This Sample terms sheet is provided for informational purposes only. The District expects the final agreement to be substantially similar to this form, subject to negotiation of scope, fee, schedule, and other project-specific terms.

1. Services.

The Consultant shall perform the services described in the final scope of services attached to the Agreement, together with such additional services as may be authorized in writing by the District. The Consultant shall furnish all labor, supervision, expertise, materials, equipment, and incidentals reasonably necessary to perform the services.

The Consultant shall perform the services in a professional and timely manner, in accordance with generally accepted standards of care exercised by members of the Consultant’s profession currently practicing under similar circumstances in Utah.

2. Term and Schedule.

The term of the Agreement shall commence on the effective date stated in the fully executed Agreement and shall continue until completion of the services, unless earlier terminated in accordance with the Agreement. The Consultant shall perform the services in accordance with the schedule approved by the District, subject to extensions approved in writing.

3. Compensation.

The District shall compensate the Consultant in accordance with the cost/fee schedule and payment terms set forth in the Agreement. Unless otherwise stated in writing, compensation shall be on a not-to-exceed basis, inclusive of ordinary expenses, and no increase in the not-to-exceed amount shall be effective unless approved in writing by the District.

The Consultant shall submit invoices in reasonable detail identifying the work performed, the personnel performing the work, the time incurred, and reimbursable expenses, if any.

The District may withhold payment on disputed amounts pending reasonable review of the invoice.

4. Consultant Responsibilities.

The Consultant represents that it is duly licensed, qualified, and authorized to perform the services required by the Agreement and will maintain all required licenses and registrations throughout the term of the Agreement.

The Consultant shall designate a project manager authorized to act on behalf of the Consultant. The Consultant shall not replace key personnel identified in its proposal without the District’s prior written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.

The Consultant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations, ordinances, and orders applicable to the services and to the Consultant’s performance under the Agreement.

The Consultant is responsible for the acts and omissions of its officers, employees, agents, subconsultants, and subcontractors in connection with the services.

5. District Responsibilities.

The District shall designate a representative authorized to act on behalf of the District for purposes of administering the Agreement.

The District shall make available to the Consultant information in the District’s possession that the District reasonably determines is relevant to the services. The Consultant may rely on information furnished by the District unless the Consultant knows or reasonably should know that the information is materially inaccurate or incomplete.

6. Ownership and Use of Work Product.

Reports, studies, memoranda, models, calculations, electronic files, and other deliverables prepared by the Consultant for the project shall become the property of the District upon payment of all amounts properly due under the Agreement, except that the Consultant retains ownership of its standard details, software, tools, methodologies, know-how, and other instruments of service that are not uniquely prepared for the District.

The District may use the deliverables for the project for which they are prepared. Reuse or modification of deliverables for another project or for construction without appropriate review by a qualified professional shall be at the District’s sole risk, except to the extent resulting from Consultant’s negligence or other breach of the Agreement.

7. Records; Public Records.

The Consultant shall maintain records relating to the services and charges under the Agreement for at least four (4) years after final payment, or longer if required by law. Upon reasonable notice, the District or its authorized representatives may review and copy such records to the extent relevant to the Agreement.

Because the District is subject to the Government Records Access and Management Act, Utah Code Title 63G, Chapter 2, Consultant acknowledges that records provided to or created for the District may be subject to disclosure unless protected by law.

8. Insurance.

The Consultant shall maintain, at its own expense and throughout the term of the Agreement, insurance of the types and in the minimum amounts reasonably required by the District, including workers’ compensation insurance as required by law, commercial general liability insurance, automobile liability insurance, and professional liability/errors and omissions insurance.

Before commencing services, the Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance evidencing the required coverages. The District may require additional insured status on liability policies other than professional liability, as appropriate.

9. Indemnification; Governmental Immunity.

To the extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless the District and its officers, employees, and agents from and against claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, but only to the extent caused by the negligent acts, errors, omissions, or willful misconduct of the Consultant or those for whom the Consultant is responsible.

To the extent permitted by law, the District shall be responsible only for its own negligent acts and omissions and those of its officers, employees, and agents. Nothing in the Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of any immunity, defense, limitation, or protection available to the District under the Governmental Immunity Act of Utah or other applicable law.

10. Independent Contractor.

The Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee, agent, joint venturer, or partner of the District. The Consultant has no authority to bind the District except as expressly authorized in writing.

11. Changes in Services.

The District may request changes, deletions, or additions to the services. No adjustment in compensation or time for performance shall be effective unless set forth in a written amendment or change order executed by authorized representatives of the parties.

12. Suspension and Termination.

The District may suspend the services or terminate the Agreement, in whole or in part, for convenience upon written notice to the Consultant. In that event, the Consultant shall be entitled to payment for services properly performed through the effective date of suspension or termination, together with authorized reimbursable expenses then due, but shall not be entitled to anticipatory profits or consequential damages.

Either party may terminate the Agreement for cause if the other party materially breaches the Agreement and fails to cure the breach within a reasonable time after written notice.

13. Assignment and Subconsultants.

The Consultant shall not assign the Agreement without the District’s prior written consent.

The Consultant may retain subconsultants identified in its proposal and approved by the District, but the Consultant remains fully responsible for the performance of the services.

14. Notices.

Notices required under the Agreement shall be in writing and delivered personally, by nationally recognized overnight courier, or by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the addresses stated in the final Agreement, or to such other address as a party may designate by notice.

15. Governing Law; Venue; Entire Agreement.

The Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Utah. Venue for any action arising out of the Agreement shall lie exclusively in a court of competent jurisdiction in Salt Lake County, Utah, unless otherwise required by law.

The final written Agreement, including all exhibits and authorized amendments, shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter of the Agreement and shall supersede prior negotiations and understandings concerning that subject matter.

16. Anti-Boycott.

In accordance with Utah Code §§ 63G-27-102 through 63G-27-202, the Consultant certifies that: (A) The Consultant is not currently engaged in a boycott of the State of Israel or an economic boycott as defined in Utah Code § 63G-27-102. (B) The Consultant agrees not to engage in such boycotts for the duration of this contract. (C) The Consultant will notify the public entity in writing if it begins engaging in an economic boycott during the term of this contract. A notice under item (C) may be grounds for termination of this contract. This clause does not apply if the contract is valued below $100,000 or if the Contractor has fewer than 10 full-time employees, unless otherwise required by law.

17. E-Verify.

The Consultant shall comply with license laws as required by the State of Utah. The Consultant certifies that it is registered with the and uses a Status Verification System as defined in Utah Code Ann. § 63G-12-102(21), such as E-verify, to certify the employment status of new employees who work under the Consultant's supervision or direction within the state of Utah, as required by Utah Code Ann. § 63G-12-302(3)(b) and, further, that the Consultant is in compliance with and will remain in compliance throughout the term of the contract with the requirements of Utah Code Ann. § 63G-12- 302(3), including requiring a similar employee status verification by affidavit from all approved subcontractors working on the project. The Consultant and subcontractors shall comply with any and all local, state and/or federal laws, rules, regulations and/or ordinances applicable to the work.