20251007_GWK_RFP_Feasibility.pdf

JIM NASH

OAKLAND COUNTY WATER RESOURCES COMMISSIONER

Page 1 of 13 12/4/2023

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

ENGINEERING SERVICES

FEASIBILITY STUDY TO EVALUATE

DECHLORINATION AND DISINFECTION

ALTERNATIVES AT THE GEORGE W.

KUHN RETENTION TREATMENT BASIN

OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN

PREPARED BY:

OAKLAND COUNTY WATER RESOURCES COMMISSIONER’S OFFICE BUILDING

95 WEST

ONE PUBLIC WORKS DRIVE WATERFORD, MICHIGAN 48328-1907

Date: October 7, 2025

Page 2 of 13 12/4/2023

PURPOSE

The purpose of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is for the George W. Kuhn Drain Drainage District (Owner) to solicit proposals from professional engineering firms (Consultant) for the completion of a Feasibility Study for the disinfection alternatives at the George W. Kuhn (GWK) Retention Treatment Basin (RTB.) A juried selection process will be used to establish a final award for this project. Each proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the criteria described herein.

Scoring will be based on the Consultant’s proposed fee as well as the demonstrated understanding of the project including local knowledge, scope of services, schedule, personnel assigned to the project and related project experience. The Owner will enter negotiations with the highest ranked firm when the final scope of work is formalized.

BACKGROUND

The George W. Kuhn Drain Drainage District (the “District”) consists of both combined and separated sanitary districts. The combined sewer system of the District serves all or part of 14 communities, encompassing a drainage area of 24,500 acres upstream of the Red Run Drain, a tributary of the Clinton River in the Lake St. Clair Watershed. During dry weather, both the separated and combined systems flow southeast to the Great Lakes Water Authority (GLWA) system for treatment. During wet weather, flow regulators in the collection system close and redirect the combined flow north to the GWK RTB for treatment. The RTB and upstream collection can retain approximately 124 million gallons before discharging to the Red Run Drain.

The current facilities ensure there are no untreated combined sewer overflows from the District.

The tributary area is considered fully developed primarily with medium-to-high density, single-family homes and some commercial and light industrial areas.

The RTB is authorized through its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. MI0026115 to discharge treated (skimmed, screened, settled, and disinfected) combined sewage flows to the Red Run Drain. The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE) refers to these treated flows as “RTB Discharges” to differentiate them from untreated Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) or untreated sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs.)

The District is a Public Corporation established under Chapter 20 of the Michigan Drain Code and is administered by an elected Drain Board and the Oakland County Water Resources Commissioner, which is an elected position.

The District’s facilities include:

Collection System and Outlets

• Over 125 miles of combined sewer system, with infrastructure dating back to 1866.

• Sewer sizes range from 10” diameter to a triple 144” x 144” box culvert.

• Dry weather flow is directed to GLWA via the Dequindre Road Interceptor Sewer.

Page 3 of 13 12/4/2023

• Contractual maximum discharge rate to GLWA is 260 cubic feet per second (cfs).

• During wet weather, excess flow is diverted to the GWK RTB.

GWK RTB

• Originally built in 1972 with 94 million gallons of storage capacity.

• Expanded in 2006 to 124 million gallons, incorporating new screening and disinfection. It is now one of the largest screening facilities.

• Dewatering, flushing and sampling systems.

• Further improved in 2024 with a new 25-million-gallon storage tunnel under Interstate I-

75 for a total current system storage of 149 million gallons.

RTB Disinfection System

• Disinfection is achieved at the RTB using liquid sodium hypochlorite, typically received at a concentration of 15%, which is then diluted to approximately 4% to 8% and stored in eight (8) fiberglass storage tanks, each with a capacity of 18,750 gallons, for a total volume of 150,000 gallons.

• Eight (8) titanium sealed centrifugal pumps of various capacities are utilized to dose sodium hypochlorite between 7 gpm and 1,074 gpm to diffusers and 16 submersible mixers.

• There is no dechlorination provided. Operators sample at the point of discharge to monitor total residual chlorine (TRC) and adjust dosing to meet permit limits and goals.

Operation Wet weather flows enter and exit the RTB via gravity and most wet weather events are captured within the RTB. The RTB overflows to the Red Run Drain approximately 8 to 9 times per year on average. The influent flow rate is based on runoff from precipitation events over the catchment and is 0 cubic feet per second (cfs) during dry weather. The RTB has a design flow rate of 6,700 cfs for the 10-year, 1-hour design storm event. However, influent flow rates have reached up to 12,000 cfs.

The District’s NPDES permit includes the following effluent limitations

• Fecal coliform bacteria limit of 400 cts/100 ml (May through October) and 1,000 cts/100 ml (November through April.)

• Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) goal of 1.5 mg/l as an event average effluent concentration and an event instantaneous maximum effluent concentration of 2.0 mg/l (November through April) and 3.0 mg/l (May through October.)

The District is generally able to comply with the NPDES fecal coliform bacteria limits and TRC goals, but this requires a high degree of operational oversight and preparation before, during and after overflow events. The firm selected for this RFP will complete a Feasibility Study to evaluate dechlorination and disinfection alternatives as described in the following section.

Page 4 of 13 12/4/2023

SUMMARY OF OBJECTIVES

The GWK RTB NPDES permit was renewed August 1, 2025, and requires the District to undertake a Feasibility Study to evaluate actions that would be necessary for the RTB to achieve compliance with Michigan’s Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation (WQBEL) for TRC. The Study is required to examine the existing facility’s infrastructure and performance and identify additional control measures needed to achieve compliance with the WQBEL for TRC. The State’s WQBEL for TRC is 0.038 mg/l. The NPDES permit requires the study to be completed and submitted by August 1, 2027.

The Study should include a consideration of alternatives to comply with WQBEL while considering technical, financial, and operational constraints, along with a recommended alternative, project cost estimate, and schedule for implementation.

As part of the Feasibility Study, consultants are being asked to review operation of the existing facilities and consider various alternatives for achieving WQBEL at the effluent of the RTB while consistently also meeting the fecal coliform bacteria limit. We anticipate the alternatives that will be considered to include the following at a minimum:

• Continued use of liquid sodium hypochlorite for disinfection with the addition of dechlorination to meet the required WQBEL.

• Use of alternative disinfection methods, such as peracetic acid and performic acid.

• Other potential disinfection methods.

The Consultant shall organize their proposed work plan and associated fee by task, as described herein:

• Task 1: Review existing information related to the facility, initiate a kickoff meeting with the Owner to confirm scope of work and desired outcomes and deliverables. Provide a draft outline of the Feasibility Study and define resources and any data or additional information required by the Owner. Identify primary alternatives for achieving WQBEL that will be considered in the Study.

• Task 2: Conduct Feasibility Study while having regular progress meetings with Owner.

Conduct all research and data collection required to effectively evaluate alternatives. This shall include at a minimum development of a Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) computer model with the goal of simulating existing hydraulics and mixing conditions for the existing disinfection system. The CFD model shall be developed using the RTB’s physical geometry that is established by using 3D laser scanning of the inside of the facility.

Deliver 50% Draft Feasibility Study report document for review and comment by Owner.

The Draft shall identify principal alternatives that merit further consideration and possibly eliminate options that are cost prohibitive, or not feasible due to technical, construction/siting, or operational considerations. For the options that are determined to be feasible; the Consultant shall develop preliminary construction costs and initial 20-

Page 5 of 13 12/4/2023 year Life Cycle Cost (LCC) that incorporate operational; maintenance; chemical; and energy costs.

• Task 3: After Owner reviews the 50% draft report and comments are incorporated, develop a draft submittal that provides background data and summarizes the principal alternatives for submittal to EGLE. Meet with Owner and EGLE to discuss work completed to date and receive and incorporate EGLE comments and feedback. Discuss any considerations or scope adjustments required with Owner to complete remainder of Study.

• Task 4: Deliver 90% Draft Feasibility Study that includes cost estimates for the principal alternatives and preliminary process flow diagrams, site plans, and other figures and drawings required to demonstrate the constructability of the principal alternatives.

Provide the report to Owner for review and incorporate Owner comments into Study.

• Task 5: Deliver Final Feasibility Study for Owner submittal to EGLE. Provide ongoing assistance to Owner to review and address comments and questions from EGLE for up to nine months after submission. Deliverables shall be provided in accordance with the terms and conditions provided. Provide the report to Owner for review and incorporate Owner comments into Study.

• Task 6: Under the direction of a qualified biologist, evaluate implementation of EGLE’s WQBEL as it relates to water quality in the Red Run Drain. The headwaters of the Red Run Drain is at the confluence of multiple separated storm water discharges and the discharge from the GWK RTB. The evaluation shall examine existing conditions of the entirety of the Red Run Drain during times of discharge from the RTB. The goal of the evaluation would be to determine the impact of lowering and/or eliminating the TRC that currently flows from the GWK RTB on the receiving waters. A baseline of existing conditions shall be established and then compared to the condition where TRC is reduced to the WQBEL and/or eliminated. A computer model may be used for this purpose and some historical sampling data is available for establishing the baseline condition.

REQUIRED SCHEDULE

The Study shall adhere to the following schedule:

• Submit 50% Draft Study by August 1, 2026.

• Submit Final Feasibility Study by June 1, 2027. Owner will submit to EGLE by no later than August 1, 2027, as required by the NPDES schedule.

• A preliminary work plan and schedule shall be as part of the RFQ.

Page 6 of 13 12/4/2023

SCOPE OF CONSULTANT’S SERVICES

A further breakdown of requested services needed to fulfill the stated objectives above is provided in the attached Engineering Services Agreement located in Appendix A. The Engineering Services Agreement consists of the following documents, which together will form the contract between the Owner and Engineer:

1. DC-391 Part A – Engineering Services Agreement

2. DC-391 Part B – Engineering Services Agreement Standard Terms and Conditions

3. The forms selected with an “X” below:

☒ PRE-391 – PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE SERVICES

DPS-391 – DESIGN PHASE SERVICES

BID-391 – BIDDING SERVICES

AMS-391 – ASSET MANAGEMENT SERVICES

CON-391 – CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES

SUR-391 – CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING AND LAYOUT SERVICES

RE-391 – RESIDENT ENGINEER SERVICES

RPR-391 – RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE SERVICES

ADD-391 – ADDITIONAL SPECIAL SERVICES

Engineer’s Proposal, dated [ ] (scope of work only).

PROPOSAL FORMAT

The Consultant’s proposal shall be presented in an 8-1/2" x 11" format (figures no larger than 11"x 17"). The text shall be concise with emphasis placed on completeness and clarity. The proposal shall be submitted electronically in PDF format and shall include three separate files:

one with the proposal scope (Section I-III), one with the proposed fee (Section IV), and one including all administrative forms (Section V). Scoring will be conducted by the Selection Committee. Proposals shall be limited to 40 pages with a font of 11 or larger. Resumes and administrative forms will not be counted towards the size of the Proposal. Separate each of the following Sections by tabs. Follow the outline in the Sections when putting together the Proposal.

The Owner, at its option, may employ a second phase of the selection process consisting of an oral presentation of the Consultant’s proposal, an interview, or a combination of the two.

Consultants who submit a complete response to this RFP may be required to make one or more oral presentations to the Owner’s representatives. These presentations provide an opportunity for the Consultant to clarify their submittal to ensure that the Selection Committee has a thorough understanding of the submittal and ask questions of the Consultant to clarify the requirements of the RFP. At this time, the Selection Committee also may pose questions to the Consultants regarding their submittals.

Page 7 of 13 12/4/2023

The submission of additional pertinent information beyond the requirements of this RFP is acceptable.

Consultants will be evaluated and ranked on the information provided in Sections I through IV, but the information described in Sections V is required but will not be a part of the overall ranking.

Section I – Understanding of the Project, Scope of Consultant’s Services and Duration Schedule Introduction - Provide a maximum two-page introduction with a brief discussion of the Consultant’s past accomplishments, awards, recognitions, as well as the Consultant’s understanding of the project scope and how the firm is situated to address that scope.

Work Plan - Provide a detailed work plan that discusses how the Consultant will meet each task of the scope of the Project as detailed in the Engineering Services Agreement located in Appendix A. Discuss the proposed planning, organization, and management tools to be used to control schedule and costs. Include any anticipated design delegation to the Contractor.

Schedule - The Consultant shall provide a preliminary schedule for the Work Plan and deliverables with an anticipated completion date for each task. Assume a Notice to Proceed date of January 13, 2026. Key deliverables are identified in the Engineering Services Agreement located in Appendix A. Schedules shall be provided in Gantt chart format.

The weighted value of this Section will be 30% of the overall evaluation by the Selection committee.

Section II - Personnel Assigned to Project (Project Team) Provide the name of the Project Manager(s) to be assigned this work along with a description of their experience and expertise. This person(s) will direct and coordinate all phases of the project.

Also list the names of other key members of the project team along with their experience and expertise, and specific work they will be responsible for. Provide an organizational chart of all team members to show hierarchy and interactions within the project team.

If sub-Consultants are to be used, list the key individuals from these firms and their expertise and include on the organizational chart. If the same members are not included in each phase, please list them separately and identify the project phases they will be involved in.

Include anticipated hours for each person that a resume has been submitted for, including all Sub-consultants.

The naming of personnel as listed above will be considered by this office to be the design project team and will be expected to be assigned to the project for its duration.

Any legal arrangement proposed between the firms comprising a “joint venture, team, sub-consultants, etc.” is to be explained in the proposal.

Page 8 of 13 12/4/2023

While there are no set minimum requirements for MBE, WBE or DBE involvement on this project, the Owner is committed to maximizing economic opportunities for qualified small, minority-owned, and economically disadvantaged business enterprises. The Consultant shall provide their method for maximizing opportunities for inclusion and diversity participation for this solicitation. Good faith efforts in reporting will include the firms contacted and why they declined as well as firms recommended for award and other pertinent information.

Consultant shall act in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations: 2 CFR § 200.321 - Contracting with small and minority businesses, women's business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms:

(a) The non-Federal entity must take all necessary affirmative steps to assure that minority businesses, women's business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms are used when possible.

(b) Affirmative steps must include:

(1) Placing qualified small and minority businesses and women's business enterprises on solicitation lists;

(2) Assuring that small and minority businesses, and women's business enterprises are solicited whenever they are potential sources;

(3) Dividing total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or quantities to permit maximum participation by small and minority businesses, and women's business enterprises;

(4) Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirement permits, which encourage participation by small and minority businesses, and women's business enterprises;

(5) Using the services and assistance, as appropriate, of such organizations as the Small Business Administration and the Minority Business Development Agency of the Department of Commerce; and

(6) Requiring the prime contractor, if subcontracts are to be let, to take the affirmative steps listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section.

The following resources may be of assistance to the Consultant in this effort: Michigan Unified Certification Program (MUCP) – http://www.michigan.gov/mucp MDOT Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program – https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/business/contractors/dbe

The weighted value of this Section will be 20% of the overall evaluation by the Selection Committee.

Section III - Related Project Experience Provide descriptions of the firm’s ability and experience in performing the engineering services described in this RFP that demonstrate sewer or district development including planning, studies, design, and/or construction. Provide a list of related municipal project experience within the last ten years.

Provide detailed information demonstrating experience with the following:

http://www.michigan.gov/mucp http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/business/contractors/dbe

Page 9 of 13 12/4/2023

• Design, construction and evaluation of various disinfection technologies and dechlorination, with particular emphasis on combined sewer overflows and/or wet weather flows.

• Ability to perform 3D laser scanning inside below grade structures that results in a CAD model of the facility.

• Ability to develop and evaluate a CFD model to allow for evaluation of hydraulics and chemical mixing in the RTB.

• Communication and negotiation with State and Federal regulators with respect to water quality standards and NPDES permitting.

• Evaluation of in-stream water quality and biological impacts as it relates to bacteria and

TRC.

• Ability to implement new water treatment technologies.

• Ability to study and pilot alternative disinfection and disinfection technologies.

Submit five project references. For each project include the following: project description, project dates, dollar value and the names and titles of individuals currently employed with your firm that were assigned to the project and the role(s) they performed. Include a statement on budget and schedule in comparison (from inception to completion) for each project listed.

The weighted value of this Section will be 20% of the overall evaluation by the Selection Committee.

Section IV - Estimate of Fees An estimate of fees to complete the tasks as outlined in the Scope of Consultant’s Services is required. The estimate is to be presented in a spreadsheet format that details the hours, employee classifications, rates for each classification, and name of employee. The proposed overhead rate, fixed fee percentage, markups or Sub-consultants, materials, and equipment should also be specified and included in this fee estimate. Cost should be broken down by Tasks that are reflected in the Work Plan and provide a clear understanding of the hours and cost to complete each activity. Provide the Estimate of Fees in Excel and PDF format.

The Owner will enter negotiations with the highest ranked firm when the final scope of work is formalized.

The weighted value of this Section will be 30% of the overall evaluation by the Selection Committee.

Section V – Administrative Forms The Consultant is to provide executed copies of all the requested documents located in Appendix The documents in this section will not be counted towards the size of the Proposal.

Page 10 of 13 12/4/2023

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

WRC will provide the following documents for reference:

Appendix A

• DC-391 Part A – Engineering Services Agreement

• DC-391 Part B – Engineering Services Agreement Standard Terms and Conditions

• PRE-391 – Preliminary Engineering Phase Services

• NPDES Permit

• RTB Record Drawings

• Operational Narrative and Data

• Red Run Drain map, GWK District maps, and stormwater sampling report.

Appendix B

• E-Verify Program

• Iran Linked Business Certification

• Certification of Safety Compliance

• Engineer’s Disclosure

• Non-Collusion Affidavit

• General Information

• Vendor Debarment

The documents in Appendix A and B are provided electronically and are available for download via a file exchange site (Basecamp) by completing the form found at the following link:

https://forms.office.com/r/VgZ46VHqsm

Please reach out to Lesli Maes P.E., Operations Engineer, at maesl@oakgov.com with any issues accessing the Appendix documents.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Agreement Before submitting its proposal, the Consultant shall thoroughly review and become familiar with the attached Engineering Services Agreement and Standard Terms and Conditions. The Consultant selected for the project will be expected to enter into a similar agreement with the

WRC.

Insurance The Consultant shall refer to the specific insurance requirements for this project as presented in Section 15 of the Engineering Services Agreement Standard Terms and Conditions.

Indemnification The Consultant shall refer to the specific indemnification requirements for this project as presented in Section 16 of the Engineering Services Agreement Standard Terms and Conditions.

https://url.avanan.click/v2/r01/___https:/forms.office.com/r/VgZ46VHqsm___.YXAzOm9ha2dvdjphOm86YWI3MTZiNmQ5YjcyNjc3YmNjODRiNjE5MGFhZmJlNzA6NzphMWFmOmNkYTM2ZDlmOGZhMTZjMDlkZmI0ZDg2YmIwODA4ZThjYzdiZWFiZTBkOTI1MTI1NDg5MWU5NjY4ZDgxODc2NTY6aDpGOk4 mailto:maesl@oakgov.com

Page 11 of 13 12/4/2023

Conflicts of Interest Consultant warrants that before submitting its proposal and/or entering into this contract it has performed an inquiry within its firm to determine whether the services to be provided under this contract may pose a conflict of interest. For purposes of this contract, a conflict of interest occurs when the services to be provided conflict, are adversarial to, may influence Consultant’s judgment or appear to influence Consultant’s judgment or quality of services under the contract with the Consultant’s representation of other clients. Except as provided herein, Consultant shall certify, to the best of its knowledge, to the WRC that there are no conflicts of interest by providing the services under this contract.

If at any time Consultant determines that there is a conflict of interest or potential conflicts of Interest, then the Consultant shall disclose such conflicts of interest to the WRC. The WRC may request that the Consultant obtain a waiver or acknowledgment of the conflict from its client(s).

In the event that a conflict of interest arises in the course of providing services under this contract, the Consultant may be required to withdraw from its representation of the WRC and may be liable for incremental costs, if any, associated with the WRC having to engage another engineering or consulting firm to perform the services under this contract.

Disclosure of Contents All information provided in the Consultant’s proposal will be held in confidence and will not be revealed or discussed with competitors until the deadline for submission of proposals has expired. Pursuant to Section 13 (1) (j) of the Michigan Freedom of Information Act, as amended, MCL 15.243 (1) (j), provides that a public body may exempt from disclosure as a public record A [a] bid or proposal by a person to enter into a contract or agreement, until the time for the public opening of the bids or proposals, or if a public opening is not conducted, until the deadline for submission of bids or proposals has expired. The submission of additional pertinent information beyond the requirements of this RFP is acceptable.

Rejection of Proposals The WRC reserves the right to reject any and all of the proposals received as a result of this RFP.

No late proposals will be accepted. The official time clock shall be the date/time clock located at the OCWRC main office.

Incurred Cost The WRC will not be liable for any cost incurred by the Consultant in developing its proposal or for any other work performed through and including the execution of a contract for professional services, prior to the execution of a contract.

Addenda to the RFP An addendum will be issued in the event it becomes necessary to revise any part of this RFP.

Page 12 of 13 12/4/2023

Completeness of Consultant’s Proposal The Consultant’s proposal shall address all items completely and thoroughly, in accordance with the proposal format provided. The proposal shall be signed by an officer of the firm, or the team authorized to bind the Consultant to its provisions.

The contents and commitments in the Consultant’s proposal shall remain firm for 120 calendar days from the submittal due date.

By submitting a proposal, the Consultant’s officer certifies that it is not currently debarred from submitting bids for contracts issued by any political subdivision or agency of the State of Michigan or the EPA and that it is not an agent of a person or entity that is currently debarred from submitting bids or contracts issued by any political subdivision or agency of the State of Michigan, or the EPA.

Consultant Responsibilities The Consultant shall be capable of providing all professional services as described above under the Scope of Consultant’s Services and to maintain those capabilities until notification that their proposal was unsuccessful. Exclusion of any service for the project may serve as cause for rejection.

Acceptance of Proposal Content The proposal presented will be evaluated by the Owner’s Selection Committee. Scoring will be conducted by the Selection Committee based on the Consultant’s understanding of the project including local knowledge, scope of services, schedule, personnel assigned to the project and related project experience. Final recommendation of the highest-ranking firm will be made by the Selection Committee.

Award The Owner reserves the right to award all or a portion of the work by task. Award of any part of the project scope is subject to funding availability and GWK Drain Board approval.

RECOMMENDED PREBID MEETING

A recommended site visit and prebid meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 21, 2025, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. local time, at the GWK facility located at 1400 Ajax Dr, Madison Heights, MI 48071. Respondents will be provided with a walkthrough of the site and additional site visits, if desired, may be coordinated via Lesli Maes P.E., Operations Engineer, at maesl@oakgov.com.

Page 13 of 13 12/4/2023

QUESTIONS

All questions must be submitted via Bidnet/MITN by 5:00 pm on EST on October 31, 2025.

Questions received after this date may not be answered.

SUBMISSIONS

The Consultant’s proposal must be submitted electronically by Friday, November 14th at 2:00 pm.

mailto:maesl@oakgov.com.