Rev 07/01/24

RFP 26-173-Q 09/24

Eugene Water & Electric Board

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

for

Leaburg-Walterville 6th CSIR Part 12D Report

A&E

RFP No.: 26-173-Q Closing Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2026 Time: 2:00 PM PST

Description: The Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) is seeking proposals from qualified consultant firms to perform independent safety inspection and review services for the Leaburg-Walterville Hydroelectric Project pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 18, Part 12 Subpart D (Part 12D) requirements.

Purchasing Contact: Sandra Hahn (541) 685-7163 sandra.hahn@eweb.org

Pre-Proposal Conference: YES Mandatory Date: October 22, 2026 Time: 1:30 PM Location: Online, Microsoft Teams RSVP to: sandra.hahn@eweb.org

This is a COMPETITIVE SEALED PROCUREMENT.

ELECTRONIC PROPOSALS SUBMITTED VIA THE OREGONBUYS BID SITE ARE REQUIRED. Emailed submittals will not be accepted.

To ensure your submission is received prior to the closing date and time, it is recommended that you begin the submittal process on the OregonBuys website at least 72-hours prior to the closing date and time listed above.

SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT: There will be only one point of contact for the entire Request for Proposal process. The contact point is the EWEB Purchasing Office, and the contact person is the Purchasing Contact listed above, unless otherwise stated. Any questions or issues that may arise regarding the specifications, the bidding process, and/or the award process shall be directed to the Purchasing Contact listed above. EWEB’s official response to any questions or requests will be in writing via the Addendum process.

FOR MORE INFORMATION please refer to Part 1 “Instructions to Proposers”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Description

Legal Advertisement

1 Instructions to Proposers

2 Scope of Work

3 Minimum Qualifications and Requirements

4 Evaluation Process & Proposer Selection

5 Evaluation Criteria

6 Proposal Form

EXHIBITS

Sample Contract

LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT

RFP #26-173-Q

LEABURG-WALTERVILLE 6TH CSIR PART 12D REPORT

The Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) is seeking proposals from qualified firms to perform independent inspection, review, and assessment services for the Leaburg-Walterville Hydroelectric Project pursuant to 18 CFR Part 12, subpart D requirements.

Proposals shall be submitted on the State of Oregon – OregonBuys website (https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/), before, 2:00 pm, Tuesday, November 10, 2026. (Emailed responses will not be accepted.) Proposals will not be accepted after this hour and date.

RFP documents may be obtained by downloading the RFP documents from the State of Oregon's bid site ("OregonBuys"): https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/. (On OregonBuys home page, search under “Bid Solicitation” for “EWEB” or bid # S-P00140-00018184. For navigation help, please call 1-855-800-5046.)

A mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference will be held at 1:30 PM, October 22, 2026, Online via Microsoft Teams.

The purpose of the conference is to discuss the work to be performed with the prospective Proposers and allow them to ask questions concerning the RFP. Attendance by at least one employee of the primary contractor is mandatory. Subconsultants are encouraged to attend, but their attendance is not mandatory. Please RSVP beforehand to Sandra Hahn: sandra.hahn@eweb.org.

All proposals shall be submitted as set forth in Section 1 - Instructions to Proposers. EWEB is not responsible for proposals submitted in any manner, format or to any delivery point other than as required by the Solicitation Document.

No proposal may be withdrawn after the hour set for the opening thereof until the elapse of thirty (30) days from the date and time set for opening.

EWEB reserves the right to waive any or all informalities and irregularities (EWEB Rule 3-0470) and may cancel the Request for Proposals or reject any or all proposals pursuant to EWEB Rule 3-0640.

Date: October 13, 2026

Sandra Hahn, Purchasing Contact https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/

1. INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

All proposals and contracts are subject to the provisions and requirements of the Oregon Revised Statutes 279A and 279B and EWEB Public Contracting Rules Divisions 1, 2, 3 and 6.

INFORMATION OF RECORD

The official source of information for this project until the Intent to Award is posted is located at the State of Oregon's bid site, located at https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/. IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPOSER TO

CHECK THE WEBSITE ON A TIMELY BASIS.

PROPOSAL PREPARATION

1.1 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND COST

Proposals shall be typewritten or prepared in ink and shall be submitted electronically, per Section 1.8 below. Proposals shall conform to the requirements of the Request for Proposals. All necessary attachments shall be submitted with the proposal and in the required format.

Proposer is responsible for all costs incurred in connection with its Proposal, including, but not limited to, the costs to prepare and submit the Proposal, costs of samples and other supporting materials, costs to participate in demonstrations, and costs associated with protests.

1.2 CONFORMANCE TO SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS

Proposals shall conform to the requirements of the Request for Proposals. All necessary attachments shall be submitted with the proposal and in the required format.

1.3 PROTEST OF SPECIFICATIONS / REQUIREMENTS

A Proposer who believes that the procurement process is contrary to law, or that the solicitation is unnecessarily restrictive in that specifications limit competition arbitrarily, without reasonably promoting the fulfillment of the procurement needs of EWEB, or that the solicitation document is legally flawed in that it contains terms or conditions that are contrary to law, or that the solicitation improperly specifies a brand name as defined in ORS 279B.200, may submit a protest via email to sandra.hahn@eweb.org. Insert the following in the subject header:

RFP SPECIFICATION PROTEST, RFP # 26-173-Q

To be considered, protests shall be received no less than 5 business days before close (EW-3-0700(2)).

Protest of specifications shall include the reason for protest, any and all evidence and documented factual information that supports Proposer’s protest, and any proposed changes to the requirements. The EWEB Purchasing department shall promptly respond to each written protest, and where appropriate, issue all revisions, substitutions, or clarifications via Addenda to all Proposers. Proposers must exhaust all administrative remedies before seeking judicial review.

1.4 PROPOSER'S PROPOSED TERMS AND CONDITIONS Rule 3-0230(7)(b)

Proposers may include in the Cover Letter of their response, proposed revisions to the contractual terms and conditions in the Sample Contract (Exhibit 1) and the Scope of Work included in this RFP document.

(Proposer may show proposed changes by using Word Track Changes tool OR providing proposed revisions in cover letter.) Proposers may not protest or request to change the entire terms and conditions of the solicitation. For example, you may not seek to replace EWEB’s terms and conditions in whole with your company’s terms and conditions, standard contract, master services agreement, etc.

mailto:sandra.hahn@eweb.org

Terms included with Proposer’s proposal documents will not be considered unless they are listed in the Cover Letter as requested terms to negotiate.

EWEB reserves the right to negotiate the proposed terms and/or conditions with Proposer, and either accept or reject the proposed terms and/or conditions. REQUESTS FOR REVISION OF EWEB CONTRACTUAL

TERMS AND CONDITIONS MAY BE MADE AT TIME OF PROPOSAL SUBMISSION. THERE MAY BE NO

OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO AT A LATER DATE.

NO PROPOSED TERMS OR CONDITIONS SHALL BECOME A PART OF THE AWARDED CONTRACT UNLESS

ACCEPTED BY EWEB AND INCORPORATED INTO THE CONTRACT IN WRITING.

1.5 SIGNATURE ON PROPOSAL

Proposals shall be signed by an authorized representative of the Proposer. Signature on a proposal certifies that the proposal is made without connection with any person, firm or corporation making a proposal for the same goods and/or services and is in all respects fair and made without collusion or fraud. Signature on a proposal also certifies that the Proposer has read, fully understands and agrees with all solicitation requirements, terms and conditions. No consideration will be given to any claim resulting from proposing without fully comprehending all requirements of the Request for Proposals.

Proposers shall only enter information within the proposal document where it is requested or required.

Proposers shall NOT make any alterations to the original solicitation document. Any proposal that has been altered may be rejected.

1.6 CANCELLATION, REJECTION, DELAY OF RFP

Pursuant to Rule 3-0640, EWEB may cancel, reject in whole or in any part any proposals, if EWEB determines it is in the best interest of EWEB to do so.

1.7 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

A mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference will be held on October 22, 2026 at 1:30 PM, online via Microsoft Teams.

The purpose of the conference is to discuss the work to be performed with the prospective Proposers and allow them to ask questions concerning the RFP. Attendance by at least one employee of the primary consultant is mandatory. Subconsultants are encouraged to attend, but their attendance is not mandatory.

Please RSVP the Purchasing Contract

1.8 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

(a) OregonBuys Electronic Response

Please be sure to combine all documents into one pdf file before attempting to submit your bid into the OregonBuys bid site.

In order to submit an electronic proposal on the OregonBuys website, Proposer must be registered with OregonBuys and able to submit an electronic proposal. For instructions to register on OregonBuys, visit the following site: OrBuysSupplierRegistrationSteps.pdf (oregon.gov)

If you experience any issues registering, please contact OregonBuys at:

Phone: 1-855-800-5046 Email: support.oregonbuys@das.oregon.gov

When Proposer is submitting their proposal electronically, Proposer should follow the procedures outlined in any of the following:

https://www.oregon.gov/das/ORBuys/Documents/OrBuysSupplierRegistrationSteps.pdf mailto:support.oregonbuys@das.oregon.gov https://www.oregon.gov/das/ORBuys/Documents/OregonBuys%20Vendor%20Formal%20Solicitation%20R esponse.pdf for electronic submission.

A video presentation on submitting an electronic proposal may be found at: Supplier - Submitting a Quote - Overview (periscopeholdings.com)

Terminology specific to the OregonBuys system may be found at:

https://www.oregon.gov/das/ORBuys/Documents/Phase1TerminologyCrosswalk.pdf

Proposals received in a manner other than through the OregonBuys website and/or after the closing date and time will not be considered and will be rejected. EWEB is not responsible for proposals submitted in any manner format or to any delivery point other than as required by the Solicitation document.

(b) REQUIRED PROPOSAL PACKAGE Complete, sign, and return the following documents as RFP response. Failing to include these documents could lead to rejection of proposal.

• Cover Sheet, with:

Contractual Acceptance: Statement accepting ALL terms and conditions contained in this solicitation and the Sample Contract (Exhibit 1). Statement may also include request for negotiation of proposed terms and conditions as allowed per Section 1.4.

Termination for Default: Proposers shall indicate if they have had a contract terminated for default in the last five years. Termination for default is defined as notice to stop performance that was delivered to the Proposer due to the Proposer’s non-performance or poor performance and the issue of performance was either (a) not litigated due to inaction on the part of the Proposer, or (b) litigated and determined that the Proposer was in default.

NOTE: If a Proposer has had a contract terminated for default in this period, then the Proposer shall submit full details including the other party’s name, address and phone number. EWEB will evaluate the facts and may, at its sole discretion, reject the proposal on the grounds of Proposer’s past performance.

• Proposal Form (Section 6)

• Response to Minimum Requirements (Section 3)

• Response to All Evaluation Criteria (Section 5)

• All Addenda Acknowledged

IMPORTANT NOTE RE PRICING – DO NOT submit pricing proposal with your submission. All Proposers should be prepared to submit their pricing within 24 hours of formal invitation to submit pricing, shortly after shortlist notification.)

(c) RESPONSIVENESS / RESPONSIBILTIY A “Responsive” proposal is a proposal that substantially complies with the Request for Proposals instructions and requirements.

A “Responsible” Proposer can demonstrate ability to meet the requirements of the Scope of Work, has the appropriate experience, is legally qualified to do the Work, has the required certifications https://www.oregon.gov/das/ORBuys/Documents/OregonBuys%20Vendor%20Formal%20Solicitation%20Response.pdf https://www.oregon.gov/das/ORBuys/Documents/OregonBuys%20Vendor%20Formal%20Solicitation%20Response.pdf https://www.periscopeholdings.com/courses/suppliersubmittingaquote/#/lessons/-IJ5uftCSaLqTjitSezQGrNh9dTNGqaA https://www.periscopeholdings.com/courses/suppliersubmittingaquote/#/lessons/-IJ5uftCSaLqTjitSezQGrNh9dTNGqaA https://www.oregon.gov/das/ORBuys/Documents/Phase1TerminologyCrosswalk.pdf required, has a satisfactory record of integrity and can meet the other requirements described in

ORS 279B.110(2).

1.9 ADDENDA

Any VERBAL communication cannot and shall not be construed as approval of the acceptability of any deviation to any requirement. All changes to requirements and/or the solicitation documents will be made in the form of Addenda. The Proposer is responsible for ensuring that all Addenda have been downloaded and are acknowledged in their RFP Response. Proposer may sign each issued Addendum and include with response or acknowledge in the space provided on the Proposal Form.

All Addenda can be obtained electronically at the State of Oregon's bid site ("Oregon Buys"):

https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/.

1.10 PROPOSAL MODIFICATION

If a Proposer wishes to make modifications to a submitted Proposal, Proposer must do so through OregonBuys prior to the Proposal Due Date and Time stated on the Cover Page for this RFP.

1.11 PROPOSAL WITHDRAWALS:

If a Proposer wishes to withdraw a submitted Proposal, Proposer must do so through OregonBuys, using the “Withdraw Quote” button prior to the Proposal Due Date and Time stated on the Cover Page for this RFP.

1.12 EXCEPTIONS

Any exceptions to the requirements of this solicitation MUST be submitted in accordance with Item 1.3

PROTEST OF SPECIFICATIONS / REQUIREMENTS. Exceptions submitted with your proposal, or in any manner other than the process provided herein, may cause your proposal to be ruled non-Responsive and rejected.

1.13 PROPOSAL OPENING: Unless otherwise provided by Law or Rule, proposals received in response to this

Request for Proposals shall be opened at the scheduled closing date and time at the EWEB Purchasing department located at 4200 Roosevelt Blvd, Eugene, Oregon 97402. Enquiring Proposers shall be informed only of the names of Proposers submitting proposals. No other information shall be available at that time.

Award decisions will NOT be made at the opening.

1.14 ALTERNATE PROPOSALS

Proposers may submit more than one proposal. All proposals must comply with the requirements of the RFP except that additional proposals may incorporate, by reference, repetitive information which is provided in the complete proposal.

1.15 PROPRIETARY DATA/PUBLIC RECORD

This Request for Proposal, together with copies of all documents pertaining to the award of a contract, shall be kept by EWEB and made a part of a file or record which shall be open to public inspection. If a proposal contains any information that is considered a trade secret under ORS 192.345(2), each sheet of such information shall be marked with the following legend:

"This data constitutes a trade secret under ORS 192.345(2), and shall not be disclosed except in accordance with the Oregon Public Records Law, ORS Chapter 192."

The Oregon Public Records Law exempts from disclosures only bona fide trade secrets, and the exemption from disclosure applies only "unless the public interest requires disclosure in the particular instance" ORS 192.345(2). Therefore, non-disclosure of documents or any portion of a document submitted as part of a proposal may depend upon official or judicial determinations made pursuant to the Public Records Law.

The above restriction may not include cost or price information, which shall be open to public inspection.

https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/

1.16 SOCIAL EQUITY

EWEB supports the use of Minority, Women, Emerging Small Businesses (M/W/ESB), local businesses, Disadvantaged Business Enterprises and Qualified Rehabilitation Facilities (QRF). EWEB encourages the awarded offeror to use the following voluntary practices to promote open competitive opportunities for disadvantaged businesses as applicable:

a. Access lists of certified minority, women, emerging small business or disadvantaged business enterprises from the Oregon State Office of Minority, Women and Emerging Small Business (OMWESB) by visiting their website at:

b. Visit the Oregon State Qualified Rehabilitation Facilities Program website to search for Qualified Rehabilitation Facilities from whom to procure products or services.

SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

1.17 The schedule of events set out herein represent Eugene Water & Electric Board’s best estimate of the schedule that will be followed.

Request for Proposal released October 13, 2026

Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference October 22, 2026

Last day for EWEB to receive questions from Proposers November 3, 2026

Last day EWEB will post Addenda on Bid Site November 5, 2026

Closing date (last day to submit proposals to EWEB) November 10, 2026

Responses evaluated November 17, 2026

EWEB-optional Interview presentations held Week of December 1 - 3

Pricing evaluated December 8, 2026

Intent to Award announcement posted on bid site December 8, 2026

Board approval January 5, 2027

Contract award January 7, 2027

2. SCOPE OF WORK

2.1 BACKGROUND /OBJECTIVES

The Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) operates and maintains the Leaburg – Walterville Hydroelectric Projects under a single federal license (No. 2496) on the McKenzie River. The project consists of two independent hydroelectric generation developments as briefly described below. More detailed project information is found in the 2026 Supporting Technical Information Document (STID) that can be provided upon request and execution of a Critical Energy Infrastructure Information General Non-Disclosure Agreement.

Leaburg Development: The Leaburg Development is the Project's upstream facility and includes a dam, fish screen, primarily earthen canal, forebay, siphon spillway, penstocks, powerhouse, tailrace, and substation.

The Leaburg Canal has been out of service since the FERC order to dewater in 2018 due to concerns about internal erosion occurring in the embankment. EWEB’s Board of Commissioners approved a resolution to move towards permanently discontinuing power generation and decommissioning the Leaburg Development. The Development is still in use for stormwater conveyance, and EWEB continues to operate and maintain the facilities in accordance with the FERC license. EWEB has a consultant team working on Near-Term Risk Reduction Measures and decommissioning designs.

Walterville Development: The Walterville Development includes a headworks, fish screen, primarily earthen canal, forebay, siphon spillways, sluiceway, penstock, powerhouse, tailrace, and substation.

The Walterville Canal has been in a dewatered condition since late February 2024 due to the observation of an unexplained spike in seepage flows and associated turbidity near the forebay. Preparations and designs for repair work are currently targeting implementation in late Summer to Fall 2027.

The objective of this contract is to perform independent inspection, review, and assessment services for the Leaburg-Walterville Hydroelectric Project pursuant to 18 CFR Part 12, subpart D requirements while following the FERC engineering guidelines for the evaluation of Hydropower projects per Chapter 16 – Part 12D Program. Independent consultant must be a FERC-approved independent consultant to perform dam safety inspections. Specific instructions to conduct the Sixth Independent Consultant’s Safety Inspection are included in the FERC Regional Engineer’s letter dated September 22, 2026 for the Walterville Development and September 28, 2026 for the Leaburg Development. These September letters will be provided for reference along with other materials that will be helpful for proposal preparation upon completion of an NDA per the RFP advertisement.

2.2 LENGTH OF CONTRACT

The contract for this project (“Contract”) will start from the date of award, approximately December 31, 2026 and expire on April 30, 2029. The contract may be extended with a formal amendment executed by both parties, for a maximum duration of 5 years from original contract execution date, if needed. All major tasks are scheduled to be completed late 2027 to early 2028. The work performed after is only intended to address review comments and questions that may be raised by FERC after the delivery of the report.

2.3 LOCATION OF WORK

The location the work is to be performed, completed and managed is at Contractor’s business location and EWEB facilities in Eugene, Waterville, and Leaburg, Oregon.

EWEB WILL NOT provide workspace for the Consultant. The Consultant must provide its own workspace.

2.4 ENGINEERS ESTIMATE

The EWEB estimate for this Work is $250,000.

2.5 SCOPE OF WORK

Tasks

Task Order #1 – 2027 Part 12D Periodic Inspection for Leaburg-Walterville Project

Consultant to perform and provide independent inspection, review, and assessment services for the Leaburg- Walterville Hydroelectric Project pursuant to 18 CFR Part 12, subpart D requirements and shall follow the FERC engineering guidelines for the evaluation of Hydropower projects per Chapter 16 – Part 12D Program.

Consultant must be a FERC approved independent consultant to perform dam safety inspections as detailed in Section 3 Minimum Requirements.

The Consultant shall provide deliverables as outlined in this Scope of Work to EWEB for review and comment prior to submittal to FERC. The Consultant shall address EWEB comments and revise the deliverables as necessary until EWEB determines that the deliverable is ready for submittal to FERC. The Consultant shall incorporate sufficient time into their schedule for EWEB review and Consultant revisions to submit deliverables within the timeframe specified in 18 CFR Part 12, subpart D requirements. Following submittal to FERC, the Consultant shall address FERC comments and requirements, and revise and resubmit the deliverables as necessary to obtain FERC acceptance. No additional compensation will be provided for revisions required to correct deficiencies, omissions, or nonconformance with applicable FERC requirements.

All deliverables resulting from this Scope of Work, as well as information handled or generated shall be treated as Critical Energy Infrastructure Information and handled and protected in accordance with applicable requirements.

Task 1. Project Management Consultant shall designate one person to serve as Project Manager. The

Consultant Project Manager will be responsible for coordinating the Consultant’s team, organizing project resources, and monitoring and controlling budget and progress. The Consultant Project Manager shall have the authority to make decisions necessary to effectively manage and progress the work and shall be responsible for obtaining the resources necessary for timely project completion including maintaining the overall project schedule, coordinating the Consultant’s team and subconsultants, tracking project action items and decisions, coordinating required EWEB and FERC communications, and monitoring compliance with the FERC requirements.

Task 1.1. Project Schedule Consultant shall prepare and submit a project schedule, in the form of a Gantt chart using Microsoft Project, which will contain task description, start and end date, and completion milestones. Consultant shall review the project schedule on a monthly basis and submit updates if there are significant changes.

Task 1.2 Project Status Reporting and Invoicing Consultant shall prepare and submit bi-monthly project status reports and invoices every two months. Project status reports and invoices shall be submitted concurrently.

Project status reports shall be in the form of a memorandum and shall compare budget status and project schedule progress (percent completion). Reports shall briefly summarize project progress, including the status of outstanding action items and next steps; identify any decisions required by EWEB; identify any potential budget or schedule impacts; and describe any work required for successful project completion that the Consultant believes is outside of its scope of services.

Invoices shall be consistent with the work completed and shall indicate, by task, the total budget, budget remaining, amount previously billed, and amount of current billing, including dollars, personnel names, personnel classifications, billing rates, hours, and direct charges. Invoices shall provide sufficient detail for

EWEB to reconcile invoiced costs with the approved project budget and the percent completion reported in the project status report. The amount invoiced shall be consistent with or less than the percent completion identified in the project status report. Amounts invoiced for any task shall not exceed the approved contract budget for that task.

At EWEB’s sole discretion, EWEB may allow transfer of charges from a task that is over budget to a task that has budget remaining after all work associated with both tasks has been completed. No transfer of budget between tasks shall be made without prior written approval from EWEB. If a task is projected to exceed its approved budget, Consultant shall notify EWEB as soon as the potential overrun is identified and shall provide an estimate of the additional effort and cost required to complete the task.

Task 1.4. Project Coordination Consultant shall coordinate work with Consultant team members, including subconsultants, FERC, and EWEB Project Manager to facilitate efficient and effective progression of the work, maintaining action items and decision making logs.

Task 1.5. Project Owner Kickoff Meeting Consultant shall conduct a virtual project kickoff meeting, participated by the Consultant’s team and EWEB project staff. Consultant shall facilitate the meeting, prepare meeting agenda, and take notes which include action items, decision making, responsible parties, and required due dates. The kickoff meeting shall summarize project objectives, document and information requirements, project schedule, coordinating FERC requirements, inspection requirements, and deliverables.

Meeting notes shall be distributed to participants within 3 business days following the meeting. Meeting to be held virtually through Microsoft Teams.

Task 1.6. Bi-weekly Project Team Meeting Consultant shall conduct a virtual project meeting every two weeks, attended by appropriate members of the Consultant’s team and EWEB project staff. Consultant shall facilitate the meeting, prepare meeting agenda, and take notes which include action items, decision making, responsible parties, and required due dates. Consultant shall review the status report prepared in Task 1.2 at applicable meetings. Consultant shall also discuss project schedule, budget, outstanding information requests, technical or project issues, FERC coordination, upcoming activities, and items requiring EWEB decisions. Meeting notes shall be distributed to participants within 3 business days following the meeting. Meeting to be held virtually through Microsoft Teams Meetings.

Task 1.7. Regulatory Second Coordination Call Consultant team members shall participate in the regulatory second coordination call as required by FERC. Call shall take place within 6 weeks after the approval (or conditional approval) of the Part12D inspection plan. Consultant shall be responsible for agenda and required meeting materials and prepare meeting notes including action items, decision making, responsible parties, and required due dates. Meeting notes shall be distributed to participants within 3 business days following the meeting. Consultant shall refer to Enclosure 2 of the September FERC letters when preparing meeting agenda.

Task 1 Deliverables:

• Project schedule and updates

• Kick-off Meeting agenda and meeting notes

• Bi-monthly Project Status Reports and Invoices

• Bi-weekly Project Team Meeting agendas and meeting notes

• Regulatory Second Coordination Call (EWEB, Consultant Team, and FERC) and meeting notes

Task 2. Part 12D Inspection Plan. Per 18 CFR Section 12.34, the Part 12D Inspection Plan is required to be submitted to FERC at least 180 days prior to the first IC activity (field inspection). The Consultant shall provide a digital copy of the draft Inspection Plan in both searchable PDF and Word formats to EWEB for review and shall document and track review comments provided by EWEB project manager, and respond clearly in a format, such as an Excel table, acceptable to all reviewers. A review meeting should be scheduled with EWEB staff to discuss responses to the review comments.

The Consultant shall coordinate with EWEBs Project Manager to prepare and submit the Inspection Plan to FERC sufficiently in advance of the FERC deadline to allow adequate time for EWEB review, comment, and Consultant revisions within the required timeframe. Following submittal to FERC, the Consultant shall address FERC comments and requirements, and revise and resubmit the Inspection Plan as necessary to obtain FERC acceptance.

The Consultant shall include in the Inspection Plan the scope of the inspection, proposed IC Team, proposed project schedule, and all other information required by applicable FERC regulations and guidance. The Consultant shall develop the Part 12D Inspection Plan in accordance with the minimum requirements established in 18 CFR Part 12D and Chapter 16-3.3 of the FERC Engineering Guidelines.

Task 2 Deliverables:

• Draft Inspection Plan

• Draft Inspection Plan review meeting/teleconference agenda and meeting notes

• Response to EWEBs comments on Draft Inspection Plan

• Revised Inspection Plan

• Final Inspection Plan for EWEB review and submittal to FERC

• Responses to FERC comments and revisions to the Inspection Plan, as required, until FERC acceptance is obtained

• FERC-accepted Inspection Plan

Task 3. Periodic Inspection Pre-Inspection Preparation Report (PI-PIPR). Per 18 CFR Section 12.42, the PI-PIPR is required to be submitted to FERC at least 30 days prior to the first IC activity (field inspection). The Consultant shall provide a digital copy of the draft PI-PIPR in both searchable PDF and Word formats to EWEB for review and shall document and track review comments provided by EWEB project manager, and respond clearly in a format, such as an Excel table, acceptable to all reviewers. A review meeting should be scheduled with EWEB staff to discuss responses to the review comments.

The Consultant shall coordinate with EWEBs Project Manager to prepare and submit the PI-PIPR to FERC sufficiently in advance of the FERC deadline to allow adequate time for EWEB review, comment, and Consultant revisions within the required timeframe. Following submittal to FERC, the Consultant shall address FERC comments and requirements, and revise and resubmit the PI-PIPR as necessary to obtain FERC acceptance.

The PI-PIPR shall document the Consultant’s initial findings from the review of project documentation, instrumentation data, and any other information that can help ensure the Consultant Team is adequately prepared to perform the site inspection. FERC will review the PI-PIPR to evaluate whether the Consultant Team has an adequate understanding of project features and determine whether the inspection activities can proceed as scheduled. If the name(s) and resume(s) of any supporting members of the Consultant Team were not provided in the Part 12D Inspection Plan, they must be provided in the letter transmitting the PI-PIPR. The Consultant shall develop the PI-PIPR in accordance with the minimum requirements established in 18 CFR Part 12D, Chapter 16-4 of the FERC Engineering Guidelines, and Enclosure 3 of the September FERC letters.

Task 3 Deliverables:

• Draft PI-PIPR

• Draft PI-PIPR review meeting/teleconference agenda and meeting notes

• Response to EWEBs comments on draft PI-PIPR

• Revised PI-PIPR

• Final PI-PIPR for EWEB review and submittal to FERC

• Responses to FERC comments and revisions to the PI-PIPR, as required, until FERC acceptance is obtained

• FERC-accepted PI-PIPR

Task 4 Periodic Inspection. The scope of a Periodic Inspection is established in 18 CFR Section 12.35 and comprises the following: a thorough review of existing information to familiarize the Consultant Team with the relevant background and historical information to allow proper evaluation of project features; Review and evaluation of dam and public safety programs (e.g., Operations and Maintenance Program, Public Safety Plan, Owner’s Dam Safety Program, etc.); Review and evaluation of instrumentation data and surveillance reports; A physical field inspection; and Preparation of the Periodic Inspection Report.

The Consultant shall conduct the Periodic Inspection in accordance with the minimum requirements established in 18 CFR Part 12D and Chapter 16-5 of the FERC Engineering Guidelines. These requirements are incorporated into and considered part of this Scope of Work. The periodic inspection consists of four tasks:

Task 4.1 Review of prior reports The Consultant team must review and consider all relevant reports on the safety of the development made by or written under the direction of Federal or state agencies, submitted under Commission regulations, or made by other consultants. The Consultant team must perform sufficient review to have, at the time of the periodic inspection, a full understanding of the design, construction, performance, condition, upstream and downstream hazard, monitoring, operation, and potential failure modes of the project works.

Consultant shall perform a comprehensive and critical review of original design and construction documents;

subsequent performance; assessment of necessary investigation, analysis, or remediation. The review must take great care to avoid accepting observed anomalies as normal and not solely rely on interpretations/conclusions of previous analyses by reviewing, evaluating, and commenting on the appropriateness and current validity of all the previous analyses.

Documents to be reviewed include the following, at a minimum:

• At minimum, the two preceding Part 12D safety inspection reports

• Supporting technical information documents, including project design and construction history

• PFMA reports and SQRAs

• DSSMRs

• Reports and correspondence on all work items and status or results of previous Part 12D recommendations or FERC requirements after the previous Part 12D inspection

• Other documents necessary to conduct this PI

If any document(s) is revealed missing during the review, Consultant shall contact EWEB project manager in a timely manner to search for the missing information before executing the next tasks below.

Task 4.2 Physical field inspection The physical field inspection must include a detailed visual observation of all physically accessible project features by one or more members of the Consultant Team. Special inspections as detailed in Section 16-5.3.1 of the engineering guidelines must be taken into consideration. Consultant shall make arrangement with the EWEB project manager and FERC representative to conduct project inspections with project operation staff and regulatory representatives. The Consultant will have reviewed the project documents in Task

4.1 before the physical inspection. Project Inspections include the following, at a minimum:

• A physical field inspection of each development in its entirety excluding transmission, transformer facilities and generation equipment

• Inspection of the Walterville Project Canal under full operation and during outage conditions if necessary

• Inspection of the Leaburg Project Canal in the current state of operations

• Observations and documentation of project features and changes (as listed in the FERC letter) with sufficient photos taken

• Review and assess all relevant data concerning settlement, cracks, erosion, seepage, H&H, seismicity, etc

Inspection schedule should be coordinated with EWEB project manager well ahead of the visit to take advantage of weather conditions. If an inspection checklist is used, it shall be included in Appendix F of the Part 12D inspection report. Site specific checklist should be formatted to include specific visual surveillance items related to the PFMs.

Task 4.3 Review of surveillance and monitoring plan and data The Consultant team must review the surveillance procedures, instrumentation layout, installation details, monitoring frequency, performance history, data history and trends, and relevance to potential failure modes; and review the frequency and scope of other surveillance activities. The Consultant Team must review DSSMRs to supplement their field inspection observations.

Conclusions from the Consultant Team must be of their own without relying entirely on a previous interpretation or to state that data is acceptable because the behavior is consistent over time. EWEB will provide the Consultant team with DSSMRs and all available data, through the date of the field inspection, such that the Consultant Team can identify, describe, and evaluate, at a minimum:

• Relationships between instrument readings and environmental factors such as reservoir elevation, precipitation, air/water temperature, project operations, etc.

• What constitutes expected behavior for each instrument (and, by extension, what constitutes unexpected behavior)

• Whether there are any historic readings or ongoing trends that may indicate adverse behavior, including data from instruments that may have failed or are no longer in use

• Whether there are any readings that are inconsistent with other related observations or readings from nearby instruments

• Whether any established thresholds, automated alarms, etc. are set such that they will trigger appropriate follow-up actions prior to substantial progression of a potential failure mode.

Task 4.4 Review of dam and public safety programs The Consultant team must review and provide any findings and recommendations for, at a minimum, the following programs:

• ODSP: evaluate if it is being implemented appropriately

• DSSMP: consider both the surveillance procedures and instrumentation and their effectiveness at monitoring for the identified PFMs as well as general health; consider whether inspections during and after unusual are of an appropriate scope and frequency; review procedures for and the timing of instrumentation data and surveillance reports, and any reporting of adverse findings to more senior personnel for investigation

• Hazard Potential Classification: review the conditions upstream and downstream of a project to evaluate whether the current hazard potential classification is appropriate, and whether any changed conditions warrant reconsideration of the Sudden Failure Assessment (SFA) or other procedures in the Emergency Action Plan.

• EAP: review must consider the written EAP document as well as the licensee’s training procedures, coordination with outside persons and agencies, and the familiarity of project staff with their roles and responsibilities; review and evaluate the after-action report and licensee’s plan of action if any EAP activations or functional/full-scale exercises have occurred since the previous Part12D Report

• PSP: review and evaluate the public safety measures that are in the immediate vicinity of project structures and/or that are directly related to standard project operations; note any devices that are missing, damaged, inoperable, or otherwise not as described in the PSP and consider whether any new devices are warranted based on their observations; consider any project-related public safety incidents that have occurred since the previous Part 12D Inspection; standard operating procedures that may have the potential to cause a hazardous situation for members of the public recreating at or near the project site

• Operations and Maintenance Programs: review the licensee’s written documentation related to regular and periodic maintenance of project works, including maintenance tracking system used; Reports on identification, evaluation, and resolution of safety-related maintenance issues; Documentation of completion of maintenance items; Inspection checklists; SOPs; and other items as appropriate.

Task 5. Periodic Inspection Report (PIR). Per the September FERC letters, the PIR must be submitted to FERC no later than April 30, 2028, however, the Consultant shall provide a digital copy of the draft PIR in both searchable PDF and Word formats to EWEB for review no later than February 18, 2028 which is a firm date. Consultant shall document and track review comments provided by EWEB project manager, and respond clearly in a format, such as an Excel table, acceptable to all reviewers. A review meeting should be scheduled with EWEB staff to discuss responses to the review comments. The final PIR is due to EWEB no later than March 31, 2028, which is a firm date.

The Consultant shall coordinate with EWEBs Project Manager to prepare and submit the PIR to FERC sufficiently in advance of the February and March 2028 deadline to allow adequate time for EWEB review, comment, and Consultant revisions. Following submittal to FERC, the Consultant shall address FERC comments and requirements, and revise and resubmit the PIR as necessary to obtain FERC acceptance.

The Leaburg-Walterville Project includes two independent canal developments, Leaburg Canal Development and Walterville Canal Development, each with its own hydro facilities, therefore, the final PIR for the Project will have two parts: Division 1 – Part 12D PIR for Leaburg Development and Division 2 – Part 12D PIR for Walterville Development. The two divisions shall independently follow the FERC report outlines. The Consultant shall develop the PIR in accordance with the minimum requirements established in 18 CFR Part 12D, Chapter 16-5 of the FERC Engineering Guidelines, and Enclosure 3 of the September FERC letters.

Task 5 Deliverables

• Draft PIR

• Draft PIR review meeting/teleconference agenda and meeting notes

• Response to EWEBs comments on draft PIR

• Revised PIR

• Final PIR for EWEB review and submittal to FERC

• Responses to FERC comments and revisions to the PIR, as required, until FERC acceptance is obtained

• FERC-accepted PIR

Task 6. Continued Technical and Professional Assistance. The Consultant shall provide up to 80 hours of support in resolving questions and comments from FERC on the Part 12D PIR through point of final acceptance. The 80 hours provided under this Task are intended for FERC questions and comments beyond the normal revisions and corrections necessary to address deficiencies in the PIR and shall not limit the Consultant’s responsibility to provide a complete and adequate PIR. This task is intended for the calendar year 2028.

Task 6 Deliverables

• Draft response to questions and comments from FERC and EWEB

• Final response to question and comments to FERC and EWEB

• List of required EWEB decisions and actions

3. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (PASS/FAIL)

Following are the “Minimum Requirements” that shall be met by all Proposers. Response to this section will be considered on a pass or fail basis. Response to each and all requirements must pass before a proposal will be reviewed and scored by the evaluation team.

Proposers shall respond to each of the Minimum Requirements in writing in a brief and concise manner. (See Submittal section following.) EWEB does not pre-qualify Proposers; your proposal must show that your firm meets the requirements. EWEB will attempt to answer questions or clarify the requirements if needed.

1. Proposer must have been in business providing engineering/design services for projects similar in scope and nature to the requirements specified in Section 2 Scope of Work, continuously for at least 7 years.

2. Preparation of work products shall be completed or overseen by an engineer(s) of the appropriate discipline licensed with the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying.

3. Proposer shall be listed on the FERC’s Previously Approved ICs list as of September 18, 2026.

4. Proposer shall have completed and submitted a minimum of 3 previous Part 12 Safety Inspection Reports that have been successfully accepted by FERC within the last 7 years.

5. Sub-Consultants - Proposer must also provide background information of any proposed key sub-consultants under this Contract, if awarded, including city/state of office location, a description of at least 3 projects similar to the Scope of Work specific in Section 2 that sub-consultant worked on with Proposer in the last 10 years, and 3 client references.

Submittal for Minimum Requirements

Please provide the following information on separate pages labeled “Minimum Requirements”.

1. Company Information

a. Indicate whether Proposer is a sole proprietor, partnership, LLC, corporation or other (specify).

b. Indicate how many years Proposer has continuously been in business.

c. Indicate the number of years Proposer has had experience providing engineering services comparable to that required by the Contract documents.

2. Preparation of work products shall be completed or overseen by an engineer(s) of the appropriate discipline licensed with the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying. Please provide specific information supporting this requirement.

3. Proposer shall be listed on FERC’s Previously Approved ICs list as of September 18, 2026. Consultant, once selected by EWEB, shall immediately provide resume(s) of individuals designated as IC(s) to perform the safety inspection work for EWEB to submit to FERC for approval. Refer to 18 CFR Section 12.31 for the definition of an IC.

4. Proposer shall have completed and submitted a minimum of 3 previous Part 12 Safety Inspection Reports that have been successfully accepted by FERC within the last 7 years. For each project, provide client references with the following information:

1. Name of Company Client

2. Contact name, phone, and email

3. Title of Project and description, especially where work is similar to EWEB’s project

4. Original project completion date and actual date finished

5. Original project budget and actual amount invoiced

EWEB reserves the right to check client references for each project. Please ensure that all contact information is up to date and that client is willing and able to respond to EWEB regarding the project.

5. Sub-Consultants - Provide names of any proposed key sub-consultants under this Contract, if awarded, city/state of office location, and describe at least 3 projects similar to the Scope of Work specific in Section 2 that sub-consultant worked on with Proposer in the last 10 years, and 3 client references. For each project, provide references with the same information (a through e) required in item 4 above.

4. EVALUATION PROCESS & PROPOSER SELECTION

EWEB intends to use a Qualifications Based Selection (QBS) process appropriate for A&E projects. A Multi-Step Evaluation Process will be used to determine scores and final rankings. The following is a high-level view of the process:

STEP ONE: Minimum Requirements responses will be reviewed for a Pass / No Pass assessment. Proposals that earn a Pass assessment will move forward to Step Two.

STEP TWO: Written proposals are evaluated, and preliminary scores are ascertained. Up to 3 of the most qualified Proposers will be included on the shortlist and interviews / presentations may be utilized. (These are optional to EWEB.) Pricing will NOT be evaluated during this step.

STEP THREE: At the completion of Step Two, EWEB will release scoring and rankings of the qualified Proposers.

Proposers may elect to withdraw from further consideration at this point. Pricing information for all remaining candidates will be reviewed and added to the final scores and a Finalist will be selected for negotiation of a contract.

The total possible number of points are as follows:

Criteria Possible Points

Step One - Minimum Requirements Pass / No Pass only

Step Two - Qualifications Each Sub-total Initial Evaluation

Project Understanding and Approach 25 Staff, Resources and Project Management 15 Key Staff Qualifications/Experience 25 Past Performance and References 20 85

Interviews (Optional to EWEB) Scores Adjusted and Finalized

Step Three - Pricing 15

TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS 100

4.1 Review and Acknowledgment of Defective Proposals

Due to limited resources, EWEB generally will not completely review or analyze proposals that on their faces fail to comply with the minimum mandatory requirements of the solicitation documents nor will EWEB generally investigate the references or qualifications of such proposals. Therefore, EWEB will not acknowledge whether or not an unsuccessful proposal was complete, Responsive, Responsible, sufficient, or lawful in any respect. This is a public solicitation, the processes and procedures which are established and required by Oregon law and EWEB adopted rules. Proposers are advised to strictly follow the process, procedures, and requirements as set forth in the RFP documents and not anticipate or rely on any opportunity to negotiate, beyond such limitations that are identified herein.

4.2 Right of Rejection

Proposers must comply with all of the terms of the RFP, EWEB Rules, and all…