MEDFORD IRRIGATION DISTRICT | Medford Canal Piping Phase 1

1 | P a g e

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Professional Engineering Services

Medford Canal Piping Phase 1 – 30% Preliminary Design Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Technical Assistance Grant

1. Introduction

1.1 Invitation

Medford Irrigation District (MID or District) invites qualified engineering consulting firms to submit Proposals to provide professional engineering services for the Medford Canal Piping Phase 1 Project.

The selected consultant will advance the preferred piping alternative identified in MID's System Improvement Plan (SIP) from a planning-level concept to approximately 30 percent preliminary design. The work completed under this contract is intended to support future environmental review, implementation funding, permitting, final design, and construction.

1.2 Procurement Method

This Request for Proposals uses a Qualifications-Based Selection (QBS) process for engineering services pursuant to ORS 279C.110 and applicable Oregon public contracting requirements. Although firms are submitting Proposals, MID will evaluate and rank Proposers based on qualifications and the published evaluation criteria, not price. This project is funded through an Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) Technical Assistance Grant therefore state procurement requirements apply.

Proposers shall not submit pricing, labor rates, fee schedules, estimated hours, or other cost information with their Proposal. Following evaluation and ranking, MID will negotiate the detailed scope of services and compensation with the highest-ranked Proposer.

1.3 Schedule

Milestone Target RFP Issued Nov. 4, 2026 Questions Due Nov. 18, 2026 Addendum Nov. 23, 2026 Proposals Due Dec. 4, 2026 Evaluation Dec. 7-8, 2026 Interviews (if needed) Dec. 9, 2026 Intent to Award Dec. 10, 2026 Negotiation Dec. 11-17, 2026 Notice to Proceed Dec. 18, 2026

2. Planning History MID completed a comprehensive System Improvement Plan (SIP) with assistance from Farmers Conservation Alliance (FCA). The SIP evaluated modernization opportunities throughout the irrigation system and identified priority projects based on water conservation, operational reliability, constructability, implementation readiness, and overall benefit to the District.

2 | P a g e

The Medford Canal Piping Phase 1 Project was identified as a priority modernization project because it offers the potential to reduce conveyance losses, improve drought resiliency, reduce maintenance requirements, and improve long-term system reliability.

The Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) subsequently awarded MID a Technical Assistance Grant to advance this priority project into preliminary engineering. The purpose of this procurement is to retain a qualified engineering consultant to prepare a 30% preliminary design package suitable for environmental review and future implementation funding.

3. Project Description The Medford Canal Piping Phase 1 Project will advance the planning-level concept identified in MID's System Improvement Plan (SIP) to approximately 30% design for piping approximately 2.7 miles of the Medford Canal below Bradshaw Drop. The project is located approximately eight miles northeast of the City of Medford in the Little Butte Creek watershed in Jackson County, Oregon.

The Medford Canal is approximately 120 years old, and this project reach is estimated to lose approximately 21% of conveyed water, or approximately 4.2 cubic feet per second (cfs), to seepage and evaporation. These conveyance losses require MID to divert additional water to meet patron deliveries and contribute to demands on the drought-stressed Little Butte Creek system. Little Butte Creek is an important spawning tributary for ESA-listed Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast (SONCC) coho salmon and is identified as impaired on Oregon's 303(d) list for multiple water quality parameters, including temperature, dissolved oxygen, and E.

coli.

Canal seepage also creates operational and infrastructure concerns along the project reach. Seepage contributes to waterlogging of adjacent agricultural lands and has affected nearby residences and the existing Bradshaw Drop pipeline. The canal is also located upslope of agricultural lands, residences, and other infrastructure in portions of the project reach, creating the potential for damage in the event of a canal failure.

The proposed project would replace the existing open canal with buried pipeline and associated appurtenances. The 30% design effort is anticipated to include survey and mapping, utility coordination, geotechnical investigation, hydraulic evaluation and refinement of the preferred pipeline concept, preliminary design drawings, environmental and permitting support necessary to inform the design, and development of a planning-level opinion of probable construction cost.

The selected Consultant will build upon the planning-level design developed through the SIP, verify the underlying design assumptions, and refine the preferred alternative as necessary to address hydraulic performance, constructability, geotechnical conditions, existing turnouts and infrastructure, drainage crossings, property constraints, and long-term District operations and maintenance.

Implementation of the project is anticipated to eliminate approximately 4.2 cfs of conveyance losses. MID has committed to dedicating 25% of the conserved water instream, providing additional flow to Little Butte Creek for the benefit of SONCC coho salmon and other aquatic species. In addition to the anticipated water conservation and environmental benefits, the project is intended to improve water supply and delivery reliability for MID patrons, reduce long-term operations and maintenance needs, and reduce risks associated with canal seepage and potential failure to adjacent agricultural lands, residences, and infrastructure.

3 | P a g e

3.1 Project Objectives

• Develop a technically sound 30% preliminary design.

• Confirm hydraulic performance and design assumptions.

• Identify permitting, utility, and geotechnical considerations.

• Develop a planning-level opinion of probable construction cost.

• Produce a Basis of Design Report suitable for future project phases.

3.2 Available Information

The RFP includes the OWEB grant map in Attachment B. Following consultant selection and contract execution, MID will make available relevant existing technical information in its possession, which may include the System Improvement Plan, supporting hydraulic information or model files, GIS and as-built records, survey/property information, operational data, and OWEB grant documents. The selected Consultant will be responsible for professionally reviewing and verifying information relied upon in the 30% design.

4. General Project Requirements

4.1 Coordination

The Consultant shall coordinate closely with MID and FCA throughout the project. Monthly progress meetings are anticipated together with milestone review meetings at completion of major deliverables.

4.2 Deliverable Expectations

Deliverables are expected to include technical memoranda, hydraulic calculations, draft and final PDF reports, editable CAD files, GIS data (if developed), planning-level cost estimates, meeting summaries, and a complete 30% design package.

4.3 Future Phases

This procurement is limited to preliminary engineering. Final design, permitting support, bidding assistance, construction administration, and other future services are not included but may be authorized under future amendments or procurements, subject to applicable law and District policy.

5. Scope of Services The following scope describes the anticipated services necessary to advance the planning-level concept developed through the MID System Improvement Plan to approximately 30% preliminary design. Proposers are encouraged to identify refinements to the approach that would improve technical quality, constructability, or efficiency. The final scope, level of effort, schedule, and compensation will be mutually refined and negotiated with the highest-ranked Proposer following selection.

5.1 Task 1 - Project Management and Coordination

The Consultant will manage and coordinate the work; maintain communication with MID; coordinate subconsultants; monitor scope, schedule, and budget; and maintain a decision and action-item log.

• Participate in a project kickoff meeting with MID

• Prepare and maintain a detailed project schedule identifying field work, technical analyses, District review periods, and major deliverables.

4 | P a g e

• Provide concise monthly progress summaries identifying work completed, work anticipated, decisions needed, schedule status, and emerging risks.

• Coordinate the work of surveying, geotechnical, hydraulic, civil, and other specialty disciplines necessary for the preliminary design.

• Maintain a project decision log and document key design assumptions.

Anticipated deliverables: project schedule, monthly progress summaries, meeting notes, decision/action-item log.

5.2 Task 2 - Existing Information Review and Design Basis

The Consultant will review the MID System Improvement Plan and supporting technical information provided by the District. The SIP's planning-level design is the starting point for this assignment. The Consultant will verify assumptions, identify data gaps, and recommend refinements needed to establish the basis for 30% design.

• Review the SIP conceptual alignment, hydraulic assumptions, planning-level cost information, and implementation recommendations.

• Review available as-builts, GIS data, water delivery information, property information, aerial imagery, and other District records.

• Conduct a site reconnaissance with MID staff to review existing canal conditions, turnouts, crossings, access constraints, and operational considerations.

• Confirm preliminary design criteria, including design flow, pipe material and pressure class considerations, minimum cover, access, appurtenances, and operational requirements.

• Identify information or decisions required from MID before advancing design.

Anticipated deliverable: Design Criteria / Data Gaps Memorandum or equivalent section of the Basis of Design Report.

5.3 Task 3 - Surveying, Mapping, and Property Information

The Consultant will perform the topographic and boundary-related survey work reasonably necessary to support 30% design for the approximately 2.7-mile project reach from Bradshaw Drop to Yankee Creek. Survey work should capture existing canal geometry, structures, access roads, drainage crossings, utilities, property features, turnouts, and other features that could affect pipeline alignment or construction.

• Establish horizontal and vertical control appropriate for subsequent design phases and construction survey.

• Survey existing canal centerline, banks, access roads, structures, turnouts, drainage crossings, visible utilities, fences, buildings, significant surface features, and other relevant features.

• Coordinate utility locates and incorporate available utility information into base mapping.

• Review available property records and identify locations where the preferred alignment may require easements or additional property rights.

• Prepare preliminary easement exhibits or legal-description support where needed to define anticipated property needs at the 30% level.

• Prepare a digital terrain model and design base map suitable for plan and profile development.

Survey deliverables shall be prepared under the responsible charge of an Oregon-licensed Professional Land Surveyor where required by law.

5 | P a g e

Anticipated deliverables: survey/base mapping files, control information, DTM, and preliminary property/easement exhibits as applicable.

5.4 Task 4 - Geotechnical Investigation

The project reach includes areas described in the OWEB grant application as unstable clay slopes and will require buried pipeline construction along an existing canal corridor. The Consultant will develop and complete a geotechnical investigation appropriate for 30% design and future advancement of the project.

• Review available geologic and geotechnical information and conduct site reconnaissance.

• Develop a field exploration program targeted to anticipated trench conditions, unstable slopes, structures, and other critical locations.

• Complete borings, test pits, sampling, and laboratory testing as appropriate for the preliminary design.

• Characterize soil, rock, and groundwater conditions relevant to excavation and pipeline installation.

• Provide preliminary recommendations for trench stability, bedding and backfill, dewatering, slope stability, foundation support, seismic considerations, and other constructability issues.

• Identify additional investigation that should be completed during later design phases.

Anticipated deliverable: A Draft Geotechnical Memorandum and a Final Geotechnical Memorandum suitable to support 30% design.

5.5 Task 5 - Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis

The Consultant will verify and refine the hydraulic basis for the proposed gravity-pressurized pipeline. The analysis will build upon available SIP information and District operating data and will establish design parameters for pipe sizing and appurtenances.

• Compile available diversion, delivery, operational, and hydraulic information relevant to the Medford Canal.

• Confirm design flow conditions, including appropriate peak, minimum, and seasonal operating scenarios.

• Develop or refine a hydraulic model of the proposed pipeline.

• Evaluate available head, hydraulic grade line, pipe velocities, pressure conditions, and operational constraints.

• Evaluate tie-in requirements to the existing approximately 60-inch Bradshaw Drop pipeline.

• Evaluate turnout hydraulics and preliminary requirements for pressure regulation, flow control, isolation, air/vacuum relief, drainage, and other appurtenances.

• Evaluate hydraulic considerations at the three seasonal drainage crossings and other critical locations identified during design.

• Identify surge or transient concerns that warrant more detailed analysis during subsequent design.

Anticipated deliverables: hydraulic model files, calculations, and Hydraulic Analysis Memorandum or equivalent Basis of Design section.

5.6 Task 6 - Utility, Drainage, and Constructability Coordination The Consultant will identify and evaluate conflicts and constructability considerations that could materially affect the preliminary design, project cost, or future permitting.

• Coordinate with known utility owners and incorporate available utility information into the preliminary design.

6 | P a g e

• Evaluate the three seasonal drainages and other crossings along the project reach and develop preliminary crossing concepts.

• Evaluate access, staging, temporary water management, canal shutdown constraints, and likely construction sequencing.

• Identify locations where existing canal geometry, adjacent homes, agricultural operations, slopes, or property constraints could affect construction.

• Identify major risks and recommend actions for risk mitigation in subsequent design steps.

Anticipated deliverable: constructability/risk summary incorporated into the Basis of Design Report.

5.7 Task 7 - Environmental and Cultural Resource Design Support The Consultant is not being retained under this RFP to complete a full environmental review or obtain all project permits. However, the preliminary design must be developed to support future environmental, cultural resource, and permitting work. The Consultant will provide engineering information and mapping needed to define the anticipated project footprint and potential impacts.

• Identify likely permits and regulatory approvals that may influence subsequent design and project schedule.

• Develop preliminary limits for ground disturbance, access, staging, drainage crossings, and other project features needed for future environmental review.

• Coordinate design information with MID, FCA, and other environmental or cultural resource specialists retained by the District.

• Identify design decisions that should be advanced before cultural resource consultation, landowner coordination, or permitting can be completed.

• Prepare project figures or design information reasonably needed to support future grant, environmental, and permitting activities.

Unless specifically added during contract negotiations, archaeological surveys, biological surveys, permit applications, and agency consultation are not included as independent Consultant deliverables.

5.8 Task 8 - 30% Preliminary Design Package

The Consultant will prepare a coordinated 30% preliminary design package that advances the preferred SIP concept and establishes the principal project configuration. The package should be sufficiently developed to support District decision-making, future environmental review and funding applications, and efficient advancement into later design.

• Title, index, general notes, design criteria, and legend sheets.

• Overall project layout and key plan sheets.

• Plan and profile drawings for the proposed pipeline alignment.

• Preliminary pipe size, material, pressure class, and alignment.

• Bradshaw Drop tie-in concept.

• Turnout upgrade concepts and typical details.

• Preliminary locations and concepts for isolation valves, air/vacuum valves, drains, access structures, and other appurtenances.

• Preliminary concepts for drainage crossings and other significant crossings.

• Preliminary erosion control, site restoration, access, and staging considerations where appropriate for

30% design.

7 | P a g e

• Identification of anticipated easement/property needs.

• Design details sufficient to communicate major project features and support the planning-level cost estimate.

All engineering drawings shall be prepared under the responsible charge of an Oregon-licensed Professional Engineer. Plans shall be submitted electronically in PDF and native editable format.

5.9 Task 9 - Planning-Level Cost Estimate and Implementation Schedule The Consultant will prepare an opinion of probable construction cost appropriate for the 30% design level and a preliminary implementation schedule. The estimate should be organized so MID can readily update it for future funding applications.

• Develop major quantities from the 30% design.

• Document unit costs, allowances, contingencies, escalation assumptions, and exclusions.

• Include construction, mobilization, temporary water management, site restoration, utility coordination, and other major foreseeable cost components.

• Identify major cost risks and items requiring refinement during subsequent design.

• Prepare a preliminary schedule identifying anticipated future design, environmental/permitting, procurement, and construction phases.

Anticipated deliverables: 30% opinion of probable construction cost and preliminary implementation schedule.

5.10 Task 10 - Basis of Design Report

The Consultant will prepare a concise Basis of Design Report documenting the technical basis for the 30% design and the decisions necessary to advance the project. The report may incorporate task memoranda by reference or as appendices.

• Project description and design objectives.

• Existing information reviewed and key data gaps.

• Design criteria and assumptions.

• Survey and property considerations.

• Geotechnical findings and recommendations.

• Hydraulic analysis and recommended design parameters.

• Pipe alignment, materials, appurtenances, turnouts, crossings, and tie-in concepts.

• Utility, constructability, environmental/permitting, and property considerations.

• 30% cost estimate and implementation schedule.

• Risks, unresolved issues, and recommended next steps for subsequent design.

Anticipated deliverables: Draft and Final Basis of Design Report.

5.11 Quality Assurance / Quality Control

The Consultant will maintain an internal quality assurance/quality control process appropriate for professional engineering services. Each major technical deliverable shall be independently reviewed by qualified personnel before submittal to MID. The Consultant shall identify its proposed QA/QC approach in the Proposal.

8 | P a g e

6. Deliverables and Review Process The following matrix summarizes anticipated major deliverables. Proposers may recommend refinements to the sequence or packaging of deliverables. Final deliverables and review periods will be established during contract negotiations.

Task Major Deliverable Anticipated Review 1 Project schedule; progress summaries; meeting notes Ongoing

2 Design Criteria / Data Gaps Memorandum

MID/FCA review

3 Survey/base mapping; DTM;

property exhibits as applicable

Technical review

4 Draft and Final Geotechnical Memorandum

MID/FCA + design team

5 Hydraulic model/calculations;

technical memorandum

MID/FCA review

6-7 Constructability, utility, environmental/permitting design inputs

Integrated with design

8 Draft and Final 30% Design Package

Formal milestone review

9 Opinion of probable construction cost; implementation schedule

With 30% package

10 Draft and Final Basis of Design Report

Formal milestone review

6.1 Review Comments

MID anticipates one consolidated review cycle for each major draft deliverable. The Consultant shall maintain a comment-response log for the 30% design package and Basis of Design Report and document disposition of substantive comments.

6.2 Electronic Deliverables

• PDF versions of all reports, memoranda, figures, and drawings.

• Native editable CAD/design files used to prepare the 30% drawings.

• GIS files developed specifically for the project, including associated metadata where practical.

• Hydraulic model files and supporting calculation files.

• Editable cost estimate and schedule files.

• Survey data and base mapping files appropriate for continued project development.

7. District Responsibilities and Project Coordination MID anticipates providing or coordinating the following, subject to availability:

• Access to the MID System Improvement Plan and supporting planning-level design information.

• Available GIS, as-built, operational, water delivery, property, and infrastructure records.

• Access to District facilities and coordination with affected landowners as appropriate.

• Timely review and consolidated comments on Consultant deliverables.

• District operational knowledge and decisions regarding preferred operating conditions and design preferences.

9 | P a g e

• Coordination with OWEB and administration of the Technical Assistance Grant.

• Coordination with FCA, which may continue to provide project management and technical support to MID.

• Payment of agency permit or application fees, if such fees become applicable and are authorized by MID.

The Consultant is responsible for identifying information needed from MID early enough to avoid unnecessary schedule impacts.

8. Proposal Requirements Proposals should be concise, project-specific, and organized in the order below. Marketing material that does not directly address the evaluation criteria will be discarded. Pricing will be evaluated in subsequent steps.

8.1 Cover Letter

Provide a brief cover letter signed by an authorized representative. Identify the firm's primary contact and confirm the firm's interest, availability, and ability to enter into a professional services agreement with MID.

8.2 Firm and Team Qualifications

• Brief description of the prime consultant and proposed subconsultants.

• Identification of the proposed Project Manager and key technical personnel.

• Roles and responsibilities of each key team member.

• Relevant Oregon professional registrations.

• Availability and anticipated commitment of key staff through completion of the work.

8.3 Relevant Experience and Past Performance

Describe up to five projects that best demonstrate the team's experience with irrigation modernization, large-diameter buried pipelines, gravity or low-pressure conveyance, canal-to-pipe conversion, hydraulic modeling, survey, geotechnical investigation, agricultural property coordination, and preliminary design. Include client, location, project description, team members involved, completion date, and client reference.

8.4 Project Understanding and Technical Approach

Demonstrate understanding of the Medford Canal Piping Phase 1 Project and describe the proposed approach to advancing the SIP concept to 30% design. Address the principal technical risks, data needs, hydraulic considerations, field work, constructability, and coordination issues the Proposer expects to manage.

8.5 Project Management, Schedule, and QA/QC

• Describe project management and communication approach.

• Provide a proposed schedule showing major tasks and deliverables.

• Describe how the team will maintain schedule and coordinate subconsultants.

• Describe the firm's QA/QC process for preliminary engineering deliverables.

8.6 References

Provide at least three references for comparable work, including contact name, organization, email, and telephone number.

8.7 Required Certifications

Submit the certifications included with the RFP, as applicable. MID may request clarification or additional documentation needed to determine responsibility or execute the contract.

10 | P a g e

8.8 Prohibited Pricing Information

DO NOT INCLUDE pricing, fee schedules, billing rates, estimated hours, reimbursable costs, or other compensation information in the Proposal. MID will request and negotiate compensation information only after selection of the highest-ranked Proposer, consistent with ORS 279C.110.

8.9 Proposal Length and Format

Proposals should not exceed 20 single-sided pages, excluding the cover, table of contents, resumes, and required certifications. Proposals should utilize 10-point font or larger. Proposals must submitted electronically as a single searchable PDF.

9. Proposal Submission and Solicitation Communications

9.1 Submission

Proposals must be received by MID no later than the Proposal Due Date defined by Section 1.3. Final submission instructions, including the District email address, shall be included in the advertised RFP.

Proposals delivered after the Proposal Due Date will not be accepted for consideration.

Proposal subject/file name: Medford Canal Piping Phase 1 - Engineering Services Proposal - [Firm Name].

9.2 Questions

All questions concerning this RFP shall be submitted in writing to the District contact identified in the advertised solicitation by the Questions Due date. MID may respond through written addenda. Oral interpretations are not binding.

9.3 Addenda

Any changes to the RFP will be issued by written addendum and posted through the same channels used to advertise the solicitation. Proposers are responsible for reviewing issued addenda before submitting a Proposal.

9.4 Site Visit

MID may offer an optional site visit during the solicitation period if useful to prospective Proposers.

Attendance will not be used as an evaluation criterion .

10. Evaluation and Qualifications-Based Selection MID will use a qualifications-based selection process. Proposals will be evaluated on the qualifications of the Proposer for the professional services required. Cost will not be considered during the initial evaluation and ranking.

Evaluation Criterion Points Relevant Experience and Past Performance 30 Project Manager and Key Personnel 25 Project Understanding and Technical Approach 25 Project Management, Availability, Schedule, and

QA/QC

Proposal Quality and Responsiveness 5 Total 100

11 | P a g e

10.1 Relevant Experience and Past Performance - 30 Points

Experience with comparable irrigation modernization and canal piping projects; quality and relevance of completed work; experience with public or quasi-municipal clients; ability to meet schedules; cost control on prior work; and reference feedback.

10.2 Project Manager and Key Personnel - 25 Points

Qualifications, specialized experience, technical competence, availability, continuity, and demonstrated ability of the proposed Project Manager and key personnel to perform the required services.

10.3 Project Understanding and Technical Approach - 25 Points Understanding of the project objectives and constraints; appropriateness and efficiency of the proposed approach; identification of key risks and data needs; and demonstrated ability to advance planning-level concepts into a useful 30% design package.

10.4 Project Management, Availability, Schedule, and QA/QC - 15 Points Resources committed to the project, ability to perform within the anticipated schedule, communication and coordination approach, subconsultant management, and quality assurance/quality control procedures.

10.5 Proposal Quality and Responsiveness - 5 Points

Clarity, organization, completeness, and conformance with the RFP requirements.

10.6 Interviews and Clarifications

MID may conduct interviews with the highest-ranked Proposer if the evaluation committee determines interviews would materially assist the selection. If interviews are conducted, MID will provide the shortlisted firms with consistent instructions and will document the final ranking. MID may also seek written clarification of a Proposal, provided the clarification does not permit a material revision that would compromise the fairness of the procurement.

10.7 Selection and Ranking

The evaluation committee will rank Proposers based on the published criteria. MID will identify the highest-ranked Proposer and document the selection. The District reserves the right to reject any or all Proposals when doing so is in the District's best interest.

11. Contract Negotiation and Award

11.1 Negotiation with Highest-Ranked Proposer

After selection, MID and the highest-ranked Proposer will discuss, refine, and finalize the scope of services, performance schedule, staffing, rates, estimated hours, reimbursable expenses, and maximum compensation. MID will evaluate the negotiated compensation and, at the sole discretion of MID, either accept or reject Proposer’s rates and maximum compensation.

11.2 Unsuccessful Negotiation

If MID and the selected Proposer are unable to reach agreement on contract terms, MID will formally terminate negotiations with that Proposer and may begin negotiations with the next most qualified Proposer.

MID may continue in rank order until an agreement is reached or the selection process is terminated.

12 | P a g e

11.3 Contract

The selected Consultant must enter a Professional Services Agreement with MID. Following selection of the highest-ranked Proposer, MID and the selected Consultant will negotiate the final scope of services, schedule, compensation, and other contract terms consistent with this RFP and applicable Oregon law.

11.4 Future Services

MID is currently procuring the services described in this RFP. MID may consider future services such as additional preliminary design, final design, permitting support, bidding assistance, and construction-phase engineering to the extent permitted by applicable law, MID procurement policy, available funding, and the terms of the Consultant contract. No future work is guaranteed.

12. Solicitation and Protest Procedures

12.1 Solicitation Protests

A prospective Proposer may protest the contents of the solicitation in accordance with applicable Oregon public contracting law, MID's adopted procurement procedures, and applicable Attorney General Model Rules. Any protest must be in writing, identify the protesting party, identify the provision being protested, state the legal and factual grounds for the protest, and describe the requested remedy. The final advertised RFP shall state the applicable protest deadline and submission address.

12.2 Selection Protests

An adversely affected Proposer may protest the District's consultant selection in accordance with applicable Oregon public contracting law and MID's adopted procedures. The Notice of Intent to Award or selection notice will identify the deadline and method for filing a protest.

12.3 Governing Procedure

MID intends the protest process for this professional services procurement to be consistent with ORS 279C.110(8) and the applicable Attorney General Model Rules, including OAR 137-048-0240, unless MID has adopted a different controlling procedure. Proposers are responsible for complying with the procedure identified in the final solicitation.

13. General Conditions

13.1 Proposal Costs

All costs incurred in preparing and submitting a Proposal, participating in interviews, or negotiating a contract are the Proposer's responsibility.

13.2 Public Records

Proposals and procurement records are subject to Oregon public records law. Consistent with ORS 279C.107, MID may withhold proposals from public inspection during the competitive proposal and negotiation process as permitted by law. Proposers must clearly identify information they believe is exempt from disclosure;

merely marking an entire Proposal confidential is discouraged and does not determine exempt status.

13 | P a g e

13.3 Reservation of Rights

In addition to all rights and remedies available under Oregon law, the District expressly reserves the following rights:

• Reject any or all Proposals when the District determines rejection is in its best interest.

• Cancel or revise the solicitation before contract signature.

• Waive minor informalities or irregularities that do not affect substantive terms.

• Request clarification or verification of information submitted.

• Modify the schedule by written addendum.

• Negotiate the final scope and contract terms with the selected Proposer consistent with the QBS process.

13.4 Compliance with Law

The Consultant shall comply with applicable federal, state, county, and local laws and regulations in performing the contracted services. This project is funded with state OWEB funds; federal Uniform Guidance procurement provisions are not included in this solicitation.

13.5 Licensure

Professional engineering and land surveying services shall be performed under the responsible charge of professionals appropriately licensed in Oregon when licensure is required.

13.6 Subconsultants and Key Personnel

The Proposal shall identify significant subconsultants and key personnel. Substitution of the Project Manager or other key personnel after award will require MID approval. The Consultant remains responsible for the performance and coordination of its subconsultants.

13.7 Insurance

The selected Consultant will be required to maintain insurance appropriate for professional engineering services, including workers' compensation as required by law, commercial general liability, automobile liability, and professional liability/errors and omissions. Final limits and additional insured requirements will be stated in the final Professional Services Agreement.

13.8 Conflict of Interest

Proposers shall disclose actual or potential conflicts of interest that could affect performance of the services.

MID may request additional information or mitigation measures before award.

13.9 Funding and Grant Requirements

The work is supported by an OWEB Technical Assistance Grant. The Consultant shall provide information reasonably needed by MID to document grant-supported work, expenditures, progress, and deliverables. MID remains responsible for grant administration unless otherwise negotiated.

13.10 Ownership and Use of Work Products

Ownership, license, reliance, and reuse rights for drawings, models, survey information, reports, and other work products will be governed by the Professional Services Agreement. MID expects to receive the electronic files necessary to continue the project into future design phases.

14 | P a g e

14. Attachments Attachment Description A Proposal Certifications and Required Forms B Project Map and SIP Conceptual Design Figures C Evaluation Score Sheet

Attachment B includes the applicable SIP project map and conceptual design figure(s) needed to communicate the planning-level project concept. Additional existing technical information will be provided to the selected Consultant after contract signature, as applicable.

15 | P a g e

ATTACHMENT A - PROPOSAL CERTIFICATIONS

The following certifications are adapted from MID's prior engineering-services procurement forms. Each Proposer should complete and return the applicable forms with its Proposal.

A-1. Bidder/Proposer Residency Statement Under ORS 279A.120, Oregon's reciprocal preference law, public contracting agencies apply resident/nonresident preferences as provided by law. For purposes of this certification, a Resident Bidder/Proposer is a bidder or proposer meeting the statutory requirements of ORS 279A.120.

Proposer is: ☐ Resident Proposer ☐ Nonresident Proposer

If resident, Oregon business address:

If nonresident, state of residency:

Firm:

Authorized Signature:

Printed Name / Title:

Date:

A-2. Certificate of Non-Discrimination Under ORS 279A.110, the Proposer certifies that it has not discriminated against minority, women, or emerging small business enterprises in obtaining subcontracts and, if awarded a contract, will not discriminate in the awarding of subcontracts.

Firm:

Authorized Signature:

Printed Name / Title:

Date:

A-3. Certificate of Compliance with Oregon Tax Laws The undersigned certifies, under penalty of perjury, that the Proposer is, to the best of the undersigned's knowledge, not in violation of applicable Oregon tax laws, including the tax programs referenced in ORS 305.380.

Firm:

Authorized Signature:

Printed Name / Title:

Date:

A-4. Independent Contractor Certification The Proposer certifies that it will perform the contracted professional services as an independent contractor and will satisfy applicable requirements of ORS 670.600. The Proposer is responsible for maintaining all business registrations. professional licenses, bonding, and insurance required for the services.

Firm:

Authorized Signature:

Printed Name / Title:

Federal Tax I.D. #:

Date:

16 | P a g e

A-5. Proposal Certification By signing below, the Proposer certifies that:

• The Proposal has been prepared independently and without collusion with other bidders/proposers.

• The Proposer has reviewed the RFP and addenda and agrees to be bound by the Proposal for the period stated in the solicitation.

• No pricing, fee schedule, billing rate, estimated hours, or other compensation information is included in the Proposal.

• The information provided in the Proposal is true and accurate to the best of the Proposer's knowledge.

• The Proposer has disclosed any actual or potential conflicts of interest known at the time of submittal.

• The Proposer can obtain and maintain the insurance and Oregon professional licensure required by the final agreement.

Firm:

Authorized Signature:

Printed Name / Title:

Date:

17 | P a g e

ATTACHMENT B - PROJECT MAP AND SIP CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FIGURES

18 | P a g e

ATTACHMENT C - EVALUATION SCORE SHEET

Proposer Name: ______________________________________________

Evaluator: _________________________________________________ Date: __________________

Evaluation Criterion Maximum Points Score Relevant Experience and Past Performance

Project Manager and Key Personnel

Project Understanding and Technical Approach

Project Management, Availability, Schedule, and QA/QC

Proposal Quality and Responsiveness

TOTAL 100

Required / Pass-Fail Review Item Yes No / Comment Proposal received by deadline Required certifications completed No pricing or fee information included

Oregon licensure / ability to provide required licensed services demonstrated

Proposal substantially conforms to RFP format

Evaluator Comments