Request_for_ITB_CCNA_RFP_JoesCreekPhosphorusRemoval.docx

REQUEST FORM FOR ADVERTISEMENT OF

CCNA NON-CONTINUING PROJECT

OR CONTINUING CONTRACT

DATE: 8/4/2025

PID Name: Joes Creek Stream Restoration Utilizing Phosphorus Mitigation and Realtime Variable Rate Injection and Monitoring Systems PID Number: TBD Project Manager/Department: Rob Burnes/PW

Phone Number: 727-453-3149 email: rburnes@pinellas.gov

NOTE: Please ensure that Project Manager and Supervisor review and approve all information listed below prior to submitting SharePoint request

1. When does this contract need to be awarded? 12/15/2025

2. Required dates sensitive to Project (grants, etc.): 01/15/2026

Please complete the following information to prepare the CCNA/RFP request (Intake) for OpenGov, Contract Review, and Advertisement. Once Department review is completed and approved in Intake, PW Contracts staff will submit to Purchasing for Contract Review. Purchasing will draft Invitation to Bid (ITB) for final review before Advertisement. The following may be included in the Invitation to Bid package, which project manager will need to provide in SharePoint Work Request to PW Contracts:

1. Invitation to Bid Form – Complete all sections

2. Scope of Work

3. Budgetary Detail Report

4. Funding Form

5. Additional reference documents

6. Project Location Map

7. Preliminary Staff Report

The following areas must be 100% completed to avoid a delay in drafting the ITB in Intake.

3. Who will provide CEI Services for this project? Environmental Management

4. Commodity Codes: A universal taxonomy for identifying commodities and services in procurement systems. Vendors are self-classified using those codes and some will only receive the advertisements for the commodity codes they have selected. OpenGov Commodity Codes.xls (please list all that apply) Water Pollution Services-92694; Ecological Services-92640; Water/Wastewater Conservation Services-92695; Water Treating Chemicals (Not Otherwise Classified)-88594

5. Financial Information:

A. Budget (Construction and CEI Services –if applicable): Amount: $0.00 B. Budget Description: $901,840

6. Is this replacing an existing contract? Yes or No No A. Existing Contract Number B. Vendor Name:

C. Contract Increase/decrease needed D. Contract term/time extension needed

7. Site Visit (with Purchasing) Yes or No No, unless requested by Vendor If yes, Mandatory or Non-Mandatory Non-mandatory

8. Pre-Conference (prior to award with Purchasing) Yes or No If yes, Mandatory or Non-Mandatory

9. Continuing or Non-Continuing CCNA? Non-Continuing

10. Completion Days for entire Project? 880

Phase 1: 880 Phase 2: N/A Total: 880

11. Evaluation Criteria? Yes or No Yes

1. Evaluation Criteria Selection: RFP, RFN, or CCNA? RFP

2. Evaluation Committee?

(Enter names of evaluation committee members. No more than two can be selected from the requesting department. Five members are required for purchases with annual approval of more than $100,000.00. Three members are required for purchases with an annual approval of less than $100,000.00.)

Rob Burnes, Pam Leasure, Nicole Maloney, Need help on 2 others

12. Strategic Plan & Subtask(s): http://www.pinellascounty.org/strategicplan/default.htm

13. Potential Vendors? Yes (if yes, list emails of requested vendors below) No Yes;

SePRO-Pamela Dugan-pamelad@eutrophix.com;

Applied Ecology-Sarah Malone-smalone@appliedecologyinc.com

14. Contract Term: 2 years 6 months

15. Term Contract Extension/Renewal: No

16. Price Structure: Lump Sum, Quantity, or N/A Lump Sum

17. Funding Source (select all that apply):

Department Operating Budget Only until reimbursed; 100% grant funded Grants (Federal, State funding derived through Federal Funds, or State Funding): State Funding-FDEP Innovation Grant Capital N/A

ARPA N/A

N/A - Revenue N/A

Please list title of funding sources:

FDEP Innovation Grant

18. If grant funded, have you included grant requirements language in Appendix 4 – Special Notices?

a. Note: Include all required Exhibits and Attachments

b. What is the total expected project capital expenditure for this project? 0

c. Does the project fall under ARPA Flex Act Project? No

19. Contract Security-Bonds (Amount or %): Unsure *For Construction- 5% for Bid Bonds, Performance and Payment Bonds - 100%, Annual Contract – 50%

20. Additional Notes: (Financials and Term Information):

21. Is this purchase for Goods Only? No

1. How will the Goods be received? Shipped Common Carrier, Vendor Delivered, PC Employee Pickup? Vendor Delivered

22. Is there any type of Service or Installation involved? Yes or No Yes

1. Will the vendor be coming on County Property for any reason? Yes or No Yes

2. Will the vendor have access to County computer systems (remote in for repairs, etc)? Yes or No No

23. Summary (Introduction Section):

Pinellas County is invested in improving Joe’s Creek water quality so local urban communities can enjoy outdoor recreational opportunities centered around safe, clean, and enjoyable water. This project involves coupling innovative chemical application and monitoring approaches to remove Phosphorus (P) within the waters of Joe’s Creek as well as inactivating legacy P in the sediment of the four small lakes within Joe’s Creek flow path. This project proposes an inline automated injection technology for continuous application of a lanthanum-based P sequestration agent into Joe’s Creek, as well as the application of lanthanum-based treatments to sequester sediment-bound P within the four lakes.

24. Background (Introduction Section) (Optional):

Scope of Work (ITB Section):

Note: You can add/remove any of the example title below, change the order, create new items, etc. If you have any questions, please reach out to Contracts Group.

25. Objective/Justification:

Urban Stream Restoration Utilizing Phosphorus Mitigation and Realtime Variable Rate Injection and Monitoring Systems

26. Background:

The 9,256-acre Joe’s Creek Watershed includes the cities of Pinellas Park, Kenneth City, and St. Petersburg, as well as unincorporated Pinellas County (Lealman). There are four small lakes within Joe’s Creek flow path, which encompass approximately 25 acres. The creek is primarily used for stormwater conveyance capacity and flood risk reduction. Pinellas County monitors one fixed site along the freshwater portion of Joe’s Creek eight times a year, site 35-10. Pinellas County also monitors site 35-04 along Bonn Creek which flows into Joe’s Creek from the north and site 35-12 along Miles Creek, which diverges from Joe’s Creek at 66th St N, and flows through St. Petersburg.

The tidal portion of Joe’s Creek (WBID 1668E) is impaired for dissolved oxygen (DO) and chlorophyll-a, while the freshwater portion is impaired for DO. Joe’s Creek has also exhibited increasing trends in total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), total suspended solids, and turbidity. Joe’s Creek is impaired for biology; the most recent (2022) Stream Condition Index score for the creek was 27; a score greater than 40 is deemed “passing.” Many portions of the creek are dominated by nuisance exotic vegetation, such as Hydrilla, Pontedaria crassipes (water hyacinth), and Ludwigia spp.

Phosphorus (P) pollution drives the primary productivity of most surface waters in Florida. The mitigation of this pollution results in the rapid improvement of water quality shifting ecosystem function to a less favorable environment for the formation of harmful algal blooms. These favorable ecosystem shifts to more diverse native species coupled with nutrient reductions are long-lasting environmental transformations that provide enhanced water quality and outdoor recreational benefits to surrounding communities.

27. Requirements:

Vendor must use grant approved phosphorus reduction products, EutroSORB WC and EutroSORB SI

Mandatory Requirements (Conditions)

28. Deliverables:

Develop, permit, implement, and monitor the automated inline injection of EutroSORB WC, and in-lake sediment inactivation within the four small lakes using EutroSORB SI into portions of Joes Creek. Detailed deliverables are in the scope below.

29. Project Description Pinellas County is invested in improving Joe’s Creek water quality so local urban communities can enjoy outdoor recreational opportunities centered around safe, clean, and enjoyable water. This project involves coupling innovative chemical application and monitoring approaches to remove P within the waters of Joe’s Creek as well as inactivating legacy P in the sediment of the four small lakes within Joe’s Creek flow path. This project proposes an inline automated injection technology for continuous application of a lanthanum-based P sequestration agent into Joe’s Creek, as well as the application of lanthanum-based treatments to sequester sediment-bound P within the four lakes.

Implementation of this project is proposed to occur on land owned by Pinellas County. The purpose of this demonstration project is to inactivate legacy P in the four small lakes and reduce water column P concentrations in Joe’s Creek. The benefits of this demonstration include reduced P levels with improved water quality and ecosystem function moving downstream to Cross Bayou, as well as treatment of legacy P in the sediment. This project will be implemented over a one-year period and long-term maintenance and nutrient-mitigation strategies could be developed based upon the results. The management of legacy P will provide rapid water quality improvement in Joe’s Creek and allow for the expansion of native aquatic vegetation and reduction of nutrient loads into Cross Bayou and the Gulf, which will help to enhance a more diverse ecosystem and local economy. The combined estimated P load in the sediment and flowing water of Joe’s Creek to be mitigated during the 12-month demonstration is ~2,100 lbs (includes Joe’s Creek water column and top 4-cm of sediment in the four small lakes). The project cost-effectiveness will be measured by determining the cost/lb-P mitigated in Joe’s Creek compared to costs associated with best management practices approaches, such as Phoslock®, alum treatments, or mechanical removal.

The design of the Joe’s Creek Nutrient Mitigation Plan utilized historical sediment data, recent water quality measurements, and flow data from an active United States Geological Survey (USGS) gaging station to develop a sediment inactivation strategy for the four small lakes along the creek, employing two lanthanum-based chemistries. The approach for Joe’s Creek involves the automated inline injection of EutroSORB WC, a liquid lanthanum-based solution for stripping P from the water column. Another component of the project will include in-lake sediment inactivation within the four small lakes using EutroSORB SI, a liquid P-binding solution for sediment inactivation. Once applied, lanthanum ions react preferentially with phosphate compounds and rapidly form a highly stable insoluble mineral. The resulting mineral complex becomes integrated as an inert component into the natural sediments of the waterbody and is not bioavailable. Due to the specificity of EutroSORB materials to phosphate it will continually bind new incoming P from internal and external sources. During application, EutroSORB SI sediment inactivator is applied as a liquid over the surface of the lakes as a single blanket treatment. The proposed 12-month project would be implemented in the summer of 2026 with the application of no more than 2,700 gallons of EutroSORB SI to mitigate an estimated 1,100 lbs of P in the top 4-cm of sediment and the automated injection of ~2,000 gallons of EutroSORB WC to mitigate an estimated 1,000 pounds of P in the water column of Joe’s Creek.

To monitor success of the project, water quality grab samples as well as continuous data collection with three NuLAB™ automated monitoring systems (Figure 1) will be implemented to collect pre-treatment, during and post-treatment samples over the 12-month demonstration period. At a minimum, the following water quality parameters will be collected/analyzed: TP, soluble reactive P, TN, nitrite, nitrate, DO, turbidity, pH, and temperature. In addition, pre- and post-treatment sediment samples will be collected from the four lakes and analyzed for percent solids in addition to the following P fractions as mg P/kg: labile P, reductant-soluble P, metal-oxide P, organic P, and apatite/residual. The pre-treatment sediment samples will be compared to post-treatment sediment samples to quantify the amount of bioavailable P that transforms into non-bioavailable mineralized forms of P. The Contractor will conduct acute and chronic whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) jar testing prior to the application of EutroSORB WC and EutroSORB SI. The Contractor will also conduct acute and chronic whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) pre- and post-treatment of EutroSORB WC and EutroSORB SI. To quantify demonstration performance the pre-treatment water quality and sediment samples will be compared to post-treatment samples and provide the total pounds of P mitigated in the sediment and water column during the 12-month demonstration.

30. Scope of Work (detailed) Task #1: Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Task Description: The Contractor will prepare, submit, and receive approval on a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) prior to commencement of any sampling, laboratory experiments and analyses and data analyses associated with the project. The QAPP must specify the sampling procedures, locations, instruments, frequency, and parameters to be sampled.

Deliverable #1a: Draft QAPP:

The Draft QAPP in Word format to Pinellas County (County). Upon request, the Contractor will provide a paper copy of the Draft QAPP to the County.

Performance Standard: The County and Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) will ensure review of the draft QAPP for compliance with this Agreement and the quality assurance requirements, to ensure sufficient monitoring is planned to measure project effectiveness and provide comments to the Contractor as needed prior to Final QAPP submittal.

Deliverable #1b: Final QAPP Final County-approved QAPP submitted electronically in PDF format to the County. Upon request, the Contractor will provide a paper copy of the Final QAPP to the County.

Performance Standard: The County and FDEP will review the Final QAPP to ensure that draft comments have been incorporated and the Final QAPP is in compliance with this Agreement and the quality assurance requirements. Upon review and written approval from the County and FDEP of the Final QAPP, the Contractor may proceed to Task 2.

Task #2: Design, Permitting and Project Management Task Description: The Contractor will oversee the project design and necessary permitting. The Contractor will also perform project management, to include field services, site meetings with sub-contractor(s), and overall project coordination, implementation, and supervision. As part of the project design the Contractor will conduct acute and chronic jar WET testing using water from the waterbody before treating with Eutrosorb SI and Eutrosorb WC. The Contractor will conduct the WET testing with a combination of the two lanthanum-based chemicals.

Deliverable #2a: The Contractor will submit an electronic copy of 1) the final design, including professional certification as applicable, and 2) a list of all required permits identifying issue dates and issuing authorities submitted to the County. Upon request, the Contractor will provide copies of obtained permits or permit-related correspondence or documentation and/or a paper copy of the final design.

Performance Standard: The County and FDEP will review the deliverables to verify that they meet the specifications in the Grant Work Plan and this task description. Upon review and written acceptance by the County’s Grant Manager of each deliverable under this task the Contractor may proceed with payment request submittal.

Deliverable #2b: The Contractor will submit an electronic copy of the WET testing results to the County for approval. Upon request, the Contractor will provide a paper copy of the results.

Performance Standard: The County and FDEP will review the WET testing results. Upon review and written acceptance by the County and FDEP of all deliverables under this task, the Contractor may proceed to Task 3.

Task #3: Treatment Application & Monitoring Task Description: The Contractor will conduct treatment application and monitoring, and water quality and sediment sampling in accordance with the County-approved QAPP for this project (see Task 1).

Deliverable #4: The Contractor will submit a summary of completed monitoring activities (dates completed, sampling conducted and any not conducted and why, monitoring results along with interpretation of those results (as expected or not as expected)) submitted electronically, along with the draft or final (when submitting final request) laboratory report and sampling logs (must also have field and weather data) to the County. Upon request, the Contractor will provide a paper copy or copies to the County. These deliverables may be submitted no more frequently than monthly.

Performance Standard: The County and FDEP will review the monitoring results for completion and compliance with QAPP requirements. Upon review and written acceptance by the County and FDEP each deliverable under this task, the Contractor may proceed with payment request submittal.

Task #4: Final Report and Presentation Task Description: The Contractor will submit a Final Report and Presentation summarizing the results of the project, including all tasks agreed upon. The Final Report must include at a minimum:

The Contractor has the option to provide the County and FDEP with a virtual presentation (Microsoft Teams) or an in-person presentation of their Final Report. Please note that travel expenses for the in-person presentation are not reimbursable or allowable. The presentation will be no more than 60 minutes and will have sufficient time for questions and answers.

Deliverable #4a: Draft Final Report The Contractor will submit an electronic copy of the draft Final Report in Word format to the County’s Grant Manager for review prior to submission of the Final Report. Upon request, the Contractor will provide a paper copy of the draft Final Report.

Performance Standard: The County and FDEP will review the submitted draft Final Report to verify that it meets the specifications in the project’s FDEP Grant Work Plan and this task description and provide any comments to the Contractor for incorporation into the Final Report.

Deliverable #4b: Final Report The Contractor will submit an electronic copy of the Final Report, with all suggested changes incorporated, in PDF format, to the County for review and approval by the County and FDEP. Upon request, the Contractor will provide a paper copy of the Final Report.

Performance Standard: The County and FDEP will review the Final Report to verify that it meets the specifications in the project’s FDEP Grant Work Plan and this task description. Upon review and written approval by the County and FDEP of the Final Report, the Contractor may proceed with the Final Report Presentation.

Deliverable #4c: Project Presentation The Contractor will submit an electronic copy of the Project Presentation prior to presentation day. Upon request, the Contractor will provide a paper copy of the Project Presentation.

Performance Standard: Upon completion of the presentation of the project and written approval by the County and FDEP of the Project Presentation, the Contractor may proceed with payment request submittal for this task.

31. SCHEDULE

90 Days before the Task End Date

30 Days before the Task End Date

10/31/2027

11/30/2027

12/31/2027

32. COMPENSATION

For the services performed under the scope of services, the CONSULTANT shall be compensated based on the Lump Sum amount of:

Evaluation Criteria:

Note: You can add/remove any of the example options below, change the order, create new items, etc. If you have any questions, please reach out to Contracts Group.

1.

Title: Contractor Qualifications Example: Qualifications Description (optional):

A statement describing the Proposer’s qualifications and experience in providing the same or similar services as outlined in the RFP Scope of Work. This description should include the names of the person(s) who will provide the services, including any subcontractors, their qualifications, and the years of experience in performing this type of work/services.

Scoring Method: Pick one: Point based, 0-100 Weight (Points): 350 Admin Scoring: Yes or No No Hide scoring method & weight: Yes or No No

2.

Title: Contractor Approach Example: Approach Description (optional):

A separate written narrative describing the methods and/or manner in which the Proposer proposes to satisfy the requirements of the Scope of Work.

Scoring Method: Pick one: Point based, 0-100 Weight (Points): 325 Admin Scoring: Yes or No No Hide scoring method & weight: Yes or No No

3.

Title: Compensation Example: Compensation Description (optional):

The proposed compensation to be paid by the County for the services identified in the Statement of Work, including the methodology for determining the compensation. Unless the method of compensating Proposer for the services is otherwise specified in Section B, paragraph 5, Proposer shall specify whether the proposed compensation is based on: (i) a lump sum not-to-exceed amount; (ii) time and materials with a not-to-exceed amount;(iii) milestone payments upon completion of identified tasks or deliverables; (iv) percentage of completion of the services; or (v) any other proposed method of compensation.

Scoring Method: Pick one: Point based, 0-100 Weight (Points): 300 Admin Scoring: Yes or No Yes Hide scoring method & weight: Yes or No No

4.

Title: No Exceptions to RFP Example: No Exceptions to RFP Description (optional):

Proposer is advised that exceptions to any terms and conditions contained in this RFP or the Services Agreement must be stated with specificity in its response to the RFP. The points available under this criterion will be deducted if the Proposer takes exception to any language to this RFP package. Failure to provide exceptions with the submittal shall result in the mandatory acceptance of the agreement as submitted herein by default. Exceptions must be submitted on a separate sheet titled: exceptions.

Scoring Method: Pick one: Point based, 0-100 Weight (Points): 25 Admin Scoring: Yes or No Yes Hide scoring method & weight: Yes or No No Revised Nov2023 Page 1 of 2 image1.jpeg image2.png