RFQ City of Oakland Wildfire Recover 2024 Round II - final.pdf

Request for Qualifications Round 2 City of Oakland – Water and Wastewater Wildfire Recovery Project – Phase 1-R2

CITY OF OAKLAND, Douglas County, Oregon

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS:

WATER AND WASTEWATER WILDFIRE RECOVERY PROJECT – PHASE 1 R2

CONTENTS

HEADING PAGE NUMBER

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS 2

A. INVITATION TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS 2

B. INTENT OF THIS REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS 3

C. BACKGROUND 3

D. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS 4

E. CLARIFICATION OR PROTESTS OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS 4

F. OPENING OF PROPOSALS 5

G. PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND AWARD 6

H. SCOPE OF WORK 8

I. FORMAT AND CONTENT OF PROPOSALS 11

J. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 13

ATTACHMENT A – PROPOSER STATEMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS

A. INVITATION TO SUBMIT QUALIFICATIONS

The City of Oakland Public Works Department (“City") will receive statements of qualification in tentative (“Proposals”) response to this Request for Qualifications (“RFQ”) until 2:00 PM, local time, Wednesday, July 17th, 2024. Proposals must be submitted to James Hart, Public Works Director, at: jhartoakland@gmail.com.

Briefly, the work of this RFQ is for design and implementation services for evaluating, scoping, predesign, and estimating damages resulting from the Archie Creek Fire and measures needed to restore the City’s water and wastewater facilities to their pre-disaster condition.

All statements of qualifications properly submitted and received will be opened immediately following the time the proposals are due. A list of the names of persons submitting proposals will be available to all proposers along with such other information as the public officer considers appropriate at the time.

To be considered, proposals must be submitted electronically in accordance with all the following instructions:

1. Proposals must be submitted as an attachment to an email, submitted to the email address stated above,

2. The subject line of the email must clearly identify the submission as a response to this specific RFQ, and

3. Unless otherwise stated in the Proposal Requirements, proposal documents may be submitted in PDF format only.

Interested parties may receive a complete set of RFQ documents by emailing a request to James Hart at: jhartoakland@gmail.com

There will be a non-mandatory site visit held at the City’s water treatment plant located at 239 N.E. 1st St., Oakland, Oregon, at 10:00 AM, local time, Wednesday June 19, 2024.

The deadline for submitting questions regarding this RFQ will be 5:00 PM, local time, Friday, July 12th, 2024. Technical questions should be submitted to James Hart, P.O. at jhartoakland@gmail.com or by telephone 541-580-6617. Questions regarding procurement may be submitted to James Hart, Public Works Director, at jhartoakland@gmail.com or by telephone 541-580-6617

The City may issue an addendum to modify or add to the terms of this RFQ, or to change the time or date for submission of proposals. Any such addendum will be emailed by the City to all bona fide proposers who have requested copies of the RFQ.

The requirements or clarifications contained in any addendum issued must be included in the proposals received and will become part of any resulting contract.

mailto:jhartoakland@gmail.com mailto:jhartoakland@gmail.com mailto:lpryce.ess@gmail.com mailto:jhartoakland@gmail.com mailto:jhartoakland@gmail.com mailto:jhartoakland@gmail.com

The City may reject any proposal not in compliance with the proposal procedures set forth in this RFQ, Oregon Administrative Rules, or Oregon law, and may reject for good cause all proposals upon the City of Oakland’s finding that it is in the public interest to do so.

B. INTENT OF THIS REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

The City is seeking proposals from licensed engineering professionals to provide solutions and cost estimates to restore its water and wastewater assets to a pre-disaster condition from continual damage caused by the Archie Creek Fire in 2020. The City is soliciting proposals from professional engineering firms in compliance with Federal and State procurement laws for all of the effort. This entails completing the scoping and estimates needed to damages and restore the “systems” to their pre-disaster conditions.

C. BACKGROUND

The City of Oakland experienced severe water quality issues and equipment damage due to upstream watershed damage caused by the Archie Creek Fire in the year 2020.

The post-wildfire water quality effects included ash and slime that coated optical assemblies in the water treatment plant equipment. This resulted in a Public Violation Notice because the online sensor reporting data and UV disinfection intensity could not be verified by the Oregon Health Authority. There were additional impacts to the water treatment plant, the wastewater treatment plant, the distribution system, the water reservoirs, the raw water intake, the collections system and the recycle holding pond. Other regulatory permit requirements need to be addressed.

An EPA study called the “FINAL REPORT, Drinking Water and Watershed Evaluation City of Oakland, Oregon, June 21, 2023,” submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 and U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization” was completed in the year 2023. The results of the study determined an exact correlation between the post- wildfire water quality changes in the Calapooya Creek, and the unusual issues and ongoing damages within the water treatment plant, the wastewater treatment plant, the recycle holding pond and the collection system the distribution system, the tanks, the filters, and scrubbers, including the sludge waste basins at both the WTP and WWTP locations.

The “FINAL REPORT” document highlights the change in water quality and its long-term effects including increased sludge from organics, higher water temperatures, and favorable conditions for blue-green algal and micro-organisms legacy growth within the mixed media filters & scrubbers, the optical equipment, the tanks, the sensors, the UV system and connecting water reservoirs, including the increased organics in the form of sludge and INI. The selected engineer firm’s liability will be reduced because the City’s three-year water quality history will be fully documented by OHA in the 2024 Water System Inspection by July 1, 2024.

D. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

1. Proposal Preparation. Proposers are responsible for reading and understanding all portions of the RFQ documents, including attachments and addenda (if any), and to include all requirements in their proposals. To be responsive, proposals must be made in writing, and address the background, information, questions, criteria, and requests for information contained in the RFQ. Proposals must be submitted in the required form and must contain all other required documents and responses, be signed by the proposer or the proposer’s authorized representative and submitted in the manner stated in this RFQ.

2. Proposals Subject to Oregon Public Records Law. Proposals submitted in response to this RFQ become public records under Oregon law and, following contract award, will be subject to disclosure to any person or organization that submits a public records request. Proposers are required to acknowledge that any proposal may be disclosed in its entirety to any person or organization making a records request, except for such information as may be exempt from disclosure under the law. Each proposer must clearly identify all information included in its proposal that is claimed to be exempt from disclosure. If the City receives a records request, including subpoena, covering information the bidder believes is covered by an applicable public records exemption, it is the proposer’s responsibility to defend and indemnify the City for any costs associated with establishing such an exemption.

3. Proposal Submission. Proposals must be received by the time and date stated for receipt in the Invitation to Submit Proposals. To be considered, proposals must be submitted in the form and manner stated in the Invitation for Proposals, complete with a Proposer’s Statements & Certifications Form signed by the proposer or its authorized representative, responses to all criteria and requirements included in the RFQ, other documents required to be submitted, if any, and contain the number of copies required. By submitting a proposal, proposer acknowledges that the proposer has read and understands the terms and conditions applicable to this RFQ and accepts and agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of the contract, including the obligation to perform the scope of work and meet the performance standards.

4. Correction, Withdrawal, and Late Submissions. A proposer may withdraw its proposal at any time prior to the deadline set for receipt of proposals, by email to the person identified for receipt of proposals and may submit a new sealed proposal in the manner stated in the Invitation to Submit Proposals. The City will not consider proposals received after the time and date indicated for receipt of proposals. A proposer may not modify its proposal after it has been deposited with the public officer, other than to address minor informalities, unless the proposal is withdrawn and resubmitted as described above.

E. CLARIFICATION OR PROTESTS OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS

5. Clarifications. If a proposer finds discrepancies or omissions in the RFQ documents, or is in doubt as to their meaning, the proposer must immediately notify the public officer designated for receipt of proposals or other person identified for submission of questions.

If the public officer believes a clarification is necessary, an addendum will be issued in writing and distributed as stated in this RFQ. An addendum may postpone the date for submission of proposals. The requirements or clarifications contained in any addenda so issued must be included in the proposals received and will become part of any resulting contract.

The apparent silence of the RFQ documents regarding any detail, or the apparent omission from the RFQ of a detailed description concerning any point, means that only the best commercial or professional practice, material, or workmanship is to be used.

6. Protest of Solicitation Documents. A prospective proposer may protest the competitive selection process, or provisions set forth in the RFQ documents, if the prospective proposer believes the solicitation process is contrary to law or that a solicitation document is unnecessarily restrictive, legally flawed, or improperly specifies a brand name pursuant to the requirements of ORS 279B.405(2). Any written protest must be submitted to the public officer identified for receipt of proposals not less than 10 days prior to the deadline for submission of proposals.

The City will consider a protest of the solicitation documents if the protest is timely filed and contains all the following items:

a. The title of the RFQ is the subject of the protest.

b. The grounds that demonstrate how the procurement process is contrary to law or how the solicitation document is unnecessarily restrictive, is legally flawed, or improperly specifies a brand name.

c. Evidence or supporting documentation that supports the grounds on which the protest is based; and

d. The protest must state the changes to the procurement process or the RFQ document that the prospective proposer believes will remedy the conditions upon which the protest is based.

If the protest meets these requirements, the City will consider the protest and issue a decision in writing. If the protest does not meet these requirements, the City will promptly notify the prospective proposer that the protest is untimely or that the protest failed to meet these requirements and give the reasons for the failure. The City will issue its decision on the protest not less than 3 business days before proposals are due, unless the City makes a written determination that circumstances justify a shorter time limit.

F. OPENING OF PROPOSALS

1. Proposals Held Until Time for Opening. The City will not examine any proposal prior to opening. The public officer designated for receipt of proposals may, as time allows, verify that the response document(s) attached to a submission was received intact, and may, but is not required to, notify a proposer that an emailed submission was received in an incomplete or defective form.

2. Late Submissions. Any proposal or modification received after the designated deadline will not be opened or considered.

3. Inspection of Proposals Submitted. The proposals submitted will be open to public inspection immediately after the issuance of notice of intent to award, with the exception of any information covered by an exemption to disclosure.

G. PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND AWARD

1. Responsiveness. Proposals will be reviewed by the public officer for responsiveness to the minimum requirements established by the RFQ, which include at a minimum, but are not limited to:

a. Submission of a completed Proposer Statements & Certifications Form in the form included as Attachment C to this RFQ.

b. Compliance with the procedures and requirements set out in the RFQ, Oregon

Administrative Rules Chapter 137, Divisions 46 through 49, and Oregon Public Contracting Law.

c. Application of any applicable preferences for goods and services that have been manufactured, Produced, or performed in Oregon (ORS 279A.120), resident bidder status (ORS 279A.120), recycled materials (ORS 279A.125), or printing (ORS 282.210).

2. Proposal Evaluation. The City will make contract award based on the responsiveness of the actual proposals received to the requirements established in the RFQ, considering price, qualifications, experience, resources, proposed services, Proposers past record of performance, and other relevant factors, as well as responses received from references, interviews, post-RFQ submissions, and follow-up questions, if any.

Each proposal will be evaluated by the City’s evaluation committee on the basis of the process and scoring established in Attachment D. Based upon evaluation of the submitted proposals, the evaluation committee may choose to conduct further interviews or discussions with two or more proposers with the highest-scored proposals, as described in Attachment D. Any Interviews may include a requirement for a presentation by the proposer and questions from the City regarding the proposal and services to be provided. Specific criteria for selection interviews, if any, will be distributed at the time interviews are scheduled.

In evaluating the proposals and selecting a contractor, the City reserves the rights to:

a. Reject any and all proposals,

b. Issue subsequent Requests for Proposals for the same or similar goods or services,

c. Not award a contract for the requested services,

d. Waive any irregularities or informalities,

e. Accept the proposal which the City deems to be the most beneficial to the City,

f. Negotiate with any proposer to further amend, modify, redefine, or delineate its proposal,

g. Negotiate and accept, without re-advertising, the proposal of the next-highest scored proposer, in the event that a contract cannot be successfully negotiated with the selected proposer, and

h. Further question any proposer to substantiate claims of experience, background knowledge, and ability.

3. Mistakes in Proposals. Minor informalities may be waived. Mistakes discovered after opening where the intended correct statement or amount is clearly evident or properly substantiated may be corrected. Where the intended correct statement or amount is not clearly evident or cannot be substantiated by accompanying documents, and where the statement or amount is material to determining compliance with the minimum requirements of the RFQ, the proposal may be rejected. The City reserves the right to waive technical defects, discrepancies, and minor irregularities, and to not award a contract when it finds such action to be in the public interest.

4. Notice of Award. The City will provide written notice of its intent to award to a given proposer or proposers at least 7 days before the award, unless the City determines that a shorter notice period is more practicable. Unless otherwise stated in the RFQ documents, the Notice of Intent to Award will be given by posting the notice on the Procurement & Purchasing webpage in the same location as the RFQ posting.

5. Protest of Intent to Award. Any proposer that submitted a proposal for the RFQ and is not recommended for award may protest the City’s intention to award. To be considered, the protesting proposer must be eligible to be awarded the contract in the event that the protest is successful. Determination on protests will be made by the decision maker, either the Mayor, City Recorder, or Council, depending upon which has authority to execute the contract. To be considered, a protest must be submitted in writing to the public officer and received within 7 calendar days after the Notice of Intent to Award is posted, and must contain the grounds for the protest, in accordance with OAR 137-047-0700 through 137-047-0745.

6. Rejection of Proposals. If all proposals are rejected, new proposals may be called for in a new solicitation, or the proposals received may be considered with an opportunity for supplemental submission from those proposers that submitted proposals, if the City finds it is unlikely that re-advertising would lead to greater competition. The public officer is delegated the authority to reject all proposals, prepare findings of best interests, and provide written notice of rejection of all proposals.

Federal Contract Procurement Law

SCOPE OF WORK

General There will be an engineering phase and a construction phase to the repair project, and this RFQ is for engineering only:

follows:

7. Phase I includes Architectural and Engineering (A&E), as described in this RFQ, includes scope, damage descriptions, and final design for valid and complete estimated repairs costs for Civil, Electrical, Software, Hardware, Geotechnical, Environmental and many others with justification. Verification, reporting, environmental, all other reviews, permitting and quotes with cost methodology, inflation estimated cost analysis, all required studies, cost of permits to complete project, etc.

A complete and accurate picture of efforts to scope the damage, descriptions, relationship to wildfire, repairs to be made and accurate costs based upon pre-design efforts must be delivered as part of this contract deliverable.

8. This RFQ is for Phase I Scope and Engineering and the award of the first phase does not guarantee an award in a subsequent phase.

9. Proposer may choose to propose anything they desire to solve the problem but the one suggested solution in Appendix E must be designed, and costs presented enough to determine that proposers concept more efficiently and cost effectively

CONTRACT FEDERAL DISCLSOURES (See Appendix K)

REMEDIES: Applies to all FEMA grant and cooperative agreement programs.

Contracts for more than the simplified acquisition threshold, currently set at $250,000, must address administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or breach contract terms, and provide for such sanctions and penalties as appropriate. See 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II, A

TERMINATION FOR CAUSE AND CONVENIENCE: Applies to all FEMA grant and cooperative agreement programs.

All contracts exceeding $10,000 must address termination for cause and for convenience by the non-Federal entity, including how it will be affected and the basis for settlement. See 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II, B.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY: This requirement applies to all FEMA grant and cooperative agreement programs and the exact language below is required.

Standard: Except as otherwise provided under 41 C.F.R. Part 60, all contracts that meet the definition of “federally assisted construction contract” in 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.3 must include the equal opportunity clause provided under 41 C.F.R. § 60- 1.4(b), in accordance with Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity (30 Fed. Reg. 12319, 12935, 3 C.F.R. Part, 1964-1965 Comp., p. 339), as amended by Executive Order 11375, Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity, and implementing regulations at 41 C.F.R. Part 60 (Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor). See 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II, C.

returns the City of Oakland assets to a pre-disaster condition.

Phase 1 Work. (In addition to Appendix E)

1. Review and evaluate previous efforts and compilation of a damage inventory to the water and wastewater treatment systems with the understanding that:

a. The damage inventory alone does not restore the facilities to a pre-disaster condition.

b. The City’s source water from the Calapooya Creek continues to be compromised and impacting the water treatment and distribution systems as well as the wastewater treatment system.

c. Includes engineering estimates stamped by a licensed engineer of these impacts as directly related to the Archie Creek Fire:

(1) how it is related to the disaster

(2) validation of permitting to make repairs.

(3) predesign and engineering (90%) to fix said repair.

(4) valid permits to make said repairs and valid permits to dispose of materials.

(5) a valid pre-design accepted by the regulatory agencies, the City and Tribes, Environmental and SHPO, CORPS, State Lands and all other Governmental Agencies involved or known or unknown with OHA review.

2. Review, evaluate and provide engineered cost-benefit analysis of additional recommended engineering measures to restore both water and wastewater facilities to pre-disaster conditions as related to the ongoing impacts of the water supply in same format of Section A herein.

3. The Scope, Descriptions and Engineering estimates must fully address each of the following:

Address water plant technologies to control the water temperature of the source water within process parameters.

Address or control the turbidity of the finished water within process parameters under 0.1 ntu at maximum water production of 500 gpm.

Address or control the pH of the finished water within process parameters.

Address and control and meet all water quality parameters required by Oregon

Health Authority and to the satisfaction of the City of Oakland and OHA Completely prevent, monitor, report and address or control/limit algal and biological growth or pass through of biological organisms into the distribution system.

Completely prevent the buildup and pass-through of black slime on all instrumentation, sensors, optics, surfaces, or pipes resulting from ash, manganese, or iron or algal or biological growth.

Completely prevent the buildup and pass-through of bacteria or virus or biological organisms on the surfaces of the mixed media filters, chlorine tanks, clear wells, or reservoirs within the distribution system.

Completely prevent, address or control, the excess sludge from organics removed from the process. Provide a method to handle the processed sludge and decanted water.

Completely prevent, address or control, all backwash water separately from the

Wastewater Treatment Plant Process or Collection System or provide a method to achieve Discharge Permit Compliance to an aerobic Wastewater Treatment Plant within the Permitted Influent Specifications without exceeding INI, aerobic processes and TSS or BOD.

Address, control, and remove all ash sludge, debris or sedimentation/slime from all tanks and reservoirs throughout the Raw Water Intake System, the Water Treatment System, and the Distribution System.

Provide comprehensive integration of all existing technologies, software, firmware, and water system components, used under codes and standards or “in-kind”; to operate in cooperation without process bugs, software bugs, firmware breakdowns or timing and function conflicts with summer, fall, winter and spring operations with a minimum of two years of full system replacement warranty.

Provide online sensors with data trending to provide a means to measure that the water supplier is achieving the goals within OHA regulations, every day when water is being processed to maximum flow capability.

Provide engineering, technology and/or solutions that do not exceed or require annual funding that is more than a 10% increase in the water purveyor’s normal non- emergency operational and maintenance budget using the 2013, 2014, 2015 budgets after inflationary calculations to the year 2023.

If engineering solutions provided exceed the current maintenance budget, provide a rate study showing reasonable increases that can accommodate said technologies that are reasonably implemented and achievable.

Provide all statements of final documentation as required by governmental audit, and governmental agencies. Provide the City of Oakland with completed “As- Builds”, drawings, electrical schematics, firmware and hardware design and software keys and copies.

Shall adhere to and provide governmental agencies with required reporting for the duration of the project (quarterlies, collection of cost documentation, grant/project management)

Shall develop the form and format of the daily reports to the satisfaction of City of Oakland and governmental agencies to be consistent with governmental standards and style for electronic monitoring reports, with input from City of Oakland staff.

Shall acknowledge that governmental financial assistance may be used to fund all or a portion of the contract. The contractor will comply with all applicable Federal law, regulations, executive orders, governmental policies, procedures, and directives.”

Shall acknowledge that the Federal Government is not a party to this contract and is not subject to any obligations or liabilities to the non-Federal entity, contractor, or any other party pertaining to any matter resulting from the contract.”

Provide an accurate engineering estimate for design and construction prepared and signed by a licensed engineer in the State of Oregon

4. The selected firm must meet the following expectations for deliverables of scope of work.

The selected firm agrees that all engineering work, solutions, intellectual property and data results performed under the Contract belong to the City of Oakland and will be provided to the City of Oakland in a written and digital form with enough printed copies, a minimum of 10 copies, to complete the project and move to the next phase of repairs; this includes an organized and easy-to-follow engineering package.

The selected engineering firm agrees to provide a schedule of deliverables with proposal based on Attachment E

The selected engineering firm will not be made to provide a firm price, but a total estimated cost of time and materials is required based upon the selected firm’s engineering rates at time of contract negotiation so the City can secure additional funding, if needed.

Once a total estimated amount has been calculated by the engineering firm for the items in Attachment E, the City of Oakland will have six months to secure additional funding, if needed, and will notify selected firm of intent to engage in services sooner if financially able.

The selected contractor will have 30 working days to review final contract documents from the time of award by the Oakland City Council and can request an adjustment to the estimated total time and materials during that 30-day period.

The total time and materials estimate, and signed contract will either be engaged immediately because funding is secured or delayed until the total estimated funding is available for the project.

I. FORMAT AND CONTENT OF PROPOSALS

Proposals should demonstrate that the proposer can furnish the services in a manner that will be cost-effective for the City. Note that clear, organized, and concise proposals prepared by the Project Manager are highly desirable.

1. Documents to be Submitted. The proposal submitted must include all the following:

a. Responses to each of the required items stated under 3 below,

b. A completed and executed Proposer Statements and Certifications form, and

c. A statement of any exceptions taken to the requirements of this RFQ.

2. Format Requirements. The proposal submitted must be in compliance with the following rules:

a. Be in the order and numbering requested,

b. Be submitted in the form and within the limitations stated in the Invitation to

Submit Proposals,

c. Contain primary text and headings in not less than 12-point type (with smaller text acceptable in notes, graphs, requested tables, and images), and

d. Be limited to 25 pages, nominal 8.5” x 11” size. Pages used for a cover letter

(which may not exceed two pages), section dividers, resumes, and exceptions are not included in the page limit.

3. Required Response Criteria. The proposal submitted must address each of the

• Cover Letter. The Proposer may use this section to introduce the Proposal or to summarize the key provisions of the Proposal.

• Statement of Understanding. The Proposer shall include a detailed statement of the understanding of the Project.

• Qualifications. The proposer’s statement of qualifications must contain the o List the Project Manager and all key personnel (including subcontractors) and management to be utilized for the work. Include a description of education, certificates or licenses, professional background, experience, skills, expertise, and training for the type of services required. Samples of previous project products can be submitted. Resumes and samples should only include project experience relevant to the scope of work outlined in this

RFQ.

o Describe the demonstrated experience of the firm and its principals in completing previous projects of similar nature along with a discussion of how experience on previous projects relates to the City of Roseburg proposed project.

o Provide a statement of experience of the Firm, Project Manager and Project Team with work of a similar nature.

o Provide a statement describing the capability to complete all phases of the Project within the time schedule.

• Scope of Work. This section outlines the proposed work plan to achieve the goals and objectives. The work plan should clearly identify major tasks, the objective of each task, the subtasks needed to accomplish the work and the expected deliverable for each task. Tasks should be arranged in a logical fashion to demonstrate how the work would proceed.

• Level of Effort. In a spreadsheet format, list the task with subtasks, position, classifications that will be assigned to each task/subtask, subconsultants.

• Additional Information. Any other information that the Proposer feels applicable to the evaluation of the Proposal or of their qualifications for accomplishing the Project should be included in this section. You may use this section to address those aspects of your services that distinguish your firm from other firms.

To ensure equitable evaluation of the proposals, CITY will use the evaluation criteria shown in the following table. A selection committee will evaluate each proposal to determine the responsible proposer whose proposal the City determines to be the most advantageous to the City based on the evaluation process and criteria below.

Criteria Points

Statement of Understanding, including the organized approach to work assignments, key staff members, familiarity with area, quality assurance

Qualifications, including project experience, technical background, capability of project staff and firm, references

Scope of Work, including understanding of City’s needs and technical issues, completeness, and clarity

Resources/Level of Effort, including resource commitment, work task allocation

Cover Letter/Additional Information 20

Total possible points 100

The award process will consist of two parts: selection based on this Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and contract negotiation. The selected proposer will be required to enter into a contract and provide insurance in a contract provided after the RFQ selection.

J. TENTATIVE SCHEDULE

Advertise RFQ – April 2024

Award at Council – First Tuesday in August 2024

The Awarded Work Contract will not start until approved by City or

February 2025 whichever comes first.

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:

A. PROPOSER’S STATEMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS

E. PROJECT GOALS, SCOPE, ENGINEERING DELIVERABLES

K. APPENDIX K: CONTRACT PROVISIONS

X. 2020 Archie Creek Fire Report FEMA ETART Extended Report

Y. 2023 Archie Creek Fire Damage Oakland WTP Final Report

Z. 2023 City of Oakland Archie Creek Fire Damage Story Board

ATTACHMENT A

PROPOSER’S STATEMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS

Proposer’s Name:

Proposer’s Offer. Proposer offers to provide the required services in accordance with the requirements of the Request for Proposals (RFQ) stated above and the enclosed proposal. The undersigned Proposer declares that the Proposer has carefully examined the above-named Request for Qualifications, and that, if this proposal is accepted, Proposer will execute a contract with the City of Oakland to furnish the services of the proposal submitted with this form. Proposer attests that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of the personal knowledge of the person signing this proposal, and that the person signing has the authority to represent the individual or organization in whose name this proposal is submitted.

Proposer’s Acceptance of Terms and Conditions. By execution of this Form, the undersigned Proposer accepts all terms and conditions of this Request for Proposals except as modified in writing in its proposal. The Proposer agrees that the offer made in this proposal will remain irrevocable for a period of 60 days from the date proposals are due.

Proposer’s Acknowledgement of Public Records Law. By execution of this Form, the undersigned Proposer acknowledges that its entire proposal is subject to Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.410–192.505) and may be disclosed in its entirety to any person or organization making a records request, except for such information as may be exempt from disclosure under the law. The proposer agrees that all information included in this proposal that is claimed to be exempt from disclosure has been clearly identified either in the proposal, or in an itemization attached hereto. Proposer further acknowledges its responsibility to defend and indemnify the City for any costs associated with establishing an exemption claim made by the Proposer.

ADDENDA

Proposer has received and considered, in the accompanying proposal, the terms of the following addenda, if any:

CONTRACT FEDERAL DISCLSOURES (See Appendix K)

REMEDIES: Applies to all FEMA grant and cooperative agreement programs.

Contracts for more than the simplified acquisition threshold, currently set at $250,000, must address administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or breach contract terms, and provide for such sanctions and penalties as appropriate. See 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II, A

TERMINATION FOR CAUSE AND CONVENIENCE: Applies to all FEMA grant and cooperative agreement programs.

All contracts exceeding $10,000 must address termination for cause and for convenience by the non-Federal entity, including how it will be affected and the basis for settlement. See 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II, B.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY: This requirement applies to all FEMA grant and cooperative agreement programs and the exact language below is required.

Standard: Except as otherwise provided under 41 C.F.R. Part 60, all contracts that meet the definition of “federally assisted construction contract” in 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.3 must include the equal opportunity clause provided under 41 C.F.R. § 60- 1.4(b), in accordance with Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity (30 Fed. Reg. 12319, 12935, 3 C.F.R. Part, 1964-1965 Comp., p. 339), as amended by Executive Order 11375, Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity, and implementing regulations at 41 C.F.R. Part 60 (Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor). See 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II, C.

CERTIFICATIONS

By signing this Proposer’s Certification form, Proposer certifies that:

1. Certification of Resident Bidder Status. The proposer is _/is not (check one) a resident bidder, as defined in ORS 279A.120.

2. Certification of Non-Discrimination. Proposer has not discriminated and will not discriminate against a subcontractor in awarding a subcontract because the subcontractor is a disadvantaged business enterprise, minority-owned business, woman-owned business, a business that a service-disabled veteran owns, or an emerging small business that is certified under ORS 200.055.

3. Certification of non-collusion. This proposal is made without connection or agreement with any individual, firm, partnership, corporation, or other entity making a proposal for the same services and are in all respects fair and free from collusion or collaboration with any other proposer.

4. Certification of Compliance with Tax Laws. Proposer has, to the best of Proposer’s knowledge, complied with Oregon tax laws in the period prior to the submission of this proposal, including:

(a) All tax laws of the State of Oregon, including but not limited to ORS 305.620 and

ORS chapters 316, 317, and 318,

(b) Any tax provisions imposed by a political subdivision of this state that applied to

Proposer or its property, goods, services, operations, receipts, income, performance of or compensation for any work performed, and

(c) Any rules, regulations, charter provisions, or ordinances that implemented or enforced any of the foregoing tax laws or provisions.

The undersigned, by signature here, acknowledges, accepts, and certifies the statements and certifications as stated above.

PROPOSER

Authorized signature Proposer’s legal name

Name of authorized signer Address

Title

Date Federal Tax ID number.

OPTIONAL CONTACT INFORMATION REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL

Contact name.

Telephone number.

Email address.

ATTACHMENT E

Project Goals (Return to Pre-disaster Condition)

1) lower sludge accumulation at WTP and WWTP

2) lower chemical use at WTP and WWTP

3) lower electrical use at WTP and WWTP

4) reduce/recycle or use for beneficial purpose, process wastewater.

5) extend repair time and shut down time WTP (10 days @ 300,000 GPD)

6) meet minimum OHA drinking water regulation Oregon.

7) address Calapooya Creek water chemistry and temperature changes and low flows.

Solution to be scoped to (lower capital cost, O&M cost, and restore to pre-disaster state)

PROPOSE WTP Cost Estimate and Engineering Design Items (100%)

(all systems controlled by SCADA w/manual option)

1) placement of (1) temporary water treatment system rental (350 gpm or greater) on effluent between trains and chlorine contact chamber, to meet all OHA drinking water requirements, until repairs are completed in (six years or less)

2) removal and replacement of QTY (2) mixed media filters and QTY (4) filter scrubbers with the same or better technology.

3) clean and repair QTY (1) finished water chlorine contact-tank.

4) clean and repair QTY (1) finished water clear well.

5) clean and repair QTY (2) water reservoirs.

6) clean and repair QTY (2) self-cleaning strainers

7) clean and repair/replace 90 feet of three inch and six-inch pipe between effluent and chlorine tank.

8) clean and repair/replace (QTY (2) liquid chlorine or better technology for main disinfection technology serving two treatment trains.

9) clean, repair/replace all pipes between effluent trains and chlorine contact chamber.

10) add QTY (2) with a minimum 300 gpm each UV reactor, horizontal mount, with self-cleaning capability, intensity alarm, relay or 4-20 milli-amp shut off that meets or exceeds OHA log 5.5 giardia and crypto treatment process criteria or alternative equal technology.

11) security fence at water treatment plant with gates or equal as required.

12) add QTY (2) redundant booster pumps w/VFD to prevent water hammer connected to SCADA on/off.

13) add QTY (1) passive vacuum prevention tank (prevents filter pressure loss

Issues)

14) add (2) chlorine injection system that uses liquid chlorine and serves two treatment trains with drip diffusers above filter media or ozone or other equal technology.

15) Add QTY (2) pump stations or equal technology and 2,000 feet of (zoned controlled) sprinkler delivery system into R.R Park and Triangle Park and lawns to partially land apply 12,000,000 gallons of water per year, 30,000 gallons of water per day.

16) One 30-foot X 30-foot concrete sludge drying bed with drain to waste basin and “GEOBAG” with QTY (4) SCADA controlled sludge pumps for sludge management and 400 feet of security fence and gates.

17) modify or complete replacement WTP SCADA system (from scratch) for both WTP, WWTP and Raw Water Intake with data trending and water main logging collection.

18) Add QTY (450) 5/8 wireless water meters, QTY (10) 1-inch wireless water meters and QTY (6) six-inch wireless water meters and QTY (2) eight-inch wireless water meter and bulk water meter; software and communications to reduce water demand.

19) Add a 1 million or 2-million-gallon concrete reservoir at the top of existing public land on Old Town Loop with enclosed and powered operations building and SCADA with chlorine system, mixers, cathodic protection, sensors, and earthquake protection;

provide access road with security fence.

WWTP Changes Cost and Design (100%)

1) QTY (2) Skid add disc filter or equal technology to achieve Class 1 effluent under DEQ Discharge Permit Outfall 001/002/003 w/SCADA or ORENCO FINISHER or equal alternative.

2) QTY (2) skid UV Systems, OZONE, or equal technology to achieve Class 1 effluent under DEQ Discharge Permit Outfall 001/002/003 W/SCADA to 300 gpm

3) QTY (2) SKID type pump station,

4) QTY (1) holding tank or inground holding pond (1MGD)

5) QTY (1) irrigation system to land apply Class 1 effluent under DEQ Discharge

Permit Outfall 003 W/SCADA @ 300 GPM with 30 sprinkler heads and 3,000 feet of 10-inch C900 delivery system and sprinklers to land apply class I water.

6) QTY (1) Reed Bed or Alternative Drying bed with Geo-bag or alternative

7) QTY (1) Replacement SCADA as required or full system replacement

Regulatory Studies Triggered by Permits and Repairs (100%)

1. WTP maintenance cost study

2. WWTP maintenance cost study

3. Water Rate Study

4. Sewer Rate Study

5. Water Master Plan

6. Facilities Plan

7. Recycle Water Plan

8. Water Conservation Plan

9. CT Study

10. Pilot Tests

11. Regulatory Review

12. SHIPO EVIRONMENTAL

13. Wet Land Delineation Plan

14. Corp of Engineers Environmental Review

15. SDC Study

16. Earthquake Analysis

17. Geotechnical Report

18. Survey Review Scope

19. Engineering/Grant Reporting Other

20. Annual Operational Cost Study

21. Flood Plain Study

22. Elevation Certificates

23. All permits

24. All bid documents

25. All agency submissions

100% Design Engineering and Scope will include each of the following engineering disciplines to address all components of attachment E.

1. Design Engineering

2. Civil Engineering

3. Software Engineering

4. Hardware Engineering

5. Electrical Engineering

6. Telemetry Engineering

7. Environmental Engineering

8. Geotechnical Engineering

9. Structural Engineering

10. Survey

Contract Negotiations

The selected firm will be required to provide each of the following within 30 days of the award:

1) An engineering contract for the City Council and City Attorney to review.

2) A detailed schedule of deliverables with a timeline

3) A description of each deliverable; its form and content and limits

4) A project draws; a drawdown schedule, with process for approvals and change orders.

Alternate Solutions:

The Selected firm may provide alternative scope, cost and 100% engineering for this request and offer a lower cost alternative that accomplishes the same goals if such an opportunity is presented and accepted.