RFQ Water and Sanitary Sewer Facility Plan Update RFP1
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ)
WATER AND SANITARY SEWER FACILITY PLAN UPDATE
City of Kalispell
201 1st Ave E
PO Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903
October 2024
2
Table of Contents
I. Introduction and Purpose ...................................................................................................... 4
II. General Information .............................................................................................................. 4
III. Anticipated Scope of Work .................................................................................................... 4
1. Facility Plan Update Background and Description .............................................................. 5
A. Water Facility Plan ......................................................................................................... 5
B. Wastewater Facility Plan ................................................................................................ 5
C. Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant Plan ................................................................... 5
D. Additional Discussion .................................................................................................... 5
2. Required Scope of Services .............................................................................................. 6
A. Common Tasks for each Facility Plan Update (FPU) ......................................................... 6
B. Water Facility Plan Update ............................................................................................. 6
C. Wastewater Facility Plan Update .................................................................................... 8
IV. Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) Selection Criteria ........................................................... 10
A. General ....................................................................................................................... 10
B. Cover Letter (2 Points) .................................................................................................. 10
C. General Information (3 Points) ...................................................................................... 10
D. Relevant Company Experience (30 Points) .................................................................... 10
E. Company Qualifications (10 Points) .............................................................................. 10
F. Contract Understanding and Approach (25 points) ........................................................ 11
G. Approach to Contract Management (20 points) ............................................................. 11
H. Other Factors (10 points) ............................................................................................. 11
V. Submittal Requirements ..................................................................................................... 11
1. Page Format and Number: .............................................................................................. 11
2. File Format and Submission: ........................................................................................... 12
3. Disqualification: ............................................................................................................. 12
3
VI. Selection Process and Schedule ......................................................................................... 12
1. Project Evaluation Committee ........................................................................................ 12
2. Schedule ....................................................................................................................... 12
3. Post SOQ Submittal ........................................................................................................ 13
A. Ranking ....................................................................................................................... 13
B. Recommendation ........................................................................................................ 13
C. Debriefings .................................................................................................................. 13
D. Contract Negotiations .................................................................................................. 13
E. Other ........................................................................................................................... 13
4
I. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The City of Kalispell Public Works Department is accepting Statement of Qualifications (SOQs)
from qualified Consultants to provide engineering services for Water and Sanitary Sewer Facility
Plan Updates. The Sanitary Sewer Facility Plan Update will also include the Wastewater Treatment
Plant (WWTP).
II. GENERAL INFORMATION
Pursuant to the authority granted to it under MCA 7-5-4301(2)(a), the City of Kalispell (City) seeks
to procure qualified professional engineering services.
The SOQ must be uploaded electronically via QuestCDN vBid by 5:00pm Mountain Time,
December 9, 2024.
Questions pertaining to the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) should be directed to Keith Haskins,
Deputy Director of Public Works, at 406-758-7727 or khaskins@kalispell.com or via the QuestCDN
Q&A forum. The City shall not be held responsible for any oral instructions. Any changes to this
RFQ will be in the form of an addendum posted to the project on QuestCDN.
The City reserves the right to reject any or all SOQs, to waive any informality or irregularity in any
SOQ received, and to be the sold judge of the merits of the respective SOQs received. The
Consultant will be selected on the basis of demonstrated competence and qualification for the
type of services required, and thereafter the City will negotiate the services agreement with what it
deems to be the most qualified Consultant.
A pre-submittal conference for the SOQ will be held on November 13, 2024, at 2 pm. The meeting
will be held electronically and a meeting invite will be provided to all applicants of record via
QuestCDN prior to the pre-submittal conference.
III. ANTICIPATED SCOPE OF WORK
After being selected, the Consultant will execute a Master Services Agreement with the City to
provide the scope of work set forth below. The Consultant and the City shall negotiate the exact
scope of work, schedule and fee after the selection.
5
1. FACILITY PLAN UPDATE BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION
A. WATER FACILITY PLAN
The water facility plan was most recently updated in 2018. The Water Facility Plan Update
(WFPU) provided a “guide for short-term, near-term, and long-term management of capital
improvements for Kalispell’s water system.”1
The 2018 WFPU completed an update to the planning service area map; provided a water use
characterization; projected future water demand; delivered a comprehensive, calibrated, and
up-to-date water model; provided a fire flow analysis; developed short-term, near-term and
long-term infrastructure improvements; completed a risk analysis and identified projects to
mitigate those risks; and provided a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) plan which included
proposed schedules for completion and cost estimates.
B. WASTEWATER FACILITY PLAN
The wastewater facility plan was most recently updated in 2019. Similar to the WFPU, the
Wastewater Facility Plan Update (WWFPU) also provided short-term, near-term, and long-term
capital improvements for Kalispell’s wastewater collection system.
The 2019 WWFPU completed an update to the planning service area map; characterized
wastewater flow patterns; projected future wastewater flows; delivered a comprehensive,
calibrated, and up-to-date sewer model; developed short-term, near-term and long-term
infrastructure improvements; completed a risk analysis and identified projects to mitigate
those risks; and provided a CIP plan with schedules for completion and cost estimates.
C. ADVANCED WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PLAN
The Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility Plan Update (AWWTP FPU) was also
completed in 2019.
The 2019 AWWTP FPU updated facility flows and loading projections; evaluated unit processes
and capacities for treatment; and recommended improvements needed to ensure appropriate
treatment for growth and to meet current and future permitting regulations.
D. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION
Since completion of these three facility plans in 2018 and 2019, many of the improvements
identified in the respective planning documents have been completed. As development
pressure continues to grow, material and construction costs rise, and existing infrastructure
continues to age, the City must ensure it continues to meet its level of service goals to existing
customers and appropriately plan for future growth.
1 (N.D.). WATER FACILITY PLAN UPDATE. CITY OF KALISPELL.
https://www.kalispell.com/DocumentCenter/View/1993/Water-Facility-Plan-Update-PDF
6
2. REQUIRED SCOPE OF SERVICES
The anticipated scope of services for this project is outlined below. Additional tasks and work
elements may be added during contract negotiations. Tasks or elements may also be deleted
through contract negotiations. The consultant may recommend the addition or removal of
tasks, or modifications of tasks, in describing their particular understanding and approach for
the project.
A. COMMON TASKS FOR EACH FACILITY PLAN UPDATE (FPU)
I. Utilize and build upon the existing information provided in the 2018 WFPU, the 2019
WWFPU, and the 2019 AWWTP FPU and other available resources.
II. Review and update the general information for the planning and service areas.
III. Identify potential expansion areas based on current and projected patterns of community
growth and development.
IV. Collect and review data available within the City’s Public Works and Development
Services Departments.
V. Participate in Planning Commission meetings, City Council work sessions, and public
information meetings.
VI. Prepare draft and final facility plan reports and functional tracking worksheets for short-
term (less than 5 years), near-term (5 – 20 years) and long-term (more than 20 years)
planning periods.
VII. Prepare print and digital graphical executive summaries that present the process and
findings of the FPU in a format that is easy for the general public to understand and
consume.
VIII. Provide the City of Kalispell with recommendations for modeling software. The software
recommendations shall include a cost analysis and pros vs cons analysis for city
consideration and selection of modeling software.
B. WATER FACILITY PLAN UPDATE
I. Water Use Characterization: Assess existing and proposed land use, zoning, and other
planning information within the City’s planning boundary to determine existing and future
boundaries for model scenario development. Planning boundaries should be logically
consistent with the WWFPU.
II. Water Demand: Review and calculate water demand characteristics for the distribution
system based on 10-years of production flow data. Review and calculate water use
characteristics based on 10-years of customer water meter records.
III. Duty Factors: Develop water demand duty factors based on existing land use and water
meter records. Develop future land use duty factors based on proposed density and land
use characteristics. Densities shall consider recent changes in state legislation such as
the impacts of Accessory Dwelling Units.
IV. Winter Average: In addition to water use characterizations for different zoning types,
characterization shall also include residential winter average.
7
V. Hydraulic Model Demand Update: Consultant shall update the City’s existing water
distribution system model which is currently an InfoWater Pro model. The hydraulic model
was most recently updated in the Spring of 2024. The consultant shall also update the
model with any new development or system upgrades completed since the last model
update so that at the completion of the WFPU, the model data is the best data available.
A. Update the existing water demand within the model based on the recent average
and peak water use demand.
B. Apply the future water demand loading within the model based on duty factors as
established within the water use characterization task.
C. Calculate and update diurnal patterns for the upper, lower, and middle pressure
zones based on average and high demand periods.
VI. Model Validation: Upon completing pattern and demand updates, complete extended
period simulations comparing modeled system pressure, tank levels, and well production
to observe system values. Comparison shall be made to one week of peak water use and
one week of average water use.
VII. Design Parameter Review: Review existing water system design parameters and planning
values. Compare to updated water duty factors and provide recommendations for
updates, if necessary.
VIII. System Analysis: Perform an existing system evaluation utilizing average and peak day
demand. The completion of water storage tanks in the Upper and Lower Pressure Zones
will be concurrent with the water facility plan. Therefore, the existing system evaluation
shall assume the new 1-million-gallon water storage tank in the upper zone has been
placed into service and the 2.5-million-gallon storage tank which replaces the 1.7-million-
gallon Reservoir No. 1 storage tank in the Lower Zone has been placed into service.
IX. Future System Analysis: Perform a future system evaluation utilizing average and peak day
demand. Identify future water distribution system improvements including new wells,
transmission mains, and storage to serve the planning area boundary.
X. Risk Assessment: Review the Risk Analysis performed with the previous WFPU and
perform an updated risk assessment. The Risk Assessment shall include the latest
information available in CityWorks, projects completed since the last WFPU, updates to
the city’s infrastructure completed in GIS, and consideration of new regulatory
requirements (such as the EPA Lead and Copper Rule). Asset conditions will be inferred
through the analysis of work orders, maintenance history, and records of breaks and
failures.
XI. Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Plan: Provide an updated CIP plan based on all
analyses performed as part of the WFPU. The CIP plan will prioritize and estimate costs
for strategic water main replacement and repairs, new water main construction, water
production, water storage, projects to improve water system sustainability, projects to
meet new growth demands and reduce risks to the current water system, and projects to
meet regulatory requirements. The CIP plan will incorporate and schedule improvements
into an overall tabulated CIP recommendation as well as subcategories for short-term,
near-term, and long-term as previously discussed.
8
C. WASTEWATER FACILITY PLAN UPDATE
I. Wastewater Use Characterization:
A. Assess existing and proposed land use, zoning, and other planning information within
the City’s planning boundary and Evergreen Service Area to determine existing and
future boundaries for model scenario development.
B. Review and calculate wastewater generation characteristics for the collection system
based on wastewater treatment plant flow data. Review and calculate domestic
wastewater generation characteristics based on winter-time water meter billing
records.
C. Develop wastewater loading duty factors based on existing land use and water meter
records. Develop future land use duty factors based on proposed density and land
use characteristics.
II. Duty Factors: Duty factors shall include considerations for increased housing density
both within existing system extents and future growth areas in accordance with Senate
Bill 382.
III. Inflow and Infiltration: Develop and execute an approach for calculating and allocating
inflow and infiltration.
IV. Wastewater Collection Hydraulic Model Update:
A. Consultant shall update the City’s existing wastewater collection system model which
is currently an InfoSWMM model. The hydraulic model was most recently updated in
the spring of 2024.
B. The consultant shall update the model with any new development or system upgrades
completed since the last model update so that at the completion of the WWFPU, the
model data is the best data available.
C. Update the existing wastewater loading within the model based on the recent dry
weather loading as identified in the wastewater characterization task.
D. Apply the future wastewater loading within the model based duty factors as
established within the wastewater characterization task.
E. Review diurnal patterns at the wastewater treatment facility and at lift stations (with
available data) to verify domestic loading patterns.
V. WWTP Hydraulic and Treatment Loading Update:
A. Consultant shall utilize existing WWTP BioWin model which was most recently
updated in August 2017. The consultant shall update the model with any new
upgrades since the last model update so that at the completion of the WWFPU, the
model data is the best data available.
B. Update the existing WWTP loading with the model based on the recent wet and dry
weather loading as identified in the wastewater characterization task.
C. Apply the future wastewater loading within the model-based duty factors as
established within the wastewater characterization task.
D. Evaluate existing unit processes and provided rated treatment (flow and parameter
load) capacities.
VI. Design Parameter Review: Review existing wastewater collection system design
parameters and planning values. Compare to updated wastewater duty factors and make
recommendations as needed.
9
VII. System Analysis:
A. Perform an existing system evaluation utilizing the best available historic annual flow
patterns as established during facility plan update.
B. Perform a future system evaluation utilizing system flow and established rainfall
events as the wet weather design storm. Identify future collection system
improvements including lift stations, force main, and gravity mains to serve the growth
area boundary.
C. Identify and describe WWTP hydraulic and parameter treatment bottlenecks.
VIII. Risk Assessment:
A. Review the Risk Analysis performed with the previous WWFPU and perform an
updated risk assessment. The Risk Assessment shall include the latest information
available in CityWorks, projects completed since the last WWFPU, updates to the
city’s infrastructure completed in GIS, and consideration of any new regulatory
requirements. Asset conditions will be inferred through the analysis of work orders,
maintenance history, sewer overflows, and records of breaks and failures.
B. Provide a separate risk analysis for the WWTP including the latest maintenance
information available, updates to infrastructure and treatment processes completed
since the last AWWTP FPU, and consideration of any new regulatory requirements.
IX. Wastewater Collection Capital Improvement Plan:
A. Provide an updated wastewater collection system CIP plan based on all analyses
performed as part of the WWFPU.
B. The CIP plan will prioritize and estimate costs for strategic sewer main replacement
and repairs, new sewer main construction, projects to improve wastewater system
sustainability, projects to meet new growth demands and reduce risks to the current
wastewater system, and projects to meet regulatory requirements.
C. The CIP plan will incorporate and schedule improvements into an overall tabulated
CIP recommendation as well as subcategories for short-term, near-term, and long-
term.
X. Wastewater Treatment Plant Capital Improvement Plan:
A. Provide an updated WWTP CIP plan based on all analyses performed as part of the
WWFPU.
B. The CIP plan for the WWTP shall be separate from the CIP for the collection system.
The CIP plan will prioritize and estimate costs for strategic replacement and repairs,
projects to improve system sustainability, projects to meet new growth demands and
reduce risks to the WWTP, and projects to meet regulatory requirements.
C. The CIP plan will incorporate and schedule improvements into an overall tabulated
CIP recommendation as well as subcategories for short-term, near-term, and long-
term.
D. Integrate findings and recommendations from the City’s on-going Biosolids Treatment
and Disposal Project
10
IV.STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS (SOQ) SELECTION CRITERIA
A. GENERAL
The professional service provider will be selected through a qualification-based selection
process. Firms interested in providing requested scope of services to the city of Kalispell must
submit a statement of qualifications (SOQ) that addresses the following evaluation criteria.
Applicants are encouraged to organize their submissions in such a way as to follow the general
evaluation criteria listed below. Information included within the SOQ may be used to evaluate
your firm as part of any criteria regardless of where that information is found within the SOQ.
Information obtained from the SOQ and from any other relevant source may be used in the
evaluation and selection process.
B. COVER LETTER (2 POINTS)
Cover letter shall be one-page containing at a minimum: Company name, contact name,
address, fax number, and email address.
C. GENERAL INFORMATION (3 POINTS)
I. Description of Company
II. Lead firm’s primary and secondary contact information
III. Legal company organization; organization chart with names
D. RELEVANT COMPANY EXPERIENCE (30 POINTS)
I. Describe the firm’s experience with similar projects. For each project provide the
following information:
A. Water, Wastewater Collection, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility Plans and
contract costs if applicable (10 points).
B. Ability to maintain and meet schedules established in a professional contract (include
data on proposed work completion dates and actual timeline achievements)
(5 points).
C. Key project staff members still with the firm and their project role (5 points).
II. Statement of experience with the following:
A. Modeling and analysis of water, wastewater collection, wastewater treatment
systems, and preferred software (5 points).
B. Coordination and implementation of permitting and public/private agency
requirements including Montana Department of Environmental Quality (5 points).
E. COMPANY QUALIFICATIONS (10 POINTS)
I. Describe the company’s history in the industry. Provide resumes of key personnel in
Appendix A (2 points).
II. Briefly describe applicable certifications and licenses held by the company in the state of
Montana (2 points).
III. List and briefly describe the professional services the company provides to 3-5 other
jurisdictions and the length of time the services have been provided (3 points)
11
IV. A minimum of three referrals and references from other municipalities or local
governments which consultant has provided similar services as required in this FPU for
water, wastewater collection, and wastewater treatment (3 points).
F. CONTRACT UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH (25 POINTS)
I. Describe consultant’s understanding of the current needs of the City of Kalispell for the
professional services being requested (5 points).
II. Provide recommendations for modeling software to be used for each FPU.
Recommendations should include discussion on ease of incorporation of existing
modeling, expected delivery timeframes for each system modeled, and discussion of
deliverables to be provided to the City (10 points).
III. Identify and discuss any potential difficult issues consultant may face in providing
services for the City of Kalispell (5 points).
IV. Identify and discuss methods to mitigate these difficulties (5 points).
G. APPROACH TO CONTRACT MANAGEMENT (20 POINTS)
I. Present a brief description of how the firm intends to organize and conduct the project
(5 points).
II. Describe your company’s approach in initiating and establishing the service that meet the
needs and requirements of the City (5 points).
III. Provide a narrative outlining a proposed scope of work that includes description of each
task and work product, and a concise explanation of the firm’s approach to
accomplishing the tasks (5 points).
IV. Describe a proposed time schedule of work with key milestones and product deliveries
(5 points).
H. OTHER FACTORS (10 POINTS)
I. Provide the firm’s record of commitment to schedule as demonstrated on past projects
(2 points).
II. Current contracts and ability to proceed promptly. (2 points)
III. Relevant factors impacting the quality and value of service (2 points).
IV. Firm’s record of commitment to professional service budgets as demonstrated on past
projects (4 points).
V.SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
1. PAGE FORMAT AND NUMBER:
I. The SOQ shall include a one-page cover letter plus a maximum of twenty (20) pages to
address the SOQ criteria specified in Section 3 (excluding resumes).
II. Up to four (4) of the pages within the SOQ may be formatted as tabloid (11x17) and all
other sheets must be letter (8.5 x 11).
III. Table of Contents, section divider pages, and resumes provided in Appendix A do not
count towards the total page count.
12
2. FILE FORMAT AND SUBMISSION:
SOQ’s must be submitted electronically in PDF file format via Quest vBid prior to the
deadline provided in Section I.
3. DISQUALIFICATION:
Failure to comply with the following criteria may be grounds for disqualification:
I. Receipt of submittal prior to the specified cut-off date and time.
II. Submittal in the correct file format.
III. Adherence to maximum page requirements.
IV. Relevant experience with facility plans or master plans.
V. Adequate consultant qualifications.
VI.SELECTION PROCESS AND SCHEDULE
1. PROJECT EVALUATION COMMITTEE
A Project Evaluation Committee will evaluate each Statement of Qualifications (SOQ)
according to the above criteria, as well as past performance evaluations, and select up to
three finalists that will be Short Listed for the contract.
The Evaluation Committee will evaluate the short list and select the top qualified firm. If
more information is required to select the top qualified firm, a short list of firms will meet
with the Project Evaluation Committee for interviews.
The purpose of the interview (if required) will be to expand on the information provided in
the SOQ, not to repeat information already provided.
Those firms selected for the Short List will be provided additional instructions by the City.
Those firms not selected for further consideration will be notified.
2. SCHEDULE
The following tentative schedule has been prepared for this project. Firms interested in this
project must be available on the interview meeting date.
I. Pre-submittal conference: November 13, 2024, at 2 p.m. via Teams
II. SOQ due: December 9, 2024, at 5:00 p.m.
III. Firms notified for interview: December 16, 2024 (if necessary)
IV. Interviews: December 22, 2024 (if necessary)
V. Council Approval of Consultant: January 6, 2025
VI. Final drafts of Facility Plans ready for City Council adoption: August 15, 2025
VII. Incorporation into Kalispell Growth Plan: Fall, 2025
13
3. POST SOQ SUBMITTAL
A. RANKING
Following the evaluation and interviews (if needed), the Project Evaluation Committee will
determine a ranking for each firm based on the published criteria of this RFQ. Consideration will
be given to both the written Statement of Qualifications and any oral presentations or
interviews. No other factors or criteria will be used in the qualification ranking.
B. RECOMMENDATION
The highest ranked firm will be recommended to the City Manager and City Council for contract
award.
C. DEBRIEFINGS
Requests for debriefings or selection decisions shall be made in writing to the City. All
information submitted by firms and related Project Evaluation Committee evaluations and
rankings shall be considered confidential until after contract execution and award by the City
Council.
D. CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS
The City will enter into negotiations with the selected firm and execute a contract upon
completion of negotiations for the professional services for City Council approval. Contract
negotiations will include, but not necessarily be limited to the following elements: scope of
work, project timetable, products of work, and fees.
If the City is unsuccessful in negotiating a contract with the highest ranked team, the City may
then negotiate with the second or third highest ranked team until a contract is executed. If the
list of preferred design firms is exhausted without a contract being awarded, the City may
decide to terminate the selection process or re-advertise.
E. OTHER
The City will not reimburse any cost associated with the preparation, submittal, or presentation
of any Statement of Qualification.
Consultant design firms are advised that in accordance with Montana law, any information
submitted may be subject to public inspection. Firms are further advised that, while the City is
constrained by budget for this work, the City does not consider cost proposals or estimates of
fees in its evaluation of qualifications.