Engineering Services- PFAS Evaluation and Source Development Study

Murray City is soliciting Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from qualified engineering firms to provide professional engineering services for a PFAS Evaluation and Source Development Study. The study will address the Hyland Well and 500 East Well, two nearby municipal groundwater sources where PFOA has been detected during recent sampling.

The Utah Division of Drinking Water (DDW) has reserved up to **$100,000** in Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) Emerging Contaminants funding under SRF No. 3F4319PE, with 100% principal forgiveness. Final funding authorization is contingent upon DDW receiving an engineering contract that identifies the project tasks, timeline, and budget. Consultant selection, contract award, and performance of the work are subject to the funding conditions in Sections 7 and 15.

The following scope establishes anticipated study tasks. The final scope will be negotiated with the highest-ranked firm and must be approved by the City and, when required, DDW before work begins.

A. Project Management, Kickoff and Data Review

• Conduct a kickoff meeting and confirm goals, decision criteria, communication protocols, schedule, and deliverables.
• Prepare a project management plan, data-request list, quality-control plan, and detailed schedule.
• Identify material data gaps and recommend targeted actions. Additional sampling or testing shall not proceed without written City authorization.

B. Regulatory and PFAS Data Evaluation

• Summarize the PFAS regulatory requirements, compliance-monitoring framework, reporting levels, and schedule applicable to the sources.
• Coordinate regulatory assumptions and planning criteria with Murray City and DDW.

C. Existing Source and System Evaluation

- Document the operational role, capacity, condition, seasonal use, pumping configuration, available site area, utilities, hydraulics, and constraints of the Hyland and 500 East sources.

D. Treatment Alternatives Evaluation

- At minimum, screen and, where viable, develop planning concepts for: Granular activated carbon (GAC); Ion exchange (IX); Reverse osmosis or other membrane treatment; Other proven treatment technologies substantiated for municipal drinking-water application.

E. Operational and Non-Treatment Alternatives

• Evaluate blending only if the City can maintain a controlled, measurable, and regulatorily acceptable blend under expected source and demand conditions.
• Evaluate seasonal use, source rotation, reduced production, or temporary shutdown, including lost-capacity and reliability consequences.

F. Deeper Aquifer and Source Development Feasibility

• Assess the likelihood of a hydraulically distinct deeper aquifer, potential yield, expected water quality, PFAS vulnerability, and inter-aquifer connection risk.
• Recommend a phased investigation program, potentially including exploratory drilling, geophysical logging, zone isolation, aquifer testing, and water-quality testing.

G. Alternatives Comparison and Life-Cycle Cost

• Prepare planning-level capital estimates with assumptions, contingencies, accuracy range, and exclusions.
• Compare alternatives using an agreed planning horizon and net-present-value approach.

H. Recommended Mitigation and Implementation Plan

• Recommend a preferred alternative or phased strategy supported by the technical and cost evaluation.
• Prepare an implementation schedule identifying regulatory milestones and realistic durations.

I. Deliverables, Meetings, and Public Communication

• Monthly progress updates and task-based invoices.
• Technical memoranda sufficient to document assumptions and decisions.
• Draft engineering study report for City and DDW review.
• Comment-response matrix and final engineering study report.
• Final engineering study to be signed and sealed by the Utah licensed professional engineer responsible for the work.

J. Optional or Additional Services

- No optional service is authorized by award of the base contract alone.

**Submission method:** Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) shall be electronically submitted, mailed, or hand delivered. Electronic Submittals (Preferred Method of Delivery): The Division of Purchasing utilizes the Utah Public Procurement Place (U3P) platform via Euna, formerly known as Bonfire. To respond to this solicitation, register through the U3P Euna platform.

All SOQs sent by mail or hand delivery must be contained in a sealed envelope clearly labeled in the lower right-hand corner with the RFQ number, project title, and firm name. SOQs received after the deadline stated in this RFQ will not be accepted and will be returned unopened.

SOQs shall not exceed (20) pages total, excluding cover page and resumes. **Price shall not be submitted with the initial SOQ.** Questions, clarifications, or requests for information must be submitted in writing through the Euna Procurement Q&A Section.

**Required forms:** the signed State-provided DBE Certification-Signature Page and the signed State-provided lower-tier debarment certification in Attachment C.

**Evaluation:** A maximum of 200 points is available for written SOQs. Interview evaluation: 100 points if necessary.

• Project understanding and identification of key decisions, risks, and data gaps – 0 to 40 points
• Technical approach to PFAS treatment and alternatives evaluation – 0- 40 points
• Groundwater/source-development and hydrogeologic experience – 0 – 30 points
• Qualifications, roles, and availability of key personnel – 0 to 30 points
• Utah drinking-water regulation and federally funded/SRF experience – 0 to 25 points
• Project management, quality control, schedule, and deliverables – 0 to 20 points
• Past performance and references – 0 – 10 points
• Familiarity with local conditions and Murray’s groundwater system – 0 – 5 points

Final Study Report: 10/1/2027 (Funding Agreement Deadline).