Power Generation System Master Plan Project

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)
for Power Generation System
Master Plan
ADDENDA
Prospective bidders are responsible for reviewing any
published addenda regarding this bid at
ebmud.com/business-center
CONTACT
Simon Kobayashi, Associate Civil Engineer
(510) 287-1648
simon.kobayashi@ebmud.com
RESPONSE DUE
October 16, 2026
4:00 p.m. PST
SUBMIT ELECTRONICALLY TO*
Simon Kobayashi, EBMUD
simon.kobayashi@ebmud.com
*Hardcopy proposals will not be accepted
375 ELEVENTH STREET . OAKLAND . CA 94607-4240 . WWW.EBMUD.COM/BUSINESS-CENTER/

EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
RFP for Power Generation System Master Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. STATEMENT OF WORK
A. SCOPE
B. PROPOSER QUALIFICATIONS
C. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
D. DELIVERABLES / REPORTS
II. CALENDAR OF EVENTS
A. MANDATORY SITE WALK
III. DISTRICT PROCEDURES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS
A. RFP ACCEPTANCE AND AWARD
B. EVALUATION CRITERIA/SELECTION COMMITTEE
C. PRICING
D. NOTICE OF INTENT TO AWARD AND PROTESTS
E. INVOICING
IV. RFP RESPONSE SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION
A. DISTRICT CONTACTS
B. SUBMITTAL OF RFP RESPONSE
C. RESPONSE FORMAT
ATTACHMENTS
EXHIBIT A - RFP RESPONSE PACKET
EXHIBIT B - INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
EXHIBIT C - CONSULTING AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT D - IRAN CONTRACTING ACT CERTIFICATION
EXHIBIT E - SCOPE OF WORK
EXHIBIT F - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY INFORMATION TO BE EXCLUDED FROM
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUESTS
EXHIBIT G - FIGURES AND REFERENCES
REV 5/13/26

Power Generation System Master Plan
I. STATEMENT OF WORK
A. SCOPE
It is the intent of this request for proposals (RFP) to describe the professional
engineering consultant services, terms, and conditions needed for an agreement to
prepare a Power Generation System (PGS) Master Plan which includes review of asset
condition assessment information, alternatives analysis, projection of future air
regulations, lifecycle analysis, capital project roadmap development, and optional work.
Optional work may include flare equipment testing and troubleshooting and capacity
review, engine generators (PGS-1) conductor condition assessment and remaining
useful life, header redundancy economic analysis, gas conditioning system capacity
upgrade assessment, and other ideas indicated in the requested proposals. See Exhibit E
for the full scope of work.
The East Bay Municipal Utility District (District) intends to award a contract to the
Proposer(s) who best meets the District's requirements. The objectives of this
professional services contract are to develop alternatives analysis; identify necessary
capital projects; and assess the benefits and lifecycle costs of the projects and preferred
alternatives.
The existing PGS facilities, including three engine generators (PGS-1), a gas turbine (PGS-
2), gas conditioning system, flares and related equipment, are reaching the end of their
asset lives. Flaring capacity is insufficient to independently handle peak gas production,
which results in a risk that raw biogas is vented, a regulatory violation. The gas
conditioning system is a bottleneck to beneficial use of biogas, as there is not enough
conditioning capacity to run all engines and turbine simultaneously. In addressing these
issues, economic, practical, innovative, synergistic, and comprehensive alternatives and
lifecycle analyses are needed to assist the District in deciding how to evolve the system
to meet future regulatory, policy, and plant energy demands. Power demands are
anticipated to increase in the future with upcoming nutrient removal regulatory
requirements.
Major Equipment:
Cogeneration
2.15 MW Enterprise Engines, 3 units
4 MW Solar Turbine Mercury 50, 1 unit
Gas Storage
Duosphere digester gas storage covers (307,000 cubic feet each), 2 units
Gas Conditioning
ESC Corporation Gas Conditioning Skid (~2,700 cfm), 1 unit
Flaring
Varec Biogas 239A 08 S6 Series Flares, 4 units
Abutec enclosed flares, 2 units
Page 3

Power Generation System Master Plan
Heating
Cleaver-Brooks 4WI-700-500-125HW CB-LE Firetube Boiler (16.7 million
btu/hr), 1 unit
Extensive support utilities including biogas piping, electrical and control systems,
heating and cooling water loops and heat exchangers.
B. PROPOSER QUALIFICATIONS
1. Proposer Minimum Qualifications
a. Lead Firm
(1) Proposer, Proposer's principal, or Proposer's staff shall have been
regularly engaged in the business of providing wastewater
treatment planning, design, and optimization for at least five (5)
years within the last ten (10) years.
(2) Proposer shall also have experience with comprehensive planning
studies for biogas utilization systems. The relevance of cited
projects, and the experience of specific individuals proposed for the
current project, should be emphasized.
b. Project Manager/Key Personnel
(1) Provide both technical and project management qualifications for
the proposed Project Manager and Key Personnel. Proposed
personnel must meet the following minimum requirements:
(a) Project Manager must have had successful experience
completing at least two (2) contracts for design or planning
engineering projects within the last ten years with a
minimum fee of $150,000.
(b) Project Manager must be an employee of the lead firm with
at least five years of experience managing
civil/water/wastewater process/energy process, planning, or
design projects for water/wastewater facilities.
(2) The Project Manager will be the primary client contact and is
responsible for the day-to-day management of the project and
ensuring that the scope, budget, and schedule are met. The
following information should be provided for the Project Manager
and Key Personnel:
(a) Years of experience
(b) Percent (%) time available for this project
Page 4

Power Generation System Master Plan
(c) Resumes (should demonstrate experience beyond minimum
qualification requirements)
c. Proposer's staff or subcontractors shall stamp all deliverables, reports,
drawings, and specifications. Stamps shall be of their relevant disciplines
including but not limited to:
(1) California Professional Civil Engineer(s) in good standing with the
Board of Professional Engineers and/or California Professional
Mechanical Engineer(s) in good standing with the Board of
Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.
d. Proposer shall possess all permits, licenses, and professional credentials
necessary to perform services as specified under this RFP.
2. Proposer Qualifications of Interest
a. Please include information on experience on projects of similar type, size,
and complexity as the proposed project. This includes experience in the
following:
(1) Comprehensive planning studies for biogas conveyance and
utilization systems. The relevance of cited projects, and the
experience of specific individuals proposed for the current project,
should be emphasized.
(2) Planning and/or design studies on feasibility/implementation of
renewable energy and/or microgrid applications.
(3) Operating optimization project/as-needed services, involving a
combination of controls optimization, standard operating
procedure development, best practices implementation, and
system optimization for a biogas-fueled power generation system.
C. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
Refer to Exhibit E - Scope of Work for more information.
D. DELIVERABLES / REPORTS
1. Refer to Exhibit E - Scope of Work for more information.
Page 5

Power Generation System Master Plan
ANTICIPATED MAJOR PROJECT MILESTONES
Event Date
Project Kickoff January 2027
Task 2 Data Collection and Review February 2027
Task 2.1 Project Assumptions and Constraints February 2027
Task 2.2 Project Condition and Risk Assessment March 2027
Review
Task 3.1 Air Regulations Future Projection June 2027
Task 3.2 Screening of Technologies and May 2027
Alternatives
Task 3.3 Alternatives Evaluation Criteria and May 2027
Approach
Task 3.4 Develop Preliminary Alternatives June 2027
Task 3.5 Refined Alternatives Analysis July 2027
Task 4 PGS Capital Project Roadmap August 2027
Task 5 PGS Master Plan Report October 2027
Task 6 Optional Services TBD
II. CALENDAR OF EVENTS
EVENT DATE/LOCATION
RFP Issued September 8, 2026
September 22th @ 1 PM at: 2020 Wake Ave
MANDATORY Site Walk Oakland, CA 94607
E-mail Simon.Kobayashi@ebmud.com to sign-up for the
site visit and for required forms.
Deadline for Proposers to September 30, 2026 by 4:00 p.m.
Submit* Questions and *Questions may be submitted electronically via email to
Clarifications to District Simon.Kobayashi@ebmud.com
Addendum (if necessary) October 5, 2026 by 4:00 p.m.
Response Due October 16, 2026 by 4:00 p.m.
Potential Interviews October 26, 2026 through October 30, 2026
Anticipated Contract Start January 4, 2027
Date
Note: All dates are subject to change by District.
Page 6

Power Generation System Master Plan
Proposers are responsible for reviewing https://www.ebmud.com/business-
center/requests-proposal-rfps/ for any published addenda. Hard copies of addenda
will not be mailed out.
A. MANDATORY SITE WALK/ PROPOSAL CONFERENCE
Mandatory site walk/Proposal conference will be held to:
1. Allow the District to discuss the scope of the project.
2. Provide Proposers an opportunity to view the Power Generation System
infrastructure and site footprint necessary to respond to this RFP.
3. Provide an opportunity for Proposers to ask specific questions about the project
and request RFP clarifications.
4. Provide the District with an opportunity to receive feedback regarding the project
and RFP.
All questions deemed to be pertinent by the District will be addressed in Addenda
following the site walk/Proposal conference.
***In order to be eligible to submit a Proposal on this RFP, a representative from the
Proposer's company MUST attend site walk/Proposal conference and sign in to confirm
her/his attendance. If an RFP response is submitted by a company that was not in
attendance at this meeting, its RFP response WILL be rejected***
III. DISTRICT PROCEDURES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS
A. RFP ACCEPTANCE AND AWARD
1. RFP responses will be evaluated by the Selection Committee and will be scored
and ranked in accordance with the RFP section entitled "Evaluation
Criteria/Selection Committee."
2. The Selection Committee will recommend award to the Proposer who, in its
opinion, has submitted the RFP response that best serves the overall interests of
the District. Award may not necessarily be made to the Proposer with the lowest
overall level of effort.
3. The District reserves the right to award to a single or to multiple General or
Professional Service Providers, dependent upon what is in the best interest of the
District.
4. The District has the right to decline to award this contract or any part of it for any
reason.
Page 7

Power Generation System Master Plan
5. Any specifications, terms, or conditions issued by the District, or those included in
the Proposer's submission, in relation to this RFP, may be incorporated into any
purchase order or contract that may be awarded as a result of this RFP.
6. Award of contract. The District reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to
accept one part of a proposal and reject the other, unless the proposer stipulates
to the contrary, and to waive minor technical defects and administrative errors,
as the interest of the District may require. Award will be made, or proposals
rejected by the District as soon as possible after proposals have been opened.
B. EVALUATION CRITERIA/SELECTION COMMITTEE
All proposals will be evaluated by a Selection Committee. The Selection Committee may
be composed of District staff and other parties that have expertise or experience in this
type of procurement. The Selection Committee will select a Proposer in accordance with
the evaluation criteria set forth in this RFP. The evaluation of the RFP responses shall be
within the sole judgment and discretion of the Selection Committee.
The Selection Committee will evaluate each RFP response meeting the qualification
requirements set forth in this RFP. Proposer should bear in mind that any RFP response
that is unrealistic in terms of the technical or schedule commitments, or unrealistically
high or low in level of effort, will be deemed reflective of an inherent lack of technical
competence or indicative of a failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of the
District's requirements as set forth in this RFP.
RFP responses will be evaluated and scored according to the Evaluation Criteria below
and scored according to a zero to five-point scale. The scores for all Evaluation Criteria
will then be added to arrive at a weighted score for each RFP response. An RFP response
with a high weighted total will be ranked higher than one with a lesser-weighted total.
The Evaluation Criteria are as follows:
Evaluation Criteria
A. Understanding of the Project (10 points):
RFP responses will be evaluated against the RFP specifications and the questions
below:
1. Has the Proposer demonstrated a thorough understanding of the purpose
and scope of the project?
2. How well has the Proposer identified pertinent issues, innovative solutions,
and potential problems related to the project?
3. Has the Proposer demonstrated that it understands the deliverables the
District expects it to provide?
4. Has the Proposer demonstrated that it understands the District's time
schedule and can meet it?
Page 8

Power Generation System Master Plan
B. Project Approach (15 points):
The Proposer will be evaluated to determine the following:
1. Effective methods of carrying out the scope of the work.
2. Potential for innovative approaches and solutions.
3. Has the Proposer demonstrated that they understand the deliverables and
schedule the District expects it to provide?
4. Does the project team organization chart demonstrate an effective and
cohesive project team?
C. Relevant Experience (15 points):
RFP responses will be evaluated against the RFP specifications and the questions
below:
1. Does the PM demonstrate effective leadership skills?
2. Do the individuals assigned to the project have experience on similar
digester gas co-generation and renewable energy alternatives analysis or
design projects?
3. Did those individuals successfully complete those similar projects on
schedule and under budget?
4. Are resumes complete and do they demonstrate backgrounds that would be
desirable for individuals engaged in the work the project requires?
5. Breadth of Experience - A comparison will be made on the demonstrated
experience analyzing and implementing digester gas beneficial reuse
technologies and renewable energy technologies.
6. Lifecycle and Risk Analyses Impact on Decision-making - have the team's
lifecycle and risk analyses recommendations led to investment decisions?
7. How extensive is the applicable experience of the personnel designated to
work on the project?
D. Implementation Plan and Schedule (5 points):
An evaluation will be made of the likelihood that the Proposer's implementation
plan and schedule will meet the District's schedule. Additional credit will be
given for the identification and planning for mitigation of schedule risks which
the Proposer believes may adversely affect any portion of the District's
schedule.
E. Level of Effort (10 points):
An evaluation will be made of the Proposer's estimated staff hours and level of
availability and commitment:
1. Reasonableness - does the proposed staffing accurately reflect the Proposer's
effort to meet requirements and objectives?
2. Realism - is the proposed staffing appropriate to the nature of the services to
be provided?
3. Does the key staff's (including the Project Manager's) level of availability and
commitment reflect adequate resource allocation?
F. References (See Exhibit A - RFP Response Packet) (15 points):
Page 9

Power Generation System Master Plan
References are only performed on the shortlisted Proposers and the score for
reference checks is not included in the preliminary short list score. References
will be taken from the qualifying experience section of Exhibit A. It is the
proposer's responsibility to verify their references are reachable at the provided
contact information. If the contact information provided is not correct and the
listed references cannot be reached, the District reserves the right to declare
the proposal non-responsive and incomplete.
G. Oral Presentation and Interview (25 points):
The proposer will be evaluated based on how well they present their proposal
and conduct the interview. The oral interview may consist of standard questions
asked of each of the Proposers and specific questions regarding the specific RFP
response and the presentation given. Invitations for the interview and
presentation are only given to shortlisted Proposers.
H. Contract Equity Program (5 points):
Proposer shall be eligible for SBE or DVBE preference points if they are a
certified small business entity, as described in the guidelines contained in
Exhibit A-Contract Equity Program, and they check the appropriate box,
requesting preference, in Exhibit A-Proposer Information and Acceptance.
Qualified DVBEs and/or SBEs will receive an additional 5 points to their total
score.
C. PRICING
Prices negotiated shall be firm for the first twelve months of any contract that may be
awarded pursuant to this RFP.
D. NOTICE OF INTENT TO AWARD AND PROTESTS
At the conclusion of the RFP response evaluation process, all entities who submitted a
proposal package will be notified in writing by e-mail or USPS mail with the name of the
Proposer being recommended for contract award. The document providing this
notification is the Notice of Intent to Award.
Negotiations for a Consulting Services Agreement with a "not to exceed" contract price
(for time and expenses) will be scheduled shortly after the Notice of Intent to Award. If
an Agreement cannot be achieved, the District will proceed to negotiate with the next
highest ranked Proposer.
Protests must be in writing and must be received no later than seven (7) workdays after
the District issues the Notice of Intent to Award. The District will reject the protest as
untimely if it is received after this specified time frame. Protests will be accepted from
proposers or potential proposers only.
Page 10