To: Members of the Castle Rock Water Commission
From: Mark Marlowe, P.E., Director of Castle Rock Water
Mark Henderson, P.E., Assistant Director
Matthew Hayes, P.E., Technical Engineering Manager
Josh Hansen, P.E., CIP Project Manager Supervisor
Emily Huth, P.E., CIP Project Manager
Title
Resolution Approving a Design Services Agreement between the Town of Castle Rock and Burns & McDonnell, for the Meadows Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Improvements and Ray Waterman Regional Water Treatment Center (RWRWTC) Chlorine Storage Project [Meadows Water Treatment Plant and Ray Waterman Regional Water Treatment Facility]
Town Council Agenda Date: November 17, 2026
Body
________________________________________________________________________________
Executive Summary
The purpose of this memo is to request the Town Council approval of a Resolution (Attachment A) for the Design Services Agreement (Exhibit 1) with Burns & McDonnell for design engineering and bid support services for the design of the Meadows WTP Improvements and RWRWTC Chlorine Storage Project. Improvements at Meadows WTP include the replacement of underdrain systems within the gravity media filters, conversion from the existing anhydrous ammonia to liquid ammonium sulfate, and an evaluation of facility hydraulics to evaluate production capacity. Improvements at RWRWTC include expansion of chlorine storage to allow for number of days of storage to meet industry standards and ensure adequate supplies during peak demand season. Staff recommends approval of the agreement between Castle Rock Water (CRW) and Burns & McDonnell for $349,068 with a 10% town managed contingency for a total authorization of $383,975. Services are expected to begin upon execution of the contract and be completed in summer of 2027. Construction is currently planned for XXXX.
Discussion
Meadows Water Treatment Plant (MWTP)
The MWTP portion of the project includes design scope related to the filters, ammonia chemical system, and overall facility hydraulics. MWTP has eight (8) gravity dual-media filters. Three of the eight filters do not perform as expected, therefore, CRW is looking to replace the existing underdrain system with the Stainless Steel (SS) AWI Phoenix Underdrain System. The SS AWI Underdrain system has been installed in two other treatment facilities, and operations staff has been pleased with the performance and durability of the equipment. When the overall water system conversion to chloramines was completed in 2013, the ammonia system chosen for implementation at MWTP was anhydrous ammonia (pressurized ammonia gas tanks). While unavailable at the time of conversion, there is now a local supplier of liquid ammonium sulfate (LAS). LAS is a more stable and less toxic form of ammonia. MWTP is the only remaining facility with a gas feed ammonia system, so this conversion to LAS will allow for safer operating conditions and consistency with other facilities. Additionally, MWTP has historically been unable to operate at its rated treatment capacity of eight (8) million gallons per day (MGD). Production capacity from the treatment plant is typically closer to a maximum value of 6 MGD. As part of this project, the facility will be evaluated from a hydraulics and operational perspective to determine if improvements can be made to increase treatment production from the facility.
Ray Waterman Regional Water Treatment Center (RWRWTC)
RWRWTC was constructed in 2005 and is an 8 MGD groundwater treatment plant that uses sodium hypochlorite (chlorine) as the primary disinfectant. This facility is the location at which the Town accepts Water Infrastructure Supply Efficiency (WISE) project water, which also requires application of chlorine. Chlorine is primarily dosed in two locations at the facility: at the beginning of the treatment plant to achieve disinfection contact time requirements, and to influent WISE water for break-point chlorination purposes prior to WISE water combining with treated water at RWRWTC. LAS is dosed downstream of the high service pumps to convert the disinfectant to chloramines for the distribution system. There are two existing chlorine storage rooms in the chemical building. The current storage tanks provide 2,200 gallons of storage, which provides only about seven (7) days of storage in high demand season. The amount of storage does not meet industry standards and is problematic if there are delivery or lead time issues when ordering chemical tank deliveries. Additional chlorine storage options will be investigated in this design scope. Because chlorine storage modifications are not currently budgeted for construction at the facility within the 5-year Capital Implementation Plan (CIP) plan, CRW is interested in evaluating cost-effective options to implement temporary storage or phase improvements for permanent facilities.
Objectives and Deliverables
The scope of work includes a hydraulic and operational analysis (including surveying to confirm facility and site elevations) for the MWTP, which may identify additional recommendations for improvement. The consultant will develop preliminary and final design documents for the filter replacement and LAS conversion portions of the work at MWTP and the chlorine storage scope at RWRWTC. Additional tasks include preparation of technical specifications, completion of all required permitting, and MWTP bidding phase services. Work will include the following: conceptual design (10%), preliminary design (50%), final project design (90%), Issued for Bid package (100%), permitting, and an engineer’s opinion of probable construction cost.
CRW conducts an annual Request for Qualifications (RFQ) advertised on Bidnet that determines qualified consultants for various Castle Rock Water CIP Projects. A project specific Request for Proposal (RFP) was issued to eight (8) pre-qualified consultants from the 2026 RFQ that were selected for the treatment category. Responses were received from six (6) firms. Results from the RFP are summarized in the table below.
|
Consulting Firm |
Total Cost |
|
AECOM |
$399,530 |
|
Black & Veatch |
$397,753 |
|
Burns & McDonnell |
$349,068 |
|
Carollo |
No proposal |
|
CDM Smith |
$633,157 |
|
Consor |
$308,292 |
|
HDR |
No proposal |
|
Tetra Tech |
$244,808 |
Burns & McDonnell (BMcD) was selected by the evaluation committee to perform services for this project, and staff determined that their proposed fee is reasonable. Proposal values ranged from approximately $240,000 to $630,000. While not the lowest cost proposed, BMcD’s proposal best aligned with the goals of the project. BMcD has recent design experience in both treatment plant facilities and a strong understanding of the concerns of the CRW operations staff that were demonstrated in the presentation and development of creative ideas within their proposal. Specifically, they presented several developed concepts within their proposal for equipment layout for the MWTP filter replacement and LAS conversion, as well as the RWRWTC chlorine storage portions of the project. Given these initial concepts as a starting point, allows BMcD to be more aggressive with their design schedule, which will be critical to maintain the planned construction activities to align with the SCADA Phase VI work planned to be occurring at MWTP soon. CRW operations staff has a great working relationship with the BMcD project management and technical team and are pleased with the services that BMcD has been providing to design projects over the years. BMcD’s technical approach, consistent design team, and emphasis on collaboration resulted in the best value selection for this RFP.
Budget Impact
The Burns & McDonnell proposal fee is $349,068. Staff requests an additional $34,907 (Town-managed 10% contingency) be authorized for a total project authorization of $383,975. The project will be funded from the Miller WTP Piping & Filter Fund (210-4275-442.75-44).
|
Project Number |
Account Name |
Account Number |
Contract Amount |
Contingency |
Authorization Amount |
2026 Budget |
|
260016 260017 |
Miller WTP Piping & Flter |
210-4275-442.75-44 |
$349,068 |
$34,907 |
$383,975 |
$500,000 |
Proposed Motion
“I move to recommend to Town Council approval of the Resolution as presented”
Attachments
Attachment A: Resolution (Not Attached)
Exhibit 1: Agreement (Not Attached)
Attachment B: Location Map