Litchfield WPCA moves forward with QBS RFP for wastewater engineering, seeks DEEP guidance on advertising and funding

LITCHFIELD, Conn. — The Litchfield Water Pollution Control Authority’s Capital Planning subcommittee on July 9 agreed to proceed with a quality‑based selection (QBS) request for qualifications for wastewater engineering services and to include a peer review of an earlier Woodard & Curran study in the scope.

Chairman Chris Levesque and Plant Superintendent T. Donoghue said the Authority must use a QBS process to remain eligible for Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) grant funding and that the draft RFP is substantially complete and will be recirculated to the full committee for comment.

The RFP scope discussed by commissioners includes GIS mapping and document management, hydraulic modeling of sewer system capacity, sewer inspection and condition assessment (including CCTV and manhole inspection), inflow/infiltration investigation, and research and documentation of sewer easements. Commissioners emphasized that firms invited to interview should send the staff who would actually perform the work rather than sales or marketing personnel and recommended a standardized presentation, a question‑and‑answer period, and a uniform scoring system for interviews.

"We are only requesting qualifications and comments at this stage," Levesque said, underlining that proceeding with the RFQ does not commit the Authority to specific expenditures.

Commissioners discussed ensuring compatibility with the town’s Diamond Maps GIS platform and consolidating easement documentation as part of the Authority’s Capacity, Management, Operation and Maintenance (CMOM) program. T. Donoghue reviewed submission requirements as drafted: one signed original and seven paper copies of written qualifications, plus one electronic PDF, and noted a planned legal advertisement.

Commissioner Keith Shortsleeve asked staff to check with DEEP about whether any specific advertisement language or notice requirements apply. Commissioners agreed that individual comments on the draft RFP should be routed directly to staff rather than circulated among the full committee to avoid creating an online quorum.

Levesque said the prior Woodard & Curran engineering study had a narrower scope and that a peer review of that study would be incorporated as a task for the incoming consultant.

On capital planning and financing, Levesque reviewed the approval process — a Board of Selectmen recommendation followed by Board of Finance approval — and said the Authority has reserve funds that could avoid bonding for the project. He asked Town corporate counsel and bond counsel whether bond counsel involvement is required for the internal appropriation needed to enter a DEEP loan, and said a public hearing on any expenditure is anticipated.

Levesque asked T. Donoghue to finalize the schedule for taking the RFP scope to the full Board (targeting the meeting after next month’s regular meeting, pending funding/bonding resolution), to define all funding sources including the balance in Fund 66, and to project how that fund would be affected by debt service over the next 20 years.

The meeting record lists several staff assignments: T. Donoghue will recirculate the final RFP draft, confirm with DEEP whether specific advertisement language or notice requirements apply, and assemble funding‑source details and a 20‑year Fund 66 projection; Levesque and T. Donoghue will consult Town corporate counsel and bond counsel about bond counsel involvement for an internal appropriation/DEEP loan.

A motion to adjourn was taken and the committee adjourned at 6:59 p.m. The transcript records that "all members voted 'aye'" and the motion carried; the minutes contain inconsistent phrasing about who moved and who seconded the motion, which the record does not reconcile.

The Authority’s next procedural step is to finalize the RFP language and funding analysis and then seek full Board consideration once the legal and funding questions are resolved.