County recommends Denali Water Solutions contract for biosolids land application, commissioners raise PFAS concerns

Johnson County wastewater staff recommended Aug. 14 that the county award RFP 2025‑011 for biosolids land application to Denali Water Solutions LLC. Staff said five evaluation criteria (approach, key staff, firm experience, staff utilization and cost) were used; cost carried a 30% weight. Denali was ranked top once costs were included, and fee proposals ranged from $683,285 to $1,048,350; staff recommended a contract not to exceed $1,000,000 per year for a three‑year period with an optional three‑year renewal. Susan Pekarek (Department of Wastewater) explained the county’s process: solids from continuous wastewater treatment are digested and stabilized and may be land applied as a soil amendment in compliance with EPA regulations; the current contract expires in October. Pekarek said Denali is the incumbent with proven performance and capacity. She said the county will revisit contract authority once the Nelson treatment facility’s digester is online (anticipated in 2028). Commissioners asked questions about PFAS (per‑ and poly‑fluoroalkyl substances). Commissioner Myers asked for reassurance about “forever chemicals” returning to farmland. Pekarek said wastewater utilities do not create PFAS but receive them from consumer products; staff are monitoring regulations, working with consultants on treatment technologies, and complying with applicable EPA rules and sampling/reporting requirements. She said technologies that remove PFAS exist but are costly and energy intensive and that some utilities have paused advanced PFAS treatment due to expense. Commissioner Ashcraft asked why cost determined the award where other evaluators ranked the second firm higher on approach; staff replied that cost was 30% of the evaluation and Denali had experience and farms already lined up. Staff also told the board that landfilling biosolids would be substantially more expensive (about three times current land application costs) and potentially require long drives to landfills that can accept the volumes. No formal contract award was made at the agenda review; staff recommended the item be placed on the Aug. 21 agenda for formal action.