Kalispell staff recommends GCCM delivery for wastewater biosolids dewatering improvements

City of Kalispell staff told the council at a February work session that they will ask the council to approve use of Montana''s general contractor construction manager (GCCM) alternative project delivery model for a wastewater biosolids dewatering improvement project, citing repeated unsuccessful bids under the traditional design-bid-build process, the city's contractual limit with Glacier Gold and an impending schedule tied to Glacier Gold's operations.

The recommendation matters because Glacier Gold has accepted the city's biosolids since 1993 and a 2004 contract set a limit of 600 dry tons per year; city staff said Glacier Gold lacks additional capacity and may shut its Olney facility. That schedule, combined with the technical complexity of reconfiguring the treatment plant's dewatering room while keeping daily operations running, led staff to recommend the GCCM model as a way to secure contractor interest, shorten delivery time and provide early cost transparency.

Assistant Director of Public Works Keith Haskins and consulting engineer Scott Buecher of AE2S outlined the project scope and procurement steps. Haskins said the immediate need is to replace an aging belt filter press with a larger volute press, add a polymer feed skid, replace waste-activated sludge pumps, install a new conveyor system for offloading, and reorganize the dewatering room to allow for a future dryer if required. Buecher added that the room reconfiguration is a complex demolition and rearrangement that must be done while the plant continues daily biosolids dewatering.

The city previously sought bids under the design-bid-build method and encountered limited contractor interest and high prices. Staff described a recent project that required three bidding iterations; the first configurations produced no bids, a second schedule returned proposals roughly twice the engineer''s estimate, and later outreach and design revisions eventually produced only two bids. Those experiences led staff to evaluate alternative delivery methods used elsewhere in Montana and the U.S.

Under the GCCM approach described by staff, Kalispell would run a two-step selection: a request for qualifications to vet contractors''experience and capacity, followed by a request for proposals that would include a preliminary guaranteed maximum price (GMP) at roughly 50% to 60% design. Buecher said, "The guaranteed maximum price is a contractual cost ceiling agreed upon between the owner and the GCCM, establishing the highest amount the owner will pay for the project within construction overhead and contractor fees profit the whole 9 yards." He explained staff's intent to obtain an early GMP and then refine it through design so the city and contractor can align scope with the city's budget before final construction contracting.

Staff told the council they have discussed the approach with Montana Department of Environmental Quality and that the city would follow the statutory requirements under Montana Code Annotated Title 18, Chapter 2, Part 5 (Alternative Project Delivery Contracts). That law requires a governing body's approval based on at least two of three conditions: significant schedule ramifications, material cost savings, or substantial technical complexity. Buecher told the council staff believes the project meets at least two of those criteria (schedule and technical complexity).

On estimated costs and fees, Buecher characterized the overall project as roughly a $4 million effort for planning purposes and estimated the GCCM preconstruction services might add "$40,000 to $50,000" (about 1% of that figure) to the design-phase costs. He said owners remain financially responsible for design errors and omissions unless a contractor exceeds a demonstrated GMP because of contractor inefficiency; unforeseeable conditions would still be considered for adjustment.

Council discussion was generally favorable. Several councilmembers endorsed bringing a resolution to the next council meeting that would incorporate the Montana code's selection criteria and define the solicitation and evaluation process. No formal vote to adopt the GCCM model was recorded at the work session; staff said they would return with a resolution for council consideration at the next regular meeting.

Next steps: staff will prepare a resolution tied to the MCA selection criteria and issue a two-step procurement (RFQ then RFP with preliminary GMP) if the council approves the resolution. Staff emphasized the immediate priorities would be procurement of the new volute press and steps that could be undertaken early to protect the schedule tied to Glacier Gold.

(Reporting by City of Kalispell staff and consultants at the work session.)