Key personnel resumes vs. RFQ, 300 West Extension

Five resumes for the Statement of Qualifications for 300 West Extension and SR-641 Intersection design services, City of Cottonwood Falls, Utah, checked against the RFQ's minimum and preferred qualifications. Supporting text is highlighted, relevant experience is counted as calendar time, and each resume is trimmed and reformatted to Attachment C. 2 of 17 minimum qualifications are not met.

City of Cottonwood Falls RFQ No. 2026-14, SOQ due Nov 20, 2026RFQ Sections 4.2, 5.3 and 6.25 key personnel, 17 minimum and 5 preferred qualificationsPrepared Nov 5, 2026

Summary

Years of experience · RFQ 4.2.3

Hydraulics lead is two months short once concurrent projects count once

Dana Kowalski's resume states 11 years, and her hydraulics projects add up to 12 yr 3 mo. Four of them overlap, so her calendar time in hydraulic design is 9 yr 10 mo, two months under the 10-year minimum (RFQ 4.2.3, p. 10). The 11 years include 15 months as a construction inspector.

Action: add earlier hydraulics work missing from the resume, or propose another Hydraulics Lead.

Minimum qualification ST3 · RFQ 4.2.4

Structures lead's only pedestrian bridge was completed before the five-year cutoff

The requirement for a new pedestrian bridge within the last five years rests on the Mill Park bridge, completed June 2021. The window runs from the SOQ due date back to Nov 20, 2021 (RFQ 4.2.4, p. 11). The Industrial Way widening is a vehicular bridge and does not count.

Action: add a more recent pedestrian bridge if Brian Okafor has one, or propose another Structures Lead.

Attachment C · RFQ 5.3

Keeping the five most recent projects drops a minimum qualification

Marcus Whitfield's master resume lists seven projects; Attachment C allows five. Keeping the newest five drops Main Street 2013–2016, the only project showing arterial reconstruction under traffic (RD3). The qualification-driven trim keeps it and drops the 2010–2013 subdivision work and the 2016–2017 roundabout instead.

Review by key person

Pick a person. Resume vs. RFQ shows the master resume with highlights next to the RFQ qualifications for the role. Experience counts calendar time against the minimum, Trim to one page shows how the resume fits Attachment C, and Attachment C shows the reformatted resume.

0Minimum qualifications met

0Highlighted passages

0Pages, master → Attachment C

Yellow marks text that supports a qualification. Click a highlight or a qualification. The dashed line shows where one page ends on the master resume.

–

Projects on the resume along a timeline. Orange marks months when two projects in the discipline ran at the same time.

Project in disciplineOther workConcurrent monthsCalendar timeMinimum

Key person	Minimum	Stated	Added up	Calendar	Status

Trim to Attachment C: one page, five projects (RFQ 5.3)

The qualification-driven trim drops projects that support no qualification first and keeps any project that alone shows a minimum qualification. Five most recent is shown for comparison: it keeps the newest five projects and drops the rest.

KeptShortenedOne lineDropped

Resume section	Action	Lines	Reason

Attachment C, Key Personnel Resume

The City's resume form uses items 12–19 of SF 330 Part I, Section E. It is filled from the qualification-driven trim; years in item 14 come from the employment history.

Attachment C · Key Personnel ResumeRFQ No. 2026-14

Master resume	Attachment C	Note
Name, credentials	12	Name with PE and CFM as on the license.
Proposed role	13	Role title exactly as in RFQ Section 4.2.
Employment history	14a, 14b	Whole years since the first engineering position and since hire at the current firm, as of the SOQ due date.
Office	15	Office that performs the work.
Education	16	Degree and specialization; school names omitted.
Licenses	17	State and discipline. Confirm active status with DOPL before submittal.
Certifications and training	18	Carried over in full.
Summary paragraph	–	No field on the form; not carried over.
Presentations and service	–	No field on the form; not carried over.
Project list	19 a–e	Five projects at most, chosen by the qualification-driven trim.
Project dates	19 (2)	Year professional services and construction were completed; ongoing shown as such.
Project description, role	19 (3)	Role first, then scope and cost.
Employer at the time	19 check box	Checked only for projects performed with the current firm.

Sources and method

Sources

RFQ_2026-14_300_West_Extension_Design.pdfRequest for Qualifications: 4.2 Minimum qualifications (pp. 9–11), 5.3 Resume format (p. 12), 6.2 Evaluation criteria (p. 14)26 pages
Exhibit_A_Scope_of_Services.pdfCollector street, storm drain and detention, pedestrian bridge over the irrigation canal, signalized intersection with SR-6419 pages
Attachment_C_Key_Personnel_Resume.docxCity resume form, one page per person, items 12–19 as in SF 330 Part I, Section E1 page
Master_Resumes_Key_Personnel.docxTalus Peak Engineering master resumes for the five proposed key personnel8 pages

Method

RFQ Section 4.2 was split by role into minimum qualifications, and Section 6.2 into scored preferred qualifications, each with section and page.
Each master resume was read paragraph by paragraph. Text that supports a qualification was highlighted and linked to it. Time-limited qualifications were checked against the SOQ due date, Nov 20, 2026.
Relevant experience was counted per discipline in whole calendar months from the project history: concurrent projects count once (RFQ 4.2) and ongoing projects run through November 2026.
Each resume was trimmed to Attachment C, one page and five projects (RFQ 5.3). Projects with no link to a qualification were dropped oldest first; a project that alone supports a minimum qualification was kept.
The trimmed resume was reformatted to Attachment C items 12–19 and checked against the qualifications again.

Assumptions and limitations

The review is based on resume text. Licenses, dates and references have not been verified against DOPL records or past owners.
Page fit assumes about 50 lines per page on Attachment C. Check the final layout in Word.
Whether a description is enough to show a qualification is a judgment call; the selection committee may read it differently.
"Within the last five years" is read as completed on or after Nov 20, 2021, or ongoing.