FROM: Robert Thompson, General Manager
Originator: Mike Dorman, Director of Engineering
SUBJECT:
title
ANNUAL PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES AGREEMENTS, CONTRACT NO. FE24-00-XX
end
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
recommendation
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Approve Annual Professional Design Services Agreements (PDSA) with the following firms to provide professional engineering design and construction support services for a term of three (3) years commencing July 1, 2024 and expiring June 30, 2027, with a maximum annual fiscal year contract limitation not to exceed $1,000,000 for each PDSA, and
FIRM CONTRACT NO.
1. AtkinsRéalis USA, Inc. FE24-00-01
2. Black and Veatch Corporation FE24-00-02
3. Brown and Caldwell FE24-00-03
4. Civiltec Engineering, Inc. FE24-00-04
5. Dudek FE24-00-05
6. GHD Inc. FE24-00-06
7. Hazen and Sawyer FE24-00-07
8. HDR Engineering, Inc. FE24-00-08
9. Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. FE24-00-09
10. Kleinfelder, Inc. FE24-00-10
11. Lee & Ro, Inc. FE24-00-11
12. Michael Baker International, Inc. FE24-00-12
13. ProjectLine Technical Services, Inc. FE24-00-13
14. SPEC Services, Inc. FE24-00-14
15. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. FE24-00-15
B. Approve two additional one-year optional extensions for each PDSA.
body
BACKGROUND
The Orange County Sanitation District (OC San) Purchasing Ordinance authorizes procurement of professional design services less than $500,000 through task order-based Annual PDSAs. The Annual PDSAs limit task orders awarded to a single firm in a fiscal year to $1,000,000. There are currently four sets of Annual PDSAs for design services issued in 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021. The sets for 2012, 2015, and 2018 have expired, and the set from 2021 expires on June 30, 2024. When an Annual PDSA expires, any existing and active task orders remain valid, but no new task orders can be issued.
When the need for professional design services for a specific project are identified, and the anticipated value of the services is less than the $500,000 task order limit, staff issues a request for task order proposals to prequalified firms. The proposals are scored and ranked per the selection criteria included in the request for task order proposals, and negotiations are conducted with the selected firm. The process of procuring design services through task orders is significantly quicker and more cost effective for both OC San and the competing consultants than issuing stand-alone agreements.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Sound engineering and accounting practices, complying with local, state, and federal laws
• Comply with California Government Code §4526 and select “on the basis of demonstrated competence and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required”
PROBLEM
The process of soliciting and selecting consultants for individual PSDAs on smaller projects is slower and costlier for both OC San and the consultants competing for projects.
PROPOSED SOLUTION
Approve Annual PDSAs with a prequalified list of design consultants per the Purchasing Ordinance. The following table lists project types for which each of the consultants are prequalified.
|
|
Firm |
Type 1: Site Works, Building and Safety |
Type 2: Linear and Collections |
Type 3: Process, Electrical and I&C |
|
1. |
AtkinsRéalis USA, Inc. |
|
|
X |
|
2. |
Black and Veatch Corporation |
|
X |
X |
|
3. |
Brown and Caldwell |
X |
X |
X |
|
4. |
Civiltec Engineering, Inc. |
X |
X |
|
|
5. |
Dudek |
X |
X |
X |
|
6. |
GHD Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
7. |
Hazen and Sawyer |
X |
X |
X |
|
8. |
HDR Engineering, Inc. |
X |
X |
X |
|
9. |
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
10. |
Kleinfelder, Inc. |
|
X |
|
|
11. |
Lee & Ro, Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
12. |
Michael Baker International, Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
13. |
ProjectLine Technical Services, Inc. |
X |
|
X |
|
14. |
SPEC Services, Inc. |
|
|
X |
|
15. |
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. |
X |
X |
X |
TIMING CONCERNS
The current Annual PDSAs expire on June 30, 2024. If new Annual PDSAs are not issued, staff will not be able to issue task orders to procure design services for small projects.
RAMIFICATIONS OF NOT TAKING ACTION
Without these Annual PDSAs, OC San would need to conduct full solicitations for the design of each small project, delaying completion of those projects, and increasing administrative costs. The relatively high proposal costs versus the potential project profit tends to limit the number of proposers for these smaller projects.
PRIOR COMMITTEE/BOARD ACTIONS
N/A
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Consultant Selection:
On December 20, 2023, OC San issued a request for qualifications (RFQs) for Annual PDSAs, Contract No. FE24-00, and a notice was sent to multiple categories of firms registered in OC San’s purchasing database. The RFQs defined three categories of projects and invited interested consultants to pursue qualifications for any or all of those categories.
The following evaluation criterion were described in the RFQ and used to determine the most qualified consultants.
|
CRITERION |
WEIGHT |
|
Consultant Team Resources |
20% |
|
Delivery Capabilities |
20% |
|
Related Project Experience |
30% |
|
Staff Qualifications |
30% |
On February 13, 2024, 20 statements of qualifications (SOQs) were received. The following table lists the firms that submitted SOQs and for which project types they submitted qualifications.
|
|
Firm |
Type 1: Site Works, Building, and Safety |
Type 2: Linear and Collections |
Type 3: Process, Electrical and I&C |
|
1. |
AtkinsRéalis USA, Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
2. |
Black and Veatch Corporation |
|
X |
X |
|
3. |
Brown and Caldwell |
X |
X |
X |
|
4. |
Civiltec Engineering, Inc. |
X |
X |
X |
|
5. |
Dahl, Taylor & Associates, Inc. |
X |
|
X |
|
6. |
Dudek |
X |
X |
X |
|
7. |
GHD Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
8. |
Hazen and Sawyer |
X |
X |
X |
|
9. |
HDR Engineering, Inc. |
X |
X |
X |
|
10. |
IDS Group, Inc. |
X |
|
|
|
11. |
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
12. |
Kleinfelder, Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
13. |
Lee & Ro, Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
14. |
Lockwood Andrews and Newman, Inc. |
|
X |
|
|
15. |
Michael Baker International, Inc. |
|
X |
X |
|
16. |
P2S Inc. |
X |
|
X |
|
17. |
ProjectLine Technical Services, Inc. |
X |
|
X |
|
18. |
SPEC Services, Inc. |
|
|
X |
|
19. |
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. |
X |
X |
X |
|
20. |
The Austin Company |
X |
|
|
|
Total SOQs Submitted Per Project Type |
11 |
14 |
17 |
The SOQs were evaluated in accordance with the process set forth in the Purchasing Ordinance by a preselected Evaluation Committee consisting of two Engineering Supervisors and one Engineer. The Evaluation Committee also included two non-voting representatives from the Contracts Administration Division.
Each member of the Evaluation Committee scored each SOQ for each project type submitted using the evaluation criterion listed above. The following tables summarize the scoring and ranking for each project type.
PROJECT TYPE 1: SITE WORKS, BUILDING, and SAFETY
Site Works, Building, and Safety projects are those where most of the work involves general civil, building, occupied spaces, or safety improvements. These projects are usually located at either of OC San’s two treatment plants or one of 15 off-site pump stations. Of the 11 firms submitting qualifications for these projects, the Evaluation Committee recommended seven firms be awarded annual PDSAs.
|
Firm |
Consultant Team Resources (max. 20) |
Delivery Capabilities (max. 20) |
Related Project Experience (max. 30) |
Staff Qualifications (max. 30) |
Total Score (max. 100) |
Rank |
|
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. |
18.7 |
18.7 |
27.0 |
27.0 |
91.4 |
1 |
|
HDR Engineering, Inc. |
18.0 |
18.7 |
28.0 |
26.0 |
90.7 |
2 |
|
Brown and Caldwell |
19.3 |
19.3 |
22.0 |
24.0 |
84.6 |
3 |
|
Dudek |
18.7 |
19.3 |
21.0 |
23.0 |
82.0 |
4 |
|
ProjectLine Technical Services, Inc. |
16.0 |
18.0 |
23.0 |
23.0 |
80.0 |
5 |
|
Hazen and Sawyer |
18.0 |
17.3 |
18.0 |
26.0 |
79.3 |
6 |
|
Civiltec Engineering, Inc. |
14.7 |
13.3 |
26.0 |
24.0 |
78.0 |
7 |
|
IDS Group, Inc. |
12.0 |
15.3 |
24.0 |
19.0 |
70.3 |
8 |
|
The Austin Company |
13.3 |
13.3 |
21.0 |
22.0 |
69.6 |
9 |
|
Dahl, Taylor & Associates, Inc. |
12.7 |
9.3 |
24.0 |
18.0 |
64.0 |
10 |
|
P2S Inc. |
8.7 |
10.0 |
13.0 |
14.0 |
45.7 |
11 |
PROJECT TYPE 2: LINEAR and COLLECTIONS
Linear and Collections projects are those where most of the work involves installation, rehabilitation, or repair of buried piping outside of the two treatment plants. Of the 14 firms submitting qualifications for these projects, the Evaluation Committee recommended 12 firms be awarded annual PDSAs.
|
Firm |
Consultant Team Resources (max. 20) |
Delivery Capabilities (max. 20) |
Related Project Experience (max. 30) |
Staff Qualifications (max. 30) |
Total Score (max. 100) |
Rank |
|
Dudek |
18.7 |
20.0 |
29.0 |
27.0 |
94.7 |
1 |
|
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. |
18.7 |
18.7 |
28.0 |
28.0 |
93.4 |
2 |
|
HDR Engineering, Inc. |
18.0 |
18.7 |
28.0 |
28.0 |
92.7 |
3 |
|
Michael Baker International, Inc. |
19.3 |
18.7 |
27.0 |
27.0 |
92.0 |
4 |
|
GHD Inc. |
18.0 |
18.7 |
28.0 |
27.0 |
91.7 |
5 |
|
Brown and Caldwell |
18.7 |
19.3 |
27.0 |
26.0 |
91.0 |
6 |
|
Black and Veatch Corporation |
11.3 |
20.0 |
28.0 |
26.0 |
85.3 |
7 |
|
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. |
16.7 |
16.7 |
24.0 |
26.0 |
83.4 |
8 |
|
Lee & Ro, Inc. |
16.0 |
16.0 |
26.0 |
25.0 |
83.0 |
9 |
|
Hazen and Sawyer |
18.0 |
17.3 |
22.0 |
24.0 |
81.3 |
10 |
|
Kleinfelder, Inc. |
17.3 |
17.3 |
22.0 |
23.0 |
79.6 |
11 |
|
Civiltec Engineering, Inc. |
14.7 |
13.3 |
26.0 |
24.0 |
78.0 |
12 |
|
AtkinsRéalis USA, Inc. |
14.0 |
15.3 |
20.0 |
23.0 |
72.3 |
13 |
|
Lockwood Andrews and Newman, Inc. |
13.3 |
14.7 |
20.0 |
19.0 |
67.0 |
14 |
PROJECT TYPE 3: PROCESS, ELECTRICAL, and INSTRUMENTATION and CONTROL
Process, Electrical, and Instrumentation and Control projects are usually located at either of the two treatment plants or one of 15 off-site pump stations. Of the 17 firms submitting qualifications for these projects, the Evaluation Committee recommended 13 firms be awarded annual PDSAs.
|
Firm |
Consultant Team Resources (max. 20) |
Delivery Capabilities (max. 20) |
Related Project Experience (max. 30) |
Staff Qualifications (max. 30) |
Total Score (max. 100) |
Rank |
|
Brown and Caldwell |
19.3 |
19.3 |
28.0 |
30.0 |
96.6 |
1 |
|
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. |
18.7 |
18.7 |
28.0 |
28.0 |
93.4 |
2 |
|
HDR Engineering, Inc. |
18.0 |
18.7 |
28.0 |
28.0 |
92.7 |
3 |
|
Dudek |
18.7 |
20.0 |
26.0 |
27.0 |
91.7 |
4 |
|
Michael Baker International, Inc. |
19.3 |
18.7 |
25.0 |
27.0 |
90.0 |
5 |
|
Black and Veatch Corporation |
12.7 |
20.0 |
27.0 |
30.0 |
89.7 |
6 |
|
GHD Inc. |
18.0 |
18.7 |
26.0 |
26.0 |
88.7 |
7 |
|
Hazen and Sawyer |
18.0 |
17.3 |
26.0 |
25.0 |
86.3 |
8 |
|
Lee & Ro, Inc. |
16.0 |
16.0 |
27.0 |
26.0 |
85.0 |
9 |
|
SPEC Services, Inc. |
16.7 |
18.7 |
26.0 |
23.0 |
84.4 |
10 |
|
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Inc. |
16.7 |
16.7 |
25.0 |
25.0 |
83.4 |
11 |
|
ProjectLine Technical Services, Inc. |
16.0 |
18.0 |
22.0 |
21.0 |
77.0 |
12 |
|
AtkinsRéalis USA, Inc. |
14.0 |
15.3 |
24.0 |
23.0 |
76.3 |
13 |
|
Kleinfelder, Inc. |
17.3 |
17.3 |
18.0 |
16.0 |
68.6 |
14 |
|
Civiltec Engineering, Inc. |
14.7 |
13.3 |
19.0 |
19.0 |
66.0 |
15 |
|
Dahl, Taylor & Associates, Inc. |
12.7 |
9.3 |
22.0 |
22.0 |
66.0 |
16 |
|
P2S Inc. |
8.7 |
10.0 |
17.0 |
17.0 |
52.7 |
17 |
CEQA
N/A
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This request complies with authority levels of OC San’s Purchasing Ordinance. This item has been budgeted (Budget Update, Fiscal Year 2023-2024, Appendix A, Page 8, Small Construction Projects Program, Project No. M-FE) and the budget is sufficient for the recommended action.
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OC San website (www.ocsan.gov) with the complete agenda package:
• Professional Design Services Agreements
• Presentation
MD:tk