FROM: Robert Thompson, General Manager
Originator: Mike Dorman, Director of Engineering
SUBJECT:
title
CEQA SUPPORT SERVICES, PSA2025-004
end
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
recommendation
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a Professional Services Agreement with HDR Engineering, Inc. to provide California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Support Services, PSA2025-004, for a three-year period commencing October 1, 2025, through September 30, 2028, with two one-year renewal options, for annual amount not to exceed $300,000 and a total contract amount not to exceed $1,500,000.
body
BACKGROUND
The Orange County Sanitation District (OC San) implements a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) which is required to comply with CEQA. This is currently implemented on a project-by-project basis with the necessary supporting professional services provided by each projects’ team.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Meet CEQA and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) standards
• Ensure the public’s money is wisely spent
• Comply with California Government Code §4526: Select the “best qualified firm” and “negotiate fair and equitable fees”
PROBLEM
The current method for implementing CEQA is decentralized – each project utilizes an environmental specialist consultant to determine and implement associated requirements. Accordingly, OC San works with many consultants for these services, and it is challenging to maintain consistency. This method of implementation is less efficient and more cumbersome to manage across the program.
PROPOSED SOLUTION
Approve a Professional Services Agreement to provide on-call CEQA support services for up to a five-year period ending in September 2030.
TIMING CONCERNS
Delaying the new agreement will prevent the transition to a more efficient use of staff time and resources when implementing aspects of CEQA such as construction mitigation measures.
RAMIFICATIONS OF NOT TAKING ACTION
OC San will continue to implement CEQA support services in a decentralized manner, utilizing OC San resources less efficiently.
PRIOR COMMITTEE/BOARD ACTIONS
N/A
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
On February 20, 2025, OC San issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to procure the work and services outlined in the Project’s scope of work. The RFP was publicly advertised in the Orange County Register and an electronic notification was sent to multiple professional firms through OC San’s Vendor Portal in PlanetBids.
Eleven proposals were received on April 9, 2025. The proposals were evaluated in accordance with the evaluation process set forth in OC San’s Purchasing Ordinance by a pre-selected Evaluation Team consisting of the following OC San staff: one Engineering Manager, one Engineering Supervisor, and one Principal Staff Analyst. The Evaluation Team also included one non-voting representative from the Contracts Administration Division.
The following evaluation criteria were described in the RFP and used to evaluate the proposals.
|
CRITERION |
WEIGHT |
|
Project Understanding and Approach |
35% |
|
Related Project Experience |
30% |
|
Project Team and Staff Qualifications |
35% |
The Evaluation Team scored the proposals on the established criteria as summarized in the table below:
|
Proposer |
Project Understanding and Approach (Max. 35 Points) |
Related Project Experience
(Max. 30 Points) |
Project Team and Staff Qualifications
(Max. 35 Points) |
Total Score
(Max. 100 Points) |
|
HDR Engineering, Inc. |
30 |
25 |
32 |
87 |
|
Rincon Consultants, Inc. |
27 |
23 |
26 |
76 |
|
Environmental Science Associates |
25 |
24 |
26 |
75 |
|
Michael Baker International, Inc. |
26 |
22 |
26 |
74 |
|
UES Professional Solutions, Inc. |
21 |
20 |
23 |
64 |
|
WSP USA, Inc. |
21 |
19 |
22 |
62 |
|
Chambers Group, Inc. |
20 |
18 |
21 |
59 |
|
Dudek |
20 |
17 |
22 |
59 |
|
Tetra Tech, Inc. |
19 |
16 |
19 |
54 |
|
ECORP Consulting, Inc. |
15 |
18 |
20 |
53 |
A proposal was received from UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. (UltraSystems), however it was rejected as non-responsive because it did not conform to the RFP requirements, specifically:
• Section VIII. Evaluation Procedures of the RFP states “Proposals submitted without required documents may be considered non-responsive and may be rejected.”
• Section II.C. Submittal of Proposals of the RFP states, “Proposals and/or revisions to Proposals submitted after the date and time indicated above will not be accepted by OC SAN.”
UltraSystems omitted the Technical Proposal as required by Section V. Technical Proposal, including Understanding and Approach, Related Project Experience, and Project Team and Staff Qualifications. On May 2, 2025, OC San issued a proposal rejection to UltraSystems, based on the above.
Based on this scoring, staff recommends approval of an agreement to HDR Engineering, Inc. They had a strong understanding of the types of tasks this contract will be used for and a clear plan for executing the work. The proposed team was another strong point with an experienced contract manager and technical team that covered all necessary disciplines.
Review of Fee Proposal and Negotiations:
Beginning on May 27, 2025, the Evaluation Team reviewed HDR Engineering, Inc.’s requested exceptions to the Professional Services Agreement. The rates were reviewed for general conformance and found to be acceptable, and all contractual terms were successfully negotiated. Staff recommends approval of the agreement to HDR Engineering, Inc.
CEQA
N/A
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This request complies with authority levels of OC San’s Purchasing Ordinance. The budgeted costs are contained within the approved CIP project budget and no additional funding is necessary.
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OC San website (www.ocsan.gov) with the complete agenda package:
• Draft Professional Services Agreement
JF:op