|
Back to Calendar
Return
|
| |
Consent-Community Services # 41.
|
| Board of Supervisors |
|
|
|
|
| Subject |
| Approve second amendment to Agreement No. 17-176 with Golder Associates to increase the maximum compensation to $1,601,338 for design and construction quality assurance services for the landfill. (No general fund impact) (Echiburú/Yazdani) |
| Recommended Action |
- Approve second amendment to Agreement No. 17-176 with Golder Associates to increase the maximum compensation to $1,601,338 for design and construction quality assurance services for the landfill; and
- Authorize the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign the amendment.
|
| Strategic Plan Goal(s) |
Operational Excellence
Sustainable Environment |
| Reason for Recommended Action/Background |
On June 6, 2017 the Board approved the initial agreement with Golder for engineering design and construction quality assurance services for the landfill. The agreement was the result of a competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) process with Golder being ranked favorably and awarded an agreement for a number of design and construction quality assurance services including design of the landfill’s next module, WMU 6F. On October 9, 2018 the Board approved the first amendment to this agreement revising the scope to include construction quality assurance services for construction of the new landfill module, Waste Management Unit 6F and closure of Waste Management Units 4 and 5.
With each of these projects, Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations requires that an independent third party provide the construction quality assurance (inspection to assure that the project is constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications). Major items of work with each of these projects include placement and compaction of soil and installation of geomembranes (thick plastic), all with the primary purpose of protecting the groundwater from contamination.
The cost basis for the first amendment was based on an assumed construction schedule of 5 days per week and 10 hours per day with 2-3 technicians. In actuality, the contractor for both projects has worked between 10-12 hours per day and 6 days per week in order to maintain the construction schedule. Additionally, due to multiple tasks occurring simultaneously, up to 4 technicians were required to be on-site to perform inspection. The additional funds included under Tasks 8 and 9 are conservative estimates for completion of inspection activities associated with these projects.
Also included in this second amendment is additional funds to assist the division in various other projects on an as-needed basis. Currently, this includes assistance with groundwater modeling and control and liquid waste. |
| Collaborations (including Board advisory groups and external partner agencies) |
| County Counsel has approved the second amendment as to form. |
| Competitive Bid Process |
On March 24, 2017 the County issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking qualified firms to assist the Division of Integrated Waste Management in completing a number of upcoming design and construction quality assurance projects at the landfill. A pre-proposal meeting was held at the landfill to discuss each of the tasks and go over any questions consultants might have. Four consultants attended this pre-proposal meeting. Golder and Geo-Logic were the only two firms to submit proposals by the April 27th due date.
A three-person review committee composed of division staff ranked the proposals based on the criteria included in the RFP. Both Golder and Geo-Logic submitted well-written proposals that demonstrated their firms’ capabilities as well as a thorough understanding of the projects and reasonable cost estimates to complete them. With more than one project occurring simultaneously, and two well-qualified candidates, division staff explored the possibility of a partial award to each of the firms. Discussions with the Purchasing Division as well as County Counsel’s office indicated that a partial award to each consultant was an option. Staff then discussed this with each of the consultants, who were also agreeable.
Proposals were evaluated based on the following criteria:
1). Reasonableness of Costs (15 points)
2). Qualifications and Experience (15 points)
3). Demonstration of Successfully Completing Similar Past Projects (10 points)
4). Demonstrated Competence (10 points)
5). Demonstration of Adequate Staffing to Complete the Projects (10 Points)
6). Customer References (10 points)
7). Exceptions to Sample Agreement (10 points)
8). Quality and Completeness of Submitted Proposal (10 points)
9). Proposer’s Concept & Understanding of the goals and intent of the project. (10 points)
Geo-Logic received an average score of 93 from the review committee and Golder received an average score of 90. Both Golder and Geo-Logic have successfully performed similar construction quality assurance services at the landfill over the last 20 years and staff is confident in each firm’s abilities. |
|
| Fiscal Impact |
|
|
| Source of Funds for this Expenditure |
|
|
Explanation (Expenditure and/or Revenue) |
| Further explanation as needed: |
| The funds necessary for construction quality assurance for the construction for Waste Management Unit 6F are part of the recently approve solid waste revenue bonds and have been included in the 2019/2020 Sanitation Enterprise budget. The funds necessary for the construction quality assurance for the closure of Waste Management Units 4 and 5 are part of their closure fund, with has been transferred to the 2019/2020 Sanitation Enterprise fund. The remaining funds necessary under this amendment are budgeted under the Sanitation Enterprise fund. |
|
|
|
|
|