Okaloosa County BOCC — July 21, 2015 — Constantine Letter - Procurement Process — reading text

May 20, 2015 100557 Mr. Jeff Littrell Okaloosa County Water and Sewer System Suite 300, 1804 Lewis Turner Boulevard Fort Walton Beach, FL 32547 Subject: Arbennie Pritchett WRF- 5 MGD Expansion Project- Proposal Selection Process Okaloosa County Water and Sewer Department Mr. Littrell, As you are aware, under the current RFP process for the Arbennie Pritchett Expansion project, OCWS selected three qualified D/B Teams to submit final qualification based proposals. The three firms were CDM Smith, Crowder Construction and Garney Construction. On April 17, 2015, we received a withdraw letter from Crowder Construction. On May 6, 2015 we received a withdraw letter form Garney Construction. Therefore leaving only one (1) qualified firm to submit a proposal and pricing quote for the project. As a result of these circumstances, OCWS requested Constantine to provide an opinion on moving forward with the process and if the Project could still be awarded and meet the current budget amount. Constantine Engineering has reviewed the current selection process for the Arbennie Pritchett WRF Expansion Project and finds that the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and Request for Proposals (RFP) process are in compliance the current laws and procurement policies. The language in the RFQ and RFP is consistent in describing the County’s process for selecting the three most qualified D/B Teams in accordance with FLORIDA STATUES Chapter 287 Section 055 - Applicability to Design- Build Contracts (4) COMPETITIVE SELECTION.— (b) The agency shall select in order of preference no fewer than three firms deemed to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services. In determining whether a firm is qualified, the agency shall consider such factors as the ability of professional personnel;… The agency may request, accept, and consider proposals for the compensation to be paid under the contract only during competitive negotiations under subsection (5). The RFQ process selected the “…three firms deemed to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services.” Now we have entered into the competitive negotiations portion of the process as described in F.S.S. Chapter 287.055 (5) Competitive Negotiations: 1988 LEWIS TURNER BOULEVARD, UNIT 3, FORT WALTON BEACH, FL 32547 PHONE: 850.244.5800 FAX: 850.862.5808 WWW.TCGENG.COM Mr. Jeff Littrell. Page 2 Project No. 100557 (5) COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATION.— (a) The agency shall negotiate a contract with the most qualified firm for professional services at compensation which the agency determines is fair, competitive, and reasonable... (b) Should the agency be unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with the firm considered to be the most qualified at a price the agency determines to be fair, competitive, and reasonable, negotiations with that firm must be formally terminated. The agency shall then undertake negotiations with the second most qualified firm. Failing accord with the second most qualified firm, the agency must terminate negotiations. The agency shall then undertake negotiations with the third most qualified firm. (c) Should the agency be unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with any of the selected firms, the agency shall select additional firms in the order of their competence and qualification and continue negotiations in accordance with this subsection until an agreement is reached. The process the County has chosen to use to select the “most qualified firm for professional services…” and to negotiate a contract that includes “…compensation which the agency determines is fair, competitive, and reasonable...” is the process of requesting proposal from the three most qualified firms. The RFP process allowed the County to solicit proposals from the three most qualified firms, and by using a defined ranking system identified in the RFP, select the most qualified D/B Team to begin negotiating a final agreement, as described below: RFP WS 01-15 Section 2.17 Award of Contract  The County will award the proposal to the lowest respondent, and the County reserves the right to award the proposal to the respondent submitting a responsive proposal with a resulting negotiated agreement which is most advantageous and in the best interest of the County, and to reject any and all proposals or to waive any irregularity or technicality in proposals received. Okaloosa County shall be the sole judge of the proposal and the resulting negotiated agreement that is in its best interest and its decision shall be final. C. Okaloosa County reserves the right to waive any informalities or reject any and all proposals, in whole or part, to utilize any applicable state contracts in lieu of or in addition to this proposal and to accept the proposal that in its judgment will best serve the interest of the County. D. Okaloosa County specifically reserves the right to reject any conditional proposals and will normally reject those which made it impossible to determine the true amount of the proposal. Each item must be proposal separately RFP WS 01-15- Addendum 1 Q: Please clarify the following and its intent: Section 2 Item 17.B. AWARD OF CONTRACT . The County will award the proposal to the lowest respondent, and the County reserves the right to award the proposal to the respondent submitting a responsive proposal with a resulting negotiated agreement which is most advantageous and in the best interest of the Mr. Jeff Littrell. Page 3 Project No. 100557 County, and to reject any and all proposals or to waive any irregularity or technicality in proposals received. Okaloosa County shall be the sole judge of the proposal and the resulting negotiated agreement that is in its best interest and its decision shall be final. A: This is standard Okaloosa County language included in all potential construction, service or procurement contract. Contract award will be in accordance with the guidelines established in Section 5 of the RFP (this is 5.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, selection committee and interviews). RFP Section 5 Language: 5.1 OCWS has assembled a selection committee (the Selection Committee) comprised of five people as outlined below. The Selection Committee will be evaluating and ranking the Proposals, thereby determining the highest ranked Proposer, with whom the County will then enter into negotiations… Once negotiations are complete, the Selection Committee will formalize its recommendation for action in a written report and submit it to the Board of Commissioners for approval. 5.6 Once a Recommended Proposer has been identified, the Selection Committee will make a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners for approval. Once a Recommended Proposer is approved by the Board of Commissioners, the Proposers will be notified of the final rankings both verbally and in writing. Based on the language contained in the RFQ and the RFP and Statues, Constantine feels the current procurement process is acceptable and in accordance with the approved and adopted guidelines. In addition, the required negotiation phase of the procurement process will allow for verification of cost and comparison against third party estimates taken during the same period. Budget estimates currently obtained by Constantine indicate the Project is obtainable at the current OCWS budget allowance. Timing of the selection of the D/B and final contract negotiations could possible impact the cost as the construction industry is currently showing continued increases in material and labor cost. Please call me at 850.244.5800 if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Constantine Engineering, Inc. Joseph G. Crews, P.E. Project Manager File: 100557 Mark Wise, OCWS Darren Alford, OCWS Jeb Chessher, OCWS Jim Kizer, TCG