Item 8HAGENDA ITEM # 8H
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: Professional Engineering Services RFP No. 10-01
Third-Party Review and Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Wastewater TMDL Final Design
SUBMITTED BY: Donna Kaluzniak, Utility Directo (~'
DATE: November 13, 2009
BACKGROUND: The City's final design for Wastewater TMDL improvements
is currently underway. The City allowed in the contract for athird-party review of
the design. The purpose of the third-party review is to allow an outside engineer
to review the design and determine if additional cost savings are possible.
Also, when the contract was recently transferred from HDR Engineering to J.
Collins Engineering Associates, staff noted that an outside firm would need to
perform Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Reviews during the design
process.
Requests for Proposals were advertised and seven firms responded. The three top-
ranked firms were:
1. Applied Technology & Management (ATM)
2. GAI Consultants
3. CPH Engineering
Applied Technology & Management had the best team and record of similar past
projects. The firm is very familiar with the City's project. ATM completed the
Sewer Master Plan Update in 2006, which included a basic analysis of options to
meet the TMDL. This firm also worked with the analysis to determine if Atlantic
Beach could provide treatment for Neptune Beach.
BUDGET: Funding for the third-party review and QA/QC is available in the
sewer fund.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff to negotiate a contract for RFP No. 10-
01, Third-Party Review of Wastewater TMDL Design with Applied Technology
& Management, Inc.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposal Scoring Sheet
2. Request for Proposal No. 10-01
3. Proposals are available for review from City Clerk
REVIEWED BY CITY
~ u or r
~ NOVEMBER 23, 2009
~ ~ ~
~
O ~ ~
N ~
O r
vi
H c%1 0, o`^o rn
_.
~: ._
~, , -r_
i.
.~
O
~
O U
~ ( rt -r
p
~. ~
L7G
ti ti ~
~
-,
U ~ a.+
.U ~~
~~ y
o
\ I ~ I
~~
l~ O U
U '7 I I
[~ V i I
C~ I
U ~,
w a.~ ~ ~
~ ~~
~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~
~'" ~ w
o S~ w~ ~~ w~ ~~
~
U ~ "'~
~ ~
~= _
,O ~ ~.
a~
Q O
c
'C
~ p
f0 Y rn
~
Tom.
-
x
y,
.J
~ ~ ~ Q O
~.
¢U ~.
~
~~,
p '
,~ ~ ~ ~ i r~i -
0 . ~ O.
p! w O Y
N ~
'rl
M y a~'i
U U
N y a`~'i
N U
U y
y
'+ N
U
N
a•+ p U
c~ a Q ~. ~. • o ~
w
a y N
' o w (
j
N
' o I-.
w
a .
°~' a ~ sa. °~'
v ~n rn v~ ~o
__
~r. ~
- _
~f,
rl
~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ y ~,
z S
°
' °
o on
~ U ~ ~
~
`~ c~ ~3 '~w'~'ao~ ~w
~
~
U ~ o y '~
.~
a ~ ~ v ~
~ U
~ ¢ ~
U G ~ W W .~ ~ ~
~ x
~ v U 5
O' as ~
i
,
•
~
w
i
W ~
~„ ~ ~ Wa ~= ~
as °' ~a wU
~"U ww
a•a, a~ i ~Ww i
~
wwp„ i a ~
~ u-lu-1
~
a
,L
1
a~Q~-~w ~a,a i ~~ ~ ~~ o ~, „c~ ~ ~ ~
i
.~a ~a~w ~w a
0. y y O ~ ., Q ~ ° ~ °~ -o N c~ ~ ~ ~ 'O ~ b y ~• x ~ c3 > .C a
v~~xH~7 °Q »o Q3H3aa ¢ac7 ~v a~c~.°~~.~~
,~ o
N
Nw
~~
w
Cs
~ 'y M N
p ~+ .--.
~ ~
~
~` ~ ~ ~ o ,~
a" oG ~ c ~ U r~ °o` o ~
~ ~
; ~ ~ a 00 0 ~ N ~
~ '~ ~ ~ O
~i ~ Q ti ~ U rn L~ ti M ^
A ~--~ GG V] ~, M
.-.
O
O
a
LL
z
N
W
W
Q
a
F-
z
g
W
Q
3
N
Q
3
LL
0
3
W
Q
a
0
~_
F-
oc
O
W
u
z
Z
z
W
O
LL
J
Q
O
a
O
oc
a
0
z
O
H
Q
J
Q
W
~ ~ ~
~ O
~ t~
~ o0
~
N
00 N
0o ~O
r N
o0
;,
-r -r -~ -t
ti ti ti ti
I I I I I I
f~ U
.U ~
S"
[
L~ v~
CC U
'U ~
L~ ~ L7a I
C~V U
U
~
" W ~
a I
_ ftj U
U
'
t
~
.,
,
Gc. ~"' r~ T' ~
L7. ~" ~ r7"' ~
[Jr ," r~i L7
~"' om.
[~7 `n W
Lz, 7' .~ ~"'
~' rJ
1~ f t f
~r, ~~.
1 _ J_.
-Y
^Y
OG Y
~r,
r~ r ~:, ~
V1 U
U y
N L. V) U
U N
N 4r
~ +N' Li
N sue,
'^-~ N
`*" v~
U y
N i..~.
o w
0. t.. o w
LL s., ~ a
i
N O 'o cam?
CL a"
~ [~ ~ V •--~ h 00
~~,
~ :
3 -
,~
r,
~ ,
r , _
-r
~~_
~I N ,~
bA ~ ri r i rl
s... ~ a~i
o
•~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ .~ p
~ ~ a
o
cYa .+
.~
:o cd
~
.~ a''i U
; W •~ W
~
n
~v '" ~'
~ W W ~ 'olio S x;333
~ •~ .~ .~ a~ .~ ~
0' .~
O .~ aUi ~.r~ I
a`~i W U w
~
~~¢ a ~'aoW ~
~ .~,a n3, °~'' °~'
x~~
~ U c.°'
~
~ ~ °v.aa
~~'
~
tea'-~'-~
~
a~ o o W •~
°w~a ~~° ~ ~
~ I ~ _.,
aw3•~' ~ ~
a ~'° .~
'ow~''~
~
p., a l I .o ~ W W U I C U o I~~ a a, I~ I
wcaoW.aW,a I~
I aw
a~ r''xW ~ I ~'
.~wa ~a w a H
a. F, I ~;w °
Wtia.'~ "
S
~
a~9.aW ~b
a.
~ i
~a.~~ ~
~w I
~ I ~
W a °' gua ~
~N~
c ~ ~
~ ~ -, ~
ba °~a~
'~
°' ~, ~,
.,xE--~;m~3 x~Ur~c~x ~7aCa xti3'v~w a
y
~ w
~ r'~=,
ow
'~ °ow
6 ~' °? ~ o °? Q 3 ~ °? A 'c N ai
W ~ j >~
w o.-.
O ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ >~
w... o~
~ ~ N
~ ~ y
~ c ~
~
Q
~
' ~ ~ c
a~~ ~~
~ ~ ~ N C OU v~ ~,
WM ~oo
~
~ ~ N
h ~--+ W ~-. M .-
a ~ U] ~-. M +
~t
+
r
~
~ W ~/ l~ L~ ~ ti M V
~ ~+ CG ti M
AGENDA ITEM # 8H
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
AGENDA ITEM # SH
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
REQUEST FOR LETTER PROPOSALS
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
THIItD-PARTY REVIEW OF WASTEWATER PLANT UPGRADE DESIGN
RFP 10-01
The City of Atlantic Beach, Public Utilities Department is seeking letter proposals and submittal
of qualifications for engineering services to perform athird-party review of wastewater treatment
plant upgrades at the Atlantic Beach Wastewater Plant #1.
Letter Proposals must be submitted is triplicate by 4.30 p m Friday, October 30, 2009 and
addressed to:
Ms. Donna Kaluzniak, Utility Director
1200 Sandpiper Lane
Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
904-270-2535
dkaluzn i ak (a~,coab. us
All questions concerning the submittal of proposals must be addressed to Donna Kaluzniak,
CEP, Utility Director. No questions may be directed to any other party.
I. INFORMATION
The City of Atlantic Beach owns and operates two wastewater treatment plants and their
associated collection and transmission systems.
Wastewater Plant #l, located at 1100 Sandpiper Lane, serves all customers within the City
limits. Wastewater Plant #2, located at 739 Renault, serves the out-of--city area to the north and
west of the City limits.
A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for nitrogen and Basin Management Action Plan
(BMAP) to meet the TMDL were adopted by the Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP). As part of the BMAP, the City plans to make improvements to the wastewater treatment
system.
An in-depth preliminary evaluation and design was completed by HDR Engineering to determine
the most cost effective way to meet the TMDL requirements. Based on the results of the
preliminary design, the City has contracted with HDR Engineering, Inc. to provide final design
of the recommended improvements. Those improvements include:
• Utilizing a combination of existing and new force mains to transfer flow from
Wastewater Plant #2 to Wastewater Plant #1.
• Upgrading the existing Extended Aeration process at Wastewater Plant #1 to a 4-Stage
Bardenpho treatment process by modifying existing tankage, adding filtration, and
capability for high level disinfection for future reuse.
• Re-rating the existing Wastewater Plant # 1 from 3.0 MGD to 3.75 MGD.
• Abandoning Wastewater Plant #2.
Page 1
AGENDA ITEM # 8H
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
As part of the design process, the City desires athird-party engineering review of the final design
at the 30% completion stage to assist with determining if there are additional capital and/ or
future operating cost savings for the project.
II. SCOPE OF WORK
Provide athird-party engineering review at the 30% design stage of improvements for the TMDL
Upgrades for Atlantic Beach Wastewater Treatment Plant #1. Each third-party review team
member will receive a set of the 30% design drawings and specifications. The third-party review
team may also utilize the Technical Memorandums and Preliminary Engineering Report as
prepared by HDR Engineering, record drawings of the existing WWTP, DEP Wastewater
Treatment Plant Permits, operating and available O&M and financial information for the Atlantic
Beach WWTP #1 and #2, and other technical memoranda and correspondences provided by the
City andlor design engineer.
The third-party will review the proposed mechanical, electrical and hydraulic design, based on
the selected process to determine potential cost savings. The third-party engineering review will
include the following stages:
Preparation and Information Phase Third-Party Review Team meets with Designer and City,
review project mission statement and project Third-Party Review constraints, define functional
requirements of the project and project elements. Gathering and distributing information on the
project, compiling project construction and operations and maintenance costs provided into cost
model, and completing a site visit and pre-workshop review of the documents by each team
member.
Deliverable -workshop agenda
Third-Party Engineering Review Workshop -conduct 16 hour Workshop on 2 separate days
including:
Creative Phase -Brainstorm and identify ideas based on the existing 30% design that will
provide the necessary project functions at a lower cost to the City or will result in
improvement to the value of the end product.
Judgment Phase -Third-Party Review Team will select those ideas identified in the
Creative Phase with the most merit through a process of discussion and group consensus.
The team will reach consensus on which ideas are the best technically, have the greatest
potential for acceptance, and will result in the greatest savings or value enhancement for the
City.
Development Phase -Each selected idea will then be expanded to include a description of
the recommended design modification with a summary of its advantages and disadvantages.
Each Third-Party Review recommendation is supported by calculations, sketches, and
estimates of the savings in capital, O&M, and present worth of life cycle cost savings.
Presentation Phase -the Third-Party Review Team presents the findings and
recommendations of the Workshop to representatives of the City, the designers, and any
Page 2
AGENDA ITEM # 8H
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
other stakeholders invited by the City. The Third-Party Review team summarizes the
findings, recommendations, and suggestions of the team along with the estimate of the
potential cost impact of implementing each recommendation.
Deliverable -Briefing Document of Workshop (6 copies)
Post-Workshop Services -The post-study services include any necessary consultation to
interpret the intent of the Third-Party Review recommendations; preparation of the Preliminary
Third-Party Review Report; and coordination with the City and the designer to assist them in
decisions regarding the recommendations. The Final Third-Parry Review Report will identify
which recommendations will be implemented in whole or in part, and which will not be
implemented. The Engineer will prepare this report based on input from the City that documents
the decisions made and the technical rationale behind them.
Preliminary Third-Party Review Report -complete documentation of the third-party review
workshop and resulting recommendations. Deliverable includes 5 copies, plus digital copy.
Final Third-Party Review Report -upon evaluation of the recommendations by the City and
Designer and receipt of a Response Memorandum from the City a Final Third-Party Review
Report will be prepared. Deliverable includes 5 copies, plus digital copy.
The Final Third-Party Review Report in combination with the Preliminary Third-Party
Review Report becomes the official documentation of the Third Party Engineering Review
for this Agreement.
Project Management -manage the satisfactory performance of the Third-Party Review team,
timely delivery of reports, and the delivery of accurate invoices.
Deliverable -project summary and invoices upon delivery of the Preliminary Third-Party
Review Report and Final Third-Party Review Report
III. CONSULTANTS WRITTEN PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SELECTION
PROCESS
Selection Process:
Consultant selection shall be in accordance with this request for proposal. The evaluation
process shall determine qualifications, interest, and availability. City staff will first review all
written responses. This review will result in a ranked list of fully qualified respondents and a
recommendation for contract award. The determinations shall be based upon the criteria below.
An agreement will be developed for signatures upon approval of the City Commission.
The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, waive informalities and technicalities,
and make awards to the firm whose proposal best serves the interest of the City. Also, the City
reserves the right to make such investigation as it deems necessary to determine the ability of any
Page 3
AGENDA ITEM # 8H
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
proposer to perform the services requested.
Method of Ranking: During the review of written responses, each criterion below
will be ranked on a scale of zero (0) through ten (10). In addition, each criterion has been
assigned a percentage value that weights the criterion's significance to the project as shown
below.
Written Proposal /Qualifications Package Requirement: Respondents are to adhere to the
requirements shown below. Failure to do so may result in rejection of proposal as non-
responsive.
Proposals are to be LETTER PROPOSALS, with a maximum of 10 pages, (not including
item 5.).
- Be concise and to the point.
- Provide adequate information on each criterion below.
- Provide the ranking criteria information below in the order shown.
Ranking Criteria:
1) Firm's Professional Qualifications and Project Team [35%]: Provide an
organization chart and list Consultant team members and sub-contractor firms,
including brief summary resumes, with bullets on education, training and directly
related experience for project personnel. Team members listed in the proposal must
be available for work on the City's project during the entire contract period. In the
event a team member leaves the employ of the consultant during the contract
period, another team member with equal or better experience and qualifications
must be substituted, with the notification to the Utility Director.
2) Past Record of Professional Accomplishments [35%]: A list plus brief
description of completed projects similar to the City project under consideration.
Provide a reference list of public sector entities within the state of Florida for which
similar services have been provided. Include owners' contact person, E-mail, FAX
number, telephone number, and brief project description.
3) Staff Availability and Capability to Meet Deadlines [10%]: Current and
projected workload for the project team which indicates the availability of staff to
complete assigned projects in a timely manner. Timeliness of completion of current
or past projects for the City of Atlantic Beach will be included in this criterion, if
applicable.
4) Project Approach: [10%] Briefly describe the firm's specific proposed approach
to the complete the project.
5) Financial Responsibility and Insurance[5%]: The form of business of the prime
consultant, i.e., proprietorship, partnership, corporation; years in business; changes
in ownership; bank reference; and any other information the applicant may wish to
Page 4
AGENDA ITEM # 8H
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
supply to verify financial responsibility. Include a bank letter or other 3ra Pte'
assurance of financial responsibililty and current certificate of insurance
6) Proximity [5%): Location of the consultant's home office (corporate headquarters)
and location of the local office where the project(s) will be produced. The members
of the project teams should be permanently assigned to the project office.
7) Cost [0%]: Quote hourly rates, fees, or charges that will be used during
negotiation of the project.
a. Schedule of direct labor rates (without fringe benefits) for the following
categories of personnel to be used on this requirements contract.
Principal (Partner or Senior Officer)
Project Manager (Responsible Professional)
Design Engineer or Architect (Registered)
Designer or Technician (Non-registered)
Drafter
Clerical (Typist, Word Processor, Printer, Assembly)
Other (Specify)
b. Proposed overhead rate on direct labor, profit rate, costs of printing, CAD
systems or other direct project costs.
c. Any other information available to show pricing methods.
d. Miscellaneous guidance:
- Proposed rates and costs will be used in the negotiation of fees and shall
remain in effect throughout the current term of the continuing contract.
- List the proposed overhead rates in use by the firm. In no case will the City
pay a total overhead rate that exceeds 150 percent of direct labor.
- Profit rate shall be applied only to direct labor plus associated overhead and
shall not exceed 10 percent. No mark-up or profit shall be paid on non-labor
related job costs, reimbursable expenses, or services provided by
subcontractors.
IV. OTHER REQUIREMENTS
Indemnification Requirement:
Page 5
AGENDA ITEM # 8H
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
The City shall require the following or similar indemnification paragraphs to be made part of the
contract(s) as entered into with the successful proposer(s).
The City shall be held harmless against all claims for bodily injury, sickness, disease, death or
personal injury or damage to property or loss of use resulting therefrom arising out of
performance of the agreement or contract, unless such claims are a result of the City's own
negligence.
The City shall also be held harmless against all claims for financial loss with respect to the
provision of or failure to provide professional or other services resulting in professional,
malpractice, or errors or omissions liability arising out of performance of the agreement or
contract, unless such claims are a result of the City's own negligence.
Insurance Requirements: The consultant(s) shall procure and maintain during the term of the
continuing contract, insurance of the types and in the minimum amounts stated below.
Coverages
Schedule Minimums
A. Workers' Compensation Florida $100,000 -each accident
Statutory Coverage and Employer's $100,000 -each employee
Liability (including Appropriate $500,000 -policy limit for disease
Federal Acts)
B. Comprehensive General Liability $1,000,000 -bodily injury each occurrence
$1,000,000 -bodily injury aggregate
$1,000,000 -property damage each occurrence
$1,000,000 -property damage aggregate
C. Products -Completed Operations
D. Business Auto Liability
(All autos -owned, hired or used)
$1,000,000 -aggregate
Same as Comprehensive General Liability
E. Professional Liability
F. Excess or Umbrella Liability
Same as Comprehensive General Liability
Optional
Insurance shall be written by an insurer holding a current certificate of authority pursuant
to Chapter 624, Florida Statutes. Prior to commencing any work on the continuing contract,
certificates of insurance, approved by the City, evidencing the maintenance of said
insurance shall be furnished to the City's construction project manager. The certificates
shall provide that no material alteration or cancellation, including expiration and
non-renewal, shall be effective until fifteen (15) days after receipt of written notice by the
City. All coverages shall name the City as "additional insured".
Page 6
AGENDA ITEM # 8H
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
Receipt of certificates or other documents of insurance or policies or copies of policies by
the City, or by any of its representatives, which indicate less coverage than required will
not constitute a waiver of the successful proposer(s)' obligation to fulfill the insurance
requirements herein.
Anti-Collusion Requirement: Under no circumstances shall any prospective proposer, or any
person or persons acting for or on behalf of any said prospective proposer, seek to influence or
gain the support of any member of the City Commission or the City Staff favorable to the
interest of any prospective proposer or seek to influence or gain the support of any member of
the City Commission or City Staff against the interest of any prospective proposer. Any such
activities shall result in the exclusion of the prospective proposer from consideration by the City.
Public Entity Crimes Requirement: A person or affiliate who has been placed on the
convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime may not submit a bid or a
proposal on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or
public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property to a public entity, and may not
transact business with any public entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in SECTION
287.017, for CATEGORY TWO for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the
convicted vendor list.
Page 7