HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-19-12 EO&WR Committee Packet-------:"'7-'-----
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
ATTENDANCE RECORD
MEETING: Engineering, Operations & Water Resources Committee DATE: Se tember 19 2012
i I
NAME ADDRESS PHONE i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
COMPLETION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS VOLUNTARY AND NOT A PRECONDITION FOR ATTENDANCE
1-1:\DisIScclWfNWORDIBOA RDIATENDNC.DOC
I
OTAY WATER DISTRICT ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS & WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
and
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
Board Room WEDNESDAY
September 19, 2012
12:00 P.M.
This is a District Committee meeting. This meeting is being posted as a special meeting
in order to comply with the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54954.2) in the event that a quorum of the Board is present. Items will be deliberated, however, no formal board actions
will be taken at this meeting. The committee makes recommendations to the full board for its consideration and formal action.
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO
SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JU-
RISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
DISCUSSION ITEMS
3. APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL AS-NEEDED CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND
INSPECTION SERVICES CONTRACT TO ALYSON CONSULTING IN AN AMOUNT
NOT-TO-EXCEED $350,000 FOR A PERIOD OF THREE (3) FISCAL YEARS (FY 2013 TO FY 2015) (KAY) [5 minutes]
4. APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL AS-NEEDED ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES
CONTRACT TO AEGIS ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, INC. IN AN AMOUNT NOT-
TO-EXCEED $300,000 FOR A PERIOD OF TWO (2) FISCAL YEARS (FY 2013 TO FY 2014) (MARCHIORO) [5 minutes]
5. APPROVE A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO LAYFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL SYS-
TEMS CORPORATION FOR THE FLOATING COVER REPLACEMENT AT THE 624-
1 RESERVOIR IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $497,050 (MARCHIORO) [5 mi-nutes]
6. ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER RESOURCES DIVISIONS’ STRATEG-
IC PLAN FISCAL YEAR-END 2012 UPDATE REPORT (STEVENS) [10 minutes]
7. SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE (WATTON) [10 minutes]
2
8. ADJOURNMENT
BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING: Gary Croucher, Chair David Gonzalez
All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be delibe-
rated and may be subject to action by the Board.
The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the Dis-
trict’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the
open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the
Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting
her at (619) 670-2280.
If you have any disability that would require accommodation in order to enable you to partici-
pate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to
the meeting.
Certification of Posting
I certify that on September 14, 2012 I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at least
24 hours in advance of the meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section
§54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley, California on September 14, 2012.
______/s/_ Susan Cruz, District Secretary _____
AGENDA ITEM 3
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: October 9, 2012
SUBMITIED BY: Daniel Kay PROJECT:
Associate Civil Engineer
Dan Martin
Engineering Manager
APPROVED BY: IZ! Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
1Z1 German Alvarez, Asst. General Manager
1Zl Mark Watton, General Manager
VARIOUS DIV. NO. ALL
SUBJECT: Award of As-Needed Construction Management and Inspection
Services Contract for Fiscal Year 2013 through Fiscal Year
2015
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
award a professional As-Needed Construction Management and
Inspection Services (CMIS) contract to Alyson Consulting (Alyson)
and to authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with
Alyson in an amount not-to-exceed $350,000 for a period of three (3)
fiscal years (FY 2013 -FY 2015).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into
a professional As-Needed CMIS agreement with Alyson in an amount
not-to-exceed $350,000 for three (3) fiscal years (FY 2013 -FY
2015).
ANALYSIS:
The District will require the services of a professional CMIS
consultant in support of the District's Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) projects for three (3) fiscal years (FY 2013 -FY 2015). It
is more efficient and cost effective to issue an as-needed contract
for construction management and inspection which will provide the
District with the ability to obtain consulting services in a timely
and efficient manner . This concept has also been used in the past
for other disciplines such as engineering design , geotechnical,
electrical, and environmental services .
The District will issue task orders to the consultant for specific
projects during the contract period. The consultant will then
prepare a detailed scope of work, schedule, and fee estimate for
each task order assigned under the contract . Upon written task
order authorization from the District , the consultant shall then
proceed with the project as described in the scope of work .
The anticipated CIP projects that are estimated to require CMIS for
the duration of this contract are listed below:
ESTIMATED
CIP Capital Facilities Project COST
P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations $50 ,000
P2477 624-1 Reservoir Cover Replacement $25,000
P2493 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating $30 ,000
P2507 East Palomar Street Utility Relocation $20 ,000
P2518 803-3 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating $15,000
P2519 832-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating $15,000
S2033 Sewer System Various Locations Rehabilitation $75,000
S2040 Calavo Sewer Basin Improvements $60,000
S2041 Rancho San Diego Sewer Basin Improvements $40,000
TOTAL: $330 ,000
The CMIS scopes of work for the above projects are estimated from
preliminary information and past projects . Therefore , staff
believes that a $350,000 cap on the As-Needed CMIS contract is
adequate , while still providing additional capacity for unforeseen
support needs by the District.
This As-Needed CMIS contract does not commit the District to any
expenditure until a task order is approved to perform work on a CIP
project. The District does not guarantee work to the consultant,
nor does the District guarantee that it will expend all of the funds
authorized by the contract on professional services .
2
The District solicited CMIS by placing an advertisement on the Otay
Water District's website on July 5 , 2012 with various other
publications including the San Diego Daily Transcript . Twenty-two
(22) firms submitted a letter of interest and a statement of
qualifications . The Request for Proposal (RFP) for As-Needed CMIS
was sent to the twenty two (22) firms resulting in eight (8)
proposals received by August 14 , 2012.
• Alyson Consulting
• Dudek & Associates , Inc .
• G&A, Inc .
• Harris & Associates
• KCM Group
• Nolte Vertical Five
• Psomas
• Valley Construction Management
The thirteen (13) firms that chose not to propose are Arcadis-US,
Inc ., CPM Partners , Inc ., EPC Consultants, Jacobs Engineering Group,
Inc ., Lee & Ro , Inc ., Marrs Services , Inc ., Nuera Contracting &
Consulting, RBF Consulting, SA Associates , Vali Cooper & Associates,
Vanir Construction Management , Inc ., Willdan Engineering, and Zero
Energy Institute LLC.
In accordance with the District's Policy 21, staff evaluated and
scored all written proposals and interviewed the top three (3) firms
on August 29, 2012. Alyson received the highest score for their
services based on their experience, understanding of the scope of
work, proposed method to accomplish the work, and their composite
hourly rate. Alyson was the most qualified consultant with the best
overall rating or ranking score . A summary of the complete
evaluation is shown in Attachment B.
Based upon the review of all the hourly composite rates , staff did
not negotiate with Alyson to lower their proposed rates because
their rate was below the average submitted by all nine (9)
consultants .
Alyson submitted the Company Background Questionnaire as required by
the RFP and staff did not find any outstanding issues . In addition,
staff checked their references and performed an internet search on
the company . Staff found the references to be excellent and did not
find any outstanding issues with the internet search . Staff found
that Alyson is a relatively new company, however, the individuals
proposed on this project have worked with the District in the past
with previous firms and they performed at a high level .
3
FISCAL IMPACT: ~ Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The funds for this contract will be expended for a variety of
projects , as previously noted above. This contract is for as-needed
professional services based on the District's need and schedule, and
expenditures will not be made until a task order is approved by the
District for the consultant's services on a specific CIP project.
Based on a review of the financial budgets, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budgets will be sufficient to support the
professional as-needed consulting services required for the CIP
projects noted above.
The Finance Department has determined that the funds to cover this
contract are available as budgeted for these projects .
STRATEGIC GOAL :
This Project supports the District's Mission statement, "To provide
high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the
Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient
manner" and the District's Vision, "A District that is innovative in
providing water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for
outstanding customer service ."
LEGAL IMPACT:
None .
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Engineering Design\FY 2013-2014\Staff Report\BD 10-9-12, Staff Report, As-Needed Engineering Design
Services, (JM-RR) .docx
DK/DM:jf
Attachments: Attachment A -Committee Action
Attachment B Summary of Proposal Rankings
4
ATTACHMENT A
"-----I SUBJECT/PROJECT: Award of As-Needed Construction Management and Inspection i
I
VARIOUS ;~~~ices Contract for Fiscal Year 2013 through Fiscal Year I
COMMITTEE ACTION :
The Engineering, Operations , and Water Resources Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on September 19 , 2012. The Committee
supported Staff's recommendation.
NOTE:
The "Committee Action" is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for Board approval . This
report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board.
Qualifications of
Staff
Understanding of
Scope, Schedule and Resources
Soundness and
Viability of
Proposed Project
Plan
INDIVIDUAL
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
AVERAGE
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
Proposed Rates*
Consultant's
Commitment to DBE
AVERAGE
TOTAL
WRITTEN
Additional
Creativity and Insight
Strength of
Project Manager
Presentation,
Communication Skills
Quality of
Response to Questions
INDIVIDUAL
TOTAL - ORAL
AVERAGE
TOTAL ORAL
30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 15 15 10 10 50 50 #REF!Poor/Good/
Excellent
Dan Martin 26 23 26 75 13 13 8 8 42
Brandon DiPietro 26 22 24 72 13 12 8 9 42
Ron Ripperger 25 23 25 73 13 13 7 7 40
Bob Kennedy 27 23 27 77 12 13 9 8 42
Jake Vaclavek 26 21 25 72 11 13 8 7 39
Dan Martin 22 20 23 65
Brandon DiPietro 25 21 23 69
Ron Ripperger 24 23 25 72
Bob Kennedy 24 20 24 68
Jake Vaclavek 27 21 26 74
Dan Martin 28 24 29 81 14 14 9 9 46
Brandon DiPietro 29 23 28 80 14 14 8 9 45
Ron Ripperger 26 24 27 77 14 14 9 9 46
Bob Kennedy 27 23 27 77 14 14 9 9 46
Jake Vaclavek 29 21 26 76 13 14 7 9 43
Dan Martin 25 22 24 71 13 14 9 8 44
Brandon DiPietro 26 23 26 75 14 12 8 8 42
Ron Ripperger 25 23 24 72 14 13 8 8 43
Bob Kennedy 24 20 24 68 12 13 9 8 42
Jake Vaclavek 23 20 23 66 13 13 7 7 40
Dan Martin 22 20 22 64
Brandon DiPietro 24 21 22 67
Ron Ripperger 24 21 22 67
Bob Kennedy 20 17 20 57
Jake Vaclavek 20 17 17 54
Dan Martin 26 22 26 74
Brandon DiPietro 26 22 25 73
Ron Ripperger 26 24 25 75
Bob Kennedy 24 20 24 68
Jake Vaclavek 25 20 25 70
Dan Martin 22 20 22 64
Brandon DiPietro 24 23 21 68
Ron Ripperger 24 23 23 70
Bob Kennedy 20 17 20 57
Jake Vaclavek 21 19 17 57
Dan Martin 26 23 26 75
Brandon DiPietro 27 23 27 77
Ron Ripperger 24 23 23 70
Bob Kennedy 24 20 24 68
Jake Vaclavek 22 23 22 67
Dan Martin 24 22 24 70
Brandon DiPietro 27 24 25 76
Ron Ripperger 26 23 24 73
Bob Kennedy 24 20 24 68
Jake Vaclavek 25 20 25 70
*The fees were evaluated by comparing rates for five positions. The sum of these five rates are noted on the table to the left.
Consultant Rate Position Score Note: The Review Panel does not see or consider rates when scoring other categories. Rates are scored by the PM, who is not on the Review Panel.
Valley CM $430 lowest 15
G&A Inc.$465 13
Atkins $540 10
Nolte Vertical Five $552 9
Alyson Consulting $565 9
Psomas $610 7
Dudek $618 6
KCM Group $630 6
Harris & Associates $735 highest 1
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS
As-Needed Construction Management and Inspection Services
77
78
73
76
127
68
79
45 132 Excellent
TOTAL SCORE REFERENCES
41 125
Psomas 71 7 Y 78
ORAL
42
74
70
WRITTEN
87
84
Dudek 71 6 Y 77
ATTACHMENT B
MAXIMUM POINTS
Alyson Consulting
70 15
Y9
10
78
79
RATES SCORING CHART
Nolte Vertical Five
Y 68
Atkins Y
Y 85
KCM Group 62 6
9 Y
Valley CM
Harris &
Associates 72 1 Y 73
13 76G&A Inc.63 Y
NOT INTERVIEWED
NOT INTERVIEWED
NOT INTERVIEWED
NOT INTERVIEWED
NOT INTERVIEWED
NOT INTERVIEWED
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Construction Management\As Needed CM & Inspection Svcs FY13, FY15\Selection Process\Summary of Proposal Rankings - Final.xls
AGENDA ITEM 4
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: October 9, 2012
SUBMITTED BY: Jeff Marchioro
Senior Civil Engineer
Ron Ripperger
Engineering Manager
PROJECT:
APPROVED BY: {gl Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
[gl German Alvarez, Asst. General Manager
[gl Mark Watton, General Manager
VARIOUS DIV. NO. ALL
SUBJECT: Award of As-Needed Engineering Design Services Contract for
Fiscal Years 2013 and 2014
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
awards a professional As-Needed Engineering Design Services contract
to Aegis Engineering Management, Inc. (AegisEM) and to authorize the
General Manager to execute an agreement with AegisEM in an amount
not-to-exceed $300,000 for a period of two (2) fiscal years (FY
2013, FY 2014).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into
a professional As-Needed Engineering Design Services agreement with
AegisEM in an amount not-to-exceed $300,000 for a period of two (2)
fiscal years (FY 2013, FY 2014).
ANALYSIS:
The District will require the services of a professional engineering
design consultant in support of the District's Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) for two (2) fiscal years. It is more efficient and
cost effective to issue an as-needed contract for engineering design
which will provide the District with the ability to obtain
consulting services in a timely and efficient manner. This concept
has also been used in the past for other disciplines such as
construction management, geotechnical, electrical, and environmental
services .
The District will issue task orders to the consultant for specific
projects during the contract period. The consultant will then
prepare a detailed scope of work , schedule, and fee estimate for
each task order assigned under the contract . Upon written task
order authorization from the District, the consultant shall then
proceed with the project as described in the scope of work .
The anticipated CIP projects that are estimated to require
engineering design services for the duration of this contract are
listed below :
ESTIMATED
CIP DESCRIPTION COST
P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations $65,000
P2528 30-Inch Potable Water Pipeline Manifold at $20,000 624 Reservoirs
R2048 Otay Mesa Distribution Pipelines $15,000
S2024 Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement $15,000
S2033 Sewer System Various Locations Rehabilitation $50 ,000
S2040 Calavo Sewer Basin Improvements $90 ,000
S2041 Rancho San Diego Sewer Basin Improvements $20 ,000
TOTAL: $275,000
The engineering design scopes of work for the above projects are
estimated from preliminary information and past projects .
Therefore , staff believes that a $300 ,000 cap on the As-Needed
Engineering Design Services contract is adequate , while still
providing additional capacity for unforeseen support needs by the
District .
This As-Needed Engineering Design Services contract does not commit
the District to any expenditure until a task order is approved to
perform work on a CIP project . The District does not guarantee work
to the consultant, nor does the District guarantee that it will
2
expend all of the funds authorized by the contract on professional
services.
The District solicited engineering design services by placing an
advertisement on the Otay Water District's website on June 18, 2012
and with various other publications including the San Diego Daily
Transcript. Seventeen (17) firms submitted a letter of interest and
a statement of qualifications. The Request for Proposal (RFP) for
As-Needed Design Services was sent to fifteen (15) of the firms
resulting in ten (10) proposals received by July 20 , 2012 .
• Aegis Engineering Management
• AMN Management, Inc .
• Atkins North America , Inc.
• Harris & Associates
• Lee & Ro, Inc.
• O'Brien & Wall
• PSOMAS
• RBF Consulting
• Stantec
• Tran Consulting Engineers
The five (5) firms that chose not to propose are Alyson Consulting,
Dudek & Associates, Inc., Hilts Consulting Group, Inc ., SA
Associates , and Stetson Engineers , Inc.
In accordance with the District's Policy 21, Staff evaluated and
scored all written proposals and interviewed the top four (4) firms
on August 28, 2012. AegisEM received the highest score for their
services based on their experience, understanding of the scope of
work, proposed method to accomplish the work, and their composite
hourly rate. AegisEM was the most qualified consultant with the
best overall rating or ranking. A summary of the complete
evaluation is shown in Attachment B.
AegisEM submitted the Company Background Questionnaire as required
by the RFP and staff did not find any significant issues . In
addition, staff checked their references and performed an internet
search on the company . Staff found the references to be excellent
and did not find any outstanding issues with the internet search .
Staff, based on review of all hourly composite rates and in
accordance to District Policy 21, negotiated with AegisEM to lower
their proposed composite rate. AegisEM lowered their originally
proposed composite hourly rate from $893 to $810 , which was $13
3
lower compared to the average of the other consultants ' composite
rates .
AegisEM has held the District's Professional Services Contract for
recycled water plan checking, retrofit , and inspection services for
developer projects since January 2010 .
FISCAL IMPACT : ~ Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The funds for this contract will be expended for a variety of
projects , as previously noted above . This contract is for as-needed
professional services based on the District's need and schedule , and
expenditures will not be made until a task order is approved by the
District for the consultant 's services on a specific CIP project .
Based on a review of the financial budgets, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budgets will be sufficient to support the
professional as-needed consulting services required for the CIP
projects noted above .
The Finance Department has determined that the funds to cover this
contract are available as budgeted for these projects.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project supports the District 's Mission statement, "To provide
high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the
Otay Water District in a professional, effective , and efficient
manner" and the District's Vision, "A District that is innovative in
providing water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for
outstanding customer service ."
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Engineering Design\FY 2013-2014\Staff Report\BD 10-9-12, Staff Report, As-Needed Engineering Design
Services, (JM-RR)-l.docx
JM/RR:jf
Attachments : Attachment A
Attachment B
Committee Action
Summary of Proposal Rankings
4
I SUBJECT/PROJECT:
I VARIOUS
ATTACHMENT A
!Award of As-Needed Engineering Design Services Contract for
I Fiscal Years 2013 and 2014
I
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on September 19, 2012 . The Committee
supported Staff's recommendation.
NOTE:
The "Committee Action" is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This
report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board.
Qualifications of
Team
Responsiveness
and Project
Understanding
Technical and
Management
Approach
INDIVIDUAL
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
AVERAGE
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
Proposed Rates*
Consultant's
Commitment to
DBE
TOTAL -
WRITTEN
Additional
Creativity and
Insight
Strength of
Project Manager
Presentation and
Communication
Skills
Responses to
Questions
INDIVIDUAL
TOTAL - ORAL
AVERAGE
TOTAL ORAL
TOTAL
SCORE
30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N Y/N 15 15 10 10 50 50 150 Poor/Good/
Excellent
Ronald Ripperger 28 24 27 79 14 14 9 9 46
Dan Martin 25 22 25 72 13 14 8 9 44
Bob Kennedy 25 23 26 74 14 14 9 9 46
Daniel Kay 27 23 26 76 14 14 9 9 46
Kevin Cameron 27 22 27 76 14 14 9 9 46
Ronald Ripperger 23 20 22 65
Dan Martin 23 19 20 62
Bob Kennedy 23 20 19 62
Daniel Kay 24 19 24 67
Kevin Cameron 25 18 23 66
Ronald Ripperger 28 23 27 78 12 12 7 7 38
Dan Martin 29 24 28 81 13 13 8 8 42
Bob Kennedy 27 22 25 74 11 11 7 8 37
Daniel Kay 28 24 28 80 12 11 7 7 37
Kevin Cameron 24 24 29 77 12 12 7 7 38
Ronald Ripperger 24 22 25 71
Dan Martin 26 23 27 76
Bob Kennedy 24 20 24 68
Daniel Kay 25 22 26 73
Kevin Cameron 28 22 26 76
Ronald Ripperger 24 22 24 70
Dan Martin 26 21 23 70
Bob Kennedy 25 22 25 72
Daniel Kay 27 22 26 75
Kevin Cameron 24 22 24 70
Ronald Ripperger 22 19 19 60
Dan Martin 21 18 18 57
Bob Kennedy 20 19 19 58
Daniel Kay 15 13 15 43
Kevin Cameron 18 18 18 54
Ronald Ripperger 27 23 27 77 13 13 8 8 42
Dan Martin 28 24 28 80 13 13 8 9 43
Bob Kennedy 26 23 26 75 12 12 8 8 40
Daniel Kay 26 22 27 75 13 13 9 9 44
Kevin Cameron 27 22 27 76 13 14 9 9 45
Ronald Ripperger 26 22 25 73
Dan Martin 27 22 24 73
Bob Kennedy 24 21 23 68
Daniel Kay 28 22 26 76
Kevin Cameron 26 21 25 72
Ronald Ripperger 25 22 24 71
Dan Martin 24 20 21 65
Bob Kennedy 23 20 21 64
Daniel Kay 26 21 25 72
Kevin Cameron 25 20 23 68
Ronald Ripperger 26 22 23 71 12 12 6 6 36
Dan Martin 28 23 28 79 12 12 7 7 38
Bob Kennedy 24 22 25 71 11 11 7 7 36
Daniel Kay 28 23 28 79 11 11 6 6 34
Kevin Cameron 28 23 28 79 12 13 6 6 37
Consultant Rate Position Score Consultant Rate Position Score
1. AEGIS Engineering Management $893 4 6. O'Brien & Wall $415 highest 15 *The fees were evaluated by comparing rates for seven positions. The sum of these rates are noted on the table to the left.
2. AMN Management, Inc.$707 8 7. PSOMAS $960 3 Note: Review Panel does not see or consider rates when scoring other categories. Rates are scored by the PM, who is not on Review Panel.
3. ATKINS $745 7 8. RBF $1,028 1
4. Harris & Associates $1,025 1 9. Stetson Engineers, Inc.$904 4
5. LEE & RO, Inc.$903 4 10. Tran Consulting Engineers$650 10
ATTACHMENT B
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS
As-Needed Engineering Design
WRITTEN ORAL
Y 46
MAXIMUM POINTS
41. AEGIS Engineering
Management
NOT INTERVIEWED
79
?
Y
Y
Y 75
38
NOT INTERVIEWED
76 10 86
NOT INTERVIEWED
122
?
36Y
9. Stetson Engineers,
Inc.68 4 72 72
10. Tran Consulting
Engineers
Y
8. RBF 72 1 73 73
43Y
NOT INTERVIEWED
7. PSOMAS 77 3 80 123
5. LEE & RO, Inc.71 4 75
4. Harris & Associates
3. ATKINS 78 7 85 123
73 1 74 74
NOT INTERVIEWED
125 Excellent
REFERENCES
2. AMN Management,
Inc.64 8 72 72
75
RATES SCORING CHART
NOT INTERVIEWED6. O'Brien & Wall 54 15 Y 69 69
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Engineering Design\FY 2013-2014\Selection Process\Summary of Proposal Rankings - written fee interview.xls
AGENDA ITEM 5
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETINGDATE: October 9, 2012
SUBMITIED BY: Jeff Marchioro
Senior Civil Engineer
Ron Ripperger
Engineering Manager
PROJECT:
APPROVED BY: ~ Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
~ German Alvarez, Asst. General Manager
~ Mark Watton, General Manager
P2477-
001103
DIV. NO. 1
SUBJECT: Award of a Construction Contract to Layfield Environmental
Systems Corporation for the Floating Cover Replacement at the
624-1 Reservoir
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
award a construction contract to Layfield Environmental Systems
Corporation (Layfield) for the floating cover replacement at the 624-1
Reservoir in an amount not-to-exceed $497,050 (see Exhibit A for
Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a
construction contract with Layfield in an amount not-to-exceed
$497,050 for the floating cover replacement at the 624-1 Reservoir.
ANALYSIS:
The 12 .4 million gallon 624-1 Reservoir was originally constructed in
the early 1980s . The reservoir was improved and fitted with its
existing polypropylene liner and floating cover in 1999 . In the last
few years, the floating cover has been repeatedly repaired to
maintain the integrity of the cover material . Dive videos taken
recently show leaks and sunlight penetrating the floating cover in
many places. Based on this new information, it will become cost
prohibitive to continue to repair the existing cover with only two
(2) years remaining of its expected useful life . The existing cover
material normally has a life expectancy of 15-20 years . The dive
videos also revealed that the reservoir liner appeared to be in good
condition.
In March 2012 , the District's As-Needed Engineering Design
consultant, Atkins North America , Inc . (Atkins), completed a
Technical Memorandum which evaluated the cover replacement
alternatives assuming that the liner would not be replaced at this
time. The memorandum included life cycle cost comparisons of
different reservoir cover materials and corresponding life
expectancies . Atkins recommended using the same material as the
existing cover (polypropylene) for replacement of the cover because,
compared to materials with longer life expectancy (chlorosulfonated
polyethylene), the life expectancy of a new polypropylene cover
better matches the life expectancy of the existing liner . Atkins
also recommended replacement of the existing spring tensioners with
weight tensioners that can be reused when the new polypropylene
cover/existing polypropylene liner will be replaced 15-20 years from
now .
Atkins prepared the bid documents . Mayer Reprographics (Mayer)
distributed the bid documents electronically through Mayer's online
planroom.
Staff contacted several contractors prior to and during the bid
process to encourage them to submit a bid for the Project. Floating
cover installation work is very specialized and there are only six
(6) commonly recognized installers in the continental United States
including Colorado Lining, Erosion Control Applications , Inc.,
Layfield, Lange Containment Systems , MPC Containment International
LLC, and RTD Enterprises . Only Erosion Control Applications , Inc .,
Layfield, and MPC Containment International LLC are commonly known to
install the "mechanically tensioned" style cover that is currently in
use at the 624-1 Reservoir .
2
The Project was advertised for bid on July 24, 2012. A Pre-bid
Meeting and site visit were held on August 7, 2012, which was
attended by four (4) contractors. To maintain bidders' interest in
the Project, Staff responded to questions and clarification as
quickly as possible. This process resulted in a total of six (6)
addenda that were sent out to all bidders and plan houses which
resulted in the following three (3) conforming bids received on
August 23, 2012.
CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID AMOUNT
1. Layfield Environmental Systems $497,050 Corporation
2. MPC Containment International LLC $541,655
3. Erosion Control Applications, Inc. $683,600
The Engineer's Estimate is $580,000.
The evaluation process included reviewing all bids submitted for
conformance to the contract documents. The lowest bidder, Layfield,
submitted a responsible bid and holds a Class A Contractor's license
which expires on May 31, 2014. Staff checked the references provided
with Layfield's bid. The references indicated that Layfield is a
well-established and well recognized company as well as a recognized
leader for development of the "mechanically tensioned" style cover
that is currently in use at the 624-1 Reservoir. Layfield acquired
the business assets of CW Neal Corporation (CW Neal) in April 2004.
CW Neal installed the existing 624-1 Reservoir floating cover in
1999. The District has previously worked with Layfield to install,
repair, and maintain floating covers at the 624-1 Reservoir and other
reservoirs in the District. Layfield recently moved their
fabrication and warehousing facility from El Cajon to Spring Valley.
Layfield's new location is just up the street from the District
offices at 2500 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard. The proposed Project
Manager has experience throughout southern California on similar
projects and received good references. A background search of the
company was performed on the internet and revealed no outstanding
issues with this company. Layfield submitted the Company Background
and Company Safety Questionnaires as required by the Contract
Documents.
Staff has verified that the bid bond provided by Hartford Fire
Insurance Company is valid. Once Layfield signs the contract, they
will furnish the performance bond and labor and materials bond.
Staff will verify both bonds prior to executing the contract.
3
FISCAL IMPACT: ~ Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The total
$800,000.
forecast,
budget for CIP P2477, as approved in the FY 2013 budget,
Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
are $754,575.
Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budget is sufficient to support the Project.
See Attachment B for budget detail.
is
Finance has determined that 100 % of the funding is available from the
Replacement Fund for CIP P2477.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project supports the District's Mission statement, "To provide
high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay
Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient manner"
and the District's Vision, "A District that is innovative in
providing water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for
outstanding customer service."
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
JM/RR: j f
P:\WORKING\CIP P2477 Reservoir Cover Rep1acement\Staff Reports\BD 10-9-12, Staff Report, 624-1 Res F1oatinq Cvr Rep1 .docx
Attachments: Attachment A -Committee Action
Attachment B -Budget Detail
Exhibit A -Location Map
4
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P24 77-001103
ATTACHMENT A
Award of a Construction Contract to Layfield Environmental
Systems Corporation for the Floating Cover Replacement at
the 624-1 Reservoir
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on September 19, 2012. The Committee
supported Staff's recommendation.
NOTE:
The "Committee Action" is written in anticipation of the Committee
moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent
to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any
discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to
presentation to the full Board.
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P24 77-001103
ATTACHMENT B
Award of a Construction Contract to Layfield Environmental
Systems Corporation for the Floating Cover Replacement at
the 624-1 Reservoir
Otay Water District Date Updated: September 05, 2012
P2477 -Res -624-1 Reservoir Cover Replacement
Outstanding Projected Final Budget Committed Expenditures Commitment & Vendor/Comments
800,000 Forecast Cost
Planning
Addl subprojects
Labor 17,880 17,880 -17,880
Total Planning 17,880 17,880 -17,880
Design
Labor 24,179 24,179 5,000 29,179
Consu~ant Contracts 1,810 1,810 -1,810 ALTA LAND SURVEYING INC
59,020 49,924 9,096 59,020 ATKINS
Service Contracts 1,062 1,062 -1,062 LAYFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
1,823 1,547 276 1,823 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC
84 84 -84 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
KEAGY REAL ESTATE
Total Design 87,978 78,606 14,372 92,978
Construction
Labor 3,562 3,562 100,000 103,562
Service Contracts 16,104 16,104 -16,104 LAYFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
2,000 2,000 -2,000 DIVE/CORR INC
497,050 -497,050 497,050 LAYFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
15,000 15,000 CONTINGENCY @ 3%
10,000 10,000 CLOSEOUT
Total Construction 518,716 21,666 622,050 643,716
Grand Total 624,575 118,153 636,422 754,575
NTS
DIV. 5
PROJECT SITE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
624-1 RESERVOIR FLOATING COVER REPLACEMENT
LOCATION MAP
EXHIBIT A
CIP P2477
AGENDA ITEM 6
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETINGDATE: October 9, 2012
PROJECT: VARIOUS DIV. NO.: ALL
SUBMITIED BY: Geoffre lknevens
Chief, ~rmation Technology and Strategic Planning
APPROVED BY: [gi
[gl
SUBJECT: FY 2 0 12
REPORT
~~~arez, Assistant General Manager
n, General Manager
AR-END STRATEGIC PLAN AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
No recommendation. This is an informational item only.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see "Attachment A".
PURPOSE:
To provide a fiscal year-end report on the District's Strategic
Performance Plan.
ANALYSIS:
The District has completed the first year of the FY 2012-2014
Strategic Plan. Overall, results are positive with the District very
close to its target for strategic plan objectives and above target
for performance measures. In addition, on average over the last five
years, the District is on or above target for both objectives and
performance measures. Detailed information on each year's outcome is
available electronically on the Board Extranet.
Strategic Plan Objectives
Strategic plan objectives are designed to ensure staff is making the
appropriate high-level changes necessary to move the District in the
planned direction to meet new challenges and opportunities . Overall
performance of strategi c plan objectives is pos i tive wi th 36 of 42
objectives (86%) complete, ahead, or on schedule, and two items
behind schedule. Of the objectives that were behind, such as
implementing billing functionality or financial planning work,
several are now on schedule . Some projects may need to be reassessed
as the environment has changed. Three items are on hold because they
are out of our control, such as negotiations with the City of San
Diego on the South Bay Reclamation Plant. Consequently, on-hold items
are excluded from the overall performance calculation.
Objectives: All Departments
• I 1-
~ed On Schedo.Ae Behind On Hold No Reports Not Started
Objective Reports
Legend
Completed
On Schedule
Behind Schedule
On Hold
No Reports
0 Not Scheduled to Start Yet
36/42 strategic objectives are on or ahead of schedule (86%)
Performance Measures: Monitoring Day-To-Day Performance
Performance measures are designed to track the day-to-day performance
of the District. These items measure the effectiveness and
efficiency of da i ly operations. The overall goal is that at least
75 % of these measures be rated "on target". District results in this
area are also positive with 33 of 43 (77 %) items achieving the
desired level or better.
YTD Measures: All Departments
Completed On Target Not On
Target
On Hold No Reports Not started
Menwe Report•
43 Totlll
Legend
Completed
On Target
Not on Target
On Hold
No Reports
0 Not Scheduled to Start Yet
33/43 Measu res on or ahead of schedule (77%) --Target is 75%
2
Trend Analysis
This year we have begun to accumulate enough data to examine our plan
performance over time. Staff is pleased that the plan performance
has been very consistent in meeting the overall targets. On average,
over the last six to eight years, the plan is above target for both
objectives and measures.
Next Steps
Trend 6 Year Average-Strategic Objectives On Target
100
90 ----=====:::;;:
"'Ci) m so -"-----
~
<;f 70 ...___ __ _
G> a: (]) 60 ~---.!. a: (])
(j) 50 +----& 40 ----
30 -'----r--
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Fiscal Year
Trend - 8 Year Average -Performance Measures
100
90 +--------,-----1
80 +-----..0-'
70
60
50
20
10 -
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
OBJ
Staff is currently focused on implementing year two of the Board
approved FY12-FY14 Strategic Plan. We will continue to review and
communicate the plan at the department and enterprise levels. Staff
3
will also examine current targets and measures to see if they can be
improved. In conclusion, staff anticipates further refinement of
District initiatives to ensure that plans and schedules are properly
coordinated and integrated. Staff appreciates the high level of
support that the Board provid this effort.
FISCAL IMPACT: Chief Financial Officer
None at this time.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Strategic Plan and Performance Measure reporting is a critical
element in providing performance reporting to the Board and staff.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachments: Attachment A -Committee Action Report
Attachment B -PowerPoint Presentation
4
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
ATTACHMENT A
FY 2012 YEAR-END STRATEGIC PLAN AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
REPORT
COMMITTEE ACTION :
The Finance , Administration , and Communications Committee met on
September 17 , 2012, to review items pertaining to the Finance,
Administrative, and Information Technology departments . The
Engineering , Operations, and Water Resources Committee met on
September 19, 2012 , to review items pertaining to the Engineering and
Operations departments . Both committees support presentation to the
full Board for their review .
NOTE:
The "Committee Action" is written in anticipation of the Committees
moving the i tern forward for Board approval . This report will be sent
to the Board as a committee approved item, or modified to reflect any
discussion or changes as directed from the committees prior to
presentation to the full Board.
..
.
.
0
-c
r:
:
w
I N ~
0 N >-
LL
~
c:
cu
-a.
~ ~
0 N I N ~
0 N 0
(I
)
c:
0
l2oo3l2oo4l2oo51 2oo6l 2007! 2ooal 2oogl 201 o I 2011! 2012 l2of3 l2o14l
i}
We are here
FY2012 Objectives
36 of 42 objectives complete, ahead or on target (86°/o)
Target is 90°/o
Objectives: All Departments
40
30
! ;20
t-
10
Legend
·Completed
On Schedule
Behind Schedule
On Hold
No Reports
Not Scheduled to Start Yet
FY2012 Performance Measures
33 of 43 performance measures complete, ahead or on target (77o/o)
Target is 75°/o
YTD Measures: All Departments
40
30
• J20
1-
10
31
Completed On Target Not On On Hold No Reports Net St8r1ed
Target
Measure Reports
43 Total
legend
, Completed
On Target
Not on Target
On Hold
No Reports
Not Scheduled to Start Yet
Trend Analysis --Plan Objectives
00 -01
Trend 6 Year Average-Strategic Objectives On Target
100
90 I 1:!' j 80
1 70 9
160 • • •-•-•-•-•OBJ
~ 50 NA "' 40 I
30
20052006200720082009201020112012
Fiscal Year
Trend Analysis --Performance Measures
005-201
Trend - 8 Year Average -Performance Measures
100
90
"'C 80 -..,
CCI ~ 70
~ 60
0
c 50 0 c 40
Q) e 30
Q)
0.. 20
10
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 201 0 2011 2012
iscaiYear
(]
)
+-
'
ro
c
·-
-o
L.
.
0 0
()
en
+-
'
.:
:
:
t
:
.
-o
c
(]
)
L.
.
..
ro
C)
0
L.
.
~
><
(]
)
ro
I-
E
C)
ro
-o
co
L.
.
c
(]
)
(]
)
ro
I-
>
(]
)
en
-c
_J
(]
)
c:
L.
.
ro
I
::
J
en
en
en
ro
c:
z
c.
.
(]
)
0
ro
·-
::
E
+-
'
::
E
ro
C)
(.
)
~
·-
c
c:
li
'
C)
·-
::
J
..
(]
)
>
E
+-
'
0
ft
S
ro
L.
.
E
L.
.
c.
.
.c
+-
'
E
0
(/
)
-
()
==