Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 Construction Inspection 2021 - BoardAGENDA ITEM #12 Page 1 of 4 MEETING DATE:April 7, 2021 TO:Board of Directors FROM:Neil Kaufman, Water System Engineer SUBJECT:Award of a Contract to Perform Construction Inspection Services. APPROVED BY______________________________ Brian C. Wright, Interim General Manager RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Interim General Manager to execute a professional services contract with Construction Materials Engineers to perform Construction Inspection Services during calendar year 2021 in an amount not to exceed $150,000, plus a ten percent change order allowance for a total authorization not to exceed $165,000. DISCUSSION: Since 2015, the Water Department has utilized an outside consultant to perform construction inspection of developer-funded projects. The consultants have been selected through a Request for Proposals (RFP) process. During the summer of 2020, the Water Department utilized Construction Materials Engineers (CME) of Reno, Nevada to perform this inspection work.CME was selected based upon an RFP was issued in 2018.The work performed by CME was satisfactory and the CME contract was extended to cover construction inspection for 2019 and 2020. In September 2020, a new RFP intended to cover inspection of developer-funded projects for 2021 was issued.The submittal deadline for proposals was October 30, 2020.During November 2020, the Water Department conducted a review of upcoming projects and anticipated staffing needs for the summer of 2021. There are major District-funded projects to be constructed during the summer of 2021, including the District Pipeline Replacement -2021 and the Martiswoods Pump Station projects. It was determined that the Water Department did not have sufficient internal staff to perform inspection of these projects. It was then decided that the scope of the construction inspection RFP should be expanded to cover these District-funded projects. Review of the original proposals was halted and a revised RFP was issued in January Page 2 of 4 2021. This RFP included inspection of both the developer-funded and District funded projects. There are additional requirements associated with District-funded projects, including: Inspection of storm water management practices & storm water pollution prevention plan compliance Inspection of site safety and traffic control Tracking of contractor labor and equipment to facilitate review of change order requests Payment of prevailing wages to inspection staff Six proposals were received in response to the revised RFP. 4Leaf –Fair Oaks, CA Batie Plumbing, Truckee, CA Construction Materials Engineers (CME)–Reno, NV Lumos and Associates –Reno, NV Universal Engineering Services (UES)–Reno, NV Wood Rodgers –Reno, NV A staff committee of three employees reviewed the proposals based on the following criteria: Experience of the firm with similar water system construction inspection assignments Past experience of proposed inspectors with similar water system construction inspection assignments Procedures methodology and quality assurance/quality control Cost On a technical basis,4Leaf, CME and Lumos were scored closely together as the top three firms. UES and Wood Rodgers scored into a second tier below the top three. The rankings are summarized below: Technical Scoring Firm Rank CME 1 4Leaf 2 Lumos 3 Wood Rodgers 4 UES 5 Batie Plumbing 6 Page 3 of 4 The proposed costs were then evaluated.A typical work day was assumed for the purpose of evaluating costs. This typical work day assumes that there will be a single inspector that will perform inspection work on both District-funded and developer projects on a given day. This typical work day involved: Five hours of inspection of District-funded projects Three hours of inspection of developer funded projects 40 miles of travel within the Truckee area Travel time and mileage between the corporate office and Truckee It should be noted that the actual inspection activities on any given day will vary. On some days, there may not be any developer-funded work requiring inspections. On other days, two inspectors might be required due to critical items such as tie-ins or pressure testing. The cost scoring based on this typical day is summarized below: Cost Scoring Firm Rank Batie Plumbing 1 UES 2 Wood Rodgers 3 CME 4 Lumos 5 4Leaf 6 Among the top three firms from the technical scoring, the costs for CME and Lumos were essentially the same. 4Leaf has higher cost structure due to the additional travel time and mileage from Fair Oaks instead of Reno. The overall ranking (technical capability & cost) of the proposers is: Overall Scoring Firm Rank CME 1 Lumos 2 4Leaf 3 UES 4 Wood Rodgers 5 Batie Plumbing 6 Therefore, it is recommended that the contract be awarded to CME. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 1.05.020 Objectives: 3. Provide reliable and high quality water supply and distribution system to meet current and future needs. Page 4 of 4 6. Manage the District in an effective, efficient, and fiscally responsible manner. 1.05.030 Goals: 4.5 Provide effective and efficient maintenance and replacement programs. FISCAL IMPACT: A separate work order is created for each developer project. Inspection of developer constructed facilities is billed against the appropriate work order and the costs are paid by the developer. The Water Department generates an estimate of the level of inspection effort required for a given project and collects a deposit for those costs at the time the development agreement is signed. If the total inspection costs exceed the initial deposit, the developer is billed for these additional costs. It the initial deposit is not exceeded, the remaining funds are returned to the developer.When an outside firm is used to perform the construction inspection, those costs are billed against the deposit collected from the developer. There is a minimal financial impact to the District associated with accounting and contract management. The process for District-funded projects is similar in that separate work orders have been established for the two projects and the inspection time spent on each project will be allocated to the appropriate internal work order. About $37,000 was spent on outside inspection of developer funded projects in 2020. As noted above, this cost was recovered from the developers. Total construction inspection costs covering both District-funded and developer funded projects are estimated at $150,000 for the summer of 2021. There is some uncertainty associated with this estimate and a 10 percent change order allowance is recommended. There are sufficient funds within the Board Approved Water Utility Operating Budget to cover the cost of inspection for the District-funded projects.