Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEngineering & Operations MINUTES 06-08-21 Page 2 of 7 CENTRAL SAN CONTRACENTRAL • DISTRICT 5019 • SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OFDIRECToxs: TAD J PILECKI CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA President ILLIAMS SANITARY DISTRICT DAIDR. tProTem Tem President Pro ENGINEERING & OPERATIONS BARBARA D.HOCKETT COMMITTEE MARIAH N.LAURITZEN MICHAEL R.MCGILL MINUTES PHONE: (925)228-9500 FAX: (925)372-0192 Tuesday, June 8, 2021 www.centralsan.org 11:15 a.m. (All attendees participated via videoconference) Committee: Chair David Williams Member Mariah Lauritzen Guest: Shane McCarthy, Basset Engineering (left after Item 4.a.) Staff. Roger S. Bailey, General Manager (joined during Item 4.a.) Kenton L. Alm, District Counsel Katie Young, Secretary of the District Steve McDonald, Director of Operations (joined during Item 4.a.) Jean-Marc Petit, Director of Engineering and Technical Services Edgar Lopez, Capital Projects Division Manager Sasha Mestetsky, Senior Engineer (left during Item 4.b.) Amelia Berumen, Assistant to the Secretary of the District 1. Notice This meeting was held in accordance with the Brown Act as in effect under the State Emergency Services Act, the Governor's Emergency Declaration related to COVID-19, and the Governor's Executive Order N-29-20 issued on March 17, 2020 that allowed attendance by Board Members, District staff, and the public to participate and conduct the meeting by teleconference, videoconference, or both. The agenda included instructions for options in which the public could participate in the meeting. June 17, 2021 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 153 of 168 Page 3 of 7 Engineering & Operations Committee Minutes June 8, 2021 Page 2 2. Call Meeting to Order Chair Williams called the meeting to order at 11:15 a.m. 3. Public Comments No public comments. 4. Agenda Items a. Review draft Position Paper to reject a bid protest and award a construction contract in the amount of $3,117,488 to Basset Engineering, the lowest responsive and responsible bidder for the Walnut Creek Sewer Renovations, Phase 15, District Project 8465; find that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and authorize up to a 15- percent contingency Mr. Lopez provided a brief overview of the project and opined it appeared to be a favorable time to bid the project as pipeline project opportunities are few in the Bay Area, which likely accounts for receipt of seven bids and several competitive prices. In regard to a bid protest, Mr. Lopez said staff completed a thorough review of the bid documents and timely protest. California Trenchless, Inc. (CTI, the second low bidder) questioned Basset Engineering's (Basset) project experience submitted on their bid form. Mr. Lopez offered that CTI was invited to attend this meeting but declined. He introduced Basset's representative, Shane McCarthy, whose experience was listed on the bid form and was in attendance should the Committee have any direct questions. Mr. Lopez stated staff reviewed the experience clause in the bid documents and spoke at length with Basset. He explained that Mr. McCarthy's experience provided on the bid form was valid and that staff is familiar with the experience of Basset's key personnel and employees, and their knowledge of District projects. Mr. Lopez referred to the explanation provided in the Position Paper and expressed that staff did not see any reason to reject Basset's bid nor deem it as non-responsive. Basset has the proper experience, equipment, insurance, bonds, and all other necessary qualifications to perform and complete the project. It was noted Basset is also currently completing a similar project for the City of San Francisco Department of Public Works. Staff's findings and the response received from Basset's attorney regarding the bid protest were provided to CTI; however, no response was received as of this meeting. June 17, 2021 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 154 of 168 Page 4 of 7 Engineering & Operations Committee Minutes June 8, 2021 Page 3 Mr. Alm provided a summary of the letters received as part of the bid protest process. Each party clearly made their intended point; however, the definition of bidder(whether restricted to corporation or individual) was not defined in the specifications. As such, although reasonable assumption could be made, nothing in the bid documents would restrict the experience to a corporate identity as depicted by CTI. Discussion followed regarding the current specification language and potential refinement to better clarify the experience requirement in the future. Staff explained that project-specific, corporate and/or key personnel experience has been included in larger and more complex projects to pre- qualify bidding contractors, such as the recent Pump Station Improvement - Phase 1 and the Solids Handling Facility Improvements projects. Mr. Lopez added that some pre-qualification requirements focus on local experience and familiarity with workforce in the Bay Area since large projects can attract out-of-state contractors. However, this specificity was not a part of the requirements for this particular project. During the discussion, it was suggested to include in the bid specifications the experience of the person in charge of the job to consider project experience to potentially alleviate future protests such as this one. This would consider the principal-in-charge or key personnel background experience rather than the company experience while retaining the opportunity for staff to use its discretion to determine the experience qualification. Mr. Bailey stated he concurred with District Counsel's suggestion to clarify the specification language and that staff will use the opportunity to review the bid language and revise as necessary to ensure there is no ambiguity. Member Lauritzen asked whether making such changes may narrow the field and lead to fewer bidders. Mr. Alm responded that the language he proposes would not discourage bidders and may lend an opportunity to attract more bidders. Mr. Lopez stated staff will bring this topic to the Specification Coordination Committee (SCC) which includes a legal counsel advisor in its review. He acknowledged Member Lauritzen's concern and concurred the language should not limit the pool of bidders. He stated a fair and transparent way to describe the experience section in the bid specifications will be considered and reconciled by the SCC with legal advisement. Chair Williams inquired how the calculation error made by CTI on this bid compared to the error made in the last project award (Contractor Staging Improvements) that also had a bid protest. Mr. Lopez stated this error was different and correctable by specification standards. The other project's error June 17, 2021 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 155 of 168 Page 5 of 7 Engineering & Operations Committee Minutes June 8, 2021 Page 4 required interpretation and the bidder attempted to correct their price. This project error was mathematical only as the pricing written in words was correct and the extended pricing was miscalculated. The error that occurred on the Contractor Staging Improvements project was material and staff had no choice but to recommend rejection. In this case, it is considered a discrepancy and has a remedy in the bid specifications. COMMITTEE ACTION: Recommended Board approval. b. Review draft Position Paper to authorize the General Manager to execute a pre-purchase contract change order in an amount not to exceed $314,000 with APG-Neuros, Inc. to include three new filter houses for the Electric Blower Improvements, District Project 100015 Mr. Lopez recapped the scope of the project and the intention of the original Board authorized contract with APG-Neuros to purchase and replace three electric blowers for process redundancy and capacity. The design consultant, HDR, Inc. (HDR), completed the design, worked with the manufacturer on equipment submittals, which ultimately led to the order placement for the blowers. Subsequently, staff learned the existing filter houses are not sufficient at removing required particulates and should not be used with the new blowers. HDR, staff, and the manufacturer recommended replacement of the existing filter houses so that the new equipment will function properly. He referred to the Position Paper for the technical discussion on this matter. Furthermore, he stated that rehabilitating the existing filters, incorporating new cartridge style filters, remediating the lead paint in the existing houses, plus time and labor would be far more expensive than replacing the filter houses outright as recommended. Mr. Lopez stated that the change order to purchase the three filter houses would not increase the total project budget. In response to an inquiry that this appears to be an increase, he explained the budget allocated for potential rehabilitation is more than the replacement cost. Therefore, the project cost in itself would not increase, only the contract cost to APG-Neuros. There is adequate budget for the change order. The alternatives listed in the Position Paper are not recommended by staff. Due to equipment lead-time and need for the project to be completed prior to the shutdowns necessitated by the upcoming Solids Handling Facility Improvements project construction, time is of the essence to purchase the filter houses. This change order exceeds staff and General Manager authority, Board approval is required. Chair Williams asked for clarification that if the rehabilitation was going to be too costly for the lead paint matter, would staff not have known the challenge June 17, 2021 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 156 of 168 Page 6 of 7 Engineering & Operations Committee Minutes June 8, 2021 Page 5 beforehand and included the filter housing in the project. Mr. Petit replied that the intent was to continue use of the existing equipment until the decision was made whether to remain with steam aeration blowers, which would have been addressed when that decision was known. As part of this project's design, the blowers require cleaner air and, after further review, it was recommended to replace the filter houses to achieve proper air quality and performance. The new filters will be used for both the new and existing blowers. COMMITTEE ACTION: Recommended Board approval. 5. Announcements Mr. Petit announced bid opening updates for the following projects: • Electric Blower Improvements and Treatment Plant Piping Renovations - Phase 10, District Projects 100015 and 7369 - the combined bid package has been rescheduled from June 17 to July 1 to attract further bidder interest. • Solids Handling Facility Improvements, District Project 7348 - bid opening is scheduled for June 16. 6. Suggestions for Future Agenda Items a. Receive list of upcoming agenda items and provide suggestions for any other future agenda items COMMITTEE ACTION: Received the list. 7. Future Scheduled Meetings Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 11:00 a.m. Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 11:00 a.m. Tuesday, July 27, 2021 at 11:00 a.m. 8. Announce Closed Session Mr. Alm announced the following closed session item was not needed and would not be heard. 9. Closed Session — Not required. a. Conference with Legal Counsel — Threat of Litigation — anticipated exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2): • One Potential Case — California Trenchless, Inc. v. Central San. June 17, 2021 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 157 of 168 Page 7 of 7 Engineering & Operations Committee Minutes June 8, 2021 Page 6 10. Report Out of Closed Session — Not applicable. 11. Adjournment— at 11:50 a.m. June 17, 2021 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet- Page 158 of 168