Arlington County Government Sealed Solicitation
Title: 21-DES-RFP-257 On-Call Bridge and Ancillary Structure Services
Deadline: 8/31/2020 1:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
Status: Awarded
Solicitation Number: 21-DES-RFP-257
Description: Arlington County is seeking to obtain the services of a qualified contractor to provide on-call bridge and ancillary structure engineering services.
Documents:
| Documents as of 7/27/2020 |
|---|
| 21-DES-RFP-257 On-Call Bridge and Ancillary Structure Services.pdf |
| 21-DES-RFP-257 Proposal Submittal Forms.pdf |
Addition 1
Posted: 8/12/2020
Type of Addition: Addendum No. 1
Overview: Addendum No. 1 revises the SOW, payment and evaluation criteria.
Documents:
Addition 2
Posted: 8/31/2020
Type of Addition: In Review
Addition 3
Posted: 3/22/2021
Type of Addition: Award Information
Overview: 21-DES-RFP-257 Notice of Award
Documents:
Question 1
Posted: 8/3/2020
Question: RFP Part IV (Scope of Services) Section 2 states that "the consultant shall provide personnel and equipment necessary to perform underwater inspection of the bridge structures." Additionally, Part IV Section 6 Subpart III (Consultant Personnel) states that "the Consultant must provide all services required under this Contract in-house with the exception of geotechnical reports, testing and surveying, which can be subcontracted." Can the underwater inspection be subcontracted to a consultant who is a certified underwater bridge inspector as well?
Response: Yes, the underwater inspection can be subcontracted to a Certified Underwater Bridge Inspector/Consultant. Reference the Revised Scope of Services.
Question 2
Posted: 8/5/2020
Question: Good Morning- I am inquiring about the list of incumbents for the On-Call Bridge and Ancillary Structure Engineering Services Contract No. 21-DES-RFP-257.
Response: Volkert, Inc. is the incumbent for the current contract for Bridge Design and Rehabilitation Services.
Question 3
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: Good afternoon, Regarding RFP 21-DES-RFP-257: Is it possible to make an exception and accept the following from different DOT’s? 1. VDOT Bridge Replacement Plans 2. VDOT Bridge Rehabilitation Plans 3. VDOT Bridge & Ancillary Structure Repair Plans 4. VDOT Bridge MOT Plans Would it be acceptable to sub out the following? 1. Underwater inspections. 2. Pin and hanger UT. 3. Hydraulic, hydrologic, storm drainage collection, Best Management Practice (BMP) facilities retrofit project design and scour analysis. 4. Prepare limited environmental studies and coordination with state regulatory agencies
Response: No exceptions will be made to accept the documents listed above from a different DOT.
Question 4
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: 1. Section VI. Scope of Services, item No. 5 indicates that: “Structure load ratings shall be completed using Virtis computer program, and when it is not possible to use Virtis, other programs can be used with prior approval by the County.” However, VDOT IIM-S&B-86.3 indicates that “AASHTOWare Br|R® software shall be used for load rating bridges, except as follows: Steel curved girders shall be rated using DESCUS® software. Buried arch culvert, and other buried structures designed to account for soil-structure interaction may be rated using CANDE.” Please confirm AASHTOWare Br|R® software is the software for load rating applications. 2. DBE requirements for this project is not specified. Given the number of disciplines required to perform described tasks (surveying, geotechnical, material testing, under water inspection, etc.), is there any requirements for DBE or the number of subconsultant firms that could be considered?
Response: 1. Yes, AASHTOWare Br|R® (formerly Virtis) is the software for load rating applications. 2. No, the County has a policy for DBE and we will make a good faith effort to consider DBE. We also, suggest the Vendor to do the same.
Question 5
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section IV “Scope of Services” Part III “Contractor’s Personnel” (page 14) states that the Consultant must provide all services required under this Contract in-house, with the exception of the provision of geotechnical reports, testing and surveying, which can be subcontracted. RFP Section IV “Scope of Service” (see eighth paragraph on page 10) states that diving services for the inspection, analysis, and recommendation of repairs on submerged substructures of bridges may be required. Diving services are a very specialized professional service that are provided by specialty subcontractors. Please advise if diving services may be subcontracted in addition to surveying and geotechnical services.
Response: Yes, diving services may be subcontracted. Reference the Revised Scope of Services in Addendum No. 1.
Question 6
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: 2. RFP Section IV “Scope of Services” Part V “Contract Pricing” states that the services under this Contract will be paid for using hourly rates for the positions included in the Consultant’s Personnel paragraph of the Scope of Services. Part III “Consultant’s Personnel” only lists positions for Program Manager, Team Leader, and Load Rater. Since Section IV “Scope of Services” describes a full range of services that may be required under this Contract, please advise if hourly rates for positions other than those listed in Part III “Consultants Personnel” will be allowed.
Response: Yes, hourly rates for positions other than those listed in Part III “Consultants Personnel” will be allowed at the hourly rates comparable to the ones of the prime firm, to include the overhead costs not exceeding the overhead cost percentage approved for the prime firm.
Question 7
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section IV “Scope of Services” Part V “Contract Pricing” implies that all costs and expenses of providing to the County the services described must be included in the hourly rates. For potential bridge inspection assignments, it is anticipated that traffic control and the rental of specialized inspection equipment, including but not limited, to snooper trucks, bucket trucks, boats and manlifts may be required. The expenses for these items are commonly reimbursable under safety inspection contracts. For assignments involving geotechnical services it is anticipated that laboratory testing and drilling may be required. The expenses for these items are commonly reimbursable under professional services contracts. For assignments involving construction administration services, construction inspections, or construction management it is anticipated that materials testing, specialty PPE, specialty tools/equipment, travel (mileage, leased vehicles, etc.) may be required. The expenses for these items are commonly reimbursable under construction engineering and inspection contracts. Please advise if these types of direct expenses detailed above can be considered as reimbursable for individual task orders under the contract
Response: Yes, these types of direct expenses detailed above can be considered as reimbursable for individual task orders under the contract.
Question 8
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section V “Proposal Requirements” Part 6 (page 20) lists 15 items (sample documents) that are to be included with the proposal, including VDOT Bridge Replacement Plans, VDOT Bridge & Ancillary Inspection Reports, etc. We are unable to comply with this requirement as our Contracts/Agreements with VDOT and other entities are written such that we do not own the rights to these documents. We are not allowed to publish or reproduce the documents. We respectfully request that this requirement be removed from the “Proposal Requirements” for this RFP.
Response: Reference the Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Weights in Addendum No. 1.
Question 9
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section V “Proposal Requirements” Part 6 (page 20) lists 15 items (sample documents) that are to be included with the proposal. One of the items is for NEPA documents submitted to VDOT. The preparation of NEPA documents is only required on projects that receive federal funding. If projects may receive federal funding on this contract then please advise if there is a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal for this contract.
Response: The County will not receive Federal funding and there will be no DBE goal for this contract.
Question 10
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section V “Proposal Requirements” Article 9 (page 24) implies that the Consultant will not be paid for the remaining 10% of the total amount allocated for any task until it is completed. Since this is a professional services contract we respectfully request that this requirement be removed from the RFP.
Response: Reference the Payment section in Addendum No. 1.
Question 11
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: On RFP page 20, Section V. Proposal Requirements, Part 6. Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Weights, under “Offeror’s Qualifications and Experience of Proposed Staff” section C asks offerors to “Limit the number of pages to two (2) pages for items 1-3 and 6”. May you please confirm if items 1-3 and 6 shall be limited to two pages total or two pages per item?
Response: Reference the Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Weights in Addendum No. 1.
Question 12
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: Arlington County typically indicates that offerors must state in their proposal whether they request revisions to any of the non-mandatory terms, the reason(s) for the request(s), and proposed alternative language. Offerors who do not request a revision in their proposal are typically not able to object or request revisions to any contract terms during the negotiation process. Given that the RFP for this solicitation for services does not include this language, can the County please confirm offerors will be able to request revisions to the non-mandatory contract terms during the negotiation process? Or, should exceptions be included in the proposal?
Response: The County’s preference would be to have the exceptions in advance. However, if the Offeror decides to wait to contract negotiations, the County will accept the exceptions at that time. This will extend the final Contract process.
Posted: 8/12/2020
Type of Addition: Addendum No. 1
Overview: Addendum No. 1 revises the SOW, payment and evaluation criteria.
Documents:
Posted: 8/31/2020
Type of Addition: In Review
Posted: 3/22/2021
Type of Addition: Award Information
Overview: 21-DES-RFP-257 Notice of Award
Documents:
Posted: 8/3/2020
Question: RFP Part IV (Scope of Services) Section 2 states that "the consultant shall provide personnel and equipment necessary to perform underwater inspection of the bridge structures." Additionally, Part IV Section 6 Subpart III (Consultant Personnel) states that "the Consultant must provide all services required under this Contract in-house with the exception of geotechnical reports, testing and surveying, which can be subcontracted." Can the underwater inspection be subcontracted to a consultant who is a certified underwater bridge inspector as well?
Response: Yes, the underwater inspection can be subcontracted to a Certified Underwater Bridge Inspector/Consultant. Reference the Revised Scope of Services.
Posted: 8/5/2020
Question: Good Morning- I am inquiring about the list of incumbents for the On-Call Bridge and Ancillary Structure Engineering Services Contract No. 21-DES-RFP-257.
Response: Volkert, Inc. is the incumbent for the current contract for Bridge Design and Rehabilitation Services.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: Good afternoon, Regarding RFP 21-DES-RFP-257: Is it possible to make an exception and accept the following from different DOT’s? 1. VDOT Bridge Replacement Plans 2. VDOT Bridge Rehabilitation Plans 3. VDOT Bridge & Ancillary Structure Repair Plans 4. VDOT Bridge MOT Plans Would it be acceptable to sub out the following? 1. Underwater inspections. 2. Pin and hanger UT. 3. Hydraulic, hydrologic, storm drainage collection, Best Management Practice (BMP) facilities retrofit project design and scour analysis. 4. Prepare limited environmental studies and coordination with state regulatory agencies
Response: No exceptions will be made to accept the documents listed above from a different DOT.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: 1. Section VI. Scope of Services, item No. 5 indicates that: “Structure load ratings shall be completed using Virtis computer program, and when it is not possible to use Virtis, other programs can be used with prior approval by the County.” However, VDOT IIM-S&B-86.3 indicates that “AASHTOWare Br|R® software shall be used for load rating bridges, except as follows: Steel curved girders shall be rated using DESCUS® software. Buried arch culvert, and other buried structures designed to account for soil-structure interaction may be rated using CANDE.” Please confirm AASHTOWare Br|R® software is the software for load rating applications. 2. DBE requirements for this project is not specified. Given the number of disciplines required to perform described tasks (surveying, geotechnical, material testing, under water inspection, etc.), is there any requirements for DBE or the number of subconsultant firms that could be considered?
Response: 1. Yes, AASHTOWare Br|R® (formerly Virtis) is the software for load rating applications. 2. No, the County has a policy for DBE and we will make a good faith effort to consider DBE. We also, suggest the Vendor to do the same.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section IV “Scope of Services” Part III “Contractor’s Personnel” (page 14) states that the Consultant must provide all services required under this Contract in-house, with the exception of the provision of geotechnical reports, testing and surveying, which can be subcontracted. RFP Section IV “Scope of Service” (see eighth paragraph on page 10) states that diving services for the inspection, analysis, and recommendation of repairs on submerged substructures of bridges may be required. Diving services are a very specialized professional service that are provided by specialty subcontractors. Please advise if diving services may be subcontracted in addition to surveying and geotechnical services.
Response: Yes, diving services may be subcontracted. Reference the Revised Scope of Services in Addendum No. 1.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: 2. RFP Section IV “Scope of Services” Part V “Contract Pricing” states that the services under this Contract will be paid for using hourly rates for the positions included in the Consultant’s Personnel paragraph of the Scope of Services. Part III “Consultant’s Personnel” only lists positions for Program Manager, Team Leader, and Load Rater. Since Section IV “Scope of Services” describes a full range of services that may be required under this Contract, please advise if hourly rates for positions other than those listed in Part III “Consultants Personnel” will be allowed.
Response: Yes, hourly rates for positions other than those listed in Part III “Consultants Personnel” will be allowed at the hourly rates comparable to the ones of the prime firm, to include the overhead costs not exceeding the overhead cost percentage approved for the prime firm.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section IV “Scope of Services” Part V “Contract Pricing” implies that all costs and expenses of providing to the County the services described must be included in the hourly rates. For potential bridge inspection assignments, it is anticipated that traffic control and the rental of specialized inspection equipment, including but not limited, to snooper trucks, bucket trucks, boats and manlifts may be required. The expenses for these items are commonly reimbursable under safety inspection contracts. For assignments involving geotechnical services it is anticipated that laboratory testing and drilling may be required. The expenses for these items are commonly reimbursable under professional services contracts. For assignments involving construction administration services, construction inspections, or construction management it is anticipated that materials testing, specialty PPE, specialty tools/equipment, travel (mileage, leased vehicles, etc.) may be required. The expenses for these items are commonly reimbursable under construction engineering and inspection contracts. Please advise if these types of direct expenses detailed above can be considered as reimbursable for individual task orders under the contract
Response: Yes, these types of direct expenses detailed above can be considered as reimbursable for individual task orders under the contract.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section V “Proposal Requirements” Part 6 (page 20) lists 15 items (sample documents) that are to be included with the proposal, including VDOT Bridge Replacement Plans, VDOT Bridge & Ancillary Inspection Reports, etc. We are unable to comply with this requirement as our Contracts/Agreements with VDOT and other entities are written such that we do not own the rights to these documents. We are not allowed to publish or reproduce the documents. We respectfully request that this requirement be removed from the “Proposal Requirements” for this RFP.
Response: Reference the Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Weights in Addendum No. 1.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section V “Proposal Requirements” Part 6 (page 20) lists 15 items (sample documents) that are to be included with the proposal. One of the items is for NEPA documents submitted to VDOT. The preparation of NEPA documents is only required on projects that receive federal funding. If projects may receive federal funding on this contract then please advise if there is a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal for this contract.
Response: The County will not receive Federal funding and there will be no DBE goal for this contract.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: RFP Section V “Proposal Requirements” Article 9 (page 24) implies that the Consultant will not be paid for the remaining 10% of the total amount allocated for any task until it is completed. Since this is a professional services contract we respectfully request that this requirement be removed from the RFP.
Response: Reference the Payment section in Addendum No. 1.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: On RFP page 20, Section V. Proposal Requirements, Part 6. Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Weights, under “Offeror’s Qualifications and Experience of Proposed Staff” section C asks offerors to “Limit the number of pages to two (2) pages for items 1-3 and 6”. May you please confirm if items 1-3 and 6 shall be limited to two pages total or two pages per item?
Response: Reference the Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Weights in Addendum No. 1.
Posted: 8/10/2020
Question: Arlington County typically indicates that offerors must state in their proposal whether they request revisions to any of the non-mandatory terms, the reason(s) for the request(s), and proposed alternative language. Offerors who do not request a revision in their proposal are typically not able to object or request revisions to any contract terms during the negotiation process. Given that the RFP for this solicitation for services does not include this language, can the County please confirm offerors will be able to request revisions to the non-mandatory contract terms during the negotiation process? Or, should exceptions be included in the proposal?
Response: The County’s preference would be to have the exceptions in advance. However, if the Offeror decides to wait to contract negotiations, the County will accept the exceptions at that time. This will extend the final Contract process.