Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTUSTIN RANCH ROAD GRADING AND STORM DRAIN BID AWARD-BID PROTESTTUSTIN TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL VIA: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, INTERIM CITY MANAGER FROM ,,"DOUGLAS S. STACK, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER �4 CC: �`� _ DOUGLAS C. HOLLAND, CITY ATTORNEY On June 7, 2011, city council authorized the bid of the Phase 1 construction for the Tustin Ranch Road Extension (CIP Nos. 70100 & 70206) consisting of grading and storm drain work. Eight bids were received and opened publicly by the bid due date of July 12, 2011, with Sandoval Pipeline Engineering being the apparent low bidder. Subsequently two protest letters were received, one from Soil Retention, Inc. and one from the Griffith Company, the apparent second low bidder (see attached letters). Briefly, the project includes the construction of a Mechanically -Stabilized Earth (MSE) wall for a certain portion of roadway elevated to cross the flood control channel, railroad tracks, and Edinger Avenue. Soil Retention, Inc. provided the design of the MSE wall as a subconsultant to the design engineer. The Project Specifications contained a performance base specification for the MSE wall and did not specifically name a proprietary system for this element of work. The City set forth a performance specification to allow contractors to meet that specification with whatever product they choose to use. The main point of each protest alleges that the apparent low bidder's listed subcontractor has substituted an alternative MSE wall system. The City has approved no substitute. The bid submitted by the apparent low bidder will be held to the performance base specification for the MSE wall. Griffith Company further adds that the apparent low bidder does not have the proper licensing for one particular alternative bid item and consequently did not list a qualified subcontractor to perform such work if necessary. The bid item identified is for the Management, Transportation & Disposal of Contaminated Materials Other than Groundwater. The apparent low bidder's bid price for this work is less than Y2 of 1% of the total bid. As such, the apparent low bidder is not required to list this subcontractor and it is assumed that the apparent low bidder will retain the services of a properly licensed subcontractor to perform the work if needed. Attached are copies of each protest letter and the City's response, respectively. Staff is recommending award of the Tustin Ranch Road Grading and Storm Drain Project to Sandoval Pipeline Engineering and is available to answer any questions you may have. ATTACHMENT No. 1 RESPONSE TO BID PROTEST—SOIL RETENTION SYSTEMS, INC. Department of Public Works Douglas S. Stack, RE. Director July 18, 2011 Mr. Jan Erik Jansson President Soil Retention Systems, Inc. 2501 State Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: City of Tustin — Tustin Ranch Road Extension Phase 1 Project CIP Nos. 70100 & 70206 Response to Bid Protest Dear Mr. Jansson: The City of Tustin ("City") received your Protest of Bid Results dated July 13, 2011 and has reviewed the particulars therein. In your protest you request that the City find the apparent lowest bidder, Sandoval Pipeline, Inc. ("Sandoval"), non-responsive for its alleged failure to specify an approved wall system for Bid Items 48 and 49. In your protest you allege that the City specified the Verdura Retaining Wall system and that only bidders proposing to use this system can be deemed responsive. Further, by Sandoval's listing of Geogrid as a subcontractor, it cannot meet the required specifications and should be rejected. The City responds to your protest and allegations as follows. Contrary to your allegations, the City did not call out a particular MSE retaining wall system by specific brand or trade name in its specifications. What the City did was provide a performance based specification that spells out in detail what the MSE retaining wall that is to be provided by the successful bidder is to conform to. This is the same process that the City uses in all of its public works projects. The City sets forth a performance specification and allows contractors to meet that specification with whatever product it chooses to use. In this instance, if a bidder had chosen to provide a wall that did not meet those particular specifications, that bidder was required by the specifications to submit documentation to the City requesting said substitute. In this case, no bidder, including Sandoval, chose to submit a substitute. As such, Sandoval is required to provide a MSE retaining wall that conforms to the performance specifications listed in the bid. If, as in any public works project, a contractor attempts to provide a product, system or work that does not comply with the required specifications, that product, system, or work will be rejected until such a time as contractor meets compliance. If the contractor refuses to meet compliance, the City has numerous avenues to seek recovery including, but not limited to, its performance bond, termination, and/or a breach of contract action against the non-performing contractor. It is not proper for the City to assume, in advance of performance that a contractor is going to provide non -complaint work and find that contractor non-responsive. In this instance, if Sandoval attempts to provide a MSE retaining wall system that does not comply with the performance specifications, that system will be rejected and Sandoval will be required to provide a compliant system. However, until such a time as Sandoval submits its 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 s P: (714i 573-3150 0 i=: ?714) 734.8991 6 www.tu5tinca org Mr. Jan Erik Jansson Tustin Ranch Road Extension Phase 1 July 18, 2011 Page 2 shop drawings or performs work that evidences non-compliance, they are deemed to be in agreement with providing contractually compliant work. You further allege that the listing of Geogrid as a subcontractor is evidence that Sandoval cannot provide a MSE retaining wall that meets the required specifications because, in your opinion, your are the only subcontractor that can provide a wall that meets the performance specifications. The City believes you are incorrect, in your assumption. This is a performance based specification and so long as the wall system that is constructed meets the required specifications, it will be deemed compliant. Until such time as shop drawings are submitted, there is no way to determine whether or not a wall system will meet the specifications. However, Sandoval, as the lowest bidder, assumes the responsibility of providing a compliant system and there is no evidence to suggest that they intend to do otherwise. In conclusion, the City finds no merit in your protest and hereby denies it based on the information listed above. Further, the City staff intends to move forward with recommendation to the City Council of award of this project to Sandoval as the lowest responsive bidder. Sincerely, I , /I A lien Nishikawa Tustin Legacy Development Services Manager 0 SOIL RETENT10F." SYSTEMS INC. DATE: July 13, 2011 TO: City of Tustin, Department of Public Works Attn: Mr. Ken Nishikawa 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Ph: 714-573-3150 SUBJECT: PROTEST OF BID RESULTS FS-00XX*1113f i 1 , PROJECT: Tustin Ranch Road Extension Phase 1 from Walnut Avenue to Warner Avenue, Grading and Storm Drain Construction Project, Project CIP Nos. 70100 & 70206, City of Tustin, California Soil Retention Systems, Inc. protests the bid results for the above mentioned project. The apparent low bidder (Sandoval Pipeline) has listed a subcontractor for the MSE Retaining Wall construction (Bid Items #48 and #49) that did not provide a bid with an approved wall system. The apparent low bidder and his listed wall subcontractor have violated Item 1.3 in Section B of the bid specifications. Within Subsection A - Substitutions, the bid specifications state: "Only substitutions approved prior to bid date via addendum will be considered." Based upon Addenda 1 and 2 of the bid specifications, no alternative MSE wall systems where approved in relation to the specified MSE wall system (Veidurdo Retaining Wall). The wall subcontractor (Geogrid) listed by Sandoval Pipeline has provided a proposal for a substitute retaining wall system (Keystone Retaining Wall). The Keystone Retaining Wall does not meet the minimum strength and quality requirements set forth in the bid document plans. This procedure is an unfair bidding practice to all prime bidders. Please feel free to contact the undersigned with any questions. Resp ctf ully submitted, A�l Jan Erik Jansson President 146 kii I A I 'i I � - � I J, ll, V A V ki Darien Osborne, PE Senior Project Engineer 2501 State Street # Carlsbad, CA 92008 - P: (760) 966-6090 9 F: (760) 966-6099 * www.soilretention.com Contractor's License # 516900 'A' ATTACHMENT No. 2 Department of Public Works Douglas S. Stack, P.E. Director July 18, 2011 Mr. Ryan J. Aukerman District Manager Griffith Company 3050 E. Birch Street Brea, CA 92821 Re: City of Tustin — Tustin Ranch Road Extension Phase 1 Project CIP Nos. 70100 & 70206 Response to Bid Protest Dear Mr. Aukerman: The City of Tustin ("City") received your bid protest dated July 15, 2011 and has reviewed the particulars therein. In your protest you request that the City find the apparent lowest bidder, Sandoval Pipeline, Inc. ("Sandoval"), non-responsive for (1) its alleged failure to be properly licensed to perform Bid Item A3 (Management, Transportation & Disposal of Contaminated Materials Other Than Groundwater) and (2) its alleged failure to specify an approved wall system for Bid Items 48 and 49. In your protest you allege that by Sandoval's listing of Geogrid as a subcontractor, Sandoval has in some way admitted that it intends not to provide a MSE Retaining wall that is in compliance with the project specifications. The City responds to your protest and allegations as follows. First, in regards to the question of licensing, Section EH of the specifications includes the statement that, "[s]ubject to the approval of regulatory agencies, the intent of the project includes reuse of material excavated from the Special Construction Zone as engineered fill within the project where identified in the plans." Although contaminated soils to be disposed of offsite is not anticipated to be encountered, Bid Item A3 was included as an alternate with an assumed quantity of 1,000 tons. Sandoval's bid price for this item was $49,000, which is less than Y2 of 1% of the total bid of $12,623,788. As such, Sandoval was not required to list this subcontractor and it is assumed that Sandoval will retain the services of a properly licensed subcontractor to perform the work. Second, in regards to the issue of the MSE retaining wall, contrary to your belief, the City did not call out a particular MSE wall system by specific brand or trade name in its specifications. What the City did was provide a performance based specification that spells out in detail what the MSE retaining wall that is to be provided by the successful bidder is to conform to. This is the same process that the City uses in all of its public works projects. The City sets forth a performance specification and allows contractors to meet that specification with whatever product it chooses to use. In this instance, if a bidder had chosen to provide a wall that did not meet those particular specifications, that bidder was required by the specifications to submit documentation to the City requesting said substitute. In this case, no bidder, including Sandoval, chose to submit a substitute. As such, Sandoval is required to provide a MSE retaining wall that conforms to the performance specifications listed in the bid. If, as in any public works project, a contractor attempts to provide a product, system or work that does not comply with the required specifications, that product, system, or work will be rejected until such 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 * P: (714) 573-3150 0 F: (714) 734-8991 * www tustinca.org Mr. Ryan Aukerman Tustin Ranch Road Extension Phase 1 July 18, 2011 Page 2 a time as contractor meets compliance. If the contractor refuses to meet compliance, the City has numerous avenues to seek recovery including, but not limited to, its performance bond, termination, and/or a breach of contract action against the non-performing contractor. It is not proper for the City to assume, in advance of performance, that a contractor is going to provide non -complaint work and find that contractor non-responsive. In this instance, if Sandoval attempts to provide a MSE retaining wall system that does not comply with the performance specifications, that system will be rejected and Sandoval will be required to provide a compliant system. However, until such a time as Sandoval submits its shop drawings or performs work that evidences non-compliance, they are deemed to be in agreement with providing contractually compliant work. You further allege that the listing of Geogrid as a subcontractor is evidence that Sandoval cannot provide a MSE retaining wall that meets the required specifications because, in your opinion, the subcontractor you listed is the only subcontractor that can provide a wall that meets the performance specifications. The City believes you are incorrect, in your assumption. This is a performance based specification and so long as the wall system that is constructed meets the required specifications, it will be deemed compliant. Until such time as shop drawings are submitted, there is no way to determine whether or not a wall system will meet the specifications. However, Sandoval, as the lowest bidder, assumes the responsibility of providing a compliant system and there is no evidence to suggest that they intend to do otherwise. In conclusion, the City finds no merit in your protest and hereby denies it based on the information listed above. Further, the City staff intends to move forward with recommendation to the City Council of award of this project to Sandoval as the lowest responsive bidder. Sincerely, / A_ Ken Nishikawa Tustin Legacy Development Services Manager Corporate Office 3050 E Birch Street Brea, CA 92821 [714)984-5500 Fax [714) 854-9754 Central District 1898 South Union Ave P O. BOX 70159 Bakersfield, CA 93387- 0157 [6611831-7331 Fax [661) 831-0113 Southern District 12200 Bloomfield Ave Santa Fe Sprigs, CA 90670 [562) 929-1126 Fax [562) 864-8970 Structures ivision 3050 E. Birch Street Brea, CA 92821 [7141984-5500 Fax (714) 854-9754 Heavy Division 3050 E. Birch Street Brea, CA 92821 [714) 984-5500 Fax [714) 854.9754 Underground Division 3050 E Birch Street Brea, CA 92821 [714) 984-5500 Fax [714) 854-9754 Contractors License #88 www anffitheornpany. net July 15, 2011 City of Tustin Department of Public Works 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Attn: Ken Nishikawa Tustin Legacy Development Service Manager Re: Tustin Ranch Road Extension Phase 1 E-o J ::5 2011 TUSTIN PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. It has come to our attention that the apparent low bidder, Sandoval Pipeline Engineering, Inc., has two (2) Incurable Defects with their bid on the above project. The first Defect is that Sandoval Pipeline Engineering, Inc. does not have the proper California State Contractors License classification to perform the work covered by bid Item Number A3, "Management, Transportation & Disposal of Contaminated Materials Other than Groundwater". None of his listed subcontractors are properly licensed to do the work either. California Business and Professions Code section 7058.7(a) states," No contractor shall engage in a removal or remedial action, as defined in subdivision (d), unless the qualifier for the license has passed an approved hazardous substance certification examination." Therefore Sandoval Pipeline Engineering, Inc. bid is non-responsive. The second Defect with Sandoval Pipeline Engineering, Inc's bid submittal is that the listed subcontractor for the Modular Concrete Retaining Wall A and B, Bid Items 48 and 49, Geogrid Retaining Walls Systems, Inc., bid on an alternate wall manufacture and not the wall manufacturer specified as listed on page F-24 of the Technical Specifications. We feel that Sandoval Pipeline Engineering Inc. did not review the sub -bid received from Geogrid Retaining Walls Systems, Inc., and as such was not a responsible contractor. This is a public safety issue as an inferior design and manufacture will endanger those using the roadway. In order to modify the specifications as to design and manufacturer, a request for substitution must be requested. Section B of "The Instructions to Bidders", is very specific as to any substitutions. "Only substitutions approved prior to bid date via addendum will be considered. No substitutions will be considered after bid due date and Award of Contract." Neither addenda one or addenda two allowed a substitution for the Modular Concrete retaining Wall therefore the listed subcontractor must be Soil Retention Systems, Inc. Griffith Company's listed subcontractor is Soil Retention Systems, Inc. The above are all that we can provide at this time as we have not been furnished with a copy of Sandoval Pipeline Engineering, Inc's Bid Proposal. We verbally requested a copy of the proposal after the bids were opened and have not received a copy at this time. We again request that a copy be furnished so that we can determine if there are any other Defects. We maintain that these two Incurable Defects are enough to declare Sandoval Pipeline Engineering Inc's bid as non-responsive and not considered for award. We are also worried that as Sandoval Pipeline Engineering Inc., did not correctly understand the specifications by not using the specified wall manufacturer, they could have not understood other unique items to this project specifications and construction methods such as water proof concrete, the RCB exterior liner, accelerated construction schedule, dewatering and the Special Construction Zone requirements. Knowingly awarding to a non-responsive contractor with a flawed bid will put the City at risk as the contractor attempts to "cut corners" to offset their misunderstanding of the contract requirements, and put the project at risk for not getting done on a timely basis. Respectfully, GRIFFIT Ryan J. Auker"fan District .- Cc: T. Foss R. Pierce, Esq, J. Angus G. Gibson W. Grauten