The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About16 APPV SPECS & PLANS-LIBRARY PROJ 09-04-07 AGENDA REPORT Agenda Item Reviewed: City Manager Finance Director 16 ~, MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 4, 2007 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: CHRISTINE A. SHINGLETON, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PRE-QUALIFIED GENERAL CONTRACTORS AND APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR THE TUSTIN LIBRARY PROJECT (CIP NO. 1045) SUMMARY The general contractors for the Tustin Library Project (CIP No. 1045) have been pre-qualified and are ready to be approved as eligible to bid the project. The plans and specifications for the Tustin Library Project (CIP No. 1045) have been prepared and bids may be solicited from the list of pre-qualified general contractors. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Approve the list of pre-qualified general contractors as identified in Exhibit "A" as eligible general contractors to bid the project. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 07-69, approving the plans and specifications for the Tustin Library Project (CIP No. 1045), and authorizing and directing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and solicit bids from the approved list of pre-qualified general contractors only. FISCAL IMPACT The Fiscal Year 2007-2008 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget for the Tustin Library Project provides total remaining funding for the project of $21,588,428 which includes remaining architectural and engineering costs, acquisition expenses, project construction management costs, geotechnical services, reprographics, construction and Furnishings, Fixtures and Equipment (FF&E). Plans and specifications for the Project include construction and certain FF&E items; additional FF&E items will be separately bid. The total costs for the project including all past and future expenditures are projected to be $29,234,676. The engineer's estimate for the work covered by the plans, specifications and bid documents is $16,200,000. A more thorough budget analysis will be provided to the City Council with any future recommendation to award the construction bid. Approval of Pre-qualified General Contractors and Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Advertise for Bids and the Tustin Library Project (CIP No. 1045) September 4, 2007 Page 2 DISCUSSION The tentative schedule for construction of the projects is as follows: City Council Authorization to Advertise for Bids ................................... 09/04/2007 First Legal Advertisement ..................................................................... 09/06/2007 Second Legal Advertisement ............................................................... 09/20/2007 Bid Opening ......................................................................................... 10/25/2007 Award of Contract ................................................................................ 11 /19/2007 Start Construction ............................................................................... 01 /07/2008 Complete Construction ......................................................................... 07/17/2009 Over the last few years the City has worked towards replacing the existing Tustin Branch Library with a new Tustin Library to be operated by the Orange County Public Library. Despite rejection of the City's funding request for the project by the State Library Bond Act Board, the City Council reconfirmed the outstanding merits of the project and committed to completing the project and securing necessary funding for the project. This commitment level has been demonstrated by the City Council's direction to staff to proceed with final .construction design for the new Tustin Library Project by Field Paoli Architecture in March 2005, the retention of Griffin Structures in December 2006 to provide project management services for the project including pre-construction constructability reviews and design coordination assistance, and the recent appropriation of additional funding for the project as part of the FY 2007-2008 budget adoption. Given the complexity of the Tustin Library Project, the City elected to utilize apre- qualification process to ensure that experienced contractors with proven track records and financial stability would be bidding on the Tustin Library Project. On April 17, 2007, the Tustin City Council approved the general contractor pre-qualification package for construction of Tustin Library Expansion. After a public notice process, the City Clerk on June 6, 2007 received submittals under the pre-qualification process from fourteen (14) general contractors for the Tustin Library Project. The pre-qualification process for the Tustin Library was modeled after the Department of Industrial Relations format without any modifications by the City of Tustin. As a result of review of the stipulated essential requirements for qualification and the analysis completed by Griffin Structures and City Public Works and Redevelopment Agency staff, it has been determined that all fourteen (14) contractors originally submitting pre-qualification submittals in response to the City's request will be eligible to bid the Tustin Library Project. A list of these general contractors is provided as an Exhibit "A" to this agenda report. Approval of Pre-qualified General Contractors and Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Advertise for Bids and the Tustin Library Project (CIP No. 1045) September 4, 2007 Page 3 Under the California Environmental Quality Act Implementing Guidelines, the City Council on May 6, 2002 approved a Negative Declaration for the project with adoption of Resolution No. 02-49, and recorded a Notice of Determination with the County Recorder on May 30, 2002. Plans and specifications for the approximate 32,000 square foot Tustin Library Project have now been completed and the project is ready to bid to the list of pre-qualified general contractors. Christine A. Shingleton Assistant City Manager Tim D. Serle Director of Public Works/City Engineer Attachments: Resolution No. 07-69 Exhibit "A" (List of Qualified General Contractor) Location Map S:\City Council Items\2007 Council ItemsWpproval of P&S Tustin Library Expansion (CIP 1045) & Reso 07-69.doc RESOLUTION NO. 07-69 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE TUSTIN LIBRARY PROJECT (CIP NO. 1045), AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS TO A LIST OF PRE-QUALIFIED GENERAL CONTRACTORS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California to contract for the construction of the Tustin Library Project (CIP No. 1045); and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has presented plans and specifications for the construction of said work; and WHEREAS, A Negative Declaration was prepared and adopted on May 6, 2002 and Notice of Determination was recorded with the County Recorder on May 30, 2002 ;and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the plans and specifications presented by the City Engineer are hereby approved as the plans and specifications for: Tustin Library Project (CIP No. 1045) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is herby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for the performance of the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications; PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Tustin held on the 4th day of September 2007. Lou Bone, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk a m w ~. (n LCD ~/ O 0 r ~ Z Q H aZ ~? O V V~ ~ ~ Ow GC Z aw ~~ aW 00 - J~ a z~ ci ' =w ~- a ~, ~ ~ x ~ ~ x ~ ~ x ~ x ~ x x x x x x X X x x ~ Z 000 00 OO Ot.C) ra0 NO OCO Or ~~ I`r- 00 O~ ~O tn~ OM 00 0000 0000 Oln 000 OO OCO NO Nlf) Or O~ OO NN ~+ V lf')I` rN f~l` f`i` LnN r0 OO ~~ ~0 Mr M~ ~~ 00 rr tt~ rr 0000 r0 OO f`M o000 Md' Nd' rr 0~ I`Cp MM NN ~~+ Ot.C) OCO 00~ 00 00I` std' I`i` NN I`I` Nti CON MM MM MM C p ~t.C) NO 00 f`I` 0C0 oOM 00 tt~ 0Cfl O~ OO 0000 In~ 0000 rr MM ~~ ~d' NI` CO d' 00 I`f~ MM OCfl d'~ CO CD MM ~'~ U 00 00 0000 tt~ 00 d'~ CO CO 00 00 00 OCO d'~ 00 d'~ ~~ (pCp rr rr d-~ rr NN rr- ~~ ~~ NN rr rr rr 0 0 I~ 1` 00 00 f` I` 0 0 f` f` O O M M 0 0 0 0 O CO I` I` M M f` I` O N Q O ~ i ~ ~ r m O O ~ •~ (/1 O N I` r r p CO ~ N ~ O ~ i 0 N N ~ O ~M ~ C r ~ N ~ N ~~ ~ (n ~ ~~ N~ O ~ C N ~ ~ ~ _ ~ NO C~ Lp mN -p ~ O .L O 0 OQ N~ ~O >+ (~ 00 ~Q 0 ..~ p ~0 j m ~ QO 000 OV0 ~0 a N~ N Q0 ~U (nN ~~ LU ~~ mQ ~~ Z~ CO UM pQ ~Q ~O NQ ~ O tn0 NCO C) N O Q NU _ NO CO ~ oQ °~~ UU U ~~ ~U ~~ ~~U ~rn ~ o oU a~ ~ ~~ U~ .~nU c ~Q ~ y- ~ N •C Q -Op Q LL ~ J O Q O Ur ~~ ~ N O Q '= Q O N ~ U ~ 4 - V~ M N N cN/ 1 G . L ° -p C L N~ ~ C O a--+ r, Q \.J 5 Lr N L W T N ~ O {,yam U O C U r ~ ~ >> O ~ ~ C W ~ N W ~ N U O ~ lf7 L r N 00 ~ Ln C 0 Q t!') N M N z N > C t.(') Q a-' ~ .C M~ O U O (~ 00 C r N 0 N CV C N .C r~ ~ L r N O N 0 ~ cn 00 O ~ .C L(7 ~ I` .C f~ ~ I` ~ I` N 00 N ti L ~ N N O ~ ~ f` ° N- InW COCn rQ N- ~--U rO rJ r- r-- N~ r`O LnJ NU O i V ' N C C a i ~ C ~ ~ c ~ ~ ° ~ ~ N O ° ~ ~ ° °~ ° ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ° o ~ ~ c a = O C) •L ~ c c ~ ~ N z D ~ ~ 0 N (~ N ° W O ~ ~ ~ -~ = ~ D U ~ ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ .o s (~ ~ U ~ o ~ cn O ~ O ~ N _ L U m O o cn C Q N ~ cn _ m c ~ c ~ Q U c U ~ ~ L ~ a ~ ~ O ° - U d ~ c o Q ~ o U ~ c a U N Z O ~ ~ c ~ o L ~ ~ N C7 0 U ~ C o ~ O :~, >+ ~ N U p ~ v C U v ~ ~ +r ~ ~ o U C) L C - O ~ C o c n ~ o O ~ L ~, LZ ~ ° U L ° r-=~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ° L Q V L L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° C U p - ~ '~ .L O _ U O _ .C ~ N U V ~ = m ~ ~ ~ ~ L U ~ to C O m (q ~ O .Q O .~ O ~ L O , C ~ O U ~ N C O ~ U C U ~ Z O O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ -p ~ ~ 0 U U o ~ ~ ~ ~ ° _ ~ ~ Y U L ~ C ~ ~ ~ ° ~ L 'L' U W m (n ~ 2 ~ ~ U 2 (n ~ ~ ~ ~ ADMINISTRATION ~~ ~~ ~~ ' ~, August 13, 2007 Ms. Christine Shingleton Assistant City Manager City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Subject: Tustin Library -Pre-Qualification of Contractors Dear Christine, AUG 2 '7 2001 i DECEIVED ° vD AUG 2 7 2007 TUSTIN PUF3LIC 1N(~RKS DEPT. Griffin Structures, Inc. is forwarding the results of the pre-qualification of general contractors for the Tustin Library Project. A total of fourteen (14) contractors submitted pre-qualification packages for consideration by the City of Tustin. ' The pre-qualification process for the Tustin Library project was modeled after the Department of Industrial Relations format without any modifications by the City of Tustin. The DIR format utilizes two methods (parts) to determine the pre-qualification status for a perspective contractor. The methods and the results of each are summarized by the following: 1. Part I: Essential Requirements for Qualification: This section consists of nine (9) questions with the condition that any one question answered incorrectly automatically disqualifies the contractor. Attached is Exhibit A which is the results to Part 1 including the answers to each of the nine (9) questions. In summary, all fourteen (14) contractors satisfy this major component of the Pre-Qualification process. 2. Part II: List of Scorable Questions. The list of scorable questions is divided into three sections. The following are the sections and results for each from each of the contractors: Section I: History of the business and organizational performance. This section consists of sixteen (16) questions with a possible maximum score of 76. The DIR recommends a minimum score of 57 to pre-qualify. Attached is Exhibit B which is the results to Section 1 including the answers to each of the sixteen (16) questions and the corresponding score for each contractor. In summary, all fourteen (14) contractors scored above the minimum required score of 57 and therefore satisfies this major component of the Pre-Qualification process. GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INCORPORATED Corporate Headquarters 385 Second Street Laguna Beach, California 92651 Tel 949.497.9000 Fax 949.497.8883 CALIFORNIA NEVADA ARIZONA Section II: Compliance with occupational safety and health laws, workers' compensation and other labor legislation. This section consists of eleven (11) questions with a possible maximum score of 53. The DIR recommends a minimum score of 38 to pre-qualify. Attached is Exhibit C which is the results to Section II including the answers to each of the eleven (11) questions and the corresponding score for each contractor. In summary, all fourteen (14) Contractors scored above the minimum required score of 38 and therefore satisfies this major component of the Pre-Qualification process. Section III: Completion of recent projects and quality of performance. This section includes a series of interview questions, and may also include questions about recently completed (public or private) construction projects. For the interview questions, the DIR recommends that a public agency interview project managers for the owners of two completed projects. DIR recommends a scoring system that would allow a maximum score of 120 points for each interview. For these questions, DIR recommends qualification for a contractor whose score on each of the two interviews is 72 points or more, a denial of pre- qualification for a contractor whose score on either interview is less than 55 points, and an additional interview with another reference if the score resulting from one interview is between 55 and 72 points. The approach taken to the interviews utilized the Model Interview Questions provided by the DIR and also the recommend scoring for each of the thirteen (13) questions. The Contractors are required to provide a minimum of six (6) past completed projects. The goal was to select two projects that closely represented the project being considered by the City of Tustin. A representative from Griffin Structures contacted the project's reference and conducted each of the two interviews. The project reference was not the contractor, but the individual that represented the ownership of each completed project. The interviews consisted of the DIR questions being asked and the answers were provided strictly by the project reference. The scores to each question were not established by Griffm Structures. Due to the subjective nature of the questions, the scores varied between individual project references contacted. Attached is Exhibit D which is the interview questions for two recently completed projects for each of the fourteen. (14) contractors and the corresponding scores based on the responses given by the references contacted. In summary, all fourteen (14) contractors scored above the minimum required score of 72 for each of the two interviews and therefore satisfies this major component of the Pre-Qualification process. In conclusion, all fourteen (14) contractors are pre-qualified in response to the City of Tustin's request for pre-qualification of bidders commencing with forthcoming public work bid. A copy of the pre- qualification request package issued to all contractors is attached for reference. If you have any questions regarding the above and/or the attached results then please feel free to contact myself at your earliest convenience. GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INCORPORATED Corporate Headquarters 385 Second Street Laguna Beach, California 92651 Te1949.497.9000 Fax 949.497.8883 CALIFORNIA NEVADA ARIZONA Griffin Structures, Inc. GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INCORPORATED Corporate Headquarters 385 Second Street Laguna Beach, Califonva 92651 Tel 949.497.9000 Fax 949.497.8883 CALIFORNIA NEVADA ARIZONA Vice President EXHIBIT A PART I: ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALIFICATION TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS PART 1: ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALIFICATION Note: Contractor will immediately be disqualified if the answer to any questions 1 through 5 is "No" Note: Contractor will immediately be disqualified if the answer to any questions 6,7,8 or 9 is "Yes". QUESTION 1. Contractor possesses a valid and current Class "B" Califomla Contractor's license for the project or projects for which it intends to submit a bid RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.J. DAUM X S.J. AMOROSO X SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEIL X WOOOCLIFF CORP. X QUESTION 2. Contractor has a commercial liability insurance polity with a polity limit of at least $2,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate, commercial automobile insurance with a limit of at least $1,000,000, and California worker's compensation insurance with a limit of at least $1,000,000. RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.J. DAUM X 5.1. AMOROSO X SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEIL X WOODCLIFF CORP. X QUESTION 3. Contractor has current workers' compensation insurance policy as required by the Labor Code of is legally self-Insured pursuant to Labor Code section 3700 et. seq. RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.J. DAUM X S.J. AMOROSO X SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEIL X WOODCLIFF CORP. X TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 4. Have you attached your latest copy of a reviewed or audited financial statement with accompanying notes and supplemental information. RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS • BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.1. DAUM X S.J. AMOROSO X SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEIL X WOODCLIFF CORP. X QUESTION 5. Have you attached a notarized statement from an admitted surety insurer (approved by the California Department of Insurance) and authorized to issue bonds in the State of California, which states a) that your current bonding capacity is sufficient for the project for which you see pre-qualification for a single project. RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.J. DAUM X S.J. AMOROSO X SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEiI X WOODCLIFF CORP. X QUESTION 6. Has your contractor's license been revoked at any time in the last five years RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.J. DAUM X S.J. AMOROSO X - SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEIL X WOODCLIFF CORP. X TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 7. Hasa surety firm completed a contract on your behalf, or paid for completion because your firm was default terminated by the project owner within the last (S) years? • RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.1. DAUM X S.J. AMOROSO X SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEIL X WOODCLIFF CORP. X QUESTION 8. At this time of submitting this pre-qualification form, is your firm ineligible to bid on or be awarded a public works contract, or perform as a subcontractor on a public works contract, pursuant to either Labor Code section 1777.1 or Labor Code section 1777.7? RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.J. DAUM X S.J. AMOROSO X SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEIL X WOODCUFF CORP. X QUESTION 9. At any time during the last five years, has your firm, or any of Its owners or officers, been convicted of a crime involving the awarding of a contract of a government construction project, or the bidding or performance of a govemment contract? RESPONSE YES NO COMMENTS BERNARDS X ERICKSON-HALL X GKKWORKS X HOWARD S. WRIGHT X HARBOR X MORILLO X P.H. HAGOPIAN X PINNER X PW CONSTRUCTION X R.1. DAUM X S.J. AMOROSO X SWINERTON X W.E. O'NEIL X WOODCLIFF CORP. X EXHIBITB PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION I: HISTORY OF THE BUSINESS AND ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS EXHIBIT B TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION 1: HISTORY OF THE BUSINESS AND ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE D.I.R. RECOMMENDS USE OF A PASSING SCORE OF 57 OUT OF A POSSIBLE 76 POINTS SEE ATTACHED "LIST OF THE SCORABLE QUESTIONS AND THE SCORING INSTRUCTIONS" PROVIDED BY THE D.I.R. QUESTION 1. How many years has your organization been in business in California as a contractor under your present business name and license number? RESPONSE YEARS SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS 33 5 ERICKSON-HALL 9 5 GKKWORKS 10 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT 2.S 0 The Howard S. Wright family of affiliated companies has been established for over 120 years. HARBOR 8 5 MORILLO 30 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN 21 5 PINNER 51 5 PW CONSTRUCTION 23 5 R.J. DAUM 71 5 S.J. AMOROSO 30 5 SWINERTON 119 5 W.E.O'NEIL 22 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. li 5 QUESTION 2. Is your firm currently the debtor in a bankruptry case? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 3 ERICKSON-HALL X 3 GKKWORKS X 3 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 3 HARBOR X 3 MORILLO X 3 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 3 PINNER X 3 PW CONSTRUCTION X 3 R.J. DAUM X 3 S.J. AMOROSO X 3 SWINERTON X 3 W.E.O'NEIL X 3 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 3 QUESTION 3. Was your firm in bankruptry any time during the last five years? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 3 ERICKSON-HALL X 3 GKKWORKS X 3 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X• 3 HARBOR X 3 MORILLO X 3 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 3 PINNER X 3 PW CONSTRUCTION X 3 R.1. DAUM X 3 S.J. AMOROSO X 3 SWINERTON X 3 W.E.O'NEIL X 3 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 3 EXHIBIT B TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 4. Has any CSLB license held by your firm or its Responsible Managing Employed (RME) or Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) been suspended within the last five years? • RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X S MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X S S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X S QUESTION 5. At any time in the last five years, has your firm been assessed and paid liquidated damages after completion of a project, under a construction contract with either a public or private owner? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X S MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X S PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 0 R.J. DAUM X 5 5.1. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X S W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION Liquidated damages were assessed in the amount of $243,000 due to schedule delays 6. In the last five years has your firm, or any firm with which any of your company's owners, officers or partners was associated, been debarred, disqualified, removed or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing, any government agency or public works project for any reason? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X S ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X S HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J.OAUM X S 5.1. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 EXHIBIT B TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 7. In the last five years, has your firm been denied an award of a public works contract based on a finding by a public agency that your company was not a responsible bidder? • RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5, ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X ~ S MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X S R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X S SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION 8. In the past flue years, has any claim against your firm concerning your firm's work on a construction project, been filed in a court or arbitration? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 0 D.I.R. recommends a score of 0 points if more than 5 such instances. W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION 9. In the past five years, has your firm made any claim against a project owner concerning work on a project or payment for a contract, and filed that claim in court of arbitration? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORIlLO X 0 D.I.R. recommends a score of 0 points if more than 2 such instances. P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 EXHIBIT B TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 10. At any time during the past five years, has any surety company made any payments on your firm's behalf as a result of a default, to satisfy any claims made against a performance or payment bond issued on yoer firm's behalf in connection with a construction project, either public or private? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X S ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION 11. In the last five years, has any insurance carrier, for any form of insurance, refused to renew the insurance polity for your firm? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X S P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X S R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X S SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION 12. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers, or partners ever been found liable in a civil suk, or found guilty in a criminal action, for making any false claim or material representation to any public agenry or entity? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X S HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X S R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 EXHIBIT B TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 13. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers, or partners ever been convicted of a crime involving any federal, state, or local law related to construction? • RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 ' R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION 14. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers, or partners ever been wnvided of a federal or state crime of fraud, theft, or any other act of dishonesty? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEiI X 5 WOODCUFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION 15. If your firm was required to pay a premium of more than one percent for a performance and payment bond on any project(s) on which your firm worked at any time during the last three years, state the percentage that your firm was required to pay. RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X S 6KKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 • PW CONSTRUCTION X 3 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 EXHIBIT B TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 16. During the last five years, has your firm ever been denied bond credit by a surety company, or has there ever been a period of time when your firm had no surety bond in place during a public construction project when one was required? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X S SWINERTON X S W.E.0'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 SCORING RESULTS SCORE PASS FAIL BERNARDS 76 X ERICKSON-HALL 76 X GKKWORKS 76 X HOWARD 5. WRIGHT 71 X HARBOR 76 X MORILLO 71 X P.H. HAGOPIAN 76 X PINNER 76 X PW CONSTRUCTION 69 X R.J. DAUM 76 X S.J. AMOROSO 76 X SWINERTON 71 X W.E.0'NEIL 76 X WOODCLIFF CORP. 76 X A LIST OF THE SCORABLE QUESTIONS AND THE SCORING INSTRUCTIONS The scorable questions arise in three different areas: (I) History of the business and organizational performance; (II) Compliance with occupational safety and health laws, workers' compensation and other labor legislation; and (III) Completion of recent projects and qualm of performance. The interview questions (interviews by the public agency of project managers on projects completed recently by the contractor) are included in group III. In apre-qualification procedure for a single proTct, this last category would also include a scoring of the number of recently completed projects that are similar to the project on which pre- qualification is at issue. Note: Not all questions in the questionnaire are scorable; some questions simply ask for information about the contractor firm's structure, officers and history. This document includes only those questions that are "scorable." The question numbers in this document are the numbers used in the questionnaire. Thus, the questions included here begin with question number 6, and there are a few breaks in the numerical sequence. The Scores Needed for Prequalification To prequalify, a contractor would be required to have a passing grade within each of the three large categories referred to above. For Section I, "History of the business and organizational performance," DIR recommends use of a passing score of 57 on this portion of the questionnaire (of a maximum score of 76 on this portion of the questionnaire). For Section II, Compliance with occupational safety and health laws, workers' compensation and other labor le 'station DIR recommends use of a passing score of 38 on this portion of the questionnaire (of a maximum score of 53 points on this portion of the questionnaire). Section III, Completion of recent projects~qualit~ f performance, includes a series of interview questions, and may also include questions about recently completed (public or private) construction projects. For the interview questions, DIIZ recommends that a public agency interview project managers for the owners of two completed projects. DIR recommends a scoring system that would allow a maximum score of 120 points for each interview. For these questions, DIR recommends qualification for a contractor whose score on each of two interviews is 72 points or more; a denial ofpre-qualification for a contractor whose score on either interview is less than 55 points; and an additional 19 interview with another referenee if the score resulting from one interview is between 55 points and 72 points. DIR makes no recommendation about how to score a contractor's answers about recently completed past projects. Because of the wide range of projects that a public agency maybe planning, and the similarly wide range in the skills, abilities, and experience that a public agency will consider most important for a pending project, it is impossible to propose a useful model scoring system to apply to the answers given about a contractor's completed projects. 4uestions about History of the Business and Organizational Performance (16 questions) 1. How many years has your organization been in business in California as a contractor under your present business name and license number? years 3 years or more = 2 points 4 years = 3 points S years = 4 ptS 6 years or more = S points 2. Is your firm currently the debtor in a bankruptcy case? ^ Yes ^ No "No" = 3 points" "Yes" = 0 points 3. Was your firm in bankruptcy any time during the last five years? (This question refers only to a bankruptcy action that was not described in answer to question 7, above). ^ Yes ^ No "No" = 3 points" "Yes" = 0 points 4. Has any CSLB license held by your firm or its Responsible Managing Employee (RME) or Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) been suspended within the last five years? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = 0 points 20 A 5. At any time in the last five years, has your firm been assessed and paid liquidated damages after completion of a project, under a construction contract with either a public or private owner? ^ Yes ^ No No projects with liquidated damages of more than $50,000, or one project with liquidated damages = S points Two projects with liquidated damages of more than $50,000 = 3 points Any other answer: no points 6. In the last five years has your firm, or any firm with which any of your company's owners, officers or partners was associated, been debarred, disqualified, removed. or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing, any government agency or public works project for any reason? NOTE: "Associated with" refers to another construction firm in which an owner, partner or officer of your firm held a similar position, and which is listed in response to question 1 c or 1 d on .this form. . ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = 0 points 7. In the last five years, has your firm been denied an award of a public works contract based on a finding by a public agency that your company was not a responsible bidder? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = 0 points NOTE: The following two questions refer only to disputes between your firm and the owner of a project. You need not include information about disputes between your firm and a supplier, another contractor, or subcontractor. You need not include information about "pass-through" disputes in which the actual dispute is between a sub-contractor and a project owner. Also, you may omit reference to all disputes about amounts of less than $50,000. r 21 8. In the past five years, has any claim a~;air=st your firm concerning your firm's work on a construction project, been filed in court or arbitration? ^ Yes ^ No If the~rm's average gross revenue for the last three years was less than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenue for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicah'ng 1, 2, or 3 such instance 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances. 9. In the past five years, hay your firm made any claim against a project owner concerning work on a project or payment for a contract, and filed that claim in court or arbitration? ^ Yes ^ No If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instance If your~rm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances 22 10. At any time during the past five years, has any surety company made any payments on your firm's behalf as a result of a default, to satisfy any claims made against a performance or payment bond issued on your firm's behalf in connection with a construction project, either public or private? ^ Yes ^ No S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such claim. 3 points for "Yes" indicating no more than 2 such claims Subtract five points for "Yes" if more than 2 such. claims 11. In the last five years, has any insurance carrier, for any form of insurance, refused to renew the insurance policy for your firm? . ^ Yes ^ No S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances. . 12. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers, or partners ever been found liable in a civil suit, or found guilty in a criminal action, for making any false claim or material misrepresentation to any public agency or entity? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = subtract S points 13. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been convicted of a crime involving any federal, state,' or local law related to construction? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = subtract S points 14. Has your firm or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been convicted of a federal or state crime of fraud, theft, or any other act of dishonesty? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = subtract S points 23 15. If your firm was required to pay a premium of more than one per cent for a performance and payment bond on any project(s) on which your firm worked at any time during the last three years, state the percentage that your firm was required to pay. You may provide an explanation for a percentage rate higher than one per cent, if you wish to do so. S points if the rate is no more than one per cent 3 points if the rate was no higher than 1.10 per cent 0 points for any other answer. 16. During the last five years, has your firm ever been denied bond credit by a surety company, or has there ever been a period of time when your firm had no surety bond in place during a public construction project when one was required? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = 0 points 4uestions about compliance with safety, workers compensation, prevailing wage and apprenticeship laws. (11 questions) 1. Has CAL OSHA cited and assessed penalties against your firm for any "serious," "willful" or "repeat" violations of its safety or health regulations in the past five years? Note: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, you need not include information about it. ^ Yes ^ No If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million, .scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instances. If the~rm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 .such instance 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances. 24 2. Has the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration cited and assessed penalties against your firm in the past five years? Note: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the appropriate appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, you need not include information about it. ^ Yes ^ No If yes, attach a separate signed page describing each citation. If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. D points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances. If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than DSO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances: 3. Has the EPA or any Air Quality Management District or any Regional Water Quality Control Board cited and assessed penalties against either your firm or the owner of a project on which your firm was the contractor, in the past five years? NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a .citation and the Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, or if there is ~a court appeal pending, you need not include information about the citation. - ^ Yes ^ No If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes"indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances. 25 4. How often do you require documented safety meetings to beheld for construction employees and field supervisors during the course of a project? 3 points for an answer of once each week or more often. 0 points for any other answer 5. List your firm's Experience Modification Rate (EMR) (California workers' compensation insurance) for each of the past three premium years: NOTE: An Experience Modification Rate is issued to your firm annually by your workers' compensation insurance carrier. Current year: Previous year: Year prior to previous year: If your EMR for any of these three years is or was 1.00 or higher, you may, if you wish, attach a letter of explanation. NOTE: An Experience Modification Rate is issued to your firm annually by your workers' compensation insurance carrier. S points for three year average EMR of . 95 or less 3 points for three year average of EMR of more than .9S but no more than 1.00 0 points for any other EMR 6. Within the last five years, has there ever been a period when your firm had employees but was without workers' compensation insurance or state-approved self-insurance? ^ Yes ^ No S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating l such instance. 0 points for any other answer. 26 7. Has there been more than one occasion during the last five years on which your firm was required to pay either back wages or penalties for your own firm's failure to comply with the state's prevailing wage laws? ^ Yes ^ No NOTE: This question refers only to your owa firm's violation of prevailing wage laws, not to violations of the prevailing wage laws by a subcontractor. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less'than DSO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No, " or "Yes" indicating either 1 or Z such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either S or 6 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 8. During the last five years, has there been more than one occasion on which your own firm has been penalized or required to pay back wages for failure to comply with the federal Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements? ^ Yes ^ No If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No, " or "Yes" indicating either 1 or Z such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either- "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either S or 6 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 27 9. Provide the name, address and telephone number of the apprenticeship program sponsor(s) (approved by the California Division of Apprenticeship Standards) that will provide apprentices to your company for use on any public work project for which you are awarded a contract by the City of Tustin. S points if at least one approved apprenticeship program is listed. 0 points for any other answer. 10. If your firm operates its own State-approved apprenticeship program: (a) Identify the craft or crafts in which your firm provided apprenticeship training in the past year. (b) State the year in which each such apprenticeship program was approved, and attach evidence of the most recent California Apprenticeship Council approval(s) of your apprenticeship program(s). (c) State the number of individuals who were employed by your firm as apprentices at any time during the past three years in each apprenticeship and the number of persons who, during the past three years, completed apprenticeships in each craft while employed by your firm. S points if one or more persons completed an approved apprenticeship while employed by your firm. 0 points if no persons completed an approved apprenticeship while employer by your firm. 28 1 1. At any time during the last five years, has your firm been found to have violated any provision of California apprenticeship laws or regulations, or the laws pertaining to use of apprentices on public works? NOTE: You may omit reference to any incident that occurred prior to January 1,. 1998 if the violation was by a subcontractor and your firm, as general contractor on a project, had no knowledge of the subcontractor's violation at the time they occurred. ^ Yes ^ No. If yes, provide the date(s) of such findings, and attach copies of the Department's final decision(s). If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No,"or "Yes" indicatiing either 1 or 2 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instance 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instance If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either S or 6 such instance 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 29 EXHIBIT C PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION II: COMPLIANCE WITH OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH LAWS, WORKERS'S COMPENSATION AND OTHER LABOR LEGISLATION TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS EXHIBIT C TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION II: COMPLIANCE WITH OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH LAWS, WORKERS COMPENSATION AND OTHER LABOR LEGISLATION DIR RECOMMENDS USE OF A PASSING SCORE OF 38 OUT OF A POSSIBLE 53 POINTS SEE ATTACHED "LIST OF THE SCORABLE QUESTIONS AND THE SCORING INSTRUCTIONS" PROVIDED BY THE D.I.R. QUESTION i. Has CAL OSHA cited and assessed penalties against your firm for any "serious", "willful" or "repeat" violations of its safety or health regulations in the past five years? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X S HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 Appeal was filed and Cal/OSHA agreed that previous violation was not Contractor's liability. P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X S PW CONSTRUCTION X S R.J. DAUM X 5 5.1. AMOROSO X S SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION 2. Has the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration cited and assessed penalties against your firm in the past five years RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X S PW CONSTRUCTION X 0 A total of seven (7) citations were issued. DIR recommends (0) points for more than 5 instances. R.J. DAUM X S S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X S QUESTION 3. Has the EPA or any Air Quality Ma nagement District or any Regional Water Quality Control Board cited and assessed penalties against either your firm or the owner of a project on which your firm was the contractor, in the past five years RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X S HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X S EXHIBIT C TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 4. How often do you require documented safety meetings to be held for construction employees and field supervisors during the course of a project? RESPONSE SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS WEEKLY 3 ERICKSON-HALL WEEKLY 3 GKKWORKS WEEKLY 3 HOWARD 5. WRIGHT WEEKLY 3 HARBOR WEEKLY 3 MORILLO WEEKLY 3 P.H. HAGOPIAN WEEKLY 3 PINNER WEEKLY 3 PW CONSTRUCTION WEEKLY 3 R.1. DAUM WEEKLY 3 S.J. AMOROSO WEEKLY 3 SWINERTON 81-MONTHLY 0 DIR recommends (3) points for once a week and (0) points for any other answer W.E. O'NEIL WEEKLY 3 WOODCLIFF CORP. WEEKLY 3 QUESTION 5. List your firm's EMR for each of the past three premium years. RESPONSE CURRENT PREVIOUS PRIOR AVG. SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS 0.73 0.67 0.98 0.79 5 ERICKSON-HALL 0.88 0.88 1.05 0.94 5 GKKWORKS 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT 0.54 0.54 0.67 0.58 5 HARBOR 0.82 ~ 0.82 0.90 0.85 5 MORILLO 1.12 0.85 0.83 0.93 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN 0.89 0.89 0.86 0.88 5 PINNER 0.69 0.69 1.06 0.81 5 PW CONSTRUCTION 0.81 0.87 1.00 0.89 5 R.J. DAUM 1.11 0.85 0.72 0.89 5 S.J. AMOROSO 0.63 0.67 0.83 0.71 5 SWINERTON 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.42 5 W.E.0'NEIL 0.83 •0.95 0.89 0.89 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.99 3 QUESTION 6. Within the last five years, has there ever been a period when your firm had employees but was without workers' compensation insurance or state approved self-insurance? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 EXHIBIT C TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 7. Has there been more than once occasion during the last five years on which your firm was required to pay either back wages or penalties for your own firm's failure to comply with the state's prevailing wage laws? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X S HARBOR X S MORILLO X S P.H. HAGOPIAN X S PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.1. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X S QUESTION 8. Ouring the last flue years, has there been more than one occasion on which your own firm has been penalized or required to pay back wages for failure to comply wRh the federal Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X S P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X S SWINERTON X 5 W.E.0'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 QUESTION 9. Provide the name, address and telephone number, of the apprenticeship program sponsor(s) that will provide apprentices to your company for use on any public work project for which you are awarded a contract by the City of Tustin RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 0 Contractor does not utilize an apprenticeship program due to no self performing work. ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 0 Contractor does not utilize an apprenticeship program due to no self performing work. HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 0 Contractor does not utilize an apprenticeship program due to no self performing work. HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X S PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM x 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E. O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 EXHIBIT C TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS QUESTION 10. If your firm operates its own State-approved apprenticeship program: RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 0 ERICKSON-HALL X 0 GKKWORKS X 0 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 0 HARBOR X 0 MORILLO X 0 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 0 PINNER X 0 PW CONSTRUCTION X 0 R.J. DAUM X 0 S.J. AMORO50 X 0 SWINERTON X 0 W.E.O'NEiI X 0 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 0 QUESTION 11. At any time during the last five years, has your firm been found to have violated any provision of California apprenticeship laws or regulations, or the laws pertaining to use of apprentices on public works? RESPONSE YES NO SCORE COMMENTS BERNARDS X 5 ERICKSON-HALL X 5 GKKWORKS X 5 HOWARD S. WRIGHT X 5 HARBOR X 5 MORILLO X 5 P.H. HAGOPIAN X 5 PINNER X 5 PW CONSTRUCTION X 5 R.J. DAUM X 5 S.J. AMOROSO X 5 SWINERTON X 5 W.E.O'NEIL X 5 WOODCLIFF CORP. X 5 SCORING RESULTS SCORE PASS FAIL COMMENTS BERNARDS 43 X ERICKSON-HALL 48 X GKKWORKS 43 X HOWARD S. WRIGHT 43 X HARBOR 48 X MORILLO 48 X P.H. HAGOPIAN 48 X PINNER 48 X PW CONSTRUCTION 43 X R.J. DAUM 48 X S.J. AMOROSO 48 X SWINERTON 45 X W.E.O'NEIL 48 X WOODCLIFF CORP. 46 X A LIST OF THE SCORABLE (}UESTIONS AND THE SCORING INSTRUCTIONS The storable questions arise in three different areas: (I) History of the business and organizational ,performance; (II) Compliance with occupational safety and health laws, workers' compensation and other labor le 'sly ation; and (III) Completion of recent projects and quality of perforrnarice. The interview questions (interviews by the public agency of project managers on projects completed recently by the contractor) are included in group III. In apre-qualification procedure for a single project, this last category would also include a scoring of the number of recently completed projects that are similar to the project on which pre- qualification is at issue. Note: Not all questions. in the questionnaire are storable; some questions simply ask for information about the contractor firm's structure, officers and history. This document includes only those questions that are "storable." The question numbers in this document are the numbers used in the questionnaire. Thus, the questions included here begin with. question number 6, and there are a few breaks in the numerical sequence. The Scores Needed for Prequalification To prequalify, a contractor would be required to have a passing grade within each of the three large categories. referred to above. For Section I, "History of the business and organizational performance," DIR recommends use of a passing score of 57 on this portion of the questionnaire (of a maximum score of 76 on this portion of the questionnaire). For Section II, Compliance with occupational safety and health laws, workers' compensation and other labor legislation DIR recommends use of a passing score of 38 on this portion of the~questionnaire (of a maximum score of 53 points on this portion of the questionnaire). Section III, Completion of recent projects and quality of performance, includes a series of interview questions, and may also include questions about recently completed (public or private) construction projects. For the interview questions, DIR recommends that a public agency interview project managers for the owners of two completed projects. DIR recommends a scoring system that would allow a maximum score of 120 points for each interview. For these questions, DIR recommends qualification for a contractor whose score on each of two interviews is 72 points or more; a denial ofpre-qualification for a contractor whose score on either interview is less than 55 points; and an additional 19 interview with another reference if the score resulting from one interview is between 55 points and 72 points. DIR makes no recommendation about how to score a contractor's answers about recently completed past projects. Because of the wide range of projects that a public agency maybe planning, and the similarly wide range in the skills, abilities, and experience that a public agency will consider most important for a pending project, it is impossible to propose a useful model scoring system to apply to the answers given about a contractor's completed projects. Questions about History of the Business and Organizational Performance (16 questions) 1. How many years has your organization been in business in California as a contractor under your present business name and license number? years 3 years or more = 2 points 4 years = 3 points S years = 4 pts 6 years or more = S points 2. Is your firm currently the debtor in a bankruptcy case? ^ Yes ^ No "No" = 3 points" "Yes" = 0 points 3. Was your firm in bankruptcy any time during the last five years? (This question refers only to a bankruptcy action that was not described in answer to question 7, above). ^ Yes ^ No "No" = 3 points" "Yes" = 0 points 4. Has any CSLB license held by your firm or its Responsible Managing Employee (RME) or Responsible Managing Officer (RMO) been suspended within the last five years? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = 0 points ~0 5. At any time in the last five years, has your firm been assessed and paid liquidated damages after completion of a project, under a construction contract with either a public or private owner? ^ Yes ^ No No projects with liquidated damages of more than $50,000, or one project with liquidated damages = S points Two projects with liquidated damages of more than $50,000 = 3 points Any other answer: no points 6. In the last five years has your firm, or any firm with which any of your company's owners, officers or partners was associated, been debarred, disqualified, removed or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing, any government agency or public works project for any reason? NOTE: "Associated with" refers to another constrµction firm in which an owner, partner or officer of your firm held a similar position, and which is listed in response to question lc or ld on.this form. . ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = 0 points 7. In the last five years, has your firm been denied an award of a public works contract based on a finding by a public agency that your company was not a responsible bidder? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = 0 points * * * * *' NOTE: The following two questions refer only to disputes between your firm and the owner of a project. You need not include. information about disputes between your firm and a supplier, another contractor, or subcontractor. You need not include information about "pass-through" disputes in which the actual dispute is between a sub-contractor and a project owner. Also, you may omit reference to all disputes about amounts of less than 550,000. 21 8. In the past five years, has any claim asst your firm concerning your firm's work on a construction project, been filed in court or arbitration? ^ Yes ^ No If the firm's average gross revenue for the last three years was less than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes'.' indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenue for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicadng 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances. 9. In the past five years, hay your firm made any claim against a project owner concerning work on a project or payment for a contract, and fled that claim in court or arbitration? ^ Yes ^ No If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3~ points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as, follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances: 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances. r 22 r 10. At any time during the past five years, has any surety company made any payments on your firm's behalf as a result of a default, to satisfy any claims made against a performance or payment bond issued on your firm's behalf in connection with a construction project, either public or private? ^ Yes ^ No S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such claim. 3 points for "Yes" indican'ng no more than 2 such claims Subtract five points for "Yes" if more than 2 such claims 11. In the last five years, has ~ any insurance carrier, for any form of insurance, refused to renew the insurance policy for your firm? ^ Yes ^ No S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instances 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances. 12. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers, or partners ever been found liable in a civil suit, or found guilty in a criminal action, for making any false claim or material misrepresentation to any public agency or entity? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = subtract S points 13. Has your firm, or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been convicted of a crime involving any federal, state,' or local law related to construction? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = subtract S points 14. Has your firm or any of its owners, officers or partners ever been convicted of a federal or state crime of fraud, theft, or any other act of dishonesty? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = su= act S points 23 s 15. If your firm was required to pay a premium of more than one per cent for a performance and payment bond on any project(s) on which your firm worked at any time during the last three years, state the percentage that your firm was required to pay. You may provide an explanation for a percentage rate higher than one per cent, if you wish to do so. S points if the rate is no more than one per cent 3 points if the rate was no higher than 1.10 per cent 0 points for any other answer. 16. During the last five years, has your firm ever been denied bond credit by a surety company, or has there ever been a period of time when your firm had no surety bond in place during a public construction project when one was required? ^ Yes ^ No No = S points Yes = 0 points Questions about compliance with safety. workers compensation. prevailfng wage and apprenticeship laws. (11 questions) 1. Has CAL OSHA cited and assessed penalties against your firm for any "serious," "willful" or "repeat" violations of its safety or health regulations in the past five years? Note: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board has aot yet ruled on your appeal, you need not include information about it. ^ Yes ^ No If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than 2 such instances. If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than DSO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 .such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances. 24 t 2. Has the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration cited and assessed penalties against your firm in the past five years? Note: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the appropriate appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, you need not include information about it. ^ Yes ^ No If yes, attach a separate signed page describing each citation. If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than DSO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating. 2 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances: If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than DSO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instance, 3. Has the EPA or any Air Quality Management District or any Regional Water Quality Control Board cited and assessed penalties against either your firm or the owner of a project on which your firm was the contractor, in the past five years? NOTE: If you have filed an appeal of a citation and the Appeals Board has not yet ruled on your appeal, or if there is ~a court appeal pending, you need not include information about the citation. - ^ Yes ^ No If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than DSO million,- scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instance 0 points for "Yes" or if more than 2 such instances If the firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than DSO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1, 2, or 3 such instance 3 points for "Yes"indicating either 4 or S such instances. 0 points for "Yes" if more than S such instances. 25 ,.. 4. How often do you require documented safety meetings to be held for construction employees and field supervisors during the course of a project? 3 points for an answer of once each week or more often. 0 points for any other answer 5. List your firm's Experience Modification Rate (EMR) (California workers' compensation insurance) for each of the past three premium years: NOTE: An Experience Modification Rate is issued to your firm annually by your workers' compensation insuraace carrier. Current year: Previous year: Year prior to previous year: If your EMR for any of these three years is or was 1.00 or higher, you may, if you wish, attach a letter of explanation. NOTE: An Experience Modification Rate is issued to your firm annually by your workers' compensation insurance carrier. S points for three year average EMR of . 9S or less 3 points for three year average of EMR of more than .9S but no more than 1.00 0 points for any other EMR 6. Within the last five years, has there ever been a period when your firm had employees but was without workers' compensation insurance or state-approved self-insurance? ^ Yes ^ No S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating 1 such instance. 0 points for any other answer. 26 7. Has there been more than one occasion during the last five years on which your firm was required to pay either back wages or penalties for your own finm's failure to comply with the state's prevailing wage laws? ^ Yes ^ No NOTE: This question refers only to your own firm's violation of prevailing wage taws, not to violations of the prevailing wage taws by a subcontractor. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less'than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No, " or "Yes" indicating either 1 or 2 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances: If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either S or 6 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 8. During the last five years, has there been more than one occasion on which your own firm has been penalized or required to pay back wages for failure to comply with the federal Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements? ^ Yes ^ No If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million, ,scoring is as follows: S points for either "No, " or "Yes" indicating either 1 or Z such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either S or 6 such instances. _~, 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 27 9. Provide the name, address and telephone number of the apprenticeship program sponsor(s) (approved by the California Division of Apprenticeship Standards) that will provide apprentices to your company for use on any public work project for which you are awarded a contract by the City of Tustin. S points if at least one approved apprenticeship program is listed. 0 points for any other answer. I0. If your firm operates its own State-approved apprenticeship program: (a) Identify the craft or crafts in which your firm provided apprenticeship training in the past year. (b) State the year in which each such apprenticeship program was approved, and attach evidence of the most recent California Apprenticeship Council approval(s) of your apprenticeship program(s). . (c) State the number of individuals who were employed by your firm as apprentices at any time during the past three years in each apprenticeship and the number of persons who, during the past three years, completed apprenticeships in each craft while employed by your firm. S points if one or more persons completed an approved apprenticeship while employed by your firm. 0 points if no persons completed an approved apprenticeship while employer by your firm. 28 s 1 t . At any time during the last five years, has your firm been found to have violated any provision of California apprenticeship laws or regulations, or the laws pertaining to use of apprentices on public works? NOTE: You may omit reference to any incident that occurred prior to January 1, 1998 if the violation was by a subcontractor and your firm, as general contractor on a project, had no knowledge of the subcontractor's violation at the time they occurred. ^ Yes ^ No. If yes, provide the date(s) of such findings, and attach copies of the Department's final decision(s). If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No,"or "Yes" indicating either 1 or 2 such instance. 3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instance 0 points for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances. If your firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than $SO million, scoring is as follows: S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating no more than 4 such instances. 3 points for "Yes" indicating either S or 6 such instances. 0 points for "Yes" and more than 6 such instances. 29 EXHIBIT D MODEL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS Tustin Library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS ANO QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: BERNARDS REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 GIUESTION Dr. Pat Godfrey, Fullerton Paul Mang, Ocean Park School District (714) 447-7400 Hotels, CourtyaM by Marriott - Valencia (805) 432-8225 Brief description of the project $65 mil new school from ground 141 room 3 story hotel with up -acted as CM banquet rooms and kitchen facilities, included all sitework, pools and spa. Acted as CM 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresobed on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 9 9 ersonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 9 8 su rvision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on 9 8 the 'ob? Max. 10 ints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 9 10 u ates? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 9 9 schedule that our a enc usiness roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes°). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 8 8 the contractor res nsible for the dale in com letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 7 9 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 8 10 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of turning in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- 8 ~ built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 oints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were - an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 8 10 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 'nts 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 10 8 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.°) 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work 9 overall? Max. 10 ints TOTAL SCORE: 103 !i'6 PASS PASS Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: ERICKSON-HALL REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 QUESTION Cherokee Point Elementary La Mesa Fire Station #11 School Roger Garza (619) 571- Matt Souttsre (619) 667-1171 8719 Brief description of the project 60,000 sf elementary school w/ 2 Fire Station 8 Emergency Ops playgrounds, steel construction center. 21,000 sf steel bldg w wood framing, included all site development work, complex 'ob 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 oints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 9 9 rsonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 10 8 su rvision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on 10 9 the 'ob? Max. 10 ints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other papennrork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 10 9 u etas? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 10 8 schedule that our a nc business a roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 10 7 the contractor res nsible for the dale in com lotion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to pertorm change order work. 10 7 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 9 9 contractor integrated the change onier work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of turning in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- 9 5 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual - 9 8 difficu in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 10 10 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work 10 9 overall? Max. 10 oints TOTAL SCORE: 116 98 PASS PASS Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION 111: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: GKKWORKS REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 QUESTION Carl Heimberger, City of Carl Hstmbsrgsr, City of Anaheim 14 765-4306 Anaheim 14 765-4306 Brief description of the project West Anaheim Youth Center - Haskett Branch Library - was a police facility, community Construction of new library center and gymnasium 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 6 9 ersonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate ~ 8 su rvision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10-being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on ~ 9 the 'ob? Max. 10 'nts 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other papennrork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 8 9 u ates? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project H 9 schedule that our a en business a roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points ff the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 4 10 the contractor res nsible for the dale in com lotion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 8 8 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor perforrned the work after a change order was issued, and 'how well the 8 9 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of fuming in Operation 8~ Maintenance manuals, completing as- 6 6 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 6 7 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 6 ~ interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work 8 9 overall? Max. 10 ints TOTAL SCORE: 78 101 PASS PASS Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS ANO QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: HARBOR CONSTRUCTION REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 QUESTION Louis Cunningham, Oxnard Hal Arbogast, City of Union High School (805) 385- Cerritos, Cerritos Senior 2562 Center S62 860-0311 Brief description of the project Modernization of 4 high schools 5,000 sf addition to an existing facility that remained in service during construction, incl all trades 8~ some site work 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more _2 0 than 120. days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be, deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 8 8 rsonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate ~ 8 su rvision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on 9 7.5 the 'ob? Max. 10 ints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other papenerork, including change order papennrork and scheduling 9 7 u ales? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 8 9 schedule that our a nc business roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 10 10 the contractor res nsibie for the dale in corn letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 5 7 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 8 8 5 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of turning in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- 9 8 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 5 8 difficul in resoivin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 10 10 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work 9 8 overall? Max. 10 ints TOTAL SCORE: 95 99 PASS PASS Tustin Library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: HOWARD S. WRIGHT CONSTRUCTORS REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 GIUESTION Steve Cary, Washington Kelty Saito, South Park RPO, Mutual, Irvine Campus LLC, Eileven (503) 502-8700 E:x nsion 206 500-3362 Brief description of the project Construction of an 89,000 sf bldg Construction of 176 condo and 1,600 car parking garage units in a 13 story bldg w/ retail on ground floor and parking beneath. 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 6 8 ersonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 10 8 su rvision? Max. 10 oints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on 10 7 the 'ob? Max. 10 oints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 9 8 u ates? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 8 8 schedule that our a enc business a roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points ff the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 9 10 the contractor res nsible for the dela in com lotion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 8 7 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 8 8 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of turning in Operation 8- Maintenance manuals, completing as- 8 8 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 ints ' 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 10 7 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 10 10 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work 10 8 overall? Max. 10 ints TOTAL SCORE: 106 97 PASS PASS Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: MORILLO CONSTRUCTION, INC. REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 CtUEST10N Gary Attridge, Azusa Unified, Nabih Balady, City of LA, Gladstone & Valleydale ES, Pacan Park Gymnasium, (949) 500-2625 (213) 97&1900 Brief description of the project Elementary school modernization Approx 9,000 sf indoor project gymnasium, incl BB court. Steel & concrete structure with CMU & nice arch details, also all sitework 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to tie deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate ~ 9 rsonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate ~ 9 su ervision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on 9 10 the 'ob? Max. 10 ints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other papennrork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 5 10 u ates? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 4 8 schedule that our a nc usiness a roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is °no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 10 10 the contractor res nsible for the dela in com letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 4 7.5 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 6 10 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been . performing in the area of turning in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- ~ 8 5 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 6 8 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 oints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the persori being 10 ~ interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work 9 9 overall? Max. 10 oints TOTAL SCORE: 84 106 PASS PASS Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PRQJECTS:AND QUALITY.OF PERFORMANCE - ~ - ~ -. • DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM Tt•WOULD~ALLOW •A MAXIMUM SCORE OF I20 POINTSfOR EACH INTERVIEW: FOR ~'HESE QUESTIONS, DIR ~ ~: RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FORA CQNTR~iCTOR WHOSE SCORE CAN EACHiNTERVtEW IS 72 POIN,TS.OR MORE, A DENIAt~OF RRE-QtlAi1F1.CAT10N _•; ., , FOR A.CONTRACTOR WHOSE.SCORE ON Et~IER iNTER1/fEW IS LESS THAN 55 pOtNTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WI'[H ANOTHER REFEREi~CE IF;•THE•SCORE ' .' " ~ , RESULTING FRAM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWI(EElit 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. '. CONTRACTOR: P.H. HAGOPIAN CONTRACTOR, INC. REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 _ - QUESTION Mark Bauer, Capistrano Unified 6olb•tenz, PJHM-A~Aftects, School District, Canyon Vista .Laguna Niguel Elementary (949) 234-9543. School, (949) 496.8191 Brief description of the project New construction of an Stick framed with some steel, elementary school Type Vstructure - 30 classrooms • :1 •~ Are there any outstanding stow notices, hens, or cleians-by the contractoF that are _ , , ,• ,, - - ~ currently unresolved omc~atrapts for which notices of con}pietion were. recorded more _ - ~ _ • than 120•days ago?. (1,poirrt,for each is deducted.frocn overaA score# maximwn ~ - ~ _ _ 0 • _ - _. , •• amount to be deducted is 5 oints - 2 On a scale~of-1-10, with.l0 t~ingthe best, did~he•eontractorprovide.adequatflt ~• -., :. - ersonnel? Max. 10 oints 10 9 . 3 On a scaio~of 1-10, with 10•beingthe best, did the contractor provide.adequate;. ~ " •~ ~~' n su rvision? Max. 10 ints 10 9 R. 4' On a scale of 1-10, with 10~being the•best,.~was there adeq~te equipment provided on 10, .. ,- '`~ ~. -` the 'ob? Max. 10 ints 7 ~...5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10•being the best, was the aontractCr:timely in providing ~ ; ,, ~ ~: - T~ - - • ~ reports and other paperwork, including change order ~papennrork.and scheduling t0 - - - 9 i ; - .. .. u dates? Max. 10 oints • •• .6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did U1e contactor. adhere to-the-pmrect - - ' w • chedule that our a enc usiness a roved? hlax. i0 int8 -"•.. - • • . . ~ 10 9 ' ~ . •:7 - Was the project• completed on time? {a0' points if.the answer ie"~1!es"). -:~~.. - ~ , Or, if the answer is "no," orna scale of 1-14, wrtb.'10 tieing the`t~est~ to: uhat:8xtent was 10 10 ~~ = .: ; . `•• the contractor res nsible~ for. the dale in com lotion? • - : , •, ; , . . 8 •. Orr a scale,vf 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor-oa the timely •? ~;.. _ - _ submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to ,perfoma~:change• order. tiwtk. ~ 10 = • -. - - - 9- - . ~ : , Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10~being the best, rate the. contractor on:hbv~wetr~t#.ie•~, :~ ~ _ - ;= • - - • , • ~ contractor performed the work after a change on~er• .was•issued, and•:how wail .tlae ~ • :. contractor. iptegrated the change •order work into the existing: wodc. •(MaFx.:l~,points). ~ 10 • _ g- • - : v _ -10 •.. On•a scale of 1-10, with• ]0 being: the best, rate•how has•the ~ntractoFbeera.: •,. _ • , ~ . ~ , ~ - - ~ - performing.in the area of ffirraing.in Opbration 8 Maintenance maneals;.completing as - - - -. ~ , - • -~:~ built drawings, .providing requiredtraining•and taking care of wacrant~iitems2=Max. 10 _ . - i0 . , • ~ . - ~ 9 • ints ' 1 t • . - On a scale of 1-10, with 10 bi~ing-the best, rate the.cunt"r+sctor.on•whetkrerthere.lwere • - • .- ~. °' an unusually high number of-~cFaims, given th+s nature.of_tfie proje~t,•or unusual. . • 10 g- • . difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints _ _ ~. 7 2 ~ ~ On- a scale- of .1-10, with 10~being the highest, rate'the contractoF with respect tb-tlmely . • - • _ - • . yments by the contractor to either subcohtrActors or suppliers:: (If. the•persoe being .. - • • - interviewed knows of no~uch difficulties, the score on this.questioe•~rouhi~tie °10.°) ~~ , 10 - 10 - - , _ 13 - • On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the hest how would'you rate the- quatt~y.of the•wor•Ir : : ~ ~ , . , . overall? Max. 10 ints 10 .9 TOTAL SCORE: 120 108 PASS PASS Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: PINNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 GIUESTION Marine Scisncs~s Research Physical Sdiences Building - Building - UCSB Gary Banks UCR Chi Kwan ((951) 827- 805 893-5684 4201 Brief description of the project 4 story building totaling approx 130,000 sf building constructed 60,000 to 65,000 sf, research between 2002 and 2005 facil' 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate ~ 8 rsonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate ~ ~ su rvision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on 8 8 the 'ob? Max. 10 ints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order papennrork and scheduling 6 7 u ates? Max. 10 oints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 4 ~ schedule that our a enc usiness a roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 4 6 the contractor res nsible for the dale in com letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 6 6 . Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 7 8 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of fuming in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- 8 6 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 oints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 8 6 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 10 10 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work ~ ~ overall? Max. 10 oints TOTAL SCORE: 82 86 PASS PASS Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: PW CONSTRUCTION, INC. REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 QUESTION Jerry Hills, Jackson Fred Diamond, Community Elementary School (714) 480- Day School, (626) 912-0665 5747 Brief description of the project Modernization project, approx New campus ground up $10 mil ran e 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 9 10 rsonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 9 10 su rvision? Max. 10 oints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on ' 9 10 the ob? Max. 10 oints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 9 10 u ates? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale- of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 10 1 schedule that our a nc business a roved? Max. 10 ints 0 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 10 10 the contractor re nsible for the dela in corn letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 9 10 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 8 1 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 0 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of turning in Operation 8~ Maintenance manuals, completing as- 9 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 10 oints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 10 10 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 10 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 10 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work overall? Max. 10 ints 9 10 TOTAL SCORE: 111 120 PASS PAS$ Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN S5 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: RJ DAUM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 GIUESTION Steven. Rabin (310) 224-4205- Giovanni Garbeliini LA Southern Calffomia Regional Southwest College (213) 798- Occupational Center 1821 Brief description of the project 2 story building with brick veneer, 60,000 sf 3 story building included a career center, several (Type II), concrete & structural offices & a dozen or so steel w/ stucco ' classrooms 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum 0 amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate rsonnel? Max. 10 ints 9 10 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate su rvision? Max. 10 ints g 10 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on the 'ob? Max. 10 ints 10 - 10 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing . reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 9 9 u ates? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project schedule that our a enc usiness a roved? Max. 10 ints 8 8 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 8 8 the contractor res nsible for the dale in corn letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 9 10 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 9 10 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been pertorming in the area of turning in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 unable to answer 8 ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual unable to answer 10 difficu in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 10 10 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work overall? Max. 10 oints 10 10 TOTAL SCORE: 91 113 PASS PASS Tustin library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: S.J. AMOROSA CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 ' GIUESTION Bob Haun, City of Alameda, Jack Schaefer, Contre Costa Alameda Free Librery (510) 747 Community College, San 4310 Ramon Valley Center (925) 2291000 x1280 Brief description of the project 45,800 sf new library and green College center -80,000 sf with structure classrooms, physical & life sciences labs & computer center 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10; with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 10 9 ersonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, .with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 10 9 su rvision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on 8 8 the 'ob? Max. 10 oints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling . 8 9 u ates? Max. 10 oints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 9 10 schedule that our a en usiness a roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 10 10 the contractor res nsible for the dela in corn letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 8 9 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor pertormed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 9 9 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of turning in Operation 8~ Maintenance manuals, completing as- 8 9 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 9 9 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 oints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 10 10 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work 10 9 overall? Max. 10 oints TOTAL SCORE: 109 110 PASS PASS Tustin Library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: SWINERTON BUILDERS REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 QUESTION Denise Scribner, City of Long Long Beach Public Beach, MacArthur Library (582) Safety/Police BldgiJenise 570-8257 Scribner, City of Lonq Beach 582 57Q-8258 Brief description of the project 16,000 sf 1 story library building Seismic hazard mitigation & to LEED Silver cart renovation of police facilities & tenant im rovements 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 pant for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 10 10 . ersonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate 9 9 su ervision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on ' 10 10 the ob? Max. 10 ints 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 10 10 u tes? Max. 10 infs. 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 10 10 schedule that our a enc usiness a roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes°). Or, if the answer is °no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 10 10 the contractor res nsible for the dale in corn letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 10 10 Max. 10 oints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 10 10 contractor integrated the change order work into the existing vuork. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been pertorming in the area of turning in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- 8 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 9 ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 10 10 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 10 10 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.°) 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work overall? Max. 10 ints 10 10 TOTAL SCORE: 118 118 PASS PASS Tustin Library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART 11: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION III: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WRH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: W.E. O'NEIL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 (QUESTION John Smock, US Army Corps Tim Lindholm, MTA, Division of Engineers, Joint Strike 8 Transportation Bidg (213) Fighter Phase 1 do II (661) 277- 922-7297 2856 Brief description of the project $30 mil conversion of existing 3 story admin & ops bldg w/ hangar & constr of outbuildings sheriff's office. Glass bldg w/ LEED silver cart 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum 0 0 amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with. l0 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate rsonnel? Max. 10 ints 10 9 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate su nrision? Max. 10 oints 10 9 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on the 'ob? Max. 10 ints 10 10 5 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 10 7 u ales? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project schedule that our a en business a roved? Max. 10 ints 10 8 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes°). Or, if the answer is "no,° on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 10 5 the contractor res nsible for the data in com lotion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 10 9 Max. 10 ints 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the contractor integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 9 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of turning in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 10 Not Done Yet ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 10 g difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 10 10 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work overall? Max. 10 oints 10 10 TOTAL SCORE: 120 95 PASS PASS Tustin Library Pre-Qualification of Contractors Summary 13-Aug-07 PART II: LIST OF SCORABLE QUESTIONS SECTION ill: COMPLETION OF RECENT PROJECTS AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE DIR RECOMMENDS A SCORING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW A MAXIMUM SCORE OF 120 POINTS FOR EACH INTERVIEW. FOR THESE QUESTIONS, DIR RECOMMENDS QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EACH INTERVIEW IS 72 POINTS OR MORE, A DENIAL OF PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR A CONTRACTOR WHOSE SCORE ON EITHER INTERVIEW IS LESS THAN 55 POINTS, AND AN ADDITIONAL WITH ANOTHER REFERENCE IF THE SCORE RESULTING FROM ONE INTERVIEW IS BETWEEN 55 POINTS AND 72 POINTS. CONTRACTOR: WOODCLIFF CORPORATION REFERENCE # 1 REFERENCE # 2 QUESTION Vince Johnson, Lakeview Mike Hopkins, DSA Elementary School, (3i0) 902- Inspector, Thurgood 2514 Marshall ES, (805) 290.6144. Responses to questions 1 & 12 provided by Use Winegar (805) 487-3918 x241 Brief description of the project Elementary school -60,000 sf on Elementary School a 10 ac site 1 Are there any outstanding stop notices, liens, or claims by the contractor that are currently unresolved on contracts for which notices of completion were recorded more 0 0 than 120 days ago? (1 point for each is deducted from overall score; maximum amount to be deducted is 5 ints 2 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate ~ 8 ersonnel? Max. 10 ints 3 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor provide adequate ~ ~ su rvision? Max. 10 ints 4 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, was there adequate equipment provided on 9 ~ the 'ob? Max. 10 oints 5 On a scale of 1-1Q with 10 being the best, was the contractor timely in providing reports and other paperwork, including change order paperwork and scheduling 5 5 u ales? Max. 10 ints 6 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, did the contractor adhere to the project 5 4 schedule that our a enc usiness roved? Max. 10 ints 7 Was the project completed on time? (10 points if the answer is "Yes"). Or, if the answer is "no," on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, to what extent was 4 0 the contractor res nsible for the dela in com letion? 8 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on the timely submission of reasonable cost and time estimates to perform change order work. 8 8 Max. 10 ants 9 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on how well the contractor performed the work after a change order was issued, and how well the 8 8 contractor. integrated the change order work into the existing work. (Max. 10 points). 10 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate how has the contractor been performing in the area of fuming in Operation & Maintenance manuals, completing as- ~ 4 built drawings, providing required training and taking care of warranty items? (Max. 10 ints 11 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, rate the contractor on whether there were an unusually high number of claims, given the nature of the project, or unusual 7 8 difficul in resolvin them. Max. 10 ints 12 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the highest, rate the contractor with respect to timely payments by the contractor to either subcontractors or suppliers. (If the person being 6 10 interviewed knows of no such difficulties, the score on this question should be "10.") 13 On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best, how would you rate the quality of the work 8 ~ overall? Max. 10 ints TOTAL SCORE: 81 76 PASS PASS EXHIBIT E CONTRACTOR I N FO R MATT O N TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS EXHIBIT E TUSTIN LIBRARY PRE-QUALIFICATION CONTRACTOR INFORMATION BERNARDS BROS., INC. PINNER CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. 618 San Fernando Road 1255 So. Lewis Street San Fernando, CA 91340 Anaheim, CA 92805 Phone: 818-898-1521 Phone: 714-490-4000 Fax: 818-361-9208 Fax: 714-490-4016 Contact Person: Steve Pellegren Contact Person: John Pinner CA License No. 302007 CA License No. 166010 ERICKSON-HALL CONSTRUCTION CO. PW CONSTRUCTION INC. 500 Corporate Drive 1905 E. Route 66, Suite 200 Escondido, CA 92029 Glendora, CA 91740 Phone: 760-796-7700 Phone: 626-857-1955 Fax: 760-796-7750 Fax: 626-857-1946 Contact Person: Dave Erickson Contact Person: Christina Fiol CA License No. 751343 CA License No. 479948 GKKWORKS R.J. DAUM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 2355 Main Street, Suite 220 11581 Monarch Street Irvine, CA 92614 Garden Grove, CA 92841 Phone :949-250-1500 Phone: 714-894-4300 Fax: 949-955-1662 Fax: 714-894-4449 Contact Person: Charles Merrick Contact Person: Helen Monahan CA License No. 774456 CA License No. 127760 HARBOR CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. S.J. AMOROSO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. 15550 Rockfield Blvd., B-100 275 E. Baker Street, Suite B Irvine, CA 92618 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Phone :949-457-1888 Phone: 714-433-2326 Fax: 949-457-9888 Fax: 714-433-2329 Contact Person: Donald E. Desjardin Contact Person: Brian DerMatoian CA license No. 761803 CA License No. 331024 HOWARD S. WRIGHT CONSTRUCTORS, LP SWINERTON BUILDERS 2121 Alton Parkway, Suite 150A 17731 Mitchell North, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92606 Irvine, CA 92614 Phone :949-608-3474 Phone: 949-622-7000 Fax: 949-567-1915 Fax: 949-477-3085 Contact Person: Joe Martino Contact Person: Sam Laham CA License No. 860938 CA License No. 92 MORILLO CONSTRUCTION W.E. O'NEIL CONSTRUCTION CO.OF CALIFORNIA 227 N. Holliston Ave. 5245 Pacific Concourse Drive, #260 Pasadena, CA 91106 Los Angeles, CA 90045 Phone :626-796-3800 Phone: 310-643-7900 Fax: 626-792-4669 Fax: 310-643-6541 Contact Person: Antoine B. Morillo Contact Person: Shaun Guertin CA License No. 326965 CA License No. 494031 P.H. HAGOPIAN CONTRACTOR WOODCLIFF CORPORATION 778 W. Town & Country Road 1849 Sawtelle Blvd. Suite 610 Orange, CA 92868 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Phone :714-633-1222 Phone: 310-312-1400 Fax: 714-633-1459 Fax: 310-312-1403 Contact Person: Paul H. Hagopian Contact Person: Babak Nehoray CA License No. 408967/492286 CA License No. 719883 X L C7 Z "B" ST. m N .. ~ C Z r W r~ x Z Cn O Z ~D O fTl I_n Z O O U1 r ~ O ~ n O D ~ ~ m \~ ~ ~o ~ ~ 'pT ~a~ Fs~~ 0 N -1 "A" ST. D_ Z "B" ST. ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ PEPPER- m C7 TREE PARK "C" ST. m 0 z v N EL CAMINO ~ REAL ~ ~ 0 S. PROSPECT AV. \F a l J O C 07 ~_ Z HALL m €~ CENTENNIAL WY. ~~~~ o rr 09'2. 0 _ Orange County Public Library V M 1501 E. ST. ANDREW PLACE, SANTA ANA, CA 92705 (714) 566-3000 (~ `4.. ~Y; ti4' 9ZIF04~ Helen Fried ACTING COUNTY LIBRARIAN u u ADMINISTRATION August 21, 2007 AUG 2 7 2007 Ms. Christine Shingleton, Assistant City Manager City of Tustin -City Hall 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Subject: New Tustin Library Construction Dear Ms. Shingleton; DECEIVED Orange County Public Library has reviewed the plans as submitted by the architects, Field Paoli. We appreciate the involvement the City of Tustin afforded us during the planning process and we are very satisfied with the plans to construct the new Tustin Branch Library. We look forward to partnering with the City of Tustin by providing the best library service we can. Sincerely, !~l ~~ Helen Fried Acting County Librarian ALISO VIEJO ~ BREA • COSTA MESA • COSTA MESA/MESA VERDE • COSTA MESA TECHNOLOGY • CYPRESS • DANA POINT • EL TORO • FOOTHILL RANCH FOUNTAIN VALLEY • GARDEN GROVE/CHAPMAN • GARDEN GROVE REGIONAL • WEST GARDEN GROVE • IRVINE/I-IERITAGE PARK REGIONAL • IRVINE/UNIVERSITY PARK 1RVINE/WHEELER RANCH • LA HABRA • LA PALMA • LADERA • LAGUNA BEACH • LAGUNA HILLS TECHNOLOGY • LAGUNA NIGUEL • LAGUNA WOODS • LOS ALAMITOS/ROSSMOOR RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA • SAN CLEMENTE • SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO REGIONAL • SEAL BEACH/MARY WILSON • SILVERADO • STANTON • TUSTIN • VILLA PARK • WESTMINSTER Tustin Library Project Manual August 27, 2007 Bid Set Available For Review In City Clerk's Office