Source: http://business.flydenver.com/bizops/QA.asp?contractid=5014
Timestamp: 2019-09-17 00:39:29
Document Index: 557888382

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 42', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 42', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 44']

PROJECT: On-Call Architectural and Engineering Design Professional Services
NUMBER: 201951236-00
Question Number 1: Page 11, Section 4a. lists two hyperlinks to download Submittal 2 and Exhibit E forms but the links seem to be broken. Can you please update the link or send the forms via email?
Question Number 2: Regarding Submittal 2 and Exhibit E, we understand that some firms are sensitive to release of this information. Is it acceptable for a subcontracting firm to provide us this information in a sealed envelope that is inserted into our package with the 2 electronic flash drives?
Answer: Yes, it will be acceptable for the subcontracting firm to provide the prime with their Submittal 2 and Exhibit E on 2 electronic flash drives in a separate sealed envelope that is inserted into the prime's package with the 2 electronic flash drives. The subcontracting firm can also drop off their sealed envelope with their Submittal 2 and Exhibit E on 2 electronic flash drives; however, the envelope must address the prime they are submitting on behalf of.
Question Number 3: If the airport already has a firm’s Submittal 2 and Exhibit E information on file under an existing contract with the airport, does said firm still need to submit this information along with the RFP response? Or, will a letter documenting the existing contract number suffice?
Answer: No, DEN will not accept a Submittal 2 and Exhibit E that is on file under an existing contract. Submittal 2 and Exhibit E must be submitted for this RFP.
Question Number 4: For the completion of the LOI’s, please confirm that we only need to enter the percentage and not a dollar amount.
Answer: Yes, for this RFP you are required to list a percentage rather than a dollar amount on the LOI’s.
Question Number 5: In the pre-proposal meeting it was suggested that primes should indicate all subconsultant firms and skillsets that could possibly be involved in the variety of projects that could be encountered under this on-call. This could result in a long list of firms that “could” be helpful “if” a certain type of project were to arise.
Answer: After reconsidering the statement by the project manager during the pre-proposal meeting, please use the following information as improved guidance. Each proposer should weigh the advantages and disadvantages of indicating all potential subconsultants in their proposal. It will be difficult to predict every skillset that will be needed and may be time prohibitive to assemble this list within the schedule of this RFP process. It is recommended that proposers consider the skillsets that will most likely be needed during the course of the on-call contract. Subconsultants who are not identified in the original proposal can be added to the contract at a later point by submitting a Professional Employee Authorization Form (Exhibit B, Attachment B).
Question Number 6: I believe it was stated that all firms identified in the proposal that could possibly be involved and used towards fulfilling the MWBE participation would need to be listed in the proposal along with a percentage allocation. It is not acceptable to indicate any specialty firms that “could” be used and not list a % participation.
Answer: • Sec. 28-68. - Contracts for professional design and construction services—Identification of participating MBEs and WBEs. •	(a) At the time of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner, the proposer shall provide to the city or private owner a list of all MBEs that are being utilized toward the satisfaction of the project goal whether as a self-performing proposer, or as sub-consultants, suppliers, manufacturers, manufacturer's representatives, brokers or members of a joint venture. Unless otherwise specified in a request for qualifications, request for proposal or other proposal solicitation, in the event that a proposal is requested for the provision of on-call services for a period of time, with no delineation of the dollar amount of specific on-call projects, the proposer need list only the anticipated percentage participation of MBEs and WBEs rather than specific dollar amounts. The list shall specify: (1) The name and contact name for the MBE or WBE; (2) The dollar value and description of the commercially useful function to be performed by the MBE/WBE consistent with subsections (c) and (d). In the case of utilization of a supplier, manufacturer, manufacturer's representative or broker, the appropriate percentage of dollar value attributable to such business enterprise as a commercially useful function shall be calculated with all underlying data supplied. If the proposer provides a dollar fee amount, then both the dollar value and percentage must be listed in the proposal; (3) If applicable, the percentage of the value of the commercially useful function to be performed by the MBE or WBE consistent with subsections (c) and (d) as compared to the total contract amount; (4) The designation of each business enterprise as either an MBE or a WBE; (5) An adequate statement from the proposer that the dollar amount of work or the percentage of the work (whichever is applicable) to be performed by such MBEs and WBEs on the contract, other than that self-performed by the proposer, was furnished to the proposer and agreed upon prior to the time of submission of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner; and (6) An adequate statement from the proposer that it understands that a letter of intent, including, but not limited to, values provided by self-performing proposers, joint venturers, sub-consultants, suppliers, manufacturers, manufacturer's representatives and brokers, expressed in dollar values and as a percentage of the overall work, must be submitted to the director for each MBE and WBE listed, including a self-performing proposer, at the time of submission of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner. (b) Only that level of MBE/WBE utilization demonstrated in accordance with this section at the time of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner may be counted in satisfaction of the project goal except as otherwise set out in sections 28-72 and 28-73. Proposers must submit such an executed letter of intent for each MBE or WBE listed by the proposer, including a self-performing proposer, at the time of the submission of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner. Failure to do so will render the proposal nonresponsive. (c) All MBE/WBE consultants, sub-consultants, joint venturers, suppliers, manufacturers, manufacturer's representatives or brokers listed in a proposal must actually perform a commercially useful function in the work of a contract within the area(s) for which they are certified, and must not function as a conduit. Consistent with industry or professional practice, and as permitted by rules and regulations adopted by the director, MBEs and WBEs may enter into subcontracts, including subcontracts with non-MBEs and non-WBEs. In no case, however, shall an MBE or WBE act as a conduit, nor shall the participation of an MBE or WBE count toward a project goal to the extent it fails to perform a commercially useful function. (d) All expenditures for materials, supplies, and equipment obtained from an MBE or WBE manufacturer, manufacturer's representative or supplier shall count toward the project goal as specified in section 28-54(48). Expenditures for materials, supplies and equipment paid to MBEs or WBEs that are not manufacturers, manufacturer's representatives or suppliers may count toward the project goal only to the extent of fees or commissions charged for providing a bona fide service, such as professional, technical, consultant or managerial services and assistance in the procurement of essential personnel, facilities, equipment, materials or supplies required for performance of the contract, provided that the fee or commission is determined by the director to be reasonable and not excessive as compared with fees customarily allowed for similar services. (e) Any agreement between a proposer and an MBE or WBE in which the proposer requires that the MBE or WBE not provide sub consulting quotations to other proposers is prohibited and shall render a proposer's proposal nonresponsive. (Ord. No. 760-06, § 2, 11-13-06; Ord. No. 85-14, § 2, 2-18-14; Ord. No. 159-19, § 42, 3-18-19)
Question Number 7: Please clarify the rules surrounding identifying subconsultant firms on the team that could be used to show depth of resources and capabilities, and how they need to be accounted for relative to the M/WBE goal.
Answer: •	Sec. 28-68. - Contracts for professional design and construction services—Identification of participating MBEs and WBEs. •	(a) At the time of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner, the proposer shall provide to the city or private owner a list of all MBEs that are being utilized toward the satisfaction of the project goal whether as a self-performing proposer, or as sub-consultants, suppliers, manufacturers, manufacturer's representatives, brokers or members of a joint venture. Unless otherwise specified in a request for qualifications, request for proposal or other proposal solicitation, in the event that a proposal is requested for the provision of on-call services for a period of time, with no delineation of the dollar amount of specific on-call projects, the proposer need list only the anticipated percentage participation of MBEs and WBEs rather than specific dollar amounts. The list shall specify: (1) The name and contact name for the MBE or WBE; (2) The dollar value and description of the commercially useful function to be performed by the MBE/WBE consistent with subsections (c) and (d). In the case of utilization of a supplier, manufacturer, manufacturer's representative or broker, the appropriate percentage of dollar value attributable to such business enterprise as a commercially useful function shall be calculated with all underlying data supplied. If the proposer provides a dollar fee amount, then both the dollar value and percentage must be listed in the proposal; (3) If applicable, the percentage of the value of the commercially useful function to be performed by the MBE or WBE consistent with subsections (c) and (d) as compared to the total contract amount; (4) The designation of each business enterprise as either an MBE or a WBE; (5) An adequate statement from the proposer that the dollar amount of work or the percentage of the work (whichever is applicable) to be performed by such MBEs and WBEs on the contract, other than that self-performed by the proposer, was furnished to the proposer and agreed upon prior to the time of submission of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner; and (6) An adequate statement from the proposer that it understands that a letter of intent, including, but not limited to, values provided by self-performing proposers, joint venturers, sub-consultants, suppliers, manufacturers, manufacturer's representatives and brokers, expressed in dollar values and as a percentage of the overall work, must be submitted to the director for each MBE and WBE listed, including a self-performing proposer, at the time of submission of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner. (b) Only that level of MBE/WBE utilization demonstrated in accordance with this section at the time of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner may be counted in satisfaction of the project goal except as otherwise set out in sections 28-72 and 28-73. Proposers must submit such an executed letter of intent for each MBE or WBE listed by the proposer, including a self-performing proposer, at the time of the submission of the final project-specific proposal submitted to and authorized by the city or a private owner. Failure to do so will render the proposal nonresponsive. (c) All MBE/WBE consultants, sub-consultants, joint venturers, suppliers, manufacturers, manufacturer's representatives or brokers listed in a proposal must actually perform a commercially useful function in the work of a contract within the area(s) for which they are certified, and must not function as a conduit. Consistent with industry or professional practice, and as permitted by rules and regulations adopted by the director, MBEs and WBEs may enter into subcontracts, including subcontracts with non-MBEs and non-WBEs. In no case, however, shall an MBE or WBE act as a conduit, nor shall the participation of an MBE or WBE count toward a project goal to the extent it fails to perform a commercially useful function. (d) All expenditures for materials, supplies, and equipment obtained from an MBE or WBE manufacturer, manufacturer's representative or supplier shall count toward the project goal as specified in section 28-54(48). Expenditures for materials, supplies and equipment paid to MBEs or WBEs that are not manufacturers, manufacturer's representatives or suppliers may count toward the project goal only to the extent of fees or commissions charged for providing a bona fide service, such as professional, technical, consultant or managerial services and assistance in the procurement of essential personnel, facilities, equipment, materials or supplies required for performance of the contract, provided that the fee or commission is determined by the director to be reasonable and not excessive as compared with fees customarily allowed for similar services. (e) Any agreement between a proposer and an MBE or WBE in which the proposer requires that the MBE or WBE not provide sub consulting quotations to other proposers is prohibited and shall render a proposer's proposal nonresponsive. (Ord. No. 760-06, § 2, 11-13-06; Ord. No. 85-14, § 2, 2-18-14; Ord. No. 159-19, § 42, 3-18-19) Sec. 28-73. - Project change orders, amendments, and modifications. (a)Contractors and consultants on contracts hereunder shall have a continuing obligation to immediately inform the DSBO in writing of any agreed-upon increase or decrease in the scope of work of such contract, upon any of the bases discussed in this section 28-73, regardless of whether such increase or decrease in scope of work has been reduced to writing at the time of notification. (b) Any increase in the scope of work of a contract for construction, reconstruction, or remodeling, whether by amendment, change order, force account or otherwise, or any increase in the scope of services of a contract for professional design or construction services, whether by amendment or any other addition of special, additional or other services to the contract, which increases the dollar value of the contract, whether or not such change is within the scope of work designated for performance by an MBE or WBE at the time of contract award, shall be contemporaneously submitted to the DSBO. Those amendments, change orders, force accounts or other contract modifications that involve a changed scope of work that cannot be performed by existing project subcontractors, sub-consultants, joint venturers, suppliers, manufacturer, manufacturer's representatives or brokers, or by the contractor or consultant, shall be subject to a goal for MBEs and WBEs equal to the original project goal on the contract that was included in the bid or proposal requirements. The contractor or consultant shall satisfy such goal as respects such changed scope of work by soliciting new MBEs or WBEs in accordance with section 28-60 or 28-65 as applicable, or the contractor or consultant must show each element of modified good faith set out in section 28-75(c) hereof. The contractor or consultant shall supply to the director the documentation described in section 28-75(c) with respect to the increased dollar value of the contract. (Ord. No. 760-06, § 2, 11-13-06; Ord. No. 85-14, § 2, 2-18-14; Ord. No. 159-19, § 44, 3-18-19)
Question Number 8: Part IP-8.d Section lists limits of participation above $5,000,000 contracts. Is this $5M construction contract or $5M design consultant contract? The former may be likely, depending on task orders issued, the latter is above design fee cap, so not applicable. Please clarify what condition applies?
Answer: This will only apply to suppliers, not sub-consultants. The threshold is based on the contract amount and not the task order amount.
Question Number 9: Part IP-9 Section requires percentage breakdown of each team consultant’s participation; however task orders are unknown. Team member participation will be dependent on task order scope of work, so percentage of participation for each is unknown. Please clarify how DEN expects these percentages to be developed?
Answer: Percentage of subconsultant participation will be identified per task once the contract is awarded. The percentage breakdown is not required on this contract proposal.
Question Number 10: Please confirm if correct, one flash drive containing Excel files of Submittal 2 and Exhibit E (a copy of each form must be provided for the primary consultant and each subconsultant – for example, if the proposed team includes 1 primary consultant and 9 subconsultants, the flash drive must include 10 Submittal 2’s and 10 Exhibit E’s) in a sealed, addressed envelope.
Answer: No, DEN is requesting two flash drives containing the Excel files of Submittal 2 and Exhibit E for the primary and all subconsultants in a separate sealed, addressed envelope.
Question Number 11: "Please confirm if correct one flash drive containing a PDF of all other proposal content (narrative, resumes, DSBO forms, other proposal forms, etc.) in a separate, sealed, addressed envelope. "
Answer: No, DEN is requesting two flash drives containing of all other proposal content (narrative, resumes, DSBO forms, other proposal forms, etc.) in a sealed, addressed envelope.
Question Number 12: Upon further inspection, it appears that one copy of Exhibit E accommodates the prime consultant and all subconsultants for the purposes of the proposal, whereas each entity does need to provide a separate Submittal 2. Please confirm if this is correct?
Answer: "Proposers may submit all Exhibit E information on one file, or break out the information for the prime and subconsultant firms across multiple Exhibit E’s. A separate Submittal 2 is required for each entity since it provides information that is specific to each individual firm."
6:39 PM Denver time