18-Evaluation Criteria.pdf

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Engineering Services for Regional Biosolids Facility Design

Form Date 9/23/25

Submit responses to all Evaluation Criteria. Vendors who fail to submit the information and/or documentation required by any Evaluation Criteria by the solicitation’s closing date and time—excluding Reference Forms—may receive no points (if applicable) for the corresponding Evaluation Criteria.

Refer to Instructions to Vendors, Section K, for additional information. Vendors should structure proposal to align in the order of the Evaluation Criteria.

Evaluation Criteria

1. Ability of Professional Personnel Maximum

Points

a. Describe the qualifications (including any licenses or certifications) and relevant experience of the Project Manager and all key staff, including Subconsultants/Subcontractors (Project Team) assigned to this Project. Include resumes for each Project Team member. Include the qualifications and relevant experience of all subconsultants’ key staff to be assigned to this project. Relevant experience includes planning, design, permitting, Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) development support, construction administration, startup, commissioning, and operational support of thermal biosolids drying facilities, pelletization systems, odor control systems, solids handling facilities, and associated wastewater infrastructure.

Provide Project Team’s Organization Chart, identifying key staff, showing roles and/or position titles, firm name, staff names, and lines of authority.

b. The Prime Vendor must demonstrate direct experience serving as Engineer of Record on projects using the Managing General Contractor (MGC) delivery method, including documented participation in GMP development, constructability reviews beginning at the 30% design milestone, cost reconciliation efforts, value engineering coordination, and integration of design intent with MGC preconstruction services.

2. Project Approach Maximum

Points

a. Facility Design Approach Describe the Prime Vendor’s approach to the Project design to address multiple sludge types, technical design, permitting, construction, and commissioning challenges and completion of all items from the Scope of Services. Describe how Prime Vendor’s approach will ensure the Project is able to comply with all applicable regulatory requirements, including deadlines set by state and federal law, as well as the Project milestones set by the County. Include lessons learned from previous similar projects and how they may be applied to expedite this Project. Include how the Prime Vendor will use subconsultants in the Project.

b. MGC/GMP Delivery Approach Describe the Prime Vendor’s approach to coordinating with the County’s selected MGC, including integration of preconstruction services, participation in constructability reviews beginning at the 30% design milestone, cost reconciliation efforts, value engineering, procurement support, phased construction planning, and collaboration during GMP development.

Evaluation Criteria

3. Past Performance Maximum

Points

a. Describe the Prime Vendor’s experience on successfully completed projects within the past twenty-five (25) years that involved the planning, design, permitting, and Engineering services during construction of large-scale thermal drying of municipal biosolids. Preference may be given to projects that have been successfully commissioned and are in operation within the United States. Each example should identify the type of drying technology (belt, drum, or thin film), the design capacity of the facility expressed in wet tons per day

(wtpd) or dry tons per year (dtpy), and whether the project was designed to process multiple sludge types.

To be comparable to the Regional Biosolids Drying Facility, preference may be given to projects with a design capacity of approximately 700 to 800 wtpd (≈ 38,000 – 39,000 dtpy) or multiple facilities whose combined capacity equals or exceeds that range. Project examples may include new facilities, expansions, rehabilitations, or retrofits of active, operational biosolids drying plants. Each description should clearly state the scope of work, project duration, permitting requirements, measures implemented to maintain operations during construction, and the outcome in terms of schedule, cost, and client satisfaction. For projects delivered using MGC, the proposal should clearly identify the delivery method, final construction value, the Prime Vendor’s role during preconstruction and GMP development, and whether the GMP was successfully established within the approved construction budget. The Prime’s role must be clearly specified (Prime Consultant or Subconsultant) along with the disciplines, expertise, and work elements performed.

At least three (3) project examples are required, with corresponding references. Additional projects may be submitted at the vendor’s discretion. Preference may be given to projects in Florida or other regions with similar regulatory and operational conditions, and to projects involving multi-utility or regional facilities where interlocal agreements or shared capacity were implemented. For projects outside Florida, the vendor should provide sufficient information to demonstrate how the regulatory and operating conditions are similar.

Provide a minimum of three references for projects described. Refer to Vendor Reference Verification Form and submit as instructed (with proposal) or within three business days after County’s request. Only provide references for non-Broward County Board of County Commissioners contracts. For County contracts, the

County will review performance evaluations database for previous or current contracts with the County.

The County considers references and performance evaluations in the evaluation of Prime Vendor’s past performance.

Preferences identified in the evaluation criteria will be applied as qualitative enhancements to scoring, meaning vendors whose project examples best align with the stated preferred characteristics may receive higher consideration due to their increased relevance and demonstrated capability. These preferences do not constitute mandatory thresholds, but will inform the County’s assessment of experience, comparability, regulatory familiarity, and overall suitability for the Regional Biosolids Drying Facility.

b. Describe the Prime Vendor’s experience in navigating regulatory approvals and compliance for

Class AA biosolids drying facilities, including Florida Department of Environmental Protection

(FDEP) permitting (Chapter 62-640, Florida Administrative Code FAC), compliance with 40 CFR

Part 503, and air permitting for thermal drying systems and combustion units.

Provide examples where the firm successfully obtained permits for dryer facilities, odor and emissions systems, or biosolids Class AA certifications.

Each example should highlight the regulatory process, challenges faced (such as odor control requirements, nutrient management restrictions, or siting/public acceptance issues), and the strategies used to achieve timely approvals and maintain compliance. Preference may be given to firms with demonstrated success working with FDEP and local permitting agencies in Florida, and with proven ability to anticipate and address future requirements such as Per-and Polyfluoroalkyl

Substances PFAS readiness.

Vendors must submit at least three (3) project examples that align with these criteria, each with a corresponding reference. Additional project examples and references may be provided at the vendor’s discretion. However, a minimum of three (3) references, tied to at least three of the submitted project examples, is required.

Provide a minimum of three references for projects described. Refer to Vendor Reference

Verification Form and submit as instructed (with proposal) or within three business days after

County’s request. Only provide references for non-Broward County Board of County

Commissioners’ contracts. For County contracts, the County will review performance evaluations database for previous or current contracts with the County. The County considers references and performance evaluations in the evaluation of Prime Vendor’s past performance.

Preferences identified in the evaluation criteria will be applied as qualitative enhancements to scoring, meaning vendors whose project examples best align with the stated preferred characteristics may receive higher consideration due to their increased relevance and demonstrated capability. These preferences do not constitute mandatory thresholds, but will inform the County’s assessment of experience, comparability, regulatory familiarity, and overall suitability for the Regional Biosolids Drying Facility.

Evaluation Criteria

4. Workload of Firm Maximum

Points

For the Prime Vendor only, list all completed and active projects that the Prime Vendor has managed within the past five years. In addition, list all projected projects in the near future.

Projected projects will be defined as a project(s) that Prime Vendor is awarded a contract but the Notice to Proceed has not been issued.

Identify any projects that Prime Vendor worked on concurrently. Describe Prime Vendor’s approach to managing these projects. Were there or will there be any challenges for these projects? If so, describe how Prime Vendor dealt or will deal with the challenges of managing multiple projects.

5. Location Maximum

Points

Refer to Location Certification Form and submit as instructed.

Points shall be allocated as follows based on the Prime Vendor’s selection of one of the five options in the Location Certification Form: Option 1 (0 points); Option 2 (5 points); Option 3 (3 points);

Option 4 (points range from 0-5 depending on the composition of the joint venture); and Option 5 (0 points).

6. Willingness to Meet Time and Budget Requirements Maximum

Points

Indicate whether Prime Vendor is committed to meeting these requirements when identified under this agreement.

Prime Vendor is committed to meet Time and Estimated Budget for Phases 1, 2 and 3:

Time:

Phase I Preliminary Engineering: 6 months

Phase II Design and Permitting: 12 months

Phase II GMP Development and Procurement Support: 6 months

Phase Ill Engineering Services During Construction: 24 months

Estimated Budget: $50,000,000

YES or NO

Yes = 2 Points and No = 0 Points

Evaluation Criteria

7. Volume of Previous Work Maximum

Points

Refer to Volume of Previous Payments Attestation and submit as instructed.

The calculation for Volume of Previous Work is all amounts paid to the Prime Vendor by Broward

County Board of County Commissioners at the time of the solicitation opening date within a five-year timeframe.

Points assigned for Volume of Previous Work will be based on the amount paid-to-date by the

County to a Prime Vendor MINUS the Vendor’s confirmed payments paid-to-date to approved certified County Business Enterprise (CBE) firms performing services as Prime Vendor’s subcontractor/subconsultant to obtain the CBE goal commitment as confirmed by County’s Office of Economic and Small Business Development. The Volume of Previous Work for a Prime Vendor previously awarded a contract as a member of a Joint Venture calculation is based on the actual equity ownership of the Joint Venture.

3 points will be allocated to Prime Vendors paid $0 - $3,000,000;

2 Points will be allocated to Prime Vendors paid $3,000,001 - $7,500,000;

1 Point will be allocated to Prime Vendors paid $7,500,001 - $10,000,000;

0 Points will be allocated to Prime Vendors paid over $10,000,000

Payments for Prime Vendor will be verified by the County.