KB-4907-0000 Key Bridge Rebuild Main Span & Marine Approaches RFQ.pdf

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

MARYLAND TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Baltimore, Maryland

COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSALS PROCUREMENT

PHASE 1:

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ)

KEY BRIDGE REBUILD MAIN SPAN & MARINE APPROACHES

DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT

ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, BALTIMORE CITY AND BALTIMORE COUNTY

CONTRACT NO. KB-4907-0000

Issue Date: July 21, 2026

Prospective Offerors who have received this document from a source other than https://emma.maryland.gov and wish to assure receipt of any changes or additional materials to the RFQ, should immediately log into the eMaryland Marketplace Advantage website for this Solicitation so that amendments or other communications are sent directly to them.

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Maryland Transportation Authority

Contract No. KB-4907-0000

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RFQ KEY INFORMATION SUMMARY SHEET.………….……………………….…...……i

SECTION 1 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1.2 ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS

1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.4 FSK BRIDGE REBUILD PROJECT GOALS

1.5 PROJECT SCHEDULE

1.6 CONTRACT TYPE

1.7 GOVERNING LAW

1.8 QUALITY MANAGEMENT

1.9 BONDING AND SECURITIES

1.10 RULES OF CONTACT

1.11 PROPOSER QUESTIONS

1.12 RFQ ADDENDA

1.13 COST/STIPEND

1.14 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST

1.15 RESTRICTIONS ON PARTICIPATION IN THE CONTRACT

1.16 PERSONNEL SUBSTITUTIONS

1.17 eMARYLAND MARKETPLACE ADVANTAGE (eMMA)

1.18 SELF PERFORMANCE

1.19 ACCOUNTING REQUIREMENTS

1.20 EXECUTIVE ORDER 01.01.2024.18 COMPLIANCE

SECTION 2 PROCUREMENT PROCESS

2.1 OVERALL PROCUREMENT PROCESS

2.2 REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION

2.3 CHALLENGES

2.4 ANTICIPATED PROCUREMENT SCHEDULE

SECTION 3 SOQ SUBMISSION

3.1 SOQ OVERVIEW

3.2 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR THE RFQ/SOQ

3.3 CONTENTS FOR SOQ SUBMISSION

3.4 SOQ FORMAT AND ORGANIZATION

SECTION 4 PROTESTS

SECTION 5 RIGHTS AND DISCLAIMERS

5.1 MDTA RIGHTS

5.2 MDTA DISCLAIMERS

SECTION 6 CIVIL RIGHTS AND FAIR PRACTICES PROGRAM AND EQUAL

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

6.1 POLICY

6.2 DBE PARTICIPATION GOAL

6.3 LOCAL AND SMALL BUSINESS OUTREACH

6.4 ON THE JOB TRAINING (OJT) GOAL

6.5 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

6.6 SMALL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE

6.7 TITLE VI CONTRACT PROVISIONS

6.8 LOCAL HIRING INITIATIVE

SECTION 7 REQUIRED SOQ ATTACHMENT FORMS

i

STATE OF MARYLAND

MARYLAND TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

RFQ KEY INFORMATION SUMMARY SHEET

CONTRACT NO.: KB-4907-0000

eMMA SOLICITATION: BPM057351

TITLE: Key Bridge Rebuild Main Span and Marine Approaches

FACILITY: Francis Scott Key (FSK) Bridge

COUNTY: Anne Arundel County, Baltimore City and Baltimore County

ADVERTISED: July 21, 2026

PRE-PROPOSAL

CONFERENCE: July 30, 2026, 2:00 pm, Local Time (Eastern Prevailing

Time) Online Event. Register Here.

QUESTIONS DUE DATE: August 4, 2026

PROCUREMENT

OFFICER: Jeffrey Davis Phone No. 410-537-7832 Email Address: jdavis8@mdta.state.md.us

SUBMITTALS ARE

TO BE SENT TO: Maryland Transportation Authority

Division of Procurement Attn: Jeffrey Davis 2310 Broening Highway Baltimore, MD 21224

DUE DATE & TIME: August 19, 2026; 12:00 pm, Local Time (Eastern Prevailing Time)

CLASSIFICATION: Class - L (> $100,000,000)

PROJECT TIME: As near to December 31, 2030 as practicable. Design- Builder to provide open to traffic date as a part of their schedule submittal with Phase 2 proposal which will be incorporated into contract.

https://events.gcc.teams.microsoft.com/event/15442049-4dcf-4bff-89e8-70c83fa56f6b@b38cd27c-57ca-4597-be28-22df43dd47f1 mailto:jdavis8@mdta.state.md.us i

All other contract work shall be completed no later than 18 months after FSK Bridge Open to Traffic Date.

LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: Project Liquidated Damages to be described in the RFP

MINIMUM DBE GOALS: Not applicable to this procurement

SOQ DOCUMENTS AND

AMENDMENTS: Can be downloaded from https://emma.maryland.gov . Any questions regarding this website, please contact the eMaryland Marketplace Advantage Help Desk at eMMA.helpdesk@maryland.gov https://emma.maryland.gov/

SECTION 1 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA) is seeking the services of a qualified Design-Build Team (DB Team) for a Design-Build (DB) contract as defined in the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) 21.05.11 and Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 636. The contract will be procured using the “Competitive Sealed Proposals” procurement method as defined in COMAR 21.05.03.

This Request for Qualifications (RFQ) is the first phase of the Competitive Sealed Proposals procurement. To be invited to proceed to the second phase of the procurement process, a Proposer must respond to this RFQ, by submitting a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) on the due date and by the time specified. MDTA anticipates that three (3) Proposers will be placed on the Reduced Candidate List (RCL), described herein. If there is sufficient interest by qualified Proposers and the MDTA is satisfied that there will be an acceptable level of response, then Phase Two – Request for Proposals (RFP) will be issued only to the RCL.

The MDTA is seeking teams of designers and contractors who are qualified and prepared in all aspects to complete the design of, and construct, the Francis Scott Key (FSK) Bridge Design-Build Project (the “Project” or “FSK Bridge”).

Engineering codes and standards, including those of the various Federal, State, and local jurisdictions where the Project is located shall be applicable. Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration, Standard Specifications for Construction and Materials shall be applicable to the new bridge and its supporting infrastructure.

MDTA will be issuing the RFP to the RCL. After issuance of the RFP, the MDTA will hold one-on-one meetings with the firms on the RCL. The purpose of these meetings is to discuss issues and clarifications regarding the RFP and/or the Proposer’s potential Alternative Technical Concepts (ATCs). The meetings are intended to provide Proposers with a better understanding of the RFP. Each meeting will be held independently with each Proposer on the RCL. Further details on the one-on-one meetings will be provided in the RFP; however, no aspect of these meetings is intended to provide any Proposer with access to information that is not similarly available to other Proposers or to verbally change or amend written contract requirements, and no part of the evaluation of Proposals will be based on the conduct or discussions that occur during these meetings.

The MDTA reserves the right to disclose to all Proposers any issues raised during the one-on-one meetings which require addenda to the RFP, except to the extent the MDTA determines that, in its sole discretion, such disclosure would impair the confidentiality of an ATC or would reveal a Proposer’s confidential business strategies. The MDTA will not disclose any information pertaining to an individual Proposer’s Proposal, ATCs, or other technical concepts to other Proposers.

An ATC is a request by a Proposer to modify a contract requirement, specifically for that Proposer’s use in the Proposal process. The ATC must provide a solution that is equal to or better than the requirements in the RFP. The MDTA, in its sole discretion gets to determine whether an ATC is equal to or better than the requirements of the RFP.

Approval of ATCs is at the MDTA’s sole discretion. ATCs may be submitted by Proposers after placement on the RCL as stipulated in the RFP. The MDTA will use this ATC process during Phase Two of the procurement process to allow innovation and flexibility to be incorporated into the Proposals and ATC’s may be considered in making the selection decision. This is intended to avoid delays and potential conflicts in the design associated with the deferral of technical concept reviews to the post-award period and to ultimately obtain the best value to the MDTA. The ATC process will be further defined in the RFP.

SOQs will only be evaluated from Proposers that have assembled a team capable of providing all services and improvements required within the Project. Responses from individual engineering, construction, or consultant firms not prepared to provide all required services will be considered non-responsive.

1.2 ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS

The following abbreviations and capitalized terms used in this RFQ shall have the meanings indicated below.

1.2.1 ABBREVIATIONS

GP-1.04 ABBREVIATIONS (2026 MDOT SHA Standard Specifications for Construction and Materials)

ADD: The following:

AET ................................................................................................... All-Electronic Tolling ATC .................................................................................... Alternative Technical Concept BAFO ................................................................................................ Best and Final Offer CFR ...................................................................................... Code of Federal Regulations CSP ..................................................................................... Competitive Sealed Proposal DBE ........................................................................... Disadvantaged Business Enterprise DB ................................................................................................................. Design-Build DNR ............................................................................. Department of Natural Resources

EA .......................................................................................... Environmental Assessment ECM ........................................................................ Environmental Compliance Manager EEO .................................................................................. Equal Employment Opportunity GAAP .............................................................. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles GEC ............................................................................... General Engineering Consultant IDQM ...................................................................... Independent Design Quality Manager ITP .............................................................................................. Instructions to Proposers JV ................................................................................................................. Joint Venture LLC ........................................................................................... Limited Liability Company MD……………………………………………………………………………….……...Maryland MDOT .................................................................. Maryland Department of Transportation MDTA ............................................... Maryland Transportation Authority (also "Authority") N/A ............................................................................................................. Not Applicable NEPA…………………………………………………...….National Environmental Policy Act NTP ....................................................................................................... Notice to Proceed OJT ………………………………………...……………………………... On the Job Training PTOE ................................................................ Professional Traffic Operations Engineer QA ........................................................................................................ Quality Assurance QC .............................................................................................................. Quality Control RCL ............................................................................................. Reduced Candidate List RFP ................................................................................................ Request for Proposals RFQ .......................................................................................... Request for Qualifications ROW ........................................................................................................ Right(s)-of-Way SHA ..................................................................... Maryland State Highway Administration SOQ ........................................................................................ Statement of Qualifications U.S. DOT ..................................................... United States Department of Transportation

1.2.2 DEFINITIONS

GP-1.05 DEFINITIONS (2026 MDOT SHA Standard Specifications for Construction and Materials)

ADD: The following:

“Addenda/Addendum” means supplemental written additions, deletions, and modifications to the provisions of this RFQ after the Advertisement date of the RFQ.

“Advertisement” means the public announcement inviting prospective Proposers to obtain this RFQ and submit an SOQ.

“Authority” means the Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA), the Project contracting agency and owner of the Project.

“Commitment Tracking Database” means the database that has been compiled by the Design-Builder, which includes permit conditions, commitments and considerations that must be adhered to by the Project.

“Design-Builder” or “Design-Build (DB) Team” means the Contractor selected pursuant to the RFP that enters into the Contract with the MDTA to design and construct the Project. The Design-Builder or DB Team is comprised of the contractor, designer and any subcontractors identified in the contract.

“Designer” or “Design-Build Engineer” means the engineering firm(s) working for the Design-Builder who must have qualified, licensed design professionals to furnish design services required under the Contract Documents. Also reference COMAR 21.05.1.01 for Design Professionals.

“Design Subconsultant” means a qualified, licensed design professional engineering firm or individual who is not an employee of the Designer but is retained by the Designer or Design-Builder or employed or retained by anyone under contract to the Designer or Design-Builder, to furnish design services required under the Contract Documents.

“Directive Work” means project scope elements where the MDTA or its assigned designers, working directly for MDTA, have produced final signed and sealed plans and specifications by which the Design-Builder is bound to perform the depicted and specified work and furnish the labor, equipment, and materials necessary to complete the work.

“Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)” as defined in 49 CFR Part 26. For the purposes of this Project, all DBE's must be MDOT certified as demonstrated on the DBE Forms to be submitted in conformance with the RFP requirements.

“Environmental Compliance Manager (ECM)” means the individual designated by the Design-Builder and under the authority of the Design-Build Project Manager, with full-time responsibility for the environmental compliance of the Project during design and construction. The Environmental Compliance Manager may be an employee of the DB entity, Contractor, Designer or a subconsultant.

“General Engineering Consultant (GEC)” means the engineering team selected by the MDTA to support the MDTA in managing the design and construction of the Project.

“Independent Design Quality Manager (IDQM)” means an engineering firm with no contractual relationship to the Designer, retained by the Design-Builder that will review all design elements performed by the DB Team to ensure compliance with the Contract requirements and the Design-Builder’s Quality Plan. This is in addition to the Designer’s own internal quality control and assurance procedures. The IDQM Firm signing and certifying compliance with the Contract requirements must hold the same Professional Licensure, applicable certifications, trainings, etc., as that required of the Designer.

“Lead Principal Participant” means the Principal Participant that is designated by the Proposer as having the lead responsibility for managing the Proposer’s organization.

“Main Span” means the portion of the overall FSK Bridge that includes the cable-stayed main span and any adjoining side spans or approach spans that form the continuous superstructure integral with the stayed portion of the bridge. This section extends beyond the limits of the cable stays to the points where the structure transitions to conventional approach bridges supported on piers not associated with the stay system.

“Marine Approaches” means the portion of the overall FSK Bridge that includes the bridge spans supported by foundations located within the Patapsco River (the “River”).

These sections extend from the Main Span to the land approaches on each side of the River which are to be constructed under separate procurements.

“Permit” means both the executed regulatory agency action and its associated approval process, authorization and conditions. Applies to any regulatory agency having jurisdiction over actions associated with the Project or resources affected by the Project.

“Principal Participant” means a legal entity, firm or company, individually or as a party in a joint venture or limited liability company or some other legal entity, that will be signatory to the Contract with MDTA. Principal Participant(s) will be expected to accept joint and several liabilities for performance of the Contract. Principal Participants are not design subconsultants, construction subcontractors or any other subcontractors to the legal entity that signs the Contract.

“Project” means the improvements to be designed and constructed by the Design- Builder and all other Work products to be provided by the Design-Builder in accordance with the Contract Documents.

“Project Quality Manager” means the key person in the Design-Builder’s organization with overall responsibility for development and management of the Design-Builder’s Quality Plan and responsible for the overall Quality Control program of the Design- Builder, including the quality of management, design, and construction. Such individual shall act under the authority of the Design-Builder’s corporate management or Joint Venture (JV) Board.

“Proposer” means a legal entity submitting a Statement of Qualifications for the Project in response to this RFQ. In the context of responses to the RFP, the term means a firm on the Reduced Candidate List (RCL) that submits a Proposal and is the same as an “offeror” under COMAR, Title 21.

“Quality Assurance” means all planned and systematic Oversight actions by MDTA necessary to provide confidence that the Design-Builder is performing QC in accordance with the Quality Plan, that all Work complies with the Contract and that all materials incorporated in the Work, all equipment, and all elements of the Work will perform satisfactorily for the purpose intended. QA actions include monitoring and verification of design through auditing, spot-checking and participation in the review of the Design Plans and Working Drawings; and monitoring and verification of construction, manufacturing/process facilities and equipment, on-site equipment and QC documentation through auditing, spot inspections and reconciliation of material acceptance and rejection based on QC testing and Verification Sampling and Testing at production sites and the Project Site. Quality Assurance also includes Independent Assurance, consultation and provision of written comments by MDTA, documentation of QA activities, final inspection and Final Acceptance.

“Quality Control” means all planned and systematic actions by the Design-Builder to ensure the Work complies with the Contract and that all materials, equipment, and construction processes meet specified requirements and perform as intended. Quality Control (QC) includes development and implementation of the Quality Plan; inspection, testing, and supervision of design and construction; verification of compliance with the Design Plans and Working Drawings; and control of materials through sampling, testing, and acceptance or rejection. QC also includes maintenance of inspection and test records, control of equipment, correction of nonconforming Work.

“Quality Plan” means the Design-Builder’s plan for implementing an overall quality program and associated activities, including Design-Builder’s QC and QA procedures to assure and document quality of design and construction activities through reviews, inspections, testing, internal communications, and necessary interfaces with the MDTA.

The MDTA intends to follow its typical inspection policies and procedures for construction inspection and administration, including quality control and quality assurance as defined in the MDOT SHA Standard Specifications for Construction and Materials.

“Reduced Candidate List (RCL)” means the list of Proposers that have submitted SOQs that the MDTA determines, through evaluation of the SOQs, are the most highly qualified to perform the Work.

“Request for Proposals (RFP)” means a written solicitation issued by the MDTA seeking Proposals (including technical and price) to be used to identify the Proposer offering the best value to the MDTA. The RFP will be issued only to Proposers who are on the Reduced Candidate List (RCL).

“Request for Qualifications (RFQ)” means the written solicitation issued by the MDTA seeking SOQs to be used to identify and create a Reduced Candidate List (RCL) of Proposers to receive the RFP for the Project.

“River” means the Patapsco River.

“Site” means the land, water and/or premises on which the Project is located.

“Specialty Subcontractor” means those consultants or subcontractors identified to perform Work critical to the success of the Project. Qualified Primes may self-perform specialty work, when applicable.

“Statement of Qualifications (SOQ)” means the information prepared and submitted by a Proposer in response to this RFQ.

“Work” means any of the activities, duties, materials, labor, products, and items to be furnished and provided by the Design-Builder as part of the Contract.

1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Francis Scott Key Bridge (FSK) was a 1.7-mile-long bridge on I-695 spanning the navigable Patapsco River providing a critical connection to the Port of Baltimore. I-695 is a fully access controlled highway, forming the southeastern section of the beltway loop around Baltimore City. FSK was a divided four-lane typical section with two lanes in each direction and was on the National Highway System (NHS). The Project will construct the Main Span bridge and Marine Approaches. The land approaches will be constructed under design-bid-build procurements separate from this Project, as well as for the demolition of portions of remaining bridge structures and associated miscellaneous marine work. These construction contracts will occur concurrently with the Project. The proposed Main Span bridge shall be a cable-stayed bridge whose main span over the Federal Navigational Channel shall be 1,665 feet long with a minimum vertical clearance as defined in the approved USCG Bridge Permit (1-25-5 and approved amendments).

The approximate Project layout is shown below:

MDTA intends to secure the design services for the Main Span, cable stayed bridge and portions of the vessel collision protection system. These designers, contracted directly to MDTA, will complete the design and provide signed and sealed plans for the cable stayed bridge and the vessel collision protection system for the main pylons (also referred to as Pier 24 and 25). These scope elements will be Directive Work and MDTA will be providing design support during construction to support Requests for Information, Shop Drawing Reviews, and plan changes during construction (Redlines). The remainder of the design, including the Marine Approach spans and the vessel collision protection for the remainder of the cable stayed foundations (Piers 22, 23, 26, and 27) will be the responsibility of the DB Team to design to completion, sign and seal, and construct, including design support during construction.

The MDTA is seeking DB Teams that are committed to performing to a high degree of quality, are committed to environmental compliance, and have proven experience in the design and construction of bridges and highway infrastructure having similar scope, magnitude and complexity as this Project. The DB Teams should be capable of developing innovative and cost-effective design and construction solutions that will achieve the MDTA’s goals for the Project; and be willing to partner with the MDTA and other Project stakeholders for the mutual success of the Project. Specifically, the MDTA is seeking DB Teams that will complete the Project at or below the total construction budget range, will minimize life cycle costs, will meet or exceed the schedule for fully opening all four (4) lanes of the new bridge to traffic, will minimize the total Contract Time of the Project, will provide a safe toll facility with zero fatalities and serious injuries during and after construction, will integrate high quality design, construction and operational aspects to deliver a durable, functional bridge achieving the minimum 100-year service life requirements, and will minimize customer travel delays during and after construction.

The Project consists of completing the final design and construction of a four-lane bridge crossing over the Patapsco River that is consistent with the Categorical Exclusion for the Project approved by Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”) on July 23, 2024. The final design and construction performed by the DB shall incorporate the following Early Work Packages (EWPs) completed under MDTA Contract No. KB-4903-0000:

• EWP-2 and EWP-4 – Production Pile Procurement and Installation Procurement of 122 ea. 96-inch diameter steel pipe piles with a wall thickness of 1.5-inch for the pylon/pier protection foundations and 16 ea. 96-inch diameter steel pipe piles with a wall thickness of 2-inches for pier protection foundations. The pylon foundation piles (82 piles) will be coated with one coat of coal tar epoxy from the top of the pipe to 20 feet below the mudline and will include a minimum of 10 shear rings. The pier protection piles (56 piles) will be uncoated and will include a minimum of 6 shear rings.

• EWP-3 and EWP-5 – Trestle Material Procurement and Installation Procurement and Installation of mainline south and north access trestle. South trestle includes over 50,000 sf of access trestle supported by temporary 36-inch diameter piles.

North trestle incudes over 80,000 sf of access trestle supported by temporary 36-inch diameter piles.

• EWP-8 – Pier Protection Pile Procurement Procurement of 100 ea. 96-inch diameter steel pipe piles with a wall thickness of 1.5-inch for the pylon pier protection foundations. No coating or shear rings are included in these piles. MDTA anticipates installing these piles as part of an upcoming EWP.

As part of MDTA Contract No. KB-4903-0000, the Progressive Design-Build Contractor completed 90-percent design of the Project. These 90-percent design plans, reports, geotechnical data, base mapping, and associated permits for the relevant work elements will be provided with the Request for Proposals.

The Design-Builder will need to coordinate with the adjacent Contractor(s) building the land approaches. The Design-Builder will be responsible for constructing the final prestressed concrete girder span adjacent to the marine spans on each side of the River.

The land approach Contractor(s) will procure the prestressed girders for these spans based on the approach span design and store the girders onsite for erection by the Design-Builder. The land approach Contracts will construct conduit for electrical and fiber optic within their project limits. The Design-Builder will be responsible for fiber and electrical line installation and system wide testing and integration for the complete FSK Bridge.

1.4 FSK BRIDGE REBUILD PROJECT GOALS

The MDTA’s goals for the replacement of the FSK Bridge, listed in descending order of importance, are:

A) Cost – Complete the Project at or below the total construction budget range of $3.5 billion to $4.0 billion while minimizing life-cycle costs.

B) Schedule – Fully open all four (4) lanes to traffic on the new bridge as soon as practicable. Work activities shall be sequenced to minimize impacts to maritime traffic and the Port of Baltimore, and minimize disturbances to surrounding communities.

C) Safety – Provide a safe toll facility with zero fatalities and serious injuries for workers and the public during and after construction. Safe passage of all port and maritime traffic through the project site shall be maintained for the duration of the project in collaboration with federal, state and local agencies having jurisdiction.

D) Quality – Integrate high-quality design, materials, construction and operational aspects to deliver a resilient and aesthetically pleasing bridge achieving the minimum 100-year service life requirements.

E) Aesthetics – Design and Construct a visually attractive structure that serves as the gateway to Baltimore City and the Port of Baltimore.

1.5 PROJECT SCHEDULE

MDTA desires that the FSK Bridge be open to traffic as near to December 31, 2030 as practicable. To that end, an sincentive provision will be included in the Contract as a no excuse bonus for completion of the FSK Bridge Open to Traffic Date.

All other contract work shall be completed no later than 18 months after FSK Bridge Open to Traffic Date.

See Section 2.4 for information regarding the anticipated procurement schedule.

1.6 CONTRACT TYPE

The Contract will be a lump sum, Design-Build Contract and will be awarded through a Competitive Sealed Proposals procurement under the State Finance and Procurement Article of the Maryland Code and COMAR 21.05.03.

1.7 GOVERNING LAW

The Proposer shall comply with all applicable laws in all aspects, including federal, state and local laws and regulations applicable to the procurement process of this Project and in performance of the Contract. All legal matters and any disputes arising from the Contract will be governed by the laws of the State of Maryland and subject to the jurisdiction of the Maryland State Board of Contract Appeals (“MSBCA”) or if the MSBCA lacks jurisdiction then to the courts in the State of Maryland. The Design-Builder shall obtain all required government approvals in Maryland applicable for the Work performed.

1.8 QUALITY MANAGEMENT

The DB’s QC program must follow the requirements of 23 CFR Part 637 and the Contract Documents. The MDTA will review the DB Team’s program to assure that it meets guidelines and minimum requirements established by the MDTA. MDTA approval of the program will constitute MDTA concurrence that it meets these criteria based on its review, but the DB shall be responsible for meeting criteria regardless of MDTA concurrence, shall maintain ownership of the program, shall be fully responsible for its execution, and shall maintain sole responsibility for the quality and workmanship of the Work.

The MDTA intends to utilize a design audit process for all Design-Builder design packages. Under this approach, the DB will be required to utilize the services of an Independent Design Quality Manager (IDQM) Firm to review all design elements to ensure they are in compliance with the Contract requirements and the DB’s Quality Plan.

The IDQM Firm will be responsible to sign and certify that all design submittals prepared by the DB are in conformance with the Contract requirements prior to construction. This is in addition to the Designer’s own internal quality control and assurance procedures.

The IDQM Firm certifying compliance with the Contract requirements must hold the same Professional Licensure, applicable certifications, trainings, etc., as that required of the Designer.

The MDTA intends to follow its typical inspection policies and procedures for construction inspection and administration, including quality control and quality assurance as defined in the MDOT SHA Standard Specifications for Construction and Materials (2026 Edition).

The Design-Build contract will not alter the authorities of the MDTA’s Facility Administrator, Directors, Area Engineer, Project Engineer, or construction inspection personnel in their administration of the construction contract.

1.9 BONDING AND SECURITIES

The Proposer shall provide evidence that it can obtain a Performance Bond and a Payment Bond in accordance with the requirements in Maryland’s Standard Specifications for Construction and Materials, GP – Section 3 and appropriate for a Project Classification L as defined in Maryland’s Standard Specifications for Construction and Materials, Section TC 2.01 for a minimum value of $1,500,000,000.

Such evidence shall take the form of a letter from a surety company indicating that such capacity is anticipated to be available for the contracting entity. Letters indicating “unlimited” bonding capacity are not acceptable. The surety company providing such letter must be rated at least A- by two nationally recognized credit rating agencies or at least A-VII by A.M. Best & Company. The letter should articulate and enumerate the entity’s backlog and work in progress in relation to its bonding capacity.

A Bid Bond will be required at the RFP stage of the procurement.

1.10 RULES OF CONTACT

The Procurement Officer (see RFQ Key Information Summary Sheet for contact information), or a representative hereafter designated in writing by the Procurement Officer, shall be the MDTA's single point of contact and source of information for this procurement.

The following rules of contact shall apply during the Contract procurement process, which begins upon the release of this RFQ, and will be completed with the execution of the Contract. These rules are designed to promote a fair and unbiased procurement process.

Contact includes face-to-face, telephone, facsimile, electronic mail (e-mail), instant message, texting or formal written communication.

The specific rules of contact are as follows:

A) Section 11-205 of the State Finance and Procurement Article, Annotated Code of Maryland, prohibits and penalizes collusion in the State procurement process.

B) A Proposer may contact the MDTA only through the Procurement Officer and only in writing, and not orally. The Proposer's contacts with the MDTA shall be only through a single representative authorized to bind the Proposer.

C) The Procurement Officer normally will contact a Proposer in writing through the Proposer's designated representative.

D) Neither a Proposer nor its agents may contact MDTA employees, including MDTA heads, members of the evaluation committee(s) and any other person who will evaluate SOQs, regarding the Project, except through the process identified above.

E) Neither a Proposer nor its agents may contact any other State or Federal official, regulatory agency, any firm on the restricted participant list included in Section 1.15, or stakeholder staff regarding the Project.

F) Any contact by a Proposer determined by the MDTA to be improper may result in disqualification of the Proposer.

G) The MDTA will not be responsible for or bound by (1) any oral communication, or (2) any other information or contact that occurs outside the official communication process specified herein, unless confirmed in writing by the Procurement Officer.

1.11 PROPOSER QUESTIONS

The MDTA will consider questions submitted in writing by Proposers regarding this RFQ, including requests for clarification and requests to correct errors. All such requests must be submitted to the Procurement Officer for this Project (see RFQ Key Information Summary Sheet).

Only e-mailed inquiries submitted to the Procurement Officer will be accepted. No requests for additional information or clarification sent to any other MDTA office, consultant, GEC, the FHWA, or any other entity, will be considered.

Only requests received by 4:00 p.m. Eastern Prevailing Time on the date specified in RFQ Key Information Summary Sheet will be addressed. Questions will not be accepted by phone. Questions must include the requestor’s name, address, telephone number, e-mail address, and the Proposer he/she represents.

All responses to questions on the RFQ will be posted on eMaryland Marketplace Advantage. Responses to questions and addenda will not be mailed out.

1.12 RFQ ADDENDA

In the event it becomes necessary to revise any part of the RFQ, or if any additional information is required to enable potential Offerors to interpret the provisions of the RFQ, an addendum will be issued by MDTA and posted on eMaryland Marketplace Advantage.

Prospective Offerors should review eMaryland Marketplace Advantage periodically to determine whether or not MDTA has issued an Addendum to this RFQ. MDTA is not responsible for notifying Offerors of addendums to the RFQ other than by posting addendums on eMaryland Marketplace Advantage.

If an Addenda has revised any of the requirements of the RFQ documents, make sure that you submit the revised pages/information in your submittal.

1.13 COST/STIPEND

Proposers are solely responsible for all costs and expenses of any nature associated with responding to this RFQ, including attending briefing(s) and providing supplemental information.

During the RFP Stage, a stipend up to the amount of $1,000,000.00 will be paid to each unsuccessful but responsive Proposer from the RCL that meets the requirements specified in the RFP.

1.14 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The Proposer’s attention is directed to 23 CFR Section 636 Subpart A and in particular to Subsection 636.116 regarding organizational conflicts of interest. Section 636.103 defines “Organizational Conflict of Interest” as follows:

“Organizational conflict of interest means that because of other activities or relationships with other persons, a person is unable or potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the owner, or the person's objectivity in performing the contract work is or might be otherwise impaired, or a person has an unfair competitive advantage.”

The Proposer is prohibited from receiving any advice or discussing any aspect relating to the Project or the procurement of the Contract with any Person with an organizational conflict of interest, including, but not limited to, the Persons identified in Section 1.15.

By submitting its SOQ, each Proposer agrees that, if an organizational conflict of interest is thereafter discovered, the Proposer must make an immediate and full written disclosure to the MDTA that includes a description of the action that the Proposer has taken or proposes to take to avoid or mitigate such conflicts. If an organizational conflict of interest is determined to exist, the MDTA may, at its discretion, cancel the Contract. If the Proposer was aware of an organizational conflict of interest prior to the award of the Contract and did not disclose the conflict to the MDTA, the MDTA may terminate the Contract for Default.

1.15 RESTRICTIONS ON PARTICIPATION IN THE CONTRACT

An individual or entity that has received monetary compensation as the lead or prime design consultant under a contract with the MDTA or Kiewit Infrastructure Company (KIC) to perform services as part of MDTA Progressive Design Build Contract No. KB-4903- 0000 and/or have been retained to perform general engineering consultant (GEC) services or construction management/inspections (CMI) services on behalf of the MDTA for the Francis Scott Key Bridge Replacement Project, or a person or entity that employs such an individual or entity, or entities with prime design phase responsibilities which have received in excess of $500,000 for services performed for this Project, may not submit a SOQ, Technical Proposal or a Price Proposal for this procurement and is not a responsible offeror under COMAR 21.06.01.01. The Technical Proposal or Price Proposal from such an individual or entity will be rejected pursuant to COMAR 21.06.01.01 and

COMAR 21.06.02.03.

The following is a list of consultants and/or subconsultants that MDTA has determined to be conflicted and ineligible to participate in any manner in this SOQ or subsequent RFP based on their participation on the Project. The MDTA makes no representations regarding the completeness of the list.

• AECOM

• Applied Research Associates

• Armand Resource Group, Inc.

• Arup US, Inc.

• Athavale, Lystad & Associates, Inc.

• Blackwater Environmental Group, LLC

• CES Consulting, LLC

• CHI Consulting Engineers, Inc.

• Coastal Resources, Inc.

• COWI

• Daniel Consultants, Inc.

• DMY Engineering Consultants, Inc.

• Donald MacDonald Architects LLP

• Drive Engineering Corp.

• EBA Engineering, Inc.

• Fire & Risk Alliance, LLC

• GFT Infrastructure, Inc.

• GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.

• Horton Lee Brogden Lighting Design Inc.

• Infrastructure Technologies, LLC

• Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson

• Kaur Engineering Consultants, Inc.

• Kelly McNutt Consulting, LLC

• Kiewit Engineering Group, Inc.

• Kiewit Infrastructure Company

• Mahan Rykiel Associates, Inc.

• Mass Electric Construction Co.

• Moffatt & Nichol, Inc.

• Remline Corp

• RJM Engineering, Inc.

• Rossi Group

• Rowan Williams Davies & Irwin, Inc.

• Rummel, Klepper & Kahl, LLP

• STV Incorporated

• Systra International Bridge Technologies

• Thorton Tomasetti, Inc.

• VHB

• Wallace Montgomery & Associates, LLP

• Weeks Marine, Inc.

• W.F. Baird & Associates, Ltd.

• Whitman, Requardt & Associates, LLP

• WSP USA, Inc.

The following is a list of consultants and/or subconsultants that MDTA has determined to be conflicted and ineligible to participate in any manner in this SOQ or subsequent RFP based on their participation on MDTA Contract No. KB-4903-0000. The MDTA makes no representations regarding the completeness of the list. These firms may be considered for participation on the successful Proposer’s team following Contract award; however, they may not be included in any way in the Proposer’s SOQ or response to the subsequent RFP.

• Alvi Associates, Inc.

• Chesapeake Environmental Management

• Floura Teeter Landscape Architects, Inc.

• JASCO Applied Sciences

• MP Engineers, P.C.

• Navarro and Wright Consulting Engineers, Inc.

• Straughan Environmental, Inc.

• SuYash Consulting, LLC

With the exception of the firms listed above, no other firms are known to have restrictions in participating in the Project at this time. The list above will be updated as necessary throughout the procurement process.

§13-212.1 of the Maryland State Finance & Procurement Article contains various restrictions on participating in State procurements. Any questions regarding eligibility must be immediately brought to the attention of the Procurement Officer in writing.

No official or employee of the State of Maryland, as defined under the General Provisions Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland, whose duties as such official or employee include matters relating to or affecting the subject matter of this contract, shall, during the pendency and term of this contract and while serving as an official or employee of the State, become or be an employee of the DB Team or an entity that is a subcontractor on this contract.

No DB Team may use any persons meeting the above restrictions in any capacity, key personnel or otherwise, on this Contract. It is the responsibility of the DB Team to identify any potential ethics issues concerning its former MDTA employees and seek an opinion from the Maryland State Ethics Commission regarding any potential conflicts of interest.

The DB Team shall provide certification in its cover letter that it is in compliance with former employee rules prohibiting work on a matter in which a former MDTA employee participated significantly as a State Employee for the duration of this contract.

1.16 PERSONNEL SUBSTITUTIONS

It is the MDTA’s expectation and preference that a Proposer’s organization, including all Principal Participants, Specialty Subcontractors, and key personnel identified in the SOQ, will remain intact for the duration of the procurement process and throughout the full duration of the Contract. As such, if a Proposer proposes substitutions for participants after the SOQ submittal, such changes may result in the Proposer’s disqualification. In the event that a Proposer opts to request a substitution or substitutions, such substitution(s) will require written approval by the MDTA. To qualify for MDTA’s approval to remove, add or replace Principal Participants, Specialty Subcontractors, and key personnel, the written request must document that the proposed removal, replacement, or addition will be equal to or better than the key personnel provided in the SOQ. MDTA will use the criteria specified in this RFQ, and the qualification submitted by the Proposer in the SOQ, to evaluate all requests. An equal or better determination will be made at the MDTA’s sole discretion and shall not be subject to dispute.

Requests for changes must be made in writing no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the due date for submission of Proposals. The Proposer should carefully consider the make-up of its team, prior to submittal of the SOQ, to reduce the likelihood of occurrence of any such changes during the Proposal period and, of equal importance, throughout the full duration of the Contract.

1.17 eMARYLAND MARKETPLACE ADVANTAGE (eMMA) eMMA is an electronic commerce system administered by the Maryland Department of General Services. MDTA will use the eMMA website (https://emma.maryland.gov) for advertisement.

To receive a contract award, a Proposer must be registered on eMMA. Registration is free. Go to https://emma.maryland.gov, click on “New Supplier? Register Now” to begin the process and then follow the prompts.

1.18 SELF PERFORMANCE

Except as may be provided in the Contract, the Design-Builder to whom a Contract is awarded shall perform with its own organization and with the assistance of workers under its immediate supervision work of a value of not less than 50 percent of the total original value of the Contract.

1.19 ACCOUNTING REQUIREMENTS

All Proposers must have internal control systems in place for their design entities and / or subcontractors that meet federal requirements for accounting. These systems must comply with requirements of 48 CFR 31, “Federal Acquisition Regulations, Contract Cost Principles and Procedures,” and 23 CFR 172, “Administration of Engineering and Design Related Service Contracts.”

1.20 EXECUTIVE ORDER 01.01.2024.18 COMPLIANCE

MDOT has evaluated this contract in accordance with Executive Order 01.01.2024.18 to determine if a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) is required for the contract and has determined that a PLA is not required. While the use of a PLA is not required for this contract as part of any submission, the Design-Builder is permitted to voluntarily do so.

SECTION 2 PROCUREMENT PROCESS

2.1 OVERALL PROCUREMENT PROCESS

The procurement process for the Contract will be in accordance with laws and rules of the State of Maryland, using the Competitive Sealed Proposals (CSP) method of procurement as set forth in COMAR 21.05.03 (also known industry wide as “best value”).

The intent of the MDTA is to award the Contract to the responsible Proposer from the RCL whose proposal is determined to be the most advantageous to the MDTA, considering the price and technical evaluation factors set forth in the tRFP

The procurement process will include two phases:

PHASE ONE - RFQ

The purpose of this RFQ is to allow the MDTA to evaluate the SOQs submitted. Once SOQ evaluations are complete, a RCL of DB Teams considered most highly qualified shall be developed. The RCL will be determined based on an evaluation of the factors set forth herein. SOQs submitted in response to this RFQ must include a response to the mandatory information and each technical evaluation factor. SOQs that do not include the mandatory information or responses to each technical evaluation factor shall not be evaluated. See Section 3 for SOQ evaluation factors and submittal requirements.

PHASE TWO - RFP

DB Teams who have made the RCL will be notified in writing and will be subsequently provided the RFP package. This package will include all materials necessary for the DB Teams to submit proposals meeting the technical and price requirements for this project.

Those DB Teams that do not make the RCL will be notified in writing and will be provided the opportunity for a debriefing.

The RFP will provide specific instructions on the submission requirements, evaluation factors, objectives of the evaluation, and evaluation rating guidelines for the RFP phase of the procurement. Proposers shall have an opportunity to submit Alternative Technical Concepts (ATCs). Questions and comments will be answered in the form of an addendum to the RFP. ATCs will be considered as confidential and MDTA will inform the Proposer, which submitted the ATC, whether the ATC is considered viable. MDTA will own all ATCs submitted and may adopt them for use by the successful Proposer, after Award.

Proposals in response to the RFP will be reviewed and evaluated based on evaluation factors to be specified in the RFP, including technical evaluation factors and price. The RFP requirements and evaluation and selection procedures are being designed, consistent with COMAR Title 21 and the regulations of the FHWA, to allow the MDTA to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of each Proposal’s quality (through the technical evaluation factors) in addition to considering the price offered, thus allowing it to determine which Proposal is the most advantageous to the MDTA.

The Technical Proposal and Price Proposal responses to the RFP, including any incorporated ATCs, shall be submitted in sealed packages on the dates and times specified in the RFP. The Proposals shall not be publicly opened. The Proposals shall be opened in the presence of at least two MDTA employees who shall compile a register of received Proposals. Responses to the RFP Proposals not delivered at the location, date and by the time specified in the RFP shall be returned unopened to the Proposer.

The Technical and Price Proposals, including any incorporated ATCs, shall be evaluated in accordance with COMAR 21.05.03.03 by a committee established for that purpose and based on the evaluation criteria set forth below. The Evaluation Committee will review Proposals, participate in Proposer’s discussions, and provide input to the Procurement Officer.