PC-550000-CB121.pdf

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LETTER OF QUALIFICATION

FOR USE WITH STANDARD NOTE 1 ADVERTISEMENTS ONLY

375-030-24

PROCUREMENT

08/25

Advertisement No.: 26402 DOT FM Number: 452175-1-22-01

Submittal Date: 11/10/2025 Project Name: SFRC-Overpass Feasibility Studies at Various Locat

Consultant’s Name: MARLIN Engineering, Inc.

(Firm must use the name shown on the Consultant’s qualification letter, if prequalified.)

Street Address: 3363 W Commercial Blvd, Suite 115

City: Fort Lauderdale State: FL Zip: 33309

Office Location: Broward County Contact person: Jeff Weidner

Phone: 957-870-5058 Contact email: jweidner@marlinengineering.com By submittal of this letter the Consultant certifies that all information provided in the letter is true and accurate. The Consultant further certifies that staff proposed are currently employed by the firm(s) identified, or the Consultant shall provide a statement indicating when staff will become employed by the identified firm(s).

The Consultant shall attach a Certificate of Professional Liability Insurance as part of the submittal. Additionally, for projects $500,000 or above an FDOT approved overhead audit dated within 6 months of the Consultant’s fiscal year end must be on file with the Department; or a recent overhead audit dated within 6 months of the Consultant’s fiscal year end must be submitted to the Prequalification Administrator via email to co.profserv@dot.state.fl.us prior to the Letter response deadline indicated in the advertisement. In all cases, the overhead audit must be prepared by an independent Certified Public Accountant (CPA) or governmental agency and in conformance with the Department's current Reimbursement Rate Guidelines. A completed Request for Qualification Form No. 375-030-01 must accompany the submittal of an overhead audit to the Prequalification Administrator.

The Letter of Qualification should address the following information:

• Proposed approach and understanding of critical issues.

• Relevant project experience – Similar type of work experience; including reference contact information.

• Other content provided by firm.

• Estimate of current workload and available resources.

• Proposed key personnel and their proposed roles (do not include resumes).

Consultants: Please be aware that all font (including font in graphics, tables, and captions on photos) must be standard Arial Narrow, 11 point, single line spacing with no modification of font or spacing allowed. ½” clear margin on all sides must be maintained on all pages. It is the Consultant’s responsibility, due to font and format restrictions within this form, to work within the constraints of the form and its format. Character styling such as use of color, bold, and italics is allowed. Use of a table is recommended for text boxes. The page layout may be modified to add columns, tables, graphics, and photos. All graphics and photos must be created in a clean, blank word document and the “text wrapping square” option applied before cutting and pasting into this form.

Consultants may add their logo at the top of the first page (directly underneath the header), however, the Consultant shall not extend the form beyond the pages allocated for the Letter to accommodate insertion of the logo. Consultants are not permitted to insert any other information in the header other than the logo. After pasting your letter into this form, highlight all text and ensure the font size of Arial Narrow, 11 point was retained. Once your content is inserted, delete any additional blank pages that are generated by pressing your delete key after the last word in the Letter of Response. Recreation of the form in another software application to modify the form format is not permitted. This form works best when saved with a .docx extension. *Please retain the source document as it may be requested at a later date in the procurement, to verify adherence with aforementioned restrictions. Note: You may begin typing on this page.

PURPOSE: FDOT D4 is advancing a program of Railroad–Highway Grade Separation (RR Separation) Feasibility Studies for 6 crossings on the SFRC. The study will evaluate 4 alternatives at each location: Rail Over Road; Road Over Rail; Road Under Rail and a No-Build Alternative with the objective of advancing an alternative to PD&E phase for each location. Deliverables include 6 individual sets of documents, including, at a minimum, Preliminary Engineering Report, alternative concepts, cost estimates and a preliminary environmental assessment.

KEY STAFF, TEAMING & SIMILAR EXPERIENCE: MARLIN

(MEI) is excited to submit this LOR having significant experience conducting FDOT and MPO RR Separation studies, PD&E, design and post design services. Our Key Staff include:

Ramon Soria, PE, (15% available,42 years’ experience) Project Principal, Project Manager (PM) for D6 25th Street Viaduct RR Separation Study and Principal-in-Charge for PD&E, Design and Post Design FM #405575-6 and 405575-9.

Rafael Lagos, PE, (60%, 32 yrs) Chief Design Engineer, QA/QC

Officer on the 25th Street Viaduct RR Separation Design FM #405575-6 and 405575-9; 4 FEC RR Grade Separation Concept Designs - Martin MPO (MMPO), and 6 FEC RR Separations Design

– Broward MPO (BMPO).

Richard Creed, PE, (60%,39 yrs) QA/QC Officer Richard has 37 years’ experience and was the D4 Design Office Roadway Engineer for 15 years overseeing highway reconstruction, signalization, resurfacing, safety, and bridge construction projects.

Jeff Weidner – (80%,36 yrs) PM has recent PD&E experience as PM for the Midtown Plantation Bridge FM#448884-1-22-01 that received OEM LDCA approval in early 2025. Jeff has also managed grade separation and freight studies for D6, Miami-Dade TPO, Indian River (IRMPO) and MMPO as shown below.

D6 Doral Freight Mobility Plan 437945-1-22 Ref-Carlos Castro Miami-Dade TPO 2045 Freight Plan – Ref – Kevin Walford, IRMPO RR Grade Separation Study Ref-Brian Freeman MMPO FEC RR Grade Separation Study Ref-Beth Beltran MMPO 2045 Long Range Freight Plan Ref-Beth Beltran, MPO mailto:co.profserv@dot.state.fl.us

375-030-24

PROCUREMENT

Jeff also currently serves as Subconsultant Chief Planner on 6 RR Separations for the BMPO working with our Team Members Kimley Horn and Associates (KHA).

Armando Aguiar, PE, (60%,17 yrs) Sr. Roadway Engineer He has prepared typical section packages and adjustment plans/matrices for utility conflicts and experience creating alignments with profiles; grades and horizontal and vertical design.

The Team Roles and Responsibilities: MEI will manage the project and lead alternatives development/evaluations, utilities, traffic, safety, concept design, and Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) and documentation; KHA brings FRA and SFRC RR crossing design experience to support alternatives development, design and lead TSM&O/ITS; ASA Consultants (ASA*) provides D4 structures expertise; GCME* for Geotechnical evaluation; Infinite Source Communications (ISC*) will lead stakeholder engagement; Insight Transportation Consulting (ITC*) will lead microsimulation and Metric Engineering (ME) will lead travel demand modeling and the environmental and drainage evaluations (* denotes DBE status).

Subconsultant Key Staff Experience:

Stewart Robertson, PE, (65%,25 yrs) KHA, Sr. Engineer specializes in Multimodal engineering and is currently managing 6 locations for RR Separations for the BMPO.

Stefano Viola, PE, (60%,19 yrs) KHA, Sr. Designer has provided design and construction services to SFRTA for 60 RR crossings as part of the systemwide crossing program.

Jill Cappelli, PE, (65%,25 yrs) KHA, TSMO/ITS Engineer, Deputy PM Sub, D4 TSM&O Consultant FM#229765-6: TWOs led by KHA include Integrated Corridor Management (ICM), TSM&O outreach, ITS design, arterial Traffic Incident Management.

Sohelia Sadough, PE - (70%,30 yrs) ASA, Sr. Structural Engineer, PM / EOR for Interchange bridges over rail, highways and waterways, I-95/ I-595 Interchange FM#409354-2-52-01.

Ashutosh Kumar, (60%, 21 yrs) ITC, Sr. Planner specializes in traffic microsimulation including Copans Rd SFRC/I-95 Grade Separation Feasibility Study FM #447845-1-12-01.

Nicole Mauntler, PE, AICP (65%,17 yrs) ME, serves as PD&E PM for PD&E studies and Drainage Engineer for Roadway Design.

Rob Myers, (65%, 21 yrs) ME, Sr. Environmental Scientist has conducted a wide array of environmental assessments and has managed PD&E projects in five FDOT districts.

SCOPE & UNDERSTANDING: Building upon our qualifications, an iterative alternatives evaluation will be performed to identify concepts that improve congestion, safety, system resilience, and multimodal connectivity. Coordination with FDOT, operators, local jurisdictions and others throughout the process is critical to ensure advancement of feasible alternatives.

Existing Conditions: The FRA Accident Prediction System provides predictive analytics for annual collisions and the FDOT RHCI ranks crossings across the state for safety needs from the most dangerous #1, to the safest #10,641. The RHCI ranks SR 848/Stirling Road #2, SR 870/Commercial Blvd #4, Palmetto Park Road #11, SR 882/Forest Hill Blvd # 18, Linton Blvd #24 and SR 806/Atlantic Ave #45 for safety improvements; and the FRA predicts a 13% to 36% chance of at least one collision this year. This data is compelling and recommends overpasses at all locations.

Tiered comparative analyses and BCAs will be performed to determine long-term operational, environmental, and community impacts. The outcome will be recommended alternative(s) for each crossing to be advanced to PD&E.

APPROACH: Rail Traffic: The Team will adjust 2045 future rail projections from the 2021 SFRC Master Plan to the 2050 planning horizon to ensure consistency with the BMPO and Palm Beach TPA Long Range Plans. The Master Plan projects a significant increase in rail traffic through 2045 due to expanded Tri-Rail commuter service, incremental Amtrak intercity additions, and moderate freight growth by CSX. The plan indicates that as of 2019 (pre- COVID baseline), there are approximately 58–60 trains per day and by 2045 this number could rise to as many as 96 daily trains under a maximum growth scenario Traffic Analysis: Quantitative evidence will evaluate whether grade separations at the crossings meaningfully reduce delay, improve safety and enhance multimodal performance. Modeling will be performed to simulate existing, No-Build TSM&O, and conceptual Build alternatives. Operational Measures of Effectiveness including delay, LOS, and queue length—will be reported for each movement and aggregated by intersection and crash reduction assessment will be performed to support BCAs.

Alternatives Analysis: The analysis will be context-sensitive to each study location, all are situated near I-95 interchanges, where roadway geometry, access and clearance requirements present unique design challenges. Each of the concepts pose challenges:

Rail over Road designs require a minimum overpass extension of 3500’ in each direction and challenges include: intersecting roadways that will need to be crossed with a clearance of 16.5’, redesigned or closed; accommodating or eliminating any sidetracks; and impacts to up and downstream stations. Our review indicates that SR 882/Forest Hill is the only location that does not face these challenges, however, this location is in close proximity to single family homes and local support will be a challenge.

Road Under Rail (Underpass) and Road over Rail (Overpass) options will be challenging at all 6 locations; a road overpass requires 23.5’ clearance from the top of tracks, or, the road underpass needs 16.5’ feet clearance under the rail superstructure.

Each will require a minimum extension of the over/under pass from 500’ to 800’ in each direction. The challenge, again, is impacts to intersecting streets and driveways that will need to be crossed, closed and/or redesigned. Our current work with the BMPO projects has identified key lessons learned:

• For Both Over and Underpasses, mid-block tie-down locations better accommodate expanded intersections.

• Utility impacts are critical for all options, particularly for

Underpasses.

• Horizontal impacts are challenging as typical sections can exceed right of way. Lane reductions are not anticipated as the locations provide access to I-95. Opportunities include shared use paths instead of sidewalks and bike lanes, and cantilevered sidewalks.

• Underpasses have drainage issues and require pumping systems which substantially increase operating and maintenance costs.

• Rail over Road and Underpasses will have added costs for MOT.

Geotechnical: We understand that 5 out of 6 locations are chiefly underlain by mineral soils and we do not anticipate any issues with soil conditions. The exception is Palmetto Park Road which required 3 to 4 feet organic soil removal during construction. Locations of unsuitable materials will be preliminarily identified and further addressed in subsequent project phases as needed.

TSM&O: Prior to advancing build alternatives, the team will perform an evaluation of TSM&O strategies to determine that it alone cannot meet the P&N. Operational enhancements could include:

• Ramp metering and arterial traffic management systems

• Traffic incident and work zone management

• Road weather and traveler information systems

• Congestion pricing

• Traffic control and signal timing enhancements

• Commercial vehicle and freight management systems

• Transit signal priority and multimodal coordination strategies The team will also coordinate with D4 to explore hybrid alternatives integrating TSM&O and multimodal components with traditional build alternatives to better meet project objectives. Findings will be summarized in a Concept of Operations document.

Environmental: Our approach involves using the best readily available data to establish the baseline environmental conditions so that we can superimpose various alternatives and analyze potential impacts. Major community and social concerns include disruption of nearby businesses or residences, particularly during construction and long term-noise / visual impacts from elevated structures.

Elevated structures expand the perceived intensity of noise impacts and a structure-mounted noise wall is not always feasible, so noise impacts will be carefully evaluated. An initial review of contamination databases did not indicate any fatal flaws and additional investigations will be conducted to confirm the contamination risk at each crossing. Several crossings are also within flood zones which need to be carefully considered during concept development.

Stakeholder Engagement: MEI is aware that RR Separations can be a divisive issue with the general public where R/W, aesthetics and closed streets can be a major concern. Jeff and Monica Diaz, ISC, who have D4, SFRTA, and Rail Operator experience will vet concept challenges/opportunities with stakeholders and thoroughly document outreach activities and feedback in the Comments and Coordination Reports. The public will be further engaged during the PD&E for feasible alternatives.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT: Our Management and Project Control Plan (M&PCP) will detail scope, communication and issue resolution protocols. Our M&PCP will be crafted to accelerate the vetting of 4 alternatives at each of the 6 locations as early as possible in the schedule. We will develop a clear P&N Statement and then begin with a Tier 1 effort to eliminate options that have fatal flaws such as road / rail access management, R/W, environmental and/or community impacts in order to pare down the detailed analysis effort. Jeff will work closely with Maria Jaimes, FCCM, FDOT PM and stakeholders to advance viable alternatives to Tier 2 for Build and No-Build / TSM&O options that will be vetted through a comparative qualitative and quantitative approach.

Finally, the Tier 3 evaluation will include base year and design year operational analysis for the Build and No Build concepts and utilize a BCA for each. Control of Schedule: Within ten days post-NTP, a critical path schedule, including 2-week internal QA/QC deliverable review and 4-week FDOT review periods, will be optimized and submitted to ensure that all activities and milestones are clearly shown. We will strive to maintain positive float with regular PSEE schedule updates focusing on critical path items, monitoring upcoming 30, 60, and 90-day activities. We will also target early completion of items requiring approvals. Control of Budget: MEI takes pride in public service and know that working with tax-payer funds is a huge responsibility and one that we take very seriously!

Budget control requires a well-defined scope to mitigate scope creep and continuous monitoring to ensure monthly invoicing aligns with payout curves and that DBE/SBE targets are met. Project budgets for concept alternatives will use the LRE system and include lessons learned from our experience.

QAQC is our job and not FDOT’s, so all deliverable documents will be accompanied by a QAQC draft copy and Certificate of Completion showing who and when QA/QC was performed. This is a unique project that requires very specialized expertise. Our team includes a broad range of planning and engineering expertise including roadway and rail design, TSMO/ITS, structures, environmental, utilities, traffic and long-range modeling, multimodal and stakeholder engagement. We will execute a collaborative QC approach across all area of expertise in the QA process. Our QAQC process is tied to our project schedule and includes using FDOT checklists, allowing sufficient time for QA/QC reviews and that documents will be complete and easy to approve.

Why MARLIN! Our team’s strength lies not only in our extensive technical experience with rail corridor projects across South Florida, but in our proven ability to transform that experience into actionable, solutions that deliver safer, more connected, and more resilient transportation systems.

Our staff have led, or contributed to, many FDOT and MPO RR Separation efforts over the last 2 decades, including data collection, train numbers/delay monitoring, feasibility studies, PD&E projects, final designs and construction. This continuity ensures that the lessons learned, design refinements, and agency coordination strategies developed through these past initiatives directly guide the approach for this study.

Our approach blends technical excellence with innovation. From developing validated simulation models to assessing corridor-level impacts, MARLIN ensures that every analysis is defendable, transparent, and decision-ready. The team’s integration of TSM&O, environmental, and structural disciplines—backed by recognized experts in RR Grade Separation design and operations—will provide FDOT with a comprehensive, future-focused assessment aligned with statewide safety and mobility goals.

Prequalification of Prime Consultant and any proposed Subconsultants by advertised type(s) of work:

Consultant Name Project Advertised Major & Minor Work Types

2.0 3.2 3.3 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 6.1 6.3.1 6.3.2 SB

Prime MARLIN Engineering, Inc.

Su bc on su lta nt s

ASA Consultants, Inc GCME, Inc Infinite Source Communication Group LLC Insight Transportation Consulting Inc Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc Metric Engineering, Inc

SB = Small Business

6.3.3 7.1 7.2 7.3 8.1 8.2 13.5 13.6 13.7 99.0 SB

Prime MARLIN Engineering, Inc.

Su bc on su lta nt s

ASA Consultants, Inc GCME, Inc Infinite Source Communication Group LLC Insight Transportation Consulting Inc Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc Metric Engineering, Inc

SB

Prime

Su bc on su lta nt s

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - RFP

December 9, 2025 will.suero@hdrinc.com mdorweiler@hntb.com jweidner@marlinengineering.com

Re: Request for Proposal - AD# 26402: Feasibility Study of Grade Separations at Various Railroad Crossings along the South Florida Rail Corridor (SFRC).

Dear Consultant:

I am pleased to advise you that your firm has been shortlisted for the AD# 26402: Feasibility Study of Grade Separations at Various Railroad Crossings along the South Florida Rail Corridor (SFRC). To enable the Department to complete the evaluation of your firm, you are requested to prepare resumes, an organization chart or staffing chart, and to participate in an interview with the technical review committee. The resumes and organization chart or staffing chart must be prepared in accordance with the enclosed information, which includes a scope of services. Resumes, required forms, and organization chart or staffing chart shall be e-mailed to d4.profserv@dot.state.fl.us. All documents are due by 3:00 PM, January 6, 2026.

The interviews are scheduled for January 7, 2026 in D4-DO1, District Office Conference Room 1 at the FDOT D4 Headquarters.

Note: All times listed in this letter and attached documents are Eastern Time Zone unless specifically noted otherwise.

Sincerely, Tyrone Robertson, Contract Analyst II Procurement Office

Attachments CC: Maria Jaimes

Tyrone Robertson

Request For Proposals For

AD# 26402: Feasibility Study of Grade Separations at Various Railroad Crossings along the South Florida Rail Corridor (SFRC).

1. Purpose:

2. Scope of Consultant Services:

3. Length of Consultant Services:

4. Contract Restrictions & Proposed Method of Compensation:

5. Staffing Requirements:

6. Scope of Services Meeting:

7. Deadline for Questions:

8. Resumes, Organization Chart or Staffing Chart, Required Certification, and Forms:

9. Consultant Interviews:

10. Consultant Selection:

11. Contract Negotiations:

12. Schedule:

Attachment A – Scope of Services

Attachment B – Standard Professional Services Agreement Terms

Attachment C – Interview Evaluation Form

Attachment D – Required Certifications

Attachment E – Anticipated Method of Compensation (Rates not included)

Request For Proposals

1. Purpose:

Shortlisted Consultants:

The Florida Department of Transportation requires professional services for the project known as AD# 26402: Feasibility Study of Grade Separations at Various Railroad Crossings along the South Florida Rail Corridor (SFRC). Additional information is necessary to complete the evaluation of each shortlisted consultant’s ability to provide the desired services. As a result, each shortlisted consultant is requested to provide resumes, organization chart or staffing chart, required certification, forms, and to participate in an interview to discuss qualifications for the project.

HDR Engineering, Inc.

HNTB Corporation MARLIN Engineering, Inc.

2. Scope of Consultant Services:

For a detailed description of the required consultant services, refer to Attachment A, Scope of Services.

3. Length of Consultant Services:

The consultant services are scheduled for a maximum period of 18 months. The consultant services shall begin only upon the receipt of a written Notice to Proceed (NTP) from the Department. The term of the contract is 10 years.

4. Contract Restrictions & Proposed Method of Compensation:

A standard consultant contract will be executed with the selected consultant for this project. The standard contract terms are provided as Attachment B. The following additional information is furnished to the consultant firm for consideration:

4.1 Professional Liability Insurance Requirement: $250,000.00. For purposes of contracting, only Professional Liability Insurance from a company or companies authorized to do business in the State of Florida is acceptable. The selected prime consultant shall submit proof of Professional Liability Insurance coverage in the minimum threshold amount designated above, prior to contracting. The policy/ies and coverage described herein may be subject to a deductible. Pay all deductibles as required by the policy. The Department shall be notified in writing within ten days of any cancellation, notice of cancellation, lapse, renewal, or proposed change to any policy or coverage described herein. The Department’s approval or failure to disapprove any policy/ies, coverage, or ACORD Certificates shall not relieve or excuse any obligation to procure and maintain the insurance required herein, nor serve as a waiver of any rights or defenses the Department may have. No policy/ies or coverage described herein may contain or be subject to a Retention or a Self-Insured Retention. A commitment letter from a financial institution is also not acceptable for purposes of contracting.

4.2 Computer Usage: The selected Consultant firm may desire to use the Department's mainframe computer (not CADD) for project related tasks.

Requested computer services will be considered during the contract negotiations.

4.3 Subconsultant Services: Services assigned to subconsultants must be approved in advance by the Department. Subconsultants performing the standard types of work covered by Rule Chapter 14-75, F.A.C., must be technically prequalified with the Department or have an application for prequalification under review at the time that they are proposed.

Subconsultants with fees less than $500,000, and/or performing specialty services (non-standard types of work), a self-certified overhead statement may be accepted. These overhead statements must be sent to Central Office for review and approval.

Private attorney services may not be utilized on Department contracts without advance approval from the Attorney General’s Office. The advance approval may only be requested by Agency General Counsel (FDOT), and not the consultant firm. Since approval cannot be assumed, consultant firms shall refrain from proposing legal firms as part of the professional services consultant team in their procurement response and proposal documents. As referenced in Section 287.059(3), F.S.:

“An agency requesting approval for the use of private attorney services shall first offer to contract with the Department of Legal Affairs for such attorney services at a cost pursuant to mutual agreement. The Attorney General shall decide on a case-by-case basis to accept or decline to provide such attorney services as staffing, expertise, or other legal or economic considerations warrant. If the Attorney General declines to provide the requested attorney services, the Attorney General’s written approval shall include a statement that the private attorney services requested cannot be provided by the office of the Attorney General or that such private attorney services are cost-effective in the opinion of the Attorney General. The Attorney General shall not consider political affiliation in making such decision. The office of the Attorney General shall respond to the request of an agency for prior written approval within 10 working days after receiving such request. The Attorney General may request additional information necessary for evaluation of a request. The Attorney General shall respond to the request within 10 working days after receipt of the requested information.”

When universities or colleges are needed to perform services, the Department’s Project Manager shall procure such services by means of either a University

Master Agreement task work order, a governmental agency contract, or a competitive solicitation for contractual services, as appropriate (reference Section 287.057(21), F.S.). Universities proposed as subconsultants will not be added to the professional services contract.

4.4 Subconsultant Participation:

Consultants please be reminded that if you are selected on this project, you need to enter your subconsultant commitments after contract execution. Also, if you are awarded supplemental agreements as part of this project, the subconsultant commitments will also need to be reported.

4.5 Method of Compensation:

The Department anticipates a lump sum with limiting amounts will be established for this contract. A Total Maximum Limiting Amount shall be established based upon final negotiations and shall compensate the consultant for costs associated with the project.

4.6 Public Entity Crimes: A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime may not submit a bid, proposal, or reply on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity;

may not submit a bid, proposal, or reply on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work; may not submit bids, proposals, or replies on leases of real property to a public entity; may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with any public entity; and may not transact business with any public entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in s. 287.017 for CATEGORY TWO ($35,000) for a period of 36 months following the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list.

Antitrust Vendor Violator Contract Language: Pursuant to section 287.137(2)(a), Florida Statutes, a person or an affiliate who has been placed on the antitrust violator vendor list following a conviction or being held civilly liable for an antitrust violation may not submit a bid, proposal, or reply for any new contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity; may not submit a bid, proposal, or reply for a new contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work; may not submit a bid, proposal, or reply on new leases of real property to a public entity; may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a new contract with a public entity; and may not transact a new business with a public entity.

Affidavit Regarding Labor and Services: Prior to contract execution, extension or renewal, the Department shall notify the Contract awardee of the need to download, complete and submit FDOT Form No. 375-030-31. Please have the form signed and notarized and send a scanned copy to the Department. The nongovernmental entity (Contract awardee) must maintain the original copy in accordance with other provisions of this Agreement or Contract, and in accordance with Florida law.

4.7 Vendor Registration through E-PROCUREMENT: As per Rule 60A-1.030, all consultants doing business with the State shall register in the MyFloridaMarketPlace system. Information about the registration process is available, and registration may be completed by linking to the following web address: https://vendor.myfloridamarketplace.com

NOTE: Contracts procured under s. 287.055, Florida Statutes are exempt from the 1% transaction fee. Interested persons lacking internet access may request assistance from MyFloridaMarketPlace Customer Services at (866) FLA-EPRO (352-3776) or State Purchasing, 4050 Esplanade Drive, Suite 300, Tallahassee, Florida 32399.

4.8 Inspector General: The Consultant agrees to comply with section 20.055(5), Florida Statutes, and to incorporate in all subcontracts the obligation to comply with section 20.055(5), Florida Statutes.

5. Staffing Requirements:

After submittal of Letters and up through contract execution, proposed subconsultants/subcontractors/sub-vendors, teaming arrangements, or key staff of the Consultant cannot be changed or substituted except in instances of force majeure or in the event of circumstances that cannot reasonably be anticipated and/or are beyond the control of the prime consultant. In such cases, changes or substitutions are subject to the discretion of the Department, and cannot be made without written approval of the Department. All such requests made during the contract procurement must be routed and coordinated through PSU only, as the official point of contact during contract procurement. After contract execution, subconsultant/subcontractor/sub-vendor, teaming arrangement, or key staff changes/substitutions require pre-approval of the Department’s Project Manager before implementing. All qualification/certification requirements of the original advertisement shall govern, where applicable.

6. Scope of Services Meeting:

A Scope of Services meeting is not required for this project.

7. Deadline for Questions:

Any technical or administrative questions shall be addressed to the following:

Tyrone Robertson, Procurement Office Florida Department of Transportation, 3400 W. Commercial Blvd., Fort Lauderdale, FL

NOTE: The shortlisted consultant teams shall not have any conversations concerning this project with the project manager, technical review committee, selection committee, or any other persons regarding issues related to this project other than the specified procurement office personnel identified above.

The deadline for technical questions is January 5, 2026.

33309, Phone: 954-777-4615, E-mail address: d4.profserv@dot.state.fl.us

There is no deadline for contract or administrative questions.

8. Resumes, Organization Chart or Staffing Chart, Required Certification, and Forms:

Please note that there is no requirement for submittal of technical proposals.

The firms being considered for this project are required to electronically submit resumes, organization chart or staffing chart, required certification, and forms. Resumes must be no longer than 2 pages per resume per person. The organization chart or staffing chart is limited to a one page chart which can be either 8 ½” x 11” or 11” x 17”, at the discretion of the Consultant. A maximum (2) page schedule (11” x 17”) shall be submitted, per FPID.

The proposed schedule shall illustrate the sequence of events for highway improvements (roadway design, surveys, drainage, traffic operations plans, and utility adjustment plans, etc.). To be consistent, also please type your proposed schedule in months (example:

16 months). Font size of 11, with ½ inch margins are recommended for clarity, but not required for Consultant submittals. The Consultant firm may elect to submit an organization chart OR staffing chart, not both. Examples of acceptable and unacceptable content for organization charts, staffing charts, staff hour estimate charts, and a link to the Construction Training and Qualification Program (CTQP) system can be found at this link. Organization, staffing, or staff hour estimate charts containing extra narrative content (not in conformance with examples) will be deemed unacceptable, at the sole discretion of the Procurement Office, and will not be passed on to the Technical Review Committee for review and evaluation with the other submittals.

Resumes and organization chart or staffing chart shall include sufficient information to enable the Department to evaluate the technical capability of the firms to provide the desired services. Resumes shall be included only of persons who will actually be playing key roles in the project, if selected. Resumes and organization chart or staffing chart shall not contain links to other web pages that would provide additional technical content.

8.1 Other Information & Required Certifications:

Organization Chart or Staffing Chart and Resumes (including Subconsultants): Consultant shall include the names and levels of key personnel (including Project Manager), names of subconsultant staff (if any). Resumes are limited to 2 pages in length.

Form No. 375-030-30, Truth in Negotiation Certification – Attachment D

Form No. 375-030-83, Professional Services Commitment Form – Attachment D

Estimate of Work Effort – Project Staff Hour Summary Form. The consultant must submit the Project Staff Hour Summary Form for this project in the format provided by the FDOT included in this Request for Proposal (RFP) package. Consultants can obtain the standard Project Estimate of Work Effort – Project Staff Hour Summary form by accessing the following link: http://www.fdot.gov/designsupport/Scope/default.shtm Any work done by a subconsultant shall be clearly identified.

Form No. 375-030-32, Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion for Federal Aid Contracts – Attachment D

Form No. 375-030-33, Certification for Disclosure of Lobbying Activities on Federal-Aid Contracts – Attachment D

Form No. 375-030-34, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities – Attachment D If this form is not applicable for your firm, please sign your firm name and write N/A on the top of the form.

Form No. 375-031-06, E-Verify – Attachment D

Form No. 375-030-18, Consultant Affirmation Form – Attachment D Form required to be completed by both prime and subs.

Form No. 375-030-60, Vendor Certification Regarding Scrutinized Companies Lists – Attachment D

The forms provided in Attachment D shall be executed by an officer of the consultant firm submitting the proposal.

8.2 Copyrighted Material:

Copyrighted material will be accepted only if accompanied by a waiver that will allow the FDOT to make paper or electronic copies necessary for the use of Department staff and agents. It is noted that copyrighted material is not exempted from the Public Records Law, Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. Therefore, such material will be subject to viewing by the public, but copies of the material will not be provided to the public.

8.3 Submittal of resumes, organization chart or staffing chart, required certification, and forms:

The resumes, organization chart or staffing chart, required certification, and forms shall be submitted as an attached, single computer file via e-mail. PDF (Adobe Acrobat) is the preferred format, but a Word file is acceptable. Please do not include cover sheets or dividers. The Department has a 20 MB limit on e-mail attachments. The file shall be sent to d4.profserv@dot.state.fl.us. Deadline for FDOT receipt of file is 3:00 PM on January 6, 2026. All submittals may be subject to public records requests. Zipped email attachments are NOT acceptable, and will be disabled by FDOT’s email server due to security reasons.

9. Consultant Interviews:

Consultants under consideration for this project will be interviewed by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) in person, or by video-conference if TRC member(s) are in a district and cannot travel on the date of interviews.

9.1 INTERVIEW REQUIREMENTS: The following guidelines will govern the interviews:

(1) A portion of the prepared Interview questions shall be common to all shortlisted Consultants. The Department may prepare additional questions that are unique for a Consultant based on the Consultant’s Letter of Response, organization/staffing chart, or other information. TRC members may also ask follow-up clarifying questions during the Interview, where time permits.

(2) The Department may pose questions about hypothetical or actual projects, or situational questions, but only during the follow-up Question and Answer portion.

(3) Just prior to the start of the Interview, each Consultant team shall be given the prepared questions to review for five (5) minutes. One copy of the questions shall be provided to each member of the Consultant team. The Consultant may keep the copy of the questions during the Interview. The Consultant may not leave the Interview room to review the questions. The Consultant firm remains in the same room as the TRC and Professional Services Unit (PSU) staff when reviewing the questions. The five minutes for reviewing questions is not considered as part of the Interview.

Discussions by the Consultant team members during the 5 minute review are not part of the Interview process, and are not considered in evaluation of the Consultant.

(4) Introductions of Consultant staff and Department staff are also not counted as part of the Interview time. Interviews are limited to 45 minutes total, inclusive of Consultant opening statement and Questions and Answers

(Q&A). Ten (10) minutes will be allowed after the Interview for follow-up questions pertaining to the Consultant’s responses and Consultant closing statement (closing statement is optional and only if time permits). PSU shall be timekeeper, and is responsible for ensuring the Consultant firm adheres to the stated time limits. The Interview may conclude early if less time is actually required. Each Consultant firm may make an opening statement of approximately 5 minutes (opening statement is optional). The opening statement shall not be separately timed.

(5) Attendance at the interview by the Consultant’s proposed Project Manager is strongly recommended.

(6) A maximum of 6 attendees per Consultant team is allowed. Switching out of participants in the Interview room is not permitted. Disciplines that must attend the interview are N/A. If a proposed subconsultant is listed as a subconsultant on more than one (1) team for a single project, then it is the responsibility of the subconsultant to disclose this information with each respective team. The Department representatives in attendance will at a minimum be the members of the Technical Review Committee and a Procurement Office representative (interview facilitator).

(7) No handouts other than standard paper business cards will be allowed before, during, or after the interview.

(8) The Department shall supply and make available either a standard white board or flip chart with markers during the interview. The Consultant is not permitted to bring in prepared diagrams or drawings to display on the Department-supplied flip chart or white board. Procurement will discard the flip chart pages at the completion of the interview. Flip charts and/or white board illustrations will not be given to TRC for evaluation after the interview.

Consultant may begin drawing as soon as the questions are handed to them (the beginning of the five minutes of review).

(9) Consultant may bring one unaltered aerial plot, 24” x 36” maximum for use during the interview. Split views are allowed, as long as the overall total size does not exceed 24” x 36”. No alterations other than a North arrow as well as street names can be shown on the aerial for locating purposes when brought to the interview. The unaltered aerial plot may be marked up or drawn upon by the Consultant during the interview, but not before the interview begins. One aerial per project may be submitted. No other visual aides are allowed.

(10) Consultants may bring in paper notepads or index cards with notes during their interviews, for their own reference and use. The notepads and index cards will not be left behind for the Department, nor shared with the TRC.

(11) Consultants are not permitted to refer to smartphones, tablets, laptops, or other electronic devices during the course of the Interview. This includes Google Glass, Ray-Ban meta smart glasses, or other similar type function technology wearables.

9.2 SCHEDULE OF INTERVIEWS: Interviews are scheduled for January 7, 2026 and will be conducted in D4-DO1, District Office Conference Room 1, Florida Department of Transportation, FDOT D4 Headquarters, 3400 W. Commercial Blvd., Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309.

The order of interviews will be established by random drawing.

Firm: Time:

1. HNTB Corporation 9:00 AM

2. MARLIN Engineering, Inc. 10:15 AM

3. HDR Engineering, Inc. 11:30 AM

4.

5.

6.

10. Consultant Selection:

A technical review committee will review the resumes and the organization chart or staffing chart received from the consultant firms being considered for final selection.

Attachment C provides the criteria to be considered by the technical review committee in the evaluation of organization chart or staffing chart, resumes, and interviews.

Evaluations and comments will be provided to the Selection Committee.

The Selection Committee, consisting of Steven C. Braun, P.E., District Secretary; John P.

Krane, P.E., Director of Transportation Development; Paul A. Lampley, P.E., Director of Transportation Operations; and a representative of the Procurement Office, will meet to discuss the capabilities of the consultant firms. At the discretion of the Committee, other persons may be requested to provide information at the meeting.

The results of the final selection meeting will be posted on the FDOT Procurement Advertisements web page.

11. Contract Negotiations:

Contract discussions will be initiated with the firm ranked number 1 by the Selection Committee. The consultant will be asked to prepare a fee proposal with backup information to support the proposed wage rates for the services. The consultant's audit information will be used to determine the allowance for administrative overhead and fringe benefits for the project, facilities capital cost of money and direct expense percentage. If subconsultants are proposed to work on the project, information to substantiate each firm's overhead rate and proposed wage rates will also be required.

Should the Department be unable to negotiate a fair, reasonable, and competitive price for the consultant services with the firm ranked number 1, the Department will terminate the negotiations. The Department will then begin contract negotiations with the next ranked firm.

The proposed costs MUST be submitted in the Automated Fee Proposal Spreadsheet.

The Automated Fee Proposal and Guidelines can be obtained by accessing the following link and clicking on the Automated Fee Proposal Spreadsheet:

http://www.fdot.gov/procurement/formmenu.shtm.

When completing the AFP, it is the expectation that the Consultant submit resumes for each individual proposed on the project. Consultants, please understand that it is critical that you classify proposed staff in accordance with Attachment B of the Negotiation Handbook. If proposed staff is classed inappropriately, it may cause delays in having to revisit the staff hours (if applicable for this project). In order to minimize time delays, please utilize the Negotiation Handbook typical definitions found in Attachment B to best decide the proposed classifications.

Upon completion of the Automated Fee Proposal, the Awarded Prime Consultant shall email the Automated Fee Proposal to the District Professional Services Unit.

The Awarded Prime Consultant MUST also prepare the back-up information to support the proposed wage, overhead and expense costs for services proposed.

The due date for the Automated Fee Proposal and backup documentation shall be provided in the Request for Fee Proposal document (or e-mail).

This webpage also contains an Automated Fee Proposal User’s Guide which may be very helpful in understanding the spreadsheet. At a minimum, the fee proposal shall include the following:

Identification of the Basis for Proposed Wage Rates Approved Overhead and Fringe Benefits and Expense Percentage Proposed Operating Margin Identification of the Basis for Loaded Rates Subconsultant Costs

The negotiated compensation will be in an amount the Department determines is fair, competitive, and reasonable considering the scope and complexity of the project. The Consultant will be requested to submit a detailed Staff Hour Estimate and Fee Proposal with the support information to the Department. Staff Hour Estimates for PD&E, roadway and bridge design projects must be submitted in the Staff Hour Estimating spreadsheet provided by the Department.

12. Schedule:

Date Time Action

January 5, 2026 5:00 PM Cutoff Date for Technical Questions January 6, 2026 3:00 PM Resumes, organization chart or staffing chart, required certification, and forms due (aka Phase II Submittal Deadline)

January 7, 2026 9:00 AM Interviews Begin January 26, 2026 9:30 AM Final Selection

Dates for selected firm after final selection, please note dates are subject to change:

Date Time Action

N/A Scope Clarification Meeting February 6, 2026 12:00 PM Fee Proposal Due February 27, 2026 9:00 AM Planned end of Negotiation Date

(Negotiation conclusion date) March 27, 2026 N/A Planned Date of Execution

Note: All times listed in this document are Eastern Time Zone unless specifically noted otherwise.

A - 1

Attachment A – Scope of Services

Feasibility Scope of Services

MM YR

Page A-2 FPID: 452175-1-22-01

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR

FEASIBILITY STUDY

Feasibility Study of Grade Separations at Various Railroad Crossings along the South Florida Rail Corridor (SFRC)

District 4

Palm Beach County & Broward County This Scope of Services is an attachment which is incorporated into the agreement between the State of Florida Department of Transportation (hereinafter referred to as the DEPARTMENT or FDOT) and (hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT) relative to the transportation facility described as follows:

Financial Project ID: 452175-1-22-01

Project Description: SFRC-Grade Separation

Bridge No.: 930294; 930446; 930504; 930503; FL62089; 930500;

930499; 930199; 930188; 860196; 860330; 860580;

860579; FL62135

Railroad Crossing No.: 628139W; 628155F; 628160C; 628165L; 628186E;

628274P

Project Type: Feasibility Study

Lead Agency FDOT District 4

Page A-3 FPID: 452175-1-22-01

Table of Contents

1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES PURPOSE

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND OBJECTIVES

2.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

2.2 PROJECT REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS FOR WORK

2.2.1 Governing Regulations

2.2.2 Liaison Office

2.2.3 Personnel

2.2.4 Sub-Consultants

2.2.5 Lead Agency, Cooperating Agency, and Participating Agency

2.2.6 Meetings and Presentations

2.2.7 Communications

2.2.8 Quality Control

2.2.9 Schedule

2.2.10 Submittals/Deliverables

2.2.11 Computer Automation

2.2.12 Conflict of Interest

2.3 COORDINATION WITH OTHER CONSULTANTS AND ENTITIES

2.4 CONTRACT MANAGEMENT

2.5 ADDITIONAL SERVICES

2.5.1 Scoping

2.5.2 Notice of Intent

2.5.3 Miscellaneous Services

2.6 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY THE DEPARTMENT

2.7 OPTIONAL SERVICES

3.0 PUBLIC INVOLVMENT

3.1 SCHEDULED PUBLIC MEETINGS

3.1.1 Types of Public Meetings

3.1.2 Meeting Requirements

4.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSES AND CONSIDERTATIONS

4.1 REVIEW OF PREVIOUS STUDIES

4.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS

4.3 SURVEY

4.3.1 Survey Design

Page A-4 FPID: 452175-1-22-01

4.4 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

4.5 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

4.5.1 Traffic Analysis Methodology

4.5.2 Traffic Counts

4.5.3 Existing Traffic Operational Analysis

4.5.4 Future Demand Forecasting

4.5.5 No-Build Analysis

4.5.6 Development and Screening of Build Alternatives

4.5.7 Project Traffic Analysis Report

4.6 SAFETY

4.6.1 Existing Conditions Analysis

4.6.2 Future Conditions Analysis

4.6.3 Documentation of Safety Analysis

4.7 UTILITIES AND RAILROAD

4.7.1 Utilities

4.7.2 Railroads

4.8 ROADWAY ANALYSIS

4.8.1 Design Controls and Criteria

4.8.2 Typical Section Analysis

4…