RFP 24_752_037 RFC No_ 1.pdf

Request for Proposals for

Third Party Commissioning Services

RFP 24-752-037

Request for Clarification (RFC) #1

Request for Proposals for Third Party Commissioning Services

RFC #1 Page 1 of 7

Item Answer

RFC 1.1 Do we have drawings available for pricing? All construction documents can be obtained by emailing angela_arlene-myrick@dekalbschoolsga.org

RFC 1.2 Are the reference letters from the 3 example projects or ANY Owner, A/E or GC that we've worked with in the last 5 years?

The reference letters should match the example projects.

RFC 1.3 For section XI.C.2.1.3, will you accept a listing of the key personnel that will be assigned to this project?

No, please provide the information as requested in the section.

RFC 1.4 For section XI.D.2.9, should the subconsultant information be provided separately from the resumes requested in XI.D.2?

Yes

RFC 1.5 Is there an anticipated proposed schedule for each project? Is the intent to construct all projects at the same time?

Yes. Please see “Anticipated Construction Project Schedules” as part of Addendum No. 3.

RFC 1.6 Will Landscape Commissioning be included as part of the scope of work? No.

RFC 1.7 Will Renewable Energy Commissioning be included as part of the scope of work? No.

RFC 1.8 Will Emergency Power Commissioning be included as part of the scope of work? Yes.

RFC 1.9 RFP Section 2.9 references to “Attend up to fourteen (14) Project Team review meetings to coordinate and collaborate with the project team and discuss comments on plans and specifications.” Confirm if indicated quantity is per project or total lump sum.

Per Project.

RFC 1.10 RFP Section 2.9 13 references to “Perform twelve (12) on-site inspections and document each with a field observation report within two (2) days of the site visit”. Confirm if indicated quantity is per project or total lump sum.

Per Project

RFC 1.11 RFP Section 2.9.14 references to “Attend twelve (12) on-site meetings for review of progress, coordination, and issues resolution”. Confirm if indicated quantity is per project or total lump sum.

Per Project

RFC 1.12 Drawings for the two (2) existing sites (Champion Theme MS Mechanical & Electrical & Nancy Creek Facility Major Building System) have not been uploaded to the dekalbschoolsga.ionwave.net. Could you please provide the existing building drawings at your earliest convenience.

Please refer to RFC 1.1 mailto:angela_arlene-myrick@dekalbschoolsga.org

RFC #1 Page 2 of 7

RFC 1.13 Are the reference letters from the 3 example projects or ANY Owner, A/E or GC that we've worked with in the last 5 years? – Please clarify.

Please refer to RFC 1.2

RFC 1.14 Where do the forms need to go within the order of the proposal? Please follow the submission order in the RFP. All required attachments shall be uploaded to IONWAVE under the “Response Attachments” tab.

RFC 1.15 Is minority participation required? No

RFC 1.16 Do the sample price sheets need to be filled out? Yes

RFC 1.17 What do we do with the sample project sheets? Please complete all pricing sheets and upload to IONWAVE under the “Response Attachments” tab.

RFC 1.18 What’s the Cx scope of the 3 sample projects? (i.e MEP, Fire Alarm, Fire Safety, etc.) Refer to RFP Section X “General Scope of Work” and Appendix A: Owner’s Criteria and Narrative Scope“.

RFC 1.19 What projects are we supposed to price? All pricing sheets are to be completed and uploaded to IONWAVE under the “Response Attachments” tab.

RFC 1.20 Is the intent for us to estimate 5 projects? Yes.

RFC 1.21 Is envelope commissioning to be included in all sample projects? Please refer to RFP Section X “General Scope of Work”.

RFC 1.21 Are Exhibits A–E that are attached to Appendix E required to be filled out? No

RFC 1.22 Where is Appendix F for the Owner’s Appendices? Appendix F is the last page in the Appendices Package.

RFC 1.23 Can we get access to the plans and specs for the provided Owner’s Exhibits, and can we get access to the Owner’s Exhibits themselves as they weren’t provided with the RFP?

Please refer to RFC 1.1

RFC 1.24 Is the template budget on the price sheets meant to be a commissioning budget to be used to break out our pricing?

The template budget is the anticipated construction cost.

RFC 1.25 Are all of the lighting and plumbing fixtures listed separately according to the COBie-compliant database?

A summarized solution may be proposed by the awarded vendor(s).

RFC 1.26 The RFP references Owner’s Exhibits A-E for the Champion Theme School and the Nancy Creek Facility projects. Please release them for our firm’s review.

Please refer to RFC 1.1

RFC #1 Page 3 of 7

RFC 1.27 Can an Owner’s Representative’s Reference Letter be submitted instead of an Owner’s Reference Letter?

No

RFC 1.28 In the addendum, Attachments I 1-3 were released in Excel format. For consistency, please release Projects 4 and 5 in Excel format.

Please see Attachments I1-I3 Revision 2 as part of Addendum 3.

RFC 1.29 Would DeKalb County School District consider allowing each proposer to initially provide pricing for Pre-Design and Design Phase Commissioning (Cx) Services only, and to provide Construction Phase, and Closeout Phase approximately when 75% construction documents are submitted by the design team? Each firm could be evaluated on their Pre-Design/Design Phase price and qualifications, and the chosen firm could negotiate the Construction Phase, and Closeout Phase fee at the later date mentioned herein. This is typical of the procedure the Georgia State Finance and Investment Commission (GSFIC) utilizes when acquiring a Cx Professional for a project and provides for more accurate pricing after the final systems are chosen for the project. Please note Exhibit A thru E (which appear to be the design documents) listed on page 3 of the RFP are not shown in the Bid Attachments in the Bid Opportunity Detail at http://dekalbschoolsga.ionwave.net.

Please provide pricing as requested in the RFP. Please refer to RFC 1.1 with regards to accessing design documents.

RFC 1.30 Can the requested outline and format of the Proposal be more clearly defined? Page 18 of the RFP begins to describe the Offeror’s electronic proposal format, and it appears to require the following information in the following order.

1. Table of Contents

2. Compliance Information

2.1 – Firm Overview

2.2 – Not sure what this section should be titled 2.3– Not sure what this section should be titled

2.4 – Financial Information

2.5 – Litigation/Capacity/Convictions Information After this there is no section 3……The RFP begins describing section D Initial Screening which is a subsection of section XI Proposal Submission Requirements.

There are no additional sections.

RFC 1.31 Will proposals be rejected for not following the requested format? All proposals will be evaluated.

RFC 1.32 Umbrella insurance requirement is $5 million. This seems high for commissioning services. Is the $5 million a hard requirement or is a lower amount allowed?

Yes

RFC #1 Page 4 of 7

RFC 1.33 Under firm experience, the RFP requested reference letters from the Owner, Architect and Construction Manager. Please confirm that this means three letters for each of the projects used to illustrate firm experience.

Please refer to RFC 1.3.

RFC 1.34 RFP notes Owner’s Exhibits A through E. Are these available to be obtained to assist in pricing for these facilities?

Please refer to RFC 1.1.

RFC 1.35 RFP notes 3 sample projects to be priced. Only information provided is square footage. Will these projects be new building construction or major renovation projects? Are these to be single story of multiple story?

Please refer to Section IX of the RFP (page 12).

RFC 1.36 In the virtual pre-submittal meeting, it was briefly mentioned that there is a 30-page limit. Does this limit include the additional attachments (A-J, insurance certificate, financial statements, corporate licensing, individual licensing) requested, or can those be included in an appendix that does not count against the page limit? Please clarify.

The 30-page limit is for the technical proposal.

RFC 1.37 Multiple systems (HVAC, HVAC Controls, Plumbing, Electrical Power, listed indicate a full sampling required but not during functional testing, if not during functional testing when shall the Cx sample the systems as their readiness will not be confirmed until functional testing?

A summarized solution may be proposed by the awarded vendor(s).

RFC 1.38 If our team does not include any subcontractors, can we omit Attachment C? Please return Attachment C with N/A

RFC 1.39 Will the GA Capital Outlay Program or any other source of state GA funds finance any of the work?

Not relevant to this RFP

RFC 1.40 Are there any Stated Cost Limitation(s) established for the MSA or any of the projects identified in the RFP? (Reference: Exhibit H number 7).

Not relevant to this RFP

RFC 1.41 Is there a minimum number of on-site inspections per month required per project? (Reference:

Exhibit H number 13).

Please refer to Section X of the RFP item 2.9.

RFC 1.42 Will the DCSD or County Educational Board require assistance to obtain approvals from the Georgia Department of Education Facilities Services Unit for any of the projects? (Guidelines Incorporated by Reference in Exhibit H).

Not relevant to this RFP

RFC 1.43 Will two (2) “Principals in Charge” instead of one be acceptable for purposes of binding Offeror / Commissioning Authority for any matters arising from this MSA valued in excess of $50K?

(Reference Contract Article 1, Subpart 4).

Yes.

RFC #1 Page 5 of 7

RFC 1.44 Please provide Owner’s Drug Program for onsite personnel. (Reference Contract Article 1, Subpart 10).

All prospective bidders are required to follow all state and federal laws and regulations regarding drug use on school grounds.

Prospective bidders are also required to follow the DCSD Drug Free Workplace policy as stated in DCSD Board Policy. The policy can be viewed using the link below.

https://simbli.eboardsolutions.com/Policy/ViewPolicy.aspx?S=40 54&revid=eSy8vWOub01jTT7YL0Dk7A==&ptid=amIgTZiB9plus hNjl6WXhfiOQ==&secid=ruE8yj8gaZHBkLjNHWmKZw==&PG= 6&IRP=0&isPndg=false

RFC 1.45 Is there a maximum markup percentage (%) for the work under the MSA or any of the identified projects? (Reference Contract Article 4, subpart 6).

10% https://simbli.eboardsolutions.com/Policy/ViewPolicy.aspx?S=4054&revid=eSy8vWOub01jTT7YL0Dk7A==&ptid=amIgTZiB9plushNjl6WXhfiOQ==&secid=ruE8yj8gaZHBkLjNHWmKZw==&PG=6&IRP=0&isPndg=false https://simbli.eboardsolutions.com/Policy/ViewPolicy.aspx?S=4054&revid=eSy8vWOub01jTT7YL0Dk7A==&ptid=amIgTZiB9plushNjl6WXhfiOQ==&secid=ruE8yj8gaZHBkLjNHWmKZw==&PG=6&IRP=0&isPndg=false https://simbli.eboardsolutions.com/Policy/ViewPolicy.aspx?S=4054&revid=eSy8vWOub01jTT7YL0Dk7A==&ptid=amIgTZiB9plushNjl6WXhfiOQ==&secid=ruE8yj8gaZHBkLjNHWmKZw==&PG=6&IRP=0&isPndg=false https://simbli.eboardsolutions.com/Policy/ViewPolicy.aspx?S=4054&revid=eSy8vWOub01jTT7YL0Dk7A==&ptid=amIgTZiB9plushNjl6WXhfiOQ==&secid=ruE8yj8gaZHBkLjNHWmKZw==&PG=6&IRP=0&isPndg=false

RFC #1 Page 6 of 7

RFC 1.46 Per page 10, section N - Contract of the RFP, please see proposed contract revisions:Re:

Indemnification on Page 8 of RFP subpart H: Would it be possible to exclude the defense of claims due to professional negligence from the current duty to defend if the offeror (Farnsworth Group Inc) also committed to reimburse the Indemnitees for legal costs after an award / determination of liability? The rationale for this revision request is that these costs are not insurable until/unless an award has been entered. Full text of the proposed revisions (in red):The Offeror shall indemnify, defend (except the defense of claims due to professional negligence), and hold harmless the DeKalb County School Board, the DeKalb County School District, DCSD, and their officials, officers, employees, agents, and assigns (all of whom may collectively be referred to as "lndemnitees" throughout this RFP) from an and all claims, demands, suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, losses, liabilities, costs, interest, and damages of every kind and description, including any attorneys' fees and/or litigation and investigative expenses, for bodily injury, personal injury, (including but not limited to offeror's employees), or loss or destruction of property (including loss of use, damage or destruction of DCSD owned property) to the extent that any such claim or suit was caused by, arose out of, or contributed to, in whole or in part, by reason of any act, omission, professional error, fault, mistake, or negligence whether active, passive or imputed, of the offeror its employees, agents, representative, or their employees, agents, or representatives in connection with or incidental to offeror's performance of the agreed-upon service to the extent caused by Offeror and/or its employees, agents, or representatives. Offeror shall also promptly reimburse the Indemnitees for all legal costs, including reasonable attorney fees, related to the defense of claims due to professional negligence after a final determination or award of liability, in proportion to any liability assigned to the Offeror’s acts or omissions.

Re: Instruments of Service Limitation on Liability Article 5, Subpart 1: Add to Article 5.1: The Instruments of Service are intended to be used only for the compensated projects defined under this Agreement. Any reuse or modification of the Instruments of Service for other purposes without the prior written consent of the Commissioning Authority shall be at the user's sole risk, without liability to Commissioning Authority. This disclaimer shall survive termination or expiration of this Contract. Add a Waiver of Consequential Damages that protects both parties To the fullest extent permitted by law, Owner and Commissioning Authority waive against each other and the other’s officers, directors, members, agents, employees and insurers, any and all claims for or entitlement to special, incidental, indirect or consequential damages arising out of resulting from or in any way related to this Master Services Agreement.

The language to the Indemnity provision should include the duty to defend and shall not be changed.

RFC #1 Page 7 of 7

RFC 1. 47 Re: MSA Contract Section 15.1 – Could the language say “Commissioning Authority” instead of “ser” when consenting to venue?

No objection to the change.