Request For Clarification Responses

The following list is comprised of paraphrased Requests for Clarification (RFC) submitted in writing using this form:

Request for Clarification (RFC) Form

These paraphrased questions and associated responses are not part of the contract documents and are provided as supplemental information. Questions without answers may be posted here to indicate that we have received them before the deadline and we intend to respond. 

Last updated: 12/27/2021 11:36am

For environmental services, could you be more specific as to the County's needs on this scope? (RFC 43844 submitted 11/03/2021)

We're looking for several firms to provide a variety of services, including, but not limited to architectural and engineering services, planning, environmental, right-of-way, utility location, and other related services. A more comprehensive list and more scope details will be included with the RFQ & sample agreement, once published. Firms will be able to indicate the field(s) for which they would like to be considered. Response date: 11/05/2021

Will the new RFQ/Agreement(s) include disciplines and/or services for which the County already has on-calls in place? (RFC 44072 submitted 11/08/2021)

The new on-call Request for Qualifications will include various services for which the Department has current on-call agreements in place. The new agreement(s) will not immediately override or replace existing on-call agreements, but will be used concurrently until the current agreements expire. The Department is taking a more general/holistic approach to our consulting procurement and aims to consolidate and include a variety of services that had been split up and handled under more narrow RFQs and Agreements under a single solicitation. Response date: 11/09/2021

Please provide the overall page limit and does the cover and index page count towards not exceeding the page limit? (RFC 44296 submitted 11/16/2021)

There is no overall page limit, but each document you upload has a 10 MB limit.

An index should not be necessary because the components are separated in the Bid Express Solicitation and each component document should be uploaded in its own upload field. For example, your Cover Letter / Executive Summary should be uploaded in the file upload field "Cover Letter" under "Attach Required Documents."

There are six (6) twelve (12) additional optional file upload fields available under "Attach Optional Additional Documents" for additional file uploads, each of which has a 10 MB limit. For example, if your "f. Firm qualifications" document were 12 MB, you would divide the document into 2 files, each under 10 MB and upload the first file under "f. Firm Qualifications" and the second file would be uploaded under "Attach Optional Additional Documents." We suggest (though it is not required) that you use filenames to indicate the nature of the additional files. Example: "F-Firm-Qualifications-2-of-2.pdf" Response date: 11/17/2021

Can the RFQ submitted last June 2020 be reconsidered for this RFQ? (RFC 44305 submitted 11/16/2021)

You are welcome to reuse your answers and materials from previous RFQs, however you must fill out the questions in the Bid Express Solicitation and upload the different attachments in the file upload field for each question that applies to be considered responsive. For example: Upload a pdf containing your Cover Letter/Executive Summary in the file upload field for "a. Cover Letter" in the section "Attach Required Documents." Upload a separate pdf containing your firm organization chart in the file upload field for "g. Firm organization chart." Type in the name of the Project Manager in the provided text field for "Consultant’s Project Manager Name." Response date: 11/17/2021

Do we need to submit separately for each discipline? (RFC 44304 submitted 11/16/2021)

Only submit one response and select multiple disciplines within Bid Express. Response date: 11/17/2021

Can the County provide a list of firms that hold current contracts for on-call architectural, engineering, and related services? (RFC 44288 submitted 11/16/2021)

The following list of firms hold current contracts for on-call architectural, engineering, environmental, solid waste engineering, and staff augmentation services with the Department of Public Works and Planning. This list is not comprehensive and is limited to services that are currently performed through on-call service or staff augmentation contracts related to architectural and engineering services. In addition, some of the services in this new RFQ had previously been performed through other arrangements/agreements, such as project-based Requests for Proposals or using County forces.

• A&M Engineers
• AECOM
• Applied Earthworks
• Area West Environmental Consultants
• Avila & Associates
• ASH Architects/Huber & Huber
• Biggs Cardosa Associates
• BKF Engineers
• Blackburn Consulting
• Blair, Church and Flynn
• Blue Ridge Services Montna Inc.
• BSK
• Carollo Engineering
• Cornerstone Structural Engineering Group
• DeNovo Planning
• Dewberry Drake Haglan
• Dyson & Janzen
• EBA Engineering
• Electrical Power Systems
• Forensic Analytical Consulting Services (HMS)
• Geo-Logic Associates
• Geosyntec
• GHD Services, Inc.
• Golder Associates, USA Inc.
• GPA Consulting
• Hardin-Davidson Engineering
• Integrated Designs
• James W. Babcock
• JLB Traffic Engineering
• Kitchell
• Kleinfelder
• Krazan
• Lars Anderson
• Lawrence Engineering Group (LEG)
• Live Oak Associates
• LSA Associates
• Mark Thomas & Co.
• MGE Engineering
• Moore Twining
• NV5
• OCMI, Inc
• O’Dell Engineering
• Parrish Hansen
• Peters Engineering Group
• Provost & Pritchard
• Quincy Engineering
• RDT Architecture & Interior Design, Inc.
• Rincon Consulting
• Robina Wright
• SCS Engineers
• Sierra West
• Southern Yosemite Engineering Inc.
• SSG
• Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
• Stratus Environmental, Inc.
• SWCA
• T2 Utility Engineers
• TAM CZ
• Technicon
• Tetra Tech BAS, Inc.
• TJKM Transportation Consultants
• TRC Engineers
• Vanir Construction Management
• Wood Wiley & Jebian

Response date: 11/24/2021

May we submit different rate sets for Federally-funded and County-funded projects? (RFC 44372 submitted 11/18/2021)

Yes. Response date: 12/10/2021 

Regarding section V. SOQ Submittal Requirements, in the Request for Qualifications, Item 2 "Attachments to all SOQs" (page 8 of 13) "Provide the following information uploaded to the Solicitation as a separate pdf for each:" does this mean you would like to receive nine (9) separate pdfs or can this section be combined into one pdf, with each item on each page? (RFC 44378 submitted 11/18/2021)

We would like to receive nine (9) separate pdfs. The sections should not be combined in one pdf. The BidExpress system will combine and order the sections for each firm’s Response to the RFQ. This is intended to ensure adequate space for the response to each question and to speed review and document processing through using the more uniform response structure. Response date: 11/24/2021

Regarding section V. SOQ Submittal Requirements, in the Request for Qualifications, item 1 "Solicitation Form"". The RFQ states, "provide the following information in the fields provided in the Solicitation". We do not see that this Solicitation Form was included in the RFQ. Will the County be issuing this Form? (RFC 44387 and 44420 submitted 11/18/2021)

The Solicitation Form is available via this link, which is provided on the project website, in the RFQ on the cover page under "Submittals" (page 1 of 13), and under "V. SOQ Submittal Requirements" (page 7 of 13): https://www.bidexpress.com/businesses/36473/home  

This link will take you to the open solicitations for Fresno County Department of Public Works and Planning on the Bid Express webpage. The Solicitation is listed under the heading "Upcoming Solicitations" as "RFQ 2021 On-Call A&E Consultant and Related Services." Response date: 11/18/2021 

When will the County be posting the Sample Agreement, Attachment J? (RFC 44389 submitted 11/18/2021)

The Sample Agreement has been drafted, but it is under review. The most recent draft has been posted to the website. A final version of the proposed agreement will be provided to the consultants who are shortlisted. Firms will be able to bring up any issues with the proposed agreement during the interview. Response date: 11/24/2021 Revised 12/07/2021

Will projects subject to AB 1768 be released under this OnCall and does the County expect prevailing wage rates to be included in the cost proposals? (RFC 44393 submitted 11/18/2021)

Yes. See Attachment J - Sample Agreement Article 23 State Prevailing Wage Rates. Response date: 11/24/2021

Does discipline "Water Resources Engineering" encompass both groundwater and surface water projects? (RFC 44394 submitted 11/18/2021)

See Attachment J - Sample Agreement – Appendix B - Scope. Response date: 11/24/2021

Could you please clarify whether the $20,000,000 award ceiling is per consultant across all engineering disciplines or across all consultants selected within each engineering discipline? (RFC 44395 submitted 11/18/2021)

It is across all architectural and engineering and other related disciplines for the entire duration of the agreement (3 years plus potentially 2 one-year renewals for a maximum of 5 years) distributed among the consultants who perform work as needed. There is no minimum amount per consultant. Response date: 11/24/2021

See Attachment J – Sample Agreement – Appendix B – Scope. These services fall under "Environmental Planning Services" and "Materials Testing." Response date: 12/03/2021

Per the website, is Staff Augmentation part of the RFQ? (RFC 44475 submitted 11/22/2021)

Yes. See Attachment J - Sample Agreement – Appendix B - Scope. Response date: 11/24/2021

Per page 8 of 13 of the RFQ, Section 2, Attachments to all SOQs, should the word "discipline" be inserted after the word "each" in the first sentence/clause? (RFC 44476 submitted 11/22/2021)

No. Submit a pdf for each attachment to the SOQ listed (#a-i). Response date: 11/24/2021

If the word "discipline" is not inserted after the word "each," per page 8 of 13, we note that different information would be submitted under Sections 1.e, 2.b through 2.i., and 3.a depending on the specific discipline, and you have different review teams depending on the discipline, so we request that to make your review process and our SOQ assemblage easier, consultants be permitted to submit a separate PDF file/SOQ for each discipline. (RFC 44479, 44482 and 44514 submitted 11/22/2021)

You are welcome to either use headings in your pdf to indicate relevant sections for each discipline or submit additional pdfs for each discipline, though you are not required to do so. There is sufficient space provided under "Client References" for twenty (20) references and if you wish you may indicate the applicable disciplines for each reference under "Projects Worked On."

If you choose to attach additional pdfs, there are twelve (12) additional optional file upload fields available under "Attach Optional Additional Documents" that you may use for this purpose. We suggest (though it is not required) that you use filenames to indicate the sections and disciplines for the additional files. Examples: "F-Firm-Qualifications-Archaeology-2-of-2.pdf" or "Client-References-Continued.pdf" Response date: 11/29/2021 Response date: 11/29/2021

Per page 8 of 13 of the RFQ, Section 3, Attachments Related to Federally Funded Eligibility. Attachment A is referenced, however this Attachment was not provided. (RFC 44480 submitted 11/22/2021)

Attachment A Exhibit 10-I, Notice to Proposers Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Information has been posted. Response date: 12/07/2021

Please clarify the DBE goal. (RFC 44481 submitted 11/22/2021)

The goal is 4%. See Attachment A Exhibit 10-I, Notice to Proposers Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Information for information about the DBE goal and see Addendum 1 regarding review by Caltrans. Response date: 12/07/2021 

Please define the scope for Construction Quality Assurance. (RFC 44513 submitted 11/24/2021)

Construction Quality Assurance is not a separate discipline. We anticipate removing "Construction Quality Assurance" from page 11 of the RFQ under "Road Maintenance and Construction Committee" via addendum.

Within the Civil Engineering discipline in Attachment J - Sample Agreement – Appendix B – Scope, Construction Quality Assurance includes in the field and plan/specifications review. Field review provides periodic or continuous observation of construction methods and as-built conditions to ensure conformance with the plans and specifications. The scope of review may include any part of Civil design. Response date: 12/01/2021

Can we use 11x17 sheets where necessary? (RFC 44584 submitted 11/30/2021)

For this SOQ, all responses must be submitted electronically via Bid Express, and there are no printing specifications.

For technical reports and design plans referenced in Attachment J Sample Agreement – Appendix D Deliverables, the standard sizes of various documents are listed. Deviations from the listed formats should be verified with the Project Administrator for specific projects. Response date: 12/03/2021

For the "firm org chart" mentioned on page 8, would the County like to see an org chart of our entire firm, or an org chart of the team that will be working on the on-call projects? (RFC 44585 submitted 11/30/2021)

The org chart should show the team anticipated to work on the on-call projects as well as tracing the reporting relationships from that team to your firm’s highest leadership. Response date: 12/06/2021

Regarding the Litigation Statement, does the County require litigation for the entire history of the firm or can we limit the requirement to litigation within the last five years? (RFC 44684 submitted 12/02/2021)

You may limit to litigation within the last five (5) years. Response date: 12/06/2021

I understand that our existing Environmental on-call agreement is primarily for federally funded transportation projects and that the new RFQ emphasizes Architectural and Engineering services, but given that there appears to be a fair amount of transportation projects how will projects be divided between the two agreements? (RFC 44825 submitted 11/29/2021)

Mini-RFPs will be issued to all qualified on-call consultants whenever the scope of services is covered by both agreements and the services can be performed before the end of the agreement term. Consultants with current on-call agreements are encouraged to respond to this RFP to ensure they continue to receive mini-RFPs after the expiration of the current agreement and to shift to the new cycle of on-call agreements.

Example 1: A mini-RFP is issued for a community impact assessment on a federally funded transportation project. The work is expected to conclude before the existing agreements expire. The list of consultants who would be issued the mini-RFP would include both consultants with agreements through the new RFP who are eligible for "Environmental Planning Services" and are eligible for work on Federal funded projects, as well as all environmental consultants with the existing agreements under the 2020 RFQ, as they all have established eligibility for work on federally funded projects. Consultants from both agreements would respond. If the top candidate firm were participating on both agreements, the County would announce which agreement (2020 or 2022) would apply.

Example 2: A mini-RFP is issued for environmental planning work on a federally funded transportation project where the scoped work is expected to conclude in 2026. The 2020 agreements cannot be extended beyond 2025, but the 2022 agreements could be extended to 2027. This mini-RFP would only be issued to consultants eligible for federal funding in the "Environmental Planning Services" under the new RFQ. Response date: 12/07/2021

Page 11 of 13, notes that the evaluation committee will address criteria listed in Attachment C "Exhibit 10-B, Consultant Evaluation Sheet". This attachment does not appear to be listed on the web site. Will you be providing this form? (RFC 44835 submitted 12/06/2021)   

"Attachment C. Exhibit 10-B, Consultant Evaluation Sheet" was posted to the website on 11/15/2021 under "Requests for Qualifications, Attachments, and Addenda, as well as to the Bid Express Solicitation under "RFQ, Appendices and Addenda." Response date:12/07/2021

Page 8 of 13 of the RFQ, Item 2.i asks for "...projects completed or under design for which your firm provided engineering consultant services..." Since not all of the categories are for engineering design, can we submit projects for which we have provided similar services; not necessarily engineering? (RFC 44845 submitted 12/06/2021)   

Yes, see Addendum 1. Response date: 12/07/2021

Is it expected that that vertical construction (buildings) will receive federal funding or is the mainly constrained to horizontal and utility infrastructure projects? E.g. roads, bridges, trails, paths, traffic, water, and wastewater. (RFC 44853 submitted 12/06/2021)    

In general, most building projects we have completed in the past or are contemplating completion of do not involve federal funding.  However, we cannot precisely anticipate future funding sources. The following disciplines are anticipated to never have projects that involve federal funding:

• Solid Waste Engineering

The following disciplines are anticipated to rarely have projects that involve federal funding:

• Architectural Design and Drafting
• Building Commissioning (LEED)
• Certified Access Specialist (CASP) Certification
• Land Use / Planning
• Pavement Management
• Water Resource Operators

The following disciplines are anticipated to occasionally have projects that involve federal funding:

• Assessment Engineering
• Construction Management
• Cost Estimating
• Electrical Engineering
• Encroachment Permit Inspections
• Industrial Hygiene, Hazardous Material, Lead and Asbestos Compliance
• Plumbing and Mechanical Engineering

The following disciplines are anticipated to often have projects that involve federal funding:

• Archaeology / Architectural History / Paleontology
• Biology
• Civil Engineering
• Environmental Planning Services
• Geotechnical Engineering
• Hydraulic Engineering
• Landscape Architecture
• Materials Testing
• Structural Engineering
• Surveying
• Traffic and Transportation Engineering
• Utility Locating
• Water Resources Engineering

Response date: 12/07/2021

Our interpretation of "Environmental Planning Services" is that this category includes CEQA/NEPA and other generalist services but does not include specialist services such as include air, noise, etc. Is this interpretation accurate? (RFC 44828 submitted 12/06/2021) 

No. See Consultant Scope of Services – Appendix B. Specialist services are listed under "Environmental Planning Services" in the "Description of the Work by Discipline" on pages 9-10, including Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Wildfire/Energy (for County Initial Studies), Community Impact Assessment, Farmland, Floodplains, Initial Site Assessment, Noise and Vibration, Relocation, Sole Source Aquifer, Section 4(F), Section 6(F), Visual, Water Quality/Resources. Response date: 12/08/2021 

Do you have a maximum number of projects? What if we have hundreds of projects? What about projects located throughout the US and abroad? What about projects by our teams located elsewhere? Should we list only relevant projects? Is there a maximum number of projects per category? Is there a minimum of specific projects? (RFC 44910, 44913, and 44988 submitted 12/07/2021)

See Addendum 2. List all projects in the last 4 years where the project location is in California and the project was worked on by your proposed key personnel, regardless of the work location of the key personnel. Response date: 12/10/2021 

The County has identified a DBE goal of 4% for this contract. This effectively precludes any non-DBE firm from proposing to provide Staff Augmentation services on projects with federal funding. Does the County intend to only use staff augmentation on non-federal projects or will the DBE goal be relaxed for Staff Augmentation services? (RFC 44976 submitted 12/08/2021) 

The DBE goal and/or good faith effort does not apply to Staff Augmentation services, as there are no subconsultants allowed for Staff Augmentation services. Where there is no opportunity for subconsultants, no DBE goal applies.  (This was recently clarified in the 2021 Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual update to Chapter 10: Consultant Selection.) Response date: 12/10/2021

While reviewing the RFQ attachments B.1 and B.2: on B.2 (Federal Projects) there are superscripts 3 and 4 with footnotes for determining the billing rates on personnel. So based on the actual hourly rate a billing rate can be determined. However, on B.1 (Non-Federal Projects) the superscripts and footnotes do not match up.  Footnote 3 stated (in the billing section) that we are required to enter the actual employee hourly rate without a multiplier. So whatever the employee is paid is the billing rate we get to charge. Is there a multiplier the County is requiring and is there a % increase that County is allowing annually? (RFC 44977 submitted 12/08/2021)

Yes, for the Federal projects whatever the actual employee is paid is the billing rate.

Mark-ups are not allowed. Mark-ups are adding a percentage of a subconsultant’s rate. 

The straight hourly billing rate is without an overtime multiplier.

For B-1 Cost Proposal Non-Federal, since the ICR does not apply, consultants may list the employee billing rate here, even if than amount is different than the rate the employee is paid.

Both superscripts 3 and 4 should refer to footnote 3. If you are naming the employee under "Name/Job Title/Classification", use the rate you will bill for that actual employee, without an overtime multiplier. Aside from key personnel, listing rates by job classifications is preferred.

See Article 5 Compensation, Allowable Costs and Payments Section B.3. Consultant Fee regarding annual inflation increases. Response date: 12/10/2021 

For Pavement Management services, will certified Pavement Management Program (PMP) raters be required to perform this work? (RFC 44989 submitted 12/08/2021)

Yes. Response date: 12/10/2021

The DBE goals/ participation only apply if the work performed requires the use of subcontractors. If your firm does not anticipate subcontracting any of the work it might perform under this contract, then no DBE goals apply.

You would indicate this in your Bid Express Solicitation, under "Attach Required Documents – e. Subconsultants (if any)" by selecting the omission terms "No subconsultants will be used" and selecting "Optional Component: I am NOT bidding on Attach Required Documents if applying for Federally Funded Eligibility" as all three documents apply to subconsultants. Response date: 12/27/2021