WEST MESQUITE INTERCHANGE DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

Transcription

1 WEST MESQUITE INTERCHANGE DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION PROJECT GOALS THE PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS IN THE RFP TECHNICAL PROPOSAL PRICE PROPOSAL INCLUSION IN CONTRACT REQUIRED FORMS PROPERTY OF THE DEPARTMENT ERRORS DEFINITIONS IMPROPER CONDUCT PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT/AFFIRMATION (FORM NC) LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT PROPOSAL SCHEDULE ANTICIPATED PROCUREMENT SCHEDULE PROPOSAL DUE DATE INSURANCE CHANGES TO THE PROPOSER S ORGANIZATION INELIGIBLE FIRMS FIXED PRICE ELEMENTS OF WORK PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS PROCUREMENT PROCESS METHOD OF PROCUREMENT RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS AND OTHER INFORMATION DEPARTMENT DESIGNATED POINT OF CONTACT RULES OF CONTACT PROPOSERS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE RFP ADDENDA AND RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ADDENDA CORRESPONDENCE AND INFORMATION RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS DATE FOR ISSUANCE OF FINAL ADDENDUM AND RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS RESPONSIVE PROPOSAL NON-PUBLIC PROCESS PROPOSAL OWNERSHIP PROPOSAL STIPEND West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project i Industry Review Draft

3 2.9 ALTERNATE TECHNICAL CONCEPTS; PRE-PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS SUBMITTAL AND REVIEW OF ATCS CONTENTS OF THE ATC SUBMITTAL DETERMINATIONS BY THE DEPARTMENT INCORPORATING INTO PROPOSAL CONFIDENTIALITY SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS SUBMISSION OF A PROPOSAL MODIFICATIONS TO A PROPOSAL WITHDRAWAL OF A PROPOSAL PUBLIC OPENING OF PROPOSALS LATE PROPOSALS DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTORS EXAMINATION OF RFP PACKAGE, AND WORK SITE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS LEGAL AUTHORITY CURRENCY PROPOSAL BOND BONDING REQUIREMENTS RETURN OF PROPOSAL BOND ESCROWED PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS DELIVERY OF EPDS REVIEW OF EPDS RETURN OF EPDS DEPARTMENT S ACKNOWLEDGMENT SIGNATURES REQUIRED NUMBERS OF DOCUMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PROPOSAL BOND TECHNICAL PROPOSAL PRICE PROPOSAL COST OF PREPARING PROPOSAL OBLIGATION TO AWARD ADDITIONAL SUBMITTALS PRIOR TO CONTRACT EXECUTION PROPOSAL MEETINGS INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS ATTENDEES QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project ii Industry Review Draft

4 5.1 CONTRACT NOTICE OF INTENT TO AWARD NEGOTIATION EXECUTION OF CONTRACT PROPOSAL EVALUATIONS BEST-VALUE DETERMINATION INITIAL RESPONSIVENESS EVALUATION PASS/FAIL EVALUATION LEGAL PASS/FAIL FINANCIAL PASS/FAIL TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION QUALITY FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS AND EVALUATION WEIGHTING USE OF ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION TECHNICAL SCORE SCHEDULE AND TIME REASONABLENESS EVALUATION PRICE PROPOSAL EVALUATION THE DEPARTMENT S RIGHT TO REJECT PRICE PROPOSALS CLARIFICATIONS INTERVIEWS/PRESENTATIONS COMPETITIVE RANGE PROPOSAL REVISIONS DISCUSSIONS PURPOSE OF DISCUSSIONS DISCUSSIONS PROCEDURES SELECTION PROTESTS APPLICABILITY REQUIRED EARLY COMMUNICATION FOR CERTAIN PROTESTS DEADLINES FOR PROTESTS PROTEST CONTENTS FILING OF PROTEST COMMENTS FROM OTHER PROPOSERS BURDEN OF PROOF DECISION ON PROTEST PROTESTER'S PAYMENT OF COSTS RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF PROPOSERS THE DEPARTMENT S RIGHTS AND DISCLAIMERS THE DEPARTMENT S RIGHTS THE DEPARTMENT DISCLAIMERS West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project iii Industry Review Draft

5 A1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS... 1 A2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND SUMMARY STATEMENT... 2 A2.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 2 A2.2 SUMMARY STATEMENT... 3 A3.0 LEGAL AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION... 3 A3.1 LEGAL INFORMATION FOR VOLUME 1 OF THE PROPOSAL... 3 A3.2 LEGAL INFORMATION FOR APPENDIX A TO THE PROPOSAL... 4 A3.2.1 AUTHORIZATION DOCUMENTS... 4 A3.2.2 NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT/AFFIRMATION... 5 A3.2.3 ORGANIZATIONAL DOCUMENTS... 5 A3.2.4 CERTIFICATE REGARDING INELIGIBLE CONTRACTORS (FORM IC)... 5 A3.3 FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR APPENDIX A TO THE PROPOSAL... 6 A3.3.1 PROPOSER S FINANCIAL INFORMATION... 6 A3.3.2 LETTER OF COMMITMENT OF SURETY... 8 A3.3.3 SURETY FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS... 9 A3.3.4 GUARANTY... 9 A4.0 MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC... 9 A4.1 MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC INFORMATION FOR VOLUME 2 OF THE PROPOSAL... 9 A5.0 MANAGEMENT APPROACH INFORMATION A5.1 MANAGEMENT APPROACH INFORMATION FOR VOLUME 3 OF THE PROPOSAL A5.1.1 ORGANIZATION and COMMUNICATION structure A5.1.2 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A5.1.3 DESIGN MANAGEMENT PLAN A5.1.4 QUALITY PLAN A5.1.5 PUBLIC OUTREACH PLAN A6.0 OTHER TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS INFORMATION A6.1 OTHER TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS INFORMATION FOR VOLUME 4 OF THE PROPOSAL A6.1.1 ROAD WAY DESIGN A6.1.2 PERMANENT GUIDE SIGN REPLACEMENT A6.1.3 DRAINAGE A6.1.4 LANDSCAPE AND AESTHETICS A6.1.5 PERMANENT STRIPING West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project iv Industry Review Draft

6 A7.0 SCHEDULE AND TIME INFORMATION A7.1 SCHEDULE AND TIME INFORMATION FOR VOLUME 5 OF THE PROPOSAL A7.1.1 CALENDAR DAYS TO COMPLETE A7.1.2 PROPOSED BASELINE PROGRESS SCHEDULE A7.1.3 PRELIMINARY BASELINE PROJECT SCHEDULE A8.0 FORMAT AND ORGANIZATION OF THE PROPOSAL B1.0 INTRODUCTION... 1 B2.0 PRICE PROPOSAL... 1 B2.1 PROPOSAL PRICE SUBMITTAL... 2 B2.2 SCHEDULE OF PRICES (FORM SP)... 2 B2.2.1 PRICE CENTERS (FORMS PC1 TO PC12)... 3 B2.2.2 ENGINEERING AND DESIGN ACTIVITIES (FORM PC2)... 3 B2.2.3 LANDSCAPE AND AESTHETICS (FORM PC6)... 3 B2.2.4 FORM PPS-P... 3 B2.2.5 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS... 3 B2.2.6 DEVELOPING THE PPS-P... 4 B2.3 PROPOSAL BOND... 4 B3.0 ESCROWED PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS... 4 B4.0 SUPPLEMENTAL PRICING INFORMATION... 4 B5.0 FORMAT FOR SUBMITTAL OF PRICING DOCUMENTS... 5 B5.1 PRICE PROPOSAL... 5 West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project v Industry Review Draft

7 1.0 INTRODUCTION This (RFP) is issued by the Nevada Department of Transportation (the Department) to seek competitive Proposals for the West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project (the Project). The Department invites and will consider Proposals only from proposers who submitted a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) during the Project s Request for Qualifications (RFQ) phase, and have been notified of their inclusion on the Short-List of Proposers (the Proposers). In the preparation of their Proposals, Proposers shall address the Project goals identified in Instructions to Proposers (ITP) Section 1.1. Proposals shall be submitted in two separate parts: the Technical Proposal and the Price Proposal. Both parts will be evaluated as set forth in ITP Sections 6.2 through 6.5. The apparent best value Proposer will be selected as set forth in ITP Section PROJECT GOALS The Department s goals for the Project are: A. Early completion for a safer, better operating highway. B. Minimization of impacts to the traveling and adjacent public during construction. C. A high quality, durable, maintainable, aesthetic, and safe Project. D. Costs at or below available funds for the Project Furthermore, the Department hereby notifies all Proposers that it will not discriminate in the award of this contract on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex or handicap. See Contract Documents Part 2, DB Section for additional information and requirements. 1.2 THE PROPOSAL The following sections set forth the Proposal requirements DOCUMENTS IN THE RFP The documents issued as part of this RFP consist of the following: A. This ITP B. Contract Documents Parts 1 through 9, inclusive C. Reference Documents D. Any additional documents issued by Addenda to this RFP West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 1 Draft #2 9/22/2010

8 1.2.2 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL Each Proposer shall submit its Technical Proposal, which shall consist of Contract Documents Part 10, Proposal Information (the Proposal Information) and the Supplemental Selection Information Contract Documents Part 10, Proposal Information. The Proposal Information shall consist of the information requested and the completed forms provided in ITP Appendix A, and as specified in ITP Section Supplemental Selection Information The Supplemental Selection Information shall consist of the Executive Summary, the Summary Statement, and the information to be submitted in Appendix A of the Proposal, as specified in ITP Appendix A. The Supplemental Selection Information is for evaluation purposes only and will not be included as part of the Contract Documents PRICE PROPOSAL Each Proposer s pricing information shall be set forth in the Price Proposal, which shall consist of the information described in ITP Appendix B (the Pricing Information). The Pricing Information shall be submitted as specified in ITP Appendix B INCLUSION IN CONTRACT The Proposal Information and the Pricing Information shall be included with and bound into the Contract at execution as Contract Documents Part 10. The Reference Documents will not form part of the Contract. Except as expressly set forth in the Contract Documents, the Department makes no representation, warranty, or guarantee as to the Reference Documents accuracy, completeness, or pertinence, and shall not be responsible for such or for any interpretations thereof or conclusions drawn therefrom. The Reference Documents are made available to the Proposers for the purpose of providing such information as is in the possession of the Department, whether or not such information may be accurate, complete, pertinent, or of any value. Each Proposer shall use or elect to not use such information at its own risk and is solely responsible for its own independent due diligence in connection with the preparation and submission of its Proposal REQUIRED FORMS Each Proposer shall complete and include in its Proposal all of the forms provided in ITP Appendix C (the Proposal Forms). Any failure to provide all the information or complete all of the Proposal Forms in the formats specified in ITP Appendices A and B may result in the Department s rejection of the Proposal, or giving it a lower rating. All blank spaces in the Proposal Forms must be filled in as directed, and no change shall be made to the phraseology of the Proposal Forms or any item therein. West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 2 Industry Review Draft

9 1.2.6 PROPERTY OF THE DEPARTMENT Unless a waiver is provided as specified in ITP Section 2.7, all documents submitted by Proposers in response to this RFP shall become the property of the Department and, except for specified confidential records, will not be returned to Proposers. The concepts and ideas contained in each Proposal shall also become the Department s property, which the Department may use as it determines, at its sole risk, and in its sole discretion ERRORS If, at any time during this procurement, a Proposer identifies any mistake, error, conflict, or ambiguity in the RFP, or any of the documents it receives or submits to the Department, such Proposer shall have an affirmative duty to: (i) notify the Department of the mistake, error, conflict, or ambiguity, and, if appropriate; (ii) recommend a correction in writing and in accordance with ITP Section DEFINITIONS The following definitions are applicable to the ITP: Clarification means a written or oral exchange of information that takes place between the Department and a Proposer after the receipt of Proposals during the evaluation and selection process. The purpose of clarifications is to address ambiguities, inconsistencies, omissions, minor errors or mistakes, and clerical revisions in a Proposal. Competitive Range means the list of the most highly ranked Proposals that have a reasonable chance of being identified as the apparent best-value Proposer. The Competitive Range will be based on the rating of each Proposal against all evaluation criteria. Deficiency means: (1) any failure of a Proposal to meet any of the Department s requirements as specified in this ITP; or (2) any flaw in the Proposal which, in the Department s sole discretion, increases the risk of unsuccessful Contract performance to an unacceptable level. Short-List means the list of those Proposers that have submitted Statements of Qualifications that the Department determines, through evaluation, are eligible to receive an RFP and are invited to submit Proposals. Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) means the statement of qualifications submitted by a Proposer in response to the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the Project issued by the Department. For the definitions of other initially capitalized terms, see Contract Documents Part 2, DB Section IMPROPER CONDUCT PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES If a Proposer, or anyone representing a Proposer, offers or gives any advantage, gratuity, bonus, discount, bribe or loan of any sort to the Department, including the Department s agents, consultants or anyone West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 3 Industry Review Draft

10 representing the Department, at any time during this procurement process, the Department shall: (i) immediately disqualify the Proposer; (ii) the Proposer shall forfeit its Proposal Bond (see also ITP Section 3.3); and (iii) the Proposer shall not be entitled to any payment as contemplated under ITP Section 2.8 or otherwise. In addition, the Department may exercise such other rights and remedies as are available at law or in equity, including the right to sue the Proposer for damages NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT/AFFIRMATION (FORM NC) Each Proposer shall submit a Non-Collusion Affidavit (ITP Appendix C, Form NC) as set forth in ITP Appendix A, Section A LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT All correspondence regarding this RFP, any Proposal, and the Contract shall be in the English language. If any original documents required for the Proposal are in any other language, each Proposer shall provide an English translation, which shall take precedence in the event of conflict with the original language. 1.6 PROPOSAL SCHEDULE ANTICIPATED PROCUREMENT SCHEDULE The following procurement schedule is anticipated. The Department reserves the right to alter these dates at any time and for any reason, in its sole discretion. Table 1-1 Anticipated Procurement Schedule RFP Release Date November 15, 2010 One-on-one Meetings with Proposers December 2, 2010 One-on-one Meetings with Proposers December 9, 2010 Last Day to Receive ATC Proposals December 10, 2010 Last Day to Receive Proposer Questions December 13, 2010 Last Day to Issue Final Addendum and/or Answers to Proposer Questions December 17, 2010 Responses to all ATCs due December 20, 2010 Proposal Due Date January 11, 2011 Escrowed Proposal Documentation Due January 13, 2011 Notice of Intent to Award January 28, 2011 West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 4 Industry Review Draft

11 1.6.2 PROPOSAL DUE DATE The completed Proposals shall be delivered to the addressee at the address specified in ITP Section by no later than 3:00 pm Pacific Time on the date specified in ITP Section (the Proposal Due Date). 1.7 INSURANCE Refer to Contract Documents Part 2, DB Section Insurance certificates shall be submitted prior to Contract execution. 1.8 CHANGES TO THE PROPOSER S ORGANIZATION If a Proposer wishes to change the organization represented in its Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) by adding, deleting or substituting a Principal Participant or Designer, the Proposer shall submit to the Department a written request for the Department s approval of such change, and Proposer must receive written permission to do so from the Department at least ten days prior to the Proposal Due Date (ITP Section 1.6.1). If a request is made to add or substitute a Principal Participant or Designer, the Proposer shall submit, with Proposer s request, the information that was required in the RFQ for each Principal Participant or Designer, including legal and financial data, as well as the information required to evaluate the new Principal Participant or Designer s qualifications. If a request is made to delete a Principal Participant or Designer, the Proposer shall submit such information as may be required by the Department to show that the changed organization still meets the RFQ criteria (e.g., pass/fail and relevant RFQ evaluation criteria). Any request to change a Proposer s organization must be received by the Department not later than 30 calendar days prior to the Proposal Due Date (ITP Section 1.6.1). The Department, however, may, in its sole discretion, consider a request received after this deadline if such a request is based on unusual circumstances beyond the Proposer s control. 1.9 INELIGIBLE FIRMS Each Proposer shall be aware of and comply with the requirements of 23 CFR , and include in its Proposal a full disclosure of all potential organizational conflicts of interest. In addition, any firm that is rendered ineligible, due to any state or federal action, is ineligible to participate on any Proposer s team. Firms and individuals (including any affiliate thereof) that are ineligible to participate on any Proposer s team include without limitation: Nossaman LLP HDR Engineering, Inc 1.10 FIXED PRICE ELEMENTS OF WORK The Project s Scope of Work is generally set forth in Contract Documents, Part 1, Appendix A. One of the Department s goals is to achieve the highest value for the available funding for the Project. In furtherance of this goal, the Department has established a fixed price for landscape and aesthetics. Each Proposer shall include in its Proposal Price a lump sum amount of $600, for landscaping and West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 5 Industry Review Draft

12 aesthetics elements. For the lump sum amount set forth above, the Proposer will be required to submit a plan describing how the lump sum amount for the specific category of work will be utilized. The plan shall be subject to negotiations under ITP Section 5.2 prior to award and execution of the Contract and following award and execution, the Department, in its sole discretion, shall be permitted to further modify the applicable plan so long as such modification does not increase the cost of implementation thereof above the lump sum amount stated herein PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS [TO BE UPDATED/REVISED IF NEPA DOCUMENT CATAGORICAL EXCLUSION (CE) IS STILL OUTSTANDING PRIOR TO RELEASE OF THE FINAL RFP] It is important to note that, at this time, that the Project remains in the environmental process and that a categorical exclusion (CE) has not been obtained. Additional alternatives, including a no-build alternative, are being considered in the environmental process and it is possible that the Project scope may be modified through the environmental process or that a no-build alternative may be adopted. Nothing contained in this RFP is intended to modify, limit or otherwise constrain the environmental process or commit the Department or any other entity to undertake any action with respect to the Project including any procurement or the design and construction of the Project. 2.0 PROCUREMENT PROCESS 2.1 METHOD OF PROCUREMENT The Contract will be procured through a single Design-Build ( DB ) Contract per Nevada Revised Statutes ( NRS ) through , inclusive, and use a selection process that considers price and other factors identified in this RFP (also known as best value ). The intent of the Department is to award the Contract to the Proposer that submits a responsive Proposal that provides the best value to the Department, using the evaluation factors set forth in ITP Sections 6.1 through 6.5. The procurement process includes two steps: A. The RFQ (determination of short-listed Proposers); and B. The RFP (selection of Proposer who submits the best value Proposal). The procurement process may, at the Department s sole discretion, include a Request for Proposal Revisions or Best and Final Offers (BAFOs), as set forth in ITP Section 6.9. The successful Proposer will be selected using the evaluation and selection process set forth in ITP Section RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS AND OTHER INFORMATION The RFP and other information may be obtained by Proposers who have been notified of their inclusion on the Short-List from the person designated as the Department s point of contact in ITP Section The Department will provide the RFP and certain other information concerning the Project that was not West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 6 Industry Review Draft

13 available during the RFQ stage and may not be publicly available. To access this information, the Proposer will be provided with a password in which to access such information on (the Website); the Department anticipates updating the Website, as appropriate, during the procurement process. In order to have access to the Website, a Proposer s Authorized Representative(s) must execute and return Attachment A of the Communication Protocols to Ms. Marty Espinoza at MEspinoza@dot.state.nv.us, with a copy to Elizabeth Isenhart at eisenhart@dot.state.nv.us, followed by delivery of an original by U.S. mail or other means to the Department, Attn: Admin Services, 1263 S. Stewart St., Room 101, Carson City, NV Proposers will receive notice via upon activation of their access to the Website. The Communication Protocol is available from Ms. Marty Espinoza at the referenced address DEPARTMENT DESIGNATED POINT OF CONTACT All correspondence with the Department must be in writing and submitted by to the Department s designated point of contact, as specified in DB Section B, below. Include West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project in the subject line of all correspondence. The Department will not consider any correspondence delivered in any other way except as specified in this ITP Section 2.2.2, except that the Department may call informational meetings with Proposers, as the Department deems necessary. (See ITP Section 4.1.) RULES OF CONTACT Each of the following rules of contact shall apply during this procurement: A. After the submittal of any Statement of Qualifications (SOQ), no Proposer or any of its team members may communicate with another Proposer or its team members with regard to any aspect of the procurement, except that contact among Proposer organizations will be allowed during Department-sponsored informational meetings. B. Each Proposer shall correspond with the Department regarding this RFP only through the Department s and such Proposer s designated representatives. Such authorized representatives shall only communicate in writing to the Department through Ms. Marty Espinoza at MEspinoza@dot.state.nv.us with a cc: to Elizabeth Isenhart at eisenhart@dot.state.nv.us. C. No Proposer or representative thereof shall have any ex parte communications regarding the Procurement Documents or the procurement with any member of the Nevada State Transportation Board, Stakeholders or with any Department or Stakeholder staff, advisors, contractors or consultants regarding any aspect of the procurement. D. The Department intends to conduct one-on-one meetings with each Proposer on the dates set forth in the ITP Section 1.6.1, and on such other dates designated by the Department in writing to the Proposers. One-on-one meetings will be undertaken pursuant to the protocols issued with the RFP. If a one-on-one meeting is conducted for one Proposer, such meetings shall be offered to all Proposers. West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 7 Industry Review Draft

14 E. Any communications determined to be improper, at the sole discretion of the Department, may result in disqualification. F. Proposers shall not disclose any aspect of their Proposals until the earliest of (i) the execution of the Contract by the Department, (ii) rejection of all Proposals by the Department or (iii) cancellation of the Project. G. The Department intends to be the sole source of all public information (press releases, public notices, etc.) concerning the Project process during the procurement. H. Any official information regarding the Project, the procurement, and the Procurement Documents will be either by from by Ms. Espinoza or her designee, or posted on the Website. I. The Department will not be responsible for any oral exchange or any other information or exchange that occurs outside the official process specified herein. J. Any communication determined by the Department to be improper, in its sole discretion, may result in disqualification of the Proposer. 2.3 PROPOSERS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE RFP Each Proposer shall be responsible for reviewing the RFP and any Addenda issued by the Department prior to the Proposal Due Date (ITP Section 1.6.1), and for submitting written questions requesting clarification or interpretation of any perceived discrepancy, deficiency, ambiguity, error or omission contained therein, or of any provision which the Proposer fails to understand. Failure of a Proposer to so examine and inform itself shall be at its sole risk, and no relief for error or omission will be provided by the Department. Proposers may submit questions regarding the Project, the RFP or communications provided by the Department, including requests for additional information, for clarification, for interpretation or to correct errors, to Ms. Espinoza, by at MEspinoza@dot.state.nv.us with a cc: to Elizabeth Isenhart at eisenhart@dot.state.nv.us. The questions and comments should be submitted in Microsoft Word and on the form included as Exhibit 1 of the Communications Protocol. Questions must be sequentially numbered and specifically reference the relevant document, section, and page number, unless such request is of general application (in which case the request for clarification shall so note General ). Proposers are responsible for ensuring that any written communications clearly indicate on the first page or in the subject line, as applicable, that the material relates to the West Mesquite Interchange Design- Build Project. Questions may be submitted only by the Proposer s designated representative(s) identified in its SOQ, and must include the requestor s name, address, telephone and facsimile numbers, and the Proposer he/she represents. The Department may rephrase questions as it deems appropriate and may consolidate similar questions. West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 8 Industry Review Draft

15 The Department reserves the right to not consider questions or requests not meeting the foregoing requirements. No questions or requests addressed to any person other than Ms. Espinoza will be considered. No telephone or oral requests will be considered Proposers questions and the Department s responses will be entered into a cumulative matrix which will remain on the Website, which will be available to all Proposers throughout this procurement. Only written questions delivered in accordance with ITP Section will be considered. No oral questions will be considered. No requests for additional information or clarification to any other Department office, consultant, employee or the FHWA will be considered. Only questions received by 5:00 pm, local time, on the Last Day to Receive Proposer questions (ITP, Section 1.6.1) will be addressed, except that questions relating to the last Addendum (if issued later than 21 days prior to Proposal Due Date (ITP Section 1.6.1)), may be submitted no later than three working days after the date of the last Addendum. If a Proposer believes a question contains confidential or proprietary information (including that the question itself is confidential), it must mark such question as confidential. The Department reserves the right to disagree with the confidentiality of information provided by a Proposer. If the Department disagrees with a confidentiality designation, it shall notify the Proposer, in which case the Proposer may retract the question in writing or retract the confidentiality designation, each within a time period specified by the Department. Failure of the Proposer to respond within such specified time frame shall mean that the Proposer has retracted the confidentiality designation. If the Proposer retracts the question, the Department will not answer the question unless it believes it must do so in the interest of maintaining a fair process or complying with applicable law (with such answer being transmitted to all Proposers). If the Proposer retracts the confidentiality designation, the Department shall answer the question for all Proposers. 2.4 ADDENDA AND RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ADDENDA The Department reserves the right to issue Addenda at any time during the period of this procurement. Any such Addenda will be bound into and included as part of the Contract only if expressly stated in the Addenda. The Department is responsible for providing Addenda only to the short-listed Proposers. The Proposal shall include written acknowledgement of receipt of all Addenda CORRESPONDENCE AND INFORMATION Except as specified in ITP Sections and 2.2.2, no correspondence or information from the Department or anyone representing the Department regarding the RFP, or the procurement process generally, shall have any effect and may not be relied upon by Proposers RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS The Department will provide written responses to questions received from Proposers as specified in ITP Section 2.3. Except for duplicative questions or other questions determined by the Department to be immaterial, each Proposer s questions and the Department s responses will be posted without attribution in a cumulative matrix on the Website, and notifications will be sent to all Proposers when changes or updates are posted. To the extent responses are provided, they will not be considered part of the Contract West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 9 Industry Review Draft

16 nor will they be relevant in interpreting the Contract, except as said responses may clarify Contract provisions otherwise considered ambiguous. The Department may decide not to respond directly to specific requests, but may instead incorporate relevant responses into the RFP documents through Addenda DATE FOR ISSUANCE OF FINAL ADDENDUM AND RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS The Department does not anticipate issuing any Addenda and/or responses to questions later than the Last Day to Issue Final Addendum and/or Answers to Proposer questions, as set forth in ITP Section RESPONSIVE PROPOSAL Each Proposer shall submit a Proposal that provides all of the information required by this ITP. Each Proposal must be submitted in the official format specified in ITP Section Each Proposer shall sign each copy of the Proposal submitted to the Department, as required under ITP Section 3.5. The Department, in its sole discretion, may determine that any Proposal is non-responsive and disqualify it from further consideration for any of the following reasons: A. The Proposal does not comply with the instructions and rules contained in this ITP or its Appendices. B. The Proposal is submitted on a paper form or disk other than that furnished or specified by the Department; it is not properly signed; or any part of the Proposal Forms (see ITP Appendix C) are altered or deleted except as contemplated hereby. C. The Proposal is illegible or contains any omission, erasure, alteration, or item not called for in the RFP, or contains any unauthorized addition, conditional or alternate Proposal provision, or other irregularities of any kind; or the Department determines that such irregularities make the Proposal incomplete, indefinite, or ambiguous as to its meaning. D. The Proposer adds any conditions, limitations or provisions reserving the right to accept or reject the Award, or to enter into the Contract following the Award. E. The Proposer attempts to limit or modify the Forms of Proposal, Labor and Material, or Performance Bonds (see ITP Appendix C); the Form of Proposal Bond (see ITP Appendix C) is not provided; and/or requested information deemed material by the Department is not provided. F. Any other reason the Department, in its sole discretion, determines the Proposal to be nonresponsive. 2.6 NON-PUBLIC PROCESS The Department intends to maintain a non-public process for the duration of this procurement process to the extent permitted by law. Except to the extent such rights are waived by a Proposer, the Department shall not release to a third party, or otherwise make public, any financial or proprietary information submitted by a Proposer as part of any Statement of Qualifications (SOQ), Proposal, or other submission West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 10 Industry Review Draft

17 to the Department, or any records created during the evaluation and selection process containing such financial or proprietary information. If a Proposer submits information in its Proposal that the Proposer believes to be protected from disclosure under NRS (6), such Proposer must do each of the following: A. Clearly mark all financial or proprietary information in its Proposal at the time the Proposal is submitted, and include a cover sheet identifying each section and page which has been so marked. Blanket statements indicating that the entire Proposal is confidential shall not be permitted. B. Include a statement in its Proposal justifying the Proposer s determination that certain records should be protected from disclosure. C. Defend any action seeking release of the records that the Proposer believes to be protected from disclosure, and indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the State, the Department, its agents, and its employees from any judgments awarded against the State or the Department in favor of the party requesting the records, including any and all costs connected with that defense. This indemnification survives the cancellation or termination of this procurement, or Award and subsequent execution of the Contract. In submitting a Proposal, each Proposer agrees that this indemnification survives as long as the financial or proprietary information is in the possession of the State. Pursuant to NRS , financial or proprietary information provided to the Department by any Proposer is not subject to inspection at any time by third persons unless otherwise required by law. All records pertaining to this procurement will become public information after execution of the Contract, unless such records are determined to be protected from disclosure under NRS (6). If the Department selects a Proposal for Award, the Department shall hold a public meeting for the purposes specified in NRS (6). The Department may issue a notice of intent to Award prior to the meeting, identifying the apparent best value Proposer and the ranking of the Proposers. At such meeting, the Department may make available to the public a summary setting forth the factors used by the Department to select the apparent best value Proposer, the amount of each Proposer s price, and the ranking of the Proposers who submitted Proposals and, if applicable, BAFOs. 2.7 PROPOSAL OWNERSHIP Unless a separate waiver declining acceptance of a stipend is provided as described in ITP Section 2.8 below, by submitting a Proposal in response to the RFP each Proposer acknowledges that the Department owns the ideas and information contained in the Proposal and reserves the right to use any such ideas or information in connection with any contract awarded for the Project, or in connection with any subsequent procurement. West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 11 Industry Review Draft

18 2.8 PROPOSAL STIPEND The Department will offer a stipend in the amount of FIFTY THOUSAND and No/100 United States Dollars ($50,000.00) for each unsuccessful Proposer that has submitted a Proposal that is responsive to all elements of the RFP, in the sole discretion of the Department, and that has achieved a rating of Pass on all Pass/Fail evaluation factors and an adjectival rating of at least Acceptable for all quality evaluation factors (See ITP Sections 6.3 and 6.4.1). No Proposer will be required by the Department to accept a stipend. A Proposer that declines to accept a stipend shall sign a written waiver stating that it is unconditionally and irrevocably waiving its right to a stipend payment and deliver such waiver with its Proposal. Unless a separate waiver is provided, each Proposer who submits a Proposal is thereby indicating its acceptance of a stipend from the Department and the granting of a right for the Department to use any and all ideas provided in such Proposal. In doing so, the Proposer has unconditionally, irrevocably and knowingly waived its rights under NRS (6) that apply to the protection of any such information as proprietary. In the event that this procurement is cancelled after the Proposal Due Date, the stipend will be paid to all unsuccessful Proposers that submitted responsive Proposals without the waiver described above. (See ITP Section 2.5) 2.9 ALTERNATE TECHNICAL CONCEPTS; PRE-PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS This ITP Section 2.9 sets forth a process for early review of Alternative Technical Concepts (ATCs) conflicting with the requirements for design and construction of the Project, or otherwise requiring a modification of the Contract Documents. This process is intended to allow Proposers to incorporate innovation and creativity into their Proposals, in turn allowing the Department to (i) consider Proposer ATCs in making the selection decision, (ii) avoid delays and potential conflicts in the design associated with deferring reviews of ATCs to the post-award period, and, ultimately, (iii) to obtain the best value for the public. ATCs eligible for consideration hereunder shall be limited to those deviations from the requirements of the as-issued Contract Documents that result in performance and quality of the end product that is equal to or better than the performance and quality of the end product absent the deviation, as determined by the Department in its sole discretion. A concept is not an ATC if, in the Department s sole judgment, it merely results in reduced quantities, performance or reliability. A concept is not eligible for consideration as an ATC if it is premised upon or would require (i) an increase in the amount of time required for Completion of the Project, (ii) an increase in the Contract Price, (iii) further environmental evaluation, revision or supplement to the Project s categorical exclusion (CE), (iv) acquisition of right-of-way or any real property interest from a non-governmental entity or (v) elimination in its entirety of the Roundabout concept. Any ATC that has been pre-approved may be included in the Proposal, subject to the conditions set forth herein. If a Proposer is unsure whether a concept is consistent with the requirements of the RFP or if that concept would be considered an ATC by the Department, the Department recommends that the Proposer submit such concept for review as an ATC. West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 12 Industry Review Draft

19 2.9.1 SUBMITTAL AND REVIEW OF ATCS The Proposer may submit ATCs for review to the Department until the date identified in ITP Section All ATCs shall be submitted in writing to the addressee at the address identified in ITP Section 2.2.1, with a cover letter clearly identifying the submittal as a request for review of an ATC under this procurement. If the Proposer does not clearly designate its submittal as an ATC, the submission will not be treated as an ATC by the Department. The Department will review each ATC submitted. If the Department needs more information to determine whether or not the ATC will be approved or not approved, the Department will submit written questions to the Proposer and/or discuss the ATC at a one-on-one meeting held pursuant to ITP Section D in order to better understand the details of the ATC. The Department may conditionally approve an ATC based on required revisions to a portion or portions of the ATC. If an ATC is not approved or conditionally approved and the Proposer feels that the non-approval or the conditions for approval were due to an incorrect conclusion on the part of the Department, it may resubmit the ATC for one additional review to the Department s representative at the address identified in ITP Section B. If a re-submittal is made, it shall be accompanied by a cover letter clearly (i) identifying such submission as an ATC submitted for an additional review and (ii) summarizing the clarifications intended to assist the Department in its re-evaluation of the ATC CONTENTS OF THE ATC SUBMITTAL Each ATC submittal shall include five copies and shall include each of the following: A. Identification: A sequential ATC number identifying the Proposer and the ATC number (multi-part or multi-option ATCs shall be submitted as separate individual ATCs with unique sequential numbers). B. Description: A detailed description and schematic drawings of the configuration of the ATC or other appropriate descriptive information including, if appropriate, product details (e.g., specifications, construction tolerances, special provisions, etc.). C. Usage: Where and how the ATC would be used on the Project. D. Schedule Reduction: Any reduction in the time period necessary to design and construct the Project resulting from implementing the ATC, including, as appropriate, a description of method and commitments. E. Cost Savings: An estimate of the savings that would accrue to the Department should the ATC be approved and implemented. F. Deviations: References to any requirements of the RFP Documents or to any elements of the Contract Documents that are inconsistent with the proposed ATC, an explanation of the nature of the proposed deviation and a request for approval of such deviations or a determination that the ATC is consistent with the requirements of the RFP Documents. West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 13 Industry Review Draft

20 G. Analysis: An analysis justifying the ATC and why the deviations from the requirements of the RFP Documents should be allowed; a description of how the ATC is equal or better in quality and performance than the requirements of the RFP Documents. H. Impacts: Discussion of potential impacts on vehicular traffic, community impact, and safety. I. Right of Way: If and what additional right-of-way will be required to implement the ATC (and Proposers are advised that they shall (i) be solely responsible for the acquisition of any such right-of-way, including the cost thereof; (ii) not be entitled to any additional time or money as a result of Site conditions (i.e., Hazardous Materials, differing site conditions, geotechnical issues, Utilities, etc.) on such additional right-of-way; and (iii) not be entitled to any additional time or money as a result of any delay, inability or cost associated with the acquisition of such right of way). As specified in ITP Section 2.9, ATCs that require acquisition of right of way from a non-governmental entity will not be considered. J. History: A detailed description of other projects where the ATC has been used under comparable circumstances, the success of such usage, and names and telephone numbers of project owners that can confirm such statements. K. Risks: A description of added risks to the Department and other Persons associated with implementing the ATC. L. Costs: An estimate of the ATC implementation costs including life-cycle (repair and maintenance) costs to the Department, the Design-Builder and other Persons. M. Price: An estimate of the impact of the ATC on the Proposal Price DETERMINATIONS BY THE DEPARTMENT The Department will make one of the following determinations with respect to each properly submitted ATC: A. The ATC is approved. B. The ATC is not approved. C. The ATC is conditionally approved, i.e., the ATC is not approved in its present form, but is approved subject to satisfaction, in the Department s sole judgment, of specified conditions. D. The submittal does not qualify as an ATC but may be included in the Proposal without an ATC (i.e., the concept complies with the RFP requirements). E. The submittal does not qualify as an ATC and may not be included in the Proposal. Each Proposer, by submittal of its Proposal, acknowledges that the opportunity to submit ATCs was offered to all Proposers, and waives any right to object to or protest the Department s determinations West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 14 Industry Review Draft

21 regarding acceptability of ATCs. The Department s rejection or conditional approval of an ATC will not entitle Proposer to an extension of the Proposal Due Date or the date that the ATCs are due; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not limit the Department s absolute and sole right to modify the Proposal Due Date or any other date in connection with this procurement Approval of an ATC will constitute a change in the specific requirements of the Contract Documents associated with the approved ATC for that specific Proposer. Should the Design-Builder be unable to obtain required approvals for any ATC incorporated into the Contract Documents, or if the concept otherwise proves to be infeasible, the Design-Builder will be required to conform to the original RFP requirements INCORPORATING INTO PROPOSAL A Proposer may incorporate one or more pre-approved and/or conditionally approved ATCs into its Proposal. For conditionally approved ATCs, the Proposer may not incorporate such ATC into the Proposal unless all conditions have been met (see ITP Section 2.9.3). Copies of the Department s ATC approval letters for each incorporated ATC shall be included in the Proposal. Proposals with or without ATCs will be evaluated against the same technical evaluation factors. Proposals incorporating an ATC(s), including an ATC that provides technical enhancements, may or may not receive a higher technical rating. The Proposal Price shall reflect any incorporated ATCs. Except for incorporating approved and/or conditionally approved ATCs, the Proposal may not otherwise contain exceptions to or deviations from the requirements of the RFP Documents. Prior to execution of the Contract, ATCs from unsuccessful Proposers may, in the Department s sole discretion, be presented to the selected Proposer for possible incorporation into the Contract Documents during negotiation of the final terms of the Contract pursuant to ITP Section 5.2. In addition, following execution of the Contract, ATCs from unsuccessful Proposers may, in the Department s sole discretion, be presented to the selected Proposer/Design-Builder as a Contract Change Order CONFIDENTIALITY ATCs properly submitted by a Proposer and all subsequent communications regarding its ATCs will be considered confidential until the Contract negotiation process begins or the procurement is canceled as specified herein; provided, however, that, if the Department, in it sole discretion, determines, based on a proposed ATC or otherwise, that the RFP contains an error, inconsistency, ambiguity or mistake, the Department reserves the right to modify the RFP to correct the error, inconsistency, ambiguity or mistake, regardless of any impact on a proposed ATC. If a Proposer wishes to make any announcement or disclosure to third parties concerning any ATC, it shall first notify the Department in writing of its intent to take such action, including details as to date and participants, and obtain the Department s prior approval to do so. West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 15 Industry Review Draft

22 2.10 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS SUBMISSION OF A PROPOSAL The Proposal shall be submitted in accordance with this ITP and the following requirements: A. The Technical Proposal, which includes the Proposal Information and the Supplemental Selection Information, shall be in a sealed container that is clearly marked as Technical Proposal West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build (see ITP Appendix A). The Price Proposal shall be sealed within a separate container that is clearly marked as Price Proposal West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build (see ITP Appendix B). The Proposal, consisting of the Technical Proposal and Price Proposal shall be delivered to: Agreement Services Nevada Department of Transportation 1263 South Stewart Street, Room 101 Carson City, NV B. The Department Contract Number (TBD) and the fact that this is a Proposal for the West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project shall be clearly shown on the cover of the containers. The name and address of the Proposer shall be clearly marked on the outside of the containers. C. When sent by United States Mail or private carrier (e.g., Federal Express, United Postal Service, etc.), the sealed containers shall be sent, in accordance with this ITP, to the Department at the address and in care of the official specified in ITP Section 2.10, in whose office the containers are to be received, and shall be received by such official no later than the time specified in ITP Section D. Where certified copies are required, each Proposer shall stamp the document or cover with the words Certified True Copy, and have the stamp oversigned by the Proposer s designated point of contact. E. The submission of a Price Proposal indicates a Proposer s agreement and permission, in accordance with 23 CFR (c) to reveal such price at a public meeting held to ratify the Department s selection of a Proposer in accordance with NRS (6) MODIFICATIONS TO A PROPOSAL A Proposer may modify its Proposal in writing prior to the specified time on the Proposal Due Date (see ITP Sections and 1.6.2). The modification shall conform in all respects to the requirements for submission of a Proposal. Modifications shall be clearly delineated as such on the face of the document to prevent confusion with the original Proposal and shall specifically state that the modification supersedes the previous Proposal and all previous modifications, if any. If multiple modifications are submitted, they shall be sequentially numbered so the Department can accurately identify the revised Proposal. Any modification must contain complete Proposal sections, West Mesquite Interchange Design-Build Project 16 Industry Review Draft