friends of the cheat · friends of the cheat page 11 of 19 friends of the cheat’s point of...

FRIENDS OF THE CHEAT 119 South Price Street Suite 206 | Kingwood, WV 26537 | www.cheat.org

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

A DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT

Beaver Creek at McElroy Seep Passive AMD Treatment System

Preston County Cuzzart, West Virginia

June 5th, 2020

Request for Proposals McElroy Seep Passive AMD Treatment Project June 5th, 2020 Preston County, West Virginia

Friends of the Cheat

Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1

PROJECT OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................. 1

Water Quality Information ...................................................................................................... 2

Conceptual Design .................................................................................................................... 5

Anticipated Scope of Work ...................................................................................................... 9

Anticipated Design Services ..................................................................................................... 9

Anticipated Environmental Services ....................................................................................... 9

Anticipated Construction Services .......................................................................................... 9

PROCUREMENT OVERVIEW ............................................................................................... 10

Estimate Contract Value ........................................................................................................ 10

Procurement Schedule and Project Milestones .................................................................... 10

Friends of the Cheat’s Point of Contact and Project Reference ......................................... 11

RFP DOCUMENTS .................................................................................................................... 11

Offeror’s Pre-Submittal Responsibilities and Representations .......................................... 11

Pre-Proposal Meeting ............................................................................................................. 12

CONTENTS OF PROPOSALS ................................................................................................. 12

Proposal Checklist .................................................................................................................. 13 Letter of Submittal .............................................................................................................. 13 Offeror’s Qualifications...................................................................................................... 13 Acknowledgment of Receipt of RFP, Revisions and/or Addenda .................................. 13 Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) ..................................................................... 14 Proposal Schedule ............................................................................................................... 14

Proposal Evaluation Criteria ................................................................................................. 14 Review of Water Quality Data (10 points maximum) ..................................................... 15 Design Concept (30 points maximum) .............................................................................. 15 Construction Project (10 points maximum) ..................................................................... 15

EVALUTAION PROCESS FOR PROPOSALS ..................................................................... 16

Proposal Evaluation Factors .................................................................................................. 16



Page iii

PRICE PROPOSAL ................................................................................................................... 16

PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL REQUIRMENTS......................................................................... 17

Due Date, Time and Location ................................................................................................ 17

Format ...................................................................................................................................... 17

QUESTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS ................................................................................. 18

AWARD OF CONTRACT, PROPOSAL VALIDITY AND CONTRACT EVALUATION....................................................................................................................................................... 18

Negotiations and Award of Contract .................................................................................... 18

Proposal Validity ..................................................................................................................... 18

Contract Execution ................................................................................................................. 19

NO ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY ........................................................................................ 19



Page 1 of 19

INTRODUCTION

Friends of the Cheat (FOC) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization located in Kingwood, West Virginia, dedicated to the restoration, preservation, and promotion of the Cheat River watershed. FOC requests submittals of Design-Build proposals for professional services necessary to accomplish the planning, design, construction, and administration for the Beaver Creek at McElroy Passive Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) Treatment System project (Project) near Cuzzart, West Virginia. This Request for Proposals (RFP) is issued to those entities which submitted Statement of Qualifications (SOQs) pursuant to FOC’s Request for Qualifications (RFQ) or were previously approved by FOC and were invited to submit proposals in response to this RFP. The purpose of this RFP is to determine which short-listed Offeror will be awarded the design-build contract for the project.

The Project priorities are: • Conceptual design – design of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to achieve the project-

specific goals; • Justification of BMPs – sufficient consideration and justification of BMPs for the project; • Feasibility and Operations and Maintenance – efficient design to reduce the need for future

inspection and maintenance, providing FOC full confidence in the Project’s long-term performance and durability;

• Project approach – proposed approach to managing all aspects of the Project such that the potential risk for all stakeholders is limited;

• Construction of the Project – Offerors anticipated means and methods, and impacts thereof; • Cost – provide the best price for the scope of work identified in this RFP.

PROJECT OVERVIEW

The Project is located in Preston County (Figure 1), near Cuzzart, West Virginia, off of Auman Road (approximate coordinates 39.606149, -79.586805). From I-68, take exit 23 for WV-26 toward Bruceton Mills. Turn right onto WV-26 S and continue for 2.3 miles. Turn left onto Prison Road and continue 1.3 miles. Take a slight right onto continue on Brandonville Pike for 1.8 miles. Turn left onto Centenary-Mountaindale Rd/ Centenery Rd for 1.3 miles. Turn left onto Auman Rd (CR-11/1) and proceed 0.6 miles. Turn left on dirt road with gate, stay right at the fork. Travel 0.2 miles to the site.

The Project involves the design of a passive AMD treatment system to treat mine water discharging to an unnamed tributary of Beaver Creek from an abandoned mine site. Beaver Creek is a tributary to Big Sandy Creek, which is a tributary to the Cheat River. Big Sandy Creek hosts a viable fishery and is nationally renowned for river recreation. As such, Friends of the Cheat and its partners have targeted restoration activities in the watershed since the late 1990s.



Page 2 of 19

Acid mine drainage loads from the seep on the project site entering the UNT to Beaver are on average approximately 40 lbs/day of acidity, 3.8 lbs/day of dissolved aluminum, 0.26 lb/day of dissolved iron, and 1.2 lb/day of dissolved manganese. Target reductions for the Project are 80% or greater of the current loads.

Figure 1. Location of the Beaver Creek at McElroy site near Cuzzart, WV.

Water Quality Information Water quality data from FOC and third party sampling are listed in Tables 1-3. Additional lab data can be provided as it becomes available. NF represents no flow conditions. ND represents ‘Non-Detect’ findings.



Page 3 of 19

UNT us McElroy

Date Cond. (us/cm)

Flow (GPM)

pH (S.U.)

Alkalinity (mg/L)

Acidity (mg/L)

Dis. Al (mg/L)

Dis. Fe (mg/L)

Dis. Mn (mg/L)

01/16/2020 109 769.24 7.57 14.7 3.97 ND ND 0.236 10/17/2019 226 26.5914 7.59 53.7 -12.58 ND ND 0.181 07/03/2019 126 88.4136 7.26 22 -10.53 ND ND 0.105 05/10/2019 128 391.24 7.55 22.4 -9.16 ND 0.189 0.232 04/12/2019 160 71.36 7.37 14.9 -2.08 ND ND 0.135 03/11/2019 110 780.91 7.26 10.6 -2.04 ND ND 0.227 02/19/2019 150 532.05 7 10.8 0.3 ND ND 0.298 01/16/2019 146 343.11 7.21 12.8 -0.99 ND 0.193 0.36 12/03/2018 114 498.17 7.02 13.7 -2.99 ND ND 0.291 09/08/2017 159 59.0172 7.37 43.5 -1.98 ND 0.55 0.238

Table 1. Water quality data from the unnamed tributary (UNT/Beaver Creek RM 1.68) upstream of the project site (“UNT us McElroy”), to which Seep MC27J6-560-1 “McElroy Seep 1” flows into. See Figure 2.

McElroy Seep 1

Date Cond. (us/cm)

Flow (GPM)

pH (S.U.)

Alkalinity (mg/L)

Acidity (mg/L)

Dis. Al (mg/L)

Dis. Fe (mg/L)

Dis. Mn (mg/L)

01/16/2020 708 38.305 3.49 ND 123.4 10.4 0.572 3.08 10/17/2019 NF 07/03/2019 684 30.56048281 3.41 ND 85.4 8.78 0.525 2.88 05/10/2019 666 16.899 3.43 ND 86.57 8.26 0.396 2.83 04/12/2019 732 12.33 3.43 ND 123.8 8.8 0.705 3.1 03/11/2019 637 60.671 3.46 ND 84.96 8.03 0.236 2.37 02/19/2019 765 85.961 3.5 ND 87.97 7.63 0.24 2.28 01/16/2019 698 39.123 3.48 ND 90.69 9.08 0.313 2.59 12/03/2018 676 69.873 3.45 ND 88.24 8.26 0.353 2.53 11/02/2018 642 47.25 3.49 ND 86.29 7.99 0.727 2.53 09/18/2018 739 53.542 3.42 ND 91.17 8.52 0.398 2.53 08/06/2018 800 0.892 3.71 ND 136.5 6.7 6.56 3.53 07/12/2018 770 30.041 3.38 ND 112.6 10.6 0.671 3.22 06/14/2018 636 9.058 3.43 ND 78.36 9.87 0.71 3.11 03/15/2018 863 36 3.13 ND 88.36 10.16 0.33 3.09 03/30/2018 797 81 3.15 ND 84.38 9.98 0.42 2.83 11/04/2016 499 5 3.58 ND 104.4 5.32 23 3.05

Table 2. Water quality data from Seep MC27J6-560-1, “McElroy Seep 1” (Figure 2). Major source of acidity on McElroy project site.



Page 4 of 19

McElroy Pond 1

Date Cond. (us/cm)

Flow (GPM)

pH (S.U.)

Alkalinity (mg/L)

Acidity (mg/L)

Dis. Al (mg/L)

Dis. Fe (mg/L)

Dis. Mn (mg/L)

11/04/2016 109 NF 6.61 36.4 9.69 ND 1.37 2.1 10/18/2016 124 NF 6.47 22 ND 0.179 2.06 1.94

Table 3. Water quality data from pond “McElroy Pond 1” near “McElroy Seep 1” (See Figure 2). Limited flow detected.

UNT ds McElroy

Date Cond. (us/cm)

Flow (GPM)

pH (S.U.)

Alkalinity (mg/L)

Acidity (mg/L)

Dis. Al (mg/L)

Dis. Fe (mg/L)

Dis. Mn (mg/L)

01/16/2020 143 740.97 6.19 ND 21.25 0.103 ND 0.471 10/17/2019 225 37.2504 6.86 51.2 0.77 ND 0.56 0.394 07/03/2019 175 262.9968 6.55 9.75 0.16 ND ND 0.52 05/10/2019 145 347.48 7.02 16.9 -4.28 ND ND 0.465 04/12/2019 172 86.84 7.08 11.8 0.94 ND 0.186 0.411 03/11/2019 131 918.92 6.92 ND 3.55 ND ND 0.352 02/19/2019 209 653 6.47 ND 6.79 0.266 ND 0.581 01/16/2019 176 486.27 6.32 ND 10.78 0.218 0.261 0.631

Table 4. Water quality data from the unnamed tributary (UNT/Beaver Creek RM 1.68) downstream of the project site, to which Seep MC27J6-560-1 “McElroy Seep 1” flows into. See Figure 2.

All available water quality data is available in a Microsoft Excel upon request.



Page 5 of 19

Figure 2. Monitoring locations at McElroy Project Site.

Conceptual Design

When FOC applied for EPA 319 funding in 2017, a draft conceptual was included (Figure 3) including a Limestone Leach Bed and Settling Pond. Since, Biomost, INC. had created a design conceptual (Figure 4, Figure 5) featuring a Jennings Vertical Flow Pond and Wetland in May of 2018 as part of FOC’s Big Sandy Creek Watershed Based Planning. FOC will consider any passive AMD design that results in 80% or greater load reductions of acidity, Al, Fe, and Mn from the site for this RFP. Alternatives to the below two configurations may be proposed to address Project objectives. The design-builder is responsible for the final design.

McElroy Seep 1

McElroy Pond 1

UNT us McElroy

UNT ds McElroy



Page 6 of 19

Figure 3, 4, and 5. Preliminary conceptual maps of potential treatment features for McElroy Seep Passive AMD Treatment Project. Figure 3. Original Conceptual provided to EPA 319 program to receive funding in 2017.



Page 7 of 19

Figure 4. Biomost, Inc. Conceptual provided to FOC in May of 2018 (560-1 OPTION in red only for this proposed project).



Page 8 of 19

Figure 5. Simplified version of BioMost, Inc. Conceptual for outreach purposes, created by FOC.



Page 9 of 19

Anticipated Scope of Work

The anticipated scope of work to be undertaken by the Design-Builder under the Design-Build contract for this Project will include, but is not limited to:

• Site assessment including survey and geotechnical work as needed • Developing and completing the design to be reviewed by FOC, • Drawings and specifications for the Project, including erosion and sediment control and

pollution prevention plans • Providing technical assistance for FOC to obtain all necessary permits • Maintain site as good or better quality than found (e.g., roads, fences, grading, etc.) • Designing and constructing all Best Management Practices • Quality Assurance and Quality Control for design and construction • Overall Project management and coordination • Creating as-built drawings • Developing an Operations and Maintenance manual

Anticipated Design Services

Design services shall address all items necessary for construction and operation of the completed treatment system. Design services are anticipated to include, but are not limited to, those services necessary to design and construct all BMPs. Other data collection and technical studies are anticipated to include, but are not necessarily limited to: geotechnical investigation, materials analysis, and hydrological analyses including water quality monitoring.

Anticipated Environmental Services

The Design-Builder shall provide technical assistance for FOC to acquire all required permits for the Project. Stream and Wetland Delineation field work and the preparation of a Wetland Delineation and Stream Identification Report (WDSIR) may be needed.

Anticipated Construction Services

The possible construction services to be undertaken by the Design-Builder for this Project are anticipated to include, but are not limited to: earthwork, installation of open limestone channels, installation of a flushing limestone leachbed or Jennings Vertical Flow Pond, installation of a settling pond and/or constructed wetland, erosion and sediment control, and compliance with all environmental requirements and permits.

The Design-Builder shall have overall responsibility for construction oversight. The Design-Builder shall authorize all change orders. The FOC Restoration Program Manager (Madison Ball) will also provide construction oversight as necessary.



Page 10 of 19

PROCUREMENT OVERVIEW

Friends of the Cheat will use a two-phase selection process on the Project. Qualified Offerors will submit a Proposal.

Offeror’s Proposals will be evaluated and scored by FOC based on the evaluation criteria established in this RFP. An Offeror’s Proposal must meet all requirements established by this RFP. Requirements of this RFP generally will use the words “shall”, “will”, or “must” (or equivalent terms) to identify a required item that must be submitted with an Offeror’s Proposal. Failure to meet RFP requirements may render an Offeror’s Proposal non-responsive. The extent to which an Offeror’s Proposal meets or exceeds evaluation criteria will be evaluated by the FOC Evaluation Team and reflected in the FOC Evaluation Team’s scoring (in their sole discretion) of the Offeror’s Proposal.

Upon completion of the evaluation and scoring of the Proposals, the highest scored Offeror whose Proposal is responsive, and whose price is within FOC’s budget for design and construction services will be recommended to the Executive Director for an award of a lump sum Design-Build Contract.

Estimate Contract Value

Friends of the Cheat’s current estimated contract value for this Project (both design and construction) is approximately $174,600.

Procurement Schedule and Project Milestones

Friends of the Cheat currently anticipates conducting the procurement of the Project in accordance with the following list of milestones leading to completion of the project. This schedule is subject to revision and FOC reserves the right to modify this schedule if it finds necessary, in its sole discretion. All times are listed as prevailing local time.

Advertise RFP 06/05/2020 Mandatory pre-proposal conference call 06/29/2020 (10:00 a.m.) Proposal submission due 08/17/2020 (4:00 p.m.) FOC approval/Notice of Award 08/24/2020 Design-Build contract execution 09/08/2020 Notice to Proceed 09/18/2020 Final design completion 01/11/2021 Acquire Permits as Necessary Ongoing Construction Complete 08/31/2021



Page 11 of 19

Friends of the Cheat’s Point of Contact and Project Reference

Friends of the Cheat’s sole point of contact (POC) for matters related to the RFP shall be Madison A. Ball. FOC’s POC is the only individual authorized to discuss this RFP with any interested parties, including Offerors. All communication with FOC’s POC about the Project or this RFP shall be in writing, as required by applicable provisions of this RFP.

Name: Madison A. Ball Phone: (304)329-3621 x7 Address: Friends of the Cheat Fax: (304)329-3622 1343 North Preston Highway Email: [email protected] Kingwood, WV 26537 FOC disclaims the accuracy of information derived from any source other than FOC’s POC, and the use of any such information is at the sole risk of the Offeror.

All written communication to FOC from Offerors shall specifically reference the correspondence as being associated with “McElroy Seep”.

RFP DOCUMENTS

Each Offeror shall review the proposed RFP documents and provide questions or requests for clarification, including but not limited to terms that it considers to be ambiguous or to which it takes exception. Such questions or requests for clarification will be submitted to FOC’s POC. FOC will review all questions and/ or requests for clarification received and, if it deems appropriate, in its sole discretion, may modify the RFP documents through an Addendum. Offerors shall base their Proposals on the terms and conditions of the RFP documents included in the latest issued Addendum.

Offeror’s POC shall be notified via email and provided an electronic copy of any Addenda to the RFP Documents. Hard copies of the Addenda will be available upon request. If there is any conflict between the electronic format and hard copy of any RFP Documents or Addenda, the hard copy on file shall control.

Offeror’s Pre-Submittal Responsibilities and Representations

Each Offeror shall be solely responsible for examining the RFP documents, including any Addenda issued to such documents, and any and all conditions which may in any way affect its Proposal or the performance of the work on the Project, including but not limited to:

Examining and carefully studying the RFP documents, including any Addenda and other information or data identified in the RFP documents;

Studying the Project Site using available data and technology to become familiar with the general, local, and Site conditions that may affect the cost, progress, or performance of its work on the Project;



Page 12 of 19

Becoming familiar with and satisfying itself as to all federal, state, and local laws and regulations that may affect the cost, progress, or performance of its work on the Project;

Determining that the RFP documents are sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms and conditions for the performance of Offeror’s work on the Project; and

Notifying FOC in writing of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies that the Offeror discovers in the RFP Documents.

Any failure to fulfill these responsibilities is at the Offeror’s sole risk, and no relief will be provided by FOC.

Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference Call

FOC will hold a mandatory Pre-Proposal conference Zoom web call with potential Offerors on 06/29/2020 at 10:00AM using the following call line information:

Zoom Meeting 6/29/2020 at 10:00 EST

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84694084155

Meeting ID: 846 9408 4155

Dial by your location +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)

+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1 929 205 6099 US (New York) +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)

Meeting ID: 846 9408 4155

Due to risk of exposure to COVID-19, during the web call FOC will provide a video walk-through of the McElroy Seep site and not provide an on-site meeting at this time. Those who do not attend the conference call will not be considered for proposals. Offerors may visit the site individually if preferred. Please contact FOC’s POC Madison Ball before visiting site so coordination with the landowner may occur.

CONTENTS OF PROPOSALS

The Proposal will consist of all information required and will be submitted in a sealed, mailed package as well as an electronic package by 08/17/2020, at 4:00PM. The Price Proposal shall be submitted in a separate sealed and labeled envelope within the entire proposal package. The electronic package shall be emailed to [email protected] (DO NOT include Price Proposal in

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84694084155

mailto:[email protected]



Page 13 of 19

the email package). Offerors shall complete the Proposal Checklist, and include it with their Proposal. It shall also include a signed copy of Acknowledgments of Receipt of Addenda.

Proposal Checklist

The following Proposal Components must be included in the Proposal and referenced on the Proposal Checklist:

Letter of Submittal

The Letter of Submittal shall:

Be on the Offeror’s letterhead and identify the full legal name and address of the Offeror. The Offeror is defined as the legal entity who will execute the Contract with FOC. The Letter of Submittal shall be signed by an authorized representative of the Offeror’s organization. All signatures shall by original and signed in ink.

Declare that the offer represented by the Proposal will remain in full force and effect for one hundred twenty (120) days after the date the Proposal is actually submitted to FOC.

Identify the name, title, address, phone and fax numbers, and email address of an individual who will serve as the Point of Contact for the Offeror.

Identify the name, address and telephone number of the individual who will serve as the Principle Officer for the Offeror. (e.g., President, Treasurer, Chairperson of the Board of Directors, etc.).

Provide a Final Completion Date. The proposed dates herein shall be no later than the date(s) set in the Procurement Schedule (08/31/2021).

Offeror’s Qualifications

Offeror shall confirm in its Proposal that the information contained in their most recent SOQ provided to FOC remains true and accurate. If any changes have been made to the Offeror’s organizational structure, Lead Designer, Key Personnel or other individuals identified in the Offeror’s SOQ, then those changes require written notification.

Acknowledgment of Receipt of RFP, Revisions and/or Addenda

Offerors shall provide FOC the Acknowledgement of Receipt of Addenda, set forth in the Attachments, signed by the Offeror’s Point of Contact or Principle Officer, with submission of the Proposal, which will serve as acknowledgement that Offeror has received this RFP.



Page 14 of 19

Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE)

Provide a written statement that Offeror is committed to following DBE principles when selecting vendors and subcontractors.

Proposal Schedule

Provide a Proposal Schedule for the entire Project outlining the Offeror’s proposed plan to accomplish the Work. The Proposal Schedule submission shall include the Offeror’s proposed overall sequence of work, and times during each work task and deliverable required to complete the Project will be accomplished. The Proposal Schedule shall be broken down into major phases of the Project (i.e., project milestones, project management, design, construction, etc.).

The Offeror’s Proposal Schedule must take into account: internal plan reviews, FOC plan reviews and approvals, environmental permitting and constraints, construction activities and QA/QC inspection and testing. The Final Completion Date must occur by or precede 08/31/2021.

Proposal Evaluation Criteria

The score of each Proposal evaluation criterion is based on a rating scale of 1-10 as listed below. Scores can be recorded to the nearest half-point. Each evaluation criterion may require an Offeror to respond to multiple subcomponents.

Excellent (9-10): The Offeror has significantly exceeded the stated criteria in a way that is beneficial to Friends of the Cheat. This rating indicates a consistently outstanding level of quality for the stated criteria, with very little or no risk that the Offeror would fail to meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Good (6-8): The Offeror has exceeded the stated criteria. This rating indicates a generally better-than-acceptable quality for the stated criteria, with little or no risk that the Offeror would fail to meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Fair (4-5): The Offeror has met the stated criteria. This rating indicates a minimally acceptable level of quality for the stated criteria, and the Offeror demonstrates a reasonable probability of success.

Poor (1-3): The Offeror has failed to meet the stated criteria and/or lacks essential information and is conflicting and/or unproductive. This rating demonstrates significate weakness and/or unacceptable quality. There is no reasonable likelihood of success.

FOC reserves the right to conduct an independent investigation of any information, including prior experience, identified in a Proposal by contacting project references, accessing public information,



Page 15 of 19

contacting independent parties, or any other means. FOC also reserves the right to request additional information from an Offeror during the evaluation of that Offeror’s Proposal.

Review of Water Quality Data (10 points maximum)

Offerors shall provide sufficient review and analysis of water quality data from the project site to enable FOC to understand and evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the importance of acid mine drainage water quality parameters for the evaluation of project success.

Evaluation Criteria: 1-10 points – Extent to which Offeror’s review and analysis meets or exceeds the Project’s intended scope of work.

Design Concept (30 points maximum)

Proposals must include and will be evaluated based on:

Conceptual design: The extent to which the Proposal meets or exceeds the Project’s intended scope of work to benefit the end user. Offeror shall provide sufficient information to enable FOC to understand and evaluate the Offeror’s approach to designing Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the Project.

Justification for selection of BMPs: The extent to which the Offeror has considered the types of materials and technologies used to maximize the probability for Project success.

Feasibility and Operations and Maintenance (O&M): the extent to which the Offeror has considered the methods and feasibility of BMPs used to reduce the need for future inspection and maintenance, providing FOC full confidence in the Project’s long-term performance and durability.

Evaluation: 1-10 points each - Extent to which the Proposal meets or exceeds the Project’s intended scope of work will benefit end users. Additionally, the extent to which the Offeror has considered the types of materials, methods, and functionally used to reduce the need for future inspection and maintenance, thus providing FOC full confidence in the Project’s long-term asset performance and durability.

Construction Project (10 points maximum)

Offeror shall provide sufficient information to enable FOC to understand and evaluate the Offeror’s anticipated means and methods for the construction of the Project and the impact those means and methods will have on water quality. In evaluating the Offeror’s means and methods for construction, FOC’s Evaluation Team will score (in their sole discretion) the Offeror’s Proposal based upon the evaluation criteria found in this RFP.

Describe the Offeror’s approach for construction phasing including the general sequence of activities required to complete the Project by the Final Completion date.



Page 16 of 19

Evaluation: 1-10 points – Effectiveness of Offeror’s approach to sequencing construction activities to adequately address safety and operations, as well as geotechnical constraints, environmental impacts, staging and storage areas, maximizing the probability of anticipating and mitigating any potential delays to construction or expediting the Final Completion of the Project.

EVALUATION PROCESS FOR PROPOSALS

FOC will evaluate each Proposal from each Offeror. In its sole discretion, FOC may hold interviews, ask written questions of the Offerors, seek written clarifications, and conduct discussions on the Proposals.

Proposal Evaluation Factors

The Proposal will be evaluated based upon the following factors.

Factor Maximum Points Possible Review of Water Quality Data 10 Design Concept Conceptual design 10 Justification for selection of BMPs 10 Feasibility and O&M 10 Construction Project 10

TOTAL 50

Each evaluation criterion has an assigned maximum number of points that demonstrates its relative importance. If FOC determines that a Proposal does not comply with or satisfy requirements of the RFP Documents, FOC may find such Proposal to be non-responsive.

PRICE PROPOSAL

The Offeror shall specify a Cost Breakdown Summary in whole numbers and the Proposal Price, in both numbers and words. The Proposal Price shall be based upon the Proposal Schedule submitted. Offerors are advised that the prices set forth above shall be considered full compensation to Offeror for all design and construction of this Project, to include: labor, material, equipment, permits, taxes, overhead, profit and any other expenses of any kind applicable to the work to be undertaken by Offeror associated with such work, including but not limited to any escalation, extended site overhead, acceleration of schedule, and/or shift of construction sequencing.

The Offeror shall provide a Schedule of Items for the Price Proposal. This Schedule of Items shall identify all material quantities and costs of each proposed pay item that make up the total Contract Price. The value associated with each pay item shall be inclusive of all direct and indirect costs, overhead, profit and any other expenses of any kind.



Page 17 of 19

Quality control costs should not exceed 3% of the total job.

Mobilization costs are limited to 5% of the total bid.

Provide the Bid Bond in the amount of 5% of the total bid. A copy of the Bid Bond Form is included. Provide proof of licensure and insurance.

Due to reimbursement from funders for the Project is required, payments from FOC to the Design-Builder shall be net 60.

PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL REQUIRMENTS

Failure of any Offeror to submit its Proposal in accordance with this RFP may result in rejection of its Proposal.

Due Date, Time and Location

Proposals (one electronic copy and three physical copies) must be received by the due date and time set forth in the Proposal Schedule (08/17/2020, 4:00PM). The Price Proposal shall be submitted in a separate sealed and labeled envelope within the entire proposal package. All submissions, including hand-delivered packages, US Post Service regular mail, US Postal Service express mail, or private delivery service (FEDEX, UPS, courier, etc.) must be delivered to the following individual at the following address:

Friends of the Cheat 1343 North Preston Highway Kingwood, WV 26537 Attn: Madison Ball

The electronic copy shall be sent to Madison Ball at [email protected] with “McElroy Seep Passive AMD Treatment Proposal” in the Subject Line. Do not include the price proposal in the electronic copy. Neither fax nor sole email submissions will be accepted. Offerors are responsible for effecting delivery by the deadline above, and late submissions will be rejected without opening, considering, or evaluation, and will be returned unopened to sender. FOC accepts no responsibility for misdirected or lost Proposals.

Format

Each Offeror shall deliver three (3) identical paper copies of the Proposal, one (1) of which must bear original signatures on the Letter of Submittal, (1) separately sealed and labeled Price Proposal, as well as one (1) electronic copy to be sent to [email protected] (excluding Price Proposal). Each physical copy of the Proposal shall be securely bound.





Page 18 of 19

QUESTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS

All questions and requests for clarification regarding this RFP shall be submitted to FOC’s POC in writing (submission by email is acceptable). No requests for additional information, clarification, or any other information should be directed to any other individual. No oral requests for information will be accepted.

FOC’s responses to questions or requests for clarification shall be in writing, and may be accomplished by an Addendum to this RFP. FOC will not be bound by any oral communications, or written interpretations or clarifications that are not set forth in an Addendum.

FOC, in its sole discretion, shall have the right to seek clarification from any Offeror to fully understand information contained in the Proposal and to help evaluate and rank the Offerors.

AWARD OF CONTRACT, PROPOSAL VALIDITY AND CONTRACT EVALUATION

FOC has determined that Negotiation and Award of Contract will be made in the following manner:

Negotiations and Award of Contract

FOC will review the Proposal submitted by the highest-scored Offeror. If the Proposal is responsive and the price proposal is within FOC’s budget for design and construction services, then FOC will issue a Notice of Intent to Award the Successful Offeror.

FOC may conduct limited negotiations with the Successful Offeror to clarify any remaining issues regarding scope, schedule, financing, or any other information provided by the Successful Offeror.

If the price proposal submitted by the highest-scored Offeror is not within FOC’s budget for design and construction, the price may be negotiated to provide fair and reasonable compensation and maximize Contract value with price and other factors considered.

In the event an acceptable price cannot be negotiated, FOC will begin negotiations with the next highest-scored Offeror. The Final Award will be made to the qualified, responsible Offeror whose proposal is most advantageous with price, prior experience and other factors considered.

Proposal Validity

The offer represented by the Price Proposal will remain in full force and effect for one hundred twenty (120) days after the Proposal Submission Date. If Award of Contract has not been made by FOC within one hundred twenty (120) days after the Proposal Submission Date, each Offeror that has not been previously agreed to an extension of such a deadline shall have the right to withdraw its Proposal.



Page 19 of 19

Contract Execution

Upon Award of Contact, the Successful Offeror shall deliver an executed copy of the Design-Build Contract to FOC, who shall execute and deliver such copy to the Successful Offeror within seven (7) days of receipt. If the Successful Offeror cannot supply a Design-Build Contract, FOC will be responsible for delivering an executed copy of the Design-Build Contract to the Successful Offeror, who shall execute and deliver such copy to FOC within seven (7) days of receipt.

Upon the Award of Contract, the Design-Builder shall deliver receipt of Performance and Payment Bond, each of which for 100% of the contract price. The Design-Builder shall deliver proof of a final check for utilities on the project site. The Design-Builder shall maintain proper workers’ compensation coverage throughout the Project.

NO ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY

FOC assumes no obligations, responsibilities, and liabilities, fiscal or otherwise, to reimburse all or part of the costs incurred or alleged to have incurred by parties considering a response to and/or responding to this RFP. All such costs shall be borne solely by each Offeror and its team members.



PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

FRIENDS OF THE CHEAT McELROY SEEP

Bid Submitted to: Friends of the Cheat 1343 North Preston Highway Kingwood, WV 26537 Attn: Madison Ball

Design Services (Lump Sum): $

Construction Services (Lump Sum): $

All Other Costs (Lump Sum): $

Total Proposal Price (Lump Sum): $ (Equal to total sum of items listed above) Total Proposal Price (words):

Bid Submitted by: Name of Company

Address

City, State, Zip

Phone Number

Email

Signature Title

Print Name



ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF ADDENDA


The undersigned Offeror hereby acknowledges receipt of the following Addenda:

Addendum Number

Dated Acknowledge Receipt (initial)

_________________ _________________ _________________

_________________ _________________ _________________

_________________ _________________ _________________

_________________ _________________ _________________ No Addenda were received: Acknowledgment for: Name of Bidder By: Signature of Authorized Representative Name: Print or Type Title: Date:

PENAL SUM FORM

EJCDC® C-430, Bid Bond (Penal Sum Form). Published 2013. Prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee.

Page 1 of 2

BID BOND Any singular reference to Bidder, Surety, Owner or other party shall be considered plural where applicable.

BIDDER (Name and Address): SURETY (Name, and Address of Principal Place of Business): OWNER (Name and Address): BID Bid Due Date: Description (Project Name— Include Location): BOND Bond Number: Date: Penal sum $ (Words) (Figures) Surety and Bidder, intending to be legally bound hereby, subject to the terms set forth below, do each cause this Bid Bond to be duly executed by an authorized officer, agent, or representative. BIDDER SURETY (Seal) (Seal) Bidder’s Name and Corporate Seal Surety’s Name and Corporate Seal By: By: Signature Signature (Attach Power of Attorney) Print Name Print Name Title Title Attest: Attest: Signature Signature Title Title Note: Addresses are to be used for giving any required notice. Provide execution by any additional parties, such as joint venturers, if necessary.

PENAL SUM FORM

EJCDC® C-430, Bid Bond (Penal Sum Form). Published 2013. Prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee.

Page 2 of 2

1. Bidder and Surety, jointly and severally, bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns to pay to Owner upon default of Bidder the penal sum set forth on the face of this Bond. Payment of the penal sum is the extent of Bidder’s and Surety’s liability. Recovery of such penal sum under the terms of this Bond shall be Owner’s sole and exclusive remedy upon default of Bidder.

2. Default of Bidder shall occur upon the failure of Bidder to deliver within the time required by the Bidding Documents (or any extension thereof agreed to in writing by Owner) the executed Agreement required by the Bidding Documents and any performance and payment bonds required by the Bidding Documents.

3. This obligation shall be null and void if: a. Owner accepts Bidder’s Bid and Bidder delivers within the time required by the Bidding Documents (or any

extension thereof agreed to in writing by Owner) the executed Agreement required by the Bidding Documents and any performance and payment bonds required by the Bidding Documents, or

b. All Bids are rejected by Owner, or c. Owner fails to issue a Notice of Award to Bidder within the time specified in the Bidding Documents (or any

extension thereof agreed to in writing by Bidder and, if applicable, consented to by Surety when required by Paragraph 5 hereof).

4. Payment under this Bond will be due and payable upon default of Bidder and within 30 calendar days after receipt by Bidder and Surety of written notice of default from Owner, which notice will be given with reasonable promptness, identifying this Bond and the Project and including a statement of the amount due.

5. Surety waives notice of any and all defenses based on or arising out of any time extension to issue Notice of Award agreed to in writing by Owner and Bidder, provided that the total time for issuing Notice of Award including extensions shall not in the aggregate exceed 120 days from the Bid due date without Surety’s written consent.

6. No suit or action shall be commenced under this Bond prior to 30 calendar days after the notice of default required in Paragraph 4 above is received by Bidder and Surety and in no case later than one year after the Bid due date.

7. Any suit or action under this Bond shall be commenced only in a court of competent jurisdiction located in the state in which the Project is located.

8. Notices required hereunder shall be in writing and sent to Bidder and Surety at their respective addresses shown on the face of this Bond. Such notices may be sent by personal delivery, commercial courier, or by United States Registered or Certified Mail, return receipt requested, postage pre-paid, and shall be deemed to be effective upon receipt by the party concerned.

9. Surety shall cause to be attached to this Bond a current and effective Power of Attorney evidencing the authority of the officer, agent, or representative who executed this Bond on behalf of Surety to execute, seal, and deliver such Bond and bind the Surety thereby.

10. This Bond is intended to conform to all applicable statutory requirements. Any applicable requirement of any applicable statute that has been omitted from this Bond shall be deemed to be included herein as if set forth at length. If any provision of this Bond conflicts with any applicable statute, then the provision of said statute shall govern and the remainder of this Bond that is not in conflict therewith shall continue in full force and effect.

11. The term “Bid” as used herein includes a Bid, offer, or proposal as applicable.



PROPOSAL CHECKLIST


Offerors shall furnish a copy of this Proposal Checklist with the Proposal.

Proposal Component Proposal Page Reference

Included? (Y/N)

Proposal Checklist Letter of Submittal Offeror’s Qualifications Acknowledgement of Receipt of RFP, Revisions and/or Addenda

Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) Proposal Schedule Proposal Evaluation Criteria Review of Water Quality Data Design Concept Conceptual Design Justification for Selection of BMPs Feasibility and O&M Construction Project Price Proposal Price Proposal Form Schedule of Items itemized (material quantities/costs) Bid Bond Form Proof of licensure Proof of insurance and professional liability insurance Proposal Schedule Narrative