Laserfiche WebLink
DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 1991 <br />TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER <br />COUNTY ADMINISTRATO <br />FROM: TERRANCE G. PINT <br />DIRECTOR OF UTILI SERVICES <br />STAFFED AND HARRY E. ASHER-'� <br />PREPARED BY: ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES <br />SUBJECT: ENGINEERING FIRM SELECTION <br />ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION <br />SERVICES FOR A 1 MGD SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION <br />FOR THE NORTH COUNTY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT <br />BACKGROUND: <br />The Department of Utility Services received eleven (11) responses <br />to its request for Proposal to provide engineering services for the <br />above -referenced project. The selection committee reviewed the 11 <br />(11) responses and selected four�'(4) firms to be interviewed for the <br />project. <br />ANALYSIS: <br />On February, 27, 1991, the selection committee interviewed the four <br />(4) firms and, as a result of the interviews, ranked the firms as <br />follows: <br />1. Masteller, & Moler Associates, Inc. <br />2. Professional Engineering Consultants <br />3. HNTB <br />4. BCM Engineers, Inc. <br />RECOMMENDATIONS: <br />The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of <br />County Commissioners authorize the Department of Utility Services to <br />conduct negotiations and to proceed with an agreement with the first <br />choice firm of Masteller & Moler Associates, Inc., based upon the <br />outcome of the negotiations. The Department also requests approval <br />to proceed with negotiations with the subsequent ranked firms if <br />negotiations fail with the No. 1 ranked firm. <br />Commissioner Scurlock questioned Utility Department Director <br />Pinto as to whether we want to proceed with an engineering firm <br />selection in light of the fact that Sebastian may or may not opt <br />out of the North County; if we do get a negative response we would <br />not expand that facility, we would just use current capacity. <br />13 <br />HAR -11 2 1991 <br />a00K � P tuE 00 <br />