File #: 24-0890    Version: 1 Name: Motion to Award PSUT-24-09 "Prestressed Concrete Pipe Repair Fittings"
Type: Bid Status: Passed
File created: 9/18/2024 In control: City Commission
On agenda: 10/8/2024 Final action: 10/8/2024
Title: MOTION TO AWARD IFB # PSUT-24-09 "PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PIPE REPAIR FITTINGS" TO THE SOLE RESPONSIVE/RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, RANGELINE TAPPING SERVICES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $55,386.
Sponsors: Utility
Attachments: 1. 1. PSUT-24-09 Bid Tabulation, 2. 2. Rangeline Tapping Services, Inc - Bid Submittal, 3. 3. PSUT-24-09 Prestressed Concrete Pipe Repair Fittings

Title

MOTION TO AWARD IFB # PSUT-24-09 "PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PIPE REPAIR FITTINGS" TO THE SOLE RESPONSIVE/RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, RANGELINE TAPPING SERVICES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $55,386.

 

Summary Explanation and Background

 

PROCUREMENT PROCESS TAKEN:

 

- Chapter 35 of the City’s Code of Ordinances is titled “PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES, PUBLIC FUNDS.”

 

- Section 35.15 defines an Invitation for Bid as “A written solicitation for competitive sealed bids with the title, date and hour of the public bid opening designated therein and specifically defining the commodities or services for which bids are sought.  The invitation for bid shall be used when the city is capable of specifically defining the scope of work for which a service is required or when the city is capable of establishing 15 precise specifications defining the actual commodities required.  The invitation for bid shall include instructions to bidders, plans, drawings and specifications, if any, bid form and other required forms and documents to be submitted with the bid.”

 

- Section 35.18 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "COMPETITIVE BIDDING OR COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS REQUIRED; EXCEPTIONS.

 

- Section 35.18(A) states, "A purchase of or contracts for commodities or services that is estimated by the Chief Procurement Officer to cost more than $25,000 shall be based on sealed competitive solicitations as determined by the Chief Procurement Officer, except as specifically provided herein."

 

- Section 35.19 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "SEALED COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURE."

 

- Section 35.19(A) states "All sealed competitive solicitations as defined in § 35.18 shall be presented to the City Commission for their consideration prior to advertisement."

 

- Section 35.19(E)(5) states, "The city reserves the right to waive any irregularities in the bids, as determined by the Chief Procurement Officer and approved by the City Manager."

 

- Section 35.21 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "AWARD OF CONTRACT."

 

- Section 35.21(A) of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "City Commission approval.

 

- Section 35.21(A)(1) states, "An initial purchase of, or contract for, commodities or services, in excess of $25,000, shall require the approval of the City Commission, regardless of whether the competitive bidding or competitive proposal procedures were followed."

 

SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:

1.  On June 18, 2024, the City Commission authorized the advertisement of IFB # PSUT-24-09 "Prestressed Concrete Pipe Repair Fittings", which was advertised on August 8, 2024.

 

2.  The purpose of the solicitation was to seek proposals from qualified firms to supply repair fittings for a 30” Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe (PCCP) force main.  The 30” PCCP force main has reached the end of its useful life and is scheduled for replacement soon.  While plans for the replacement of the 30" PCCP force main are being developed, the City plans to stock these repair fittings as a contingency, in case of a failure.

 

3.  On September 3, 2024, the City opened one (1) bid from the following vendor:

 

 

Vendor

Total Cost

 

RangeLine Tapping Services, Inc.

$55,386.00

 

4.  During the evaluation of the bid(s), the Procurement Department noticed that although the Vendor Drug-Free Workplace Certification Form was signed and submitted, RangeLine Tapping Services, Inc. did not check any of the boxes in "Section 2 Affirmation" portion of the form.  Following this discovery, the Procurement Department reached out to RangeLine Tapping Services, Inc. to correct this error. They promptly re-submitted the form and checked the box that states, "Place a check mark here only if affirming bidder complies  fully with the above requirements for a Drug-Free Workplace."  Additionally, RangeLine Tapping Services erroneously submitted their completed Equal Benefits Certification Form under the sections for the Local Vendor Preference Certification and Anti-Human Trafficking Affidavit.  As a result, the Procurement Department reached out to the vendor to have the submit the appropriate forms.  RangeLine Tapping Services resubmitted all the aforementioned forms and are fully compliant, thereby the Procurement Director is recommending waiving their irregularities, pursuant to section 35.19(E)(5) of the City's Code of Ordinances.

 

5.  The Utilities Department reviewed the proposal and deemed Rangeline Tapping Services, Inc. to be the sole responsive/responsible bidder.

 

6.  In addition, RangeLine Tapping Services, Inc. has also completed the Equal Benefits Certification Form and has stated that the "Contractor currently complies with the requirements of this section."

 

7.  Request Commission to award IFB # PSUT-24-09 “Prestressed Concrete Pipe Repair Fittings” to the sole responsive/responsible bidder, RangeLine Tapping Services, Inc., in the amount not to exceed $55,386.

 

Financial Impact

FINANCIAL IMPACT DETAIL:

 

a)   Initial Cost:  Amount not to exceed $55,386.00.

b)   Amount budgeted for this item in Account No:  Funds will be available account # 471-535-6021-663065-0000-000-0000 (Force Main).

c)   Source of funding for difference, if not fully budgeted:  Not Applicable.

d)   5 year projection of the operational cost of the project: Not Applicable.

e)   Detail of additional staff requirements:  Not Applicable.

 

FEASIBILITY REVIEW:

A feasibility review is required for the award, renewal and/or expiration of all function sourcing contracts.  This analysis is to determine the financial effectiveness of function sourcing services.

 

a)   Was a Feasibility Review/Cost Analysis of Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor Conducted for this service? Not Applicable.

b)   If Yes, what is the total cost or total savings of utilizing Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor for this service? Not Applicable.