DEPARTMENT Infrastructure Division
AGENDA NO.
13 MEETING DATE October 22, 2024
AGENDA ITEM
Public Utilities Commission
City and County of San Francisco
Calendar: Regular Calendar
Project Manager: Daniela Brandao
Award Contract No. DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project
Summary of
Proposed
Commission
Action:
Award Contract No. DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project, in the amount of $121,541,812, and with a duration of 1,020 consecutive calendar days (approximately two years and ten months), to the sole, qualified proposer, PCL Construction, Inc., to design and construct the Biogas Utilization Project, a subproject of the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project, to provide beneficial use of the biogas generated from the new digesters by converting it to renewable natural gas for pipeline injection.
Background: The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Wastewater Enterprise Biogas Utilization Project (Project) is a necessary facility for operation of the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project. Currently under construction, the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project will replace the existing, outdated solids treatment facilities at the Southeast Treatment Plant and provide new digesters and treatment processes that will capture and treat odors more effectively, produce a higher quality bio
solids product, and
beneficially reuse the biosolids and biogas to enhance sustainability, reliability, and affordability.
The Project will provide beneficial use of the biogas generated in the new digesters by converting it to renewable natural gas (RNG ) for pipeline injection. The biogas realizes its highest value as RNG because it can be injected into the utility pipeline as renewable fuel, which may garner environmental credits and other regulatory benefits.
The scope of the Project includes, but it is not limited to, designing and constructing new facilities for biogas cleaning and separation (upgrading biogas to RNG), gas compressors and compressed gas lines for injection of the RNG into the existing Pacific Gas & Electric gas pipeline, and a thermal oxidizer to treat tail gas before it is released into the atmosphere.
Pacific Gas & Electric will separately design and build its Interconnection Station, outside the scope of this contract.
The Project also p romotes current California state goals for in -state production and distribution of RNG as documented in Assembly Bill 1900 Agenda Title: DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project Design and Construction Services Commission Meeting Date: October 22, 2024
and Senate Bill 840. In addition, the generation of RNG is in line with the City’s sustainability policies as it displaces the use of fossil fuels . RNG currently offers value as renewable fuel for compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles, but it also provides an opportunity as a “bridge fuel” for in city- natural gas uses that cannot shift to electric.
On February 9, 2021, by Resolution No. 21 -0024, this Commission authorized the removal of the E nergy Recovery Facility from the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project/Contract No. WW-647R, conditioned on environmental review of an alternate biogas end -use being complete d and approved by the San Francisco Planning Department, and this Commission’s approval of construction of the alternate biogas end-use.
On July 12, 2024, t he SFPUC advertised a Request for Qualifications and Proposals for Design- Build Services for Contra ct DB -138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project. Due to the unique complexities of the design and construction required for this Project, the SFPUC has selected a best value design- build
project delivery method in accordance with San
Francisco Administrative Code section 6.61, subdivision (c).
Scope of Contract: The contract work location is at Southeast Treatment Plant in San Francisco, CA.
The contract work includes designing, permitting, construct ing, test ing, starting up, and delivering a fully functional biogas utilization system consisting of:
• New facilities for biogas cleaning and separation (upgrading biogas to RNG);
• Gas compressors and compressed gas lines (under Jerrold Avenue) for injection of the RNG into the existing Pacific Gas & Electric gas pipeline; and
• Thermal oxidizer to treat tail gas before it is released into the atmosphere.
Funding and Costs: Funding Source: Sewer System Improvement Program Project funded, Project No. CWWSIPDP01, Biosolids Digester Facilities Project.
Award: $121,541,812
Schedule: Estimated Notice-to-Proceed Date: November 2024 Estimated Final Completion Date: September 2027
Contract Duration: 1,020 consecutive calendar days ( 900 consecutive calendar days to Substantial Completion and an additional 120 consecutive calendar days to Final Completion)
Evaluation and
Selection Criteria:
Advertised: July 12, 2024
Agenda Title: DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project Design and Construction Services Commission Meeting Date: October 22, 2024
Proposals Received: On September 11, 202 4, the SFPUC received one proposal. It was materially responsive and below the engineer’s estimate.
Bid Rank Design
Cost
Construction
Cost
Total Design-
Build Fixed Price
1. PCL
Construction, Inc. $8,500,000 $113,041,812 $121,541,812
Staff performed outreach to potential proposers and determined that further outreach efforts or modification of the requirements would be unlikely to result in a larger bidding pool with substantially lower price proposals. Staff therefore recommends award to the responsible proposer submitting the sole proposal, PCL Construction, Inc.
Environmental
Review:
On March 8, 2018, by Motion No. M -20129, the San Francisco Planning Commission c ertified the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project Final Environmental Impact Report ( Final EIR) (Case No. 2015- 000644ENV), as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
On March 13, 2018, by Resolution No. 18-0042, this Commission approved the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project and adopted the CEQA Findings, including the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as required by the CEQA.
On July 12, 2024, the San Francisco Planning Department issued an Addendum to the Final EIR (Modified Case No. 2015- 000644ENV-03) evaluating the biogas utilization system facilities. The work under Contract No. DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project is wit hin the scope of the project authorized under the Final EIR and Addendum.
The Final EIR, CEQA Findings, including the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Resolution No. 18-0042, and the Addendum to the Final EIR can be found here: https://sfpuc.sharefile.com/public/share/web-
sfecf636476cd4457a01d3378fc2305dd
Local Business
Enterprise
Utilization and
Non-Discrimination
in Contracting:
The contract Monitoring Division established a 7% Local Business Enterprise (LBE) subcontracting requirement for both design (pre -construction) and construction phases of this contract. The contractor committed to a LBE subcontractor participation of 7.0% and 7.14% for the respective design and construction phases for this contract with its bid submittal.
Attachments: 1. Contract Monitoring Division Memorandum
2. Biogas Utilization Project Staff Recommended Project Delivery Method – Best Value Design-Build, June 27, 2024.
Agenda Title: DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project Design and Construction Services Commission Meeting Date: October 22, 2024
Location Map
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
City and County of San Francisco
RESOLUTION NO.
WHEREAS, The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) is planning for the construction of a new facility to convert biogas generated from the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project at the Southeast Treatment Plant into renewable natural gas (Biogas Utilization Project); and
WHEREAS, The proposed Biogas Utilization Project (Project) promotes current California state goals for in -state production and distribution of renewable natural gas as documented in Assembly Bill 1900 and Senate Bill 840, and this aligns with the City’s sustainability policies as it displaces the use of fossil fuels while offering value as renewable fuel for compressed natural gas vehicles, and also providing an opportunity as a “bridge fuel” for in city-natural gas uses that cannot shift to electric; and
WHEREAS, Due to the unique complexities of the design and construction required for this Project, the SFPUC has selected a best value design -build project delivery method in accordance with San Francisco Administrative Code section 6.61(c) , which delivery method the General Manager approved on June 28, 2024; and
WHEREAS, On July 12, 2024, the SFPUC advertised a Request for Qualifications and Proposals for Design-Build Services for Contract No. DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project; and
WHEREAS, The contract duration is 1,020 consecutive calendar days; and
WHEREAS, On September 11, 2024, the SFPUC received one proposal; and
WHEREAS, SFPUC staff and Contract Monitoring Division reviewed the proposal for responsibility, responsiveness, and application of bid preferences, and determined that PCL Construction, Inc., is the sole, qualified proposer and that it submitted a responsive proposal; and
WHEREAS, The Contract Monitoring Division established a 7 % Loc al Business Enterprise (LBE) subcontracting participation for the design (pre -construction) and construction phases of this contract, and PCL Construction, Inc., committed to a LBE subcontractor participation of 7.0% and 7.14% for the respective design and construction phases for this contract with its bid submittal; and
WHEREAS, On March 8, 2018, by Motion No. M -20129, the San Francisco Planning Commission c ertified the Final Environmental Impact Report ( Final EIR) for the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project (Case No. 2015- 000644ENV), as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, On March 13, 2018, by Resolution No. 18- 0042, this Commission approved the Biosolids Digester Facilities Project and adopted the CEQA Findings, including the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as required by the CEQA; and
WHEREAS, On July 12, 2024, the San Francisco Planning Department issued an Addendum to the Final E IR (Modified Case No. 2015- 000644ENV-03) evaluating t he biogas utilization system facilities; and the work under Contract No. DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project is within the scope of the project authorized under the Final EIR and the Addendum to the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, The San Francisco Planning Department is the custodian of records, located in File No. 2015-000644ENV and Modified Case No. 2015-000644ENV-03, at 49 South Van Ness Avenue, Suite 1400, San Francisco, California 94103, which have been made available for review by this Commission and the public, and those files are part of the record before this Commission; and
WHEREAS, Staff has made the Project files, including the Final EIR, Resolution No. 18- 0042, t he CEQA Findings , including the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Addendum to the Final EIR available for review by this Commission and the public, and those files are part of the record bef ore this Commission; and
WHEREAS, This Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR, Resolution No. 18-0042, the CEQA Findings, including the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Addendum to the Final EIR, and all written and oral information provided by the San Francisco Planning Department, the public, relevant public agencies, SFPUC and other experts and the administrative files for the Project; and
WHEREAS, Funds are available from Project No. CWWSIPDP01, Biosolids Digester Facilities Project; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, This Commission has reviewed and considered the Final EIR and the Addendum to the Final EIR and the record as a whole, and finds that the Final EIR and Addendum are adequate for its use as the decision –making body for the Project and incorporates the CEQA Findings, including the Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Resolution No. 18-0042 by this reference thereto as though set forth in this Resolution; and, be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, This Commission finds that since the Final EIR and the Addendum to the Final EIR were finalized, there have been no substantial Project changes and no substantial changes in Project circumstances that would require major revisions to them due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or an increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance that would change the conclusions set forth in them; and, be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, This Commission he reby awards Contract No. DB-138, Southeast Treatment Plant Biogas Utilization Project, in the amount of $121,541,812 and with a duration of 1,020 consecutive calendar days , to the sole, qualified proposer , PCL Construction, Inc.
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Public Utilities Commission at its meeting of October 22, 2024.
Director of Commission Affairs
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
OUR MISSION: To provide our customers with high-quality, efficient and reliable water, power and sewer services in a manner that values environmental and community interests and sustains the resources entrusted to our care.
DATE: June 27, 2024
TO: Dennis Herrera
General Manager
THROUGH: Stephen Robinson
Assistant General Manager, Infrastructure
FROM: Daniela Brandao
SFPUC Senior Project Manager
SUBJECT: Biogas Utilization Project
Staff Recommended Project Delivery Method -
B
est Value Design-Build
Staff recommends the Design-Build (DB) integrated project delivery method (Administrative Code section 6.61(c): Best Value Procurement) for the design and construction of the Biogas Utilization Project (hereinafter referred to as the “Project”), which is a sub-project of Capital Project No. CWWSIPDP01 Biosolids Digester Facilities Project (BDFP), under the Wastewater Capital Improvement Program.
The Project has unique challenges and risks that require specialized engineering and construction expertise. The Project also has a tight schedule to coordinate the work with the startup of BDFP.
Staff recommends using the section 6.61 DB project delivery method for this Project because it: (1) fosters a high level of collaboration and teamwork among the owner, designer, and contractor; (2) provides for a single design-build entity holding both design and construction accountability; (3) saves time through the consolidation of design and construction procurement, thus facilitating commencement of construction in 2025 to mitigate delays to BDFP startup and risk of extended flaring; and (4) reduces the risk of construction contract claims.
The “Best Value” approach under subsection 6.61(c) is the most appropriate of the available DB methods, because it permits the agency to consider qualifications and other subjective criteria in the selection of a design-builder and will achieve time and cost efficiencies. The selection process will be able to focus on qualifications in selecting the best combined contractor and designer team with expertise and experience needed for this challenging Project.
Section 6.61(a) of the San Francisco Administrative Code permits use of the
2 Design-Build project delivery method only if the General Manager, prior to issuing a request for qualifications (RFQ), determines that the design-build delivery method is necessary to achieve anticipated cost savings or time efficiencies, or both, and that such a delivery method is in the public's best interest. For the reasons set forth in this memorandum, Staff seeks a General Manager determination that the use of the Best Value DB project delivery method for this Project will achieve both time and cost efficiencies and is in the public’s best interest by permitting the selection of the best-qualified design- build team at a fixed price,, and saving time by consolidating the procurement of design and construction services, accommodating a performance-based specification instead of requiring the development of bridging-documents, allowing commencement of fabrication and construction activities before completion of Project design.
I. The Biogas Utilization Project
The Biogas Utilization Project is a necessary facility for operation of the BDFP.
Currently under construction, the BDFP will replace the existing, outdated solids treatment facilities at the Southeast Treatment Plant (SEP) and provide new digesters and treatment processes that will capture and treat odors more effectively, produce a higher quality biosolids product, and beneficially reuse the biosolids and biogas to enhance sustainability, reliability, and affordability.
Biogas is produced during the process of anaerobic digestion of organic waste.
The Biogas Utilization Project will provide beneficial use of the biogas generated in the new digesters by converting it to renewable natural gas (RNG) for pipeline injection. The biogas realizes its highest value as RNG because it can be injected into the utility pipeline as renewable fuel, which may garner environmental credits and other regulatory benefits.
The scope of the Biogas Utilization Project includes, but it is not limited to, designing and constructing new facilities for biogas cleaning and separation (upgrading biogas to RNG), gas compressors and compressed gas lines (under Jerrold Avenue) for injection of the RNG into the existing Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) gas pipeline, and a thermal oxidizer to the treat tail gas before it is released into the atmosphere.
The Biogas Utilization Project also promotes current California state goals for in-state production and distribution of RNG as documented in Assembly Bill 1900 and Senate Bill 840. In addition, the generation of RNG is in line with the City’s sustainability policies as it displaces the use of fossil fuels and improves air quality. RNG currently offers the highest economic and environmental value
3 as renewable fuel for compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles, but it also provides an opportunity as a “bridge fuel” for in city-natural gas uses that cannot shift to electric.
II. Prior Procurement Effort
In August 2021, SFPUC selected Public-Private Partnership (P3) delivery as the recommended approach for the Biogas Utilization Project. P3 project delivery allows for private financing and integrated design, construction, and operations.
In December 2022, the Commission approved the P3 approach. In March 2023, the Board of Supervisors (BOS) adopted a project-specific ordinance, allowing the SFPUC to proceed with the P3 approach for the BUP. By the ordinance, the BOS waived Chapters 6, 14B, 21, and Section 23.30 of the Administrative Code to enable the procurement of the P3 for Biogas Utilization Project to move forward. The scope of the P3 was to design, construct, finance, operate and maintain the Biogas Utilization Project for up to 20 years after completion.
The P3 procurement commenced in April 2023 with the publication of the RFQ to qualify and shortlist proposers. Three proposers were shortlisted and entered the RFP phase. The SFPUC received two proposals on May 13, 2024.
Late in the P3 procurement, SFPUC had to make material changes to the P3 Agreement in response to changing regulations from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for biogas projects. Those changes were material and compounded by increased escalation and costs for the project, all of which caused the revenue risk P3 as originally structured to become financially unviable. Because of these combined factors, the financial risk for the SFPUC and our ratepayers was too high and SFPUC cancelled the P3 procurement.
While the P3 procurement was cancelled, it remains a high priority for the SFPUC to deliver the Biogas Utilization Project, in alignment with the BDFP.
III. Project Schedule and Budget
It is anticipated that it will take 24-30 months for design and construction of the Biogas Utilization Project. The design and construction must start as soon as possible to align with commissioning and startup of the BDFP. The BDFP is scheduled to start producing gas in November 2026 and will be flaring the gas until enough gas is produced for commissioning and startup of the Biogas Utilization Project. The Project must reach Operational Readiness by April 2027. Without the Biogas Utilization Project completed to align closely with BDFP completion, the BDFP would have to continue to flare the gas, a practice that is only acceptable and permitted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) for a limited period during commissioning and startup, and
4 for emergency operations. In addition, continued flaring would not support SFPUC’s environmental justice/air quality commitments to District 10.
Procurement Schedule and Project Milestones:
• Advertise combined RFQ/RFP: July 9, 2024
• Commission Award Date: November 12, 2024
• Notice of Award: November 15, 2024
• NTP: January 20, 2025
• Construction Start: April 21, 2025
• Mechanical completion deadline (to align with BDFP): by February 23, 2027
• Operation readiness deadline (to align with BDFP): by April 23, 2027
The Engineer’s Estimate is currently being updated for this new procurement.
Based on previous estimates and information gathered from P3 proposals, staff are anticipating the cost for SFPUC to deliver the project will be approximately $150 million - $175 million, including SFPUC soft costs and contingency.
IV . Alternative Project Delivery Methods
1. Design-Bid-Build
Design-Bid-Build (D-B-B) is the traditional construction project delivery method (San Francisco Administrative Code section 6.20). Staff does not recommend D-B-B because: 1. It doesn’t meet the project schedule and 2. It doesn’t meet the goal of having one entity accountable for the design and construction of the project.
2. Construction Manager/General Contractor
Under the Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) project delivery method (Administrative Code section 6.68), the SFPUC would work with a design professional team and a CM/GC during the design process. The CM/GC then performs pre-construction services such as design review, constructability input, scheduling, and estimating. Staff does not recommend the CM/GC method because: 1. It doesn’t meet the project schedule since a separate procurement would be required for design in advance of the CM/GC bidding out the job and 2. It doesn’t meet the goal of having one entity accountable for the design and construction of the project.
5 3. Design-Build
Design-Build can, although not always, involve a full integration of design and construction (Administrative Code section 6.61). We recommend a fully integrated DB for this project, using the performance-based specifications and the Best Value approach to assess the proposed approaches and designs.
Under traditional DB, the SFPUC could develop (either in-house or through an outside professional design firm) a conceptual design. These preliminary design documents are sometimes referred to as bridging documents. The selected design-builder then completes the design and constructs the project. Traditional DB would not be optimal for this project because: (1) it doesn’t meet the project schedule since a conceptual design would need to be developed in advance of the DB; and (2) preliminary documents would have little to no value either in the selection of a design-builder or in the work performed by the design-builder; the solution for the Biogas Project must be conceived and developed and constructed by a single entity.
With integrated DB, the SFPUC would select a design-builder based primarily on qualifications and its proposed design and approach to the project. The procurement would be based on performance technical requirements that were developed for the Biogas Project, under the P3 procurement. The successful design-builder would be fully responsible to create the solution for, design, and construct the new Biogas Facilities. There is greater opportunity for collaboration with the SFPUC and mutual development of schedule and budget, in alignment with BDFP. This integrated DB approach also provides a single point of accountability for the overall performance of the new Biogas system and holds the design-builder responsible throughout the Project, from conceptual design, to fabrication, to construction. This reduces the risk of disputes or claims.
V . The Design-Build (DB) Selection Processes
Under Administrative Code section 6.61, there are three options for selecting a design-builder: (1) a prequalification process followed by a competitive bid; (2) a selection process based on criteria that may include qualifications, approach, and cost, but with a specified Fixed Budget Limit as the maximum price; and (3) best value procurement. We recommend a best value procurement as the most appropriate fit for this Project the preferred DB approach, for the following reasons.
1. In a competitive, “low bid” DB selection process (section 6.61(b)(2)), an independent prequalification process is followed by a Request for Bid (RFB).
6 Although it requires a scored prequalification, the final selection is not based on the quality and success of each bidder’s previously completed projects. The lengthy prequalification process creates issues with the project’s tight schedule.
2. In a Fixed Budget Limit Procurement D-B selection process (section
6.61(b)(3)), the contractor is selected based on a variety of competitive criteria, which may include cost, but the SFPUC sets a maximum contract price, called the Fixed Budget Limit, at the outset of the procurement. It requires an independent prequalification process before the RFP can be advertised, which will be difficult for this project’s tight schedule. This selection method requires a strong understanding of the work scope including potential enhancements as well as a pre-determined cost estimate. The Biogas Utilization Project is unique, and Staff does not have enough reference information to set a fixed budget.
Also, setting a fixed budget prematurely may limit innovations and prevent the design-builder from bringing forth ideas that may result in a more reliable or better solution for the biogas. The Project does not lend itself to this selection process because of the unknowns, the risks, and the inability to identify potential enhancements.
3. The Best Value DB selection process (section 6.61(c)) can be based on a combination of qualifications and either (1) a total project cost/bid price; or (2) a progressively developed cost of construction. Both employ a competitive proposal procurement process. Staff recommends a combined request for qualifications and proposals, with specified minimum qualifications for the design-builder and its core trade subcontractors. Selection is based on a combination of qualifications and price. The SFPUC selection process will include separate scores for qualifications and price. The best value proposal will be the one with the most points based on qualifications, approach, and price. a. For the total project cost alternative, the interested design-build teams’ proposals will include a price for the entire project including design and construction. This is the preferred Best Value approach. It saves time because the proposers compile the team of subcontractors before submitting proposals, and it provides cost certainty because the proposers must compete against each other for a fixed price that should not change after selection (absent unforeseen changes in condition or design).
b. Alternatively, section 6.61(c)(5) permits use of a Best Value Progressive Design-Build (PDB) selection process. The selection process is similar to the total project cost alternative, except proposals will only include a price for the pre-construction/engineering phase and proposed percentage mark- ups on construction costs, with total construction costs to be determined by
7 bidding out subcontractor trade packages to perform the work plus the design- builder’s mark-up. The initial contract amount for the successful PDB design- builder will include only the amount for the pre-construction/engineering phase.
The contract amount will be amended progressively with actual construction costs as the design-builder bids out the construction trade packages. The advantage to this approach here is that it would allow further post-selection development of design and the subcontractor team, thus leveling the playing field for potential proposers that were not as involved in the P3 and thus have less familiarity with the project. However, this advantage is outweighed by the additional time it takes for subcontractor prequalification (required pursuant to section 66.61(c)(5)(A)) and competitive procurement, and the lack of cost- certainty and competitive pressure for the trade packages.
IV . Staff Recommendations:
Staff recommends using the DB project delivery method for this project. The Biogas Utilization Project is critical for the successful delivery of the BDFP, the City’s largest project, which is halfway through construction. To minimize impact to BDFP, DB is the best approach for the delivery of the Biogas Project.
Further, staff recommends the Best Value Design-Build (DB) selection and project delivery method, with a total project cost/bid price at proposal, for the following reasons.
1. It allows SFPUC to determine and select the most qualified contractor based on the qualifications, expertise, experience, and price, without the restrictions of a Fixed Budget Limit and the lengthy prequalification process.
2. It allows SFPUC to have access to both the designer and contractor at the early stage of the project.
3. It promotes collaboration among SFPUC, the designer, and the contractor. This helps bring forth better, safer, and more cost-effective solutions for the Project.
4. It allows SFPUC to gain greater understanding of the design, costs and, risks in a progressive manner and make faster informed decisions and achieve high quality outcomes.
5. It provides a single point of accountability for the overall delivery and performance of the project. It holds the design-builder responsible throughout the project from design to construction. This will reduce the risk of disputes or claims.
8 6. Using one single DB contract, SFPUC will save time and cost by eliminating multiple contracts for design and construction services and providing the authority to commence certain construction activities during the design phase.
7. It also saves time by avoiding the need for lengthy prequalification of the prime and/or subcontractors that is required under the alternative DB methods.
8. It provides cost certainty by requiring fixed-price bids in the proposals.
Staff recommends the cost criterium to constitute 30%-35% of the overall evaluation.
Pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code section 6.61(a), this memorandum summarizes the staff recommendation and, if approved, the General Manager’s determination, to use the Best Value selection process for a Best Value Design-Build (DB) project delivery method contract for the design and construction of the Biogas Utilization Project. Upon careful consideration of the Project’s risks, goals and objectives, Staff anticipates that this DB delivery method will provide a highly functional, timely, cost-effective, and safe biogas system in alignment with the best interest of ratepayers and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).
Approved
Signature __________________________________
Dennis Herrera, SFPUC General Manager
Date
cc: Tyson Arbuthnot, Deputy City Attorney
June 28, 2024