Category Score (0-100) Weighted % Weighted Score
1 Relevant Experience and Qualifications 85 25% 21.25
2 Approach and Understanding of the Project 90 20% 18
3 Familiarity with EMWD and City of San Jacinto Requirements and Coordination 90 15% 13.5 4 Project Team and Availability 100 10% 10
5 Cost Competitiveness 90 30% 27
Overall Score 455 89.75
1 2
3 4
5 Civiltec’s total cost of $84,505 represents strong overall value, higher than ERSC’s proposal but notably lower than Webb’s. The pricing is consistent with the project’s scope and level of complexity, and the detailed cost breakdown reflects transparency and a clear understanding of cost control.
Narrative Explanation
Civiltec
Civiltec has extensive experience designing interconnections between water agencies and departments; however, they have not previously completed inter-tie projects directly for the City of San Jacinto or EMWD.
Civiltec’s approach is detailed and mirrors the City’s requested scope. It includes utility locates, and structured 60%, 90%, and 100% submittals. Their work plan reflects a strong understanding of coordination and permitting requirements with EMWD.
Civiltec has a proven and successful history working with the City of San Jacinto’s Water Department, demonstrating a clear understanding of the City’s operational nuances and the importance of delivering projects efficiently and on schedule. Though it is stated that they have experience working with EMWD no such jobs were identified.
The proposed team includes senior professionals with direct experience on the Bath and Grand Well projects. Availability percentages are clearly stated and realistic, ensuring strong project support and responsiveness throughout the design process. The team has also confirmed their ability to begin work immediately upon notice to proceed, and their proposed completion timeline aligns well with the San Jacinto Water Department’s expectations.
Category Score (0-100) Weighted % Weighted Score
1 Relevant Experience and Qualifications 80 25% 20.00
2 Approach and Understanding of the Project 95 20% 19.00 3 Familiarity with EMWD and City of San Jacinto Requirements and Coordination 80 15% 12.00 4 Project Team and Availability 90 10% 9.00
5 Cost Competitiveness 95 30% 28.50
Overall Score 440 88.50
1 2
3 4
5 ERSC’s fee is competitive and well within budget expectations. Their lower cost proposal improves their overall score in cost competitiveness despite fewer details in technical sections.
ERSC
Narrative Explanation
ERSC’s experience includes municipal infrastructure projects and smaller intertie designs; however, their direct experience with EMWD and City of San Jacinto is limited compared to the other firms.
ERSC’s proposed approach generally follows the RFP structure and demonstrates that the team conducted meaningful field review and measurements to better understand where the above-ground piping would be located. They identified several valid potential issues related to layout and constructability.
ERSC demonstrates only partial familiarity with EMWD requirements and has limited examples of prior coordination. Additional detail on past interagency projects would have strengthened this section. No experience with San jacinto Water Department The proposed team is experienced but smaller, and several roles appear shared across concurrent projects. The completion time for the project was not the fastest but not far off.
Category Score (0-100) Weighted % Weighted Score
1 Relevant Experience and Qualifications 90 25% 22.5
2 Approach and Understanding of the Project 90 20% 18
3 Familiarity with EMWD and City of San Jacinto Requirements and Coordination 80 15% 12 4 Project Team and Availability 85 10% 8.5
5 Cost Competitiveness 75 30% 22.5
Overall Score 420 83.5
1 2
3 4
5 Webb’s proposed cost of $116,747 is the highest among the three firms by a considerable margin. While the scope is comprehensive, the significant price difference reduces their overall cost competitiveness for this project.
Narrative Explanation
Webb
Webb has extensive experience designing interconnections between water agencies and departments, including several intertie projects with EMWD; however, they have not previously completed any projects directly for the City of San Jacinto.
Webb’s approach and understanding of the project are extensive and well-developed. They clearly identified potential challenges and provided thoughtful strategies to address them. However, their proposed timeline does not adequately emphasize the expedited nature of the project or the City’s desire for a swift design completion.
Webb’s team has prior experience working with EMWD on interconnection and hydraulic modeling projects, showing a general understanding of EMWD’s design standards and review processes. However, their proposal indicates limited direct experience with the City of San Jacinto’s Water Department and may require additional coordination to become fully familiar with the City’s specific standards and procedures.
The project team is composed of experienced professionals with a well-organized structure and a clearly defined QA/QC plan. While the team has indicated strong availability and effective coordination across disciplines, the proposed completion timeline extends beyond the City’s preferred schedule.