N.J. Admin. Code § 19:9-2.8

Current through Register Vol. 56, No. 11, June 3, 2024

Section 19:9-2.8 - Procedure for prequalification and award of contracts for architectural, engineering, and land surveying services

(a) This section shall apply to contracts for architectural, engineering, and land surveying services that are not subject to N.J.A.C. 19:9-2.2(d), 2.3, or 2.5. The Authority may choose to apply this section to contracts below the public bidding threshold as set forth in N.J.S.A. 27:23-6.1.b in its sole discretion. The Authority may use procurement processes other than those prescribed in this section if those processes have been approved by the Federal government or other State statute, rule, or executive order, or if an emergency has been declared by the Executive Director. Where a procurement involves the proposed use of Federal funds, and Federal law, regulations, or guidelines require a procurement procedure other than those prescribed in this section, the Authority shall follow the Federal procedures. All procedures provided for herein that are consistent with Federal requirements shall be followed.

(b) The following words and terms, when used in this section, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

"Complex projects" means projects other than "simple projects," and includes most projects involving transportation, planning or complex design, or any project having an estimated fee over $ 2,000,000.

"Director" means either the Chief Engineer, Director of Operations, or Director of Maintenance, depending on whether the contract emanates from the Engineering Department, Operations Department, or the Maintenance Department.

"EOI" means an expression of interest from firms interested in performing professional architectural, engineering and land surveying services for the Authority.

"Firm" means any individual, firm, partnership, corporation, association, joint venture or other legal entity permitted by law to provide professional architectural, engineering or land surveying services in this State.

"Professional architectural, engineering, and land surveying services" means those services, including, but not limited to, planning, design, environmental, and construction inspection services required for the development and construction of projects, within the scope of the practice of architecture, professional engineering, or professional land surveying as defined by the laws of this State or those services performed by an architect, professional engineer, or professional land surveyor in connection with his or her professional employment practice, and which are subject to N.J.S.A. 52:34-9.1 et seq.

"Review committee" means the committee assigned to review a contract for professional architectural, engineering and land surveying services, which shall include at least three persons designated by the Director and approved by the Executive Director.

"Simple projects" means projects or other engineering services where the scope can be clearly defined and is not likely to change during the course of the project where the estimated fee is $ 2,000,000 or less. Simple projects include, but are not limited to, bridge inspection projects, supervision of construction projects and highway and bridge design projects with an estimated fee of $ 2,000,000 or less.

"Technical Review Committee" means the committee assigned to review a contract for professional architectural, engineering, and land surveying services, which shall include at least three persons designated by the Director and approved by the Executive Director.

(c) Professional services prequalification requirements shall be as follows:

1. A firm interested in a contract for professional architectural, engineering, or land surveying services shall complete and file a "Professional Service Prequalification Questionnaire" ("PSPQ") with the Authority. Firms qualified for a particular type of project based on the Authority's evaluation of the PSPQs will be eligible for consideration when such projects are being contracted for by the Authority without having to present their qualifications on a project-specific basis.

2. For the procurement of general consultants, rather than a project-specific procurement, the procedures relating to prequalification of firms may be modified to address the needs and requirements of the Authority.

3. Each firm shall identify on the PSPQ each type of work for which the firm desires prequalification. All PSPQs shall contain the following information:

i. Current and past projects undertaken by the firm;

ii. The nature of services provided on each project;

iii. The qualifications of the professionals employed by the firm; and

iv. Other information which the Authority may determine necessary to assess the firm's qualifications.

4. A firm shall notify the Authority in writing of any substantial change in the information on its PSPQ when such change occurs. A firm shall have a current PSPQ on file with the Authority on the date of the EOI submittal in order to be considered for a project. For purposes of this section, a current PSPQ is one which has been on file with the Authority for no more than 24 months.

(d) Expression of interest (EOI) solicitation and/or advertisement shall be as follows:

1. A Request for EOIs (RFEOI) shall be advertised in an appropriate newspaper or journal, having a large circulation in the State and/or advertised on the Authority's website, www.nj.gov/turnpike, or through other electronic means. Such advertisements shall be published not less than seven calendar days preceding the date upon which the EOIs are to be received. The RFEOI shall identify the scope of services required from the prequalified firms and the evaluation process to be used for the project. When the Authority seeks to engage more than one firm through a single RFEOI, the number of firms that the Authority intends to engage shall be identified in the RFEOI.

2. When general consultant services are needed, the Authority shall establish a list of criteria that firms must meet in order to be sent an RFEOI for the general consultant contract. Firms that meet such criteria shall be sent an RFEOI.

(e) Evaluation of EOIs shall be as follows:

1. Upon receipt of the EOIs, the Authority shall review the EOIs for completeness and shall reject those EOIs which are incomplete. The Authority shall notify all firms whose EOIs are determined to be incomplete in writing. For all projects, if fewer than three EOIs are deemed complete, the EOI solicitation may be rewritten and/or re-solicited, or the procurement may continue with fewer than three firms, as determined by the Executive Director, in consultation with the Director.

2. For simple projects, the technical evaluation process shall consist of the evaluation of EOIs in accordance with the procedures set forth in this section.

3. For complex projects, the evaluation of EOIs shall serve as a method by which to create a list of firms that shall receive the requests for proposals (RFP) for the project. If only three or four EOIs have been deemed complete by the Authority, these firms shall receive the RFP and the Technical Review Committee will not conduct an evaluation of the EOIs as set forth below. If more than four EOIs have been deemed complete, the EOIs shall be submitted to the Technical Review Committee for review as set forth in (e)4 below.

4. TThe EOIs shall be ranked by the Technical Review Committee on the basis of numerical scores resulting from weighted rating factors. These factors will be weighted in proportion to their relative importance on a project-by-project basis. The relative weight attributed to each rating factor for a particular project and the ranking methodology shall be set forth in the RFEOI. In ranking the EOIs, the Technical Review Committee may consider criteria contained in the RFEOI, including, but not limited to:

i. Experience of the firm on similar projects;

ii. Experience of the Project Manager or Resident Engineer on similar projects;

iii. Key personnel's qualifications and relevant experience;

iv. Understanding of the project and the Authority's needs;

v. Approach to the project;

vi. Commitment and ability to perform the proposed work and outstanding work with the Authority;

vii. Commitment to quality management;

viii. Attainment of Small Business Enterprise goals; and

ix. Any other factors specified in the Authority's EOI solicitation.

5. For simple projects, once the Technical Review Committee has ranked the EOIs, it shall require the top three or more technically ranked firms, which number of firms shall be at the discretion of the Director, to provide their proposed fees in a separate envelope. The firms shall not be told of their ranking position at this time. The selection process shall continue in the manner described in (g) below. If a particular simple project warrants, the Director may elect to issue an RFP and the selection process shall proceed in accordance with the process for complex projects.

6. For complex projects, after the evaluation and ranking of the EOIs, no fewer than the top three ranked firms shall receive an RFP. All firms that are not to receive the RFP shall be notified.

7. When the Authority is seeking to engage more than one firm through a single solicitation of EOIs, following the Technical Review Committee's evaluation of the EOIs, it shall prepare a list of a sufficient number of technically qualified firms to enable the Authority to engage the number of firms identified in the RFEOI. If the Technical Review Committee is unable to prepare a list of technically qualified firms in a sufficient number to negotiate with and engage the number of firms identified in the RFEOI, the Authority shall reduce the number of firms it is seeking to engage through the EOI, and/or reissue the RFEOI in whole or in part. The Technical Review Committee shall negotiate with firms in the same manner as described in (g) below.

(f) Requests for Proposals (RFPs) shall be evaluated as follows:

1. Responses to the RFP shall be comprised of the technical proposal and fee proposal. The firms receiving the RFP shall be directed to submit a detailed fee proposal in a separate sealed envelope at the time of submission of the technical proposal.

2. The Technical Review Committee shall evaluate the technical proposals submitted to the Authority. The Technical Review Committee shall rank the technical proposals on the basis of numerical scores using the rating criteria specified in the RFP. The relative weight attributed to each rating factor and the methodology for ranking firms shall be set forth in the RFP.

3. The Technical Review Committee may require an interview and/or presentation by the firms with the highest ranked proposals. The Director, in his or her discretion, may waive this requirement for a particular project. Subsequent to the interview and/or presentation, the Technical Review Committee shall revisit its technical ranking of the firms, re-score as appropriate and shall thereupon recommend the highest ranked firms to the Director, or the Executive Director if the Director was a member of the Technical Review Committee.

(g) Cost negotiation and final selection shall be as follows:

1. For all projects, upon reviewing the Technical Review Committee's recommendation, the Director or the Executive Director shall either concur with the selections or direct the Technical Review Committee to pursue additional evaluation measures, consistent with the EOI solicitation or RFP, which shall be specified in writing by the Director or the Executive Director.

2. Once the selections are approved, the selected firms' fee proposals will be reviewed by the Technical Review Committee. The Executive Director may add one or more persons to the Technical Review Committee to assist in the negotiation process. Using all fee proposals and the engineer's estimate as a guideline, the Technical Review Committee shall negotiate a fair and reasonable fee with the highest technically ranked firm, taking into consideration all relevant factors, including, but not limited to, the estimated value of the services to be rendered and the scope, complexity, and professional nature thereof. If the Technical Review Committee is unable to negotiate a fair and reasonable fee with the highest technically ranked firm, it shall formally terminate negotiations and undertake negotiations with the second highest technically ranked firm. Failing accord with the second highest technically ranked firm, the Technical Review Committee shall formally terminate negotiations and undertake negotiations with the third highest technically ranked firm. If the Technical Review Committee is unable to negotiate successfully with any of the three highest technically ranked firms, it shall select additional professional firms in order of their competence and qualifications and it shall continue negotiations in accordance with the procedure set forth herein until an agreement is reached. The Executive Director, upon consultation with the Director, may direct the Technical Review Committee to re-solicit the contract. Once a final fee is agreed upon, the Technical Review Committee shall make its recommendation to the Director.

3. The Technical Review Committee in consultation with the Director shall prepare a written report outlining its recommendations and activities in reviewing, negotiating, and selecting the recommended firm. The Director shall submit the Technical Review Committee's report to the Executive Director.

4. If the Executive Director concurs with the recommendation, the Executive Director shall recommend to the Board, in writing, that the firm be issued an Order for Professional Service.

5. If the Executive Director is not satisfied with the recommendation, he or she may:

i. Instruct the Technical Review Committee to submit further support for its recommendation;

ii. Direct the Technical Review Committee to re-negotiate the fee; or

iii. Instruct the Director to re-solicit the contract.

N.J. Admin. Code § 19:9-2.8

Amended by 49 N.J.R. 3236(b), effective 9/18/2017