2022-09-20 CC Agenda - Public Communications related to Item B4 - Pavement Rehab Project2022-09-20 CC AGENDA PACKET
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION RELATED TO ITEM B4 - PW 22-01
PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT
ardy & Harper, Inc.
�cauing c��rae�a�
STATE LIC Number 215952
September 15, 2022
City of El Segundo
350 Main Street
El Segundo, Ca 90245
310-524-2200
Subject: Response to Dash Construction Protest of Hardy and Harper, Inc. Bid for PW 22-01 FY
21/22 Pavement Rehabilitation Project
Dear Mr. Rice,
In response to your letter received Monday September 12, 2022 concerning Dash Construction's
8-19-22 formal protest and request for a "prompt and detailed review", Hardy and Harper wish to
provide counter to both provided documents.
Upon careful review of Dash's protest, nowhere within the provided document from Dash
construction is there a mention of the City's quoted statement "the apparent low bidder, Hardy
and Harper, Inc. should be rejected on the following protest point —their bid item #1 is above the
5% maximum of the total bid amount, which is a requirement set forth in the bid documents".
Based on the provided material, Dash construction is not requesting H&H's bid be rejected, Dash
Construction does however merely request a "fair and equitable review" of the fact pointed out
in their protest that Hardy and Harper exceeded the prescribed 5% maximum amount of item 1
by 2.6%.
While it is true and correct that the 5% maximum was exceeded for item #1 of the
aforementioned bid in question, I would like to point out several reasons as to why this is merely
an irregularity based on the bid proposal documents and in no way shape or form does this
irregularity represent grounds for rejection.
1; The bid proposal documents for the above -mentioned project clearly outline several items
which if not followed or omitted are the sole mentioned grounds for rejection of bid. Proposal
documents pages 1-B-4; 9.1, 9.3, 9.4, 9.7; 1-B-5; 10.1 and 1-13-6; 13.1, 13.2, 13.2.1 and 13.3
clearly and specifically outline ALL offenses that are grounds for rejection for this Bid Proposal.
Furthermore, H&H's bid in question complies with all required documents previously mentioned
within the instances of grounds for rejection of bid. To reduce redundancy, I will omit those
descriptions, but I will mention that nowhere in the detailed instructions to bidders or plans and
specifications of this project is it mentioned that exceedance of a percentage threshold for a lump
sum item is grounds for rejection of a bid.
32 RANCHO CIRCLE I LAKE FOREST, CA 92630 1 (714) 444-1851 • FAX (714) 444-2801
Ward, & Harper, Inc.
Mfg
STATE LIC. Number 215952
2: On Bidder's instructions Page 1-B-7, 14.2 "The City has the right to waive nonmaterial
irregularities in a Bid and to accept the lowest responsive Bid as determined by the City."
As the exceedance of the 5% max on item 1 is in no way shape or form described in any of the
above -mentioned locations described previously in bullet paragraph 1, the exceedance cannot be
considered grounds for rejection of bid, it is, in fact a non -material irregularity.
3: A 5% threshold for item 1 is not feasible pursuant to the prescribed scope for inclusion of
requirements mentioned in pay description of the line item in question. Special Provisions
section III-A-3, 3-0 Mobilization articles 1-22 costs exceed the prescribed amount by percentage
per the proposal. Section III-A-3 does not mention the requirement for a 5% max on payment as
prescribed in the bid schedule. Precedence of documents will show that the bid proposal takes
precedent over the special provisions, however, the discrepancy is worth noting in writing at this
point. Furthermore, the payment descriptions for all other pay items listed in the project bid
schedule do not afford a way to compensate for these specific items. Therefore, costs for these
items cannot be accounted for elsewhere in the bid, pursuant to provided bid documents, these
requirements must be contained within item 1. It should be noted as well that the City elected in
July of 2020 to award the FY 20 Pavement Rehabilitation Project to Hardy and Harper ultimately
electing to waive the exceedance of 5% item 1 threshold as it was determined a minor
irregularity.
4: In the interest of good faith, Hardy and Harper propose to reduce the amount of $73,615.00
submitted as item #1 of the bid to $48,050.00 to meet the mentioned 5% bid item. This
represents a cost savings of $25,565.00 or a cost savings of $62,342.00 representing the
difference from H&H adjustment to current Dash Construction proposal amount.
As the City is within its rights to reject any and all bids, pursuant to the provided bid proposal
documents, I would like to strongly reiterate the fact that based on those same provided
documents the City is also WELL within its right to wave ANY irregularities. It is my sincerest
hope that these provided facts and statements provide clarity and resolution to the current
situation and that the City elects to accept H&H's bid proposal in addition to our provided credit.
We look forward to working with you on this project and many more in the future.
B g. ' ,
ike undson
r. Estimator / Sr. Project Manager
Hardy and Harper, Inc
714 620 4296
32 RANCHO CIRCLE I LAKE FOREST, CA 92630 1 (714) 444-1851 • FAX (714) 444-2801