Texas
Department
of Transportation
Supplement #1
Published September 5, 2012
Questions and Answers For
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL #55-2RFPP001
ROW Division
118 East Riverside Drive
Austin, Texas 78704
Proposal Due Date: September 19, 2012 at 12:00 Noon (CST)
The following document contains questions and responses posed to the Right of Way
Division (ROW) regarding the August 24, 2012 publication of the Request for Proposal (RFP)
55-2RFPP001 for Statewide Right of Way Acquisition Professional Services. Each question
was submitted in writing and the responses are presented in a logical sequence as they pertain
to each Section of the RFP.
This document is published as Supplement #1 to the original RFP published August
24, 2012 and the responses are considered part of the original RFP. The questions are
reprinted as close to their original format as possible while maintaining the anonymity of the
writer.
SECTION 1 - Table of Contents
No questions were submitted.
SECTION 2 - General Information
Question 2A: If TxDOT’s responses to submitted questions are answered by TxDOT in
“general terms” and do not address the specific circumstances, can additional clarification be
obtained from TxDOT?
Response to 2A: Not after 4:00 PM (CST) September 4, 2012.
Question 2B: Can a provider include a “written explanation” behind sections of the proposal
for which additional information might be needed to explain the circumstances for the
documentation provided, so that TxDOT can properly and fairly evaluate the provider?
Response to 2B: Yes as long as the required information in the RFP is also included. Any
deviation from the format is at the sole risk of the provider.
Question 2C: We are currently in the middle of a work authorization and may not be finished
by October as we just started in June. My understanding is that TxDOT prefers to extend
(amend) the contract and work authorization instead of having the new contract take over.
Response to 2C: This question is not relevant to RFP 55-2RFPP001. Contact the ROW
Division under separate correspondence with this question.
Question 2D: Is there any benefit for a higher than minimum score?
Response to 2D: No.
SECTION 3 - Statement of Work
Question 3A: On page 12 of the RFP, paragraph 1.7.16 states that after the hearing is set,
the provider will serve the Notice of Hearing to the indicated parties at least 11 days prior to
the Special Commissioners Hearing. I think Senate Bill 18 changes that to 20 days.
Response to 3A: You are correct, the requirement is 20 days.
SUPPLEMENT #1 to 55-2RFPP001
Page 2 of 8
SECTION 4 - Proposal Information
Question 4A: Most of the sections in the RFP have a statement requiring attachments to be
placed/attached to the back of the individual section, but some don’t. Am I safe in assuming
that attachments/placement at the end of each section is appropriate?
Response to 4A: Follow the instructions in each section of the RFP. If instructions for a
specific section state that a specific document should be placed behind that section, then
follow the instructions. Risk in not following the format instructions of the RFP is the sole
responsibility of the responding provider.
SECTION 5 - General Terms and Conditions
No questions were submitted.
SECTION 6 - Professional Qualifications and Experience for the Company
Question 6A: Can you utilize services provided as a sub-contractor to show Company
Experience?
Response to 6A: Yes, if the company name is the same; i.e., if ACME ROW Company acted
as a Sub-Provider for a transportation project and is now submitting a response to this RFP as
a Prime Provider, the company name must be the same.
Question 6B: If services for a project were originated under one contract/work authorization
and it was necessary to transfer the remaining milestones to a new contract/work authorization,
does the experience need to be shown separately in the “Experience Verification Log” on Page
25. (i.e. IH35 Project the original parcel count was 40 Parcels, transferred milestones were for
20 parcels, would this be shown as two separate entries or shown as one project).
Response to 6B: The first column of the experience verification log asks for the, “Month and
Year the Work was Completed”. Following this reasoning, each line in the table should only
contain the number of parcels and the services that were completed during the specified dates.
Question 6C: Can we use copies of verification letters and evaluations from the previous RFP
if these letters reference the timeframe as required in the current RFP?
Response to 6C: Yes.
Question 6D: All of our work for the past two years has been getting fresh water lines and
sanitary/storm sewer line easements for a condemning authority. Do these parcels count as
experience for right of way projects?
Response to 6D: No. The department wants experience on right of way projects that is at a
different level than utility easements. The right of way projects can be anywhere in the nation
including local government projects.
Question 6E: In section 6 the RFP states that title/closing services and property disposal are
stated as items to be included in the “Professional Qualifications and Experience of the
Company”, but they are not included in the evaluation criteria in section 10. Do we need to
address these services in the RFP?
SUPPLEMENT #1 to 55-2RFPP001
Page 3 of 8
Response to 6E: The services are included in section 6 because they are services with which
you can claim experience. They are not included in section 10 because a specific person does
not have to be designated by the provider. They are services the provider must be ready and
capable of completing, but they can be performed by any member of the provider’s team.
Question 6F: Does “ROWAPS style” mean TxDOT/CDA/SPD/DB; i.e., SH130DFW
Connector?
Response to 6F: ROWAPS style work does not refer to a specific transportation project. It
simply means the style of services; i.e. performance based work by a private sector company
or individual for a condemning authority in the manner of project management, title, appraisal
services, negotiation, relocation assistance, eminent domain support and disposal of property
after possession of a parcel by the state.
SECTION 7 – Evaluation of Past Performance
Question 7A: If services for a project were originated under one contract/W.A. and it was
necessary to transfer the remaining milestones to a new contract/W.A., is it acceptable to
provide a copy of the “Interim” Evaluation for the original services and the “Close-out”
Evaluation for the remaining services to document. This question is only applicable if the
project needs to be shown as 2 separate entries on the Experience Verification Log in Sec. 7.0.
Response to 7A: Yes, but the project should be shown as a single line item in the log.
Question 7B: If you provided services as a sub-contractor can you utilize a copy of the PrimeProviders evaluation? If yes, how does a sub-provider document which services were
performed since the evaluations do not designate who performed the work for each category?
Response to 7B: If the evaluation document does not identify who performed the specific
service discipline the document cannot be used by the evaluator to determine if the work was
acceptable. In these situations you describe, the sub-provider should secure a letter or
performance evaluation from the prime provider stating what, where and when the work was
performed by the sub-provider and whether the work was acceptable.
SECTION 8 – Capacity of the Company
Question 8A: Can the Lobbying Certification received from the sub-providers be color copies
of scanned originals.
Response to 8A: Yes
Question 8B: Can “letters of intent to work” for sub-providers be color copies of scanned
originals?
Response to 8B: Yes
SUPPLEMENT #1 to 55-2RFPP001
Page 4 of 8
SECTION 9 – Meeting Scheduling Demands
Question 9A: On page 31 of the RFP (paragraph 4.1) states that the Gantt chart must be
prepared from a commercial project scheduling software with tracking and presentation
capability equal to or superior to “Micro Soft Project” software. The actual scoring table
shown on the same page 31 does not reference to “Micro Soft Project” software.
Response to 9A: This was a typo. The Gantt Chart must be produced from a commercial
project scheduling software with tracking and presentation capability, but it does not have be
equal to or superior to “Micro Soft Project” software.
SECTION 10 - Professional Q&E for the Individual Service Disciplines
Question 10A: Can the verification letters relating to individual qualifications be the same
ones as used on the previous RFP as long as the dates the work was completed fall within
the current 5 year range for this RFP? Example: a verification letter dated in 2010 but
covers projects completed after August 31, 2007.
Response to 10A: Yes.
SECTION 11 - Professional Q&E for the Project Manager
Question 11A: Does a public utility with the power of Eminent Domain constitute a condemning
authority by TxDOT standards for the purpose of this RFP?
Response to 11A: Yes, unless the specific section of the RFP requires eminent domain for a
transportation project in which case it would not qualify. Please read each section of the RFP
thoroughly specifically in regards to this scenario.
Question 11B: Does an SR/WA designation from the IRWA count as a professional
designation for a project manager?
Response to 11B: Yes.
Question 11C: Can any additional information be given in the table shown as 8.0 for the
general work experience in the right of way industry of the project manager? Is it to match
the preceding table 7?
Response to 11C: Table 7 in Section 11 of the RFP is the project manger’s log for
experience as a project manager and is reported in terms of the number of parcels. Table 8
in Section 11 of the RFP is the same project manger’s log for experience for any general
work in the right of way industry ( i.e., could be as an acquisition agent, relocation agent,
etc.) and is reported in terms of the number of years.
SUPPLEMENT #1 to 55-2RFPP001
Page 5 of 8
SECTION 12, 13 and 14 - Professional Q&E for the Real Estate Appraiser #1, #2 and #3
Question 12/13/14A: Must an appraiser have received approval of the TxDOT Appraiser
Pre-Certification to qualify for points or will proof that the request for certification has been
submitted to TxDOT suffice for receiving the points?
Response to 12/13/14A: Proof that the request for pre-certification is sufficient, but the
contract will not be executed without the pre-certification being approved.
Question 12/13/14B: Does an SR/WA designation from the IRWA count as a professional
designation for a Real Estate Appraiser?
Response to 12/13/14B: No.
Question 12/13/14C: At what point does a Real Estate Appraiser considered to have a precertification approved by TxDOT? Is there a certain date by which an appraiser would need
to have completed the necessary pre-certification paperwork in order to be approved by
TxDOT prior to the September 19, 2012 submission date for the RFP?
Response to 12/13/14C: An appraiser is pre-certified by TxDOT when TxDOT completes the
evaluation of the appraiser’s application and notifies the appraiser of the pre-certification
approval. An appraiser does not need to actually have received notification from TxDOT, but
the contract will not be executed without the pre-certification being approved.
Question 12/13/14D: If we use a subcontractor for appraisal services, may we charge
TxDOT more than we pay the appraiser?
Response to 12/13/14/D: the short answer is Yes, but the value added of a provider’s
management fee added to an appraisal service will be considered by the TxDOT contract
manager. The TxDOT ROWAPS Project Manager will consider all issues of the performance
based services including the best value for the state. The risk of a fee schedule moving to
the high end of the typical industry fee is the sole responsibility of the provider.
SECTION 15 and 16 - Professional Q&E for the Review Appraiser #1 and #2
Question 15/16A: Does a Review Appraiser need to have a TxDOT Pre-Certification Letter that
specifically states they are certified as a Review Appraiser?
Response to 15/16A: No.
Question 15/16B: Must an appraiser have received approval of the TxDOT Appraiser PreCertification to qualify for points or will proof that the request for certification has been
submitted to TxDOT suffice for receiving the points?
Response to 15/16B: Proof that the request for pre-certification is sufficient for the
evaluation team, but the contract will not be executed without the pre-certification being
approved.
Question 15/16C: Does an SR/WA designation from the IRWA count as a professional
designation for a Real Estate Review Appraiser?
Response to 15/16C: No.
SUPPLEMENT #1 to 55-2RFPP001
Page 6 of 8
SECTION 17 – Professional Q&E for the Negotiation Agent
Question 17A: If a Negotiation Agent has met the parcel requirement and has the correct
professional designation, but has worked for a condemning authority that does not require a
Real Estate license. Can they be considered for the full “5 Pt” value if they are actively
pursuing a Texas Real Estate License? If yes, what documentation is required?
Response to 17A: Yes, but the contract will not be executed until the fulfillment of the Texas
Real Estate License has been met. The documentation can be any supporting document
regarding the status and intent of the Negotiation Agent to successfully complete and receive
a Real Estate License.
Question 17B: Does an SR/WA designation from the IRWA count as a professional
designation for a Negotiation Agent?
Response to 17B: No.
Question 17C: I understand TxDOT wanting TREC licenses. When will TxDOT allow
employees to get TREC licenses so they have them when they leave.
Response to 17C: This question is not relevant to RFP 55-2RFPP001.
SECTION 18 – Professional Q&E for the Relocation Assistance Specialist
Question 18A: Does an SR/WA designation from the IRWA count as a professional
designation for a Relocation Agent?
Response to 18A: No.
SECTION 19 – Professional Q&E for the Condemnation Support Specialist
Question 19A: Does an SR/WA designation from the IRWA count as a professional
designation for a Condemnation Support Specialist?
Response to 19A: No.
Question 19B: What “Professional Designation” is applicable to the Condemnation Support
Specialist?
Response to 19B: An active designation or certification by a national or international
organization which requires training, experience, testing, and recertification in the field of
eminent domain OR a license to practice law in the state of Texas.
SECTION 20 – Fee Schedule
All of the submitted questions were specifically addressed to either Attachment A or
Attachment B. The questions and answers are shown on the last page (page 8) of this
supplement.
SUPPLEMENT #1 to 55-2RFPP001
Page 7 of 8
SECTION 21 – Execution of the Proposal
No questions were submitted.
SECTION 22 – Forms
Question 22A: On page 56 of the RFP in Section 22 there are three forms listed. The
instructions shown on page 56 state that the forms are to be placed behind Section 24 of the
completed RFP. This appears to be a typo and I assume the forms should be placed behind
Response to 22A: You are correct. The forms should be placed behind Section 22 of the RFP
as there is not a Section 24.
Question 22B: Are Certificates of Insurance (1560-CSS) required from the sub-providers? If
yes, do they need to be included in the individual appraiser/review section or behind Section
22?
Response to 22B: The Certificate of Insurance (1560-CSS) form is only required for the Prime
Provider.
Attachment A – Proposed Fee Schedule for all Services Except Appraisal Services
Question A-1: Attachment A shows “low and low” blanks for each individual service
discipline except for the four disciplines of “Title and Closing”, “Negotiation”, “Condemnation
Support”, and “Disposal of Property”. Shouldn’t it read “low and high”?
Response to A-1: Yes, the proposed fee schedule for each individual service discipline
requires both a “low and high” proposed fee.
Attachment B – Proposed Fee Schedule for Appraisal Services
Question B-1: Attachment B shows the proposed fee schedule for Appraisal Services to be
completed on a per parcel basis. Should the proposed fee schedule for the Review
Appraisal Services also be completed on a per parcel basis?
Response to B-1: Yes.
Question B-2: Should separate forms be completed to show the proposed fee schedule for
Appraisal Services and Review Appraisal Services?
Response to B-2: Use Attachment B to the RFP (an Excel© spreadsheet) for the proposed
fee schedule for both Appraisal Services and Appraisal Review Services on one single
spreadsheet.
Question B-3: Where do we put the dollar amount for the Review Appraiser? I don’t see it
on the proposed fee schedule spreadsheet.
Response to B-3: The proposed fee schedule for the Review Appraisal Services is found at
the bottom of Attachment B to the RFP (an Excel© spreadsheet) under the category of
appraisal assignment shown as “Other”.
SUPPLEMENT #1 to 55-2RFPP001
Page 8 of 8