TWENTY-SIXTH LEGISLATURE, 2011
STATE OF HAWAII
A BILL FOR AN ACT
RELATING TO PROCUREMENT.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The legislature finds that the current procurement process for design-build contracts requires offerors to prepare, in most instances, conceptual design drawings as part of their proposals. This requires a considerable initial investment and may prevent many local firms from submitting proposals for design-build contracts. As a result, purchasing agencies may experience a decrease in competition and an increase in prices, and may potentially be forced to sacrifice design and construction creativity.
The purpose of this Act is to provide for the selection of the most qualified offerors for design-build contracts and to encourage the participation of Hawaii-based companies, including local small firms, in the design-build contract proposal process.
SECTION 2. Section 103D-104, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new definition to be appropriately inserted and to read as follows:
""Design-build" means a project delivery method in which the procurement officer enters into a single contract for design and construction of an infrastructure facility."
SECTION 3. Section 103D-303, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended to read as follows:
"§103D-303 Competitive sealed
proposals. (a) Competitive sealed proposals may be [
to procure construction, goods, or services[ , or construction designated
in rules adopted by the procurement policy board as goods, services, or
construction which are] that are either not practicable or not
advantageous to the State to procure by competitive sealed bidding. [ Competitive
sealed proposals may also be utilized when the head of a purchasing agency
determines in writing that the use of competitive sealed bidding is either not
practicable or not advantageous to the State.]
(b) Proposals shall be solicited through a request for proposals.
(c) Notice of the request for proposals shall be given in the same manner as provided in section 103D-302(c).
(d) Proposals shall be opened so as to avoid
disclosure of contents to competing offerors during the process of [
evaluation. A register of proposals shall be prepared [ in accordance
with rules adopted by the policy board] and shall be open for public
inspection after contract award.
(e) The request for proposals shall state the relative importance of price and other evaluation factors.
(f) Discussions may be conducted with
responsible offerors who submit proposals determined to be reasonably [
of being] likely to be selected for a contract award for the
purpose of clarification to assure full understanding of, and responsiveness
to, the solicitation requirements. Offerors shall be accorded fair and equal
treatment with respect to any opportunity for discussion and revision of
proposals, and revisions may be permitted after submissions and prior to award
for the purpose of obtaining best and final offers. In conducting discussions,
there shall be no disclosure of any information derived from proposals
submitted by competing offerors.
(g) Award shall be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal is determined in writing to be the most advantageous, taking into consideration price and the evaluation factors set forth in the request for proposals. No other factors or criteria shall be used in the evaluation. The contract file shall contain the basis on which the award is made.
(h) In cases of awards made under this
section, nonselected offerors may submit a written request for debriefing to
the chief procurement officer [
or designee] within three working days
after the posting of the award of the contract. Thereafter, the [ head of
the purchasing agency] procurement officer shall provide the [ requester]
nonselected offeror a prompt debriefing [ in accordance with rules
adopted by the policy board]. Any protest by the [ requester] nonselected
offeror pursuant to section 103D-701 following debriefing shall be filed in
writing with the [ chief] procurement officer [ or designee] within
five working days after the date [ that] upon which the debriefing
(i) In addition to any other provisions of this section, construction projects may be procured using the design-build method described herein:
(1) Step One. The procurement officer shall issue a request for qualifications in advance of the request for proposals to prequalify offerors; provided that a short list of no more than three responsible offerors, based on the qualifications stated in their proposals, shall be selected prior to submittal of proposals. The number of offerors to be selected for the short list shall be stated in the request for qualifications, and the procurement officer shall provide prompt notice to all offerors as to which offerors have been short listed.
(2) Step Two. The procurement officer shall issue a request for proposals to the offerors selected for the short list in step one. The request for proposals shall include design requirements, solicit proposal development documents, and state proposal evaluation criteria. The procurement officer may pay a conceptual design fee to non-selected offerors that submit a technically responsive proposal to the request for proposals in step two; provided that the terms of the payment of a conceptual design fee shall be stated in the request for qualifications and the request for proposals."
SECTION 4. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored.
SECTION 5. This Act shall take effect on July 1, 2112.
Procurement; Design-build Contracts
Establishes discretionary request for competitive sealed proposal procedures using a two-step design-build process. Defines design-build. Authorizes the procurement officer to pay a conceptual design fee to unsuccessful offerors. Clarifies process of short-listing of offerors for purposes of nonselection. Effective 7/1/2112. (HD1)
The summary description of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.