Memorandum - California Courts



|Date | |Action Requested |

|April 29, 2010 | |Please review the attached responses to questions regarding the |

| | |RFQ. |

|To | | |

|Potential Proposers | |Deadline |

| | |None |

|From | | |

|Judicial Council of California | |Contact |

|Administrative Office of the Courts, | |occm_solicitations@jud. |

|Office of Court Construction and Management | | |

| | | |

|Subject | | |

|Addendum No. 1 | | |

|Responses to Questions | | |

| | | |

|STATEWIDE CEQA SERVICES | | |

|Solicitation Number: OCCM-2010-19-RO | | |

| |

|# | | | |

|1 |RFQ – Appendix A |Under firm identification/key staff members, sufficient space is provided to |The purpose of this RFQ is to evaluate the experience of the |

| | |indentify 9 key staff. There is no space to identify subconsultants (e.g., |prime contractor. Subconsultants will be considered on a |

| | |traffic), including DVBE’s. Is it assumed that if subconsultants are needed, |project-by-project basis, therefore please do not include |

| | |they would be added on a project-by-project basis, and not identified in the |information about subs at this time. |

| | |response? | |

|2 |RFQ – Appendix A |Can we include relevant projects performed by |Please include any and all relevant experience, even if it |

| | |key staff while at other firms? Much of the |was at other firms. We are looking at the total experience |

| | |professional experience we bring to a project has |of your key staff, not just what they have done with your |

| | |been built over the course of our careers. |firm. |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download