HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-01-24; City Council; 12994; CONTRACT AWARD FOR PURCHASE OF FIRE RESISTIVE STATION UNIFORMS.
s
d 9
a.
z 0
5 a
1 g
8 3
r
y 8- C!T@OF CARLSBAD - AGENW BILL
7
AB # 12;- TITLE: CONTRACT AWARD FOR PURCHASE OF DEP'
MTG. m FIRE RESISTIVE STATION UNIFORMS CITY
DEPT. PCH CITY
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends Council adopt Resolution No. qs- I s , awarding fire resis
uniforms bid for the contract period February I, 1995 through January 31, 1994
option to renew the contract for two (2) additional me (1) year periods, to LC
Uniform Co Inc.
ITEM EXPLANATION
The City of Carlsbad and sixteen agencies participated in the joint cooperative
resistive station uniforms. Based on a questionnaire distributed to the ager
estimated that 1400 shirts and 900 pairs of pants will be purchased from thi!
anticipated orders would result in uniform purchases in excess of $140,000. Eact-
public agency will place their respective order(s) with the vendor.
The National Fire Protection Association's Standard 1500, "Fire Service Occupatio
and Safety", requires fire resistive material be used in all layers of clothing wc
fighters. The uniforms in this bid meet the safety requirements of the afore1
standard and provide an estimated 50% increase in uniform lifespan over th
resistive station uniforms currently worn by Carlsbad Fire Department personnel.
In accordance with Section 3.28.1 20 of the Municipal Code, Notice to Bidders was
and Requests for Bid were sent to twelve vendors. Six bids were opened, witnt
recorded on November 29, 1994. Representatives from Carlsbad, San Diego, Ran Fe, Vista, Bonita and Oceanside Fire Departments evaluated the bids.
The lowest, responsive bid was submitted by Long Beach Uniform Co., lnc., 2
Beach Blvd., Long Beach CA 90806.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City of Carlsbad's Fire Department anticipates spending approximately $'
uniforms this fiscal year. These funds are available in the Fire Department's Safety E
Account No. 001-820-2220-2641.
EXHIBITS
1. Resolution No. 9 5 - 18
2. Tabulation of Bids
3. Exceptions to bid samples
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I.6
17
I.8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0 EXHIBIT
RESOLUTION NO. 95 - 18
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF FIRE
RESISTIVE STATION UNIFORMS
WHEREAS, it is advantageous to the City to join with other agencies in the
fire resistive station uniforms and
WHEREAS, bid proposals were submitted by twelve vendors and were iuc
known criteria.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City (
California, as follows:
1.
2.
That the above facts are true and correct.
That the bid for fire resistive station uniforms be awarded to Long Be
Co., Inc., 2789 Long Beach Blvd., Long Beach CA 90806 and the Purchasing Offic
authorized to execute a Purchase Order for these items as the need arises for a perk
February 1, 1995 through January 31, 1996, with the option for the City Manager to rc
(2) additional one (1) year periods.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Counc
of Carlsbad on the 24th day of JANUARY , 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Kulchin, Finnila, Hall
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. R
(SEAL)
1,
0 0
EXHIBIT
TABULATION OF BIDS
BID #5 November 29, l!
11:oo A FIRE RESISTIVE STATION UNIFORMS
1 Bid ruled non-responsive - Vendor is not an authorized distrbutor for item bid. The
manufacturer will not supply uniforms to the vendor.
* Samples did not meet specifications
Shaded cells denotes lowest responsive bid
0 EXHIBIT “3”
DATE: January 11, 1995
TO: Ruth Fletcher, Purchasing Officer
FROM:
SUBJECT: Bid No. 5 Sample Review and Award Recommendations
Anthony J. Sorci, S.D.C.F.E.C., Tech. Comm. Chair.
AWARD RECOMMENDATION:
The committee met on December 5th to review the bid samples submitted for Bid
No.5. The results of that review are listed bellow. Based on the review of the
submitted bid samples, the committee recommends Long Beach Uniforms as the
lowest responsive bidder. Their bid samples had two (2) exceptions which arc
considered minor discrepancies..
BID SAMPLE REVIEW:
Keystone Uniforms:
Exceptions to the specifications:
Shirt:
1. Shirt Collar, laydown vs. standup type.
2. Shirt safety panel sewn down vs. open.
3. Buttons mounted on the outside of safety panel.
4. Sewn in creases.
5. Western cut back yoke.
6. No badge strap.
7. Pen slot on pocket flap too small.
8. No pen slot sewn to pocket.
9. Velcro closure of pocket not to specifications.
10. Shirt material not to specifications.
Pant:
1. Belt loops too small.
2. No bar tack reinforcement of hook/clasp.
3. Closure utilizes a snap type cap on the outside of waistband.
4. No shirt lock on the inside of waistband.
5. Pockets are not to specifications (reinforcement).
6. Crotch and seat of pants not to specifications.
7. No French fly construction.
8.’ Three needle seam construction.
9. Material not to specifications.
' EXHIBIT "3"
PAGE 2
0
BID SAMPLE REVIEW: Cont ...
Ace Uniforms: Bid Sample Alternate "Rubin"
Exceptions to the specifications:
Shirt:
1. No pen slot sewn to pocket.
2. Velcro closure of pocket not to specifications.
3. Shirt material not to specifications.
Pant:
1. No bar tack reinforcement of hook/clasp.
2. Pockets are not to specifications (reinforcement).
3. Crotch and seat of pants not to specifications.
4. Material not to specifications.
BID SAMPLE REVIEW
Long Beach Uniforms
Exceptions to the specifications:
Shirt:
1. No pen slot sewn to pocket or flap.
Pant:
1. No French fly
Technical Committee Chair