Architect and Engineering IDIQ for BEP DC Facility Upgrades
ARCHITECT ENGINEER (A-E) CONTRACT FOR THE BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING (BEP) DC FACILITY (DCF) UPGRADES **THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL** The BEP is soliciting for Non-Personal Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6. This announcement is being solicited as a small business set-aside pursuant to FAR 19. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this action is 541330 and the small business size standard is $15M. Interested A-E firms submitting a qualification package must have an active and valid registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) database; https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM. As a result of this announcement, the BEP intends to award multiple Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts that will be for five (5) years from the date of award, to include five one-year ordering periods. The total amount for each individual contract shall not exceed $1.6M. The anticipated awarded IDIQ contracts will have a guaranteed minimum of $3,000 obligated at time of contract award. Firm-fixed priced task orders will be issued, as the need arises, during the course of the contract period. PROJECT INFORMATION: The Architect-Engineering (A-E) Contractor shall provide A-E services for the BEP’s DCF on an Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) basis. The level of work may be Title I, Title II, or Other-Services, or any combination of these as described in this contract. Specific project requirements will be outlined in the individual task order descriptions and in subsequent pre-design meetings. (Title I) Professional services of an architectural or engineering nature, as defined by State law, if applicable, that are required to be performed or approved by a person licensed, registered, or certified to provide those services; (Title II) Professional services of an architectural or engineering nature performed by contract that are associated with research, planning, development, design, construction, alteration, or repair of real property; and (Other A-E Services) Those other professional services of an architectural or engineering nature, or incidental services, that members of the architectural and engineering professions (and individuals in their employ) may logically or justifiably perform, including studies, investigations, surveying and mapping, tests, evaluations, consultations, comprehensive planning, program management, conceptual designs, plans and specifications, value engineering, construction phase services, soils engineering, drawing reviews, preparation of operating and maintenance manuals, and other related services. The work required under this IDIQ contract consists of furnishing all services, materials, supplies, support, labor, transportation, and performing all work necessary for production of facility and recreation design and project management of construction projects. All references to “A-E” or ”Firm” apply to the architectural, engineering construction management and planning services contractor and all consultants and/or subcontractors hired by the Firm. All other references to the “contractor” refer to the entity that is or will be performing the associated construction efforts. The lead firm(s) selected for contract award(s) will be predominantly an architectural-engineering firm specializing in Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering or Architecture and possess other architecture and engineering capabilities identified. Location: Bureau of Engraving & Printing 14th & C Streets SW Washington, DC 20228 All offerors must identify their operating location for this requirement. Offers operating location must be located within fifty (50) miles of the location address to be considered (FAR 36.602-1(a)(5). SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: This acquisition is set-aside for small business contractors. Interested A-E firms having the capabilities to perform this work are invited to submit an electronic copy of their SF 330 (A-E Qualifications) to the Contract Officer listed below. The current SF 330 (attachment 01) must be used and may be obtained from the following web site: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/download/116486. All fonts shall be at least 10 pitch or larger and pages shall be 8 ½” x 11”. PART 1 OF THE SF 330 SHALL NOT EXCEED 100 PAGES. Blank sheets and/or Tabs separating the sections within the SF 330 will not count in the page-count maximum for PART I, Section F. When listing projects in PART I, Section F, an Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) or IDIQ contract with multiple task orders as an example, is not considered a project. A task order executed under an IDC/IDIQ contract is a project. In Block G-26, along with the name, include the firm with which the person is associated. A PART II is required for the prime contractor and any Subcontractors that will have a key role in the proposed contract. Factor 1: Specialized Experience (36.602-1(a)(1)and(2) Factor 1 consists of the response included in section F of the SF-330. Projects illustrated for this factor shall include work performed within the last five (5) years. Factor 2: Past Performance (FAR 36.602-1(a)(4) a. Past performance represents the Government’s confidence in the contractor’s ability to successfully perform as proposed and is based on an assessment of the contractor’s present and past performance. In order to facilitate the Government’s evaluation of the contractor’s past performance, the contractor shall submit a past performance questionnaire to at least (3) tee of the references listed in section F of the SF-330, or provide the associated Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) as an attachment to the technical proposal submission (any CPAR attached does not count toward the total page count). b. The questionnaire is included in Attachment 02. The completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be emailed directly from the evaluator to Joseph Pishioneri at Joseph.Pishioneri@bep.gov and received not later than the closing date of this RFP. It is the contractor’s responsibility to follow-up and ensure the questionnaires are received in a timely manner. c. Contractors are also advised that past performance information may be obtained from other sources known to the Government; and that the Government may also evaluate information from such other sources, even though the contractor does not include such information in its Proposal. Factor 3: Technical Approach and Sustainability (FAR 36.602-1(a)(2) Factor 3 shall be submitted as part of Section H of the SF-330. The technical approach shall be specific and detailed enough to clearly demonstrate the contractor’s understanding of the requirements in the statement of work. The contractor's proposed technical approach shall disclose, in as much detail as possible, the contractor’s plan for accomplishing all phases of the requirement. The technical approach shall address the extent of any proposed subcontracting including the identification of the subcontractor, which tasks/subtasks they will perform, and the percentage of work that the subcontractor will perform on each task/subtask. A sustainable design philosophy shall seek to reduce negative impacts on the environment, and the health and comfort of building occupants, thereby improving building performance. Utilizing a sustainable design philosophy shall encourage decisions at each phase of the design process that will reduce negative impacts on the environment and the health of the occupants, without compromising the bottom line. The sustainable design philosophy shall address the offerors experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction and the use of recovered materials, and their applicability to this project. Factor 4: Quality Control/Quality Assurance/ Title II Services (FAR 36.602-1(a)(6) Factor 4 shall be submitted as part of Section H of the SF-330. The offeror shall describe their quality control/quality assurance processes and practices, including providing any written procedures for the quality assurance of products. This section shall describe all calculations, specifications, and drawings verified for accuracy and adequacy by a separate, equally (or more) qualified individual from the originator. This section shall describe thoroughness and frequency of the review process, including clarifying the percentage of the product that is typically spot checked, or any sanity checks for reasonableness. Finally, the offeror shall provide a copy of their ISO 9001:2015 certification as proof of certification. The A/E offeror shall describe the Title II Services they plan to provide during the construction phase of the project. This section should describe the offerors’ process in providing title 2 services, including their process in addressing submittals, shop drawings and Requests for Information (RFI’s). Toughout this contract, the construction contractor will provide product submittals and shop drawings for review and approval. The offeror shall describe its process to approve, approve with comments, or reject with comments within 14 calendars days of receipt. During the construction phase of the project, the construction contractor will have questions, clarifications and/or concerns for a specific design process or field discovery. The construction contractor will submit a Requests For Information (RFI) and the offeror shall describe its process to approve the proposed solution or provide a viable solution within 14 calendar days of receipt. Factor 5: Resource Plan/ Key Personnel (FAR 36.602-1(a)(5) Factor 5 consists of responses included in the SF-330 document. The offeror shall describe the proposed team that will attend to all types of work within this contract, including the design of building alterations/renovations /repairs of historical and industrial facilities accommodating printing and related printing process. Included should be an organizational chart identifying lines of authority and supervisory responsibilities. Offeror shall describe its capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Key personnel shall consist of the following: Specialized Technical Personnel Project Manager Project Superintendent Provide resumes of all key personnel listing their qualifications, special training and experience over the past five (5) years. Each resume should include at a minimum, the following information: Name Educational background, including technical education/training Work experience covering the last 5 years, including titles, duties, dates, employer, and client references Specific qualifications to address critical elements of projects, project scheduling, and cost control Length of time employed with current firm SELECTION CRITERIA: Selection criteria outlined in Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 36.6 and Brooks Act provisions apply. Evaluation will be based on the following factors: 1) Specialized Experience, 2) Past Performance, 3) Technical Approach and Sustainability; 4) Quality Control/Assurance/Title II Services; and 5) Resource Plan/Key Personnel. Factors 1, and 2, Corporate Experience and Past Performance, are of equal value to each other, however are weighted heavier than the remaining factors. The remaining factors, (3-5) are of equal importance. Specialized Experience (36.602-1(a)(1)and(2) Section F of SF-330 The Government will evaluate the extent to which a contractor possesses relevant experience, performed within the last five (5) years, to the Government’s requirements under this solicitation and the degree of similarity in terms of size, scope and complexity; based upon the information provided in Section F of the SF-330. The evaluation will involve an assessment of the depth, breadth, and relevance of experience of the contractor, with particular emphasis on specialized experience designing building alterations/renovations/repair of historical industrial facilities and site preparations to accommodate equipment, equipment accessories and their utilities and the degree of similarity in terms of size, scope, and technical complexity to the solicitation requirements. When evaluating contractor experience under this solicitation, the Government will not consider the experience of proposed subcontractors. The Government reserves the right to verify the cited experience. The Offeror shall demonstrate experience acting as the prime contractor and managing construction subcontractors in design-build projects. Contractor Teaming Arrangements: Experience of each party to the contractor teaming arrangement will be evaluated only to the extent that it relates to the work that each party will be responsible for under the IDIQ. Experience of the contractor teaming arrangement, operating as a team, is more relevant than experience of the individual parties to the team as it represents experience of the team rather than that of the individual players. The evaluation will be made by reviewing the information submitted by the contractor. Failure of a contractor to provide a thorough description of how its experience is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicited requirements may result in the proposal being determined ineligible for IDIQ award. Past Performance (FAR 36.602-1(a)(4) Past performance is the measure of how a contractor has performed and satisfied its customers. Using the questionnaires or the associated Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR), and other available information, the Government will evaluate performance information on each contractor based on the past and present efforts. The evaluation will include assessments in areas such as, Technical (quality of product or service, compliance with performance schedules/timeliness, and Management or business relations.) Contractor Teaming Arrangements: Past performance of each party to the contractor teaming arrangement will be evaluated only to the extent that it relates to the work that each party will be responsible for under the IDIQ. Past performance of the contractor teaming arrangement, operating as a team, is more relevant than the past performance of the individual parties to the team as it represents past performance of the team rather than that of the individual players. Technical Approach and Sustainability (FAR 36.602-1(a)(2) The Government will evaluate the extent to which the technical approach (as provided in section H of the SF-330) demonstrates the contractor’s: understanding of the solicited contract requirements; strategy for providing solution in line with requirements in the Performance Work Statement utilization of subcontractors (if applicable); project management plan and the extent to which the plan demonstrates the contractor’s ability to manage the project tasks, potential issues, and assigned personnel; the adequacy of the contractor’s approach to providing experienced personnel to perform the requirements; plan to maintain continuity of assigned employees and ability to backfill vacancies in a timely manner; the adequacy of the contractor’s resource allocation, including labor categories and level of effort to accomplish each of the tasks in the SOW; contingency plan that demonstrates the contractor’s capability to prevent and adjust to major and minor interruptions during performance. Sustainable design principles shall include experience in: Energy conservation Pollution prevention Waste Reduction Use of Recovered Materials Offeror will be evaluated on its ability to illustrate how the sustainability experience will impact the contract requirements. Quality Control/Assurance/Title II Services (FAR 36.602-1(a)(6) The Government will evaluate the extent of the contractor’s Quality Control/Assurance (as provided in Section H of the SF-330) demonstrates the contractor’s: Written procedures for Quality Control/Assurance, including calculations, specifications, and drawings verified for accuracy and adequacy by a separate, equally (or more) qualified individual from the originator. The adequacy of the contractor’s review process including frequency of spot checks, sanity checks for reasonableness, and complete product review Evidence of ISO 9001:2015 certification utilization of subcontractors (if applicable); project management plan and the extent to which the plan demonstrates the contractor’s ability to manage the project tasks, potential issues, and assigned personnel; the adequacy of the contractor’s approach to providing experienced personnel to perform the requirements; plan to maintain continuity of assigned employees and ability to backfill vacancies in a timely manner; the adequacy of the contractor’s resource allocation, including labor categories and level of effort to accomplish each of the tasks in the SOW; contingency plan that demonstrates the contractor’s capability to prevent and adjust to major and minor interruptions during performance. The Government will evaluate the extent of the contractor’s Title II services; specifically: The ability to address submittals and shop drawings with in a timely manner. The offeror’s process shall demonstrate the ability to approve with comments, or reject with comments within 14 calendar days of receipt. The ability to address Requests For Information (RFI’s) within a timely manner. The offeror’s process shall demonstrate the ability to approve the proposed Construction contractor solution or provide a viable alternative solution within 14 calendar days of receipt. **It’s possible that project plans crafted during this contract are not implemented within the five year period of performance of the IDIQ contract. In that case, the Government reserves the right to execute the Title II services via another contract vehicle available or established at that time. Resource Plan/Key Personnel (FAR 36.602-1(a)(5) Based upon the information provided in the SF-330, the Government will evaluate the adequacy of the offeror's: Approach to providing the resources with the appropriate skills, depth of experience, training, and professional qualifications. Ability to maintain continuity of assigned employees and ability to back-fill vacancies in a timely manner. Accessibility, availability, qualifications and continuity of key personnel. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the Offeror's proposed resource allocation, including the labor categories and capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. The key personnel shall have but not limited to the following qualifications: Specialized Technical Personnel: Specialized Technical Personnel shall have a bachelor's degree from a U.S. accredited university or college with a major in engineering, architecture, or related technical field. Specialized Technical Personnel shall provide evidence of Professional Engineer active license and registration in Washington, DC and/or in the states of Maryland and Virginia. Personnel shall demonstrate work experience, and technical competence of electrical, mechanical, structural/civil, architectural, fire protection, or environmental requirements covering the last five (5) years. Project Manager: The Project Manager shall have a bachelor's degree from a U.S. accredited university or college with a major in engineering, architecture, or related technical field, and/or at least five years’ experience in managing architectural, engineering or construction projects of similar size and scope and five (5) years’ experience in Historical Government Buildings. The Project Manager shall be employed by the Prime Contractor. Project Superintendent: The Project Superintendent shall have a minimum of five (5) years’ experience as a superintendent on projects similar in size and scope, and five (5) years’ experience in Historical Government Buildings. The project Superintendent shall be employed by the Prime Contractor. The project superintendent shall have overall responsibility for all operations on the jobsite. TECHNICAL APPROACH EVALUATION FACTORS Excellent Proposal greatly exceeds the Government’s requirements. The proposal solution is of the highest quality and is thoroughly justified or substantiated. It has a strength(s) in meeting the solicited requirements, and if any weakness(es) exist, they do not offset the strengths. The proposal does not contain any deficiencies. Overall, the proposed solution presents minimal risk to the Government. Good Proposal somewhat exceeds the Government’s requirements. The proposal solution is high quality and is well justified or substantiated. It has a strength(s) and weakness(es) in meeting the solicited requirements, but the strengths more than outweigh the weakness(es). The proposal does not contain any deficiencies. Overall, the proposed solution presents low risk to the Government Satisfactory Proposal meets the Government’s requirements. The proposed solution is of satisfactory quality and is well justified or substantiated. It has a strength(s) and weakness(es) in meeting the solicited requirements, but the strengths outweigh the weakness(es). The proposal does not contain any deficiencies. Overall, the proposed solution presents low to moderate risk to the Government. Marginal Proposal fails to satisfy the Government’s requirements. The proposed solution contains insufficient evidence to demonstrate a satisfactory level of quality and it cannot be determined if it is justified or substantiated. The proposal may have a strength(s) in meeting the solicited requirements; however, they are offset by either significant weakness(es) or deficiencies. Corrections of significant weakness(es) and/or deficiencies could result in an satisfactory Proposal, without a major rewrite of the Proposal. Overall, the Proposal represents moderate to high risk for the Government. Unsatisfactory Proposal fails to satisfy the Government’s requirements. The proposed solution is not reasonably justified or substantiated. In total, the solution contains numerous inconsistencies, significant weaknesses, and/or deficiencies. The Proposal may contain a strength(s), however, any strengths are outweighed by the significant weakness(es) and/or deficiencies. The Proposal has little to no chance of success and correction would require extensive revision that amounts to a major rewrite in order to be rated as satisfactory. The Proposal represents a high risk for the Government. EXPERIENCE EVALUATION FACTORS Extremely Similar Experience clearly demonstrates prior work that is extremely similar in size, scope, and complexity. Cited experience includes many strengths that more than offset any weaknesses. Given the contractor’s experience, there is no doubt the contractor has the ability to successfully perform this requirement. Similar Experience clearly demonstrates prior work that is similar in size, scope, and complexity. Cited experience includes strengths that more than offset any weaknesses. Given the contractor’s experience, there is little doubt the contractor has the ability to successfully perform this requirement. Somewhat Similar Experience demonstrates prior work that is somewhat similar in size, scope, and complexity. Cited experience includes weaknesses that offset strengths. Given the contractor’s experience, some doubt exists that the contractor has the ability to successfully perform this requirement. Not Similar and/or Not Relevant Experience fails to demonstrate prior work on projects similar in size, scope, and complexity. Cited experience includes weaknesses and no strengths. Given the contractor’s experience, significant doubt exists that the contractor has the ability to successfully perform the requirement. PAST PERFORMANCE FACTORS EXCEPTIONAL Contractor’s performance significantly exceeded most or all contract requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective. VERY GOOD Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective. SATISFACTORY Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory. MARGINAL Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. UNSATISFACTORY Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problems(s) for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) Performance information not recent or relevant as defined in the Solicitation. Unable to provide assessment. The following definitions shall be considered in this evaluation: Strength: An element of the Proposal which exceeds a requirement of the solicitation in a beneficial way to the Government. Weakness: A flaw in the Proposal that increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Significant Weakness: A flaw in the Proposal that appreciably increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Deficiency: A material failure of the Proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses that increase the likelihood of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable levels. THIS IS A PRESOLICATION NOTICE AND IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. Submittals must be received no later than 12:00 P.M. Eastern Standard Time (EST) February 10, 2021. Questions must be submitted no later than 12:00 P.M. EST January 19, 2021. Regulation requires the Selection Board not consider any submittals received after this date and time. Please email all required submittals to Joseph Pishioneri at joseph.pishioneri@bep.gov. NOTE: To avoid a conflict of interest, any contractor proposing as a prime may not have a subcontractor who is also proposing as a prime. As required by acquisition regulations, discussions for the purpose of determining prospective contractors’ qualifications will be conducted for those firms considered highest qualified by the selection board, based upon the evaluation criteria. It is anticipated discussions will be held virtually. Phone calls and personal visits for the purpose of discussing this solicitation with contracting/project management and/or engineering personnel are not allowed. CONTRACTING OFFICER INFORMATION: Bureau of Engraving and Printing Attn: Joseph Pishioneri Email: joseph.pishioneri@bep.gov
ZA20N00040 Department of the Treasury Bureau of Engraving and Printing
1/7/21, 11:44 AM Architect and Engineering IDIQ for BEP DC Facility Upgrades
ARCHITECT ENGINEER (A-E) CONTRACT FOR THE BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING (BEP) DC FACILITY (DCF) UPGRADES **THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL** The BEP is soliciting for Non-Personal Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6. This announcement is being solicited as a small business set-aside pursuant to FAR 19. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this action is 541330 and the small business size standard is $15M. Interested A-E firms submitting a qualification package must have an active and valid registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) database; https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM. As a result of this announcement, the BEP intends to award multiple Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts that will be for five (5) years from the date of award, to include five one-year ordering periods. The total amount for each individual contract shall not exceed $1.6M. The anticipated awarded IDIQ contracts will have a guaranteed minimum of $3,000 obligated at time of contract award. Firm-fixed priced task orders will be issued, as the need arises, during the course of the contract period. PROJECT INFORMATION: The Architect-Engineering (A-E) Contractor shall provide A-E services for the BEP’s DCF on an Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) basis. The level of work may be Title I, Title II, or Other-Services, or any combination of these as described in this contract. Specific project requirements will be outlined in the individual task order descriptions and in subsequent pre-design meetings. (Title I) Professional services of an architectural or engineering nature, as defined by State law, if applicable, that are required to be performed or approved by a person licensed, registered, or certified to provide those services; (Title II) Professional services of an architectural or engineering nature performed by contract that are associated with research, planning, development, design, construction, alteration, or repair of real property; and (Other A-E Services) Those other professional services of an architectural or engineering nature, or incidental services, that members of the architectural and engineering professions (and individuals in their employ) may logically or justifiably perform, including studies, investigations, surveying and mapping, tests, evaluations, consultations, comprehensive planning, program management, conceptual designs, plans and specifications, value engineering, construction phase services, soils engineering, drawing reviews, preparation of operating and maintenance manuals, and other related services. The work required under this IDIQ contract consists of furnishing all services, materials, supplies, support, labor, transportation, and performing all work necessary for production of facility and recreation design and project management of construction projects. All references to “A-E” or ”Firm” apply to the architectural, engineering construction management and planning services contractor and all consultants and/or subcontractors hired by the Firm. All other references to the “contractor” refer to the entity that is or will be performing the associated construction efforts. The lead firm(s) selected for contract award(s) will be predominantly an architectural-engineering firm specializing in Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering or Architecture and possess other architecture and engineering capabilities identified. Location: Bureau of Engraving & Printing 14th & C Streets SW Washington, DC 20228 All offerors must identify their operating location for this requirement. Offers operating location must be located within fifty (50) miles of the location address to be considered (FAR 36.602-1(a)(5). SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: This acquisition is set-aside for small business contractors. Interested A-E firms having the capabilities to perform this work are invited to submit an electronic copy of their SF 330 (A-E Qualifications) to the Contract Officer listed below. The current SF 330 (attachment 01) must be used and may be obtained from the following web site: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/download/116486. All fonts shall be at least 10 pitch or larger and pages shall be 8 ½” x 11”. PART 1 OF THE SF 330 SHALL NOT EXCEED 100 PAGES. Blank sheets and/or Tabs separating the sections within the SF 330 will not count in the page-count maximum for PART I, Section F. When listing projects in PART I, Section F, an Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) or IDIQ contract with multiple task orders as an example, is not considered a project. A task order executed under an IDC/IDIQ contract is a project. In Block G-26, along with the name, include the firm with which the person is associated. A PART II is required for the prime contractor and any Subcontractors that will have a key role in the proposed contract. Factor 1: Specialized Experience (36.602-1(a)(1)and(2) Factor 1 consists of the response included in section F of the SF-330. Projects illustrated for this factor shall include work performed within the last five (5) years. Factor 2: Past Performance (FAR 36.602-1(a)(4) a. Past performance represents the Government’s confidence in the contractor’s ability to successfully perform as proposed and is based on an assessment of the contractor’s present and past performance. In order to facilitate the Government’s evaluation of the contractor’s past performance, the contractor shall submit a past performance questionnaire to at least (3) tee of the references listed in section F of the SF-330, or provide the associated Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) as an attachment to the technical proposal submission (any CPAR attached does not count toward the total page count). b. The questionnaire is included in Attachment 02. The completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be emailed directly from the evaluator to Joseph Pishioneri at Joseph.Pishioneri@bep.gov and received not later than the closing date of this RFP. It is the contractor’s responsibility to follow-up and ensure the questionnaires are received in a timely manner. c. Contractors are also advised that past performance information may be obtained from other sources known to the Government; and that the Government may also evaluate information from such other sources, even though the contractor does not include such information in its Proposal. Factor 3: Technical Approach and Sustainability (FAR 36.602-1(a)(2) Factor 3 shall be submitted as part of Section H of the SF-330. The technical approach shall be specific and detailed enough to clearly demonstrate the contractor’s understanding of the requirements in the statement of work. The contractor's proposed technical approach shall disclose, in as much detail as possible, the contractor’s plan for accomplishing all phases of the requirement. The technical approach shall address the extent of any proposed subcontracting including the identification of the subcontractor, which tasks/subtasks they will perform, and the percentage of work that the subcontractor will perform on each task/subtask. A sustainable design philosophy shall seek to reduce negative impacts on the environment, and the health and comfort of building occupants, thereby improving building performance. Utilizing a sustainable design philosophy shall encourage decisions at each phase of the design process that will reduce negative impacts on the environment and the health of the occupants, without compromising the bottom line. The sustainable design philosophy shall address the offerors experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction and the use of recovered materials, and their applicability to this project. Factor 4: Quality Control/Quality Assurance/ Title II Services (FAR 36.602-1(a)(6) Factor 4 shall be submitted as part of Section H of the SF-330. The offeror shall describe their quality control/quality assurance processes and practices, including providing any written procedures for the quality assurance of products. This section shall describe all calculations, specifications, and drawings verified for accuracy and adequacy by a separate, equally (or more) qualified individual from the originator. This section shall describe thoroughness and frequency of the review process, including clarifying the percentage of the product that is typically spot checked, or any sanity checks for reasonableness. Finally, the offeror shall provide a copy of their ISO 9001:2015 certification as proof of certification. The A/E offeror shall describe the Title II Services they plan to provide during the construction phase of the project. This section should describe the offerors’ process in providing title 2 services, including their process in addressing submittals, shop drawings and Requests for Information (RFI’s). Toughout this contract, the construction contractor will provide product submittals and shop drawings for review and approval. The offeror shall describe its process to approve, approve with comments, or reject with comments within 14 calendars days of receipt. During the construction phase of the project, the construction contractor will have questions, clarifications and/or concerns for a specific design process or field discovery. The construction contractor will submit a Requests For Information (RFI) and the offeror shall describe its process to approve the proposed solution or provide a viable solution within 14 calendar days of receipt. Factor 5: Resource Plan/ Key Personnel (FAR 36.602-1(a)(5) Factor 5 consists of responses included in the SF-330 document. The offeror shall describe the proposed team that will attend to all types of work within this contract, including the design of building alterations/renovations /repairs of historical and industrial facilities accommodating printing and related printing process. Included should be an organizational chart identifying lines of authority and supervisory responsibilities. Offeror shall describe its capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Key personnel shall consist of the following: Specialized Technical Personnel Project Manager Project Superintendent Provide resumes of all key personnel listing their qualifications, special training and experience over the past five (5) years. Each resume should include at a minimum, the following information: Name Educational background, including technical education/training Work experience covering the last 5 years, including titles, duties, dates, employer, and client references Specific qualifications to address critical elements of projects, project scheduling, and cost control Length of time employed with current firm SELECTION CRITERIA: Selection criteria outlined in Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 36.6 and Brooks Act provisions apply. Evaluation will be based on the following factors: 1) Specialized Experience, 2) Past Performance, 3) Technical Approach and Sustainability; 4) Quality Control/Assurance/Title II Services; and 5) Resource Plan/Key Personnel. Factors 1, and 2, Corporate Experience and Past Performance, are of equal value to each other, however are weighted heavier than the remaining factors. The remaining factors, (3-5) are of equal importance. Specialized Experience (36.602-1(a)(1)and(2) Section F of SF-330 The Government will evaluate the extent to which a contractor possesses relevant experience, performed within the last five (5) years, to the Government’s requirements under this solicitation and the degree of similarity in terms of size, scope and complexity; based upon the information provided in Section F of the SF-330. The evaluation will involve an assessment of the depth, breadth, and relevance of experience of the contractor, with particular emphasis on specialized experience designing building alterations/renovations/repair of historical industrial facilities and site preparations to accommodate equipment, equipment accessories and their utilities and the degree of similarity in terms of size, scope, and technical complexity to the solicitation requirements. When evaluating contractor experience under this solicitation, the Government will not consider the experience of proposed subcontractors. The Government reserves the right to verify the cited experience. The Offeror shall demonstrate experience acting as the prime contractor and managing construction subcontractors in design-build projects. Contractor Teaming Arrangements: Experience of each party to the contractor teaming arrangement will be evaluated only to the extent that it relates to the work that each party will be responsible for under the IDIQ. Experience of the contractor teaming arrangement, operating as a team, is more relevant than experience of the individual parties to the team as it represents experience of the team rather than that of the individual players. The evaluation will be made by reviewing the information submitted by the contractor. Failure of a contractor to provide a thorough description of how its experience is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicited requirements may result in the proposal being determined ineligible for IDIQ award. Past Performance (FAR 36.602-1(a)(4) Past performance is the measure of how a contractor has performed and satisfied its customers. Using the questionnaires or the associated Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR), and other available information, the Government will evaluate performance information on each contractor based on the past and present efforts. The evaluation will include assessments in areas such as, Technical (quality of product or service, compliance with performance schedules/timeliness, and Management or business relations.) Contractor Teaming Arrangements: Past performance of each party to the contractor teaming arrangement will be evaluated only to the extent that it relates to the work that each party will be responsible for under the IDIQ. Past performance of the contractor teaming arrangement, operating as a team, is more relevant than the past performance of the individual parties to the team as it represents past performance of the team rather than that of the individual players. Technical Approach and Sustainability (FAR 36.602-1(a)(2) The Government will evaluate the extent to which the technical approach (as provided in section H of the SF-330) demonstrates the contractor’s: understanding of the solicited contract requirements; strategy for providing solution in line with requirements in the Statement of Work utilization of subcontractors (if applicable); project management plan and the extent to which the plan demonstrates the contractor’s ability to manage the project tasks, potential issues, and assigned personnel; the adequacy of the contractor’s approach to providing experienced personnel to perform the requirements; plan to maintain continuity of assigned employees and ability to backfill vacancies in a timely manner; the adequacy of the contractor’s resource allocation, including labor categories and level of effort to accomplish each of the tasks in the SOW; contingency plan that demonstrates the contractor’s capability to prevent and adjust to major and minor interruptions during performance. Sustainable design principles shall include experience in: Energy conservation Pollution prevention Waste Reduction Use of Recovered Materials Offeror will be evaluated on its ability to illustrate how the sustainability experience will impact the contract requirements. Quality Control/Assurance/Title II Services (FAR 36.602-1(a)(6) The Government will evaluate the extent of the contractor’s Quality Control/Assurance (as provided in Section H of the SF-330) demonstrates the contractor’s: Written procedures for Quality Control/Assurance, including calculations, specifications, and drawings verified for accuracy and adequacy by a separate, equally (or more) qualified individual from the originator. The adequacy of the contractor’s review process including frequency of spot checks, sanity checks for reasonableness, and complete product review Evidence of ISO 9001:2015 certification utilization of subcontractors (if applicable); project management plan and the extent to which the plan demonstrates the contractor’s ability to manage the project tasks, potential issues, and assigned personnel; the adequacy of the contractor’s approach to providing experienced personnel to perform the requirements; plan to maintain continuity of assigned employees and ability to backfill vacancies in a timely manner; the adequacy of the contractor’s resource allocation, including labor categories and level of effort to accomplish each of the tasks in the SOW; contingency plan that demonstrates the contractor’s capability to prevent and adjust to major and minor interruptions during performance. The Government will evaluate the extent of the contractor’s Title II services; specifically: The ability to address submittals and shop drawings with in a timely manner. The offeror’s process shall demonstrate the ability to approve with comments, or reject with comments within 14 calendar days of receipt. The ability to address Requests For Information (RFI’s) within a timely manner. The offeror’s process shall demonstrate the ability to approve the proposed Construction contractor solution or provide a viable alternative solution within 14 calendar days of receipt. **It’s possible that project plans crafted during this contract are not implemented within the five year period of performance of the IDIQ contract. In that case, the Government reserves the right to execute the Title II services via another contract vehicle available or established at that time. Resource Plan/Key Personnel (FAR 36.602-1(a)(5) Based upon the information provided in the SF-330, the Government will evaluate the adequacy of the offeror's: Approach to providing the resources with the appropriate skills, depth of experience, training, and professional qualifications. Ability to maintain continuity of assigned employees and ability to back-fill vacancies in a timely manner. Accessibility, availability, qualifications and continuity of key personnel. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the Offeror's proposed resource allocation, including the labor categories and capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. The key personnel shall have but not limited to the following qualifications: Specialized Technical Personnel: Specialized Technical Personnel shall have a bachelor's degree from a U.S. accredited university or college with a major in engineering, architecture, or related technical field. Specialized Technical Personnel shall provide evidence of Professional Engineer active license and registration in Washington, DC and/or in the states of Maryland and Virginia. Personnel shall demonstrate work experience, and technical competence of electrical, mechanical, structural/civil, architectural, fire protection, or environmental requirements covering the last five (5) years. Project/Contract Manager: The Project/Contract Manager shall have a bachelor's degree from a U.S. accredited university or college with a major in engineering, architecture, or related technical field, and/or at least five years’ experience in managing architectural, engineering or construction projects of similar size and scope and five (5) years’ experience in Historical Government Buildings. The Project/Contract Manager shall be employed by the Prime Contractor. TECHNICAL APPROACH EVALUATION FACTORS Excellent Proposal greatly exceeds the Government’s requirements. The proposal solution is of the highest quality and is thoroughly justified or substantiated. It has a strength(s) in meeting the solicited requirements, and if any weakness(es) exist, they do not offset the strengths. The proposal does not contain any deficiencies. Overall, the proposed solution presents minimal risk to the Government. Good Proposal somewhat exceeds the Government’s requirements. The proposal solution is high quality and is well justified or substantiated. It has a strength(s) and weakness(es) in meeting the solicited requirements, but the strengths more than outweigh the weakness(es). The proposal does not contain any deficiencies. Overall, the proposed solution presents low risk to the Government Satisfactory Proposal meets the Government’s requirements. The proposed solution is of satisfactory quality and is well justified or substantiated. It has a strength(s) and weakness(es) in meeting the solicited requirements, but the strengths outweigh the weakness(es). The proposal does not contain any deficiencies. Overall, the proposed solution presents low to moderate risk to the Government. Marginal Proposal fails to satisfy the Government’s requirements. The proposed solution contains insufficient evidence to demonstrate a satisfactory level of quality and it cannot be determined if it is justified or substantiated. The proposal may have a strength(s) in meeting the solicited requirements; however, they are offset by either significant weakness(es) or deficiencies. Corrections of significant weakness(es) and/or deficiencies could result in an satisfactory Proposal, without a major rewrite of the Proposal. Overall, the Proposal represents moderate to high risk for the Government. Unsatisfactory Proposal fails to satisfy the Government’s requirements. The proposed solution is not reasonably justified or substantiated. In total, the solution contains numerous inconsistencies, significant weaknesses, and/or deficiencies. The Proposal may contain a strength(s), however, any strengths are outweighed by the significant weakness(es) and/or deficiencies. The Proposal has little to no chance of success and correction would require extensive revision that amounts to a major rewrite in order to be rated as satisfactory. The Proposal represents a high risk for the Government. EXPERIENCE EVALUATION FACTORS Extremely Similar Experience clearly demonstrates prior work that is extremely similar in size, scope, and complexity. Cited experience includes many strengths that more than offset any weaknesses. Given the contractor’s experience, there is no doubt the contractor has the ability to successfully perform this requirement. Similar Experience clearly demonstrates prior work that is similar in size, scope, and complexity. Cited experience includes strengths that more than offset any weaknesses. Given the contractor’s experience, there is little doubt the contractor has the ability to successfully perform this requirement. Somewhat Similar Experience demonstrates prior work that is somewhat similar in size, scope, and complexity. Cited experience includes weaknesses that offset strengths. Given the contractor’s experience, some doubt exists that the contractor has the ability to successfully perform this requirement. Not Similar and/or Not Relevant Experience fails to demonstrate prior work on projects similar in size, scope, and complexity. Cited experience includes weaknesses and no strengths. Given the contractor’s experience, significant doubt exists that the contractor has the ability to successfully perform the requirement. PAST PERFORMANCE FACTORS EXCEPTIONAL Contractor’s performance significantly exceeded most or all contract requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective. VERY GOOD Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective. SATISFACTORY Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory. MARGINAL Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. UNSATISFACTORY Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problems(s) for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) Performance information not recent or relevant as defined in the Solicitation. Unable to provide assessment. The following definitions shall be considered in this evaluation: Strength: An element of the Proposal which exceeds a requirement of the solicitation in a beneficial way to the Government. Weakness: A flaw in the Proposal that increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Significant Weakness: A flaw in the Proposal that appreciably increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Deficiency: A material failure of the Proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses that increase the likelihood of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable levels. THIS IS A PRESOLICATION NOTICE AND IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. Submittals must be received no later than 12:00 P.M. Eastern Standard Time (EST) February 10, 2021. Questions must be submitted no later than 12:00 P.M. EST January 19, 2021. Regulation requires the Selection Board not consider any submittals received after this date and time. Please email all required submittals to Joseph Pishioneri at joseph.pishioneri@bep.gov. NOTE: To avoid a conflict of interest, any contractor proposing as a prime may not have a subcontractor who is also proposing as a prime. As required by acquisition regulations, discussions for the purpose of determining prospective contractors’ qualifications will be conducted for those firms considered highest qualified by the selection board, based upon the evaluation criteria. It is anticipated discussions will be held virtually. Phone calls and personal visits for the purpose of discussing this solicitation with contracting/project management and/or engineering personnel are not allowed. CONTRACTING OFFICER INFORMATION: Bureau of Engraving and Printing Attn: Joseph Pishioneri Email: joseph.pishioneri@bep.gov
2031ZA2101000 Department of the Treasury Bureau of Engraving and Printing
1/8/21, 10:42 AM