22R2598 P-678 SOLICITATION.pdf

SOLICITATION NO. N40085-22-R-2598 P-678 DRY DOCK 8 SALTWATER SYSTEM FOR CVN-78, NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD, PORTSMOUTH, VA

All correspondence regarding this solicitation shall be directed via email to Rachel Honecker at rachel.n.honecker.civ@us.navy.mil.

RACHEL N. HONECKER 757-341-1652

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

29-Mar-2022

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

X

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________1688 calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________4 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________03 May 2022 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

NAVFACSYSCOM MID-ATLANTIC

CONTRACTING CORE

9324 VIRGINIA AVENUE

NORFOLK VA 23511-3095

N40085

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

N4008522R2598 74

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

N4008522R2598

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

BASE PRICE

FFP

Work to be performed in Phase 1. Price includes CLIN 0001AA through CLIN

0001AM.

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

BASE PRICE

FFP

Work to be performed in Phase 2. Price includes CLIN 0002AA through CLIN

0002AJ.

OPTION ITEM NO. 1

FFP

Work to be performed in Phase 2. Price includes CLIN 0003AA through CLIN

0003AP.

OPTION ITEM NO. 2

FFP

Work to be performed in Phase 1.

OPTION ITEM NO. 3

FFP

Work to be performed in Phase 1.

OPTION ITEM NO. 4

FFP

Work to be performed in Phase 2.

OPTION ITEM NO. 5

FFP

Work to be performed in Phase 2.

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0002 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0003 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0004 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0005 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0006 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0007 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT

4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

4.3 PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs)

4.4 CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES (SAM.GOV)

5. INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

6. ATTACHMENTS: MAY BE LOCATED ON CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES UNDER ATTACHMENTS

6.1 ATTACHMENT A – PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY LOG

6.2 ATTACHMENT B – SECNAV 5512 FORM

6.3 ATTACHMENT C – CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET

6.4 ATTACHMENT D – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

6.5 ATTACHMENT E – HISTORICAL SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION

6.6 ATTACHMENT F – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION COMMITMENT DOCUMENT

6.7 ATTACHMENT G – INDIVIDUAL SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

6.8 ATTACHMENT H – PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

6.9 ATTACHMENT I – PIEE SOLICITATION VENDOR ACCESS INSTRUCTIONS

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.1.1 This acquisition is being solicited on an unrestricted basis, with Full and Open Competition.

1.1.2 The NAICS code for this procurement is 237990 and the size standard is $39,500,000.

1.1.3 In accordance with DFARS 236.204, the magnitude of construction for this project is between 100,000,000 to $250,000,000.

1.1.4 This solicitation is formatted as a Request for Proposal according to FAR Part 15. This method permits evaluation of proposals based on price competition, technical merit and other factors; permits impartial and comprehensive evaluation of offerors' proposals; permits discussions if necessary; and ensures selection of the source whose performance provides the best value to the Government.

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

Description of Work:

This project is comprised of two phases of construction with a ship docking between Phase 1 and Phase 2. Phase 1 will construct 34.5kV site power distribution including underground duct banks, feeders, pad mounted switches, 34kV- 4.16kV substations and underground feeders to Pumpwell

8. Pumpwell 8 construction consists of Pumpwell 8 drainage capacity upgrades, L=HP0-replacement of Main Drain Pump (MDP) motors, back-up power for drainage pumps, interior electrical upgrades for a 4.16kV system to serve the drainage and MDP pumps, control booth and console, and SCADA system upgrades. Supporting structural and site upgrades include installation of micropile foundations, monorail, temporary pumpwell suction chamber plugs, pumpwell drainage piping routed through the abandoned South flooding flume, outfall structure, temporary cofferdam, railroad repairs and underground utilities relocation and paving.

Phase 2 will demolish two pump stations and their saltwater intake structures (Buildings 828 and

829) and construct two saltwater pump stations including their saltwater intakes, back-up power, and pile foundations including additional timber wharf piles. The project will construct an underground saltwater distribution system around the dry dock including direct buried piping and utility tunnel penetrations. Saltwater feeders will supply the North and South sides of the dry dock gallery and coping level with saltwater for cooling and firefighting needs through multiple piping manifolds. Saltwater return piping will be routed along the dry dock wall and transition into the abandoned North and South flooding flumes to outfall structures at the river. Temporary cofferdams will be required. Sitework includes crane rail reconstruction, railroad repair, utility relocations and paving.

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

2.1 The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

2.2 As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

2.3 The tradeoff process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition. The Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow consideration of award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror.

2.4 As stated in the solicitation, all technical factors when combined are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating; and all technical factors and the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating, when combined are approximately equal to price.

2.5 Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions.

Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal. The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(s) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(s). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. The solicitation requires the evaluation of price and the following non-price factors:

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Factor 2 – Management Approach and Schedule Factor 3 – Safety Factor 4 – Past Performance Factor 5 – Small Business Utilization and Participation

The distinction between experience and past performance is that experience pertains to the volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work described under the definition of recent, relevant projects, in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Past performance pertains to both the relevance of recent efforts and how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.

2. The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors 1, 2, 3, and 5) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 4). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality, or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-price proposal’s superiority to the Government. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

3. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor.

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Price shall be submitted on the Price Proposal Form included in the solicitation. The offeror shall submit the proposal in accordance with INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, 4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, 4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS. All submissions shall include the following:

• Cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, DUNS, CAGE code, Point of Contact (POC), POC phone number, and POC email address;

• Completed SF 1442 signed with all amendments acknowledged;

• Price Proposal Form;

• Copy of Representation and Certifications and proof of registration in System for Award

Management (SAM);

• Confirmation of filing of Veterans’ Employment and Training (VETS) VETS-4212 for the 2020/2021 filing cycle;

• Bid Guarantee in accordance with FAR Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee. Amount shall be at least 20 percent of the proposed price, but shall not exceed $3 million; and

• Responsibility Determination Information (see below).

• Small Business Subcontracting Plan

Note: Price information included in the non-price/technical proposal will not be considered. Likewise, non-price/technical information included in the price proposal will not be considered.

The offeror is required to submit a complete Price Proposal Form that includes completion of all contract line items numbers (CLINs). Pricing information is not required to be completed under Section 00 10 00 – Solicitation Contract Form in SF 1442. All required proposal documents shall be submitted in accordance with FAR 15.208.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILTY DETERMINATION INFORMATION – In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically FAR 9.104-1, General Standards. In a separate tab, the offeror shall provide the following information in the price proposal package:

1. One (1) signed bank reference demonstrating adequate financial resources. If offeror’s firm has a line of credit – provide information on how many figures offeror can borrow against the line of credit (ex: “medium 6 figures” – exact line of credit is not required).

2. The offeror shall provide the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for the prime contractor, certified by an independent accounting firm, if practicable, or signed by an authorized officer of the organization.

Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital, which will be used for the performance of the resultant contract. For Joint Venture arrangements, submit the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for each company in the Joint Venture and discuss the financial responsibilities among the companies. The Government may also utilize Dun & Bradstreet reports to evaluate the financial capacity of the offeror.

3. Description of offeror’s facilities and equipment.

4. Other offeror’s work presently under contract.

SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (April 2020) (REFERENCE FAR 52.219-9 ALT II AND

DFARS 252.219-7003) INFORMATION.

In accordance with FAR 19.7, all other than small businesses shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBSP) utilizing the template provided as Attachment G. Acceptability of the SBSP will be considered a responsibility matter. The SBSP will not be evaluated or rated by the SSEB, but reviewed by a Small Business Professional/Authorized Representative and the Contracting Officer for acceptability. The SBSP shall be negotiated and/or accepted within the time specified by the Contracting Officer. Failure to negotiate an acceptable subcontracting plan within the time limit prescribed by the Contracting Officer will render the offeror ineligible for award of the contract. The SBSP will be incorporated into the resulting contract.

NAVFAC’s command-wide small business subcontracting targets are shown below. These may be higher or lower than percentages that would represent realistic, challenging, small business subcontracting goals for this acquisition consistent with efficient and effective performance of the contract. These targets are based on a percentage of total planned subcontract dollars.

Small Business (SB) 40% Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) 5% HUBZone SB 3% Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB) 9% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) 3%

The SBSP shall be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Utilization and Participation factor. In accordance with DFARS 215.304(c)(i), when an evaluation assesses the extent that small businesses are specifically identified in proposals, those small businesses considered in the evaluation shall be listed in the SBSP.

Please note that SBSP goals and the participation rates provided in the Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) WILL NOT be the same. The participation rates within the SBPCD are provided as percentages of the total contract value; subcontract plan goals are provided as a percentage of planned subcontracting dollars. While the percentages will differ, the types of products/services identified in the SBSP, should be the same as those products/services identified in the SBPCD. Likewise, the planned small business subcontract dollars in the SBSP will be equal to (or in some cases greater than) the extent of small business participation identified in the SBPCD.

Although required to be submitted with offeror’s price proposal, this information will not be evaluated as part of the price proposal. This information forms the basis of your firm’s responsibility determination should your firm be considered for award. Proposal packages from unsuccessful offerors will not be returned to the offeror, but shall be destroyed by the Contracting Officer. No certificate of destruction will be issued.

(2) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items (see Section B of the solicitation). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section 00 10 00 of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair, reasonable, and balanced price:

(i) Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

(iii) Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

(b) Non-price Factors:

The offeror shall submit the proposal in accordance with INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, 4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, 4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS. All submissions shall include the following:

• Cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, DUNS, CAGE code, Point of Contact (POC), POC phone number, and POC email address;

• Refer to individual factors for page limitations. Pages that exceed indicated page limitations shall not be evaluated.

Note: Price information included in the non-price/technical proposal will not be considered. Likewise, non-price/technical information included in the price proposal will not be considered.

(1) Factor 1, Corporate Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The offeror shall submit the following information:

Submit a minimum of two (2) up to a maximum of five (5) construction projects performed by the Offeror that best demonstrates the Offeror’s relevant experience (projects similar in size, scope, and complexity to this project).

Projects submitted for the offeror shall have been completed within the past fifteen (15) years from the date of issuance of this RFP or be at least 75% complete by the date of issuance of the RFP. Projects that are not at least 75% complete as of the date of issuance of this RFP will be considered “Not Relevant”. Additionally, Projects completed more than fifteen (15) years prior to the date of issuance of this RFP will be considered “Not Relevant.”

For purposes of this procurement, relevant projects are further defined as:

Size: A final construction cost of $25,000,000 or greater. At least one project shall be $75,000,000 or greater.

Scope: New construction, performed in a marine environment, that demonstrates experience with cast-in-place concrete work and/or pre-cast concrete work. Individual projects do not need to demonstrate experience with both types of concrete work, but submitted projects must collectively demonstrate experience with both types of work.

Complexity: Collectively, submitted projects must demonstrate experience with all of below elements of work:

a) Installation of steel pipe piles, micropiles, and timber piles, cofferdam construction with dewatering.

b) Excavation and reconstruction work in pumpwells.

c) Heavy industrial utility distribution systems including:

1) Civil (e.g., fire protection water, water supply and return systems when located below grade);

2) Mechanical (e.g., fire protection water, water supply and return systems when located above grade or in utility tunnels);

3) Electrical (e.g., installation of medium voltage site power distribution systems including underground duct banks, feeders, and pad mounted switches);

d) Structural and site upgrades including equipment pads with pile foundations;

e) Installation of industrial pumps and pumping systems;

f) Construction of water pump stations (e.g., water intakes, back-up power, and pile foundations)

Ensure that project descriptions clearly address how each project meets the scope and complexity requirements as delineated above, and provides the final construction cost. The absence of any such information may result in the Project being considered Not Relevant, which could result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE for this Factor. The absence of one project that has a $75,000,000 or greater final construction cost that also meets the scope and complexity requirements will result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE for this Factor.

Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered. Furthermore, the offeror’s experience as a subcontractor will not be considered.

A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project;

rather offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project. The submission of a multiple award and/or indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contract as a whole will be considered Not Relevant.

The attached Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided pages (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods).

If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Experience submitted for one of the Offeror’s Joint Venture members while the Joint Venture member was a member in a different Joint Venture entity may be submitted to demonstrate relevant project experience. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members may be rated lower. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) total projects.

If the Offeror is proposing as a single corporate entity (i.e. not as a Joint Venture), the Offeror may submit relevant project experience it performed as a partner in a previous Joint Venture. Offerors are still limited to a total of five

(5) projects.

If an offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The evaluation will assess the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review five (5) projects total. Any projects submitted in excess of the limit of five (5) will not be considered. An offeror that does not submit a minimum of two (2) relevant projects as defined above will receive a rating of “Unacceptable” and will not be eligible for award.

Offerors that demonstrate the following additional experience on a Relevant project may be considered more favorably than those that do not:

a) Projects performed inside a Navy Shipyard Controlled Industrial Area (CIA).

b) Experience with construction dewatering to include deep well dewateringand monitoring/managing dewatering impacts through the use of geotechnical instrumentation and survey monitoring.

c) Experience with commissioning of complex industrial pumping systems and electrical controls.

(2) Factor 2, Management Approach and Schedule:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Submit a narrative work plan, summary level, and Critical Path Method (CPM) project schedule to describe your approach to managing the project and ensuring adherence to the project schedule. Both the schedule and narrative must address the execution of the base work and all options, as defined in the RFP. The narrative shall not exceed five (5) double-sided (or ten (10) single-sided) 8-1/2" x 11" pages. Provide both the summary level and critical path schedules, documenting any multiple critical paths, in 11" x 17" pages and in an Adobe PDF file, along with the CPM schedule source file. There is no page limit on the summary levelor CPM schedule.

The narrative work plan shall address major elements of work and demonstrate understanding of the scope, all phases and major milestones, technical complexities, and construction schedule required to achieve the work as identified in the solicitation. Identify activities that may affect the project timeline, including other/off site work activities. In addition, the plan shall address the following technical complexities:

a) Long lead time equipment - drainage pumps, generators, switchgear;

b) 35kV site Electrical Distribution System and 34kV – 4.16kV Substations;

c) Pumpwell 8 rehabilitation, including piping, drainage pumps, and associated control systems;

d) Main Drain Pump (MDP) Motor Replacements – 3 Motors;

e) Supporting Structural System Upgrades, including Micropiles;

f) Temporary Dry Dock Suction Channel Plugs Installation;

g) The installation and removal of temporary cofferdams;

h) Construction of Pump stations 6 and 8, including electrical power and SCADA connections

i) Pile foundation, including Additional Wharf Timber Piles;

j) Selective demolition and reconstruction of utility tunnels, and demolition and reconstruction of crane and railroad tracks.

The project schedule shall illustrate the offeror’s ability to achieve or improve on the contract completion date set out in the RFP (1,698 calendar days, including 15 days for bond approval). Identify the overall completion time for this project, in accordance with the RFP, as well as interim completion times (including each sequence of work as identified in the RFP) and key milestones for sequences as required to complete construction. The schedule shall demonstrate an understanding of the work, a logical sequence of events to accomplish the work, and contain enough information to identify all of the major milestones, as defined in the RFP.

The schedule shall be based on a contract award date of 31 August 2022. This date is for proposal purposes only and is not intended to indicate an anticipated/planned award date.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

Offerors will be evaluated on the extent to which they demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements of the RFP. A narrative work plan that identifies areas of risk in logistics and resource management, and provides a comprehensive contingency plan that addresses mitigation of any identified risks with potential solutions, may be considered more favorably. A schedule that proposes realistic contract duration shorter than the required duration indicated in the RFP may be considered more favorably. A schedule that proposes contract duration longer than indicated in the RFP will be rated UNACCEPTABLE.

NOTE: If a realistic duration shorter than specified in the RFP is proposed, the proposed duration will be incorporated into the resultant contract.

(3) Factor 3, Safety:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: The Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate; and Total Case Rate (TCR) for the specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY), as well as a safety narrative, as described further below. For a partnership or joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART rates and TCR for the specified five (5) CY for each contractor who is part of the partnership/joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Any fatalities experienced within this 5-year timeframe must be explained in detail, to include root cause and corrective actions.

NOTE: DART and TCR shall not be submitted for subcontractors.

1. DART Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ CY2017, CY2018, CY2019, CY2020, and CY2021 worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no DART rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. DART cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, and/or restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness.

b. Calculation of DART rate: Multiply the total number of DART cases by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

2. TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ CY2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. TCR cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness.

b. Calculation of TCR rate: Multiply the total number of TCR incidents by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

3. Technical Approach to Safety: Submit a narrative that addresses the following:

a. Describe the Offeror’ s approach to implementing and executing a Safety Management System (SMS) including Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describe the evaluation process used to select potential subcontractors.

c. Describe the processes of how the Offeror will oversee safety compliance of subcontractors at all levels throughout performance of the contract (to include the Offeror’s own in-house workforce).

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page.

4. The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information. These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The evaluation will collectively consider the DART rate, TCR, Technical Approach to Safety, and other sources of information available to the Government as part of such collective evaluation. The board will evaluate the DART rates and TCR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

1. DART Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing DART rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

d. This chart correlates the DART rate to the level of risk:

Risk DART Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 1.0 Low Risk From 1.0 to 1.99 Moderate Risk From 2.0 to 2.99 High Risk From 3.0 to 4.0 Extremely High Risk Greater than 4.0

2. TCR Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing TCR rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

d. This chart correlates the TCR rate to the level of risk:

Risk TCR Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 2.49 Low Risk From 2.5 to 3.49 Moderate Risk From 3.5 to 4.49 High Risk From 4.5 to 5.99 Extremely High Risk Greater than 6.0

3. The Technical Approach to Safety Narrative. To determine the degree to which the Offeror:

a. Describes a viable SMS that addresses elements; such as Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describes a methodical process of evaluating subcontractor’s safety performance in their selection process.

c. Describes a logical management plan to hold themselves and their subcontractors accountable for adhering to the safety requirements of the contract.

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page. Information on pages beyond this will not be considered.

4. The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information. These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

(4) Factor 4, Past Performance:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE

PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 – Corporate Expereince. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT

SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment D), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Rachel Honecker, via email at rachel.n.honecker.civ@us.navy.mil prior to proposal closing date.

Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs.

However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

Also include performance recognition documents received within the last five (5) years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/Entity Identifier numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

IMPORTANT: It is the responsibility of the offeror to provide accurate points of contact for each identified contract and current telephone numbers and/or email addresses. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the offeror’s references or the references’ unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor. Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues. Such explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

Performance awards or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on how well the offeror performed on the projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

The degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

- A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

- A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality;

- A pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.); and

- Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand.

(5) Factor 5, Small Business Utilization and Participation:

It is the policy of the Government to provide maximum practicable opportunities in its acquisitions to Small Business (SB) concerns, including Historically Underutilized Business Zone Small Business (HUBZone SB), Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), and other small business concerns. Further, it is the policy of the Government that such concerns will have the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in contract performance consistent with its efficient performance.

This Factor assesses both the historical achievements in utilizing small business concerns and the proposed small business participation commitment for this requirement. The offeror is required to demonstrate its previous commitment to SBs through its record of past utilization of SBs and the level of commitment to small business if awarded a contract under this solicitation.

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

1. All Offerors (both large AND small businesses) shall use Attachment E (Historical Small Business Utilization) to demonstrate their historical utilization of SBs. Each project submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience, shall be included on Attachment E. Failure to include each project submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience, on Attachment E, or the failure to fully complete Attachment E for each project may result in a deficiency. Information provided in a different format and/or on a form created by the offeror will not be evaluated. Attachments or addendums to Attachment E will not be evaluated. Only complete Attachment E. Offerors are permitted to expand portions of the form, as needed, to provide sufficient response. Instructions regarding how to complete Attachment E are included at the beginning of the attachment.

2. All Offerors (both large AND small businesses) shall use Attachment F (Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) to submit the following required information for evaluation of this factor:

• To demonstrate commitment to use small business concerns in the performance of this contract, identify by name the subcontractors that will be used to support each specific small business category (i.e., SB, HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, and SDVOSB). Identify the type and complexity of product/service to be subcontracted, and the type of commitment (i.e., teaming agreement, joint venture agreement, mentor protégé agreement, letter of commitment, etc.) with each subcontractor.

o If subcontractors are not identified by name, offerors shall provide a detailed explanation why not identified. If firm written commitments with SBs are not in place, offerors shall provide an explanation and rationale on the ability to achieve the proposed participation.

(See Attachment F, paragraph 5) o If the offeror does not intend to subcontract, provide a detailed explanation why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance. SBs intending to 100% self-perform are not required to provide an explanation. (See Attachment F, paragraph 6)

• To demonstrate maximum practicable participation of small businesses, identify (in terms of dollar value and percentage of the total contract value) the offeror’s proposed small business participation. The minimum required small business participation (i.e. work to be performed by small business as the prime contractor and/or work to be performed by small business subcontractors) is 20%. Offerors who are not able to meet the minimum total small business participation requirement of 20% (of the total contract value) shall provide a detailed explanation why the minimum total small business participation requirement cannot be achieved.

• Information provided in a different format and/or on a form created by the offeror will not be evaluated. Attachments or addendums to Attachment F will not be evaluated. Only complete Attachment F.

• Large business offerors may achieve the minimum total small business participation requirement through subcontracting to small businesses.

• Small business offerors may achieve the minimum total small business participation requirement through their own performance/participation as a prime as well as through a joint venture, teaming arrangement, and/or subcontracting with other small business concerns.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate the realism and likelihood of success in achieving the small business objectives of this acquisition based on the following:

1. The extent to which the offeror is able to demonstrate a history of supporting Government policies concerning the utilization of small business concerns (including all of the various socioeconomic categories of small business, HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, SDVOSB) and the success in achieving goals established by subcontracting plans on prior contracts. For projects submitted for Factor 1, Experience, that did not have established small business goals, consideration will be given to the utilization of the small business concerns and the degree of usage of small business relative to the total contract value.

2. The extent to which the offeror has demonstrated an achievable commitment to use small businesses (including HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, SDVOSB) in the performance of this contract within the SBPCD.

• The minimum small business participation requirement, through work performed by the small business prime and/or subcontracting with small businesses, shall meet or exceed 20% of the total contract value, unless the offeror provides a reasonable and well-documented explanation for why the minimum 20% small business participation requirement cannot be achieved.

o Offerors that demonstrate a clear commitment to providing maximum practical opportunity to small businesses may be rated higher.

o Proposing less than 20% total small business participation requirement may result in a deficiency.

o Offerors that do not demonstrate clear commitment to providing maximum practical opportunity to small businesses may result in a deficiency.

• The SBPCD will be evaluated to determine the extent to which small business concerns are specifically identified by name and socioeconomic category in the document and the degree to which small business concerns (including HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, and SDVOSB) will participate relative to the total contract value. The complexity and variety of the work small business concerns will perform and the degree of commitment to use named sources through formal teaming agreements, joint venture agreements, mentor protégé agreements, written/signed letters of /commitment, etc. will be evaluated to assess achievability of the commitment.

o If no subcontractors are identified and a detailed explanation for why subcontractors are not identified with firm commitments AND the offerors ability to achieve the proposed small business participation is not provided, the offeror may be rated lower.

o If the offeror does not intend to subcontract and a detailed explanation concerning why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance is not provided, the offeror may be rated lower. (Not applicable to SBs intending to 100% self-perform).

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT:

The site visit information will be provided via Amendment.

4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS: In response to this request for proposal, the complete proposal shall include the Price Proposal and the Non-Price…