Request for Qualifications-Scoreboard-Amend-2.pdf

Video Scoreboard for US Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA) Tomb Field Solicitation Number: 693JF720R000021-Amendment no. 2

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

PART 1 – GENERAL

1.1. INTRODUCTION, PURPOSE, SCOPE

1.1.1. This statement of work describes the removal of existing scoreboard and to supply, design, if necessary and install a new video scoreboard for Tomb Field located at the USMMA.

1.1.2. The USMMA campus consists of 82 acres along the Long Island shoreline, about 50 buildings, waterfront structures and facilities, berthing of vessels and small craft and athletic fields.

1.1.3. The Academy is in operation 365 days a year, 24 hours a day and must continue to be in operation during all phases of construction.

1.1.4. The United States Merchant Marine Academy athletics program has a rich history of success and is a vital component in the development of exemplary leaders. The Mariner athletic program is the primary laboratory for Midshipmen leadership development and is sustained through recruitment/retention of the nation’s best and brightest students. As an NCAA Division III institution, the Academy prides itself on providing Midshipmen a first-class experience in the classroom and in competition. The addition of a video scoreboard will enhance the overall experience for all midshipmen through its use in graduation, parades, special events and athletic competition. Tomb Field is the “front porch” of the Academy and this video scoreboard will be viewed by all Midshipmen, Faculty, Staff, and Alumni throughout their experiences on campus. This upgrade will improve the appearance of our aging facilities at the Academy and it will assist in the development of our Midshipmen’s experience. The events at Tomb Field include football, soccer, lacrosse, graduation and parades.

1.2. PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this statement of work is for the contractor to provide a complete fully and operational and functioning video scoreboard (maybe commercially-off-the-shelf) for Tomb Field. The contractor shall provide all required investigative work, design, demolition, rigging and all required construction services to meet the requirements in this statement of work.

1.3. SCOPE

1.3.1. The contractor shall provide and install a fully functional and operational video scoreboard that will be 60 feet wide by 30 feet high to ensure maximum viewing capability from all seating areas up to 140 yards away. The video scoreboard shall be a minimum of 10 feet above the ground.

1.3.2. The Contractor shall remove and dispose of the existing scoreboard located at Tomb Field and all associated accessories and supports in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.

1.3.3. The contractor will be required to relocate the existing anchor and flag pole and remove an existing shot-put pad.

1.3.4. The contractor shall hire a land surveyor and independent underground utility locating company to mark out all existing underground utilities and provide a scaled land survey showing all underground utilities.

1.3.5. The new video scoreboard shall include but not limited to the following features.

a. Speaker and Audio system.

b. LED color display board based on Multi-Color or equal and Nichia or equal.

c. The pixel resolution shall be in a range of 14-16mm. The resolution shall provide a high quality viewing experience for the audience from the distances described above. The resolution range based on pixel size must be 700x1500.

d. This LED display must have the ability to change color, size, brightness and scale to meet the needs of football, track and field, soccer and lacrosse.

1.3.6. The contractor shall submit to the CO a full proposal of the new video scoreboard including dimensions, weight, construction details, material, material thickness, material finish, operational features, electrical connections and electrical requirements including voltage, phase and frequency. The submittal shall include pictures and drawings that fully resemble the finished product including USMMA approved colors and approved logo “USMMA” in channel letters on top of the structure. The submittal shall also include scoreboard controllers, consoles, media systems, hard drives, audio systems, Wi Fi, internet connection, etc. The submittal shall include the video scoreboard programming capabilities to support all athletic functions including coring, timing, free standing clocks, scoring and game clock devices.

1.3.7. The contactor shall submit to the CO a full proposal for review and approval to the COR including the structural design signed and sealed by a licensed structural engineer registered in New York State. The design must take into account all structural loads from the new video scoreboard including dead load, live load and wind load. The Structural design shall include all required footings, cross bracing, etc.

1.3.8. The contractor shall submit to the CO for review and approval a full electrical design drawing signed and sealed by a licensed professional engineer.

1.3.9. The contractor shall submit to the CO for review and approval a full site drawing signed and sealed by a licensed Civil Engineer that will show the exact location of the new video scoreboard, relocation of existing anchor and flag pole, new foundation, structural supports, electrical service, electrical route and electrical power source and all other required accessories required to provide a fully functional video scoreboard.

1.3.10. The contractor shall submit to the CO for review and approval to the CO a full rigging plan for both the removal and disposal of the existing scoreboard and installation of the new scoreboard.

1.3.11. Required in Phase II of the Design-Build Process: The contractor shall submit to the CO a full construction cost estimate for review and approval that includes all required costs to provide a fully functional video scoreboard for Tomb Field at the USMMA.

1.3.12. The contractor shall order the new scoreboard and start construction only after all required submittals have been reviewed and approved by the CO.

1.3.13. The contractor shall provide a full warranty on the new video scoreboard for a minimum of 10 years.

1.3.14. The contractor shall complete all work described in this statement of work by December 11, 2020.

1.3.15. All work shall be performed by a contractor licensed to perform work in New York State. All new work shall be in accordance with the New York State Building Code, NCAA, NFPA Electrical Code, OSHA and Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) means the organization, office, or individual responsible for approving layout drawings, equipment, an installation or a procedure. Usually the AHJ is the building and/or fire official of the city or county in which the job site is located.

1.3.16. All Engineering work shall be performed by a licensed professional engineer registered in New York State.

1.3.17. All surveying work shall be performed by a licensed land surveyor registered in New York State.

1.4. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.4.1. In Phase I of the two-phase design-build selection procedure, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “offerors”) submit certain specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the design-build construction contract resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will short-list with the technically acceptable offers of the Phase I to compete for the design-build contract in Phase II by submitting proposals in accordance with Section M of the Phase II RFP. The best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price pursuant to FAR 15.101-2 Lowest price technically acceptable source selection process.

1.4.2. Firms formally organized as design-build entities, design firms and construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals.

Associations may be as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal. To qualify for Phase II, the Offeror or Offeror’s subcontractor are required to have professional architects and engineers, registered in the appropriate technical disciplines as specified in FAR 52.236-25 Requirements for Registration of Designers (June 2003). All designs must be under the direct supervision of appropriately licensed professionals for each discipline involved.

1.4.3. Phase I Evaluation Factors:

Only firms meeting the minimum requirements (PASS/FAIL) will be considered for further evaluation for possible selection during Phase II Request for Proposals (RFPs). Qualifications will be evaluated in Phase I to determine no more than the three (3) most highly qualified Offerors. Each proposal will undergo a Technical Evaluation utilizing the Evaluation Factors as defined below as equally important and in PART 3 of this Phase I solicitation. Phase I does NOT involve a pricing submission or evaluation of price.

Location Factor Number Description Order of Importance

Section 1 Cover Letter N/A Section 2 Factor 1 Technical Approach (but not detailed design or technical information

Equally important as Factor 2

Section 3 Factor 2 Technical Qualifications

Section 4 Factor 2a Specialized experience and technical competence

Equally important as Factor 1

Factor 2b Capability to perform (see 4.2.2.1., 1.4.1., 3.2.1.)

Equally important as Factor 1

Factor 2c Past Performance of the offeror’s team (including the architect-engineer and construction members

Equally important as Factor 1

1.4.4. Intent for No Discussions: Offerors are hereby advised that the Government intends to evaluate qualifications and select no more than the three (3) most highly qualified Firms to proceed to Phase II without discussions or any contact with Firms concerning the proposals received for Phase I. The Government reserves the right to contact Firms and/or conduct discussions in Phase I if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

PART 2 – SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE I, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFERORS

2.1. PHASE I REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

Design-Build Firms meeting the requirements described in this announcement are invited to submit a completed SF

330. Firms responding shall submit a single SF 330 and list their intended use of outside consultants in Part I, Section C. Outside consultants may supplement a firm’s capabilities but shall not be used as a basis for your firm to meet the Minimum Qualification Requirements for Factor II.

The technical proposal shall be submitted by email only no later than August 28, 2020 at 11:00 pm to alfredia.rich-murphy@dot.gov cc: lachelle.johnson@dot.gov. Please ensure that all correspondence includes the solicitation number 693JF720R000021 in the subject line.

Each Evaluation Factor Submission Requirement of the proposal shall be submitted as a separate PDF document. Each submission shall indicate the following on a cover page:

NAME OF OFFEROR, FACTOR # (1,2,3)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION (FAR 3.104)

PHASE I PROPOSAL FOR 693JF720R000021

2.2. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND FORMATTING

Proposals shall be typewritten, with fonts no smaller than 11 points, 1/2" top, bottom and 1" side margins, single space, paginated, portrait mode on letter size paper; except charts and matrices may be displayed in landscape mode. No hyperlinks or electronic media will be allowed or considered. Phase I proposals shall consist of four (4) Sections (Section 4 has 3 subsections), detailed below. Failure to address any of the requirements herein may result in rejection of the Offeror’s Phase I proposal.

Failure to address any of the requirements herein may result in rejection of the offeror’s Phase I proposal.

2.3. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SECTION 1—COVER LETTER with the following information:

A. Identification of the business entity submitting the offer;

B. Name, Address, Telephone and Facsimile numbers of Offeror and email address;

C. DUNS Number;

D. Name, telephone number, title and signature (and electronic addresses if available) of person(s) authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.

E. Joint ventures, SBA Mentor – Protégé, or other teaming proposals shall clearly identify the roles and level of participation of each firm in the proposed work and shall include the Small Business Administration approval of Small Business status of the offering business entity. Small Business Administration approval of Small Business status shall be included with Phase I proposal submission. Failure to include SBA certification of small business status for purposes of this solicitation with submission of the Phase I proposal shall result in rejection of the offer.

Joint Venture Agreement: (1) All offers submitted by joint ventures must include a copy of the joint venture agreement which fully discloses the legal identity of each member of the joint venture, the relationship between the members, the form of ownership of each member, and any limitations on liability or authority for each member. (2) An authorized representative of each member of the joint venture must sign the submission accompanying an offer regardless of any agency relationship established between the members. No page limit.

SBA Mentor – Protégé Agreement: If a business concern is contemplating an 8(a) Mentor- Protégé Joint Venture on this project, evidence shall be provided from the Offeror that the Mentor-Protégé Agreement has been submitted and approved by the Small Business Administration (SBA) by the closing date of Phase I submission. All Mentor-Protégé Joint Ventures must be in accordance with SBA requirements. Mentor-Protégé Joint Ventures applications must be approved by the Mentor-Protégé’s cognizant SBA office on or before the date that Phase I proposals are due. Failure to demonstrate SBA approval of the Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture with the Phase I proposal shall result in rejection of the offer. No page limit.

F. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent mailto:alfredia.rich-murphy@dot.gov mailto:alfredia.rich-murphy@dot.gov mailto:lachelle.johnson@dot.gov shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent's authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

G. A table of contents that identifies each of the Sections submitted.

H. Proof of Bonding Capacity: Required to assure that Offeror’s selected for Phase II will have the bonding capacity for both performance and payment bonds as required under the terms and conditions of this solicitation and resultant contract pursuant to FAR 52.228-15.

Each Offeror shall submit evidence from an approved corporate surety or an individual surety indicating a single and aggregate bonding capacity of the Offeror and is not dependent on any teaming arrangement between prime and subcontractors. (For a listing of approved corporate sureties see website at https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/ref/suretyBnd/c570_a-z.htm).

FAR 28.202 (Acceptability of corporate sureties) and FAR 28.203 (Acceptability of individual sureties) provide additional information regarding corporate and individual sureties. Also, see FAR 52.228-15 Performance and Payment Bond - Construction (b) (1), (2) for penal amounts.

Each Offeror shall submit a Surety Letter from its surety company on company letterhead demonstrating the surety’s commitment to bond the Offeror at a minimum of $1million. The Surety Letter shall guarantee that the Offeror has the bonding capacity to perform the task based on the Offeror's own merit and that the capacity is not dependent on any teaming arrangement between prime and subcontractors. The Surety Letter shall also state the current credit rating of the Surety. No page limit.

I. Certifications and Representations: Offeror’s Certifications and Representations will be obtained from the United States federal government’s System for Award Management (SAM) database.

The Offeror shall ensure information is current in SAM prior to the Phase I response due date.

Anomalies and inconsistencies found in the Offeror’s Certifications and Representations may result in deeming the Offeror’s Phase I proposal non-responsive.

PART 3 – TECHNICAL QUALIFICATION EVALUATION – PHASE I

3.1. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SECTION 2—FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

3.1.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Provide information that describes the offeror’s organization and intended technical approach to execute the design-build contract per paragraph 1.1.2. All six (6) areas below must be addressed in the Phase I proposal. The information provided for this Factor 2, Organization & Technical approach, shall not exceed twenty (20) pages; if more than twenty (20) pages are submitted, only the first twenty (20) will be evaluated. Clearly and concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution. The twenty (20) page limit does not include resumes submitted for key personnel identified, below.

3.1.1.1. Organization:

Describe which firms, firms’ resources, the relative firms’ roles and responsibilities and any contractual arrangements that have been established to constitute the offeror’s design-build team. Clearly describe any teaming or joint venture arrangements, including a clear description of each firm’s roles and responsibilities on the project. The Offeror shall document teaming arrangements with its design firms(s) (see attachment 6 as a guide) if the design is not self-performed as a part of the prime. A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) may be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation). The proposal shall:

1) Include a simple organizational chart, illustrating the organization, including the proposed quality control group(s). Clearly distinguish contractor (Prime/Sub, etc.) relationship/affiliations.

2) Present a matrix of responsibilities for each firm in executing the key work breakdown structure activities of the project, including design and construction activities for each major feature (i.e., site work, utilities and each scoreboard, or building).

3) Identify the design firm(s) chosen for the project, if not to be self-performed.

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/ref/suretyBnd/c570_a-z.htm

4) Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing the how the design and construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team

5) Include a key personnel organization chart that clearly depicts the key positions and the names of the personnel, their firm affiliations and their job locations, their job/position title within the organization. The key personnel organization chart shall be consistent with the corporate organization chart, with the matrix of responsibilities assigned to the D-B team firms, and with the list of key personnel to be provided under the Tab, “Key Personnel”. Clearly identify contractor (Prime/Sub, etc.) relationship/affiliations.

6) Describe the design team management and quality control plan for the design process and completed design documents. Seamless coordination is essential during design phase.

7) Describe the construction team management and quality control plan for the construction of proposed facilities and site work.

3.1.1.2. Collaborative Approach for Design-Build:

1) Describe the technical approach to design and construction of the scoreboard.

2) Describe interactions within the team and with the USMMA during the design. Specifically describe design plan to meet submittal requirements, changes, and quality control.

3) Describe the roles of all key team members during design.

4) Describe the type of video scoreboard to be used on the project, by which team and how the team intends to incorporate video scoreboard into the design to avoid constructability issues.

5) Describe the role and interaction of the design team with the construction team during construction. Include control and approval of revisions to the accepted design; requests for information; shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; Quality Control;

Commissioning; Testing; Special Inspections; and contract completion and closeout.

3.1.1.3. Planning and Scheduling:

1) Describe the time control capabilities and systems to be used to plan design and construction and how the schedule will be used to manage design and construction. Discuss internal procedures for handling delays to minimize time growth or “schedule creep”.

2) Describe the Conceptual Approach to the seventy-seven (77) day Start-up/Commissioning/Training Period to run concurrently with the ten (10) year Materials/Workmanship and Performance Warranty Period. (If other than, include your proposed.)

a. In Phase II, the offeror will develop a summary schedule. In Phase I, the Government is interested in the offeror’s planning and scheduling capabilities.

3.1.1.4. Self-Performed Work:

Generally, describe the items the offeror will self-perform to comply with FAR Clause 52.219-14 -- Limitations on Subcontracting.

3.1.1.5. Quality Control:

1) Describe the team’s quality control approach, corporate systems and capabilities to maintain quality control of the design and construction.

2) Describe the proposed quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan.

3) Provide specific information on how you will manage design quality control, track design evolution and changes during design to meet the schedule and to facilitate quicker Government reviews.

4) Provide information on how you will handle internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, submittal reviews, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as-builts and completion documentation.

5) In addition to the required designer-of-record roles specified within the RFP for maintaining integrity of the design, describe any other DOR involvement in the quality control process, if any.

a. There is no need to submit a quality control plan as the successful offeror will provide that after award.

b. In Phase I, the Government is interested in demonstrable capabilities to assure and control quality and how the offeror can achieve or exceed the contract’s quality control system requirements.

3.1.1.6.1. Key Project Personnel Capabilities and Experience:

(Not included in the twenty (20) page count limit above.)

1) Provide a consolidated list of key personnel with name, position title and description of project responsibility for each.

2) Provide at least one (1) alternate for all Key Personnel.

3) Include key designers, whether employed by the prime or by a design subcontractor.

4) For each person provide a brief resume, using the Key Personnel Resume forms (attachment 4) as a guide.

5) The following Key Personnel are required:

a. (Prime) Project Manager. This individual shall have a minimum of five (5) years of experience in projects of similar size and complexity facility design and the construction industry. The Project Manager shall be responsible for the overall management and coordination of the contract and shall be the central point of contact with the Government for performance of all work under the contract including warranty requirements. They shall have an intimate working knowledge of the project requirements and design and construction issues. The Project Manager shall oversee delivery accomplishment, administer all instructions, and answer all questions from the Contracting Officer and Contracting Officer Representative during the life of the contract. The Project Manager shall be responsible for ensuring that adequate internal controls and review procedures are followed in order to eliminate conflicts, errors and omissions and for ensuring that all technical requirements are met.

b. Architect of Record. This individual shall have a minimum of five (5) years of experience in projects of similar size and complexity facility design and the construction industry, and a minimum of ten (10) years in the general industry. They shall have performed in the capacity as “Architect of Record” for a minimum of five (5) years.

They shall be an expert design professional, knowledgeable and experienced in project sequencing. This individual shall also have a demonstrated, relevant, understanding and experience in codes, criteria, guidelines, and standards related to their discipline. The individual shall have a complete understanding of their disciplines, specifically:

Architectural systems design & installation, building envelope, doors, windows, acoustical properties, and their interface with other systems. The Architect of Record shall be a Registered Architect in the State of New York.

c. Project Site Superintendent. This person shall have a minimum of ten (10) years of experience in government construction contracts and five (5) years as a Project

Superintendent. The contractor will ensure that a competent superintendent is on site at all times. They should be directly overseeing all work to include subcontractors, safety, and quality control. They are responsible to ensure all labor and safety requirements are complied with and ensure the work site is cleaned each work day. All communications concerning day-to-day workmanship on the project is the responsibility of the superintendent who has the necessary authority to act for the Contractor. This position may be “dual hatted” with the SSHO position.

d. Safety Representative (Site Safety Health Officer (SSHO). This individual shall have a minimum of five (5) years’ experience directly responsible for the safety program and site safety and knowledgeable in all Federal and State safety requirements. Required training is the 40 Hour Construction Safety Hazard Awareness Training Course for Contractors, which proof of completion shall be included with the resume and proposal.

Site activities performed in conjunction with this program may pose safety hazards, which require specialized expertise to effectively address and eliminate. The Contractor shall be responsible for preparing and implementing an effective safety and health program that includes a generic site safety and health plan. This position may be “dual hatted” with the Superintendent position.

e. All designers of record shall be registered in New York in accordance with contract clause: 52.236-25, Requirements for Registration of Designers.

6) Provide unequivocal letters of commitment from all proposed key personnel not currently employed by the team members. Use the form letter (attachment 5) as a guide.

3.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

3.2.1. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the organization and technical approach. The Government will evaluate the firm’s understanding of D-B and the capability to execute the project.

3.2.2. The Government will evaluate clarity and strength of the overall organization, the structure and staffing to execute the entire scope of work. The Offeror is required to select and commit to design firms to achieve an “acceptable” rating and is preferred to have completed with that design firm (or currently be 100% complete) on a previous project submitted within the last five (5) years. Joint venture participant’s contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background.

3.3. TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS EVALUATION – PHASE I – FACTOR 2

3.3.1. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SECTION 3 – FACTOR 2a – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND

TECHNICAL COMPETENCE

3.3.2. Submission Requirements:

A. The offeror shall document recent, relevant Construction Specialized experience on similar projects and Designer Specialized experience. Offerors may identify both public and commercial projects that are similar to the instant requirement. If the offeror is a joint venture, each Firm shall provide information demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project. The information provided for Factor 1, Specialized Experience, shall not exceed twenty (20) pages; if more than twenty (20) pages are submitted, only the first twenty (20) will be evaluated.

B. Relevant experience examples may include both public and commercial work. All projects identified must be 100% complete, or have been completed within the last seven (7) years from the proposal due date. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the projects identified to those performed by the division or unit being proposed as part of the Design-Build team for this offer. It is preferred the design and construction firm have completed at least one (1) project together as the prime design-build team within the last five (5) years.

C. “Relevant” is defined as projects similar to the project in this solicitation in scope, magnitude and complexity and that have a logical connection with the requirements of this RFP.

D. The Offeror shall submit no more than three (3) projects for completed projects similar to the size, scope and complexity as described in Paragraph 1.3.

3.3.3. Reference Project Tables: Reference project tables shall be submitted for up to three (3) project examples demonstrating relevant construction and design experience. Each element identified in the tables shall be completed for each submitted project. The offeror shall annotate whether they were the design-builder, prime construction contractor, or designer of record for the project. Only projects where the offeror was the design builder, prime construction contractor, or designer of record shall be evaluated.

A. For Construction Experience: In addition to the requirements above, only those projects for which the Offeror was the Prime Contractor shall be submitted. Offerors shall explain how the information provided is relevant to the proposed acquisition and the projects selected shall clearly demonstrate the design and construction capabilities of the Offeror. For each project, provide project specific information in a Table format.

B. For Design Experience: In addition to the requirements above, only those projects for which the Designer was the Designer of Record shall be submitted. Offerors shall explain how the information provided is relevant to the proposed acquisition and the projects selected shall clearly demonstrate the design capabilities of the Offeror. For each project, provide project specific information in a Table format.

C. Supplemental Narrative: The offeror may provide a supplemental narrative (not project lists), not to exceed two (2) pages, explaining how any corporate experience that is not directly related to the specific projects submitted is applicable to this project and how the Government will benefit.

D. Teaming, Design-Build Experience: The offeror should describe any previous teaming experience between current team members if not described in the project list. Describe team members’ experience on projects if not included on the project list. The firm(s) preparing the design must demonstrate qualifications and experience in sustainable design and development. The above information is limited to projects that are 100% complete or that have been completed within the past seven (7) years of the due date of Phase I proposals.

3.3.4. EVALUATION CRITERIA for Specialized Experience:

3.3.4.1. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, relevant experience of the offeror (prime contractor and design firm) in design, construction or design-build, relative to their role on this project. The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations. Federal Government project experience will not necessarily be rated more favorably than non-Federal Government project experience.

3.3.4.2. The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of the offeror for any cited projects or any other recent projects for which the offeror was a participant. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

3.3.4.2.1. Offerors that demonstrate more recent and relevant experience shall be rated more favorably.

3.4. TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS – PHASE II—FACTOR 2

3.4.1. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SECTION 4—FACTOR 2c – PAST PERFORMANCE

3.4.2. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

3.4.2.1. In accordance with FAR 42.1503(e), past performance will be evaluated using the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). If no relevant past performance history is available for your DUNS number, you may choose to utilize the attached Customer Satisfaction Survey/ Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment 1) which will be used for evaluation. The Government will only evaluate up to five (5) Customer Satisfaction Surveys/ Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) combined for prime contractor, the design firm(s).

Government databases will be checked and previous customers and/or evaluators may be contacted as references or verification of performance. All performance ratings shall be considered for contracts completed within the past five

(5) years from the date proposals are due. The Government reserves the right to evaluate past performance information on proposals submitted in response to this Phase I solicitation from any available source.

3.4.2.2. All projects submitted on a Customer Satisfaction Survey/Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) must be 100% construction complete or completed within five (5) years preceding the date proposals are due. The 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, Specialized Experience. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Customer Satisfaction Surveys/Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) should be submitted with your proposal, but are not required. 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, alfredia.rich-murphy@dot.gov via email prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. This does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. While the Government may elect to consider data from any and all other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror.

3.5. EVALUATION CRITERIA for Past Performance:

3.5.1. Past performance assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an offeror’s ability to supply the products and services that meet a user’s needs and the degree of success of the D-B team's recent (turned over within 5 years preceding the date of this solicitation or 100% complete), relevant experience. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall receive one of the following ratings: Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence or Unknown Confidence (Neutral). This is based on a demonstrated record of performance.

3.5.1.2. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of design or construction, timeliness, management of the work subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and designer or contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, warranty work, etc. (see Attachment 1). The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, problem resolution for design or construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government also places a higher value on projects which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation. The Government also places a higher value on projects which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully.

mailto:alfredia.rich-murphy@dot.gov

Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its proposed key personnel, apart from that of the entity.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance, or for whom information on past performance is not available, or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown or neutral past performance.

4. PHASE I EVALUATION PROCEDURES

4.1. PHASE I OVERALL RATING: In addition to individual factor ratings, the Government will assign an overall rating for the Phase I proposal.

4.2. PHASE I EVALUATION PROCEDURES

4.2.1. The evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation will be based on the content of the proposal, proposal corrections and any relevant information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information, and shall be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria specified in this solicitation. The DOT/MARAD will not consider any proposal incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

4.2.2. EVALUATION

4.2.2.1. Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for the Phase I submission, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine their performance capability. The Government does not intend to develop a competitive range or conduct discussions with Phase I offerors. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it in response to this Phase I solicitation.

4.2.2.2. The Government reserves the right to allow proposal corrections or clarifications, if deemed necessary to determine the most highly qualified offerors.

4.2.2.3. The Contracting Officer, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will select no more than three (3) of the most highly qualified offerors to short-list for Phase II.

4.1. EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

4.3.1. General: Each proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the specified evaluation criteria identified in this Phase I solicitation. After all proposals are evaluated and assigned ratings, the Government will compare the ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages of proposals against each other in order to determine which Offerors are the most highly qualified under Phase I to short-list for participation in Phase II.

4.3.2. Rating System: After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, DOT/MARAD will assign an adjective rating of “Exceptional”, “Very Good”, “Satisfactory”, “Marginal”, or “Unsatisfactory” to each factor.

PART 4 – PHASE II PROPOSAL SUMMARY (FOR INFORMATION ONLY)

IMPORTANT NOTICE

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS SECTION BELOW

THIS SECTION IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION ONLY.

PHASE II RFP WILL BE ISSUED TO THE MOST HIGHLY QUALIFIED

OFFERORS (NO MORE THAN THREE) SELECTED AS A RESULT OF THIS

PHASE I EVALUATION.

THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL FACTORS ARE GIVEN FOR INFORMATION ONLY IN

ACCORDANCE WITH FAR 36.303-1.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THESE PHASE II TECHNICAL FACTORS AS PART OF THE PHASE I

PROPOSAL. COMPLETE PHASE II REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PACKAGE WILL BE ISSUED

TO NO MORE THAN THE 3 MOST HIGHLY QUALIFIED OFFERORS AFTER AUGUST 28,

2020. EVALUATION FACTORS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.

4.1. BASIS OF AWARD, PHASE II

A maximum of three (3) Offerors will advance to Phase II. Phase II evaluation shall be based on the Offeror’s technical proposal and price proposal in accordance with the Best Value Continuum lowest price technically acceptable process (FAR 15.101-2). The Government will award to the Offeror where the expected outcome of the acquisition in the Government’s estimation provides the best value in response to the terms and conditions included in the Phase II solicitation. Contract award shall be made after review and evaluation of the Phase II proposals.

4.2. PHASE II TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION FACTORS (not yet definitive and are subject to change).

The Phase II Technical Evaluation factors are listed below and will be based on lowest price technically acceptable selection procedures.

Phase II Technical Evaluation factors will include:

Factor 1: Design Technical: Detailed Technical Approach for Design and Construction Subfactor 1: Design Quality 2: Capability 3: Expertise

Factor 2: Proposed Contract Duration, Summary Schedule, and Project Management

Subfactor 1: Past Performance Subfactor 2: Project Management Subfactor 3: Schedule Subfactor 4: Disposal Plan Subfactor 5: Safety Plan

Factor 3: Price

PART 5 – PHASE I ATTACHMENTS

5.1. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 – Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0) Attachment 5 – Letter of Commitment Key Personnel Attachment 6 – Teaming Arrangement Form

Note: Attachments 0, 2, 3, 4, were removed and 5 and 6 are optional examples, only.