80KSC021R0006 - Phase 1 RFP.pdf

(See ).

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair) IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

9. FOR INFORMATION

CALL:

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

SOLICITATION

1. SOLICITATION NUMBER

CODE

4. CONTRACT NUMBER

7. ISSUED BY

11. The contractor shall begin performance within

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

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

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

b. An offer guarantee

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

d. Offers providing less than

STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 8/2014)

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(d) calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will be rejected.

is, is not required.

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

(date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers will be publicly opened at that time. Sealed envelopes copies to perform the work required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by (hour) award, YES NO notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory negotiable.

calendar days and complete it within calendar days after receiving

a. NAME b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

12b. CALENDAR DAYS

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

3. DATE ISSUED PAGE OF PAGES

80KSC021R0006

TBD

John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA Procurement Office Code: OP-CS Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS (Title, identifying number, date)

This is Phase 1, Request for Qualifications, of a 2 Phase Design/Build Project to Upgrade the Vehicle Assembly Building 325 Ton Crane at Kennedy Space Center, Florida. Phase 2 will be provided at a later date to those Offerors selected from this Phase 1. Non-Selected Phase I Offerors will be notified.

FAR 52.219-6, Notice of Total Small Business Set Aside (Mar 2020) applies. This is a total Small Business Set Aside.

Offers will only be accepted from Small Business offerors. The applicable NAICS Code is 333923 with a small business size standard of 1,250 employees.

Offeror MUST enter their cage code and DUNS number in block 14, page 2 of the SF 1442.

Offeror MUST be registered in SAM and VETS-4212.

The Government estimated price range of this project is between $1M and $5M.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO

Email Address - KSC-IDIQbids@mail.nasa.gov Attn: Anthony Caruvana

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER

OP-CS

Anthony Caruvana 321-867-3464

6. PROJECT NUMBER

N/A

2:00:00 PMa. Sealed offers in original and local time 01/14/2021

X

X

99227.1

1912/15/2020

N/A

17. The offeror agrees to perform the work required at the prices specified below in strict accordance with the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted calendar days after the date offers are due. (Insert any number equal to or greater than the minimum requirement by the Government in writing within stated in Item 13d. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13d.)

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

AMOUNTS

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

NUMBER

DATE.

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR (Include ZIP Code)

CODE FACILITY CODE

15. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

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

20a. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER (Type or print)

22. AMOUNT

26. ADMINISTERED BY

30a. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN (Type or print)

31c. DATE

STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 8/2014) BACK

31b. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY

31a. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.) Your offer on this solicitation is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award consummates the contract, which consists of (a) the Government solicitation and your offer, and (b) this contract award. No further contractual document is necessary.

30b. SIGNATURE 30c. DATE

28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT (Contractor is required to sign this document and return and deliver all items or perform all work requirements identified on this form and any continuation sheets for the consideration stated in this contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be governed by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certifications, and specifications incorporated by reference in or attached to this contract.

copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees to furnish

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

ITEM 25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) ( ) 41 U.S.C. 3304(a) ( )

20b. SIGNATURE 20c. OFFER DATE

OP-CS

John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA Procurement Office Code: OP-CS Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899

NASA Shared Service Center (NSSC) Financial Management Division (FMD) - Accounts Payable Bldg. 1111, C. Road Stennis Space Center, MS 39529

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

Cage Code: DUNS:

NONE

Solicitation 80KSC021R0006 Request for Qualifications

Design-Build Upgrade 325-Ton Crane at the Vehicle Assembly Building, Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Acquisition Overview

1.1. Scope …………………………………………………………………….5

1.2. Selection Process…………………………………………………………5

2. Phase 1, Design Build Request for Qualifications (RFQ)

2.1. Evaluation Factors ……………………………………………………….5

2.2. Factor 1: Specialized Experience ……………………………………….6

2.3. Factor 2: Offeror’s Past Performance …………………………….…

2.4. Factor 3: Technical Approach …………………………………….…….7

3. Solicitation Provisions and RFQ Instructions

3.1. FAR 52.252-1, Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference………8

3.2. Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Full Text……………………….. 9

3.3. RFQ Instructions…………………………………………………………10

4. Selection Process and Phase 1 Evaluation Criteria

4.1. Phase 1 Selection Process………………………………………………..12

4.2. Compliance Review……………………………………………………...12

4.3. Award Eligibility Review………………………………………………..12

4.4. Specialized Experience, Past Performance, and Technical Approach…..13

Evaluation Procedures

4.5. Discussions……………………………………………………………….13

4.6. Factor 1 – Specialized Experience Evaluation……………………………13

4.7. Factor 1 Evaluation Ratings………………………………………………13

4.8. Factor 2 – Past Performance Evaluation………………………………….14

4.9. Factor 2 Evaluation Ratings………………………………………………15

4.10. Factor 3 – Technical Approach Evaluation………………………………16

4.11. Factor 3 Evaluation Ratings…………………………………………….. 17

4.12. Notification and Debriefing of Unsuccessful Offerors…………………..17

Request for Qualifications

Design-Build Upgrade 325-Ton Crane at the Vehicle Assembly Building,

5. Future Phase 2 Request for Proposal……….……….. ……………….……….18

5.1. Price Proposal…………………………………………………………….18

5.2. Proposed Technical Solutions……………………………….……………18

5.3. Management Approach……………………………………….…………..18

5.4. Relative Importance of Phase 2 Evaluation Factors………………………19

Attachments

1. Attachment 1 – Statement of Work

2. Attachment 2 – Past Performance Questionnaire

3. Attachment 3 – Pre-Proposal Inquiry Form

4. Attachment 4 – Annual Representations and Certifications

Request for Qualifications (Phase 1)

Design-Build Upgrade 325-Ton Crane at the Vehicle Assembly Building,

1. Acquisition Overview

1.1. Scope. This Design/Build project replaces obsolete system/components of the Vehicle Assembly

Building’s (VAB) 325-ton bridge crane. The scope includes replacing bridge and trolley DC Motor Controllers; main and auxiliary brake systems; feed rail system; and control systems including PLCs, console displays, and software-programming. For full project scope details see the Statement of Work, Attachment 1.

The work is to be performed within two windows of opportunity. The first window is from August 2021 to June 2022. The second window is from June 2023 to May 2024. The windows of opportunities are subject to change pending actual Artemis launch dates. Following any work completed in either window, the crane is to be operational and certified for use. Complete the entire work ready for use not later than May 31, 2024.

1.2. Selection Process. This acquisition is a two-phase, design-build selection following the procedures in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.3. Note: This requirement is set aside for small business. Only small businesses are eligible for award.

In this Phase 1, Request for Qualifications (RFQ), the Government will evaluate the offeror’s Specialized Experience, Past Performance, and Technical Approach. Based on the evaluation of Phase 1 criteria, the Government will select no more than five of the most highly qualified offerors to advance to Phase 2, Request for Proposals (RFP).

The future Phase 2 RFP will provide greater detail and include final technical requirements and contract clauses for award. The Phase 2 evaluation criteria will be Price, Proposed Technical Solutions, and Management Approach. Upon evaluation of Phase 2 proposals, the Government will make one (1) award to the selected offeror with the proposal that provides the best overall value to the Government in accordance with FAR Part 15, which could result in a contract award to an offeror that is not the lowest priced.

2. Phase 1, Design-Build Request for Qualifications (RFQ)

2.1. Evaluation Factors: The offeror must submit a Qualifications package to include specific information addressing each of the evaluation factors below. Offerors will be evaluated to determine the most highly qualified teams in relation to the evaluation factors. Failure to provide the requested data or to comply with the instructions in this notice may result in an offeror being evaluated as not highly qualified. The evaluation factors for the work described in this request for qualifications are as follows:

Factor 1: Specialized Experience Factor 2: Offeror Past Performance (including Construction and Design Team Members)

Factor 3: Technical Approach

2.2. Factor 1: Specialized Experience

2.2.1. Specialized Experience. Offerors shall provide a Specialized Experience Summary identifying three (3) contracts/projects currently being performed (design must be complete and at least 50% construction completed) or successfully completed within five (5) years of the date of issuance of this solicitation (including federal, state, local government, and private projects) similar in size, content, and complexity to this Government acquisition.

Offerors proposing contractor teaming arrangement with a major subcontractor(s) shall identify the scope of work that will be performed by the prime contractor and the scope of work that will be performed by the major subcontractor(s). In addition to the three (3) contracts/projects performed by the prime contractor, offerors shall identify in the Specialized Experience summary three (3) contracts/projects currently being performed (design must be complete and at least 50% construction completed) or successfully completed by the major subcontractor(s) within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this solicitation (including federal, state, local Government and private projects) similar in size, content, and complexity to the applicable work under this Government acquisition. (A major subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor performing any engineering design work or any other subcontractor performing 30% or more of the contract work.)

The Specialized Experience narrative shall be limited to two pages of information for each referenced contract/project and include the following information:

• Name of project and contract/order number.

• Dates of the contract performance period as initially awarded.

• Dates of the actual completed performance period.

• Current project completion percentage if project is not completed.

• Place of contract performance.

• Name and address of customer or Government Agency.

• Name, telephone number and e-mail address of Contracting Officer or equivalent customer contact.

• Services provided (i.e., design-build, design only, construction only, supplier only, etc.).

• Contractual relationship (i.e., prime contractor, joint venture partner, major subcontractor, etc.).

• Dollar value of contract/project as initially awarded; break out major subcontract values.

• Dollar value of contract/project at completion.

• A brief statement on why the selected contract/project demonstrates technical experience needed to meet the technical performance requirements of this project as described in this solicitation.

• Statement of problems encountered, if any, during contract performance to include, but not limited to, challenges to successfully completing the project on schedule; safety violations/discrepancies; Department of Labor violations/discrepancies; non-payment of employees, subcontractors, and/or suppliers; terminations and debarment. Offerors shall also describe the offeror’s corrective actions relative to each identified problem.

• Description of contract changes resulting in large dollar value and/or schedule increases, if any.

2.3. Factor 2. Offeror’s Past Performance

2.3.1. Offerors must provide a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (see Attachment 2) to the owner/customer point of contact (POC) for each of the projects submitted for the prime and major subcontractors under Factor 1. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that POCs submit the completed questionnaires directly to the Contracting Officer via email to anthony.m.caruvana@nasa.gov for arrival no later than the deadline date for receipt of Phase 1 proposals. The Government will not consider any PPQs that are submitted by the offeror instead of the POC. In addition, offerors must submit, with their qualification package, copies of the first page of each past performance questionnaire that the offeror sends to each customer contact identified in Factor 1 above. NOTE: The offeror is required to complete the “THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED BY THE OFFEROR” area prior to sending the questionnaire to its customer.

2.3.1.1. If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available for a project submitted for Factor 1, the offeror should also submit it. However, a CPARS evaluation is not a substitute for a completed PPQ. Any CPARS submitted will not count towards the overall page count (see paragraph 3.3.3.

below).

2.3.2. Safety Past Performance. Offerors must provide Safety Past Performance Information to include:

(i) A copy of the Contractor’s OSHA 300A Log for the past three years (or equivalent) as described in Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart 1904.5.

(ii) Documented evidence of Experience Modification Rate (EMR) for the previous three (3) years.

(iii) Days Away, Restricted or Transferred Rate (DART) for the previous three (3) years.

(iv) Total Case Rate (TCR) for the previous three (3) years.

(v) Days Away from Work Injury Illness (DAFWII) for the previous three (3) years.

(vi) Results of any investigations of OSHA violations (willful, serious, repeated, and other than serious) or pending OSHA violations from the past three (3) years.

NOTE: The Safety Past Performance information requested above does not count against the 40 page limit (see paragraph 3.3.3. below).

2.4. Factor 3: Technical Approach

2.4.1. The offeror’s proposed organizational structure:

i. Demonstrate how you will provide a highly qualified team by providing an organizational chart of the proposed design-build team to work on this project. Include qualifications and a narrative discussing the defined roles and responsibilities for those key personnel who will perform the major duties for the offeror. Provide resumés for each identified key personnel on the offeror’s team. Resumés shall not exceed 1 page each.

ii. For joint ventures and other teaming arrangements, include a clear description of each company’s roles and responsibilities on the project. Describe any contractual arrangements that the offeror has established or plans to establish with these firm(s) for this project.

Describe how the proposed team will proactively and collaboratively work together to satisfy the Government’s objectives.

2.4.2. The offeror’s proposed management and integration plan:

i. Describe the process for managing technical integration across all phases of the work.

Provide the offeror’s approach to integration between the designer, builder, and the Government. Describe the process for ensuring that communication is effective throughout the organization, including between management and field personnel. Describe the decision-making process and the means to integrate Government input. Describe lines of authority, to include addressing the role of Engineers in Responsible Charge during the construction phase of the project.

ii. Provide a timeline showing the design, factory testing, procurement/delivery of long lead items, mobilization, installation, and commissioning.

iii. Provide a written narrative of the proposed approach to performing and accomplishing the statement of work within the allowed work windows identified in paragraph 1.A above.

iv. Identify anticipated challenges in accomplishing the work on time, within the work windows and proposed approaches for resolving challenges/difficulties.

3. Solicitation Provisions and RFQ Package Instructions

3.1. FAR 52.252-1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at these addresses:

FAR site: http://www.acquisition.gov/far/index.html NFS site: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/NFS.pdf

3.1.1. Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference

FAR 52.204-7 SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT (OCT 2018)

FAR 52.204-16 COMMERCIAL AND GOVERNMENT ENTITY CODE REPORTING (AUG

2020) http://www.acquisition.gov/far/index.html http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/NFS.pdf

FAR 52.204-18 COMMERCIAL AND GOVERNMENT ENTITY CODE MAINTENANCE

(AUG 2020)

3.2. Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Full Text

3.2.1. FAR 52.211-1 AVAILABILITY OF SPECIFICATIONS LISTED IN THE GSA INDEX

OF FEDERAL SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS AND COMMERCIAL ITEMS

DESCRIPTIONS, FPMR Part 101-29 (AUG 1998)

(a) The GSA Index of Federal Specifications, Standards and Commercial Item Descriptions, FPMR Part 101-29, and copies of specifications, standards, and commercial item descriptions cited in this solicitation may be obtained for a fee by submitting a request to—

GSA Federal Supply Service Specifications Section, Suite 8100 470 East L’Enfant Plaza, SW Washington, DC 20407 Telephone (202) 619-8925 Facsimile (202) 619-8978.

(b) If the General Services Administration, Department of Agriculture, or Department of Veterans Affairs issued this solicitation, a single copy of specifications, standards, and commercial item descriptions cited in this solicitation may be obtained free of charge by submitting a request to the addressee in paragraph (a) of this provision. Additional copies will be issued for a fee.

3.2.2. FAR 52.211-3 AVAILABILITY OF SPECIFICATIONS NOT LISTED IN THE GSA

INDEX OF FEDERAL SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS AND COMMERCIAL ITEM

DESCRIPTIONS (JUN 1988)

The specifications cited in this solicitation may be obtained from:

https://beta.sam.gov

3.2.3. FAR 52.233-2 Service of Protest (Sep 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from:

Contracting Officer: Anthony M. Caruvana Email Address: anthony.m.caruvana@nasa.gov Phone: 321-867-3464

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO.

3.2.4. 52.236-25 -- Requirements for Registration of Designers. (June 2003)

Architects or engineers registered to practice in the particular professional field involved in a State, the District of Columbia, or an outlying area of the United States shall prepare or review https://beta.sam.gov/ mailto:anthony.m.caruvana@nasa.gov and approve the design of architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, civil, or other engineering features of the work.

3.2.5. NFS 1852.233-70 PROTESTS TO NASA (DEC 2015)

(a) In lieu of a protest to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), bidders or offerors may submit a protest under 48 CFR Part 33 (FAR Part 33) directly to the Contracting Officer for consideration by the Agency. Alternatively, bidders or offerors may request an independent review by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement, who will serve as or designate the official responsible for conducting an independent review. Such reviews are separate and distinct from the Ombudsman Program described at 1815.7001.

(c) Bidders or offerors shall specify whether they are submitting a protest to the Contracting

Officer or requesting an independent review by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement.

(d) Protests to the Contracting Officer shall be submitted to the address or email specified in the solicitation (email is an acceptable means for submitting a protest to the Contracting Officer).

Alternatively, requests for independent review by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement shall be addressed to the Assistant Administrator for Procurement, NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C. 20546-0001.

3.3. RFQ Instructions:

3.3.1. Number of Copies and Delivery Instructions. One (1) electronic copy of the offeror’s qualification package shall be submitted. The electronic offer must arrive at email address KSC- IDIQbids@mail.nasa.gov by the time specified in the solicitation. (Note: The NASA/KSC e-mail box is limited to 15MB of unencrypted and 10MB of encrypted data on a PC and 12 MB of unencrypted and 7 MB of encrypted data on a MAC. Additionally, the server may reject files within these size limits due to an array of unforeseen conditions.) Electronic offers that fail to furnish the required information or that rejects any of the terms, conditions, and provisions of the solicitation may be excluded from consideration. If an offer received at the Government facility by electronic data interchange is unreadable to the degree that conformance to the essential requirements of the solicitation cannot be ascertained, the Contracting Officer will immediately notify the offeror that the offer will be rejected unless the offeror provides clear and convincing evidence –

(a) Of the content of the offer as originally submitted; and

(b) That the unreadable condition of the offer was caused by the Government software or hardware error, malfunction, or other Government mishandling.

Late submissions will be reviewed in accordance with FAR 15.208(b)(1)(i).

3.3.2. Qualification Package Preparation Instructions.

This solicitation is available only through the beta.SAM.gov website (https://beta.SAM.gov). No hard copies, CDs or other media will be provided by the Government. It is the responsibility of the potential offerors to download the documents posted on Beta.SAM.gov website.

mailto:KSC-IDIQbids@mail.nasa.gov mailto:KSC-IDIQbids@mail.nasa.gov

The Specifications and Drawings for this solicitation have an Export Administration Regulation (EAR) determination of EAR 99 or EAR Controlled or ITAR Controlled. Therefore, download of these documents won’t be permitted unless the requester has been cleared through the Defense Logistics Information Service (DLIS). This registration must be completed on beta.SAM.gov.

A PROPERLY SUBMITTED QUALIFICATION PACKAGE MUST CONSIST OF THE

FOLLOWING:

(1) One electronic copy of the SF 1442, Solicitation Offer and Award, with Blocks 14 through 16 and Blocks 19 through 20c completed and signed by an authorized representative of the offeror. The person signing the offer must initial each erasure or change appending the offer.

(2) One electronic copy of Attachment 4, Annual Representations and Certifications online at the System for Award Management (SAM) website as required by FAR Provision 52.204-8, Annual Representations and Certifications, incorporated in full text in Attachment 4 of this solicitation.

(3) One electronic copy of the offeror’s Specialized Experience in accordance with paragraph

2.2 above.

(4) One electronic copy of each Past Performance cover page sent to each customer contact identified in accordance with paragraph 2.3.1 above.

(5) One electronic copy of the Safety Past Performance information in accordance with paragraph 2.3.2 above.

(6) One electronic copy of the offeror’s Technical Approach in accordance with paragraph 2.4 above.

3.3.3. Qualifications Package Page Limitation. The entire Qualification Package shall not exceed forty (40) pages and shall include any information the offeror feels may be of benefit in the evaluation and selection process. The offeror may use its discretion on how best to present the information requested within the RFQ. Proposals exceeding the maximum page limitations will have the extra pages removed prior to evaluation and will not be evaluated. The following are excluded from the 40-page limitation: SF 1442, CPARS evaluations, safety past performance information, transmittal cover pages, tab pages, and tables of contents. A tab page is intended to be a blank sheet used to separate the submission and may include a section heading. Any additional information provided on a tab page, other than section heading, will result in the tab page being counted against the 40-page limitation.

A page is defined as one side of an 8-1/2-inch x 11-inch sheet of paper, with at least a one-half inch margin on all sides, using Times New Roman font with a type-size no smaller than 12-point font.

3.3.4. Questions Regarding this Solicitation (Request for Qualifications Package) (Oct 2020)

(a) Questions or comments regarding this solicitation must be submitted via email, cite the solicitation number (80KSC021R0006), and be directed to the following Government representative:

Name: Anthony M. Caruvana Email: anthony.m.caruvana@nasa.gov

(b) Questions must be submitted on the Pre-Proposal Inquiry (PPI) Form (Attachment 3), in MS Excel (no PDF or read only) or in the body of an e-mail message (in the same format as the PPI Form). Questions must be sent to the Contracting Officer identified above by December 29, 2020 to allow for analysis and dissemination of responses in advance of the Qualifications Phase 1 due date. Questions received after this date will be considered but may not be answered. Oral questions will not be accepted.

(c) Questions or comments must not be directed to the technical activity personnel.

4. Selection Process and Phase 1 Evaluation Criteria

4.1. Phase 1 Selection Process. This section identifies the process by which the Government will evaluate proposals. The Government will reveal the number and identities of offerors only to Government employees involved in the evaluation and selection process. The evaluation process consists of five parts: (1) Compliance Review; (2) Award Eligibility Review; (3) Factor 1 - Specialized Experience; (4) Factor 2 - Past Performance Evaluation; and (5) Factor 3 - Technical Approach Evaluation.

4.2. Compliance Review. The Government will not complete the initial evaluation of any proposal when it is determined that the proposal is unacceptable because it does not represent a reasonable initial effort to address the essential requirements of the RFQ or clearly demonstrates the offeror does not understand the requirements or it contains major deficiencies or omissions. The Contracting Officer will document the rationale for discontinuing the initial evaluation of a proposal in accordance with this section. The Government will not review proposal pages that exceed the page count limitation or are otherwise not compliant with Section 4 and will notify the offerors accordingly.

4.3. Award Eligibility Review. This is an initial check for determining an offeror’s eligibility for award. This check will include the following items:

A. Small Business Compliance. In accordance with FAR 52.219-6, Notice of Total Small Business Set-Aside, only small businesses under NAICS code 333923 will be evaluated. The small business size standard for NAICS code 333923 is 1,250 employees.

B. VETS-4212 Compliance. The Government will review the VETS-4212 Federal Contractor Reporting website at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/vets/programs/vets4212 and verify that the offeror is registered in VETS-4212.

C. System for Award Management (SAM) Verification. The Government will verify that the offeror has registered in the SAM database (see FAR 4.11). FAR 4.1103, Procedures, will govern unregistered offerors.

D. Representations and Certifications. The Government will review the completed representations and certifications of the offeror (Attachment 4 and SAM) to determine if there is anything that may preclude award of a contract to the offeror.

4.4. Specialized Experience, Past Performance and Technical Approach Evaluation Procedures – The

Government will evaluate each offerors Specialized Experience, Past Performance, and Technical Approach packages and assign an individual rating for each evaluation factor for each offeror. Then, a best value comparative assessment of each offeror’s evaluation factors will be made with Specialized Experience being more important than Technical Approach, which is more important than Past Performance. The Government will select no more than five of the most highly qualified offerors to advance to Phase 2.

4.5. Discussions - Offerors should put forth their best efforts for their Phase 1 submissions and furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine its qualifications. The Government intends to determine the most highly qualified offerors on the basis of the initial submissions, without discussions.

The Government reserves the right to conduct communications with offerors in accordance with FAR 15.306(b), if the Contracting Officer determines that such communications are necessary or are otherwise in the Government’s best interest.

4.6. Factor 1 – Specialized Experience Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s specialized experience as demonstrated on projects submitted under paragraph 2.2 above. The Specialized Experience Evaluation is an assessment of the offeror’s ability to perform the design-build project requirements.

Additional favorable consideration will be given for:

• Specialized experience including working at heights, bridge crane upgrades more highly complicated than KSC’s proposed project, and projects with challenging work windows.

• Specialized experience working on prior projects with one or more of its proposed team members.

• Specialized experience on projects with a constructed value over $1M.

4.7. Factor 1 Evaluation Ratings. The Government will assign one of the following ratings to the offeror’s

Factor 1 submission:

Excellent A comprehensive and thorough submission of exceptional merit with one or more significant strengths. No deficiency or significant weakness exists.

Very Good A submission having no deficiency, and which demonstrates overall competence. One or more significant strengths have been found, and strengths outbalance any weaknesses that exist.

Good A submission having no deficiency, and which shows a reasonably sound response. There may be strengths or weaknesses, or both. As a whole, weaknesses not offset by strengths do not significantly detract from the offeror’s response.

Fair A submission having no deficiency, and which has one or more weaknesses. Weaknesses outbalance any strengths.

Poor A submission that has one or more deficiencies or significant weaknesses that demonstrate a lack of overall competence or would require a major revision to correct.

The Government will utilize the following definitions for deficiency, weakness, significant weakness, strength, and significant strength:

Deficiency A material failure to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Weakness A flaw that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength An aspect of the submission that will have some positive impact on the successful performance of the contract.

Significant Strength Some aspect of the submission that greatly enhances the potential for successful contract performance.

4.8. Factor 2 – Past Performance Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s past performance experience on recent and relevant projects similar in size, content, and complexity to this VAB 325T Crane Upgrades design-build project. The Government will evaluate the past performance of the offeror on all contracts/projects identified in the offeror’s Specialized Experience Summary.

The completed past performance questionnaires submitted by the offerors’ Contracting Officers or customer contact equivalents identified in the Specialized Experience Summary will be evaluated. The Government will also evaluate the offeror’s technical and schedule performance based on the PPQ responses and with information obtained from Government organizations and personnel, commercial sources, and public information sources. The Government will also evaluate the offeror’s past performance in:

(i) Providing effective project management ability (including but not limited to project managers, quality control managers, trade integrators, safety managers, and superintendents); labor (skilled and unskilled workers); equipment; supplies; tools; and financial resources to successfully perform, provide contract deliverables and complete work in a safe and timely manner.

(ii) Providing immediate and effective contractor management attention at the job site and partnering with the owner to resolve technical and schedule issues.

(iii) Ability to provide quality engineering shop drawings and accurate and complete as-built documentation.

(iv) Ability to complete work scope within the approved schedule including any customer driven changes.

(v) Ability to build, upgrade, and rehabilitate overhead bridge cranes.

(vi) Ability to create, maintain, and comply with a safety and health program with visible management control and involvement during the duration of the contract.

(vii) Compliance with Department of Labor requirements and resolution of reported labor violations/discrepancies.

(viii) Providing prompt payment of employees, subcontractors, and suppliers for services performed under the contract.

(ix) Maintaining acceptable Days Away Restricted or Transferred (DART) Rates, Total Case Rates (TCR), Days Away From Work Injury Illness (DAFWII), and Experience Modification Ratings (EMR) for the previous three years.

(x) Reporting and taking corrective actions on safety accidents/incidents in a timely manner.

4.9. Factor 2 Evaluation Ratings. The Government will assign one of the following ratings to the offeror’s

Factor 2 submission:

Very High Level of Confidence The offeror’s relevant past performance is of exceptional merit and is very highly pertinent to this acquisition, indicates exemplary performance in a timely, efficient, and economical manner and very minor (if any) problems with no adverse effect on overall performance. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a very high level of confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. (One or more significant strengths exist. No significant weaknesses exist.)

High Level of Confidence The offeror’s relevant past performance is highly pertinent to this acquisition; demonstrating very effective performance that would be fully responsive to contract requirements. Offeror’s past performance indicates that contract requirements were accomplished in a timely, efficient, and economical manner for the most part, with only minor problems that had little identifiable effect on overall performance. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a high level of confidence the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. (One or more significant strengths exist. Strengths outbalance any weakness.)

Moderate Level of Confidence

The offeror’s relevant past performance is pertinent to this acquisition, and it demonstrates effective performance. Performance was fully responsive to contract requirements; there may have been reportable problems, but with little identifiable effect on overall performance. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a moderate level of confidence the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. (There may be strengths or weaknesses, or both.)

Low Level of Confidence The offeror’s relevant past performance is at least somewhat pertinent to this acquisition, and it meets or slightly exceeds minimum acceptable standards. Offeror achieved adequate results; there may have been reportable problems with identifiable, but not substantial, effects on overall performance. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a low level of confidence the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Changes to the offeror’s existing processes may be necessary in order to achieve contract requirements. (One or more weaknesses exist.

Weaknesses outbalance strengths.)

Very Low Level of Confidence

The offeror’s relevant past performance does not meet minimum acceptable standards in one or more areas; remedial action was required in one or more areas. Performance problems occurred in one or more areas which, adversely affected overall performance.

Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a very low level of confidence the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. (One or more deficiencies or significant weaknesses exist.)

Neutral In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a) (2) (ii) and (iv)).

4.10. Factor 3 – Technical Approach Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed technical approach to include:

i.The offeror’s understanding of the design-build process and the capability to successfully execute the project.

ii.The overall organizational structure, including key subcontractors, delineation of roles and responsibilities, decision authority among the team members, and the proposed management structure to successfully execute the design-build scope of work.

iii. A cohesive team that exhibits high levels of collaboration between the numerous design engineering disciplines, construction trades, and the Government throughout the entire project cycle from award through commissioning and closeout.

iv.The offeror’s ability to produce a comprehensive schedule, including design, factory testing, procurement/delivery of long lead items, mobilization, installation, and commissioning.

v. The offeror’s ability to describe a thorough approach to performing and accomplishing the statement of work within the allowed work windows.

vi. The offeror’s ability to identify and anticipate problems in accomplishing the work and providing methods for resolving those challenges.

4.11. Factor 3 Evaluation Ratings. The Government will assign one of the following ratings to the offeror’s Technical Approach:

Excellent A comprehensive and thorough technical approach of exceptional merit with one or more significant strengths. No deficiency or significant weakness exists.

Very Good A technical approach having no deficiency, and which demonstrates over-all competence.

One or more significant strengths have been found, and strengths outbalance any weaknesses that exist.

Good A technical approach having no deficiency, and which shows a reasonably sound response.

There may be strengths or weaknesses, or both. As a whole, weaknesses not offset by strengths do not significantly detract from the offeror’s response.

Fair A technical approach having no deficiency, and which has one or more weaknesses.

Weaknesses outbalance any strengths.

Poor A technical approach that has one or more deficiencies or significant weaknesses that demonstrate a lack of overall competence or would require a major revision to correct.

The Government will utilize the following definitions for deficiency, weakness, significant weakness, strength, and significant strength:

Deficiency A material failure to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Weakness A flaw that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength An aspect that will have some positive impact on the successful performance of the contract.

Significant Strength Some aspect of the proposal that greatly enhances the potential for successful contract performance.

4.12. Notification and Debriefing of Unsuccessful Offerors. The Contracting Officer will notify unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.5. An unsuccessful offeror may request a debriefing by submitting a written request to the Contracting Officer within three days after receipt of the notice excluding the offeror.

5. Future Phase 2 Request for Proposal (RFP). After evaluating Phase 1 proposals, the contracting officer will select the most highly qualified offerors (not to exceed five) and provide a Phase 2 Request for Proposal to the selected offerors. The Phase 2 evaluation factors will be Price, Proposed Technical Solutions, and Management Approach.

NOTE: The information in sub-paragraphs 5.1 – 5.4 below is a draft of the information that will be expected from offerors selected to provide Phase 2 proposals. Offerors are cautioned that this may change and the final requirements will be provided within the Phase 2 RFP.

The Government will hold an Industry Day at KSC for offerors invited to submit Phase 2 proposals on a date to be determined. The purpose of this event is to allow the Phase 2 offerors the opportunity to visit the site and see the 325-Ton Crane. More details will be given with the issuance of the Phase 2 Request for Proposal.

5.1. Price Proposal – Contractor must provide a single proposed lump sum price for the entire design-build effort for evaluation.

5.2. Proposed Technical Solutions

5.2.1. Provide Design Concept including drawings, sketches, as needed by the offeror to demonstrate a clear understanding of the scope of work and how to accomplish it.

5.2.2. Provide a list of proposed shop drawings, list of product replacement parts, list of proposed equipment to be installed, list of proposed operation and maintenance manuals to be provided to the Government.

5.2.3. Provide a preliminary design schedule.

5.2.4. Describe strategies for mobilization efforts, demolition of items to be replaced, Factory

Acceptance Tests (including manufacturing locations), Site Acceptance Tests, Software Programming, etc.

5.2.5. Proposed Technical Solutions. The offeror can propose technical solutions that may help to mitigate risks that the Offeror may identify through anticipated challenges, or that would otherwise improve the overall outcome of the project.

5.3. Management Approach

5.3.1. Project Execution Plan - Offerors shall provide a Project Execution Plan detailing the proposed methodology and schedule for designing and upgrading the Vehicle Assembly Building 325 Ton Crane. The Project Execution Plan shall include the following information:

i.Detailed schedule – Project schedule showing how the offeror will accomplish the scope within the allowed work windows. The detailed schedule shall include design activities, factory testing, procurement/delivery of long lead items, mobilization, installation, and commissioning of all items in the scope of work.

The work is to be performed within two windows of opportunity. The first window is from August 2021 to June 2022. The second window is from June 2023 to May 2024. The windows of opportunities are subject to change pending actual Artemis launch dates.

Following any work completed in either window, the crane is to be operational and certified for use. Complete the entire work ready for use not later than May 31, 2024.

ii. Describe the tools or techniques that will be used for effectively managing the schedule.

iii.Organizational chart of the complete Design-Build team proposed by the offeror with roles and responsibilities clearly defined.

iv. Identify and describe the Builder and Designer responsibilities in the overall design-build process, construction, and commissioning phases. Describe the proposed decision-making processes for technical, schedule, and financial aspects of the design and construction.

Identify the decision-making authorities and delegations of authority within the team.

v. Describe the offeror’s proposed quality control management structure. Describe quality control processes including a description of corporate systems and capabilities to maintain quality control of the design and construction.

vi. Describe the proposed configuration management system and the approach to maintaining integrity of the design, change control and revision management, and verification of design expectations.

5.4. Relative Importance of Phase 2 Evaluation Factors. All evaluations factors other than price, when combined, will be approximately equal to cost.

4 Attachments

1. Attachment 1 – Statement of Work

2. Attachment 2 – Past Performance Questionnaire

3. Attachment 3 – Pre Proposal Inquiry Form

4. Attachment 4 – Annual Representations and Certifications