911 Seismic - NOAA TI - Phase I RFQ 9.30.20.docx

GSA Solicitation No. EQ10PCP-20-0010 911 Fed Bldg Structural Systems, ABAAS Upgrades & NOAA TI Space Build-Out The Solicitation, Phase 1 – Request for Qualifications

Table of Contents I. General Information A. The Project B. The Solicitation and Contract C. List of Phase 1 Solicitation Documents D. Authorized Representatives E. Pre-Proposal Conference F. Estimated Price Range G. Questions Regarding Phase 1 H. Receipt of Qualifications

II. Proposals A. Proposal Contents B. Proposal Format C. Technical Proposal D. Other Requirements E. Requirements of Joint Venture Offerors

III. General Provisions A. Availability of Funds B. Requests for Clarification or Interpretation C. Notice to Small Business Firms D. Information Concerning the Disclosure of Solicitation Results E. Affirmative Procurement Program F. Notice Concerning Preparation of Proposals G. Bond Requirements (Phase 2 Requirements) H. Contractor Performance Information I. Safeguarding and Dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Building Information

J. INFORM 2.0

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions To be issued in Phase 2

V. Additional Solicitation Provisions and Instructions A. Additional Provisions

(i) GSAR 552.236-74, Evaluation of Options (Mar 2019)

(ii) GSAR Clause 552.236-77, Government’s Right to Exercise Options (Mar 2019) VI. Method Of Award A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals B. Evaluation of Phase 2 Proposals C. Determination of Responsibility D. Price Reasonableness E. Unbalanced Price F. Total Evaluated Price G. Non Price Factors H. Evaluation of Joint Ventures

I. General Information I.A. The Project The 911 Federal Building, 911 NE 11th, Portland, Oregon was constructed in 1953 by the Lloyd Corporation and leased by GSA until 1959 when the government purchased the building. The 8- story Federal Building is adjacent to and shares common areas with the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Building.

The proposed project is being acquired as a Design-Build (DB) project. The seismic and non-seismic structural upgrades shall meet current codes and standards, further ensuring the facility’s operational status for decades to come. Related to the structural systems’ upgrades, the facility, particularly where impacted by the limited scope structural upgrades portion of the project, shall be updated to ABAAS compliance in accordance with GSA policies and directives relative to Capital-funded Repair and Alteration (R&A) projects. The NOAA TI Space Build-out project renovates a significant portion of the 2nd floor’s overall space to meet NOAA Fisheries Western Region headquarters’ requirements, in an initiative to relocate the Fisheries’ Regional office and functions from a nearby leased location into the Federal Building.

Tenants:

· U.S. Congress - House of Representatives and Senate

· Department of Interior- Bureau of Indian Affairs

· Bureau of Reclamation - Fish and Wildlife Service

· Department of Labor - Health Safety Administration

· General Services Administration - Public Buildings Service

· Department of Homeland Security - U.S. Coast Guard

· Department of Energy - Bonneville Power Administration (although BPA is housed in the neighboring building, 905, they share a common linking space with 911.

Project Summary:

The design build contractor shall provide a fully functional design and construction effort to upgrade the structural – seismic and non- seismic structural systems (e.g. architectural; mechanical, electrical, plumbing, data & communications; fire & life safety; conveyance; etc.) – throughout the facility, while maintaining the fully occupied and operational status to tenants (occupants) during normal business hours in support of normal business and facility operations. This is of critical importance given the expectation that the project occur within a fully occupied and functional federal office building.

Related to the structural systems’ upgrades, the facility, particularly where impacted by the limited scope structural upgrades portion of the project, shall be updated to ABAAS compliance in accordance with GSA policies and directives relative to Capital-funded Repair and Alteration (R&A) projects.

The NOAA TI Space Build-out project renovates a significant portion of the 2nd floor’s overall space to meet NOAA Fisheries Western Region headquarters’ requirements, in an initiative to relocate the Fisheries’ Regional office and functions from a nearby leased location into the Federal Building.

This move also involves relocation for a member of the US House of Representatives, Congressman Earl Blumenauer’s, office space from its existing location that is currently located on the 2nd floor. An additional project requirement is to build-out space for the Congressman’s functions in currently vacant space on the 2nd floor’s east side. Relocating the Congressional office space from its existing location (2nd floor mid-floor plate) to the 2nd floor east side, prior to upgrading their existing space for seismic & non- seismic structural compliance, will minimize downtime and negative impact to their functionality from the seismic upgrade construction that is envisioned to occur in/near their existing space.

Project Goals:

· Comply with all project requirements, including (but not limited to) GSA PBS P-100 standards (baseline, unless noted otherwise).

· Substantial Completion Date for the NOAA TI Space Build-out no later than 15-Oct-2022, in order for NOAA to vacate their existing space before existing lease expiration.

· Upgrade the facility’s seismic and non-seismic structural systems.

· Minimize impact to tenants and public users.

· Maintain an adequate, code compliant number and proper configuration of access and egress pathways throughout the facility, including within tenant spaces, during and after construction.

· Maintain/upgrade the facility features impacted by project work to be ABAAS compliant.

· The integrated design and construction phasing of these (2) offices are critical to the successful completion of this overall project.

There are no feasible alternatives to the project. This is a limited scope renovation and the cost of the proposed project is far less than the cost of constructing a new facility.

The design-build scope of work includes all labor and materials required to provide design, engineering, construction and other related services necessary for successful completion of this project.

More than one possible option will be presented when the RFQ/RFP is released which is the result of project development studies performed by GSA prior to the release of this RFQ/RFP. Options are provided for information purposes only. During subsequent phases of the contract, the Contractor shall examine and/or verify the information provided and obtain additional information necessary to complete the design and construction of the project. The Design Build contractor remains solely responsible and liable for design deficiency and should not depend upon reports, drawings or information provided by the Government as part of the contract documents.

GSA envisions a highly collaborative design build delivery approach for this project. The expectation is that the DB contractor will work closely with all the stakeholders to deliver a project that meets the expectations and needs of all stakeholders and GSA's requirements for a high performing building.

I.B. the Solicitation and Contract

(1) This procurement is being conducted using the two phase selection process found in FAR 36.3. Qualification proposals will be evaluated in Phase One to determine which offerors will submit proposals for Phase Two. One contract will be awarded using competitive negotiation. In Phase 1, GSA will select a short list of the most highly qualified offerors and request that those offerors submit Phase 2 proposals. All responsible sources may submit a Phase 1 proposal. A maximum of 3 firms will be selected to submit Phase 2 proposals. Only those selected offerors are authorized to submit Phase 2 proposals. Those offerors not selected for participation in Phase 2 will be notified in accordance with FAR 15.503(a). In Phase 2, Offerors may submit a price proposal subject to the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) requirements set forth in the Phase 2 solicitation (a PLA proposal), a price proposal not subject to the PLA requirements set forth in the Phase 2 solicitation, or both. Any price proposal submitted in Phase 2 shall clearly identify whether it is subject to such PLA requirements.

(2) This Solicitation sets forth requirements for Phase 1 qualifications proposals and the evaluation factors for Phase 2 proposals for a Contract to design and construct the Project. Proposals conforming to the Solicitation requirements will be evaluated in accordance with the Method of Award set forth herein. The Government will award the Contract to the selected Offeror, subject to the conditions set forth herein.

(3) Neither the Solicitation nor any part of an Offeror's proposal shall be part of the Contract except to the extent expressly incorporated therein by the Contracting Officer.

I.C. List of Phase 1 Solicitation Documents The Solicitation Documents are comprised of:

(1) The Solicitation – Phase 1

(2) Offeror Representations and Certifications Form

(3) Standard Form (SF) 1442 – Solicitation Offer and Award

(4) Draft of the Agreement

(5) The Scope of Work, Specifications, Drawing Exhibits and other Attachments to the Agreement.

I.D. Authorized Representatives The following individuals are designated as the authorized GSA representatives under this Solicitation:

Authorized Representative Information:

Contracting Officer’s Information

Name: Rick Risso

Address: 400 15th St SW Auburn, WA 98001

Telephone: 253-508-2627

Email: richard.risso@gsa.gov

I.E. Estimated Price Range The Design/Build budget amount is $30M

I.F. Questions Regarding Phase 1

Submit all questions regarding Phase 1 to the Contracting Officer on or before 2 November 2020 to richard.risso@gsa.gov. Any responses provided by GSA will be posted on the Government wide Point of Entry (GPE) as an Amendment to the Solicitation.

I.G. Receipt of Qualifications

(1) In order to be considered for Phase 2 and award, Phase 1 qualifications proposals conforming to the requirements of the Solicitation must be received at the email address reflected below no later than 1:00 pm local time on:

Date: 9 November 2020

Address: via email to richard.risso@gsa.gov NOTE: Only electronic submissions will be accepted and must be received at the above email address by the closing date and time specified in the solicitation. Offerors must include the Solicitation Number, Project Title.

(2) Phase 1 Qualifications proposals are considered received as of the date and time the email is in the inbox of the recipient. GSA bears no responsibility for the successful receipt of such emails and the contractor is encouraged to submit a proposal early, with a read receipt, to confirm receipt prior to the due date.

II. Proposals II.A. Proposal Contents Proposals shall consist of the following documents, completed and executed in accordance with this Solicitation:

1. Technical Proposal

2. Other Documents as Required II.B. Proposal Format This is an all-electronic solicitation release including amendments. All documents will be posted on the electronic beta.SAM.gov website at www.beta.SAM.gov. Offerors interested in submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation will be responsible for monitoring this website and the solicitation link to ensure timely receipt of any amendments or other solicitation related information posted therein. Offerors are responsible for downloading all required documents from the beta.SAM.gov website. Hard copies will not be made available. Documentation designated as Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) will not be released until the offeror has completed the SBU form (attached) and submitted it to the CO at richard.risso@gsa.gov.

This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of the Phase 1 (Qualifications) proposals.

Phase 2 (Request for Proposals): The Government will evaluate Phase 1 Proposals based on the Factors as described in this solicitation, and short list a maximum of three (3) offerors to submit Phase 2 proposals.

Offerors are to provide the requested information making every effort to present information clearly and concisely. Lengthy narratives containing extraneous information are discouraged. All information shall be submitted in English. Proposals that do not follow the instructions, or otherwise include documentation that is difficult to read/decipher, may result in disqualification.

Format: Page Size will be 8-1/2” X 11” with at least ½ margins all around. Typeface should be Times New Roman 12. Narratives shall be single spaced. All text shall be legible and easily read.

Proprietary statements, security markings, and page numbers should fall within the defined margin area. Acceptable formats for submission of proposal are PDF, Microsoft Word, Excel and Microsoft Project.

Proposals shall include the solicitation number and project title: “911 Fed Bldg Structural Systems, ABAAS Upgrades & NOAA TI Space Build-Out”. Pages shall be numbered sequentially.

Proposal shall be organized as follows:

(a) Cover Page – Shall include the following: Solicitation Number, Project Title, Offeror’s name, address, phone number, and email address

(b) Statement providing: SAM Registered/Certified (include DUNS and CAGE Code), No Active Exclusions, and Provisions/Clauses completed (do not send SAM Record).

(c) Statement acknowledgement that adequate bonding will be obtained

(d) Statement that design/construction documents will be prepared by licensed professionals registered in Oregon.

(e) Identification and signature of officer(s) of the company authorized to bind the government.

(f) SF1442 – Signed and Amendments Acknowledged

(g) Technical Proposal – Technical Proposal should be organized by the Evaluation Factors listed below and include a Table of Contents.

Page limitations are indicated under each Evaluation Factor GSA shall evaluate proposals on a fair and equitable basis. Page limits are strictly enforced. Proposals which exceed these limits may have an unfair advantage. The Government will only review the number of allowed pages as stated in the solicitation

II.C. Technical Proposal Proposals must address the technical approach, technical qualifications, and the other Phase 1 evaluation factors stated herein. Any proposal not meeting all of the following criteria may result in not being further considered for award.

PHASE 1: EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHT

Factor 1: Technical Qualifications 50% Sub Factor 1A: Specialized Experience Sub Factor 1B: Past Performance

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS

SUB FACTOR 1A: SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE – 25%

Description: This factor considers the extent of the offeror’s experience on projects of similar size (building square feet and dollar value), scope and complexity. The Offeror shall submit information on three (3) relevant projects of similar size, scope and complexity completed not more than five (5) years prior to the closing date of the RFQ.

“Relevant” is defined as projects similar to the project in this solicitation in size (i.e. square feet and dollar value) and which have a logical connection with the requirements of this solicitation by including similar scope elements and which demonstrate equal or greater overall project complexity associated with them.

Specifically, for purposes of this procurement, design build experience considered especially relevant would include seismic, structural, architectural and ABAAS modernizations with a construction cost of ~$30M to ~$40M, an average square footage of 300,000 – 400,000 square feet and the following scope and complexity considerations:

1) Similar building facilities

2) Federal building Repair & Alteration, Modification and/or Construction projects

3) Projects occurring within occupied facilities

4) Design-Build/Collaborative approach projects

An Offeror’s especially relevant experience would also ideally span a typical project’s entire life-cycle, from REQUIREMENTS DEVELOPMENT through CLOSEOUT project phases. An explanation of each of the four types of especially relevant experience is as follows:

Similar Building Facilities. For the purpose of this RFQ, projects submitted should demonstrate the Offeror’s relevant experience providing design build services on projects for facilities of similar size (square feet and dollar value) to the project in this solicitation. Examples include, but are not limited to, such buildings as multi-story office buildings and multi-use facilities consisting primarily of office space.

Federal Building Repair & Alteration, Modernization and/or Construction. For the purpose of this RFQ, projects submitted for this area of experience should demonstrate the Offeror’s relevant experience providing design build services on relevant Federal Repair & Alteration (R&A), Modernization and/or Construction projects of similar size (square feet and dollar value) to the project in this solicitation, demonstrating the firm’s knowledge of federal construction contracting procedures. Particularly relevant for this area of experience would highlight Offeror’s experience with projects within similar high profile federal buildings including federal buildings, courthouses and agency/department headquarters facilities.

Occupied Building Construction. For the purpose of this RFQ, projects submitted for this area of experience should demonstrate the Offeror’s relevant experience providing design build services on projects of similar size (square feet and dollar value) to the project in this solicitation in buildings that were occupied during construction and which required critical phasing and coordination efforts with multiple tenants necessary for success. Particularly relevant for this area of experience would highlight Offeror’s previous experience with projects in similar high profile federal buildings, courthouses and agency/department headquarters facilities.

NOTE: “Occupied” in this instance is defined as a construction (including R&A and Modernization) project occurring within tenant space without the tenants vacating or swinging completely out of the space during work. Projects should also demonstrate that any work required within tenant occupied space(s) occurred both during AND outside normal working hours (with normal work hours typically running approximately 06:00-18:00, Monday – Friday), or within facilities that operate 24/7. Relevant projects should also demonstrate that any tenant spaces that were disturbed by project work were brought back to usable and fully operational condition before 06:00 each business day (or at the end of the construction contractor’s work shift if occurring within a 24/7 facility). For purposes of this RFQ, projects not meeting these criteria and/or those in which construction activity occurred in adjacent-to-occupied-space (i.e. in vacated portions of an occupied facility) will not be considered relevant for evaluation purposes.

Collaborative Design-Build Projects. For the purpose of this RFQ, projects submitted for this area of experience should demonstrate the Offeror’s relevant experience providing design build services on projects whereby, in addition to the design build firm, the Owner also contracted with a separate Contractor team to provide both CMA/CxA/Inspection services under one contract (i.e. a separate CMA/CxA contract). The Offeror shall demonstrate it provided comprehensive services to the Owner which included regular interface with the CMA/CxA Contractor. The services shall have been performed on relevant design-build projects of similar size (square feet and dollar value) to the project in this RFQ.

Standard for Evaluation: This criterion will be evaluated for the quality of experience demonstrated. The greater the relevance of the Offeror’s experience, the more likely the Offeror will receive a higher rating during evaluations. Projects similar in scope, size and complexity to the project identified in the RFQ in which the proposed design build team has worked together will likely receive a higher rating during evaluations. In addition, Offerors that demonstrate a higher degree of relevant experience will be evaluated more favorably.

Submittal Requirements: Offerors shall submit three (3) project examples demonstrating relevant experience. The minimum submission requirements for this Factor are defined as follows:

1) A list of three (3) relevant projects completed or currently in work, not more than five (5) years prior to the closing date of the RFQ. Offerors shall clearly state the year of completion or percentage of completion for each project submitted. Completed projects may be given more weight than those projects not yet completed; likewise projects that are still on-going, but are further along in the project life-cycle, may be given more weight than those projects that are in an earlier phase.

2) Narrative summaries of the submitted projects that demonstrate the Offeror’s capabilities, technical expertise, and experience managing complex projects with reference to considerations of timeliness and technical success. Offerors shall clearly explain how the project is relevant to the proposed acquisition.

3) Limit the summaries to no more than one (1) page (see exhibit for a sample Project Experience Form) for each project including the following information:

1. Project Title & Location

2. Narrative Summary/Description of the Project. Address how the project relates to the solicited project and provide an explanation of how the project is relevant.

3. Project Delivery Method/Building Type (i.e. Design/Build; Federal Courthouse, Athletic Training Center, School, etc.)

4. Size of Project in terms of Dollar Value and Square Feet of Contract (Include a breakout of the design build services contract award amount(s), as well as the construction contract/budget amount)

5. Design Build Contract Start & Completion Dates (Month/Year) or Percentage of Completion

6. Customer Point of Contact (include name, address, email address, telephone number, customer’s agency/firm affiliation, customer’s relationship to the project)

In addition to the above information, the Offeror shall clearly identify for which, if any, of the four especially relevant types of experience areas each project example pertains. For example Offeror’s Project A may qualify and be listed for Similar Building Facilities, Federal Construction, Occupied Building, and Design/Build project, while Project B may qualify and be listed only for Similar Building Facilities and Occupied Building construction.

A project experience matrix (see sample below) shall also be submitted.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE MATRIX OF THE PROPOSED CONTRACTOR

PROJECT TITLE

SIMILAR

BUILDING FACILITIES

PROJECT A

PROJECT B

PROJECT C

SUB FACTOR 1B: PAST PERFORMANCE – 25%

Past Performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform based on previous and current contract and support agreements. A confidence assessment rating will be assigned to each Offeror. Past performance information may be obtained through CPARS and questionnaires tailored to the circumstances for this acquisition, through interviews with program managers and contracting officers, or other sources known to the Government. Data from previous source selections or contractor capability assessments will be used if recent and relevant.

To assist the Government’s evaluation, each Offeror’s proposal will contain the supporting past performance documentation which demonstrates experience. Current performance (the Government will not consider performance on an effort that concluded more than six (6) years from the date proposals are due will have greater impact in the performance confidence assessment than less recent performance. In determining relevance, consideration will be given for, but not limited to, such things as project similarity, project complexity, contract type, contract environment, and subcontractor interaction. The evaluation will be constrained to the most recent and relevant contracts.

For the purpose of this evaluation, the “Offeror” includes the prime contractor’s organization as complemented by the prime’s team (subcontractors and other operating units of the prime, for example).

The Government reserves the right to visit/revisit any or all Offerors and to contact any and all references. The assessment will be accomplished using both data provided by the Offeror and data obtained from other sources. The assessment of past performance as a specific evaluation factor is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9.

Submittal Requirements. In accordance with FAR 42.1503(e), past performance will be evaluated using the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), as well as Performance Evaluation Surveys, found at Exhibit 4. Only performance ratings for contracts completed within the past six (6) years from the date proposals are due shall be considered. If an Offeror does not have past performance available in CPARS, the Performance Evaluation Surveys will be used exclusively. A lack of past performance information will result in a neutral rating for this factor during evaluation. Government databases will be checked and previous customers may be contacted as references. All projects submitted on a Performance Evaluation Survey must have been completed within the last six (6) years from the date proposals are due. Further instructions are found at the top of the Performance Evaluation Surveys exhibit. The Government reserves the right to contact the evaluator on previous Government or private sector work to verify the Offeror’s construction/design performance.

Offerors shall submit a list of all customers (including current point of contact, phone number, and electronic address) to whom Performance Evaluation Survey was provided. A reproducible Performance Evaluation Surveys form is provided within the exhibits supplied with this RFQ.

No more than three (3) Performance Evaluation Surveys total shall be submitted. If additional surveys are submitted, the Contracting Officer will only evaluate the first three surveys received.

With regard to Performance Evaluation Surveys, Region 10 PBS requests that the client complete this questionnaire and submit it directly back to the Offeror. The Offeror will submit this completed questionnaire to Region 10 PBS with their proposal, and may duplicate this questionnaire for future submission on Region 10 or other PBS solicitations. Clients are highly encouraged to submit questionnaires directly back to the Offeror. However, questionnaires may be submitted electronically to Region 10 PBS as indicated below.

Richard Risso Contracting Officer Email: richard.risso@gsa.gov

The Government reserves the right to contact the identified references provided in an Offeror’s proposal to verify information provided by an owner on a Survey.

***NOTE: For surveys sent directly to the Contracting Officer, please include a designation to include the following (if emailed, include this designation either in the subject line or as the first line of the email body):

“911 Fed Bldg Seismic & ABAAS Upgrades + NOAA TI Design Build”, Performance Evaluation Survey for [enter Contractor Name for which survey was completed] (member of [enter name of this Solicitation’s Prime])”.

FACTOR 2: APPROACH TO DESIGN- BUILD – 25%

This factor considers the Offeror’s approach to establishing a design-build team that will proactively and collaboratively work together to satisfy the Government’s performance objectives. To that end, the Government is looking for a holistic approach (incorporating expertise in many areas including but not limited to architecture, engineering, interior design, sustainability and construction operations.

Submittal Requirement: Each Offeror must submit a written narrative (not to exceed 10 pages) concerning its approach to the DB process. An Offeror may allocate the 10 pages in any manner it chooses.

Standard for Evaluation: The narrative must discuss each of the subjects set forth below. The following bullets are not sub factors; rather, they are elements the Government will consider when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal.

Philosophy and Design Intent: The Offeror’s philosophy and design intent as related to the project described in the solicitation. Such a discussion may include such topics as the parameters of an overall design philosophy; approach to project challenges and commitment to integrated and sustainable design. The Offeror’s philosophy and design intent should be characterized by clarity, standard grammar, and the absence of clichés or jargon. The Government expects clear, thoughtful phrases that demonstrate the ability of the team to communicate ideas. The Government will evaluate whether the Offeror’s philosophy and design intent is suitable for this project.

Management Process: The Offeror shall describe their overall management approach to DB including such topics as: roles and responsibilities of team members; description of the lines and methods of communication; decision-making; interaction with consultants; the means to integrate client input; the role of specialty contractors; and managing quality and cost. The Government will evaluate the probability that the Offeror’s management process will result in a cohesive and collaborative team effort.

Stipend: In consideration for the preparation of a Phase 2 proposal, GSA will pay a stipend of $40,000 to Offerors not selected for award. Offerors that submit incomplete or unacceptable Phase 2 proposals will not be eligible for a stipend. For the avoidance of doubt, no stipend is paid during Phase 1.

The Phase 2 RFP will also provide that as a condition of submitting a Phase 2 proposal, and notwithstanding the conditions of any notice appearing thereon, the Government shall have unlimited rights (as defined in the “Drawings and Other Data to Become Property of Government” clause contained in the Agreement) to the technical data contained in the proposal.

To be eligible for a stipend, the Offeror must present a complete design concept solution that patently differs from the “preferred option”, which is thoroughly documented within the “GSA 911FB Seismic PDS Submittal 4, Final Volume 1 Technical (Rev 3)”, which is part of the solicitation package.

Summary of the ‘preferred option”:

· New concrete shear walls along Grid Line D in the Tower.

· Thickening of existing shear walls at the center core and east/west end stairwell cores as well as various locations in the auditorium.

· New collector elements throughout the structure

· Retrofit of existing foundations beneath existing shear walls.

The above strengthening scheme was chosen by the GSA because it has minimal impact to existing tenants and does not require any significant alterations to existing floor layouts and projects to be a cost-efficient solution.

The standard has been met when:

· The Offeror satisfactorily explains how the stipend will be distributed among the team members, should they get shortlisted to Phase Two. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror will share the stipend in an equitable manner among the team members.

· The Offeror’s philosophy and design intent is suitable for this project

· There’s a satisfactory probability that the Offeror’s management process will result in a cohesive and collaborative team effort

· There’s a satisfactory probability that the Offeror will share the stipend in an equitable manner among team members

Additional favorable consideration may be given for any of the following:

· Clearly demonstrated and defined compatible corporate values and corporate philosophies

· The proven, successful implementation of the Management Process on any of the projects listed under Sub Factor 1A

· Entities that have developed a patented process or unique product on which the design-builder intends to rely in performing the project identified in the RFQ

· Written, binding agreements between the team members on the equitable distribution of the stipend

FACTOR 3 – LEAD DESIGNER – 25%

This factor considers the Lead Structural Designer and Lead Architect Designer’s portfolio. For purposes of this evaluation factor, the term “Lead Designer” means an individual or team of designers who will have the primary responsibility to develop the concept and the project design.

Submittal Requirements: Each Offeror must submit the information requested below. The following are not sub factors, but, rather, are elements the Government will consider when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal.

Submit a portfolio representative of the Lead Structural Designer and Lead Architect Designer’s abilities. Address their participation in each project.

a. If the Lead Designers are an individual, submit a portfolio of up to three (3) projects completed in the last ten (10) years (maximum of 5 five pages per project) for each discipline.

b. If the Lead Designers are a team, submit a portfolio of up to two (2) completed projects by the lead designer(s) on the team (maximum of 5 five pages per project) for each discipline.

c. Each project must include a narrative that addresses the design approach with salient features and discuss how the client's program, functional, image, mission, economic, schedule, and operational objects were satisfied by the overall design/planning solution. Include tangible evidence such as certificates, awards, or peer recognition.

d. As part of the submittals listed above, each Offeror may include:

1. One of the following for each project: a representative floor plan, a site plan, a rendered 3-D model, a building section, or other appropriate drawing, and

2. Two pages of photographs for each project.

3. Identify and describe areas of responsibility and commitment to each project.

II.D. Other Information to be Submitted with Proposals

(1) Representations and Certifications Offerors are reminded their SAM registration status must be “Active”, at the time their offer is submitted, to be considered for award (see 52.204-7). Offerors submitting a proposal in response to this Solicitation shall complete electronic Annual Representations and Certifications in conjunction with required Entity registration in System for Award Management (SAM), accessed via System for Award Management. Offerors shall also submit with their proposal, the Annual Representations and Certifications (FAR 52.204-8), using the attached Offeror’s Representations and Certifications.

(2) Proof of Bonding to $30M. This requirement is satisfied by submission of a letter from the surety confirming the offeror has the bonding capacity to perform. An actual bond does not need to be submitted for the Phase 1 RFQ.

II.E. Requirements of Joint Venture Offerors

(1) All offers submitted by joint ventures must include a copy of an executed joint venture agreement (with original signatures) 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 SF 1442 accompanying an offer regardless of any agency relationship established between the members.

(3) In the case of corporations that are joint venture members, the corporation secretary must certify that the corporation is authorized to participate in the joint venture, either by certifying in the joint venture agreement, or by submitting a separate certification to the Government. The joint venture must also provide a certificate that identifies a principal representative of the joint venture with full authority to bind the joint venture.

(4) Representations and certifications, financial information, and past performance information must be submitted for each member of the joint venture.

III. General Provisions III.A. Availability of Funds Issuance of this Solicitation does not warrant that funds are presently available for award of a Contract. Award of the contract shall be subject to the availability of appropriated funds, and the Government shall incur no obligation under this Solicitation in advance of such time as funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for the purpose of contract award.

III.B. Requests for Clarification or Interpretation The Government will attempt to answer all requests for clarifications or interpretations of the Solicitation Documents prior to the date set for receipt of offers, but do not warrant that all such requests will be answered within 15 calendar days. Prospective Offerors should make such requests not less than 15 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of offers.

III.C. Notice to Small Business Firms A program for the purpose of assisting qualified small business concerns in obtaining certain bid, payment, or performance bonds that are otherwise not obtainable is available through the Small Business Administration (SBA) (Small Business Administration). For information concerning SBA's surety bond guarantee assistance, contact your SBA District Office.

III.D. Information Concerning the Disclosure of Solicitation Results This acquisition is being conducted under the provisions of FAR Part 15 as a negotiated procurement. In accordance with FAR 3.104 and FAR 15.207, after receipt of proposals, no information regarding the identity of those submitting offers, the number of offers received, or the information contained in such offers will be made available until after award except as provided by FAR 15.503.

III.E. Affirmative Procurement Program GSA has implemented an Affirmative Procurement Program (APP) intended to maximize the use of recovered materials, environmentally preferable, and bio-based products. Offerors should familiarize themselves with the requirements for using and reporting on the use of such materials in performance as set forth in the Agreement. Refer to Clause FAR 52.223-10 encouraging vendors to practice waste reduction.

III.F. Notice Concerning Preparation of Proposals Offerors are cautioned to carefully read the entire Solicitation and the Agreement to be included in the Contract contemplated by the Solicitation in order to be fully aware of all requirements and clauses in the contemplated Contract. Verify that all blanks requiring information to be supplied in an Offer have been properly filled out, that all pricing and other numerical data is accurately calculated, and that all copies of the Offer contain the same information.

III.G. Bond Requirements (Phase 2 Requirements) If a bid guarantee is required to be submitted with your offer, any contract awarded will require a performance bond and payment bond as specified in the Agreement. Offerors who utilize individual sureties should note the requirement for a certified, audited, financial statement for each person acting as an individual surety under clause FAR 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee and the requirements of clause FAR 52.228-11 Pledge of Assets.

III.H. Contractor Performance Information

(1) Evaluating Contractor Performance: The General Services Administration is using the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) module as the secure, confidential, information management tool to facilitate the performance evaluation process. CPARS enables a comprehensive evaluation by capturing comments from both GSA and the contractor. The website for CPARS is Contractor Performance Assessment Completed CPARS evaluations are sent to the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (CPARS) which may then be used by Federal acquisition community for use in making source selection decisions. CPARS assists acquisition officials by serving as the single source for contractor past performance data.

(2) CPARS Registration: Each award requiring an evaluation must be registered in CPARS. The contractor will receive several automated emails. Within thirty days of award, the contractor will receive an e-mail that contains user account information, as well as the applicable contract and order number(s) assigned. Contractors will be granted one user account to access all evaluations.

(3) Contractor CPARS Training: Contractors may sign up for CPARS training. A schedule of classes will be posted to the CPARS training site (CPARS Training) and updated as needed.

(4) Contractor Representative (CR) Role: All evaluations will be sent the Contractor Representative (CR) named on your award. The CR will be able to access CPARS to review and comment on the evaluation. If your CR is not already in the CPARS system, the contracting officer will request the name and email address of the person that will be responsible for the CR role on your award.

Once an evaluation is ready to be released the CR will receive an email alerting them the evaluation is ready for their review and comment. The email will indicate the time frame the CR has to respond to the evaluation; however, the CR may return the evaluation earlier than this date.

GSA shall provide for review at a level above the contracting officer (i.e., contracting director) to consider any disagreement between GSA and the contractor regarding GSA’s evaluation of the contractor. Based on the review, the individual at a level above the contracting officer will issue the ultimate conclusion on the performance evaluation.

Copies of the evaluations, contractor responses, and review comments, if any, will be retained as part of the contract file.

III.I. Safeguarding and Dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Building Information Certain information contained in the Solicitation Documents may have been designated as Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) building information. With respect to such information, Offerors shall agree to the terms for receipt of such information, as set forth in the provision “Administrative Matters” in Section III of the Agreement, as a condition of receipt of such information.

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions To be issued with Phase 2 Solicitation.

V. Additional Solicitation Provisions and Instructions V.A. Additional Provisions VI. Method of Award VI.A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals The Government will evaluate Phase 1 proposals based on the following evaluation factors and short list a maximum of three offerors to submit Phase 2 proposals.

PHASE 1: EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHT

Factor 1: Technical Qualifications 50% Sub Factor 1A: Specialized Experience Sub Factor 1B: Past Performance

VI.B. Evaluation of Phase 2 Proposals

The Government will evaluate proposals using the evaluation procedures as stated in this RFP and in accordance with FAR 15.101-1 and 15.3. It is the Government’s intention to award contract(s) to the Offeror(s) whose proposal conforms to the requirements of the Solicitation and is considered to be most advantageous to the Government, Total Evaluated Price and other factors considered. In addition to Total Evaluated Price, the following Phase 2 non-price factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

PHASE 2: EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHT

● Contractor Quality Control Mgr (CQCM)

Factor 6: Price

Statement of Importance

All factors other than price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than price.

NOTE: The importance of price will increase if the non-price (technical) factors of two or more proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of value to the Government, or if the price of one proposal is so high or so low as to significantly diminish the value of a proposal’s technical superiority to the Government.

VI.C. Determination of Responsibility In order to be considered responsible, an Offeror must demonstrate that it meets the requirements of FAR 9.104-1. The Contracting Officer's determination of an Offeror's responsibility or non-responsibility may be based upon any information obtained by the Contracting Officer, and is independent of the evaluation of offers set forth herein.

VI.D. Price Analysis

(1) The Contracting Officer will use Price Analysis to analyze the Offeror’s proposal to ensure that the final agreed-to-price is fair and reasonable. In performing Price Analysis, the Contracting Officer may use, singly or in combination with others, the analytical techniques described in FAR 15.404-1, to ensure that the final price is fair and reasonable. The Contracting Officer may request the advice and assistance of other experts to ensure that appropriate Price Analysis is performed.

VI.E. Unbalanced Prices Offers must include balanced prices. Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonably high prices. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. All offers with separately priced line items or subline items shall be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced. If price analysis techniques indicate that an offer is unbalanced, the contracting officer shall: (i) Consider the risks to the Government associated with the unbalanced pricing in determining the competitive range and in making the source selection decision; and (ii) Consider whether award of the contract will result in paying unreasonably high prices for contract performance. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

VI.F. Total Evaluated Price

Total Evaluated Price shall be calculated using the prices indicated in the Phase 2 Price Proposal using the formula in the Phase 2 Solicitation.

VI.G. Non-Price Factors

See II.C. Technical Proposal

PHASE 1: EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHT

Factor 1: Technical Qualifications 50% Sub Factor 1A: Specialized Experience Sub Factor 1B: Past Performance

VI.H. Evaluation of Joint Venture Offerors In the evaluation of responsibility and non-price factors, information submitted for a party to the joint venture will only be evaluated to the extent that the terms of the joint venture agreement do not limit such party's performance or financial obligations as a party to the Contract contemplated by this Solicitation.

911 Fed Bldg Structural Systems, ABAAS Upgrades & NOAA TI Space Build-Out, 9.30.20 Solicitation No. EQ10PCP-20-0010 image2.png image3.png image1.jpg