Attachment B - Evaluation Factors - Roof Replacement 1.pdf

Evaluation Factors - FEMA Region 6 FRC Ground Level HVAC and Roof Replacement

Item Recommendation

Requirement FEMA Region 6 FRC Ground Level HVAC and Roof Replacement

Place of Performance Federal Regional Center, 800 N. Loop 288, Denton, Texas 76209

NAICS 238220, Plumbing, Heating, and Air-Conditioning Contractors

Recommended PSC Z2AA, Repair or Alteration of Office Buildings, or Z2AZ, Repair or Alteration of Other Administrative Facilities

Acquisition Type Construction/repair and alteration, firm-fixed-price

Recommended Contract Type

Firm-Fixed-Price, single award

Recommended Evaluation Method

Best Value Tradeoff

Evaluation Strategy

Best Value Tradeoff evaluation rather than Lowest Price Technically Acceptable.

Rationale

A tradeoff approach is appropriate because the project involves:

• Work on an occupied FEMA facility.

• Roof leak remediation with potential long-term facility impacts.

• HVAC replacement, ductwork, dampers, electrical connections, and controls integration.

• Environmental compliance for refrigerant recovery and possible hazardous materials.

• BABAA compliance.

• Tight 45-day period of performance.

• Need to minimize disruption to facility operations.

• Need for qualified site supervision and coordination with FEMA security/access requirements.

Price should be evaluated, but the Government would benefit from the ability to pay a price premium for a technically superior approach that reduces schedule, performance, warranty, safety, or operational risk.

Evaluation Factors

The Government may evaluate proposals using the following factors:

1. Technical Approach

2. Project Management, Staffing, and Schedule

3. Relevant Experience

4. Past Performance

5. Compliance, Safety, and Quality Control

6. Geographical Area

7. Price

Recommended relative importance:

• Factors 1 through 6, when combined, are more important than price.

• As proposals become more technically equal, price becomes more important.

• The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest-priced offeror if a higher-rated proposal provides a better value.

Evaluation Factors

Factor 1: Technical Approach

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror demonstrates a clear, feasible, and technically sound approach to completing the roof replacement and HVAC replacement requirements described in the SOO.

The evaluation may consider the offeror’s approach to:

• Removing existing roof membrane and insulation without damaging the underlying steel roof structure.

• Inspecting the existing metal roof surface and addressing discovered conditions.

• Installing sub-membrane insulation using Energy Guard, Polyiso, or equivalent energy-saving material.

• Installing a PVC, TPO, or EPDM roof membrane with a minimum 25-year materials warranty.

• Installing new cast iron drains with top-mounted caged units.

• Removing existing rooftop HVAC package units in accordance with EPA refrigerant handling requirements.

• Replacing the 5-ton HVAC unit serving the mailroom.

• Adding one new 5-ton HVAC unit, including ducting, to serve the Native Nations Room.

• Retaining and integrating the newly installed 12.5-ton HVAC unit serving the Lobby/Security

Office and hallway.

• Providing HVAC units with a SEER rating of 18 or higher.

• Installing ductwork, dampers, breakers, disconnects, and electrical connections.

• Integrating the HVAC systems into the existing Metasys system.

• Performing test and balance procedures and documenting results.

• Ensuring redundancy through damper configuration so another unit may condition the affected area if one unit fails.

• Addressing drainage, ponding, leak prevention, and long-term roof performance.

• Complying with applicable codes, manufacturer requirements, industry standards, and best commercial practices.

A higher rating may be assigned to proposals that provide a detailed, practical, and low-risk technical approach that clearly addresses both the roofing and HVAC elements, demonstrates understanding of the FRC facility constraints, and includes well-supported product selections and installation methods.

Factor 2: Project Management, Staffing, and Schedule

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to manage, staff, coordinate, and complete the project within the required period of performance.

The evaluation may consider:

• Proposed project schedule, including a Gantt chart with milestones.

• Ability to complete all work within the 45-day period of performance.

• Sequencing of demolition, roofing, HVAC installation, electrical work, controls integration, testing, cleanup, and final inspection.

• Plan for coordination with FEMA, the CO, COR, Project Officer, facility management, and

Safety Officer.

• Proposed staffing, including project manager, site supervisor, roofing personnel, HVAC personnel, electricians, controls technicians, safety personnel, and subcontractors.

• Availability and qualifications of proposed key personnel.

• Plan to maintain qualified on-site supervision throughout performance.

• Approach to site access, badging, security requirements, and required training.

• Approach to material delivery, staging, just-in-time delivery, and limited storage.

• Plan to minimize disruption to building occupants and operations.

• Approach to managing noise, work hours, access limitations, parking, loading, weather impacts, and daily cleanup.

• Communication and issue escalation procedures.

• Identification of major project risks and proposed mitigation strategies.

A higher rating may be assigned to proposals that provide a realistic and detailed schedule, demonstrate adequate staffing and supervision, identify project risks, and provide credible mitigation strategies for maintaining facility operations while meeting the 45-day completion requirement.

Factor 3: Relevant Experience

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror has recent and relevant experience performing projects similar in size, scope, and complexity.

Relevant experience may include projects involving:

• Commercial or federal roof membrane replacement.

• EPDM, TPO, or PVC roof systems.

• Roof insulation replacement and drainage improvements.

• HVAC package unit removal and replacement.

• Ductwork installation and damper installation.

• Test and balance activities.

• Building automation or Metasys integration.

• Work in occupied government, commercial, or critical operational facilities.

• Projects with security access requirements.

• Projects requiring EPA refrigerant recovery and environmental compliance.

• Projects requiring Davis-Bacon wage compliance.

• Projects completed under compressed schedules.

Offerors should provide project examples that include:

• Customer name.

• Project title.

• Contract number, if applicable.

• Location.

• Period of performance.

• Dollar value.

• Description of work performed.

• Relevance to this requirement.

• Whether the offeror acted as prime contractor or subcontractor.

• Point of contact information, if requested by the solicitation.

A higher rating may be assigned to proposals demonstrating successful completion of multiple recent projects involving both commercial roofing and HVAC replacement in occupied or controlled-access facilities.

Factor 4: Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the quality of the offeror’s past performance on recent and relevant contracts.

The evaluation may consider:

• Quality of work.

• Timeliness and schedule adherence.

• Cost control.

• Safety record.

• Customer satisfaction.

• Effectiveness of project management.

• Responsiveness to issues and corrective actions.

• Compliance with contract requirements.

• Performance in occupied facilities.

• Performance on federal or similar government contracts.

• Performance involving subcontractor coordination.

The Government may use information provided by the offeror and information obtained from other sources available to the Government, such as CPARS, past performance questionnaires, or other agency records.

Offerors with no relevant past performance may receive a neutral rating for this factor. A neutral rating will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably.

Factor 5: Compliance, Safety, and Quality Control

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s plan for complying with safety, environmental, labor, security, quality assurance, and project documentation requirements.

The evaluation may consider the offeror’s approach to:

• OSHA compliance and use of required PPE.

• Fall protection and rooftop work safety.

• Hazard communication.

• Refrigerant recovery and EPA compliance.

• Identification, reporting, testing, and handling of suspected asbestos, lead-based paint, or other hazardous materials.

• Waste disposal and recycling.

• BABAA compliance documentation.

• Davis-Bacon wage compliance.

• Protection of Government property.

• Daily cleanup and final cleanup.

• Accident reporting.

• Quality assurance and quality control inspections.

• Manufacturer installation requirements.

• Warranty documentation.

• Test and balance documentation.

• As-built drawings, manuals, and preventive maintenance schedule.

• Contractor employee access, background investigation, facility access, and training requirements.

A higher rating may be assigned to proposals that provide a comprehensive, project-specific safety and quality control plan with clear procedures, responsible personnel, inspection points, documentation controls, and corrective action processes.

Factor 6: Geographical Area

The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR 52.212-2 and the evaluation factors stated in the solicitation. Due to the mission-critical nature of this requirement and the need for timely response and completion of work, the Government requires the contractor to demonstrate the ability to perform within a 150-mile radius of FEMA Regional Center, 800 N. Loop 288, Denton, Texas, 76209. The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR 52.212-2 and the evaluation factors stated in the solicitation.

Factor 7: Price

The Government will evaluate price for fairness, reasonableness, and, if applicable, balance.

The price evaluation may include review of:

• Total firm-fixed price.

• Price breakdown by major work element.

• Roofing work.

• HVAC equipment and installation.

• Electrical connections.

• Controls integration.

• Test and balance.

• Demolition and disposal.

• Permits, if applicable.

• Safety and environmental compliance.

• Closeout documentation.

• Warranty-related costs.

• Any options, if included.

The Government may determine whether the proposed price is reasonable based on competition, comparison to the Independent Government Cost Estimate, historical pricing, market research, or other price analysis techniques.

The Government may also evaluate whether the proposed price is balanced, meaning that prices are not materially overstated or understated for one or more line items in a way that creates performance risk.

Rating Scheme

The Government may use the following ratings for non-price factors.

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal significantly exceeds requirements and demonstrates an exceptional approach with very low risk. Strengths substantially benefit the Government.

Good Proposal exceeds requirements in one or more meaningful areas and demonstrates a sound approach with low risk.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and demonstrates an adequate approach with no worse than moderate risk.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet one or more requirements or presents performance risk that may be correctable.

Unacceptable Proposal fails to meet one or more material requirements or presents unacceptable performance risk.

Risk Ratings

Rating Description

Low Risk Little potential for disruption, delay, unsuccessful performance, or increased Government oversight.

Moderate Risk

Some potential for disruption, delay, or performance issues, but risk appears manageable.

High Risk Significant potential for disruption, delay, unsuccessful performance, safety issues, or increased Government oversight.

Technical Acceptability Requirements

The solicitation may state that a proposal must, at a minimum, demonstrate the following to be eligible for award:

1. Ability to complete the project within the required period of performance.

2. Use of roofing membrane with a minimum 25-year materials warranty.

3. Use of HVAC units with SEER rating of 18 or higher.

4. Compliance with EPA refrigerant recovery requirements.

5. Compliance with OSHA requirements.

6. Compliance with Davis-Bacon wage requirements.

7. Compliance with BABAA requirements.

8. Ability to integrate HVAC units into the existing Metasys system.

9. Ability to perform and document HVAC test and balance.

10. Ability to provide qualified on-site supervision.

11. Ability to meet FEMA facility access and security requirements.

12. Ability to provide required closeout documentation, including warranties, manuals, preventive maintenance schedule, and as-built drawings.