Final Draft RFP for posting.pdf

Contract No.:

U S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

PROJECT PRA-FOOT 8E14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22

FOOTHILL PARKWAY DESIGN-BUILD

Partially Funded Under The American Recovery & Reinvestment Act

Request for Proposal

RFP NO: DTFH71-10-R-00006

This Contract Cites

Standard Specifications FP-03 U.S. Customary Units

CONTRACTOR:

ADDRESS:

STATE: Tennessee

COUNTY: Blount

PARK: Great Smoky Mountains National Park

Foothills Parkway

ROADWAYS: STATIONS FEET

Foothills Parkway 788+80(+/-) to 836+07(+/-) 4,727

PROJECT LENGTH TOTAL: 1,000 feet = 0.89 miles

TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT:

The project consists of the design and construction of the Foothills Parkway from the eastern terminus of the Foothills Parkway near Bridge 8 and to the western terminus of project FOOT 8E17, Bridge 2 (under construction). The work includes the design and construction of all roadway, walls, five bridges, and other miscellaneous work from 836+07(+/-) to 788+80(+/-).

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Solicitation/Contract Form (SF-1442)

I. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

A. General Information B. Procurement Process C. Proposal Requirements D. Government Furnished Information

II. CONTRACT TERMS AND CONTITIONS

A. Special Terms and Conditions .................................................................1 - 11 B. Contract Clauses .......................................................................................1 - 10

III. MINIMUM WAGE SCHEDULE ....................................................................1 - 6

IV. REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND OTHER STATEMENTS.

K. Representations and Certifications ...........................................................1 - 8 L. Instructions, Conditions, and Notices To Offerors or Respondents .........1 - 11

V. SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

A. Division 100—General Requirements .....................................................1 - 34 B. Division 110—Design Criteria.................................................................35 - 39 C. Division 120—Submittals and Reviews ..................................................39 - 45 D. Division 150—Project Requirements ......................................................45 - 72 E. Divisions 200 through 700—Work Item and Material Requirements .....72 - 123

VI. PERMIT

Biological Assessment, pages 1 - 56 Finding of No Significant Impact 1998, pages 1 - 7 Finding of No Significant Impact 2009, pages 1 – 4

'���+��%0� "

( "12 �2�" " �3� - "#"""")

��������#��������&�3���$��4����5���.#�&���3�6� !7� )7� 67� 87��"7������������� ��+������%�����7�3���������5��������������� ������3� ����6������������ �������$��4�������3�6� -7�+� ������9��������������� ��:���3��� ��7� ����7�� ����7������������ ��,������61)<"-9<2&:����-66<6"9<2&:�

���������5.��'7�$����� ���������*) �������5��' �����>�$��������� 8867�$����� ���������!

�������5��' �����>�$����������""87�$����� ���������!

����3����������7���;$�������?�������������� ��������������������3.�

�����./��0123#4203�5.#66�$/781�9/3:03;#14/��

#=#3>? 10284/�20�9304//>������./�9/3:03;#14/�9/380>�85� ;#1>#203@� 1/7028#$6/���&�//�------------------------------------------------�'

#���/#6/>�0::/35�81�038781#6�#1>

85�102�3/AB83/>�85?�$���1�0::/3�7B#3#12//�������

4���66�0::/35�#3/�5B$C/42�20�2./�&�'�=03D�3/AB83/;/125?�#1>�&�'�02./3�930E858015�#1>�46#B5/5�81403903#2/>�81�2./�5068482#2801�81�:B66�2/(2�03�$@�3/:/3/14/�������

:�2.85�85�#�5/#6/>�$8>�5068482#2801?�0::/35�=866�$/�9B$6846@�09/1/>�#2�2.#2�28;/����/#6/>�/1E/609/5�4012#81817�0::/35�5.#66�$/�

;#3D/>�20�5.0=�2./�0::/303F5�1#;/�#1>�#>>3/55?�2./�5068482#2801�1B;$/3?�#1>�2./�>#2/�#1>�28;/�0::/35�#3/�>B/�

>�� ::/35�930E8>817�6/55�2.#1

� "� � 6�*�4#6/1>#3�>#@5�#1>�40;96/2/�82�=82.81�---------------- ---------------- 4#6/1>#3�>#@5�#:2/3�3/4/8E817

.����>7���;$���� �+�!��

"*2 �2�" "

�8"� �������)G)�G���G ���

4098/5�20�9/3:03;�2./�=03D�3/AB83/>�#3/�>B/�#2�2./�96#4/�59/48:8/>�81�

2/;���$@�------------- �------------------- �$� ���604#6�28;/

4#6/1>#3�>#@5�:03��0E/31;/12�#44/92#14/�#:2/3�2./�>#2/�0::/35�#3/�>B/�=866�102�$/�40158>/3/>�#1>�=866�$/�3/C/42/>�������-----------------�

�"������&�/E���G��' �3/5438$/>�$@����

�'�� �� �G�&>'

�8�

DRAFT

�����./�0::/303�#73//5�20�9/3:03;�2./�=03D�3/AB83/>�#2�2./�9384/5�59/48:8/>�$/60=�81�523842�#4403>#14/�=82.�2./�2/3;5�0:�2.85�5068482#2801?�8:�2.85�0::/3�85�#44/92/>

$@�2./��0E/31;/12�81�=382817�=82.81�--------------------�4#6/1>#3�>#@5�#:2/3�2./�>#2/�0::/35�#3/�>B/����������

�����./�0::/303�#73//5�20�:B3185.�#1@�3/AB83/>�9/3:03;#14/�#1>�9#@;/12�$01>5�

0��#������ ��2�

������� �)4��

3�2���%����

����������3 4��� '5 '6 �--����7��

3�2���%���

������� )4������ �$���� �� �4������

����2�� #��0 ��2�����

�)��������� )�&4' ������������ &4'

�"������&��*���G��'����, �8�

DRAFT

pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division A/P Branch, AMZ-150 P. O. Box25710 or E-MAIL

9-AMC-AMZ-EFLINVOICES@FAA.GOV

OklahomaCity,OK73125 pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text pschaad Typewritten Text

PART I. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

SUBPART I.A GENERAL INFORMATION

I.A.1 General

This Request for Proposals (RFP) is issued by the Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) to solicit competitive proposals for a design/build contract for Foothills Parkway Project FOOT 8E14, 8E16, 8E18, 8E19, 8E20, and 8E22. The RFP is issued as Phase Two of a “two phased” design/build selection process. Those Offerors selected in Phase One are invited to submit Proposals to design and build the Project according to the requirements and procedures contained in this RFP. Phase One selected Offerors are those firms/teams who were notified in writing by EFLHD inviting them to participate in Phase Two of the selection process.

The Offerors invited to submit Phase Two proposals are as follows:

Contractor 1

Contractor 2

Contractor 3

I.A.2 Description of Project

Foothills Parkway PRA-FOOT 8E14, 8E16, 8E18, 8E19, 8E20, and 8E22 is located in Blount County, Tennessee, northeast of the city of Townsend. The proposed project is for the design and construction of new road and five new bridges. The construction work will include clearing, erosion and sediment control measures, site stabilization and revegetation, roadway excavation and embankment, aggregate base, hot asphalt concrete pavement (HACP), retaining walls, soil nailing, drainage improvements, stone masonry, and other miscellaneous work on the Foothills Parkway. The walls, piers, and abutments are to continue the same aesthetic stone masonry look and characteristics of Foothills Parkway bridges 8, 9, and 10 located within 1 ½ miles of the proposed project site. Steel structures will not be considered. The terrain is mountainous and extremely difficult to access with any vehicles.

At this time the only permissible access to the project site for construction vehicles is from the entrance to the Parkway at the intersection of U.S. Route 321 in Walland, Tennessee. This is a gated entrance and remains closed at all times. The project site is approximately 9 miles from the gate.

Access to the project site will also be made available to passenger vehicles through the gate on Carr Creek Road. The government recently awarded a contract to construct Bridge 2 (FOOT 8E17) on Section 8E of the Foothills Parkway in Wears Valley, this contract is scheduled for completion in November 2011. Access to construct Bridge 3 (FOOT 8E19) will be permitted from the entrance to the Parkway at the intersection of U.S. Route 321 in Wears Valley after the work to construct Bridge 2 (FOOT 8E17) is accepted by the Government.

The proposed project limits are within existing National Park Service (NPS) right-of-way. The design and construction cost for this project is estimated to exceed $20,000,000.

Detailed Project Descriptions:

FOOT 8E14 – PMIS 079798: This is to design and construct the Foothills Parkway between existing Bridge 8 and proposed Bridge 7 from Station 821+50 to 836+07 (approximately 1,450 linear feet).

The work will include the construction of a parking area in the vicinity of Station 827+00 (Caylor Gap) with a capacity of 20 +/- vehicles, including oversized vehicles. The majority of this section of the roadway will require the construction of retaining walls and the use of cut and fill. The design of this section of roadway is substantially complete and all permits have been obtained for the proposed work.

FOOT 8E16 – PMIS 132744 (Foothills Parkway Bridge 7): This is to design and construct the Foothills Parkway from Station 812+65 to 821+50 and Foothills Parkway Bridge 7, a proposed 197 foot long, three span AASHTO girder bridge. The roadway portion of this section of roadway will require the construction of retaining walls and the use of cut and fill. No permits have been obtained for this section of the project and the design of the roadway is 90% complete.

FOOT 8E18 – PMIS 140229 (Foothills Parkway Bridge 6): This is to design and construct the Foothills Parkway from Station 809+50 to 813+00 and Foothills Parkway Bridge 6, a proposed 177 foot long, three span AASHTO girder bridge. The roadway portion of this section of roadway will require the construction of retaining walls and the use of cut and fill. No permits have been obtained for this section of the project and the design of the roadway is 30% complete.

FOOT 8E22 – PMIS 132804 (Foothills Parkway Bridge 5): This is to design and construct the Foothills Parkway from Station 803+00 to 809+50 and Foothills Parkway Bridge 5, a proposed 276 foot long , four span AASHTO girder bridge. The roadway portion of this section of roadway will require the construction of retaining walls. No permits have been obtained for this section of the project and the design of the roadway is 30% complete.

FOOT 8E20 – PMIS 51298 (Foothills Parkway Bridge 4): This is to design and construct the Foothills Parkway from Station 792+50 through 803+00 and Foothills Parkway Bridge 4, a proposed 300 +/- foot long , post-tensioned box beam or four span AASHTO girder bridge. The roadway portion of this section of roadway will require the construction of retaining walls and the use of cut and fill. No permits have been obtained for this section of the project and the design of the roadway is 30% complete.

FOOT 8E19 – PMIS 157527 (Foothills Parkway Bridge 3): This is to design and construct the Foothills Parkway from Station 788+80 to 792+50 and Foothills Parkway Bridge 3, a proposed 180 +/- foot long , three span AASHTO girder bridge. The roadway portion of this section of roadway will require the construction of retaining walls and the use of cut and fill. No permits have been obtained for this section of the project and the design of the roadway is pending 30% complete.

I.A.3 Definitions FAR Clause 52.202-1 and Subsection 101.04, Definitions, is supplemented as follows:

Amendment -- Written or graphic instructions issued which correct or change the RFP or the contract documents.

Bid -- Response to the solicitation that, if accepted, would bind the Offeror to perform the resultant contract.

Offer -- Same as Bid.

Proposal -- Same as Bid.

Request for Proposal -- The document prepared by the Government specifying and describing the Government’s objectives and the procedures to be followed in preparing and submitting of a proposal and awarding a contract.

Solicitation -- Same as Request for Proposal.

I.A.4 Description of Work Responsibilities

Contractor Responsibilities -- The Contractor shall be responsible for all work as described in these RFP documents. The scope of work includes design, construction, maintenance during construction, project management, project scheduling, quality control/quality assurance for design and construction, materials sampling and testing, obtaining permits (see Section 107), coordination and design assistance for removal, clean up, and disposal of acid drainage producing material and coordination with other governmental agencies and entities including federal, state, and local governments.

EFLHD Responsibilities -- EFLHD is the representative for the owner which is the National Park Service (NPS). EFLHD will perform management, design, and construction oversight activities of the Contractor’s operations and end products to satisfy the Government that the Contractor meets the contract requirements. Included in the oversight activities will be design reviews, construction acceptance, independent verification testing activities, and oversight of maintenance of traffic and environmental compliance as outlined in this RFP.

NPS Responsibilities -- The NPS will provide input to EFLHD to assure that the project design and construction conforms to the basic character of the Foothills Parkway.

I.A.5 Procurement Schedule

The following preliminary milestone dates have been identified. This schedule is subject to change at any time by EFLHD.

May 3, 2010 Issue RFP to Offerors.

May 20, 2010 Pre-Proposal Conference and Project Walk-Through with FHWA, NPS and Offerors.

June 3, 2010 Deadline for Recommendations for Changes to RFP.

June 22, 2010 Technical and Cost Proposal DUE.

July 14, 2010 Oral Presentations to be held at EFLHD Office in Sterling, Virginia.

July 22, 2010 Award of Contract to one Offeror, Notification and Debriefing to Unsuccessful Offerors.

September 2010 Notice to Proceed (NTP) issued.

I.A.6 Stipulated Fee

A stipulated fee will be awarded to each Phase Two Offeror which provides a responsive, but unsuccessful, proposal. If no contract award is made, all responsive Offerors will receive the stipulated fee. The amount of the fee will be $125,000 and will be provided to each such Offeror within 90 days after award of the contract or decision not to award.

In consideration of its agreement to pay said stipulated fee, EFLHD reserves the right to use any ideas or information contained in the proposals in connection with any contract awarded for the Project, or in connection with a subsequent procurement, without any obligation to pay any additional compensation to the unsuccessful Offerors.

I.A.7 Organization of Request for Proposals

This RFP is divided into five parts. Part I provides instructions to the Offerors. Part II contains Contract Clauses and Conditions. Part III contains the Wage Determination for on site work. Part IV contains the Representations, Certifications and Other Statements to be filled out by the Offerors.

Part V contains the Unique Project Specifications (UPSs). The UPSs amend and supplement the Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects, FP-03, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Refer to Section 101 of the UPSs for a further description of Part V.

I.A.8 Offeror Site Visits

In addition to the site visit scheduled in Subsection I.A.5, Offerors may visit the project during the proposal phase to conduct additional investigations or other studies other than geotechnical. Obtain approval from the EFLHD and the NPS prior to site visits. At a minimum, provide a plan of access to conduct investigations and studies, a restoration plan to restore all disturbed areas back to original conditions, a traffic control plan, and dates and hours of work. An eight working day approval period will be in effect from the date an acceptable proposal is received to the date approval is given.

In accordance with FAR Clause 52.236-3, Site Investigation and Conditions Affecting the Work, the Offeror acknowledges that it has taken steps reasonably necessary to ascertain the nature and location of the work, and that it has investigated and satisfied itself as to the general and local conditions which can affect the work or its cost.

After award of the contract, subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site which differ materially from those indicated in this RFP, or unknown physical conditions at the site, of an unusual nature, which differ materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inhering in work of the character provided for in the RFP, will be addressed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.236-2 Differing Site Conditions.

SUBPART I.B PROCUREMENT PROCESS

I.B.1 Procurement

I.B.1.a Method of Procurement

EFLHD is seeking Phase Two Technical and Price Proposals to design and construct the project in accordance with the two-phased selection process as prescribed in FAR 36.3. Only those Offerors who have been selected in Phase One will be eligible to submit Phase Two proposals. The Phase Two process includes a pre-proposal conference/site visit, followed by a Technical & Price Proposal submittal, oral presentations, and finally a determination of award. EFLHD will award the contract (if at all) to the responsible Offeror determined to provide the “Best Value” to the Government.

I.B.1.b Examination of RFP Documents

Electronic copies of the RFP (including Government Preliminary Design Plans) and the information called out in Section I.D will be available to each pre-qualified Offeror. The Offeror shall be solely responsible for examining the RFP documents, including all addendums issued, and for informing itself with respect to any conditions that may in any way affect the amount or nature of the proposal, or the performance of the work. Failure of the Offeror to so examine and inform itself shall be its sole risk and no relief for error or omission will be provided by EFLHD.

I.B.1.c Interpretation of RFP Documents

The Offeror shall be responsible for reviewing the RFP documents and any subsequent amendments and for requesting clarification or interpretation of any material discrepancy, deficiency, ambiguity, error or omission, or of any provision which the Offeror otherwise fails to understand.

Any inquiries concerning interpretation of the contract documents must be in writing pursuant to FAR Clause 52.214-6, Explanation to Prospective Bidders.

For procurement related inquires, contact:

Primary: Alternate:

Ms. Peggy Schaad Ms. Shirley Anderson Contracting Specialist Contracting Specialist Federal Highway Administration Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 21400 Ridgetop Circle 21400 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, Virginia 20166 Sterling, Virginia 20166 Phone: 571-434-1596 Phone: 703-948-1407

FAX: 703-404-6217 FAX: 703-404-6217

EFLHD.contracts@dot.gov EFLHD.contracts@dot.gov

If EFLHD determines, in its sole and absolute discretion, that such interpretation or clarification requires a change in the RFP documents, EFLHD will prepare and issue an amendment. EFLHD will not be bound by, and the Offeror shall not rely on, any oral communication regarding the RFP documents, and shall not rely on any communication except written communications as described in the RFP documents.

mailto:EFLHD.contracts@dot.gov� mailto:EFLHD.contracts@dot.gov�

If the Offeror has meetings or discussions with other agencies or entities during the procurement phase, the Offeror shall be responsible for verifying this information with EFLHD.

I.B.1.d Receipt of RFP Documents and Other Notices

The Offeror shall specify the addressee(s) that EFLHD will send the communications concerning any contract notices or contract amendments. Failure to so notify EFLHD of addressee(s) may result in the Offeror failing to receive amendments or other important communications from EFLHD.

I.B.1.e Amendments

EFLHD reserves the right to revise the RFP documents anytime before PROPOSAL DUE DATE. Such revisions, if any, will be announced by amendments to the RFP documents. Copies of such amendments will be furnished to all Offerors.

If any amendments significantly affect this RFP, as determined by EFLHD, a new PROPOSAL DUE DATE may be set. The announcement of such new date will be included in the amendments.

The Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of all amendments in accordance with FAR Clause 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisitions. Failure to acknowledge receipt of amendments may cause the proposal to be deemed non-responsive and result in rejection.

I.B.1.f Changes and Exceptions to the RFP Requirements

Offerors are encouraged to submit recommendations for changes to the RFP documents. Offerors shall submit the recommendations any time up to two weeks prior to the PROPOSAL DUE DATE.

The Offeror shall fully explain the recommended change and the benefits to the Government associated with the recommendation being proposed.

If the Offeror wishes to submit such a recommendation, it shall be submitted directly to Ms. Peggy Schaad at the address specified in RFP Subsection I.B.1.c. Only written recommendations will be considered. If the recommended change is accepted, EFLHD will issue an amendment to the RFP to all Offerors.

If the recommended change is not accepted, EFLHD will so notify the Offeror who recommended the change. No further action will be taken. All information contained in recommended changes not accepted will be held in strict confidence.

I.B.1.g Submission of Proposals

Each proposal submitted shall be delivered to EFLHD in sealed envelopes/boxes clearly addressed and identified for “Project FOOT 8E14, 8E16, 8E18, 8E19, 8E20, 8E22”. The Price Proposal shall be in a sealed envelope separate from the Technical Proposal. See Subpart I.C for format requirements and number of copies required.

Submit all proposals so that they will arrive at EFLHD’s office at 21400 Ridgetop Circle, Sterling, Virginia, 20166, on the due date as specified in Section I.A.5. Proposals shall be sent directly to the attention of Ms. Peggy Schaad. It is the Offeror’s sole responsibility to ensure that its proposal is received. Proposals received after the time due may be rejected without consideration or further evaluation.

I.B.2 Pre-Proposal Conference/Site Visit

A Pre-Proposal Conference will be held at the project site on the date listed in Section I.A.5. The purpose of the conference is to explain or clarify the project specifications and requirements.

Offerors are to submit written questions to the e-mail address listed in Subsection I.B.1.c. Remarks and explanations at the conference shall not qualify the terms of the solicitation and the specifications remain unchanged unless the solicitation is amended in writing.

Immediately following the Pre-Proposal Conference, the Offerors will have the chance to walk through the project. Government personnel will be available to clarify requirements and answer questions. A written record of the conference will be furnished to all Offerors.

Offerors are limited to fifteen personnel attending the Pre-Proposal Conference and site visit. Names of the Offerors’ attendees are to be submitted to the address or e-mail address listed in Subsection I.B.1.c.

I.B.3 Evaluation and Selection Procedure Steps

EFLHD will use a Best Value Selection procedure. Technical and Price Proposals will be evaluated separately with separation retained until final technical and price evaluations are made.

Selection will be made based on both technical and price consideration as described in Subsection I.B.6.

A final recommendation, based upon technical and price criteria that provides the “Best Value” to the Government, will be made to the Selection Official. EFLHD reserves the right to seek the technical opinions and advice from appropriate divisions within the Government to be considered during the evaluation of the technical proposals.

The selection procedure will involve the following major steps:

1. EFLHD receives Technical and Price Proposals.

2. Technical and Price Proposals are separated and Evaluation Board (Board) begins reviewing the Technical Proposals.

3. Oral presentations on Technical Proposals.

4. Technical Proposals evaluated by the Board with ratings assigned for predetermined technical criteria.

5. Price Proposals evaluated by the Board.

6. Relationship of price and quality evaluated per Section I.B.6, with the overall proposal providing the best value to the Government forwarded to the Selection Official.

7. Selection Official makes determination of award.

I.B.4 Proposal Submittal

I.B.4.a Review of Price Proposal

The Price Proposal will include the Contract Bid Price total (from Table 1 of Price Form 01, Subsection 109.06) plus the Government’s Contract Administration Costs based on $3,300 per calendar day necessary to complete all contract work from Notice to Proceed (NTP) to final construction completion. The Offeror shall submit prices for each Lump Sum Bid Item, unit prices and quantities for each Statistically Accepted Bid Item, and unit prices for each Contingent Fee Bid Item as described in Section 109. In addition, the Offeror shall also provide the number of calendar days that they will commit to completing the project. The number of calendar days cannot exceed a maximum of 1,825 calendar days (combined design and construction). The number of calendar days indicated by the Offeror will thereby establish the final completion date stated in Section 108, after which liquidated damages will be assessed for work required beyond that date.

The price used for evaluation purposes will be the sum of the Base Contract Bid Price and the Contract Administration Cost as shown on Price Form 01. The Government may reject a proposal as nonresponsive if the prices shown are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. A price proposal is materially unbalanced when it is based on prices significantly less than the cost for some work and prices which are significantly overstated in relation to cost for other work, and if there is a reasonable doubt that the price proposal will result in the overall best value to the Government, or if it is so unbalanced as to be tantamount to allowing an advance payment.

See Subsection I.C.3 for the required documents to be submitted with the Price Proposal.

The price provided will not be disclosed to individual technical evaluators prior to completion of technical evaluation.

I.B.4.b Review of Technical Proposal

EFLHD will use the evaluation criteria shown in I.C.4 in assigning a numerical technical rating for each Offeror. The main categories of the technical proposal and maximum scores for each category are listed below:

• Management/Coordination/Project Control. Maximum Score = 225.

• Engineering. Maximum Score = 475.

• Aesthetics/Workmanship. Maximum Score = 300.

I.B.5 Oral Presentations

I.B.5.a General

All responsive Offerors will be given the chance to make formal oral presentations on their Technical Proposals.

The purpose of the oral presentations is to afford the Offerors an opportunity to highlight the significant aspects of their written Technical Proposals, and to orally communicate their understanding of the RFP. Oral presentations shall not be used to fill in missing or incomplete information that was required in the written proposals. Topics or issues not addressed in the written proposal shall not be discussed during the oral presentations. Offerors shall not include any price or price information in their oral presentations. The Board will use the information gained from the oral presentations to supplement the written proposals in the evaluation of the Technical Proposals. If an Offeror chooses not to participate in the oral presentations, then the technical score will be based solely on the written proposal.

I.B.5.b Procedures

The oral presentation of the Technical Proposal may be made by one or more representatives of an Offeror’s team. Suggested representatives include the Design-Build Project Manager, the Engineer of Record, the Construction Superintendent, the QA/QC Manager(s) for design and construction, the geotechnical engineer, the bridge engineer, traffic engineer, and/or other specialists who are knowledgeable about their specialty areas and who will be directly involved with this project.

Presenters may use visual aids to illustrate key points and supporting information. Eight complete copies of all visuals used in oral presentations shall be left with the Board at the conclusion of the presentation. Each Offeror will be provided with 1 hour to present their proposal and an additional 30 minutes to answer Board questions, however, the Board will ultimately determine when to terminate the presentations.

Upon conclusion of the presentation, the presenters will be asked to recess outside the presentation room for approximately fifteen minutes. At this time, the Board may develop clarification questions on the presentation. After the recess, the presenters may be invited back to answer questions.

Questions will be for clarification only on the material already presented. Offerors will not be permitted to ask questions of the Board except to ask the meaning of a clarification question posed by the Board, and no additional time will be allowed to research an answer. Responses to questions will be documented and considered as part of the technical proposal.

I.B.5.c Order of Presentations

EFLHD will establish the order of the Offerors’ presentations by random selection. EFLHD will establish the date and time for oral presentations approximately five days following submission of the

RFP.

Offerors will be given a minimum of seven calendar days advance notice of the date and time of their scheduled presentations by telephone and e-mail. Once established, the date and time block for an Offeror’s presentation will be firm and will not be revised. Failure to appear at the designated time will result in an Offeror’s forfeiture of the opportunity to make an oral presentation.

The location for all oral presentations will be at the EFLHD Office at 21400 Ridgetop Circle, Sterling, Virginia.

I.B.6 Best Value Determination

The Board will rate the Technical Proposals based on the evaluation criteria listed in Subsection I.C.4 and perform a separate assessment of price and provide a recommendation to the Selection Official of the proposal representing the best value to the Government. The Technical Proposal and the Cost Proposal will be weighted equally.

Calculation of the best value proposal will be as follows:

The Overall Technical Score will be determined by each Board member assigning a numerical rating for each evaluation criterion in the Technical Proposal. Then the consensus method will be used by the Board to determine a final numerical rating for each evaluation criterion. The final numerical ratings will be summed to determine the Overall Technical Score for each Offeror’s Technical Proposal. The maximum possible Overall Technical Score is 1,000 for each proposal.

After the overall technical scores are assigned, the Price Proposals will be opened. A best value cost-technical tradeoff will be determined as follows:

1. The proposals are ranked in order of price (Total Amount Bid plus Contract Administration Cost), starting with the lowest price. The following is an example of the initial ranking according to price:

Offeror Total Amount Bid Overall Plus Contract Admin. Cost Technical Score C $20,600,000 845 D $21,720,000 912 A $23,190,000 880 B $23,800,000 965

2. A cost-technical tradeoff is performed by comparing the top two (2) initially ranked proposals. A Price Increment (P.I.) and Technical Score Increment (T.I.) are computed by the following equations:

P.I. = (PriceOfferor D - PriceOfferor C) ÷ (PriceOfferor C) x 100% P.I. = (21,720,000 – 20,600,000) ÷ (20,600,000) x 100% P.I. = 5.44%

T.I. = (Tech. ScoreOfferor D – Tech. ScoreOfferor C) ÷ (Tech. ScoreOfferor C) x 100% T.I. = (912 - 845) ÷ (845) x 100% T.I. = 7.93%

The T.I. over P.I. ratio is examined. If the ratio is greater than one (1), as in this example, than the second-ranked Offeror (D) is considered to provide a greater value to the government:

T.I. ÷ P.I. = 7.93% ÷ 5.44% = 1.46 1.46> 1.00 ; therefore Offeror D is considered to provide a greater value (Technical Increment outweighs the Price increment).

Offeror D is retained for the next step, while Offeror C is eliminated. If the T.I. over P.I. ratio had been less than one (1), then Offeror C would have been considered to provide a greater value to the government.

3. A cost-technical tradeoff is performed by comparing the higher-ranked proposal from Step No. 2 above (Offeror D) to the next proposal listed in the initial ranking chart (Offeror A). A P.I. and T.I.

are computed similar to above:

P.I. = (PriceOfferor A - PriceOfferor D) ÷ (PriceOfferor D) x 100% P.I. = (23,190,000 – 21,720,000) ÷ (21,720,000) x 100% P.I. = 6.77%

T.I. = (Tech. ScoreOfferor A – Tech. ScoreOfferor D) ÷ (Tech. ScoreOfferor D) x 100% T.I. = (880 - 912) ÷ (912) x 100% T.I. = -3.51%

The T.I. over P.I. ratio is then examined:

T.I. ÷ P.I. = - 3.51% ÷ 6.77% = - 0.52

Since the ratio in this example is less than one (1), Offeror D continues to be considered to provide a greater value to the government. In this case, the Technical Increment decreased while the price Increment increased. Offeror D is retained for the next step, while Offeror A is eliminated.

4. Lastly, a cost-technical tradeoff is performed by comparing the higher-ranked proposal from Step No. 3 above (Offeror D) to the next proposal listed in the initial ranking chart (Offeror B). A P.I. and T.I. are computed similar to the above:

P.I. = (PriceOfferor B - PriceOfferor D) ÷ (PriceOfferor D) x 100% P.I. = (23,800,000 – 21,720,000) ÷ (21,720,000) x 100% P.I. = 9.58%

T.I. = (Tech. ScoreOfferor B – Tech. ScoreOfferor D) ÷ (Tech. ScoreOfferor D) x 100% T.I. = (965-912) ÷ (912) x 100% T.I. = 5.81%

Since the ratio in this example is less than one (1), Offeror D continues to be considered to provide a greater value to the Government. In this case, the Technical Increment did not outweigh the Price Increment. Offeror D is retained, while Offeror B is eliminated.

The proposal offering the best value to the Government (Offeror D in the above example) will be forwarded to the Selection Official.

I.B.7 Award

The Selection Official will select for contract award the proposal which offers the best value to the Government.

The technical proposal will be incorporated into the contract by reference and the contractor shall be bound by its contents.

SUBPART I.C PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

I.C.1 Organization of Proposal

The proposal submittal to EFLHD shall include the following:

a) Cover Letter

b) Executive Summary

c) Technical Proposal containing:

1. Management/Coordination/Project Control

2. Engineering

3. Aesthetics/Workmanship

d) Price Proposal – Packaged Separately

The proposal shall include the Offeror's complete technical response to this RFP and contain all required supporting documentation. All items shall be organized, clearly indexed, and easily identified by EFLHD. Submit the package to Ms. Peggy Schaad at the address shown in RFP Subsection I.B.1.c. The Offeror shall submit one copy of the Cover Letter, eight copies of the Executive Summary, eight copies of the Technical Proposal, and one copy of the Price Proposal for review. The Price Proposal shall be in a sealed envelope separate from the Technical Proposal.

Only the Technical Proposals and the Price Proposals will be evaluated during the Best Value Determination (Subsection I.B.7). The Cover Letter and Executive Summary will not be scored. The contents of the proposals and all discussions regarding proposals will be kept in strictest confidence during the evaluation process and prior to payment of the stipulated fee.

I.C.2 Executive Summary

The Offeror shall submit an Executive Summary that is to be written in a non-technical style and shall contain sufficient information to familiarize EFLHD personnel with the Offeror's project approach and its ability to satisfy the requirements of the project. The Executive Summary is not to contain any pricing information. The Executive Summary shall be limited to a maximum of three pages of text.

At a minimum, the Executive Summary shall include the following:

• A description of the major components of the project.

• A summary of the Offeror’s Management/Coordination/Project Control plan.

• A summary of the Offeror’s Engineering and Aesthetic approaches to the project.

• A summary of the Offeror’s team, identifying major participants and describing their roles in the project. Include a summary of key personnel to be assigned to the project.

Verify that major participants and key personnel have not changed from those submitted with the Phase One Request for Qualifications (RFQ).

In cases where the Executive Summary conflicts with the Technical Proposal, the Technical Proposal shall govern.

I.C.3 Price Proposal

All pr ice i nformation i ncluding c ontract f orm S F 1442; R epresentations, C ertifications and O ther Statements of Offerors; Price Forms 01, and 2A through 2C; and the Offeror developed Forms PP01, PP02, andPP03 shall be sealed in a separate package and be clearly marked “PRICE PROPOSAL.”

The price to be used for the price proposal evaluation and the contract amount will be the sum of the Contract Bid Price and the Contract Administration Cost as shown on Price Form 01. In the case of multiplication errors, the Bid Amount will be based on the Unit Price bid. In the case of addition errors, the Bid Amount will be based on the individual Line Items.

Contract form SF 1442 shall be executed by an authorized representative of the Offeror. The Offeror shall provide appropriate evidence of authority (such as an authenticated resolution of its governing body and certificates of incumbency or powers of attorney) of the person signing the proposal to bind the Offeror to each proposal should it be accepted by the EFLHD.

The Offeror shall complete form SF 1442 e ntirely and the Bid Guarantee shall conform to bonding requirements contained in Section 102.

SF 1442 - Block 17:

Amounts should be completed as follows:

Schedule A - $ If additional Schedules and/or Options are included list separately as follows:

Schedule B (Option 1) - $

DO NOT INCLUDE ANY CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION COSTS IN BLOCK 17.

I.C.4 Technical Proposal

The information submitted in the proposal will be evaluated by the Board using the criteria shown below.

The proposal shall contain clearly written material that is legible and complete. Offerors should not include standard manuals or detailed discussions in this proposal. Approach and discussion information should be concise and specific to this project. All drawings should demonstrate a clear understanding of the RFP and enable the Board to easily evaluate the capabilities of the Offeror for the work on t his project. The proposal shall consist of text, plus drawings, graphs, photographs, and tables as needed to clearly describe the Offeror's approach to the work.

The technical solutions shall be organized into the following major sections and shall provide proposed solutions, analyses, and other information necessary for the Board to be able to evaluate the Offeror’s reasoning and approach:

Evaluation Criteria from the RFP (with revisions from the RFP amendment included):

I.C.4 Technical Proposal

The information submitted in the proposal will be evaluated by the Board using the criteria shown below.

The proposal shall contain clearly written material that is legible and complete. Offerors should not include standard manuals or detailed discussions in this proposal. Approach and discussion information should be concise and specific to this project. All drawings should demonstrate a clear understanding of the RFP and enable the Board to easily evaluate the capabilities of the Offeror for the work on this project. The proposal shall consist of text, plus drawings, graphs, photographs, and tables as needed to clearly describe the Offeror's approach to the work.

The technical solutions shall be organized into the following major sections and shall provide proposed solutions, analyses, and other information necessary for the Board to be able to evaluate the Offeror’s reasoning and approach:

I.C.4.a Management/Coordination/Project Control. Maximum Score = 225.

1. Approach to overall QA/QC, in order to deliver a quality design and construction project on-time and within budget (see Sections 153 and 155). Maximum score = 125.

• Method for delivering a high quality design product. Include a summary of the proposed

Quality Assurance and Quality Control plans. Address design and coordination issues in relation to QA/QC.

• Method for delivering a high quality construction project. Include a summary of the proposed Quality Assurance and Quality Control plans. Address construction and coordination issues in relation to QA/QC.

• Description of system to be used to manage the design and construction schedule. Include procedures to ensure a timely completion of the project. Include procedures for rescheduling activities and schedule recovery. Also include documentation procedures, and procedures for keeping EFLHD and NPS informed and up-to-date.

• Proposed project schedule. Include major and critical activities for design and construction

(including Government reviews), durations, logical relationships, and design and construction milestones. Indicate roadway segments and/or bridges planned for early construction. At a minimum for each roadway segment and bridge, include milestones for Intermediate Design Submittals, Final Design Submittals, Beginning of Construction, and End of Construction.

• Description of management system to be used to control costs. Include procedures to ensure project is designed and constructed within approved budget. Also include documentation procedures, and procedures for keeping EFLHD and NPS informed and up-to-date.

• Preliminary Schedule of Values showing approximate quantities and contribution factors for each Pricing Item activity. Do not include pricing information with the preliminary Schedule of Values submitted with the Technical Proposal.

• Organizational structure. Include a summary of the Design-Build team, identifying major participants and describing their roles in the project. Include a summary of key personnel to be assigned to the project. At a minimum, include the Design-Build Project Manager, the Designer of Record, the Project Engineer, the Construction Superintendent, the QA/QC Manager(s) for design and construction, the bridge engineers, the hydraulic engineers, and the geotechnical engineers. Verify that major participants and key personnel have not changed from that submitted with the Phase One Request for Qualifications (RFQ). Also include how the design personnel will interface with the construction efforts, and how the construction personnel will interface with the design efforts.

2. Procedures and coordination for ensuring that the EFLHD and NPS comments and concerns are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Maximum score = 50.

• Procedures for coordinating with EFLHD and NPS during design to ensure all comments and concerns are incorporated (see Section 121).

• Procedures for coordinating with EFLHD and NPS during construction to ensure all comments and concerns are incorporated.

3. Approach to public safety and public awareness; and procedures for housekeeping, clean-up, and personnel control. Maximum score = 50.

• Proposed public safety plan (including accident management and reporting) during construction.

• Procedures for housekeeping, clean-up, personnel control, and other management or project control procedures.

• Proposed health and safety plan for contractor personnel. Demonstrates ability to provide and manage for the safety of personnel during construction operations.

I.C.4.b Engineering. Maximum score = 475.

1. Approach to roadway design and construction. Submit a typical section for each roadway showing material types, depths, and lateral limits of each pavement structure element. Also submit maintenance expectations. Maximum score = 100.

• Proposed asphalt and aggregate base types, materials, and depths for each roadway. If required, also include subgrade stabilization methods, materials, and depths.

• Proposed life expectancy and maintenance expectations for culverts, roadways, and slope stability items.

• Proposed preliminary alignment and profile each roadway section from the Government preliminary design plans. The Parkway vertical and horizontal alignments cannot be changed.

• Proposed borrow and waste (disposal) sites. Waste and disposal sites cannot be visible from this project or any previous or future Foothills Parkway project (see Subsections 203.05(a) and 204.14). The Proposal will be considered non-responsive if waste and disposal sites are visible. Onsite disposal, apart from pyritic material is not permitted.

2. Approach to bridge design and construction. Describe and/or define the structure types of the bridge and approach walls that will be used for the project. Steel structures and AASHTO Girder structures will not be considered. Provide the following: Maximum score = 300.

• Proposed Type, Size, and Location (TS&L) Plans, stating any deviations from the

Government preliminary design plans (see Subsection 111.06) and why the deviations provide a better engineering solution; however, the Parkway vertical and horizontal alignments cannot be changed.

• A maximum three page description for each bridge and a maximum one page description for each wall type. Describe each structure type, design criteria (parameters), methods of structural analysis, construction materials, design life considerations, and a description of creative or innovative aspects of the design and construction that will benefit the quality, time, or cost of the project. Also submit structure life and maintenance expectations.

• Proposed bridge and wall foundations and design parameters.

• Approach to bridge construction. Include description of construction method and sequence of construction for each bridge proposed. Address how the bridge structure and walls are to be constructed in the site’s steep terrain environment with minimal disturbance and with access from only the west end of the project until access is granted from the East.

• Proposed method to connect bridge abutments and walls.

• Locations, types, and typical section views of proposed walls to accommodate the approaches to the bridge and other roadway areas.

3. Approach to design and construction of other roadway elements, including roadway drainage, and temporary and permanent erosion control. Maximum score = 75.

• Hydrological design methodologies for box culverts and pipe culverts, design storm selections, and materials. Submit design life for pipe culverts (minimum = 50 years).

• Hydrological design methodologies for temporary and permanent erosion control, design storm selections, and materials; and consideration of the highly erodible loess soils for the selection, use, and timing of temporary and permanent erosion control devices and measures.

I.C.4.c Aesthetics/Workmanship. Maximum score = 300.

1. Approach to providing a finished facility that will match the character of bridges 8, 9, and 10 on the Foothills Parkway and the retaining walls associated with those bridges on the Foothills Parkway “Missing Link”. Maximum score = 125.

• Provide a maximum of one page description for each bridge and a maximum one page description for wall and roadway characteristics and Context Sensitive Solutions that are proposed for project.

• Proposed cut and fill slope ratios in order to blend the roadway template into the existing terrain. As shown on the typical sections of the Government preliminary design plans, the steepest side slope ratios allowed are 1:1 in cut and 1.2V:1H in fill. The Proposal will be considered non-responsive if proposed cut or fill slopes are steeper than this.

• Procedures for ensuring that the finished bridge matches the character of other newly constructed bridges on the Foothills Parkway.

• Proposed areas of selective vista clearing to enhance aesthetic appearance and to match the character of the Foothills Parkway.

• Consideration of aesthetics when selecting temporary and permanent erosion control materials, including minimizing future slope failures due to the highly erodible soils.

2. Approach to protection of existing natural resources within the project limits. Maximum score = 125.

• Procedures for protection of existing vegetation to remain, Indiana bats, and other existing natural resources within the project limits.

• Procedure for ensuring that sites are adequately stabilized after clearing, use of site stabilization plans, revegetation plans, and site monitoring during construction and during acceptance periods.

3. Procedures and coordination for obtaining permits (see Subsection 107.01), to ensure that the permitting requirements are incorporated during design and construction. Maximum score = 50.

• Procedures for ensuring that all of the permitting is incorporated into the design and construction of the project.

• Procedures for ensuring that permit, submittals, agency reviews, and other requirements do not delay the overall project schedule.

SUBPART I.D GOVERNMENT FURNISHED INFORMATION

The Government is furnishing each of the following documents/information with this RFP:

Design Reference Documents, Standards and Details see web and FTP sites below:

• Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway (FP-03 US Customary Units) http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/files/contracting/manuals-guides/FP03-english.pdf

• Federal Lands Highway Project Development and Design Manual (http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/contracting/manuals-guides.aspx)

• EFLHD Standard Drawings and Details.

(http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/contracting/english.aspx)

• EFLHD Design Exceptions Form. (To be found at the FTP site)

• Environmental Assessment for the Missing Link, Section 8E, Foothills Parkway, dated

December 1996 (To be at the FTP site)

• Geotechnical Investigation for Foundation at Bridges 3-8 June 27, 1997 (To be at the

FTP site)