N3943019R2101.pdf

INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC) FOR THE GLOBAL PETROLEUM, OILS, AND LUBRICANTS PROJECTS, WORLD-WIDE.

This is an unrestricted acquisition w ith a reserve for three small businesses concerns.

NAICS: 237120 Size Standard: $36.5 Million Maximum dollar amount for all contracts combined is $880,000,000.

Estimated Task Order range is $10,000 to $26,000,000 Minimum Guarantee is $10,000 or aw ard of the seed task.

Small Business Offerors must demonstrate a minimum aggregate bonding capacity of $15 million to allow for the management of multiple, concurrent projects at the higher dollar magnitude w ithin the task order reserve price range. Large Business Offerors must have minimum of $100M aggregate bonding capacity.

Construction Contract – Net 14 days for payment (FAR 52.232-27)

ERIN L. WATSON 805 982-5079

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

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

02-Jan-2019

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______ calendar days and complete it w ithin ________ calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

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

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

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________3 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________20 Feb 2019 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, of fers must be publicly opened at that time.

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

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

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

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

NAVFAC EXWC

CODE ACQ / NAVAL BASE VENTURA COUNTY

1100 23RD AVE BLDG 1100

PORT HUENEME CA 93043-4301

N39430

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

04:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

N3943019R2101 60

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specified below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

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

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be ful ly completed by offeror)OFFER

N3943019R2101

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

00 11 19

SECTION 00 11 19

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

1. Introduction This is a solicitation for an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC). This procurement uses the two-phase design-build selection procedures and consists of one solicitation covering both phases with the intent to award six or more MACCs. See Section 00 72 00 for the general scope of the contract.

2. Set-Aside This contract is an unrestricted acquisition but contains a reserve for at least three (3) small business concerns. Post award, any request for task order proposal less than $2M, and to be performed in the 50 United States, will be solicited from only the small business reserve pool.

3. NAICS Code:

237120 – Oil and Gas Pipeline and Related Structures Construction. Size Standard: $36.5 million.

4. Inquiries Inquiries regarding the Request for Proposal (RFP) shall be submitted electronically to the contract specialist, Erin Watson at erin.l.watson@navy.mil utilizing the Request For Information (RFI) form (Attachment E). RFI’s regarding the Phase I factors shall be submitted no later than 1 February 2019. RFI’s submitted after this date may not be answered. RFI’s regarding phase II and the seed task may be submitted after 1 February 2019. NAVFAC EXWC will provide responses to RFI via amendment, which will be posted on Federal Business Opportunities.

Offerors submitting questions will not be identified, and questions may be redacted if the name of the offeror’s firm is embedded in the RFI.

5. Proposal Submittal Requirements Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be formatted as follows and furnished in the number of copies stated herein. The format for the proposal is as follows:

5.1 Phase One:

5.1.1 Cover Letter. The cover letter shall include—

5.1.1.1 The solicitation number;

5.1.1.2 The name, address, telephone and facsimile numbers, and e-mail addresses of the Offeror;

5.1.1.3 The DUNS Number and CAGE Code of the Offeror;

5.1.1.4 A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;

5.1.1.5 Names, titles, and phone and email addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation and;

5.1.1.6 Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority.

5.1.1.7 Identification of any potential organizational conflicts of interest.

5.1.2 Signed SF 1442 with blocks 14 though 20c completed

5.1.3 Tab 1 - Factor 1, Technical Approach (Attachment “A,” Organizational Chart, summary resumes for certain key personnel, and Signed Copies of Agreements or Letters of Commitment for Each Member of the Offeror’s Team)

5.1.4 Tab 2 - Factor 2, Experience (Attachment “B”)

5.1.5 Tab 3 - Factor 3, Past Performance (CPARS/CCASS/ACASS evaluations or PPQ – Attachment “C”;

Offeror’s Team Consent Form – Attachment “D”; and address any adverse past performance, if applicable).

5.1.6 Responsibility Determination: A responsibility determination will be made prior to determining which offerors will be requested to submit Phase Two proposals. The following items are required to be submitted.

5.1.6.1 Financial Questionnaire: Offeror shall submit a completed form in Attachment “F”. The form shall be completed by the firm’s financial institution(s) and returned to the offeror in a sealed envelope. This information will be utilized to verify Financial Responsibility as required by FAR Part 9.

5.1.6.2 Surety Form: Offeror shall submit a completed form in Attachment “G”. The form shall be completed by the firm’s surety(ies). Note that the aggregate bonding capacity for small business firms must be $15,000,000 or more. Large Business firms must have $100,000,000 aggregate bonding capacity.

5.1.6.3 VETS-4212 Report Submission Confirmation (or Statement of Non-applicability).

5.2 Phase Two: Offerors shall submit Phase II proposals only when notified of being selected to advance to the Phase II evaluation.

5.2.1 Tab 4 - Factor 4, Technical Solution (Seed Task) Attachment “H”

5.2.2 Tab 5 - Factor 5, Safety (Attachment “I”)

5.2.3 Tab 6 - Factor 6, Small Business Participation and Commitment (Attachment “J” Small Business Subcontracting Record; Attachment “K” Small Business Subcontracting Record; Large Businesses only – Attachment “L” Subcontracting Plan Template) The minimum targets for this contract (all years) are:

SB 55%

SDB: 10%

WOSB: 10%

HubZone: 3%

VOSB: 3%

SDVOSB: 3%

5.2.4 Tab 7 - Factor 7, (Attachment “M”) Price (In sealed envelope in original proposal folder only) – The envelope shall contain the following original documents: SF1442 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) with blocks 14 through 20c completed; Bid Bond (in the amount of 20% for Planned Task Order (PTO) #0001), pricing detail for PTO #0001.

Proposals shall be submitted in three ring binders or bound, with tabs or separators. Page limits, if stipulated, must be adhered to. Proposals shall be submitted on 8.5” X 11” paper, utilizing both sides of the paper.

5.3 Offerors are requested to submit only the information/exhibits required. Do not submit any additional information such as brochures, or other pre-printed materials.

5.4 A total of one (1) original and three (3) hard copies (4 total) of the Phase I proposal must be received by this office no later than the date and time stated in Block 13 of the SF1442. Offerors should address all evaluation factors and shall submit the proposal to the following address:

Naval Facilities Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center Acquisitions, Code ACQ-72 Attention: Erin Watson 1100 23rd Ave, Bldg. 1100 Port Hueneme, CA 93043-4301

5.5 Federal Express and United Parcel Service deliveries are made to the shipping and receiving section of Bldg.

1100. Packages submitted through the U.S. Postal Service are sorted in another location before being distributed to the buildings on the installation. If proposals are hand carried, Offeror’s are advised to contact the contract specialist to coordinate receipt of the proposal at the Pass and ID office located at the Sunkist Gate.

5.6 LATE SUBMITTALS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. Proposal must be clearly marked on the outside of the package with the solicitation number.

6. Pre-Proposal Conference

6.1 A pre-proposal conference will be held on 17 January 2019, at 9:00 AM local time at Bldg 50, Naval Base Point Loma where an overview of this RFP will be provided. Due to the size of the conference room, firms are limited to two attendees for the pre-proposal conference. Additional attendees may attend the site visit. Attendees who do not have a current common access card (CAC) or Defense Biometric Identification System (DBIDS) will need to complete a SECNAV 5512 and return it to the points of contact listed above. Requests must be received no later than 4 January 2019 to ensure adequate processing time for the installation. The site walk will occur after the completion of the pre-proposal conference, at approximately 11:00 AM.

6.2 All prospective Offerors are urged to attend this conference. In order to make the conference as productive as possible, Offerors are encouraged to submit, one week prior to the pre-proposal conference, any questions they may have in writing to the contract specialist at erin.watson@navy.mil. Note: this is not the final deadline for the submission of questions. The submission of written questions will not preclude anyone from posing questions during the pre-proposal conference.

6.3 Prospective Offerors are advised that the pre-proposal conference will be held solely for the purpose of providing an explanation of the specifications, terms, and conditions of this solicitation.

6.4 No minutes of this meeting will be issued. All prospective Offerors are advised that this solicitation will remain unchanged unless it is amended in writing. However, if an amendment is issued, normal procedures relating to the acknowledgment and receipt of any such amendment as described in 52.215- 1(b) Amendments to Solicitation, shall apply.

6.5 A site visit for the seed task order will occur after the pre-proposal conference. The number of offerors and the identity of offerors selected for Phase II is considered source selection information, therefore the site visit must be held before Phase II proposals are requested.

7. System for Award Management (SAM) Contractors must be registered in the System for Award Management prior to award of a DoD contract.

For more information, visit http://www.sam.gov. A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor not registered in SAM. Remember to review the NAICS codes listed in your firms profile and ensure that you have listed the NAICS code for this procurement (NAICS 237120) in order to certify your size standard for this procurement.

8. Federal Contractor Program

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 22.1303, any contractor or subcontractor with a contract of $150,000 or more with the Federal Government must take affirmative action to hire and promote qualified targeted veterans which includes, special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, recently separated veterans, and any other veterans who served on active duty during a war or in a campaign or expedition for which a campaign badge has been authorized. Companies must file an annual VETS-4212 report, which shows the number of targeted veterans in their work force by job category, hiring location, and number of new hires, including targeted veterans hired during the reporting period and the maximum number and minimum number of employees of such contractor during the period covered by the report. Instructions, information and follow-up assistance is provided at VETS-4212 Internet site at https://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212.htm

9. Incurred Expenses

The Government is not responsible for any costs incurred or associated with preparation and submission of a proposal in response to this solicitation.

10. Historical Data

10.1 The current contracts were awarded on 2/25/2015, with an effective date of 3/1/2015. The task orders that have been issued to date (as of 9/30/2018) are listed below. Note that “CIR” means Clean, Inspect and Repair. The Current Amount includes the value of any modifications that have been awarded.

10.2 The current contract holders (incumbents) are:

Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions (formerly AMEC Foster Wheeler) N3943015D1629 Bristol Engineering Services Company, LLC N3943015D1630 Cape Burns & McDonnell JV N3943015D1631 Aptim Federal Services (formerly CB&I Federal Services) N3943015D1632 Dawson-Pond JV N3943015D1633 Gilbane Federal N3943015D1634 Truston Technologies Inc. N3943015D1635 Weston Solutions, Inc. N3943015D1636

Contract # Task Order # Title Award Date Current Amount

N3943015D1629 0001 CIR Tanks in Pensacola 02/25/2015 6,146,410.98

N3943015D1629 0002 Tank 5 Floating Pan Installation, Fallon NV 07/29/2016 1,082,557.00

N3943015D1629 0003 CIR tanks A-4 and A-12 Akasaki Japan 09/12/2016 5,460,636.98

N3943015D1629 EJ01 Re-Procurement of Cleaning POL Tanks & Pipelines Project NATO Fuel Depot, Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy

05/10/2016 3,897,432.15

N3943015D1630 0001 Minimum Guarantee

02/25/2015 25,000.00

N3943015D1630 0002 CIR Tanks 2891, 2892, 3110, 3114A , and 3114B Milford, FL at NAS Whiting Field

05/31/2016 1,067,087.00

N3943015D1630 0003 CIR Tank 2109H at NAS Jacksonville, FL

06/30/2016 1,459,601.18

N3943015D1630 0004 CIR Tanks 101, 102, and 103 Kingsville, Texas 11/30/2016 1,449,355.08

N3943015D1630 N3943017F4053 CIR Tanks 2910-1, 2910-2 and 2910-3 at NAS Whidbey Island

11/16/2017 2,125,426.00

N3943015D1630 N3943017F4058 CIR Tanks JPT-1 and JPT-2 , China Lake CA 08/14/2017 1,557,676.00

N3943015D1630 N3943018F4153 CIR Tanks 4 and 6, Fallon NV 06/22/2018 998,693.00

N3943015D1630 N3943018F9851 CIR Tanks 1 and 5, Point Loma CA 07/19/2018 1,159,960.00

N3943015D1631 0001 Minimum Guarantee

02/25/2015 25,000.00

N3943015D1631 0002 Cathodic Protection Repairs, multiple locations

06/17/2016 3,462,515.00

N3943015D1631 0003 CIR Tanks 4001, 4351, 4002, Cherry Point, NC 06/29/2016 4,558,298.05

N3943015D1631 0004 CIR Tanks 2042 and 2044, Mayport, FL 07/29/2016 1,377,986.68

N3943015D1631 0005 CIR TANKS 1156 and 1159 ORT WORTH, TEXAS 03/20/2017 4,145,201.00

N3943015D1631 0006 CIR TANKS U29 and U35, Tengo Vista Guam 03/30/2017 4,222,300.68

N3943015D1631 FZ01 Construct Truck Parking, Truck Fill Stands, repair Truck off-loading stations, El Centro CA

05/24/2017 6,405,944.93

N3943015D1631 N3943017F4000 CIR Tanks B1, U1, U6 and U8 Sasa Valley, Guam 06/13/2017 6,206,331.59

N3943015D1631 N3943017F4020 CIR Tanks U17, U19, &U20 and External Inspection Tank S4, Guam

06/30/2017 6,840,103.42

N3943015D1631 N3943017F4054 CIR Tanks 48, 54 and 55 Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii 08/09/2017 8,382,506.64

N3943015D1632 0001 Minimum Guarantee 02/25/2015 0.00

N3943015D1632 0002 REPAIR BILGE WATER TANK A-4, Hawaii 09/29/2015 7,449,043.00

N3943015D1632 0003 CIR Tank R1 at Sasa Valley and Tanks U30, U31, U33 and U34 at Tenjo Vista, Guam

08/31/2016 7,683,874.00

N3943015D1632 0004 CIR Tanks 4 and 13, Red Hill Hawaii 08/31/2016 14,718,398.00

N3943015D1632 0005 CIR Tanks 14, 17 and 18, Red Hilll Hawaii 08/31/2016 20,437,942.00

N3943015D1632 0006 CIR Tanks A-6-, A-7 and Y-7 Sesebo, Japan 09/12/2016 20,625,321.00

N3943015D1632 0007 CIR Tanks 26, 33, 149, and 181 Manchester WA 04/10/2017 12,081,972.00

N3943015D1632 FZ01 Repair Miramar Fuel Pipeline, San Diego CA 09/03/2015 26,555,640.31

N3943015D1632 FZN0 Replace Fuel Pipeline MCAS Miramar, San Diego CA 09/23/2015 5,297,082.00

N3943015D1632 FZN1 Fuel Tank Closure, San Pedro CA 06/29/2016 14,610,276.00

N3943015D1632 N3943018F4044 Repair of aboveground/underground fuel pipelines and valve pits DFSP, GUAM

02/06/2018 16,812,707.00

N3943015D1632 N3943018F4132 CIR Surge Tanks S1, S2, S3 and S4 Pearl Harbor- Hickam, HI

06/08/2018 10,749,692.00

N3943015D1633 0001 Minimum Guarantee 02/25/2015 0.00

N3943015D1633 0002 Cathodic Protection Surveys and Repairs, Worldwide 07/16/2015 1,477,314.22

N3943015D1633 0003 CIR Tank 1720T Corpus Christi, TX 06/29/2016 2,484,227.00

N3943015D1633 0004 Pax River OOS API of tanks 2787 and 2788 07/28/2016 2,169,936.00

N3943015D1633 0005 Various Fuel Farm Projects, Fallon NV 08/13/2016 4,115,126.00

N3943015D1633 0006 CIR Tanks 517, 518, and 519, New Orleans LA 08/26/2016 1,524,454.00

N3943015D1633 0007 Replace 1500'' of 8" CPP pipeline, Point Loma CA 09/12/2016 1,860,000.00

N3943015D1633 0008 CIR Tanks 12 and 13 New London, Groton, CT 05/16/2017 3,119,452.00

N3943015D1633 0009 CIR Tanks 3863 and 3864, Little Creek VA 05/16/2017 1,778,306.00

N3943015D1633 N3943017F4027 CIR Tanks 801 and 802, El Centro CA 07/24/2017 358,457.00

N3943015D1633 N3943017F4051 Cathodic Protection surveys and repairs world-wide. 08/09/2017 981,915.15

N3943015D1633 N3943017F4075 CIR Tanks B-1 & B-2 Pearl Harbor-Hickam, HI 08/24/2017 3,968,631.00

N3943015D1633 N3943017F4083 CIR Tank 301 Pearl Harbor-Hickam, HI 08/29/2017 1,777,398.00

N3943015D1633 N3943018F4006 Cathodic Protection Surveys and Repairs Worldwide 11/16/2017 1,224,532.87

N3943015D1633 N3943018F4074 CIR Tanks 1253 and 6479 Kaneohe Bay, HI 03/06/2018 4,131,161.00

N3943015D1633 N3943018F4087 CIR Tank 975 Externally Inspect tanks 976, 977, 978 North Island and Externally Inspect 168, 169 at Point Loma, CA

04/18/2018 608,213.00

N3943015D1633 N3943018F4176 CIR Tanks OT-11 and OT-11A New London CT 08/03/2018 1,446,401.00

N3943015D1633 N6247317F4152 Repair Twenty Miramar Pipeline emergent repairs between Point Loma and MCAS Miramar, CA.

08/22/2017 4,716,533.00

N3943015D1633 N3943018F4339 CIR Tank 337 Patuxant River MD 08/30/2018 2,048,695.00

N3943015D1633 N3943018F4324 CIR Tanks 522, 523, & 524, Barking Sands HI 09/10/2018 2,048,695.00

N3943015D1633 N3943018F4407 Cathodic Protection Repairs, worldwide 09/28/2018 963,307.21

N3943015D1634 0001 Minimum Guarantee 02/25/2015 0.00

N3943015D1634 0004 CIR Tank 108 Hakozaki Japan 06/22/2016 7,693,232.00

N3943015D1634 0005 CIR Tanks 104, 106, Hakozaki Japn 08/24/2016 9,981,522.00

N3943015D1634 0006 CIR TANKS 101, 107 Hakozaki Japan 08/26/2016 11,788,573.00

N3943015D1634 0008 CIR Tanks 302, 305, 307, 308 Tsurumi Japan 09/06/2016 17,393,368.00

N3943015D1634 0009 CIR Tanks 602, 604, 605 Tsurumi Japan 09/06/2016 13,137,207.00

N3943015D1634 FZ01 Repair Natural Gas System Camp Pendleton CA 07/30/2015 2,676,169.00

N3943015D1634 FZ02 Repair Underground Natural Gas Distribution System El Centro, CA

09/27/2016 2,572,080.10

N3943015D1634 FZ03 Repairs to MOGAS Service Station San Clemente Island

CA

01/06/2017 7,224,728.00

N3943015D1634 FZ04 Tanks 125,126, and 127 Closures San Clemente Island, CA

05/19/2017 2,388,197.00

N3943015D1634 JM01 Replace Fuel Storage Tanks, NS Guantanamo Bay, Cuba 01/21/2016 10,140,442.00

N3943015D1634 JM02 AUTEC DLA Deficiencies Andros Island, Bahamas 07/20/2016 4,323,977.79

N3943015D1634 N3943017F4120 NEXWC CI11 OOS CIR SAS POL Storage Tanks for Conversion of RME Tanks to F76 and F76 Tanks to JP5, DFSP Guam

09/22/2017 25,774,000.00

N3943015D1635 0001 Minimum Guarantee 02/25/2015 25,000.00

N3943015D1635 0002 Cathodic Protection Surveys and Repairs Worldwide 03/22/2017 133,494.00

N3943015D1635 FZ01 Replace NASNI Fuel farm filter separators 05/24/2017 660,579.60

N3943015D1635 FZN1 Replace Mogas Tank 1 Pt Hueneme CA 03/10/2017 421,803.52

N3943015D1635 FZN2 Upgrade fuel farm hot pit separators, fusible link valves, & PRT tank, North Island CA

05/24/2017 354,576.00

N3943015D1636 0001 Minimum Guarantee 02/25/2015 25,000.00

N3943015D1636 0002 CIR Craney Island Tanks 60, 61; Chambers Field Tanks

LP38, LP40, LP41, VA

08/09/2016 3,000,184.00

N3943015D1636 0003 Repair Tank 47 Pearl Harbor-Hickam, HI 08/31/2016 1,621,877.41

N3943015D1636 N3943017F4028 CIR Tanks F-10, F-8, F-20, F-9 and F-25 Oceana MD 08/03/2017 3,592,513.00

N3943015D1636 N3943017F4031 CIR Tanks 29, 40, 43,146, 179,and 216 Manchester WA 08/02/2017 7,204,806.00

N3943015D1636 N3943018F4155 CIR Tank S311, Red Hill, Hawaii 06/26/2018 1,307,021.00

N3943015D1636 N3943018F4340 CIR Tanks 40, 42, 43 Craney Island 08/30/2018 2,799,924.00

N3943015D1636 N3943018F4408 CIR TANKS 2074, 2076 AND 43-5, Jacksonville FL (Tank 2074 is an option)

09/30/2018 859,216.28

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES MAX

QUANTITY

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0001 880,000,000 Each GPOL CIR, Repair and SRM Services

FFP

Construction and engineering services to perform inspection, testing, design, and construction (primarily maintenance and repair) for pipelines, fuel storage tanks, and associated POL related equipment at various locations worldwide.

FOB: Destination

MAX

NET AMT

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 POP 01-MAR-2020 TO

28-FEB-2025

N/A N/A

FOB: Destination

Section 00 20 00 - Instructions for Procurement

00 21 16

SECTION 00 21 16

INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

Basis of Award and Evaluation Factors

1. DEFINITIONS

1.1 CONCURRENT TASK ORDERS: Projects with multiple starting and ending points, performed under separate task orders, and/or contracts where the period of performance occurred simultaneously for a substantial (two months or more) period of time.

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

1.3 DESIGN-BUILD: Refers to combining design and construction in a single contract with one contractor. Design-build projects require design of the project by a licensed professional (i.e. engineer, architect). Projects that only require shop drawing level effort are not design-build projects.

1.4 FIVE-YEAR PERIOD: The prescribed timeframe for this solicitation that refers to the period of time for which projects may be submitted for experience, past performance, or for prior support for small business. The five-year period is calculated by counting back five years from the initial RFP issuance date.

1.5 FULLY DESIGNED PROJECT: Refers to the traditional delivery method where design and construction are sequential and contracted for separately with two contracts and two contractors.

1.6 LEAD DESIGN FIRM: Applies to any outside Lead Design Firm and any in-house Lead Designer(s).

1.7 OFFEROR: Refers to the contractor submitting the proposal as offeror, including joint ventures, whose name appears in Block 14 of Standard Form 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award).

1.8 PAGE: Refers to one printed side of a piece of paper. (For example, five pieces of paper printed on both sides would result in 10 pages of narrative.)

1.9 PROJECT: A design-build or a fully designed construction activity or task, with a single starting point and a single ending point.

1.10 SELF-PERFORM: Refers to performing work in-house without subcontractors.

1.11 SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESS: A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

1.12 STRENGTH: An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal which has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

1.13 WEAKNESS: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

1.14 100% COMPLETE:

1.14.1 For construction projects: The facility is completely constructed and ready for the intended use.

1.14.2 For design projects: 100% plans and specifications signed off by an Architect-Engineer and ready for construction with final cost estimate. Does not include any Post Construction Award Support (PCAS).

2. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS:

2.1 Factor 1 – Technical Approach will be rated using the following adjectival ratings:

Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

2.2 Factor 2 – Experience, Factor 4 – Technical Solution, and Factor 5 – Safety will be rated using the following adjectival ratings:

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Outstanding (O)

Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good (G)

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable (A)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal (M)

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable (U)

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

2.3 Factor 3 – Past Performance will be evaluated for Relevancy and Performance Confidence using the following adjectival ratings:

Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method Adjectival Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Performance Confidence Assessments

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

2.4 Factor 6 - Small business participation will be rated utilizing the following adjectival ratings:

Small Business Rating Method

Outstanding (O) Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good (G) Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Acceptable (A) Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Marginal (M) Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable (U) Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

3. SOLICITATION PROCESS OVERVIEW

3.1. This solicitation will use the Two Phase Design-Build procedures of FAR 36.3.

4. PHASE ONE – SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION FACTORS

4.1 Factor 1 Technical Approach:

(a) Solicitation Submission Requirements: The composition and management of the firms proposed as the design-build (DB) team for this contract will be evaluated in this factor. The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “1”:

1. Using Attachment “A” (Offeror Team Composition and Management), provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firm(s); and primary design firm(s) (if applicable); and major subcontractors for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement. Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the various firms (see FAR Subpart 9.6). Attachment A shall be limited to two (2) double-sided pages or four (4) single-sided pages.

2. On a separate sheet, include a one (1) page organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the entities.

3. Provide one (1) summary resume for the Program Manager, no more than five (5) summary resumes for

Project Managers, and one (1) summary resume for the lead engineer if design work is ever completed in house.

Limit individual summary resumes to one (1) double sided page or two (2) single sided pages.

4. The Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor-protégé agreement (MPA), or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., joint venture member, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.) (No page limits).

(b) Basis of Evaluation: The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will include a determination as to whether the offeror’s proposed teaming arrangement includes the necessary members to accomplish the three major centrally managed programs (Tanks, Pipelines, and Cathodic Protection) to be performed under this contract and to perform at geographically dispersed areas; whether the proposed organizational structure meets the requirements of the Part 2 specifications (refer to Attachment H); and whether the key personnel resumes submitted by the Offeror meet the personnel requirements listed in section 00 72 00. This factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis.

4.2 Factor 2 Experience :

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “2”: Use Attachment “B” (Offeror or Designer Experience Project Data Sheet) to submit no more than five

(5) projects performed by the offeror and/or the offeror’s Lead Design Firm, and/or major subcontractors. Submit Project Data Sheets that demonstrate construction and/or design experience on projects that were completed within five (5) years of the issue date of the RFP; that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.

A project is defined as a design-build or a fully designed construction activity or task, with a single starting point and a single ending point. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project. The attached Offeror and/or Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment B) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages). If a worksheet has more than two (2) pages, the information in excess pages will be removed and not be considered by the evaluation board. Any projects submitted in excess of five (5) projects will be removed and not be considered by the evaluation board.

Any project not completed will not be considered.

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP.

If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects.

If an offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate how the affiliate will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement to demonstrate construction experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a letter of commitment from the subcontractor and an explanation of the meaningful involvement that the subcontractor will have in performance of this contract.

(b) Basis of Evaluation: The offeror’s submissions will be evaluated to determine whether the past projects are similar to the work to be performed under this contract. Projects which demonstrate that the offeror has the resources and knowledge needed on this contract will be rated more favorably.

Any project that was completed more than five years before the issuance date of the RFP will not be considered.

Data sheets that fail to provide required and complete information may be rated lower.

Projects where the offeror and the lead design firm have worked together may be rated higher.

Projects where the offeror as the prime and the major subcontractor have worked together may be rated higher.

Projects where the Joint Venture partners have worked together may be rated higher.

Projects performed by the offeror may be rated more relevant than projects performed by the Lead Design Firm and/or performed by major subcontractors.

Data sheets that demonstrate the project was performed concurrently with other data sheets (projects) may be rated higher.

Projects that, in the aggregate, demonstrate experience with the full scope of the RFP (i.e. tank repair, piping repair, and cathodic protection surveys and repairs) may be rated higher.

4.3 Factor 3, Past Performance:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “3”. Offerors are required to submit past performance information for the SAME five projects that were submitted for Factor 2, Experience. For each project/contract, there are two submittal requirements: (1) past performance evaluation forms; and (2) a narrative statement.

(1) Past Performance Evaluation Forms. For each project/contract, the offeror must submit a FINAL Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation (legacy ACASS or CCASS evaluations are acceptable) or a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment C). If a final CPARS evaluation is available on the CPARS website for the contract/project, the offeror must submit the CPARS evaluation for the project/contract. If there is not a final CPARS evaluation for the project/contract, a PPQ must be submitted. A PPQ form is included as Attachment C to the solicitation. Offerors must submit the PPQ form to the client for completion. Offerors should take care to ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact on the PPQs. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of the questionnaires. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project/contract before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ which will provide contract/project and client information. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Erin Watson, via email at erin.l.watson@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date.

An offeror should not submit a PPQ when a final CPARS evaluation is available. Only one PPQ shall be submitted per project.

The Government will only consider recent past performance. Recent is defined as projects/contracts completed no more than five years from the posting date of this RFP. Projects/contracts which were completed more than five years before the posting of this RFP will not be evaluated.

The Government may utilize any other information available in the past performance evaluation.

(2) Narrative Statement. Offerors must submit a statement for each project/contract submitted that provides an overview of each project/contract and how the project/contract is relevant to the work described in the performance work statement of this solicitation. The statement for each project/contract may not exceed one page.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate each offeror’s past performance using a three-step process. First, the Government will determine whether the project is recent. Second, the Government will evaluate the relevancy of all projects/contracts submitted by the offeror and other information available (Relevancy Assessment). Third, the Government will, considering relevancy and the offeror’s performance on those contracts, assign a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating.

(1) Recency Assessment: The Government will evaluate whether the project was completed within the past five years, considering the issue date of the RFP. Projects that are not recent will not be considered further.

(2) Relevancy Assessment: The Government will conduct a relevancy assessment of each project/contract submitted by the offeror to determine the work performed under those projects/contracts relates to the work described in this solicitation. The Government is not obliged to seek out and consider information other than the information the offeror submits but may at its discretion consider information involving other projects/contracts.

The Government will evaluate the relevancy of projects based on the evaluation scale in the table shown above. The terms “scope”, “magnitude” and “complexity” have broad meaning such that evaluators will consider any feature of a past project/contract which has a predicative effect on performance on the current contract.

The purpose of assessing relevancy is to take into account the predictive value of past effort toward success on this contract. Therefore, work performed under a Government contract may be considered more relevant than work performed under a commercial contract. In addition, past performance as a prime contractor may be more relevant than the past effort performed as a subcontractor.

(3) Overall Performance Confidence Assessment Rating. Taking into account the Relevancy Assessment (Step 2), and the quality of performance on the past projects/contracts, the Government will assign an overall performance confidence assessment rating for this factor (past performance rating) based on the scale in the table shown above. Offerors for whom past performance information is not available or is so sparse that no rating can be reasonably assigned will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably and, as a result, will receive an “Unknown Confidence” rating for this factor. A favorable record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than an “Unknown Confidence” rating.

CPARS and PPQs that have narratives that qualify the ratings provided may be considered more favorably than CPARS and PPQs with no comments or limited comments, even if the ratings are higher.

5. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS FOR PHASE ONE:

5.1 Factor - 1 Technical Approach will be evaluated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis. Any firm found Unacceptable for Technical Approach will not be considered further. Offerors that are considered Acceptable for Technical Approach will then be evaluated for Factor 2 – Experience and Factor 3 – Past Performance. For Phase One, Factor -2 Experience and Factor 3 - Past Performance are equal to one another.

6. SELECTION OF OFFERORS FOR PHASE TWO:

6.1 The Government does not intend to enter into discussions for Phase One proposals. Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions. Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal.

6.2 Phase One evaluation will result in a determination of the most highly qualified Offerors. The Government will first evaluate small business proposals and select approximately four (4) offerors to submit a Phase Two proposal.

The Government will then evaluate the unrestricted proposals and select approximately four (4) offerors to submit a Phase Two proposal. The actual number of firms selected to submit Phase Two proposals may be more or less, considering the number of most highly qualified proposal received and the number of proposals at which an efficient competition can be conducted. Offerors are advised that those Offerors who are selected to proceed to Phase Two are not guaranteed receipt of a contract award.

7. PHASE TWO – SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION FACTORS

7.1 Factor 4 – Technical Solution:

For evaluation of Factor 4 – Technical Solution, a seed task order is included in this solicitation as Attachment “H”. The non-price factors (Technical Approach and Schedule) are elements of this factor will be combined to form the basis of this factor.

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “4”

1. Technical Approach: The offeror shall submit a technical proposal for the seed task. The technical proposal shall provide a work breakdown structure that demonstrates an understanding of the scope and presents the proposed approach to accomplish the requirements of the seed task; including relevant subcontractors; proposed means and methods; plans to mitigate potential problem areas and logistical issues. Include a project organizational chart that lists the core positions (Program Manager, Project Manager, Site Manager, Site Safety, Design QC, Construction QC, Project Engineer(s), and the Designer of Record) and a summary of the qualifications and experience of core personnel and subcontractors. The offeror’s technical approach shall be limited to a maximum of 20 pages.

2. Schedule: The Offeror shall provide a Critical Path Method (CPM) Schedule and a schedule narrative. The schedule shall identify: the award date, submission of bonds, Post Award Kickoff meeting (PAK), and Pre- Construction Meeting, submittals, government review periods, material/equipment delivery, utility outages, all on-site construction broken out by definable features of work, inspection, testing, weather days and other anticipated non-work days, and closeout activities. The narrative shall explain the logic and sequence of events necessary for the successful execution of the project. Submit the schedule on one or more 11x17 sheets, the narrative shall be limited to one 8 ½ x 11 page.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The offeror will be evaluated on the level of understanding of the requirements of the seed task; the technical merit of the proposed means and methods; the identification of potential problem areas and logistical issues, and the technical merit of any such mitigation plans. The offeror will also be evaluated on the experience of the key personnel and subcontractors. The schedule, including the narrative, will be evaluated to determine whether the sequence of the schedule is logical, whether the required activities are provided; whether the duration of the activities are realistic given the offeror’s proposed means and methods and resources to be utilized in accomplishing the work. Schedules that demonstrate completion before the task order period of performance completion date, while adhering to all requirements delineated in the RFP, may be rated higher. The completion date for the seed task order will be based on the duration submitted in the offeror’s schedule.

7.2 Factor 5 - Safety:

(a) Submittal Requirements: Submit Attachment “I” (Safety Data Sheet / Safety Narrative) under Tab “5.” Individual blocks on this form may be expanded.

The Offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and sub-contractor performed work and the Offeror’s method for qualifying, evaluating, selecting all tiers of sub-contractors. The narrative shall include:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR); include three previous calendar years’ worth of data. This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The Offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If there is no EMR premium, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of the element.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) and Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates; submit three previous calendar years’ worth of data. If the OSHA DART and TRC rates cannot be submitted, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART and TRC rate data negatively should be addressed as part of this element.

(3) Technical Approach for Safety should describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. Fully describe the safety management system that will be used to oversee safety compliance and performance of self-performed and sub-contractor performed work. Also describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and all subcontractor levels. Additionally, describe the methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to two pages.

Note: The narrative shall be limited to two pages. For a partnership or joint venture, the submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Safety narratives for joint ventures may be up to four pages in length.

The Government is seeking…