Solicitation_N40080-14-R-8600_-_P572_Widen_Russell_Road.pdf

P572 INFRASTRUCTURE WIDEN RUSSELL ROAD, MARINE CORPS BASE, QUANTICO, VA

Competition Requirements: Small Business (SB) Set-Aside 100%

NAICS CODE: 237310

Procurement Method: Contract by Negotiation, IAW FAR Part 15

Source Selection Process: Best Value Source Selection (BVSS) Trade - 0ff Process

Type of Contract: Firm Fixed Price

The design-build amount is betw een $10-$15 million

KENNETT MORRIS

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

18-Nov-2013

(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

X

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 _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________545 calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

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 __________ copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________ (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers 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 _______90 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

NAVAL FACILITIES ENG COMMAND WASHINGTON

1314 HARWOOD ST SE, LDG 212, 4TH FLOOR

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD DC 20374

N40080

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

(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:

N40080-14-R-8600 40

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 specif ied 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 fully completed by offeror)OFFER

N40080-14-R-8600

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Project

BASE

FFP

All labor, management, supervision, tools materials, site work and provisions to provide a complete and useable roadway widening and associated improvements from station 79+00 to station 143+79, complete in accordance with the RFP specifications and drawings, but not including work indicated or specified to be provided under any of the other items.

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

0002 1 Project

BASE

FFP

Regarding Part 4, Section G103004, paragraph 1.2 and Part 3, Chapter 3, subpart

3.2.3 (b), provide the following: Remove unsatisfactory soil and material and replace with new satisfactory soil and material (including but not limited to soil/material, backfilling and compaction). Unsatisfactory soil and material shall be removed from Government property and properly disposed of by the Contractor.

For the purposes of this solicitation, assume quantity of unsatisfactory soil and material to be 27,580 cubic yards.

PRICE FOR ITEM 0002:

$____/Cubic Yard 27,580 Cubic Yard =

0003 1 Project

OPTION ITEM 1

FFP

All labor, management, supervision, tools, materials, site work and provisions to provide a complete and useable roadway widening and associated improvements from station 143+79 to station 146+79, complete in accordance with the RFP specifications and drawings, but not including work indicated or specified to be

0004 1 Project

OPTION ITEM 2

FFP

All labor, management, supervision, tools, materials, site work and provisions to provide a complete and useable widening and associated improvements from station 146+79 to station 149+79, complete in accordance with the RFP specifications and drawings, but not including work indicated or specified to be

Notes:

(1)Offeror shall provide a price for all items on the Price Schedule.

(2) A firm fixed price is required for each item and no provision will be made for economic price adjustments.

(3) The Design Build Budget range is $10-$15M and is inclusive of Items 0001 thru 0004.

(4) The Offeror’s price is valid for 60 days from the receipt of proposals.

(5) It is noted that in addition to other requirements, the Base Bid also includes full design services for Base Bid Items. Design services are included in the scope (and cost) of all Additive Items.

(6) Options will be evaluated in accordance with 52.217-5 Evaluation of Options.

(7) Offeror shall submit their best price for this project, inclusive of Item 0001, 0002, and all Options.

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE TERMS

Supplies/services will be inspected/accepted at:

CLIN INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

0001 Destination Government Destination Government 0002 Destination Government Destination Government 0003 Destination Government Destination Government 0004 Destination Government Destination Government

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS UIC

0001 545 dys. ADC 1 N/A

0002 545 dys. ADC 1 N/A

0003 545 dys. ADC 1 N/A

0004 545 dys. ADC 1 N/A

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

A. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This project will be located at Marine Corps Base (MCB), Quantico, VA. The P-572 project is the third of four projects. This project constructs road improvements to Russell Road. The project is to widen Russell Road from two lanes to three or four lanes from the existing entrance at MCCDC HQ Building to Catlin Avenue. The project also includes the required signaling devices with camera equipment to control the direction of traffic and the relocation of existing utilities such as telecom, water, sewer, electric, and natural gas utility lines as necessary.

The project will add one or two additional traffic lanes from the existing entrance at MCCDC HQ Building, station 79+00, to Catlin Avenue, acceleration and deceleration lanes in accordance with VDOT standards. The project will allow 2 full traffic lanes along this portion of Russell Road during peak rush hours.

The road will be constructed as a “Rural Road”, without C&G, to Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Road Specifications. Construction will include relocation of telecom, water, sewer, electric and natural gas utility lines as necessary. Environmental mitigation includes wetland restoration.

Some demolition will be necessary for Russell Road such as milling the existing pavement surface within the limit of the project; replace the existing storm drain under the disturbed area in its entirety; and replace the pavement along the length of the replaced storm drain.

Low Impact Development will be included in the design and construction of this project.

B. SITE VISIT INFORMATION

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995)

(a) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) Site visits may be arranged during normal duty hours by contacting:

Date and Time: TBD (Phase II)

Location: Address: Marine Corps Base Quantico Public Works Department Public Works Building 2004 First Floor HR Training Room (#110A) 2004 Barnett Ave Quantico, VA 22134-0855

Telephone: TBD

Access: Valid ID such as Driver’s License

C. INQUIRIES, PROPOSAL FORMAT AND PROPOSAL DUE DATE

Pre-proposal Inquiries (PPI) shall be submitted in writing. Offerors shall use the PPI Form contained herein when submitting inquiries via email to the following email addresses:

kennett.morris@navy.mil and elias.stamatiades@navy.mil

Pre-proposal inquiries will be accepted until 2:00 PM, 09 December, 2013. Responses to PPIs will be published via solicitation amendment.

All PHASE I proposals must be received prior to 2:00 PM, 18 December, 2013. Any proposals submitted after the time set for receipt will be stamped with the date and hour of receipt and will remain unopened until after contract award.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:

For PHASE I, Offerors shall submit one (1) original and two (2) copies of the PHASE I technical proposal

(FACTORS 1 & 2).

Upon evaluation of PHASE I proposals, eligible Offerors for PHASE II will be notified to submit their proposal for PHASE II (Factors, 3, 4, and Price). PHASE II proposals shall consist of one (1) original and and two (2) copies of the PHASE II technical proposal (Factors 3, 4); one (1) original and one (1) copy of the price proposal.

Follow all instructions as stated in the Solicitation Submittal Requirements for each factor. Technical and price proposals need to be submitted in separate packages. There should absolutely be no prices included in the technical proposal package. All proposal text documents shall be formatted on 8.5 x 11 inch paper with one inch margins using 11 point, Times New Roman font. All proposal text documents shall be numbered pages and outlined in alpha-numeric format.

All proposals and copies shall be packaged in a sealed box. Please include, with proposals, one cover letter indicating your Point of Contact, mail address, email address, and phone number for this offering.

All proposal packages shall be mailed or hand delivered to:

NAVFAC Washington 1314 Harwood Street, SE, Bldg 212 Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374 Attention: Kennett Morris and Elias Stamatiades

*If hand delivering, address package as if mailing and deliver to FIRST FLOOR MAILROOM OF BLDG 212

Fascimile or email copies will NOT be accepted.

BASIS FOR AWARD

D. BEST-VALUE DECISION AND DOCUMENTATION

The SSA shall select the source whose proposal offers the best value to the Government in accordance with established criteria in Evaluation Factors for Award Section of the Solicitation.

The best-value decision shall be based on a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation, considering recommendations and minority opinions presented to the SSA. While the SSA may use reports and analyses prepared by others, the source selection decision shall represent the SSA’s independent judgment.

1. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

2. As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

3. The tradeoff process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition. The Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow consideration of award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror.

4. As stated in the solicitation, the relative importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is that technical factors are equal to each other and when combined are of equal importance to Past Performance. The combined non-cost/price factors are approximately equal to price.

5. 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. The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(s) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(s). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

E. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS/DESCRIPTIONS FOR NON-PRICE FACTORS

The technical rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal.

a. A combined technical/risk evaluation considering risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings shall be used. The technical risk evaluation shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the following Table 1. Adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign an overall rating to each technical proposal and to assign a rating for each technical factor. Use upper case letter ratings for major technical factors as well as the overall rating. The addition of plus (+) or minus (-) to an adjective rating is not allowed.

Table 1: Combined Technical/Risk Adjectival Ratings

Rating Description

Outstanding (O)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good (G)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable (A)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal (M)

Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable (U)

Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.

Proposal is unawardable.

The definitions in Table 2 below shall be used to identify the Strengths, Weaknesses, and Deficiencies that influenced the Adjectival Rating of each Non-Cost/Price Evaluation Factor for each Offeror’s proposal.

TABLE 2: Definitions

Strength

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

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

Significant Weakness

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

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.

F. SAFETY EVALUATION FACTOR

1. Per NFAS 15.304(b), solicitations utilizing source selection procedures for procurements within the 50 United States and the District of Columbia shall contain a standard “Safety” technical evaluation factor. This factor shall be included as a stand-alone evaluation factor and not as a sub-factor or an element of the Past Performance evaluation factor. This action will result in the selection of contractors that have consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and the ability to properly manage and implement safety procedures for themselves and all tiers of subcontractors under their purview.

2. The safety evaluation has three elements: Experience Modification Rate (EMR), Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA) Days Away from Work, Job Restriction, or Transfer (DART), and Technical Approach to Safety.

3. The three elements of safety identified above, are not sub-factors. The evaluators should collectively consider all elements of safety when assigning an overall adjectival rating for this factor. The SSEB will need to make a qualitative determination of the rating for this factor, taking into account the risk ratings for EMR and DART and the subjective evaluation of the narrative.

4. Evaluators will not average the rating from the three years for the EMR and the DART.

5. The following should be utilized by evaluators as a general guideline to evaluate the

EMR and DART rates:

Risk EMR Very Low Risk Less than 0.6 Low Risk From 0.6 to less than 0.8 Moderate Risk From 0.8 to 1.0 High Risk Greater than1.0 to 1.1 Extremely High Risk Greater than 1.1

Risk DART Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 1.0 Low Risk From 1.0 to 1.99 Moderate Risk From 2.0 to 2.99 High Risk From 3.0 to 4.0 Extremely High Risk Greater than 4.0

G. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

1. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements.

2. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired thorough the source selection.

3. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection.

4. Performance relevancy will be rated as either “Relevant” or “Not Relevant”. The relevancy ratings in the following table shall be used:

Table 4: Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar 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.

1. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

2. The Past Performance Factor will be rated with a Performance Confidence Assessment. In conducting a Performance Confidence Assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in the following Table 5:

Table 5. Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Description

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.

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.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

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.

H. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Factors 1-2 will be evaluated in Phase I and Factors 3-4 will be evaluated in Phase II. In making the best value award decision after Phase II, the government will consider Factors 1-4 and price. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is that technical factors are equal to each other and when combined are equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance). The combined non-cost/price factors are approximately equal to price.

Phase I:

Factor 1 – Technical Experience Factor 2 – Past Performance

Phase II:

Factor 3 – Safety Factor 4 – Technical Solution

PRICE

Non-Cost/Price Evaluation Factors:

PHASE I

EVALUATION FACTORS

Factor 1 – Technical Experience:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(1) Provide a narrative describing the proposed design-build team comprised of the primary construction firm(s) and primary design firm(s) for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement.

Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual relationship(s) between the various firms (see FAR Subpart 9.6). The narrative shall also include a simple organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the entities. The technical approach narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages (minimum 11 font) including the organizational chart. The information requested in item #2 below is not included in this page limitation.

(2) Submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., joint venture partner, partner, team member, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.).

(3) Design and Construction Experience:

Submit two (2) projects, one (1) for the proposed primary construction contractor and one (1) for the proposed primary design contractor that best demonstrate the experience on a relevant project that is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. Projects that demonstrate experience for the proposed design-build team may result in a higher rating for Factor 1, Technical Experience. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

• A road improvement or new road construction a minimum of 4,000 LF utilizing Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) standards or equivalent;

• A road improvement or new road construction incorporating automated traffic signalization;

• A road improvement or new road construction in which existing utilities were relocated or modified to accommodate new construction;

• A road improvement or new road construction where difficult grading was present, requiring retaining walls, and/or challenges related to proximity to a wetland.

Project submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past five (5) years [November 2008 – November 2013] of the date of issuance of this RFP.

A project is defined as a design and construction project performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole should not be submitted as a project; rather Offerors should submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded;

however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed two (2) single-sided pages (minimum 11 font).

For the submitted project, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e.: unique features, area, construction methods).

In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for a project completed by the Joint Venture entity. Offerors are still limited to a total of one (1) project combined.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s technical experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing a relevant design and construction project as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The Government will only review two (2) projects. Any project submitted in excess of the two (2) for Design and Construction Experience will not be considered.

Higher rating may be given to a relevant project that demonstrates the following:

• Design-build experience;

and/or

• Low impact development (LID) experience;

and/or

• Experience in regulating and maintaining unimpeded traffic flow on a consistently occupied military base.

Factor 2 – Past Performance:

Submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment B) for the projects submitted in Factor 1, Technical Experience. The Offeror should provide completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) in the proposal.

Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQ previously submitted for other RFPs.

However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project. The Government may make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project to obtain the PPQ information. However, Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to help ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Kennett Morris at: kennett.morris@navy.mil

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on the project submitted under Factor 2, Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues. Explanations shall not exceed four (4) single-sided pages in total (minimum 11 font).

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the Offeror’s references or the references unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

Performance award or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant project submitted under Factor 2, Experience and past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources. In addition to the above, the Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any and all sources including sources outside of the Government. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of Contractors who are part of a partnership or joint venture identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance and will receive an Unknown Confidence rating.

PHASE II

EVALUATION FACTORS

Factor 3 – Safety

(a) Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each Contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. EMR and DART Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

For the three (3) [2009-2012] years previous complete calendar years, submit your EMR (which compares your company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums over a three (3) year period). If you have no EMR, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and upward or downward trends should be addressed as part of this element. Lower EMRs will be given greater weight in the evaluation.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

For the three (3) [2009-2012] years previous complete calendar years, submit your OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If you cannot submit an OSHA DART Rate, affirmatively state so, and explain why.

Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART Rate data and upward or downward trends should be addressed as part of this element. Lower OSHA DART Rates will be given greater weight in the evaluation.

(3) Technical Approach for Safety:

Describe the plan that the Offeror will implement to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors, as a part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. Also, describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at all subcontractor levels. The Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages in total (minimum 11 font).

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record, the Offeror’s plan to select and monitor subcontractors, any and innovative safety methods that the Offeror plans to implement for this procurement. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety may include, but are not limited to, OSHA, NAVFAC’s Facility Accident and Incident Reporting (FAIR) database, and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the Offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

- Experience Modification Rate (EMR)

- OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate

- Offeror Technical Approach to Safety

- Other sources of information available to the Government

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

The Government will evaluate the EMR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

Lower EMRs will be given greater weight in the evaluation.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

The Government will evaluate the OSHA DART Rate to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rates. Lower OSHA DART Rates will be given greater weight in the evaluation.

(3) Technical Approach to Safety:

The Government will make a determination to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project. The Government will also determine the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement. Those Offerors whose plan demonstrates a commitment to hire subcontractors with a culture of safety and who propose innovative methods to enhance a safe working environment may be given greater weight in the evaluation.

Factor 4 – Technical Solution

Provide a narrative describing the technical solution to the project that meets the requirements of the RFP. Include the following:

i. Site layout description including roadways, traffic signalization, emergency vehicle access, and ATFP standoff distances. Also include in the narrative a description of the general concept proposed to meet low impact development (LID) and approach to traffic planning and snow removal plans during construction.

Narrative shall not exceed twelve (12) single-sided pages (minimum 11 font). Do not provide plans and sketches as part of the proposal. The RFP contains plans, so concept drawings are not required. The successful contractor shall develop the final plans and layouts after contract award.

ii. The solicitation allows for a maximum of 545 calendar days to complete the project. An Offeror can provide a shorter schedule from contract award through construction completion for the Base Bid and all possible options to complete the project in less than 545 calendar days. In this case, the Offeror should provide a maximum of 30 milestones and explain how they plan to accomplish this schedule without reducing scope requirements, submissions, and Government review periods. All days should be “calendar days”. Schedules should be limited to two (2) 11”x17” pages. Submissions of length beyond two (2) pages will not be evaluated. If a shorter schedule is proposed, discuss in the narrative the proposed schedule and milestones to complete the project.

iii. The Offeror should express whether they intend to comply with the solicitation requirements.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will make a subjective evaluation to determine the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of the architectural and engineering requirements of the project. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's technical solution to determine adherence to the technical requirements of the RFP.

Proposals demonstrating a shorter schedule that is realistic and acceptable to the Government, will be given a greater weight in the evaluation.

The contract completion date for design and construction is 545 calendar days after award, inclusive of 15 calendar days for the submittal of bonds and insurance. If a schedule of lesser duration is determined to be acceptable, it will become part of the successful Offeror’s contract.

PRICE:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

In separate binder from Phase II technical factors, Offeror shall submit two copies of Price Proposal. Each copy of Price Proposal binder shall have the title “Price Proposal” clearly displayed on the cover page. In addition to the title on cover page, include Solicitation Number, Solicitation Title, Prime Contractor name, Address, Phone Number, Fax Number, DUNS number, CAGE Code, Main Point of Contact, POC’s phone Number, POC’s e-mail address.

Each copy of Price Proposal Binder shall contain the following information in the order listed:

• SF-1442, signed with all solicitation amendments acknowledged

• Completed Price Schedule from Section 00101 of solicitation

• Copy of ORCA Representations and Certifications

• Bid Guarantee Bond in accordance with Provision NFAS 5252.228-9302-Bid Guarantee

If applicable, Offerors shall identify all items in the RFP that have been deleted or modified and the associated price adjustments included in the Price Proposal.

Items deleted or modified should also have been clearly identified and described in the appropriate technical factor submission of the Technical Proposal. Any pricing information shall not be included in the Technical Proposal.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

(1) The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price includes the basic requirements, and all option items, plus the calculation of mark-ups. The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (July 1990) in section 00100 of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Price analysis will be performed by one or more of the following methods to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

• Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

• Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

• Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

• Comparison of market survey results.

• This project Design to Build Budget amount range is between $10M-$15M and is inclusive of

Items 0001 thru 0004.

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.215-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION (JAN 2004)

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision--

“Discussions” are negotiations that occur after establishment of the competitive range that may, at the Contracting Officer's discretion, result in the offeror being allowed to revise its proposal.

“In writing or written” means any worded or numbered expression which can be read, reproduced, and later communicated, and includes electronically transmitted and stored information.

“Proposal modification” is a change made to a proposal before the solicitation's closing date and time, or made in response to an amendment, or made to correct a mistake at any time before award.

“Proposal revision” is a change to a proposal made after the solicitation closing date, at the request of or as allowed by a Contracting Officer as the result of negotiations.

“Time”, if stated as a number of days, is calculated using calendar days, unless otherwise specified, and will include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. However, if the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, then the period shall include the next working day.

(b) Amendments to solicitations. If this solicitation is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this solicitation by the date and time specified in the amendment(s).

(c) Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals. (1) Unless other methods (e.g., electronic commerce or facsimile) are permitted in the solicitation, proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted in paper media in sealed envelopes or packages (i) addressed to the office specified in the solicitation, and (ii) showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror.

Offerors using commercial carriers should ensure that the proposal is marked on the outermost wrapper with the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) of this provision.

(2) The first page of the proposal must show--

(i) The solicitation number;

(ii) The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the offeror (and electronic address if available);

(iii) 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;

(iv) Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror's behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation; and

(v) 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, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

(3) Submission, modification, or revision, of proposals.

(i) Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals, and any modifications, or revisions, so as to reach the Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the solicitation. If no time is specified in the solicitation, the time for receipt is 4:30 p.m., local time, for the designated Government office on the date that proposal or revision is due.

(ii)(A) Any proposal, modification, or revision received at the Government office designated in the solicitation after the exact time specified for receipt of offers is “late” and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition; and--

(1) If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals; or

(2) There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government's control prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or

(3) It is the only proposal received.

(B) However, a late modification of an otherwise successful proposal that makes its terms more favorable to the Government, will be considered at any time it is received and may be accepted.

(iii) Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government installation includes the time/date stamp of that installation on the proposal wrapper, other documentary evidence of receipt maintained by the installation, or oral testimony or statements of Government personnel.

(iv) If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that proposals cannot be received at the office designated for receipt of proposals by the exact time specified in the solicitation, and urgent Government requirements preclude amendment of the solicitation, the time specified for receipt of proposals will be deemed to be extended to the same time of day specified in the solicitation on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.

(v) Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice received at any time before award. Oral proposals in response to oral solicitations may be withdrawn orally. If the solicitation authorizes facsimile proposals, proposals may be withdrawn via facsimile received at any time before award, subject to the conditions specified in the provision at 52.215-5, Facsimile Proposals. Proposals may be withdrawn in person by an offeror or an authorized representative, if the identity of the person requesting withdrawal is established and the person signs a receipt for the proposal before award.

(4) Unless otherwise specified in the solicitation, the offeror may propose to provide any item or combination of items.

(5) Offerors shall submit proposals in response to this solicitation in English, unless otherwise permitted by the solicitation, and in U.S. dollars, unless the provision at FAR 52.225-17, Evaluation of Foreign Currency Offers, is included in the solicitation.

(6) Offerors may submit modifications to their proposals at any time before the solicitation closing date and time, and may submit modifications in response to an amendment, or to correct a mistake at any time before award.

(7) Offerors may submit revised proposals only if requested or allowed by the Contracting Officer.

(8) Proposals may be withdrawn at any time before award. Withdrawals are effective upon receipt of notice by the Contracting Officer.

(d) Offer expiration date. Proposals in response to this solicitation will be valid for the number of days specified on the solicitation cover sheet (unless a different period is proposed by the offeror).

(e) Restriction on disclosure and use of data. Offerors that include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall--

(1) Mark the title page with the following legend: This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed--in whole or in part--for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this offeror as a result of--or in connection with-- the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]; and

(2) Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend: Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.

(f) Contract award. (1) The Government intends to award a contract or contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal(s) represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and subfactors in the solicitation.

(2) The Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Government's interest.

(3) The Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals received.

(4) The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.