Amendment 6_N4008023R2185 NAVFAC Washington IDIQ JOC 030724.pdf

N4008023R2185

1731579_1789591

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this Solicitation Amendment 5, in accordance w ith the Summary of Changes, is to:

1. Provide PPI Responses, #190 - #210

2. Provide PPC RSVP( Attendance) List

3. Provide Solicitation Instruction changes All other Solicitation Instructions remain unchanged

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 40

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 07-Mar-2024

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N4008023R2185

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

13-Feb-2024

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

07-Mar-2024

CODE

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYS COMMAND

1314 HARWOOD STREET SE

WASHINGTON DC 20374

N40080 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 6

PPI #190 - #210 Responses

Solicitation N4008023R2185

NAVFAC Washington IDIQ JOC

PPI #

Rec'd

REFERENCE

QUESTION

GOVERNMENT

RESPONSE

Posted on

Amend No. Pg. Sect. Para.

Do we have to submit the signed Amendments with the proposal?

Clarification - Sign SF

1442 block 19 acknowledging the amendments and submit with proposal

For historical data and reference, Please provide a list of Incumbent contractors with their co-efficient from previous

JOC contracts.

No - This information is considered proprietary and cannot be furnished

Please provide Pre Bid a sign-in sheet.

Included in this Amendment 6

SF1442

Item 2

In AMD 1, there were Wage

Determinations, please clarify what the use of these are for since this is a RS Means based pricing with a coefficient applied.

Clarification - Wage Determinations are applicable at the Task Order Level, to the Non Pre

Price Line Items

I

Note: a coefficient of 1.00 indicates that the Government will award future orders at cost as priced in the most current RS

Means.

IAW the Solicitation - The Coefficient for Pre-Priced line items, shall be greater than 1.000 (> 1.000) and

The Coefficient for Non Pre Price line items, shall be greater than 1.000(> 1.000)

01 00

1.1

Will the most current RS Means be used for pricing including all quarterly updates?

Clarification - The most current RS Means will be used for pricing throughout the contract, however with annual updates

01 00

1.1

Will the 2024 RS Means be utilized throughout the life of the contract or will the most current RS Means be utilized?

Clarification - The most current RS Means will be utilitzed throughout the contract

3.1.3

With the OTR coefficient, is this to account for weekend & holiday hours in additional to OT or off hour work? These individual rates could vary for each.

Clarification - OTR accounts for weekend, holiday and OT hours

3.4

It states that the design costs shall be based on negotiated rates, after award. Can you please expand on what this means. Would we define a set of hourly rates to be applied against hours? Typically design costs are based upon each RFP requirement and priced per Designer / Engineering Firm.

Clarification - "design and engineering costs shall be based on the negotiated rates and fees negotiated after award." - At the Task Order Level

3.4

Typically the Design costs are per RFP requirements, will these design costs be included in the Non Pre-Priced with the coefficient being applied? It states that the design costs shall be based on negotiated rates, after award.

See PPI#198 Response

Will there be Task Orders that will have documented scheduled site visit dates / times or will everyone need a response within 2 days from the contractor?

Clarification - Task Order Coordination of the site visits requirements should be conferred with the

Contracting Officer for the ordering office

Aamend

5.1

Please confirm, if for Design Build (DB), Contractor is to submit the following:

Contractor prepared drawings, design calculations, specs, etc.

with the pricing proposal response to the individual

RFP's.

Yes - Confirmed

65 of

5.2.2

* MEANS CostWorks software is an acceptable estimating tool for use on this contract. It may be used in lieu of the printed editions of the books listed. Is E 4-Clicks software acceptable?

See PPI #34 Response

66 of

5.2.1 &

5.2.3

Pricing of each Task Order is determined by applying the most current R.S. MEANS

“total incl O&P” unit pricing, However, in this paragraph it states: The unit price (pre-priced bare cost items ) as shown in the R.S. MEANS Cost Data Books shall be considered to include all pertinent costs listed below (unless specifically stated otherwise in R.S.

MEANS): 5.2.1 & 5.2.3 appear to have a discrepancy on use of bare or total incl O&P. Which is to be used?

See PPI# 82 Response

5.2.5

When the MEANS line item price is significantly lower than the actual cost of an item due to extreme market volatility or other circumsgtances, the Contractor is permitted to submit a request to the Contracting Officer for conversion of the item to a non-pre-priced item. Does this request need to be submitted prior to submission of pricing proposal?

Yes

5.3

For services or materials in excell of $2,500, the contractor shall obtain a minimum of three competitive quotes from companies that normally perform or are qualified to perform the task. If Contractor cannot obtain three quotes, but has the documentation that three were requested, will this be acceptable?

If the Contrator cannot obtain three quotes, coordination of the requirement should be conferred with the Contracting Officer for a specific ordering office.

Are these wage rates to be used by our subcontractor's when pricing individual Task Orders?

Clarification - Wage rates may be used at the offeror's discretion with subcontractors.

AMD 3

Line Item

Please clarify the intent of the

Escort Coefficient - the Coefficient for the Escort line item shall be less than zero.

The escort line item price is calculated by combining the

Escort cost - how do we determine what the escort costs are if the escorts are provided by Government?

See PPI #119 Response

General

How many task orders are anticipated during the course of a year in terms of number of, not dollar volume?

See PPI #89 Response

Gener al

Can Division 01 be used in R.S.

Means?

Clarification - Division 01 use at the Task Order Level should be conferred with the Contracting Officer for the ordering office

3/6/2024

Factor 2

For Attachment A, Construction

& Design Experience Project Data Sheet, the instructions state "Individual blocks on this form may be expanded", however, the form cannot be adjusted as it is currently a

PDF. Can a word doc version of the form be provided?

Clarification - PDF versions are provided for official Solicitation and

Amendment

RSVP List - PPC, Solicitation N4008023R2185 2/23/24

Name of Firm

Name of Attendee

E-Mail

SAF, Inc. William Rowles Trowles@safinc.us.com

SAF, Inc. Howard Edwards Trowles@safinc.us.com

ARS Aleut Construction Clifford Lemley clifford.lemley@ext.aleutfederal.com)

Turner Strategic Technologies Ms. Kelsey Cates KCates@tstvb.com

Turner Strategic Technologies Mr. Steve Szemes SSzemes@tstvb.com

Sandow Construction INC Kasmera Santiago-Downey kasmera@sandowcosntruction.com

Sandow Construction INC Andre Downey andre@sandowcosntruction.com

Etolin Strait Mrs. Jamie Vanek jvanek@etolinstrait.com

Etolin Strait Mr. John Trant jtrant@etolinstrait.com

Atmos Solutions Anthony Fernando afernando@atmossolutionsinc.com

Atmos Solutions John Tabella jtabella@atmossolutionsinc.com

Gboss James Carr james.carr@goldbelt.com

Gboss Matthew Thackery matthew.thackery@goldbelt.com

EVCON-CWC JV, LLC, Mike Bayerle mross@coakleywilliams.com

EVCON-CWC JV, LLC, Megan Ross. mross@coakleywilliams.com

Terra Cnstruction Mr. Geoff Bambini gbambini@terraconstructs.com

Terra Cnstruction Lisa Krown lkrowne@terraconstructs.com

Chugach Consolidated Solutions Jerome Cornett jerome.cornett@chugachgov.com

Chugach Consolidated Solutions Steven Dorsey jerome.cornett@chugachgov.com

Puyenpa Services, LLC Chris Brown kevinhartford@puyenpa.com

Puyenpa Services, LLC Dustin Wood kevinhartford@puyenpa.com

JS Global Michael Galante Michael.galante@jsg1.com

Taggart Brown & Assocites Taggart Brown taggart@taggartbrown.com

Taggart Brown & Assocites Evan Pinkett evan@taggartbrown.com

Ritz Construction Nicholas Ritzer nmr@ritzbuilds.com

Ritz Construction Makenzie Thompson proposals@ritzbuilds.com

Ritz Construction Kristin Goodwin (Alternate) proposals@ritzbuilds.com

Superior Structures Matthew Calvin access@superior-structures.com

Superior Structures Dustin Graham access@superior-structures.com

Centennial Contractors Enterprises, Inc. Laura Roland lroland@cce-inc.com

Centennial Contractors Enterprises, Inc. Mike O’Neill lroland@cce-inc.com

Eastern Coast Construction Emery Chickey Emery.c@easterncoastconstruction.com

Eastern Coast Construction Justin Blair justinblair@aarow-inc.com

Plenary Enterprise, LLC Barrington Jackson bjackson@plenaryenterprises.com

Plenary Enterprise, LLC Dwayne Spriggs dwayne_spriggs@msn.com

Chesapeake Facilities Services Ryland Clegg rclegg@facilitysite.com

Chesapeake Facilities Services Brett Holmberg brett.holmberg@facilitysite.com

Argus CJW JV 3 LLC Bishnu KC bishnu@cjwcontractors.com

Argus CJW JV 3 LLC Anuj Kumar anuj@cjwcontractors.com

Argus CJW JV 3 LLC Ralph E. Crews ralph@cjwcontractors.com

HEP Construction Saud Jabali-Nash snash@hepconstruction.com

SDC-Tidewater JV, LLC David Phelps david.phelps@tideh2o.net

Disclaimer: The list as provided is incomplete as it was used primarily to support RSVP to the conference, and to WNY Base, gate entrance vetting processes. Because the conference was offered via In-Person, Telephone, and MSTeams, all attendees are not listed.

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. SOLICITATION AND AMENDMENTS: The solicitation and subsequent amendments will be issued via the Solicitation Module in the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE). Similarly, Offeror(s) shall utilize this module when submitting proposals.

2. OFFERS

Offers shall be submitted as specified in FAR Clause 53.215-1, “Instructions to Offerors”. Proposals must be secured and marked as follows:

2.1 Offer for:

SOLICITATION NUMBER N40080-23-R-2185, NAVFAC WASHINGTON INDEFINITE DELIVERY

INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) JOB ORDER CONTRACT (JOC)

2.4 Offers must be signed by an authorized officer of the firm; or if signed by other than such authorized, certification of such authority to sign or negotiate for the firm must be forwarded with the offer.

2.5 Offerors must complete Blocks 14 through 16 of the Standard Form 1442, and prices on the Price Schedule.

Representation and Certifications must be done in accordance with the FAR Clause 53.204-8, of the Solicitation.

2.6 OFFERORS SHALL SUBMIT ELECTRONIC ORIGINAL OF THEIR PROPOSAL.

2.7 PROPOSALS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR BLUE and/or Gold CONTRACT consideration, WITH

TABS FOR THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS

SECTION MAXIMUM PAGES

SF 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) As Required Section and Prices As Required Section Representation and Certifications As Required

SECTION

Section Factor 1, Technical Approach (Under Tab 1) Section Factor 2, Experience (Under Tab 2) Section Factor 3, Safety, (Under Tab 3) Section Past Performance, (Under Tab 4)

2.8. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

All proposals (with all required supporting documentation) shall be electronically submitted through the Department of Defense (DoD) Solicitation Module in the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) so that they are received by the date and time specified in Block 8 of the Standard Form (SF) 1443. Email or hard copy proposals will not be accepted.

3. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE:

3.1 A Pre-Proposal Conference for Solicitation No. N40080-23-R-2185 is scheduled for Friday 23 February 2024, on the Washington Navy Yard, at Building 22, Large Conference Room, from 9:00AM – 1:00PM EST.

3.2 In order to make the conference as productive as possible, An RSVP of all prospective offerors, NTE two (2) people is required. Offerors are requested to submit all Inquiries, Comments, Suggestions, and Concerns on the Pre- Proposal Inquiry (PPI) forms no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the pre-proposal conference. PPI forms shall be forwarded to Contract Specialist Frank G. Decker frank.g.decker.civ@us.navy.mil and shamarian.n.plummer.civ@us.navy.mil. The cut-off date for all final PPI Comments, Suggestions, and Concerns is 10 calendar days before the proposal closing date and time at 2:00PM, EST.

3.3 Failure of a prospective Offeror to submit any questions or to attend the conference will be construed to mean that the Offeror fully understands all requirements of the solicitation. Prospective offerors are advised that the pre-proposal conference will be held solely for the purpose of explaining the concepts involved in the project and the specifications, terms, and conditions of this solicitation.

3.4 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 Contract Clause “Amendment to Solicitations” of this section shall be applicable.

4. PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES

All inquiries shall be referred to the Contract Specialist Frank G. Decker frank.g.decker.civ@us.navy.mil and shamarian.n.plummer.civ@us.navy.mil. The Government does not intend to respond to inquiries submitted less than 10 calendar days before the proposal closing date and time. Failure of a prospective Offeror to submit any questions will be construed to mean that the Offeror fully understands the requirement of the solicitation.

5. PROPOSAL DUE DATE

Proposals are due on Monday, 18 March 2024 at 2:00PM, EST. Proposals received by the designated POC after the due date and time will not be considered.

6. INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The Contractor’s technical proposal, including revisions and amendments, made prior to contract award and a copy of which is in the possession of both parties, will be incorporated into this contract upon award by reference with the same force and effect as if set forth in full text. All contractor personnel shall meet or exceed the qualification standards, experience levels and trade background set forth in the technical proposal.

In the event of an inconsistency between the provisions of this contract and the technical proposal, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (i) the contract (excluding the technical proposal), and then (ii) the technical proposal.

7. JOINT VENTURE OFFERORS:

Joint Venture Agreements must be received by the SBA prior to proposal due date and approved before award of a resulting contract. If your firm is contemplating a joint venture on this procurement, advise your firm’s assigned Business Opportunity Specialist (BOS) as soon as possible. It is also recommended that the agreement be submitted as soon as practicable to ensure compliance with established regulations. Joint Venture Agreement after it has been submitted. Each agreement shall demonstrate the relationship between the firms and identify contractual relations and authorities of each firm/joint venture. Joint Venture Agreements shall be signed by all Joint Venture Parties.

Joint Venture Agreements that are not signed be all Joint Venture Parties shall be considered as a deficiency.

8. SUBCONTRACTING INFORMATION:

For information regarding the SBA Mentor Protégé Program see http://www.sba.gov. For information regarding the Department of Defense (DOD) Funded Mentor Protégé Program see http://www.acq.osd.mil/ssadbu/mentorprotege/info. As part of the outreach program it is recommended that your company/firm consider using the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Pronet database as a source of small businesses. Pronet is a free internet database of information on more than 171,000 small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women owned small businesses and HUBZone small businesses. As of October 1, 1999, Small Disadvantaged subcontractors must receive formal certification by the SBA. Pronet is available on the SBA’s web page: http://www.sba.gov. Information on the DOD’s Women Owned Small Business Program is available at http://www.acq.osd.mil/sadbu/wosb.

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. FEDERAL CONTRACTOR PROGRAM

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 23.1303, 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.

11. RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION/PRE-AWARD SURVEY

11.1 FAR 9.103 requires the Contracting Officer to make an affirmative determination of responsibility prior to making an award. The general standards for responsibility are outlined in FAR 9.104 and include having adequate performance schedule, having a satisfactory performance record, having the necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls, and technical skills, or the ability to obtain them, having the necessary production, construction, and technical equipment and facilities, or the ability to obtain them, and being otherwise eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations. The pre-award survey is not a part of the technical evaluation.

11.2 The Government may conduct a pre-award survey of Offerors to determine whether such Offeror is qualified and capable of performing the contract. The pre-award survey may involve examination of the Offeror's financial and technical status and understanding of the contract requirements.

11.3 Requested information shall be forwarded within three (3) business days upon request or as indicated on the letter from the Contracting Officer. Failure to provide requested information may result in rejection of the proposal.

11.4 The following are examples of the information that, upon request, the Offeror shall be required to provide in writing to the pre-award survey team.

1. Identification of the Contractor's personnel and management to be used on this contract.

2. The Contractor's technical and management plans for performing required services.

3. Description of Contractor's facilities and equipment.

4. Summary of the Contractor's experience in performing work of the type required by this specification.

5. Current financial statements and data.

6. Other work presently under contract.

7. Prior contracts for similar work, and the names and addresses of individuals with the organization issuing the contract who may be contacted for information concerning the Contractor's performance.

8. Contractor Quality Control plan for this contract.

12. NOTICE OF NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY (NIST) SPECIAL

PUBLICATION (SP) 800-171 DOD ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS

The following provision and clause are applicable to this acquisition-- DFARS 252.204-7019 (Notice of NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements) and 252.204-7020 (NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements).

As prescribed by DFARS provision 252.204-7019, if the offeror is required to implement NIST SP 800- 171, the offeror must have a current (not older than three years unless a lesser time is specified in the solicitation) NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment for each covered contractor information system that is relevant to the offer, contract, task order, or delivery order, in order to be considered for award. It also requires the contractor to post summary level scores of their NIST SP 800-171 Assessments in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) database.

For this solicitation, a minimum Confidence Level assessment of “Basic” as identified in the NIST SP 800-171 Assessment Report within the SPRS is required to be considered for award.

The Basic, Medium and High NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessments are described in the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology located at:

https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_contractor_implementation_of_NIST_SP_ 800-171.html

Guidance regarding the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessments can be found at https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/.

Offerors are encouraged to seek guidance from their own legal or cyber-security compliance advisors for advice concerning the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment requirements.

NOTE: The Government will not extend or delay the procurement for pending Contractor NIST SP 800-171 assessments.

EVALUATION

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

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(s); to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract(s) to the offeror(s) submitting the proposal(s) determined to represent the best value— the proposal(s) most advantageous to the Government, cost/price and other factors considered.

2. As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award two (2) single-award contracts 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, all technical factors when combined are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating; and all technical factors and the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating, when combined 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. An Unacceptable rating in any of the non-cost/price factors will result in an overall rating of “Unacceptable” for the non-cost/price factors, unless 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.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. Evaluation Factors:

The solicitation requires the evaluation of price and the following non- cost/price factors:

FACTOR 1– Technical Approach FACTOR 2 – Experience FACTOR 3 – Safety FACTOR 4 – Past Performance

The distinction between experience and past performance is that experience pertains to the volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work described under the definition of recent, relevant projects, in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Past performance pertains to both the relevance of recent efforts and how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.

2. Instructions to Offerors

2.1 FAR Part 9.6 defines Contractor team arrangements. Contractor team arrangement, as used in this subpart, means an arrangement in which -- (1) Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime Contractor; or (2) A potential prime Contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

2.2 If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate how the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies will have involvement in the performance of the contract in order for the experience information of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies to be considered. The proposal shall state specific commitments of technical resources (e.g., personnel, management, equipment that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies shall commit to the performance of this contract). In particular, the proposal shall clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies in terms of the work it will either self-perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in the performance of the contract. Vague commitments to support are likely insufficient;

rather, they must demonstrate intent/manner of actual performance on the contract action being solicited.

2.3 The Offeror shall submit a signed copy of partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team (e.g., partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.) whose projects are submitted to demonstrate Construction or Design Experience. The Government will not consider any project submitted for Factor 2 if it was performed by a firm other than the Offeror and there is no supporting partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment demonstrating the necessary level of meaningful involvement. Note: See specific restrictions on the use of subcontractor experience under Factor 2.

3. Relative Importance:

3.1 The relative order of importance for evaluation factors is as follows: Factor 1 – Technical Approach will only be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable. If an Offeror is rated Unacceptable in Factor 1, then they will not be eligible for award unless corrected during discussions. In making the best value award decision, the Government will consider Factor 2 – Experience, Factor 3 – Safety, Factor 4 - Past Performance, and price. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is that technical Factors 2 – Experience and 3 – Safety are equal to each other and when combined are equal importance to the performance assessment (Factor 4 – Past Performance). The combined non-cost/price factors are approximately equal to price.

3.2 The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-cost/price proposals are rated essentially equal or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-cost/price proposal’s superiority to the Government.

Award will be made to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

4. Basis of Evaluation, Best Value Determination

4.1 The Government intends to conduct two (2) separate best value determinations to determine the proposals most advantageous to the Government, cost/price and other factors considered. For this solicitation, the Government will use the following strategy to determine the best value proposals which will result in two distinct awards:

(a) Offerors shall submit two (2) clearly marked price proposals. Price Proposal 1 – Consisting of Blue Locations, and Price Proposal 2 – Consisting of Gold Locations.

Offerors submitting only one price proposal (i.e. for either location) will be considered non-responsive and will not be considered for award.

(b) Offerors shall submit only one (1) non-price/cost proposal. The assigned ratings for each non-price/cost factor, as well as the overall technical rating, will be used to conduct the best value determination for each award (blue and gold).

(c) The Government will make two separate best value determinations based on the proposals received as outlined above:

4.2 Best value determination #1 – will be based on evaluated non-price/cost proposal ratings (a) and price proposal 1 for Blue locations using the relative order of importance as described in paragraph 2 above.

Best value determination #2 – will be based on evaluated non-price/cost proposal ratings and price proposal 2 for Gold locations using the relative order of importance as described in paragraph 2 above.

4.3 The Government intends to award two (2) single award JOCs as a result of this solicitation. The awards shall be made to the offeror(s) representing the best value to the Government as a result of the independent best value determinations described above. Awards may be made to a single offeror if the both best value determinations determine it to be in the best interest of the government, with both price and non-price/cost factors considered.

5. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor

(a) Price

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

a. Given a Government Estimated Volume of Work (EVW), Offerors shall submit their Price proposal / Price Schedule with consideration for EACH location

i. (Blue-N4008023R2185: Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command (NAVFAC) Washington’s area of responsibility (AOR), primarily at locations at Waldorf Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, MD; Annapolis Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD; Waldorf Naval Support Facility, Indian Head, MD Fredericksburg Naval Support Facility, Dahlgren, VA; and other NAVFAC Washington AOR locations as required)

ii. Gold-N4008023R0037: Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command (NAVFAC) Washington’s area of responsibility (AOR), primarily at locations at Naval Support Activity, Washington, DC; Silver Spring Naval Support Activity, Bethesda MD; Fredericksburg ROICC, Quantico, and other NAVFAC Washington AOR locations as required.)

b. Contract Line Items (CLINS) Pricing for the Base Year, and all Option Years (see Section Services and Prices) as follows:

CLIN 0001 – Base Ordering Period: (30 September 2024 – 29 September 2026) CLIN 0002 - Option Ordering Period: (30 September 2026 – 29 September 2029)

c. Exhibit Line Items (ELINS) Pricing for each ordering period are as follows:

i. ELIN (A, B, C, D, E) 0001 - Pre-Price line item; primary locations ELIN (A, B, C, D, E) 0002 - Non Pre- Price line item; primary locations ELIN (A, B, C, D, E) 0003 - Other than Regular Working Hours (OTR);

primary locations

ii. ELIN (A, B, C, D, E) 0004 – Escorts; primary locations

iii. ELIN (A, B, C, D, E) 0005 - Pre-Price line item; secondary locations ELIN (A, B, C, D, E) 0006 - Non Pre-Price line item; secondary locations ELIN (A, B, C, D, E) 0007 - Other than Regular Working Hours

(OTR);

secondary locations

iv. ELIN (A, B, C, D, E) 0008 – Escorts; secondary locations

d. COEFFICIENTS for each ELINs: The Offeror shall propose the Coefficient (Coef) for each CLIN ELIN as follows:

i. The ELINs (0001, 0002, 0005, and 0006), shall be the respective coefficients for Pre-Priced and Non Pre-Price line items and shall be greater than 1.000 (i.e., 1.063).

Note: a coefficient of 1.000 indicates that the Government will award future orders at cost as priced in the most current RS Means.

ii. The ELINs (0003, 0004, 0007, and 0008) shall be the respective coefficients for Other than Regular Working Hours (OTR) and Escort line items, and shall be greater than 0.000 (i.e., 0.936))

Note: a coefficient of 0.000 indicates that work performed during non-working hours and requiring escorts is not subject to any additional cost to Government for all future orders.

iii. All proposed coefficients shall have only three (3) decimal places (i.e., 1.063, 0.936)

iv. The Offeror shall provide each ELIN $ amount as $ = ((EVW x Coef) +

EVW)

v. The Offeror shall provide each CLIN $ Total Value as $ = the sum of all ELIN $ amounts.

vi. The Contractor shall provide the Total Proposed Price as $ = the Sum of all CLIN $ amounts (Base Years + Option Years)

Sample: Blue

PRICE SCHEDULE – Blue JOC Base Period (Ordering Period 1)

ELIN

No.

ELIN Description EVW

(USG

COEFFICIENT

(Ktr (fill-in)

Calculated Amount (fill-in)

Given)

A0001 Pre-priced line items Primary Location

$10,000,000.00 (> 1.000) $ = (EVW x Coef) + EVW)

A0002 Non-pre-priced items Primary Location

$3,000,000.00 (> 1.000) $ = (EVW x Coef) + EVW)

A0003 MULTIPLI

ER OTR

Primary Location

$800,000.00 (> 0.000) $ = ((EVW x Coef) + EVW)

A0004 MULTIPLIER

Escort Primary Location

$800,000.00 (> 0.000) $ = ((EVW x Coef) + EVW)

A0005 Pre-priced line items Secondary Location

$4,000,000.00 (> 1.000) $ = (EVW x Coef) + EVW

A0006 Non-pre-priced items Secondary Location

$1,000,000.00 (> 1.000) $ = (EVW x Coef) + EVW)

A0007 MULTIPLIER OTR

Secondary Location

$200,000.00 (> 0.000) $ = ((EVW x Coef) + EVW)

A0008 MULTIPLIER

Escort Secondary Location

$200,000.00 (> 0.000) $ = ((EVW x Coef) + EVW)

Subtotal for Base Period; Ordering Period 1 $ = (Sum of ELIN $ amounts)

(2) Basis of Evaluation:

a. The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic years and all option years (see Section B of the solicitation).

b. The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 53.217- 5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section 00 70 00 “Conditions Of The Contract”, of the solicitation.

c. In accordance with FAR 53.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the SOLICITATION.

Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

Comparison of market survey results.

(b) Non-cost/price Factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach:

(1) Solicitation Submittal 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:

a. Provide a simple organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms for this contract. Include a brief description of the role and responsibility of each entity not to exceed (1) one single-sided page. If the experience of an entity is being claimed in Factor 2, that entity must be named in the organizational chart.

b. In addition, 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 signed by 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.). Letters of commitment for the Designer of Record shall be addressed from the Designer of Record to the Offeror. The Designer of Record’s letter of commitment shall be signed by the Designer of Record’s signing authority.

(2) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will be used as a means to review the organizational structure and roles and responsibilities proposed by the Offeror. This factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis.

Factor 2 – Experience:

In the context of this solicitation “Construction” is:

a. The erection, installation or assembly of a new real property facility requiring multiple-disciplines (e.g. structural, mechanical and civil) or tailored design or engineering efforts and/or

b. The addition, expansion, extension, alteration, conversion or replacement of a real property facility requiring multiple disciplines or tailored design or engineering efforts.

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Construction Experience:

Submit a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. (Note: Any projects submitted in excess of five (5) for Construction Experience will not be considered.)

For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is defined as follows:

a. Size: Construction project task orders with a final contract value of $100,000. To $4,000,000. Projects submitted above or below this stated dollar range will not be considered relevant;

b. Scope/Complexity: Projects that include new building construction or building renovation/alteration (interior or exterior) involving multiple (at least 2) building systems and infrastructures (e.g. architectural, HVAC, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection)

c. Construction projects completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP and Completed to the point of Beneficial Occupancy

In aggregate, the submitted relevant project experience shall demonstrate the following:

a. Experience as the Prime Contractor on all of the submitted construction projects;

b. At least one (1) relevant design-bid-build (DBB), construction project;

c. At least one (1) relevant design-build (DB), construction project.

d. At least one (1) relevant construction project shall have a final construction cost of at least $1,000,000.

A project is defined as a 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 shall not be submitted as a project;

instead Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. 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 one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

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 (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods). In addition, the description shall also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features. Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through a Sustainable Third Party Certification program.

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. If a project was performed by a JV, and not all partners from that JV are on the JV proposed for this contract, the offeror shall clearly demonstrate what portion of the work was performed by the JV member offering on this contract and shall not include work performed by the JV as a whole. The JV member proposed for this contract shall specifically address field work performed by that JV member including field staffing and direct field work oversight. The JV member proposed for this contract shall also address home office management performed by that JV member including the number/percentage of employees provided for the overall contract by the JV members as well as the overall percentage of work performed by the JV member. The Offeror shall also submit a SIGNED copy of the Joint Venture agreement indicating the proposed participation of each Joint Venture member. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. The proposal shall state specific commitments of technical resources (e.g. personnel, equipment) that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies commit to the performance of this contract. In particular, the proposal will clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member that will be located at the worksites and company offices in the city/area of the project. The proposal shall also describe specific roles of the affiliate/subsidiary/ parent/LLC/LTD member companies in terms of the work it will either self-perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in performance of the contract. The Offeror MAY NOT utilize experience of a subcontractor to demonstrate construction experience under this evaluation factor unless specialized subcontractor experience is stated as acceptable. Failure to submit this information may result in a lower rating.

(2) Design Experience

Submit a maximum of five (5) relevant design projects for the design team that best demonstrates design experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. (Note: Any projects submitted in excess of five (5) for Design Experience will not be considered.)

For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is defined as follows:

a. Size: Construction project task orders with a final contract value of $100,000. To $4,000,000. Projects submitted above or below this stated dollar range will not be considered relevant;

b. Scope/Complexity: Projects that include new building construction or building renovation/alteration (interior or exterior) involving multiple (at least 2) building systems and infrastructures (e.g. architectural, HVAC, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection)

c. Construction projects completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP and Completed to the point of Beneficial Occupancy

Collectively the submitted relevant project experience shall demonstrate the following:

a. Experience as the Prime Contractor on all of the submitted design for construction projects;

b. At least one (1) relevant design project for a design-bid-build (DBB), construction project;

c. At least one (1) relevant design project for a design-build (DB), construction project.

d. At least one (1) relevant design project shall have an estimated construction cost (ECC) of at least $1,000,000.

A project submitted under design experience will meet the recency requirement if (a) the construction effort was completed within five (5) years immediately preceding the proposal due date, regardless of the design completion date, OR (b) the construction effort is ongoing, but the design completion date was reached within the five (5) years immediately preceding the proposal due date. Each relevant completion date shall be clearly stated on the Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet. A project is defined as a complete design effort performed under a single task order or contract/subcontract. 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 Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. 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 one (1) double-sided page or two

(2) single-sided pages.

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 SOLICITATION (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. Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through a Sustainable Third Party Certification program.

For projects that involve a historic building or a building in a historic district, the description should address features detailing how the work was completed in accordance with the "Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties

The proposal shall state specific commitments of technical resources (e.g. personnel, equipment) that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies commit to the performance of this contract. In particular, the proposal will clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member that will be located at the worksites and company offices in the city/area of the project. The proposal shall also describe specific roles of the affiliate/subsidiary/ parent/LLC/LTD member companies in terms of the work it will either self- perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in performance of the contract. Failure to submit this information may result in a lower rating.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor to demonstrate design experience. The Offeror must provide a supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the involvement for the design subcontractor. Offerors proposing multiple design firms should submit relevant project experience for all design firms. Failure to do so may result in a lower rating. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

(2) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction and design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the SOLICITATION. The Government will only review five (5) projects for construction and five (5) for design. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Construction Experience and five (5) for Design Experience will not be considered.

Proposals demonstrating projects where the Offeror and the proposed design firm(s) have previously worked together may be considered more favorably than those that have not worked together.

Proposals demonstrating more design-build experience may be considered more favorably than those that do not have design-build experience.

Proposals demonstrating more project experience with sustainable features…