N4008313R2637SBMAC_PHASE_I.pdf

Revised 7 December 2011 1

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION

DISCLOSURE LIMITATIONS AS OUTLINED IN FAR 2.101 & 3.104 APPLY

NOTICE TO PROPOSERS

THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) IS ISSUED AS A TWO-PHASE DESIGN BUILD PROCUREMENT.

THE TIME AND DATE SET FORTH WITHIN IS FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS FOR PHASE I ONLY.

PHASE II WILL BE ISSUED BY AMENDMENT ONLY TO THE SUCCESSFUL OFFERORS DETERMINED

TO BE THE MOST HIGHLY QUALIFIED FROM PHASE I.

RFP NO.: N40083-13-R-2637

RFP ISSUE DATE: July 30, 2013

PROPOSAL DUE DATE: September 4, 2013, 2:00 P.M.(EDT)

PROJECT TITLE: Small Business Multiple Award Construction Contract (SB MACC)

NAVFAC MIDWEST PWD CRANE

300 Hwy 361, Building 2516 Naval Support Activity

Crane, Indiana 47522-5082

ALL INQUIRIES CONCERNING THE ATTACHED RFP MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING, BY E-MAIL TO THE BELOW ADDRESSEE, AND MUST BE RECEIVED NO LATER THAN 10 CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR

TO THE PROPOSAL DUE DATE/TIME, IN ORDER TO PERMIT ADEQUATE TIME FOR THE

GOVERNMENT TO REPLY TO INQUIRIES.

YOU MAY FAX YOUR QUESTIONS TO THE ATTENTION OF ANNETTE TAYLOR (CODE PRC22):

annette.taylor@navy.mil

Phase I proposals should be sent to:

NAVFAC MW PWD CRANE

ATTN: Annette Taylor, Contracting Officer

300 Hwy 361, Building 2516 Naval Support Activity

Crane, Indiana 47522-5082

NOTE: In accordance with FAR 19.508, this RFP is issued with the Clause 52.219-6 NOTICE OF TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS SET ASIDE. Offers are solicited only from small business concerns, defined by NAICS Code 236210, size standard of $33.5M/year average over 3 years.

Revised 7 December 2011 2

DOCUMENT 00010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION

00001 TITLE PAGE

00010 TABLE OF CONTENTS

2. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS PHASE I

00202 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS - PHASE I

Part 1. General Part 2. Phase I Proposal Factors & Evaluation Part 3. Phase II Proposal (FOR INFORMATION ONLY.)

3. ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A – Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet Attachment B – NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

4. GENERAL INFORMATION TO BE NOTED:

1. The System for Award Management: All offerors are required to be registered in The System for Award

Management (SAM). SAM is a Federal Government owned and operated FREE web site that consolidates the capabilities in CCR, Fed Reg, ORCA, and EPLS. The website is:

https://www.sam.gov

NOTE: Registration on SAM is FREE. Beware of websites charging for registration.

Registration is required in the following databases:

Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database in accordance with DFARS 252.204-7004.

LACK OF REGISTRATION IN THE CCR DATABASE WILL MAKE THE OFFEROR

INELIGIBLE FOR AWARD.

Offeror’s are required to complete and submit Annual Representations and Certifications via the Online Representations and Certifications Applications (ORCA) in accordance with FAR 52.204-8.

Offeror’s are required to complete and submit VETS-100 Federal Contractor Report on Veterans’ Employment in accordance with Public Law 107-288 and FAR 52.222-37.

The website address is: http://vets100.cudenver.edu

2. ELECTRONIC INVOICING

https://www.sam.gov/ http://vets100.cudenver.edu/

Revised 7 December 2011 3

In accordance with DFARS 252.232-7003, "ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF PAYMENT REQUEST AND RECEIVING REPORTS", and 252.232.7006 Wide Area WorkFlow Payment Instructions, as prescribed at DFARS 232.7004. The United States Navy utilizes Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF) to electronically process vendor requests for payment. This application allows DoD vendors to submit and track Invoices and Receipt/Acceptance documents electronically.

The contractor is required to utilize this system when submitting invoices under this contract, unless the provision at DFARS 252.232-7003(c) applies. The contractor shall (i) register to use WAWF at the https://wawf.eb.mil site, within ten (10) calendar days after award of this contract. Step by step procedures to register are available at the https://wawf.eb.mil site. Additional instructions for submitting invoices via WAWF will be provided after award.

The Navy WAWF point of contact (POC) for this contract is Annette Taylor, (812) 854-2673;

annette.taylor@navy.mil.

3. Please Note: All projects on this contract will require: Bid, Payment and Performance Bonds as follows:

• For Phase I of the RFP, offeror’s are only required to submit a letter from their bonding company indicating they have the capability to bond up to $5 million per project and $8 million per year.

• Bid, Payment and Performance Bond requirements apply to PHASE II only

• Bid Bonds will be required in Phase II for each seed project in the amount of 20% of the seed project price.

• Performance and Payment bonds in the amounts shown below will be required for the seed project after award. Performance and Payment bonds will required on each subsequent task order issued on this contract in the amounts shown below.

FAC 5252.228-9302, BID GUARANTEE (ALT I)(JAN 1996) –

To assure the execution of the contract and the performance and payment bonds, each bidder/offeror shall submit with its bid/offer a guarantee bond (Standard Form 24) executed by a surety company holding a certificate of authority from the Secretary of the Treasury as an acceptable surety, or other security as provided in FAR Clause 52.228-1, "Bid Guarantee". Security shall be in a penal sum equal to at least 20 percent of the proposed price, but in no case to exceed $3,000,000. The bid guarantee bond shall be accompanied by a document authenticating the agent's authority to sign bonds for the surety company.

FAC 5252.228-9305, NOTICE OF BONDING REQUIREMENTS (ALT I)(DEC 2000)

(a) Within 15 days after receipt of each task order award, the bidder/offeror to whom the award is made shall furnish the following bond(s) each with satisfactory security:

X A performance bond (Standard Form 25). The performance bond shall be in a penal sum equal to 100 percent of the contract price.

X A payment bond (Standard Form 25A). The payment bond shall be in a penal sum equal to 100 percent of the contract price.

https://wawf.eb.mil/ https://wawf.eb.mil/

Revised 7 December 2011 4

(b) Any surety company holding a certificate of authority from the Secretary of Treasury as an acceptable Surety on Federal bonds will be accepted. Individual sureties will be permitted as prescribed in FAR 28.203 and FAC 5252.228-9300. Alternative types of security in lieu of furnishing sureties on performance and/or payment bonds will be permitted as prescribed in FAR 28.204, and will be held for at least one year after the completion of the contract. Additional bond security may be required as prescribed in FAR 52.228-2. Bonds shall be accompanied by a document authenticating the agent's authority to sign bonds for the surety company.

(c.) The contract time for purposes of fixing the completion date, default, and liquidated damages shall begin to run 15 days from the date of award, regardless of when performance and payment bonds or deposits in lieu of surety as executed.

(d.) All Contractor employees shall obtain the required employee and vehicle passes as required. All Contract employees are required to be badged through the Non-Common Access Card (N-CAC) Contractors/Vendors Program (i.e. RapidGate). RapidGate includes enrollment, registration, background vetting, screening, issuance of credentials, and electronic validation of credentials at the contractor's expense through a designated independent contractor NCAC service provider. Credentials (badges) will be issued every five years and access privileges will be reviewed/renewed on an annual basis. Rapid Gate information can be found at the following web site: http://rapidgate.com. All cost associated with Rapid Gate shall be the responsibility of the Contractor.

Revised 7 December 2011 5

SECTION 00202

PROPOSAL REQUIREMENT – PHASE I

RFP NO. N40083-13-R-2637

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR QUALIFICATION

DESIGN/BUILD - PHASE I

PART 1. GENERAL

1.1. GENERAL PROJECT OVERVIEW

1.1.1. This solicitation will be issued as a “TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS” set-aside inviting small business competition and will result in multiple awards (no more than five (5)) firm-fixed price contracts for construction, design, alternation and repair of Government facilities at the Naval Support Activity, Crane, Indiana. Small Business Contractors who are selected for award will be given the opportunity to compete on future individual task orders ranging from $500,000 to $5,000,000. The contract period is for twelve months with four 12-month option periods. The total contract term shall not exceed five years (60 months) or $40,000,000.00, whichever comes first. . Historically projects on the SB MAC contract have included design build and fully designed projects for office renovation, laboratories & test facility renovations, ordnance and production facility renovations, bridge replacements and new building construction.

1.1.2. The Government intends to obtain services including all labor, material, transportation, equipment and supervision required to accomplish various types of construction projects, including design-build and fully designed projects, as well as projects with minimal or no design required.

1.1.3. Project Requirements.

Projects on the SB MAC contract will require the expertise of all engineering and architectural disciplines; including, project manager, project architect, mechanical engineer, structural engineer, civil engineer (Registered in Indiana), electrical engineer, interior design, landscape architect, sustainable design, asbestos, environmental and registered fire protection engineer. Special attention must be given to the durability of Government facilities.

1.2 OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.2.1 This procurement consists of two phases. Phase I will result in a narrowing of offerors (not more than ten (10) firms) based on Phase I evaluation factors that include: (1) Technical Approach; (2) Experience with Sub-factors (A1) Construction Experience and (A2) Design Experience; (3) Past Performance; and (4) Safety

1.2.2. Evaluation of the proposal(s) permits impartial and comprehensive evaluation of each offeror’s proposal; permits discussion, if necessary; and ensures selection of the sources whose performance will provide the best value to the Government. OFFERORS ARE ADVISED THAT SELECTION FOR

ADVANCEMENT IN PHASE I AND/OR AN AWARD IN PHASE II MAY BE MADE WITHOUT

DISCUSSION OR ANY CONTACT CONCERNING THE PROPOSAL RECEIVED.

1.2.3. The Government reserves the right to reject any or all offers at any time prior to award; to negotiate with any or all offeror’s; to award the contract to other than the offeror submitting the lowest total price; to

Revised 7 December 2011 6 award to the offeror submitting the highest technically rated or the lowest total price proposal and to award to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to be the most advantageous “Best Value” to the Government.

Both Phase I and Phase II proposals are requested initially on the most favorable price and technical terms.

Offeror’s should not assume that they would be contacted or afforded an opportunity to qualify, discuss, or revise their proposals. However, the Government reserves the right to clarify certain aspects of proposals or conduct discussions providing an opportunity for the offeror’s to revise its proposal.

1.2.4. In Phase II, the offeror’s will be required to submit a technical and price proposal for the initial seed project for a design-build project for CAAA Building 102 Renovation. Other offeror’s selected for award of the contract but not receiving a seed project award will receive a guarantee minimum of $20,000 that will be funded at the time of award and will satisfy the offeror’s minimum guarantee. Note: Additional seed projects may or may not be included with the Phase II RFP. If other projects are identified in Phase II, the selected offeror’s will be required to submit proposals for those projects as well.

1.2.5. Building 102 will be shut down and all on-site work must be performed between June 1, 2014 and December 1, 2014. The completion of the project will be December 15, 2014 in order to allow time for submission of close-out documents.

The estimated cost range for the complete design and construction of the seed project is $800,000 to $1,200,000.00.

1.2.4. Award of the Building 102 seed project will be made on a best value basis. Award of any other identified seed projects may be either on best value basis or low priced technical acceptable basis as described in the RFP.

1.3 SUBSEQUENT TASK ORDERS

1.3.1 Only the offeror’s who receive a SB MACC award will be allowed to compete on subsequent future task orders, proposals received from other contractors will not be accepted. Each task order will site a specific completion date and associated liquidated damages. They will be scoped by the Government personnel and contractors and may not have traditional plans and specifications.

1.3.2. It is highly encouraged that SB MACC awardees participate in all task order site visits and submit proposals for all RFP’s. If during a 12 month period, an awardee does not submit a proposal on a majority of the issued RFP’s, the Government reserves the right to not extend the contract for that particular contractor when the next contract options are exercised.

The Government reserves the right to add replacement contractors through competition using on-ramp procedures if adequate competition on subsequent task orders is not received among the existing SB MAC contractors. If the Government elects to utilize the on-ramping procedures, then the number of contractors to be added will be determined at that time.

1.3.3 Participation in the pre-proposal conference or site visits for future task orders will be the responsibility of the offeror and are not reimbursable by the Government.

1.3.4 Subsequent task orders may be awarded on best value OR low price, technically acceptable basis If the government decides to issue the task order as a best value, award factors will vary depending on the unique

Revised 7 December 2011 7 requirements for each task order. If the low price, technically acceptable method is used in the evaluation of subsequent task orders, the lowest price proposed that is technically acceptable will receive the award.

1.4 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

1.4.1 In response to this Phase I Request for Proposal, the proposal shall include only a technical proposal. Offerors should address all the evaluation factors contained within for Phase I and submit an original and four (4) copies in a binder to:

Proposals shall be addressed to:

NAVFAC Midwest PWD Crane ATTN: Annette Taylor, Code PRCR22at Naval Support Activity, Building 2516

300 Hwy 361 Crane, IN 47522-5082

Proposals are due September 4, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time

1.4.2. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION: The technical proposal submission should indicate “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY” and “SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 3.104.” The envelope shall be clearly marked “TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FOR RFP N40083-13-R-2637 (ATTN:

Annette Taylor, Code PRC22at). It is imperative that you clearly indicate on the outside of your package the Solicitation Number. Late submittals will only be considered if allowed by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition (MAY 2001).

PART 2. PROPOSAL FACTORS & EVALUATION – PHASE 1

2.1 Evaluation Factors – Phase 1. The areas of consideration for evaluation of technical proposals are detailed below and are of equal importance.

Factor 1 – Technical Approach Factor 2 - Experience

• Sub factor A1. Construction Experience

• Sub factor A2. Design Experience

Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Safety

Factor 1: Technical Approach:

(a) 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:

(1) Provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement. Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual

Revised 7 December 2011 8 relationships 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. If the experience of a significant subcontractor is being claimed in Factor 2, the firm must be named in the above narrative and organizational chart.

The technical approach narrative shall be limited to five (5) double-sided pages plus the organizational chart.

The information requested in items 2 and 3 below are not included in this page limitation.

(2) In addition to the narrative, the Offeror shall 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, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.).

a. If you are submitting an offer as a joint venture, identify each member of your joint venture and whether the member is a LB, HUBZone, SB, SDB, WOSB, or VOSB firm, and if applicable, HBCU/MI; and the value in terms of dollar value of the work to be performed by each member of your joint venture. The Government will evaluate your joint venture as either a large business of small business based upon the information provide.

NOTE: If the proposal is being submitted as a Joint Venture, the letter from the bonding company must state that the bonds will be issued in the name of the Joint Venture.

(3) Corporate Management. The offeror shall show the relationship between the home office and on-site field management personnel, by name. Offerors shall explain the degree of autonomy of the on-site organization from the home office and address lines of authority, responsibility and span of control. Offerors shall complete Personnel Reference sheets in the solicitation for all key personnel (e.g., corporate personnel who will have decision making responsibilities over the term of the contract). Show how work effort will fluctuate based on volume of work ordered. Provide a list of in-house trades. Provide information on material purchasing system/staffing.

(4) Financial Support. Offerors shall clearly demonstrate their financial stability by providing the information requested below. Offerors shall also demonstrate their ability to sustain their financial obligations during the first 90 days of this contract:

1.Line of credit: Provide a letter from a financial institution showing your available line of credit (e.g., Minimum six figures, or $255,000).

2. Documented Bonding Capacity of at least $5 million per project and $8 million per year

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will be used as a means to evaluate the organizational structure and teaming relationships proposed by the Offeror.

THIS FACTOR WILL BE RATED ON AN ACCEPTABLE OR

UNACCEPTABLE BASIS. A CONTRACTOR RECEIVING AN

UNACCEPTABLE RATING WILL NOT MOVE TO PHASE II.

Revised 7 December 2011 9

Factor 2 - Experience

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Construction Experience:

Submit a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

A relevant construction project is one that involves various types of new construction or renovation projects, including design-build and fully designed projects, as well as projects with minimal or no design required. A relevant project is a Firm Fixed Priced project with a cost range from $500,000 to $5 million. Projects with complex scheduling issues, substantial hazardous materials abatements, or projects involving hazardous atmosphere ratings and explosive operations may be viewed more favorably.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. 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; rather Offerors shall 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. 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 two (2) double-sided page (or four (4) 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 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 U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process.

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 shall be submitted for each Joint Venture partner. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture partners may be rated lower.

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 proposal), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

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

Revised 7 December 2011 10

(2) Design Experience

Submit a maximum of five (5) 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. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

A relevant design project is one that involves various types of construction projects, including design-build and fully designed projects of new construction or renovations. A relevant project is a Firm Fixed Priced project with a construction cost range from $500,000 to $5 million. Projects designed to be executed in phases, or projects involving hazardous atmosphere ratings, LEED certifications, explosive operations, or laboratory designs may be viewed more favorably.

Submit a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) construction projects for the Offeror.

Projects submitted shall be completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

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 A) 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 two (2) double-sided page (or four (4) 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 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 U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies, the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor to demonstrate design experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor.

(b) 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

Revised 7 December 2011 11 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 RFP. The Government will only review five projects for construction and five for design. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Construction Experience and five (5) for Design Experience will not be considered.

Relevant 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.

Relevant projects that demonstrate design-build experience may be considered more favorably than those that do not have design-build experience.

Relevant projects that demonstrate experience with sustainable features may be considered more favorably than those that do not demonstrate experience with sustainable features.

Offerors who submit relevant projects that demonstrate experience self-performing relevant features of work may receive a higher rating than those who do not demonstrate self performance.

Factor 3 – Past Performance:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

If a completed Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in factor 2 for construction experience. If a completed AE Contractor Appraisal Support System (ACASS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in factor 2 for design experience. If there is not a completed CCASS or ACASS evaluation then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 2 for both Construction Experience and Design Experience. The Offeror should provide completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) in the proposal. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs 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(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

The Government may make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project(s) 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, Annette Taylor, annette.taylor@navy.mil.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues.

Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

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:

Revised 7 December 2011 12

This evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience and past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources. More emphasis will be placed on more relevant projects. 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.

Factor 4 – 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 four (4) 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. EMR rates shall be provided on insurance company letterhead.

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

For the four (4) 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 pages.

Revised 7 December 2011 13

(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 Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS), 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 evaluate the narrative 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 evaluate the narrative to 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.

Revised 7 December 2011 14

************************IMPORTANT NOTICE************************

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS SECTION

Phase II RFP will be issued to only the qualified offerors selected as a result of the Phase I evaluation

The following technical factors are given for information only and may vary slightly from the actual factors in Phase II

Note: One or more additional seed projects may or may not be included with the Phase II RFP. If other projects are identified in Phase II, specific yet similar evaluation factors for those seed projects will be included in the Phase II RFP.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THESE PHASE II TECHNICAL FACTORS

DURING PHASE I

PART 3. PHASE II REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

Phase II Seed Project – CAAA Building 102 Renovation;

A more detailed SOW will be provided in Phase II.

Building 102 is occupied by Crane Army Ammunition Activity (CAAA) and is a Demilitarization Building of Medium Caliber Ordnance. The building is generally a steel structure with corrugated metal siding, containing approximately 6,385 square feet on the first level and approximately 1,605 square feet on the mezzanine level within a secured area.

This project shall partially renovate Building 102 at NSA Crane, which is an electrically hazardous classified building. The renovation involves lighting upgrades, door upgrades, and painting; provide life safety improvements, heating and hot water system, the removal of the glazing, piping, and hazardous material remediation to meet safety requirements. A new boiler building will be built for the boilers separate from Building 102. Building 3349 and Building 2137 shall require electrical and mechanical work as part of the renovation for the removal of the steam system.

A. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Offeror is required to submit an original and seven (7) copies of their technical proposal in a SEPARATE SEALED ENVELOPE MARKED: “TECHNICAL PROPOSAL – DO NOT OPEN IN MAILROOM”. Each copy shall be separately bound in a three ring binder with an index and sections tabbed. The technical proposal shall not contain any pricing information.

B. GENERAL. Not more than ten (10) offeror’s will advance to Phase II. Phase II will be evaluated on the offerors’ technical proposal, cost/price and other factors considered. Technical and price factors will be considered and weighted equally in significance.

Revised 7 December 2011 15

C. EVALUATION FACTORS. The sum of all technical factors will be equal to the price; sub factors are of equal importance. Offerors will be required to submit a technical and price proposals for the seed project; CAAA Building 102 Renovations at NSA, Crane, Indiana.

FACTOR 1 - TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS

Sub factor A1. Technical Narrative Sub factor A2. Explosive Safety Sub factor A3. Schedule

FACTOR 1 TECHNICAL SOLUTION

The contractor shall develop a narrative describing their technical solution of the project, including design and construction activities for the renovation of bldg 102 in compliance with the RFP. The narrative shall address, at a minimum, each of the sub-factors listed below. The contractors shall put the information in the same order that it is presented in this list.

SUBFACTOR A1: Technical Narrative

a. In detail, provide a narrative describe the abatement and demolition phasing/plan of action for the project.

b. In detail, describe the proposed hot water heating system design basis for the project (piping schematic, boiler manufacturer and series, pumping arrangement, design hot water temperature drop).

c. Describe the Energy efficient features of the proposed hot water heating design.

d. Describe proposed methods for freeze protection (glycol system, pump operation, etc.) to protect the outside distribution piping from freezing.

e. Provide concept drawings/sketches for proposed boiler house and site.

f. In detail, provide a narrative describe the proposed windows/doors/stairs replacement work.

g. Provide concept drawings/sketches for proposed windows/doors/stairs/upper room renovations to facility.

h. Describe experience with NAVFAC Redzone methodology;

i. Provide a proposed construction schedule to include design submittal dates, GOV review times, abatement start, construction start, construction activities, commissioning, BOD, and closeout activities.

SUBFACTOR A2: Explosive Safety

j. Demonstrate knowledge and experience working in areas that have been contaminated with energetic and/or explosive residue(s).

k. FOR OPTION 1: List the personnel who will be the unexploded ordnance officer (UXO) and submit a resume for each of these persons. Also, demonstrate knowledge and experience in

Revised 7 December 2011 16 disposal of building debris contaminated with explosive residue. (Reference NAVSEA OP5 for UXO requirements)

SUBFACTOR A3: Schedule

a. Provide a project Gantt Chart with the following items clearly identified. For the purposes of the schedule the contractor shall assume an award of 40 days after the bid date. (The schedules will be shifted based upon the actual award date)

i. Critical path

ii. Assumed contract award date (CAD)

iii. Building Occupancy Date (BOD) (see narrative in RFP for those items required prior to

BOD)

iv. Contract Completion Date (CCD).

v. Provide construction phasing in schedule, including any utility cutovers and downtimes as appropriate

vi. NAVFAC redzone items.

D. PRICE PROPOSAL

1. The Government will evaluate an offerors total price for all work to be performed for the duration of the contract. In competitive acquisitions, evaluations of proposals will be made based on cost/price that represents the best overall value to the Government. Reasonableness of an offeror’s proposal will be evaluated through cost or price analysis techniques as described in FAR Subpart 15.305(a)(1) and (4).

Offeror’s total price for the seed project that represents the best overall value to the Government. The price evaluation will determine whether an offeror’s proposed prices are complete in relation to the RFP and technical proposals.

2. The total price will be the price for the entire, complete project in accordance with the RFP and will be considered in determining which proposal provides Best Value to the Government. The price proposal will be evaluated on the basis of the price factors. A seed project will be awarded in Phase II to the contractor whose technical proposal, cost/price and other factors considered provides the best value to the Government. There will be a guaranteed minimum of $20,000 awarded to each of the selected awardees not receiving a seed project award.

3. The proposal must represent a price that provides best value to the Government when consideration is given to prices in the market, technical and functional capabilities of the offeror, risk, and the current source selection situation. Price is not the most important evaluation factor, however, if after evaluation of the technical and price proposals, price may be the deciding factor for selection, depending upon whether a highly evaluated technical proposal warrants the evaluated price differential. The importance of price will increase if offerors in the competitive range are considered essentially equal in terms of technical capability, or if a price is so significantly high as to diminish the value of technical superiority to the Government.

E. PRICE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS:

1. PRICE PROPOSAL: Offeror is required to prepare and submit the following documents in a SEPARATE

SEALED ENVELOPE MARKED: “PRICE PROPOSAL – DO NOT OPEN IN MAILROOM”:

Revised 7 December 2011 17

a) One original and one (1) executed copy of the Solicitation, Offer and Award Forms for the Design and

Construction of the Facility, NAVFAC Crane, IN and supplemental pages.

b) One original and one (1) copy of any Alternative Design Solution Cost Saving for the Seed Project

c) One (1) executed copy of Representations and Certifications Forms

d) One (1) executed bid guarantee (SF-24) for 20% of the seed project price.

e) Completion Schedule Adjustment for seed project

f) Acknowledgement of all amendments

Revised 7 December 2011 18

ATTACHMENT A

CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET

Project No. (check one) : CON #1 CON #2 CON #3 CON #4 CON #5

DESIGN #1 DESIGN #2 DESIGN #3 DESIGN #4 DESIGN #5

1. Experience for: Offeror Joint-Venture Other (Explain)

Firm Name:

Address:

Phone Number:

DUNS Number:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain)

Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Number: Delivery/Task Order Number:

Title:

Location:

4. Award Date (mm/dd/yy): Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

5. Type of work:

New Construction Renovation Repair Alteration Other (explain):

6. Type of Contract/Task Order: (Check ALL that apply)

Firm-Fixed Price Cost/Time and Material Other (explain):

Complete Block 7 for Construction Projects. Complete Block 8 for Design Projects.

7. Construction Project:

Award Amount: Final Price:

Type of Contract/Task Order: (Check ALL that apply)

Design-Build Design-Bid-Build Delivery/Task Order (IDIQ) Other (explain):

If Design-Build, identify the Lead Design Firm:______________________________________________

8. Design Project:

A/E Design Fee: Total Construction Value:

Type of Contract/Task Order: (Check ALL that apply)

Design-Build RFP Development Designer of Record Engineering Services Full Plans & Specs

Other (explain):

Revised 7 December 2011 19

9. Provide a detailed description of the project and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e.: unique features, square footage, construction methods), including any sustainable features or USGBC LEED certifications. If design-build, include a description of the design-effort.

10. Provide a detailed description of what work your firm self-performed on this project:

11. Other Information:

Revised 7 December 2011 20

ATTACHMENT B

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO NAVFAC WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON NAVFAC SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO NAVFAC. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR NAVFAC POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

Revised 7 December 2011 21

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner.