Amendment_0009_18R8717.pdf

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

N40085-18-R-8717, Design-Build (DB) RM17-0145, CNIC Base Support Consolidation, Bldg. H1, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Kittery, ME

The purpose of this amendment is to provide the updated proposal delivery information and provide an alternate method to obtain the AutoCAD draw ings. For information regarding the updated proposal delivery information, please refer to the Proposal Delivery Information section of the solicitation. To obtain the AutoCAD draw ings, please contact Rachel Honecker via email at rachel.honecker@navy.mil and request the file.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 16

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 30-Jul-2018

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 N4008518R8717

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

27-Jun-2018

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, X 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 1 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

30-Jul-2018

CODE

NAVFAC MID ATLANTIC

ACQUISITION CORE

9324 VIRGINIA AVENUE

NORFOLK VA 23511-3095

N40085 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N4008518R8717

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 21 16 - INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

The proposed construction provides, but is not limited to, renovating spaces in H1, which was originally constructed in 1913 as a T-shaped, 75,262 square foot Naval Hospital and, in 1975, converted to an outpatient clinic. The existing health clinic consists of a four-story core block with wings of three stories each, extending from the central core in three directions. Exterior walls are load-bearing masonry, consisting of concrete, clay structural tile, and brick. The interior building superstructure is a partial concrete and cement-plaster encased steel frame at the wider portions of the building footprint. The steep pitched roof consists of slate shingles over a wood deck, supported by steel trusses and purlins.

Renovations shall support the consolidation and configuration of space for the building occupants for facilities being demolished (H10, 241 and 235), Installation Commanding Officer and other supporting CNIC base support functions. Electrical and mechanical system and architectural finishes upgrades will be provided in the renovated areas. Structural improvements will occur within the facility at areas included in the renovation, and also at the stairways and egress pathways in order to improve compliance with fire and life safety codes. Heating systems will be repaired or replaced in areas that are being renovated, as well as the provision of upgraded lighting, power and air conditioning. Fire suppression and mass notification systems shall be upgraded and provided in areas where the deficiencies exist. Furthermore, the project will provide energy efficiency. SHPO consultation and mitigation will be required for all permanent modifications made to character defining features.

Department of Defense and Department of the Navy principles for high performance and sustainable building requirements will be included in the design and construction of this project as appropriate. Low Impact Development will be included in the design and construction of this project as appropriate.

Project will demolish existing buildings H-10, 241 and 235.

Facility will be designed to meet or exceed the useful service life specified in DoD Unified Facility Criteria.

Facilities will incorporate features that provide the lowest practical life cycle cost solutions satisfying the facility requirements with the goal of maximizing energy efficiency.

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE/SITE VISIT INFORMATION

A pre-proposal conference/site visit will be held on: Thursday, 12 July 2018, at 12:00 PM EST.

Location: Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Gate 1, Pass and ID Office, One Walker Street, Building 384.

Base Access:

1. All site visitors are required to be listed on a visitor request written on company letterhead with the following information:

-First Name, Last Name, Middle Initial -U.S. Citizen (Yes or NO) -State of Residence -If the Individual has a current PNSY issued Green badge -Letter should state – Site visit for solicitation N40085-18-R-8717, RM17-0145, CNIC Base Support Consolidation, Bldg. H1, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Kittery, ME

The visitor request must be returned to NAVFAC seven (7) days prior to the site visit date. Send completed forms to Rachel Honecker, via email at rachel.honecker@navy.mil no later than Thursday, 05 July 2018.

2. Complete the Department of the Navy Local Population ID Card/Base Access Pass Registration form (Attachment G) and bring that form and two forms of identification (ID) on the approved ID list (Attachment H) to the Pass and ID Office. DO NOT SUBMIT THE FORM TO NAVFAC. Once at the Pass and ID Office, select the “C-DBIDS” button at the kiosk for processing.

3. All visitors shall be prepared to show a valid Government-issued photo ID to enter the facility.

4. All visitors must be U.S. Citizens. All visitors will be required to provide one of the following for proof of citizenship and access to the facility.

-Valid United States Passport -Valid driver’s license and CERTIFIED copy of your birth certificate *Please see the “REAL ID ACT” at https://www.dhs.gov/real-id/maine for more information on acceptable forms of ID while visiting the facility. If you do not have a valid license per the REAL ID Act, a passport or birth certificate and another form of ID listed from the website are required for access.

5. Camera Restriction: No camera or cell phones containing cameras are permitted on the facility. Anyone found possessing a camera or cell phone during the visit may be removed.

6. NOTE – No photographs will be permitted. No laptops will be permitted. Contractor’s failing to provide information in a timely manner or presenting improper/incomplete documentation may be denied access.

7. Contact Information: Contract Specialist Rachel Honecker, (757) 341-1975, rachel.honecker@navy.mil.

PROPOSAL DELIVERY INFORMATION

Your price and non-price proposals shall be submitted no later than: 13 August 2018, at 2:00 PM EST. In addition to the original, plus three (3) copies, your submission should include one (1) CD-ROM with the price and non-price proposal. Electronic submission of proposals will not be accepted (aside from the requirement to submit one (1) CD ROM with the price and non-price proposal), and with the exception of Attachment F –Price Proposal Form and Attachment I – Individual Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Attachments F and I may be submitted via e-mail to the following: john.p.bishop1@navy.mil or crystal.godwin@navy.mil. If an offeror chooses to submit Attachments F and I via e-mail, then such offeror does not need to include Attachments F and I with the hard copy (or CD-ROM copy) of the full price and non-price proposals to be mailed or hand delivered. Pricing information is not required to be submitted under Section 00010 – Solicitation Contract Form in SF 1442. All required proposal documents shall be submitted in accordance with FAR 15.208.

Mail or hand deliver to:

Attn: John Bishop, Contract Specialist

NAVFAC MIDLANT, ACQ21

9324 Virginia Avenue, Bldg. Z140, Rm 225 Norfolk, VA 23511

Security Information Due to increased security at all military installations, all prospective visitors who do not currently have a valid Contractor’s ID (DBIBS Pass) must allow sufficient time to obtain a one-day pass to permit entry to the base.

Prospective visitors planning to deliver proposals who do not have a valid Contractor’s ID to enter Naval Station Norfolk, must submit a completed copy of the Solicitation Attachment G “SECNAV 5512/1 form.” The attachment must be fully completed, signed, and shall be sent to John Bishop, Contract Specialist, via AMRDEC. Please follow the below instruction for sending one-day pass request:

1. The AMRDEC SAFE application can be accessed via https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe.

2. Proceed as Guest - Select this option if you do not have a CAC.

3. After selecting, the page will be redirected to the package upload form. Fill in all the required input fields:

◦Your Name - Your name;

◦Your Email address - Your email address;

◦Confirm Your Email Address - Re-enter your email address;

◦Description of File(s) - Enter a description for the package;

◦File(s) - Click the "Browse" button to select your file(s). You may add up to 25 files per package, so long as the total file size does not exceed 2GB;

◦Deletion Date - Select a date for the package to be deleted from SAFE. The maximum (which is also the default) is two weeks (14 days) from today;

◦Provide an email address to give access to - Enter john.p.bishop1@navy.mil@navy.mil here and click "Add".

◦Grant access to these people - This is the list of people you have granted access to the package. To remove a recipient, highlight their name and click the "Remove" button;

◦Caveats - Default is "None";

◦Encrypt email message when possible - Please encrypt the package's notification email to each recipient;

◦Notify me when files are downloaded - You (the sender) will receive a notification via email when a recipient downloads the package;

◦Require CAC for pickup - Require the recipient to be logged in with a valid US DoD-issued CAC to download the file(s). Recipients without a CAC will not be able to download the package.

4. Clicking the "Upload" button will upload the files and submit the package. Guest users will need to check their email to verify their email address before the recipients will be notified.

5. After the package has been uploaded (and verified, if proceeding as a guest), each recipient will receive a link to the package download page as well as a password. These passwords are unique for each recipient (not the package), and will be disabled once SAFE detects that the user successfully downloaded each file within the package.

Forwarding recipient and sender notification emails to anyone except the AMRDEC SAFETeam is strictly forbidden.

The following items are required to obtain a pass: Contractor’s Visit Request on file, two forms of ID (i.e. valid Driver's License and [one of the following] US Passport, US Social Security Card or Birth Certificate), Vehicle Registration or Rental Car Agreement, proof of Car Insurance, and proof of State Safety Inspection. Please see http://ww.uscis.gov/i-9-central/acceptable-documents for acceptable forms of identification.

The Naval Station Norfolk Pass & ID Office is located in building CD9 at 9040 Hampton Blvd across from Gate 5.

All potential offerors must adhere to this notice in order to avoid delay in submitting your proposal. The level of security at Naval Station Norfolk may change at any time. As the level of security heightens, the amount of time required to gain access to the Naval Station increases.

BASIS OF 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, to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range, and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value – the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

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

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

4. As stated in the solicitation, this procurement will utilize design-build selection procedures. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors, factors 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are of equal importance to each other, respectively, and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor, Factor 3,. When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price. The importance of price will increase if the offeror’s non-cost/price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality , or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-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.

5. Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions.

Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal. The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(es) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(es). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. The solicitation requires the evaluation of price and the following non-price factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach Factor 2 – Experience Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Safety Factor 5 – Technical Solution Factor 6 – Energy Design Reduction Factor 7 – Small Business Utilization

The distinction between experience and past performance is that experience pertains to the types of work and volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement, 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. Factor 1 will only be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable. In making the best value award decision, the Government will consider non-price factors 2-7 and price. The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is that technical factors (Factors 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7) are equal to each other respectively, and when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 3). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price. 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.

The importance of price will increase if the offeror’s non-price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality, or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-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.

3. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor:

a. Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Price binder: Price shall be submitted on the Price Proposal Form included in the solicitation. The offeror shall submit one (1) original, marked “Original”, and one (1) copy, marked “Copy”, each in a separate three ring binder with the following:

Cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, DUNS, CAGE code, Point of Contact (POC), POC phone number, and POC email address;

Completed SF 1442 signed with all amendments acknowledged;

Price Proposal Form;

Copy of Representation and Certifications and proof of registration in System for Award

Management (SAM);

Confirmation of filing of Veterans’ Employment and Training (VETS) VETS-4212 for the 2017 filing cycle;

Bid Guarantee in accordance with FAR Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee. Amount shall be at least 20 percent of the proposed price, but shall not exceed $3 million; and

Responsibility Determination Information (see below).

In the event of a discrepancy between the original and copies, the original version of the proposal will govern.

The offeror is required to submit a complete Price Proposal Form that includes completion of all contract line items numbers (CLINs).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILTY DETERMINATION INFORMATION – In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically FAR 9.104-1, General Standards. In a separate tab, the offeror shall provide the following information in the price proposal package:

1. One (1) signed bank reference demonstrating adequate financial resources. If offeror’s firm has a line of credit – provide information on how many figures offeror can borrow against the line of credit (i.e. medium 6 figures – exact line of credit is not required).

2. The offeror shall provide the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for the prime contractor, certified by an independent accounting firm, if practicable, or signed by an authorized officer of the organization.

Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital, which will be used for the performance of the resultant contract. For Joint Venture arrangements, submit the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for each company in the Joint Venture and discuss the financial responsibilities among the companies. The Government may also utilize Dun & Bradstreet reports to evaluate the financial capacity of the offeror.

3. Description of offeror’s facilities and equipment.

4. Other offeror’s work presently under contract.

5. Small Business Subcontracting Plan (reference FAR 52.219-9 Alt II and DFARS 252.219-7003).

NAVFAC's command-wide small business subcontracting targets are shown below. These may be higher or lower than percentages that would represent realistic, challenging small business subcontracting goals for this acquisition.

Offerors representing as other than small businesses shall establish small business subcontracting plan goals and shall document in their subcontracting plans the basis for all proposed goals. Plans shall be submitted with initial offers.

SB 65%

SDB 15%

HUBZone SB 6%

WOSB 15%

SDVOSB 5%

Small businesses identified by name shall be listed in small business subcontracting plans submitted pursuant to FAR 52.219-9 in order to facilitate compliance with 252.219-7003(e).

See the Small Business Subcontracting Plan Template (Attachment D) for format.

Although required to be submitted with offeror’s price proposal, this information will not be evaluated as part of the price proposal. This information forms the basis of your firm’s responsibility determination should your firm be considered for award. Proposal packages from unsuccessful offerors will not be returned to the offeror, but shall be destroyed by the Contracting Officer. No certificate of destruction will be issued.

(2) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items (see attached Price Proposal Form). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section 00600 of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, 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:

(a) Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

(b) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

(c) Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

(d) Comparison of market survey results.

b. Non-price Factors:

Non-price binder: The offeror shall submit one (1) original, marked “Original”, and two (2) copies, marked “Copy”, each in a separate three ring binder with the following:

Cover page with Solicitation Number, Solicitation Title, Prime Contractor Name, Address, Phone Number, Fax Number, DUNS, CAGE Code, Point of Contact, Phone Number, and Email Address;

8 ½ x 11 paper, 12-point font;

Refer to individual factors for page limitations. Pages that exceed indicated page limitations shall not be evaluated;

Additionally, include an electronic version of the price and non-price proposal on one

CD-ROM.

As with the price proposal, in the event of a discrepancy between the original and copies (or CD-ROM), the original version of the proposal will govern. Furthermore, any price information within the technical proposal (non-price proposal) will not be considered. Likewise, any technical/non-price information within the price proposal will not be considered.

(1) 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 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 an entity is being claimed in Factor 2, that entity must be named in the above narrative and organizational chart.

The technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages) including the organizational chart. The information requested in item #2 below is 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, approved mentor protégé agreement (MPA), or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., joint venture member, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.).

(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.

(2) Factor 2, Experience

The offeror shall submit the following information:

1. Construction Experience

Submit a minimum of two (2) up to 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. For the purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

Size: A final construction cost of $10,000,000 or greater AND work performed on at least 25,000 SF of subject facility.

Scope: New construction, renovation or repair of a multi-story (minimum 2-stories) administrative facility.

Complexity: Each submitted project does not require demonstrated experience with all of the following components, but collectively, experience with all of the elements below must be established throughout the submitted relevant projects.

a) Experience with hazardous material abatement;

b) Experience with HVAC retrofitting;

c) Experience with historic facilities and adherence to the Secretary of the Interior’s guidelines for selective demolition and renovation;

d) Experience with multi-phased/sequenced construction that allowed facility to remain open for operations throughout the project; and

e) Experience with projects in congested urban or industrial areas with limited construction laydown space.

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. Projects which are not complete as of the date of issuance of this RFP shall not be considered by the SSEB.

The attached Construction 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 one (1) double-sided pages (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 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 may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members 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 SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered for construction experience.

2. Design Experience

Submit a minimum of two (2) and up to 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. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

Size: A final construction cost of $10,000,000 or greater AND work performed on at least 25,000 SF of subject facility.

Scope: Design of new construction, renovation or repair of a multi-story (minimum 2-stories) administrative facility.

Complexity: Each submitted project does not require demonstrated experience with all of the following components, but collectively, experience with all of the elements below must be established throughout the submitted relevant projects.

a) Experience with hazardous material abatement;

b) Experience with HVAC retrofitting;

c) Experience with historic facilities and adherence to the Secretary of the

Interior’s guidelines for selective demolition and renovation;

d) Experience with multi-phased/sequenced construction that allowed facility to remain open for operations throughout the project; and

e) Experience with projects in congested urban or industrial areas with limited construction laydown space.

Projects submitted for the offeror 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 the 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 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 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 (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 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. 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.

The basis of evaluation will include the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction 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 RFP. The Government will only review ten (10) projects total. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Construction Experience and five (5) for Design Experience will not be considered. An offeror that does not submit a minimum of two (2) relevant projects for Construction Experience and two (2) relevant projects for Design Experience as defined above will receive a rating of “Unacceptable” and will not be eligible for award. Failure to submit supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor will result in a rating of “Unacceptable” for this factor and make the offeror ineligible for award.

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.

(3) Factor 3, Past Performance

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for Construction Experience. If a completed A-E Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) 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 CPARS 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, Rachel Honecker, via email at rachel.honecker@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 awards or additional information submitted will not be considered.

This evaluation will consider how well the offeror’s team performed on relevant projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience and may also consider past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

The Government will consider the recency 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 team’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the offeror’s team’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will receive a “Neutral Confidence” rating.

Past performance ratings of “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” hold more value than a “Neutral Confidence” rating and will be considered more favorably in the evaluation of past performance.

(4) Factor 4, Safety

(i) Solicitation 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, DART and TRC Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(a) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Include three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data (2015, 2016, and 2017). This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If the offeror has no EMR or premium, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of the factor submission.

(b) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data (2015, 2016, and 2017). If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided.

Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA and DART data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(c) Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data

(2015, 2016, and 2017). If an offeror cannot submit TRC rates, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(d) Technical Approach for Safety: The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to one

(1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages), and must address all items below.

1. The offeror shall describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors.

2. The offeror shall fully describe the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work.

3. The offeror shall describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels.

4. The offeror shall describe their methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps.

(ii) 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 eSAMS database, and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

Experience Modification Rate (EMR) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate Offeror Technical Approach to Safety Other sources of information available to the Government

(a) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): For the three previous complete calendar years the offeror will submit EMR. If no EMR exists, the offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate explaining why not. If an insurance company-provided equivalent rate is provided, it will be treated the same as an EMR. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of this selection factor. The board will evaluate the EMR to determine if the offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

(b) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rates: For the three previous complete calendar years, the offeror will submit their OSHA DART, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If unable to submit OSHA DART rates, affirmatively state so, and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART data and negative trends should be addressed as part of this element. The board will evaluate the OSHA DART rates to determine if the offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact rates.

(c) Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates: For the three previous complete calendar years, the offeror will submit their TRC, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If unable to submit TRC rates, affirmatively state so, and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the TRC rate data and negative trends should be addressed as part of this element. The board will evaluate the TRC rates to determine if the offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact rates.

(d) Technical Approach to Safety: The offeror will describe their plan to evaluate their safety performance and that of potential 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. The board 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 board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement and validate the contractor has addressed methodology to be used in the execution of an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques/processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. 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.

(e) Other Sources of Information Available to the Government: Other sources for safety may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS) in Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and other related databases.

(5) Factor 5, Technical Solution

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

- Interior circulation/adjacencies

- Tenant specific UFC requirements

- Exterior façade describing how the proposed construction elements integrate with the existing building, surrounding area and existing base facilities design or architectural theme.

- Site layouts including a description of the building orientation (where occurs), roadways, parking (include ingress and egress), emergency vehicle access, and school bus access. Also include in the narrative a description of the proposed stormwater strategy concept.

Narrative shall not exceed three (3) double-sided pages (or six (6) single-sided pages). Up to four (4) conceptual floor plan drawings, up to four (4) elevations and up to three (3) site plans may be provided to supplement the narrative.

The Government will evaluate the narrative and conceptual drawings considering the extent to which the offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of the architectural, engineering and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Installation requirements of the project. The Government will evaluate the offeror's technical solution to determine adherence to the technical requirements of the RFP.

(6) Factor 6, Energy Design Reduction

1. Energy Efficiency Narrative:

Provide a detailed narrative describing how the proposed solution will provide energy efficiency improvements to the facility with exterior envelope and mechanical system repairs. Describe how the solution incorporates sustainable principles and complies with DoD-ABAAS requirements. Also, explain incorporation of energy efficiency in accordance with UFC 1-200-02 and how the solution will meet or exceed the requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2013. Lastly, describe how the HVAC system solution for the building will satisfy the minimum ASHRAE 62.1 requirements while conforming to the EISA 2007.

Perform a LCCA to determine if solar energy is cost effective to meet all or part of the hot-water requirements for building H-1. Describe whether or not this proves to be life cycle cost effective. Also perform a LCCA to determine if providing a photovoltaic system is cost effective.

Organize narrative in four parts: 1) Existing Orientation, Configuration, and Shape; 2) Existing envelope properties);

3) Mechanical (HVAC, plumbing, and domestic hot water heating systems, including any solar hot water systems);

and 4) Electrical Systems (lighting and control systems, including any interior and exterior lighting systems, renewable energy and control systems).

Note: Building performance rating and percent energy reduction are calculated in terms of energy rather than energy cost.

Do not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages).

1. Energy Efficiency Narrative and Solution: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed energy efficiency narrative and solution.

(7) Factor 7, Small Business Utilization

This factor assesses both the historical achievements in utilizing small business concerns as subcontractors and proposed small business participation and commitment strategies.

1. Achievements - Submit a narrative and supporting information, as follows:

a. All offerors shall submit a narrative, limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages), to describe their achievements in supporting the Government’s policy to provide maximum practicable opportunities for small business (SB), veteran-owned small business (VOSB), service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB), historically underutilized business zone (HUBZone) small business, small disadvantaged business (SDB), and women-owned small business (WOSB) concerns to participate as subcontractors consistent with efficient contract performance.

b. All offerors shall submit small business subcontracting information associated with each project cited under the Experience factor (Factor 1) in the format provided in Attachment D, Small Business Subcontracting Record.

c. Offerors representing as other than small businesses shall also provide copies of the most current individual subcontracting reports (ISRs) associated with each project cited under the Experience factor (Factor 1), if a small business subcontracting plan…