N4008519R9020 Amendment 0003.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

SOLICITATION NO. N40085-19-R-9020 CON- DBB P457 CRYOGENICS FACILITY MCAS BEAUFORT

SEE SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

Contract POC: Kristy Wright; kristy.l.w right1@navy.mil; 757-341-1644

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 18

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 14-Jul-2020

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 N4008519R9020

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

15-Jun-2020

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 X is extended, is not extended.

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

14-Jul-2020

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:

N4008519R9020

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0003

The purpose of this amendment is to provide the following:

1. Extend the proposal due date to 21 July 2020

2. PPI responses

PPI

Reference

Question Response Page Section Paragraph

Drawing File

A-602 A-501

Sheet A-602 depicts a single hung window. A- 501 shows what looks to be center set fixed storefront details. The specifications list awnings (project out) as well as hung windows.

Please advise what product we are to provide for operable (hung or awning?) or fixed windows (storefront)?

Provide awning windows with bug screens.

Drawing File

A-502 A-503

The storefront details on A-502 and A-503 show an offset glazed curtain wall framing member. To achieve ATFP criteria, the system will be much deeper if curtain wall is desired (7 ½”). A (5 ½”) center glazed frame can be used to achieve ATFP and a less space consuming finished product. Please advise.

(5 ½”) Center glazed storefront is acceptable, but must be ‘thermally broken’.

6 Page 8 RFP

The RFP at page 8 asks for copies of the SAM Representations and Certifications as well as “proof of registration in SAM. Is the Copy of FARS/DFARS Report satisfactory for proof of SAM registration or, if not, what documentation is being sough for proof of SAM registration?

Propose according to RFP

7 Page 8 RFP

The RFP at page 8 asks for confirmation of filing of Offeror’s VETS-4212 for the 2017 filing cycle. Is this reference to 2017 correct or should Offeror’s submit their most current VETS filing (for the 2019 cycle)?

The VETS-4212 cycle is 2019. Please see Amendment 0003

8 Page 12 RFP

The RFP at page 12 asks for Total Recordable Case data. Is the OSHA 300a sufficient supporting documentation for TRC as well as DART rate, or is other documentation being sought?

Propose according to RFP

9 Page 16 RFP

The RFP at page 16 and Amendment 1 state that the proposal due date is 7/16 for electronic originals, but that hard copies and CD-ROMS have to be postmarked for express mail by 7/15 (Day prior to the Proposal Due Date). Given this, does the hard copy have to include the price proposal form filled out as well as the fully executed 1442?

Please send those documents via email prior to the proposal due date. The hard copy does not have to include the fully filled out price proposal form.

Drawing File

B-200 Are 3” diameter earthquake drains allowed in lieu of the specified 4” diameter? 3” meets the industry standard and is commonly utilized.

The earthquake drains should be 4 inch diameter as specified on the plans and specifications.

Drawing File

A-601 & A-602

Please confirm that door openings 102, 105, 106, 111, 113B, 114, and 115A are to have an STC rating of 53. If so, we will need to make adjustments to the hardware specified to achieve the STC value. Please confirm the STC rating and we can adjust hardware as required to comply with this STC value.

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

A-601 & A-602

Confirm that the following openings require an STC rating of 40: 101, 103, 104, 107A, 107B, 108, 109A, 109B, 110, 116. We assume we can make the required hardware adjustments to achieve this STC rating if required. Please advise.

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

S-001

Are the exterior hollow metal doors and frames to be blast resistant? They appear to be so from sheet S-001, “Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection Notes”. However, I cannot find the blast standoff distance information which is also required. Please provide me with this information.

Doors are not rated for blast resistance.

Any glazing needs to meet the requirements of UFC 4-010-01 dated 12DEC2018, Paragraph 3-11.1

08 34

Drawing File

A-602

There are no notes on sheet A-602 regarding sound rating of any doors. Does section 083473 apply to this project? If so please designate doors where sound rating is required on sheet A-602.

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

A-602

There are wood doors shown on the door schedule on A-602 but there is no spec section for wood doors. Please provide specifications for wood doors.

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

A-602 The door material and elevation and frame elevation is missing from the door schedule for door 112. Please provide this information.

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

CS-100

Two “receiving bollards” are noted on CS100 (note 28). There is no detail provided for “receiving bollards”. Should these be included per detail C3 or C4/CS500? If not please provide a detail.

These bollards should be considered to be Fixed Bollards as shown in detail C3.

Drawing File

S-102

What is the required size and spacing of the vertical reinforcing at the CMU walls at the N2/O2 Tank Storage and MNGG Shelter shown on S-102?

Reinforcing for both walls is #6 vertical reinforcing at 32” o.c., max. The walls are fully grouted.

Drawing File

A-104 To verify – is roof insulation and gypsum cover board required at the Tank Storage and Storage Canopy structures?

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

A-201 & A -303

The translucent panel height scales to 4’-4” on elevation D1/A-201 but section A1/A-303 notes the opening height as 3’-4”. Please verify the correct dimension for the translucent panel opening (height and length).

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

A-501

Please clarify the soffit construction. A3 & B3/A-501 appears to show hat channel on the underside of the outlookers while B1, C3 & C4/A-505 show 1-1/2” metal stud framing. A3 & B3/A-501 note 5/8” gypsum board, air barrier and metal soffit panel while B1, C3 & C4/A-505 only notes ½” exterior gypsum.

Response forthcoming

841113 or 85113

Is window type A to be included as aluminum storefront per section 084113 or aluminum windows per section 085113?

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

A-601 & A-101

Wall Type 1 is labeled at 2 sides of Tool Room 114 but there appears to be furring on one side of the CMU while the details on A-601 shows furring on both sides. Please clarify what is required at these 2 walls at Tool Room 114.

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

A-601

Wall Types 4 and 4A on A-601 note “High Impact GWB” on both sides of the wall on the details but notes “Type X Gypsum Board, Both Sides” in the Remarks column. Which is correct?

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

I-102 & A-

Sheet I-102, Finish Schedule Note 3 states “all window sills to be SS-2”. Note 3 is labeled on the finish schedule at rooms 107 and 109.

These rooms do not have any windows. Also window sill detail B5/A-501 does not show a solid surface window sill. Please clarify if solid surface window sills are required and if so where.

Finish Schedule Note 3 should be at Rooms 101, 103, and 104 where there are windows. Delete Note 3 from Finish Schedule Rooms 107 and 109.

Drawing File

CD100

Demolition Keynote 6 states to “Remove Concrete Pad (Bid Option)”. Which Bid Option should this be included with?

This is an error. The words Bid Option should not be included with this note.

The removal of the concrete pad is part of the base bid.

Drawing File

A-601 & A-101

Please confirm that there are no Doors/Frames in a Type 3 wall. I only ask as it has both a fire rated and an STC rated wall. It would be important on both points if we have any door/frames in a Type 3 wall. I see a Type 3 wall on sheet A-601. I only see a Type 3 wall marker located at the separation wall between Room 111 and Room 106.

Response forthcoming

08 41 13 & 08 51 13

Please advise if the aluminum doors and frames are to be blast resistant and impact resistant.

Specification 084113 calls out Impact Protection, but spec 085113 calls out for Blast Resistant. Please identify which pertains to

Response forthcoming which product.

07 22 00 & 07 61

Drawing File

A-505

Section 07 22 00 para.2.1.3 states provide R-value indicated on the drawings. Drawing A- 505 indicates R-30 Section 07 61 14 para. 2.5 states provide R-value of 36 or more. Please advise which is the correct R-value.

Response forthcoming

01 30 01.00

Drawing File

I-101 Please provide a furniture specification for Bid Item 0005 for FF&E.

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

ES103

What is the location of Node B614? Does the 72 Strand originate there? Will there be an existing splice point there or will it originate in an existing rack?

The survey done for this design did not specifically include this area. An approximate area is shown on the drawings, but it will need to be field verifies. The 72 strands does originate there. Assume there is an existing rack.

Drawing File

ES102

Is an aerial splice required for new 300pr at pole #2163? Or will the cables be cut and backfed into HH-1 where they are to be spliced or should we leave a coil for others?

The cables will be cut and back fed into HH-1. Leave a coil for others to use.

Drawing File

ES102

Is an aerial splice required for 300pr/12SM at pole #2180? Or will the cables be cut and backfed into MH-1 where they are to be spliced or should we leave a coil for others?

The cables will be cut and back fed into HH-1. Leave a coil for others to use.

Drawing File

ES102

At existing Handhole (near pole # 2169), are we splicing a 300pr/24SM or 300pr/12SM?

24SM is not in the provided matrix

24 SM.

Drawing File

ES102

At existing Handhole, are we splicing into existing copper and fiber? If so, what are the copper/fiber counts of the existing?

You are splicing into existing copper and fiber. Currently there is 24 strands of fiber and 300 pair of copper.

08 41 13 para 3.4.1.a 3.4.5

The specs instruct to “Test air infiltration in accordance with ASTM E783” but provide no direction regarding number of units required to be tested. Also, the specs start by referencing ASTM E783 in para. 3.4.1 and then go on to reference to ASTM E283 in para. 3.4.1.a.

ASTM E783 is a field test an ASTM E283 is a laboratory test. Does the specifier want field testing, lab testing, both, and how many units?

Finally, the specs instruct to “Submit certified test reports showing that the system is designed to provide no uncontrolled water when tested in accordance with ASTM E1105.” Does the specifier intend the same “certified test reports” requirement for the air infiltration testing in 3.4.1, or is field testing and/or additional lab testing for air infiltration actually required?

Response forthcoming

Drawing File

ES102

Where does the 25pr originate coming out of MH1 and where does it end? Drawings are showing a new 25 pair being spliced to 300pr in MH-2 so where does the original 25 pair

25 pair copper will be run from MH-1 to the entrance of P457.

land?

Drawing File

ES102

Drawing ES102 shows (1) 300pr/12SM being installed from MH-3 to Both HH-1 and existing HH, however from MH-2 shows only (1) 300pr/12SM, are these cables being spliced in MH-3 or should we be installing (2)300pr/12SM to each HH from MH-2?

These cables are being spliced in MH-3.

Drawing File

ES103

Does the EUC (existing underground conduit) pathway have existing Maxcell/innerduct for the new 72 SM or should be carry?

Assume there is no existing maxcell/innerduct for EUC.

Drawing File

ES102

Drawings do not call out new Maxcell/innerduct for the new fiber pathway, is that covered by others?

Provide maxcell/innerduct for all fiber pathways.

RFP Pg

Please provide wage determination for roofer Propose according to RFP

01 30 01.00

1.3

Specification 01 30 01.00 22 DESIGN, PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION OF

FURNITURE, FIXTURES AND

EQUIPMENT states “the FF&E Planned Modification is $95,000 and does NOT include the Contractor's Handling and Administration Rate (HAR). This Government FF&E estimate must not be altered by Contractors during the bid process.” Please clarify the following:

a. Is the Contractor to insert $95,000 for CLIN 0005 at the time of bid?

b. Bids for FF&E should not be solicited at this time, but the $95,000 should be used an the contract will be modified after the fact once design is complete and bids have been collected?

c. Is the Contractor to include, in addition to the $95,000 in CLIN 0005, design fees and Contractor's Handling and Administration Rate (HAR) in CLIN 0001?

Response forthcoming

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 16-Jul-2020 02:00 PM to 21-Jul-2020 02:00 PM.

The required performance has changed from SOLICITATION NO. N40085-19-R-9020 CON- DBB P457 CRYOGENICS FACILITY MCAS BEAUFORTPROPOSALS ARE DUE ON 16 JULY 2020, AT 2:00 PM EDT.

REFER TO SECTION 00 21 16 FOR PROPOSAL DELIVERY INFORMATION.PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES

(PPI) SUBMISSION AND CUT-OFF IS AS DIRECTED IN THE SOLICITATION. MAGNITUDE OF

CONSTRUCTION FOR THIS PROJECT IS BETWEEN $5,000,000 AND $10,000,000 IN ACCORDANCE WITH DFARS 236.204.NAICS CODE IS 236220 -Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, AND THE SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD IS $39,500,000. THIS ACQUISITION IS BEING SOLICITED AS A

SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE.WAGE DETERMINATION GENERAL DECISION NUMBER: SC20200008

01/03/2020 to SOLICITATION NO. N40085-19-R-9020 CON- DBB P457 CRYOGENICS FACILITY MCAS BEAUFORTPROPOSALS ARE DUE ON 21 JULY 2020, AT 2:00 PM EDT. REFER TO SECTION 00 21 16 FOR PROPOSAL DELIVERY INFORMATION.PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPI) SUBMISSION AND CUT-OFF IS AS DIRECTED IN THE SOLICITATION. MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THIS PROJECT IS BETWEEN $5,000,000 AND $10,000,000 IN ACCORDANCE WITH DFARS 236.204.NAICS CODE IS 236220 - Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, AND THE SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD IS $39,500,000. THIS ACQUISITION IS BEING SOLICITED AS A SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE.WAGE

DETERMINATION GENERAL DECISION NUMBER: SC20200008 01/03/2020.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEORS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT (PHASE II)

4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

4.3 PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs)

4.4 BETA.SAM.GOV (BETASAM)

5. INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

6. ATTACHMENTS: LOCATED ON BETA SAM

6.1 ATTACHMENT A - PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY LOG

6.2 ATTACHMENT B - CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE AND PROJECT DATA SHEET

6.3 ATTACHMENT C - PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE

6.4 ATTACHMENT D – PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

1. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.1.1 This solicitation is being issued as A Small Business Set-Aside.

1.1.2 The NAICS code for this procurement is 236220 and the size standard is $36,500,000

1.1.3 This acquisition will be advertised utilizing FAR Part 36, Design Bid Build Source Selection Procedures and 15 – Contracting by Negotiations resulting in a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract for construction services.

1.1.4 Magnitude of Construction: Between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000.

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

The project is to construct a new, low-rise cryogenics facility. Construction of the cryogenics facility is generally described as reinforced concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall system with an exterior split-faced CMU veneer, concrete pile foundations, interior walls of CMU and a standing seam metal roof system. The cryogenics facility includes an administration / maintenance section and a liquid oxygen/ nitrogen production section. Project also constructs a covered storage area for gas cylinder storage. Built-In Equipment includes lockers, display cases and shelving. The AT/FP includes standard force protection measures such as mass notification systems, emergency shutoffs for ventilation systems, laminated windows, blast resistant construction including windows, doors and frames, emergency lighting and signage. Site Preparations include removal of contaminated earth, earthwork, site fill, site demolition at Bldg 898 and Bldg 702, and cryogenic tanks removal. Paving and Site Improvements include concrete pavement, asphalt parking, landscaping, storm water management, equipment shelter and a dumpster pad. Oxygen/nitrogen filling stations, and storm water piping. The filling stations provide cover for the pipe works and storage for cylinders.

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

1. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the lowest priced, technically acceptable offer.

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 LPTA process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

4. In order to permit efficient competition, the Navy will utilize the following methodology.

Proposals will initially be screened for price and placed in order (lowest price to highest price).

The Navy will then evaluate the technical factors of the lowest priced proposal. In the event the proposal is deemed Unacceptable, the process described will be conducted again as many times as necessary, until such time as the Government identifies a technical acceptable proposal. The Navy will make award to the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal from among the lowest priced proposals. However, the Navy, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to increase the number of proposals it will review under this methodology. Accordingly, under this methodology, the technical factors of some proposals may not be evaluated by the Navy. If discussions are deemed necessary by the Contracting Officer, all proposals will be evaluated (both technical and price) for the purpose of establishing a competitive range.

5. An overall non-price factors rating must be at least “ACCEPTABLE” in order to be eligible for award. An “UNACCEPTABLE” rating in any factor results in the overall non-price factors proposal being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” unless corrected through discussions, if held. An overall non-price factors rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” makes a proposal ineligible for award.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Factor 2 – Safety Factor 3 – Past Performance

The distinction between Corporate Experience and Past Performance is Corporate 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. 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 electronically, marked “Original” in accordance with the directions and submission requirements detailed in the solicitation or subsequent amendments. Additionally, the offeror shall submit one (1) hard copy, marked “Copy” and one

(1) CD‐ROM, in accordance with the directions and submission requirements detailed in the solicitation or subsequent amendments. All hard copies shall be in separate 3-ring binders. All submissions shall including 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 2019 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 to exceed $3 million;

� Responsibility Determination information (see below)

The offeror is required to submit a complete Price Proposal Form that includes completion of all contract line item numbers (CLINs). Failure to complete all CLINs may result in the proposal being rejected or otherwise not considered.

In the event of a discrepancy between the original and copies, the original electronic copy marked “original” of the proposal will govern. Furthermore, any price information within the technical proposal (non-price proposal) will not be considered. Likewise, any technical/nonprice information within the price proposal will not be considered.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL

PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION INFORMATION – In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically 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.

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, all option items and the planned modification (see Section B of the solicitation). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section 00700 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:

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

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

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

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

(b) Technical Factors:

Non-price binder: The offeror shall submit one (1) original electronically, marked “Original” in accordance with the directions and submission requirements detailed in the solicitation or subsequent amendments. Additionally, the offeror shall submit one (1) hard copy, marked “Copy” and one (1) CD‐ROM, in accordance with the directions and submission requirements detailed in the solicitation or subsequent amendments. All hard copies shall be in separate 3-ring binders. All submissions shall including 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 proposals on one CD-ROM.

In the event of a discrepancy between the original and copies, the original electronic copy marked “original” of the proposal will govern. Furthermore, any price information within the technical proposal (non-price proposal) will not be considered. Likewise, any technical/nonprice information within the price proposal will not be considered.

(b) Non-cost/price Factors:

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The offeror shall submit the following information:

Submit a minimum of two (2) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects that best demonstrates experience as a prime contractor 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 single building with a cumulative square footage of 5,000 SF or greater.

Scope/Complexity: New construction projects of an industrial facility or warehouse structure.

Renovations and additions will not be considered.

Projects submitted for the offeror shall be completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Projects must clearly state the construction completion date or may be considered Not Relevant. Also, projects completed outside of this window will be considered “Not Relevant.”

Ensure that the project description clearly describes whether the project is new construction, addresses how the project meets the Size and Scope/Complexity requirements as delineated above, and provides the final construction cost.

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 C) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form nor will the Government consider information submitted via any other medium. 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). The Government will not consider information beyond this page limit.

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). Projects that are not sufficiently described so as to clearly demonstrate compliance with the above Size and Scope/Complexity requirements may be deemed Not Relevant.

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 partners. Experience submitted for one of the Offeror’s Joint Venture partners in which the Joint Venture partner was a partner in a different Joint Venture entity may be submitted to demonstrate relevant project experience. 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 the Offeror is proposing as a single corporate entity (i.e. not as a Joint Venture), the Offeror may submit relevant project experience it performed as a partner in a previous Joint Venture.

Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects.

Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered. Likewise, the Government will not consider the offeror’s experience as a subcontractor.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction as defined above 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 five (5) projects total. Any projects submitted in excess of the first five (5) will not be considered. An offeror that does not submit a minimum of two (2) relevant projects as defined above will receive a rating of “Unacceptable” and will not be eligible for award unless corrected through discussions, if held.

Factor 2 – 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.)

Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Include three previous complete calendar years’ (2017, 2018, 2019) worth of data. This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If the offeror has no EMR or premium, for any year, the offeror must affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends must be addressed as part of the factor submission.

OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ (2017, 2018, 2019) worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART, for any year, the offeror must 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.

Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ (2017, 2018, 2019) worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit TRC rates, for any year, the offeror must 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.

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.

� 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.

� 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.

� 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.

� 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 evaluation will collectively consider the following:

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

Experience Modification Rate (EMR): For the three previous complete calendar years (2017, 2018, 2019), 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 companyDesign-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.

OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rates: For the three previous complete calendar years (2017, 2018, 2019), 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, the offeror must 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.

Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates: For the three previous complete calendar years (2017, 2018, 2019), 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, the offeror must 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.

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 Government will not consider information beyond this page limit. 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.

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.

Factor 3, Past Performance:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

FOR EACH PROJECT SUBMITTED WITH ITS PROPOSAL FOR FACTOR 1 –

CORPORATE EXPERIENCE, IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE,

IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED

CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT

SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror must complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment D), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Kristy Wright, via email at kristy.l.wright1@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/Entity Identifier numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror. It is the responsibility of the offeror to provide accurate points of contact for each identified contract and current telephone numbers and/or email addresses.

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.

Offerors are strongly encouraged to provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. Offerors are also strongly encouraged to address any adverse past performance issues. Such explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

Performance award or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on how well the offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and past performance on other relevant projects currently documented in known sources.

The degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance including, but not limited to:

- A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

- A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality;

- A pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.); and

- Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand

- A respect for stewardship of Government funds

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.

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT: There will be NO Site Visit or Pre- Proposal Conference for this solicitation.

4.2. In response to this request for proposal, the complete proposal shall include the Price Proposal and the Non-Price Factors Proposal, submitted in accordance with the Evaluation Factors for Award and other requirements as set forth in this solicitation:

i. The Price Proposal and the Non-Price Proposal shall be submitted in separate 3-ring binders. All pages shall be numbered and binders shall be appropriately tabbed, conforming to the proposal submittal requirements’ structure for each evaluation factor.

Price and Non-Price Proposals must be submitted SEPARATELY in sealed envelopes/boxes. Any pricing information included in the Non-Cost/Price Proposal will not be considered. Similarly, any Non- Price information included in the Price Proposal will not be considered.

“PRICE PROPOSAL OR NON-COST/PRICE PROPOSAL FOR RFP N40085-19-R-9020,

ATTN: KRISTY WRIGHT; DO NOT OPEN IN MAIL ROOM”.

Price and Non-Price Proposal submissions will be accepted via email to kristy.l.wright1@navy.mil or via DoD SAFE (Secure Access File Exchange) only.

Electronic submissions could be separated so as not to overload e-mail/DOD SAFE during transmission.

Information from DoD SAFE https://safe.apps.mil/ website: “DoD SAFE (Secure Access File Exchange) is a service to make it easy for you to exchange unclassified files up to 8.0 GB that can't be sent through email. The recipient will receive an automated email and instructions for uploading the file(s).”

A DOD Safe submission must be requested by the offeror no later than 4 calendar days before the proposal due date and time. To request a DOD SAFE generated link to submit your proposal, send an email to Contract Specialist Kristy Wright at kristy.l.wright1@navy.mil stating the name and email of the recipient.

In addition to an electronic version of the bid guarantee, a paper copy must be provided.

Mailing address:

NAVFAC MIDLANT, ACQ21

9324 Virginia Avenue Bldg. Z140, Room 225 Norfolk, VA 23511 Attn: Kristy Wright, Contract Specialist

Note: Offerors will NOT be penalized for deadline submission of paper copies as long as an electronic version is received by the proposal due date and time and the mailed item(s) postmark is at least 1 day prior to the proposal due date.

ii. The offeror’s proposal must include all data and information required and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offeror shall be compliant with the requirements as stated herein, for non-conformance may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

Proposals MUST be sent via express mail carriers. Hand-delivery is NOT an option. Please mail to the following address:

NAVFAC MIDLANT

9324 Virginia Avenue, Bldg., Z140, Room 225 Norfolk, VA 23511 Attn: Kristy Wright, Contract Specialist - ACQ21

4.3. PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs): All inquiries must be submitted in writing and received by the Contract Specialist by 10 calendars days prior to proposal due date in order to permit adequate time to reply to the inquiry. There is no guarantee that PPI’s submitted after the cut-off date will be answered before the solicitation closes. Submit all questions to kristy.l.wright1@navy.mil. Use of the PPI Log template is REQUIRED. The PPI Log Template (Attachment A) can be found on the BETASAM website under the Additional Documents section.

4.4. Amendments will be posted directly to beta.sam.gov. The drawings and specifications will be posted on beta.sam.gov under the Additional Documents section of this RFP. Additionally, other postings will be made to beta.sam.gov, such as the pre-proposal inquires (PPI) log, revised drawings, etc., under the Additional Documents section of the RFP. It is recommended contractors check the beta.sam.gov Additional Documents section of the RFP periodically to see if additional postings have been made. It is the contractor’s responsibility to check beta.sam.gov for all postings.

(End of Summary of Changes)