N4008520R33330005 Amendment 3 35kV.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

The purpose of this amendment is to extend the Proposal Due Date to July 27th, 2020 at 4:00pm (CST), answ er additonal questions #62 thru #68 to the Pre-Proposal Inquires (PPI's) and add tw o attachments related to question #62 of PPI. Changes have been made to the answ ers at questions #32 and #57 of PPI.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 24

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 10-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 N4008520R3333

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

21-May-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

10-Jul-2020

CODE

NAVFAC MID ATLANTIC

PWD GREAT LAKES - FEAD

310 SEABEE WAY

GREAT LAKES IL 60088-2814

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N4008520R3333

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 21-Jul-2020 04:00 PM to 27-Jul-2020 04:00 PM.

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The below Table of Contents has been added

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 34KV One Line Attachment 2 12KV One Line

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEROR

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

REPLACE 35KV NORTH BRANCH SERVICE

NAVAL STATION GREAT LAKES, IL

CLIN 0001: Contractor shall supply all labor, materials, equipment, transportation and supervision necessary to design, construct and replace the existing 35kv North Branch underground electrical distribution system feeding buildings 322, 325, 328, 329, 510 and 520 with a new 12.47kv underground electrical distribution system. Project will include feeder cable installation and connections to new pad mounted transformers. Demolishing of the existing 35kv building feeds to the maximum extent possible and disposing of electrical components.

The buildings will remain open and occupied during this project. Construction activities cannot interfere with the continued operations and work activities of the facility.

During the construction activities, ingress and egress from the occupied areas of the building shall be maintained.

The NAICS code for this requirement is 237130 with a Small Business Size Standard of $39.5M.

Reference the Statement of Work for complete project requirements.

1. POINT OF CONTACT

George Odorizzi, Contract Specialist Phone: (847) 688-5395 extension 247 Fax: (847) 688-2517 E-mail: george.e.odorizzi@navy.mil

2. STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW)/ PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE (POP)

All work shall be accomplished in accordance with the statement of work (Attachment F), enclosure, and this Request for Proposal. All work shall be completed no later than 365 455 calendar days from date of award.

3. SITE VISIT

Due to the global pandemic caused by COVID-19, site visits attendees will be required to wear self-provided personal protective equipment (PPE) and practice social distancing while on Naval Station Great Lakes property. Site visit will take place June 11, 2020 and be by appointment (to practice social distancing), with an overflow site visit the following day. Site visit is not required to submit proposal. Requirement for appointment is the total number of attendees with a recommended time slot between 0800 and 1300. Please email request for site visit to george.e.odorizzi@navy.mil and belinda.trout@navy.mil

Offerors should be properly attired for conducting a site visit with appropriate safety gear for inspecting proposed areas. Due to security restrictions, photographs of work areas affected by this RFP will need prior approval and no work stations or Government personnel are to be photographed at any time.

4. PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs)

Inquiries and questions on this Request for Proposal shall be submitted electronically in writing to the Contract Specialist using the Pre-Proposal Inquiry (PPI) form provided with this solicitation (Attachment C). Please ensure that the PPI form is sent as an Excel spreadsheet, not as a .pdf. All PPIs must be received no later than June 19, 2020 by 12:00 p.m. CT. It is the offeror’s responsibility to verify that PPIs were received by the

Government. Send electronically to george.e.odorizzi@navy.mil and belinda.trout@navy.mil

5. PROPOSAL DUE DATE & SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Proposal is due no later than July 10, 2020 at 1:00 p.m.

July 21, 2020 at 4:00p.m.CT July 27, 2020 at 4:00 p.m..

Electronic submission of proposals WILL be accepted. If electronic submission is used, the proposer shall distribute to the Contract Specialist ONLY at george.e.odorizzi@navy.mil. For mailed submittals, two (2) hardcopy proposals shall be mailed to:

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Mid-Atlantic ATTN: George Odorizzi, Contract Specialist 310 Seabee Way, Building 1-H Great Lakes, IL 60088

Hand deliveries will be accepted. It is the proposer’s responsibility to ensure timely submittal regardless of the means used to send the proposal. Naval Station Great Lakes is a secured gated facility.

If the offeror sends hard copy proposals, the package containing the proposals must be sealed. The outermost wrapper of all packages shall clearly identify the solicitation number, company name, and return address.

Price proposal and technical proposal may be submitted in same package but must be in separate sealed envelopes, and technical proposal shall not contain any price information.

The offeror is responsible for ensuring timely receipt of hard copy proposals at the time and place specified above.

Late proposals will be rejected.

NO FACIMILIED PROPOSAL WILL BE ACCEPTED.

6. ESTIMATED COST RANGE

The estimated cost range for this project is between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000.

7. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES

In accordance with FAR 52.211-12, Liquidated Damages (LD’s) in the amount of $1,120.07 will be assessed for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed or accepted.

8. WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE DAVIS-BACON ACT

In accordance with FAR 52.222-6, Construction Wage Rate Requirements issued by the Department of Labor will apply to the resultant award.

9. BONDING

In accordance with FAR 28.101-1, a bid guarantee shall be required whenever a performance and payment bond is required. The bid guarantee shall be 20% of the bid price or $3M, whichever is lower.

In accordance with FAR 52.228-15, Performance and Payment bonds equal to 100% of the awarded dollar value are required 15 days after date of award.

10. EVALUATION

In accordance with FAR 15.101, proposal evaluation will be based on providing the best value to the government.

EVALUATION FACTORS

a. PRICE

Offer Submittal Requirements:

(a) Price:

Offerors shall provide a Bid Guarantee, a Proposal Cover Sheet (Attachment D), Line Item Pricing Worksheet (Attachment E), signed Standard Form 1442 (SF1442) and signed amendments.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price of all line items. Proposals that provide prices greater than the budgetary amount may be rejected.

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 Government

Estimate (GE).

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

EVALUATION

1. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range (if applicable); and to award the task order to the offeror submitting the proposal that represents the best value to the government.

2. 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 Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the SSEB determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition range can be conducted, the SSEB 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.

Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price standpoint.

3. The best Value, Trade off process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition.

The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is that technical factors are equal to each other and when combined are equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (Factor 3 – Past Performance). The combined non-cost/price factors are approximately equal to price.

Factor 1 – Technical Approach Factor 2 – Experience Factor 3 – Past Performance

Factor 4 – Safety Factor 5 – Technical Solution

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.

Factor 2 – Experience:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Construction Experience:

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

Size: A construction value between $500,000 to $4,000,000 with at least one (1) project over $2,000,000

Scope and Complexity: The construction of medium voltage underground electrical distribution systems in fully developed areas feeding multiple facilities with major construction elements including but not limited to concrete encased duct bank, medium voltage cables and terminations and pad mounted switchgear. At least one (1) project must also include the installation or replacement of pad-mounted service transformers.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

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

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed 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 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.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement to demonstrate construction experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement that the subcontractor will have in performance of this contract. More weight may be given to the Offeror’s projects than to those submitted for subcontractors.”

(2) Design Experience

Submit a minimum of two (2) and 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 construction value between $500,000 to $4,000,000 with at least one (1) project over $2,000,000.

Scope and Complexity: The design of medium voltage underground electrical distribution systems in fully developed areas feeding multiple facilities, performing coordination analysis, short circuit analysis of load flow analysis of medium voltage electrical distribution systems, programming medium voltage breakers and switches and phasing to limit the duration of service interruptions for occupied facilities. At least one

(1) project must include experience performing building load analysis for the purpose of provided appropriately sized service transformers. At least one (1) project must also demonstrate experience developing design documents in accordance with FC 1-300- 09N, Navy and Marine Corps Design Procedures

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

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

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed 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."

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

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

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

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

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

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

Factor 3 – Past Performance:

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 AE 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, George Odorizzi, george.e.odorizzi@navy.mil.

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

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

Performance award or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

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.

Factor 4 – Safety

SAFETY

(a) Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and sub-contractor performed work and the Offeror’s method for qualifying, evaluating, selecting all tiers of sub-contractors. The narrative shall include:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR); include three previous calendar years’ 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 there is no EMR 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 element.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) and Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates; submit three previous calendar years’ worth of data. If the OSHA DART and TRC rates cannot be submitted, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART and TRC rate data negatively should be addressed as part of this element.

(3) Technical Approach for Safety should 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. Fully describe the safety management system that will be used to oversee safety compliance and performance of self-performed and sub-contractor performed work. Also describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and all subcontractor levels.

Additionally, describe the 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. The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to two pages.

Note: The narrative shall be limited to two pages. For a partnership or joint venture, the submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Safety narratives for joint ventures may be up to four pages in length.

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 its self-performed work and the work of its sub-contractors. The

Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety management system, safety performance record, and the Offeror’s methodology of qualifying, evaluating, selecting and overseeing its subcontractors. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety will include, but are not limited to: OSHA, NAVFAC’s Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS) database, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), 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 Government will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project and the specific management practices that will be in place for providing deliberate safety program management and mishap prevention support.

Offeror’s Experience Modification Rates (EMR) will be evaluated against the following Navy standards:

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

Offeror’s DART and TRC rates will be evaluated against the following Navy standards:

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

Risk TRC Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 2.49 Low Risk From 2.5 to 3.49 Moderate Risk From 3.5 to 4.49 High Risk From 4.5 to 5.99 Extremely High Risk Greater Than 6.0

Factor 5 – Technical Solution

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

- Transformer Replacement: Describe solution for replacing the service transformers listed in the RFP. Also include methodology for performing building load analysis to determine appropriate size of new transformers for the current mission of each facility.

- New 12.47 KV Feeders: Describe solution for providing three-phase, 12.47 KV radial taps to the new transformers in concrete encased duct bank from existing substations and feeders Describe how optimum feeder routing path will be determined.

- Demolition: Describe solution for the demolishing the existing 34.5 KV building feeds to the maximum extent possible.

- Analysis and Programming: Describe solution for completing coordination analysis, shor t circuit analysis, and load flow analysis of the 34.5 KV and 12.47 KV electrical distribuition system on NSGL Mainside and for providing setting for and programming the 35 KV and 15 KV breakers and 15 KV switches.

- Utility Outages: Describe how construction will be phased to minimize interruptions to building electrical service.

Narrative shall not exceed three (3) double-sided pages (or six (6) single-sided pages).

Up to three (3) conceptual drawings may be provided to supplement the narrative (i.e., floor plan, exterior elevation, and site plan).

The Government will evaluate the narrative and conceptual drawings (if included) considering the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of the architectural and engineering requirements of the project. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's technical solution to determine adherence to the technical requirements of the RFP.

ATTACHMENTS

A. Experience Form B. Past Performance Questionnaire C. Pre-Proposal Inquiry Form D. Proposal Cover Sheets E. Line Item Pricing Sheet F. Statement of Work G. Drawings H. Wage Determination I. Electrical Equipment Disposal Scope J. Transformers Removal 2019-11-07.xlsx K. Switch Removal 2019-11-07.xlsx

L. ACQR 5753952 - INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEROR

PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY (PPI'S)

SOLICITATION # N4008520R2104

Replace 35kV North Branch Service, Naval Station Great Lakes, IL

Pre-Proposal Inquires (PPIs) FORM

Questio n No.

RFP Reference (Sect/Para/Page

QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1 RFP Section Factor 3 - Past Performance, Para. (a), We strive to reduce the onus on our Government clients who need to complete the same PPQs repeatedly for proposals. Also, contracting representatives are reluctant to (or even discouraged from) completing PPQ forms if formal performance CPARS evaluations have been completed. Will the Government please consider allowing offerors to submit completed CPARS evaluations or previously completed/signed PPQs in lieu of new PPQ forms?

Please refer to page 71 of the RFP. CPARS are preferred, previously completed PPQ's within the last 12 month will be accepted in lue of new PPQ forms.

2 RFP Section Factor 3 - Past Performance, Para. (a), Per FAR 52.229-3 Federal, State, and Local Taxes, please confirm offerors are to include all applicable Federal, State, and local taxes in their bid price.

Tax exempt letter can be provided post award, Contractor to verify applicability with vendors.

3 RFP Section Factor 5 - Technical Solution, Para.

(a), Page 15

Can the Government please confirm that the three (3) conceptual drawings are excluded from the 6-page (3 page double-sided, 6 page single-sided) limit for Factor 5 - Technical Solution?

Conceptual drawings are excluded from the page limitation of the narrative

4 RFP Section

10. Evaluation, para. (a), Please confirm that the form referred to in the RFP as "Proposal Cover Sheet (Attachment D)" is the same form as RFP filename "Proposal Cover Sheet ACQR 5753952".

Yes, It is the same.

5 RFP Section

10. Evaluation, para. (a), Please confirm that the form referred to in the RFP as "Line Item Pricing Worksheet (Attachment E)" is the same form as RFP filename "Line Item Pricing Sheet".

Yes, It is the same.

6 RFP

Amendment

Amendment 0001 was issued Friday, June 5th, 2020.

The contents of Amendment 0001 were similar to the RFP filename "N4008520R3333 Solicitation 35kv", with exception to the addition of the 8(a) set-aside language on the 1st page of SF 1442. Will the Government please specify any other changes in Amendment 0001, and if the Government intends on issuing an SF30 for offerors to appropriately awknowledge this amendment?

Offerors do not need to provided acknowledgement with their proposal, as it only added a sentence to clarify 8(a) set-aside.

7 RFP

Amendment

If the Government does not intend on issuing an SF30 for Amendment 0001, which SF 1442 should offerors use in the proposal, the SF 1442 from the original solicitation issued May 27th, 2020, or the SF 1442 from the Amendment 0001 solicitation issued June 5th, 2020?

Either SF 1442 will be accepted. Both do not need to be submitted.

8 RFP Proposal Cover Sheet and SF 1442, Box 13(D)

RFP filename "Proposal Cover Sheet ACQR 5753952" states that offerors proposal must be valid for 120 days from submission. In contrast, Box 13(D) of the SF 1442 notes a minimum acceptance period of 90 calendar days after the date offers are due. Will the Government please clarify if the minimum acceptance period is 90 or 120 calendar days from the date offers are due?

Acceptance period of 90 days after date offers are due is applicable, as stated on the SF 1442

9 RFP Section Factor 2 - Experience, para. (1) & (2), Page 7 & 8

Please confirm that the mandatory form required for Factor 2 - Experience, referred to in the RFP instructions as "Attachment A – Experience Data Sheet", is the same form as RFP filename "Experience Form".

Yes, It is the same.

10 RFP Section Factor 3 - Past Performance, para. 2, Page

Please confirm that the form referred to in the RFP as "Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment D)" is the same form as RFP filename "Past Performance Questionnaire".

Yes, It is the same.

11 RFP Section Factor 2 - Experience, The RFP states, "Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process." Will the government allow offerors to include Appendices in order to provide additional documentation such as USGBC certification/validation documents?

Offerors can include Appendices to provide additional documentation such at USGBC certification/validation

12 RFP Section Factor 4 - Safety, para

(a) Note, page

The RFP states, "For a partnership or joint venture, the submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required." Will the Government please confirm the understanding that designers, subcontractors and/or company affiliates are not considered a "partnership" under this factor, and thus are not required to provide EMR/DART/TRC rates?

Please refer to the note on page 73 of the RFP. All types of subcontractors are required to provide

EMR/DART/TRC rates.

13 RFP Section

9. Bonding, Can the Government please provide the address for offerors to use to deliver the big gaurantee?

Bid Guarantee should be submitted with the Proposal

14 RFP Section Factor 2 - Experience, para. (1) and (2), Page 7 and 8

In previous NAVFAC solicitations, NAVFAC has allowed projects that exceeds the size value to be submitted and considered as relevant, resulting in the best overall value to the Government and taxpayer. Please confirm that projects over $4M will be accepted?

Yes, Projects over $4M will be accepted.

15 SOW Section

1.0 Project

Description, para Utility Outages, page

The SOW states, "Extended outages may require temporary power.". What specific time parameters constitute an extended outage? If an extended outage requires temporary power, which building systems will require power?

I would consider an extended outage as an outage length that would impact other building systems and cause damage to the facility (i.e. no heat in winter, causing pipes to freeze) or an outage length that is unable to be scheduled around the normal building mission/occupancy.

16 SOW Section 33 71 02, para. 3.5.4 Jacking and Drilling Under Roads and Structures, Is directional boring acceptable? Will the use of HDPE duct for the raceway through the bored pathway be acceptable without the use of a steel casing?

No, conduits shall be installed in trench and concrete encased.

17 SOW Section 33 71 02, para. 3.5.4 Jacking and Drilling Under Roads and Structures, The SOW states, "Conduits to be installed under existing paved areas which are not to be disturbed, and under roads and railroad tracks, must be zinc coated, rigid steel, jacked into place." Will the Government please provide clarity as to which areas are considered "not to be disturbed" as it pertains to the scope of this project?

Areas not to be disturbed as it pertains to this project are roads and railways not owned by Navy or environmentally controlled areas. This should not be applicable to this project.

18 SOW Section 33 71 02, para. 3.14.1.1 b(2), Medium voltage cables, electrical tests, Contractor suggests that existing medium voltage cabling be hi-pot tested prior to splicing said cabling to new cabling. This will avoid splicing to a cable that may be on the verge of failure. Please confirm that if this situation arises a maintenance hi-pot test should be applied to the existing system cabling prior to splicing.

Splices are not allowed on the 12.47kV system. All 12.47kV cable junctions shall be made above grade in pad mounted sectionalizer pedestals. A maintenance hi‐pot test is not required prior to splicing to existing cable but is required after splicing to existing cable.

19 SOW Section 26 12 19.10, para. 3.5, Foundation for Equipment and Assemblies, Please confirm it is permissable to utilize existing concrete transformer pads as long as dimensions are appropriate for new transformer.

As long as existing concrete pads meet the size and structural requirements for new transformers, and are not showing signs of failure, they can be reused.

20 Part 4 Minimum materials, engineering, and construction requirements, G20 Site Improvements, In the interest of causing less disruption to Navy functions and to preserve existing hardscape, is it acceptable to utilize portions of existing medium voltage duct bank for new system cabling?

Existing medium voltage duct bank can be utilized for new system cabling. Emphasize that 12.47kV circuits are not allowed in manholes.

21 SOW Part 4 Minimum materials, engineering, and construction requirements, para. G40

1.3.6 Factory

testing, Page

"The government reserves the right to witness all factory testing." Please confirm travel costs for Government representatives for factory testing will be borne by the Government.

Correct, if Government chooses to witness factory testing, Government will pay for travel cost of Government employees.

22 SOW Part 3 Statement of Work, para.

Analysis and programming, Please confirm this analysis is for the entire mainside

34.5 kV and 12.47 kV systems as opposed to only the systems to be physically altered through this scope of work.

Correct, per the RFP analysis shall include all 34.5kV and 12.47kV circuits on mainside, whether altered under this contract or not.

23 SOW Section 33 71 02, para. 3.5.9.1, Connections to Existing Concrete Pads, Page

If applicable, please provide construction as-built drawings from the installation of applicable existing switches and transformers.

The existence of construction as‐built drawings for existing switches and transformers is unknown, assume they do not exist.

24 SOW Section 33 71 02, para.

3.14.1.2(b), Low voltage cable, 600 volts, Electrical tests, page

Will the Government please confirm if insulation resistance testing is required on existing secondary cables prior to connecting existing secondary cables to new transformers?

Yes insulation resistance testing is required for existing secondary cables prior to connection to new transformers.

25 SOW, Part 4, page 14, para G401006

Paragraph states splices are required. However, Part 3, SOW/Project Program, page 2, Demolition states:

Provide 34.5kv splices in manholes 1027, 1028, and 1034 to bypass unneeded cable for removal of building taps. Which is correct?

Splices are not allowed on the 12.47kV system. All 12.47kV cable junctions shall be made above grade in pad mounted sectionalizer pedestals. Part 3, Demolition requires 34.5kV splices to the existing cable to bypass building taps.

26 Solicitation,Off er, and Award Block 11.

Request 90 days be added to the performance period. With the two 21 day design approval periods (50% and 100% reviews) pluse required design time 365 days is not enough time to design, procure long lead items, then construct.

90 Days will be added.

27 SOW, Part 3, Page 2, Demolition

Paragraph states that existing 34.5kv cables in manholes 1027, 1028, and 1034 are to be spliced together after the switches are removed. Is the intent for the resulting M30-M40 tie to be an alternate subtransmission loop path? If so, the existing relays at M30 and M40 for that cable loop need to be replaced with line differential relays. This also involves SCADA work. Is the replacement of the existing overcurrent relays with line differential relays required?

Correct the intent is for the resulting M30‐M40 tie to be an emergency 34.5kV subtranmission loop. No the replacement of the overcurrent relays and associated

SCADA work is not part of this project.

28 SOW, Part 4, G20 Site

Improvements.

Our experience at Great Lakes is that all backfill in paved areas needs to be flowable fill. Is that still a requirement?

Regardless of fill type used it must be able to meet compaction requirements. Type of Fill also varies depending on means and methods employed.

29 SOW Part 3 SOW, Chapter 1.0, para Analysis and Programming, SOW page 24

Please clarify the requirement listed in RFP Part 3, 1.0, paragraph “Analysis and Programming” to provide a complete coordination analysis, short circuit analysis and load flow analysis of the 34.5 KV and 12.47 KV electrical distribution systems on Naval Station Great Lakes mainside." Is this analysis limited to the buildings included under the scope of the RFP? Or does this RFP include performing the short circuit analysis and load flow analysis for the complete existing 34.5 KV and

12.47 KV electrical distribution systems for the entire

mainside of Naval Station Great Lakes?

Per the RFP analysis shall include all 34.5kV and 12.47kV circuits on mainside, whether altered under this contract or not.

30 SOW Part 3 Statement of Work, para1.0 Building load analysis , page 23/185

Please confirm in case of building load analysis found unbalance of phase distribution, contractor need to revise and change/alter circuits feeding via panel through this scope of work. Does the contractor need to provide record drawings for these changes?

The intent of this contract is not to correct unbalanced building loads, but to appropriately size the new transformers to the actual building load.

31 General, scope Can the Government provide as builts for the buildings that the power feed serves along with any available as built drawings, utility maps, or existing conditions data for the surrounding area in which the feeder will be installed?

The availability of building as builts is unknown. Refer to RFP Part 6, Attachment G for utility maps and existing conditions.

32 General, RFP Based on the current COVID pandemic conditions and subsequent limitations on businesses for collaboration and coworking, will the Government extend the proposal due date by 3 weeks? This will allow offerors additional time to collaborate with teaming partners considering that most teams are working remotely which decreases efficiency on a collaborative proposal effort such as this.

Proposal Due Date has been extended until July 27th, 2020, no later than 4pm (CST)

33 Part 3 Statement of work, 1.0 Project Description, page 1 - Transformer Replacement

Please provide historical metering data for transformers serving buildings 322, 325, 328, 329, 510, 520 and

12.47 kV feeder circuits M41, M42, M31 and M32 if available.

See Excel files provided for facility metering data. No data is available for feeder circuits. 8 Files at Beta.Sam are labeled as B322, B325, B328, B329‐1, B329‐2, B510, B520‐1 and B520‐2

34 Part 3 Statement of work, 1.0 Project Description, page 1 - 12.47 kV Feeders

Please confirm that Substaton M40 and Substation M30 spare 12.47 kV feeder cubicles and overcurrent relays are fully functional and ready for service except for possible relay setting changes.

Correct M40 and M30 spare 12.47kV cubicles, breakers and relays are fully functional.

35 Part 3 Statement of work, 1.0 Project Description, page 1 - 12.47 kV Feeders

Please confirm that Substation M40 and Substation M30 spare 12.47 kV feeder cubicles have spare breakers which are fully functional and can be ustilized for new 12.47 kV feeders as needed for this project scope.

Correct M40 and M30 spare 12.47kV cubicles, breakers and relays are fully functional.

36 Are any existing environmental impact survey’s available for the areas where work is to be performed?

No

37 Please confirm that transformers have been drained of all fluids.

The transformer have not been drained.

38 Are there any existing tests or survey’s of the existing equipment for PCB oil, Asbestos, Lead or any other environmental hazards?

No

39 What are the lead time requirements for electrical shutdowns requests?

UEM requires 14 days notice for outage requests.

40 Are there specific Dates, Days of the week or times of day that must be avoided for electrical shutdowns for any location?

Unknown, outages will be coordinated with each group of facility occupants when requested.

41 Is there a maximum duration of electrical shut downs in any of the affected locations.

Shut downs must be scheduled with affected facilities as to not impact mission. If outages can not be scheduled without impacting mission, temporary utilities will need to be provided.

42 Are there any emergency generators that will remain in place and operational with the potential to backfeed while our work is being performed?

No

43 Are there any specific noise attenuation requirements for temporary generators in any of these locations or near any specific buildings.

Sound deflectors or other muffeling techniques may need to be employed depending on application and proximtity to occupied buildings.

44 Are there height restrictions for any areas being serviced. 17'6" (Access Gate Canopies).

45 Are there any weight restrictions for access roads All access to hospital Side(South of Sampson ST Bridge) must be coordinated with KO through Gate 3 for all

Heavy Trucks. Main Side.

46 Is Easypower modeling software acceptable? Great Lakes is attempting to standardize our electrical studies in SKM so that we will have a library of files to provide to future contractors as a starting point.

47 Is there an existing model that will be provided to contractors.

No

48 Can performance period be extended due to extensive design period?

90 Days will be added.

49 Can directional boring be used in lieu of duct banks. No, conduits shall be installed in trench and concrete encased.

50 Please confirm per section per G1010 & G1020 that there is not location on site for any demolished material & debris generated by this project.

Correct all debris shall be disposed of properly off‐site.

51 Please confirm per section per G1010 & G1020 that there is not a location on site for any excavated soil on site. If this needs to be removed, is there any requirements when this material leaves the project site.

There are no designated area on site to receive excess soil. Any soil that leaves Naval Station Great Lakes must be tested prior to removal from the site to determine it is not contaminated. Additionally soils must be managed in accordance with the approved NAVSTA Great Lake Soil Management Plan (see attached)

52 Are there any utility locating service providers on base. See RFP Part 2, 01 14 00.05 20 section 1.1

53 Are there any restricted areas that require an escort for badged contractors to perform work.

As seen during the walkthrough, electrical equipment is located in locked enclosures.

54 Are there any environmental permits that are required for the…