Amendment 0011.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

INDEFINITE DELIVERY/INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC) FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION

PRIMARILY IN THE HAMPTON ROADS AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY (AOR), VIRGINIA

This procurement is being solicited as a small business set-aside.

All correspondence regarding this solicitation shall be directed via email to Jonathan Durham at jonathan.m.durham.civ@us.navy.mil

See Continuation Page

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 16

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 11-Jul-2023

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 N4008523R2562

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-May-2023

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 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

11-Jul-2023

CODE

NAVFACSYSCOM MID-ATLANTIC

CONTRACTING 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:

N4008523R2562

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

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

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0011

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate:

1. Revised language for Factor 1 Corporate Experience

2. Incorporate revised language for 1.3 General Overview of Contract

3. Revise response to Pre-Proposal Inquiry #11, #147, #264, #266 and #271

4. Incorporate responses to Pre-Proposal Inquiries

1. Revised language for Factor 1 Corporate Experience

From:

Factor 1, Corporate Experience

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Construction Experience

Offerors shall submit a minimum of three (3) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects that best demonstrates its experience on relevant projects (similar in size, scope, and complexity to the projects proposed for this MACC). Offeror must have performed as prime contractor on all submitted projects. Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered.

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

Size: A final construction cost of at least $5,000,000. At least (1) one relevant project shall have a final construction cost of at least $10,000,000.

Scope/Complexity: Individual projects shall demonstrate experience with at least one of the following:

• New/Addition: New construction of commercial or institutional building or construction of new addition to a commercial or institutional building. New construction or addition work must be conditioned for occupancy and with finished interior.

• Renovation: Interior renovation of a commercial or institutional building that includes repairs/alterations to multiple building systems and infrastructures (e.g. mechanical, electrical, architectural, fire protection).

In addition to meeting the above Size and Scope/Complexity, submitted relevant projects shall, cumulatively, demonstrate the following characteristics:

(1) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with new construction or building addition.

(2) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with interior building renovation that includes repairs/alterations to multiple building systems.

(3) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with design-build.

Notes:

• The Offeror must clearly identify the building systems repaired or altered in each renovation project within their narrative. The project may be determined Not Relevant, if the Government is unable to determine which building systems were repaired. Additionally, work that is strictly ancillary to a main system will not be considered as multiple systems (e.g. electrical work ancillary to mechanical installation).

• Projects submitted that only include horizontal or civil site work will not be considered relevant.

• If a submitted project contains both new construction/addition and renovation work, the offeror shall clearly delineate the dollar value for the portion of the final construction cost associated with the new construction/addition work and the renovation work in the project description. In order for a project to be considered relevant as new construction/addition work, the value of the new construction/addition work must independently meet project size and scope/complexity requirements. Likewise, in order for a project to be considered relevant as renovation work, the value of the renovation work must independently meet project size and scope/complexity requirements. A project may be determined not to satisfy relevancy requirements for new construction/addition or renovation, if the Government is unable to determine whether the project meets the respective requirements.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

For all submitted projects, ensure that the project description clearly identifies whether or not the project is new construction or renovation, the final construction cost (delineated for new and renovation, if applicable), and addresses how the project meets the scope/complexity requirements. The absence of any such information may result in the project being considered Not Relevant, which could result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE for this Factor.

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 and will not be considered.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) 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). Information beyond this page limit will not be considered.

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. Offerors may submit experience where a member of the JV performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above. Likewise, Offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a project where it performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

For a JV, the Offeror shall submit a signed JV agreement. For 8(a) Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture, the Offeror shall submit the signed SBA Mentor-Protégé Approval Letter and signed JV agreement.

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 and clearly describe the role that firm will have in the performance of the contract. If meaningful involvement is not demonstrated, experience of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will not be considered.

Design Experience:

While the seed project is not design-build, design-build projects may be contemplated under this MACC. Therefore, the offeror is required to address the design firm to be utilized on future projects.

Offerors shall clearly identify the Architect-Engineer firm that is proposed to be utilized as the Designer of Record (DOR) for future task orders under this MACC. Provide the full name of the firm, address, UEI number, and CAGE code. The designated firm will be required to be utilized as the DOR on future design-build task orders under the resulting MACC, unless a substitution is approved by the Contracting Officer for the proposed task order. To evidence this, Offerors must submit a letter of commitment from the design firm proposed.

Offerors shall submit a minimum of three (3) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant design projects performed by the designer of record (DOR) that best demonstrates the DOR’s experience on relevant projects (similar in size, scope, and complexity to the projects proposed for this MACC). The design firm must have been the DOR on all submitted projects.

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

Size: A final construction cost of at least $5,000,000. At least (1) one relevant project shall have a final construction cost of at least $10,000,000.

Scope/Complexity: Individual projects shall demonstrate experience with at least one of the following:

• New/Addition: New construction of commercial or institutional building or construction of new addition to a commercial or institutional building. New construction or addition work must be conditioned for occupancy and with finished interior.

• Renovation: Interior renovation of a commercial or institutional building that includes repairs/alterations to multiple building systems and infrastructures (e.g. mechanical, electrical, architectural, fire protection).

In addition to meeting the above Size and Scope/Complexity, submitted relevant projects shall, cumulatively,

(1) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with new construction or building addition.

(2) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with interior building renovation that includes

(3) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with design-build.

• The Offeror must clearly identify the building systems repaired or altered in each renovation project within their narrative. The project may be determined Not Relevant, if the Government is unable to determine which building systems were repaired. Additionally, work that is strictly ancillary to a main system will not be considered as multiple systems (e.g. electrical work ancillary to mechanical installation).

• Projects submitted that only include horizontal or civil site work will not be considered relevant.

• If a submitted project contains both new construction/addition and renovation work, the offeror shall clearly delineate the dollar value for the portion of the final construction cost associated with the new construction/addition work and the renovation work in the project description. In order for a project to be considered relevant as new construction/addition work, the value of the new construction/addition work must independently meet project size and scope/complexity requirements. Likewise, in order for a project to be considered relevant as renovation work, the value of the renovation work must independently meet project size and scope/complexity requirements. A project may be determined not to satisfy relevancy

Projects submitted for the DOR shall have been completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Submitted projects that were not completed within this timeframe will be considered Not Relevant. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. The design completion date shall be clearly stated on the Construction & Design

Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C). The project will be considered Not Relevant if the design completion date is not clearly provided.

For all submitted projects, ensure that the project description clearly identifies whether or not the project is new construction or renovation, the final construction cost (delineated for new and renovation, if applicable), and addresses how the project meets the scope/complexity requirements. The absence of any such information may result in the project being considered Not Relevant, which could result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE for this Factor.

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 and will not be considered.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) 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).

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. Offerors may submit experience where a member of the JV performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above. Likewise, Offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a project where it performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above. 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. If meaningful involvement is not demonstrated, experience of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will not be considered, and will be deemed “Not Relevant”.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor as the Designer of Record in order 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. If the agreement/letter is not provided or meaningful involvement is not demonstrated, experience of the proposed designer will not be considered.

(ii) 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. Offerors that do not submit a minimum of three (3) relevant Construction Experience Projects and a minimum of three (3) relevant Design Experience Projects will be rated

UNACCEPTABLE.

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

Offerors who submit multiple relevant projects that demonstrate design-build experience may be considered more favorably than those who only meet the minimum requirement for design-build experience.

Relevant projects that demonstrate the ability to perform multiple projects simultaneously may be considered more favorably than those who do not have experience performing multiple simultaneous projects.

Relevant projects that demonstrate experience with local environmental and permitting requirements in Hampton Roads areas may be considered more favorably.

To:

Factor 1, Corporate Experience

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Construction Experience

Offerors shall submit a minimum of three (3) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects that best demonstrates its experience on relevant projects (similar in size, scope, and complexity to the projects proposed for this MACC). Offeror must have performed as prime contractor on all submitted projects. Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered.

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

Size: A final construction cost of at least $5,000,000. At least (1) one relevant project shall have a final construction cost of at least $10,000,000.

Scope/Complexity: Individual projects shall demonstrate experience with at least one of the following:

• New/Addition: New construction of commercial or institutional building or construction of new addition to a commercial or institutional building. New construction or addition work must be conditioned for occupancy and with finished interior.

• Renovation: Interior renovation of a commercial or institutional building that includes repairs/alterations to multiple building systems and infrastructures (e.g. mechanical, electrical, architectural, fire protection).

In addition to meeting the above Size and Scope/Complexity, submitted relevant projects shall, cumulatively,

(4) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with new construction or building addition.

(5) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with interior building renovation that includes

(6) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with design-build.

• The Offeror must clearly identify the building systems repaired or altered in each renovation project within their narrative. The project may be determined Not Relevant, if the Government is unable to determine which building systems were repaired. Additionally, work that is strictly ancillary to a main system will not be considered as multiple systems (e.g. electrical work ancillary to mechanical installation).

• Projects submitted that only include horizontal or civil site work will not be considered relevant.

• If a submitted project contains both new construction/addition and renovation work, the offeror shall clearly delineate the dollar value for the portion of the final construction cost associated with the new construction/addition work and the renovation work in the project description. In order for a project to be considered relevant as new construction/addition work, the value of the new construction/addition work must independently meet project size and scope/complexity requirements. Likewise, in order for a project to be considered relevant as renovation work, the value of the renovation work must independently meet project size and scope/complexity requirements. A project may be determined not to satisfy relevancy

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

For all submitted projects, ensure that the project description clearly identifies whether or not the project is new construction or renovation, the final construction cost (delineated for new and renovation, if applicable), and addresses how the project meets the scope/complexity requirements. The absence of any such information may result in the project being considered Not Relevant, which could result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE for this Factor.

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 and will not be considered.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) 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). Information beyond this page limit will not be considered.

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. Offerors may submit experience where a member of the JV performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above. Likewise, Offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a project where it performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

For a JV, the Offeror shall submit a signed JV agreement. For 8(a) Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture, the Offeror shall submit the signed SBA Mentor-Protégé Approval Letter and signed JV agreement.

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 and clearly describe the role that firm will have in the performance of the contract. If meaningful involvement is not demonstrated, experience of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will not be considered.

In accordance with 13 CFR 125.2(g), small business Offerors may utilize the prime contractor experience of a small business first-tier subcontractor(s) to demonstrate experience under this evaluation factor if that small business Offeror cannot independently satisfy the experience requirement as defined above. In order to utilize the experience of a small business first-tier subcontractor(s), the offeror must specifically identify the proposed small business first-tier contractor(s) and clearly demonstrate that the subcontractor will have meaningful involvement in the performance of this MACC. The Offeror must provide a supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment from the subcontractor. The explanation of the meaningful involvement shall be included with this Factor. The Offeror or its small business first-tier subcontractor shall have been the prime contractor on all submitted projects. The Government notes that 13 CFR 125.2(g) is specific to only small business Offerors and named small business first-tier subcontractors. As such, the small business Offeror is not permitted to use the experience of a large business subcontractor or large business corporate affiliate in place of its own experience, if the small business Offeror cannot independently satisfy the experience requirement as defined above.

Design Experience:

While the seed project is not design-build, design-build projects may be contemplated under this MACC. Therefore, the offeror is required to address the design firm to be utilized on future projects.

Offerors shall clearly identify the Architect-Engineer firm that is proposed to be utilized as the Designer of Record (DOR) for future task orders under this MACC. Provide the full name of the firm, address, UEI number, and CAGE code. The designated firm will be required to be utilized as the DOR on future design-build task orders under the resulting MACC, unless a substitution is approved by the Contracting Officer for the proposed task order. To evidence this, Offerors must submit a letter of commitment from the design firm proposed.

Offerors shall submit a minimum of three (3) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant design projects performed by the designer of record (DOR) that best demonstrates the DOR’s experience on relevant projects (similar in size, scope, and complexity to the projects proposed for this MACC). The design firm must have been the DOR on all submitted projects.

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

Size: A final construction cost of at least $5,000,000. At least (1) one relevant project shall have a final construction cost of at least $10,000,000.

Scope/Complexity: Individual projects shall demonstrate experience with at least one of the following:

• New/Addition: New construction of commercial or institutional building or construction of new addition to a commercial or institutional building. New construction or addition work must be conditioned for occupancy and with finished interior.

• Renovation: Interior renovation of a commercial or institutional building that includes repairs/alterations to multiple building systems and infrastructures (e.g. mechanical, electrical, architectural, fire protection).

In addition to meeting the above Size and Scope/Complexity, submitted relevant projects shall, cumulatively,

(4) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with new construction or building addition.

(5) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with interior building renovation that includes

(6) At least one (1) project must demonstrate experience with design-build.

• The Offeror must clearly identify the building systems repaired or altered in each renovation project within their narrative. The project may be determined Not Relevant, if the Government is unable to determine which building systems were repaired. Additionally, work that is strictly ancillary to a main system will not be considered as multiple systems (e.g. electrical work ancillary to mechanical installation).

• Projects submitted that only include horizontal or civil site work will not be considered relevant.

• If a submitted project contains both new construction/addition and renovation work, the offeror shall clearly delineate the dollar value for the portion of the final construction cost associated with the new construction/addition work and the renovation work in the project description. In order for a project to be considered relevant as new construction/addition work, the value of the new construction/addition work must independently meet project size and scope/complexity requirements. Likewise, in order for a project to be considered relevant as renovation work, the value of the renovation work must independently meet project size and scope/complexity requirements. A project may be determined not to satisfy relevancy

Projects submitted for the DOR shall have the design been completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Submitted projects that were not completed within this timeframe will be considered Not Relevant. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past ten

(10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. The design completion date shall be clearly stated on the Construction

& Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C). The project will be considered Not Relevant if the design completion date is not clearly provided.

For all submitted projects, ensure that the project description clearly identifies whether or not the project is new construction or renovation, the final construction cost (delineated for new and renovation, if applicable), and addresses how the project meets the scope/complexity requirements. The absence of any such information may result in the project being considered Not Relevant, which could result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE for this Factor.

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 and will not be considered.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) 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).

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. Offerors may submit experience where a member of the JV performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above. Likewise, Offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a project where it performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above. 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. If meaningful involvement is not demonstrated, experience of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will not be considered, and will be deemed “Not Relevant”.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor as the Designer of Record in order 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. If the agreement/letter is not provided or meaningful involvement is not demonstrated, experience of the proposed designer will not be considered.

(ii) 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. Offerors that do not submit a minimum of three (3) relevant Construction Experience Projects and a minimum of three (3) relevant Design Experience Projects will be rated

UNACCEPTABLE.

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

Offerors who submit multiple relevant projects that demonstrate design-build experience may be considered more favorably than those who only meet the minimum requirement for design-build experience.

Relevant projects that demonstrate the ability to perform multiple projects simultaneously may be considered more favorably than those who do not have experience performing multiple simultaneous projects.

Relevant projects that demonstrate experience with local environmental and permitting requirements in Hampton Roads areas may be considered more favorably.

2. Incorporate revised language for 1.3 General Overview of Contract, 1.3.1

1.3.1 This acquisition will result in the award of a Firm Fixed Price (FFP), Design-Build/Design-Bid- Build (DB/DBB) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) for General Construction primarily in the Hampton Roads Area of Responsibility (HR AOR).

The Hampton Roads AOR includes the following locations: Naval Air Station Oceana and Dam Neck Annex, Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story, NASA Wallops Island, Naval Station Norfolk, Naval Support Activity (NSA) Hampton Roads, Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Naval Weapons Station Yorktown and Cheatham Annex, and Naval Support Group Activity Sugar Grove. Work may be required in other areas in the area of responsibility of NAVFAC Mid-Atlantic if deemed necessary. The Government intends to award up to eight (8) contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offerors whose proposals represent the best values after evaluation in accordance with the factors and their relative importance unless the Source Selection Authority determines that award to more than five

(5) Offerors is appropriate.

1.3.1 This acquisition will result in the award of a Firm Fixed Price (FFP), Design-Build/Design-Bid- Build (DB/DBB) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) for General Construction primarily in the Hampton Roads Area of Responsibility (HR AOR).

The Hampton Roads AOR includes the following locations: Naval Air Station Oceana and Dam Neck Annex, Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story, NASA Wallops Island, Naval Station Norfolk, Naval Support Activity (NSA) Hampton Roads, Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Naval Weapons Station Yorktown and Cheatham Annex, and Naval Support Group Activity Sugar Grove. Work may be required in other areas in the area of responsibility of NAVFAC Mid-Atlantic if deemed necessary. The Government intends to award up to eight (8) five (5) contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offerors whose proposals represent the best values after evaluation in accordance with the factors and their relative importance unless the Source Selection Authority determines that award to more than five

(5) Offerors is appropriate.

3. Revise response to PPI #11, 147, 264, 266 and 271

Number

Reference

Question Government Response Page Section Paragraph

11 of

RFP

Construction Experience

The RFP states that if both the JV partners do not show projects they would be rated lower . Howver the FAR clause125.2 amended in Sep 2019 states that a small buisness contractor can use the first tier subcontractors capabilities and past performance who are identified in the proposal when the SB do not have the past performance necessary for the award . Please advise if the SBA approved JV partners experince only is provided , it will be accepted without risk of lowering the rating

The small business subcontractor rules referenced in your question have not yet been incorporated into federal procurement regulations, such as the FAR. For this procurement, the Government would prefer to see shared work experience from both Joint Venture partners but it is not a mandatory submittal requirement for Factor 1 – Experience.

Instead, Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture partners may be rated lower.

RFP

pg 17 of 60

Factor 4, Past

Performance

The RFP States "The offeror shall include all completed CPARS (interim and final) for a project" - some of our construction projects have multiple interim CPARS, please confirm the Government would really like to see multiple CPARS (could be up to 4) per project or if just the final CPARS per project will be acceptable?

Submit all available, completed CPARS

Amd

Amendment 3 states "Submit […] both interim and final, completed CPARS." In some cases, especially for older projects, we only retain the Final CPAR in perpetuity.

Please advise if any lack of Interim CPARs will be evaluated negatively.

Bid per RFP

14 of

Factor 1 - Corporate Experience

(ii) Basis of Evaluation

Factor 1, Corporate Experience, Basis of Evaluation section of the RFP states, “Relevant projects that demonstrate the ability to perform multiple projects simultaneously may be considered more favorably than those who do not have experience

Bid per RFP performing multiple simultaneous projects.”

However, the Factor 1, Corporate Experience, Notes section of the RFP states, “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 and will not be considered.”

Is it the intention of the Government to receive program examples in Factor 1 – Corporate Experience “Data Sheets” that demonstrate Offerors capabilities to perform multiple concurrent task orders?

Or is it the intention for Offerors to include examples in narrative form in a separate section under Corporate Experience tab?

Where shall offerors provide information demonstrating Offeror's ability to perform multiple projects simultaneously?

17 of

Factor 4 - Past

Performance

(i) Solicitation Submittal

Requirements

Factor 4 - Past Performance does not specify if this is a requirement is for both construction and design experience.

Are Past Performance/CPARS required for design experience as well? If yes, we will also need to submit letters acknowledging Prime ability to receive reference information.

Bid per RFP

Number Reference

Question Government Response Page Section Paragraph

11 of

RFP

Construction Experience

The RFP states that if both the JV partners do not show projects they would be rated lower . Howver the FAR clause125.2 amended in Sep 2019 states that a small buisness contractor can use the first tier subcontractors capabilities and past performance who are identified in the proposal when the SB do not have the past performance necessary for the award . Please advise if the SBA approved JV partners experince only is provided , it will be accepted without risk of lowering the rating

The Government has revised the evaluation factor language for Factor 1 Corporate Experience to follow the guidelines set forth by 13 CFR 125.2(g)

RFP

pg 17 of 60

Factor 4, Past

Performance

The RFP States "The offeror shall include all completed CPARS (interim and final) for a project" - some of our construction projects have multiple interim CPARS, please confirm the Government would really like to see multiple CPARS (could be up to 4) per project or if just the final CPARS per project will be acceptable?

Submit all completed, available CPARS

Amd

Amendment 3 states "Submit […] both interim and final, completed CPARS." In some cases, especially for older projects, we only retain the Final CPAR in perpetuity.

Please advise if any lack of Interim CPARs will be evaluated negatively.

Lack of interim CPARS will not be evaluated negatively

14 of

Factor 1 - Corporate Experience

(ii) Basis of Evaluation

Factor 1, Corporate Experience, Basis of Evaluation section of the RFP states, “Relevant projects that demonstrate the ability to perform multiple projects simultaneously may be considered more favorably than those who do not have experience performing multiple

The Government will evaluate the Offeror's ability to perfom multiple projects simultaneously off of the projects submitted for Corporate

Experience and their overlapping performance periods.

simultaneous projects.”

However, the Factor 1, Corporate Experience, Notes section of the RFP states, “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 and will not be considered.”

Is it the intention of the Government to receive program examples in Factor 1 – Corporate Experience “Data Sheets” that demonstrate Offerors capabilities to perform multiple concurrent task orders?

Or is it the intention for Offerors to include examples in narrative form in a separate section under Corporate Experience tab?

Where shall offerors provide information demonstrating Offeror's ability to perform multiple projects simultaneously?

17 of

Factor 4 - Past

Performance

(i) Solicitation Submittal

Requirements

Factor 4 - Past Performance does not specify if this is a requirement is for both construction and design experience.

Are Past Performance/CPARS required for design experience as well? If yes, we will also need to submit letters acknowleding Prime ability to receive reference information.

Yes

4. Incorporate Pre-Proposal Inquiry responses

Number Pg Sec Ref Question Government Response

272 11 4 Would the government consider rating SBA-approved Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture offerors whose Factor 1

See Amendment 0011;

Revised Factor 1 language projects are only from one JV member equally with all other JV offerors?

273 133419

Please verify if the steel for the project need to meet “Buy American “ Clause. If not, please verify that it will need to be “Domestic “ steel only.

Yes

Does the steel for the project need to meet “Buy American “ Clause or does it have to be “Domestic “ steel only?

Yes page

01 00 00

While historically SEED projects are awarded below “market value” based on contractors’ typical bidding strategies. An award at far below the Government’s posted estimate ($10 million—see page 52/ section 01 00 00 /para “Estimated Budget...”) would not be a realistic price and be unfeasible for a contractor to perform at that rate over the life of the contract. Additionally, such proposed prices would undermine a true “tradeoff process” as outlined in the solicitation.

Question 1: Will the government confirm that the estimate is realistic and represents true market value?

Question 2: How will the government use a robust price realism analysis to ensure that bidders do not submit unrealistically low bids?

Propose to RFP.

RFP

pg. 11 & 12

Factor 1, Construction Experience

Notes

One of our construction projects we are considering as part of the past experience factor contains repairs to the roofing and facility envelope. We are considering the exterior envelope of the building as a system. Please confirm whether NAVFAC's interpretation of building systems includes the exterior envelope of a building.

Building envelope is considered part of thebuilding system.

277 6 of 60

1.3 General

Overview of

Contract 1.3.1

The RFP states, "the Government intends to award up to Eight (8) contracts resulting from this solicitation" however it also states further in the same paragrapgh that, "unless the Source Selection Authority determines that award to more than five (5) Offerors is appropriate."

Does the Government intend to award five (5) or eight (8) successful Offerors?

Please see Amendment 0011, Revised language

1.3 General Overview of

Contract

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 18-Jul-2023 02:00 PM to 20-Jul-2023 02:00 PM.

(End of Summary of Changes)