14-R-2201_-_IDIQ_Roofing_RFP.pdf

NOTE: OFFEROR MUST EXECUTE BLOCKS 14-20C.

INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) CONTRACT SET-ASIDE FOR EDWOSB FOR ROOFING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ABOARD MCB CAMP PENDLETON AND NOC FALLBROOK, NWS SEAL BEACH, NWS SEAL BEACH DETACHMENT NORCO, CA.

This IDIQ construction contract w ill provide repair and replacement of various types of facilities roofs systems, to include shingle, built-up roofs, preformed metal roofs, asbestos abatement, and other incidental w ork at various locations aboard Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, Naval Ordnance Center (NOC), Fallbrook, Naval Weapons Station (NWS) Seal Beach, and NWS Seal Beach Detachment Norco,CA.

This is a competitive Best Value Source Selection Procurement, using the Low est Price Technically Acceptable process, w hich is RESTRICTED to eligible Economically Disadvantaged Women Ow ned Small Businesses (EDWOSB).

The Women-Ow ned Small Business (WOSB) Program, sets forth certain criteria for EDWOSBs in section 8(m) of the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 637(m) and SBA's implementing EDWOSB Program Regulations at 13 C.F.R. 127.

NAICS: 238160

Size Standards: $14 Million

Task Order Range is $2,000 to $500,000

Minimum Guarantee is $5,000.00

SARAH CHAMBERS 760-725-9959

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

11-Dec-2013

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

X

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________365 calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________3 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________23 Jan 2014 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

NAVFAC SOUTHWEST

CAMP PENDLETON ROICC/CODE ROPCN

MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP PENDLETON

PO BOX 555229 BLDG 22101

CAMP PENDLETON CA 92055-5229

N62473

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

11:00 AM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

N62473-14-R-2201 93

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

N62473-14-R-2201

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES MAX

QUANTITY

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0001 UNDEFINED Dollars, U.S.

Base Year Performance Period - Roofing

FFP

This is Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with pre-established fixed contract prices. The actual amount of work to be performed and the time of such performance will be determined by the Contracting Officer or his/her properly authorized representative, who will issue written task orders to the Contractor. Award of the task order will be on a firm-fixed price basis.

Maximum value of $25,000,000 (minus minimum guarantee of Task Order 0001) will serve as the maximum/not to exceed amount of the entire contract period.

The Government has the option to extend the term of the contract for a term of one (1) to forty-eight (48) months by written notice to the Contractor within the performance period specified in the Schedule.

FOB: Destination

MAX

NET AMT

DELIVERY/TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND ORDER VALUE

The minimum quantity and order value for each Delivery/Task Order issued shall not be less than the minimum quantity and order value stated in the following table. The maximum quantity and order value for each Delivery/Task Order issued shall not exceed the maximum quantity and order value stated in the following table.

MINIMUM

QUANTITY

MINIMUM

AMOUNT

MAXIMUM

QUANTITY

MAXIMUM

AMOUNT

$2,000.00 $500,000.00

CLIN DELIVERY/TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND CLIN ORDER VALUE

The minimum quantity and order value for the given Delivery/Task Order issued for this CLIN shall not be less than the minimum quantity and order value stated in the following table. The maximum quantity and order value for the given Delivery/Task Order issued for this CLIN shall not exceed the maximum quantity and order value stated in the following table.

CLIN

MINIMUM

QUANTITY

MINIMUM

AMOUNT

MAXIMUM

QUANTITY

MAXIMUM

AMOUNT

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE TERMS

Supplies/services will be inspected/accepted at:

CLIN INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

0001 Destination Government Destination Government

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS UIC

0001 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

SECTION 00201

SECTION 00201

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

1. Inquiries

Inquiries regarding the Request for Proposal (RFP) shall be submitted electronically using the Request for Information (RFI) form provided as Part 1, Exhibit F. The Point of Contact (POC) for inquiries is Sarah Chambers at 760-725-9959, or e-mail at sarah.chambers2@navy.mil. The Government does not intend to respond to inquiries submitted less than 10 days before the proposal receipt date, therefore RFIs should be submitted by 06 January 2014.

2. Proposal Submittal Requirements

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be formatted as follows and furnished in the number of copies stated herein. A cover letter shall accompany the proposal.

The cover letter shall include—

(a) The solicitation number;

(b) The name, address, telephone and facsimile numbers, and e-mail address of the Offeror;

(c) The DUNS Number, CAGE Code, and TIN of the Offeror;

(d) A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all amendments, terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;

(e) Names, titles, and phone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation and;

(f) Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

Proposals shall be submitted in three-ring binders or bound, with tabs or separators. Page limits on Exhibits, must be adhered to and cannot be expanded unless stated on the numbered question of the Exhibit.

Proposals shall be submitted on 8.5" X 11" paper, double-sided print with at least 12 point font.

The format for the proposal is as follows:

Cover Letter

The Offeror shall submit the following as part of their Volume I, Price Proposal in a sealed envelope.

Volume 1 – Price Proposal o SF1442 o Completed Bid Schedule using Part 6 Attachment 8, in a separate sealed envelope.

o Bid Bond o Financial Questionnaire, Exhibit E o Section 00600 Representations and Certifications o System for Award Management Representations and Certifications

Include an unlocked/unprotected MS Excel version of your Price Proposal/Bid Schedule on the required CD.

The Offeror shall submit the following as part of their Volume II, Technical Proposal.

Volume 2 – Technical Proposal

Tab 1:

Factor 1 – Management Approach and Capabilities of the Offeror o Exhibit A – Factor 1 Worksheet o Bondability Letter o If applicable, a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified in the Narrative (e.g., joint venture partner, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.).

Tab 2:

Factor 2 – Experience of the Offeror and the Offeror’s Team o Three (3) to Five (5) projects submitted on the Exhibit B – Construction Experience Project Data Sheet

Factor 3 – Past Performance o Evaluations for submitted projects in Factor 2 submitted on the Exhibit C – Past Performance Questionnaire unless CPARS is available. If CPARS is available, Offerors shall submit. Place evaluation immediately following the applicable Factor 2 project submittal.

Tab 3:

Factor 4 – Safety

(For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. EMR and DART Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

o Exhibit D – Factor 4 Worksheet including:

� Experience Modification Rates (EMRs) for the three most recent previous calendar years � OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate for the three most recent previous calendar years

Offerors are asked to submit only the information/exhibits required. Do not submit any additional information such as brochures, CDs (excludes the required electronic copy), or other pre -printed materials.

A total of one (1) original price and (1) original technical proposal, two (2) hard copies of the technical proposal and one (1) electronic copy of the complete proposal, in response to this RFP must be received by this office no later than 11:00 a.m., local time, on 23 January 2014. Electronic copies shall be submitted as three separate documents on CD as follows:

1. One (1) Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) document of the Price Proposal (SF1442, Bid Bond, Section 00600 Representations and Certifications, and System for Award

Management Representations and Certifications)

2. One (1) unlocked/unprotected MS Excel file of the completed Bid Schedule

3. One (1) Adobe PDF document of the technical proposal.

Offerors should address all evaluation factors and shall submit the proposal to the following address:

If you intend to use FedEx, please use the following mailing address:

ROICC Camp Pendleton Attn: Sarah Chambers 9th St., Bldg. 22101 Camp Pendleton, CA 92055-5229

If you intend to use the USPS, please use the below mailing address and allow additional time for mailing in order for the proposal to arrive at the required due date and time.

ROICC Camp Pendleton Attn: Sarah Chambers Bldg. 22101, PO Box 555229 Camp Pendleton, CA 92055-5229

LATE SUBMITTALS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. Proposal must be clearly marked on the outside of the package with the solicitation number.

CONSOLIDATED RFP DOCUMENTS

Within four weeks after contract award, provide one (1) electronic and three (3) hard copies of consolidated RFP documents incorporating the Contractor’s Proposal and all RFP amendments and revisions that are contained in the contract award. Identify the changes to the RFP with “Red-lining” or “Track Changes” feature of SpecsIntact or MS Word to highlight the pre-award modifications in the contract. Identify the amendment source at each addition and deletion by annotation, such as footnote or reference in parenthesis.

3. Pre-Proposal Conference

A pre-proposal conference will be held at the ROICC Camp Pendleton, Building 22101, Camp Pendleton, CA on Thursday, 19 December 2013. Please be present no later than 9:55 a.m. (Pacific Time), in order to start the conference on time at 10:00 a.m. All prospective offerors are highly encouraged to attend this conference.

In order to make the conference as productive as possible, Proposers who wish to attend must contact Sarah Chambers at Sarah.Chambers2@navy.mil no later than 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, 17 December 2013 to register their planned attendance. Also, Proposers are expected to submit any questions they may have in writing to Sarah Chambers at the e-mail address shown above at least two business days prior to the pre-proposal conference. The submission of written questions will not preclude anyone from posing questions during the pre-proposal conference.

Failure of a prospective offer to submit any RFIs or to attend the conference will be construed to mean that the offeror fully understands all requirements of the solicitation. Prospective offers are advised that the pre-proposal conference will be held solely for the purpose of explaining the concepts involved in the project and the specifications, terms, and conditions of this solicitation.

No minutes of this meeting will be issued. All prospective offers are advised that this solicitation will remain unchanged unless it is amended in writing. However, if an amendment is issued, normal procedures relating to the acknowledgment and receipt of any such amendment shall be applicable.

Contractors attending this pre-performance conference will need to have proof of insurance, vehicle registration and their driver’s license, to get a “day” visitor pass, if they don’t already have a decal. Please arrive on time to obtain visitor’s pass prior to the scheduled conference. Instructions to ROICC Camp Pendleton are included as Attachment “9” in Part 6.

4. Joint Venture Offerors

Joint venture Offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement. The agreement shall include information that identifies the responsibilities for each entity under this contract, demonstrate the relationship between firms, and identify contractual relationship s and authorities to bind each entity of the joint venture.

The joint venture also needs to complete the online representations and certifications ( see FAR 52.204-99 DEV) for each joint venture member as well as for the joint venture itself.

5. System for Award Management (SAM)

Contractors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) prior to award of a DoD contract.

It is highly suggested that Contractors register in SAM prior to the proposal due date. Contractors may obtain information on registration and annual confirmation requirements via the SAM accessed through https://www.acquisition.gov or by calling 866-606-8220, or 334-206-7828 for international calls. A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor not registered in the SAM. Remember to review the NAICS codes listed in your record and make sure that you have listed the NAICS code for this procurement.

6. Federal Contractor Program

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 22.1303, any contractor or subcontractor with a contract of $25,000 or more with the Federal Government must take affirmative action to hire and promote qualified targeted veterans wh ich includes special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam-era, recently separated veterans, and any other veterans who served on active duty during a war or in a campaign or expedition for which a campaign badge has been authorized.

Companies must file an annual VETS-100 report, which shows the number of targeted veterans in their work force by job category, hiring location, and number of new hires, including targeted veterans hired during the reporting period and the maximum number and minimum number of employees of such contractor during the period covered by the report. Instructions, information and follow-up assistance is provided at VETS-100 Internet site at http://vets100.cudenver.edu/ or employers may contact the VETS-100 Processing Center at (301) 306-6752 or e-mail at mailto:helpdesk@vets100.com. A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor that has not submitted a required annual form VETS-100, Federal Contractor Veterans' Employment Report (VETS- 100 Report) if subject to the reporting requirements of 38 U.S.C. 4212(d) for that fiscal year.

7. Women Owned Small Business Program Repository

In accordance with the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) WOSB Federal Contract program regulations, EDWOSBs are required to upload and categorize all required documents in the SBA’s General Login System (GLS) at https://eweb.sba.gov/gls.

8. Incurred Expenses

The Government is not responsible for any costs incurred or associated with preparation and submission of a proposal in response to this solicitation.

9. No Alternate or Multiple Proposals

Neither multiple proposals, nor proposal variations or options, nor alternate or alternative proposals will be considered in the evaluation.

SECTION 00210

BAS IS OF AWARD AND EVALUATIONS FACTORS

1. BASIS OF AWARD

Selection of the responsible offeror will be accomplished using Source Selection Procedures on the basis of Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) to the Government, considering price and other factors combined.

The LPTA process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. Interested firms are expected to review the RFP, participate in a pre -proposal conference, and provide proposal information requested to evaluate their technical and past performance factors.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract after conducting discussions with offerors whose proposals have been determined to be within the competitive range. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

The Government anticipates a single award construction contract. Award of the basic construction contract will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the most advantageous to t he Government considering the technical and price factors. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the lowest price technically acceptable proposal. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable price and technical terms. Offerors should not assume that they would be contacted or afforded the opportunity to qualify, discuss, or revise their proposal. Firms participating in the pre-proposal conference and site visit will not be compensated for their participation.

2. DEFINITIONS

1. Clarifications are limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated.

2. Communications are exchanges, between the Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

3. Competitive Range See Far 15.306(c).

4. Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

5. Discussions are negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range.

6. Evaluation Notice (EN) is the PCO’s written notification to the offeror for purposes of clarifications, communications, or in support of discussions.

7. Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) is a process used in competitive negotiated contracting where the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. See FAR 15.101-2.

8. Performance Confidence Assessment is an evaluation of the likelihood (or Government’s confidence) that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements; the evaluation is based upon past performance information.

9. Recency, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the time that has elapsed since the past performance reference occurred. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant.

10. Relevancy, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; ;and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

11. Requirements Documents are all aspects of the RFP that convey the needs of the Government to offerors, including the SOO, SOW, PWS, technical requirement documents, and system requirement documents.

12. Requiring Office is the entity (for example, a program management office or other organizational entity) responsible for translating user requirements into the requirements documents within the RFP that communicate those requirements to offerors.

13. Risk, as it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk or disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. (For firm-fixed-price contract, the reference to increased cost may be removed from the risk definition.)

14. Source Selection Authority (SSA) is the official designated to make the source selection decision.

15. Source Selection Team (SST) is a team that is tailored to the unique acquisition, tasked with carrying out a source selection. Composition of the team generally consists of the SSA, PCO (if different from the SSA), SSAC, SSEB, Advisors, Cost or Price Experts, Legal Counsel, Small Business Specialists, and other subject-matter experts.

16. Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

17. Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD) is the document that reflects the SSA’s independent, integrated, comparative assessment and decision.

18. Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) is a group of Government and, if needed, approved non-

Government personnel, representing the various functional disciplines relevant to the acquisition.

19. Source Selection Plan (SSP) is a plan that describes how the source selection will be organized, how proposals will be evaluated and analyzed, and how source(s) will be selected.

20. Strength is an aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

21. Weakness means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See

FAR 15.001.

3. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS/DESCRIPTIONS

Each offeror’s technical factors and past performance will be evaluated separately. Upon the conclusion of the evaluation of the technical factors, an overall non-price factors rating of Acceptable (A) or Unacceptable (U) will be assigned to each offeror’s non-price factors proposal.

• The following adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign a rating to each technical factor. Use upper case letter ratings for major technical factor ratings. The addition of plus (+) or minus (-) to an adjective rating is not allowed.

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable (A) Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable (U)

Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

The weaknesses and/or deficiencies (as defined below) of each proposal for each non-price evaluation factor which influenced the assigned adjectival rating shall be identified.

Definitions Weakness A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness

A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency

A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

4. EVALUATION FACTORS

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

Factor 1 – Management Approach and Capabilities of the Offeror Factor 2 – Experience of the Offeror and Offeror’s Team Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Safety

“The distinction between experience and past performance is experience pertains to the types of work and volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement, in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Past performance pertains to both the relevance of recent efforts and how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.”

2. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor.

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements

The Offeror shall submit the following as part of their Volume I, Price Proposal in a sealed envelope.

i. SF1442 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) with blocks 14 through 20c completed.

ii. The Offeror shall submit their prices using the MS Excel ELIN Price Schedule included in the solicitation as Part 6, Attachment 8, in a separate sealed envelope, as part of Volume I, Price Proposal. Offerors shall also include an electronic copy of their MS Excel ELIN Price Schedule on the required CD and shall round all unit prices to the second place behind the decimal (i.e.

$1.00 vice $1.004):

Complete all Price ELINs (A001 through J017).

iii. Bid Bond (see clause 5252.228-9302 Bid Guarantee in RFP for Bid Bond amount)

iv. Exhibit E Financial Questionnaire (in sealed envelope from financial institution).

Offerors shall submit the Financial Questionnaire to their financial institution and request that the financial institution complete the questionnaire with regard to the Offeror’s firm. Upon completion of the questionnaire, the financial institution should place the completed questionnaire in a sealed envelope showing the return address of the financial institution and forward it to the Offeror so that the Offeror can include the questionnaire (in the sealed envelope) with the Offeror’s proposal.

If the Offeror is a joint venture, information should be submitted for the joint venture. If there is no information for the joint venture, information should be submitted for each joint venture partner.

The Joint Venture Agreement, Financial Questionnaire and Representations and Certifications will not be rated. They will, however, be considered in assessing the Offeror’s responsibility.

v. A print-out of the Offeror’s filled out Representations and Certifications and Active and Inactive

Exclusions from the System for Award Management (SAM). Also, per Section 00600 of the RFP, fill-out responses to FAR clause 52.219-1 “Small Business Program Representations” (APR 2012) and DFARS clause 252.209-7999 “Representations by Corporations Regarding an Unpaid Delinquent Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction under any Federal Law” (Dev 2012-O0004)

(JAN 2012).

(2) Basis of Evaluation

The price evaluation is based on the total estimated quantity specified in the solicitation for the base year performance plus four (4) 12-month option years for a total maximum duration of 60 months which equates to the sum of ELINS A001 through J017 (Section B of the solicitation). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section 0210 of the solicitation.

In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

i. Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation.

ii. Comparison of proposed prices with the independent Government Estimate

iii. Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

iv. Comparison of market survey results.

� Exhibit line item numbers (ELIN) unit prices shall be multiplied by the estimated quantity to determine the total price for each ELIN. In the event the total price for an ELIN does not mathematically equate to the product of the unit price and estimated quantity, the unit price shall take precedence over the total price.

The unit price shall be considered the Offeror’s intended bid price for the ELIN.

� A price that is found to be either unreasonably high or unrealistically low in relation to the proposed work may be indicative of an inherent lack of understanding of the solicitation requirements, or in the case of unrealistically low prices, may pose an unacceptable performance risk, and may result in the overall proposal not being considered for award.

� The Government may determine that an offer will not be considered if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Any inconsistency whether real or apparent, between proposed performance and price must be clearly explained in the price proposal. For example, if unique and innovative approaches are the basis for an apparently unbalanced or inconsistently priced proposal, the nature of these approaches and their impact on price must be completely documented. The burden of proof of price realism rests solely with the offeror.

� Each ELIN shall be priced independent of other ELINS as if it were stand-alone work (unless otherwise noted in the schedule or elsewhere in the solicitation). Proposals that appear to be unbalanced relative to unit prices may not be considered for award.

(b) Technical Factors:

FACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH AND CAPABILITIES OF THE OFFEROR

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements. Provide the following for evaluation under Tab 1 of the technical proposal Volume II:

(a) Use the Exhibit A – Factor 1 Worksheet to address the following:

� Provide both the single and aggregate bonding capacity of the Offeror (see paragraph (b) below for additional requirements regarding bonding capacity).

� Provide the number of in-house personnel employed by the Offeror.

� Provide the percentage of work that the in-house personnel employed by the Offeror will perform under this requirement as the Prime EDWOSB Offeror in accordance with the RFP requirements.

� Describe how the Offeror will ensure that it meets the percentage of work indicated above in accordance with the RFP requirements.

� Describe the type of roof related work, as prescribed in the technical specifications of the RFP that the Prime Contractor will self-perform on individual task orders.

� List the name of all affiliates, the role of the affiliate (i.e. subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, etc.), and the type of work they will responsible to perform. Offerors shall provide a letter(s) of commitment for each affiliate as a separate attachment.

� Describe the Offeror’s capabilities (manpower, equipment, and materials).

� Describe the Offeror’s ability to effectively manage and perform multiple task orders at various locations within the footprint designated for this IDIQ contract.

� The Offeror will describe how they will effectively perform quality control management by explaining how they will go about selecting a Quality Control Manager (QCM) that meets the requirements of the RFP. Offerors shall also indicate how the QCM will manage the 3 phases of control as identified in the RFP.

Offerors shall respond in the space provided on the worksheets using a minimum of 12 pt. Times New Roman or Arial font. The boxes may not be expanded unless noted on the Exhibit. The information requested in subparagraph (b) and (c) below are not included in the page limitations set forth in Exhibit A.

(b) The Offeror shall provide a bondability letter from the surety company to demonstrate the minimum single project bonding capacity and aggregate bonding capacity of at least $10,000,000 for the management of multiple concurrent projects at the higher dollar magnitude within the task order range. The letter will also indicate the current available bonding capacity.

(c) In addition to the narrative, if applicable, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., joint venture partner, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.).

(2) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s management approach and capabilities will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the solicitation.

The composition and management of the firm proposed as the Offeror’s team, capabilities/resources, ability to manage multiple task orders, percentage of the effort the offeror will self-perform and bonding capacity for this contract will be evaluated in this factor.

FACTOR 2 –EXPERIENCE OF THE OFFEROR AND OFFEROR’S TEAM

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements. Provide the following for evaluation under Tab 2 of the Technical Proposal Volume II.

(a) Submittals: Submit a minimum of three (3) roofing projects to a maximum of five (5) roofing projects that best demonstrates the experience of the Offeror and Offeror’s team, as identified in the narrative submittal for Factor 1, for repair and replacement of roof systems, to include composite shingle roof systems, built-up roof systems, preformed metal roof systems, and asbestos abatement of existing roof systems in accordance with the technical sections and attachments of the solicitation. Desirable project dollar values shall range between a minimum of $10,000 and $500,000.

(b) Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Projects may be submitted if substantially completed (80%) completed by the date of issuance of this RFP.

(c) A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract.

Multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts (basic contracts from which task orders are issued) are not permissible and will not be evaluated.

(d) The attached Offeror’s Team Experience Project Data Sheet (Exhibit B – Factor 2 Worksheet) is

MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded. A completed Exhibit B shall be submitted for each project submitted under this factor.

(e) For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the scope requirements of this solicitation (at least 3-4 sentences).

(f) If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects shall be submitted for each Joint Venture partner. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture partners may be rated unacceptable. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

The Offeror should submit relevant experience information of predecessor, affiliates/ /subsidiaries/parent member companies that are part of the Offeror’s Team identified in Factor 1. The proposal shall clearly demonstrate that these companies 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 experience under this evaluation factor. These subcontractors should be indicated as part of the Offeror’s Team in Factor 1 and the proposal shall provide a letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement that the subcontractor will have in performance of this contract. If the Offeror fails to make clear the relationship(s), the project may be removed and discarded prior to evaluation.

(2) Basis for Evaluation: The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant roofing projects as described 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 and Offeror’s team to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review up to five projects. Any projects submitted in excess of five (5) will not be considered. A proposal containing less than a minimum of three (3) required roofing projects will be considered unacceptable.

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements. Provide the following in the Technical Proposal Volume II:

(a) Evaluations under Tab 2 immediately following each of the projects, shown for Factor 2, Experience, to which they pertain.

(b) IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), Exhibit C) included in the solicitation is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project included in Factor 2, Experience. AN

OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. The Offeror should provide completed PPQs in the proposal. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference in their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should 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, Sarah Chambers via email at sarah.chambers2@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date.

(c) Also include performance recognition documents received within the last three years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

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

(e) 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.

(f) While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

(a) Past Performance shall be evaluated when using the LPTA process and will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis using the ratings in the following table:

Acceptable (A) Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

Unacceptable (U) Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

(b) The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

(c) The Government will assess the degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

- A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

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

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

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

- A respect for stewardship of Government funds

iv) Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance. The Offerors shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable”.

FACTOR 4 – SAFETY

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information in the Technical Proposal Volume II under Tab 3 using Exhibit D. (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture. EMR and DART Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(a) Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

For the three (3) previous complete calendar years (2010, 2011, and 2012), submit the Offeror’s EMR (which compares your company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums over a three (3) year period). If you have no EMR, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Offeror’s shall provide a letter from their Insurance Company that verifies these rates or indicates that an EMR rate(s) was/were not issued. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and upward or downward trends should be addressed as part of this element.

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

For the three (3) previous complete calendar years (2010, 2011, and 2012), submit your OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If you cannot submit an OSHA DART Rate, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART Rate data and upward or downward trends should be addressed as part of this element.

(c) Technical Approach for Safety:

Using Exhibit D, the Offeror shall answer Questions 3 – 6 to explain the plan that the Offeror will implement to:

• Enforce safety procedures for itself

• How the Offeror will evaluate safety performance for potential subcontractors when selecting all levels of subcontractors

• How the Offeror will manage and enforce safety performance of selected subcontractors as a part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors.

The responses to Questions 3-6 can be expanded up to two (2) pages total overall, not per question.

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record, the Offeror’s plan to select and monitor subcontractors, any and innovative safety methods that the Offeror plans to implement for this procurement. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety may include, but are not limited to, OSHA, NAVFAC’s Facility Accident and Incident Reporting (FAIR) databases, and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the Offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

- Experience Modification Rate (EMR)

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

- Offeror Technical Approach to Safety

- Other sources of information available to the Government

(a) Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

The Government will evaluate the EMR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

Lower EMRs will be given greater weight in the evaluation.

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

The Government will evaluate the OSHA DART Rate to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rates. Lower OSHA DART Rates will be given greater weight in the evaluation.

(c) Technical Approach to Safety: The Government will evaluate the Exhibit D responses to determine the degree to which the Offeror will enforce safety procedures for itself and subcontractors and how subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project.

Those Offerors whose plan demonstrates a commitment to hire subcontractors with a culture of safety and who propose innovative methods to enhance a safe working…