AMEND_0003_FINAL_19R1215.pdf

ACQR5454848

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

AMENDMENT 0003; SOLICITATION NO. N6247319R1215; DESIGN-BUILD CONSTRUCTION PROJECT P-1022, AIRCRAFT PAINT COMPLEX, NAVAL BASE CORONADO, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA; See Continuation Page 2.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 23

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 01-Oct-2019

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 N6247319R1215

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-Sep-2019

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

01-Oct-2019

CODE

NAVFAC SOUTHWEST

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CONTRACTS CORE

CODE: CINAV

1220 PACIFIC HIGHWAY

SAN DIEGO CA 92132-5190

N62473 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6247319R1215

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0003

1. The purpose of this amendment is to accomplish the following:

a. INCORPORATE responses to Requests for Information (RFI) as follows:

No. Question Government Response 12 The RFP states that, “for purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as Government or commercial contracts/projects your firm has substantially completed within the last 10 years, which provides experience demonstrating new design and construction of aircraft hangars used for aircraft maintenance, for applying mechanical and/or chemical corrosion control processes, or applying paint and other coatings to aircraft, with a minimum cost of $40,000,000.”

We respectfully request that the government allow offerors to submit aircraft hangars used for aircraft maintenance, and/or paint complexes and corrosion control facilities with highly relevant features (i.e. industrial design, large span structural systems, mechanical/ventilation and fire protection systems as well as environmental requirements) designed and constructed for purposes other than aircraft.

These facilities would meet or exceed the minimum size and construction values requested in the RFP

Please see Government response to question no. 1 in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

13 We respectfully request that the government remove the following language from the RFP that was added in amendment 0002.

“All relevant projects when combined must demonstrate experience with all four (4) of the above elements.”

The above language is very restrictive and will preclude highly qualified designers and contractors from pursuing the project. It is likely that this language will limit the competition, negatively impacting best value solutions for the government.

Please see Amendment 0003 of this solicitation. The Government has revised the solicitation Factor-2 Experience to state the following:

“All relevant projects when combined must demonstrate experience with at least three (3) of the above elements. All relevant projects, when combined, that demonstrate experience with all four (4) of the above elements may be rated higher.”

14 With Amendment 0002, the Government revised the Project relevancy and added the following sentence: “All relevant projects when combined must demonstrate experience with all four (4) of the above elements.” That sentence will likely make it impossible for any Offeror to qualify. Quite simply, the (4) different type of projects listed are each highly specialized and few and far between. It is unlikely that most prospective Offerors and their Design Firm can demonstrate relevant experience with all (4) types. Please consider eliminating that sentence to allow qualified Offerors an opportunity to submit Phase 1 Proposals.

Please see Government response to question no. 13 above.

15 The RFP states “The minimum awarded construction cost must be at least $30,000,000 for a project to be relevant”. Will the Government accept projects that were awarded less than $30,000,000, but have a final construction value of $30,000,000 or more?

No, as stated in the RFP, the minimum construction cost at time of award must be at least $30,000,000 for a project to be relevant.

b. REVISE Factor 2- Experience for both Construction and Design Experience under Section 00100

“Instructions to Offerors” of the RFP as follows:

FROM:

“All relevant projects when combined must demonstrate experience with all four (4) of the above elements.”

TO:

“All relevant projects when combined must demonstrate experience with at least three (3) of the above elements. All relevant projects, when combined, that demonstrate experience with all four (4) of the above elements may be rated higher.”

2. ALL OTHER PARAGRAPHS, PROVISIONS, AND CONDITIONS TO N62473-19-R-1215

REMAIN UNCHANGED. THE OFFEROR MUST ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF ALL

AMENDEMENTS ON THE OFFER SCHEDULE.

NAME OF THE OFFEROR: _____________________________

SIGNATURE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER:

Signature: ________________________________ Date: ________________

Printed Name/ Title: _________________________

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. Inquiries

Inquiries regarding the Request for Proposal (RFP) shall be submitted electronically using the Request for Information (RFI) form provided as Attachment L. The Point of Contacts (POCs) for inquiries are Sheena Hess at

(619) 532-1637 or via email at sheena.hess@navy.mil and Victoria Brizuela at (619) 556-0831 or via email at victoria.brizuela@navy.mil. The Government does not intend to respond to inquiries submitted less than ten (10) days before the proposal receipt date. RFP Parts 2-6 will be provided during Phase II. Therefore, requests for information regarding RFP Parts 2-6 will not be accepted until Phase II.

2. Proposal Submission Requirements

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be formatted as follows and furnished with 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 number and facsimile numbers, and email addresses of the Offeror and Lead

Design Firm;

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

(d) A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all 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, phone and facsimile numbers, and email addresses 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, where stipulated, must be adhered to. Proposals shall be submitted on 8.5” x 11” paper, utilizing both sides of the paper.

The format for the proposal is as follows:

Phase I:

Cover Letter SF1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) with blocks 14 through 20c completed Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable) Financial Questionnaire (Attachment A) in sealed envelope from financial institution Surety Form (see Attachment D ) Representations and Certifications – Section 00600 of RFP (submit all applicable clauses in section 0600) Proof of Current VETS-4212 Registration Optional for this section: Attachment B (Exhibit “A” Offer Team Composition and Management) and Attachment C (Exhibit “B” Offeror’s Team Consent) are optional forms and may be used by the Offeror as deemed necessary.

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

Offerors shall submit only the information/attachments required. Do not submit any additional information such as brochures or other pre-printed material.

A total of one (1) original and three (3) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy on CD of the complete Phase I proposal in response to this RFP must be received by this office no later than the date and time stated in Block 13 of the SF1442. Offerors shall address all Phase I evaluation factors and shall submit the proposal to the following address:

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest Acquisition Core- Navy Code RRA30.SH Attention: Sheena Hess/ Victoria Brizuela 1220 Pacific Highway, Building 128 San Diego, CA 92132-5190

Emailed or facsimile proposals will NOT be accepted.

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

THE FOLLOWING EVALUATION FACTORS ARE APPLICABLE ONLY TO THOSE

OFFERORS WHO ARE SELECTED TO PROCEED TO PHASE II OF THE SOURCE

SELECTION PROCESS. DO NOT SUBMIT RESPONSES TO FACTORS 4 THROUGH 8

IN PHASE I PROPOSALS.

Phase II:

Phase II Technical Proposal (include one (1) original and three (3) hard copies and one (1) CD):

Factor 4 – Safety Factor 5 – Technical Solution Factor 6 – Energy Design Reduction Factor 7 – Small Business Participation

Phase II Price Proposal (include one (1) original in a sealed envelope):

Factor 8 – Price (in sealed envelope) – The envelope shall contain the following original documents: SF1442 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) with blocks 14 through 20c completed, Contract Pricing Schedule (Offer Schedule); Bid Guarantee (see FAR clause 52.228-1)

3. Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visit

(a) A pre-proposal conference will be held on September 18, 2019 promptly from 09:30 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. at Mariner’s Park in San Diego, California at the following address: 1453 South 32nd Str. San Diego, CA 92113 where questions will be answered relative to this RFP. Comments, constructive criticism, and identification/notification of RFP inconsistencies are solicited as well. The Site Visit will be held on November 20, 2019 from 09:30 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. located at the project site in Naval Base Coronado (map of project site shall be provided to Contractors at a later date). A tour will be conducted at the project site with the Customer, Coastal PMD and FEAD Personnel. Offerors shall plan to obtain all necessary permits to access Naval Base Coronado prior to the site visit.

(b) The pre-proposal conference will include an opportunity for Prime Contractor and Small Business Subcontractor networking. Interested Prime Contractors and Small Business

Subcontractors are encouraged to participate. It is suggested that attendees come prepared for this event with company literature or brochures, as time will be given for Small Business Subcontractors to network with Prime Contractors interested in this procurement.

(c) All prospective Offerors are urged to attend this conference and site visit. In order to make the conference and site visit as productive as possible, Offerors are requested to submit, three days prior to the pre-proposal conference, any questions they may have in writing at least two days before the to Sheena Hess at sheena.hess@navy.mil and Victoria Brizuela at victoria.brizuela@navy.mil. The submission of written questions will not preclude anyone from posing questions during the pre-proposal conference.

(d) Failure of a prospective Offeror to submit any questions or to attend the conference will be construed to mean that the Offeror fully understands all requirements of the solicitation.

Prospective Offerors 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 the solicitation.

(e) No minutes of this meeting will be issued. All prospective Offerors 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 acknowledgement and receipt of any such amendment as described in Contract Clause “Amendment to Solicitations” of this section shall be applicable.

(f) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigation and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

4. Joint Venture Agreement:

(a) Joint Venture Offerors: Joint Venture Offerors shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement. The agreement shall include information that identifies the responsibilities for each entity under this contract, demonstrates the relationship between firms, and identifies contractual relationships and authorities to bind each entity of the joint venture.

The joint venture also must complete the online representations and certifications for each joint venture member as well as for the joint venture itself.

(b) Joint Venture Lead Design Firms: Joint Venture Lead Design Firms shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement. The joint venture agreement shall include information that identifies the responsibilities for each entity under this contract and demonstrates the relationship between firms.

5. Financial Questionnaire and Surety Form

Offerors shall submit the Financial Questionnaire to their financial institution and request the financial institution complete the questionnaire with regard to the Offeror’s firm. Upon completion of the questionnaire, the financial institution shall 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.

Offerors shall submit the Surety Form to their Surety and request the Surety complete the form with regard to the Offeror’s firm so that the offeror can include the form 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, Surety Form, and Representations and Certifications will not be rated. They will, however, be considered in assessing the Offeror’s responsibility.

6. System for Award Management

The System for Award Management (SAM) is a Federal Government owned and operated free web site that consolidates the capabilities in Central Contractor Registry (CCR),/Federal Registration(FedReg), Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA), and Excluded Parties List System (EPLS).

Contractors must be registered in SAM prior to award of a Department of Defense (DoD) contract.

For more information and to complete the electronic representations and certifications, see the SAM website at https://www.sam.gov. A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor that is not registered in SAM. Remember to review the NAICS codes listed in your SAM record and make sure that you have listed the NAICS code for this procurement (NAICS 236220 –Commercial and Institutional Building Construction).

7. Subcontracting Information

For information regarding the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Mentor-Protégé Program see http://www.sba.gov. For information regarding the Department of Defense (DoD) Funded mentor Protégé Program, see http://www.acq.osd.mil/osbp/sb/programs/. As part of the outreach program it is recommended that your company/firm consider using the Dynamic Small Business Search as a source of small businesses. The Dynamic Small Business Search is a free Internet database of information on more than 171,000 small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses, and HUBZone small businesses. As of October 1, 1999, small disadvantaged subcontractors must receive certification from the SBA. The Dynamic Small Business Search is available at http://dsbs.sba..gov/dsbs/search/dsp_dsbs.cfm. Information on the DoD’s women-owned small business program is available at http://www.acq.osd.mil/osbp/sb/initiatives/wosb/index.shtml.

8. Federal Contractor Program

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 22.1303, any contractor or subcontractor with a contract of $100,000 or more with the Federal Government must take affirmative action to hire and promote qualified targeted veterans which 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-4212 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 on the VETS-4212 web site https://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212 or employers may contact the VETS-4212 Customer Support at 1-866-237-0275 or via email at VETS4212-customersupport@dol.gov. A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor that has not submitted a required annual form VETS-4212, Federal Contractor Veterans’ Employment Report (VETS-4212 Report) if subject to the reporting requirements of 38 U.S.C. 4212(d) for that fiscal year.

9. 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.

10. No Alternate or Multiple Proposals

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

READ THE FOLLOWING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ACQUISITION REQUIREMENTS.

PROPOSALS MUST SET FORTH FULL, ACCURATE, AND COMPLETE INFORMATION AS

REQUIRED BY THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (INCLUDING ATTACHMENTS). THE

PENALTY FOR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS IN PROPOSALS IS PRESCRIBED IN 18

U.S.C. §1001.

THE GOVERNMENT INTENDS TO EVALUATE PROPOSALS AND AWARD WITHOUT

DISCUSSIONS. HOWEVER, THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT

DISCUSSIONS IF IT IS LATER DETERMINED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICERTO BE

NECESSARY. THEREFORE, EACH INITIAL OFFER SHOULD CONTAIN THE BEST

TERMS FROM A TECHNICAL AND PRICE STANDPOINT.

This solicitation includes FAR clause 52.225-11, Buy American Act – Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements and FAR 52.225-12, Notice of Buy American Act Requirement – Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements.

Contract Description

This procurement includes one (1) base item. This procurement is located at Naval Base Coronado, San Diego, California and is being advertised on an unrestricted basis inviting full and open competition and uses the two-phase design-build selection procedures and consists of one solicitation covering both phases. Source Selection procedures will be used with the intent to award a firm-fixed price construction contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal, conforming to the Request for Proposal (RFP), is the most advantageous and offers the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered. Price evaluation preference will be given to HUBZone Small Business concerns, in accordance with FAR 52.219-4.

Description of Work

This acquisition will result in an unrestricted full and open Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) Design-Build contract for the design and construction of P-1022, Aircraft Paint Complex at Naval Base Coronado, San Diego, California.

The work to be acquired under this solicitation is for the design and construction of a state of the art Paint and Corrosion Control Facilities to include provision of two new buildings, a paint facility and a corrosion facility, a new wash rack and a heat resistant aircraft access ramp. The buildings will consist of high bay areas sized similarly to existing facilities on site and designed to handle the aircraft requirements at Fleet Readiness Center Southwest (FRCSW) North Island. The facility is primarily intended to handle an entire aircraft MV22, F-18, and H-60 helicopter corrosion issues and repainting. The Paint Building will consist of four bays, divisible by retracting panels to eight bays.

The corrosion facility shall consist of two (2) bays that are not divisible.

The project includes all pertinent site improvements and site preparations, and all work required for mechanical and electrical utilities, telecommunications, environmental mitigation, drainage, and exterior lighting. The Base Proposal Item includes all bonds, labor, materials, equipment, transportation, supervision, and incidental related work to provide design, construction, procurement, and installation services to construct the facility.

The period of performance for the design and construction of P-1022 will be 874 calendar days (including 15 calendar days for bonds) from contract award as set forth in the schedule.

CLIN 0001 Description Period of Performance

Base Item 0001 FFP for all bonds, design, materials, labor, and equipment for project P-1022 Aircraft Paint Complex at Naal Base Coronado, San Diego, California in accordance with RFP Parts 2-6 (issued separately), and all amendments.

BASIS OF AWARD AND EVALUATION FACTORS

1. Basis of Award

(a) The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

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

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

(d) All technical factors when combined are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating; and all technical factors and the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating, when combined are approximately equal to price.

(e) Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions. Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal. The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(es) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(es). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

2. Definitions

100% Complete:

For construction projects: The facility is completely constructed and ready for the intended use.

For design projects: 100% plans and specifications signed off by an Architect-Engineer and ready for construction with final cost estimate. Does not include any Post Construction Award Support (PCAS).

Acceptable Features: A proposed method or technique in the proposal that addresses solicitation requirements such that no further explanation or documentation is necessary.

Best Value: The expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. See FAR 2.101.

Clarifications: Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussion is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

Combined Project(s): Projects with multiple starting and ending points, performed under separate task orders, delivery orders, or multiple contracts combined in a single description. No credit will be given for work performed under MACC/IDIQ contracts in the aggregate or for multiple projects completed under more than one task/delivery order.

Communications: Exchanges, between the Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(b).

Competitive Range: See FAR 15.306(c).

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.

Design-Build: Refers to combining design and construction in a single contract with one contractor. Design-build projects require design of the project by a licensed professional (i.e. engineer, architect). Projects that only require shop drawing level effort are not design-build projects.

Design-Bid-Build: Refers to the traditional delivery method where design and construction are sequential and contracted for separately, with two separate contracts and two contractors; one for an A-E contract and one for a construction contract.

Discussions: Exchanges (i.e., negotiations) in a competitive environment that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range.

See FAR 15.306(d).

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

Experience: Pertains to work performed by an Offeror and Offeror’s Team, within the prescribed timeframe, which is the same or similar to the work that may be ordered under this contract in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Experience is distinct from past performance (how well an Offeror has performed).

Joint Venture (JV): A legal business entity formed between two or more companies (parties) to undertake the performance activities of a contract together. This does not include other arrangements such as “teaming agreement” or “strategic alliance,” which are not recognized as bona fide joint ventures for the purposes of this solicitation.

Lead Design Firm / Design Team: Applies to the Offeror’s primary design firm(s) and any in-house lead designer(s).

New Construction: Refers to creating entirely new facilities (or new expansions/additions to existing facilities where a new structure and foundation are provided as part of the expansion/addition).

Offeror: Refers to the Contractor submitting the proposal as Offeror, including joint ventures, whose name appears in Block 14 of Standard Form (SF) 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award). In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between the Offeror’s name cited on the SF 1442 and any other part of the proposal, the SF 1442 is the conclusive document in determining the Offeror who is submitting the proposal.

Offeror’s Team: Refers to the Offeror (see definition), the Offeror's outside Lead Design Firm, and/or in-house Lead Designer(s) only; does not include subcontractors or consultants.

Page: Refers to one printed side of a piece of paper. (For example, 5 pieces of paper printed on both sides would result in 10 pages of narrative.)

Past Performance: Relates to how well an Offeror and Offeror’s Team has performed; e.g., the quality of work accomplished, schedule compliance, customer satisfaction.

Performance Confidence Assessment: 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.

Project: A design-build or design-bid-build construction activity or task, with a single starting point and a single ending point.

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.

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 solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

Renovation, Repair, Alteration Project Types: Refers to renovation, alteration, and repair type projects refers to projects where the work modifies existing facilities.

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 of disruption of schedule, or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Self-Perform: Refers to performing relevant major trade work in-house without subcontractors. This does not include project administration or management functions (such as quality control or safety program) and miscellaneous work (such as housekeeping or cleanup). Relevant and major construction trade work is that which is the same or similar to the work that may be ordered under this contract.

Significant Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Source Selection Authority (SSA): The official designated to make the source selection decision.

Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD): The document that reflects the SSA's independent, integrated, comparative assessment and decision.

Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB): A group of individuals representing the various functional disciplines relevant to the acquisition that is responsible for evaluating proposals against the solicitation criteria.

Strength: 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.

Sustainable Features: Features in the design, construction, and operation of facilities with the goal of conserving resources and minimizing adverse effects on the environment while enhancing occupant productivity, minimizing energy use, improving quality and durability of materials, increasing recycling and use of recycled products, waste reduction, etc. Relevant sustainable features are those that are the same or similar to those recognized by Third Party Certification entities.

Ten-Year Period: The prescribed timeframe for this solicitation that refers to the period of time for which projects may be submitted for experience, past performance, or for prior support for small business. The ten-year period is calculated by counting back ten years from the initial RFP issuance date.

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

3. Evaluation Factors

Offerors will be evaluated on the following factors:

Phase I:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach

Factor 2 – Experience Factor 3 – Past Performance

The most highly qualified Offerors selected to participate in Phase II will be evaluated on the following factors.

Phase II:

Factor 5 – Technical Solution

Factor 6 – Energy Design Reduction Factor 7 – Small Business Participation Factor 8 – Price

The distinction between experience and past performance is that experience pertains to the volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work described under the definition of recent, relevant projects, 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.

The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is as follows:

Phase One shall consist of Factors 1, 2, and 3. Factor 1 (Technical Approach) will be rated as either Acceptable or Unacceptable. If an Offeror is rated Unacceptable for Factor 1, they will not be invited to participate in Phase Two.

Factor 2 (Experience) is of equal importance to Factor 3 (Past Performance).

In making the best value award decision in Phase Two, Factors 2 through 7 and price will be considered. The technical factors (Factor 2 Experience, Factor 4 Safety, Factor 5 Technical Solution, and Factor 6 Energy Design Reduction) are of equal importance to each other, and when combined, are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (Factor 3 Past Performance). Factor 7 Small Business Participation will be rated as either Acceptable or Unacceptable. If an Offeror is rated Unacceptable for Factor 7, they may not be eligible for award.

The following combined non-price factors (Factor 2 Experience, Factor 3 Past Performance, Factor 4 Safety, Factor 5 Technical Solution, and Factor 6 Energy Design Reduction) are approximately equal to Factor 8 Price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality, or if price is so high, as to significantly diminish the value of a non-price proposal’s superiority to the Government. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

Offerors are advised that those Offerors who are selected to proceed to Phase II are not guaranteed receipt of a contract award. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. Price evaluation preference will be given to HUBZone Small Business concerns, in accordance with FAR 52.219-4.

Upon conclusion of Phase I evaluations, the Government shall identify a maximum of five (5) most highly qualified Offerors to proceed to Phase II.

PHASE ONE Basis of Evaluation/Submission Requirements/Criteria Description Factor 1 – Technical Approach:

(a) Proposal Submittal Requirements:

The composition and management of the firms proposed as the construction and design-build (DB) team for this contract will be evaluated in this factor.

The Offeror shall submit the following information under Tab “1”:

(1) Provide a technical approach narrative describing the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement. Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the various firms (see FAR Subpart 9.6). The narrative shall also include a simple organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the entities. If the experience of an entity is being claimed in Factor 2, that entity must be named in the above narrative and organizational chart.

The technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages) including the organizational chart. The information requested in item #2 below is not included in this page limitation.

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

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will be used as a means to evaluate the organizational structure and teaming relationships proposed by the Offeror. This factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis.

Factor 2 – Experience:

(a) Proposal Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information using Exhibit “D” and Exhibit “E” (Construction and Design Experience Project Data Sheet) under Tab 2:

(1) Construction Experience:

Submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of four (4) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrate your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as Government or commercial contracts/ projects your firm has completed in the last ten (10) years, which demonstrates experience in at least two of the following elements:

1. New construction of aircraft hangars used for aircraft maintenance,

2. New construction of aircraft hangars used for applying mechanical and/or chemical corrosion control processes

3. New construction of aircraft hangars used for applying paint and other coatings to aircraft

4. Construction coordination with active airfield operations.

All relevant projects when combined must demonstrate experience with at least three (3) of the above elements. All relevant projects, when combined, that demonstrate experience with all four (4) of the above elements may be rated higher.

The minimum awarded construction cost must be at least $30,000,000 for a project to be relevant.

The Offeror may submit construction projects with major renovation(s) of existing aircraft hangars as defined above.

However, the offeror shall submit at least one (1) new construction project that was design-build of new construction of aircraft hangars used for aircraft maintenance, for applying mechanical and/or chemical corrosion control processes, or for applying paint and other coatings to aircraft, with a minimum cost of $30,000,000. Major renovation(s) is defined as restoration, repair, replacement, or modernization of not less than 60% of all major components including but not limited to mechanical/industrial systems, electrical, plumbing, interior/exterior finishes, roofing, hangar doors, built-in equipment, fire/life safety systems, telecom, and structural. FF&E is not considered a major component.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be 100% completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

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

rather Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

The attached Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Exhibit “D”) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded;

however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods). In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features. Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members may be rated lower.

Offerors are still limited to a total of four (4) projects combined.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement to demonstrate construction experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement that the subcontractor will have in performance of this contract.

More weight may be given to the Offeror’s projects than to those submitted for subcontractors.

(2) Design Experience

Submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of four (4) relevant design projects for the design team that best demonstrates design experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as Government or commercial contracts/projects your firm has completed within the last 10 years, which demonstrate experience in at least two of the following elements:

1. New design of aircraft hangars used for aircraft maintenance

2. New design of aircraft hangars used for applying mechanical and/or chemical corrosion control processes

3. New design of aircraft hangars used for applying paint and other coatings to aircraft.

4. Design with active airfield operations coordination.

All relevant projects when combined must demonstrate experience with at least three (3) of the above elements. All relevant projects, when combined, that demonstrate experience with all four (4) of the above elements may be rated higher.

The minimum awarded construction cost must be at least $30,000,000 for a project to be relevant.

The Offeror may submit construction projects with major renovation(s) of existing aircraft hangars as defined above.

However, the offeror shall submit at least one (1) new construction project that was design-build of new construction of aircraft hangars used for aircraft maintenance, for applying mechanical and/or chemical corrosion control processes, or for applying paint and other coatings to aircraft, with a minimum cost of $30,000,000. Major renovation(s) is defined as restoration, repair, replacement, or modernization of not less than 60% of all major components including but not limited to mechanical/industrial systems, electrical, plumbing, interior/exterior finishes, roofing, hangar doors, built-in equipment, fire/life safety systems, telecom, and structural. FF&E is not considered a major component.

Projects submitted shall be 100% completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

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

The attached Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Exhibit “E”) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods). In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features. Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor to demonstrate design experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor. Offerors proposing multiple design firms should submit relevant project experience for all design firms. Failure to do so may result in a lower rating. Offerors are still limited to a total of four (4) projects combined.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction and design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review four (4) projects for construction and four (4) for design. Any projects submitted in excess of the four (4) for Construction Experience and four (4) for Design Experience will not be considered.

Weighting of submissions:

A relevant project with three or more of the above relevancy elements may be given more weight;

A relevant project with an awarded construction cost of $50,000,000 or above may be given more weight.

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

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

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

Factor 3 – Past Performance:

The evaluation of past performance will include the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, commitment to customer satisfaction, record of conforming to specifications and applicable law (i.e., labor standards and safety standards),…