N6945019R0904_Aircraft_Maint_Hangar_RFP.pdf

P211 REPLACE AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR AT NAVAL AIR STATION (NAS) KEY WEST, FL

THIS SOLICITATION IS FOR A DESIGN-BUILD (DB), FIRM FIXED PRICE (FFP), CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. THE MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION IS BETWEEN $25,000,000.00 AND $100,000,000.00. THE NAICS CODE IS 236220, COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION. THE SIZE STANDARD IS $36,500,000.

THIS IS A TWO-PHASE NEGOTIATED SOURCE SELECTION PROCUREMENT UTILIZING THE BEST VALUE TRADE-OFF APPROACH.

ALL CORRESPONDANCE REGARDING THIS SOLICITATION SHALL BE DIRECTED TO ROSALIND WHITFIELD AT rosalind.w hitf ield@navy.mil AND STEPHEN SPARKS AT stephen.sparks@navy.mil

THIS SOLICITATION IS SOLICITED ON AN UNRESTRICTED BASIS WITH FULL AND OPEN COMPEETITION FOR PARTICIPATION BY ALL BUSINESS FIRMS WITH SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY THIS CONTRACT.

ROSALIND M. WHITFIELD 904-542-6692

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

06-Mar-2019

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

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

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 ________814 calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________52.211-10

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 __________4 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________06 Apr 2019 (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 _______90 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 SOUTHEAST

ACQ CORE - AE/PPV/CE

BLDG 903, PO BOX 30

JACKSONVILLE FL 32212-0030

N69450

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE N69450

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

03:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

NAVFAC SOUTHEAST

ACQUISITION CORE

BLDG 903, PO BOX 30

NAS JACKSONVILLE

JACKSONVILLE FL 32212-0030

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

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

(904) 542-6942FAX:TEL: (904) 542-6915 TEL: FAX:

N6945019R0904 49

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

N6945019R0904

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Each Aircraft Maintenance Hangar

FFP

Full design and construction of the new hangar, to include demolition of existing buildings A-936 (the existing hangar), A-985, A-4160, A-4161, and A-4162 (all facilities in the footprint of the new hangar site), exclusive of items noted in Bid Options 1 and 2

Demolition Option 1- add the design and construction for the demolition of building A-1125. Refer to details in this RFP regarding the critical nature of the phasing of the transfer of building A-1125 operations and its subsequent demolition

Demolition Option 2 - add the design and construction of the 142-space parking lot, as shown on drawing C-202 (Site and Utility Plan, Area 2).

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

OPTION Furniture, Fixtures, & Equipment (FF&E)

FFP

Planned Modification for procurement of furniture, fixtures and equipment for all facilities. Handling and Administrative Rate (HAR) of _____%. This percentage will be multiplied by the FF&E budget of $4,823,155 to get total HAR amount for this CLIN.

Contractors shall propose HAR rate not to exceed 5% in block above then multiply by FF&E budget for total in block to right.

NET AMT

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE TERMS

Supplies/services will be inspected/accepted at:

CLIN INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

0001 N/A N/A N/A Government 0002 N/A N/A N/A N/A

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 814 dys. ADC 1 PWD KEY WEST

INSPECTOR OF RECORD

PO BOX 9018, BLDG A-629

LEXINGTON & LANGLEY

KEY WEST FL 33040-9018

305-293-2357 FOB: Destination

N44222

0002 N/A N/A N/A N/A

OPTION DELIVERY POP

The period of performance for this project is 814 calendar days:

a. Phase I – 664 days (Demolition A-985, A-4160, A-4161, and A-4162 and construction of new hangar, frontal apron, and parking lot)

b. Phase II – 150 days (Demolition A-936 and A-1125, and construction of apron at A-936)

NOTE: No additional days will be added when options are exercised.

FF&E shall be completed within the Phase I period of performance (664 calendar days). It will be executed no later than six months from beneficial occupancy date.

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTING OFF

DESCRIPTION OF ACQUISITION

1. This acquisition will result in the award of a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) Contract for Design-Build Construction.

2. Project P211 Replace Aircraft Maintenance Hangar constructs a two-module Type I aircraft maintenance hangar and associated airfield pavement for aircraft ingress and egress to hangar and operational storage. The new facility will contain high-bay space, shops and maintenance space, operation, training, and administrative space. This project will replace deteriorated, inadequate facilities and provide an adequate aircraft maintenance facility that is essential in supporting NAS Key West’s mission.

The new facility will be designed to meet or exceed the useful service life specified in the DoD Unified Facilities Criteria and the project incorporates features that provide the lowest practical life cycle cost solutions satisfying the facility requirements with the goal of maximizing energy efficiency. This project will also provide anti-terrorism/force protection (AT/FP) features and comply with AT/FP regulations and physical security mitigation in accordance with Department of Defense (DoD) Minimum Anti-Terrorism Standards for Buildings.

Programmed Space – Demolition:

Building A-936 110,150 sf Building A-4162 968 sf Building A-1125 7,290 sf

Programmed Space – New Construction:

Maintenance Hangar – OH Space (High Bay) 45,112 sf Maintenance Hangar – 01 Space (Crew and Equipment) 39,320 sf Maintenance Hangar – 02 Space (Administrative) 26,360 sf Aircraft Parking Apron 45,004 sf

ADITIONAL INFORMATION FOR OFFERORS

Contractor’s performance will be evaluated using the respective contractor performance evaluation report entry system located on the website http://www.cpars.gov/. Prior to commencement of work the contractor is required to provide the government with the name, phone number and e-mail address of the “Contractor’s Representative” that will be responsible for receipt and review of draft performance evaluations prepared by the government in the appropriate system. It is the contractor’s responsibility to keep this contact information current.

INQUIRIES/QUESTIONS

All pre-proposal inquiries (PPIs) must be submitted in writing via the “Bidder Inquiry” in ProjNet at www.projnet.org/projnet <http://www.projnet.org/projnet>. The bidder inquiry key for this solicitation is 6GWDFZ‐CEZZJV. All questions shall be submitted at least ten (10) calendar days prior to the closing date of the solicitation in order to permit adequate time to reply to the inquiry. Answers will be made via ProjNet, however, answers do not change the solicitation, any changes to the solicitation will be made via an amendment to the RFP and will be posted on FBO (www.fbo.gov <http://www.fbo.gov>).

All Offerors are encouraged to register on ProjNet for alerts and to stay abreast of bidder inquiries and Government responses that are posted in reference to this solicitation. Only self-registered users on ProjNet can submit and review inquiries. A “how to” guide has been provided in the attachments provided under additional documents in FBO. Those submitting inquiries will receive a system generated e-mail notification when their inquiry has been processed and responded to. It is the Offeror's responsibility to monitor for inquiries and responses.

The Point of Contact (POC) for other questions/inquiries is as follows:

Questions/Inquiries Primary POC: Secondary POC:

Rosalind Whitfield Stephen Sparks Phone: (904) 542-6692 Phone: (904) 542-6915 Email: rosalind.whitfield@navy.mil Email: stephen.sparks@navy.mil

It is recommended offerors periodically check FBO to see if additional postings have been made. It is the offeror’s responsibility to check FBO for all postings.

Amendments will be posted directly to FBO. The posting of amendments generates an automated message to the offeror’s point of contact listed in FBO, alerting them to the posting.

At the commencement of Phase II, the drawings and specifications will be posted to FBO under the Additional Documents section of this RFP. Additionally, other postings will be made to FBO, such as revised drawings, etc., under the Additional Documents section of the RFP. Postings to the Additional Documents section of FBO DO NOT generate an automated email to offerors.

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT

The Pre-Proposal Conference and Site Visit information will be provided in Phase II of the solicitation.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS (TWO-PHASE)

In response to this request for proposal, the complete proposal shall include Submission Requirements and the Non- Cost/Price Proposal Price Proposal for Phase I and the Price Proposal and the Non-Cost/Price Proposal for Phase II, submitted as follows:

A. PHASE I: Submission Requirements and Non-Cost/Price Proposal

The Submission Requirements and Non-Cost/Price Proposal shall be submitted in accordance with the solicitation.

All pages shall be numbered and appropriately tabbed, conforming to the proposal submittal requirements’ structure for each evaluation factor. Offerors are encouraged to simply securely staple or bind and three hole-punch proposals, and enclose each in an envelope. Binders or presentation folders are unnecessary.

The front of the Submission Requirements and Non-Cost/Price Proposals should clearly state:

• Type of Proposal (Submission Requirements or Non-Cost/Price Original or Copy)

• RFP Number and Title of Project

• Offeror’s Name

Offeror’s shall include the following information with their submission requirements:

• Authorized negotiator’s (Point of Contact (POC)) name

• POC telephone number

• POC email address

• DUNS Number (offeror and any team members)

• CAGE Code

• TIN (Federal Tax ID Number)

• It is recommended to also include an additional POC including contact information

The outside of the proposal package shall be labeled “RFP N69450-19-R-0904, P211 REPLACE AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR NAS KEY WEST, FL PHASE I, ATTN: ROSALIND WHITFIELD, ACQ AE/CE;

DO NOT OPEN IN MAIL ROOM”.

Entire Phase I Non-Cost/Price Proposal shall not exceed 24 pages in length and formatted on 8.5 x 11 inch paper with one inch margins using 12 point, Times New Roman font for Factors 1-4. This includes all typed pages, catalogue cuts, and brochure or other pre-printed material that may be submitted. This does not include Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ), CPARS evaluations, or partnership/joint venture agreements. Any pages beyond the first 24 pages submitted will not be evaluated.

B. PHASE II: Price Proposal and Non-Cost/Price Proposal

The Price Proposal and the Non-Cost/Price Proposal shall be submitted in accordance with the solicitation. All pages shall be numbered and appropriately tabbed, conforming to the proposal submittal requirements’ structure for each evaluation factor. Offerors are encouraged to simply securely staple or bind and three hole-punch proposals, and enclose in an envelope. Binders or presentation folders are unnecessary.

The Price Proposal shall be placed in a separate sealed envelope if delivered in the same package as the Non-Price Proposal.

The front of the Price Proposal and Non-Cost/Price Proposals should clearly state:

• Type of Proposal (Price Proposal or Non-Cost/Price Original or Copy)

• RFP Number and Title of Project

• Offeror’s Name

If changed since Phase I, Offeror’s shall include the following information with their submission requirements:

• Authorized negotiator’s (Point of Contact (POC)) name

• POC telephone number

• POC email address

• DUNS Number (offeror and any team members)

• CAGE Code

• TIN (Federal Tax ID Number)

• It is recommended to also include an additional POC including contact information

Submit one original, one copy, and one electronic copy (CD format) of the Price Proposal. Pricing does not need to be included in the electronic copy of the proposal. The outside of the proposal package shall be labeled “RFP N69450-19-R-0904, P211 REPLACE AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR NAS KEY WEST, FL PHASE II, ATTN: ROSALIND WHITFIELD, ACQ AE/CE; DO NOT OPEN IN MAIL ROOM”.

Entire Phase II Non-Cost/Price Proposal shall not exceed (to be specified at commencement of Phase II) pages in length and formatted on 8.5 x 11 inch paper with one inch margins using 12 point, Times New Roman font for Factors 5-7. This includes all typed pages, catalogue cuts, and brochure or other pre-printed material that may be submitted. This does not include any required drawings. Any pages beyond these maximum limits will not be evaluated.

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

DELIVERY INFORMATION

Proposals (Phase I and Phase II) shall be mailed or hand delivered to the address in Block #7 of the SF1442.

Hand-carried proposals: Hand carried proposals will require access to NAS Jacksonville. If the offeror needs access to NAS Jacksonville, the offeror must complete the NAS JAX Base Access AMAG Form for the individual who will be "driving a vehicle" onto the base. Passengers do not have to submit a form. Forms must be submitted via email no later than five (5) business days prior to the closing date of the solicitation to Rosalind Whitfield at rosalind.whitfield@navy.mil.

Submission of an AMAG form is no guarantee that you will be able to get on the base. If for any reason you get to the gate and are not allowed onto the base (even if you have submitted an AMAG form), you will need to find another way to get your proposal delivered. Government personnel will not come to the gate to sponsor you on base to deliver your proposal or pick up the proposal from you. Ultimately, it is the offeror's responsibility to ensure timely proposal submission to the specified location. Due to heightened security, it is recommended that you allow additional, sufficient time to get into the building and turn in your proposal. Use of a delivery service such as the US Postal Service, FedEx, UPS, etc. is highly encouraged.

The submitted AMAG form is only good for the proposal due date. If the proposal due date is extended, you must submit a new AMAG Form. If any other information listed on a submitted AMAG form changes (name, driver license information, address etc.), please submit a new AMAG form with the updated information. Vehicles without a pass will not be permitted on the base. Vehicle pass requests after the deadline will not be accepted. Vehicle drivers must stop at the security and pass office to obtain their vehicle pass.

In addition to the AMAG form a SECNAV 5512/1 Department of the Navy Population ID Card/Base Access Pass Registration is required for access to Naval Air Station Jacksonville. Contractors, vendors, workers, and visitors must fill out and bring the SECNAV 5512 APPROVED PASS ID FORM with them in order to gain access to the base. DO NOT SIGN the form. A completed form must be brought with the required supporting documentation to the Pass and ID office where the form will be signed in front of a government witness. If the proper documents are not provided with the SECNAV 5512, Security will not be issue a pass. The visitor must show one (1) document from List A OR one (1) Document from List B establishing identity AND one (1) from List C establishing employability. Please see page 3 of SECNAV 5512/1 Department of the Navy Population ID Card/Base Access Pass Registration for complete instructions.

You must have a valid picture ID, vehicle registration, and proof of insurance. Please arrive early as it may take some time to get the vehicle pass. All passengers in the vehicle must have picture ID. The Security and Pass Office is located at the Main Gate, Yorktown Gate, 1st building on the right.

Be advised that ALL visitors entering NAS Jacksonville are subject to a background investigation (BI). Visitors must complete the Base Access Pass Registration form and give to the Security Personnel at the Pass and ID office.

Visitors must also bring acceptable identification documents as specified on the Base Access Pass Registration form, as well as vehicle registration and proof of insurance. Visitors may be asked to fill out additional paperwork. If the visitor refuses the investigation, they will be denied access to the base. All visitors MUST know the name of the command they are visiting and MUST provide the last six numbers of their SSN to the security clerk at the Pass & ID window. If the visitor refuses the investigation, they will be denied access to the base.

The AMAG and Base Access Pass Registration form has been uploaded to FBO under the attachments.

PROPOSALS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL MUST BE RECEIVED NO

LATER THAN THE DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED IN BLOCK 13A OF THE SF1442. Proposals not received by the time and date specified shall be treated in accordance with FAR 52.215-1 “Instruction to Offerors - Competitive Acquisitions” and may be rejected.

BASIS FOR AWARD

1. The Government intends to award no more than (1) contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose proposal represent the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors (Phase I: Technical Approach, Experience, Past Performance and Safety; Phase II: Technical Solution, Energy Design Reduction, and Small Business Utilization) in the solicitation.

2. In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation, 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. As stated in the solicitation, 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.

6. 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.

A. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS/DESCRIPTIONS

1. The technical rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal.

a. A combined technical/risk evaluation considering risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings shall be used. The technical risk evaluation shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the following table. Adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign an overall rating to each technical proposal and to assign a rating for each technical factor. Use upper case letter ratings for major technical factors as well as the overall rating. The addition of plus (+) or minus (-) to an adjective rating is not allowed.

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Outstanding (O)

Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good (G)

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable (A)

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal (M)

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable (U)

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

2. Definitions: The following definitions are provided to assist evaluators in the evaluation of each non-cost/price factor.

a. 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.

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

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

d. 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.

B. SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION EVALUATION

1. Per NFAS 15.304(b), for unrestricted acquisitions, an evaluation factor for Small Business Utilization shall be included and shall be weighted at least equal to the highest rated technical factor.

2. Small business participation will be evaluated utilizing the ratings outlined in Table 4.

Table 4. Small Business Rating Method

Outstanding (O) Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good (G) Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Acceptable (A) Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Marginal (M) Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable (U) Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

C. SAFETY EVALUATION

1. Per NFAS 15.304(d), solicitations utilizing source selection procedures for procurements within the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas shall contain a standard “Safety” technical evaluation factor. This factor shall be included as a stand-alone evaluation factor and not as a sub-factor or an element of the Past Performance evaluation factor. This action will result in the selection of contractors that have consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and the ability to properly manage and implement safety procedures for themselves and all tiers of subcontractors under their purview.

2. The safety evaluation has three elements: Experience Modification Rate (EMR); Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA) Days Away from Work, Job Restriction, or Transfer (DART) and Total Recordable Case (TRC); and Technical Approach to Safety.

3. The three elements of safety identified above are not sub-factors. The evaluators should collectively consider all elements of safety when assigning an overall adjectival rating for this factor. The SSEB will need to make a qualitative determination of the rating for this factor, taking into account the risk ratings for EMR and DART and the subjective evaluation of the narrative.

4. Evaluators will not average the rating from the three previous complete calendar years for the EMR, DART and TRC and should consider data trends.

5. The following should be utilized by evaluators as a general guideline to evaluate the EMR, DART and TRC rates:

Risk EMR Very Low Risk Less than 0.6 Low Risk From 0.6 to less than 0.8 Moderate Risk From 0.8 to 1.0 High Risk Greater than1.0 to 1.1 Extremely High Risk Greater than 1.1

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

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

Note: When the requirement is for goods or services in an industry with a much higher than average incident rate, the Source Selection Authority may authorize a proportional increase in acceptance rates to ensure fairness.

D. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

1. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. The currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

2. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

The first is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance. The second is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The third is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to those aspects of an offeror’s contract history that would give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following:

similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services) and extent of subcontract/teaming. The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts;

rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

3. Past Performance relevancy will be rated as either “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”.

Table 5. Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival Rating Definition Acceptable 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 Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or for whom information on past performance is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonable assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

4. The SSEB will review all past performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment. A separate quality assessment rating is not required;

rather, the past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy and quality of performance.

In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance. In this case, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a confidence rating of “neutral.” Although the SSEB may not rate an offeror that lacks recent, relevant past performance favorably or unfavorably with regard to past performance, the SSA may determine, that a “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” past performance rating is worth more than a “Neutral Confidence” past performance rating in a best value tradeoff as long as the determination is consistent with stated selection criteria.

The Table 8 ratings below may also be used for evaluation of a technical factor or sub-factor for “Corporate Experience” that also evaluates past experience.

5. Performance Confidence Assessment. This source selection requires a greater level of discrimination within the past performance evaluation, therefore, the SSEB shall use all confidence ratings identified in Table 8 below.

Table 8. Performance Confidence Assessments

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

E. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Phase I:

Factor 1- Technical Approach Factor 2- Experience Factor 3- Past Performance Factor 4- Safety

Phase II:

Factor 5- Technical Solution Factor 6- Energy Design Reduction Factor 7- Small Business Utilization

In accordance with FAR 36.3, this procurement will use Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedures.

For the two-phase design-build procurement, Factors 1-4 will be evaluated in Phase I, and Factors 5-7 (and their respective sub factors) will be evaluated in Phase II. Factor 1 will only be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable. If an Offeror is rated Unacceptable in Factor 1, then they will not be considered for Phase II. In making the best value award decision after Phase II, the government will consider all factors and price.

2. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors and sub factors is the technical factors (Factors 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7) are of equal importance to each other respectively and when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 3). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-cost/price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

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

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(1) Executed SF1442. Offeror shall insert its company name, address, DUNS Number, CAGE Code, and Federal Tax ID number in Block #14, telephone number in Block #15, acknowledge all amendments in Block #19 (if applicable), name and title of person authorized to sign in Block #20A, signature in Block #20B, and offer date in Block #20C of the SF1442.

(2) Schedule of Prices for Contract Line Items (CLINs). CLIN 0001 Base Bid - New Hangar Construction includes demolition of buildings A-936, A-4160, A-4161, and A-4162. Option 1 - Demolish A-1125, and Option 2 - Parking Lot Extension (142 spaces). CLIN(s) price shall be considered available for award for 120 days from the proposal due date.

(i) Options shall be awarded no later than 120 days after date of award.

(3) Bid bond (SF-24). Offeror shall submit a bid bond (SF24) in the amount of 20% of your total project bid price or $3,000,000 whichever amount is less.

(4) System for Award Management (SAM). Offeror shall ensure current registration on the SAM website, www.sam.gov, including Annual Representations and Certifications are complete and updated for this procurement. If a Representation or Certification required by Section 00600 of the RFP is not provided in SAM, include the Representation or Certification in your price proposal.

(5) Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). Offeror shall ensure FAPIIS Certification as required by FAR 52.209-7, Information Regarding Responsibility Matters (October 2018).

(6) Veteran’s Employment & Training Service (VETS). VETS-4212 Federal Contractor Reporting. Offeror shall ensure a current VETS-4212 report has been submitted to the Department of Labor website http://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212.htm, if the offeror is required to submit. An email confirmation of submission can be requested and received by the offeror from the DOL website and is to be submitted in the price proposal. If the offeror is not required to submit a report to VETS-4212, include a brief statement stating that the offeror is not required to submit a report. Visit the VETS-4212 website for details concerning if your company is required to submit a VETS-4212 report and to request an email confirmation of submission.

**Note**: The bid bond, SAM, and VETS-4212 registrations must be in the name/CAGE/DUNS of the offeror identified on the SF1442.

(b) Price:

Price proposals shall be submitted separately from the technical proposals. Provide original and copies as indicated in block 13A of the SF 1442 and one (1) electronic copy (CD) of the solicitation submittal requirements identified below.

Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items (see Section 00010 of the solicitation). The Government intends to evaluate all options and will included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in 00100 of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

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

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGE.

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

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

(c) Non-cost/price Factors:

(1) Factor 1 - Technical Approach (Phase I)

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

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

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

The technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages) including the organizational chart. The information requested for agreements 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.).

(ii) 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.

(2) Factor 2 - Experience (Phase I)

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

1. Construction Experience:

RELEVENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECT DEFINITION: A relevant construction project must demonstrate Prime Contractor experience in new construction of a high bay or similar facilities with long span steel construction that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to this solicitation, have a value more than $20,000,000, and be completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

Submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrated your experience on relevant construction projects. Renovation and repair projects will not be considered. In addition, one (1) of the submitted relevant construction projects for consideration must demonstrate experience in construction of an aircraft maintenance hangar and one (1) construction project must contain secure spaces (i.e. SAPF, SCIF).

Submitted construction projects shall be 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 single task order as a project.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet 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 individual Joint Venture members. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members may be rated lower. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

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

2. Design Experience

RELEVENT DESIGN PROJECT DEFINITION: A relevant design project must demonstrate experience in designing new construction of a high bay or similar facilities with long span steel construction that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to this solicitation, have a construction value of more than $20,000,000, and be completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

Submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrated your experience on relevant design projects. Renovation and repair projects will not be considered. In addition, one (1) of the submitted relevant design projects for consideration must demonstrate experience in design of an aircraft maintenance hangar and one (1) design project must contain secure spaces (i.e. SAPF, SCIF).

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

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet 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 shall submit relevant project experience for each design firm. Failure to do so may result in a lower rating. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated depth of experience in performing relevant construction and design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review five projects for construction and five for design.

Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Construction Experience and five (5) for Design Experience will not be considered.

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

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

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

(3) Factor 3 – Past Performance (Phase I)

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for construction experience. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation, then submit Past Performance Questionnaires for each project included in Factor 2 for both Construction Experience and Design Experience.