RFP N4008519R9146.pdf

SOLICITATION NO. N40085-19-R-9146 CON- Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract for a Design-Bid-Build (DBB) construction project for P1346B/P1280B, Birch Street Road Improvements/Birch Street North at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.

PROPOSALS ARE DUE ON 18 AUG 2020, AT 2:00 PM EDT.

PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPI) SUBMISSION AND CUT-OFF IS AS DIRECTED IN THE SOLICITATION.

MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THIS PROJECT IS IN EXCESS OF $10,000,000 IN ACCORDANCE WITH DFARS 236.204.

NAICS CODE IS 236220 -Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, AND THE SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD IS $39,500,000.

THIS ACQUISITION IS BEING SOLICITED AS A SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE.

WAGE DETERMINATION GENERAL DECISION NUMBER: NC20200038 01/03/2020

SCOTT C. SCHULZ 757-341-0082

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

15-Jul-2020

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

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

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

X

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

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________555 calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

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

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

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________18 Aug 2020 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

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

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

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

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

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

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

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

NAVFAC MID ATLANTIC

ACQUISITION CORE

9324 VIRGINIA AVENUE

NORFOLK VA 23511-3095

N40085

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

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

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

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

N4008519R9146 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

N4008519R9146

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

BIRCH AND DUNCAN STREET

FFP

Price for the Total Amount for CLIN 0001 shall provide the full project scope, complete and inplace in accordance with the drawings and specifications, but not including the work indicated or specified to be provided under any other CLIN.

NET AMT

OPTION Option 1

FFP

Full depth repair of Birch Street Sta. 271+42.33 to Sta. 274+50.00, less mill and overlay in CLIN 0001E.

FOB: Destination

OPTION Option 2

FFP

Full depth repair of Birch Street Sta. Sta. 282+25.00 to Sta. 286+00.00, less mill and overlay in CLIN 0001E.

OPTION Option 3

FFP

Full depth repair of Birch Street 294+53.50 to Sta. 300+75.00, less mill and overlay in CLIN 0001E.

OPTION Option 4

FFP

Full depth repair of Birch Street Sta. 303+98.96 to Sta. 309+05.20, less mill and overlay in CLIN 0001E.

OPTION Option 5

FFP

Full depth repair of Birch Street Sta. 211+50.00 to Sta. 221+60.00, less mill and overlay in CLIN 0001A.

OPTION Option 6

FFP

Full depth repair of Cross Street Sta. 203+54.75 to Sta. 211+50.00, less mill and overlay in CLIN 0001A.

OPTION Option 7

FFP

Task 1300 Repair Existing Erosion.

OPTION Option 8

FFP

Jogging Trail and Signal Modification for Pedestrians at Duncan Street.

OPTION Option 9

FFP

Proposed stormwater drainage improvements south of Holcomb Sta.701+75.00.

OPTION Option 10

FFP

Undercut and disposal of geotechnically unsuitable subgrade soils and replacement with imported structural backfill and fill material within the excavation limits

OPTION Option 11

FFP

Excavation, handling, storage, sampling, analysis and disposal of petroleum contaminated soil (TPH <200 ppm) at a permitted licensed facility.

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

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

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

0003 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0004 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0005 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0006 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0007 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0008 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0009 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0010 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0011 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0012 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Section 00 21 13 - Instructions to Bidders

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1 PRE‐PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT (PHASE II)

4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

4.3 PRE‐PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs)

4.4 BETA.SAM.GOV (BETASAM)

5. INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

6. ATTACHMENTS: LOCATED ON BETA SAM

6.1 ATTACHMENT A ‐ PRE‐PROPOSAL INQUIRY LOG

6.2 ATTACHMENT B ‐ CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE AND PROJECT DATA SHEET

6.3 ATTACHMENT C ‐ PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE

6.4 ATTACHMENT D – PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

1. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.1.1 This solicitation is being issued as A Small Business Set‐Aside.

1.1.2 The NAICS code for this procurement is 236220 and the size standard is $39,500,000

1.1.3 This acquisition will be advertised utilizing FAR Part 36, Design Bid Build Source Selection Procedures and 15 – Contracting by Negotiations resulting in a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract for construction services.

1.1.4 Magnitude of Construction: More than $10,000,000.

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

This acquisition will result in the award of a Firm‐Fixed Price (FFP) contract for a Design‐Bid‐Build (DBB) construction project for P1346B/P1280B, Birch Street Road Improvements/Birch Street North at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.

This project will involve a series of roadway improvements to Birch Street and Duncan Street. Work includes the following: Construction of service and access road; widening of existing road; construction of turn lanes; rebuilding of road bed; milling and paving of existing road; creek crossing; installation of curbing; erosion repair of road embankment; installation, paving, and painting of pedestrian walkways, cross walks and jogging trails; stripping and marking of roadway; installation of traffic and pedestrian signals including poles; installation and movement of utility poles; installation of catch basins; installation of Best Management Practices; and relocation of utilities (gas, water, electric, communication and sanitary sewer).

Demolition: Project includes the demolition of steam pits; pavement; and foundation post.

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

1. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the lowest priced, technically acceptable offer.

2. 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.

3. The LPTA process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

4. In order to permit efficient competition, the Navy will utilize the following methodology.

Proposals will initially be screened for price and placed in order (lowest price to highest price).

The Navy will then evaluate the technical factors of the lowest priced proposal. In the event the proposal is deemed Unacceptable, the process described will be conducted again as many times as necessary, until such time as the Government identifies a technical acceptable proposal. The Navy will make award to the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal from among the lowest priced proposals. However, the Navy, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to increase the number of proposals it will review under this methodology. Accordingly, under this methodology, the technical factors of some proposals may not be evaluated by the Navy. If discussions are deemed necessary by the Contracting Officer, all proposals will be evaluated (both technical and price) for the purpose of establishing a competitive range.

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

A. 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 standalone 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) Rates; and Technical Approach to Safety.

3. The safety elements should be collectively considered and then assigned an overall adjectival rating for the safety factor. The board will need to make a qualitative determination of the rating for safety taking into account the risk ratings for EMR, DART, TRC and the subjective evaluation of the narrative.

4. The board 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

B. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS/DESCRIPTIONS

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

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

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

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

Unacceptable (U)

Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

The Weaknesses, Significant Weaknesses, and/or Deficiencies (as defined below) of each proposal for each non‐price evaluation factor which influenced the assigned adjectival rating shall be identified.

Definitions

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

Significant Weakness

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

Deficiency

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

2. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Past Performance shall be evaluated when using the LPTA process, unless waived by the PCO in accordance with FAR 15.101‐2(b). Past performance will be rated on an “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” basis using the ratings in the following table:

Table A-2. Past Performance Evaluation Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable (A)

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

Unacceptable (U)

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have 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 so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably 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.”

(a) Aspects of Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements. There are two aspects of the past performance evaluation.

(1) The first is to evaluate whether the offeror’s present/past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. The criteria to establish what is relevant is unique to each LPTA source selection. For this solicitation, a relevant project is defined in Factor 1‐ Corporate Experience.

(2) The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed 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.

(b) SSEB members will review past performance information to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to the performance confidence assessment.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Factor 2 – Safety Factor 3 – Past Performance

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

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

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Price Binder: Price shall be submitted on the Price Proposal Form included in the solicitation. The offeror shall submit one (1) original electronically, marked “Original” in accordance with the directions and submission requirements detailed in the solicitation or subsequent amendments.

Additionally, the offeror shall submit one (1) hard copy, marked “Copy” and one (1) CD‐ROM, in accordance with the directions and submission requirements detailed in the solicitation or subsequent amendments. All hard copies shall be in separate 3‐ring binders. All submissions shall including the following:

‐Cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, DUNS, cage code, point of contact (POC), POC phone number, and POC email address;

‐Completed SF 1442 signed with all amendments acknowledged;

‐ Price Proposal Form;

‐Copy of Representation and Certifications and proof of registration in System for Award Management

(SAM);

‐Confirmation of filing of Veterans' Employment and Training (VETS) VETS‐4212 for the 2019 filing cycle.

‐Bid Guarantee in accordance with FAR Clause 52.228‐1, Bid Guarantee. Amount shall be at least 20 percent of the proposed price, but shall not to exceed $3 million;

‐Responsibility Determination information (see below)

The offeror is required to submit a complete Price Proposal Form that includes completion of all contract line item numbers (CLINs). Failure to complete all CLINs may result in the proposal being rejected or otherwise not considered.

In the event of a discrepancy between the original and copies, the original electronic copy marked “original” of the proposal will govern. Furthermore, any price information within the technical proposal (non‐price proposal) will not be considered. Likewise, any technical/nonprice information within the price proposal will not be considered.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION INFORMATION – In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically 9.104‐1, General Standards. In a separate tab, the offeror shall provide the following information in the price proposal package:

1. One (1) signed bank reference demonstrating adequate financial resources. If offeror’s firm has a line of credit – provide information on how many figures offeror can borrow against the line of credit (i.e. medium 6 figures – exact line of credit is not required).

2. The offeror shall provide the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for the prime contractor, certified by an independent accounting firm, if practicable, or signed by an authorized officer of the organization. Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital, which will be used for the performance of the resultant contract. For Joint Venture arrangements, submit the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for each company in the Joint Venture and discuss the financial responsibilities among the companies. The Government may also utilize Dun & Bradstreet reports to evaluate the financial capacity of the offeror.

3. Description of offeror’s facilities and equipment.

4. Other offeror’s work presently under contract.

Although required to be submitted with offeror’s price proposal, this information will not be evaluated as part of the price proposal. This information forms the basis of your firm’s responsibility determination should your firm be considered for award. Proposal packages from unsuccessful offerors will not be returned to the offeror, but shall be destroyed by the Contracting Officer. No certificate of destruction will be issued.

(2) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items (00 10 00). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217‐5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section 00700 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 IGCE.

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

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

(b) Technical Factors:

Non‐price binder: The offeror shall submit one (1) original electronically, marked “Original” in accordance with the directions and submission requirements detailed in the solicitation or subsequent amendments. Additionally, the offeror shall submit one (1) hard copy, marked “Copy” and one (1) CD‐ROM, in accordance with the directions and submission requirements detailed in the solicitation or subsequent amendments. All hard copies shall be in separate 3‐ ring binders. All submissions shall including the following:

Cover page with Solicitation Number, Solicitation Title, Prime Contractor Name, Address, Phone Number, Fax Number, DUNS, Cage Code, Point of Contact, Phone Number, and Email Address;

8 ½ x 11 paper, 12‐point font;

Refer to individual factors for page limitations. Pages that exceed indicated page limitations shall not be evaluated;

Additionally, include an electronic version of the price and non‐price proposals on one CD‐ROM.

In the event of a discrepancy between the original and copies, the original electronic copy marked “original” of the proposal will govern. Furthermore, any price information within the technical proposal (non‐price proposal) will not be considered. Likewise, any technical/nonprice information within the price proposal will not be considered.

(b) Non‐cost/price Factors:

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The offeror shall submit the following information:

Submit a minimum of two (2) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects that best demonstrates experience as a prime contractor on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope and complexity to the RFP. For the purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

Size: A project with a minimum of 1000 linear feet of roadway construction.

Scope: New construction of roadways or reconstruction/overlay of existing roadway construction.

Complexity: Projects demonstrating experience with phasing and coordination of traffic impacts.

Projects submitted for the offeror shall be completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Projects must clearly state the construction completion date or may be considered Not Relevant. Also, projects completed outside of this window will be considered “Not Relevant.”

Ensure that the project description clearly describes whether the project is new construction or reconstruction/overlay of existing roadway construction and addresses how the project meets the Size, Scope and Complexity requirements as delineated above, and provides the final construction cost.

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. Projects which are not complete as of the date of issuance of this RFP shall not be considered by the SSEB.

The attached Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form nor will the Government consider information submitted via any other medium. 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). The Government will not consider information beyond this page limit.

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). Projects that are not sufficiently described so as to clearly demonstrate compliance with the above Size, Scope and Complexity requirements may be deemed Not Relevant.

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 partners. Experience submitted for one of the Offeror’s Joint Venture partners in which the Joint Venture partner was a partner in a different Joint Venture entity may be submitted to demonstrate relevant project experience.

Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

If the Offeror is proposing as a single corporate entity (i.e. not as a Joint Venture), the Offeror may submit relevant project experience it performed as a partner in a previous Joint Venture.

Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects.

Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered. Likewise, the Government will not consider the offeror’s experience as a subcontractor.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction as defined above 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 (5) projects total. Any projects submitted in excess of the first five (5) will not be considered. An offeror that does not submit a minimum of two (2) relevant projects as defined above will receive a rating of “Unacceptable” and will not be eligible for award unless corrected through discussions, if held.

Factor 2 – Safety

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

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

Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Include three previous complete calendar years’ (2017, 2018, 2019) worth of data. This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The offeror may submit an insurance company‐provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If the offeror has no EMR or premium, for any year, the offeror must affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends must be addressed as part of the factor submission.

OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ (2017, 2018, 2019) worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART, for any year, the offeror must affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided.

Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA and DART data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ (2017, 2018, 2019) worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit TRC rates, for any year, the offeror must affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

Technical Approach for Safety: The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to one

(1) double‐sided page (or two (2) single‐sided pages), and must address all items below.

The offeror shall describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors.

The offeror shall fully describe the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self‐performed and subcontractor performed work.

The offeror shall describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self‐performed and/or all subcontractor levels.

The offeror shall describe their methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near‐miss mishaps.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

Experience Modification Rate (EMR) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates Offeror Technical Approach to Safety Other sources of information available to the Government

Experience Modification Rate (EMR): For the three previous complete calendar years (2017, 2018, 2019), the offeror will submit EMR. If no EMR exists, the offeror may submit an insurance company‐provided equivalent rate explaining why not. If an insurance company provided equivalent rate is provided, it will be treated the same as an EMR. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of this selection factor. The board will evaluate the EMR to determine if the offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rates: For the three previous complete calendar years (2017, 2018, 2019), the offeror will submit their OSHA DART, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If unable to submit OSHA DART rates, the offeror must affirmatively state so, and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART data and negative trends should be addressed as part of this element. The board will evaluate the OSHA DART rates to determine if the offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact rates.

Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates: For the three previous complete calendar years (2017, 2018, 2019), the offeror will submit their TRC, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If unable to submit TRC rates, the offeror must affirmatively state so, and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the TRC rate data and negative trends should be addressed as part of this element. The board will evaluate the TRC rates to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact rates.

Technical Approach to Safety: The offeror will describe their plan to evaluate their safety performance and that of potential subcontractors. Also, describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at all subcontractor levels. The Safety Narrative shall be limited to two pages. The Government will not consider information beyond this page limit. The board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project. The board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement and validate the contractor has addressed methodology to be used in the execution of an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques/processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near‐miss mishaps.

Other Sources of Information Available to the Government: Other sources for safety may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS) in Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and other related databases.

Factor 3, Past Performance:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

FOR EACH PROJECT SUBMITTED WITH ITS PROPOSAL FOR FACTOR 1 – CORPORATE EXPERIENCE, IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1

– Corporate Experience. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror must complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment D), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

Offerors should follow‐up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Scott Schulz, via email at scott.c.schulz1@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

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

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror. It is the responsibility of the offeror to provide accurate points of contact for each identified contract and current telephone numbers and/or email addresses.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information.

The Government’s inability to contact any of the offeror’s references or the references’ unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

Offerors are strongly encouraged to provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. Offerors are also strongly encouraged to address any adverse past performance issues. Such explanations shall not exceed two (2) double‐sided pages (or four (4) single‐sided pages) in total.

Performance award or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on how well the offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and past performance on other relevant projects currently documented in known sources.

The degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance including, but not limited to:

‐ A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

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

‐ A pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.); and ‐ Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand and ‐ A respect for stewardship of Government funds

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination.

The assessment of the offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1. PRE‐PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT: A site visit is scheduled for 07/30/2020. Participants shall meet at Building 1005, Michael Road, Camp Lejeune no later than 9:00AM Local Time. All participants without DBIDS access to MCB Camp Lejeune shall submit a list of attendees and the following required information to Rachel Ashton via email at rachel.a.ashton@navy.mil no later than close of business on 07/24/2020. Participants requiring sponsorship shall submit the current version of the SECNAV form 5512/1 (version expiring January 31, 2021, one per attendee), a scanned copy of the photo identification(s) that will be presented at the Visitors Center, and a scanned copy of the vehicle registration(s) and insurance(s). Participants using rented vehicles shall submit participant names exactly as they appear on the identification to be presented at the Visitors Center but will not prescreened and will need to present the SECNAV form 5512/1 and rental agreement on the date of the site visit.

The sponsor information for the SECNAV form 5512/1 is Rachel A. Ashton, telephone (910) 451‐2582, extension 5225. Participants requiring sponsorship should be aware that wait times at the Visitor’s Center vary, but can be as long as two hours. The site visit will begin promptly at 9:00AM without delay. Information regarding the Visitors Center, Building TT‐13, can be found at https://www.lejeune.marines.mil/Base‐Access.

4.2. In response to this request for proposal, the complete proposal shall include the Price Proposal and the Non‐Price Factors Proposal, submitted in accordance with the Evaluation Factors for Award and other requirements as set forth in this solicitation:

Proposal Due Date:

Electronic Copy due: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time Hard Copy due: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time

LATE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

Electronic Proposal Delivery Information via DOD Safe Site:

Contractors shall send their Electronic Proposal submission to Scott Schulz through the DOD Safe Site (safe.apps.mil). Only DoD SAFE is authorized for the submission of the electronic original proposal in response to this solicitation. Further guidance is provided below for submission of hard copy submissions.

The contractor shall send the contract specialist, Scott Schulz at scott.c.schulz1@navy.mil, the email address of the offeror’s point of contact who will be receiving the Drop-Off invitation to upload proposals to the DOD Safe Site no later than August 14, 2020 by 1400, unless that date and time are changed via Solicitation Amendment.

The Contract Specialist, Scott Schulz, will “Request a Drop-Off” through DoD SAFE utilizing the provided offeror’s point of contact email address. The recipient will receive an automated email containing the information for the request and instructions for uploading. Requests from DoD SAFE will be sent on Monday, August 17, 2020.

If you do not receive an email containing drop off instructions on that date, please contact the Contract Specialist.

Only the identified POC will be able to drop-off proposals or proposal revisions in DOD SAFE. Failure to provide accurate POC information will preclude the offeror from using DoD SAFE. Note: only two email addresses may be provided per Offeror.

To submit the proposal, the offeror will utilize the link provided in the automated email to take you to DoD SAFE at https://safe.apps.mil. The system will allow for inclusion of a short note to the Recipient and then the offeror will click to add files or drag and drop them. Click “Drop-Off Files” to send the files to the recipient. You should receive a notification on the site “Drop-Off Completed” “Your files have been sent successfully.” Please keep this for your records. The file(s) are uploaded and an email will be sent to the recipient notifying them of the “drop-off”.

[Additional details can be viewed in the DoD SAFE User Guide available at https://safe.apps.mil]. Note that the submission of any proposal must be completed no later than the due date and time, unless the date and time are changed via Solicitation Amendment, using the link sent by the contract specialist via DOD Safe. The DoD SAFE system will record the date and time of package submittal. The date and time of package submittal recorded in DoD SAFE shall govern the timeliness of any proposal submission.

Offerors shall allow adequate time to upload files which may be slower for non-DoD users and to avoid other technical difficulties that may be encountered. Offerors are also responsible for submitting files in the format specified and consistent with requirements stated elsewhere in this solicitation. Files that cannot be opened, or are otherwise missing the required content are the responsibility of offerors. The maximum file size of a package is 8 GB. Up to 25 packages may be uploaded per link.

It is the sole responsibility of the Offeror to obtain the RFP files, along with any amendments, from Opportunities (www.beta.sam.gov).

Mailed Hard Copies In addition, one (1) original proposal along with CD shall be delivered by mail on the date and time listed above, respectively, unless those dates are changed via Solicitation Amendment.

Proposal shall be labeled “PRICE PROPOSAL OR NON-COST/PRICE FACTORS PROPOSAL FOR RFP

N4008519R9146, ATTN: SCOTT SCHULZ; DO NOT OPEN IN MAIL ROOM”.

Hand delivered proposals will not be accepted.

Express Mail to:

Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic 9324 Virginia Avenue Building Z-140, Room 216 Norfolk, Virginia 23511 Attn: Scott Schulz, ACQ21

4.3. PRE‐PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs): All inquiries must be submitted in writing and received by the Contract Specialist by 10 calendars days prior to proposal due date in order to permit adequate time to reply to the inquiry. There is no guarantee that PPI’s submitted after the cut‐off date will be answered before the solicitation closes. Submit all questions to scott.c.schulz1@navy.mil.

Use of the PPI Log template is REQUIRED. The PPI Log Template (Attachment A) can be found on the BETASAM website under the Additional Documents section.

4.4. Amendments will be posted directly to beta.sam.gov. The drawings and specifications will be posted on beta.sam.gov under the Additional Documents section of this RFP. Additionally, other postings will be made to beta.sam.gov, such as the pre‐proposal inquires (PPI) log, revised drawings, etc., under the Additional Documents section of the RFP. It is recommended contractors check the beta.sam.gov Additional Documents section of the RFP periodically to see if additional postings have been made. It is the contractor’s responsibility to check beta.sam.gov for all postings.

Section 00 45 00 - Representations and Certifications

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.203-2 Certificate Of Independent Price Determination APR 1985 52.203-11 Certification And Disclosure Regarding Payments To

Influence Certain Federal Transactions

SEP 2007

52.204-8 Annual Representations and Certifications MAR 2020 52.204-16 Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting JUL 2016 52.204-19 Incorporation by Reference of Representations and

Certifications.

DEC 2014

52.209-11 Representation by Corporations Regarding Delinquent Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction under any Federal Law

FEB 2016

52.215-6 Place of Performance OCT 1997 52.215-22 Limitations on Pass-Through Charges--Identification of

Subcontract Effort

OCT 2009

52.228-15 Performance and Payment Bonds--Construction JUN 2020 52.232-5 Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts MAY 2014 52.232-27 Prompt Payment for Construction Contracts JAN 2017 52.232-39 Unenforceability of Unauthorized Obligations JUN 2013 52.233-1 Disputes MAY 2014 52.233-3 Protest After Award AUG 1996 52.233-3 Alt I Protest After Award (Aug 1996) - Alternate I JUN 1985 52.233-4 Applicable Law for Breach of Contract Claim OCT 2004 52.236-5 Material and Workmanship APR 1984 52.236-7 Permits and Responsibilities NOV 1991 52.236-28 Preparation of Proposals--Construction OCT 1997 52.244-6 Subcontracts for Commercial Items JUN 2020 52.251-1 Government Supply Sources APR 2012 52.251-1 Government Supply Sources APR 2012 252.236-7001 Contract Drawings, and Specifications AUG 2000

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.209-2 PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH INVERTED DOMESTIC CORPORATIONS--

REPRESENTATION (NOV 2015)

(a) Definitions. Inverted domestic corporation and subsidiary have the meaning given in the clause of this contract entitled Prohibition on Contracting with Inverted Domestic Corporations (52.209-10).

(b) Government agencies are not permitted to use appropriated (or otherwise made available) funds for contracts with either an inverted domestic corporation, or a subsidiary of an inverted domestic corporation, unless the exception at 9.108-2(b) applies or the requirement is waived in accordance with the procedures at 9.108-4.

(c) Representation. The Offeror represents that--

(1) It [ ___ ] is, [ ___ ] is not an inverted domestic corporation; and

(2) It [ ___ ] is, [ ___ ] is not a subsidiary of an inverted domestic corporation.

(End of provision)

52.209-5 CERTIFICATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (OCT 2015)

(a)(1) The Offeror certifies, to the best of its knowledge and belief, that-

(i) The Offeror and/or any of its Principals-

(A) Are ( ) are not ( ) presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, or declared ineligible for the award of contracts by any Federal agency;

(B) Have ( ) have not ( ), within a three-year period preceding this offer, been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for:…