Section 00100_P 180_Draft.pdf

THIS IS A DRAFT AND NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

1. DESCRIPTION OF WORK

Design-Build P-180 Naval Innovation Center project scope constructs a 286,617 Gross Square Feet (GSF) flexible and reconfigurable modern multi-story facility. Interior spaces consist of highly adaptable and reconfigurable Controlled areas (accredited facilities per ICD-705), laboratories, a high bay, deep-water tank, areas for prototyping, specialized simulation environments, multi-domain secure learning spaces, autonomous systems spaces, collaboration areas, meeting hall, classrooms and conference rooms. Support spaces include storage, lounges and personnel support spaces. P-180 also includes construction of an outdoor central courtyard, entry plaza, loading ramp, utility yard, solid waste (trash/recycling) enclosure, pedestrian walkways, utilities decentralization, demolition of the Central Heat Plant/Building 236, parking, roadway realignment, and extensive electrical improvements including a dedicated substation.

The duration of the project is estimated to be five (5) years. The work is located at Monterey, California.

2. Inquiries

All inquiries concerning any part of this solicitation shall be made to the Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command Southwest, 750 Pacific Highway, San Diego, CA 92132 by 2:00 PM Pacific Standard Time on October 25, 2024. Contact Mr. Christopher Rosario at christopher.d.rosario2.civ@us.navy.mil or 619-705-4654.

3. Proposal Submittal Requirements

In addition to the submittal requirements under each Factor, proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be formatted as follows and furnished in the number of copies stated herein. A cover letter shall accompany the proposal.

The cover letter shall include—

(a) The solicitation number;

(b) The name, address, telephone numbers, and email address of the Offeror;

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

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

(e) Names, titles, phone numbers, and email addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation and;

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

In addition to the cover letter, the Offeror shall submit an Offeror’s Team Consent Form for each major subcontractor/teaming partner (e.g., team member, subcontractor (i.e., Lead Design Firm(s)), parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.) identified in the Offeror’s proposal.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be formatted as follows:

Phase One:

- Cover Letter

- First two pages of SF1442 - with blocks 14 through 20c completed

- Offeror’s Team Consent Form(s)

- Section 00 45 00 – Representations and Certifications

- Completed FAR provision, 52.204-24 Representation Regarding Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment (NOV 2021)

- Completed DFARS provision 252.225-7059 Prohibition on Certain Procurements from the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region Certification (JUN 2023) mailto:christopher.d.rosario2.civ@us.navy.mil

- VETS-4212 Report Submission Confirmation (or Statement of Non-applicability)

- Financial Questionnaire (to be completed and submitted by financial institution)

Tab 1 - Factor 1, Technical Approach

Tab 2 - Factor 2, Experience Factor 3, Past Performance

Tab 3 - Factor 4, Safety

Tab 4 - Address any adverse past performance issues, if applicable

Instructions for electronic submission of Phase One proposals are provided below:

Phase One proposals shall be submitted electronically using the Department of Defense (DoD) Solicitation Module in the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) located at https://piee.eb.mil/.

Offerors are instructed to electronically submit their complete Phase One proposal in one (1) single file, formatted in Portable Document Format (PDF) with a .pdf file extension.

Additional information regarding the PIEE Solicitation Module:

In order to submit a proposal through the PIEE Solicitation Module, you must be registered as a Proposal Manager in the DoD PIEE Suite located at https://piee.eb.mil/. The PIEE Solicitation Module Vendor Registration Guide is provided as an attachment to the RFP.

The PIEE Solicitation Module is the only electronic commerce method authorized for the submission of Phase One proposals in response to this solicitation. Submissions outside of the PIEE Solicitation Module will not be considered.

The PIEE Solicitation Module will record the date and time of proposal submission. The date and time of proposal submission recorded in the PIEE Solicitation Module shall govern the timeliness of any proposal submission.

The maximum allowable file size for the PIEE Solicitation Module is 1.9GB.

LATE SUBMISSIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED

It is an Offeror’s responsibility, when transmitting its proposal electronically, to ensure the proposal’s timely delivery by transmitting the proposal sufficiently in advance of the time set for receipt of proposals to allow for timely receipt by the Government no later than the date and time stated in Block 13 of the SF1442. 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. An Offeror risks the late receipt and rejection of a proposal where it delays transmitting its proposal until the last few minutes before the time set for receipt of proposals. Proposals that are received after the stated date and time in Block 13 of the SF1442 will not be considered.

Offerors are responsible for submitting their proposal in the format specified, consistent with requirements stated elsewhere in this solicitation. Offerors are asked to submit only the information/exhibits required. Page limits, if stipulated, must be adhered to. Files that cannot be opened, or are otherwise missing the required content are the responsibility of the Offeror.

THE FOLLOWING EVALUATION FACTORS ARE APPLICABLE ONLY TO THOSE OFFERORS

WHO ARE SELECTED TO PROCEED TO PHASE TWO OF THE SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS.

DO NOT SUBMIT TABS 5 THROUGH 7 IN PHASE ONE PROPOSALS.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS FOR PHASE TWO WILL BE PROVIDED (VIA

https://piee.eb.mil/

AMENDMENT) TO THOSE OFFERORS SELECTED TO PROCEED TO PHASE TWO.

PHASE Two:

Tab 5 - Factor 5, Technical Solution Tab 6 - Factor 6, Small Business Utilization and Participation (Optional OCONUS) Tab 7 - Factor 7, Price

Representations and Certifications and Financial Questionnaires will not be rated. However, they will be considered in assessing the Offeror’s responsibility.

4. Pre-Proposal Conference

(a) A pre-proposal conference and site visit will not be conducted at this time.

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

(c) All prospective Offerors are advised that this solicitation will remain unchanged unless it is amended in writing. Phase One RFP amendments will be posted on the SAM.gov website at https://sam.gov under Contract Opportunities. However, if an amendment is issued, normal procedures relating to the acknowledgment and receipt of any such amendment as described in Contract Clause “Amendment to Solicitations” of this section shall be applicable.

5. Financial Questionnaire

Offerors shall submit the Financial Questionnaire to their financial institution and request the financial institution complete the questionnaire with regard to the Offeror’s firm. Upon completion of the questionnaire, the financial institution should send the completed questionnaire via email directly to Christopher Rosario at christopher.d.rosario2.civ@us.navy.mil. Please ensure the financial institution utilizes the form provided in order to submit the requested information. Links to websites and/or files with .zip file extensions may not be accepted.

Additionally, please ensure financial questionnaires are submitted by the Phase One proposal due date.

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

6. System for Award Management

Offerors, including Joint Ventures, must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) at the time an offer is submitted. If an Offeror does not have an active registration in SAM at the time an offer is submitted, the Offeror is ineligible for award. Processing time should be taken into consideration when registering. Offerors who are not registered in SAM should consider applying for registration immediately upon receipt of this solicitation. Offerors must also maintain their SAM registration until time of award, during contract performance, and through final payment. See https://sam.gov for information on registration.

7. Representations and Certifications

In order to participate on this solicitation, contractors must also complete electronic representations and certifications. For more information and to complete the electronic Reps & Certs, see the SAM website at https://sam.gov. Remember to review the NAICS codes listed in your SAM record and make sure that you have listed the NAICS code for this procurement.

Note: Offerors must complete and submit Section 00 45 00 of the RFP as part of their proposal even if the Offeror is registered in SAM. Section 00 45 00 of the RFP contains clauses which are not found in the electronic Reps & Certs in SAM; therefore, we require them to be completed and submitted as part of your proposal. The https://sam.gov/ clauses found in Section 00 45 00 of the RFP are also broken out as a separate form titled “Section 00 45 00 – Representations and Certifications” which can be found with the other RFP Exhibits.

8. Federal Contractor Program

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 22.13, any contractor or subcontractor with a contract or subcontract with the Federal Government of $150,000 or more that was entered into on or after October 1, 2015 (or $100,000 or more that was entered prior to October 1, 2015) must take affirmative action to hire and promote qualified covered veterans which includes, special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam-era, recently separated veterans, and any other veterans who served on active duty during a war or in a campaign or expedition for which a campaign badge has been authorized.

If subject to the reporting requirements, companies must file an annual VETS-4212 Report, which shows the number of covered veterans in their workforce and number of new hires, including covered veterans hired during the reporting period. Instructions, information, and follow-up assistance is provided at VETS-4212 Internet site at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/vets/programs/vets4212 or employers may contact the VETS-4212 customer support at (866) 237-0275 or e-mail at vets4212-customersupport@dolncc.dol.gov.

VETS-4212 Reports must be filed between August 1 and September 30 of each year following a calendar year in which a contractor or subcontractor held a covered contract or subcontract.

Upon the successful submission of a VETS-4212 report, federal contractors will receive an email confirmation of receipt notification for their records. Offerors shall include a copy of their confirmation notification email in their proposal as verification of submission for the current reporting period. DO NOT SUBMIT A COPY OF THE REPORT ITSELF. If this requirement is not applicable to your firm, provide a statement that your firm does not have any contracts subject to this requirement.

A contract cannot be awarded to a contractor that has not submitted a required annual form VETS-4212, Federal Contractor Veterans’ Employment Report (VETS-4212 Report) if subject to the reporting requirements of 38 U.S.C. 4212(d) for that fiscal year.

9. Incurred Expenses

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

10. Utilization of Small Businesses

The selected contractor will be responsible for ensuring subcontracting opportunities are made available to responsible small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns. Additionally, all large businesses will be required to submit a small business subcontracting plan that will be incorporated into the contract award, and the awardee (if large business) will be required to submit semi-annual reports to demonstrate compliance with their subcontracting plan.

The subcontracting goals for this procurement are as follows:

Percentage of Total Subcontracting Value Small Business (SB): 60.75% HUBZone Small Business (HUBZone SB): 18.72% Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB): 15.75% Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB): 45.10% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB): 4.5%

EVALUATION

A. 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 contracts; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contracts to the offerors submitting the proposals determined to represent the best value—the proposals most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

2. 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 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.

4. Phase 1 may have factor 3 equal factors 2 and 4.

5. Phase 2 may have factor 5 equal factors 2, 3, and 4.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Phase 1 Factor 1 – Technical Approach Factor 2 – Experience Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Safety

Phase 2 Factor 5 – Technical Solution Factor 6 – Small Business Participation Factor 7 – Price

PHASE 1

Factor 1 – Technical Approach

(a) Proposal Submission 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 under Tab “1”:

(1) Using Exhibit “A” (Offeror Team Composition and Management), provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firm(s) and primary design firm(s) 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). On a separate sheet, 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.

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

The technical approach narrative (Exhibit “A”) shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages, excluding the organizational chart. The information requested in item (2) below is not included in this page limitation.

(2) In addition to the narrative, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, SBA 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, parent company, design subcontractor, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.), and for any subcontractors that will be proposed as completing work under the technical approach, submit a letter of commitment. Letters of commitment for the Designer of Record shall be addressed from the Designer of Record to the Offeror. The Designer of Record’s letter of commitment shall be signed by the Designer of Record’s signing authority.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will be used as a means to review the organizational structure, roles and responsibilities, and teaming relationships, if any, proposed by the Offeror. Offerors who do not provide all proposal submittal requirements shall receive a deficiency. This factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis. If rated Unacceptable, the Offeror will be ineligible for selection to proceed to Phase Two, and ineligible for award.

Factor 2 –Experience

(a) Proposal Submission Requirements:

(1) Submit Exhibit “B” (Construction Experience Project Data Sheet) under Tab “2.”

Construction Experience:

The Offeror shall submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.

For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as a multi-story new construction research, development, and testing facility (within NAICS code 236220) with a contract completion cost of $50,000,000 or more.

Additional minimum submission requirements:

• Submit at least one (1) relevant project that demonstrates experience with Design-Build.

• Submit at least one (1) relevant project with a multi-story new construction research, development, and testing facility that is 100,000 gross square feet or more at project completion.

• Submit at least one (1) relevant project that includes 30,000 gross square feet or more of accredited controlled area spaces compliant with ICD 705 criteria and requirements at project completion.

• Submit at least one (1) relevant project with a construction cost that is greater than or equal to $100,000,000 at project completion.

Note: A single project may satisfy more than one (1) of the above minimum requirements.

Exhibit “B” must clearly address how the project meets the above requirements.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be 100% complete (see definition) within the past (5) years of the initial date of issuance of this RFP. Projects, which are not 100% complete as of the date of issuance of this RFP shall not be considered. 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 should not be submitted as a project; rather Offerors should submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

Projects which are not 100% complete as of the date of issuance of this RFP shall not be considered. Each relevant completion date shall be clearly stated on Exhibit “B.”

The attached Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Exhibit “B”) 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 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.

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 must be submitted for the Joint Venture members. If a project was performed by a JV, and not all members from that JV are members of the JV proposed for this contract, the Offeror shall clearly demonstrate what portion of the work was performed by the JV member offering on this contract and shall not include work performed by the JV as a whole.

The JV member proposed for this contract shall specifically address field work performed by that JV member including field staffing and direct field work oversight. The JV member proposed for this contract shall also address home office management performed by that JV member including the number/percentage of employees provided for the overall contract by the JV members as well as the overall percentage of work performed by the JV member. An SBA approved Mentor- Protégé Offeror shall submit the SBA approved Mentor Protégé agreement with the SBA approval letter of the Mentor Protégé agreement and any subsequent extensions. In accordance with 13 C.F.R. 125.8(e), if the joint venture is an SBA approved Mentor-Protégé joint venture, the partners of the joint venture in aggregate must demonstrate the relevant project experience necessary to perform the contract. With the exception of firms formed under SBA approved Mentor-Protégé agreements, Joint Venture Offerors who fail to submit relevant experience for all Joint Venture members will be assigned a deficiency, will be rated Unacceptable, and, therefore, unawardable. 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 and address is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. The proposal shall state specific commitments of technical resources (e.g. personnel, equipment) that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies commit to the performance of this contract. In particular, the proposal will clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member that will be located at the worksites and company offices in the city/area of the project.

The proposal shall also describe specific roles of the affiliate/subsidiary/ parent/LLC/LTD member companies in terms of the work it will either self-perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in performance of the contract. Regarding any such submitted project, if the Offeror fails to demonstrate the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD firm’s meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract, the project will not be considered relevant and will not be evaluated. Failure to submit this information may result in a lower rating.

The Offeror may NOT utilize experience of a subcontractor to demonstrate construction experience under this evaluation factor unless the following applies:

If a Small Business Offeror or Small Business JV (two small businesses forming a small business JV) cannot independently demonstrate its own experience, the Small Business Offeror or Small Business JV may utilize the experience of a first-tier Small Business subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement in order to demonstrate relevant construction experience under this evaluation factor. The Government will consider the submitted relevant experience of each first-tier Small Business subcontractor as the experience of the Small Business Offeror or Small Business JV, provided that:

The Small Business Offeror or Small Business JV submits a supporting partnership or teaming agreement for each first-tier Small Business subcontractor; and the Small Business Offeror or Small Business JV provides an explanation of the meaningful involvement that each first-tier Small Business subcontractor will have in performance of this contract on Exhibit “A” and “B.”

Regarding any such submitted project(s), if the Small Business Offeror or Small Business JV fails to include a supporting partnership or teaming agreement and/or fails to demonstrate the first-tier Small Business subcontractor’s meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract on Exhibits “A” and “B,” the project(s) will not be considered relevant and will not be evaluated. Small Business Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

(2) Submit Exhibit “C” (Design Experience Project Data Sheet)

Design Experience:

The Offeror shall submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) relevant design projects for the design team that best demonstrates design experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. The relevant scope of work shall have been performed by the proposed Lead Design Firm(s) and all design projects shall have been performed by the design firm(s) as the Designer of Record (DOR.). Failure to submit relevant projects for all proposed Lead Design Firms may result in a deficiency for this factor.

For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as the design of a multi-story new construction research, development, and testing facility (within NAICS code 236220) with a contract completion cost of $50,000,000 or more.

Additional minimum submission requirements:

• Submit at least one (1) relevant project that demonstrates experience with Design-Build.

• Submit at least one (1) relevant project with a multi-story new construction research, development, and testing facility that is 100,000 gross square feet or more at project completion.

• Submit at least one (1) relevant project that includes 30,000 gross square feet or more of accredited controlled area spaces compliant with ICD 705 criteria and requirements at project completion.

• Submit at least one (1) relevant project with a construction cost that is greater than or equal to $100,000,000 at project completion.

Note: A single project may satisfy more than one of the above minimum requirements.

Exhibit “C” must clearly address how the project meets the above requirements.

Projects submitted for the design team shall be 100% complete (see definition) within the past five (5) years (see definition) of the date of issuance of this RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. The design completion date shall reflect the date that plans and specifications were complete, signed off by an Architect-Engineer, and approved for construction, and does not include architect/engineering services during construction. Projects which are not 100% complete as of the date of issuance of this RFP shall not be considered. Each relevant completion date shall be clearly stated on Exhibit “C.”

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

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

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 must be submitted for the Joint Venture members. If a project was performed by a JV, and not all members from that JV are members of the JV proposed for this contract, the Offeror shall clearly demonstrate what portion of the work was performed by the JV member offering on this contract and shall not include work performed by the JV as a whole.

The JV member proposed for this contract shall specifically address field work performed by that JV member including field staffing and direct field work oversight. The JV member proposed for this contract shall also address home office management performed by that JV member including the number/percentage of employees provided for the overall contract by the JV members as well as the overall percentage of work performed by the JV member. An SBA approved Mentor- Protégé Offeror shall submit the SBA approved Mentor Protégé agreement with the SBA approval letter of the Mentor Protégé agreement and any subsequent extensions. In accordance with 13 C.F.R. 125.8(e), if the joint venture is an SBA approved Mentor-Protégé joint venture, the partners of the joint venture in aggregate must demonstrate the relevant project experience necessary to perform the contract. With the exception of firms formed under SBA approved Mentor-Protégé agreements, Joint Venture Offerors who fail to submit relevant experience for all Joint Venture members will be assigned a deficiency, will be rated Unacceptable, and, therefore, unawardable. Offerors are still limited to a total of give (5) projects combined.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name and address is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. The proposal shall state specific commitments of technical resources (e.g. personnel, equipment) that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies commit to the performance of this contract. In particular, the proposal will clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member that will be located at the worksites and company offices in the city/area of the project.

The proposal shall also describe specific roles of the affiliate/subsidiary/ parent/LLC/LTD member companies in terms of the work it will either self-perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in performance of the contract. Regarding any such submitted project, if the Offeror fails to demonstrate the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD firm’s meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract, the project will not be considered relevant and will not be evaluated. Failure to submit this information may result in a lower rating.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor to demonstrate design experience under this evaluation factor. The Offeror 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 lead design firms should submit relevant project experience for all design firms. Failure to do so may result in a lower rating. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s Team’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction and design projects as defined in the proposal submission 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 for construction experience and five (5) for design experience. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for construction experience and five (5) for design experience will not be considered.

Offerors who submit more than the minimum of two (2) relevant construction projects (three (3) and up to (5) relevant projects) that demonstrate experience of the Offeror that are similar size, scope and complexity to the RFP may be rated higher.

Offerors who submit more than the minimum of two (2) relevant design projects (three (3) and up to (5) relevant projects) that demonstrate experience of the Design Firm(s) that are similar size, scope and complexity to the RFP may be rated higher.

Offerors who submit more than one (1) relevant project that demonstrates experience of the Offeror or Design Firm(s) that are greater than or equal to 30,000 square feet of accredited controlled area spaces, compliant with ICD 705 criteria and requirements may be rated significantly higher.

Offerors who submit relevant projects where the Offeror and the proposed design firm(s) have previously worked together may be rated higher.

Offerors who submit relevant projects that demonstrate experience of the Offeror or Design Firm(s) with full building height glazed storefronts over 50% of the building elevation may be rated higher.

Offerors who submit relevant projects that demonstrate experience of the Offeror or Design Firm(s) with a a multi-story new construction research, development, and testing facility that is 200,000 gross square feet or more at project completion. may be rated significantly higher.

Offerors who submit relevant projects that demonstrate experience of the Offeror or Design Firm(s) with a design build project in the State of California, that is three (3) stories or greater may be rated higher.

Offerors who submit relevant construction or design projects with a construction cost greater than $300,000,000 may be rated higher.

Factor 3 – Past Performance

(a) Proposal Submission Requirements:

Submit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (Exhibit “D”) and CPARS evaluations under Tab “2” immediately following each of the project data sheets to which they pertain. Submit any other past performance information under Tab “4.”

If a Final CPARS evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for construction and design experience. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT

SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

If there is no Final CPARS evaluation, submit a PPQ (Exhibit “D”) for each respective project included in Factor 2. The Offeror should provide completed PPQs in the proposal. Offerors may use PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs, but Offerors must include these in the proposal and shall not incorporate these by reference. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. A PPQ will not be considered if a Final CPARS is available.

Clients shall submit PPQs directly to the Government’s point of contact, Christopher Rosario via email at christopher.d.rosario2.civ@us.navy.mil, prior to the proposal closing date.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues. Explanations shall not exceed two (2) single-sided pages in total.

Performance awards or additional information submitted will not be considered.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. 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.

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

A copy of the blank PPQ to be used for requesting client references is included as Exhibit “D”.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror’s Team performed on the recent, relevant projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience. In addition to the above, the Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any and all sources including sources outside of the Government. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through CPARS using all CAGE/UEI numbers of the Offeror’s Team, inquiries of owner representative(s), SAM, Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

The Government will consider the recency and relevance of the information (as defined in Factor 2 - Experience), 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 team’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s team’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will receive a NEUTRAL Confidence rating.

Past performance ratings of “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” hold more value than a “Neutral Confidence” rating. A past performance rating of “No Confidence” will be ineligible for award.

Factor 4 – Safety

(a) Proposal Submission Requirements:

Submit Exhibit “E” (Safety Data Sheet / Safety Narrative) under Tab “3.” Individual blocks on this form may be expanded.

The Offeror shall submit the following information: The Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate; and Total Case Rate (TCR) for the specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY), as well as a safety narrative as described further below.

For a partnership, joint venture, and SBA-approved mentor protégés, the Offeror shall submit separate DART, TCR for the specified five (5) CY for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one (1) safety narrative is required. Offerors who fail to submit DART rates and TCR for each business entity who is part of the partnership/joint venture will be assigned a deficiency and will be rated Unacceptable.

For a Small Business Offeror who is utilizing the experience of a first-tier Small Business subcontractor under Factor 2 - Experience, the Offeror shall submit separate DART rates and

TCR for the specified five (5) CY for the Small Business Offeror and for each first-tier Small Business subcontractor; however, only one (1) safety narrative is required. Small Business Offerors who fail to submit DART rates and TCR for the Small Business Offeror and each first-tier Small Business subcontractor (if applicable) will be assigned a deficiency and will be rated Unacceptable.

Any fatalities experienced within this 5-year timeframe must be explained in detail, to include root cause and corrective actions.

NOTE: DART and TCR shall not be submitted for subcontractors, except as noted above for Small Business Offerors utilizing first-tier Small Business subcontractor experience.

(1) DART Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ CY2019, CY2020, CY2021, CY2022, and CY2023 worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no DART rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. If the DART rate calculation is 0.0, affirmatively state there were no DART cases during that year.

Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required, that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Dart cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, and/or restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness.

b. Calculation of DART rate: Multiply the total number of DART cases by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫 𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑹𝑹 =

Number of DART Incidents x 200,000

Total Number of Enployee Labor Hours Worked

(2) TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ CY2019, CY2020, CY2021, CY2022, and CY2023worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required, that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. TCR cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness.

b. Calculation of TCR rate: Multiply the total number of TCR incidents by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

𝑫𝑫𝑻𝑻𝑫𝑫 𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑹𝑹 =

Number of TCR Incidents x 200,000

Total Number of Enployee Labor Hours Worked

(3) Technical Approach for Safety: Submit a narrative that addresses the following:

a. Describe the Offeror’s approach to implementing and executing a Safety Management System (SMS) including Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describe the evaluation process used to select potential subcontractors.

c. Describe the processes of how the Offeror will oversee safety compliance of subcontractors at all levels throughout the performance of the contract (to include their own in-house workforce).

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages. Information on pages beyond this will not be considered.

(4) The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information. These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The evaluation will collectively consider the DART rate, TCR, Technical Approach to Safety, and other sources of information available to the Government as part of such collective evaluation. The board will evaluate the DART rates and TCR 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.

(1) DART Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five (5) years considering changes that take it from one (1) risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative rates occurring above moderate risk levels require the Offeror to provide an acceptable detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Low Risk and/or Very Low Risk for four (4) or more years within the specified five (5)

Calendar Years would indicate a significant strength.

c. Low Risk and/or Very Low Risk for three (3) years within the specified five Calendar Years would indicate a strength.

d. Declining rates that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk

(LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) and maintain LR or VLR for the remainder of the five (5) CY period would indicate a strength.

e. An increase in DART rate for any year could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to

High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any rates that rise above Moderate.

f. High Risk and/or Extremely High Risk for four (4) or more years within the specified five (5)

Calendar Years (CY) could be considered a significant weakness. High Risk and/or Extremely High Risk for three (3) or more years within the specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY) could be considered a weakness.

g. This chart correlates the DART rate to the level of risk:

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

(2) TCR Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five (5) years considering changes that take it from one (1) risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative rates occurring above moderate risk levels require the Offeror to provide an acceptable detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Low Risk and/or Very Low Risk for four (4) or more years within the specified five (5)

Calendar Years (CY) would indicate a significant strength.

c. Low Risk and/or Very Low Risk for three (3) years within the specified five Calendar Years would indicate a strength.

d. Declining rates that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk

(LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) and maintain LR or VLR for the remainder of the five (5) CY period would indicate a strength.

e. An increase in TCR for any year could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any rates that rise above Moderate.

f. High Risk and/or Extremely High Risk for four (4) or more years within the specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY) could be considered a significant weakness. High Risk and/or Extremely High Risk for three (3) or more years within the specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY) could be considered a weakness.

g. This chart correlates the TCR rate to the level of risk:

Risk TCR 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 6.0 Extremely High Risk Greater than 6.0

(3) The Technical Approach to Safety Narrative. To determine the degree to which the Offeror:

a. Describes a viable SMS that addresses elements; such as Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the

SMS.

b. Describes a methodical process of evaluating subcontractor’s safety performance in their selection process.

c. Describes a logical process of how the Offeror will oversee safety compliance of subcontractors at all levels throughout the performance of the contract (to include their own in-house workforce).

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages. Information on pages beyond this will not be considered.

(4) The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information. These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

PHASE 2

Factor 5 – Technical Solution

(a) Proposal Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the Technical Solution and conceptual drawings under Tab “5.”

Provide a narrative, not to exceed five (5) single-sided pages, size 8-1/2” x 11” using font size 10, describing the technical solution to the project that meets the requirements of the RFP within the construction cost limitation. Address the following in the narrative. Description of the Basis of Design and how it meets or exceeds the project/criteria and the requirements of the RFP. The Basis of Design shall include the following at a minimum:

- Site layout including a description of the building shape, building configuration, building height, building orientation, roadways, parking (include ingress and egress), pedestrian flow (include building ingress and egress area), pedestrian outdoor collaboration areas, Low Impact Design (LID) features, hardscape and landscape features, emergency vehicle access, and ATFP standoff distances

- Interior circulation/adjacencies and how they align with the functional requirements identified in the 35% design included in the RFP

- Approach to the design and construction of ICD 705 controlled area spaces to comply with criteria and enable successful accreditation

- Use of glazed storefronts for the exterior skin of the facility

Provide up to six (6) single-sided, size 11” x 17”, conceptual drawings to supplement the narrative, as follows:

- Floor plan

- Exterior building elevation

-…