Solicitation N4008523R2622.pdf

SOLICITATION NUMBER N40085-23-R-2622 DESIGN-BID-BUILD, BRIDGE 2 STRUCTURAL REPAIRS, PORTSMOUTH NAVAL SHIPYARD, KITTERY, MAINE

This project includes all labor, material, equipment, transportation, supervision, and incidental related w ork required to recoat and perform repairs to Bridge 2 at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard located in Kittery, Maine.

** All correspondence regarding this solicitation shall be directed via email to James Godw in at james.a.godw in41.civ@us.navy.mil.

JAMES A. GODWIN 757-341-1659

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

22-May-2023

(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 ________582 calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

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

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

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________21 Jun 2023 (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 _______210 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

NAVFACSYSCOM MID-ATLANTIC

CONTRACTING 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:

N4008523R2622 73

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

N4008523R2622

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 Each Base Price

FFP

Total Price for the entire work for Bridge 2 - Structural Steel Recoating and Repairs in accordance with the drawings and specifications, complete, but excluding work provided in another Priced line Item.

FOB: Destination

PSC CD: Y1LB

NET AMT

0002 Each OPTION Option 1 - Additional Recoating

FFP

Provision of all work associated with cleaning and recoating an additional 1,000 square feet of steel.

0003 Each OPTION Option 2 - Additional Steel Repairs

FFP

Provision of all work associated with providing an additional 1,500 lbs of steel repairs assuming that each repair piece is on the order of magnitude of 150 lbs.

0004 Each OPTION Option 3 - Additional Approach Repaving

FFP

Provision of all work associated with providing an additional 10,000 square feet of paving adjacent to the site.

0005 Each OPTION Option 4 - Additional Spall Repairs

FFP

Provision of all work associated with repairing an additional 250 square feet at a 4-inch depth of concrete spall repairs.

0006 Each OPTION Option 5 - Waterproofing Membrane

FFP

Provision of all work associated with providing approximately 667 square yards of waterproofing membrane onto the concrete bridge deck.

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

Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

4.3 PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPI’S)

4.4 CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES (SAM.GOV)

5. INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSALS

6. ATTACHMENTS: WILL BE LOCATED ON CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES UNDER ATTACHMENTS

6.1 ATTACHMENT A – PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY LOG

6.2 ATTACHMENT B – CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET

6.3 ATTACHMENT C – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

6.4 ATTACHMENT D – HISTORICAL SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION

6.5 ATTACHMENT E – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION AND COMMITMENT STRATEGY

6.6 ATTACHMENT F – INDIVIDUAL SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN TEMPLATE

6.7 ATTACHMENT G – SPECIFICATIONS

6.8 ATTACHMENT H – DRAWINGS

6.9 ATTACHMENT I – PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

6.10 ATTACHMENT J – PIEE VENDOR ACCESS INSTRUCTIONS

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.1.1 This solicitation is being issued as UNRESTRICTED FOR FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION.

1.1.2 The NAICS Code for this procurement is 237310 and the Size Standard is $45,000,000.

1.1.3 This acquisition will be advertised utilizing FAR Part 15 – Contracting by Negotiation resulting in a Firm- Fixed Price (FFP) Contract for Construction Services.

1.1.4 In accordance with DFARS 236.204, the estimated magnitude of construction is between $10,000,000 and $25,000,000.

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE CONTRACT

The general intent of this solicitation is to award a Fixed Price Construction Contract for design-bid-build (DBB) Bridge 2 Structural Repairs, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Kittery, Maine.

This project is to include, but not be limited to:

Recoating of the steel elements will consist of cleaning the steel with a blast media in accordance with SSPC-SP10 Near-White Blast Cleaning. The blast media will need to be contained and disposed of appropriately. Once the steel elements have been cleaned and properly prepared, a coating system will be applied in accordance with the coating manufacturer’s recommendations. The Contractor will also be required to provide a sound barrier to reduce the noise projected out to the surrounding areas during coating operations.

Steel repairs on the bridge will involve replacing or repairing steel elements that are heavily corroded mostly consisting of bracing elements, stiffener plates and safety railings. The steel repairs will be performed prior to the installation of the new coating system.

Miscellaneous repairs to the bridge include repairing concrete spalls in the curb, repairing the compression seal in the expansion joint, and replacing deteriorated or missing scupper ends.

The repaving of Bridge 2 and the south approach involves removal of the existing asphalt and installation of new asphalt in accordance with Maine DOT standard specifications.

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 proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal 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. All technical factors, when combined, are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating; and all technical factors and the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating, when combined, are approximately equal to price.

5. Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions. An Unacceptable rating in any of the non-cost/price factors will result in an overall rating of “Unacceptable” for the non-cost/price factors, unless corrected through discussions Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal.

The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(s) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(s). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Factor 2 – Management Approach and Schedule Factor 3 – Safety

Factor 4 – Past Performance Factor 5 – Small Business Utilization and Participation

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

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

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

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Price shall be submitted on the Price Schedule included in the solicitation. The offeror shall submit the proposal in accordance with INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, 4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, 4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS. All submissions shall include the following:

• Cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), 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 2022 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 exceed $3 million;

• Responsibility Determination Information (see below); and

• Small Business Subcontracting Plan (see below).

Note: Price information included in the non-price/technical proposal will not be considered. Likewise, non-price/technical information included in the price proposal will not be considered.

The offeror is required to submit a complete Price Schedule that includes completion of all contract line items numbers (CLINs). Pricing information is not required to be completed under Section 00010 – Solicitation Contract Form in SF 1442. All required proposal documents shall be submitted in accordance with FAR 15.208.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILTY DETERMINATION INFORMATION – In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically FAR 9.104-1, General Standards. 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. 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.

SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (April 2020) (REFERENCE FAR 52.219-9 ALT II AND

DFARS 252.219-7003) INFORMATION.

In accordance with FAR 19.7, all other than small businesses shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBSP) utilizing the template provided as Attachment F. Acceptability of the SBSP will be considered a responsibility matter. The SBSP will not be evaluated or rated by the SSEB, but reviewed by a Small Business Professional/Authorized Representative and the Contracting Officer for acceptability. The SBSP shall be negotiated and/or accepted within the time specified by the Contracting Officer. Failure to negotiate an acceptable subcontracting plan within the time limit prescribed by the Contracting Officer will render the offeror ineligible for award of the contract. The SBSP will be incorporated into the resulting contract.

NAVFAC’s command-wide small business subcontracting targets are shown below. These may be higher or lower than percentages that would represent realistic, challenging, small business subcontracting goals for this acquisition consistent with efficient and effective performance of the contract. These targets are based on a percentage of total planned subcontract dollars.

Small Business (SB) 40% Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) 5% HUBZone SB 3% Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB) 9% Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) 3% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) 3%

The SBSP shall be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Participation and Commitment Strategy (Attachment E). In accordance with DFARS 215.304(c)(i), when an evaluation assesses the extent that small businesses are specifically identified in proposals, those small businesses considered in the evaluation shall be listed in the SBSP.

Please note that SBSP goals and the participation rates provided in the Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) WILL NOT be the same. The participation rates within the SBPCD are provided as percentages of the total contract value; subcontract plan goals are provided as a percentage of planned subcontracting dollars. While the percentages will differ, the types of products/services identified in the SBSP, should be the same as those products/services identified in the SBPCD. Likewise, the planned small business subcontract dollars in the SBSP will be equal to (or in some cases greater than) the extent of small business participation identified in the SBPCD.

(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 (see attached Price Proposal Form). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section 00 21 16 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) Non-cost/price Factors 1 through 5:

The offeror shall submit the proposal in accordance with INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, 4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, 4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS. All submissions shall include the following:

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

• 8 ½ x 11 paper, 10-point font; and

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

Note: Price information included in the non-price/technical proposal will not be considered. Likewise, non-price/technical information included in the price proposal will not be considered.

(1) Factor 1 – Corporate Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Submit a minimum of two (2) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrate the Offeror’s relevant experience (projects similar in size, scope, and complexity to this RFP).

For purposes of the evaluation, a relevant construction project is further defined as:

Size: A project with a final construction cost of $7,500,000 or greater.

Scope: Repairs and recoating of an existing steel bridge, including repairs and resurfacing of the bridge deck.

Complexity: Offerors are not required to demonstrate all complexity elements (listed below) in each relevant project submitted, but shall collectively demonstrate experience with the following work, while meeting the size and scope relevancy requirements:

a) Experience with removal of existing coating system, surface preparation, and recoating of steel bridges;

b) Experience with sequencing, phasing, and traffic management requirements; and

c) Experience with over water construction from a barge.

The offeror’s body of submitted work, considered as a whole, will be reviewed to determine if it possesses all of the complexity elements listed above. Complexity will only be satisfied on projects that are considered relevant in terms of size and scope.

Offerors shall have acted as the prime contractor1 on all submitted projects.

Note1: In accordance with 13 CFR 125.2(g), small business Offerors may utilize the prime contractor experience of a small business first-tier subcontractor(s) to demonstrate experience under this evaluation factor if that small business Offeror cannot independently satisfy the experience requirement as defined above. In order to utilize the experience of a small business first-tier subcontractor(s), the offeror must specifically identify the proposed small business first-tier subcontractor(s) in its proposal in accordance with this Factor. The Offeror or, if a small business Offeror, its small business first-tier subcontractor, shall have been the prime contractor on all submitted projects. The Government notes that 13 CFR 125.2(g) is specific to only small business Offerors and named small business first-tier subcontractors. As such, the small business Offeror is not permitted to use the experience of a large business subcontractor or large business corporate affiliate in place of its own experience if the small business Offeror cannot independently satisfy the experience requirement as defined above.

Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered with the exception of the note above regarding 13 CFR 125.2(g). Furthermore, the offeror’s experience as a subcontractor will 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 shall not be submitted as a project;

rather offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project. The submission of a multiple award and/or indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contract as a whole will be considered Not Relevant.

The attached Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment B) 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 submissions via any other medium. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages).

Ensure that the project description clearly addresses how the project meets the scope and complexity requirements, as delineated above, and provides the final construction cost. The absence of any such information may result in the project being considered Not Relevant, which could result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE for this Factor, if the minimum requirements are not met.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall have been completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this RFP. Projects which are not complete as of the date of issuance of this RFP will be considered “Not Relevant.” Additionally, projects completed prior to ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this RFP will be considered “Not Relevant.”

If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members may be rated lower. If the Offeror is submitting experience for individual JV partners in which the company was a partner in a different Joint Venture entity, the Offeror must specifically address what portion of the work under the submitted project was performed by the JV partner offering on this contract and demonstrate that the work meets the Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above, or the project will not be considered relevant. Likewise, offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a project where it performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity, as defined above. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects. Offerors proposing as a JV shall submit a signed JV agreement. For Mentor- Protégé Joint Ventures, the offeror shall submit the signed and U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) approved Mentor-Protégé agreement.

If an Offeror is utilizing the prime contractor experience of a corporate affiliate (e.g., subsidiaries, sister companies, predecessor companies, and parent companies) or small business first-tier subcontractor (as delineated in the note above), the proposal shall include, on the corporate affiliate or small business first-tier subcontractor’s letterhead, a teaming agreement or letter of commitment. In order for the experience to be considered, the Offeror is also required to clearly demonstrate that the corporate affiliate(s) or small business first-tier subcontractor(s) will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract by identifying the personnel or resources from the corporate affiliate(s) or small business first-tier subcontractor(s) that will be dedicated to the contract.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review the first five (5) projects submitted for Corporate Experience. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Corporate Experience 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.

Offerors that demonstrate relevant experience with historic Government structures may be considered more favorably.

Offerors that demonstrate relevant experience with projects that incorporate active physical security systems, including but not limited to wedge barricades, may be considered more favorably.

(2) Factor 2 – Management Approach and Schedule:

Submit the following documentation, as detailed throughout this Factor, in order to describe your approach to managing the project, risk, and ensuring adherence to the project schedule:

1) Management Approach

a) Narrative Work Plan

b) Space Planning and Usage

2) Critical Path Schedule

See below for details concerning the required content of each item listed above. Factor submission shall not exceed fifteen (15) double-sided pages (or thirty (30) single-sided pages). No page restrictions on the project schedule but it must be printed on 11”x17” paper.

1. Management Approach

Provide a written work plan that addresses major elements of work, project risks, and space planning and usage.

1.a) Narrative Work Plan –The work plan shall demonstrate understanding of the scope, all phases and major milestones, technical complexities, and construction schedule required to achieve the work as identified in the RFP. Identify activities that may affect the project timeline, including other/off site work activities. Identify key project risks including their likelihood and consequences, along with mitigation or management strategies to minimize or eliminate impacts to the project cost and schedule. The plan shall address the following technical complexities:

a) Removal, abatement and management of hazardous materials; and

b) Phased construction and maintenance of vehicular and pedestrian traffic

1.b) Space Planning and Usage – The offeror shall provide a written plan identifying anticipated use of on-site options, methods for material and equipment storage both on and off site. Space use shall also provide a plan for avoiding conflicts with other active construction projects and facility operations in the project area.

2. Critical Path Schedule

The project schedule shall illustrate the offeror’s ability to achieve or improve on the contract completion date set out in the RFP. The total duration of the contract is 582 calendar days. Identify the overall completion time for this project, in accordance with the RFP, as well as interim completion times and key milestones for sequences as required to complete construction. The schedule shall demonstrate an understanding of the work to include the base CLIN and all options, a logical sequence of events to accomplish the work, and contain enough information to identify all of the major milestones, as defined in the phasing plans of the RFP. The schedule shall be based on a contract award date of AUGUST 2023. This is for proposal purposes only and not dispositive of an anticipated/planned award date.

If an Offeror proposed a realistic and feasible schedule that is shorter than the required duration and is selected for award, that schedule and duration will be incorporated into the award document and replace the advertised required duration.

A schedule that proposes a contract duration longer than indicated in the RFP will be rated UNACCEPTABLE.

Offeror shall provide a critical path method (CPM) schedule for execution and completion of the work to achieve the required interim and final completion milestones for the project. At a minimum, the CPM schedule shall address the following:

• Identify major activities and milestones;

• Provide sequencing (precedence/succession) of critical activities;

• Demonstrate knowledge of project regulatory constraints; and

• Sufficiently detailed to identify critical and near-critical activities.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

1. Management Approach - Offerors will be evaluated on the extent to which they demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements of the RFP. An Offeror’s narrative work plan that identifies areas of risk in logistics and resource management and provides a comprehensive contingency plan that addresses mitigation of any identified risks with potential solutions may be considered more favorably than those that do not.

2. Schedule - Offerors will be evaluated on the extent to which they demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements of the RFP. A schedule that proposes a realistic and feasible contract duration shorter than the required duration indicated in the RFP may be considered more favorably than those that do not.

(3) Factor 3 – Safety:

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 [CY2022, CY2021, CY2020, CY2019, and CY2018], as well as a safety narrative, as described further below. For a partnership or joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART rates and TCR for the specified five (5) CY for each contractor who is part of the partnership/joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. 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.

1. DART Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY2022, CY2021, CY2020, CY2019, and CY2018] worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no DART 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. 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.

2. TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY2022, CY2021, CY2020, CY2019, and CY2018] worth 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.

3. Technical Approach to 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 performance of the contract (to include the Offeror’s own in-house workforce).

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page.

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.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

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 complete calendar years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

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

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) may be considered a strength.

c. An increasing DART rate trend 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 trends that rise above Moderate.

d. 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 complete calendar years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

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

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) may be considered a strength.

c. An increasing TCR rate trend 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 trends that rise above Moderate.

d. 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 5.99 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 management plan to hold themselves and their subcontractors accountable for adhering to the safety requirements of the contract.

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page. 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.

(4) Factor 4 – Past Performance:

Recent, relevant projects are determined within the requirements for Factor 1, Corporate Experience.

If a completed CPARS evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal. Note: submit all CPARS evaluations (interim and final) for each project. 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 should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment C), 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, James Godwin, via email at james.a.godwin41.civ@us.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.

Offerors are highly encouraged to provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. Additionally, Offerors are highly encouraged to address any adverse past performance issues. Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total. Information provided beyond this page limit will not be considered.

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 Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) 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), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), 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.

IMPORTANT: 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. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified.

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.

A copy of the blank Past Performance Questionnaire to be used for requesting client references is included as Attachment C.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on the quality of performance on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and past performance on other 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., CPARS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

- A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

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

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

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

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. More relevant past performance will have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance, and will receive a Neutral Confidence rating.

(5) Factor 5 – Small Business Utilization and Participation:

It is the policy of the Government to provide maximum practicable opportunities in its acquisitions to Small Business (SB) concerns, including Historically Underutilized Business Zone Small Business (HUBZone SB), Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), and other small business concerns. Further, it is the policy of the Government that such concerns will have the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in contract performance consistent with its efficient performance.

This Factor assesses both the historical achievements in utilizing small business concerns and the proposed small business participation commitment for this requirement. The offeror is required to demonstrate its previous commitment to SBs through its record of past utilization of SBs and the level of commitment to small business if awarded a contract under this solicitation.

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

1. All Offerors (large, non-profits, AND small businesses) shall use Attachment D (Historical Small Business Utilization) to demonstrate their historical utilization of SBs. Each project submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience, shall be included on Attachment D. Failure to include each project submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience, on Attachment D, or the failure to fully complete Attachment D for each project may result in a deficiency. Only complete Attachment D. Information provided in a different format and/or on a form created by the offeror will not be evaluated. Attachments or addendums to Attachment D will not be evaluated. Offerors are permitted to expand portions of the form, as needed, to provide sufficient response. Instructions regarding how to complete Attachment D are included at the beginning of the attachment.

2. All Offerors (large, non-profits, AND small businesses) shall use Attachment E (Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) to submit the following required information for evaluation of this factor:

• To demonstrate commitment to use small business concerns in the performance of this contract, identify by name the subcontractors that will be used to support each specific small business category (i.e., SB, HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, and SDVOSB). Identify the type and complexity of product/service to be subcontracted, and the type of commitment (i.e., teaming agreement, joint venture agreement, mentor protégé agreement, letter of commitment, etc.) with each subcontractor.

o If subcontractors are not identified by name, offerors shall provide a detailed explanation why not identified. If firm written commitments with SBs are not in place, offerors shall provide an explanation and rationale on the ability to achieve the proposed participation.

o If the offeror does not intend to subcontract, provide a detailed explanation why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance. SBs intending to 100% self-perform are not required to provide an explanation.

• To demonstrate maximum practicable participation of small businesses, identify (in terms of dollar value and percentage of the total contract value) the offeror’s proposed small business participation. The minimum required small business participation (i.e. work to be performed by small business as the prime contractor and/or work to be performed by small business subcontractors) is 20%. Offerors who are not able to meet the minimum total small business participation requirement of 20% (of the total contract value) shall provide a detailed explanation why the minimum total small business participation requirement cannot be achieved.

• Information provided in a different format and/or on a form created by the offeror will not be evaluated.

Attachments or addendums to Attachment E will not be evaluated. Only complete Attachment E.

• Large business offerors may achieve the minimum total small business participation requirement through subcontracting to small businesses.

• Small business offerors may achieve the minimum total small business participation requirement through their own performance/participation as a prime as well as through a joint venture, teaming arrangement, and/or subcontracting with other small business concerns.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate the realism and likelihood of success in achieving the small business…