VCT Preproposal Conference Presentation.pptx

12445125R0002 VCT

Pre-Proposal Conference 1 Presented by Steve Alves, CSA 11 Team Lead 02 June 2025 Presentation is Recorded

PROCUREMENT & PROPERTY SERVICES

Agenda

Introduction to the Virginia Creeper Trail Overview of Phase I Call for Qualifications Phase I Deadlines

** ALL INFORMATION IS SUMARIZED.

FIRMS SHOULD THOROUGHLY REVIEW THE REQUIREMENTS ON SAM.GOV**

PPS

Introduction to the Virginia Creeper Trail

Adventure Time With Bane

Virginia Creeper DBC Overview Damage Description Damage from Hurricane Helene to Virginia Creeper Trail (Damascus, VA) Over 18 Miles of Truss Bridges and Trail

Acaquisition Project Schedule May June Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Phase I Quals Phase II RFP Execution Notional

Acquisition Approach Two Step Design – Build (FAR 36) Phase I Qualifications Submittals Phase II Design and Price Proposal Minimal timeline used Order of Magintude: FUNDING: $200M-$300M 40% Small Business Subcontract goals Completion date of Sep 2026

Overview of Phase I - Call for Qualifications Volume IA Cover Letter with Bonding and Safety Record Volume IB Factor 1: Technical Qualifications – Approach and Delivery Technical Approach (Construction and Architect-Engineering) Experience (Construction and Architect-Engineering) Capability/Capacity to Perform Volume IC Factor 2: Past performance of the offeror’s team

All submittals will be Adobe PDF (or equal) and 508 compliant for accessibility. See Section M for page length of each volume. The USDA-FS must be able to “copy/paste” from your submittal. Submittals not in compliance will not be considered and the opportunity to correct will not be provided.

PHASE I Call for Qualifications Evaluation Criteria Phase I, Call for Qualifications, involves all non-price Evaluation Factors. The Cover letter/bonding and safety record must be rated Pass/Fail. Failure of one of these items will result in the proposal not being further evaluated. Evaluation Factor 1 is paramount and the most significant Evaluation Factor. The Government will assess, and rate Technical Qualifications and Past Performance submittals based on how well the offerors meet the Evaluation Factors and requirements outlined in the Call for Qualifications using the evaluation criteria as follows:

Volume IA Cover Letter with Bonding and Safety Record (No Page Limit) Volume IB Evaluation Factor 1: Technical Qualifications – Approach and Delivery (100 Page Limit) Technical Approach (Construction and Architect-Engineering) 10 Pages Experience (Construction and Architect-Engineering) 40 pages const/40 pages A&E Capability/Capacity to Perform 10 Pages Volume IC Evaluation Factor 2: Past performance of the offeror’s team (20 Page Limit) (including the architect-engineer and construction members)

Volume IA Cover Letter with Bonding and Safety Record

Contractor Submittal - Bonding and Safety Bonding Capacity Standard: Minimum bonding value of $300M Submittal Requirement: Provide a letter from the Offeror’s surety stating the surety’s commitment to bond the Offeror for at least $300M for performance and payment bonds.

Constructor Safety Record Standard: Average Experience Modification Ratio (EMR) of 1.2 or less for the last three years with the rating in any one year not greater than 1.2 Submittal Requirement: Provide a statement in the Phase I cover letter of the that the firm’s average EMR is 1.2 or less for the last three years, and that the EMR in any one year has not exceeded 1.2.

Provide copies from the insurer of the firm’s EMR for the last three years in Volume I Government Standard Screening Criteria Pass or Fail

Volume IA Cover Letter with Bonding and Safety Record (No Page Limit) Screening criteria will be evaluated on a Pass/Fail basis by the Contracting Officer as part of the determinations of responsibility in Phase I. Only firms deemed responsible and receiving a rating of Pass for all Screening Criteria will be provided to the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) for evaluation.

Contractor Submittal - Bonding and Safety Bonding Capacity Standard: The Surety Letter will be evaluated to ensure that the offeror can obtain a minimum bonding value of $300M Submittal Requirement:

Provide a letter from the Offeror’s surety stating the surety’s commitment to bond the Offeror for at least $300M for performance and payment bonds. The Offeror shall submit one copy with each proposal package. Actual bonds are not required until the Award phase.

Constructor Safety Record Standard: Average Experience Modification Ratio (EMR) of 1.2 or less for the last three years with the rating in any one year not greater than 1.2 Submittal Requirement:

Provide a statement in the Phase I cover letter of the that the firm’s average EMR is 1.2 or less for the last three years, and that the EMR in any one year has not exceeded 1.2.

Provide copies from the insurer of the firm’s EMR for the last three years in Volume I Government Standard Screening Criteria Pass or Fail

Volume IB Factor 1: Technical Qualifications – Approach and Delivery

Subfactors Technical Approach (Constr and Architect-Eng) Experience (Constr and Architect-Eng) Capability/Capacity to Perform

Submittals will consist of elements demonstrating the Design-Build contractor expertise in the areas of demolition/disaster debris removal, architect-engineering projects, and construction. The DBC should have specific experience in bridge/trussell bridges, community trail creation/restoration, and historic preservation. Evaluation Factor 1 is broken down into three subfactors:

Technical Approach (Composition and Management of Proposed DB Team) 10 Page Limit Experience (Construction and Design) 40/40 Page Limit Capability/Capacity to Perform (Construction and Design) 10 Page Limit

Contractor Subfactor Submittal – Technical Approach 10 Page Limit (Construction and Architect-Engineering) Provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms ..arrangement to meet the 30 Sep 2026 deadline.

The Technical Approach narrative shall be limited to ten (10) single side pages including the org chart.

In addition to the narrative, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture (JV) agreement, These pages do not count against the narrative page limit.

Government Standard Screening Criteria Any projects submitted, more than the five (5) for the Construction Experience and five (5) for the Design Experience will not be considered.

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

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

Relevant projects that demonstrate renovation experience may be considered more favorably than those that provide new construction experience.

Relevant projects that demonstrate laboratory construction and/or renovation experience may be considered more favorable than those that do not have laboratory construction experience.

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

AE should adequately reflect professional qualification in Specialized codes: B02 Bridges; S09 Structural Design; Special Structures; C15 Construction Management; R04 Recreation Facilities (Parks, Marinas, Etc.).

Volume IB Factor 1: Technical Qualifications – Approach and Delivery; SUBFACTOR 1 Technical Approach

Contractor Subfactor Submittal – Technical Approach 10 Page Limit (Construction and Architect-Engineering) Provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement to meet the 30 Sep 2026 deadline. Provide roles, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the various firms (see FAR subpart 9.6). If the experience of a significant subcontractor is being claimed in Subfactor Factor 2, the firm must be named in the above narrative and organizational chart.

The Technical Approach narrative shall be limited to ten (10) single side pages including the organizational chart.

In addition to the narrative, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture (JV) agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., JV partner, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.). These pages do not count against the narrative page limit.

Government Standard Screening Criteria The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will be used as a means of subjectively evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP via the proposed DB team. Offerors that are rated less than satisfactory will be ineligible to proceed to Phase II.

Construction Experience (40 Page Limit) Submit a maximum of five (5) construction projects A project is defined as a project performed under a single TO/Contract Construction & Design Exp Project Data Sheet (RFP Attachments 10 and 11) description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

Offeror may utilize the experience of a subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects

Design Experience (40 Page Limit) Submit a maximum of five (5) design projects /project valued at $35 million Projects submitted shall be completed within the past seven (7) years A project is defined as a project performed under a single TO/Contract Construction & Design Exp Project Data Sheet (RFP Attachments 10 and 11)

Government Standard Screening Criteria Any projects submitted, more than the five (5) for the Construction Experience and five (5) for the Design Experience will not be considered Relevant projects …worked together may be considered more favorably than those that have not worked together Relevant projects that demonstrate design-build exp may be considered more favorably than those that do not have design-build exp Relevant projects that demonstrate renovation exp may be considered more favorably… Relevant projects that demonstrate exp with sustainable features may be considered….

AE should adequately reflect professional qualification in Specialized codes: B02 Bridges; S09 Structural Design; Special Structures; C15 Construction Management; R04 Recreation Facilities (Parks, Marinas, Etc.).

Volume IB Factor 1: Technical Qualifications – Approach and Delivery; SUBFACTOR 2 Experience

Contractor Subfactor Submittal - Experience (Construction and Architect-Engineering) Construction Experience (40 Page Limit):

Submit a maximum of five (5) construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as a Design Build or Design Bid Build project valued at $200 million or more, involving new construction or renovation of bridges and trails work types. The offeror may submit relevant experience from a subcontractor or other teaming member that they propose to use; however, the offeror must also submit a signed copy of a JV or teaming member. Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

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

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (RFP Attachments 10 and 11) 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 eight (8) 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 JV, relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the JV entity. If the JV does not have shared experience, projects shall be submitted for each JV partner. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all JV partners may be rated lower. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates / subsidiaries / parent / Limited Liability Company (LLC) / Private Limited Company (LTD) member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF-1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate / subsidiary / parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

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

Design Experience (40 Page Limit):

Submit a maximum of five (5) design projects for the design team that best demonstrates design experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as a Design Build or Design Bid Build project valued at $35 million or more, involving new construction or renovation of bridges and trails work types.

Projects submitted shall be completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

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

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (RFP Attachments 10 and 11) 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 eight (8) 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 an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates / subsidiaries / parent / LLC / LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on SF-1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate / subsidiary / parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize the experience of a design subcontractor to demonstrate design experience under this evaluation Factor. The Offer must provide a supporting JV agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor.

Government Standard Screening Criteria The assessment of the Offeror’s submittals will be used as a means of subjectively evaluating the offeror’s demonstrated breadth and depth of experience in performing relevant construction and design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. An assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review five projects. Any projects submitted, more than the five (5) for the Construction Experience and five (5) for the Design Experience will not be considered.

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

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

Relevant projects that demonstrate renovation experience may be considered more favorably than those that provide new construction experience.

Relevant projects that demonstrate laboratory construction and/or renovation experience may be considered more favorable than those that do not have laboratory construction experience.

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

AE should adequately reflect professional qualification in Specialized codes: B02 Bridges; S09 Structural Design; Special Structures; C15 Construction Management; R04 Recreation Facilities (Parks, Marinas, Etc.).

Contractor Subfactor Submittal - Capability/Capacity to Perform 10 Page Limit The Design-Build firm will be able to successfully integrate Design with Construction to meet a deadline of 30 Sep 2026.

Provide a layout Overview of Project: schedule; personnel; Control costs; Finance work; Estimate jobs; Schedule the work; Manage cash flow; Manage an effective safety program; Maintain an effective quality control system Submittal of overarching schedule/Gantt chart or equivalent that …. completion end date is 30 Sep 2026.

Government Standard Screening Criteria:

The assessment of the Offeror’s capability/capacity will be used as a means of subjectively evaluating the capability/capacity of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP via the proposed DB team. Offerors that are rated less than satisfactory will be ineligible to proceed to Phase II Submissions that propose DB teams that have previously worked together may be considered more favorably..

Ability to meet the completion date of 30 Sep 2026, may be considered more favorably than those that reflect an alternative date of completion.

Volume IB Factor 1: Technical Qualifications – Approach and Delivery; SUBFACTOR 3 Capability/Capacity to Perform

Contractor Subfactor Submittal - Capability/Capacity to Perform 10 Page Limit The Design-Build firm will be able to successfully integrate Design with Construction to meet a deadline of 30 Sep 2026. The DB firm should provide a concept overview for the execution of the VCT RFP should it be awarded to them. The concept overview should address:

Provide a layout Overview of Project: schedule; personnel; Control costs; Finance work; Estimate jobs; Schedule the work; Manage cash flow; Manage an effective safety program; Maintain an effective quality control system Submittal of overarching schedule/Gantt chart or equivalent that demonstrates executing the overall requirements in the draft RFP. The project completion end date is 30 Sep 2026.

Government Standard Screening Criteria:

The assessment of the Offeror’s capability/capacity will be used as a means of subjectively evaluating the capability/capacity of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP via the proposed DB team. Offerors that are rated less than satisfactory will be ineligible to proceed to Phase II Submissions that propose DB teams that have previously worked together may be considered more favorably than those that have not worked together.

Submissions that demonstrate an ability to meet the completion date of 30 Sep 2026, may be considered more favorably than those that reflect an alternative date of completion.

Volume IC Factor 2: Past performance Volume IC Evaluation Factor 2: Past performance of the offeror’s team (20 Page Limit) Contractor Submittal Evaluation Factor 2: Past Performance of the Offeror’s Team Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Subfactor Experience for construction experience A-E Contractor Appraisal Support System (ACASS) it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Evaluation Factor 1, Subfactor Experience. If there is not a completed CPARS, CCASS or ACASS evaluation then submit a Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (RFP Attachment 12 and 13) Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. For DB projects whereby the offeror did not receive a past performance (ACASS) or whereby the CCASS or CPARS evaluation report did not specifically address design performance, the offeror shall submit a PPQ specifically for the design work associated with the DB project.

Submitting only a performance award or additional information is not acceptable.

Government Standard Screening Criteria This subjective evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Evaluation Factor 1, Subfactor Experience and may also consider recent and relevant past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

Project recency and relevancy will be considered in the evaluation of past performance for each project. More emphasis will be placed on more recent and more relevant projects..

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance and will receive an Unknown/Neutral rating.

Volume IC Evaluation Factor 2: Past performance of the offeror’s team (20 Page Limit) This subjective evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Evaluation Factor 1, Subfactor Experience and may also consider recent and relevant past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

Contractor Submittal Evaluation Factor 2: Past Performance of the Offeror’s Team If a completed Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Evaluation Report or a Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) Evaluation Report is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Subfactor Experience for construction experience. If a completed A-E Contractor Appraisal Support System (ACASS) Evaluation Report is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Evaluation Factor 1, Subfactor Experience. If there is not a completed CPARS, CCASS or ACASS evaluation then submit a Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (RFP Attachment 12 and 13) for each project included in Subfactor 2 for both Construction and Architect-Engineering.

Experience and Design Experience. The Offeror should provide completed PPQs in the proposal.

Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. 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, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). The Government may make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project(s) to obtain the PPQ information. However, Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to help ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, steven.alves@usda.gov /Richard.huffman@usda.gov.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Evaluation Factor 2, Past Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues. Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

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 unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this Evaluation Factor.

For DB projects whereby the offeror did not receive a past performance (ACASS) or whereby the CCASS or CPARS evaluation report did not specifically address design performance, the offeror shall submit a PPQ specifically for the design work associated with the DB project.

Submitting only a performance award or additional information is not acceptable.

Government Standard Screening Criteria This subjective evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Evaluation Factor 1, Subfactor Experience and may also consider recent and relevant past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

Project recency and relevancy will be considered in the evaluation of past performance for each project. More emphasis will be placed on more recent and more relevant projects. 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 the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of Contractors who are part of a partnership or joint venture 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.

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance and will receive an Unknown/Neutral rating.

Phase I Deadlines Non-Mandatory Call for Qualifications Pre-Proposal Conference Number One: 02 JUNE 2025, 1000ET. This virtual meeting will be held via Microsoft “Teams” Join the meeting now Meeting ID: 263 350 414 644 Passcode: oE3jR6Ek Or Telephone Call In +1 202-650-0123 380411144#

Non-Mandatory Call for Qualifications Pre-Proposal Conference Number Two: 09 JUNE 2025, 1000ET. This virtual meeting will be held via Microsoft “Teams” Join the meeting now Meeting ID: 274 372 137 918 Passcode: 27p4ar2z Or Telephone Call In +1 202-650-0123 738806933#

Question Submittal Deadline for Phase I: 30 JUNE 2025

Phase I Mandatory Deadline: 09 JULY, 1300ET

Questions image1.jpeg image2.png image3.svg

.MsftOfcThm_Background1_Fill { fill:#FFFFFF;

image4.png image5.svg

.MsftOfcThm_Background1_Fill { image6.png image7.svg

.MsftOfcThm_Background1_Fill { image10.png image11.svg image16.png image17.svg

.MsftOfcThm_Text1_Fill { fill:#000000;

image18.jpeg image19.jpeg image20.jpeg image21.jpeg image22.jpeg