Washigton ARTCC 697DCK-24-R-00136.pdf

I. INTRODUCTION:

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Enroute Construction Branch, AAQ540, has a requirement for the BI-Partisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) funded project for the Underground Utility Relocation and Parking Lot Modernization at the FAA Washington Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC), 825 E Market St, Leesburg, VA 20176

This procurement is set aside exclusively for Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB).

The purpose of this Screening Information Request (SIR) is to solicit information from SBD contractors, which the FAA will evaluate in accordance with the factors outlined below and, from that information, create a short-list of qualified vendors. The short-list will be limited to the ten (10) highest scoring vendors or less if in the FAA's best interest. The minimum requirement of the FAA is defined as follows: a Pass on factor 1, as well as a score of 2 or higher for factor 2 and a score of 3 for factor 3.

Once the short-list is established, the FAA will issue a Request for Offer (RFO) to all qualified vendors on the short-list in February 2024. Contract award is anticipated by March 2024.

Electronic standard design plans, specifications and other documents will be issued to the prequalified contractors at the RFO stage.

II. SCOPE OF WORK:

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Enroute Construction Branch, currently has a requirement to replace the underground utilities at the Washington ARTCC, 825 E Market Street, Leesburg, VA. The ARTCC is a critical facility that must remain operational 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Unscheduled interruptions to utilities and/or services will not be permitted.

The work shall include, but is not limited to, the following:

Federal Aviation Administration

SCREENING INFORMATION REQUEST (SIR)

Underground Utility Relocation and Parking Lot Modernization at the FAA Washington Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC ZDC), 825 E Market Street, Leesburg, VA

SIR NO. 697DCK-24-R-00136

Replace the underground utilities on property from city mains up to facility entrance at the ARTCC, associated Power Service Building, Guard House, and ES Building. Utilities to be replaced include domestic water, fire water, fire hydrants, and associated backflow preventers, sanitary sewer and associated manhole structures, natural gas, and storm drainage and manhole structures.

Install concrete encased conduit for future fiber optic run.

Install 1 dual port, level 2, EV charging stations with associated electrical distribution equipment.

Repair parking lot and roadway throughout property, including a 2” mill and overlay throughout, and full depth asphalt replacement in areas of utility trenching.

All areas of the facility will remain occupied and functional throughout the project.

Traffic and roadway usage must be maintained, and traffic control plans will be required for any lane closures or roadway work.

New utility piping will be installed, tested, and accepted prior to connecting to the facility for cutover and prior to any demolition of existing piping.

Prior to starting any work, utility locating services must be conducted to determine exact locations. Test holes are required at utility connections and crossings prior to construction.

Hydro-excavation is required for all trenches

The successful offeror must be able to complete a minimum of 15% of the work using its own resources.

The estimated total performance time is 270 calendar days after receipt of the Notice to Proceed. The estimated construction price range $5,000,000.00 to $10,000,000.00

The NAICS code projected for this project is 237110 Water and Sewer Line and Related Structure Construction with a size standard of $45 million.

This procurement is set aside for Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB). A business is considered SDB if it meets the requirements of 13 CFR 124 and their SDB status is reflected in their SAM.gov registration under Representations and Certifications.

III. EVALUATION CRITERIA

Responses to this SIR will be evaluated on the criteria listed below which are listed in descending order of importance.

Each offeror’s response to this SIR shall be evaluated on the three (3) criteria described below. Offerors that receive a FAIL on Financial Resources will not be considered any further and as such will not be eligible to receive the RFO (Phase II). Offerors that receive a PASS will be considered further under factors 2 and 3, which are listed below in descending order of importance. Any Offeror receiving less than a total score of 2 for either factor 2 or 3 will not be eligible to receive the Phase II RFO documentation.

Factor 1 - Financial (Pass/Fail) Factor 2- Past Performance & Experience (70%) Factor 3 - Key Personnel (30%)

Factor 1: Financial - This factor will consider the Applicant’s general financial condition, resources, and ability to sustain a project of this scope and duration.

a. Annual gross business volume for the past three (3) years.

b. Financial resources.

c. Bonding capacity.

d. Company-owned equipment.

The FAA will analyze the financial statements and make a risk assessment of the Applicant’s financial capability to successfully accomplish this project.

The Applicant shall submit, at a minimum, the following:

• A copy of the Company’s latest financial statements and balance sheets for the past three (3) years.

• Disclose any unpaid judgments in excess of $1 million.

• Disclose any disputed or unadjudicated claims in excess of $5 million.

• Bonding company’s name, address, agent’s name and telephone number.

• Length of time with bonding company.

• Bonding capacity, available and current.

• Evidence that the Contractor’s current bonding capacity is at least as large as the published contract award amount. Evidence may be in the form of a letter from a licensed bonding company (surety), or from an agent normally representing such a company.

• Bond rates charged by surety.

• List of additional surety used over the past five (5) years either on a regular or intermittent basis.

• Description of current financial resources showing your firm’s ability to sustain all contract activities for a period not less than sixty (60) calendar days, including licenses, permits, insurance, bonding, mobilization, equipment, labor, and material costs.

• Description of ability to obtain financial resources.

• List of company-owned equipment.

Company Resources will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis. Only those contractors who are determined to be financially responsible will be further evaluated.

Factor 2- Past Performance and Experience – This factor includes but is not limited to the following for the prime or general contractor. Information utilized will be obtained from the references listed in the proposal, other sources known to the FAA, consumer protection organizations, and others who may have useful and relevant information.

a) Quality and timeliness of work in completed construction projects similar in size and complexity to this project (i.e., other FAA facilities, hospitals, or data centers)

b) Ability to successfully utilize major subcontractors (mechanical, electrical, and control) on projects similar in size and complexity to this project.

c) Ability to solve problems encountered and take corrective action.

d) Maintenance of good customer relations throughout past projects.

e) Reasonableness in negotiating contract changes.

f) Timeliness of payment to subcontractors and suppliers.

g) Labor and safety compliance record.

The offeror must provide documentation showing general construction experience with either the FAA, U.S. Government, agencies of state and local government, airport owners, or commercial business enterprise. The offeror’s past performance and experience must be in the capacity of a prime or general contractor. The offeror must have successfully completed three (3) construction projects similar in scope, size, and complexity to this project (i.e., FAA facilities, hospitals, and data centers) in the past 7 years. Performance information may be used for both responsibility determinations and as an evaluation factor against which the offeror’s relative rankings will be compared to assure the best value to the FAA.

Submittals must include:

1. Provide at least three (3), but not more than five (5), most applicable projects of similar size, scope, and complexity that your firm has completed as the GC/Prime contractor exceeding $5M in the past 7 years.

o Title and location of the project.

o Name, address, and phone number of the Owner, Project Manager, and

Contracting Officer/Manager of the project.

o Brief description of type and extent of work provided for each project.

o Period of Performance including originally estimated and actual completion dates o Total contract value o Percentage completed with own workforce o Brief description of problems encountered and corrective actions taken, if applicable.

2. Identify the type of construction work your company performs. Include any special qualifications of your firm that would be a particular benefit to the FAA construction project.

3. State the total value of work your company has in progress and under contract at this time as well as anticipated work (i.e., projects on which you have submitted or intend to submit offers).

4. Provide additional references for the five (5) highest dollar projects your company has completed within the past seven (7) years. Include the following for all projects:

o Title and location of the project.

o Name, address, and phone number of the Project Manager and

Contracting Officer/Manager of the project.

o Brief description of type and extent of work provided for each project.

o Total contract value.

o Performance period including the originally estimated and actual completion dates.

o Percentage of work completed by your firm as a general contractor.

o Major subcontractors were utilized for each project, including address, phone number, and point of contact.

o Brief description of problems encountered and corrective actions taken, if applicable.

FACTOR 3: Key Personnel – This factor will consider the following elements of management and field staffing experience, capability, and degree of success. Rating will be based on the least qualified person that is submitted for each position. Proposed key personnel must not be changed after award. The offeror will be expected to utilize the personnel submitted in this RFO Phase I for the execution of the project

Contractors will be rated on the following sub factors:

Key Personnel Qualifications:

1. Project Manager must be employed by the offeror (prime/general contractor) with 10 years of experience as a construction project manager for projects of similar size and complexity, or a degree in Construction Management, Engineering, Architecture, five (5) years of experience in projects similar in size and complexity.

2. Project Superintendent must be employed by the offeror (prime/general contractor) with ten (10) years of experience with the general contractor as the superintendent overseeing daily activities and coordinating subcontractors for projects similar in size and complexity.

3. Quality Control (QC) Manager must be employed by the offeror (prime/general contractor) with eight (8) years of experience as a QC Manager, superintendent, inspector, project manager, project engineer, or construction manager on similar size and type construction contracts that include the major trades that are part of this requirement. The QC Manager is required to be on-site at all times and his duties can be combined with those of the Superintendent if the individual complies with the qualifications to perform both roles.

Submittal must include:

a) Resumes for the proposed Project Manager, Superintendent, and QC Manager.

b) Provide description of contractor’s workforce, i.e., licensed electricians, carpenters, plumbers, etc.

NOTE: The successful offeror will be expected to utilize the personnel submitted for the execution of the project.

I. Determination of Rating (Factors 2 and 3)

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE and EXPERIENCE (70%)

Outstanding: Offeror past performance demonstrates an outstanding quality of work as a GC/Prime in all projects submitted of similar complexity and size completed in the past 7 years. The offeror demonstrates excellent timeliness in work completion. No issues were encountered during the construction execution. The offeror received mostly outstanding ratings from all of the references submitted. All construction change orders and/or claims were settled between the parties within the performance time of the contract. The offeror demonstrates the ability to self-perform more than 15% of the total amount of actual work to be performed under this contract with his own workforce. Score

– 3 points

Satisfactory: Offeror past performance demonstrates good quality work as a GC/Prime in projects all projects submitted of similar size and complexity completed in the past 7 years. The offeror demonstrates timeliness in work completion. The offeror was proactive and demonstrated very good management of issues encountered. The offeror received mostly good ratings from four or more of the references submitted. Most construction change orders and/or claims were settled between the parties within the performance time of the contract. The offeror demonstrates the ability to self-perform at least 15% of the total amount of actual work to be performed under this contract with his own workforce. Score – 2 points

Marginal: Offeror past performance demonstrates a marginal quality of work in at least one project of similar size and complexity completed in the past 7 years.

Offeror demonstrates minimal delays in work completion. The offeror's management of issues encountered was adequate. The offeror received mostly satisfactory ratings from most of the references submitted. A substantial number of construction change orders and/or claims were not settled prior to the completion of the project. The offeror demonstrates the ability to self-perform approximately 10% of the total amount of actual work to be performed under this contract with his own workforce. Score -1 point

Unsatisfactory: Offeror past performances demonstrates a poor quality of work in two or more projects of similar size and complexity within the last 7 years. Offeror's demonstrates significant delays in work completion. The offeror was not proactive and/or managed issues encountered poorly. The offeror received mostly Marginal and/or Unsatisfactory ratings from most of the references submitted. Settlement of construction change orders and claims was not reached between the parties. The offeror demonstrates the ability to self-perform less than 10% of the total amount of actual work to be performed under this contract with his own workforce. Score – no points will be awarded.

FACTOR 3: KEY PERSONNEL (30%)

Outstanding: The project Manager is in-house with a more than ten (10) years of experience as a construction project manager for projects of similar size and complexity, or a degree in Construction Management, Engineering, Architecture, and five (5) years of experience in projects similar in size and complexity. The superintendent is in-house with ten (10) years or more of experience with the general contractor as the superintendent overseeing daily activities and coordinating subcontractors for projects similar in size and complexity. QC manager is in-house with more than eight (8) years of experience as a QC Manager, superintendent, inspector, project manager, project engineer, or construction manager on similar size and type construction contracts that include the major trades that are part of this requirement. The QC Manager is required to be on-site at all times and his duties can be combined with those of the Superintendent if the individual complies with the qualifications to perform both roles. Score – 3 points

Satisfactory: The project Manager is in-house with a more than five (5) years of experience as a construction project manager for projects of similar size and complexity, or a degree in Construction Management, Engineering, Architecture, and five (5) years of experience in projects similar in size and complexity. The superintendent is in-house with five (5) years or more of experience with the general contractor as the superintendent overseeing daily activities and coordinating subcontractors for projects similar in size and complexity. QC manager is in-house with more than five (5) years of experience as a QC Manager, superintendent, inspector, project manager, project engineer, or construction manager on similar size and type construction contracts that include the major trades that are part of this requirement. The QC Manager is required to be on-site at all times and his duties can be combined with those of the Superintendent if the individual complies with the qualifications to perform both roles. Score – 2 points

Unsatisfactory: The project manager is NOT in-house, and/or has less than five

(5) years of experience as a construction project manager for projects of similar size and complexity, or a degree in Construction Management, Engineering, Architecture, and five (5) years of experience in projects similar in size and complexity. Superintendent is NOT in-house and/or has less than 5 years of experience with the general contractor as the superintendent overseeing daily activities and coordinating subcontractors for projects similar in size and complexity. QC manager is NOT in-house and/or does NOT have five (5) years of experience as a QC Manager, superintendent, inspector, project manager, project engineer, or construction manager on similar size and type construction contracts that include the major trades that are part of this requirement. The QC Manager is required to be on-site at all times and his duties can be combined with those of the Superintendent if the individual complies with the qualifications to perform both roles. Score – no points will be awarded.

Each offeror will be scored on the sub factors within each factor as described above, and each sub factor score will then be weighted in accordance with the sub factor rating system attached, and all of the weighted sub factor scores within a factor will be tallied to achieve the total score for each factor. The total score for each factor will then be weighted as indicated above (70% for factor 2, 30% for factor 3) and tallied to achieve the final overall score. An example of the sub factor rating system is attached (scores will be calculated using up to two decimal places).

V. SCORING SYSTEM

A. Total Possible Score

The chart below demonstrates the total number of possible points for each evaluation subfactor and factor, as well as the total number of points possible for all evaluation factors.

The rating system described below explains the process by which evaluators will assign points. The total column represents the highest possible number of points for each subfactor/factor.

The total score above will equate to the following final ratings:

Rating Score Outstanding 3 Satisfactory 2.0-2.99 Marginal 1.0-1.99 Unacceptable <1.0

VI. SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTATION:

The FAA will consider offerors’ submittals to be complete. The FAA will not conduct extensive investigations to resolve any errors or omissions contained in submittals.

Your submittals must provide documentation to substantiate any statement of fact.

Documentation includes, but is not limited to, formal resumes, licenses, financial statements, work plans, etc. Mere statements of compliance are not acceptable. The FAA reserves the right to downselect contractors immediately following the conclusion of all the evaluations, and is not required to conduct discussions with any Contractors. Therefore, it is critical that each offer be fully responsive to this SIR.

The FAA reserves the right to conduct communications with any individual Contractor or all Contractors, as the situation warrants. Communication with one or more Contractors do not require discussions with all Contractors. Note that in order to be considered for an award, an offeror must submit a response to this SIR.

Submittals must address the evaluation criteria and are required to be sent electronically to Susan.Newcomb@faa.gov. Only electronic submittals will be accepted. Point of contact is Susan Newcomb, Contracting Officer, Telephone 781-238-7659. All submittals must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, January 10, 2024 Submittals received mailto:Susan.Newcomb@faa.gov after this date will not be considered. Questions should be made in writing and emailed to Susan Newcomb at Susan.Newcomb@faa.gov.

mailto:Susan.Newcomb@faa.gov

VI. SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTATION: