SOLICITATION NOTICE
Y -- Interior Renovation Washington Hall Phase IV, Wings A, E & F at United States Military Academy, West Point, New York
- Notice Date
- 3/19/2002
- Notice Type
- Solicitation Notice
- Contracting Office
- US Army Engineer District, New York - Military, CENAN-CT, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, NY 10278-0090
- ZIP Code
- 10278-0090
- Solicitation Number
- DACA51-02-R-0007
- Response Due
- 5/15/2002
- Archive Date
- 6/14/2002
- Point of Contact
- Ina Ohrwashel, 212-264-0154
- E-Mail Address
-
Email your questions to US Army Engineer District, New York - Military
(Ina.J.Ohrwashel@nan02.usace.army.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Disadvantage Business
- Description
- NA The New York District is seeking to secure a firm fixed price construction contract through the submission of proposals involving the renovation to a Historical Landmark Academic facility, including but not limited to dining wings window restoration, repa ir or replacement of wood wainscot, restoration and grouting of slate floor, plastering, decorating painting, electrical work and emergency lighting.One award will be made. The NAICS Code 233320 The small business size is $27.5 million in gross revenu e per year as averaged over the last three years. Estimated construction value is between $5 to 10 Million dollars. Completion date is approximately 18 months from issuance of Notice to Proceed. Plans and specifications will be made on available on or ab out 30 March 02. Proposals are due on or above 15 May 02 at 12:OO P.M The NON-REFUNDABLE cost of the plans and specifications package is $10.00 for the CD Rom. Make checks or money order payable to FAO USAED NY Parties requesting the plans and specificati ons package must do so in writing stating the solicitation number or project name, complete company name and street address (we will NOT delivery to PO Boxes) telephone and facsimile number (including areas codes). The Government will use a best value pro curement method for this Source selection This is a 8A Set Aside. Source selection may result in award being made to a higher rated, higher priced offeror where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and where it is determined by the Sour ce Selection Authority that the technical superiority, overall business management approach, and/or demonstrated past performance record of the higher priced offeror outweighs the benefits of any price difference. The Source Selection Authority, using soun d business judgment,will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of the proposals submitted in accordance with the evaluation factors established within the solicitation. The solicitation will specify a specific format for submittal of the Proposal. All responding offerors will be evaluated based on the following evaluation factors(the evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance): 1. Offeror's Past Experience and Performance. 2. Management Approach. 3. Technical A pproach. I - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (PAGE LIMIT FOR VOLUME I NOT TO EXCEED 100 PAGES. PERSONNEL RESUMES ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PAGE COUNT.) Factor I - Offeror Past Experience This factor will contain the Offeror's past experience information. It is the Gove rnment's intent to evaluate the quality, recency, and relevance of each offeror's experience. For the purposes of Factor I, each Offeror must provide fully completed Project Fact Sheets Blank forms will be included in the RFP. The Offeror shall provide a Project Fact Sheet for all construction projects over $3,000,000 that the Offeror started, completed or was awarded within the last five years (if more than 10 projects fit this criteria, provide only the 10 most recent). For each subcontractor, whose work is expected to exceed $500,000 provide a fully completed Project Fact Sheet for all projects the subcontractor started, completed or was awarded within the past 5 years (if more than 5 projects fit this criteria for the subcontractors provide only the 5 m ost recent). Also include the name of the prime contractor for which the subcontractor worked. Relevant projects are those that are comparable in scope, magnitude/cost and complexity to this project. The following criteria will be utilized to define relevancy: 1. Interior construction or renovation of Historic Type College/University level type acad emic facilities with a focus on work that is similar to that required in this solicitation (i.e. plaster, millwork, painting, etc.). In addition, projects that required phasing of the specialized work (work in constrained sites) shall be indicated. Offeror s providing projects meeting this criterion will be rated highe r than those who have experience meeting items 2 and 3 below.2. Construction or renovation of academic type facilities with similar type complexity and size. Offerors providing projects meeting this criterion will be rated higher than those who have experi ence meeting item 2 and 3 below. 3. Construction or renovation of facilities of comparable size. In addition, Offerors are encouraged to provide any supplementary information to assist the Government in developing confidence in their ability to successfully complete this project on the basis of their prior experience. If the Offeror is a joint venture , the experience of each member will be considered in evaluating the Offeror's past experience. To be scored SATISFACTORY for this Factor, the Offeror must have completed a minimum of TWO projects meeting the above criteria.This Factor will contain the Off eror's past performance information. The Government believes that an offeror's past performance and the degree to which an Offeror satisfied their customers in the past is a good predictor of future performance. The Government will evaluate the quality, re cency, and relevance of each Offeror's performance on recent (within the past five years) and relevant projects. For the purposes of Factor II, each Offeror must provide fully completed Project Fact Sheets. Blank forms will be included in the RFP. Offerors must provide a Project Fact Sheet? for all construction projects over $3,000,000 that the Offeror started, compl eted or was awarded within the last five years (if more than 10 project fit this criteria, provide only the 10 most recent). For each subcontractor, whose work is expected to exceed $500,000, provide a fully completed Project Fact Sheet which the subcontr actor started, completed or was awarded within the past 5 years (if more than 5 projects fit this criteria, provide only the 5 most recent). Also include the name of the prime contractor.Relevant projects are those that are comparable in scope, magnitude/c ost and complexity to this project. The following criteria will be utilized to define relevancy: 1. Interior construction or renovation of Historic Type College/University level type academic facilities with a focus on work that is similar to that required in this solicitation (i.e. plaster, millwork, painting, etc.). In addition, projects that requir ed phasing of the specialized work (work in constrained sites) shall be indicated. Offerors providing projects meeting this criterion will be rated higher than those who have past performance meeting items 2 and 3 below. 2. Construction or renovation of academic type facilities with similar type complexity and size. Offerors providing projects meeting this criterion will be rated higher than those who have past performance meeting item 3 below. 3. Construction or renovation of facilities of comparable size. Offerors are encouraged to provide the following information in addition to the requirements listed in the Project Fact Sheet: (1) Copies of any interim or final performance ratings;(2) Copies of letters of commendation from the Client/Agency of the projec ts submitted; and (3) Copies of letters relating to contract compliance or non-compliance from the Client/Agency of the projects submitted. In addition to the information listed above, Offerors are encouraged to provide any supplementary information to assist the Government in developing confidence in their ability to successfully complete this project on the basis of their prior performance. If the Offeror is a joint venture, the performance of each member will be considered in evaluating the Offeror's past performance.The persons listed as points of contact or other representatives of their organizations, as well as other sources, may be contacted by the Government during the evaluation process. The Government may contact the Offeror's customers to ask, among other things, whether or not they believe: a.That the Offeror's performance conformed to the terms and conditions of its contract; b.That the Offeror was reasonable and cooperative during performance; c.That the Offeror completed the project(s) in a timely manner or is making timely progress on on-going projects(s); d.That the Offeror was capable, efficient and effective, especially in managing subcontractors; e.That the Offeror was committed to customer satisfaction and provided a quality product; f.That the Offeror negotiated fairly and in good faith. g.That the Offeror had a good safety record III - Management This factor will address the Offeror's management approach to the project. Offerors shall prepare this portion of the submission with the objective of giving the Government confidence in their understanding of the project and their ability to successfully manage, plan and integrate activities for the complex and challenging aspects of this project. The following factors will be rated: Factor III (a) - Management Plan Submit a management plan for this project to explain the offeror's proposed overall management approach. The management plan shall include identification of key on-site and off-site personnel and their qualifications (i.e. Project Supt, PM, PE, QA/QC Perso nnel, etc.) including identification of major subcontractors (those subcontractors whose work is expected to be over $500,000), the work they are to perform, and if the Offeror has ever worked with the major subcontractors before. The plan will also indic ate the resource commitments, availability of corporate resources, identification of potential risks and plans for mitigation of those risks (including an outline QA/QC plan and Safety plan in accordance with the RFP); and any other information to assist t he Government in developing confidence in the offeror's ability to effectively manage the project within quality, cost and schedule objectives. Factor III (b) - Key Personnel As a minimum, key personnel that shall be identified include: Corporate Project Manager/Executive (off site home office manager of the project); the Project Manager (overall manager of the project), Project Superintendent (overall field manager responsible for construction), Quality Control Manager (manager of field quality control personnel), Superintendent for Subcontractors (manager and coordinator of subcontractors), Safety Manager (principal in charge of enforcing safety codes), and Schedule Manager ( or qualifications of a consulting firm in lieu of in-house manager). Submit Resumes for each member of the management team, which are being used on this project. The Offeror shall also include a flowchart that shows the relationships between the key person nel and define the specific authorities and responsibilities of the key personnel. Substitutions of team members after contract award are subject to approval by the Contracting Officer. If the Offeror does not currently employ such personnel, the personnel must provide letters of intent. IV - Technical Approach: The Offeror shall submit an integrated master plan and master schedule to describe the proposed technical approach for executing major work items. Offerors should prepare this portion of the submission with the objective of giving the Government confidence that they thoroughly understand the requirements and complexities of this project, and that they have developed a well thought out plan that integrates all related activities including coordination with other contractors and government activities. The fol lowing factors will be rated: Factor IV (a) - Master Plan: The integrated master plan is a step-by-step description of the offeror's proposed approach for executing the work. The plan should address project phasing, coordination with government personnel with respect to continued access to the site, methods of con trolling costs and maintaining schedule, and any other pertinent information to show that the offeror thoroughly understands t he project requirements and has a well thought out plan for accomplishing the work within project quality, cost and schedule objectives. The plan should consider and identify essential government milestone activities that affect contractor progress. Factor IV (b) - Master Schedule/Execution Plan: The master schedule is a summary level schedule in bar chart or other format integrated with the master plan and showing major work element sequencing/phasing in sufficient detail to demonstrate that the proposed approach is well planned and is reasonable and achievable. Consideration is given to the construction period offered, methods of construction to be used, type of equipment to be used, scheduling system to be used, identification of critical elements in construction (which, if delayed, can delay the entire project), method of development of payment estimates from the progress schedule and method of updating the progress schedule. The Offeror must display a thorough understanding of the events associated with coordinating submittals and time allowed f or Government reviews. The following subfactors wil be evaluated to determine the overall rating for this factor: Sub-Factor (1) Phasing Plan shall include specific methods to maintain continuous services/operation to the remainder of the dining wings. Sub-Factor (2) Milestone dates including completion dates, proposed interruptions to the rest of the facility for transfer work to the other wings. Sub-Factor (3) The method of providing early notification of building service or operation interruption. Sub-Factor (4) Identification of potential restraints and time impacts and suggested mitigation methods. 4.2 Volume II - PRICE/COST PROPOSAL (Separate Binder) Pricing Schedule: The total fixed price for Phase IV will be provided in this volume. The pricing schedule identified as Section 00010 will be completed and included in this volume. This volume will not be scored, but will be evaluated in relation to the o ther factors. The relative advantages and disadvantages of the Technical Proposals, in addition to the price proposals, shall be compared. Decisions shall be based on the Total Offered Price, provided it has been determined that the price is fair and reaso nable. The Government intends to award a contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and sub-factors in the solicitation. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined are significantly more important than cost or price. However, the closer the technical scores, the more important price becomes.Registration Requirements: DFARS 252.204-7004 Required Central C ontractor Registration (CCR) applies to this procurement. Prospective contractors must be registered in the Department of Defense CCR Database prior to award. Lack of registration in the CCR database will make an offeror ineligible for award. Information o n CCR registration and annual confirmation requirements may be obtained by calling 1-888-227-2423 or via the Internet at http://ccr2000.com.
- Place of Performance
- Address: US Army Engineer District, New York - Military CENAN-CT, 26 Federal Plaza, New York NY
- Zip Code: 10278-0090
- Country: US
- Zip Code: 10278-0090
- Record
- SN00045073-W 20020321/020319213327 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |