DOCUMENT
B.07.01 W912EP21R0003 VIANG Veh MTX Pre-Proposal Conference Presentation 20220628-CDM.pptx
OVERVIEW
Original Source
Contract Opportunity
Related Opportunity
Related Agency
Posted
June 28, 2022
Type
.pptx
Size
5.84MB
Profiled People
DOCUMENT PREVIEW
EXTRACTED TEXT
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE
SOLICITATION NO. W912EP21R0003
National Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop
Addition/Alteration, Est. Nazareth
Military Compound, Charlotte Amalie,
St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands
Thank you for joining, we will begin shortly.
Please mute your microphone.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: AGENDA
INTRODUCTION
PROJECT INFORMATION
EVALUATION CRITERIA
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
Q&A SESSION
CLOSING REMARKS
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: PROJECT INFORMATION
SOLICITATION NUMBER: W912EP21R0003
PROJECT TITLE: National Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Addition/Alteration, Est. Nazareth
Military Compound, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands
DESCRIPTION OF WORK: The Scope of Work for this project consists of constructing a 4,762 SF expansion and minor repair to the existing 3,410 SF National Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop that supports both organizational and support maintenance to repair combat and tactical vehicle requirements for the VIARNG. This facility will be built on Territory Land. 100% Design will be completed prior to advertisement.
This is an addition/alteration of the existing National Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop. It will result in restoration and hardening of the existing site with an addition of a special purpose wash bay, battery charging area, and bulky equipment storage. This facility will be designed to meet Industry Standards as well as all local, State, and Federal building codes and as per Public Law 90-480. Construction will include all utility services, information systems fire detection and alarm systems, roads, walks, curbs, gutters, storm drainage, parking areas and site improvements. Note: Project consists of Options
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: PROJECT INFORMATION
SOLICITATION NUMBER: W912EP21R0003
OPTIONS: Optional work includes installing and procuring Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E), epoxy floor coating, a bridge crane, work-bay HVLS fans, water purification system, compressed air system, overhead doors, renovations to an existing VMS building.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: PROJECT INFORMATION
MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION: $1,000,000 - $5,000,000.00
TYPE OF SOLICITATION & NAICS CODE: This is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside. The NAICS Code for this Project is 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The Small Business Size Standard is $39.5 Million.
PROJECT LOCATION: This project location will be in Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, USVI
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: PROJECT INFORMATION
52.211-10 COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK (APR 1984):
The Contractor shall be required to (a) commence work under this contract within 30 calendar days after the date the Contractor receives the notice to proceed, (b) prosecute the work diligently, and (c) complete the entire work ready for use not later than 730 calendar days after the Contractor receives the notice to proceed. The time stated for completion shall include final cleanup of the premises.
52.211-12 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES--CONSTRUCTION (SEP 2000):
If the Contractor fails to complete the work within the time specified in the contract, the Contractor shall pay liquidated damages to the Government in the amount of $1,693 for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed or accepted.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
EVALUATION: EVALUATION: The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three evaluation factors described below. The Contracting Officer will use a trade-off process to determine which offer represents the best value to the Government. This process allows the Contracting Officer to consider making award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for the Technical Merit Factor and Small Business Participation Factor. Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offeror or the highest technically rated offeror.
FACTOR 1 Technical Merit
FACTOR 2 Past Performance
FACTOR 3 Price
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
FACTOR 1 Technical Merit
This factor evaluates the Organizational Chart, Key Personnel Capabilities and Experience, Quality Control.
The narrative must be evaluated based on the understanding of events identified at the beginning of this section and the offerors capability to complete the schedule within the contract duration.
A letter of commitment (Attachment 2) must be provided as established under Factor 1 for each Major Subcontractor and each for individual submitted under the Key Project Personnel. Failure to provide a letter of commitment from a proposed major subcontractor or key personnel will be noted as a deficiency.
Factor 1 Technical Merit shall be limited to 35 single-sided pages using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides; larger page layout will be accepted ONLY for the Organizational Chart and Graphic Schedule required under this Factor. Letters of Commitment will not be accounted as part of the 35 pages.
RATING SYSTEM
After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Unacceptable to each factor to reflect the Government's confidence in each offeror's technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the Request for Proposal (RFP). An adjectival rating shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATING
The offerors technical solution will consist of a combined rating. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
FACTOR 2 Past Performance
Offerors shall submit 3-4 project of similar scope, size, and locations as a prime contractor. Each project must have a completed Company Specialized Experience Form (Attachment 1), and one NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), (see Attachment 3), completed and signed by an Owner of the Project (Client) point of contact or POC for each of the projects submitted under Factor 2.
The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate whether the offerors submitted past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired.
a. If a demonstrated corporate technical experience submitted in Factor 2, is determined to be Acceptable, it will also be determined to be recent and relevant in Factor 3.
b. This assessment considers each offerors demonstrated recent (within the last five years) and relevant past performance information in supplying products/services that meet the solicitation requirements.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
CONT. FACTOR 2 Past Performance
The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed a demonstrated corporate technical experience submitted in Factor 2.
a. The offeror must receive a past performance rating of Satisfactory or better to be considered acceptable.
b. A Satisfactory Rating is defined in the NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire.
c. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for the Technical Merit Factor, and a rating of no less than Neutral Confidence must be achieved for the Past Performance Factor.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
CONT. FACTOR Past Performance
This factor will be evaluated on Relevancy and Confidence.
Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or neutral) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, shall be considered acceptable.
RATING SYSTEM
After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Unacceptable to each factor to reflect the Government's confidence in each offeror's technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the Request for Proposal (RFP). An adjectival rating shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATING
The offerors technical solution will consist of a combined rating. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
FACTOR 3 Price
This factor is not rated. Price is evaluated for reasonableness.
The Offerors volume for this factor shall be fully completed and will include the following price and price related information:
a. Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 4)
b. Standard Form 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) and Section 00010A (Line Items and Pricing Schedule)
Include the completed Standard Form 1442 for the Request for
SOLICITATION NO. W912EP21R0003
National Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop
Addition/Alteration, Est. Nazareth
Military Compound, Charlotte Amalie,
St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands
Thank you for joining, we will begin shortly.
Please mute your microphone.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: AGENDA
INTRODUCTION
PROJECT INFORMATION
EVALUATION CRITERIA
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
Q&A SESSION
CLOSING REMARKS
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: PROJECT INFORMATION
SOLICITATION NUMBER: W912EP21R0003
PROJECT TITLE: National Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Addition/Alteration, Est. Nazareth
Military Compound, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands
DESCRIPTION OF WORK: The Scope of Work for this project consists of constructing a 4,762 SF expansion and minor repair to the existing 3,410 SF National Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop that supports both organizational and support maintenance to repair combat and tactical vehicle requirements for the VIARNG. This facility will be built on Territory Land. 100% Design will be completed prior to advertisement.
This is an addition/alteration of the existing National Guard Vehicle Maintenance Shop. It will result in restoration and hardening of the existing site with an addition of a special purpose wash bay, battery charging area, and bulky equipment storage. This facility will be designed to meet Industry Standards as well as all local, State, and Federal building codes and as per Public Law 90-480. Construction will include all utility services, information systems fire detection and alarm systems, roads, walks, curbs, gutters, storm drainage, parking areas and site improvements. Note: Project consists of Options
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: PROJECT INFORMATION
SOLICITATION NUMBER: W912EP21R0003
OPTIONS: Optional work includes installing and procuring Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E), epoxy floor coating, a bridge crane, work-bay HVLS fans, water purification system, compressed air system, overhead doors, renovations to an existing VMS building.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: PROJECT INFORMATION
MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION: $1,000,000 - $5,000,000.00
TYPE OF SOLICITATION & NAICS CODE: This is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside. The NAICS Code for this Project is 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The Small Business Size Standard is $39.5 Million.
PROJECT LOCATION: This project location will be in Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, USVI
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: PROJECT INFORMATION
52.211-10 COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK (APR 1984):
The Contractor shall be required to (a) commence work under this contract within 30 calendar days after the date the Contractor receives the notice to proceed, (b) prosecute the work diligently, and (c) complete the entire work ready for use not later than 730 calendar days after the Contractor receives the notice to proceed. The time stated for completion shall include final cleanup of the premises.
52.211-12 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES--CONSTRUCTION (SEP 2000):
If the Contractor fails to complete the work within the time specified in the contract, the Contractor shall pay liquidated damages to the Government in the amount of $1,693 for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed or accepted.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
EVALUATION: EVALUATION: The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three evaluation factors described below. The Contracting Officer will use a trade-off process to determine which offer represents the best value to the Government. This process allows the Contracting Officer to consider making award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for the Technical Merit Factor and Small Business Participation Factor. Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offeror or the highest technically rated offeror.
FACTOR 1 Technical Merit
FACTOR 2 Past Performance
FACTOR 3 Price
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
FACTOR 1 Technical Merit
This factor evaluates the Organizational Chart, Key Personnel Capabilities and Experience, Quality Control.
The narrative must be evaluated based on the understanding of events identified at the beginning of this section and the offerors capability to complete the schedule within the contract duration.
A letter of commitment (Attachment 2) must be provided as established under Factor 1 for each Major Subcontractor and each for individual submitted under the Key Project Personnel. Failure to provide a letter of commitment from a proposed major subcontractor or key personnel will be noted as a deficiency.
Factor 1 Technical Merit shall be limited to 35 single-sided pages using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides; larger page layout will be accepted ONLY for the Organizational Chart and Graphic Schedule required under this Factor. Letters of Commitment will not be accounted as part of the 35 pages.
RATING SYSTEM
After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Unacceptable to each factor to reflect the Government's confidence in each offeror's technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the Request for Proposal (RFP). An adjectival rating shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATING
The offerors technical solution will consist of a combined rating. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
FACTOR 2 Past Performance
Offerors shall submit 3-4 project of similar scope, size, and locations as a prime contractor. Each project must have a completed Company Specialized Experience Form (Attachment 1), and one NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), (see Attachment 3), completed and signed by an Owner of the Project (Client) point of contact or POC for each of the projects submitted under Factor 2.
The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate whether the offerors submitted past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired.
a. If a demonstrated corporate technical experience submitted in Factor 2, is determined to be Acceptable, it will also be determined to be recent and relevant in Factor 3.
b. This assessment considers each offerors demonstrated recent (within the last five years) and relevant past performance information in supplying products/services that meet the solicitation requirements.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
CONT. FACTOR 2 Past Performance
The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed a demonstrated corporate technical experience submitted in Factor 2.
a. The offeror must receive a past performance rating of Satisfactory or better to be considered acceptable.
b. A Satisfactory Rating is defined in the NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire.
c. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for the Technical Merit Factor, and a rating of no less than Neutral Confidence must be achieved for the Past Performance Factor.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
CONT. FACTOR Past Performance
This factor will be evaluated on Relevancy and Confidence.
Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or neutral) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, shall be considered acceptable.
RATING SYSTEM
After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Unacceptable to each factor to reflect the Government's confidence in each offeror's technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the Request for Proposal (RFP). An adjectival rating shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATING
The offerors technical solution will consist of a combined rating. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: EVALUATION CRITERIA
FACTOR 3 Price
This factor is not rated. Price is evaluated for reasonableness.
The Offerors volume for this factor shall be fully completed and will include the following price and price related information:
a. Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 4)
b. Standard Form 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) and Section 00010A (Line Items and Pricing Schedule)
Include the completed Standard Form 1442 for the Request for
Show All