Inactive Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Set-Aside (FAR 19.14)

Page 9 of 9 DESCRIPTION: This is a Sources Sought-Pre-Solicitation Notice for the establishment of an Architect-Engineering (A-E) contract with services to be performed at the Albany VA Medical Center... Page 9 of 9 DESCRIPTION: This is a Sources Sought-Pre-Solicitation Notice for the establishment of an Architect-Engineering (A-E) contract with services to be performed at the Albany VA Medical Center, 113 Holland Ave, Albany, NY 12208. This requirement is 100% set-aside to Small Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) firms. THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL; NO SOLICITATION PACKAGE WILL BE ISSUED UNTIL AFTER AN EVALUATION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE PROVIDED SF-330s. The SF-330 can be downloaded through the GSA Forms Library at: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/type/TOP, scroll down to locate and click on the SF-330 hyperlink entitled, Architect-Engineer Qualifications. VA intends to award an Architect/Engineer contract for complete design services (preliminary concepts and layouts, program development, investigative services, preparation of contract drawings and specifications, cost estimating services, and construction period services) for the Design Replace Cooling Tower, Project# 528A8-19-807. The area of consideration is restricted to firms with offices and key personnel to be assigned to the design located within a 400-mile radius of the Albany VAMC site as indicated by a mapquest.com driving directions search from the prime designer s main or satellite office address to the project site. . Written questions pertaining to this requirement should be submitted no later than 4:00 PM. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), February 4, 2019. Interested firms should submit their current SF-330, Parts I and II, to Nicholas.Winne@va.gov. The SF-330s are due no later than 4:00 PM, EDT, February 13, 2019. SCOPE OF WORK: The project includes design and construction period services for replacing Cooling Towers #1 and #2 on the roof of the chilled water plant (Bldg #54). The existing cooling towers date to 1988 (estimated) and are developing leaks in the basin. The structural steel supporting the cooling towers also needs to be replaced. The existing towers are each rated for a nominal 700 ton capacity and serve chillers #1 and #2 respectively. These cooling towers also serve a plate and frame heat exchanger which is used for a water side economizer system when outdoor air temperatures are suitable. The A/E will develop the following add alternates in addition to replacing the cooling towers: Alternate #1 will provide piping and associated automatic valving and/or other controls to cross connect the cooling tower basins and cooling tower supply of Cooling Towers #1 & #2 with Cooling Tower #3 to provide improved redundancy and flexible plant operations. Cooling Tower #3 is rated for a nominal 1000 tons capacity. Under this alternate it is desired that any given cooling tower can serve any given chiller. The existing condenser water pumps will remain in service. Alternate #2 will provide for a supplemental condenser water treatment such as UV lights to work in conjunction with traditional chemical treatment to reduce scaling and/or bacterial growth and aid in the prevention of legionella. Alternate #3 will provide for installation of VFDs on condenser water pumps #15 and #16 serving Chiller #3 The AE shall conduct an engineering survey of the project to: Evaluate the existing cooling tower dunnage and structural steel support. Determine winter operation requirements for the water side economizer system. Evaluate the existing electrical service, pipe sizes, pump capacity, and chiller flow requirements Confirm existing condenser water piping configuration and size. Provide analysis on the soundness of the existing condenser water piping for all three towers (including CT #3). Recommend replacing piping if expected service life is less than the expected life of the towers. Develop as-built documentation of existing cooling towers as needed for design. The VA has no information on the existing cooling tower installation or cad base sheets for the chiller plant. Identify service space and rigging requirements. Identify methods of protecting the roof while the work is progressing. Identify any modifications needed to provide an automated condenser water circulation sequence to comply with health department guidelines with minimum energy usage Survey and identify any required architectural or structural modifications. Identify any dead legs that may be a deterrent to use of water circulation for bacterial control. A report on the engineering survey results shall be submitted for approval in advance of the 35% design submission The A/E shall perform all work necessary to prepare the specifications, drawings, bidding documents, and provide construction period services for the subject project. The design shall follow all VA/VHA Standards, VA Design Manuals, VHA Directives, Federal Energy Management Programs, as well as local, state, and federal codes. The A/E shall perform all work necessary to prepare the specifications, drawings, bidding documents, and provide construction period services for the subject project. Throughout the design phase and construction phase, the A/E shall produce and maintain all meeting minutes. Meeting Minutes shall be submitted to the VA for concurrence within three (3) working days after a meeting. The A/E shall provide written response to design comments from the previous phases of design prior to submission of the succeeding phase submission within 7 working days of receipt of the Comments from the VA. Incomplete responses are grounds for rejection. Failure to incorporate all documented VA comments into succeeding phase submissions are grounds for rejection. Invoices for work performed cannot be submitted until verification of design comments have been demonstrated to be incorporated into design documents and accepted by the COR. Prior to the submission of the un-reviewed final drawings and specifications, the A/E shall conduct a narrative walk-through with the COR for each of the trades included in the project to demonstrate that the work shown on the drawings can be physically constructed as depicted. The trades shall include, but not be limited to architectural, structural, plumbing, HVAC, fire protection and electrical. The designer for each trade shall be present at the walk-through which will encompass all of the physical areas affected by the project. Individual walk-through may be conducted for specific trades. Upon completion of the walk-through, the VA will give direction to the A/E whether the design may proceed to completion as shown or whether some redesign is necessary. The walk-through shall be scheduled by the A/E in a manner that will allow corrections before the un-reviewed final submission due date. Required corrections will not excuse the A/E from submitting the un-reviewed final drawings and specifications on time. All designs will follow, but not be limited to, the VA HVAC Design Manual, Steam & Heating Hot Water Design Manual and Sustainable Design Manuals in conjunction with the VA Master specifications. The design will be completed in a manner such that the estimated construction cost is within the VA budget. OFFERORS WILL BE EVALUATED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: The submitted SF-330s will be evaluated on the following criteria: This acquisition will be in accordance with FAR Part 36.602-1 and VAAR Part 836.602-1. The following evaluation criteria will be used to evaluate SF-330 technical proposals: The A/E must demonstrate its qualifications with respect to the published evaluation criteria for all services. Evaluation Criteria (1) through (4) are considered most important and equal among themselves; Criteria (5) and (6) are of slightly less importance than (1) through (4), but are equal value among themselves; Criteria (7) and (8) are the least important and listed in descending order of importance. Specific evaluation criteria include: 1. Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including, where appropriate, experience in central plant design, water cooled chillers, energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials. 2. Professional Qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services. 3. Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. 4. Past Performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work and compliance with performance schedules. 5. Specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. 6. Reputation and standing of the firm and its principal officials with respect to professional performance, general management, and cooperativeness. 7. Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project; provided, that application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the project. 8. Record of significant claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. Criterion 1 - Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials. Offerors will be evaluated on specialized experience and technical competence in the performance of services similar to those anticipated under this contract with regard to: Central Plant Designs of similar size Evaluating cooling load profiles and chiller operating characteristics Selecting cooling towers for optimum operating efficiency Knowledge of cooling tower operations Experience with retrofit projects in healthcare facilities Experience in providing post construction award services (shop drawing review, as-built drawing and Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) preparation, construction inspection services, and Operating and Maintenance Manuals). Submission requirements: Provide up to five (5) projects completed or substantially completed within the past five (5) years that best illustrate specialized experience of the proposed team in the areas outlined above. Example projects shall note project s square footage. All projects provided in the SF-330 must be completed by the office/branch/regional office/individual team member actually proposed to manage and/or perform work under this contract. To enable verification, firms should include the DUNS number along with each firm name in the SF-330 Part 1, Section F Item 25 Firms from Section C Involved in this Project, block (1). Include a contract number or project identification number in block 21. Include an e-mail address, and phone number for the point of contact in block 23(c). Include in the project description the contract period of performance, award contract value, current contract value, a summary of the work performed that demonstrates relevance to specialized experience as outlined above. If the contractor served as a subcontractor on a project, indicate the value of the work they provided towards the performance of the overall project. If a project was performed by a joint venture, and not all joint venture partners are on the team proposed for this contract, the offeror/team should specifically address the work performed by the joint venture partner offering/teaming on this contract. Likewise, if the offeror/team member worked as a subcontractor on a project, the description should clearly describe the work actually performed by the offeror/team member and the roles and responsibilities of each on the project, rather than the work performed on the project as a whole. If the project description does not clearly delineate the work performed by the entity/entities offering/teaming on this contract, the project could be eliminated from consideration. NOTE: If the Offeror is a joint venture, information should be submitted as a joint venture; however, if there is no information for the joint venture, information should be submitted for either joint venture partner, not to exceed a total of five (5) projects for this criterion. Projects shall be submitted on the SF-330. For submittal purposes, a task order on an IDIQ contract is considered a project, as is a stand-alone contract award. Do not list an IDIQ contract as an example of a completed project. Instead, list relevant completed task orders or stand-alone contract awards that fit within the definition above. Examples of project work submitted that do not conform to this requirement will not be evaluated. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being rated lower. All information for Criterion 1 should be submitted in Part 1, Section F of the SF-330. The Government WILL NOT consider information submitted in addition to Part 1, Section F in evaluating Criterion 1. Criterion 2 - Professional Qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services. Offerors will be evaluated in terms of the qualifications, competence and experience of the key personnel and technical team proposed to accomplish this work. Key personnel are individuals who will have major contract or project management responsibilities and/or will provide unusual or unique expertise. Provide a balanced licensed and or certified workforce in the following disciplines Architecture, Structural, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineering Submission requirements: Provide resumes for all proposed key personnel. Resumes are limited to one page each and should cite project specific experience and indicate proposed role in this contract. Provide professional registration, certification, licensure and/or accreditation. Indicate participation of key personnel in example projects in the SF-330 Part 1 Section G. Criterion 3 - Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Firms/teams will be evaluated in terms of their ability to plan for and manage work under the contract and capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Submission requirements: Describe the firm s ability to concurrently perform and manage multiple projects in different locations to meet aggressive schedules, multiple disciplines, and control costs and the firm s capacity to accomplish multiple projects simultaneously. Criterion 4 - Past Performance Offerors will be evaluated on past performance with Government agencies and private industry in terms of work quality, compliance with schedules, cost control, and stakeholder/customer satisfaction. Evaluating past performance and experience will include information provided in CPARS/ACASS for Criterion 1 projects and may include other information provided by the firm, customer inquiries, Government databases, and other information available to the Government including contacts with points of contact in other criteria. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being rated lower. NOTE: Past performance information for projects listed under Criterion 1. Submission requirements SUBMIT A COMPLETED CPARS/ACASS EVALUATION FOR EACH PROJECT UNDER CRITERION 1. IF A CPARS/ACASS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. If requested by the client, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Network Contracting Office 2 Attn: Nicholas Winne via email at Nicholas.Winne@va.gov prior to the response date. Criterion 5 - Specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. Submission requirements: Offerors shall submit evidence of individuals experience and qualifications in their respective fields. Additionally, documentation must be provided to show these individuals have worked together as a team on previous projects and their role. (Completing Sections E, F, and G, on the SF-330 meets the documentation requirement). Furthermore, offerors shall describe the ability of the firm to manage, coordinate and work effectively with team members, both internal staff and consultants. Discuss the history of working relationships with team members, including joint venture partners where applicable. Criterion 6 - Location within a 400-mile radius to the design site (Albany, NY) and knowledge of the location (Albany, NY); provided, that application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the project. Provided that the application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the contract, firms/teams will be evaluated on the locations of their office or offices that will be performing the work under this contract. Submission requirements: Indicate firms/teams location, including main offices, branch offices and any subconsultants offices and demonstrate how this will be advantageous to the Government. Criterion 7 Reputation and standing of the firm and its principal officials with respect to professional performance, general management, and cooperativeness. Submission requirements: Offerors shall provide documentation (awards, certificates, publications, commendations from within the community) as evidence of reputation and standing of its firm. Criterion 8 - Record of significant claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. Offerors with substantiated claims against the firm as a result of improper architectural and engineering services provided in the last three (3) years. Submission requirements: Records and any other documentation of substantiated claims highlighting improper or incomplete architectural engineering services against the firm within the last three (3) years. The SF-330 shall contain a statement affirming that there are no records of significant claims because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. Evaluation Scoring Evaluation factors 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 will be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings as follows: Outstanding: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low. Good: Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Acceptable: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate. Marginal: Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is not awardable. The firm s proposal demonstrates a misunderstanding of the requirement and the approach fails to meet performance standards. The firm s proposal has major omissions and inadequate details to assure evaluators that the offeror has an understanding of requirement. The ratings identified below were used in the evaluation of Past Performance (Criterion 4): Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. No doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they can satisfy the requirements of the contract. Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Little doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they could satisfy the requirements of the contract. Unknown Confidence (Neutral): No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has little expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. Some doubt exists based on past performance that they could satisfy the terms and conditions of the contract. No Confidence: Based on the offeror s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has little expectations that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. Significant doubt exists based on the offeror s past performance that they can satisfy the requirements of the contract. SELECTION INTERVIEW: Interviews shall be scheduled with firms slated as the most highly qualified. Firms slated for interviews may be asked to explain or expand on information contained in the SF-330 submittal through a formal interview or a discussion questionnaire as determined by the Contracting Officer. GENERAL INFORMATION: All design and work will conform to the current edition of the VA Master Specifications and VA Design Standards as published at the following site: www.cfm.va.gov; ASME, OSHA, IBC 2009, NFPA and NEC building codes and standards. Coordinate all work through the COR of Facilities Management Service. Contractor is responsible for all cleanups and refuse disposal throughout the construction period. The A-E firm will prepare drawings and specifications in sufficient detail such that qualified outside General Contracting companies can prepare accurate and timely proposals for the desired construction work. Microsoft Project scheduling and management software will be used by both the A-E and Contractors to allow for regular tracking of schedules and work by the VA Medical Center. Schedules with MS Project will be regularly sent to the COR upon project initiation and whenever significant changes occur in the schedule. The estimated magnitude of construction is between $500,000 and $1,000,000. The A-E will provide an initial estimate of cost to perform the above work and will design only those items that can be provided within the cost limitation. The Medical Center must remain operational throughout the construction period and a detailed sequence of work will be provided by the A-E to minimize impact of the construction. The A-E will provide documents at each submission as indicated in the statement of work. The NAICS code for this procurement will be 541330, Engineering Services. The current small business size standard for 541330 is $15 million. Requirement for Electronic Submission Unless paper offers are specifically authorized, all responses to this pre-solicitation notice must be submitted electronically as described below. The only acceptable paper form for this requirement is the receipt of past performance questionnaires. Failure to comply with this requirement may jeopardize the possibility of receiving an award for the contract due to non-compliance with the terms of the solicitation. You must submit your electronic offer, and any supplemental information (such as spreadsheets, backup data, technical information), using any of the electronic formats and media described below. In addition, contractors are notified of the award via an electronic Notice of Award e-mail. The award document will be attached to the Notice of Award e-mail. Acceptable Electronic Formats (Software) for Submission of Offers Files readable using the current Microsoft* Office version Products: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, or Access. Spreadsheet documents must be sent in a format that includes all formulas, macro, and format information. Print or scan images of spreadsheets are not acceptable.  Please see security note below for caution regarding use of macros. When submitting construction drawings contractors are required to submit one set in AutoCAD and one set in Adobe PDF. (Purpose: contracting can open the PDF version and engineering can open AutoCAD files) Files in Adobe* PDF (Portable Document Format) Files: When scanning documents scanner resolution should be set to 200 dots per inch, or greater. Other electronic format.  If you wish to submit an offer using another format than those described in these instructions, e-mail the Contracting Officer who issued the solicitation. Please submit your request at least ten (10) calendar days before the scheduled closing date of the solicitation.  Request a decision as to the format acceptability and make sure you receive approval of the alternate format before using it to send your offer. Please note that we can no longer accept .zip files due to increasing security concerns. E-mail Submission Procedures: For simplicity in this guidance, all submissions in response to a solicitation will be referred to as offers. Subject Line: Include the solicitation number, name of company, and closing date of solicitation. Use only one of the terms Quotation, Offer, or Bid depending on the solicitation type. Size: Maximum size of the e-mail message shall not exceed five (5) megabytes. The SF330, in its entirety, shall not exceed one email of 5MB. Only one email is permitted unless otherwise stated in this paragraph or in writing by the Contract Officer submitting the solicitation. The Microsoft Outlook © Email time/date stamp will be used to date and time stamp offers for the official record of receipt for the submission. The date and time stamp in recipients inbox is the official record of receipt. Security Issues, Late Bids, Unreadable Offers Late submission of offers are outlined at FAR Parts 52.212-1(f), 52.214-7, and 52.215-1(c)(3). Particular attention is warranted to the portion of the provision that relates to the timing of submission.  Please see FAR 15.207(c) for a description of the steps the Government shall take with regard to unreadable offers.  To avoid rejection of an offer, vendors must make every effort to ensure their electronic submission is virus-free. Submissions or portions thereof submitted and which the automatic system detects the presence of a virus or which are otherwise unreadable will be treated as unreadable pursuant to FAR Parts 14.406 and FAR 15.207(c ). The virus scanning software used by our e-mail systems cannot always distinguish a macro from a virus. Therefore, sending a macro embedded in an e-mail message or an e-mail attachment may cause the e-mail offer to be quarantined. You may send both the spreadsheet and the spreadsheet saved in PDF format to ensure that your proposal is readable. Password protecting your offer is not permitted. The Contracting Officer will file the offer electronically which will allow access only by designated individuals. Important Notice: Apparent successful offerors must apply for and receive verification from the Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) in accordance with 38 CFR Part 74 and VAAR 819.70 by submission of documentation of Veteran status, ownership and control sufficient to establish appropriate status, offerors must be both VISIBLE and VERIFIED by the Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation prior to contract award. Failure to be both VERIFIED by CVE and VISIBLE on VetBiz prior to contract award will result in the offeror s proposal being deemed non-compliant. All offerors are urged to contact the CVE and submit the aforementioned required documents to obtain CVE verification of their SDVOSB status if they have not already done so. 852.219-10   VA NOTICE OF TOTAL SERVICE-DISABLED VETERAN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE (JUL 2016)(DEVIATION) (a) Definition. For the Department of Veterans Affairs, Service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern or SDVSOB : (1) Means a small business concern: (i) Not less than 51 percent of which is owned by one or more service-disabled veterans or, in the case of any publicly owned business, not less than 51 percent of the stock of which is owned by one or more service-disabled veterans or eligible surviving spouses (see VAAR 802.201 Surviving Spouse definition); (ii) The management and daily business operations of which are controlled by one or more service-disabled veterans (or eligible surviving spouses) or, in the case of a service-disabled veteran with permanent and severe disability, the spouse or permanent caregiver of such veteran; (iii) The business meets Federal small business size standards for the applicable North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code identified in the solicitation document; (iv) The business has been verified for ownership and control pursuant to 38 CFR 74 and is so listed in the Vendor Information Pages database, (https://www.vip.vetbiz.gov); and (v) The business will comply with subcontracting limitations in 13 CFR 125.6, as applicable (2) Service-disabled veteran means a veteran, as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(2), with a disability that is service-connected, as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(16). (b) General. (1) Offers are solicited only from verified service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns. Offers received from concerns that are not verified service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns shall not be considered. (2) Any award resulting from this solicitation shall be made to a verified service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern. (c) Agreement. A service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern agrees that in the performance of the contract, the concern will comply with the limitation on subcontracting requirements in 13 CFR §125.6. (d) A joint venture may be considered a service-disabled veteran owned small business concern if the joint venture complies with the requirements in 13 CFR 125.15, provided that any reference therein to SDVO SBC is to be construed to apply to a VA verified SDVOSB as appropriate. (e) Any service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern (non-manufacturer) must meet the requirements in FAR 19.102(f) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation to receive a benefit under this program.