Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY - FEDBIZOPPS ISSUE OF OCTOBER 09, 2014 FBO #4702
DOCUMENT

C -- Replace Waterlines, Phase 6 - Water Treatment System - Attachment

Notice Date

10/7/2014
 

Notice Type

Attachment
 

NAICS

541310 — Architectural Services
 

Contracting Office

Department of Veterans Affairs;VISN 7 Network Contracting Activity;501 Greene Street;Hatcher Building - Suite 2;Augusta GA 30901
 

ZIP Code

30901
 

Solicitation Number

VA24714R1710
 

Response Due

11/7/2014
 

Archive Date

2/5/2015
 

Point of Contact

Theresa M. Elkins
 

E-Mail Address

theresa.elkins@va.gov
(Theresa.Elkins@va.gov)
 

Small Business Set-Aside

N/A
 

Description

Solicitation VA247-14-R-1710 Page 2 Architect-Engineering (A/E) Design Services: The Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center is seeking qualified A/E firms to furnish professional services for one (1) project. The VAMC anticipates issuing a firm fixed price contract for Architect/Engineer Service for the design project "Replace Water Lines, Phase 6 - Water Treatment System" located in Augusta, GA, project number 509-10-124. A-E firms having capabilities to perform this work are invited to submit one completed Standard Form 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications for themselves and all their subcontractors to the office shown below by the established due date. The selected A/E firm shall provide professional A/E services to include, but not limited to, design services to include the preparation of designs, plans specifications, technical reports, construction period services, site visits, cost estimates and other related professional services as defined by FAR Part 36.6 that may be necessary for the following work. Project 1: GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: The Charlie Norwood Veterans Affairs Medical Center (CNVAMC) plans to implement recommendations made for controlling certain bacteria growth in the water distribution systems in the Uptown Division (UD), Bldgs. 110 and 119 and the Downtown Division (DD), Bldg. 801. This Scope of Work (SOW) addresses the specific issues and requirements contained in the VHA's draft Directive 1061. This SOW is mainly intended to address treatment measures for certain bacteria prevention at the total building level. For the CNVAMC, three (3) buildings present the greatest risk: Building 110 (UD - Main), Fisher House (UD - Building 119), and Building 801 (DD). Each building will have a Monochloramine Water Treatment System(s) (or equivalent) that treats all of the hot water throughout the building. The following locations will need to have a Monochloramine Treatment System(s) (or equivalent) installed to control/prevent any bacteria growth: 1.(DD) - 950 15th Street, Augusta, Georgia 30901: Bldg. 801, Main Hospital, three (3) systems 2.(UD) - 1 Freedom Way Augusta, Georgia 30904: a. Bldg. 110 (Main Hospital) - one system b. Bldg. 119 (Fisher House) - one system A.The CNVAMC intends to procure design services from a CVE verified SDVOSB firm with experience in evaluating water systems relating to bacteria detection, prevention, and monitoring using Monochloramines and other treatment processes (i.e., Cu-Ag, Hyperchlorination). This project includes all labor for the design, schematic layout, drawings, specifications, As-Built drawings, and permits of Monochloramine Treatment Systems (or equivalent). Deliverable documents shall include a "Feasibility Study," "Schematic Drawings," "Preliminary Design Drawings," and "Construction Drawings" and all pertinent "Specifications" for installing the Monochloramine Treatment Systems (or equivalent) in all of the above-identified buildings. The point of contact for this contract is Mr. Carl Drewry. Please submit any technical questions to him by phone (706) 733-0188, ext. 6061. A.The following Investigative Work shall be included Within the Scope of this Project: 1. Feasibility Study A Feasibility Study is required to evaluate the individual characteristics of the total water system and the feasibility of implementing the recommended approach and to provide necessary consultation and recommendations during the design phase. The Feasibility Study shall include an ample number of new sampling points to determine optimum injection point(s), including: distal points, faucets, mixing valves, areas of high water usage, and other high risk areas for patients. The A/E shall also consider and evaluate other potential bacteria sources such as the ice machines, UD decorative fountains (if operating), both DD and UD swimming pools. The A/E shall also consider and evaluate the potential impact of Monochloramine (or equivalent) upon existing equipment and processes unique to the health care and residential environment. This would include but not limited to: Hemodialysis Unit water treatment equipment and processes; Sterilization, Processing and Supply (SPS) equipment and processes, including scopes; Dental Services water treatment and sampling/validation procedures; Pathology & Laboratory Medicine Services water treatment systems and analytical processing equipment; Research & Development Services water treatment systems and Veterinary Medicine Unit (VMU) research animals and sterilization/disinfection procedures. The A/E shall prepare schematic single line diagrams of water systems and present the main areas of water distribution and processing and to identify any areas in which water is processed differently (i.e., hemodialysis and sterile processing). The A/E shall trace existing metal water lines and identify any potential dead legs in relation to exact locations of all underground utilities, including hot water distribution systems. The design of Code compliant chemical storage facilities for the water treatment systems is part of this design contract. The A/E shall evaluate Ammonia or Sodium Hypochlorite (Monochloramine treatment components) supplies, if used, and distribution logistics issues. The contractor should consider alternative locations for the treatment system regarding the safe storage of bulk chemicals which will require areas that are cool, dry, out of direct sunlight and away from heat and ignition sources, separated from incompatible materials, secured and separated from patients, high-risk areas, and work areas. The space must be fire-resistant with adequate ventilation. Chemicals should be stored in the original, labelled, shipping containers and cylinders and secured by chain in an upright position to a wall, rack or other solid structure. Empty containers may contain hazardous residue. Consideration should be given to the logistics of delivery, handling, and shipping; empty containers may need to be stored separately and kept closed. Design considerations will be given to include potential catastrophic release of highly hazardous materials. This Feasibility Study should or may include within each of the three buildings, as appropriate: oValves - main isolation valves, tempering, and mixing oWater outlets - showers, tubs, faucets, water closets, feeds to equipment (i.e., food service, ice machines, water fountains, swimming pools) oCross-connects - locations oAutomatic water system drains oHeat exchangers - types, capacities, output temperatures, controls description oPumps - feed and circulating, capacities, controls descriptions oWater Storage Tanks - including capacity and storage temperatures oWater sampling ports oMonitoring probes and Equipment - temperature and chemical oThermometers/thermostats/temperature probes (existing) oExpansion tanks oSupplemental water treatment systems oDisinfection process access points oChemical feed tanks - chemicals, feed concentrations, quantities oChemical feed injection ports 2. Provide any civil structural, and mechanical and underground utility investigative work of existing systems necessary to insure the accuracy of the design. B. Other 1.Complete review of all shop drawings that provide specifications for the Monochloramine treatment systems (or equivalent). 2.15 site visits exclusive of the final. (Please include price for additional site visits should they be needed). 3.Reproduction costs - The cost of reproducing drawings and specifications and delivery to the VA Contracting Officer. All design to be done in accordance with the applicable and appropriate codes, regulations and VA criteria, including applicable energy related codes and standards. All questions shall be in writing to Theresa Elkins, via e-mail at Theresa.elkins@va.gov. questions replied to outside this avenue will not be binding on the Government. The magnitude of construction is between $2,000,000.00 to $5,000,000.00. Value engineering is encouraged and shall be noted at each design review. The awarded 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 work. The A/E firm is responsible for ensuring that the specifications and drawings supplied fully represent all of the work described in the Request for Proposal (RFP). 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. This project is 100% set aside for service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) concerns. The firms will need to be CVE verified and visible in VIP when SF 330's are submitted. Interested parties shall ensure current state licensing, shall have current registration in the https://www.sam.gov, verified as a SDVOSB in VetBiz at http://vip.vetbiz.gov and reporting to VETS 100 program at https://vets100.dol.gov.vets, and submit their complete Annual Representations and Certifications (ORCA) via online. SDVOSB verification is mandatory to be considered for award. Please submit a copy of your CVE verification letter with your SF330 package. Eligible firms, to include subcontractors, team members, and partners shall have a branch office located within a 200 mile radius of Charlie Norwood VAMC, Augusta, GA as determined by online MapQuest Directions (www.mapquest.com). The SF-330 can be downloaded through the GSA forms Library at: http://www.GSA.gov/portal/forms/type/TOP, type in SF330 in the "find a Form" block and click on search. The NAICS code for this project is 541310 and the applicable small business size is $7 million. Due to the requirement for site visits and coordination on design reviews, A/E firms will be required to attend meetings in person on site at the Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center in Augusta, GA. NOTE: Interested firms shall submit four (4) copies and 1 CD of their SF330 packagers no later than 1:00pm EST on November 7, 2014 with appropriate documentation to the below cited Contracting Office Address. ELECTRONIC PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED: MAILING ADDRESS: VA Southeast Network - VISN 7 501 Greene Street Hatcher Building - Suite 2 Augusta, GA 30901 Theresa M. Elkins Contract Specialist/Augusta Construction Team) BY HAND DELIVERY: VA Southeast Network - VISN 7 501 Greene Street Hatcher Building - Suite 2 Augusta, GA 30901 Theresa M. Elkins Contract Specialist/Augusta Construction Team) The A/E Selection Criteria will be based on: (In order of importance) SF 330 Supplemental Information Architect Evaluation Criteria for Project No. 509-10-124 Dated October 6, 2014 In addition to the submission of the SF 330, firms are required to provide the following supplemental information as part of total submission package. Submitting firms are to provide four (4) bound hard copies with tabs and one (1) CDs which contain the SF 330s and the following documents. 1. Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services. a) Submission requirements: o Submit personal resumes that best demonstrate the firm's professional qualifications, including specific licenses and registrations relevant to the solicitation requirements. b) Basis of Evaluation: o Evaluation of professional qualifications will include but is not limited to the subjective assessment of the firm's individual resumes as required in the solicitation. o Firms unable to demonstrate required qualifications necessary to perform designs may be considered non-responsive. Failure to provide requested data may negatively impact a firm's rating. o Higher ratings for this criterion may be given when the firm's specific personnel demonstrate excellent or very good credentials, above and beyond those usually expected. 2. Specialized experience and technical competence in the type of work required. Specialized experience pertains to the types, volume and complexity of work previously or currently being performed by a firm that is comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement. a) Definitions: o Specialized work means construction and design projects similar in project scope, size, construction features, dollar value and complexity of that listed in the RFP. Projects submitted outside these parameters will be assigned lower ratings. o Similar dollar value is considered construction projects of Five Hundred Thousand dollars ($500,000) and greater. o Similar complexity is considered projects of an operational likeness to that listed in the RFP o Within the past five (5) years shall mean from date of SF 330 package submission to five (5) years prior. b) Submission requirements: o Submit up to three (3) relevant projects, accomplished within the past five (5) years that best demonstrate your relevant experience to the solicitation requirements. Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) relevant projects are submitted. o Complete and submit a data summary sheet for each project. Each project data package may not be longer than two (2) pages in length and may include verbiage, graphics and photos. o Projects may include Federal, State, or local Government, as well as private industry projects. Firms are responsible for providing project description and applicable experience in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy. c) Basis of Evaluation: o Evaluation of specialized experience will include but is not limited to the subjective assessment of the firm's resume of the type of work required in the solicitation. o Firms unable to demonstrate proven competence to perform these kinds of projects may be considered non-responsive. Failure to provide requested data may negatively impact a firm's rating. o Higher ratings for this may be given when a proposal demonstrates project examples of excellent or very good examples of projects relevant to the solicitation. 3. Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Identify the firm's past and present workload, and convey the understanding of being able to handle several design projects concurrently and within prescribed deadlines/constraints. a) Submission requirements: o Provide a narrative, (maximum of one 8 ½" X 11" page) that discusses the firm's approach to accomplishing multiple concurrent design projects with emphases on meeting prescribed deadlines. b) Basis of Evaluation: o Evaluation of this factor will be a subjective assessment of the firm's ability to clearly demonstrate an understanding of multiple design project goals and requirements set for the completion of the projects within prescribed deadlines. o Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information provided exceeds the minimum requirements. 4. Past Performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry in terms of cost control, quality work, and compliance with performance schedules. Past performance relates to how well a firm has performed on substantially completed projects, within the past five years. a) Definitions: o Past performance is a measure of the degree to which a firm satisfied its customers in the past and complied with applicable laws and regulations. o Government agencies are defined as local, state, and federal entities. Higher ratings may be given for work performed on VA Medical Center campuses. o Private industry is defined as non-governmental clients. o "Within the past five (5) years" shall mean from date of proposal submission to five (5) years prior. o The term "substantially complete" shall mean a fully designed project with construction of the facility/project more than 80% complete. b) Submission requirements: o Submit up to three (3) relevant projects design complete or substantially construction complete within the past five (5) years and best demonstrates your relevant experience to the solicitation requirements. Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) relevant projects are submitted. o Complete and submit a project data summary sheet for each project. Each project data package may not be longer than two (2) pages in length. o Projects may include Federal, State, or local Government, as well as private industry projects. Firms are responsible for providing project description and applicable experience in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy. o Questionnaires. Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) Past Performance Questionnaires are received. c) Basis of Evaluation: o The evaluation of past performance will include but is not limited to the assessment of the firm's commitment to customer satisfaction, timely delivery of quality work, the firm's record of conforming to specifications, successful implementation of quality control procedures; adherence to schedules; and history of reasonable and cooperative behavior. o Firms unable to demonstrate proven competence to perform projects similar to the requirements of the solicitation may be considered ineligible for award. o Higher ratings for this may be given when a proposal demonstrates excellent or very good ratings for past performance and customer satisfaction on projects relevant to the solicitation. 5. Location in the general geographical area of Augusta, Ga. (within 200 mile radius) and knowledge of the locality of the Charlie Norwood VAMC: a) Definitions: o Knowledge of the locality is defined as familiarity of applicable codes and regulations in place for the area. b) Submission requirements: o Provide a narrative, (maximum of one 8 ½" x 11" page) that discusses the firm's location. c) Basis of Evaluation: o Firms that are outside a 200 mile radius of the Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center in Augusta, Ga. will be given a lower rating than those firms within that distance. o Higher ratings for these evaluation criteria may be given as follows: Firms that can be on site at the Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center in Augusta, Ga. within 120 minutes will be given a higher rating. Firms that can be on site at the Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center in Augusta, Ga. within 60 minutes will be given the highest rating. o A subjective determination of the firm's statement of knowledge of the locality and how it was obtained relative to the requirements of this solicitation. 6. Implementation of the Design Quality Control Program. Identify the roles and responsibilities of the major personnel of the firm and depict the understanding and implementation of Quality Control procedures for task orders. Firm is at risk of receiving a lower rating if fewer than three (3) relevant projects are submitted. a) Submission Requirements: o Provide a narrative, (maximum of one 8 ½" x 11" page) that discusses the firm's approach to the task orders with emphasis on the envisioned role of the design team with regard to Quality Control. b) Basis of Evaluation: o A subjective determination of the firm's statement of knowledge of Quality Control and how it will implement Quality Control procedures relative to the requirements of this solicitation. o Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information provided exceeds the minimum requirements. 7. Program management process/plan for handling Charlie Norwood VAMC projects. Identify the roles and responsibilities of the major personnel of the firm and depict the lines of communications envisioned for the design tasks between the firm and with the Government. a) Submission Requirements: o Provide an organizational chart (no larger than 8-1/2" 11") depicting the relationships between the firm and all partners and/or subcontractors/consultants to be associated with this solicitation and identifying each of the firms key positions/personnel and their role in managing work for these task orders. o Provide a narrative, (maximum of one 8 ½" x 11" page) that discusses the firm's Program management approach to the task orders. b) Basis of Evaluation: o Evaluation of this factor will be a subjective assessment of the firm's ability to clearly demonstrate an understanding of the task order projects goals and requirements and set forth a realistic approach for the design of the task order projects. o Higher ratings may be given for this factor when information provided exceeds the minimum requirements. 8. Record of significant claims against the firm because of improper or incomplete architectural and engineering services. a) Submission Requirements: o Provide a narrative (maximum of one 8 ½" x 11" page) that addresses any claims, disputes, lines or judgments against your firm for instances where there have been design errors, deficiencies and/or omissions AND the steps your firm took to resolve the issues and the ultimate outcome. o Provide a statement if item 8 above is not applicable to your firm. b) Basis of Evaluation: o Evaluation of this factor will be an objective assessment of the firm's ability to provide clear, concise, accurate design drawings and specifications free from design errors, deficiencies and/or omissions AND a subjective assessment of how well the firm managed situations when these issues were encountered. o Higher ratings will be given to firms that have not had any of the issues mentioned in item 8 above; however, firms with no performance history will be scored lower than those firms with significant performance history and none of the issues in item 8. o A lower rating will be given to firms that have experienced issues that resulted from design errors, deficiencies, and/or omissions, but resolved the matter to the satisfaction of the Government and/or customer. 9. Specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for assignment to the project and their record of working together as a team. a) Submission Requirements: o Provide a narrative (maximum of one 8 ½" x 11" page) that addresses any partnering, teaming, or subcontracting relationships your firm has and how long members within your firm have worked with one another b) Basis of Evaluation: o Evaluation of this factor will be a subjective assessment of the firms relationships and how well the firm works as a team within their organization and with other partners, teams, and subcontractors. o Higher ratings will be given to firms that clearly demonstrate organizational health and cooperation with other teams, partners, and Government and industry personnel (customers). Firms will be evaluated by the A/E Evaluation Board, scored and ranked according to score. The three (3) most qualified firms will be invited to interview with the evaluation/selection board and will be numerically scored again. The firm with the highest total combined score will be selected and asked to negotiate a fair and reasonable price. Each respondent must be able to demonstrate the ability to comply with FAR Clause 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting and all Joint Ventures must be CVE verified, submit agreements that comply with 13CFR 125.15 prior to contract award. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR SF330'S ARCHITECTS-ENGINEER QUALIFICATIONS ONLY. SOLICITATION PACKAGES ARE NOT PROVIDED FOR A-E CONTRACTS. THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL.
 

Web Link

FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/VA/AuVAMC/VAMCCO80220/VA24714R1710/listing.html)
 

Document(s)

Attachment
 

File Name: VA247-14-R-1710 VA247-14-R-1710_1.docx (https://www.vendorportal.ecms.va.gov/FBODocumentServer/DocumentServer.aspx?DocumentId=1671223&FileName=VA247-14-R-1710-000.docx)

Link: https://www.vendorportal.ecms.va.gov/FBODocumentServer/DocumentServer.aspx?DocumentId=1671223&FileName=VA247-14-R-1710-000.docx

 

File Name: VA247-14-R-1710 Past Performance QuestionnaireWaterlines.docx (https://www.vendorportal.ecms.va.gov/FBODocumentServer/DocumentServer.aspx?DocumentId=1671224&FileName=VA247-14-R-1710-001.docx)

Link: https://www.vendorportal.ecms.va.gov/FBODocumentServer/DocumentServer.aspx?DocumentId=1671224&FileName=VA247-14-R-1710-001.docx

 

Note: If links are broken, refer to Point of Contact above or contact the FBO Help Desk at 877-472-3779.
 

Place of Performance

Address: Charlie Norwood VAMC;1 Freedom Way;Augusta, GA

Zip Code: 30901
 

Record

SN03544168-W 20141009/141007234144-5fef50bd99df4b50a848c0dd777e3112 (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |