011824_Douglas LPOE DB_Solicitation_2_Phase_Part_I.pdf

GSA Solicitation No. 47PK0124R0001

Document: DB201-1/SEPTEMBER 2023 (The Solicitation)

Design Build Contract

New Commercial Land Port of Entry

Douglas, Az.

The Solicitation

Phase 1 – Request for Qualifications

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA), Pub. L. No. 117-169, enacted in August 2022, provided GSA with significant funding for (a) measures necessary to convert facilities to high-performance green buildings, (b) acquisition and installation of construction materials and products with substantially lower levels of embodied greenhouse gas emissions, and (c) emerging and sustainable technologies. The Contract resulting from this Solicitation will be funded in part by IRA appropriations, and it contains numerous IRA-specific requirements. Requirements include, but are not limited to, requirements regarding pricing, invoicing, submittals, materials, and construction. In addition, please note that this Solicitation contains an evaluation factor favoring certain construction materials with the lowest possible levels of embodied carbon. Offerors shall carefully review this Solicitation, the Agreement, the Statement of Work, the Specifications, and the Drawings. Offerors are responsible for accurately pricing and, if successful, fully performing all Contract requirements.

(The Solicitation)

Table of Contents

I. General Information A. The Project B. The Solicitation and Contract C. List of Phase 1 Solicitation Documents D. Authorized Representatives E. Pre-Proposal Conference F. Estimated Price Range G. Questions Regarding Phase 1 H. Receipt of Qualifications

II. Proposals A. Proposal Contents B. Proposal Format C. Technical Proposal D. Other Requirements E. Requirements of Joint Venture Offerors

III. General Provisions A. Availability of Funds B. Requests for Clarification or Interpretation C. Notice to Small Business Firms D. Information Concerning the Disclosure of Solicitation Results E. Affirmative Procurement Program F. Notice Concerning Preparation of Proposals G. Bond Requirements (Phase 2 Requirements) H. Contractor Performance Information I. Safeguarding and Dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)

Building Information

J. INFORM

K. Mega Construction Project Program

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions To be issued in Phase 2 A. Project Labor Agreement

V. Additional Solicitation Provisions and Instructions A. Additional Provisions

(i) GSAR 552.236-74, Evaluation of Options (Mar 2019)

(ii) GSAR Clause 552.236-77, Government’s Right to Exercise Options (Mar

2019)

(The Solicitation)

VI. Method Of Award A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals B. Evaluation of Phase 2 Proposals C. Determination of Responsibility D. Price Reasonableness/Price Realism E. Unbalanced Price F. Total Evaluated Price G. Non-Price Factors H. Evaluation of Joint Ventures

I. General Information

I.A. The Project

The General Services Administration (GSA) Design Excellence Program seeks to commission architects, engineers, and construction professionals to maintain and modernize our legacy federal buildings for the next 50 to 100 years of service. These projects will demonstrate the value of integrated design that balances historic significance with current needs; balances aesthetics, cost, constructability, and reliability; and creates environmentally responsible and superior workplaces for civilian federal employees.

In this context, GSA announces an opportunity for Design and Construction Excellence in public architecture for performance of Architectural Engineering Design and Construction services in accordance with GSA quality standards and requirements. As required by law, regulation or Executive Order, all facilities will meet performance targets and security requirements.

The anticipated project is a new design-build (DB) bridging project of a new commercial port which includes construction of a Main Building, Commercial Primary Inspection Lanes, Commercial Inspection Building and Loading Docks, Vehicle Exit Booth, Kennel Building, Vault, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) Facility, and Firearms Simulation Building, totaling approximately 180,000 gross square footage.

The existing Raul Hector Castro (RHC) LPOE in Douglas, Arizona, is a full-service, multi-modal port that inspects privately owned vehicles (POV), pedestrians (PED), and commercially owned vehicles (COV). The current facilities at the RHC LPOE no longer function adequately given the site constraints, steady increase in traffic, and outdated facilities and technologies.

The New Douglas Commercial LPOE is to expand and modernize the existing RHC LPOE as a non-commercial facility. It is planned to be located 5 miles west of the existing RHC LPOE along the U.S. Mexico border on approximately 106 acres in Arizona. Land to be assembled by the City of Douglas and donated to GSA.

The DB scope of work includes all management, supervision, labor, equipment, and materials required to provide design and construction services for the New Douglas Commercial LPOE project pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Two-Phase Design-Build Selection

Procedures and incorporating Art in Architecture Program, and Design - Construction -

Operational Excellence policies and procedures. This project shall adhere to the GSA Design

Excellence and Operational Excellence guidelines, the GSA PBS Facilities Standard for the

Public Building Service (P100) 2021 with 2022 addendum, Building Information Modeling

(BIM), and DHS CBP requirements and guidelines. The LPOE will be designed to be net-zero carbon ready and achieve LEED Gold standards. The resultant contract will be a firm fixed price.

(The Solicitation)

(The Solicitation)

Design Phase services include but are not limited to all work necessary for the design of the project. The DB Contractor must provide complete design services, including developing plans from final Concept Design through Construction Documents for all site work and building construction at the New Douglas Commercial LPOE. The DB Contractor must correct any deficiencies, code violations and instances of the design not conforming to the Contract documents. The DB Contractor must review existing documentation provided by the GSA, including drawings, surveys, studies, and reports. The DB Contractor must perform all site conditions investigation that is necessary to design, build and turn over the completed project.

This includes reviewing and validating site conditions, performing geotechnical investigations, performing pre-alteration surveys, and performing other surveys. The DB Contractor must investigate and verify the accuracy of all drawings, calculations, reports including but not limited to geotechnical report, survey, bridging documents, and Government furnished information. The

DB Contractor shall also develop, maintain, and update a construction work sequence plan, addressing, but not limited to construction phasing approach, preliminary construction schedule, constructability, and logistics issues as well as schedules for award of subcontract packages.

Construction Phase services include, but are not limited to, all work and services necessary for construction of the project, project management, selection and procurement of all necessary subcontractors, coordination of regular construction meetings, critical path method (CPM) scheduling and schedule control, monitoring of construction costs, progress reporting, conducting and coordination of inspections and testing, coordination with external stakeholders such as City of Douglas, ADOT and Government of Mexico and all other required services necessary for a complete and sustainable building.

The project is funded under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. This office anticipates award of a contract for these services in late 2024. Contract duration: Estimated 4 years (48 months), Design:

1 year (12 months), Construction: 3 years (36 months). Estimated magnitude of construction:

between $190,000,000 and $210,000,000, The NAICS code is 236220 Commercial and

Institutional Building Construction, Small Business Size: $45.0 million

I.B. the Solicitation and Contract

(1) This procurement is being conducted using the two-phase selection process found in FAR

36.3. Qualification proposals will be evaluated in Phase One to determine which offerors will submit proposals for Phase Two. One contract will be awarded using competitive negotiation. In

Phase 1, GSA will select a short list of the most highly qualified offerors and request that those offerors submit Phase 2 proposals. All responsible sources may submit a Phase 1 proposal. A maximum of 3 firms will be selected to submit Phase 2 proposals. Only those selected offerors are authorized to submit Phase 2 proposals. Those offerors not selected for participation in Phase

2 will be notified in accordance with FAR 15.503(a). In Phase 2, Offerors may submit a price

(The Solicitation) proposal subject to the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) requirements set forth in the Phase 2 solicitation (a PLA proposal), a price proposal not subject to the PLA requirements set forth in the

Phase 2 solicitation, or both. Any price proposal submitted in Phase 2 shall clearly identify whether it is subject to such PLA requirements.

(2) This Solicitation sets forth requirements for Phase 1 qualifications proposals and the evaluation factors for Phase 2 proposals for a Contract to construct the Project. Proposals conforming to the Solicitation requirements will be evaluated in accordance with the Method of

Award set forth herein. The Government will award the Contract to the selected Offeror, subject to the conditions set forth herein.

(3) Neither the Solicitation nor any part of an Offeror's proposal shall be part of the Contract except to the extent expressly incorporated therein by the Contracting Officer.

I.C. List of Phase 1 Solicitation Documents

The Solicitation Documents are comprised of:

(1) The Solicitation – Phase 1

(2) Offeror Representations and Certifications Form

(3) Standard Form (SF) 1442 – Solicitation Offer and Award

(4) Draft of the Agreement

(5) Past Performance Reference Questionnaire

I.D. Authorized Representatives

The following individuals are designated as the authorized GSA representatives under this Solicitation:

Authorized Representative Information:

Contracting Officer’s Information

Name: Shelita Harper, 9PQP

Address: 50 United Nations Plaza, 3rd Floor, Ste. 3468 San Francisco, Ca 94102

Telephone: 415.264.2517

Email: shelita.harper@gsa.gov

(The Solicitation)

Authorized Representative Information:

Alternate POC Information

Name: Bernard Tong, 9PCC

Address: 50 United Nations Plaza, Mailbox 9, Ste. 3468, San Francisco, Ca 94102

Telephone: 415.515.6254

Email: Bernard.tong@gsa.gov

I.E. Pre-Proposal Conference A virtual Pre-proposal Conference will be held on Thursday, February 1, 2024

Interested parties must notify the Contracting Officer for further information about attendance and to confirm location, time, and date. Only those parties who have notified the Contracting

Officer and provided necessary information in advance of the meeting will be allowed to attend. To request a reasonable accommodation due to a disability, contact the Contracting Officer

Date: Thursday February 1, 2024

Time: 11:00 AM PST (California Time)

Location: VIRTUAL

I.F. Estimated Price Range

The estimated price range for the Project is between $190,000,000.00 and $210,000,000.00.

I.G. Questions Regarding Phase 1 Submit all questions regarding the Phase 1 to the Contracting Officer on or before Monday, February 12, 2024. Any responses provided by GSA will be posted on the Governmentwide Point of Entry (GPE) as an Amendment to the Solicitation.

I.H. Receipt of Qualifications

(1) In order to be considered for Phase 2 and award, Phase 1 qualifications proposals conforming to the requirements of the Solicitation must be received at the following email no later than 4:00 pm local time on the following date and at the following email address.

(The Solicitation)

Date: Friday, March 8, 2024

Email Address: shelita.harper@gsa.gov cc: Bernard.tong@gsa.gov

Subject Line: Phase 1 DB New Commercial LPOE Douglas, Az.

II. Proposals

II.A. Proposal Contents

Proposals shall consist of the following documents, completed and executed in accordance with this Solicitation:

1. Technical Proposal

2. Other Documents as Required

• Proof of the offeror’s ability to provide bonding capacity of $200,000,000.00 in the form of a letter from a surety.

• SAM Registration verification (applies to Joint Ventures also)

• SF 1442 Acknowledgement of any amendments

• Offeror Reps and Certs

• Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Non-Disclosure Agreement Form 11000-6

II.B. Proposal Format

Firms having the capability to perform the services will be invited to respond to the RFP posted on the SAM.gov website. Offerors who then wish to submit an offer will be required to submit one digital copy of their Phase I Proposal. The subject line of the email shall include “Phase 1 DB New Douglas Commercial LPOE” followed by the firm(s) name. Emails, including message body, headers, and attachments are limited to 25MB. Zip files are acceptable, but the following attachment type/extensions are not permitted in any email incoming to GSA, including inside zip files: ade, adp, asx, bas, bat, BHx, cer, chm, cmd, com, cpl, crt, dbx, dll, exe, hta, htp, inf, ins, isp, js, jse, lnk, mda, mde, mdz, msc, msi, msp, mst, nch, pcd, pif, prf, reg, scf, scr, sct, shb, shs, url, vb, vbe, vbs, wms, wsc, wsf, wsh, htm, 7z.

The Phase I Proposal shall not contain more than 50 numbered pages inclusive of the table of contents, charts, exhibits, and any other materials the Offeror deems required for each evaluation factor listed herein for which the offeror is addressing (see II.A above).

Excluded from the 50-page limit, offerors are requested to submit the Surety Letter, SAM registration verification, SF1442, acknowledgement of any amendments, Offeror Reps and Certs, and DHS Non-Disclosure Agreement Form 11000-6.

mailto:shelita.harper@gsa.gov

(The Solicitation)

II.C. Technical Proposal

Proposals must address the technical approach, technical qualifications, and the other Phase 1 evaluation factors stated herein see Section VI.G. Non-Price Factors for further details. Any proposal not meeting all of the following criteria may result in not being further considered for award.

II.D. Other Information to be Submitted with Proposals

(1) Representations and Certifications

Offerors are reminded their SAM registration status must be “Active”, at the time their offer is submitted, to be considered for award (see 52.204-7). Offerors submitting a proposal in response to this Solicitation shall complete electronic Annual Representations and Certifications in conjunction with required Entity registration in System for Award Management (SAM), accessed via System for Award Management. Offerors shall also submit with their proposal, the Annual Representations and Certifications (FAR 52.204-8).

(2) Proof of the offeror’s ability to provide bonding capacity of $200,000,000.00 in the form of a letter from a surety.

II.E. Requirements of Joint Venture Offerors

(1) All offers submitted by joint ventures must include a copy of an executed joint venture agreement (with original signatures) which fully discloses the legal identity of each member of the joint venture, the relationship between the members, the form of ownership of each member, and any limitations on liability or authority for each member.

(2) An authorized representative of each member of the joint venture must sign the SF 1442 accompanying an offer regardless of any agency relationship established between the members.

(3) In the case of corporations that are joint venture members, the corporation secretary must certify that the corporation is authorized to participate in the joint venture, either by so certifying in the joint venture agreement, or by submitting a separate certification to the Government. The joint venture must also provide a certificate that identifies a principal representative of the joint venture with full authority to bind the joint venture.

(4) Representations and certifications, financial information, and past performance information must be submitted for each member of the joint venture.

https://www.sam.gov/

(The Solicitation)

III. General Provisions

III.A. Availability of Funds

Issuance of this Solicitation does not warrant that funds are presently available for award of a Contract. Award of the contract shall be subject to the availability of appropriated funds, and the Government shall incur no obligation under this Solicitation in advance of such time as funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for the purpose of contract award.

III.B. Requests for Clarification or Interpretation

The Government will attempt to answer all requests for clarifications or interpretations of the

Solicitation Documents prior to the date set for receipt of offers, but do not warrant that all such requests will be answered within 15 calendar days. Prospective Offerors should make such requests not less than 15 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of offers.

III.C. Notice to Small Business Firms

A program for the purpose of assisting qualified small business concerns in obtaining certain bid, payment, or performance bonds that are otherwise not obtainable is available through the Small Business Administration (SBA) (Small Business Administration). For information concerning SBA's surety bond guarantee assistance, contact your SBA District Office.

III.D. Information Concerning the Disclosure of Solicitation Results

This acquisition is being conducted under the provisions of FAR Part 15 as a negotiated procurement. In accordance with FAR 3.104 and FAR 15.207, after receipt of proposals, no information regarding the identity of those submitting offers, the number of offers received, or the information contained in such offers will be made available until after award except as provided by FAR 15.503.

III.E. Affirmative Procurement Program

GSA has implemented an Affirmative Procurement Program (APP) intended to maximize the use of recovered materials, environmentally preferable, and bio-based products. Offerors should familiarize themselves with the requirements for using and reporting on the use of such materials in performance as set forth in the Agreement. Refer to Clause FAR 52.223-10 encouraging vendors to practice waste reduction.

III.F. Notice Concerning Preparation of Proposals

Offerors are cautioned to carefully read the entire Solicitation and the Agreement to be included in the Contract contemplated by the Solicitation in order to be fully aware of all requirements and clauses in the contemplated Contract. Verify that all blanks requiring information to be supplied in an Offer have been properly filled out, that all pricing and other http://www.sba.gov/

(The Solicitation) numerical data is accurately calculated, and that all copies of the Offer contain the same information.

III.G. Bond Requirements (Phase 2 Requirements)

If a bid guarantee is required to be submitted with your offer, any contract awarded will require a performance bond and payment bond as specified in the Agreement. Offerors who utilize individual sureties should note the requirement for a certified, audited, financial statement for each person acting as an individual surety under clause FAR 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee and the requirements of clause FAR 52.228-11 Pledge of Assets.

III.H. Contractor Performance Information

(1) Evaluating Contractor Performance: The General Services Administration is using the

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) module as the secure, confidential, information management tool to facilitate the performance evaluation process.

CPARS enables a comprehensive evaluation by capturing comments from both GSA and the contractor. The website for CPARS is Contractor Performance Assessment

Completed CPARS evaluations may then be used by the Federal acquisition community for use in making source selection decisions. CPARS assists acquisition officials by serving as the single source for contractor past performance data.

(2) CPARS Registration: Each award requiring an evaluation must be registered in CPARS. The contractor will receive several automated emails. Within thirty days of award, the contractor will receive an e-mail that contains user account information, as well as the applicable contract and order number(s) assigned. Contractors will be granted one user account to access all evaluations.

(3) Contractor CPARS Training: Contractors may sign up for CPARS training. A schedule of classes will be posted to the CPARS training site (CPARS Training) and updated as needed.

(4) Contractor Representative (CR) Role: All evaluations will be sent the Contractor Representative (CR) named on your award. The CR will be able to access CPARS to review and comment on the evaluation. If your CR is not already in the CPARS system, the contracting officer will request the name and email address of the person that will be responsible for the CR role on your award.

Once an evaluation is ready to be released the CR will receive an email alerting them the evaluation is ready for their review and comment. The email will indicate the time frame the CR has to respond to the evaluation; however, the CR may return the evaluation earlier than this date.

GSA shall provide for review at a level above the contracting officer (i.e., contracting director) to consider any disagreement between GSA and the contractor regarding GSA’s evaluation of the contractor. Based on the review, the individual at a level above the contracting officer will issue the ultimate conclusion on the performance evaluation.

http://www.cpars.gov/ https://www.cpars.gov/lc.htm

(The Solicitation)

Copies of the evaluations, contractor responses, and review comments, if any, will be retained as part of the contract file.

III.I. Safeguarding and Dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Building Information

Certain information contained in the Solicitation Documents may have been designated as Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) building information. With respect to such information, Offerors shall agree to the terms for receipt of such information, as set forth in the provision “Administrative Matters” in Section III of the Agreement, as a condition of receipt of such information.

III.J. INFORM

A. Overview of the IN-depth Feedback through Open Reporting Methods (INFORM) Process

This solicitation is part of GSA’s post award communication process called INFORM. The process is designed to enhance the quality and usefulness of post-award communications by providing greater transparency and openness into the procurement process. INFORM seeks to increase GSA-industry communication by providing clearer and more complete information to explain the award decision.

Through the INFORM process, GSA will seek to share additional information with offerors in writing and/or through an oral feedback meeting that is not required by statute or regulation. For Part 15 including mandatory debriefs and Part 16, and in addition to any information required by FAR 15.503 and 15.506, GSA is providing each offeror with the opportunity to participate in the INFORM process as further discussed below.

B. Detailed Description of the INFORM Process

B.1. Component 1 - Notification of Award

After award and in accordance with any post-award notification timeframes required by regulation (i.e., FAR Parts 15.503(b) and 16.505(b)(6)), the contracting officer will issue written notices to the successful and unsuccessful offerors (the Notification Letter and Evaluation Statement (NLES)). The notices will contain:

• All information required by statute or regulation;

• An unredacted copy of the complete technical evaluation for that particular offeror that includes a full description of the unsuccessful offeror’s strengths, weaknesses, risks, and deficiencies;

• An overall technical evaluation summary for that particular offeror and the successful offeror that includes evaluated price; overall technical ranking, rating, (The Solicitation) or score.

B.2. Component 2 - Request for Oral Feedback Meeting or Written Questions

Within three business days after receipt of the NLES, an offeror may, but is not required to:

• submit a written request to the contracting officer for an oral feedback meeting;

• submit a list of written questions to the contracting officer; or

• take no further action.

If the offeror timely elects to request an oral feedback meeting or submit a list of written questions, GSA will consider any such request to constitute a required debriefing pursuant to FAR 15.506. If an offeror does not request an oral feedback meeting or submit a list of written questions within the three day time period, the receipt of the NLES concludes the INFORM process and satisfies the FAR requirement for debriefs pursuant to FAR 15.506.

If the offeror submits a list of written questions in lieu of the oral feedback meeting, the contracting officer will attempt to respond within five business days of receipt of the written questions. Unless otherwise stated, the contracting officer’s response to the written questions will conclude the INFORM process and any corresponding post-award debriefing as further set forth at FAR 15.506.

If the offeror requests an oral feedback meeting, the offeror should provide the following information:

• Primary point of contact;

• List of participants with titles (e.g., Senior Vice President);

• List of topics to assist GSA better prepare for the oral feedback meeting; and

• Preference for in-person, telephone, or web-based conferencing (if available).

B.3. Component 3 - Oral Feedback Meeting

During the oral feedback meeting, GSA’s objectives are to provide:

• Reasonable responses to written questions submitted by the offeror;

• Explanations for the evaluation conclusions and contract award decisions;

• Any additional information about the fairness and impartiality of the evaluation and why the award decision was rational;

• Reasonable responses to additional questions raised during the meeting;

• Additional transparency into the underlying competition process; and,

• A greater understanding of the evaluation and award process.

GSA will not provide any information that is prohibited by law or regulation.

(The Solicitation)

B.4. Component 4 - Post Oral Feedback Meeting Questions

Within two business days after the conclusion of the oral feedback meeting, the offeror may submit a list of written questions to the contracting officer. The contracting officer will provide a written response within five business days and, unless otherwise noted by the contracting officer, the INFORM process and any corresponding post-award debriefing as further set forth at FAR 15.506 will have concluded.

If the offeror elects not to submit a list of written questions within two days after the oral feedback meeting, the INFORM process and any corresponding post-award debriefing as further set forth at FAR 15.506 is concluded.

III.K. Mega Construction Project Program

The Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) Mega Construction Project (Megaproject) Program fosters equal opportunity in the construction trades workforce of federal contractors and subcontractors on large federal construction projects.

When OFCCP designates a construction project as a Megaproject, OFCCP offers contractors and subcontractors extensive compliance assistance, conducts compliance evaluations, and fosters collaboration across the public and private sectors. From the earliest stages of a designated Megaproject, OFCCP engages a wide range of stakeholders in the community to remove hiring barriers and promote consideration of a diverse pool of qualified workers for jobs in the trades.

If this project is selected by OFCCP, the contractor will be required to participate in the Mega Construction Project Program and comply with the requirements enforced by OFCCP.

To learn more about OFCCP’s Mega Construction Project Program, please see https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/construction/mega-program.

IV. FAR/GSAR Solicitation Provisions

To be issued with Phase 2 Solicitation.

IV. B FAR 52.222-33, Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement (May 2010) Alternate I (May 2010)

(a) Definitions. "Labor organization" and "project labor agreement," as used in this provision, are defined in the clause of this solicitation entitled Project Labor Agreement.

(b) The apparent successful offeror shall negotiate a project labor agreement https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/construction/mega-program https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/construction/mega-program https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/construction/mega-program https://www.acquisition.gov/far/52.222-33#FAR_52_222_33

(The Solicitation) with one or more labor organizations for the term of the resulting construction contract.

(c) Consistent with applicable law, the project labor agreement reached pursuant to this provision shall-

(1) Bind the offeror and all subcontractors engaged in construction on the construction project to comply with the project labor agreement;

(2) Allow the offeror and all subcontractors to compete for contracts and subcontracts without regard to whether they are otherwise parties to collective bargaining agreements;

(3) Contain guarantees against strikes, lockouts, and similar job disruptions;

(4) Set forth effective, prompt, and mutually binding procedures for resolving labor disputes arising during the term of the project labor agreement;

(5) Provide other mechanisms for labor-management cooperation on matters of mutual interest and concern, including productivity, quality of work, safety, and health; and

(6) Fully conform to all statutes, regulations, Executive orders, and agency requirements.

(d) Any project labor agreement reached pursuant to this provision does not change the terms of this contract or provide for any price adjustment by the Government.

(e) The apparent successful offeror shall submit to the Contracting Officer a copy of the project labor agreement prior to contract award.

(End of Provision)

3. The requirements of 52.222-33 Alt I are supplemented as follows:

a. The project labor agreement reached pursuant to FAR 52.222-33 Alt I shall supersede the terms of any other collective bargaining agreement that conflict with the terms of such project labor agreement.

(The Solicitation)

b. Within 30 days following receipt of written notification to the apparent successful offeror by the Contracting Officer, the apparent successful offeror shall furnish the Contracting Officer with a copy of an executed project labor agreement that meets the requirements of this Section. If, for any reason, the apparent successful offeror fails to furnish such project labor agreement within the time stated above, the Government may, in its sole discretion, eliminate the proposal from consideration and select the next apparent successful offeror.

V. Additional Solicitation Provisions and Instructions

V.A. Additional Provisions

(i) GSAR 552.236-74, Evaluation of Options (March 2019)

(ii) GSAR Clause 552.236-77, Government’s Right to Exercise Options (Mar2019)

VI. Method of Award

VI.A. Evaluation of Phase 1 Proposals

The Government will evaluate Phase 1 proposals based on the following evaluation factors and short list no more than 3 of the most highly technically qualified offerors to submit Phase 2 proposals.

Technical Evaluation Factor 1 –Technical Qualifications

Subfactor 1.A Experience of the General Contractor

Subfactor 1.B Past Performance of the General Contractor

Technical Evaluation Factor 2 – Approach to Design-Build

Technical Evaluation Factor 3 – Lead Designer Subfactor 3.A Lead Designer Portfolio

Subfactor 3.B Past Performance Lead Designer

VI.B. Evaluation of Phase 2 Proposals

The Government will award a contract resulting from this Solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the Solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, Total Evaluated Price and other factors considered. Non-Price Factors, when combined, are significantly more important than Total Evaluated Price. In addition to Total Evaluated Price, the following Phase 2 non-price factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

(The Solicitation)

Technical Evaluation Factor 1 – Qualifications, Experience and Past Performance of Key Personnel

Technical Evaluation Factor 2 – Management and Technical Approach Subfactor 2.A – Project Management Plan Subfactor 2.B - Small Business

Technical Evaluation Factor 3 – Sustainability

Technical Evaluation Factor 4 - Project Labor Agreement

VI.C. Determination of Responsibility

In order to be considered responsible, an Offeror must demonstrate that it meets the requirements of FAR 9.104-1. The Contracting Officer's determination of an Offeror's responsibility or non-responsibility may be based upon any information obtained by the Contracting Officer and is independent of the evaluation of offers set forth herein.

VI.D. Price Analysis and Price Realism Analysis

(1) The Contracting Officer will use Price Analysis to analyze the Offeror’s proposal to ensure that the final agreed-to-price is fair and reasonable. In performing Price Analysis, the Contracting Officer may use, singly or in combination with others, the analytical techniques described in FAR 15.404-1, to ensure that the final price is fair and reasonable. The Contracting Officer may request the advice and assistance of other experts to ensure that appropriate Price Analysis is performed.

(2) In addition, the Contracting Officer will use Price Realism Analysis in conjunction with the evaluation of the offeror’s (Phase 2 Technical Evaluation Factors) to measure an Offeror's understanding of the requirements and to assess the risk inherent in an Offeror's proposal.

Accordingly, Offerors are advised that a business decision to submit significantly low pricing will be considered as reflecting on their understanding or the risk associated with their proposals.

Price Realism Analysis will not be used for the purpose of determining the probable cost to the Government.

VI.E. Unbalanced Prices

Offers must include balanced prices. Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonably high prices. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. All offers with separately priced line items or subline items shall be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced. If price analysis techniques indicate that an offer is unbalanced, the contracting officer shall: (i) Consider the risks to the Government associated with the unbalanced pricing in determining the competitive range and in making the source selection decision; and (ii) Consider whether award of the contract will result in paying unreasonably high prices for contract performance. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

VI.F. Total Evaluated Price Total Evaluated Price shall be calculated using the prices indicated in the Phase 2 Price Proposal using the formula in the Phase 2 Solicitation.

VI.G. Non-Price Factors

Technical Evaluation Factor 1 –Technical Qualifications 60%

Subfactor 1.A Experience of the General Contractor 45%

Subfactor 1.B Past Performance of the General Contractor 15%

Technical Evaluation Factor 2 – Approach to Design-Build 20%

Technical Evaluation Factor 3 – Lead Designer 20%

Subfactor 3.A Lead Designer Portfolio 15%

Subfactor 3.B Past Performance of Lead Designer 5%

Similar Project Definition For the purposes of the Phase 1 RFQ a SIMILAR PROJECT is defined as a project that is similar in size, type and complexity. To qualify as a SIMILAR PROJECT, the project must meet all three elements as further defined here.

SIMILAR PROJECT is defined as a project that is similar in size, type and complexity. To be considered similar in size, project(s) must equal or exceed $100,000,000.00 in initial award amount and be completed in the last ten (10) years (no later than 2014). To be considered similar in type, project(s) must include new construction and/or major renovation of existing facilities.

To be considered similar in complexity, project(s) must include work as the Primary General Contractor performing in a new government or other institutional use building/campus, or an occupied government, or other institutional use building/campus.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTOR 1: Technical Qualifications (60%) Subfactor 1.A.: Experience of the General Contractor (45%)

Description: This evaluation factor considers the past experience of the offeror’s General Contractor with completing SIMILAR PROJECTS. Projects that do not meet the definition of SIMILAR PROJECT will not be considered and may result in a lower evaluation rating for this specific factor.

Submittal requirement(s): Offeror must submit only three (3) projects which meets the definition of a SIMILAR PROJECT.

Each submitted project must identify the following:

● Initial contract award amount.

● Year of project completion.

● Description of the overall project scope of work.

** Note that if the offeror is a Joint Venture the submitted projects must be those of the primary General Contractor identified in the agreement.

** Each project submitted under Subfactor 1.A shall be limited to a total of two (2) double-sided, four (4) single-sided pages.

Standard for evaluation is met when: all items identified as Submittal requirement(s) are submitted by the offeror for evaluation within the identified parameters. Projects that do not meet the definition of SIMILAR PROJECT will not be considered and may result in a lower evaluation rating for this specific factor.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for the following:

● Projects that exceed the definition of a SIMILAR PROJECT with regard to size or complexity.

● Projects where the identified General Contractor has worked previously with the identified Lead Designer and/or Design Firm.

● Projects that utilized the Design-Build project delivery method or other Integrated

Project Delivery methods. For purposes of this evaluation factor, Integrated Project Delivery is defined as the execution of a multiparty agreement in which the owner or developer contracted with a single offeror to provide all, or substantially all, of the design and construction services for that project.

● Awards or other forms of public recognition from nationally recognized organizations demonstrating construction excellence.

Subfactor 1.B.: Past Performance of the General Contractor (15%)

Description: This evaluation factor considers the General Contractor’s past performance on the SIMILAR PROJECTS submitted by the offeror under Subfactor 1.A.

The GSA is seeking to determine whether the offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction, timely delivery of services, adherence to contract schedules, subcontractor management, safety management, quality control programs, good workmanship, conformance to specifications, and fair and reasonable prices. In evaluating, the GSA may consider the information in the offeror’s proposal as well as information gathered from other sources including former customers, Government agencies, federal databases and other references.

Submittal Requirement(s): Offeror must submit a separate Past Performance Questionnaire for each of the three (3) projects submitted under Subfactor 1.A. for review. Each project submitted must identify at least one (1) reference, including name, telephone number, and email address. The GSA reserves the right to contact the identified references provided in an offeror’s proposal.

*** Note that firms may resubmit questionnaires previously submitted with other proposals or may obtain an updated/new PPQ from a client. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFQs/RFPs.

In the case of an offeror not having a record of past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably nor unfavorably. Only those offerors who have submitted and the GSA has received the required three (3) PBS Past Performance Questionnaires will be eligible to receive additional consideration. If the GSA receives negative past performance information, the offeror will be given an opportunity to respond.

Standard for evaluation is met when: all items identified as Submittal requirement(s) are submitted by the offeror for evaluation within the identified parameters. If an offeror does not meet the identified requirements this may result in a lower evaluation rating for this specific factor.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for the following:

● Overall Rating better than Satisfactory ratings from owner references.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTOR 2: Approach to Design-Build (20%)

Description: This evaluation factor considers the offeror’s approach to design-build and their ability to work together proactively and collaboratively to satisfy the GSA’s objectives, including the realization of “Design Excellence.”

Submittal requirement(s): For purposes of this evaluation factor, Design Excellence refers to the GSA’s Design Excellence Program which seeks a holistic approach (incorporating expertise in many areas, including but not limited to architecture, engineering, urban design, interior design, sustainability, and construction) that delivers value by producing high-quality, high-performance facilities on budget and on time. The program also seeks to commission our nation’s most talented constructors, designers, and artists to design and construct federal buildings of outstanding quality and value.

This approach should demonstrate the offeror’s commitment to integrated design that balances aesthetics, cost, functionality, constructability, and reliability, creating environmentally superior workplaces for federal employees and giving contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

Offeror must submit a written narrative identifying its approach to the design-build process and discuss each of the subjects set forth below.

● Philosophy and Design Intent - The offeror must describe their philosophy and design intent as related to Phase 1 of the New Douglas Commercial LPOE project described in the Solicitation. This must include the Lead Designer’s:

o Overall design philosophy;

o Understanding of the project and project issues;

o Approach to the challenge of public architecture and related issues;

o Commitment to integrated and sustainable design.

The GSA expects clear, thoughtful phrases that demonstrate the offeror’s ability to clearly communicate their own ideas. The offeror’s philosophy and design intent should be characterized by clarity.

● Management Process - The offeror must describe their overall project management approach to design-build and address the following;

o Lines and methods of communication;

o Decision-making;

o Client integration and community input;

o Management of project quality, cost, and schedule.

** The narrative shall be limited to a total of three (3) double-sided, six (6) single sided pages. The offeror may allocate the pages in any manner they choose.

Standard for evaluation is met when: all items identified as Submittal requirement(s) are submitted by the offeror for evaluation within the identified parameters. If an offeror does not meet the identified requirements this may result in a lower evaluation rating for this specific factor.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for any of the following:

● The proven, successful implementation of the Management Process on any of the projects listed under Evaluation Factor 1, Subfactor 1.A.;

● The Lead Designer’s Philosophy and Design Intent closely aligns with the needs of this project;

● The Lead Designer’s Philosophy and Design Intent and/or Management Process demonstrate a superior understanding of the project and of project issues;

● The Management Process demonstrates that the Design-Builder is committed to integrated and sustainable design.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTOR 3: Lead Designer (20%) Subfactor 3.A.: Lead Designer Portfolio (15%)

Description: This evaluation factor considers the Lead Designer’s portfolio in the context of Design Excellence. For purposes of this evaluation factor, the term “Lead Designer” means an individual who will have the primary responsibility to develop the concept and the project design. “Design Excellence” maintains the same meaning as stated in Technical Evaluation Factor 2.

Submittal requirement(s): Offeror must submit the identified items set forth below.

● Submit a design project portfolio representative of the Lead Designer’s ability to produce excellent design. The portfolio must include three (3) projects where the design has been completed in the last ten (10) years (no later than 2014). Each project narrative shall address the following:

1. Project program and function.

2. Project budget and schedule.

3. Lead Designer’s role and area(s) of responsibility.

4. How the design approach/planning solution(s) address the client’s mission/project goal(s).

** Each project narrative submitted under Subfactor 3.A shall be limited to a total of two (2) double-sided, four (4) single-sided pages.

The standard for evaluation is met when: all items identified as Submittal requirement(s) are submitted by the offeror for evaluation within the identified parameters. If an offeror does not meet the identified requirements this may result in a lower evaluation rating for this specific factor.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for any of the following:

● The Lead Designer completed all projects in the portfolio in the same role proposed on this project.

● Portfolio includes projects that include long-term site development planning or master-planning.

● Lead Designer has delivered LEED Platinum projects or projects exceeding the intended

LEED certification. Note: evidence must be provided to verify but will not be counted towards page limitation.

● Portfolio includes project(s) that have earned certificates, awards, or peer recognition demonstrating production of excellent design.

Subfactor 3.B.: Past Performance of Lead Designer (5%)

Description: This evaluation factor considers the Lead Designer’s past performance on the projects submitted by the offeror under Subfactor 3.A.

Submittal Requirement(s): The GSA is seeking to determine whether the offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction, timely delivery of services, adherence to contract schedules, design team management, good workmanship, and conformance to design requirements. In evaluating the GSA may consider the information in the offeror’s proposal as well as information gathered from other sources including former customers, Government agencies, federal databases and other references.

Offeror must submit a separate Past Performance Questionnaire for each of the three

(3) projects submitted under Subfactor 3.A. for review. Each project submitted must identify at least one (1) reference, including name, telephone number, and email address. The GSA reserves the right to contact the identified references provided in an offeror’s proposal.

*** Note that firms may resubmit questionnaires previously submitted with other proposals or may obtain an updated/new PPQ from a client. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFQs/RFPs.

In the case of an offeror not having a record of past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably nor unfavorably. Only those offerors who have submitted and the GSA has received the required three (3) PBS Past Performance Questionnaires will be eligible to receive additional consideration. If the GSA receives negative past performance information, the offeror may be given an opportunity to respond.

Standard for evaluation is met when: all items identified as Submittal requirement(s) are submitted by the offeror for evaluation within the identified parameters.

Additional favorable consideration may be given for the following:

● Overall Rating better than Satisfactory ratings from owner references.

VI.H. Evaluation of Joint Venture Offerors

In the evaluation of responsibility and non-price factors, information submitted for a party to the joint venture will only be evaluated to the extent that the terms of the joint venture agreement do not limit such party's performance or financial obligations as a party to the Contract contemplated by this Solicitation.