Revised_Sections_L___M_0001.pdf

140F0521R0004 – Design-Build IDIQ MATOC

REVISED SECTIONS L & M

Amended June 2, 2021

SECTION L -- INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR

RESPONDENTS

L.1 INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.204-7 System for Award Management (OCT 2018) 52.204-16 Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting (JUL 2016) 52.204-22 Alternative Line Item Proposal (JAN 2017) 52.207-6 Solicitations and Offers from Small Business Concerns and Small Business Teaming Arrangements or Joint Ventures (Multiple Award Contracts) (OCT 2016) 52.211-6 Brand Name or Equal (AUG 1999) 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition (JAN 2004) Alternate I (OCT 1997) 52.216-27 Single or Multiple Awards (Oct 1995)

L.2 INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.252-1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (FEB 1998) This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Clauses: https://www.acquisition.gov/browse/index/far (FAR clauses begin with 52) Department of Agriculture Acquisition Regulation (AGAR) Clauses:

https://www.acquisition.gov/agar (AGAR clauses begin with 452) Deviations to provisions may be viewed at:

https://www.dm.usda.gov/procurement/policy/FARClassDeviations.htm

(End of Clause)

52.216-1 Type of Contract (APR 1984) The Government contemplates awards of Multiple Award Task Order Contracts with Firm-Fixed-Pricing resulting from this solicitation.

(End of Clause)

52.222-5 Construction Wage Rate Requirements—Secondary Site of the Work (MAY 2014)

(a)(1) The offeror shall notify the Government if the offeror intends to perform work at any secondary site of the work, as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of the FAR clause at 52.222-6, Construction Wage Rate Requirements, of this solicitation.

(2) If the offeror is unsure if a planned work site satisfies the criteria for a secondary site of the work, the offeror shall request a determination from the Contracting Officer.

https://www.acquisition.gov/browse/index/far https://www.acquisition.gov/agar https://www.dm.usda.gov/procurement/policy/FARClassDeviations.htm https://acquisition.gov/far/current/html/52_222.html#wp1147505

(b)(1) If the wage determination provided by the Government for work at the primary site of the work is not applicable to the secondary site of the work, the offeror shall request a wage determination from the Contracting Officer.

(2) The due date for receipt of offers will not be extended as a result of an offeror’s request for a wage determination for a secondary site of the work.

52.222-23 Notice of Requirement for Affirmative Action to Ensure Equal Employment Opportunity for Construction (FEB 1999)

(a) The offeror's attention is called to the Equal Opportunity clause and the Affirmative Action Compliance Requirements for Construction clause of this solicitation.

(b) The goals for minority and female participation, expressed in percentage terms for the Contractor's aggregate workforce in each trade on all construction work in the covered are, are as follows:

Goals for minority participation for each trade Goals for female participation for each trade

(Contracting Officer shall insert goals)

These goals are applicable to all the Contractor's construction work performed in the covered area. If the Contractor performs construction work in a geographical area located outside of the covered area, the Contractor shall apply the goals established for the geographical area where the work is actually performed. Goals are published periodically in the Federal Register in notice form, and these notices may be obtained from any Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs office.

(c) The Contractor's compliance with Executive Order 11246, as amended, and the regulations in 41 CFR 60-4 shall be based on (1) its implementation of the Equal Opportunity clause, (2) specific affirmative actions obligations required by the clause entitled "Affirmative Action Compliance Requirements for Construction," and (3) its efforts to meet the goals. The hours of minority and female employment and training must be substantially uniform throughout the length of the contract, and in each trade. The Contractor shall make a good faith effort to employ minorities and women evenly on each of its projects.

The transfer of minority or female employees or trainees from Contractor to Contractor, or from project to project, for the sole purpose of meeting the Contractor's goals shall be a violation of the contract, Executive Order 11246, as amended, and the regulations in 41 CFR 60-4. Compliance with the goals will be measured against the total work hours performed.

(d) The Contractor shall provide written notification to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Federal Contract Compliance, U. S. Department of Labor, within 10 working days following award of any construction subcontract in excess of $10,000 at any tier for construction work under the contract resulting from this solicitation. The notification shall list the--

(1) Name, address, and telephone number of the subcontractor;

(2) Employer's identification number of the subcontractor;

(3) Estimated dollar amount of the subcontract;

(4) Estimated starting and completion dates of the subcontract; and

(5) Geographical area in which the subcontract is to be performed.

(e) As used in this Notice, and in any contract resulting from this solicitation, the "covered area" is _________. [Contracting Officer shall insert description of the geographical areas where the contract is to be performed, giving the State, county, and city.]

52.225-12 Notice of Buy American Requirement—Construction Materials under Trade Agreements

(MAY 2014)

(a) Definitions. “Commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) item,” “construction material,” “designated country construction material,” “domestic construction material,” and “foreign construction material,” as used in this provision, are defined in the clause of this solicitation entitled “Buy American- Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements” (Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.225- 11).

(b) Requests for determination of inapplicability. An offeror requesting a determination regarding the inapplicability of the Buy American statute should submit the request to the Contracting Officer in time to allow a determination before submission of offers. The offeror shall include the information and applicable supporting data required by paragraphs (c) and (d) of FAR clause 52.225-11 in the request. If an offeror has not requested a determination regarding the inapplicability of the Buy American statute before submitting its offer or has not received a response to a previous request, the offeror shall include the information and supporting data in the offer.

(c)Evaluation of offers. (1)The Government will evaluate an offer requesting exception to the requirements of the Buy American statute, based on claimed unreasonable cost of domestic construction materials, by adding to the offered price the appropriate percentage of the cost of such foreign construction material, as specified in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of FAR clause 52.225-11.

(2)If evaluation results in a tie between an offeror that requested the substitution of foreign construction material based on unreasonable cost and an offeror that did not request an exception, the Contracting Officer will award to the offeror that did not request an exception based on unreasonable cost.

(d)Alternate offers. (1)When an offer includes foreign construction material, other than designated country construction material, that is not listed by the Government in this solicitation in paragraph (b)(3) of FAR clause 52.225-11, the offeror also may submit an alternate offer based on use of equivalent domestic or designated country construction material.

(2)If an alternate offer is submitted, the offeror shall submit a separate Standard Form 1442 for the alternate offer, and a separate price comparison table prepared in accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of FAR clause 52.225-11 for the offer that is based on the use of any foreign construction material for which the Government has not yet determined an exception applies.

(3)If the Government determines that a particular exception requested in accordance with paragraph (c) of FAR clause 52.225-11 does not apply, the Government will evaluate only those offers based on use of the equivalent domestic or designated country construction material, and the offeror shall be required to furnish such domestic or designated country construction material. An offer based on use of the foreign construction material for which an exception was requested-

(i)Will be rejected as nonresponsive if this acquisition is conducted by sealed bidding; or (ii)May be accepted if revised during negotiations.

52.233-2 Service of Protest (SEP 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from

Shannon Blackburn.

US Fish and Wildlife Service 300 Westgate Center Dr Hadley, MA 01035

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO.

(End of Clause)

52.252-5 Authorized Deviations in Provisions (NOV 2020)

(a) The use in this solicitation of any Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR Chapter 1) provision with an authorized deviation is indicated by the addition of "(DEVIATION)" after the date of the provision.

(b) The use in this solicitation of any Agriculture Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR Chapter 4) provision with an authorized deviation is indicated by the addition of "(DEVIATION)" after the name of the regulation.

(End of Clause)

L.3 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

L.3.1 General Information L.3.1.1 Instructions to Offerors To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements to include: terms and conditions;

technical requirements; past performance requirements: pricing schedule and documents; sample project schedules; and any documents in section J that need to be included in your proposal. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

L.3.1.2 Amendments to solicitations If this solicitation is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this solicitation by the date and time specified in the amendment(s).

L.3.1.3. Late submissions, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers Offerors are responsible for submitting offers, and any modifications, revisions, or withdrawals, so as to reach the Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the solicitation.

L.3.1.4. Section L proposal preparation instructions are guidelines and they are used to provide consistency and order for the evaluation team, and the page limitations are included to reduce the size of the proposal packages for evaluation purposes. Limited pages will force contractors to list the most important elements. All information is to be combined into one (1) volume and submitted electronically, via email, to 140F0521R0004@fws.gov by the proposal due date/time specified in the solicitation.

Evaluation team will accept a couple of extra pages within reason, submitting a massive number of unnecessary propaganda and promotional information is not acceptable and will not be reviewed.

L.3.1.5. Offerors are advised that their proposals are presumed to represent their best efforts and most complete responses to this solicitation. Cursory responses or responses which merely reiterate the contents of the RFP will be considered unacceptable, will be removed from further evaluation, and will not be considered for award. Assurance of experience, technical capability, and qualifications that clearly demonstrate and support the offeror’s claims are essential. The absence of such evidence will adversely influence evaluation of the proposal. Any offeror that misses the required delivery date/time specified in the solicitation may be considered late and deemed ineligible for award. Submission of experience should reflect similar projects that were completed by the individual(s) that will be performing work under this requirement.

L.3.1.6. The Government reserves the right to make an award without discussion; however, discussions or negotiations may be held and result in a Final Proposal Revision. If it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, the Government will determine which proposals are in the competitive range. Offerors with proposals in the competitive range may be required to provide clarifying information or best/final proposals which will be considered in making the best value decision.

L.3.1.7. Proposals shall not contain classified information.

L.3.1.8. Unless exempted by an addendum to this solicitation, by submission of an offer, the offeror acknowledges the requirement that a prospective awardee shall be registered in the SAM database upon submission of proposal, during performance and through final payment of any contract resulting from this solicitation. If the Offeror does not become registered in the SAM database in the time prescribed by the Contracting Officer, the Contracting Officer will proceed to award to the next otherwise successful registered Offeror. Offerors may obtain information on registration and annual confirmation requirements via the SAM database accessed through https://www.beta.sam.gov.

L.3.1.9. Offerors responding to the solicitation notice shall submit proposals in one (1) folder/document, via email only. Proposals will ONLY be accepted via email. No disc, hard copy or faxed proposals will be accepted. Offerors are to submit an email with the subject line: “140F0521R0004 PROPOSAL – GAOA MATOC to 140F0521R0004@fws.gov.

L.3.1.10 Offerors shall submit the Geographical Location Selection Form (attached excel spreadsheet) with their proposal. Offerors shall select a minimum of one (1) and a maximum of ten (10) locations to provide services. As the instructions state, selections will determine which states the offeror would like to provide service for. Please note, the number of states an offeror selects will not be an evaluation factor and will in no way effect your proposal. There will be NO preference given to Offerors who select more states than a vendor who only selects one or two. Offerors will be evaluated for each individual location separately, therefore if selected for award the offeror may not receive an award for all states selected.

L.3.1.11 Offerors Proposal Package must contain the following documents:

Phase 1 Submission: (Do not submit price schedule with Phase 1 Submission)

• Identifying cover page (limited to 1 page)

• Table of Contents

• SF 1442 signed mailto:140F0521R0004@fws.gov https://www.beta.sam.gov/ mailto:140F0521R0004@fws.gov

• Acknowledgment of Amendments if applicable (signed copies of the SF 30)

• Completed Data Entry Form (See attachments)

• Completed Geographical Location Selection Form (See attachments)

• Technical Approach Narrative (Maximum 5 pages)

• Recent, Relevant Experience (Maximum 15 pages)

• Past Performance Questionnaires completed by reference points of contact (Maximum 25 pages)

**DO NOT SUBMIT PHASE 2 SUBMISSION WITH PHASE 1 SUBMISSION. PHASE 2

SUBMISSION IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ONLY OFFERORS

SELECTED FOR PHASE 2 WILL BE REQUESTED TO SUBMIT A PHASE 2 PROPOSAL)**

Phase 2 Submission:

• Identifying cover page (limited to 1 page)

• Table of Contents

• Design Approach Narrative and Drawings (Maximum 10 pages)

• Construction Management Plan (Maximum 10 pages)

• Key Personnel Resumes (Not to exceed 2 pages each)

• Design-Build Team Organizational Chart (Maximum 5 pages)

• Price Schedule (No page Limit)

• Written Key Assumptions (Maximum 3 pages)

• Statement of Bondability

(End of Section L)

SECTION M--EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.217-5 Evaluations of Options (JUL 1990)

M.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

M.2.1 Basis for Contract Award Selections will be made pursuant to the procedures outlined in FAR 36.3- Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedures. Phase 1 and Phase 2 evaluations will be evaluated pursuant to FAR Part 15.101-1, “Best Value Continuum” Source Selection Process. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. Based upon the Phase-1 evaluation, a minimum of five but no more than twenty offerors will be selected per geographical location for participation in Phase 2. An offeror that receives a rating of less than satisfactory in Phase 1 or Phase 2 evaluations will not move on in the evaluation process and will not be considered for award. A team of qualified government personnel will evaluate technical proposals in accordance with the solicitation. Price proposals will be evaluated independent of technical evaluations.

Award(s) will be made to highest rated offerors found to be the best value to the government. Award will further be contingent upon determinations of contractor responsibility and price reasonableness. Price will be evaluated for price reasonableness based upon the sample project included in the solicitation package.

The Government may consider award to other than the lowest priced offerors or other than the highest technically rated offerors when it is in the best interest of the Government. Technical (non-cost) evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price. The Government intends to award, without discussions, to the responsible Offerors whose proposal complies with the solicitation requirements and is determined to be the best value to the Government.

M.2.2 Final Proposal Revision The Government reserves the right to make an award without discussion; however, discussions or negotiations may be held and result in a Final Proposal Revision. If it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, the Government will determine which proposals are in the competitive range. Offerors with proposals in the competitive range may be required to provide clarifying information or best/final proposals which will be considered in making the best value decision.

Any technical revisions or non-concurrence to contract terms and conditions submitted in the final proposal revision may not be subject to further discussion or negotiation and may render the offer unacceptable to the Government. This provision is not intended to restrict the Offerors opportunity to revise figures (e.g. prices, discounts, percentage rates, etc.). Rather, it is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the Government, which could result if new or revised terms and conditions are submitted in the final proposal revision that have not been fully disclosed, discussed and understood during discussions or negotiations. Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the final proposal revision, may render the offer unacceptable to the Government.

M.2.3. Evaluation Criteria

Phase 1 Evaluation Factors:

1. Technical Approach

2. Recent, Relevant Experience

3. Past Performance

Phase 2 Evaluation Factors: (All Factors in Phase 1 carry over to Phase 2 evaluations.)

1. Design Approach

2. Construction Management

3. Key Personnel and Design-Build Team Organization

4. Price

PHASE I Evaluation Factors. There are three (3) non-price/cost evaluation factors with equal weighting. The proposal shall be organized by evaluation factors and shall not contain any price information. The offeror shall address the following factors in sufficient narrative and qualitative detail to be evaluated.

Evaluation Factor 1, Technical Approach (Maximum 5 pages) Offeror shall submit a brief narrative to explain the general approach to design and construct the sample project. Describe the techniques and methods for the sample project to include coordination with the design packages, projected project timelines, and coordination of work. Describe plan to meet submittal requirements, changes, and quality control. Describe the interaction of the design team with the construction team during construction. Include control and approval of revisions to the design; requests for information; shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; Commissioning; Testing; Special Inspections; and contract completion and closeout.

Evaluation Methodology for Phase 1 Evaluation Factor 1 Rating: Description:

Exceptional

Technical Approach demonstrates thorough and detailed understanding of Design- Build. Technical considerations and capabilities significantly exceed performance and capability standards.

• Offers one or more significant strengths which are not offset by weaknesses.

• Represents a high probability of success with no apparent risk in meeting the

Government’s requirements.

• Includes numerous advantageous characteristics of substance which can be expected to result in a superior completed product, and essentially no disadvantages.

Very Good

Technical Approach demonstrates clear understanding of Design-Build. Technical considerations and capabilities exceed performance and capability standards and include some advantageous characteristics of substance and few relatively minor disadvantages.

• Offers one or more strengths. Strengths must outweigh any weaknesses.

• Represents a strong probability of success with overall low degree of risk in meeting the Government’s requirements.

• Includes some advantageous characteristics of substance and few relatively minor disadvantages.

Satisfactory

Technical Approach demonstrates satisfactory understanding of Design-Build.

Technical considerations and capabilities meet performance and capability standards.

• Offers no strengths, or if there are strengths, these strengths are offset by weaknesses.

• Represents a reasonable probability of success with overall moderate degree of risk in meeting the Government’s requirements.

Unsatisfactory

Technical Approach demonstrates a limited or lack of understanding of Design- Build. Technical considerations and capabilities are questionable as to whether or not they meet performance and capability standards necessary for acceptable contract performance.

• Contains weaknesses and offers no strengths, or, if there are strengths, these strengths are outweighed by weaknesses.

• Represents a low probability of success with overall high degree of risk in meeting the Government’s requirements.

• An evaluation factor with an unsatisfactory rating shall result in a proposal being unawardable.

Evaluation Factor 2, Recent, Relevant Experience (Maximum 15 pages) Provide at least 3 and no more than 5 examples of recent experience by the prime contractor or designated subcontractor similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work detailed herein. At a minimum 1 of the examples provided shall be a project on which the general contractor and the designer-of-record both worked, regardless if they were design-build projects. A project is considered “recent” if it has been completed within the last five (5) years or is currently ongoing but at least 25% complete. Design-build projects, while not required, will receive a higher rating. Federal or state public projects will be rated higher than private or commercial projects.

Similar work is defined as follows:

• Vertical Construction – Administrative buildings, educational buildings, housing/bunkhouses, visitor centers, etc.

• Horizontal Construction – Roads, sewer lines/waterlines, power and communication, etc.

The offeror shall provide the following information for each of the project:

1. Name and location of the project

2. Detailed description of the project

3. Type of project (Horizontal/Vertical, type of building/structure, road/utilities, etc.)

4. Project start and completion dates

5. Construction cost at award and final construction cost at project completion

6. A narrative description of the amount and type of work the offeror performed with in-house forces and the percentage of the work that was completed by subcontractors

7. An explanation of Project Management techniques and the Quality Control measures that were used on the project. Provide a summary of issues that were encountered on the project and how they were resolved using the established Project Management techniques and Quality Control measures.

8. Name, title, address, phone number, and email address for building owner or representative of the owner who can attest to the services provided.

Evaluation Methodology for Phase 1 Evaluation Factor 2:

The proposal identifies at least three (3) similar projects with adequate details that demonstrate significant relevant experience and;

• Provides one (1) similar design-build project on which the general contractor and the designer-of-record both worked and;

• Provides two (2) similar design-build projects.

• Provides two (2) similar federal or state public projects.

The proposal identifies at least three (3) similar projects details that demonstrate fairly relevant experience

• Provides one (1) similar project on which the general contractor and the designer-of-record both worked.

• Provides one (1) similar design-build project.

• Provides one (1) similar federal or state public project .

The proposal identifies at least three (3) similar projects with sufficient details that demonstrate somewhat relevant experience

• Provides one (1) similar project on which the general contractor and the designer-of-record both worked.

The proposal identifies less than three (3) similar projects. Limited details are provided that demonstrate little relevant experience.

• An evaluation factor with an unsatisfactory rating shall result in a proposal being unawardable.

Evaluation Factor 3, Past Performance, (Maximum 25 pages/1 PPQ per Project) Offeror shall submit either a CPARS Evaluation or a completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (see attachments) on at least 3 and no more than 3 ongoing and/or past projects within the last five (5) years that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work described herein. Offerors may submit a PPQ previously submitted under a different Notice/RFP (legible copies only) as long as it is on a similar form as posted with this solicitation. The Contractor is solely responsible for the accuracy of information provided. The Government will not pursue inaccurate data. Firms that have a less than satisfactory performance rating in CPARS database will be considered unsatisfactory.

References must have thorough knowledge of the offeror’s performance on the project for the majority of the contract performance period; the quality of the reference information supplied will be considered. Past performance will be evaluated as a predictor of the offeror’s compliance with contract requirements and overall quality of performance.

The offeror shall be responsible for disseminating and collecting the past performance questionnaires which shall be submitted with their electronic proposal. The Government reserves the right to contact the references directly to discuss and/or clarify any and all information provided in the questionnaire.

The Government will also review and use any information available in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), and Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) during this process.

Evaluation Methodology for Phase 1 Evaluation Factor #3:

1. The purpose of evaluating an offeror’s past performance is to enable the Government to determine how well the offeror performed on previous and similar projects.

2. Past Performance shall provide government an indication that the offeror can provide the services and resources needed to accomplish the required work independently and in an effective and efficient method.

3. Past Performance is also used as an indicator on if the offeror can consistently deliver a best value product for construction services.

4. The offeror’s CPARs rating (or equal) of past performance documenting cost, schedule, quality of product/service, and project management will be reviewed along with the following:

• The offeror ability and capability to perform the required work

• Ability to accomplished work effectively and efficiently

• Demonstrate innovation by improving customer interface, increase longevity, reduce user effort, and save of time and/or money.

5. Analysis of areas including financial resources, operational controls, technical skills, quality assurances, and compliance with Government laws as they relate to cost, schedule, quality of product/service, and project management.

demonstrate CPARS (or equal) past performance rated “exceptional” in cost, schedule, quality of product/service, and project management. Past performance demonstrate innovation by improving customer interface, increase longevity, and reduce user effort, savings of time and/or money

The proposal identifies at least three (3) similar projects with fairly relevant details that demonstrate CPARS (or equal) past performance rated “Very Good” in cost, schedule, quality of product/service, and project management. Past performance demonstrate innovation by improving customer interface, increase longevity, and reduce user effort, savings of time and/or money.

demonstrate CPARS (or equal) past performance rated “satisfactory” in cost, schedule, quality of product/service, and project management. Past performance demonstrates limited innovation by improving customer interface, increase longevity, and reduce user effort, savings of time and/or money.

The proposal identifies less than three (3) similar projects. Limited details are provided that demonstrate little relevant past performance. Or past performance that is less than satisfactory

• An evaluation factor with an unsatisfactory rating shall result in a proposal being unawardable.

Neutral

The offeror has little/no relevant past performance upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. The offeror will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on the Past Performance evaluation criteria. IAW FAR 15.305(a)(2), firms lacking relevant past performance history will receive a neutral evaluation for past performance.

**After Phase 1 evaluations are completed, the highest rated offerors will receive a Request for Phase 2 Proposal from the Contracting Officer. All offerors not selected for Phase 2 will be notified in writing of their elimination from the competitive range.**

PHASE 2 EVALUATION FACTORS (FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ONLY

OFFERORS SELECTED FOR PHASE 2 WILL BE REQUESTED TO SUBMIT A PHASE 2

PROPOSAL)

**Do not submit Phase 2 requirements with Phase 1 submission.

PHASE 2 EVALUATION FACTORS. There are three (3) non-price/cost evaluation factors in addition to price. The Technical Factors (Evaluation Factors 1 through 3) shall not contain any price information.

All Factors and ratings in Phase 1 carry over to Phase 2 evaluations. All non-price/cost evaluation factors from Phase 1 and Phase 2 have equal weighting and when combined are significantly more important than price. The offeror shall address the following factors in sufficient narrative and qualitative detail to be evaluated.

Evaluation Factor 1, Design Approach (Maximum 10 pages) Offeror shall submit a narrative along with appropriate drawings with adequate detail to explain the general approach for accomplishing all major aspects of this project including but not limited to: proposed structural and foundation system, site development and landscaping, building systems, building security systems, etc. Include a description of how the construction personnel will be involved during the design phase. Describe interactions within the team and with the Government during the design.

Evaluation Factor 2, Construction Management (Maximum 10 pages) Offeror shall submit an annotated outline of the construction management plan that provides key details on the proposed approach to managing both pedestrian and vehicular traffic, ensuring the safety of the general public during construction, identification of long lead time for key construction materials, identification of key environmental protection challenges, interface with the designer-of-record, and interaction with the Government.

Evaluation Methodology for Phase 2 Evaluation Factors 1 and 2

Proposal/criteria demonstrates thorough and detailed understanding of requirements.

Technical considerations and capabilities significantly exceed performance and capability standards.

• Offers one or more significant strengths which are not offset by weaknesses.

• Represents a high probability of success with no apparent risk in meeting the

Government’s requirements.

• Includes numerous advantageous characteristics of substance which can be expected to result in a superior completed product, and essentially no

Proposal/criteria demonstrates clear understanding of requirements. Technical considerations and capabilities exceed performance and capability standards and include some advantageous characteristics of substance and few relatively minor disadvantages.

• Offers one or more strengths. Strengths must outweigh any weaknesses.

• Represents a strong probability of success with overall low degree of risk in meeting the Government’s requirements.

• Includes some advantageous characteristics of substance and few relatively

Proposal/criteria demonstrates satisfactory understanding of requirements. Technical considerations and capabilities meet performance and capability standards.

• Offers no strengths, or if there are strengths, these strengths are offset by weaknesses.

• Represents a reasonable probability of success with overall moderate degree of

Proposal/criteria demonstrates a limited understanding of requirements. Technical considerations and capabilities are questionable as to whether or not they meet performance and capability standards necessary for acceptable contract performance.

• Contains weaknesses and offers no strengths, or, if there are strengths, these strengths are outweighed by weaknesses.

• Represents a low probability of success with overall high degree of risk in meeting the Government’s requirements.

Evaluation Factor 3, Key Personnel and Design-Build Team Organization

• Provide the resumes (not to exceed two pages each) of the following key personnel: Project Manager, Designer-of-Record, Design Quality Manager, and Construction Quality Manager.

Indicate, as applicable, previous design-build experience, federal agency project experience, and experience working in construction and/or as an Architect/Engineer.

o Evaluation of resumes will consider education, registrations/certifications, relevant experience, and years of experience. A firm that provides resumes for key personnel with greater levels of education, relevant experience, and years of experience will be considered more highly qualified than one that provides less qualified personnel, with less education, less relevant experience and a shorter duration of experience. The number of years of experience must be demonstrated through projects relevant to the scope of this requirement. One resume may cover more than one discipline.

• Provide an organization chart for the design-build team that shows the relationships between the firms, the positions of key personnel listed above, the design subconsultants and construction subcontractors. If specific subconsultants and subcontractors have not yet been identified, indicate the design discipline or construction trade. (Maximum 5 pages)

Evaluation Methodology for Phase 2 Evaluation Factor #3:

• Demonstrate technical experience/capabilities which significantly exceed performance and capability standards.

• Offers one or more significant strengths which are not offset by weaknesses.

• Represents a high probability of success with no apparent risk in meeting the

Government’s requirements.

• Includes numerous advantageous characteristics of substance which can be expected to result in a superior completed product, and essentially no

• Demonstrates technical experience/capabilities which exceed performance and capability standards.

• Offers one or more strengths. Strengths must outweigh any weaknesses.

• Represents a strong probability of success with overall low degree of risk in meeting the Government’s requirements.

• Includes some advantageous characteristics of substance and few relatively

• Demonstrates technical experience/capabilities which meet performance and capability standards.

• Offers no strengths, or if there are strengths, these strengths are offset by weaknesses.

• Represents a reasonable probability of success with overall moderate degree of

• Demonstrates technical experience/capabilities that are questionable as to whether they meet performance and capability standards necessary for satisfactory contract performance.

• Contains weaknesses and offers no strengths, or, if there are strengths, these strengths are outweighed by weaknesses.

• Represents a low probability of success with overall high degree of risk in meeting the Government’s requirements.

Evaluation Factor 4, Price. The Offeror shall remit a completed price schedule attached in Section J of the solicitation. The Offeror shall enter unit prices and extended totals for each item listed in Price Schedule. The price shall include all necessary supervision, management, labor, transportation, equipment, materials, any other direct incidental costs, overhead and profit, unless the cost is expressly identified as a separately priced contract line item. Offeror shall provide key assumptions (in writing) for availability of labor, materials, and other factors that drive the price and multipliers provided for the selected location(s).

Price Proposal:

• For each geographic location selected, Offerors shall provide one (1) base price with no location multipliers to complete the project. Offerors shall also provide two (2) multipliers for each state they wish to propose to work in. One multiplier is for projects outside a 100-mile radius of a town/city in which local resources are available to them and one multiplier within 100 miles.

• Offerors shall complete and submit price schedules for each geographical location they are willing to perform work in.

• Offerors shall assume site conditions are the same in each location.

• Provide detailed key assumptions for availability of labor, materials, and other factors that drive the pricing provided.

• Offeror shall submit a Statement of Bondability. Statement shall provide proof of bonding capability for the sample project.

• Offerors may select up to ten (10) geographical locations to propose Design-Build Construction services.

Evaluation Methodology for Phase 2 Evaluation factor #4:

Price will be evaluated on reasonableness based on competitive pricing received in each state/location and on completeness and understanding of the risks of working in both remote and populated areas. Offerors will also be evaluated on the reasonableness of their key assumptions that drive the price provided and their ability to bond.

The price evaluation factor will not be accepted if all of the information is not included: pricing on sample project, location multipliers, key assumptions, and statement of bondability.