Sol_140P5126R0002_Amd_0001.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: is not is required copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7.ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

PAGESOF

Contractor

The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers to sign this document and return

Edward Dingle

See continuation page

NPS SER EAST MABO

100 Alabama St., SW 1924 Building Atlanta GA 30303-8701

NPS SER EAST MABO

100 Alabama St., SW 1924 Building Atlanta GA 30303-8701

PSE

PSE

140P5126R0002

05/20/2026

05/15/2026

1 7

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGES

NAME OF OFFEROR OR CONTRACTOR

SUPPLIES/SERVICES

(B)

UNIT

(D)

UNIT PRICE

(E)

AMOUNT

(F)

OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

Sponsored by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.110

ITEM NO.

(A)

QUANTITY

(C)

NSN 7540-01-152-8067

140P5126R0002/0001

The purpose of this amendment is to issue updated site visit information and updated

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award of the solicitation.

The updated site visit information is provided as attachment 0011.

The updated Section M Evaluation Factors for

Award is provided as attachment 0012.

Period of Performance: 06/22/2026 to

06/21/2027

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

Submission Requirements and Evaluation Minimum Requirements

M.1 Evaluation Factors for Award

A. General Considerations. For the evaluation, the proposals will be evaluated under the following areas of consideration: price, technical capability and approach, relevant past performance and experience.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award on initial proposals. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal must contain the offeror’s best price. If multiple line items are priced, each line item will be evaluated to ensure that balanced pricing exists. If the line items are determined to be unbalanced for the offeror that presents the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal, the Government will allow that offeror the opportunity to balance the line items before award. If the offeror cannot, or chooses not to, balance the line items, the Government will deem the offeror’s proposals unacceptable. In addition to the evaluation of the proposal for award determination, the Government may consider your past performance from data obtained from other sources.

B. Basis for Award. Award will be made to the selected contractor on the basis of the "best value" Evaluated Lowest Price Technically Acceptable proposal that the Government determines can best satisfy the objectives and requirements of this Request for Proposal, in a manner most advantageous to the Government. The documents that each offeror submitted in response to the instructions for preparing the proposal will receive a thorough evaluation.

Offeror’s must convey to the Government that they are capable of accomplishing the work in a coordinated and timely fashion, such that all the needs of the requirement will be accomplished.

Respondents must address the acceptable and unacceptable Technical Factor as follows: Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Evaluation Process.

C. Evaluation Process. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award based on initial proposals. The Government will evaluate all technical proposals on an acceptable and unacceptable basis to determine all offers that meet the minimum technically acceptable requirements. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined technically unacceptable.

Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal shall contain the offeror’s best price. If multiple line items are priced, each line item will be evaluated to ensure that balanced pricing exists. If the line items are determined to be unbalanced for the offeror that presents the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal, the Government will allow that offeror the opportunity to balance the line items prior to award.

If the offeror cannot, or chooses not to, balance the line items, the Government shall deem the offeror’s proposal as unacceptable. An unacceptable rating for any one factor makes the entire proposal unacceptable. Any costs incurred by offerors in preparing or submitting offers are the offerors' sole responsibility; the United States Government will not reimburse any offeror for any proposal preparation costs.

A contract will be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by the solicitation).

(1) Evaluation criteria: The proposals will be evaluated under the following evaluation factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Capability and Approach (Volume I) Factor 2 – Past Performance (Volume II) Factor 3 – Price (Volume III)

Attachment 0012 - Request for Proposal #140P5126R0002

D. Factor importance. Technical and Past Performance are approximately equal to cost or price.

Factor 1 - Technical Capability and Approach:

Offerors technical capability and approach are your means and methods to complete the technical aspects of all required work listed in the construction specifications, drawings, and other supporting documents. Submit a written narrative limited to seven (7) pages describing your technical approach that demonstrates strong technical capability, knowledge, and skill required to complete this requirement that demonstrates effective management, problem solving, communication, coordination, and organization. Proposals not demonstrating these attributes present higher levels of risk and will be rated technically unacceptable.

To be technically acceptable, Offerors must describe the approach to accomplish (specific trades – 1-Mechanical HVAC (Chillers, Cooling Towers), 2-Mechanical Plumbing, 3-Electrical (power, controls), etc.) work within required schedule and budget for successful contract completion. Describe your phasing and sequencing of work showing interrelationships of the major elements required for this project. Describe phasing and sequencing of work showing interrelationships of the major elements and trades required to successfully complete this project.

Offerors must demonstrate management approaches effectively: (1) demonstrate sound management practices and business processes; (2) demonstrate effective cost and quality control; and (3) demonstrate clear corporate and project team commitment, hierarchy and lines of communication, roles, responsibilities, and relationships.

Offerors must provide a construction safety plan that is deemed acceptable after meeting the following requirements:

i. The contractor's Safety Plan must be evaluated for their compliance with local/State/Federal rules and regulations and the company's consideration of safety of its employees and the general public. The contractor's Safety Plan at the minimum must address their safety policy, commitment to safety, detailed disciplinary action to be taken with respect to employees violating safety requirements, personnel safety responsibilities, personnel safety training, personal protective equipment, accident / incident reporting procedure and investigations, emergency procedures guidelines.

ii. The contractor’s Safety Plan shall establish how all safety requirements identified in Section 01 35 23 are to be met and shall designate, by name, the individual responsible for carrying out the safety program.

The offeror shall indicate whether this will be a dedicated Safety Manager position or a collateral duty assignment. Regardless of the structure proposed, if the safety responsibility is assigned as a collateral duty to the designated on-site Superintendent, the OSHA 30-hour certification requirement applicable to the Superintendent satisfies this requirement. If a dedicated Safety Manager is proposed as a separate individual, that individual shall hold, or shall obtain within 90 days of contract award, a current OSHA 30-hour construction safety certification.

Proposals not demonstrating these attributes present higher levels of risk and will be rated technically unacceptable.

The offeror must present a Construction schedule (Specific to this project and not general in nature). To be technically acceptable, the project schedule must show all elements of project scope in chronological order from award to final acceptance. Include submittal reviews, material lead time, and on-site construction phasing. The schedule must account for and conform to seasonal weather, construction restrictions such as equipment limitations and limits of disturbance, and logically layout critical path elements of work. Schedules and narrative descriptions must also have a clear and efficient critical path and logical sequencing; account for procurement lead-time, subcontractor and trade coordination’s, on-site storage and staging, resource and time constraints; and demonstrate risk mitigation and successful completion within the required period of performance. Schedule must address the approach to working within the constraints of the park’s annual special events calendar. Schedules can be submitted in MS Project Gantt Chart or similar format; for evaluation purposes only assume the Notice to Proceed date of June 00, 2026. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s ability to manage staff resources and/or multiple subcontractors working at the same site, and the ability to complete this project on time, using the Offeror’s proposed schedule for this project and any accompanying schedule narrative. Schedules which do not demonstrate these characteristics maybe rated unacceptable.

The Primary Contractor will provide a copy of qualifying Trade License.

SOUTH CAROLINA CONTRACTOR LICENSE: The presence and current validity of the Offeror’s and any proposed subcontractor’s applicable South Carolina Contractor State License will be reviewed at the website:

https://www.cslb.ca.gov/onlineservices/checklicenseII/checklicense.aspx. Offerors (and any proposed subcontractors) who possess a current and valid State License applicable to the work they will be performing on this project will be more favorably rated. The Government will confirm the presence and status of the Offeror’s South Carolina Contractor State License Classification A - General Engineering Contractor, South Carolina Contractor State License Classification B - General Building Contractor, and South Carolina Contractor State License Classification C (All applicable Trade Classifications). Offeror must indicate if proposing to subcontract any of the work and the percentage that will be subcontracted.

Offeror must submit resumes for key personnel listed below demonstrating, at a minimum of three (3) years’ experience (Site Superintendent must have a minimum of 10 years’ experience) on three projects of similar size, scope, and magnitude. For projects of similar size, offers must list Total square footage, total tonnage of Cooling/Heating units, number of units and floors, and whether the project was performed in an occupied facility during active public or tenant operations. If occupied, briefly describe the occupancy type and any operational constraints imposed on the contractor. For projects of similar scope, offers must list type of systems (i.e., VRF, Chilled Water, Rooftop Units), BMS or DDC integration, and ductwork scope — including whether existing ductwork was retained and reused, whether ductwork coordination with structural systems was required, and whether distribution work was performed in an occupied multi-story building. Also list the geographic location and climate of the project, specifically whether the project involved coastal, high-humidity, or similarly challenging environmental conditions. For projects of similar magnitude, offers must Total contract dollar value, number of trades and personnel utilized, duration of the project (months/years), and whether the project was performed on a federal, state, or municipal facility. If so, describe any special environmental, cultural resource, or occupancy protection requirements that were imposed.

Project Manager must possess Minimum five (5) years of construction project management experience on projects of similar size and scope, with HVAC, mechanical, or MEP-intensive project experience preferred. (2) Familiarity with federal construction contract requirements is preferred. (3) OSHA 30-hour construction safety certification is preferred but not required for this position, as the on-site Superintendent — who is required to be present whenever work is in progress — is required to hold this certification.

On-Site Superintendent must possess Minimum five (5) years of experience as an on-site Superintendent on construction projects of similar size and scope. Experience on HVAC or mechanical project scopes is preferred given the technical nature of this work. (2) Current OSHA 30-hour construction safety certification required. (3) The Superintendent shall be on site whenever contract work is in progress, consistent with the Quality Control Supervisor requirement in Spec 01 40 00, Section

1.5. B.1.

Environmental Manager must possess qualifications Minimum 3 years Construction experience on projects of similar size, and scope; with environmental procedures like those of this project; [familiarity with Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) such as ISO 14001]; must be familiar with environmental regulations applicable to construction operations in accordance with the project specifications.

Proposals not demonstrating these attributes present higher levels of risk and will be rated technically unacceptable.

Documentation of Past Performance (Volume II). Proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in http://www.cslb.ca.gov/onlineservices/checklicenseII/checklicense.aspx accordance with procedures outlined in Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 15.103-2 Lowest Price Technical Acceptable.

The following Non-Price Evaluation Factor will be used as the basis for determining Past Performance Acceptability:

Factor 2 – Past Performance

Submit Past Performance information using the attached Past Performance Questionnaire - Attachment 0009.

Evaluation: This factor evaluates the past performance of the Offeror to determine the offeror’s recency, relevance, and quality of performance on the same or similar requirements.

Acceptability Standard: To be Technically Acceptable, Offeror must submit references for three projects completed successfully within the last five years that involved work on historical structures. To be relevant, all reference projects must be similar in size, scope, and complexity. Information must include project scope, cost, period of performance, and customer contact information, including name, email address, and phone number.

Information may be regarding the offeror’s firm and/or its proposed subcontractors performing key trades and other construction activities. Subcontractor’s past performance will only be considered if it correlates to the work the subcontractor will be performing on this requirement. Submit a narrative disclosing any instances of past performance that may be considered less than fully satisfactory. Describe pertinent facts, circumstances and any remedial action taken or to be taken to correct the deficiency. Failure to disclose such instances could result in an unfavorable assessment of the offeror's past performance record.

To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past five (5) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails to meet this condition will not be evaluated.

To be relevant, the effort must be similar in nature of work, size, and scope. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine if it is the same or similar in nature of work, size, and scope to the services and products being procured under this solicitation.

Past performance information from other sources, including the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), may also be utilized in the determination of the past performance record. During proposal evaluations, limited exchanges between the Government and an offeror may occur to clarify the relevance of an offeror's past performance information and adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond.

Factor 3 – Price

Proposed pricing will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness. Reasonableness will be determined considering comparisons to competitive pricing and to the independent Government estimate (IGE). Normally competition establishes price reasonableness, but it may also be based upon comparison with previously proposed prices, comparison with competitive published price lists, comparison with the independent Government estimate, and other measures.

Proposed pricing that differs significantly from the competition or IGE, as an example, will be reviewed to assess potential performance risk and the offeror’s understanding of the requirements. If any price component is found to be unreasonably high, or unrealistically low, an offeror's Price proposal may be rejected. If multiple contract line items are included in the price schedule, prices will be evaluated to determine whether any line items are unbalanced. Offerors are cautioned to distribute costs appropriately.

TECHNICAL RATINGS:

Technical Acceptable and Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

PAST PERFORMANCE RATING:

Past Performance Acceptable and Unacceptable Ratings

Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

All of the above Evaluation Criteria will be evaluated on an “Acceptable and Unacceptable” basis. An Offeror’s proposal must receive a rating of Acceptable under the technical and past performance evaluation factors to be considered for award. Proposals shall be evaluated beginning with the lowest priced proposal, if the apparent lowest priced proposal is deemed technically acceptable, at this point, the proposal evaluation process will end. If the lowest priced proposal is deemed technically unacceptable, the evaluation process shall continue until the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal has been determined to be in the best interest of the government to make any subsequent award recommendation.

The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposal if such action is deemed in the best interest of the Government.

Sponsored by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.110