26RA001 - RFQ - FCSB - Final.pdf

1. INTRODUCTION:

The United States Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District (Government) is soliciting a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the Fountain City Service Base 1st Floor Office Renovation Project (Project) as Phase I of a two‐phase design‐build selection procedure. This procurement is solicited as Unrestricted “Full and Open” and will result in a firm fixed price contract. A two‐phase procurement structure will be used for the Project, consisting of a Phase I Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and a subsequent Phase II Request for Proposals (RFP). The RFQ is being issued to identify, using the criteria and methodology described herein, a shortlist of highly qualified and capable design‐build teams that will be invited to submit technical/price proposals for Phase II (RFP portion). The Government anticipates that three firms will be shortlisted (from the RFQ responses) and invited to submit responses to the RFP; however, the Government reserves the right to shortlist more or fewer firms depending on the responses to the RFQ received. There will be a maximum of five offerors selected to submit Phase II proposals. All Offerors will receive written notice regarding whether or not they were selected to compete in Phase II.

In Phase II, the RFP package will be issued to the shortlisted design‐build teams and will specify technical and pricing criteria. Those selected to compete for Phase II will have approximately 30 calendar days to prepare and submit their Phase II proposals. The Phase II proposals will be evaluated by the Government to select the design‐build contractor for the project.

No site visit will be provided for Phase I. A site visit will be offered to those offerors who are invited to compete in Phase II. The date and time for that site visit will be included in the Phase II RFP.

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this action is 236220 Commercial and Institutional Building Construction and the Small Business size standard is $45.0 million in average annual receipts.

2. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

This description of work is preliminary and for information only. The final version of the project scope will be provided in Phase II.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has a requirement for a design-build contract for the 1st Floor Office Renovation in the Fountain City Service Base Office Building (Building Number 3). The Fountain City Service Base Office Building is a part of the Mississippi River Project Office (MRPO) in the St. Paul District. The MRPO utilizes the building to provide support to Dredge Goetz Fleet, Maintenance & Repair Fleet, Channels & Harbors Management, and Navigational Site Management in the northern sections of the Mississippi River Waterways.

The Contractor shall be responsible for the renovation of the 1st floor of the Fountain City Service Base Office Building (Building Number 3). This SOW covers all services required to fully execute a Design-Build project and other supporting activities necessary for design and construction of project features described herein. Work includes all engineering and development of plans and specifications; all personnel, equipment, materials, and any associated or ancillary activities for construction of a complete and usable project in accordance with the plans and specifications; and final As-Built/Record Drawings. The Contractor shall have, at a minimum, a project superintendent, quality control manager and site safety & health officer (SSHO) present onsite to provide oversight of all demolition and construction work. Government will accept either the SSHO and Superintendent -or- the SSHO and Quality Control Manager as dual hatted for reasons of confined work limits and lack of complexity in the project scope of work. The project Superintendent, Quality Control Manager, Design Quality Control Manager and Project Manager must remain independent in project roles for the duration of the contract.

The MRPO staffing is projected to increase substantially in the coming years, and the existing office space is already at capacity. As such there is a projected need to increase the available workspace for office personnel to match future staffing requirements. Approximately 60% of the 1st floor of the Fountain City Service Base Office Building is currently designed and utilized as bulk storage space. This project is meant to reorganize the first floor and convert the current storage area of the 1st floor to a layout designed to function as a modern occupied office area.

The Contractor shall be responsible for the design and replacement of all windows on the first floor, design of the new office layout, the demolition of the existing space, the removal of demolition materials, the procurement of all associated new construction materials including office furniture, and all associated construction of the space in accordance with the approved new design. As-Built/Record Drawings must be submitted using AutoCAD Civil 3D software in .dwg format.

Following USACE approval of the contractor’s design, the contractor shall construct the project in accordance with the requirements of all Federal building codes and standards. Contractor is responsible for ensuring building remodel design meets life-safety code requirements, and remodel does not negatively impact life-safety of the rest of the building by the revised design. The design shall include all HVAC, plumbing, electrical distribution, lighting, fire protection, security systems, data network distribution, wall, floor, ceiling, window and door details necessary to accomplish the project.

All work shall be completed within 365 days of contract award.

The Contractor’s design shall allow the existing network and electrical services to the rest of the building to go uninterrupted except for brief planned outages of no greater than one-hour increments.

3. EVALUATION PROCEDURES

The purpose of the evaluation process is to provide critical input to the source selection determination by providing a comprehensive evaluation of the offers so that the Source Selection Authority / Contracting Officer (SSA/KO) has a rational basis for selection of the successful Phase I (RFQ) offerors who will be invited to submit proposals in Phase II (RFP).

During evaluations, ratings will be assigned for the factors. Ratings will be adjectival, rather than numerical.

During the evaluation, evaluators will cite the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, deviations and betterments of each Phase I qualification associated with each factor. At the completion of the evaluation process, each factor will be assigned a single rating. The single ratings for each factor will be determined by discussion and consensus of the Government’s evaluators.

3.1 DEFINITIONS

A “strength” is a provision in the proposal that increases the likelihood of successful contract performance.

A "weakness" is a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

A "Significant weakness" in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

A "deficiency" is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

A "deviation" occurs when a proposal takes exception to, implies or specifically offers something that does not meet a Government requirement. Although required by the solicitation, the Offeror may not have called the deviation to the attention of the Government. Evaluators must identify all discovered deviations. The solicitation may be amended to accept deviations; however, the specific deviation may not be specified as the solution.

A “betterment” occurs when a proposal offers something that meets and exceeds a Government requirement. Evaluations must identify all items which they believe are betterments to the Government. Evaluators may give additional consideration for offered betterment.

4. PHASE I (RFQ) EVALUATION

If the offeror intends to meet the evaluation factors and sub-factors through the use of a subcontractor, then the offeror must include a Letter of Commitment signed by both the offeror and the proposed subcontractor. The Letter of Commitment shall clearly state that the offeror and the subcontractor have committed to perform this contract together if the offeror receives the contract award. If award is made to that contractor, then they will be expected to provide that subcontractor. Any substitutions of subcontractor(s) must be with a subcontractor with equal or better qualifications. Any substitution must be approved by the Contracting Officer.

General Proposal Format shall be as follows:

• Submit proposal documentation in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. Any excel spreadsheets shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel 2016 format or later.

• Title Page. The title page must include the offeror’s name and address, phone number and email address, project title, and date of submittal.

• Font, Page Size, and Margins. Pages containing text are expected to be 8 ½ x 11 inches with at least one-inch margins at the top, bottom, and both sides. Paragraphs should be separated by at least one blank line. A standard 12-point font in either Arial or Times New Roman is required.

The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

• For any technical drawings submitted the minimum PDF document size is 11” x 17”. All information must be confined to the appropriate volume. Each volume of the proposal is expected to contain a table of contents, summary section with a brief abstract of the volume, and the narrative discussion.

• All proposal documents must clearly indicate the relevant TAB reference on the cover page for each section. All information submitted must be confined to the appropriate volume;

extraneous information may not be considered.

All Phase I documents shall be organized by the TAB assignments as follows. Responses failing to comply with TAB segregation risk being found non-responsive.

Phase I (RFQ) Item Description Location Proposal Data Sheet TAB A Factor 1 – Technical Approach TAB B Factor 2 – Design Firm Past Performance Factor 3—Construction Firm Past Performance

TAB C

TAB D

Factor 4 – Key Personnel

- Project Manager (PM) – Design

- Lead Architect – Design

- Project Manager – Construction

- Project Superintendent - Construction

TAB E

Factor 5 – Small Business Participation Approach TAB F

Price/Cost proposals will not be accepted or evaluated during Phase I. Only the most highly qualified offerors will proceed to Phase II.

5. GENERAL PROPOSAL INFORMATION

Submit the following: One copy of the signed response form, as provided in the RFQ (TAB A).

6. PHASE I (RFQ) EVALUATION FACTORS

During the evaluation, evaluators will determine the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and deviations of each proposal package for each factor. At the completion of the evaluation process each factor will be assigned a single rating. The single ratings will be determined by discussion and consensus of the Government’s evaluators, considering the consensus ratings under each factor.

Technical evaluation consists of an evaluation and quality rating of the following factors. Offerors are discouraged from providing information not required by the solicitation. Offerors shall address each of the factors/sub-factors in sufficient detail to permit a complete and comprehensive evaluation. Any deviation from the solicitation requirements may result in non-consideration of the proposal.

6.1. RELATIVE ORDER OF IMPORTANCE – PHASE I

All Factors are of equal importance.

6.2. FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH (TAB B)

The Technical Approach shall be presented in a narrative form. This document shall provide the Government a clear understanding of the Offeror’s approach to both design and construction for the FCSB 1st Floor Office Renovation. The Offeror shall submit information for the design description that covers how the Offeror will include stakeholders throughout the design process, how it will communicate the design to stakeholders (who may not have experience interpreting technical drawings), and what tools it will use in its design. The Offeror shall submit information for the construction description that covers generally how the Offeror will mitigate delays, their approach to quality control, and how they will maintain safe working conditions. The design description shall not exceed 3 pages. The construction description shall not exceed 3 pages.

Evaluation criteria

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the project site work and the Offeror’s understanding of the design criteria.

Strength – The Offeror clearly articulates its approach and provides specific tools/solutions.

Rating Scheme

Rating Definition Outstanding Phase I response demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Phase I response indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable Phase I response meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Phase I response has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Phase I response does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is un-awardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

6.3. FACTORS 2 AND 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE (TABS C AND D)

Factor 2 ‐ Design Firm Past Performance

Factor 3 ‐ Construction Firm Past Performance

The Offeror shall submit at least three (3), and no more than five (5), projects that are considered recent and relevant as defined below. If the Design and Construction firms are different, three (3) to five (5) projects shall be submitted for each firm. Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) shall be provided for each project submitted.

The PPQ-0 form (PPQ) is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client. The PPQ shall be completed by an owner or owner's representative not affiliated with your firm. Ensure correct telephone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs shall be submitted with your proposal or to the designated personnel listed below prior to the proposal due date. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the designated Government's point of contacts, via email at scott.e.hendrix@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs by reference into their proposal. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

The Government will assess the past performance on projects submitted and reserves the right to conduct telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the PPQs. In addition, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance of the Design Firm on the submitted projects and any other previous work. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), using all Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE)/ Unique Entity ID of team members (Partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror's proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of ensuring detailed, current, accurate and complete past experience information rests with the Offeror.

Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the relative merits of the Design Firm’s and Construction Firm’s past performance. The evaluation of past performance will examine how well the Design Firm and Construction Firm have performed on recent and relevant previous projects considering such criteria as overall rating; cost growth and adherence to budget; time growth, timeliness, and adherence to schedule; quality and quality control measures; management of subcontractors; overall satisfaction;

and responsiveness to customer concerns.

If an Offeror submits no performance evaluations for its Design Firm and/or Construction Firm and the Government is unable to locate evaluations in PPIRS or other Design/Construction Performance Rating Systems, an Unknown Confidence (Neutral) rating will be given. CPARS/CCASS Ratings will be given more weight than equivalent performance ratings for other types of evaluations. The Government reserves the right to consider all aspects of a Design Firm’s and Construction Firm’s performance history but will attribute more importance to work that was similar to this task order.

The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in a Design Firm’s and Construction Firm’s ability to perform contract requirements, based on a demonstrated record of performance. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the Design Firm’s and Construction Firm’s probability of meeting the RFP requirements. The past performance evaluation considers the Design Firm’s and Construction Firm’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance. There are three (3) aspects to the past performance evaluation, Recency, Relevancy, and Quality, which are described below:

Recency. The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the Design Firm’s or Construction Firm’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. Recent projects are defined as those that were completed within the last seven (7) years or which are currently under contract with design services 100% completed and construction 50% or greater completed.

Relevancy. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Design Firm or Construction Firm is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance assessment. Commercial Office Renovation projects with a minimum of 1,000 square feet renovated area and/or minimum $500,000 in contract value are considered relevant.

Quality. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the Offeror’s past performance. The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the Design Firm’s or Construction Firm’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the Design Firm or Construction Firm performed those past contracts. The Government will review this past performance information and determine the quality of the Design Firm’s or Construction Firm’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information as it applies to the performance confidence assessment.

Any projects submitted which were completed in excess of seven (7) years ago will not be evaluated.

Each Offeror will be assigned a relevancy and performance confidence rating for both the Design Firm and the Construction Firm:

Relevancy Rating Table

Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same or greater scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Performance Confidence Rating Table

Substantial Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

6.4. FACTOR 4 – KEY PERSONNEL (TAB E)

Offerors shall provide resumes detailing the experience for the Project Manager (PM) - Design, Project Manager (PM) - Construction, Project Superintendent - Construction, and Lead Architect - Design. The table below details minimum requirements. Other strengths may include having more experience than required and higher levels of education. Resumes detailing experience must be no more than two (2) pages for each Key Personnel position. Resume pages beyond the second page will not be evaluated.

Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror proposes key personnel that have experience on previous projects relevant to the proposed solution and have appropriate levels of qualifications.

Strengths:

• Key Personnel exceed the minimum qualification requirements for years of experience and number of commercial building projects.

• Key Personnel have experience performing on Department of Defense facilities or experience performing on other Federal contracts.

The following are the minimum requirements for the individuals listed in this section.

Key Personnel Position Minimum Qualification Requirements Project Manager (PM) – Design

The Design PM shall have at least five (5) years of experience serving as a Design Project Manager, managing projects of similar or greater scope and size. The Design PM must have served as a Design Project Manager for at least two (2) commercial building projects in the previous five (5) years.

Project Manager (PM) – Construction

The Construction PM shall have at least five (5) years of experience serving as a Construction Project Manager, managing projects of similar or greater scope and size. The Construction PM must have served as a Construction Project Manager for at least two (2) commercial building projects in the previous five (5) years.

Project Superintendent – Construction

Project Superintendent shall have at least five (5) years of experience managing projects of similar or greater size and scope. The Construction Project Superintendent has served as a Construction Superintendent for at least two (2) commercial building projects in the previous five (5) years.

Lead Architect - Design The Lead Architect shall hold a valid professional architecture license in at least one state within the United States and have worked on projects of similar or greater scope and size. Architect must have served as an Architect of Record for at least two (2) commercial building projects in the previous five (5) years.

Outstanding Phase I response demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Phase I response indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable Phase I response meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Phase I response has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Phase I response does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is un-awardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

No substitution of key personnel shall be allowed after the award of the Contract unless approved in writing by the Contracting Officer. In the event that the Contractor cannot provide the listed key personnel or personnel of comparable qualifications, the Contracting Officer may reduce the contract price or take such other actions as are necessary to protect the interests of the Government, including cancelling the contract.

6.5. FACTOR 5 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION APPROACH

Offerors that are considered other than small businesses shall provide the following:

• A high-level summary of the Offeror’s approach to small business participation,

• Identification of the types of small businesses (e.g., Small Disadvantaged Business, Women-

Owned Small Business, HUBZone Small Business, Veteran-Owned Small Business, Service- Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business) the offeror plans to engage,

• Documentation of the Offeror’s historical performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan,

• Examples of successful partnerships with small businesses, particularly in design-build projects,

• A statement of commitment to small business participation, including any policies or practices that promote small business engagement.

Evaluation Criteria

Offerors will be evaluated on their proposed approach and corporate commitment to small business participation, as demonstrated by prior performance and overall philosophy regarding engagement of small businesses in federal contracts. The evaluation will include consideration of the offeror’s historical achievement of small business subcontracting goals and narrative statements describing planned outreach and utilization strategies for this project. An offeror that is a small business will receive an Outstanding rating.

Strengths:

• A strong history of exceeding small business participation goals on previous contracts,

• A clear and innovative strategy for engaging small businesses in both design and construction phases,

• Evidence of long-term partnerships with small businesses, including mentorship or capacity-building initiatives.

Outstanding Phase I response indicates an exceptional approach and commitment to meeting small business objectives, or the offeror is a small business.

Good Phase I response indicates a thorough approach and commitment to meeting small business objectives.

Acceptable Phase I response indicates an adequate approach and commitment to meeting small business objectives.

Marginal Phase I response has not demonstrated an adequate approach and commitment to meeting small business objectives.

Unacceptable Phase I response does not meet small business objectives.

6.6. EXCHANGES WITH OFFERORS AFTER RECEIPT OF PHASE I QUALIFICATIONS

After receipt of the Phase I qualifications, the Government does not intend to engage in discussions with Phase I Offerors but reserves the right to do so. The Government may conduct one or more of the following exchanges as appropriate:

Clarifications - Limited exchanges between the Government and the Offerors that may occur when selection without discussions is contemplated. No Phase I qualifications revisions are allowed.

Communications - Exchanges between the Government and the Offerors that may occur to obtain sufficient information to understand and evaluate the Phase I qualifications and determine whether to include a Phase I qualification in the competitive range. No Phase I qualification revisions are allowed.

Discussions - Exchanges between the Government and the Offerors that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the Offeror to revise its Phase I qualification. Discussions do not typically apply to Phase I

(RFQ).

7. PHASE II (RFP) EVALUATION

The Government anticipates that the Phase II evaluation factors will be Price, Small Business Participation, Technical Solution, and Construction Narrative.

8. SUBMITTAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS.

No stipend or costs will be paid to Offerors that submit a response to the RFQ in Phase I, or to the short-listed firms invited to submit proposals to the RFP in Phase II.

9. SAM REGISTRATION

Offeror shall be registered in SAM (System for Award Management) https://sam.gov/content/entity-landing to include the FAR and DFARS Reps and Certs sections with the NAICS code applicable to the solicitation.

For assistance with SAM, please contact:

SAM by GSA Hours of Operation: Monday – Friday 8am to 8pm ET, U.S. Calls 866-606-8220 Service desk website: http://www.fsd.gov/

Offerors are encouraged to monitor Contract Opportunities (https://sam.gov/content/opportunities) for any amendments to the solicitation.

10. OFFEROR INQUIRIES

Offeror desiring an explanation or interpretation of the requirements, etc., must submit their questions submitted using the ProjNet system at https://www.projnet.org.

To submit a new inquiry or to view inquiries submitted by other Offerors, users must be registered and signed into the ProjNet system. Offerors may register online at https://www.projnet.org (click on “Register”).

The following information will be needed to submit or view inquiries:

Managing Agency: USACE Solicitation Number: W912ES26RA001 Bidder Inquiry Key: 6TNA9U-5IECA8

Offerors shall submit inquiries not later than 10 days prior to the response date in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the posting if necessary. Those who submit an inquiry will receive a system-generated email acknowledgement. All answers to inquiries https://sam.gov/content/entity-landing https://sam.gov/content/entity-landing https://sam.gov/content/opportunities https://www.projnet.org/ https://www.projnet.org/ will be posted in ProjNet after they have been reviewed by the USACE technical team. Offerors are advised to review the solicitation in its entirety and to review all previously submitted questions and responses prior to submitting a new inquiry.

Email your firm's Phase I submission to Scott Hendrix at scott.e.hendrix@usace.army.mil no later than 10:00am CT January 15, 2026, or amended date and time.

11. PROVISIONS/CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.214-34 SUBMISSION OF OFFERS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (APR 1991).

Offers submitted in response to this solicitation shall be in the English language. Offers received in other than English shall be rejected.

(End of provision)

52.215-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION (NOV 2021)

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision— Discussions are negotiations that occur after establishment of the competitive range that may, at the Contracting Officer’s discretion, result in the offeror being allowed to revise its proposal.

In writing, "writing," or "written" means any worded or numbered expression that can be read, reproduced, and later communicated, and includes electronically transmitted and stored information.

Proposal modification is a change made to a proposal before the solicitation’s closing date and time, or made in response to an amendment, or made to correct a mistake at any time before award.

Proposal revision is a change to a proposal made after the solicitation closing date, at the request of or as allowed by a Contracting Officer as the result of negotiations.

Time, if stated as a number of days, is calculated using calendar days, unless otherwise specified, and will include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. However, if the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, then the period shall include the next working day.

(b)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).

(c)Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals. (1)Unless other methods (e.g., electronic commerce or facsimile) are permitted in the solicitation, proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted in paper media in sealed envelopes or packages (i) addressed to the office specified in the solicitation, and (ii) showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror. Offerors using commercial carriers should ensure mailto:scott.e.hendrix@usace.army.mil that the proposal is marked on the outermost wrapper with the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) of this provision.

(2)The first page of the proposal must show–

(i)The solicitation number;

(ii)The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the offeror (and electronic address if available);

(iii)A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;

(iv)Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation;

and

(v)Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

(3)Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals. (i)Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals, and any modifications or revisions, so as to reach the Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the solicitation. If no time is specified in the solicitation, the time for receipt is 4:30 p.m., local time, for the designated Government office on the date that proposal or revision is due.

(ii)(A)Any proposal, modification, or revision received at the Government office designated in the solicitation after the exact time specified for receipt of offers is "late" and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition; and-

(1)If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals; or

(2)There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government’s control prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or

(3)It is the only proposal received.

(B)However, a late modification of an otherwise successful proposal that makes its terms more favorable to the Government, will be considered at any time it is received and may be accepted.

(iii)Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government installation includes the time/date stamp of that installation on the proposal wrapper, other documentary evidence of receipt maintained by the installation, or oral testimony or statements of Government personnel.

(iv)If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that proposals cannot be received at the office designated for receipt of proposals by the exact time specified in the solicitation, and urgent Government requirements preclude amendment of the solicitation, the time specified for receipt of proposals will be deemed to be extended to the same time of day specified in the solicitation on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.

(v)Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice received at any time before award. Oral proposals in response to oral solicitations may be withdrawn orally. If the solicitation authorizes facsimile proposals, proposals may be withdrawn via facsimile received at any time before award, subject to the conditions specified in the provision at 52.215-5, Facsimile Proposals. Proposals may be withdrawn in person by an offeror or an authorized representative, if the identity of the person requesting withdrawal is established and the person signs a receipt for the proposal before award.

(4)Unless otherwise specified in the solicitation, the offeror may propose to provide any item or combination of items.

(5)Offerors shall submit proposals in response to this solicitation in English, unless otherwise permitted by the solicitation, and in U.S. dollars, unless the provision at FAR 52.225-17, Evaluation of Foreign Currency Offers, is included in the solicitation.

(6)Offerors may submit modifications to their proposals at any time before the solicitation closing date and time, and may submit modifications in response to an amendment, or to correct a mistake at any time before award.

(7)Offerors may submit revised proposals only if requested or allowed by the Contracting Officer.

(8)Proposals may be withdrawn at any time before award. Withdrawals are effective upon receipt of notice by the Contracting Officer.

(d)Offer expiration date. Proposals in response to this solicitation will be valid for the number of days specified on the solicitation cover sheet (unless a different period is proposed by the offeror).

(e)Restriction on disclosure and use of data. Offerors that include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall-

(1)Mark the title page with the following legend:

This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed-in whole or in part-for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal.

If, however, a contract is awarded to this offeror as a result of-or in connection with-the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]; and

(2)Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend:

Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.

(f)Contract award. (1)The Government intends to award a contract or contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal(s) represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and subfactors in the solicitation.

(2)The Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Government’s interest.

(3)The Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals received.

(4)The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

(5)The Government reserves the right to make an award on any item for a quantity less than the quantity offered, at the unit cost or prices offered, unless the offeror specifies otherwise in the proposal.

(6)The Government reserves the right to make multiple awards if, after considering the additional administrative costs, it is in the Government’s best interest to do so.

(7)Exchanges with offerors after receipt of a proposal do not constitute a rejection or counteroffer by the Government.

(8)The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

(9)If a cost realism analysis is performed, cost realism may be considered by the source selection authority in evaluating performance or schedule risk.

(10)A written award or acceptance of proposal mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time specified in the proposal shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party.

(11)If a post-award debriefing is given to requesting offerors, the Government shall disclose the following information, if applicable:

(i)The agency’s evaluation of the significant weak or deficient factors in the debriefed offeror’s offer.

(ii)The overall evaluated cost or price and technical rating of the successful and the debriefed offeror and past performance information on the debriefed offeror.

(iii)The overall ranking of all offerors, when any ranking was developed by the agency during source selection.

(iv)A summary of the rationale for award.

(v)For acquisitions of commercial products, the make and model of the product to be delivered by the successful offeror.

(vi)Reasonable responses to relevant questions posed by the debriefed offeror as to whether source selection procedures set forth in the solicitation, applicable regulations, and other applicable authorities were followed by the agency.

(End of provision)

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:

Kenneth J. Eshom, Contracting Officer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 332 Minnesota Street Suite E1500 St. Paul, MN 55101-1323

(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 provision)

7. Phase II (RFP) Evaluation