Attachment 29- Draft RTOP Letter.pdf

CCMI-CEU-GO DD Month YYYY

Request for Task Order Proposal (RTOP) Design-Build MATOC Fort Gordon, GA

PART 1: REQUEST FOR TASK ORDER PROPOSAL INFORMATION

RTOP Number:

Date of Issue:

Project: Renovate & Expand Bldg-29608, Good Shepherd Chapel

Location of Services: Ft. Gordon, GA

Closing Date/Time:

This is a Request for Task Order Proposal (RTOP) for services to be provided under the Design-Build (design and construction) Multiple Award Task Order Contract

(MATOC).

Task Order Proposal (TOP) to include price, shall be valid until 30 September 2020.

Interested contract holders shall ensure they have reviewed all the documents associated with this RTOP and complied with this RTOP and have complied with all the prescribed requirements prior to submission in accordance with Section G4 of the Contract (RTOP and Issuance of Task Orders).

All items within the RTOP shall be fully completed and returned by the closing date and time indicated above. If your company does not intend to respond, please submit a "No Response" reply via email. You may return this cover page with the following information as your "No Response" reply. Your responses as well as all questions regarding this RTOP shall be directed via e-mail to: gina.kern2.civ@mail.mil with cc to:

charissa.j.hannah.civ@mail.mil.

Site visit is [Insert Day, DD Month YYYY, hh:mm am/pm], meeting location is [Insert Meeting Location]. Deadline for submittal of all questions is on or before [Insert Day, DD Month YYYY] no later than [Insert hh:mm am/pm].

02DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

MISSION AND INSTALLATION CONTRACTING COMMAND

271 Heritage Park Lane Building 35200, Room #135

FORT GORDON, GEORGIA 30905-5730

mailto:charissa.j.hannah.civ@mail.mil

No Response Firm Name: _________________________________

Point of Contact: ________________________________________

Date: _________________________________________________

Reason for not responding: (Please indicate reason for not responding)

RTOP Index:

1. Request for Task Order Proposal Cover Sheet

2. Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Structure (Prices)

a. Performance Work Statement (PWS)

b. Wage Rates

c. Request for Information (RFI Form)

3. List of Attachments:

a. Attachment 1: Task Order Pricing Schedule

b. Attachment 2: Proposal Format

c. Attachment 3: Experience Overview

d. Attachment 4: Experience Information

e. Attachment 5: Conceptual Design Package Submittal

5a. Conceptual Design Analysis 5b. Conceptual Construction Plans

f. Attachment 6: Existing (As-built) drawings

The Government contemplates award of the following contract type: Firm Fixed Price

Responses shall be electronic submissions only. Mail delivery and facsimile will not be accepted.

a. Offerors are responsible for submitting responses to the Government office designated below by the time specified in this RTOP.

b. Any response received after the date/time specified for receipt of offers is "late", and will not be considered.

PART 2: CLIN STRUCTURE (FIRM FIXED PRICE)

Base Bid: CH50091-2P RENOVATE AND EXPAND BLDG 29608

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

Design [New Construction, CH50091-2P RENOVATE AND

EXPAND BLDG 29608] JOB $________ $________

Design [Renovation, CH50091-

2P RENOVATE AND EXPAND

BLDG 29608] JOB $________ $________

Construct [New Construction Work, CH50091-2P

RENOVATE AND EXPAND

BLDG 29608] JOB $________ $________

Construct [Renovation Work, CH50091-2P RENOVATE AND

EXPAND BLDG 29608] JOB $________ $________

FOB: Destination

Total Item Numbers 0001-0002 $________

PART 3: PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The Period of Performance reads is [585 calendar days.]

PART 4: TASK ORDER ADMINISTRATION

1. MICC- Fort Gordon will perform contract administration for this Task Order requirement. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and Construction Control Inspectors (Con Rep) will be responsible for monitoring day to day operations, evaluating the contractor's performance, coordination of pre and final inspection(s) and acceptance of all work performed under resulting task order.

2. No understanding, agreement, task order modification, change order, or other matter deviating from the terms of this task order between the contractor and a person other than the Contracting Officer shall be effective or binding upon the Government.

Any such actions shall be formalized by the contracting officer and executed via a modification.

PART 5: SPECIAL TASK ORDER REQUIREMENTS

1. Construction Control Inspectors (Con Rep):

a. The Con Rep will be designated by the Directorate of Public Works (DPW) under this task order, but will not be authorized to change any of the terms and conditions of resulting task order.

b. The Con Rep will act in a liaison capacity to coordinate activities between the

Contractor and the Government as required in the performance of the work.

c. No oral statements of any person whosoever will in any manner of degree modify or otherwise affect the terms of this task order. The Contracting Officer is the only person authorized to approve changes in any of the requirements under this task order, and notwithstanding any provisions contained elsewhere in this task order, the said authority remains solely with the Contracting Officer.

2. Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) Electronic Invoicing Instruction

a. Invoices rendered under a resulting Task Order shall be submitted electronically through Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF), as a construction invoice.

WAWF instructions shall be provided in the awarded task order.

b. All invoices shall, prior to submission, be reviewed and accepted by the Con

Rep.

c. Invoices shall include a work progress schedule attachment. Final invoice shall include a Release of Claims statement.

PART 6: INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO RESPONDERS

1. General Instructions.

a. Fair opportunity shall be granted to all MATOC contract holders. Task Order

Proposals shall be evaluated using the criteria prescribed in Part 7, "Evaluation Criteria and Basis for Award." Noncompliance with the RTOP requirements indicate the responder's inability to perform the services and shall be grounds to eliminate the response from further consideration for task order award.

b. The Response. The submission of the documentation specified below shall constitute the responder's acceptance of the terms and conditions of the RTOP, concurrence with the Scope of Work (SOW), and the proposed task order type.

c. These instructions prescribe the format for the TOP and describe the approach for the development and presentation of TOP data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of TOPs, in accordance with Section G4 of the Contract, RTOP and Issuance of Task Orders).

d. Bonding - Performance and Payment Bonds shall be submitted 10 days after task order award.

e. If a responder believes that the requirements in these instructions contain errors, an ambiguity, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the responder shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale. If this notification is not provided prior to award, then the Contractor agrees that the RTOP requirements can be accomplished as provided and accepted by the proposal. The responder is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial response, as received, without discussion.

f. Post-award Notices and Debriefings. Post-award notices and debriefings will be conducted in accordance with FAR 16.505(b) (4). The Contract Specialist will notify unsuccessful responders in accordance with FAR 15.503(b) (l) as directed by FAR 16.505(b) (4)(i). Upon such notification, unsuccessful responders may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.506 as directed by FAR 16.505(b)(4)(ii). Responders desiring debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.506 as applicable.

2. Task Order Response Preparation Instructions

a. Responder's Task Order Proposal shall consist of four (4) documents, see Table 2.2.1. The documents are:

(1) Document I - Technical Capability (Evaluation Factor 1)

(2) Document II – Project Schedule (Evaluation Factor 2)

(3) Document III – Past Performance (Evaluation Factor 3)

(4) Document IV – Price Proposal (Evaluation Factor 4)

b. Task Order Proposal Format and Response Content.

(1) The Task Order Proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important.

Proposal responses will be evaluated against the criteria defined in Part 7 of the Request for Task Order Proposal (RTOP).

(2) Responses shall comprise of a cover sheet clearly marked as to document number, title, copy number, the RTOP number and the responder's name. The subfactor sections of each document shall be clearly identified and separated within the document. All pages of each response shall be appropriately numbered and identified with the RTOP number. All text shall be single spaced. This requirement does not apply to graphics, photos, etc.; Company stationary and logos are acceptable. Printing shall be easily readable (12 point font or 11 point font proportional spacing). Cross-references should be utilized to preclude unnecessary duplication of data between sections.

(a) Table 2.2.1

Document Title

I Technical Capability

II Project Schedule

III Past Performance

IV Price Proposal

(3) What Counts As A Page? A page shall be defined as an 8 ½” X 11" sheet of paper. Letter size and spacing requirements for illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the responder but shall be easily readable. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch side margins.

(4) Exceptions. Responders are required to meet all RTOP requirements, such as terms and conditions and technical requirements. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. If the responder finds it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this RTOP, clearly indicate in the document that is applicable, each exception with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken, what benefit accrues to the Government (if any), and its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, price, and specific requirements of the RTOP. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the RTOP to which the exception is taken. This information shall be provided in the format below at the top of each applicable document in Table 2.2.1:

Request for Task Order Response Exceptions RTOP Document

Identify the document or attachment to which exception is taken

Page/Paragraph Applicable page and paragraph numbers

Requirement/Portion Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Rationale & Impact Describe the rationale and impact of exception

(5) Document I – Technical Capability (Evaluation Factor 1).

The Technical Proposal shall consist of a written narrative that includes and addresses the subfactors below. The offeror shall include a proposed Design Quality Control Plan with each task order that requires a design per the MATOC Scope of Work (Section C, Paragraph 36.2). The Technical Proposal shall have NO pricing information included.

The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet the specific requirements of this Task Order. Statements that the offeror understands, can, or will comply with the Statement of Work (including referenced publications, technical data, etc.). Statements paraphrasing the Statement of Work or parts thereof (including applicable publications, technical data, etc.); and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used,” etc., will be considered unacceptable. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

(a) TAB A: Subfactor 1 – Project Execution: Offerors shall thoroughly demonstrate their capability to successfully execute the project. At a minimum, offerors’ proposals are to include: [Select the subfactors that are applicable to this project]

1. [Thorough list of potential joint venture partner(s), subcontractors, and primary suppliers and the rationale behind your choice of these entities for this project.]

2. [Narrative describing specific details, ideas, and/or recommendations considered in order to complete this project. Indicate and describe the assumptions and decisions made for preparation of technical proposal.]

3. [Detailed work plan with a list of the definable features of work and a narrative describing proposed quality associated with each definable feature of work. Definable features of work listed and described shall correlate to same definable features of work listed on the proposed schedule in TAB D.]

4. [Thorough narrative of procedures, processes and methods for managing the progress of this project and interacting with the Government from beginning to end.]

(b) TAB B: Subfactor 2 – Project Management: At a minimum, offerors shall:

[Select the subfactors that are applicable to this project]

1. [Provide a project management plan with Prime Contractor’s key management personnel and key field personnel who will be assigned to perform the duties of managing this task order. The project management plan details shall be extensive enough to address responsibility for subcontract management, surveillance of work, acceptance, rejection, documentation and resolution of deficiencies, trend analysis and shall include corrective actions, and interface with Government inspectors and contract administration representatives at each stage of design and construction.]

2. [Explain how the organization structure will affect the management of this task order and other current and future task orders. The project management plan shall demonstrate the offeror has the requisite qualifications and experience to perform under the project being considered.]

3. [Provide a narrative thoroughly detailing the offeror’s ability to acquire the necessary personnel to satisfy the project being considered. Job qualifications associated with each key non-design labor category shall be submitted to demonstrate the skills considered necessary. Job qualifications shall include applicable work experience (list of major projects/contracts, including brief scope, magnitude, and duty), education, and license/certification.

Additionally, key personnel information shall be submitted to show offeror clearly understands all tasks and requirements specified by this task order.]

4. [Provide a detailed narrative of the offerer’s ability to successfully construct multiple projects simultaneously on Fort Gordon. The offeror shall propose a sound and logical approach demonstrating their ability to respond to additional task orders under this contract. Offeror should assume that they have two (2) on-going projects (one design-build and one build) similar in nature, size, magnitude, complexity and scope.]

[OR]

5. [Provide a list of current ongoing task orders and provide a detailed narrative of the offerer’s ability to successfully execute and complete the construction of these projects with this task order. Propose a sound and logical approach demonstrating the ability to respond to the additional construction workload and commitment to this task order.]

(c) TAB C: Subfactor 3 – MATOC Design-Build: At a minimum, offerors shall:

[Select the subfactors that are applicable to this project]

1. [Thorough list of selected Design Firms and the rationale behind your choice of these entities for this project. Provide job qualifications for key design personnel to include applicable work experience (list of major projects/contracts, including brief scope, magnitude, and responsibility), education, and license/certification. Demonstrate the design firm and Designers of Record have the requisite qualifications and experience to perform under the project being considered.]

2. [Narrative description of the Prime Contractor's design quality control procedures for ensuring a coordinated design between disciplines, coordination between drawings and specifications, internal processes, and conformance with deliverables requirements as defined in the USACE Savannah District Design Manual for Military Construction, the IDIQ, and the RTOP.]

3. [Describe the ability to manage multiple design-build projects simultaneously.]

[OR]

4. [Provide a list of current ongoing task orders and provide a detailed narrative of the offerer’s ability to successfully manage and complete the design and review phases of these projects with this task order especially if using the same design firms.]

(6) Document II – Project Schedule (Evaluation Factor 2).

Offeror shall submit a detailed proposed project schedule (per MATOC Scope of Work (Section C, Paragraph 36.9 and General Requirements Specification 01 32 01.00 10 Project Schedule) using the Critical Path Method (CPM) and a written narrative that addresses the following:

(a) Project Schedule: Offerors shall thoroughly demonstrate their capability to successfully develop and execute the project schedule and meet project completion durations. Definable features of work shall correlate with those listed in the narratives in Document I, TAB A. At a minimum, offerors’ proposals are to include:

1. [Detailed narrative thoroughly demonstrating how the project will be accomplished utilizing the proposed project schedule and thorough narrative of understanding of events that must be considered in the schedule associated with, but not limited to, design reviews, permitting, submittals, holidays, long lead items, anticipated weather delays, inspections, and closeout.]

2. [Narrative describing scheduling technique and methodology to be used in completing the project to include approximate number of days. If the project duration is different from the requirement of the task order, then provide detailed justification for the change.]

(7) Document III – Past Performance (Evaluation Factor 3).

Offerors shall complete and submit two attachments included with the RTOP, Experience Overview Sheet (Attachment 3) and Experience Information Sheet (Attachment 4) detailing previous work experience (projects) to meet the requirements of this solicitation.

(a) Information for completing the RTOP’s Experience Overview Sheet and

Experience Information Sheet:

1. Offerors shall complete an Experience Overview Sheet, with a total listing not to-exceed (NTE) five (5) MATOC-based projects, performed within the last three

(3) years or currently being performed (at least 50% complete), that best represent the Offeror’s work experience required on this RTOP. If more than five (5) projects are submitted, only the most recent five (5) projects will be evaluated.

2. Offerors shall provide an Experience Information Sheet for each project listed on their Experience Overview Sheet.

3. If a key subcontractor or Joint Venture partner’s experience is submitted for evaluation purposes, clearly address the experience of those entities and relationship thereto on previous and/or ongoing projects.

4. The Government reserves the right to use past performance on all current and past task orders awarded under this IDIQ to assess the Offerors ability to perform with respect to:

(a) Recency

(b) Relevancy

(c) Quality Control

(d) Timeliness

(e) Project Management

(f) Compliance with Labor, Safety and Environmental Standards

(g) Customer Satisfaction

(8) Document IV – Price Proposal (Evaluation Factor 4).

Offerors are required to submit a price response per the Task Order Pricing Schedule (Attachment 1) and Proposal Format (Attachment 2) set forth in the RTOP. Provide a price breakdown of all direct and indirect costs to include overhead and profit.

(a) Failure to follow the below RTOP preparation instructions may result in the responder's response being deemed unacceptable by the Government. The Price document shall be organized as follows and contains the identified information.

1. TAB A - EXCEPTIONS/ ASSUMPTIONS. The contractor shall identify and explain any exceptions or deviations. Additionally, any assumptions used in the Task Order Response preparation shall be identified.

2. TAB B - SCHEDULE. The pricing schedule in Part 2 of the RTOP shall be submitted fully completed. For administrative purposes, some Contract Line Items (CLINs) have been pre-filled. The contractor shall acknowledge any amendments to the RTOP, if applicable, at the beginning of this section.

3. TAB C - CONTACT INFORMATION. The responder shall provide the name, title, telephone number, and email address of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your Task Order Response and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

PART 7: EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS FOR AWARD

1. Basis for Task Order Award

a. The Government intends to issue one task order as a result of this RTOP. The

Government intends to evaluate responses and award a task order without discussions with Offerors. Therefore, the Offerors’ initial proposal should contain their best terms from a price and technical standpoint. If revised responses are requested, they will be evaluated against the same criteria as were the initial responses.

b. After responses are received, the Government may request additional written information from one or more Offerors, but not necessarily from all Offerors.

c. The Offeror, if issued the task order, shall adhere to the terms of their proposal to include Design Quality Control Plan and Schedule. If any proposed information changes after award, then the Contracting Officer shall be notified immediately and shall determine whether or not the change is approved.

d. The Government will employ a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation method for this requirement. The Government will award a single task order to the responder whose response is technically acceptable and the lowest price.

Responses that fail to address all the requirements set forth in the RTOP and SOW will be rejected. The price proposal of all Offerors will be evaluated in order to determine whether they are reasonable in relation to the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and reflect a clear understanding of the technical proposal.

e. The Government will evaluate the responder's technical response to determine whether it satisfies the requirements of the SOW and is executable as proposed. In order to be considered for award, there must be an "Acceptable" rating in every non-price factor and must demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirement in all areas, described below, in the RTOP and the response must demonstrate a practical/functional technical approach that meets the needs of the RTOP. A determination will be rendered as to whether the technical response is evaluated as Acceptable or Unacceptable as follows:

f. Evaluation Criteria. Evaluation criteria consist of factors and subfactors. The

Task Order Responses will be evaluated under the following evaluation factors:

(1) Factor 1: Technical Capability. Based on the information provided pursuant to the instructions for content proposal, the Government will evaluate the proposals for Technical Acceptability, assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable. The Technical Acceptability evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror’s technical capability to satisfy the Government’s requirements in accordance with the RTOP and the IDIQ. An Offeror shall be considered technically acceptable in subfactors in the Technical Capability Factor in order for its technical proposal to be considered Acceptable. Any subfactor that receives an unacceptable rating will result in an overall unacceptable rating for the Technical Capability Factor and will render the offeror ineligible for award.

(a) Subfactor 1 – Project Execution. In order to be considered acceptable, the offeror shall thoroughly demonstrate the capability to successfully execute the project.

Offerors will be evaluated to determine comprehension of the project and familiarity with required construction tasks.

(b) Subfactor 2 – Project Management. The offeror shall demonstrate the ability to manage multiple work efforts of relevant size and complexity at multiple sites often with different subcontractors. The offeror’s proposal shall demonstrate management processes addressing selecting subcontractors, awarding contracts, subcontract administration, management and performance of services, scheduling and correction of defects prior to, and after government review. The proposal shall address offeror’s plan to provide a Program Manager and/or Project Managers for this task order.

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirement of the RTOP

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirement of the RTOP

(c) Subfactor 3 – MATOC Design-Build. In order to be considered acceptable, the offeror shall thoroughly demonstrate their design-build capabilities by providing written evidence of the job qualifications and experience of their architectural/engineering design personnel proposed for this task order.

(2) Factor 2: Project Schedule. The project schedule will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness per the requirements of the RTOP. Offerors will be evaluated to determine the ability to complete the project within required or reasonable duration and to determine comprehension of the required design and construction tasks.

(3) Factor 3: Past Performance. The Government will assess the Offeror’s previous experience and past performance on current and previous task orders and projects of similar size and scope awarded under this IDIQ as well as any past performance information in the Contractor Performance Assessment Review System

(CPARS).

(4) Factor 4: Price Proposal. The price proposal of all Offerors will be analyzed and evaluated in order to determine whether they are reasonable in relation to the work to be performed and reflect a clear understanding of the requirements and technical proposal. The price proposal will be validated to ensure completeness, balance, and reasonableness.

JASON L. KING

Director