B.08.02 - Solicitation - W912DR20R0007 - 10.15.20.pdf

PROJECT TITLE: RECORDS CENTER REPLACEMENT AND MERCURY FLORA (RCR/MCF) FACILITIES, FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, MD

This procurement is Full and Open Competition (unrestricted); NAICS Code 236220 "Commercial and Institutional Building Construction" w ith a size standard of $39,500,000.00.

This is a Fixed Price Aw ard Fee, Tw o (2) Phase Design-Build Construction Contract utilizing the Best Value Tradeooff process.

Contractors are requested to review requirements and instructions for a Design-Build selection in response to this Request for Proposal (RFP). This is Phase I of the solicitation phase. Phase II of the solicitaiton w ill be issued as an amendment and w ill only be available to those Offerors selected to advance from Phase I to Phase II.

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

15-Oct-2020

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________1340 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________ copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________30 Nov 2020 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time of fers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

USACE BALTIMORE

2 HOPKINS PLAZA

BALTIMORE MD

W912DR

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

11:00 AM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912DR20R0007 72

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W912DR20R0007

Section 00 20 00 - Instructions for Procurement

NOTES TO OFFERORS - PHASE I

IMPORTANT NOTES REGARDING THIS ACQUISITION

I. GENERAL:

This is a competitive acquisition for the award of a Fixed Price Award Fee (FPAF), Two-Phase Design-Build (DB) construction C-type contract. It is anticipated to be solicited on an unrestricted basis. The contract will be awarded to the Offeror whose proposal represents the “Best Value” to the Government based on the tradeoff process in Phase I and II. The best value determination will be based on a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation, considering recommendations and any minority opinions presented to the Source Selection Authority (SSA). While the SSA may use reports and analyses prepared by others, the source selection decision shall represent the SSA's independent judgment.

This is Phase I of a Two-Phase request for proposal (RFP) issued in accordance with FAR Subpart

36.3. This RFP is requesting submission of proposals under Phase I submission criteria ONLY. After evaluating Phase I proposals, the contracting officer will select the most highly qualified Offerors and request that only those Offerors submit proposals for Phase II. It is the Government’s intention to advance up to three (3) of the most highly qualified Offerors from Phase I to Phase II.

II. STIPEND:

The Government is not liable for any costs incurred by the Offeror submitting an offer in response to the Phase I element of this solicitation.

For those most highly qualified Offerors selected to advance to Phase II –

(1) This solicitation provides for payment of a stipend to those unsuccessful Phase II offerors not selected for award of the resulting contract.

(2) In order to promote increased competition, the Government offers to pay a stipend of $250,000 to eligible Phase II unsuccessful offerors in consideration for preparation of a Phase II proposal, otherwise meeting the minimum requirements described herein.

(3) To be eligible for a stipend, the unsuccessful Phase II offeror’s technical proposal must be rated at least Acceptable in all technical evaluation criteria, essentially meeting this solicitation’s Government furnished criteria.

(4) An Offeror will not be eligible for a stipend if it withdraws from the competition, prior to contract award. There will be no compensation to respondents to Phase I request for performance capability proposal or any stipend paid to the successful Offeror (awardee) in Phase II.

III. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

Dewberry Engineering, Michael Baker International, Parsons, and any other vendor who helped with the DD1391 and/or Specifications shall not propose or team on this action.

IV. USE OF NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS IN SOURCE SELECTION:

It is currently acticipated that the use of non-government advisors to assist in the Phase II evaluation for this acquisition will be needed. The following companies may take on a limited role in the evaluation of portions of the Offerors’ proposals during Phase II only: Dewberry Engineers, and Mason and Hanger.

V. STATEMENT OF AFFILIATION (SOA):

Prime contractors shall include a completed copy of the enclosed Statement of Affiliation form (certificate pertaining to foreign interest). SOAs must be submitted no later than one (1) week from the date the Phase I solicitation is issued to ensure approved SOA’s can be included in the final Phase I proposal. Interested firms shall anticipate up to a two (2) week Government review/process of SOA’s. Please email SOA approval requests to Sierra Marshall, Contract Specialist at email: Sierra.S.Marshall@usace.army.mil and Eric Lindheimer, Project Manager at email: Eric.M.Lindheimer@usace.army.mil

This document will be reviewed and approved by the security personnel; however submitted through USACE. A foreign interest is defined as any of the following:

a. A foreign government or foreign government agency;

b. Any form of business enterprise or legal entity organized, chartered or incorporated under the laws of any country other than the United States or its possessions;

c. Any individual who is not a U.S. citizen; or

d. Any form of business enterprise organized or incorporated under the laws of the U.S., or a State or other jurisdiction within the U.S. that is owned, controlled, or influenced by one of the entities described in a, b, or c above.

If the interested contractor should possess any of the above they will be required to submit a statement/letter of mitigation in order to explain their foreign interest for further review and approval.

NOTE FOR PHASE II: Prime contractors are responsible for document control. Prime contractors cannot distribute any portion of the specifications and drawings to any subcontractor or other business entity until that other entity submits a Statement of Affiliation (SOA) to the Government and have been notified that the SOA has been approved. The Prime must submit SOA's for any entity receiving documents related to this solicitation, regardless of whether they have an approve SOA from another project, for documentation purposes.

While not required, Prime Contractors may submit for approval SOAs for their anticipated key trade subcontractors anytime prior to the Phase II soliciation issuance.

VI. PROPOSAL CONDITIONS:

a. Split awards or multiple award contracts will not result from this solicitation.

VII. COMPETITION: Full and Open Competition.

VIII. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS:

a. All proposals must be submitted in accordance with the procedures set forth in Block 13 of Page 1 of this Solicitation document. PROPOSALS OR MODIFICATIONS TO PROPOSALS THAT ARE RECEIVED

BY FACSIMILE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

b. Hand Carried and Mailed Proposal: It is the responsibility of each offeror to ensure that its proposal is received by the Baltimore District’s Contracting Branch, located at 2 Hopkins Plaza, ATTN: Sierra Marshall, Floor 00-A-26, Baltimore, MD 21201 prior to the date and time set for the receipt of the proposals – See Block 13A of Page 1 of the Solicitation.

c. SF 1442 BACK (Page 2 of the Solicitation): Offerors are required to acknowledge the receipt of all amendments to the Solicitation on the Standard Form 1442 in Block 19. Offerors shall fully complete all the required areas located under the section designated as “OFFER” (refer to Items 14 through 20C).

d. BID GUARANTEE: The offerors are required to submit a Bid Guarantee for this procurement during

Phase II submissions. Any offeror failing to submit an authentic Bid Guarantee will be considered non-responsive to the Solicitation and ineligible for award. The Bid Guarantee shall be in the amount of 20% of the bidder’s price or $3,000,000.00, whichever is less. Bid Guarantees shall be in accordance with FAR provision 52.228-1.

e. BONDS AND INSURANCE: The Contractor will be required to furnish proof of insurance, including copies of the required endorsements, and performance and payment bonds within ten (10) calendar days following the Contractor’s receipt of the contract award.

IX. REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION:

Technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at (https://www.projnet.org) No Later Than (NLT) 11:00 A.M. (EST), 28 OCTOBER 2020. To submit and review inquiry items, prospective vendors will need to use the Bidder Inquiry Key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access. A prospective vendor who submits a comment /question will receive an acknowledgement of their comment/question via email. Another email to the same address will notify the prospective vendor once the reply is available for viewing.

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: ZN7RM3-388J55

Specific Instructions for ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

2. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

3. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

4. Email. Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

5. Click Continue. A page will then open saying that a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

6. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret

Answer, and Time Zone. Make sure to remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

7. Click Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

Specific Instructions for Future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. For future access to ProjNet, you will not be provided any type of password. You will utilize your Secret Question and Secret Answer to log in.

2. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

3. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

4. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

5. Email. Enter the email address you used to register previously in ProjNet.

6. Click Continue. A page will then open asking you to enter the answer to your Secret Question.

7. Enter your Secret Answer and click Login. Once this is completed you are now logged into the system.

The call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago). The telephone number for the Call Center is 800-428-HELP.

Offers will NOT be publicly opened. Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of proposals.

PLEASE NOTE: THE LAST DAY FOR INTERESTED BIDDERS TO SUBMIT THEIR

CONTRACTING AND TECHNICAL REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION IN PROJNET IS

28 OCTOBER 2020 AT 11:00 AM (EST). NO OTHER REQUEST FOR INFORMATION WILL BE

ACCEPTED AFTER 11:00 AM (EST).

*** NOTE: QUESTIONS ANSWERED IN PROJNET ARE NOT OFFICIAL UNTIL AN

AMENDMENT IS ISSUED. ***

SCOPE OF WORK

Project Description: Design and construct two (2) new, separate, State-of-the-Art structures/buildings known as Records Center (RCR) and Mercury Flora (MCF) on Fort George G. Meade, Maryland. The two buildings are in the general vicinity of each other and will share the same site. In addition, to provide space for RCR/MCF, the scope also includes full structural demolition of one large aging existing warehouse/administration facility (Approx.

132,000 SF) and five other smaller existing out-buildings (Approx. 11,000 SF total).

The RCR facility is an 85,000 SF multi-story administrative and warehouse structure for staff to perform records management functions. This facility will include secure access, administrative areas, office areas, shared workstations, conference rooms, break rooms, lockers, high-bay, humidity-controlled records storage module with cold storage rooms. The storage area will have super-flat concrete floors, fixed shelving and open storage spaces.

There will also be supporting warehouse spaces for shipping and receiving, decontamination, records staging, packaging, and forklift charging.

The MCF facility is a 250,000 SF multi-story administrative and warehouse structure to support light industrial warehouse and administrative functions. This facility will include secure access, high-bay, loading dock, industrial workshops, IT rooms, lobby, administration areas, office areas, conference areas, break rooms, café, storage areas, and an on grade corridor connection to another existing facility.

Both facilities consists of core and shell structure and foundation; electrical/mechanical service and distribution components and systems; fire protection, alarm and suppression; information technology infrastructure, communications, and security support infrastructure; exterior finishes and weatherproofing. Interior build out will provide raised access floor systems, acoustically-rated interior partitions and ceilings, power, lighting, environmental control and communications. Both facilities will be built to ICD-705 Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) standards. MCF and RCR includes redundant primary power and Uninterruptable Power Supply (UPS) and Uninterruptable Mechanical Supply (UMS) systems to ensure continuity of operations.

Site infrastructure for both facilities will include primary electrical service to the site, water, sewer, stormwater and telecommunications pathways. The supporting facilities include, site preparation and telecommunication improvements, utility services, perimeter security measures. Site preparation will include standard clearing, grubbing, cut, fill, grading and environmental protection structures. Additional site work consists of curb and gutter, walkways, courtyards and roads. Perimeter security reconstruction and extension is required with road improvements. Both Facilities will strive to meet LEED Silver certificate and comply with the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Low Impact Development will be included in the design and construction of this project as appropriate.

Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers

PROPOSAL PROVISIONS - PHASE I

PHASE I SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

1.1. Basis for Award: This is a competitive acquisition for the award of a fixed price award fee design-build contract.

A contract will be awarded to the Offeror whose proposal represents the “Best Value” to the Government in Phase I and II. The best value determination will be based on a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation, considering recommendations and minority opinions presented to the SSA.

While the SSA may use reports and analyses prepared by others, the source selection decision shall represent the SSA's independent judgment. The evaluation factors applicable to this procurement appear below.

Phase 1 – Relative Importance

Factor 1 (Carried to Phase II)

Corporate Experience and Past Performance

Factor 1 is more important than Factor 2.

Factor 2 Management Philosophy Factor 2 is the least important Factor.

Phase II – Relative Importance

Factor 3 Technical/Design Solution Factor 3 is more important than Factor 1.

Factor 1 (Carried from Phase I)

Corporate Experience and Past Performance

Factor 1 is more important than Factor 4.

Factor 4 Offeror Interview Factor 4 is more important than Factor 5.

Factor 5 Small Business Participation Plan Factor 5 is the least important Factor.

Factor 6 Price Approximately equal to all Non-Price Factors Combined

Each factor is rated individually based on the information contained in that specific factor; that is, evaluations will not be made across the factors.

1.2. Source Selection: It is the intent of the Government to seek proposals from qualified Offerors with experience in the significant features of this RFP and who can demonstrate a successful performance history in completing relevant projects. For the purposes of this solicitation, the Government will utilize the Trade-Off Process. The successful Offeror will be selected based on the “Best Overall Value to the Government”.

1.3. Each Offeror is required to submit a proposal consisting of the following volumes (binders):

a. Phase I: Volume I – Technical Proposal, Part 1 (Factors 1-2), (original and five copies)

b. Phase I: Volume II – Administrative Documents (original, no copies)

c. Electronic Requirement 1- In addition to the written binder requirement, all Offerors must provide an electronic copy of their proposal in .pdf format on a compact disc (CD). (The electronic copy shall be one file per volume that is an exact color copy of the hard, original proposal).

*NOTE: Electronic copies will be used solely for administrative purposes. Hard copies will be used for evaluation and takes precedence in the case of any discrepancies between hard copies and electronic copies.

The content of these volumes is discussed in section 1.4, below.

1.4. Specific Requirements: An Offeror’s proposal shall consist of all information and material submitted in writing for evaluation in response to this solicitation. The submission of false or misleading information shall be grounds for disqualification of the proposal. The Offeror’s name, solicitation number and solicitation Closing Time and Date, must be affixed to the outside of each volume and CD. Offerors must organize their proposals as described and outlined below. Each volume must have a table of contents and a Cover Sheet to include the Offeror’s CAGE Code, address, NAICS and business size in accordance with the System for Award Management (SAM) and Point of Contact information, such as email and phone number. Each volume’s contents must be separated by tabs as discussed below. The proposals must be in an 8-1/2” x 11” format (except for organization chart, in which a folded 11” x 17” format may be used and shall be counted as one page provided the only information presented is the organization chart). Pages may be single-sided or double-sided (double-sided pages count as two pages) and must be numbered. The minimum acceptable type size is eleven (11) point with a minimum of one inch margins on all sides. The information in each volume must be organized as follows.

1.4.1. Volume I (Technical Proposal) (Factors 1-2): Offerors must submit the information identified in section 2, below. The information must be divided by tabs and shall be organized as follows:

TAB 1 - Factor 1 Corporate Experience and Past Performance TAB 2 - Factor 2 Management Philosophy

The total number of pages must not exceed 80 pages in the aggregate. The data appearing in Factor 1 behind the tab for 2.2.2 relating to past performance evaluations, are not counted in the overall page limitation.

Offerors may distribute the pages among the Factors at their discretion. If the Offeror exceeds the page limitation, then the excess page(s) after page 80 will not be evaluated (actual tabs are not included in the count).

1.4.2. Volume II (Administrative Documents): The Administrative Documents must be placed in a separate envelope. It must contain the following:

a. SF 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award). Note - All amendments must be acknowledged in block 19;

b. Certificate of Corporate Principal/Authority;

c. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF LLL)

d. Approved Statement of Affiliation (SOA)

Those Offerors selected for Phase II will have to resign the SF1442. Additionally, Phase II Offerors are also prohibited from distributing specifications and drawings to any subcontractors until they submit a SOA to the Government and have been notified that the SOA has been approved.

1.5. Proposal envelopes shall be marked with the Offeror’s name, Solicitation Number, and the solicitation Closing

Time and Date. (See SF1442 Block 1 and Block 13)

1.6. Offerors shall submit their proposals to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2 Hopkins Plaza, ATTN: Sierra Marshall, Rm 00-A-26, Baltimore, MD 21201, no later than the time and date specified on Standard Form 1442, Block 13. Offeror proposals received after the required time and date deadline, will not be evaluated.

1.7. Use of Non-government Advisors in Source Selection:

It is currently anticipated that the following companies will take on a limited role in the evaluation of portions of the Offerors’ proposals during Phase II only:

Dewberry Engineers

Mason & Hanger

(a) Offerors are invited to review FAR 9.505 regarding organizational conflicts of interest;

(b) Offerors are advised that employees of the firms identified above may serve as technical advisors to the Source Selection Evaluation Board in the source selection process. Government advisors are being included for their specific technical knowledge in specific disciplines for use by the SSEB. These advisors will review the proposals and provide the SSEB with their review comments. The Advisors will not be involved in the consensus of the factor rating and are considered non-voting and non-board members who provide specific advice relative to their respective area of expertise. Only the SSEB shall be involved in determining the ratings for the factors. In addition some of these employees of the firms identified above may serve or have served in the conceptual development of this project, the development of the RFP and may have been involved in the value engineering process of this project.

(c) These individuals will be authorized to access only those portions of the proposal data and discussions that are necessary to enable them to perform their respective duties. They will not have access to the Price section of the proposal. Per DoD Source Selection Procedures, non-government advisors shall not participate in the review and evaluation of past performance information.

(d) In accomplishing their duties, the aforementioned firms may require access to proprietary information contained in the Offeror's proposals. Therefore, pursuant to FAR 9.505-4 – if access to proprietary information is required, these firms must execute an agreement with each Offeror that states that they will

(1) protect the Offeror's information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it is furnished. A copy of such non-disclosure agreements shall be provided to the contracting officer prior to nongovernmental advisors viewing proposal information. The NDA will be required to be submitted with the Phase II proposal.

(e) Further, Offerors must provide with their proposal written consent to the Government, stating that the Offeror consents to nongovernmental advisors or their companies accessing the Offeror’s proprietary information. The consent form will be required to be submitted with the Phase II proposal. The companies identified herein have agreed not to engage in the design or construction that is related to this effort, to abide by FAR Subpart 9.5, “Organizational Conflicts of Interest,” and to refrain from disclosing proprietary information to unauthorized personnel.

(f) After the non-Government advisors have completed their particular area of evaluation, they will be released from the evaluation process. All non-Government advisors will only have access to specific information corresponding to Factor 3: Technical/Design Solution.

2. SUBMISSION CRITERIA

2.1. VOLUME I – MINIMUM SUBMISSION CRITERIA (TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, FACTORS 1-2): For purposes of this solicitation, an “Offeror” may include a group of two (2) or more entities that have formed a “contractor team arrangement,” as that term is defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Part 9.6. In the case of entities that have formed a contractor team arrangement, the experience and performance history of any member of the team, whether or not gained while working with the other member(s) of the currently-proposed contractor team arrangement, will be considered as a part of the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal.

An Offeror that relies upon the experience and performance history of a member, members or affiliates of a proposed contractor team arrangement must provide a teaming agreement or commitment (in the case of any affiliates) signed by all parties. The Teaming agreement/commitment shall:

a. Identify the legal name(s) and cage code(s) of all entities.

b. Describe the nature of each entity’s relationship (partnership, joint venture, prime/sub or mentor/protégé) and their role on this project as a part of their proposal. The Offeror will be expected to maintain that arrangement during performance of any contract awarded to that Offeror under this solicitation.

c. The estimated percentage of work to be completed by each member submitted for the solicitation.

This can be a rough order of magnitude for Phase I; however, this agreement/commitment must be resubmitted with Phase II to include that actual proposed percentages.

In the case of affiliates, past performance of an Offeror’s “affiliate,” as that term is defined in FAR 2.101, will be evaluated (as described within this section) if the Offeror demonstrates a firm commitment that the affiliate will participate meaningfully (e.g. roles, responsibilities, etc.) in the performance of the contract. This commitment, nature of each entity’s relationship and meaningful participation shall be described in a document signed by authorized representatives of both the Offeror and its affiliate. If a teaming agreement or commitment is not provided, the experience and past performance of any team members outside of the Prime Offeror will not be considered.

The contractor team agreement/commitment shall be provided at the beginning of the Offeror’s technical proposal, prior to Factor 1, and will not be included in the overall page count.

The following are to be used in determining the status of the Offeror’s team for the evaluation of project submissions under Factor 1:

In the case of contractor team arrangements involving a Prime Contractor and Subcontractor(s), where the Prime Contractor submits the proposal in response to this solicitation, the Prime Contractor is considered the “Prime Offeror”.

In the case of joint ventures, the “Prime Offeror” experience can come from any of the entities involved in the venture.

In the case of mentor/protégé relationships, the relationship must be established by the two Offerors and approved by the chosen Government Agency prior to proposal submission. Once the relationship has been approved, the “Prime Offeror” experience can come from any of the entities involved in the relationship. The approved mentor/protégé document from the Government Agency must be submitted along with the teaming agreement.

In the case of additional projects submitted where the submitting entity performed as a subcontractor on the submitted projects, the submitting entity must submit the final cost of their portion of the project along with total project cost and all other required information.

In the case of Offerors that are large, multi-function firms (consisting of subsidiaries), experience must only be submitted by the segment of the firm (e.g., division, group, and unit) that is submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation.

In the case of affiliates, Past performance of an Offeror's "affiliate," as that term is defined in FAR 2.101, will be evaluated (as described within this section) if the Offeror demonstrates a firm commitment that the affiliate will participate meaningfully in the performance of the contract. This commitment and meaningful participation shall be described in a document signed by authorized representatives of both the Offeror and its affiliate.

If a teaming agreement or commitment is not provided, the projects of any team members outside of the Prime Offeror will not be considered. If the Joint Venture/Mentor Protégé is a Small and Large business, the Small Business will be evaluated as the Prime Offeror.

2.2. FACTOR 1 – CORPORATE EXPERIENCE ANDPAST PERFORMANCE: The submitted material MUST be organized sequentially under tabs for each numbered section to facilitate evaluation. All narratives must contain sufficient detail to demonstrate recency and relevancy.

The Offeror will demonstrate experience by the successful and contractual completion of applicable projects under Factor 1. All projects must have a construction completion date within the past ten (10) years from the date the Phase I solicitation is issued. Projects that have a date of overall work acceptance within the past ten (10) years will also be considered. The information that is required to be supplied is identified on the form provided entitled “CORPORATE EXPERIENCE IN RELEVANT PROJECTS” (Attachment A). Offerors are not required to use the form itself as part of their proposals, but the information requested on the form must be in the Offeror’s proposals and shall be in the same format as the form. Each project description must include all information included on Attachment A. Offerors may expand the form as necessary to accommodate the required project information.

2.2.1. CORPORATE EXPERIENCE: The Offeror shall submit information on a minimum of five (5) projects and a maximum of eight (8) projects demonstrating the Offeror's recent, relevant experience.

1) For all projects, construction must have been completed within the last 10 years from the date the Phase

I Solicitation is issued; or for ongoing projects, 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed by the date the Phase I Solicitation is issued.

2) At least three (3) projects must be from the Prime Contractor and at least two (2) projects must be from the design firm.

3) At least three (3) projects submitted must be greater than 100,000 square feet, or must be over $75M in construction costs.

4) Offeror’s must demonstrate experience in the following areas:

a) Performance by the Offeror as a Prime Contractor.

b) Experience between the Contractor and Designer of Record (DOR) firm.

c) Design-Build Contract delivery method.

d) Uninterruptable Power Supply (UPS) and/or Uninterruptable Mechanical Supply (UMS).

e) SCIF construction in accordance with Intelligence Community Directive 705 (ICD 705) or Director of Central Intelligence Directive 6/9 (DCID6/9).

In the case of a joint venture teaming arrangement, each member of the joint venture entity must submit at least two projects as the construction contractor. Offerors shall address the discussion requested on Attachment A while meeting the teaming arrangement requirements in section 2.1 above.

If the Offeror’s submission exceeds the maximum project limitation of eight (8) completed projects, the first eight (8) projects submitted will be evaluated only, while the remaining additional projects(s) will not be evaluated.

Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs) or any other type of task-order contracts that provide for the issuance of task orders for the performance of tasks will not be considered projects for the purposes of this evaluation. Only individual task order issued under such contracts will be evaluated as projects. Project descriptions that do not clearly describe Offeror's or team member's limit of experience, scope of the project or periods of project performance will not be considered.

It is the responsibility of the Offeror to identify, detail and demonstrate the relevancy of the submitted projects to the solicitation criteria elements. The evaluation committee WILL NOT make assumptions.

If projects do not address the above minimum requirements, the proposal will still be evaluated; however, it may demonstrate a potential increased risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

2.2.2. PAST PERFORMANCE: For each of the projects submitted in response to Section 2.2.1, provide a

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation, or a completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), completed by a representative of the owner that provides the owner's opinion of the Offeror's past performance for the project. The Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-

0) included in the RFP (Attachment B) is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the owner for each project. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the owner point of contact. Organize all Past Performance Information in the same order in which the Projects are submitted.

Submit completed PPQs with your proposal. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from an owner for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). At the owner's discretion, PPQs may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Ms. Sierra Marshall, via email at sierra.s.marshall@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. If you have questions regarding the PPQs, or require assistance, please contact Ms. Marshall at (240) 636-9615.

Previously completed PPQs may be submitted provided that the documents do not reference any other RFP.

Submitted PPQs must only reference this RFP.

Submit copies of Federal/DoD/Navy/Army performance reviews even if they may be in the agency's databases or likely within the agency's arm's reach, i.e., Contractor's copy of CPARS evaluations for each of the projects submitted, to ensure the agency has all relevant past performance information.

Provide the DUNS number(s) and CAGE code(s) for the prime contractor and all teaming partners, e.g., design firms, key subcontractors, joint venture partners, whose experience is included in this Factor. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate, and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

The Government plans to contact and interview the owner's representative identified on the Past Performance Questionnaires, and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the owner's representative, if the owner's representative is not available. In addition, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance.

Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Owners, Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

At no time during this process, or during any debriefing, or after any award, will the names of the individuals providing reference information about an Offeror's past performance be revealed to the Offerors or to any other party. If discussions are held, Offerors may be afforded the opportunity to respond to adverse comments made by references in accordance with guidelines identified in FAR Part 15.3. In this case, relevant comments will be extracted and provided to the Offeror.

2.3. FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY: The submitted material MUST be organized sequentially under tabs for each numbered section to facilitate evaluation.

All narratives must contain sufficient detail to demonstrate management capability.

2.3.1. Overall Corporate Management Structure (Approach): Describe the overall corporate management structure of the Offeror's design-build team. If the Offeror is made up of more than one firm, describe the business relationship, the authorities of the team members, and the delegation of authorities, if any, within the team to include partnering firms and subcontractors. Include an organizational chart depicting the hierarchical structure of the positions responsible for project execution. Provide a narrative description of the roles and responsibilities of the key project positions. The Offeror must describe their approach to selecting team members and major subcontractors for the project. The Offeror shall include a description that explains how and why they determine specific individuals for their teams and what factors are considered for selection of key subcontractors.

2.3.2. Workforce and Subcontractor Management Narrative: The Offeror shall describe its approach to managing a diverse workforce and multiple subcontractors. RCR/MCF shall be designed and constructed to ICD-705 compliant Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) physical and technical security standards.

All work performed under this contract, including, but not limited to, design, construction, on-site work, and off-site work, shall be performed by U.S. companies using U.S. citizens. The Offeror must describe the strategies it intends to employ to address these challenges and ensure RCR/MCF program materials are not released to unauthorized personnel or firms.

2.3.3. Design Approach and Narrative: The Offeror shall describe its organizational structure for and approach to the design process noting the Designer of Record (DOR). The narrative shall state why the Offeror's design team is uniquely qualified to undertake this project. The narrative must describe the design team's approach to working with the customer and the means to integrate its input during the design phase, how it will manage design quality control - track design evolution and coordinate the different design disciplines - during the design process, and how design refinement will be documented and executed after acceptance of Issued for Construction (IFC) design documents. The Offeror should also indicate the location of major design and production work as well as the DOR integrator approach lifecycle

2.3.4. Construction Approach and Narrative: The Offeror shall describe its organizational structure for and approach to the construction of this project. The narrative shall include the roles and responsibilities of key and/or specialty subcontractors. The narrative must state why the Offeror's construction team is uniquely qualified to undertake this project. The narrative should include the Offeror’s approach for coordinating work between subcontractors as well as their approach to working within a constrained and secure site while simultaneously construction projects and customer operations are ongoing within the site. The narrative must also include the Offeror’s approach to Quality Control and their overall Quality Control Program.

2.3.5. Design and Construction Integration Approach and Narrative: The Offeror shall describe its management approach to integrating the Design and Construction Teams throughout the project until it is completed.

Describe the organization of the on-site design-build team and the duties and responsibilities of each position.

Include in the narrative the Offeror's approach to effectively coordinate work between subcontractors to minimize design and construction conflicts.

2.3.6. Scheduling Approach and Narrative: The Offeror shall provide a narrative description of how it plans to schedule both design and construction activities in order to execute a project of this size within the incremental funding profile provided and within the period of performance. The Offeror must describe and discuss its plan to sequence and manage key activities such as design, permitting, procurement, construction, and project close-out. The Offeror shall clearly articulate any assumption made in its plan to sequence and manage key activities and any constraints that may be levied on the proposed schedule. The Offeror should also explain their plans to manage efficiencies, risk and execution of the schedule including a risk management plan that identifies major risk to the proposed schedule as well as proposed mitigations.

3. EVALUATION APPROACH

3.1. VOLUME I - EVALUATION APPROACH (TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, PHASE I – FACTORS 1-2)

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.

3.2. FACTOR 1 - CORPORATE EXPERIENCE AND PAST PERFORMANCE: The Government desires proposals that offer the best combination of experience considering all criteria. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, relevant corporate experience, including strength and weaknesses of the prime contractor and team members for both design and construction. All submissions by Offerors must demonstrate the minimum requirements for corporate experience and past performance, as stated in section 2.2. above. The level of relevancy for a project will be determined by the evaluated extent to which a single project demonstrates multiple requirements, or characteristics, identified in section 2.2. For example, a project that demonstrates both a Design- Build contract delivery method and redundant power or cooling may be found to be more relevant than a project that demonstrates only a Design-Build delivery method. Additional consideration may be given to projects with greater scope complexity, size, and dollar amount. Additional consideration may be given to multiple project relationships with the proposed designer. Additional consideration may be given to projects that successfully demonstrated meeting aggressive schedules and/or fast tracked projects.

If projects submitted have comparable scope and complexity to this solicitation including but not limited to industrial archives/records storage/warehouse construction experience, full building demolition experience, Certified Shielded Enclosure installation experience, and working within secure facilities (e.g., restricted site access, vetting of employees, clear background checks, security coordination/escorting) it may result in a higher relevancy rating which may lead to a higher confidence assessment. Projects of a lesser relevance may lead to lower confidence assessments.

Validation of Offeror performance may occur through contacting the client POC provided by the Offeror on the first page of the PPQ and various government and commercial resources.

Past Performance evaluations will be rated in terms of performance confidence for the Government. That is, projects that are considered to be non-relevant in terms of size, scope or complexity, dollar value, percentage completion within ten (10) years, responses to the Attachment A, or not meeting the teaming requirements established in section 2.2.1. (submitted under Factor 1) and demonstrating low past performance evaluation ratings will be interpreted as indicators of no confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the work. More relevant projects and high past performance evaluations will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. Higher confidence assessments will be given for higher past performance evaluation ratings.

In the case of Offerors for which no recent and relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance report 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. In this case, the Offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “neutral.”

3.3. FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall management approach for the design and construction of this project and its capability to execute an awarded contract with a cohesive and collaborative team that possesses design and construction excellence. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the submission and assign one combined technical / risk rating for Phase I Factor 2.

The Offeror’s narrative shall consider the summarized scope of work information provided in the solicitation.

The narratives shall addresses the elements identified in paragraphs 2.3 in sufficient detail to demonstrate management capabilities. The narrative must clearly demonstrate a reasonable approach to the contract, an understanding of the requirements of this contract and a plan that has clearly applied the information provided in paragraphs 2.3 which will lead to successful completion of all work within the contract duration. If the narratives do not address the above requirements, the proposal will still be evaluated; however, it may demonstrate a potential increased risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

4. RATING METHOD

4.1. Proposal Compliance Review: A proposal compliance review will be performed to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete, that the technical proposal has been received and that the Offerors are eligible to propose. An Offeror’s failure to provide all of the requested information may adversely affect the evaluation or result in rejection of the proposal as nonresponsive.

4.2. Volume I (Technical Proposal, Factors 1-2) of the proposals will be evaluated, by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) as established by the Source Selection Authority (SSA), based upon the factors listed below.

Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for the evaluation of proposals. Each factor is rated individually based on the information contained in that specific factor; that is, evaluations will not be made…