Draft_RAES_Synposis_17APR25.docx

TITLE: Multiple Award Task Order Contract for Resilient Architect-Engineering (A/E) Services at Locations Worldwide (RAES)

DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

CONTRACTING POINTS-OF-CONTACT (POC):

Specialist monica.gallegos@us.af.mil

PLEASE NOTE: THIS DOCUMENT IS A DRAFT AND IS NOT THE OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS AND NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP). There is no solicitation package to download. All information required to submit SF330 documents is contained herein. THIS DRAFT SYNOPSIS IS ISSUED TO ALLOW QUESTIONS/COMMENTS FROM POTENTIAL OFFERORS. THE AIR FORCE WILL THEN SCHEDULE A VIRTUAL INDUSTRY DAY VIA ‘TEAMS’ TO GO OVER THE QUESTIONS/COMMENTS AND SELECTION CRITERIA.

THE INTENT OF THIS DRAFT SYNOPSIS IS TO SOLICIT FEEDBACK AND COMMENTS FROM INDUSTRY. THE AIR FORCE WILL CONSIDER ANY COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS SUBMITTED AND MAY REQUEST FURTHER DISCUSSION AT THE SUBSEQUENT INDUSTRY DAY, WHICH WILL BE ANNOUNCED AT A LATER DATE. OFFERORS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE MEANINGFUL COMMENTS FOR THE AIR FORCE TO CONSIDER.

SUBMIT QUESTIONS using Attachment 1 entitled, “Attachment 1 -QnA” to the points of contact in the paragraph immediately below. Questions are due no later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time on Thursday, 01 May 2025. Submit questions/comments to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialists identified below, using the Attachment 1, Questions and Answers spreadsheet. The Government will provide a response to all questions and the resultant Official Synopsis will incorporate any changes, if applicable.

SF330 DUE DATE: The Due Date for SF330 submissions will be identified in the Official Synopsis, and will be at least 30 days from posting. SF330’s shall be submitted via email to the Contracting Officer, Ms. Brindle T. Summers at brindle.summers@us.af.mil and the Contract Specialists, Mr. Salvador Castillo at salvador.castillo@us.af.mil and Ms. Monica Gallegos at monica.gallegos@us.af.mil . Firms are reminded to be mindful of the file size of the electronic submission. The Government’s firewall may reject any email size over 10MB. For any submissions greater than 10MB, please request a DoD SAFE Drop from the Contract Specialists referenced in this paragraph. THE OFFEROR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONFIRMING THAT THEIR SF330 WAS RECEIVED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

This synopsis is expected to be issued as a Partial Small Business Set-Aside with a Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB) Reserve of (1) firm in the Small Business Pool. We anticipate award to Six Other-than-Small Business firms in the Unrestricted Pool and Five Small Business firms, including a WOSB firm in the Small Business Pool; however, the Air Force reserves the right to award to more or fewer firms. Firms participating in the Small Business Pool must be certified as a Small Business for NAICS 541330, with a size standard of $25,500,000.

The following conditions are anticipated to result in a Small Business Set-Aside at the Task Order Level:

· NON-MILCON (non-military-construction appropriation) Orders for Title I design services (planning charettes, 35% design, Issued for Construction Designs, etc) of projects that are expected to result in a Construction Cost Limitation/Programmed Amount under $5M shall be set-aside for SB.

· NON-MILCON (non-military-construction appropriation) Orders under $500K for Title I or Title II services that do NOT result in a stamped design (studies, investigations, etc) and therefore have no Construction Cost Limitation, shall be set-aside for SB.

· Orders under $1M for any AE service funded by MILCON appropriations shall be set aside for SB.

· Orders over these thresholds will be open for competition among all MATOC awardees (both the SB and UNR Pools).

· In the case of an Order for a Sequential project, the Order may be placed directly with the firm that completed the previous, directly-related phase of the overall project, as they were previously determined to be the Most Highly Qualified.

· Sequential Projects include the following, but are not limited to:

· Performing a higher level of design (i.e. a 65% or 100% issued for construction design, after previously only performing a conceptual/35% design).

· Performing a “design refresh” of a previously executed design that is outdated and needs to be updated to current codes/specs.

· Performing services such as Title II or PCAS (Post Construction Award Services) or Engineering Support During Construction (Designer of Record Support During Construction) associated with a previously executed design.

GENERAL INFORMATION

The Air Force Installation Contracting Center (AFICC)/772nd Enterprise Sourcing Squadron (772 ESS) in conjunction with the Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC), Joint Base San Antonio - Lackland Air Force Base, TX, desires to contract with Architect-Engineer (A-E) firms to support Facility Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (FSRM) and MILCON Title I and Title II projects with a focus on mission resilience at locations worldwide. The 772 ESS anticipates award of an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) contract for Resilient A-E Services, with a total contract ceiling of $2.65B, shared among all contract holders. The Task Order limitation will be a minimum of $2,500 and maximum of $10M, subject to the conditions of FAR 52.216-19 - Order Limitations.

For purposes of this synopsis, the term "Offeror" refers to the firm or Joint-Venture firm that submits a SF330 as a response to this synopsis.

In making the Most Highly Qualified selection, the Evaluation Board may conduct interviews with Highly Qualified Offerors (by phone, in person, or in writing) to move forward with the final selection process.

FAR 52.219-14 Limitations of Subcontracting (OCT 2022) applies to any resultant contract. A portion of this contract synopsis/solicitation is set aside for Small Business (including a WOSB Reserve of (1) Firm), and thus similarly-situated entities (e.g., other Small Businesses, or for WOSB Prime Offerors, other WOSB Businesses) can team with the SB or WOSB Prime Offeror to ensure the 50% threshold is met. NOTE: Joint Venture (JV) entities are considered PRIME Contractors, and therefore any experience performed by the JV Firm or any of its JV entities are considered to be executed by the “Prime” – this arrangement is NOT considered a Prime-to-Sub Teaming partner arrangement. The JV Prime entity itself must be a SB, and therefore all work to be executed by that JV entity will also count toward the 50% threshold required by FAR 52.219-14 (OCT 2022). Also note that for JV entities in a Mentor-Protégé arrangement, per 13 CFR 125.9, a mentor that has more than one protégé cannot submit competing offers (SF330s) in response to a solicitation (synopsis) for a specific procurement through separate joint ventures with different protégés.

ORDERING PERIOD AND CONTRACT TYPE: Each basic IDIQ contract within the MATOC will have an ordering period of ten years comprised of One (1) five-year base period, with One (1) five-year option period. This MATOC allows for the issuance of Firm Fixed Price (FFP) negotiated task orders during the ordering period. The basic contract will include negotiated burdened labor rates for engineering and associated labor categories and a negotiated General and Administrative (G&A) rate (if applicable), to be applicable to all task orders. The basic contract’s burdened labor rates will be a composite rate between the Prime contractor and any teaming partner rates. The composite rates include both prime and teaming partner base labor, fringe, overhead, and G&A (if applicable). The basic contract’s negotiated composite labor rates will not include profit. Level of effort (labor hours) and all other costs, to include direct costs, subcontracting costs, and profit will be negotiated with each individual task order. Opportunities for On-Ramping may become available during contract performance if the Contracting Officer determines it to be in the Government’s best interest. Selection Criteria would mirror the final selection criteria in this announcement, unless overcome by statute or policy.

Task order pricing will be negotiated based on level of effort and types of disciplines required to perform the services, using the rates established in the basic contracts.

INTENT: Firms that perform the A-E services described in this synopsis must submit an SF330 to be considered for award of a basic contract. At the Task Order level, a more in-depth evaluation will occur to determine the Most Highly Qualified (MHQ) firm for each project, with specific experience with the type of work and/or capacity of the firm to perform that specific task taken heavily into consideration in the task order selection decision. Secondary selection criteria in accordance with DFARS PGI 236.602-1, such as equitable distribution of work, may also be considered at the Task Order level.

PRIME OFFEROR SUBMISSION AND USE OF TEAMING PARTNERS: THIS PARAGRAPH APPLIES TO THE FOLLOWING DISCIPLINES/FIRM TYPES ONLY: Project Management, Architectural, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Structural Engineering, Fire Protection Engineering, Title II Construction Inspection Services, Interior Design, Construction Schedule Development/Analysis, and Construction Cost Estimating Design Services. A Firm specializing in and proposing to perform any of these disciplines on this resultant contract shall propose a maximum of ONE time – a Firm can either serve as a Prime Offeror (either on its own or as part of a JV‐Prime Offeror) OR as a Teaming Partner to ONE other Prime Offeror. Project Management must be performed by the Prime.

The Government may exclude a SF330 from this competition without evaluating it against the selection criteria below if an initial assessment of the SF330 shows it to be non-compliant. Non-compliant SF330s are SF330s that fail to address essential requirements of this synopsis, fail to furnish information demonstrating compliance with mandatory synopsis requirements, or in some other manner, do not represent a reasonable initial effort by the Offeror to satisfy the requirements of the synopsis.

Firms selected as MHQ for this Resilient AE Services MATOC and issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) will be required to submit and negotiate one (1) composite labor rate per labor category/discipline, to be incorporated into the contract. The Government will not separately negotiate teaming partner rates.

If Teaming Partners are used for the primary disciplines identified in the SF 330, PART 1, SECTIONS D and E, CRITERION (2) PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS submission of formal teaming arrangements, will ONLY be required for the Construction Inspector (Title II), Interior Design, Construction Schedule Development/Analysis, Construction Cost Estimating Design Services and Primary *ARCHITECTURAL/ENGINEERING* Disciplines (Architect, Mechanical Engineer, Civil Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Structural Engineer, Fire Protection Engineer). Submission of formal teaming arrangements will be requested with the Request for Proposal to the MHQ Firms. Formal teaming arrangements are not required with the SF330 submission.

AWARD PROCEDURES: This MATOC will be procured in accordance with the Selection of Architect-Engineers Act (40 USC Sections 1101-1104, previously known as the “Brooks Act”), as implemented by FAR 36.6. Firms will be selected as a MHQ firm in accordance with the selection criteria identified below.

SB Firms shall identify in their cover letter that they are a SB Prime Offeror and whether they want to compete in the SB Pool or the Unrestricted (UNR) Pool. WOSB Prime Offerors shall also identify in their cover letter that they are a WOSB Prime Offeror and to which pool they want to compete (UNR or SB). Evaluation of the WOSB Prime Offerors will occur first, and the Most Highly Qualified WOSB Prime Offeror will be selected to fill the One WOSB Reserve in the Small Business Pool, based on the selection criteria defined below. Any remaining WOSB Offerors will then compete with the remaining Offerors in the Small Business Pool, based on the same selection criteria defined below. The Government’s intent is to select approximately Five of the Most Highly Qualified firms in the Small Business Pool, (including the top WOSB Offeror under the Reserve), with the right to award to fewer or more firms. The Unrestricted Pool will be evaluated separately from the Small Business Pool, but the Most Highly Qualified Selections will be based on the same selection criteria defined below, with an expected award to approximately Six Firms.

At the Task Order level, all firms selected for the Small Business Pool, whether selected as part of the Reserve or otherwise, will be eligible to compete for each Task Order that is set aside for Small Business, unless a further socio-economic set-aside or exception to Fair Opportunity IAW FAR 16.505(b)(2) is issued. Task Orders that are not set aside for Small Business or a further socio-economic category, will be open for both the Unrestricted Pool and the Small Business Pool to participate in the Task Order Most Highly Qualified selection.

To receive award, contractors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) website at http://www.sam.gov. This synopsis and any resultant contract awards do not guarantee work to selected firms. However, the minimum guarantee of $2,500 will be awarded as the first Task Order against this MATOC (concurrently with the basic contract award) and will require each awardee to attend a ½ day Post-Award conference in San Antonio, TX.

A. DESCRIPTION OF WORK: This contract will support the award of Architect-Engineer (A-E) Title I and Title II Services for the 50 United States and outlying areas, as identified in individual Task Orders.

1. General Scope:

This requirement (Resilient A-E Services (RAES)) is for a MATOC for A-E Title I and Title II Services for Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (FSRM) and Military Construction (MILCON) projects for Department of Defense (DoD) Facilities. Task Orders will provide either A-E Title I and/or Title II services for the renovation of existing facilities, demolition, repair, or replacement of DoD facilities, as well as A-E services to support MILCON planning and design of new facilities.

2. Definitions:

The following definitions aid in the preparation of the Offeror’s SF 330.

"Project" defines work performed pursuant to ONE SPECIFIC TASK ORDER of an IDIQ type contract or a stand-alone C-Type contract. This definition does not consider an IDIQ type of basic contract, in and of itself, as a project. For the purposes of this evaluation, a “project” means A-E services for a Department of Defense (DoD) facility or facilities (not construction) and non-DoD facility or facilities (not construction). “Project” also denotes the design portion of a Design-Build (DB) construction contract or task order where the Offeror (A-E firm) for this synopsis served as the designer of record (DOR) for the design package in the DB project where the Government accepted the 100% design in that DB effort.

"Department of Defense (DoD) facilities" includes all facilities located on a United States DoD installation (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Space Force, Air National Guard, or Air Force Reserve bases). This definition does not include facilities on a Coast Guard base, NASA location, or other federal, commercial, or private facility, unless the A-E Title I projects followed Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) design criteria. Projects where facilities are located outside of the United States are acceptable ONLY if the project design followed DoD UFC Design Criteria. Project narratives need to be clear as to what design standards were utilized.

"Non-DoD facilities" includes all facilities located in the United States (not on an active installation) and includes its outlying areas, as defined by FAR 2.101, that have complied with all applicable building codes and regulations. Project narratives need to be clear as to what design standards were utilized.

"Relevant Project" includes Title I and Title II services for facilities meeting the definition of “project” above. The specific definitions of A-E Title I and Title II services are as follows:

“Title I Services” include engineering services related to a specific construction project and consists of conducting field surveys and investigations to obtain design data and preparing contract plans, specifications, cost estimates, and estimated construction periods of performance. Title I services may include all aspects of design, such as preparation and review of contract plans, specifications, scheduling, cost estimates, Building Information Modeling (BIM), design-build conceptual designs, interior design for fixed furniture and equipment (FF&E), energy modeling and Life Cycle Cost Analyses, seismic retrofit design, system commissioning services, and the preparation of operating and design manuals. Title I efforts also encompass other A-E Services required to support and develop design work, planning and programming, program management, project scoping, studies, investigations, evaluations, consultations, conceptual design, value engineering, operation services, monitoring services, topographic survey services, and infrastructure systems.

“Title II Services” are A-E services related to a construction project(s)and consists of supervision and inspection of construction activities. A relevant Title II project must include periodic or full-time on-site construction inspection activities by the Firm’s on-site Construction Inspector (Title II/QA Manager). Title II services may include all aspects of construction quality assurance and oversight of facility and infrastructure construction/ renovation projects and may include oversight of incidental environmental projects associated with primary requirements. Title II Services include construction phase credentialed architectural and engineering support services that encompass a full range of disciplinary expertise and services to include on-site construction oversight assistance, design reviews, quality assurance inspections, adherence to applicable specifications, construction schedule analysis, material submittal reviews, environmental submittal reviews, claim reviews, , and designer of record support, and other standard construction submittal reviews.

"Construction phase" means A-E services to provide Quality Assurance support (on the Government's behalf) for a separate construction project/contract, to include on-site inspection and oversight of construction activities to ensure adherence to technical specifications.

"Credentialed A-E support services" are services conducted by Professional Architects/Engineers to review technical construction submittals (Div 01 Submittals, material submittals, shop-drawings, As-builts, accuracy of design calculations, etc.)

"Completed projects" means the firm performed and finished the A-E contract or task order for Title I design and/or Title II construction support services within the past 10 years from the date this synopsis was posted. “Completed Project” also defines the design portion of a Design-Build contract or task order that the Prime Contractor (A-E firm) submitting the SF330 for this synopsis served as the DOR that completed the design package for the DB project, and the Government accepted the 100% design for that DB project. Further, “Completed Project” represents the completed Title II services of one, or more, construction projects under one contract. Accordingly, where a single Title II contract or Task Order covers multiple construction projects, at least one of those construction projects must have been completed, and the narrative shall ONLY describe the completed portion of the work. Similarly, where a single Task Order or Contract covers multiple Title I designs (i.e. for multiple facilities), at least one of those facility designs must have been completed and the narrative shall ONLY describe the completed portion of the work. Further, where a Task Order or contract includes both Title I and Title II services, the firm can submit the Title I portion if it is complete, even if the Title II is not yet complete, but shall only describe the completed Title I portion in the narrative.

“Resilience” as defined in DoD Instruction 4715.21 and AF Instruction 32-1015, is the ability to anticipate, prepare for, and adapt to changing conditions and withstand, respond to, and recover rapidly from disruptions.

B. Resilient A-E Services SELECTION CRITERIA:

SELECTION CRITERIA ARE LISTED IN DESCENDING ORDER OF IMPORTANCE:

The Government will evaluate SF 330s to determine the most highly qualified (MHQ) firms. All projects identified in the SF 330 must have been performed by the office/branch/individual team member performing the work. The evaluation will exclude projects not performed by the proposed office/branch/individual team member.

The following lists the Selection Criteria in descending order of importance, with “Past Performance”, “Capacity to Accomplish the Work”, and “Knowledge of the Locality” to be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis: In the event of a tie, the Slate/Selection Authority may choose to include or exclude the tied Offerors from the slate of Most Highly Qualified Firms.

1. Criterion 1: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence

2. Criterion 2: Professional Qualifications

3. Criterion 3: Past Performance

4. Criterion 4: Capacity to Accomplish the Work

5. Criterion 5: Knowledge of the Locality

Rating Definitions for the Acceptable/Unacceptable Criteria of “Past Performance”, “Capacity to Accomplish the Work”, and “Knowledge of the Locality” are included in the Evaluation Methods of those Criteria. In addition, portions of Criterion (1) will also be rated Acceptable/Unacceptable as described in the Evaluation Method.

Rating Definitions for Criterion (1) Specialized Experience and Technical Competence and Criterion (2) Professional Qualifications, are as follows:

Outstanding: Minimum requirements met. SF330 demonstrates an exceptional level of relevant A-E Title I Services experience/qualifications specific to projects that achieve the goals of RAES. If teaming partners are used, business relationships are well-developed.

Very Good: Minimum requirements met. SF330 demonstrates substantial level of relevant A-E Title I Services experience/qualifications specific to projects that achieve the goals of RAES. If teaming partners are used, business relationships are reasonably well-developed.

Good: Minimum requirements met. SF330 demonstrates a limited level of relevant A-E Title I Services experience/qualifications specific to projects that achieve the goals of RAES. If teaming partners are used, business relationships are reasonably developed.

Satisfactory: Demonstrates the minimum level of relevant A-E Title I Services experience/qualifications identified in the synopsis. If teaming partners are used, business relationships exist.

Unacceptable: Submission fails to meet one or more minimum requirements of the synopsis.

ADMINISTRATIVE SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

All SF330 submissions shall be drafted on 8 ½ x 11-page size and submitted in Adobe Portable Document Format (searchable PDF format). For all submission requirements below, adhere to the page count identified within each specific Criterion. Any pages submitted beyond the page limit identified will not be evaluated. Ensure a minimum font size of Times New Roman 11 or greater for all narratives. Charts and tables, if used, count toward the page count limitation. Organizational charts can exceed the 8 ½ x 11 Page size. Combine SF330 Parts I and II into a single PDF searchable document.

SF 330, PART 1, SECTION F, CRITERION (1) SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Proposed Team : In Sections C and D in the SF330, ensure that the following disciplines noted in this paragraph are clearly identified with the proposed firm, and in Section F, the experience of the teaming partner is demonstrated. The Offeror shall identify their proposed team, inclusive of the Prime Contractor (to include Joint-Ventures (JV)), and any teaming partners you are proposing to perform work under the resultant contract. ONLY include the following Disciplines, and identify the name of the firm(s) that is proposed to perform the following services: Project Management, Architecture, Interior Design, Structural Engineering, Civil Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Fire Protection Engineering, Construction Inspection (On-site Title II Services), Construction Schedule Development/Analysis, Construction Cost Estimating Design Services.

Offerors are not required to propose teaming partners; however, Offerors are advised that the firm proposed to perform each discipline (whether the Prime Offeror or a Teaming Partner, or both) must be used during performance of task orders for that discipline. If the Prime chooses to both self-perform a discipline AND utilize a teaming partner for the same discipline, then both the Prime and the Teaming Partner must demonstrate relevant experience in the SF330 submissions. Each engineering discipline and the associated firm that will execute that work, will be identified on the contract award and must be used during task order performance. Accordingly, offerors are advised that their SF330 proposal submission must clearly articulate projects performed by each of the proposed teaming partners. If a prime offeror intends to use a teaming partner for the same disciplines that the Prime will perform in-house, the project experience submitted must demonstrate relevant experience for both the prime and its teaming partner in those disciplines.

Project Experience:

Facility Design Narrative: In Section H, submit a narrative not to exceed 2 pages that describes the Prime or Teaming Partners experience performing Title I Issued for Construction completed projects for the design of industrial, non-industrial and secured buildings. Industrial buildings include Hangars, Warehouses, Corrosion Control Buildings, Maintenance Building, Research Labs, Air Traffic Control Towers, and other buildings that conduct industrial processes. Non-industrial buildings include Child Development Centers, Dorms, Operations Buildings, Administrative Buildings, and other buildings not considered industrial. Secured buildings include Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIF) or Intelligence Community Directive (ICD) 705 compliant spaces.

Resilient Design Projects: In Section F, (1 page per project): Offerors shall submit relevant and completed projects (see definitions above). Submit FIVE to SEVEN A-E Title I projects, and ONE A-E Title II DoD project. Projects shall be performed by the Prime Offeror or its Proposed Teaming Partners. Descriptions shall not exceed one page per project. A minimum of TWO A-E Title I projects shall be for MILCON or new construction design, and a minimum of TWO A-E Title I projects shall be for FSRM Design. At least ONE of the A-E Title I projects shall be a DoD project. Note the evaluation method below and ensure the project descriptions are detailed enough for the Government to understand the project’s scope, size, and extent of engineering required. Ensure that either the Estimated Cost of Construction (at time of design completion) or the Actual Construction Cost (at time of construction award) is included in each project description.

For each project submitted, Offerors shall specify the scope of work (engineering disciplines and building systems to demonstrate extent and complexity of design services) accomplished by the Prime and individual teaming partners. For Joint Venture Offerors, engineering disciplines performed by either entity of the Joint Venture (JV) or the JV itself are considered the Prime and are not considered “teaming partners.”

Business Relationships (1 page): The Prime Contractor is accountable for all work products. Therefore, it is crucial that the offeror(s) demonstrate strong business relationships, whether the work elements are executed in-house by the Prime, JV or by a teaming partner. The Offeror must submit a narrative, limited to one page, that outlines the Prime Offeror’s business relationship with the entities of its JV Partners (if applicable) and any teaming partners. The narrative should illustrate examples of the extent of relationships in previous contracts involving proposed team members (both Prime/JV Partners working together and any teaming partners working with the Prime), as applicable. Outline past experiences collaborating with proposed team members and the history of these working relationships, inclusive of joint venture partners and teaming partners, as applicable. Include the number of projects worked between the Prime and each Teaming Partner over the last 10 years (Note that the business relationship portion of this narrative will be used in the evaluation of Criterion 1 – 3 below).

EVALUATION METHOD: The Government encourages Offerors to review the evaluation method below to ensure project submissions and narratives provide enough information for the Government to determine the extent of the Offeror's experience and business relationships. A higher rating may be assigned for the following Title I resilient design project experience:

1. Higher Estimated or Actual Cost of the design’s resultant Construction project

2. Greater complexity (i.e. extent of engineering disciplines and required effort)

3. Greater number of relevant projects submitted Sub-sections a.1. through a.6. below are listed in descending order of importance.

a. RESILIENT DESIGN.

1. MAXIMIZATION OF PASSIVE DESIGN: Title I projects that provide passive design features including, but not limited to building orientation, passive solar design, passive day-lighting, natural ventilation, super-insulation of building envelope, and thermal mass.

2. ENERGY USE INTENSITY (EUI) AND WATER USE INTENSITY (WUI) REDUCTION: Title I projects that provide design for EUI and WUI improvements. EUI expresses a building’s energy use as a function of its size or other characteristics. EUI is measured as energy per square foot per year. WUI expresses a building's water use as a function of its size or other characteristics. WUI is measured as number of gallons per square foot per year. More consideration will be given when project descriptions include building EUI and WUI reductions that has been validated post occupancy using advanced meter readings.

3. ON-SITE ENERGY GENERATION, STORAGE, AND MANAGEMENT: Title I projects that include on-site energy generation. More consideration will be given when project descriptions include energy storage and management.

4. ENERGY RETROFITS: Title I projects that provide design for energy retrofits of existing buildings. More consideration will be given when project descriptions include a validated post occupancy building EUI reduction.

5. UFC 1-200-02, High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements: Title I design projects that meet UFC 1-200-02 and have completed one of the following third-party sustainability certifications: US Green Building Council (USGBC), “Guiding Principles Assessment for Department of Defense”; Green Building Initiative (GBI) “Department of Defense Guiding Principles Compliance”; USGBC “Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design” (LEED); , and GBI, “Green Globes”.

6. LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS (LCCA): Title I projects that provide design for LCCA required by UFC 1-200-02 High Performance and Sustainable Buildings, UFC 3-740-05 Construction Cost Estimating, 10 CFR Part 436 Subpart A, and NIST Handbook 135.

b. TITLE II SERVICES: As a minimum requirement, Title II Services projects will be rated on a Pass/Fail basis. To receive a Satisfactory Rating or better for this criterion, the offeror must demonstrate credentialed architectural and engineering support services during performance, to include both on-site construction oversight, and engineering reviews of construction administrative and technical submittals, for a construction project where the field time was a minimum of 6 months and construction cost was a minimum of $10 million.

c. FACILITY DESIGN: As a minimum requirement, the facility design narrative will be rated on a Pass/Fail basis. To receive a Satisfactory Rating or better for this criterion, the offeror must demonstrate completed design for at least two industrial buildings, two non-industrial buildings, and one secured building.

The project experience demonstrated by the Offeror in this criterion will form the basis of the initial rating assigned. The Government will then consider the strength of the Offeror’s response to Criterion 1 “Business Relationships” when determining the final rating for this criterion. Where an Offeror’s narrative demonstrates a history of strong business relationships between the Prime and its teaming partners, if applicable, the initial rating will remain the same. However, a lower rating may be assigned where the business relationships between the Prime and its teaming partners are less developed. Note that the Government considers that the larger the number of teaming partners used, the higher the risk of unsuccessful control and coordination by the Prime.

SF 330, PART 1, SECTIONS D AND E, CRITERION (2) PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Provide the data for SF330, Section E of each proposed key personnel. Each resume shall include a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) specific, relevant, and completed projects (see definitions above) that best illustrate the qualifications of the individual member for the position the Offeror proposes for the key member. Limit submission to TWO (2) Pages per Key Person.

Section E for each key person shall include the following elements: the individual's employer(s), role proposed, the number of years engaged in the discipline, any professional licensures and credentialing held, years with the company. Proposed key personnel shall be current active “certified payroll” employees of their respective firm (Prime or Teaming Partner) and that “contract, zero hour, and consulting” staff will not be considered to meet the current Key Personnel requirement. The Government will evaluate the ability of the key personnel to contribute to the successful completion of project task orders based on their experience. An individual may not perform more than one role.

After award, if the contractor needs to replace a key person identified in their originally submitted SF330, the contractor must replace that individual with someone of equal or greater experience and qualifications for approval by the Contracting Officer.

In the SF 330, Part 1, Section D, provide an organizational chart that identifies the members of the program team, to include the key personnel. Indicate the branch office location of each team member.

The individuals filling the role of each of the following positions (#1-14) are considered programmatic key personnel that provide oversight and internal quality control of A-E efforts for their associated disciplines for all Task Orders:

1. Lead Project Manager

2. Lead Construction Inspector (Title II / Quality Assurance Manager) The following individuals must be professionally licensed or credentialed (applicable license or credential is listed by position below) in their respective disciplines:

3. Lead Architect, RA

4. Lead Historic Preservation Architect, RA

5. Lead Interior Designer, NCIDQ

6. Lead Civil Engineer, PE

7. Lead Structural Engineer, PE

8. Lead Mechanical Engineer, PE

9. Lead Fire Protection Engineer, PE

10. Lead Electrical Engineer, PE

11. Lead Cost Engineer/Estimator, CCE or CCC

12. Lead Scheduler, PSP The Government expects these individuals will provide program level quality control and oversight of the task orders that result from this acquisition. The Government’s Corporate Contracting Officer (CCO) MUST approve any changes to the proposed key team members after submission of qualifications.

EVALUATION METHOD for Professional Qualifications:

The Government will first evaluate each key person to ensure their qualifications meet the following minimum requirements: Each key person must have at least 10 years of experience in their respective discipline, with the exception of the Lead Project Manager who can demonstrate this experience as a Project Manager or as an Engineer, and the Construction Inspector (Title II Services), who must demonstrate at least 10 years of experience in the construction industry, to include 3 years of experience performing construction as an on-site Quality Control Manager, onsite Construction Manager, or an onsite Project Engineer. The Prime must employ the Lead Project Manager. Each Key Person must also demonstrate at least one year of employment with their current employer (the Prime, JV or a proposed Teaming Partner). Each key person must also have at least TWO projects on their resume. The Government will also evaluate the Business Relationship narrative from Criterion (1) with that Teaming Partner and will consider the Key Person minimally acceptable if that Teaming Partner has completed at least TWO projects with the Prime during the last 10 years, with more consideration given to a Prime or Teaming Partner relationship that has a greater number of projects or years of experience working together. Ensure every position has a person proposed. The Government will interpret any blank elements of Section E as the key person not possessing that experience. A proposed key person can only serve in one key position. Key personnel #3 through 12 must be professionally licensed or credentialed as stated in the submission requirement. The Lead Title II Construction Inspector, Lead Civil Engineer, Lead Cost Engineer/Estimator, Lead Scheduler, and Lead Fire Protection Engineer will not be evaluated further, if he/she meets the minimum stated requirement.

Upon ensuring all key personnel meet the minimum qualification requirements stated above; to assign an initial rating, the Government will then consider the extent of relevant resilient design experience of all key personnel except the Lead Title II Construction Inspector, Lead Civil Engineer, Lead Cost Engineer/Estimator, Lead Scheduler, and Lead Fire Protection Engineer. Resumes that include a greater experience of A-E Title I relevant resilient design project types in the evaluation areas listed in Criterion (1) Paragraph a.1. through a.6 in descending order of importance will be evaluated more favorably.

The project experience demonstrated by the key personnel in this criterion will form the basis of the initial rating assigned. Where the Offeror proposes to use a Teaming Partner for their key personnel, the rating assigned may be adjusted based on the strength of relationships demonstrated in the narrative submission from Criterion 1, “Business Relationships”.

SF 330, PART 1, SECTION H, CRITERION (3) PAST PERFORMANCE

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Offerors shall provide current and valid customer points of contact (name, position/role, email, and phone numbers) for resilient design projects submitted in Criterion (1), Section F of the SF330. Also, submit CPARS evaluations for resilient design projects submitted in Criterion (1). The Government encourages firms to contact the appropriate government Project Managers, Contracting Officers (CO), or Contracting Officer's Representatives (COR) to ensure CPARS evaluations submitted on completed government projects, particularly for those projects submitted under Criterion (1). If a finalized CPARS evaluation is not available, Offerors may submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for completed design work. In addition to stand alone design contracts/task orders, “completed design project” includes designs completed on a Design-Build (DB) contract, even if the construction portion is not yet completed. However, the PPQ shall only address the completed design portion and the quality of that design work, if known. The PPQ is Attachment 2 to this synopsis.

Submit CPARS and PPQs to the Contract Specialist (CS), Monica Gallegos, via email at monica.gallegos@us.af.mil and Salvador Castillo at salvador.castillo@us.af.mil with the SF330 submission.

Contractors may use previously completed PPQs. For those PPQs, Government reserves the right to ask the current Government Representative on the contract of the PPQ to verify currency and accuracy of the PPQ information.

EVALUATION METHOD:

This criterion will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. The Government will evaluate the CPARS or PPQ’s provided for projects in Criterion (1) and will assign an Acceptable rating if the history of performance on the relevant projects from Criterion (1) demonstrate a low risk of poor performance. An Unacceptable rating may be assigned if the history of performance on the relevant projects from Criterion (1) demonstrate a high risk of poor performance.

SF 330, SECTION H, CRITERION (4) CAPACITY TO ACCOMPLISH THE WORK

Submission Requirement: In the SF330, Part II, block 9 a, b, c, the Offeror shall provide the number of employees for each discipline identified below:

TABLE 1 – A-E Disciplines:

This criterion will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. The government will assign an Acceptable rating when the offeror identifies at least the number of people in each applicable A-E discipline listed in Table 1 above. If the Offeror proposes to use a Teaming Partner for any of the disciplines stated, that Teaming Partner's Block 9 must indicate at least the number of people in each applicable A-E discipline, to be considered acceptable. If the Offeror cannot provide at least the number of people in each applicable A-E discipline listed in Table 1 above, this criterion will be considered Unacceptable and may render the entire SF330 Unacceptable.

SF 330, SECTION H, CRITERION (5) KNOWLEDGE OF THE LOCALITY

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

The Offeror shall furnish a logical narrative, not to exceed two pages, that describes the Prime Offeror's (and/or its Teaming Partner’s) experience performing A-E Title I and Title II services for DoD and non-DoD Facilities within the United States and its territories. The narrative shall briefly demonstrate knowledge/experience within the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Zones. ASHRAE Zones are published in ASHRAE Standard 169. Clearly identify whether the described experience/knowledge is that of the Prime or a Teaming Partner (and identify the Teaming Parter(s) in the narrative, if applicable.)

This criterion will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. The government will assign an acceptable rating when the offeror demonstrates geographical experience/knowledge within SIX of the ASHRAE Zones for A-E Title I and Title II services, with no fewer than FIVE thermal zones (numbers 1-8) and TWO moisture zones (letters A, B, and C) represented.