FA2823-15-R-4009-03_Amendment_3.pdf.doc.pdf

F1T2BR4281A001 FTFA 12-1174

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

See Summary of Changes

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 18

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 19-Mar-2015

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X FA2823-15-R-4009

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-Mar-2015

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

19-Mar-2015

CODE

AFTC/PZIO EGLIN - FA2823

308 WEST D AVENUE, SUITE 130 (BLDG 260)

EGLIN AFB FL 32542-5418

FA2823 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA2823-15-R-4009

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 3 CHANGES

The purpose of this Amendment is to reorganize the CLIN structure, add a SOW Addendum, Amend Sections L&M, Add a Bid Guarantee, Incorporate SPEC 04 20 00, and Update Proposal Response Date.

A. To reorganize the CLIN Structure IAW the table below.

CLIN Evaluation Priority 0001 – Larger Footprint with CMU (Additive 2 with Additive 1) 1 0002 – Larger Footprint (Additive 2) 2 0003 – Small Footprint with CMU (Base Bid w/Additive 1) 3 0004 – Small Footprint (Base Bid) 4

B. To incorporate the SOW Addendum dated 16 March 2015.

C. To incorporate a Bid Guarantee.

D. To incorporate the SPEC 04 20 00, Unit Masonry.

E. To change the proposal due date from 6 April 2015 to 13 April 2015.

F. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The offer guarantee has changed from is not required to is required.

The required response date/time has changed from 06-Apr-2015 12:00 PM to 13-Apr-

2015 12:00 PM.

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0001

This CLIN has been renumbered to CLIN 0004.

The CLIN description has changed from Construct RIG Facility Site C-3 to Small Footprint (Base Bid).

The CLIN extended description has changed from FTFA: 12-1174, Construct RIG Facility Site C-3. See Supplimental Files. Funds provided by 96 TW/96 RANSS/TSRI. Period of Performance is 300 calendar days. New Construction: THIS CLIN IS SUBJECT TO THE STATUTORY COST LIMITATION IN DFARS 252.236-7006 to Small Footprint, Base Bid (No Additives) FTFA: 12-1174, Construct RIG Facility Site C-3. See Supplemental Files.

Funds provided by 96 TW/96 RANSS/TSRI. Period of Performance is 300 calendar days. New Construction: THIS

PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO THE STATUTORY COST LIMITATION IN DFARS 252.236-7006.

CLIN 0001 is added as follows:

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Lot OPTION Larger Footprint with CMU (A2 w/ A1)

FFP

ADDITIVE 2: CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING WITH LARGER SQUARE

FOOTAGE IN LIEU OF SMALLER BUILDING CALLED FOR IN BASE BID

ADDITIVE 1: USE INTEGRALLY COLORED SPLIT FACE CMU IN LIEU OF

PAINTED SMOOTH FACE CMU. . FTFA: 12-1174, Construct RIG Facility Site C-3. See Supplemental Files. Funds provided by 96 TW/96 RANSS/TSRI. Period of Performance is 300 calendar days. New Construction: THIS PROJECT IS

SUBJECT TO THE STATUTORY COST LIMITATION IN DFARS 252.236-

FOB: Destination

PROJECT: FTFA 12-1174

SIGNAL CODE: A

NET AMT

CLIN 0002 is added as follows:

0002 1 Lot OPTION Larger Footprint (Additive 2)

FFP

ADDITIVE 2: CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING WITH LARGER SQUARE

FOOTAGE IN LIEU OF SMALLER BUILDING CALLED FOR IN BASE BID.

FTFA: 12-1174, Construct RIG Facility Site C-3. See Supplemental Files. Funds provided by 96 TW/96 RANSS/TSRI. Period of Performance is 300 calendar days.

New Construction: THIS PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO THE STATUTORY COST

LIMITATION IN DFARS 252.236-7006

FOB: Destination

CLIN 0003 is added as follows:

0003 1 Lot OPTION Small Footprint with CMU

FFP

Small Footprint with CMU (Base Bid w/ Additive 1) ADDITIVE 1: USE

INTEGRALLY COLORED SPLIT FACE CMU IN LIEU OF PAINTED

SMOOTH FACE CMU. FTFA: 12-1174, Construct RIG Facility Site C-3. See Supplemental Files. Funds provided by 96 TW/96 RANSS/TSRI. Period of Performance is 300 calendar days. New Construction: THIS PROJECT IS

SUBJECT TO THE STATUTORY COST LIMITATION IN DFARS 252.236-

FOB: Destination

SECTION E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

The following Acceptance/Inspection Schedule was added for CLIN 0001:

INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

Destination Government Destination Government

The following Technical Office was added for CLIN 0001:

96 CEG/CEP - F1T2BR

REATE DAVIS

501 DE LEON ST BLDG 634 STE 100

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

The following Acceptance/Inspection Schedule was added for CLIN 0002:

The following Technical Office was added for CLIN 0002:

REATE DAVIS

501 DE LEON ST BLDG 634 STE 100

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

The following Acceptance/Inspection Schedule was added for CLIN 0003:

The following Technical Office was added for CLIN 0003:

REATE DAVIS

501 DE LEON ST BLDG 634 STE 100

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule Item has been deleted from CLIN 0001:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS UIC

27-JAN-2015 1 96 CEG/CEP - F1T2BR

501 DE LEON ST BLDG 634 STE 100

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

FOB: Destination

F1T2BR

The following Delivery Schedule item has been added to CLIN 0001:

300 dys. ADC 1 96 CEG/CEP - F1T2BR

REATE DAVIS

501 DE LEON ST BLDG 634 STE 100

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

882-5740

The following Delivery Schedule item has been added to CLIN 0002:

300 dys. ADC 1 96 CEG/CEP - F1T2BR

REATE DAVIS

501 DE LEON ST BLDG 634 STE 100

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

882-5740

The following Delivery Schedule item has been added to CLIN 0003:

300 dys. ADC 1 96 CEG/CEP - F1T2BR

REATE DAVIS

501 DE LEON ST BLDG 634 STE 100

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

882-5740

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been modified:

52.228-1 BID GUARANTEE (SEP 1996)

(a) Failure to furnish a bid guarantee in the proper form and amount, by the time set for opening of bids, may be cause for rejection of the bid.

(b) The bidder shall furnish a bid guarantee in the form of a firm commitment, e.g., bid bond supported by good and sufficient surety or sureties acceptable to the Government, postal money order, certified check, cashier's check, irrevocable letter of credit, or, under Treasury Department regulations, certain bonds or notes of the United States.

The Contracting Officer will return bid guarantees, other than bid bonds, (1) to unsuccessful bidders as soon as practicable after the opening of bids, and (2) to the successful bidder upon execution of contractual documents and bonds (including any necessary coinsurance or reinsurance agreements), as required by the bid as accepted.-

(c) The amount of the bid guarantee shall be 20% percent of the bid price.

(d) If the successful bidder, upon acceptance of its bid by the Government within the period specified for acceptance, fails to execute all contractual documents or furnish executed bond(s) within 10 days after receipt of the forms by the bidder, the Contracting Officer may terminate the contract for default.-

(e) In the event the contract is terminated for default, the bidder is liable for any cost of acquiring the work that exceeds the amount of its bid, and the bid guarantee is available to offset the difference.

(End of provision)

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The below Table of Contents has been added

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment Title Date Number of Pages

Attachment A Past Performance References UNDATED 2 Attachment B Completed Past Performance Questionnaire UNDATED 2 Attachment C Financial Responsibility UNDATED 1 Attachment D Statement of Work 15 Nov 2013 2 Attachment E Drawings 15 Nov 2013 71 Attachment F Specifications (12-1174) 15 Nov 2013 475 Attachment G Wage Determination: FL150029 2 Jan 2015 6 Attachment H Hold Harmless Agreement UNDATED 1

Attachment I SOW Addendum 16 Mar 2015 2 Attachment J SPEC 04 20 00 – Unit Masonry UNDATED 10

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEROR

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

a. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

1. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet the Request for Proposal (RFP) requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and requirements as defined in the specifications and drawings. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the RFP terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The response shall consist of three (3) separate parts; Volume I - Price Proposal, Volume II - Past Performance Information, and Volume III - Past Performance References. For all volumes you must submit an original and two (2) hard paper copies and also place all Volumes on a Compact Disc (CD).

Offerors are cautioned to follow the detailed instructions fully and carefully, as the Government intends to make an award based on the initial offers received, without discussion of such offers.

In proposal volumes, follow the quantity and page limits as follows:

Volume Copies Page Limits

Volume I – Price Proposal Original + (2) copies No page limit

Financial Responsibility Original + (2) copies No page limit Questionnaires (Attachment C)

Hold Harmless Agreement Original + (2) copies 1 page (Attachment J)

Amendments (if any) Original + (2) copies No page limit Completed Standard Form 30

Volume II – Past Performance Information Original + (2) copies 10 pages

Volume III – Past Performance References Original + (2) copies No page limit (Attachment A)

Completed Past Performance Original + (2) copies No page limit Questionnaires (Attachment B)

NOTE 1. Provide the form at Attachment A of not more than five (5) references of the most relevant contracts performed for federal agencies and commercial customers within the last three (3) years as part of Volume III. If the Offeror is a Joint Venture, in addition to the five (5) references for the prime, the Offeror may provide up to five (5) additional references for the Joint Venture. In addition, the Offeror is responsible for providing the Government the completed Attachment B questionnaires provided back to the Offeror by their references as part of Volume III.

NOTE 2. Joint ventures are considered as affiliated and controlling or having the power to control each other with regard to performance of the contract.

2. Proposal Organization: The paper files will be checked to determine the number of pages and compliance with proposal instructions. Those pages in excess of the limit of Volume II will be removed from the back and returned by the PCO to ensure they are not evaluated. The Government will not keep any pages in excess of the limit. If Evaluation Notices (EN’s) are required, page limits may be placed on any responses. Any page limits for responses to ENs will be identified in the letter forwarding the ENs to you. Excess pages submitted in response to EN’s will be removed in the same manner as above by the

PCO.

3. Format for all proposal Volumes shall be as follows:

i. Proposals shall be neat, indexed (cross-indexed as appropriate) and assembled in an orderly manner.

ii. Page Set-Up/Font Size/Lines on Page: Only 8 ½ x 11 inch, portrait format pages are acceptable for text-oriented material. Landscape (8 ½ x 11 inch) pages are permitted for charts or graphs. Foldout pages are limited to 11 x 17 inch and may be portrait or landscape (limit 5). Text shall be written in full text. Text font shall be Times New Roman (No “narrow” font versions acceptable). Font size shall be 12 point with proportional spacing permitted. Type size for figures and tables must be no smaller than 8-point with proportional spacing permitted. Text may be wrapped around figures and tables. Margins on all four (4) edges of each page shall be at least 1 inch. Include: RFP number, Volume and/or subdirectory title and page number in the margin on the upper right of all pages. Single spacing may be used for figures and tables. Company name and proprietary information notices shall be placed on top and/or bottom margins. Use single column formatting only; multi-column formatting is not allowed. Graphics are allowed in either color or black and white with an 8-point minimum on embedded text except where data is only being used as a sample and readability is not intended. Proposals shall not be supplemented by a package or supplemented by reference documents. Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required.

iii. Page Definition: A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information.

iv. Page Numbering: Pages in each volume must be numbered sequentially and consecutively.

The cover page, table of contents, list(s) of tables and drawings, and blank pages are excluded from the page count.

v. Text and graphics portions of the electronic copies shall be in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2003 or higher or Adobe PDF. Data submitted in spreadsheet format shall be readable by MS Excel 2003 or higher. In case of conflict between the paper copy and the electronic copy of the proposals submitted, the paper copy shall take precedence. Offerors are cautioned to follow the detailed instructions fully and carefully, as the Government intends to make an award based on the initial offers received, without discussion of such offers.

vi. It is preferred that the volumes are not submitted in hard cover binders or spiral bound.

4. Specific Instructions for Volume I – PRICE PROPOSAL

i. Complete blocks 14 (to include CAGE Code), 15, 16, 17, 19 (if applicable), and 20A-C of the Standard Form (SF) 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. An authorized official of the firm must sign and date the SF 1442 in Blocks 20A-C. In doing so, the Offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP Sections A through J. These sections constitute the model contract.

ii. Insert proposed unit prices in Section B for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN). An Offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in Section B by the proposed unit Price for each CLIN to confirm the extended amount for each. The extended amounts will be added together to determine the Offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

iii. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in Sections I through K. Section K shall be returned in its entirety with your Price proposal. For Sections C through I, the Offeror shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in. The Offeror’s online Representations and Certifications record must be current, accurate and complete within the System for Award Management (SAM). For additional information, reference https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/.

iv. In accordance with block 13 of the SF 1442, a Bid Guarantee is required (See contract clause 52.228-1). The Bid Guarantee shall be 20% of the offered amount and must accompany the proposal submission.

v. Submission of the financial questionnaire is required to be submitted by the Offeror on the Attachment C form(s) in regards to having, or having the ability to obtain, adequate financial resources to cover the contract. The Attachment C form shall be completed by the Offeror's main financial banking institution, and may be completed for the Offeror's suppliers and/or from other businesses having financial affairs with the Offeror. This information is to guide the Contracting Officer in determining whether or not the Offeror has the necessary financial resources to perform the contract or has the ability to obtain them prior to award in accordance with FAR 9.104-1(a).

Information submitted on Attachment C form(s) is not a technical factor and will not be evaluated.

Rather, this information is required by the FAR in order to be eligible for award and is submitted in advance to expedite the Contracting Officer's determination of Offeror responsibility prior to contract award. The contractor shall submit the advanced copy of Attachment C via email to juanita.lambert@us.af.mil and courtesy copy (CC) ashley.smith.28@us.af.mil and gage.bergman@us.af.mil no later than (NLT) March 23 2015.

vi. The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if, in the Contracting Officer’s opinion, adequate price competition exists no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the PCO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists; Offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the PCO to determine the reasonableness and affordability of the Price. In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), data other than cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness and realism. Data shall be provided in accordance with FAR 15.403-5. If, after receipt of proposals, the PCO determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the Offeror shall be required to submit certified cost or pricing data. Should adequate price competition not exist after receipt of proposals, the provisions of FAR Part 15.403-4 shall apply, and the Offeror will be asked to provide certification of cost or pricing data.

5. Specific Instructions for Volume II – PAST PERFORMANCE PROPOSAL

Only information for same or similar type contracts as defined in the relevant definition in paragraph 5ii are desired. This includes Past Performance for a major subcontractor who performed 25% of the aggregate of the project. Provide any information available (i.e. descriptive language, letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrates customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed projects for same or similar contracts completed within the last three years as well as current projects nearing completion. In addition, explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems such as extended performance periods, numerous warranty calls, etc. Provide comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions. If applicable, provide a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their Past Performance information to the prime Offeror. Past Performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have recent and relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement WILL NOT be rated as highly as Past Performance information for the principle Offeror. First time Teaming Arrangements and Joint Ventures with no past performance will not be rated as highly as the principle offeror or Teaming Arrangements/Joint Ventures with previous past performance.

RECENT AND RELEVANT INFORMATION For the purpose of this RFP, recent and relevant Past Performance is defined as:

i. RECENT – Ongoing contracts with a performance history, and contracts completed within three (3) years from the issue date of this RFP (see SF 1442, Block 3).

ii. RELEVANT – Performance of construction work which is the same or similar in scope, magnitude, trade, and complexity, as described in the RFP, including the specifications and drawings, contract type, contract environment, subcontractor interaction, and Price. Relevant contracts include experience as a prime contractor and/or Joint Ventures expertise in the area of construction activities on the focus of new work, civil site work, utilities, fire alarms, mass notification systems, communications, metal roof, interior finishes, mechanical, electrical, plumbing and paving.

6. Specific Instructions for Volume III –PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCES

i. Only references for same or similar contracts are desired.

ii. The Government will evaluate the quality and extent of Offeror’s performance deemed recent and relevant to the requirements of this RFP. The Government will use information submitted by the Offeror on the Attachment A and Attachment B forms, the Past Performance Proposal, and other sources such as other federal Government offices and commercial sources, to assess performance. The Government may also use other information available that is determined relevant to this effort, such as, but not limited to, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Recent and relevant contracts include contracts that meet the recent and relevancy definitions detailed below.

iii. Teaming Arrangement or Joint Venture: If the Offeror intends to fulfill the requirements of this RFP in a teaming arrangement or joint venture, the Offeror must provide complete information as to the arrangement, including a list of any relevant and recent past/present performance information on previous teaming arrangements or joint ventures with the same teaming or joint venture partner. If this is a first-time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past and present contracts. First time, Joint Ventures or Teaming Arrangements, with no past performance will not be rated as highly as the principle offeror or established Teaming Arrangements or Joint Ventures with previous past performance.

7. Additional Instructions

i. Deviations. Deviations from these instructions will be reviewed by the Contracting Officer to ensure that no Offeror receives a competitive advantage. Deviations resulting in a competitive advantage for an Offeror will result in the proposal being determined noncompliant with the RFP requirements. Offerors unconditionally assume the risk that a clear quantitative deviation will be deemed qualitatively advantageous to the Offeror and determined noncompliant with the RFP.

ii. Disposition of Unsuccessful Proposals. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the Offeror requires otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of unsuccessful proposals.

iii. Proposal Delivery. Anticipate a three (3) to five (5) day lead time for Security Forces to process the documents and conduct the required background check. To get base access in time to submit proposal by due date of 13 April 2015 base access forms MUST be submitted no later than 1200 on 6 April 2015. Base passes cannot be picked up until 6 April 2015.

For base access see para 7iv. Offerors are advised that delays can be experienced entering the installation when proposals are hand carried to the base. See below instructions for specific requirements to access the installation. In addition to the specific instructions below; vehicle registration, proof of insurance and proper identification are required to enter the installation.

Proposals must be either hand delivered or mailed to arrive at the following address by the required dates:

AFTC/PZIOC

ATTN: ASHLEY M. SMITH AND GAGE BERGMAN

308 WEST D AVENUE, BUILDING 260, SUITE 130

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

Hand carried proposals must be submitted to Building 260, Room 130, Eglin AFB, FL. Please call the Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer to notify once your delivery is made. All Offerors' proposals must then be date/time stamped listed on the proposal envelope/package by the Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer. Outside the front door of the Contracting Office, Suite 130 is a table that contains all of the telephone numbers of personnel in Operational Contracting.

The envelope used in submitting your proposal must be plainly marked with the RFP number, and the date and local time set for proposal closing. NOTE) It is imperative that an Offeror intending to deliver their proposal by commercial carrier, e.g. Federal Express, DHL, UPS, etc., insure that the outer envelope of the commercial carrier’s package identifies the contents as a proposal. This outer package must clearly show the RFP number and the date and local time set for proposal closing.

iv. BASE ACCESS FOR SITE VISIT AND PROPOSAL SUBMISSION: If requesting base access, the Offeror must submit a written request on company letterhead to the Contract Specialist (ashley.smith.28@us.af.mil and gage.bergman@us.af.mil) and the Contracting Officer (juanita.lambert@us.af.mil) listing the following:

Names Company Date and Time of Visit Location of Visit Reason for Visit The Contracting Officer or Contract Specialist will endorse the pass request and then send it with to the Site Customer for processing.

To gain base access in time for the site visit the Offeror must submit base access forms no later than March 10th 2015. (ALREADY CONDUCTED)

v. Site Visit: See Clause 52.236-27

vi. Electronic Reference Documents. All referenced documents for this RFP are available on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website at http://www.fedbizopps.gov. Potential

Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time email notifications when information has been posted to the website for this RFP.

vii. Formal Communications: Offerors shall submit formal communications such as questions, requests for clarifications, and/or information concerning this RFP, in writing (email is considered the recommended method) to the following address NO LATER THAN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR TO THE PROPOSAL DUE DATE to allow processing an amendment to the RFP with the Offeror’s questions and answers.

ATTN: ASHLEY M. SMITH

308 WEST D AVENUE, BUILDING 260, SUITE 130

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

Email: ashley.smith.28@us.af.mil

ATTN: GAGE BERGMAN

308 WEST D AVENUE, BUILDING 260, SUITE 130

EGLIN AFB FL 32542

Email: gage.bergman@us.af.mil

8. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SECTION L, INSTRUCTIONS AND SECTION M, EVALUATION

Your attention is directed to the functional relationship between Section L above and Section M below of this RFP.

Section L provides information for the purpose of organizing the proposal and is not intended to be all-inclusive.

Section M describes evaluation factors for award, to include the evaluation procedures for responsiveness to the RFP, ranking of the Price proposal, and the assessment of Past Performance information. PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONTAIN THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BY SECTION L MAY BE REJECTED. Since there is a functional relationship between Section L and M the proposals must address all areas identified for both sections.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Section M - EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

a. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD:

1. This is a competitive best value acquisition utilizing the tradeoff process without technical proposals in accordance with FAR 15.3, Contracting by Negotiation, as supplemented by DoD Source Selection Procedures, AFFARS 5315.3, MP5315.3, and the evaluation process and criteria set forth in this Request for Proposal (RFP). This procurement will be conducted as an 8(a) set-aside. The Government will award a contract resulting from the RFP to the acceptable, responsible Offeror whose proposal, conforming to this RFP, offers the best-value to the Government. The evaluation factors are: Factor 1: Price and Factor 2:

Past Performance, with Past Performance being approximately equal to Price. Evaluation criteria are the same for all competing Offerors.

2. Offerors shall ensure that proposals are submitted in accordance with the instructions provided in clause FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisitions and Section L of this RFP. By submission of its offer, the Offeror accedes to all RFP requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, exhibits, attachments, drawings, and specifications.

3. Offerors shall propose prices for all CLINs. Any offer that fails to cite a Price for each item, or fails to make an entry, may be rejected as nonconforming to this RFP.

4. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the RFP terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Failure to meet a requirement risks rejection.

5. Only Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) offers will be evaluated for FFP Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs).

An offer using a sliding price scale, or subject to escalation based on any contingency for FFP designated CLINs, will not be accepted. Only one contract will be awarded for this requirement.

b. EVALUATION PROCESS:

1. Price Evaluation: Initially, offers will be ranked according to their Total Evaluated Prices (TEPs) for each CLIN. Each offeror’s proposed CLIN prices will be determined by multiplying the “Unit Price” by the Government provided ”Quantity” identified to determine the “Amount” for each CLIN. Price will be reviewed and evaluated based on the CLINs shown within RFP, Part I, Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices which begins on the page following the SF 1442- RFP, Offer, and Award. The Government has four CLINS for this effort and are prioritized in order as CLIN 0001 - The Larger Footprint with CMU;

0002 - The Larger Footprint; CLIN 0003 – The Smaller Footprint with CMU; CLIN 0004 – The Smaller Footprint.

Each offeror's price proposal will be evaluated, using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404, in order to determine if it is reasonable. Once the PCO has determined that adequate price competition exists within this source selection price fair and reasonableness will be evaluated, at a minimum, based on the comparison of the offeror’s overall TEP with all other competitive offerors’ overall TEPs received in response to the RFP. After the proposals are ranked by price, the past performance evaluation will proceed as defined in paragraph a.3. above.

2. Past Performance Evaluation: Using the information provided in Volume II, Past Performance Proposal and Volume III, Past Performance References (Attachment A’s) and completed Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment B’s) and other available information, the Contracting Officer shall seek recent and relevant performance information on all Offerors based on (1) the past and present efforts provided by the Offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other Government, commercial and other sources.

i. Recent Definition: Ongoing contracts with a performance history, and contracts completed within three (3) years from the issue date of this solicitation (see Standard Form 1442, Block 3).

ii. Relevancy Definition: Performance of construction work which is the same or similar in scope, magnitude, trade, and complexity, as described in the RFP, including the specifications and drawings, contract type, contract environment, subcontractor interaction, and Price. Relevant contracts include experience as a prime contractor and/or Joint Ventures expertise in the area of construction activities on the focus of new work, civil site work, utilities, fire alarms, mass notification systems, communications, metal roof, interior finishes, mechanical, electrical, plumbing and paving.

iii. The Government reserves the right to seek information on higher priced Offerors if none of the lower priced Offerors receive a Substantial Confidence performance confidence assessment. The purpose of the Past Performance evaluation is to allow the Government to assess the Offeror’s ability to perform the effort described in this RFP, based on the Offeror’s demonstrated present and Past Performance. The Government will conduct a performance confidence assessment based upon Past Performance of the Offerors as it relates to the probability of successfully performing the solicitation requirements. This evaluation will include the Offeror’s record of (i) conforming to the Specifications and contract requirements, (ii) management of the project, (iii) reasonable and cooperative behavior and performance and commitment to customer satisfaction, and (iv) quality control. This assessment represents the Government evaluation team’s judgment of the probability of an Offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort, based upon the Offeror’s demonstrated present and Past Performance. The rating may be determined initially, or as a result of discussions. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment rating of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence, or Unknown Confidence, as defined in Table 1.0.

iv. Offerors submitting Past Performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel, or subcontractors, are highly encouraged to provide sufficient details regarding them to allow the Government to fully evaluate the relative value of the information. For example, but not limited to, how is the Past Performance of a predecessor company, key personnel, or subcontractor recent and relevant to the determination of this Offeror’s ability to perform this contract. What will the level of involvement of key personnel be on this contract effort? Provide full details of any subcontractor’s involvement on this work effort. However, Past Performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have recent and relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will NOT be rated as highly as Past Performance information for the principal Offeror.

v. In evaluating Past Performance, the Government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this RFP.

vi. Offerors with no recent and relevant past or present performance history or the Offeror’s performance record is so limited that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating "Unknown Confidence," meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably. Definitions for Performance Confidence Assessments and Relevancy are as defined below:

Table 1.0 – Performance Confidence Assessments

Performance Confidence Assessments Substantial Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

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

No Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, The Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Table 2.0 – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Definitions

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Definitions Very Relevant

Present/Past Performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/Past Performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant

Present/Past Performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant

Present/Past Performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

3. Best-Value Determination:

BID SCHEDULE LIST OF PRIORITIES

CLIN Evaluation

Priority* 0001 – Additive 2 with Additive 1 1 0002 – Additive 2 (larger footprint) 2 0003 – Base Bid with Additive 1 3 0004 – Base Bid (smaller footprint) 4

* Evaluation priority is the evaluation of the customer’s most desired outcome listed as number 1, to the customer’s least desired outcome listed as number 4.

i. Offerors will be initially ranked from lowest TEP to the highest TEP for CLIN 0001

A. If the first lowest TEP for CLIN 0001is determined to be reasonable, and that offeror receives an overall Substantial Confidence performance rating, then that offer represents the best value for the Government. If that offer is less than or equal to the available funding for this contract, then evaluation process stops at this point. Award will be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

B. If the lowest TEP for CLIN 0001 does not receive a Substantial Confidence performance rating, then the offer with the next lowest TEP that is less than or equal to the available funding will be evaluated under the Past Performance Factor and the process will continue until either an offeror whose price is reasonable and less than or equal to the available funding receives a Substantial Confidence performance rating or all offerors whose prices are reasonable and less than or equal to the available funding have been evaluated.

C. The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment best-value award decision by determining if the best-value to the Government is to pay a higher cost for a higher past performance assessment rating. The Government has the ability to:

I. Award a contract to the lowest TEP offeror for CLIN 0001 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has a Substantial Confidence Rating;

II. Award to a higher TEP offeror for CLIN 0001 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has a Substantial Confidence Rating;

III. Award a contract to the lowest TEP offeror for CLIN 0001 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has at least a Satisfactory Confidence Rating;

IV. Determine not to award a contract that includes CLIN 0001.

ii. If the Government determines not to award a contract that includes CLIN 0001, offerors will then be ranked from lowest TEP to the highest TEP for CLIN 0002.

A. If the first lowest TEP for CLIN 0002 is determined to be reasonable, and that offeror the best value for the Government. If that offer is less than or equal to the available funding for this contract, then evaluation process stops at this point. Award will be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

B. If the lowest TEP for CLIN 0002 does not receive a Substantial Confidence performance rating, then the offer with the next lowest TEP that is less than or equal to the available funding will be evaluated under the Past Performance Factor and the process will continue until either an offeror whose price is reasonable and less than or equal to the available funding receives a Substantial Confidence performance rating or all offerors whose prices are reasonable and less than or equal to the available funding have been evaluated.

C. The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment best-value

I. Award a contract to the lowest TEP offeror for CLIN 0002 that is less than or

II. Award to a higher TEP offeror for CLIN 0002 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has a Substantial Confidence Rating;

III. Award a contract to the lowest TEP offeror for CLIN 0002 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has at least a Satisfactory Confidence

IV. Determine not to award a contract that includes CLIN 0002.

iii. If the Government determines not to award a contract that includes CLIN 0002, offerors will then be ranked from lowest TEP to the highest TEP for CLIN 0003.

A. If the first lowest TEP for CLIN 0003 is determined to be reasonable, and that offeror the best value for the Government. If that offer is less than or equal to the available funding for this contract, then evaluation process stops at this point. Award will be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

B. If the lowest TEP for CLIN 0003 does not receive a Substantial Confidence performance rating, then the offer with the next lowest TEP that is less than or equal to the available funding will be evaluated under the Past Performance Factor and the process will continue until either an offeror whose price is reasonable and less than or equal to the available funding receives a Substantial Confidence performance rating or all offerors whose prices are reasonable and less than or equal to the available funding have been evaluated.

C. The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment best-value

I. Award a contract to the lowest TEP offeror for CLIN 0003 that is less than or

II. Award to a higher TEP offeror for CLIN 0003 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has a Substantial Confidence Rating;

III. Award a contract to the lowest TEP offeror for CLIN 0003 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has at least a Satisfactory Confidence

IV. Determine not to award a contract that includes CLIN 0003.

iv. If the Government determines not to award a contract that includes CLIN 0003, offerors will then be ranked from lowest TEP to the highest TEP for CLIN 0004.

A. If the first lowest TEP for CLIN 0001is determined to be reasonable, and that offeror the best value for the Government. If that offer is less than or equal to the available funding for this contract, then evaluation process stops at this point. Award will be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

B. If the lowest TEP for CLIN 0001 does not receive a Substantial Confidence performance rating, then the offer with the next lowest TEP that is less than or equal to the available funding will be evaluated under the Past Performance Factor and the process will continue until either an offeror whose price is reasonable and less than or equal to the available funding receives a Substantial Confidence performance rating or all offerors whose prices are reasonable and less than or equal to the available funding have been evaluated.

C. The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment best-value

I. Award a contract to the lowest TEP offeror for CLIN 0004 that is less than or

II. Award to a higher TEP offeror for CLIN 0004 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has a Substantial Confidence Rating;

III. Award a contract to the lowest TEP offeror for CLIN 0004 that is less than or equal to the available funding and has at least a Satisfactory Confidence

IV. Determine not to award a contract.

2. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisitions and Section L of this solicitation. Offeror’s may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevance of Past Performance information) or respond to adverse Past Performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse Past Performance is defined as Past Performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

3. The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective Offerors. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions, if later the Contracting Officer determines this to be necessary. The Government may reject any or all offers, if such, is in the public interest; accept other than the lowest offer; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in received offers.

4. Rejection of Unrealistic Offers: The Government may reject any proposal that is assessed to be unrealistic in terms of program commitments, including contract terms and conditions, or unrealistically high or low in Price, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program. Proposals that are unrealistic in terms of Price may be rejected at any time during the evaluation process. Offerors are cautioned to follow the detailed instructions fully and carefully, as the Government reserves the right to make an award based on initial offers received, without discussion of such offers. The Offeror's initial proposal should reflect their best effort.

5. If the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) determines that discussions are necessary, Offerors may be required to participate in telephone discussions or in face-to-face oral discussions at the Operational Contracting Division, 308 West D Avenue, Suite 130, Bldg. 260, Eglin AFB FL.

(End of Summary of Changes)