FA302218R0007_Amendment_1.pdf

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

The purpose of this amendment is to:

A.) Incorporate SOW Rev. 1 dated 21 July 2018 B.) Update Sections L & M. All changes are in red.

C.) Change proposal due date from 24 July 2018 to 6 August 2018.

D.) CLIN 0002 for mold remediation is added. The total price for this CLIN is to be negoiated after aw ard upon the completion of B550 Demolition. Offerors are not to propose pricing for CLIN 0002.

E.) All other items remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 11

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 23-Jul-2018

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 FA302218R0007

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

25-Jun-2018

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 1 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

23-Jul-2018

CODE

14 CONS/PKA--FA3022

495 HARPE BLVD, STE 293

COLUMBUS AFB MS 39710-1006

FA3022 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA302218R0007

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 24-Jul-2018 02:00 PM to 06-Aug-2018 02:00 PM.

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0001

The unit of issue Lot has been added.

The signal code A has been added.

CLIN 0002 is added as follows:

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0002 1 Lot Mold Remediation

FFP

It is anticipated that mold remediation will be required during this project. The amount and scope of which cannot be determined until demolition is complete. The total cost of mold remediation is to be negotiated and funded after demolition.

FOB: Destination

SIGNAL CODE: A

NET AMT

SECTION E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

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

INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

Destination Government Destination Government

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule for CLIN 0002 has been added:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

450 dys. ANP 1 14CES/CECC-F1N3BC

DONALD YOUNG

555 SIMLER BLVD, SUITE 110

COLUMBUS AFB MS 39710-6010

662-434-7946 FOB: Destination

F1N3BC

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment # Description Pages Date Attachment 1 B550 SOW 46 21 Jul 2018 Attachment 2 B550 Drawings 138 11 Nov 2017 Attachment 3 Wage Determination

MS180136

5 5 Jan 2018

Attachment 4 DD 1354 2 11 Nov 2017 Attachment 5 B550 Form 66 1 6 Nov 2017 Attachment 6 Contractor Insurance

Certification 1 16 May 2018

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

ADDENDUM FAR 52.215-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (May 2018)

1) General Information

a) Contractor Selection

Selection of a contractor will be based on Lowest Price Technically Acceptable consistent with the evaluation factors described in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, to include price, technical, and past performance. Pursuant to the provisions of the clause at FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition, the Government intends to evaluate and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price, technical, and past performance standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the contracting officer later determines them to be necessary. If the contracting officer determines the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the contracting officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

b) Point of Contact

The procuring contracting officer (PCO) and contract administrator (CA) are the sole points of contact for this acquisition. Address any and all questions or concerns in writing to the PCO and CA no later than 5 days after the scheduled site visit.

Allison Lewis 495 Harpe Blvd Suite 256C Columbus AFB, MS 39710 Phone: (662) 434-7780 Fax number: (662) 434-3049 E-mail: allison.lewis.2@us.af.mil

Benjamin Raley 495 Harpe Blvd Suite 256C Columbus AFB, MS 39710 Phone: (662) 434-1457 Fax number: (662) 434-3049 E-mail: benjamin.raley@us.af.mil

c) Use of Non-Government Advisors Non-Government Advisors will not be used in this acquisition. As required by FAR 9.505, no companies are prohibited from competing for this contract.

d) Proprietary Information Information deemed by the offeror to be proprietary shall be clearly marked as proprietary information.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation will not be returned.

e) Period of Validity The proposal shall remain valid until 31 December 2018.

f) Number of Awards A single contract will be awarded for the project.

2) General Instructions

a) To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations, and certifications. Because this award is set aside for Woman Owned Small Businesses, offerors must proactively work with the contracting officer to ensure access is granted to the offeror’s Woman Owned Small Business Repository profile for the purpose of ensuring the offeror is adequately represented as a Woman Owned Small Business. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The response shall consist of three (3) volumes as outlined below:

Volume Title Max Page Limit

I Price Proposal none II Technical Proposal 40 III Past Performance 20

b) Proposal Format mailto:allison.lewis.2@us.af.mil mailto:benjamin.raley@us.af.mil

The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply restate or rephrase the Government’s requirements, rather it shall provide a convincing rationale explaining how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal. Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing. Elaborate graphics, multi-media functions (for example, video clips or sound bites), or other embellishments are not desired.

c) Distribution

NO HARD COPY PAPER PROPOSALS WILL BE ACCEPTED

Proposals shall be submitted electronically via AMRDEC to the POCs above. The subject line shall contain the solicitation number (FA302218R0007) and your company name. The AMRDEC website is https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/Welcome.aspx. Follow all instructions on the AMRDEC website. If not submitting proposal via DVD, the use of AMRDEC is mandatory. Offerors are to submit a hardcopy of their Bid Bond Guarantee to the Government office by the proposal due date and time.

d) Electronic Media

Offerors may also submit their proposals on DVD-R disks. All volumes shall be submitted on one DVD.

Offeror shall submit proposal files in Windows 2007 or newer version format with a table of contents of the proposal structure. The Price Volume shall be submitted in application-specific files developed and saved using the following versions of Microsoft software: Windows 2007 or newer version. Offerors are encouraged to refrain from incorporating detailed graphic items, other than any plans or drawings, as they are not required or desired. If multiple files are required for a given volume, offerors shall organize their electronic submission so that each volume is contained in a separate directory. Each DVD shall contain an electronic label, which is to be established on the DVD when the DVD is formatted. No password-protected, zipped, or self-extracting files shall be used. Each offeror shall provide virus-free DVDs. Offerors are reminded that if the hard copy version contains restrictive legends the DVD shall contain the same markings.

e) Pages and Typing

Pages shall be numbered by section within each volume. Font shall be at least 12 pt and all margins shall be 1 inch. These page format restrictions shall also apply to responses to any correspondence provided during the negotiation process. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Each page shall be counted except for the following:

cover pages, table of contents, cross-reference matrix, tabs and glossaries. Please note that any attachments provided will count toward the total page count.

f) Proposal Structure

Each section or part of the Offeror’s proposal shall clearly identify the specific solicitation requirements it addresses.

g) Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

The Government recommends that each volume contain a glossary of abbreviations and acronyms.

Glossaries will not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

h) Proposal Revisions https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/Welcome.aspx

Proposal Revisions shall be submitted as required or needed by the government in accordance with the following:

i) Proposal revisions shall be submitted via email, AMRDEC, or on DVD-R disks. The email, AMRDEC, or DVD-R shall contain one (1) copy with changes shown and one (1) with changes accepted.

ii) In the upper right corner of each revised page, include the offeror’s name, exact location (volume, section, page number, etc.) within the original proposal, and date of transmittal.

iii) Changes shall be marked by a change bar in the margin to indicate the changed part of each page.

iv) If the revision exceeds one page, each page shall be marked with the page number it is replacing and a numerical or alphabetical extension (i.e. 93-a…93-d).

v) For each deleted page, a blank page shall be submitted denoted with “page intentionally left blank” and the original page number.

i) The Government has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the PCO will review this determination and if, in the PCO’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 contracting officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists or that price reasonableness cannot be determined, offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine price reasonableness.

3) Specific Instructions:

a) VOLUME I – PRICE PROPOSAL - Offerors shall submit one (1) original via email, AMRDEC, or DVD of their price proposal. No Page limit.

i) Volume one shall consist of the following:

• Signed SF 1442, with total proposed price inserted in Section B CLIN 0001. And Section K, Representation and Certifications completed.

• Any and all signed solicitation amendments

• Completed Insurance Certification at Attachment 6

• Bid Guarantee

• Required Information for the Government to access the Offerors Woman Owned

Small Business Repository profile.

ii) The source selection will be conducted with the expectation of adequate price competition per FAR 15.403-1(c)(1)(i); therefore, certified cost or pricing data are not required. However, if adequate price competition does not exist or the contracting officer cannot determine price reasonableness, the Offeror may be required to submit data other than certified cost or pricing data or certified cost or pricing data to the extent necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine price reasonableness.

b) VOLUME II– TECHNICAL PROPOSAL – Offerors shall submit one (1) original via email, AMRDEC, or DVD of their technical proposal. Page limit is 40 pages single sided in accordance with the General Instruction.

i) Volume II shall consist of the following:

• Subfactor A – Offerors must submit a Specific Technical and Management Capabilities plan, to include the offerors approach for construction, environmental compliance, health and safety management, quality control, and issue resolution.

• Subfactor B – Offerors must submit a Staffing Plan identifying key subcontractors, team members, and design professionals.

• Subfactor C – Offerors must submit a Construction Schedule demonstrating coordination of work, phasing, and adverse weather.

c) VOLUME III– PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION – Offerors shall submit one (1) original via email, AMRDEC, or DVD. Page limit is 20 pages in accordance with the General Instruction. Only references for same or similar type contract. Volume III shall consist of the following:

i) The Contractor shall submit evidence of recent and relevant standalone projects comparable to this requirement and magnitude. A maximum of three (3) contracts may be submitted. More than three

(3) contracts will not be evaluated. If a Contractor submits more than three (3) they will be evaluated in the order the Contractor list them.

• Recency: Past performance will be limited to work performed in the last five years from the issue date of this solicitation.

• Relevancy: Relevancy is defined as a standalone project comparable to this requirement and magnitude (Between $1M and $5M). Contractor’s performance on projects not completed (but over 30%) and/or past CPARS/CCASS ratings can be considered for relevancy as long as it meets the following. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving requirements that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude, and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation. For this acquisition, past performance will be considered relevant when it demonstrates essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

ii) Offerors at a minimum shall provide the following Past Performance information:

(1) Company and/or Division Name

(2) Detailed Description of work performed

(3) Customer or Contracting Agency

(4) Contract Number

(5) Initial Contract Cost (at time of Proposal)

(6) Final Contract Cost (including all Change Orders, etc.)

(7) Initial Period of Performance (at time of award)

(8) Final Period of Performance (including all Change Orders, etc.)

(9) Verified, up-to-date name, address, email and phone number of the Contracting Officer

(10) Comments regarding contract compliance (e.g. finished on time and within budget)

iii) The offeror may substitute any of their 3 references with a reference for any proposed subcontractors that will be performing a significant portion of the work or for each firm participating in a joint venture/teaming arrangement.

iv) Subcontractor Consent: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide with the proposal 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 contractor.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

1) The evaluation factors are:

a) PRICE PROPOSAL

b) TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

c) PAST PERFORMANCE

Technical and Past Performance when combined are approximately equal to price.

a) BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD:

This acquisition will utilize the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable source selection procedure using price and non-price factors to make award decision. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal provides the best value to the Government. The best value to the Government is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with an acceptable past performance and lowest evaluated price, based on the results of the evaluation as described in the paragraphs below.

The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective Offerors; therefore, the initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

An Offeror may be asked to clarify certain aspects of its proposal (e.g., 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. Exchanges conducted with regard to adverse past performance or to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions, and the Government reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

For the purpose of conducting evaluations, the Government will conduct an initial evaluation in which the proposals will be ordered from the lowest total evaluated priced to the highest total evaluated priced. Next, the government shall review the two lowest priced proposals first. If both of these proposals are evaluated as technically acceptable, and are evaluated as acceptable in past performance, the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal will be selected as the proposal that represents the best value to the government.

If any of these two proposals are evaluated as technically unacceptable, or evaluated as unacceptable in past performance, then the government will continue to review the proposals from the next lowest priced proposal until the government has two technically acceptable proposals, each of which are also evaluated as acceptable in past performance, or until all proposals have been reviewed. The lowest priced technically acceptable proposal, with acceptable past performance, may then be selected as the proposal that represents the best value to the government.

b) VOLUME I- PRICE PROPOSAL

Pricing will be evaluated according to the following criteria:

i.) Reasonableness: Proposals will be evaluated for reasonableness in accordance with one or more of the proposal analysis techniques described in FAR 15.404, which may include, but not limited to, comparison to proposed prices received and comparison to the Independent Cost Estimate (IGE).

ii.) Total Evaluated Price: The total evaluated price will be the total proposed price submitted by an offeror in Section B of the SF1442 for CLIN 0001. OFFERORS ARE NOT TO PROPOSE PRICING FOR

CLIN 0002.

c) VOLUME II – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for the three (3) Technical Sub-Factors listed below. The Offeror’s proposal must demonstrate a clear understanding of the nature and scope of work required. Failure to provide a complete proposal may reflect a lack of capability to perform the work requirements and may result in a determination that the Offeror’s proposal is “Unacceptable.” Detailed instructions are included in the proposal preparation instructions section of this solicitation. During evaluation of each proposal, the Government will assign each subfactor a rating of either “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” as shown below in TABLE C-1.

NOTE: A rating of “Unacceptable” in one or more Technical Sub-Factors will constitute an overall rating of “Unacceptable” for the Technical Factor.

TABLE C-1 – Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

i.) Sub-Factor A: The offerors Specific Technical and Management Capabilities shall be evaluated to ensure:

a. The offerors approach for construction, environmental compliance, health and safety management, quality control, and issue resolution demonstrates an appropriate approach for completing the job in a safe, compliant, and timely manner.

ii.) Sub-Factor B: The Offeror’s Staffing Plans and Identification of Key Subcontractors/Team Members shall be evaluated to ensure:

a. Offeror has qualified personnel in all areas and phases of work to include:

1. Design professionals being licensed to practice in the state of Mississippi.

2. Personnel submissions will be evaluated to meet SOW/code requirements.

b. Offeror has adequate supervision at the appropriate levels of project management and provides the decision authority at the appropriate levels to maintain project quality and timeliness.

iii.) Sub-Factor C: The Offeror’s Schedule shall be evaluated to ensure that it demonstrate coordination of work activities, phasing, adverse weather considerations, and ensure the project will be delivered on time and on budget.

d) VOLUME III- PAST PERFORMANCE

The Government will use the following procedures in evaluating past performance:

Recent, relevant Past Performance will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable scale as defined below.

Table C-2. Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

For the purpose of this solicitation, recency and relevancy will be evaluated as follows:

i.) Recency: Past performance will be limited to work performed in the last five years from the issue date of this solicitation.

ii.) Relevancy: Relevancy is defined as a standalone project comparable to this requirement and magnitude (Between $1M and $5M). Contractor’s performance on projects not completed (but over 30%) and/or past CPARS/CCASS ratings can be considered for relevancy as long as it meets the following. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving requirements that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude, and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation.

For this acquisition, past performance will be considered relevant when it demonstrates essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Proposals must be evaluated as Acceptable in Past Performance to be considered for award. If a proposal receives an Unacceptable rating, the offeror will not be considered for award. Although only recent, relevant past performance will be evaluated for award, poor performance ratings or other negative information regarding non-recent and/or non-relevant past performance will be evaluated.

The government reserves the right to obtain and evaluate past performance information from any sources it deems appropriate (i.e. CPARS/CCASS and /PPIRS/FAPIIS).

An offeror may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposals, such as, the relevance of an offeror’s past performance information (as related to this acquisition), and adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond or to resolve minor clerical errors.

(End of Summary of Changes)