Attachment_23_-_Addendum_Sections_L_and_M_Instructions_to_Offeror_and_Evaluation_Factors_for_Award.pdf

Addendum Section L. Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

1.1 General Information.

1.1.1 The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by these Instructions to Offerors and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Statement of Work (SOW), Base Specifications and Solicitation.

Non-conformance with the instructions provided in these Instructions to Offerors may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

1.1.2 The proposal acceptance period is specified in Block 13, SF 1442, of this solicitation. By signing block 20B of the SF 1442, the offeror certifies that the proposal is valid from the due date and time listed in block 13A through the entire period specified in block 13D.

1.1.3 All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities website at http://www.fbo.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

1.1.4 The Government reserves the right to revise or amend the specifications, drawings, or the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such revisions or amendments will be communicated by amendments to the Request for Proposal (RFP) and posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website. If such amendments require material changes in quantities or prices, the proposal closing date may be postponed by enough days to enable offerors to revise their proposals. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new closing date and time. Offerors MUST acknowledge all amendments in their proposal, either by completing SF 1442 Block 19, providing signed copies of the amendments with their proposal (Section III), or by separate letter which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers.

1.1.5 The Contracting Officer listed below is the Government’s sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the Contracting Officer. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the Contracting Officer at the following email address:

Charles M. Carnley, Email: charles.carnley@us.af.mil

1.1.6 In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain a copy of all unsuccessful proposals.

1.1.7 The Contracting Officer will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competition; whereupon, they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR

15.505. Excluded offerors may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post award debriefing. However, excluded offerors are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The Contracting Officer will notify unsuccessful offerors of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or FAR 15.506, as applicable.

1.1.8 If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the Contracting Officer to consider as related to the claimed omission or error. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions. This reservation includes matters of additional or substitute pages of the initial proposal.

1.1.9 The Contracting Officer 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 Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine the reasonableness and affordability of the price.

1.1.10 Proposals may only be submitted by Small Business Administration (SBA) Certified 8(a) firms, registered in the North American Industrial Classification System Code (NAICS) of 236220.

Only 8(a) Business Development Participants are eligible to submit offers. Additionally, in order to submit an offer on a solicitation, each business concern in a Teaming Agreement must be a small business under the designated NAICS size standard, and must also be a small business when combined in the aggregate of all teaming affiliates.

2.0 SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS.

2.1 The following instructions are to aid in the evaluation process.

2.1.1 Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals (including any revisions, and amendments) so as to reach the Government office designated in this solicitation by the time specified in this solicitation. With exception of hard copy bid bonds which must be hand carried or sent by mail by the time specified in this solicitation, only electronic versions of the proposals will be accepted. Paper copies of proposals will not be evaluated, will be rejected, and will not be considered for award.

Proposals may be submitted electronically in one of the following two ways:

2.1.1.1 Proposals may be hand carried submissions of compact disks (CDs) containing electronic files. All documents must be in .pdf format and shall follow the instructions in 2.1.4 below. Title of the documents should include the offerors CAGE code (i.e. “Vol 1 Tech Proposal CAGE#”). Bid Bonds must be submitted in original hard copy form when delivering proposals to the 1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron at Hurlburt Field, Florida. The physical address for hand carried deliveries is 350 Tully Street, Building 90339, Hurlburt Field, Florida 32544.

Contractors should request base access for hand carried proposal delivery NLT 24 hours prior to the proposal due date/time by sending an email request identifying the company name and list of individuals requesting access to the Contracting Officer identified in paragraph 1.1.5 in the previous section.

2.1.1.2 Proposals may also be submitted by mail to the 1st Special Operations Contracting

Squadron at Hurlburt Field, Florida. Mailed proposals must be on compact disk (CD) and all files must be in .pdf format. Title of the documents should include the offerors CAGE code (i.e. “Vol 1 Tech Proposal CAGE#”). Bid Bonds must be submitted by the time specified in this solicitation in original hard copy form when mailing in proposals. The address for proposal and bond submission is:

1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron / PKB Attention: Charles M. Carnley 350 Tully Street

Hurlburt Field, FL 32544

2.1.2 Any proposal, bond, modification, or revision, that is received at the designated Government office after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals will be “late” and will not be considered unless the Contracting Officer determines the criteria set forth in FAR 15.208 exists.

2.1.3 Proposals shall be complete, clearly presented, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation as detailed in section M of this solicitation and for substantiating validity of stated claims.

The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the offeror’s facilities and/or experience and will rely heavily, on the information presented in the offeror's proposal. Proposals shall be neat, indexed (cross-indexed as appropriate) and assembled electronically in an orderly manner. Elaborate artwork and expensive visual and other presentation aids are neither necessary nor desired. Include only information that is relevant to this source selection.

2.1.4 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits.

2.1.4.1 A complete proposal shall consist of three (3) volumes: Volume I, Technical Proposal, Subfactor 1 and Subfactor 2; Volume II (a), Past Performance; Volume II (b), Signed Teaming Agreement (if applicable); and Volume III, Cost/Price Proposal (Executed RFP Documents)/Contractor Responsibility. Specific guidance regarding the content of each volume will be discussed further below. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. When Evaluation Notices (ENs) are necessary, the Government will issue them by electronic means to prospective offerors. Page limitations may be placed on responses to these ENs and such limitations will be provided at the time the EN is issued.

2.1.4.2 Electronic Page Size, Format and Limit.

2.1.4.2.1 An electronic page is defined as each face of an 8 ½” X 11” electronic sheet of paper containing information. Page limits apply to all electronic files submitted via compact disk (CD). Pages in excess of the maximum page limits defined below will not be evaluated.

For the purposes of formatting, the font type shall not be less than

12 pitch. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume.

Volume I – Technical Proposal: 75 Page Limit Subfactor 1 – SAMPLE PROJECT Subfactor 2 – Management Plan and Qualifications

Volume II (a) – Past Performance: 20 Page Limit Volume II (b) – Signed Teaming Agreement (required if proposing a teaming agreement): No Page limit

Volume III – Cost/Price: 30 Page Limit

Volume IV – SEED PROJECT Proposal: 30 Page Limit

2.1.4.2.2 All pages of each part shall be appropriately numbered and identified with the Request for Proposal (RFP) number. Pages in excess of the maximum will not be evaluated.

2.1.4.3 Cost or Pricing Related Data. All cost and/or pricing data shall ONLY be addressed in the Cost/Price Proposal Volume.

2.1.4.4 Indexing. Electronic files should be titled appropriately so as to easily discern each volume as outlined in paragraph 2.1.4.1. Each file shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that file. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

Indexing is not included in the page limitations.

2.1.4.5 Proposal Acceptance Period. The proposal acceptance period is specified in Block 13d of the Standard Form 1442 of the Solicitation. In accordance with Block 17, the number inserted must be equal to or greater than the number of days listed in Block 13d.

3.0 GENERAL: The Technical proposal shall be prepared in accordance with these instructions and shall be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria and evaluation standards in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Technical proposals shall include necessary information to enable the evaluators to form a definitive conclusion concerning the offeror's ability to perform the required construction.

3.1 Volume I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (Submit one (1) original and one (1) sanitized copy with CAGE code only in place of Company Name). Sanitized copy shall be provided as a separate file name. (i.e., “Subfactor 1 Sanitized Tech Proposal CAGE#”). Sanitized copy shall include all subfactors.

3.1.1 SUBFACTOR 1 – Sample Project

3.1.1.1 Design and Construction:

Using the Government provided SAMPLE Project package (Attachment(s) 03-08), provide a proposal for CP1010101, Repair Room 102, Bldg. X as defined in the Hurlburt SABER SOW (Attachment 1) and Hurlburt Base Master Specifications (Attachment 2). This SOW represents the Government’s requirements for the Sample project, which include project schedule, progress report, work time analysis, and proposal.

3.1.1.2 Project Schedule (AF IMT 3064):

Submit a project schedule using the AF IMT 3064. The form must show major measurable line items of the construction project, percentage/value each line item represents in the total proposal cost and a timeline when each line item is scheduled to be completed.

3.1.1.3 Progress Report (AF IMT 3065):

Submit a sample progress report using the AF IMT 3065 showing the work completed at the end of week 4. The form must show line items called out in progress schedule, percentage each line item is valued at, and in the remarks section provide the scheduled and actual percent complete for each period as well as “CONCUR/DO NOT CONCUR” for use by the Government Contracting Officer Representative (COR) to validate percentages.

3.1.1.4 Work Time Analysis (WTA):

Provide a work time analysis for the entire project. This analysis must indicate all aspects of the project which may/may not be included on the progress schedule. Items to consider would be design time, submittal receipt and approval, material arrival dates, etc..

3.1.1.5 Proposal:

Provide a proposal showing material, labor and equipment quantities subtotaled as broken down by the divisions as outlined in the Construction Specification Institute (CSI) 2010 MasterFormat® to include all amendments as of date of this Solicitation. The cost estimate should show detailed listing of RS Means line item numbers, description of items, unit of measure, quantity of units required, cost per unit and total costs for all units per line item, reflecting city cost index (Pensacola, FL) and the applicable coefficient.

3.1.2 SUBFACTOR 2 – Management Plan and Qualifications

3.1.2.1 Management Plan:

Provide a plan that shows the offeror’s overall management plan/approach. This plan shall include the offerors overall management approach with regard to organization, coordination, development, monitoring and control of the construction process. The plan shall also describe the offerors site office organization with regard to levels of management, supervisory experience, personnel authority, and specific positions required to manage requirements from design through construction to completion. The plan shall also describe your material purchasing system and capabilities. Describe how warranty/maintenance support, unforeseen site conditions, design errors, etc. will be handled by your organization. Describe interface with home/site office, subcontractor operations, and construction teams. Describe interface and partnering with government project managers, contracting officials, inspectors, and users.

Finally, the plan shall include an organizational chart with names of assigned personnel and proposed subcontractors and their areas of responsibility for each portion, along with policies and procedures for selection and management of subcontractors. The chart shall also clearly delineate on-site from off-site personnel. The Management Plan must ensure the requirements of the specifications are met at a minimum. The Management Plan shall include the minimum elements for the following components:

- Levels of management

- Supervisory experience

- Personnel authority

- Offeror’s ability to furnish manpower and equipment necessary to perform and manage multiple simultaneous SABER requirements

- Policies and procedures for effective selection and management of subcontractors

- Material purchasing system and capabilities

- Role of the design team in response to a task order; process and procedures for warranty support, unforeseen site conditions and design errors for individual delivery orders.

- Process and procedures for warranty/maintenance support, unforeseen site conditions and design errors

- Interface with home/site office, subcontractor ops, and construction teams

- Include an organizational chart with names of assigned personnel and proposed subcontractors and their areas of responsibility for each portion

3.1.2.2 Qualifications:

Provide resumes, certifications or licenses that show offeror’s personnel has achieved the minimum qualifications. The contractor’s key personnel who will be involved in the day-to-day accomplishment of this contract shall include, as a minimum, personnel qualified in the areas identified below. The following sub-paragraphs identify the minimum requirements, certifications, licenses, etc. required for personnel performing activities or acting in a specific capacity:

-Program/Project Manager (PM):

The contractor’s Program/Project Manager shall have as a minimum, a bachelor’s degree from a regionally or nationally accredited university and at least five (5) years experience managing construction projects which shall include two (2) years of industrial construction. The PM is the primary POC for the CO for all contractual issues with regards to project/program execution and is responsible for the overall management of this contract. The PM is to ensure that quality work is accomplished on schedule and assuring qualified personnel and subcontractors are assigned to complete performance. It is the PM’s responsibility to ensure that contractor personnel and subcontractors possess the appropriate qualifications and experience to complete specified project tasks and that they comply with all statutes, regulations, as well as the contract requirements. The PM shall have and provide to CO, upon request, all required employee or subcontractor certifications and qualifications.

-Superintendent(s):

Project Superintendent(s): The contractor shall identify a minimum of two (2) Superintendents, each with a minimum of five (5) years experience in construction which shall include two (2) years of industrial construction, and two (2) years experience as a project Superintendent or Foreman managing construction projects. A Superintendent shall not have more than five (5) active construction projects at one time, nor shall the workload exceed their capabilities as determined between joint understanding of the Contractor, Contracting, and Civil Engineering.

- Quality Control (QC) Manager:

The contractor shall have a QC Manager with minimum of three (3) years experience in construction which shall include two (2) years of industrial construction, and shall have at least two (2) years of hands-on construction.

4.0 Volume II, PAST PERFORMANCE. Submit one (1) copy. Volume II (a) is limited to 20 pages and Volume II (b) – Signed Teaming Agreement has no page limit. Past Performance Questionnaires and Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluations are not included in the page limitation.

4.1 Volume II (a) - Past Performance - Offerors shall provide adequate past performance information on completed or current contracts (including Federal, State, local government and private) considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed work as identified within the Specifications. Offerors must provide past performance information to establish Recency and Relevancy on all Federal contracts before State, local government or private contracts. The Government’s evaluation of past performance information will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects (See Teaming Agreements, para 4.2), when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of each contract are deemed relevant to complexity and magnitude as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with Section M. Failure to provide required relevancy description may impact the confidence rating, (i.e. aspects of previous projects should match work elements identified in the Solicitation/specification).

4.1.1 Provide a summary of the previous contracts described above, not to exceed 1 page of past performance information per reference. The summary should explain what aspects of each contract are deemed recent and relevant as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with Section M. Failure to provide required relevancy description may impact the confidence rating, (i.e.

aspects of previous projects should match work elements identified in the solicitation/specification).

The summary should not exceed 1 page per reference (maximum total of 10 pages) and include:

a) Name of project (Contract number, if applicable)

b) Name and address of customer or Government agency

c) Name, telephone, fax number and/or email of customer contact or contracting officer

d) Dollar value

e) Period of performance/Completion date

f) Brief description of work performed, and why the effort is relevant

g) Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions

4.1.1.1 Each proposal shall provide current and relevant information regarding an offeror’s actions under previously awarded contracts:

a) Recency Assessment:

An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past six (6) years from the issuance month of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

b) Relevancy Assessment is defined as contracts involving:

Projects involving the type of construction and work elements described in the attached Statement of Work and Specifications. Relevant past performance information must demonstrate design and construction experience with contracts that manage multiple simultaneous task order type projects. Project work elements include renovation, alteration and repair, additions and upgrades, heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), electrical, mechanical, and other major trades.

Managing multiple simultaneous task order projects is defined as having at least twenty

(20) active task order projects at the same time with cumulative value of all task orders totaling over $3.5 million annually.

4.1.2 Complete Section A, Contractor Information, of Attachment 20, Past/Present Performance Questionnaire and mail, or email the attached Past/Present Performance Questionnaire to all past performance references in the list you provide and instruct them to return the completed questionnaire to the individual(s) indicated in paragraph 4.1.3 below. Evaluators are only allowed to use the Attachment 20, Past Performance Questionnaire. Altered or substituted questionnaires will not be evaluated. Also, Past Performance Questionnaires will only be accepted electronically by email from Project Owners or their authorized representatives. Past Performance Questionnaires will not be accepted from Prime Contractors, Subcontractors, or Manufacturers. Offerors are responsible to ensure questionnaires are transmitted to their references, and to indicate which references the questionnaire was sent to.

4.1.3 Inform your references that they shall forward questionnaires electronically by email directly to the address below. Questionnaires must be received in the 1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron office not later than the closing date of the solicitation. Offerors are responsible for ensuring their references transmit the questionnaire to the Contracting Office. In lieu of a Past/Present Performance Questionnaire, if a project is currently available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the contractor should attach the evaluation to the questionnaire with the relevant solicitation number and submit directly to the 1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron office before the official closing date and time. Electronic submissions shall be sent to:

Richard T. Beaty, Email: richard.beaty.3@us.af.mil Lukas M. Anderson, Email: lukas.anderson@us.af.mil

4.1.4 Lack of any past performance will not automatically disqualify an offeror, but it is a factor that is considered in the Best Value Subjective Tradeoff Source Selection described in Section M.

4.1.5 If the offeror claims there is no past performance, then that status must be identified to the Contracting Officer not later than the date/time proposals are due from all offerors.

4.2 Volume II (b) Signed Teaming Agreement – If Teaming Agreements are contemplated they must comply with 13 CFR Part 121 – Small Business Size Regulations. The teaming members must provide complete information as to relevant and recent past performance information on previous teaming agreements. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the teaming agreement must provide information on all relevant contracts as specified in paragraph 4.1. The maximum number of references combined shall not exceed 15 total.

4.2.1 The Government will recognize the integrity and validity of formal contractor Teaming Agreements; provided, the agreements are identified and company relationships are fully disclosed in an offer. A Teaming Agreement must establish each party’s role in the proposal preparation process and will be incorporated into the contract. Failure to clearly define roles and/or provide a Teaming Agreement with a proposal shall make teaming arrangements and related subcontractor past performance ineligible for evaluation and consideration of award. The prime contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any Teaming Agreement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors. Teaming Agreements must provide the following information as part of their proposal, Volume II (b), not later than the date/time proposals are due:

4.2.1.1 Clearly establish roles of each party (who is prime and who is subcontractor, who is responsible for what tasks, contract administration, proposals, work management, etc.)

4.2.1.2 Provide for protection of competition-sensitive proprietary information. (Subcontractor past performance cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent).

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 contractor, only if it is being used as part of the past performance evaluation.

4.2.1.3 Identify each member’s share of the prospective contract, 50/50, 51/49, etc.

4.2.1.4 Exclusivity. Assurance that the team member will not be replaced for the duration of the contract, any exceptions should be identified. Assurance that the team members are not teaming with another firm for the same procurement.

4.2.1.5 Statement of acknowledgement that the Prime Contractor is responsible for adhering to contract terms and conditions and daily management. The Prime Contractor is obligated to negotiate in good faith and responsible for conveying mandatory government terms and conditions to subcontractors.

4.2.1.6 The prime contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any teaming agreement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors.

4.2.2 At the time of initial contract offer and at time of award, each business must be small business. . In order to submit an offer on a contract, each business concern in a teaming agreement must be small under the designated NAICS size standard, and must also be small when combined in the aggregate of all teaming affiliates

5.0 VOLUME III – PRICE/COST PROPOSAL. Submit the Standard Form 1442 and all pages originally included in the RFP. Submit one (1) copy.

5.1 Complete blocks 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20a-c of the SF 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. An authorized official of the firm submitting the offer must sign and date the SF 1442 in block 20a-c. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP, Sections A through K.

5.2 Insert coefficients of base and option years in the Bid Schedule for each Contract Line Item. All line items must be filled in. Failure to provide coefficients for all line items may eliminate you from competition.

5.3 Project distribution. It is estimated that the maximum dollar amount of this contract will be distributed as follows (this shall be reflected in the proposed coefficient for each CLIN/performance period identified in Section B):

- 95% - Standard Hours: 0700-1600hrs

- 4% --- Non-Standard Hours

- 1% --- Concentrated Work - Utilized for hurricane, natural disasters and/or other emergencies/contingencies

5.4 Complete representations and certifications in Section K or the System for Award Management

(SAM).

5.5 Submit the Financial Reference Worksheet, Attachment 21, with the top portion only completed.

5.6 Submit an electronic copy of the original Bid Bond. Note, the original hard copy Bid Bond must be submitted in accordance with paragraph 2.1.1.

6.0 VOLUME IV: SEED PROJECT

6.1 This volume will not be reviewed during the award evaluation process. The Seed Project is not an evaluation factor in selecting an awardee/successful contractor. Once an awardee/successful contractor is selected, Volume IV of the successful contractor’s proposal will be evaluated and negotiated for issuance of the first task order of the resulting IDIQ. The first task order is anticipated to be issued on the same day of award of the resulting IDIQ.

6.2 Using the Government provided SEED Project Package (Attachments 9-18), provide a proposal for Project Title: Replace Condensing Units TLF Buildings 90373, 90374 and 90375. The contractor’s SEED Project proposal shall include a written proposal.

6.2.1 Proposal:

Provide a proposal showing material, labor and equipment quantities subtotaled as broken down by the divisions as outlined in the Construction Specification Institute (CSI) 2010 MasterFormat® to include all amendments as of date of this Solicitation. The cost estimate should show detailed listing of RS Means line item numbers, description of items, unit of measure, quantity of units required, cost per unit and total costs for all units per line item, reflecting city cost index (Pensacola, FL) and the applicable coefficient.

7.0 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATION.

Your attention is directed to the functional relationship between Sections L and M of this solicitation.

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. Since the Government evaluation of proposals will cover areas identified in Section M, proposals should address all such areas of evaluation.

8.0 AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION PRIOR TO CLOSING.

The Government reserves the right to revise or amend the specifications, drawings, or the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such reservations or amendments will be communicated by amendments to the Request for Proposal (RFP) and posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website (http://www.fbo.gov). If such amendments require material changes in quantities or prices, the proposal closing date may be postponed by enough days to enable offerors to revise their proposals. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new closing date and time. Offerors MUST acknowledge all amendments in their proposal, either by completing SF 1442 Block 19, providing signed copies of the amendments with their proposal (Section III), or by separate letter which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers.

9.0 QUESTIONS.

All questions regarding this solicitation must be submitted in writing. All questions and subsequent answers will be posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website www.fbo.gov. It is the responsibility of the contractor to continuously monitor the site for updates. To mitigate the risks associated with the cancellation of this solicitation due to untimely submission of questions, all questions must be submitted electronically to the individual(s) listed below no later than 1400 hrs CST 5 business days after the site visit. Any questions submitted after this period may not be answered.

Richard T. Beaty, Email: richard.beaty.3@us.af.mil Lukas M. Anderson, Email: lukas.anderson@us.af.mil

Addendum Section M. Evaluation Factors for Award

1.0 SOURCE SELECTION

1.1 Basis for Contract Award.

This is a best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS).

These regulations are available electronically at the Air Force (AF) FAR Site, http://farsite.hill.af.mil.

The Best Value technique chosen for this particular acquisition will be a Subjective Tradeoff. The Government will select the best overall offer, based upon an integrated assessment of Technical/Technical Risk, Past Performance, and Cost/Price. Contract(s) may be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation) and is judged, based on the evaluation factors and subfactors to represent the best value to the Government. The Government seeks to award to the offeror who gives the Air Force the greatest confidence that it will best meet, or exceed, the requirements. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors, and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the technical and/or past performance of the higher price offeror outweighs the cost difference. The SSA will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation (described below).

While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

1.2 Discussions.

If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the offeror’s proposal has been evaluated at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the Final Proposal Revision are subject to evaluation and may introduce risk to the offeror’s proposal that may change the rating of the offeror’s proposal.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS.

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

Factor 1: Technical Subfactor 1: SAMPLE Project Subfactor 2: Management Plan and Qualifications

Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Cost/Price

2.1 Relative Importance of Factors. Relative Importance of Factors and Subfactors is as follows: Past Performance, Technical, and Cost/Price are listed in descending order of importance with Factor 2 Past Performance being most important, Factor 1 (Technical) next in importance and Factor 3 (Cost/Price) is least in importance. Within the Technical Factor, subfactor 2 is more important than subfactor 1.

In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), all evaluation factors other than Cost/Price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS.

The Technical evaluation provides for two distinct but related assessments into one rating: the Technical and the Technical Risk. These two have equal impact for the rating of each Technical factor.

3.1 Technical Assessment. The technical assessment provides an assessment of the quality of the offeror’s solution for meeting the Government’s requirement. The assessment will focus on the strengths and deficiencies of the offeror's proposal, and how well the offeror’s proposal meets the Technical factor requirements.

3.2 Technical Risk Assessment. The Assessment of Technical Risk, which is manifested by the identification of weakness(es), considers potential for disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The risk rating considers the risk associated with the technical approach in meeting the requirement.

3.3 Technical Subfactor Ratings. Each Technical subfactor will receive one of the color ratings described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 3 – Combined Technical/Risk Ratings, excerpted below. The Technical Risk descriptions identified in the Combined Technical/Risk Rating description are further defined in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 2B – Technical Risk Descriptions, excerpted below. Factor ratings shall not be rolled up into an overall color rating for the Technical factor.

DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 3 – Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Color Rating

Adjectival Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Proposal is unawardable.

TABLE 2B – TECHNICAL RISK DESCRIPTIONS

Rating Description

Low Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Unacceptable

Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

3.4 SUBFACTOR 1: Execution and Completeness of the SAMPLE Project:

3.4.1 Design and Construction: Using the Government provided SAMPLE Project Package, the offeror must provide a project schedule, progress report, work time analysis, and cost proposal.

The proposal shall describe procedures, processes and methods for tracking the progress of the project and interface with the Government and contractor team from beginning to end.

3.4.2 Progress Schedule: The progress schedule will be evaluated on how well the offeror captured the major line items of the project, how the percentages/value of these line items relate to the cost proposal, how the contractor schedules/plots the work and how this coincides with the overall performance period for the task order.

3.4.3 Progress Report: The progress report will be evaluated on how well the offeror transfers the data from the project schedule to the progress report.

3.4.4 Work Time Analysis: The work time analysis will be evaluated on what miscellaneous or preparatory items are identified, the actual construction period, and how a combination of these correlate to an overall period of performance for this task order.

3.4.5 Proposal: Offeror must demonstrate a clear understanding of the Statement of Work and the ability to locate and utilize appropriate line items from the RS Means Unit Price Book. The offeror shall provide a complete list of priced items from the RS Means and any non-priced items that demonstrates a complete proposal for the given SAMPLE Project. The price/cost estimate must flow in a logical order and clearly address all areas of the design. The price proposal shall include all factors representing a total cost the Government would expect to pay for the SAMPLE Project. The SAMPLE Project proposal will not be included in the price evaluation; it will be used to demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the Statement of Work and ability to complete the project using RSMeans line items and coefficient proposed.

3.5 SUBFACTOR 2: Management Plan and Qualifications.

3.5.1 Management Plan: The offeror’s overall management plan/approach will be evaluated on its organization, coordination, development, and monitoring, and control of design and construction processes. The Government source selection team will review to determine whether sufficient information is provided to describe interface with home/site office, subcontractors operations, and design and construction teams; interface and partnering with Government project managers, contracting officials, inspectors and users; and methods and criteria used to screen and select quality subcontractors and design consultants to ensure an appropriate level of experience and expertise for the job. The Management Plan must ensure the requirements of the SOW, sections 3.1 and 3.2, and Section L are met at a minimum. The plan shall effectively include, but is not limited to, the following components:

- Levels of management

- Supervisory experience

- Personnel authority

- Offeror’s ability to furnish manpower and equipment necessary to perform and manage multiple simultaneous SABER requirements

- Policies and procedures for effective selection and management of subcontractors

- Material purchasing system and capabilities

- Role of the design team in response to a task order; process and procedures for warranty support, unforeseen site conditions and design errors for individual task orders.

- Process and procedures for warranty/maintenance support, unforeseen site conditions and design errors

- Interface with home/site office, subcontractor ops, and construction teams

- Include an organizational chart with names of assigned personnel and proposed subcontractors and their areas of responsibility for each portion

3.5.2 Qualifications: The Source Selection Team will evaluate the contractor’s proposed key personnel who will be involved in the day-to-day accomplishment of this contract including, as a minimum, personnel qualified in the areas identified below. The Source Selection Team will evaluate this subfactor to determine if the qualifications of proposed personnel meet the identified minimum requirements, certifications, and licenses required for personnel performing activities or acting in the specific capacity.

-Program/Project Manager (PM):

The contractor’s Program/Project Manager shall have as a minimum, a bachelor’s degree from a regionally or nationally accredited university and at least five (5) years experience managing construction projects which shall include two (2) years of industrial construction. The PM is the primary POC for the CO for all contractual issues with regards to project/program execution and is responsible for the overall management of this contract. The PM is to ensure that quality work is accomplished on schedule and assuring qualified personnel and subcontractors are assigned to complete performance. It is the PM’s responsibility to ensure that contractor personnel and subcontractors possess the appropriate qualifications and experience to complete specified project tasks and that they comply with all statutes, regulations, as well as the contract requirements. The PM shall have and provide to CO, upon request, all required employee or subcontractor certifications and qualifications.

-Superintendent(s):

Project Superintendent(s): The contractor shall identify a minimum of two (2) Superintendent with a minimum of five (5) years experience in construction which shall include two (2) years of industrial construction, and two (2) years experience as a project Superintendent or Foreman managing construction projects. Superintendent shall not have more than five (5) active construction projects at one time, nor shall the workload exceed their capabilities as determined between joint understanding of the Contractor, Contracting, and Civil Engineering.

- Quality Control (QC) Manager:

For each TO, the contractor shall have QC Manager a minimum of three (3) years experience in construction which shall include two (2) years of industrial construction, and shall have at least two (2) years of hands-on construction.

4.0. PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR.

The Past Performance evaluation will result in an overall performance confidence assessment as defined below. This performance confidence assessment represents the Government evaluation team's judgment of the probability of an offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort based on the offeror's demonstrated past and present performance. The performance confidence assessments are defined as follows:

TABLE 5 – PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Rating Description

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.

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. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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 be able to successfully perform the required effort.

4.1 Evaluation Process: The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. Performance confidence is assessed at the overall Past Performance factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the Technical factors and Cost/Price factor taking into consideration their relative order of importance stated in Section M, paragraph 1.1(a). In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the offeror’s Past Performance proposal volume and information obtained from other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) or other databases; interviews with Program Managers and Contracting Officers; the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), and commercial sources.

4.1.1 Recency Assessment: An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past six (6) years from the issuance month of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

4.1.2 Relevancy Assessment: The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the products provided/services performed under those contracts relate to the Technical factors and Cost/Price factor, including their relative order of importance (reference Section M, 2.1). Consideration will be given to projects involving the type of construction and work elements described in the attached Statement of Work and Specifications.

Relevant past performance information must demonstrate design and construction experience with contracts that manage multiple simultaneous task order type projects. Project work elements include renovation, alteration and repair, additions and upgrades, heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), electrical, mechanical, and other major trades. Managing multiple simultaneous task order projects is defined as having least twenty (20) active task order projects at the same time with a cumulative value of all task orders totaling over $3.5 million annually. A relevancy determination of the offeror’s past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations, including joint venture partner(s) In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror or teaming partner whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance information forms (PIFs) and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. The Government will use the following relevancy definitions when assessing recent contracts:

Rating Definition

VERY RELEVANT

Present/past performance effort involved…