25R0002_Amend0002-SF30-20250528.pdf

R

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offers 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 theoffer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication 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 letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication 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 NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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.)

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

The following modifications were made:

Information From To Size Standard - Dollars $45,000,000.00

Contract Description

Repair (Cnsld-Demo) Mission Support Complex, B2245 / 2248 / 2249 A. Government anticipates the award of one Firm Fixed Price contract. This acquisition is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside.

B. Project Performance Period: The project period of performance will be 910 calendar days broken up into three distinct phases. Phase one (Design, Submittal and Material Gathering Phase) will consist of 300 calendar days, phase two (Physical Construction Phase) will consist of 550 calendar days, and phase three (Close-Out Phase) will consist of 60 calendar days.

C. NAICS Code is 236220 and Small Business size standard (SB Size standard $45M).

D. Reference Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Quoters, and Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award for proper proposal preparation.

E. Magnitude of project is between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000.

F. Bid Bond required for 100% of the project proposal price.

See Section I, FAR 52.228-1 and Section H, Paragraph 1.11.

G. Pre-Proposal conference/site visit will be held 22 May 2025 at 9:00 A.M. (PST).

H. Proposal and Past Performance package are due no later than 09 June 2025 at 10:00 A.M. (PST), unless changed by an Amendment. Complete Section G – Contract Administration Data of the SF1442.

I. Enter prices on Price Schedule Attachment:

25R0002_Atch1-PriceSchedule - Project Package.

J. Reference Attachment 2 Statement of Work and Attachments A-S for the project’s corresponding documents.

K. All questions must be submitted NLT seven days prior to RFP closing date. Refer to Section L paragraph 1.3

Repair (Cnsld-Demo) Mission Support Complex, B2245 / 2248 / 2249 A. Government anticipates the award of one Firm Fixed Price contract. This acquisition is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside.

B. Project Performance Period: The project period of performance will be 910 calendar days broken up into three distinct phases. Phase one (Design, Submittal and Material Gathering Phase) will consist of 300 calendar days, phase two (Physical Construction Phase) will consist of 550 calendar days, and phase three (Close-Out Phase) will consist of 60 calendar days.

C. NAICS Code is 236220 and Small Business size standard (SB Size standard $45M).

D. Reference Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Quoters, and Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award for proper proposal preparation.

E. Magnitude of project is between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000.

F. Bid Bond required for 100% of the project proposal price.

See Section I, FAR 52.228-1 and Section H, Paragraph 1.11.

G. Pre-Proposal conference/site visit will be held 22 May 2025 at 9:00 A.M. (PST).

H. Proposal and Past Performance package are due no later than 23 June 2025 at 9:00 A.M. (PST), unless changed by an Amendment. Complete Section G – Contract Administration Data of the SF1442.

I. Enter prices on Price Schedule Attachment:

25R0002_Atch1-PriceSchedule - Project Package.

J. Reference Attachment 2, Amend0002 Statement of Work and Attachments A-T for the project’s corresponding documents.

K. All questions must be submitted NLT seven days prior to RFP closing date. Refer to Section L paragraph 1.3

Accept Within Days 205 191 Response Due Time 10:00 AM 09:00 AM Response Due Date 09 Jun 2025 23 Jun 2025

Section C - Description/Specifications/Statement of Work

Header Miscellaneous Text (Added):

Amendment 0002 - Repair (Cnsld-Demo) Mission Support Complex, Fairchild AFB, WA

A. The purpose of this amendment is to answer questions proposed by prospective contractors for the Repair (Cnsld-Demo) Mission Support Complex Solicitation.

1. Question: 1) Request for Due Date Extension: Given the complexity of the remodel and the detailed coordination required to obtain accurate pricing from subcontractors, we respectfully request an extension of the bid due date. This additional time is especially critical for small business offerors to develop thorough, competitive proposals. We recommend extending the bid deadline to the end of June--or ideally, to a date following July 8, 2025--to accommodate this need.

Please also consider that two federal holidays, Memorial Day and Juneteenth, fall within the current proposal preparation period and further impact scheduling and subcontractor availability.

Answer: The proposal due date is hereby changed from 9 June 2025 at 10:00 AM PST to 23 June 2025 at 9:00 AM PST.

2. Question: 2) 2.1.4 PPQ Requirements: To improve efficiency in demonstrating past performance for both Government and private Owners, we respectfully request that Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) be accepted in addition to Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs). Additionally, if a PPQ has already been completed using any of the Department of Defense (DoD) PPQ formats, we request permission to submit that existing form. Allowing the inclusion of CPARs and previously completed PPQs directly within the proposal benefits all parties. CPARs represent official, Government-reviewed evaluations of contractor performance, and existing PPQs reflect feedback already provided by project contacts. Requiring these contacts to repeat evaluations they have already completed is not only inefficient but also places unnecessary demands on their time. Accepting previously completed documentation enables contractors to meet proposal deadlines more effectively by utilizing verified information already on hand. This also re-duces the risk of a project lacking a performance evaluation simply because a contact was unavailable or unwilling to complete a new PPQ. Ultimately, this approach supports a more accurate assessment of past performance.

Answer: CPARS are not considered an adequate substitute for Past Performance Information Sheets. (Section L, Paragraph 2.1.2 - Past Performance Information Sheets). CPARS are a potential source of performance information (Section L, Paragraph 1.3 - Past Performance Confidence Evaluation).

3. Section 2.1.3 - Relevant Contracts (Project Completion Timeframe):

We respectfully request that the required timeframe for completion of relevant contracts be extended from the past 3 years to the past 7 years. Small business offerors often complete a lower volume of projects within shorter periods, and this extension would provide a more accurate representation of their capabilities and experience.

FA462025R00020002

Answer: Section L, Paragraph 2.1.2, Past Performance Information Sheets is hereby changed from "Each relevant contract shall have been performed within the past three years from the date of issuance of the solicitation" to, "Each relevant contract shall have been performed within the past five years from the date of issuance of the solicitation.

Section L, Paragraph 2.1.3, Relevant Contracts is herby changed from "Provide data for up to five relevant contracts performed within the last three years from the issuance date of this solicitation for each entity the offerer wants the government to consider" to "Provide data for up to five relevant contracts performed within the last five years from the issuance date of this solicitation for each entity the offerer wants the government to consider."

Section L, Paragraph 2.1.3, Relevant Contracts is herby changed from "The government will not consider performance on an effort that concluded more than three years prior to the issuance date of this solicitation" to "The government will not consider performance on an effort that concluded more than five years prior to the issuance date of this solicitation."

Section M, Paragraph 1.3.1, Recency is herby changed from "Past performance within the past three years from date of solicitation will be considered recent and will be evaluated. Provide data for up to five relevant contracts performed within the last three years from the issuance date of this solicitation for each entity the offeror wants the government to consider" to "Past performance within the past five years from date of solicitation will be considered recent and will be evaluated. Provide data for up to five relevant contracts performed within the last five years from the issuance date of this solicitation for each entity the offeror wants the government to consider.

4. Question: Section 2.1.3 - Relevant Contracts (Construction Value Adjustment):

If the project completion timeframe is extended beyond 3 years as requested, we also ask that the minimum construction value requirement for relevant contracts be adjusted to reflect historical cost conditions. Given the significant escalation in construction costs over the past five years, we propose lowering the threshold to $10,000,000 to account for previously completed projects that would have met today's value benchmark.

Answer: DFARS 236.204 requires the disclosure of the magnitude of construction projects in solicitations. The magnitude for this project is between $25,000,000 and $ 100,000,000. To accurately assess a contractors' past performance on contracts of this magnitude, relevant projects shall be similar in size, scope, and complexity as described in this solicitation, i.e., having a construction project value between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000 and include projects with the government, state and local government agencies, and commercial customers as stated in Section L, Paragraph 2.1.3.

Offerors should submit information on contracts considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed effort.

5. Question: Section 2.1.3 - Relevant Contracts (Small Business Consideration): Recognizing the typical scale of projects awarded to small businesses, we further request that the minimum contract value for relevant experience be set at $10,000,000. This adjustment would ensure fair and meaningful evaluation of small business offerors' past performance.

Answer: To accurately assess past performance relevant projects shall be similar in size, scope, and complexity as described in this solicitation, i.e., having a construction project value between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000 and include projects with the government, state and local government agencies, and commercial customers as stated in Section L, Paragraph 2.1.3. Offerors should submit information on contracts considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed effort. The offeror shall submit up to five Past Performance Information sheets identifying active or completed contracts, either government or commercial for each prime, joint venture, or a combination of prime and joint venture partner past performance, only totaling up to five Past Performance Information sheets. (Section L, Paragraph 2.1.2, Past Performance Information Sheets).

6. Question: Please provide pictures of the elevator mechanical room that was unavailable during the site visit.

Answer: Pictures of the elevator mechanical room are provided in SOW SOWAtchT_Amend0002-ElvtrRm.

7. Question: Page two of the SOW lists CLINs 0001, 0002, 0003, and 0004 while the Price Schedule only reflects CLIN 0001. Please clarify.

Answer: The scope of the project will be accounted for under CLIN 0001. Please refer the amended SOW, 25R0002_Atch2-Amend0002-SOW2025028, Section 1.1.

B. Block 10(H) of the SF1442 states " H. Proposal and Past Performance package are due no later than 09 June 2025 at 10:00 A.M. (PST}, unless changed by an Amendment. Complete Section G-Contract Administration Data of the SF1442. " is hereby revised to read as follows: " H. Proposal and Past Performance package are due no later than , unless changed by an Amendment. Complete Section G-Contract Administration Data of the SF1442. "18 June 2025 at 9:00 A.M. (PST)

C. Block 13(d) of the SF1442 states "Offers providing less than 205 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will be rejected" is hereby revised to read as follows: "Offers providing less than for Government acceptance after the date offers are due 191 calendar days will not be considered and will be rejected".

D. 25R0002_Atch2-SOW20250423 is hereby replaced with 25R0002_Atch2-Amend0002-SOW2025028.

E. SOWAtchT_Amend0002-ElvtrRm is hereby added.

F. All other items remain unchanged.

G. Please contact Samantha Gorman at samantha.gorman@us.af.mil or Lt Hannah Wieber at hannah.wieber.1@us.af.mil with any questions or concerns.

The Requirements Text has been modified to:

This is an acquisition for a design-build renovation project for buildings 2245/2248/2249 at Fairchild AFB, Washington. The project will include the following: Design-build effort, demolition, Hazardous Material Survey, abatement, soil testing, structural design and work, water systems, pavement work, storm-water management, utilities work, sewer work, landscaping work, architectural and interior design, temporary facilities, fire safety, exterior walls and roofing, windows, and carpeting per Attachment 2, Amend0002 - Statement or Work and SOW Attachments A-T.

Section J - List of Attachments

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

Attachments:

1. 25R0002_Atch2-Amend0002-SOW2025028

2. SOWAtchT_Amend0002-ElvtrRm

Section L - Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

1.0 GENERAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

This solicitation is a 100% small business set-aside under the National American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction.

1.1 Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, and representations and certifications in addition to those identified as evaluation criteria. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a proposal being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

This is an all-electronic solicitation release. Hard copies are not available. The government will post amendments to the solicitation to the Electronic Posting 1.2 System (EPS) at https://sam.gov. It is the responsibility of each offeror to review the web page for notice of amendments, updates or changes to current information.

1.3 Pre-Proposal Conference

A pre-proposal conference will be held in accordance with Block 10 of the SF1442. All prospective offerors are highly encouraged to attend this conference and arrive at Fairchild AFB Visitors Center a minimum of 30 minutes prior. All individuals planning to attend the pre-proposal conference shall contact Ms. Samantha Gorman at samantha.gorman@us.af.mil and 1st Lt Hannah Wieber at hannah.wieber.1@us.af.mil for requirements to obtain access to base. Requests for base access shall be provided no later than seven calendar days prior to the pre-proposal conference.

Offerors shall submit any questions they may have in writing to Ms. Samantha Gorman at samantha.gorman@us.af.mil and seven days prior to the conference 1st Lt Hannah Wieber at hannah.wieber.1@us.af.mil. The submission of written questions will not preclude anyone from posing questions during the conference.

Failure of a prospective offeror to submit questions or attend the conference will be construed to mean that the prospective offeror fully understands all requirements of the solicitation. Prospective offerors are advised that the pre-proposal conference will be held solely for the purpose of explaining the concepts involved in the project and the specifications, terms, and conditions of this solicitation. All prospective offerors are advised that this solicitation will remain unchanged unless it is specifically amended in writing. If an amendment is issued, normal procedures relating to the acknowledgment and receipt of any such amendment as described in contract clause 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisition, of this Request for Proposal (RFP) shall apply.

Offerors are encouraged to submit all questions and requests for clarifications closing date in accordance with Notice to Offerors: seven days prior to the RFP Block 10 of the SF1442. The decision whether to respond to questions and requests for clarification made prior to the RFP closing shall be less than seven days at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

1.4 Joint Venture Offerors

If the offeror is a joint venture, the offeror shall provide all required solicitation information, for all parties, including a copy of the joint venture agreement with the proposal. The agreement shall include information which identifies the responsibilities for each entity under this contract. The agreement shall demonstrate the relationship between firms and identify contractual relationships and authorities to bind each entity of the joint venture. The joint venture entity must be registered with a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) number prior to the award. No corrections and/or changes to a joint venture agreement are permitted after the time for submission of proposals.

1.5 Incurred Expenses

The government is not responsible for any costs incurred or associated with preparation and submission of a proposal in response to this solicitation.

In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.8, the government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals and will destroy all extra copies. No destruction 1.6 certificate will be provided.

All proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation. Any commitments made within the proposal shall 1.7 become a part of the resultant contract. In no case shall words like "we will comply with the requirements of the contract," or equivalent statements be acceptable to meet the requirements of this RFP. Failure to comply with these instructions may result in the government summarily rejecting the offeror's proposal.

The past performance proposal (Volume I - Past Performance) and price proposal (Volume II- Price and Contract Forms) shall include the documents required 1.8 outlined under Paragraph 2.1.1 Contents of Past Performance Volume and Paragraph 2.2.4 Contract Forms. The price proposal must be based on the offeror's proposal for the project and the government's specifications as set forth herein. The government will evaluate the price proposal accordance with Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award.

Offerors shall submit two electronic copies (CD/DVD). Each CD/DVD shall include two separate file folders (Volume I - Past Performance and Volume II - Price and Contract Forms. Complete proposals are due in accordance with Block 10 of the SF1442.

Submit via Mail:

92 CONS/PKB

ATTENTION: Ms. Samantha Gorman / 1st Lt Hannah Wieber 110 West Ent Street Ste. 200 Fairchild AFB, WA 99011-8568

Or In Person:

92 CONS/PKB

110 West Ent Street Ste. 200 Fairchild AFB, WA 99011

Email to coordinate in person delivery acceptance:

samantha.gorman@us.af.mil and hannah.wieber.1@us.af.mil

Volume Submission Requirements

Folder Name: Page Limit

Volume I - Past Performance 30 Max

Volume II - Price and Contract Forms Unlimited

1.9 The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Therefore, only a limited amount of pricing information is required in the initial proposals. Upon examination of the initial proposals, the Contracting Officer will review this determination. If, in the Contracting Officer's opinion, there is adequate price competition, no additional price information, except for final proposal revisions, if requested by the Contracting Officer, will be elicited and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the Contracting Officer determines that none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1(b) applies, offerors may be required to prepare, submit, and certify cost or pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.403-4.

1.10 Submitted materials will be fully responsive to and consistent with the following:

Requirements of the RFP, Statement of Work, and CLIN(s) contained therein.

Government standards and regulations pertaining to the SOW; and Evaluation criteria for award in Section M of this RFP.

No material shall be incorporated by reference or reiteration of the RFP. Any such material will not be considered for evaluation.

Materials shall be presented in a manner which allows it to stand alone without need for evaluators to reference other documents.

Format of the proposal volumes shall be as follows:

All typing (including that on charts, graphs, and tables, etc.) shall be no smaller than 12 pitch.

Two columns of text per page are acceptable.

Elaborate format and color representations are not desirable.

Past Performance shall be limited to 30 pages.

The price proposal is not limited as to the number of pages. Utilize pricing schedule provided: .25R0002_Atch1-PriceSchedule

2.0 SPECIFIC PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

2.1 VOLUME 1 - PAST PERFORMANCE:

Past Performance Volume is due in accordance with Block 10 of the SF1442.

2.1.1 Contents of Past Performance Volume

Offerors shall submit a Past and Present Performance Volume containing the following:

Table of Contents Summary Page describing the role of the offeror, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner that the offeror is required to provide Past Performance Information Sheets in accordance with paragraph 2.1.2 below.

Past Performance Information Sheets and Past Performance Questionnaire completed in accordance with the following attachments under Section J - List of Attachments:

25R0002_Atch7-PastPerfCvrLtrQuestionnaire

25R0002_Atch8-PastPerformanceInfo For Past Performance Information and Past Performance Questionnaire. See paragraphs 2.1.2 and 2.1.4 below.

Organization Structure Change History. See paragraph 2.1.6 below.

2.1.2 Past Performance Information Sheets

Submit information on contracts considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed effort. Each relevant contract shall have been performed within the past . The offeror shall submit up to five Past Performance Information sheets in five years from the date of issuance of the solicitation Attachment: , identifying active or completed contracts, either government or commercial for each prime, joint venture, or a 25R0002_Atch8-PastPerformanceInfo combination of prime and joint venture partner past performance, only totaling up to five Past Performance Information sheets. CPARS are not considered an adequate substitution for Past Performance Information Sheets.

The offeror shall provide experience data for itself and for any proposed division, or teaming contractor or partner or key personnel whose effort on this contract will significantly influence performance of the proposed construction and/or design-build effort. Offerors are cautioned that the government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past and present performance.

2.1.3 Relevant Contracts

Past Performance Information Sheets referenced in 2.1.2 above shall include information on contracts that you consider relevant as described in the relevance chart provided in Section M, paragraph 1.3.2, demonstrating your ability to perform projects similar in size, scope, and complexity as described in this solicitation.

Provide data for performed within the from the issuance date of this solicitation for each entity the offeror wants the up to five relevant contracts last five years government to consider. Performance Information Sheets for each contract are . Include rationale supporting the assertion of relevance. limited to three pages

The government will not consider performance on an effort that concluded more than five years prior to the issuance date of this solicitation. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate.

Past performance information must demonstrate design/build construction experience as the prime contractor. Projects shall be similar in size, scope, and complexity as described in this solicitation, i.e., having a construction project value between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000 and include projects with the government, state and local government agencies, and commercial customers. A "design-build" project is defined as a single contract that requires the prime contractor to engage architectural, engineering services and construction services to complete the project with the prime contractor being the single point of responsibility.

2.1.4 Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires

The government requests the offeror send out Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires to each of the Points of Contact (POCs) identified in the Past Performance Volume for the contracts the offeror provided past performance information on. In turn, the evaluating agencies shall submit the completed questionnaires to:

Submit via Mail:

92 CONS/PKB

ATTENTION: Ms. Samantha Gorman / Lt Hannah Wieber 110 West Ent Street Ste. 200 Fairchild AFBWA 99011-8568 samantha.gorman@us.af.mil and hannah.wieber.1@us.af.mil Or via Email:

No questionnaire submittals will be accepted from the offeror being evaluated. Ensure each Evaluators send questionnaires directly to the government.shall questionnaire completed is in direct correlation to a past performance submission. Once the evaluator completes the questionnaires, the information shall be considered sensitive and shall not be released to the offeror. A cover letter for transmitting the questionnaire to each point of contact is provided in Attachment:

, in Section J - List of Attachments.25R0002-Atch7-PastPerfCvrLtrQuestionaire

Past Performance Volume is due in accordance with Block 10 of the SF1422.

2.1.5 Subcontractor Consent

Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor's consent. Provide a Subcontractor/ Teaming Partner Consent Form, Attachment: , in Section J - List of Attachments, from all subcontractors/25R0002_Atch9-SubKTRTeamingArrngmntRelease teaming partners that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to release of their past performance information to the prime contractor.

2.1.6 History of Organizational Structure Change

Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the performance of the relevant present or past efforts or between the conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition.

To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. The "roadmap" should be clear on how each company, and/or divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, are related to the offeror. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as provided by the offeror(s), a "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts identified and general enough to apply to efforts on which the government receives information from other sources.

2.2 VOLUME 2 - PRICE AND CONTRACT FORMS:

2.2.1 Price

Offerors have been provided with a project price schedule, , on which to submit a price proposal for evaluation. The government 25R0002_Atch1-PriceSchedule will evaluate the project price proposal to determine price fair and reasonable.

2.2.2 Bonds

Offerors shall provide a proposal guarantee (bid bond) for 100% of the project proposal as stated in Section C. Additionally, a letter from an acceptable surety is required indicating bonding capacity for the offeror's full proposal amount. Failure to submit bond and the aforementioned surety letter may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation and/or removal from consideration.

2.2.3 Financial Resources

Offerors shall address a fiscal plan for covering phase-in, unexpected and/or emergency situations, and initial performance costs prior to recoupment in the form of progress payments. Offerors shall submit a financial capability letter from their financial institution. This letter will be used in the Contracting Officer's determination of responsibility.

2.2.4 Contract Forms

Include the following data in this volume in the format indicated.

Section 1: Proposal forwarding letter.

Section 2: A complete copy of this RFP (through Section M, less attachments) with the original signature of an official who is authorized to contractually bind the offeror in block 20A-C of the SF 1442.

The offeror must complete the following sections within the RFP:

Part I, Section A - (SF 1442, Blocks 14-20C). Acknowledge all Amendments received in block 19.

Part I, Section B - Project Price Schedule - Use Attachment: , under Section J.25R0002_Atch1-PriceSchedule Part I, Section G - Persons Authorized to Negotiate or Conduct Discussions Part IV, Section K, Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offeror. Provisions 52.204-8 (JAN 2025) & 252.204-7007 Alternate A (OCT 2023) will need to be submitted in the System for Award Management (SAM).

Section 3: Project bid bond and surety letter with proposal amount capacity.

Section 4: Any information, excluding price, which does not properly belong within the other proposal volumes.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

1.0 Basis for Contract Award

This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing offerors' . Evaluations will be conducted in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15.3 and all supplemental regulations. These regulations are available electronically at https://acquisition.gov/. By submission of a proposal, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations, and certifications, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors such as small business. The government seeks to award to the offeror who will give the Air Force the greatest confidence that it will meet, or exceed, the requirements. The SSA shall make a best value award decision, considering price approximately equal to past performance following the procedures in the solicitation (described below). While the government source selection process, by its nature, is subjective, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. As a result of this solicitation, the government intends to award one contract.

1.1 Evaluation

The offeror's submission of a competitive project price and relevant performance information must convey to the government that the offeror is capable, possesses technical expertise and experience, possesses sufficient resources, and is able to plan, organize, and use those resources to deliver a timely and quality construction project.

Offerors' proposals will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with the proposal instructions as described in Section L - Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters. Incomplete proposals submitted by the due date and time of this RFP may be considered incomplete and not evaluated.

Additional elements required for eligibility for award include evaluation criteria related to proposed terms, conditions, and reviews. These elements are independent of the specific evaluation areas and, as such, do not receive a proposal risk assessment or performance confidence assessment rating. To qualify for an award, the following conditions must be met:

Responsibility - The offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1.

Acceptability of Offers - The offeror's proposal must comply with the requirement of law, regulation, and all conditions set forth in the solicitation. The offeror's proposal must demonstrate a clear understanding of the work requirements within the solicitation and failure to do so may result in a determination that the proposal is unacceptable. This solicitation is a 100% small business set-aside under the National American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The government does not assume a duty to search for clarification data to cure problems or inconsistencies within an offeror's proposal.

1.2 Price Evaluation

Prices will be evaluated for reasonableness and affordability based on the availability of funds. The PCO shall arrange proposals by price, from lowest to highest.

The price analysis will begin with the lowest priced offeror. If the lowest priced offeror is determined to have a "Substantial Confidence" performance rating and is determined to be responsible, then the lowest priced offeror represents the best value for the government.

The government reserves the right to award the contract to other than the lowest priced offeror. If the lowest priced offeror does not receive a "Substantial Confidence" rating, then the price evaluations will continue until an offeror with "Substantial Confidence" is reached or all proposals have been evaluated. If the lowest priced offeror received a "Substantial Confidence" rating the next lowest offeror will be evaluated for price fair and reasonable. Evaluation of the proposals shall not obligate the government to award a contract.

The government may use various price analysis techniques and procedures to ensure a fair and reasonable price in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b)(2).

Examples of such techniques include, but are not limited to the following:

Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation; normally, adequate price competition establishes price reasonableness if proposed solutions are similar.

Comparison to the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) from 92 CES.

Price analysis: The process of examining and evaluating a proposed price without evaluating its separate cost elements and proposed profit.

1.3 Past Performance Confidence Evaluation

Potential sources of performance data include but are not limited to government sources such as:

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) - Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) Questionnaires tailored to the circumstances for this acquisition, through interviews with program managers and Contracting Officers, or other sources known to the government.

Data from previous source selections or contractor capability assessments may be used if the data is recent and relevant.

A past performance evaluation team within the SSEB will conduct a past performance evaluation that examines an offeror's recent and relevant past performance record to assess the government's confidence in the offeror's ability to perform as proposed. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

1.3.1 Recency

Past performance within the past five years from date of solicitation will be considered recent and will be evaluated. Provide data for up to five relevant contracts performed within the last five years from the issuance date of this solicitation for each entity the offeror wants the government to consider.

1.3.2 Relevance

The government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the data provided or obtained. A relevancy determination will be made for each of the recent submitted contracts. For purpose of the evaluation, past performance would demonstrate design-build construction experience for projects between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000. Consideration will be given but not limited to such things as project complexity (design-build), contract type, contract environment, division of company proposing, and subcontractor interaction. A "design-build" project is defined as a single contract that requires the prime contractor to engage architectural, engineering services and construction services to complete the project with the prime contractor being the single point of responsibility. Relevancy will be evaluated as follows:

Relevance Rating Description

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.

1.3.3 Quality

The Past Performance Evaluation Team will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror's performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment.

The evaluation of Past Performance will consider the level of quality and performance from predecessor companies, major subcontractors, consultants, or JV partners, whose effort, as demonstrated in the proposal, will significantly influence performance of the proposed construction and/or design-build effort. The ratings of these entities will contribute to the overall rating of the principal offeror.

As a result of the recency, relevancy and quality assessments of the contracts evaluated, one of the confidence ratings as described below will be assigned to the Past Performance factor.

Confidenc e Rating

Description

Substanti al Confide nce

Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfacto ry Confide nce

Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral C onfidence

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 C onfidence

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 Confid ence

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.

In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably (see FAR 15.305(a) (2)(iv).) In this case, the offeror's past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of "neutral."

1.4 Award Evaluation

The evaluation process shall begin with a compliance review of all proposals to verify all proposals conform to the administrative requirements set forth in Section L. If the lowest priced offeror is determined to have a "Substantial Confidence" performance rating and is determined to be responsible, then the lowest priced offeror represents the best value for the government and will be awarded a contract contingent to availability of funds. The government reserves the right to award the contract to other than the lowest priced offeror. If the lowest priced offeror does not receive a Substantial Confidence rating, then the evaluations will continue until an offeror with Substantial Confidence is reached or all proposals have been evaluated. A "Substantial Confidence" or "Satisfactory Confidence" past performance rating will be considered a higher rating than a "Neutral Confidence" past performance rating as allowed by DoD Source Selection Procedures.

The Source Selection Authority (SSA) shall make a best value award decision, considering price approximately equal to past performance for the award of the contract, contingent on availability of funds. The government reserves the right to award to a lower confidence rating after evaluations are complete.

The PCO may decide to award to the offeror whose proposal is determined, by the SSA, to be the best value based on the initial proposals received without conducting discussions. The SSAs decision regarding which proposal is most advantageous to the government shall be based on a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

Evaluation of the project proposals shall not obligate the government to issue a contract for the project. Offerors must include a price for the project listed in Section J - List of Attachments " . The Government may use various price analysis techniques and procedures, as described in the FAR 25R0002_Atch1-PriceSchedule" and Supplements to ensure the Government receives a fair and reasonable price. Price analysis is the process of examining and evaluating a proposed price without evaluating its separate cost elements and proposed profit. Examples of such techniques include but are not limited to the following: 1) Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation (normally, adequate price competition establishes price reasonableness if proposed solutions are similar);

and 2) Comparison to the Independent Government Estimate (IGE).

All offerors must have adequate bonding and financial resources to perform design/build requirements. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and, in the format, specified in Section L. 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 for any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors would not constitute discussions and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

The government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. The government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer deems discussions are in the government's best interest.

1.5 Competitive Range

The government reserves the right to limit for purposes of efficiency, the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals (10 U.S.C.2305(b)(4) and 41 U.S.C.253B(d)). If the Contracting Officer decides that an offeror's proposal should no longer be included in the competitive range, the proposal shall be eliminated from consideration for award and written notice of the decision shall be provided to the unsuccessful offeror in accordance with FAR 15.503.

1.6 Discussions

To maximize the government's ability to obtain best value, based on the requirements and the evaluation factors set forth in this RFP, it may be necessary to conduct discussions. If discussions are necessary, they will be conducted with only those offerors determined to be within the competitive range. Discussions may be conducted either orally or in writing. The scope and extent of discussions are a matter of Contracting Officer's judgment. Accordingly, offerors are advised to submit initial proposals which are fully and clearly acceptable and without the need for additional information. Offerors may be restricted to a short turnaround (i.e., less than 24 hours) in responding to the Contracting Officer during any discussion period.

1.7 Award Selection

The government anticipates awarding one Firm Fixed Price contract.