2 MACC solicitation sections L and M.docx

Section L

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

1. Magnitude of Construction:

1.1. In accordance with FAR 36.204, Disclosure of the Magnitude of Construction Projects, the magnitudes for each category are as follows:

1.1.1. Overall Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) ceiling - $150,000,000

1.1.2. Task Orders – Subsequent Task Orders are estimated to be:

1.1.2.1. Less than $25,000

1.1.2.2. Between $25,000 and $100,000

1.1.2.3. Between $250,000 and $500,000

1.1.2.4. Between $500,000 and $1,000,000

1.1.2.5. Between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000

1.1.2.6. Between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000

1.1.2.7. More than $10,000,000

1.1.3. Seed Project – Between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000

1.2. To cover the initial award requirement of each Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract per AFFARS 5316.504(a)(2), the Government will award a minimum guarantee of $500.00 to all awardees for their proposal submission and attending the post-award briefing. Funding is not currently available for the seed project.

2. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements. Failure to meet a requirement will result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The response shall consist of three (3) separate parts, Part I – Technical Proposal, Part II – Past Performance, and Part III – Price Proposal and Administrative Documents. Evaluation will be made in accordance with Section M of this solicitation.

3. The Contracting Officer (CO) has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the CO will review this determination and if, in the CO’s opinion, adequate price competition exists, no additional price information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required; however, the CO may request other than Certified Cost and Pricing Data if necessary to determine reasonableness. Additionally, if at any time during this competition the CO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, offerors may be required to submit Certified Cost and Pricing Data in accordance with (IAW) FAR 15.402 to the extent necessary for the CO to determine the reasonableness of the price.

4. Specific Instructions:

4.1. PART I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL: Limited to no more than 40 pages as defined in para 6.1. Technical Proposals will be rated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis by subfactor. The offeror will provide a written narrative describing their technical approach for the MACC contract with specified details for the seed project provided. The offeror’s proposal shall address each of the following subfactors in detail per their understanding of the MACC contract statement of work/sample project requirements; pre-performance coordination process, management/ organizational structure, program management policies, performance time, approach to surge management, and listing all related references to the Drawings and Specifications included in this solicitation:

4.1.1. Subfactor 1 – Project Management Plan/Organizational Structure

4.1.1.1. Description: The Offeror shall provide a comprehensive PMP developed specifically for implementation of this contract. The PMP shall discuss the management approach used for design, site clearing and demolition, construction, and completion/turn-over of project. The information in the PMP shall make it clear that the Offeror has the ability to deliver a quality product and effectively manage the designers, consultants, and subcontractors on the team, as well as the ability to coordinate all work throughout the design and construction phases. The PMP shall include an explanation of the total project team management approach for the construction team. Please list any relevant experience or certifications the Project Manager may have that will help the Government determine their ability to oversee projects under the MACC contract.

4.1.2. Subfactor 2 – Seed Project Work Performance Plan

4.1.2.1. Description: The plan shall provide a detailed approach to taking the seed project requirements documents to construction completion. The narrative shall describe the technical approach for meeting each element of the requirement. The narrative shall identify how work will transition from one area to the next, and the customer-oriented approach for ensuring customer expectations and goals are met, or exceeded, throughout construction phases. This plan shall include but not limited to: material submittals, testing, policies, procedures, records, forms, and processes to be used.

4.1.3. Subfactor 3 – Seed Project Schedule

4.1.3.1. Description: Identify the major milestones that make-up the seed project critical path. The milestones will be identified as preliminary dates and also defined in terms of the number of calendar days from one milestone to the next. Identify the significant risks that may hinder progression along the critical path. Use 15 August 2020 as the sample project contract notice to proceed date.

4.1.4. Subfactor 4 – Seed Project Quality Control/Safety Plan and Certifications

4.1.4.1. Description: Offeror must provide a plan to implement the requirements of Contract Clause entitled “Inspection of Construction” FAR 52.246-12. The plan shall identify personnel, procedures, control, instructions, test, records, and forms to be used. A finalized, more detailed Quality Control Plan may be required to be submitted and approved after contract award IAW the Statement of Work.

4.2. PART II – PAST PERFORMANCE: Past performance will be rated using the confidence assessment described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 5 – Performance Confidence Assessments.

4.2.1. When addressing past performance evaluation criteria set forth in Section M of the solicitation the offeror shall provide a list of five (5) of their most recent and relevant present and/or past performance data from Federal, State, and Local Government as well as private industry contracts. The offeror shall submit present and past performance information for themselves, any joint venture member or subcontractor in accordance with the format contained in the “FACTS Sheet” (Attachment 7) and the following paragraphs.

4.2.2. A FACTS Sheet is provided with the solicitation for offerors to send to a maximum of five (5) references/projects of their choice.

4.2.2.1. The offeror or joint venture member, if applicable, shall focus its FACTS Sheet responses so that they clearly correlate present and past performance with the requirements of this RFP. The FACTS Sheet responses must clearly describe the relevance of the effort to the work proposed. The answering space on the FACTS Sheet may be expanded so that the filled-in FACTS Sheet for each relevant contract covers no more than five (5) pages per project. Provide the most current information for the Points of Contact (POCs) identified on the FACTS Sheets.

4.2.2.2. If problems were encountered during the performance of the identified contracts, provide evidence of the ability to isolate the root causes of problems and include in the FACTS Sheet a description of programs or actions taken to resolve those causes. Problems not addressed in the FACTS Sheet, but found by the Government during the evaluation of the information in this volume, will be assumed to still exist. Note: In the case of CPARS, if your input has already been provided and the rationale/circumstances have not changed, DO NOT repeat them here.

4.2.2.3. Offerors may provide information for a maximum of three (3) different contracts and/or task/delivery orders for which they have served as the prime contractor, a subcontractor, a partner, or a joint venture partner that are recent and relevant as defined in this solicitation. In addition, the offeror may provide past performance information for a maximum of three (3) different contracts and/or task/delivery orders for each proposed subcontractor and/or proposed joint venture partner that are recent and relevant as defined in this solicitation. To clarify, if an offeror is part of a joint venture and has a subcontractor with significant past performance, the offeror may submit two (2) references as the prime contractor, two (2) references for their joint venture partner and one (1) reference from a subcontractor.

4.2.2.4. Past performance information concerning subcontractors cannot be disclosed to a private party without the subcontractor’s consent. Since past performance information is proprietary source selection information, the prime contractor must submit, with their proposal, the subcontractor’s consent (Attachment 10) for the Government to disclose its past performance information to the prime during exchanges and debriefings.

4.2.3. The offeror shall then submit Attachment 8, Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), to those agencies responsible for the administration of the identified projects in the FACTS Sheet. Prior to forwarding the questionnaire to each reference, the offeror shall fill out “Section 1: Contract Identification” of the PPQ. Offerors are responsible to ensure their reference sources receive, complete, and return the questionnaires on time. Your references shall return completed PPQs NLT the offeror due date and time specified in block 13 of the solicitation SF1442. Have PPQs sent to:

7 CONS/PKA

Attn: Merry Sargent-Green & SrA Lydia Simpkins, FA4661-20-R-0001 381 Third St Bldg 7238 Dyess AFB, TX 79607

-Or-

7CONS.Team.SourceSelection@us.af.mil

4.2.4. Offerors with no recent or relevant past performance shall state this fact in their past performance volume.

4.3. PART III – PRICE PROPOSAL:

4.3.1. Complete blocks 14 through 20C of the RFP Section A, SF1442. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in RFP Sections A through K. Signature by the offeror constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. The "original" copy should be clearly marked under a separate cover. Completed pricing information in Section B of the solicitation is not required due to the nature of the MACC CLIN structure.

4.3.2. Complete the Pricing Worksheet (Attachment 6) utilizing the “Repair 28th Bomb Squadron/Simulator Building 6030” SOW (Attachment 4) and Drawings (must be requested via email to 7CONS.Team.SourceSelection@us.af.mil). The total price proposed on the Offer Schedule is the price that shall be honored by offeror who is awarded the resultant task order.

4.3.3. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in Sections I through K. Section K shall be returned in its entirety. For Sections F through I, the offeror shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in.

4.3.4. Other than certified cost or pricing data may be requested by the Government, if necessary.

4.3.5. No price information should be included in the technical or past performance proposals.

5. General Information:

5.1. Eligibility. Proposals may be submitted by any 100% Small Business concern. Teaming arrangements will not be considered. To be considered a Joint Venture, Joint Ventures must be legally bound before the due date of proposals (Joint Venture established & registered in System for Award Management). If you intend to propose as a Joint Venture please state so prior to the pre-proposal site visit, and identify who the small business Joint Venture partner will be for the respective requirement. Joint Ventures must meet 13 CFR 121 and 125 for respective Joint Venture requirements.

5.2. Pre-proposal Site Visit. A pre-proposal site visit will be conducted as specified in 52.236-27 Alternate I.

5.3. Point of Contact. The Contracting Officer (CO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO, these must be submitted via email to 7CONS.Team.SourceSelection@us.af.mil

5.4. Debriefings. The CO will notify unsuccessful offerors of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. 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 15.506, as applicable.

5.5. Discrepancies. If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing using Attachment 12 with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the 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 discussion. This reservation includes matters of additional or substitute pages of the initial proposal. Notifications must be emailed to 7CONS.Team.SourceSelection@us.af.mil.

5.6. Electronic Reference Documents. All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Contract Opportunities (beta.SAM.gov) website at http://www.beta.sam.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation. Amendments will be posted on beta.SAM.gov with the solicitation documents without notice. Offerors are responsible for accessing all amendments prior to proposal submission.

5.7. Communications. Exchanges of proposal source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the CO. Source selection information will be transmitted via email, USPS (certified mail), FedEX, UPS, or in-person by a local representative.

5.8. Questions. All offeror questions in response to this solicitation must be emailed to 7CONS.Team.SourceSelection@us.af.mil no later than 3 April 20 at 1400 CST using Attachment 12. The US Government will not be held responsible for answering any questions after this time. All questions/answers resulting from this solicitation will be posted to beta.SAM.gov.

6. Proposal Organization/Limits/Distribution

6.1. The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (Table 1 below). The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 1.

Table 1 Proposal Organization Proposal Organization

Table of Contents Tab 1: Subfactor – Project Management Plan/Organizational Structure Tab 2: Subfactor – Seed Project Work Performance Plan Tab 3: Subfactor – Seed Project Schedule Tab 4: Subfactor – Seed Project Quality Control/Safety Plan and Certifications

Table of Contents Tab 1: Past Performance FACTS Sheets (Attachment 7) Tab 2: Proof of PPQ submittal to reference source

Table of Contents Tab 1: Pricing Worksheet (must be submitted in excel provided Attachment 6) Tab 2: SF 1442 and all amendments Tab 3: Proof of Financial Responsibility (Attachment 9), Bid Bond Documentation, Subcontractor Consent Form (Attachment 10)

*A redacted copy constitutes of a copy of your proposal with all company information and logos concealed.

6.2. Page Size and Format.

6.2.1. A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Pages shall be single-spaced. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 11 point. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and ¾-inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page size and format restrictions shall apply to both electronic and hard-copy proposals.

6.2.2. Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 by 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and shall count as two pages. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics not for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 11 point. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

6.3. Page Limitations. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Each page shall be counted except the following: 1) Cover Pages, 2) Tables of Content, 3) List of Table or Figures, 4) List of Appendices. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (EN), if issued. The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to offerors or on the EN form itself. Each page containing proprietary information should be so marked.

6.4. Indexing. Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

6.5. Markings. The offeror’s proposal and any EN responses should contain the following legend at the bottom of each sheet:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION--SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

6.6. Distribution. The proposal must be completed and returned NLT the due date and time specified in block 13 of the solicitation SF1442 or subsequent amendments. Address to:

7 CONS/PKA

Attn: Merry Sargent-Green & SrA Lydia Simpkins, FA4661-20-R-0001 381 Third St Bldg 7238 Dyess AFB, TX 79607

-Or-

7CONS.Team.SourceSelection@us.af.mil

Offerors should allow sufficient time when submitting the proposals to the Contracting Office prior to the closing time. Late proposals will be processed IAW the provisions established in FAR 15.208 “Late Submission, Modifications, and Withdrawals of Proposals”. Hand carried proposals or mailed proposals must be received and date stamped by a member of the 7th Contracting Squadron no later than 2:00pm CST, 21 April 2020.

If an offeror chooses to submit a proposal via email, the offeror must be aware the email size limitation of the email server is 15 megabytes. It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure email proposals are within this size limitation. An offeror may send multiple emails to submit a proposal, if it exceeds 15 megabytes.

7. Additional Documentation:

7.1. A letter of authorization must be submitted for the Contracting Officer to verify offeror’s financial responsibility (Attachment 9). Include name, address and phone numbers for financial institutions to include points of contact.

7.2. Acknowledgement of all amendments to the solicitation IAW the instructions on the SF 30 (amendment form). This must be submitted along with proposal.

7.3. The offeror shall submit bonding capacity documents according to FAR 52.228-1.

Section M

Evaluation Factors for Award

1. SOURCE SELECTION

1.1. Basis for Contract Award: This is Subjective Trade Off source selection conducted IAW Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15, Contracting by Negotiation, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS), and DoD Source Selection Procedures, 01 April 2016. These regulations are available electronically at http://acquisition.gov. The Government will conduct a competitive source selection in which technical capability and past performance history, when combined, will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than price considerations, IAW FAR 15.101(b)(2). A contract may be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible IAW the FAR Part 9.1, 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). While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. The Government reserves the right to evaluate and/or award more than or fewer than the target number of contracts based upon Source Selection Authority (SSA) determination that it is in the Government's best interest. The award will be based on a consideration of one or more of the following items: available funding, the need to sustain adequate competition, and the availability of awardable proposals, consistent with Trade-off procedures outlined in this solicitation, following completion of an integrated assessment of the proposals received.

1.2. Number of Contracts to be Awarded: The Government’s target number of contracts is five (5) 100% Small Business awards. The Government reserves the right to evaluate and/or award more than one or fewer than the target number of contracts based upon SSA determination that it is in the Government’s best interest. Additionally, up to three (3) 100% small business offerors, may be identified to be placed in the on-ramp pool. The Government makes no representations that the on-ramp process will be initiated. Also, the offerors part of the on-ramp pool will not receive the minimum contract guarantee of $500 unless on-ramp procedures are utilized and they are recipients of a contract. The MACC IDIQ contract falls under the NAICS 236220 “Commercial and Institutional Building Construction”. The period of performance is one (1), 5-year, base period and two (2), 1-year, option periods for a 7-year total ordering period. It will be a Firm Fixed Price contract, with a $150,000,000.00 ceiling.

1.3. Discussions: The Government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions or opportunity for proposal revisions. 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. Offerors may be required to respond with their FPR within 24 hours. If the offeror’s proposal has been evaluated as acceptable at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the Final Proposal Revision are subject to re-evaluation and may introduce risk that the offeror’s proposal will be determined unacceptable or the price is no longer fair and reasonable, the offeror may be ineligible for award. If the Government elects to open discussions, the competitive range may or may not include proposals rated as “Unacceptable” at the sole discretion of the Government. A competitive range, if required, may be further reduced for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2).

1.4. Solicitation Requirements, Terms, and Conditions: Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors or subfactors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable.

1.5. Proposal Evaluation Approach:

1.5.1. Step 1: Review all timely proposals for completeness and eligibility.

1.5.2. Step 2: Evaluate all complete proposals for technical acceptability.

1.5.3. Step 3: Evaluate seed project price to determine if it’s realistic, fair, and reasonable.

1.5.4. Step 4: The proposals rated technically acceptable and pricing that has been determined realistic, fair, and reasonable will be evaluated for past performance confidence. The Contracting Officer will determine a reasonable number of proposals to be evaluated for past performance confidence that will establish the greatest competition and maximize the Government’s ability to obtain best value, no less than eight proposals. All proposals will be evaluated for past performance confidence if there are eight or less acceptable proposals.

1.5.5. Step 5: At this time, proposals rated technically acceptable, with past performance confidence assessment ratings of substantial, satisfactory, or unknown (neutral), and pricing determined to be fair and reasonable will be ranked based on an integrated assessment. In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), all evaluation factors other than Price, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

1.5.6. Step 6: Select a target of five (5) small business proposals for award, and up to three (3) small businesses for the on-ramp pool. The best value proposal for the seed project out of the awardees will be identified during this step too.

1.5.7. Step 7: A task order will be accomplished in the amount of $500 for each offeror selected to receive an award for proposal submission and attending the post-award briefing. Additionally, once funding is available for the seed project, the seed project will be awarded to the offeror that represents the best value based on price amongst those offerors selected to receive an award. Offerors selected to be part of the on-ramp pool will not receive a $500 task order unless on-ramp procedures are used and they are selected for award.

Responsibility: In addition to the evaluation factors noted above, the offeror must be determined responsible according to the standards in FAR Subpart 9.1 – Responsible Prospective Contractors.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS

2.1. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors: The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

2.1.1. Factor 1: Technical

2.1.1.1. Subfactor 1 - Program Management Plan/Organizational Structure

2.1.1.2. Subfactor 2 - Seed Project Work Performance Plan

2.1.1.3. Subfactor 3 - Seed Project Schedule

2.1.1.4. Subfactor 4 - Seed Project Quality Control/Safety Plan and Certifications

2.1.2. Factor 2: Past Performance

2.1.3. Factor 3: Price

2.2. Technical Factor: The Government’s technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on an acceptable or unacceptable basis, assigning one of the ratings described in the Technical Ratings table below for each subfactor. An overall technical rating will not be assigned. Any subfactor evaluated as “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal unacceptable and, therefore, unawardable. Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award. However, the offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

Technical Ratings

2.2.1. Subfactor 1 – Project Management Plan (PMP)/Organizational Structure

Description: The Offeror shall provide a comprehensive PMP developed specifically for implementation of this Contract. The PMP shall discuss the management approach used for design, site clearing and demolition, construction, and completion/turn-over of project. The information in the PMP shall make it clear that the Offeror has the ability to deliver a quality product and effectively manage the designers, consultants, and subcontractors on the team, as well as the ability to coordinate all work throughout the design and construction phases. The PMP shall include an explanation of the total project team management approach for the construction team. Please list any relevant experience or certifications the Project Manager may have that will help the Government determine their ability to oversee projects under the MACC contract.

2.2.1.1. Measure of Merit: The offeror must meet all identified technical criteria and not pose technical risk of failure. This requirement is met when the Offeror provides:

2.2.1.1.1. Identify key personnel associated with this requirement to include: each individual’s name, title, duty, years of experience and experience level relating to similar contracts in size and scope. At a minimum, the Offeror shall provide information for the following disciplines:

- Project Manager (minimum 5 years of experience w/ similar projects)

- Site Superintendent (minimum 5 years of experience w/ similar projects)

- Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager (minimum 5 years of experience w/ similar projects)

2.2.1.1.2. A description of the organization’s approach addressing surges in multiple work sites on separate task orders concurrently without causing undue delay of completion of these multiple task orders. This approach will also indicate the management of surges that may occur based on end of the year government finances.

2.2.2. Subfactor 2 – Seed Project Work Performance Plan

Description: The plan shall provide a detailed approach to taking the Sample Project requirements documents to construction completion. The narrative shall describe the technical approach for meeting each element of the requirement. The narrative shall identify how work will transition from one area to the next, and the customer-oriented approach for ensuring customer expectations and goals are met, or exceeded, throughout construction phases. This plan shall include but not limited to: material submittals, testing, policies, procedures, records, forms, and processes to be used.

2.2.3. Subfactor 3 – Seed Project Work Schedule

Description: Identify the major milestones that make-up the Sample Project critical path. The milestones will be identified as preliminary dates and also defined in terms of the number of calendar days from one milestone to the next. Identify the significant risks that may hinder progression along the critical path. Use 15 August 2020 as the sample project contract notice to proceed date.

2.2.4. Subfactor 4 – Seed Project Quality Control Plan

Description: Offeror must provide a plan to implement the requirements of Contract Clause entitled “Inspection of Construction” FAR 52.246-12. The plan shall identify personnel, procedures, control, instructions, test, records, and forms to be used. A finalized, more detailed Quality Control Plan may be required to be submitted and approved after contract award IAW the Statement of Work.

2.2.4.1. Measure of Merit: The offeror must meet all identified technical criteria and not pose technical risk of failure. This requirement is met when the offeror provides:

2.2.4.1.1. A description of the quality control system, including a chart or concise description showing lines of authority and acknowledgement that the CQC System Manager shall implement the three phase control system for all aspects of work specified. The CQC System Manager shall report to the project manager or someone higher in the Contractor’s organization. Project manager in this context shall mean the individual with responsibility for the overall management of the project including quality and production.

2.2.4.1.2. The names, qualifications (in resume format), duties, responsibilities, and authorities of each function. Any replacements must have similar qualifications in dealing with projects of similar size and scope.

2.3. Past Performance Factor: The Past Performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements.

2.3.1. Ratings. Each offeror will receive a single integrated performance confidence assessment. This integration may include the recent and relevant present/past performance of the prime offeror, joint ventures and subcontractors. An offeror’s overall confidence assessment will be impacted by past performance findings to include the amount and type of work proposed to be performed by each entity of the offeror’s team. More recent performance or more relevant past performance may have greater impact on the performance confidence assessment. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the MACC IDIQ, the resulting performance confidence assessment is made at the past performance factor level and represents an overall evaluation of offeror performance and the resulting confidence level for work under this requirement. Each offeror will receive one of the performance confidence rating as described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 5 – Performance Confidence Assessments, listed in the table below.

Performance Confidence Assessments

2.3.2. The Government will consider and evaluate offeror's past performance information, to include the FACTS Sheet, PPQs, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources. The Government will assess if past performance is deemed recent and relevant for the requirements of this RFP. Recent and Relevant is defined in the subparagraph below:

2.3.2.1. 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 5 years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

2.3.2.2. Relevancy: The Government will determine relevancy based on the following criteria: 1) Must be a general construction project (including, but not limited to, design-build work and bid-build work in the following divisions: carpentry, road repair, roofing, excavation, interior to include remodeling and interior modifications, electrical, plumbing, sheet metal, painting, demolition, masonry, HVAC, fire suppression, fire alarm, mass notification, or welding) and 2) Must have a minimum contract dollar value of $1,000,000.00. While projects submitted may be for any of the above disciplines, offerors may not submit more than one project that focuses exclusively on a specific specialty. Multidiscipline projects that encompass a variety of subspecialties will be considered more relevant than those projects that only address single specialties, as these more closely address the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities that this solicitation requires. The Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy. Past performance information that fails these conditions will not be evaluated. The Government will use the past performance relevancy assessment described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 4 – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

2.4. Price Factor: Offerors whose price is determined to be unreasonable may not be considered for award.

2.4.1. The Government will evaluate the proposed price for the seed project, Attachment 6, in order to determine which offerors’ total price represents the best value to the Government. The Contracting Officer will use price competition to determine whether or not an offeror's pricing is realistic, fair, and reasonable in addition to other methods required in FAR 15.404.

2.4.2. Funding for the initial project is not presently available. The Government is not obligated to award the project at any time. However, offerors are required to guarantee pricing for the initial project until 30 September 2020, as the Government reserves the right to award the project as a task order at a later date should funds become available.