FA568518R00030005.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. Provide updated versions of Provisions 52.215-1 and 52.215-2

2. Provide all Questions and Answ ers as Attachment 12

3. Provide Updated Pool Photos for the Mock Project as Attachment 13

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 19

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Sep-2018

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X FA568518R0003

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

13-Jun-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

05-Sep-2018

CODE

39 CONS/LGC - FA5685 (FOREIGN)

39 UNCU KONTRAT SUBAYLIGI

BINA NO. 485 10.NCU TANKER

US KOMUTANLIGI

INCIRLIK/ADANA

FA5685 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

ATTACHMENTS

FA5685-18-R-0003 Attachments Attachment

Number Attachment Title Number of

Pages Date

1 2018 MACC Specifications 7050 May 2018 2 MACC Task Order Instructions 5 May 2018 3 Mock Project Statement of Service 10 ND 4 Mock Project Drawings 44 ND 5 Mock Project INC-1101 – Construction Estimate Breakdown 12 April 2015 6 Mock Project INC-1106 – Schedule of Material Submittals 6 ND 7 Mock Project INC-1104 – Design Review Checklist 49 Sep 2017 8 Mock Project INC-1108 - Constructability Review Checklist 8 Sep 2017 9 Nongovernment Advisor NDA 2 ND

10 Past Performance Questionnaire 3 ND 11 Questions and Answers 11 Aug 2018 12 Pool Photos 13 ND 13 Mock Project DWG Files 40 ND

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

52.215-1 ADDENDUM

Addendum to 52.215-1

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

1. General Instructions:

a. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The response shall consist of three (3) separate volumes: Volume 1- Contract Documentation, Volume II -Technical Proposal and Volume III - Past Performance.

FA568518R0003

b. Hard copy proposals in response to this solicitation must be received by either the Contracting Officer (CO) or Contract Administrator (CA) no later than the date and time indicated on the Standard Form 1442, Page 1, Section 13, or subsequent amendments.

The time listed in Section 13 is local time. The envelope used for your proposal must be plainly marked with the solicitation number, FA5685-18-R-0003, title “Multiple Award Construction Contract” along with the due date and time set forth in the solicitation. Fax, mailed, and e-mail proposals are not acceptable methods of proposal delivery. Use of any of these methods will result in non-evaluation of the proposal. The only authorized method of proposal submission is hand carry submission. The only authorized receivers of the hand carried proposal is the CO or CA. The CO is Dana Johnson and can be contacted via email at dana.johnson.5@us.af.mil or commercial phone at 03223166919. The CA is Zeynep Selamoglu and can be contacted via email at zeynep.selamoglu.tr@us.af.mil or commercial phone at 03223168003. The CO or CA and the vendor will execute a transmittal document at the time of proposal delivery in order to confirm proposal receipt. The US Government shall not be responsible for late proposal submissions to include, but not limited to, base access delays or base access denials. Therefore, vendors must anticipate delays when submitting hand carried proposals to the CO or CA.

Vendors that obtain access to Incirlik AB have the ability to deliver proposals to the CO and CA at the below address:

Dana Johnson, Contracting Officer (CO) Ms. Zeynep Selamoglu, Contract Administrator (CA)

39 UNCU KONTRAT SUBAYLIGI

BINA NO. 485 10. NCU TANKER

US KOMUTANLIGI

INCILIK/ADANA

Vendors that do not obtain access to Incirlik AB are encouraged to deliver proposals to the CO or CA at the Incirlik AB main gate, located on the South East side of Incirlik Air Base, by contacting the CO listed above at 03223166919.

It is highly encouraged that interested vendors coordinate with the CO or CA no later than 72 business hours in advance of proposal submission in order to determine the exact method and date/time of proposal delivery. It is highly encouraged that interested vendors submit proposals in advance of the proposal due date. The US Government shall not be responsible for late proposal submissions to include, but not limited to, base access delays or base access denials.

c. Offerors shall include a digital copy of their proposal in the hard copy proposal submission. The digital copy of Volume II (Technical), shall include one (1) original copy and one (1) redacted copy. Digital proposals submitted on Compact Disc (CD) Digital Video Disc (DVD) shall be formatted for Windows operating systems. Each CD or DVD will contain only one (1) proposal Volume. The CD/DVD shall be “read-only”

FA568518R0003

and formatted for Microsoft Windows. When creating Adobe Portable Documentation Format (PDF) files, the Offeror shall create the file to enable textual search and copy functions. Macros or other embedded objects or features will be disabled as part of regular security precautions. At a minimum the proposals shall be separated and identified by each volume, and subfactor. Offerors shall limit proposal length in accordance with the table below. Offerors shall US letter standard paper (8.5 by 11 inches) for all documents other than drawings, drawing shall be on size A2 paper.

Offerors shall submit proposals in response to this solicitation in English.

i. Page Limitations (including drawings):

Page limitation Volume I – Contract Documentation 10 Pages Volume II – Technical Outline Specs (Table of Contents) - 3 Pages Basis of Design (BOD) - 110 Pages QA Check Set Drawings (marked up hard copy only) - 60 Pages Submittal Drawings (with QA revisions incorporated) - 60 Pages INC 1101 Quantities and Manhour Est. - 12 Pages INC 1106 Submittal Register - 10 Pages INC 1108 Constructability Review Checklist - 5 Pages Materials Data/Catalogue Cut Sheets - 25 Pages Diplomas - 10 Pages Certifications - 10 Pages Resumes - 20 Pages Relevant Experience/Projects - 10 Pages

335 Pages

Volume III – Past Performance 25 Pages

d. This solicitation is for an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC), for future task orders regarding repair and maintain base infrastructure on Incirlik AB and surrounding sites. In order to determine Technical acceptability for MACC requirements, one (1) mock project shall be used to determine quality, capability, and schedules. The project used shall be referred to as the “mock” project. The mock project attachments are identified in Section J of the solicitation. This solicitation is just for the MACC IDIQ, the mock project will not be awarded in addition to the base MACC IDIQ.

e. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a technical standpoint.

f. Price/Cost will not be evaluated for this solicitation, offerors shall omit all pricing data from their proposals. The target number of awardees for this contract is six (6), but the Government intends to make an award to all qualifying offerors.

FA568518R0003

g. A site visit will be conducted as specified in FAR 52.236-27. All interested offerors shall send the required information below by 26 June 2018 in order for a gate pass for the site visit to be processed in a timely manner. On the day of the site visit, all interested offerors will meet in front of building 485, Incirlik Air Base, Turkey. Offerors should be at 39th Contracting Squadron, Building 485 (Incirlik Hava Ussu, Adana) at the time and date to view the work site. Only one site visit will be conducted for the mock project.

Thus, it is highly recommended that all interested offerors perform a complete review of the solicitation SPECIFICATIONS and DRAWINGS prior to the date of the site visit.

Pictures will not be allowed to be taken at the site visit.

i. Required Gate Pass Information:

1. Names of participant

2. Company Affiliation

3. Phone number

h. No information concerning this solicitation or requests for clarification will be provided in response to telephone calls or any other form other than in writing from offerors.

Questions and requests for clarification will only be accepted if submitted via e-mail.

Requests shall be sent by e-mail to the CA and CO at zeynep.selamoglu.tr@us.af.mil and dana.johnson.5@us.af.mil. Responses to questions and requests for clarification will be posted electronically via an amendment to the solicitation on FBO. All questions in regards to this solicitation are due no later than 13 July 2018, at 1200 local time.

i. Contractors should be aware that this is a Turkish Installation and that all access to this installation is granted by the TURAF. The US Government shall not be responsible for late proposals submissions including, but not limited to, base access delays or base access denial. Therefore, SOME DELAYS SHOULD BE ANTICIPATED WHEN HAND CARRYING PROPOSALS. Offerors should allow sufficient time to arrive and submit the proposals to the CO or CA prior to the solicitation closing date and time. If a gate access is not granted please contact the CO immediately. It is possible to coordinate with the CA or the CO listed in paragraph b above for the proposals to be delivered to the CA or CO at the Incirlik AB main gate. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with the provisions “Late Submission, Modifications, and Withdrawals of Proposals”.

j. DECA Statement: In Accordance with FAR Part 6.101(a) and (b) Policy, this requirement is being solicited as Full and Open with exclusions. Due to an established economic agreement between the United States Government and the Government of Turkey, the U.S. Air Force intends to award this solicitation to a business concern within the country of Turkey; as required by the Defense and Economic Cooperation Agreement, Supplementary Agreement 3, Article VI “For the purposes of this Agreement, material, equipment, provisions, supplies, services, and civilian labor required by the Government of the United States shall be procured in Turkey to the extent feasible.” If it is discovered that award to a business concern within the country of Turkey is not feasible, the U.S. Air Force reserves the right to make award to a business concern that is not within the country of Turkey.

FA568518R0003

k. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date. In the event the Government cancels this solicitation, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an offeror for any costs.

l. Nongovernment advisors may assist in and provide input regarding the technical evaluations, but they will not determine ratings or rankings of offerors’ proposals. Non-government advisors are also prohibited from access to offeror’s past performance information. By submitting a proposal offerors are consenting to providing possible proprietary information to the nongovernment advisors. Before non-government advisors are given access to technical proposals the offerors and the nongovernment advisor will enter into their own non-disclosure agreement (RFP Attachment 9).

2. Specific Instructions:

a. Volume I - CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

i. Complete blocks 14, 15, 17, 18, 19 and 20 of the SF 1442. In doing so the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP section A through M.

ii. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in RFP sections F through K, the offeror shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in. IAW FAR 252.204-7004 System for Award Management (SAM), all offeror's shall be registered in the SAM Database.

iii. Acknowledgement of all amendments to the solicitation in accordance with the instructions on the SF 30 (amendment form).

iv. Complete nongovernment advisor non-disclosure agreement (RFP Attachment 9).

b. Volume II-TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

i. For the purposes of technical evaluation, the term “offeror” shall include any proposed teaming arrangements.

ii. The mock project in this solicitation is: Repair Upgrade Swimming Pool Facilities

1. The purpose of this technical evaluation factor is to assess the offeror’s ability to prepare and present a typical, yet challenging 65% design that the offeror can reasonably expect to perform on this contract. Provide a complete proposal package as required by the Statement of Services for the mock project (RFP Attachment 3), in order to meet the requirements of the 2018 MACC Specifications (RFP Attachment 1).

2. Offerors shall provide information that effectively represents their technical expertise and project management capabilities. The technical volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important.

FA568518R0003

Provide a design and construction approach, “without restating the government provided Statement of Services,” that describes the design and construction processes that shall be used to meet the requirements of the mock project. Any inconsistencies in project information should be identified by the offeror, and assumptions should be made to carry the design forward. The ability of the offeror to independently solve problems with incomplete/imperfect information shall be considered positively in this evaluation.

3. By submitting a proposal, the offeror is representing their firm is capable of satisfying all requirements in the specifications and their proposal. Proposals shall demonstrate an understanding of requirements to comply with and plan to ensure compliance with the multiple sources of codes (UFC, NEC, NFPA, AFIs, ETLs, regulations, etc.) that shall be applicable to the program. Demonstrating a reasonable approach to managing multiple projects simultaneously between individual projects. A reasonable approach is defined as an approach which a prudent person would take to ensure it maintains a management capability to include being able to meet the required warranty response time. Describe the approach to managing the program and individual projects between different site locations.

4. The Offeror’s Technical Proposal narrative shall fully address, acknowledge, and demonstrate their understanding, acceptance, and approach to meeting all aspects and requirements of the projects statement of services. Each project element type;

design / build, “bid / build”, and design only, shall be fully addressed to leave no doubt about the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements and responsibilities associated with each type of project. It is the Governments intent to utilize design/build projects extensively in order to simplify and streamline project execution as well as reduce costs. It is essential that the Offeror clearly demonstrate and acknowledge both the understanding and acceptance of the additional responsibilities and requirements inherent in a Design/Build project. At a minimum, Offerors shall include the below subfactors.

iii. Subfactor I – Technical Capabilities:

1. The offeror shall clearly demonstrate contractor capability by providing information that effectively represents their technical expertise and project management capabilities.

2. A narrative to demonstrate a sound approach and methodology for accomplishing work requirements identified in the below project deliverables for the Swimming Pool Upgrade design and construction, with the appropriate skills, equipment, and materials, in the appropriate quantities with specifications, and at the appropriate time to meet the Government’s desired outcomes. Each offeror shall also submit their proposed work plan for the major elements of the mock project, as listed below to include both design and construction. The narrative and materials

FA568518R0003

submittal shall clearly demonstrate the contractor’s capability to manage all resources required to perform the requirements outlined in this solicitation.

a. Project Deliverables:

i. Provide documentation for all items in the Statement of Services, required for a 65% design, as described in the MACC Specifications, to include, but not be limited to:

1. Drawings, with electronic signatures, in the title block. Engineers responsible for each discipline shall electronically sign the drawings for that discipline, in the “Designed By” block. Engineers responsible for the quality assurance in each discipline (separate from the engineers who sign in the “Designed By” block) shall electronically sign the drawings for that discipline, in the “Checked By” block. The “Approved By” block shall be electronically signed by a Principle Owner of the AE Firm, or, if designed by In-House engineers/architects, this block shall be signed by a Principle Owner of the prime contractor. Principle Owner shall be defined as someone who owns 10% or more of the company.

2. Copy of diploma(s) of university engineering/architect degrees and resumes of engineers/architects responsible of each engineering discipline. These are the engineers/architects who shall be involved in the design and quality assurance of the Swimming Pool Upgrade design.

Requirements for resumes described in Sect. 2.B.Vi.2a of this addendum

3. QA check set drawings, prepared, IAW with specification requirements (Section 3.4 of Supplement).

4. Outline Specifications (Table of Contents only)

5. Basis of Design

6. Quantity and Man-hour Estimate (INC-1101)

7. Design Review Checklist (INC-1104)

8. Submittal Register (INC-1106)

9. Constructability Review Checklist (INC-1108)

ii. Mechanical Items

1. Catalog data, technical selection data and certification of new pool water circulation system equipment according project design criteria.

2. The drawings of Flow diagram include with all piping, cabling, equipment and all required accessories of new pool water circulation system of pools.

3. Drawings include plans, elevations, details, sections, equipment list (quantities) of new pool water circulation system.

4. Working scenario for new pool water circulation system.

5. Drawing of new domestic cold/hot water system of Building 925, 923 and Pool Facilities.

FA568518R0003

6. Drawing of new waste water system of Building 925, 923 and Pool Facilities.

7. Drawing of new air conditioning, fresh air and ventilation systems of Building 925, 923 and Pool Facilities.

iii. Electrical Items

1. Catalog data, technical selection data and certification of new pool water circulation system electrical equipment.

2. The drawings of automation system of new pool water circulation system of pools.

3. Single line diagram of automation and power system of new pool water circulation system of pools.

4. The drawings of power system of new pool water circulation system of pools.

5. Drawing of new power, lighting and fire alarm system of (Main Pool & Wading Pool, 923,925, 926, pool snack bar area).

6. Certified Fire Protection Engineer PE Credentials.

iv. Architectural Items

1. 3D visual presentations which clearly express the materials to be used for the buildings, pool area and landscape.

2. Drawings of the new mechanical building.

3. Catalog data of the all architectural materials to be used in the project.

4. Drawings of the tensile membrane roof system in Pool Snack bar area.

5. Drawings of the steel ladder and dive stand.

v. Civil Items

1. Design Guide Information, applicable codes and regulations in accordance US or TURKISH government for static calculations.

2. Software with input/output format of static calculations.

3. Method of installing Pile foundation.

iv. Subfactor II– Quality Management Plan

1. Each Offeror shall submit a Quality Control Plan, to implement a rigorous Quality Management Process. This process defines the Quality Assurance reviews and Quality Control techniques required to assess the level of deliverable and process quality within the project, in accordance with the 2018 MACC Specifications (RFP Attachment 1). The Quality Control Plan shall describe the steps required to obtain designs that meet all requirements, manage construction on accordance with industry standards, including but not limited to identifying problems to the government, and tracking and resolving problems. The Offeror shall demonstrate

FA568518R0003

how quality problems shall be documented and resolved on the mock project. The demonstration shall provide the government with no doubt that the offeror understands how to manage a quality control/quality assurance program. The Offeror shall submit a graphical description of its planned organization structure (an organization chart) for successful execution of the contract, as well as a narrative on how to accomplish a project. Offerors Management Approach as a minimum shall include the following:

a. An organization chart (graph) that shows the lines of authority and communication for the execution of this contract and clearly identifying management, design and engineering/construction partnerships the lines of authority of the Offeror’s Project Manager, Quality Control and Safety Organization, as key positions, including all Joint Venture (VJ) Partners and Key Subcontractors, when applicable in the organization. The chart shall identify all offices involved in this contract from the Offeror’s Headquarters to the Offeror’s site office(s), and how they are related. All positions shall be identified on the organization chart by title, organization, physical location, and whether the positions are filled by the prime contractor or a subcontractor, and in the case of a Joint Venture, which JV partner. Describe the hiring criteria for the key positions depicted on the organizational chart to include the minimum level of education, professional licenses, technical certifications, experience and/or background, etc. that shall be required to hold the position described.

The minimum levels identified should be descriptive of the position and not a specific individual. The Project Manager, or the on-site person that communicates with the U.S. Government if the PM is not on-site, and any other personnel authorized to communicate directly with the U.S. Government shall be clearly identified.

b. A narrative description of the organization structure including roles, major responsibilities, and authorities of all Joint Venture Partners, Key Subcontractors, and key personnel. The position titles used in the narrative and Subfactor V shall match those used in the organization chart.

v. Subfactor III – Schedule

1. The offeror shall provide a progress schedule for all major design and construction elements of the mock project based upon the offeror’s proposed performance period. The scheduling of the entire project, including the design and construction sequences, is required.

2. The schedule shall include activities associated with the submittal, approval, procurement, fabrication and delivery of long lead materials, equipment, fabricated assemblies and supplies.

FA568518R0003

3. A typical procurement sequence includes the string of activities: submit, approve, procure, fabricate, and deliver. (See MACC Specs Section 01 32 01.00 10 Project Schedule, Para 3.3.2.3 Mandatory Tasks).

4. Show Government and other agency activities that could impact progress. These activities include, but are not limited to: inspections, utility tie-in, Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) and Notice to Proceed (NTP) for phasing requirements.

5. All milestones and any phasing shall be annotated with proposed actual dates in two formats: a line graph (e.g. AFF 3064, or equal), and as a Gantt chart (e.g. MS Project, or equal).

6. The progress schedule shall demonstrate the offeror’s technical capabilities and expertise. Provide a Narrative Report with the Preliminary, Initial, and each Periodic Update of the project schedule, as the basis of the progress payment request. The Narrative Report shall include: a description of activities along the two most critical paths where the total float is less than or equal to 20 work days, a description of current and anticipated problem areas or delaying factors and their impact, and an explanation of corrective actions taken or required to be taken. The narrative report is expected to communicate to the Government, the Contractor's thorough analysis of the schedule output and its plans to compensate for any problems, either current or potential, which are revealed through that analysis. The offeror shall clearly demonstrate capability to manage and complete all requirements within the proposed performance period. The Government shall be confident and have no doubt in the Offeror’s ability to manage and complete all requirements within the proposed performance period. The detailed schedule shall include specific tasks with dates for each step of the process. Schedule calculations shall retain the logic between predecessors and successors even when the successor activity starts and the predecessor activity has not finished.

vi. Subfactor IV - Relevant experience/key personnel:

1. The offeror shall identify the qualifications of design engineering and architecture personnel in the following key disciplines, who are working on the mock project:

a. Architect, Civil Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Structural Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Estimator, Construction Management, Geotechnical Engineer and Environmental Engineer.

b. The evaluation shall consider the education, training, certification, overall and relevant experience and longevity with the proposed team for all proposed key personnel.

c. All design engineers and architects in responsible charge on the mock project, and the QA engineers assigned to the mock project, shall have a minimum of

FA568518R0003

4-year Bachelor of Science degree in engineering or architecture. Copies of university diplomas and resumes shall be provided for each person, who signs as the engineer or architect in responsible charge of the mock project, or as QA engineer/architect.

d. All design engineers and architects in responsible charge on the mock project shall have a minimum of four years of experience working with US standards and codes.

2. Provide all relevant information concerning key personnel for both in-house engineers and AE firm designs. Provide the technical and educational background, and relevant job experience of these architects and engineers to perform the work required by this solicitation. As a minimum, this list shall include resumes for full-time staff employees with four-year bachelor’s degrees, or higher, and at least four years’ design experience in architecture, civil engineering, electrical engineering, and mechanical engineering.

a. Resumes shall include:

i. Name.

ii. Title.

iii. Technical/Managerial Background.

iv. Educational Background.

v. Descriptions of positions held which are relevant to the position which shall be held under this contract.

vi. English language skills.

vii. Professional licenses or certificates held.

b. Provide the full name of the firm, address, DUNS number and CAGE code.

Offerors shall submit a minimum three (3) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant projects performed by the proposed design firm or in-house engineer that will be responsible for engineering designs that best demonstrate your experience in a diverse range of design tasks similar in size, scope and complexity to the projects proposed for this MACC. For purpose of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as follows:

i. Size: A final construction cost of $100,000 or greater. At least (1) one project shall have a final construction of $750,000 or greater.

ii. Design Scope/Complexity:

iii. New building construction, building renovations, that includes floors, doors, walls, windows, external facades, repairs to roofs;

iv. Repair/replacement of major building systems such as electrical, mechanical, and HVAC;

v. Civil works shall include concrete/asphalt roads and pavements, earthwork, and drainage structures;

FA568518R0003

vi. In addition, proposal shall demonstrate expertise in environmental remediation, Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection, and CAD/GIS mapping.

c. If all projects submitted contain only horizontal or civil site work, they shall not be considered relevant. Such projects are allowed only if other projects are submitted that include scope and complexity similar to those described above.

d. Additionally, relevant submitted projects shall demonstrate the following characteristics:

i. Experience as the engineer or architect in-charge on submitted projects,

ii. Experience with design of both new construction (at least one (1) project) and renovation (at least one (1) project),

iii. Experience with design-build method (at least one (1) project).

e. Design-build and construction-only projects shall have been completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

f. A project is defined as a complete design effort performed under a single task order or contract/subcontract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a “project;” rather, Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order of the contract, as a project.

g. For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements (i.e.: unique features, area, construction methods).

c. Volume III – Past Performance

i. The offeror shall provide recent and relevant past performance on a maximum of five

(5) contracts with no more than five (5) pages per contract listed.

ii. Recent Past Performance Information: To be recent, the effort must be ongoing (at least 50% complete) or must have been completed within the past five (5) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that is not recent will not be evaluated to assess performance.

iii. Relevant Past Performance Information: Relevancy is defined as efforts which are similar in magnitude and complexity. Projects will be determined relevant if the requirement is a repair, alteration, renovation, maintenance or minor construction effort on real property with a magnitude of at least $100K and involves two or more trades.

FA568518R0003

iv. Provide any information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrates customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed product for relevant past efforts/contracts. In addition, explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems such as cost overruns, extended performance periods, numerous warranty calls, etc.

v. Performance Surveys/Past Performance Questionnaires: Offeror will complete ONLY items 1 – 6 and return the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), (RFP Attachment 10) as provided in Section J of this RFP for up to five (5) projects. The remainder of the PPQ will be completed by the raters and not by potential offerors.

(End of Addendum)

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

52.215-2 ADDENDUM

Addendum to 52.215-2

Evaluation Factors for Award

1.BASIS FOR AWARD

a. The Government will perform an assessment of the proposals and award to the technically acceptable offerors, with acceptable past performance, determined to provide the best value to the US Government.

b.Contract(s) may only be awarded to the offeror(s) who are deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (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 U.S. Government. While the U.S. Government Source Selection Authority (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.

c. For the purpose of this evaluation, the proposal must be technically acceptable with acceptable past performance in order to be considered for award. The technical proposal is not subject to trade-offs and is not subject to technical merits in the award process. To be considered for award, each proposal will be evaluated by a U.S. Government representative with the assistance of the Contracting Officer.

FA568518R0003

d. To arrive at the best value decision, the SSA will integrate the source selection evaluation factors and subfactors described in the paragraphs that follow. The factors and subfactors are the baseline against which each offeror's proposal is compared to determine the confidence the U.S. Government has that the offeror will be able to satisfactorily accomplish all work required. The baselines establish the level an offeror's proposal must meet in any factor or subfactor, or element in order to be judged acceptable. To be eligible for award, a proposal must meet all technical requirements, conform to all required terms and conditions, and include all required information. Only the offers that meet or exceed all factors in the evaluation criteria set forth in Section M, of this solicitation will be considered for award as identified herein.

e. If the target number of awardees does not receive a technically “acceptable” rating and a past performance “acceptable” rating, award without discussions is not achieved, and the SSA determines to open discussions, the following process shall be followed for determination of the competitive range: "A competitive range determination will then be based on the number of past performance "acceptable" proposals that are the most highly rated. Highly rated proposals will be based on the number of technical deficiencies and the amount of significant changes required to the proposal."

f. Upon conclusion of discussions with Offerors in the competitive range, the SSA shall then make an integrated assessment trade-off for a best value award decision.

g.Upon the decision of the SSA, contracts will be awarded to contractors deemed to be the best value to the U.S. Government. Award will consist of a base contract with a five year ordering period.

2.EVALUATION FACTORS AND PROCESS

a. By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub factors. Failure to meet a technical requirement may result in an offer being determined technically unacceptable. Offeror's must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

b.A complete proposal must be submitted in order for an offeror to be considered responsive for award IAW Section L. A "Complete proposal" response consists of three (3) separate volumes; Volume I - Contract Documentation, Volume II - Technical Proposal, and Volume III - Past Performance.

c. The evaluation process shall be conducted as follows:

1. Volume I - Contract Documentation: In order to be considered for award, proposal must fit guidelines outlined in section L, paragraph 2 (a) of this solicitation titled:

FA568518R0003

Volume I - Contract Documentation. Contract documentation will be rated as either "Responsive" or "non-responsive".

2. Volume II – Factor 1 - Technical: The offeror's technical capability will be reviewed and assigned one of the following ratings. The rating depicts whether the offeror's technical proposal meets the requirements IAW the stated evaluation criteria and solicitation requirements set forth in Section L.

RATING DEFINITION

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

a. TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY

i. The offeror's technical capabilities plan will be evaluated on its completeness and whether offeror can clearly demonstrate capability by providing information that represents technical expertise and project management capabilities IAW Section L of the solicitation. Evaluation shall include all Sub factors as listed in Section L.

All portions of the Technical Capabilities sub factor must be evaluated as acceptable to achieve an acceptable evaluation for the entire sub factor (i.e. one unacceptable section nullifies the entire Technical Capabilities evaluation).

ii. Initially, the U.S. Government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on a pass/fail basis, assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable. The proposals shall be evaluated against the following sub factors:

1. Subfactor I: Technical Capabilities - To be considered technically acceptable, the proposed offeror shall demonstrate knowledge of the project's technical requirements and have a basic approach and conceptual plan to meet the requirements of this project. All techniques and resources shall meet or exceed standards identified IAW 2018 MACC General Specifications Guide (Attachment 1), based on standards routinely used by the construction industry for same or similar projects. The proposed Offeror must also demonstrate the ability to meet project requirements by selecting and furnishing products that meet the minimum standards listed in the specifications, drawings, and throughout this solicitation. The narratives in Section L, Provision 52.215-1, Paragraph 2, (b) (iii) will be evaluated based on its accuracy and compliance with the required standards. The offeror shall demonstrate knowledge of the technical requirements and have a basic approach and conceptual plan to meet the stated requirements. The proposed offeror must also demonstrate the ability to meet project requirements by selecting and furnishing products that meet the minimum standards.

FA568518R0003

2. Subfactor II: Quality Management - To be considered technically acceptable, the proposed offeror shall include all information requested in Section L, Provision 52.215-1, Paragraph 2, (b) (iv).

3. Subfactor III: Schedule - To be considered technically acceptable, a mobilization and construction schedule must be provided to identify how the offeror intends to meet the recommended period of performance for each project, or the proposed period of performance (whichever is shorter) in accordance with Section L, Provision 52.215-1, Paragraph 2, (b) (v). The submitted schedules will be evaluated based on accuracy and the likeliness of stated execution.

4. Subfactor IV: Relevant Experience/Key Personnel – To be considered technically acceptable the offeror must demonstrate the ability to obtain the proper mix of qualified key personnel as provided in accordance with Section L, Provision 52.215-1, Paragraph 2, (b) (vi).

3. Part II- Factor 2 - Past Performance – Past Performance shall be rated on Recency and Relevancy and deemed either Acceptable or Unacceptable. Using offeror provided past performance information, past performance questionnaires (Attachment 10 to the RFP), and other means, the contracting officer shall seek relevant performance information on (1) the past and present effort provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other U.S. Government sources, if necessary. The U.S.

Government will determine and assign a past performance rating IAW the chart below.

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 (at least 50% complete) or must have been completed within the past five (5) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that is not recent will not be evaluated.

b. Relevancy Assessment - The U.S. Government will conduct an evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine the degree of relevance of the past performance. Projects will be determined relevant if the requirement is a repair, alteration, renovation, maintenance or minor construction effort on real property with a magnitude of at least $100K and involves two or more trades.

c. Quality Assessment – The US government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of past performance questionnaires, Past Performance Integrated Reporting System (PPIRS) and Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) information, interviews with government customers and, if applicable, commercial clients.

d. The U.S. Government will use the following degrees of assessment when evaluation past performance:

FA568518R0003

RATING DESCRIPTION

Acceptable Based on the offeror's performance record, the U.S. Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort or the offeror's performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror's performance record, the U.S. Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

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

4. Only proposals rated as technically "acceptable" with acceptable past performance will be eligible for award. The U.S. Government will award to offerors whose proposals are technically acceptable with acceptable past performance. Award shall be made to those offeror's without further consideration of any other offers, unless further evaluation is determined to be in the best interest of the U.S. Government.

5. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in Section L. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevance of past performance information) or to respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror previously did not have an opportunity to respond to. Communications conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

6. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Clarifications, IAW FAR 15.306(a), may be used to resolve adverse past performance information to which the offeror previously did not have an opportunity to respond to. Such clarifications will not constitute discussions.

7. The U.S. Government anticipates awarding without discussions; however the U.S.

Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

8. If the target number of awardees does not receive a technically “acceptable” rating and a past performance “acceptable” rating, award without discussions is not achieved, and the SSA determines to open discussions, the following process shall be followed for determination of the competitive range: A competitive range determination will then be based on the number of past performance "acceptable" proposals that are the most highly rated. Highly rated proposals will be based on the number of technical deficiencies and the amount of significant changes required to the proposal. Upon

FA568518R0003

conclusion of discussions with Offerors in the competitive range, the SSA shall then make an award decision.

(End of Addendum)

(End of Summary of Changes)

FA568518R0003