Phase1RFQ

Phase 1 - Request for Qualifications Design/Build of Sol. # GS-09P-09-KTC-0078 New U.S. Federal Courthouse GSA Pacific Rim, Region 9 Bakersfield, California

Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No. GS-08P-10-JB-C-0006 Design Build Services

For the Modernization of the

New Custom House

Denver, Colorado

Phase I

Technical Submittal

Prepared by:

U.S. General Services Administration

Public Buildings Service Denver, Colorado Rocky Mountain Region November 4, 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I: Project Requirements 1.0 Project Overview 1.1 Organization of RFQ 1.2 Services to be Provided 1.3 Project Summary 1.4 Summary of Acquisition Strategy 1.5 Source Selection Evaluation Criteria

PART II: Qualifications Submittal Requirements 2.0 Estimated Award Date

2.1 Estimated Completion Date

2.2 RFQ/RFP Evaluation Criteria and Basis of Award

2.3 Questions, Clarifications and Interpretations

2.4 Required Technical Data for Qualifications Submittal

2.5 Qualifications Submittal Preparation

2.6 Qualifications Submittal Delivery Date and Location

2.7 Qualifications Submittal Sealing

2.8 Phase One Submission

PART III: Past Performance Questionnaire PART IV: Projects PART V: FAR Clauses

APPENDIX:

Standard Form 330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications

PART I - PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

1.0 Project Overview

This high performance green building project will continue the legacy of outstanding public architecture that was initiated with the founding of the nation through the preservation and modernization of a historic federal building. In accord with this tradition, the General Services Administration (GSA) Construction Excellence Program provides guidance to GSA construction projects through collaboration with leaders of the private sector construction community. This partnership allows for the development and implementation of innovative approaches to project management and execution to provide the federal government and client agencies the highest quality construction within budget and schedule.

This Request for Qualifications (RFQ) is issued by the Public Buildings Service of the United States General Services Administration (GSA), Rocky Mountain Region, hereinafter referred to as the "Government", in order to obtain the services of a Design/Build Contractor also referred to as Offeror or Contractor, who shall be singularly responsible to satisfy the terms of the resulting contract. This contract will provide design/build services for the design and construction of the modernization of the New Custom House Building.

The contract will be a Firm Fixed-Price Contract as specified under FAR Subpart 16.2. The contractor for this project will be competitively chosen using Source Selection procedures in accordance with FAR Subpart 15 in conjunction with the "Best Value process." GSA will evaluate all responses using the criteria stated herein. This contract will be set aside and competed among 8(a) Design-Build firms.

1.1 Organization of RFQ

This RFQ is composed of Five (5) Sections and one (1) Appendix: Section 1 includes the Project Overview and Services to be provided. Section 2 contains Qualifications Submittal Requirements. Section 3 contains the contractor past performance questionnaire forms. Section 4 contains the similar projects submittal. Section 5 contains relevant Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) related to the RFQ process and the American Reinvestment Recovery Act (ARRA). The Appendix contains the Standard Form 330.

1.2 Services to be Provided

The services for this project will include, but are not limited to, general construction services, preparing construction documents, and serving as the Architect/Engineer of record for the project. It will be the responsibility of the Offeror to design and construct this project under GSA's construction excellence guidelines and complete construction while meeting all the specified project requirements within budget.

The scope of professional services will require at a minimum: Professional architectural, engineering, landscape architectural, interior design, and related consulting services for concept design documents, design development documents, metric construction documents, specifications, cost estimates, schedules, space planning, value engineering services, U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) services, computer-aided design and drafting (CADD), and includes the construction of buildings and related systems, controlled-access parking, and site development. The project is also to include GSA design standards for secure facilities; conformance to the P-100 (Facility Standards for Public Buildings), including a goal of LEED certification; and customer agency requirements. All design work will be required to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. The A/E should incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) strategies.

The construction services will require at a minimum: construction of the facilities, administration of the construction contract and all subcontracts, scope management, value engineering, coordination of regular construction meetings, CPM scheduling, maintaining of construction records, including daily logs and monthly reports, monitoring of construction costs, all services included in the contract documents, building commissioning and turnover to designated facility management staff, post-construction contract services (PCCS), abatement, demolition, warranties and guarantees and other required supplemental services as required under the contract.

The Contractor will provide professional, technical, administrative, and clerical personnel as needed to perform all required services including, but not limited to, those described in this Solicitation.

1.3 Project Summary The purpose of this Request for Qualifications (RFQ) is to short list a maximum of five (5) firms to proceed to the Phase Two process. In the Phase Two process a Design Build Team (DBT) will be selected to provide all labor, materials, tools, equipment and services necessary to complete design and construction of the modernization of the New Custom House in Denver, Colorado. Funding for the mechanical and electrical upgrades for this project will come from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA). The window replacement portion of this project is not funded through ARRA.

The purpose of this project is to modernize the electrical and mechanical systems at the New Custom House Courthouse. The proposed capital project will protect this 78-year old historic asset and improve the energy efficiency by replacing air handling units, replacing electrical switch gears, updating/replacing induction units and condensate piping, updating lighting and controls, updating mechanical controls, air intakes, installing isolation valves, updating/replacing domestic and mechanical plumbing, replacing ceilings and flooring, site work and new dock, updating restrooms, upgrading life safety system, and updating interior and exterior finishes.

The New Custom House is primarily used as office space; the building also contains a child care center, as food service area, and provides space for US Bankruptcy court proceedings. Tenants include: the Small Business Administration, the US Bankruptcy Courts, the Military Entrance Processing Station, Department of the Army, Department of Justice, Department of Labor, Department of the Treasury, the Railroad Retirement Board, and the Department of Homeland Security. Major tenant issues relate to the roof, parking, indoor air quality, exterior windows, and security.

The New Custom House is an 8-story office building containing 172,502 usable square feet, 247,310 rentable square feet and 278,252 gross square feet with 47 outdoor parking spaces on a 2.4 acre site. This 8-story stone building was constructed in 1931 and has 5 floors above grade plus a basement, sub-basement, and a partial floor below the sub-basement. In 1979, the building as listed on the National Register of Historic Places and is now designated as a level 2 historic asset.

Design Stage services and Construction Stage work are to be performed by the DB Contractor. Design Stage services include providing Design Concept and Design Development Phase services. Construction Stage work includes preparing construction documents and performing construction in conformance with the project requirements. The scope of services for the Design Stage will require at a minimum: Professional architectural, engineering, interior design, landscape architecture, and related consulting services for concept design documents, design development documents, construction documents. The scope of services for the Construction Stage will require at a minimum: preparation of construction documents, specifications, cost estimates, computer-aided design and drafting (CADD), CPM scheduling, scope management, value engineering, maintaining construction records, utilizing an electronic project management system in order to manage project documents, monitoring construction costs, commissioning, post-construction contract services (PCCS), demolition, construction, and other required supplemental services, if so requested by the Government. The Design-Build contractor shall have a full understanding of the project, its contract documents, and the principles of Federal construction contracting and contract administration. Most importantly, the Design-Build contractor shall have complete responsibility for design and construction of the facility, including timely delivery within the project budget.

1.4 Summary of Acquisition Strategy

This procurement will be for 8(a) set-aside competitive. The General Services Administration intends to award a firm-fixed price Design-Build Contract based on the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedures, FAR Subpart 36.3, Source Selection Procedures, FAR subpart 15.3, in conjunction with the "Best Value” process, and the GSA Construction Excellence Program. For this contract award process, GSA will issue two Solicitations in sequence: 1) Phase One, and 2) Phase Two. The Phase One procedure, which is this Request for Qualifications (RFQ), is designed to select a “short list” of the most highly qualified Offerors who will be requested to submit Phase Two proposals. All responsible sources may submit a Phase One Proposal. The number of proposals in the competitive range has been limited to a maximum of five (5), to permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. The most highly rated Offerors will be selected to participate in Phase Two (analogous to Request for Proposals (RFP)).

Interested Offerors are required to submit their responses to this RFQ by the due date established in this RFQ. The Government will evaluate all the responses to this RFQ in accordance with the criteria indentified herein, specifically the technical qualifications, experience and the past performance of the design and construction teams formed by each potential offeror for this procurement, and advise each Offeror in writing whether it will be invited to participate in the Phase Two process. Offerors that do not submit a timely RFQ response in Phase One will not be allowed to participate in the remaining phase of the procurement.

In Phase Two, the Government will issue the RFP to the most highly qualified Offerors from Phase One and request that they submit Phase Two proposals. Phase Two of the solicitation shall be prepared in accordance with FAR Part 15 and include phase-two evaluation factors, developed in accordance with FAR 15.304. Phase Two of the solicitation shall require submission of technical and price proposals, which shall be evaluated separately in accordance with FAR Part 15. Phase Two proposals will be allotted five (5) weeks of preparation time with one (1) Pre-Bid meetings scheduled during Phase Two with GSA Project Managers on guided Site Walks. The Government will reserve the right to make an award upon the basis of the initial Phase One and Phase Two offers without discussions.

1.5 Source Selection Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation process will be a Design-Build Two-Phase best value source selection. The procurement for this solicitation will be conducted in two (2) phases. The following criteria represent the technical factors that will be used by GSA's Source Selection Evaluation Board in evaluating the Offeror's Phase One submission. Technical Qualifications submittals will be evaluated in Phase One to determine the short-listed offerors will submit competitive proposals for Phase Two. Information submitted by the qualified firms in Phase Two will be evaluated to determine the Contractor that offers the best value to the Government.

1.5.1 Phase One — Technical (RFQ) Submittal: The evaluation factors for the General Contractor/Design Builder, when combined, are significantly more important than those combined factors for the Lead Designer and Design Team, each.

The technical factors for Phase One are as follows:

Mandatory Requirements: The following factors will be evaluated on a “go/no-go” basis, i.e.; offerors not meeting all of the following criteria will be eliminated from further consideration.

Proposal conforms to the requirements of the Request For Qualifications (RFQ), including, but not limited to:

· Proof of CCR Registration

· Proof of bonding capacity to $30,000,000.

· A letter of bondability on your Surety’s letterhead, confirming that you have the bonding capacity necessary for this project.

Proposal must meet the minimum requirements of the RFQ, Phase One.

Proposal contains a commitment to maintain the evaluated Design and Construction Team intact through the entire design phase.

Proposal must commit that design drawings and/or construction documents will be prepared by professional architects and engineers registered in the state of Colorado. The Design Team must have demonstrable experience in designing and delivering projects similar in scope and size.

In accordance with FAR 15.305 for all factors on past performance the following applies to all instances: “In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.”

Phase One – TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS: All factors for General Contractor/Design Builder, when combined are significantly more important than the combined factors for Lead Designer and Design Team, individually.

General Contractor/Design Builder Past Performance Qualifications/Experience of Key Personnel

Project Experience on Projects of Similar Size and Scope Lead Designer Past Performance on Design

Philosophy and Design Intent Lead Designer Profile

Lead Designer Portfolio

Design Team Past Performance

Qualifications/Experience of Key Personnel

Project Experience on Projects of Similar Size and Scope

EVALUATION FACTORS – GENERAL CONTRACTOR/DESIGN BUILDER

Factor 1 - Past Performance

This factor considers the quality of the Offeror’s past performance, within the last ten (10) years, in performing contracts for construction with regards to considerations as technical success and customer satisfaction. This factor also considers the quality of the offeror’s performance in carrying out the work required, specifically, workforce management, and scheduling.

The offeror demonstrates itself as a construction business providing verifiable information and references for four (4) projects completed over the last ten (10) years that:

a.

Demonstrate ability to meet project budget constraints by managing cost changes and claims.

b.

Demonstrate ability to effectively coordinate trades.

c.

Demonstrate ability to complete projects within the approved schedule.

d.

Demonstrate ability to ensure high degree of trade’s craftsmanship.

e.

Demonstrate success in achieving subcontractor goals.

The offeror shall provide a minimum of two (2) references for each similar project. Each contractor is responsible for providing questionnaires (provided by the Government in this RFQ) to their references to complete in a timely manner to allow a completed questionnaire to reach this office by the time and date specified for receipt of information identified in the solicitation The offeror is responsible to ensure that contact information is current and reliable. The Government will consider information provided by reference as well as other relevant information from other sources when evaluating the Offeror’s past experience. If negative information is received from sources not noted in the Offeror’s proposal, the Offeror will be given an opportunity to respond.

Factor 2 - Qualifications/Experience of Key Personnel This factor considers the experience and qualifications of the proposed key staff and how the offeror organizes and manages the project team. Project Manager’s experience directing similar project work and that the key personnel and subcontractors identified have the qualifications and experience in all areas necessary to effectively perform the required work.

Each Offeror shall submit an organizational chart and resumes for each key person on the proposed Project Team as defined below:

1) Project Team organizational chart

2) Project Manager

3) Project Superintendent

4) CPM Scheduler

a. Resumes must include a description of training and experience in respective areas of expertise.

b. Duties of each key individual must be clearly defined.

c. Resumes must describe current and proposed position titles, education, professional licensing, and any personal awards.

d. Resumes should be no longer than two (2) pages per individual.

e. Past experience must be attributable to the person named on the resume. Minimum experience permitted is as follows:

Years

Project Manager

GC Superintendent

3) CPM Scheduler

Factor 3 - Project Experience on Similar Projects This factor considers the extent of the offeror’s past experience and the quality of the offeror’s past performance on projects of similar size and complexity. The Offeror shall submit information on at least three (3) projects of similar scope and complexity.

Each Offeror shall provide:

1) A list of three (3) similar projects completed over the last ten (10) years.

2) Narrative summaries of the three (3) similar projects listed, performed within the past ten (10) years, that demonstrates the offeror’s capabilities, technical expertise, and experience managing complex projects with reference to considerations of timeliness and technical success. Interior and exterior photos are required for each project submitted. Limit the summaries to one (1) page each. Limit the photos to three (3) pages.

Include for each project submitted, title and location, project summary including square feet, contract award amount and final contract amount including all changes, dollar value of work self-performed and the percentage it represents of the final contract amount and project completion date.

In order to demonstrate the ability to perform a project with “similar scope and complexity to the New Custom House Modernization project”, the three submitted projects should demonstrate, in aggregate, the following capabilities:

· Modernization of a multi-story, multi-tenant, occupied professional office building between 100,000 and 200,000 gross square feet

· Complete renovation of multi-story building mechanical system, electrical, system and lighting, and abatement

· Work performed in buildings listed under the national register of historic places and following historical preservation requirements

· General Contracting on projects between $15 million and $25 million.

For purposes of determining “similar scope and complexity to the New Custom House Modernization project”, the following is a generalized description of a similar project:

“replacing major mechanical systems including but limited to air handling units updating/replacing induction units and condensate piping, updating mechanical controls, air intakes. Replacing major electrical systems, including but not limited to, electrical switch gears, updating lighting and controls. Other similar work would include installing isolation valves, updating/replacing domestic and mechanical plumbing, replacing ceilings and flooring, site work and new dock, updating restrooms, upgrading life safety system, and updating interior and exterior finishes.”

Square footage range of 150,000 to 350,000 gross square feet. Cost range of $20,000,000 - $30,000,000.”

EVALUATION FACTORS – LEAD DESIGNER

Factor 1 – Past Performance on Design This factor considers the extent of the lead designer’s past experience and the quality of the lead designer’s past performance.

The offeror submits a lead designer’s portfolio of not more than five (5) projects completed in the last ten (10) years (maximum of five (5) pages per project). The narrative shall address the design approach with salient features for each project and discuss how the client’s program, functional, image, mission, economic, schedule, and operational objectives were satisfied by the overall design/planning solution. This section of the submission should include tangible evidence such as certificates, awards, peer recognition, etc. and provide a client reference contact for each project. Each contractor is responsible for providing questionnaires (provided by the Government) to their references to complete in a timely manner to allow a completed questionnaire to reach this office by the time and date specified for receipt of information identified in the solicitation. A representative floor plan, a site plan, a building section, or other appropriate drawing, and a minimum of two (2) photographs must be included for each project.

Factor 2 – Philosophy and Design Intent This factor considers the lead designer’s flexibility and attitude toward design.

In the lead designer’s words (maximum of two pages), as related to this project, the offeror shall state: the parameters of an overall design philosophy; his/her approach to the challenge of public architecture and related issues; parameters that may apply in modernizing an existing multi-tenant federal office building; commitment and sensitivity to the original architectural design of the building (interior and exterior); and commitment to integrated design, sustainable design, and GSA’s Construction Excellence programs.

Factor 3 - Lead Designer Profile

This factor considers the lead designer’s credentials and the quality of the lead designer’s past performance with regards to architecture and interior design.

The offeror submits a biographical sketch of the lead designer (maximum of three (3) pages) including education, professional experience, recognition for design efforts inclusive of the portfolio examples. Identify and describe areas of responsibility and commitment to each project.

Factor 4 - Lead Designer Portfolio

This factor considers the extent of the lead designer’s ability to demonstrate innovation and creativity with regards to architecture and interior design.

The offeror submits a portfolio representative of the Lead Designer’s ability to provide design excellence. Address his or her participation in each project. If a single designer, submit a portfolio of up to three (3) projects completed in the last ten (10) years (maximum of five (5) pages per project). If the Lead Designer is a team, submit graphics and a description of up to two (2) projects from each Lead Designer or Lead Design discipline. The narrative shall address the design philosophy with salient features for each project and discuss how the client’s program, functional, image, mission, economic, schedule, and operations and maintenance objectives were satisfied by the overall design/planning solution. Include tangible evidence such as certificates, awards, peer recognition, etc., demonstrating design excellence. Where there is duplication with Criteria (1) Past Performance on Design, the Lead Designer shall address his or her participation in the project.

EVALUATION FACTORS – DESIGN TEAM

Factor 1 - Past Performance

This factor considers the extent of the proposed design team’s past experience and the quality of the past performance.

The offeror shall submit at a minimum two (2) references for each design team member. Each contractor is responsible for providing questionnaires (provided by the Government in this RFQ) to their references to complete in a timely manner to allow a completed questionnaire to reach this office by the time and date specified for receipt of information identified in the solicitation. References should be provided for all key personnel as identified below under “Design Team Personnel”. The offeror is responsible to ensure that contact information is current and reliable. The Government will consider information provided by reference as well as other relevant information from other sources when evaluating the Offeror’s past experience. If negative information is received from sources not noted in the Offeror’s proposal, the Offeror will be given an opportunity to respond.

Factor 2 - Qualifications/Experience of Design Team Personnel

This factor considers the experience and qualifications of the proposed staff and how the offeror organizes and manages the project team.

Each Offeror shall submit an organizational chart and resumes for each key person on the proposed Design Team as defined below:

Design Team organizational chart

Lead Designer

3) Architect

4) Engineers (mechanical, structural, civil, electrical, fire protection)

5) Historical Preservationist Consultant

6) Security/Blast Consultant

7) LEED Consultant

8) High Performance Green Building Consultant

a. Resumes must include a description of training and experience in respective areas of expertise.

b. Duties of each key individual within the Project Team must be clearly defined.

c. Resumes must describe current and proposed position titles, education, professional licensing, and any personal awards.

d. Resumes should be no longer than two (2) pages per individual.

e. Past experience must be attributable to the person named on the resume. Minimum experience permitted is as follows:

Years

1. Lead Designer

2. Project Manager

3. Architect

4. Engineers (each)

5. Historical Preservationist Consultant

6. Security/Blast Consultant

7. LEED Consultant

8. High Performance Green

Building Consultant

Factor 3 - Project Experience on Similar Projects

This factor considers the extent of the Project Team’s (Design Team and General Contractor) past experience and the quality of the Project Team’s past performance on projects of similar size and complexity. The Offeror shall submit information on at least three (3) projects of similar scope and complexity for the Project Team (Design Team and General Contractor). If the Project Team has not performed together as a team on prior projects, the offeror must provide detailed information on three (3) projects of similar scope and complexity for each Project Team member that best illustrates that team member’s skills and capabilities.

Each Offeror shall provide:

a. A list of three (3) similar projects completed over the last ten (10) years by the Project Team.

b. Narrative summaries of three (3) similar projects, performed within the past ten (10) years that demonstrates the offeror’s capabilities, technical expertise, and experience managing complex projects with reference to considerations of timeliness and technical success. Interior and exterior photos are required for each project submitted. The projects should be as similar to the New Custom House Modernization project as possible. Limit the summaries to one (1) page each. Limit the project photos to three (3) pages.

Include for each project submitted, title and location, project summary including square feet, contract award amount and final contract amount including all changes, dollar value of work self-performed and the percentage it represents of the final contract amount and project completion date.

Following the evaluation and scoring of the Phase One technical submittals, a short list of offerors will be established, in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.3. A maximum of five (5) firms of the highest rated Offerors will be selected and given the opportunity to submit a response to the evaluation criteria and cost proposals in Phase Two. Final selection for award of the Design-Build Contract will be on the basis of qualifications, technical quality, price, and other salient factors considered to be in the Government's best interests. If awarded the contract, the Offeror shall complete the design and construction documents and construct the facility in compliance with these completed requirements.

PART 2 QUALIFICATIONS SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2.0 Estimated Award Date

The Government anticipates award of this contract prior to March 2010; with the expectation that the Design/Build Team will commence services within 15 calendar days after issuance of the Notice to Proceed. The Government does not guarantee award within this period nor shall the Government be liable for any costs should award occur before or after this period.

2.1

Estimated Completion Date

The project shall be completed based upon a 30 month schedule; subject to the issuance of the Notice-to-Proceed (NTP) award date noted above. (This completion milestone includes all aspects of the design and construction.)

2.2 RFQ/RFP Evaluation Criteria and Basis of Award

A Design/Build Team is being solicited through this Request for Qualifications/Proposal (RFQ/RFP) process. A contract will be awarded to the firm that successfully completes Phases One and Two and is determined to provide the overall best value to the Government, including technical and price considerations. Specific details relating to the Source Selection process are set forth in this RFQ (Phase One) and further to the short-listed firms in the RFP (Phase Two).

2.3 Questions, Clarifications and Interpretations

Any prospective Offeror desiring an explanation or interpretation of the RFQ, etc. must request so in writing and shall direct such inquiries via mail or email to:

Attention: Jessica Pasicznyk General Services Administration

Denver Federal Center – 8PSC

P.O. Box 25546

Building 41, Rm 240 Lakewood, CO 80225-0546 Jessica.Pasicznyk@gsa.gov Such requests must be received no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the submission date, so as to allow a reply to reach all prospective Offerors before the submission of their qualifications. Oral explanation or instructions given before award of a contract will not be binding. Any information given a prospective Offeror concerning a solicitation will be furnished promptly to all other prospective Offerors as an amendment to this solicitation, if that information is necessary for submitting qualifications, or if the lack of it would be prejudicial to other prospective Offerors.

2.4 Required Technical Data for Qualifications Submittal

Offerors are advised that the required data will be utilized for review and evaluation and used for determination of a "Quality Rating" by a Technical Evaluation Board and that all data submitted for consideration under this RFQ will be reviewed only for the purposes required for evaluation and award. The Government will not make assumptions concerning the Offeror's intent, capabilities, facilities, or experiences. Clear identification is the sole responsibility of the Offeror.

2.5 Qualifications Submittal Preparation

Instructions for the preparation and organization of the Qualification submission are included herein. The documents shall be submitted as summarized below and as further required by this solicitation.

2.5.1 Phase One — Submittal for Technical Evaluation

General Contractor/Design/Builder

Project Experience on Similar Projects

Lead Designer Past Performance on Design

Philosophy and Design Intent

Lead Designer Profile

Lead Designer Portfolio

Design Team

Project Experience on Similar Projects

2.5.2 Qualifications Submission Information (Phase One) To aid in the evaluation of the Offeror's submission, the Qualifications submittal shall be clearly and concisely prepared in writing. Telephone, fax, and emailed offers will not be accepted. The Offeror shall include all information required by this solicitation with pages numbered and logically assembled. Each copy of the Offeror's Qualifications submittal shall identify the name of the Offeror, the date of submission, and the solicitation number.

Offerors are advised that hand carried submittals must be complete and must be received at the place designated in this RFQ before the time and date set for receipt of the Qualifications submittal. Hand carried as well as mailed submissions are subject to the provisions in FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisition.

This RFQ Phase One does not commit the Government to pay any costs incurred in the submission of the RFQ, nor does it commit the Government to procure or contract for said services. The Contracting Officer is the only individual who can commit the Government to the expenditure of public funds in connection with this proposed procurement.

The content of the Offeror's submissions will remain confidential until an award is made. There will be no public opening of the Qualifications submittals. In accordance with FAR 15.306(e)(4), the names of individuals providing reference information about an Offeror's past performance shall not be disclosed.

2.6 Qualifications Submittal Delivery Date and Location Phase 1 Qualification submittals must be delivered to the Government location listed below by 2:00 PM MST on December 4, 2009:

Mailed to:

General Services Administration

Attention: Jessica Pasicznyk Denver Federal Center, 8PSC P.O. Box 25546

Lakewood, CO 80225-0546 Hand Delivered to the Ambassador’s Desk, 2nd floor:

General Services Administration

Attention: Jessica Pasicznyk Denver Federal Center, 8PSC

Building 41, Rm 240 Lakewood, CO 80225

Phase One Offerors should note provisions of FAR 52.215-1 "Instructions to Offerors — Competitive Acquisitions".

FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY:

Offerors are advised that the RFP for Phase Two proposal submissions is anticipated to be released to the short-listed firms on or about December 21, 2009. Phase Two proposals will be allotted five (5) weeks of preparation time during which one (1) Pre-Bid meetings are scheduled with GSA Project Managers on guided Site Walks. The Government will reserve the right to make an award upon the basis of the initial Phase One and Phase Two offers without discussions.

2.7 Qualifications Submittal Sealing

The Qualifications submittal is to be placed in a single sealed enclosure and identified with the Offeror's Name, Project Name, Phase One, RFQ Submittal, Solicitation Number GS-08P-10-JB-C-0006, and the Government's time and date delivery requirement.

2.8 Phase One Submission

Firms having the capabilities to perform the services described herein are invited to respond by submitting the required technical information as specified herein. Offerors are required to submit five (5) bound copies of the Offeror's Phase One Qualifications.

The submittal must be organized, using TABS, as follows:

Tab 1: Design/Builder - Past Performance

Tab 2: Design/Builder - Qualifications and Experience of Key Personnel

Tab 3: Design/Builder - Project Experience on Similar Projects

Tab 4: Lead Designer - Past Performance on Design

Tab 5: Lead Designer - Philosophy and Design Intent

Tab 6: Lead Designer - Lead Designer Profile

Tab 7: Lead Designer - Lead Designer Portfolio

Tab 8: Design Team - Past Performance

Tab 9: Design Team - Qualifications/Experience of Key Personnel

Tab 10: Design Team - Project Experience on Similar Projects

Any information provided that does not pertain to the technical evaluation factors will not be evaluated.

Font size shall be not less than 10 point.

Sheet size of the submittal shall be 8 ½ x 11 inches. Tabloid sheets (11 x 17 inches) will be allowed for charts and tables but will be counted as 4 single-sided pages or 2 double-sided pages. Legibility, clarity, coherence, and the contents are important. The Phase One Qualifications document length shall be limited to 150 single-sided or 75 double-sided pages, exclusive of the cover sheet, dividers and table of contents. Questionnaires are received separately and also not counted as part of the 150 page limitation. Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

A cover sheet identifying the Offeror and the project shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a Table of Contents.

The fully completed SF 330 (Architect-Engineer Qualifications) shall be included in each binder used. Part One and Part Two must be completely filled out.

Materials submitted but not required by this solicitation (such as company brochures and equipment lists) shall be relegated to appendices.

Technical Submissions Requirements:

The Technical submittal shall include information as described previously and shall be presented in the sequence as requested above. Technical submissions shall be organized to correspond with the evaluation factors listed herein.

A project is considered similar when, based on the consensus judgment of the evaluating board members, the project has enough characteristics or similarities in common with the subject project that they could be determined comparable in size, scope and complexity.

For each project, the Offeror shall be evaluated based upon performance as stated in the Past Performance Questionnaire — see Part III of this document. Past performance information will be provided directly from references selected by the contractor. The past performance cover sheet should be filled out by the Offeror and provided to the reference. Each contractor is responsible for providing questionnaires (provided by the Government in this RFQ) to their references to complete in a timely manner to allow a completed questionnaire to reach this office by the time and date specified for receipt of information identified in the solicitation.

Offerors are to fill out most of the information on the first page of the questionnaire before sending it to the owner's representative for completion. Failure to obtain the required questionnaires shall result in lowered technical scores for this evaluation factor. Note that GSA will not limit reference contacts to those provided by the Offerors; instead GSA may choose to contact references independent of those provided. It is the Offerors responsibility to contact, request and track the receipt of questionnaires. Offerors shall not collect completed questionnaires, instead they shall be sent directly to the Contracting Officer (see Section 2.6 for the address) by the owner representatives. Questionnaires received after the due date for Phase 1 submissions will not be considered.

OFFEROR'S FINANCIAL CAPACITY TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT

Submit a letter of current bonding capacity from a Bonding Company. This letter will not count toward the aforementioned page limitation. The project budget is in the range of $15 million to $25 million.

Part III Past Performance Questionnaire

Note: Completed questionnaires shall be considered confidential information and may not be seen or reviewed by the contractor/Offeror. Mail or email completed questionnaires directly to:

Attention: Jessica Pasicznyk, Contract Specialist General Services Administration

Denver Federal Center - 8PSC

Building 41, Rm 240 Lakewood, CO 80225

Jessica.Pasicznyk@gsa.gov Your participation is important to us and responses are required by December 4, 2009, 2:00 PM (Mountain Time) for inclusion in our evaluation. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Name:________________________________________________________________________ Company:

Role/position during construction:

Current Telephone No.:

(Use this cover sheet for each past performance questionnaire submitted)

USE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE DESIGN-BUILDER

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

When filled in this document is source selection sensitive information iaw FAR 3.104 u.s. General Services administration

Public BuildingS service

Rocky MOUNTAIN REGION

OVERVIEW

The Offeror shown below is submitting qualifications for Design/Build services on the New Custom House Modernization project in Denver, Colorado, and provided your name as a customer reference. Part of our evaluation process requires information on the Offeror’s past performance. Your participation is important to us and responses are required by December 4, 2009, 2:00 PM (Mountain Time) for inclusion in our evaluation. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

SECTION 1: Contract Identification

To be completed by the Offeror and provided to the customer referenced Name of Offeror being evaluated: _______________________________________

Project Number/Title: _________________________________________________

Project Location:_____________________________________________________

Project Description: ___________________________________________________

Project Award Amount: $_______________________________________________

Project Final Dollar Amount: $___________________________________________

Year Completed: _________ Project Manager: _________________________

SECTION 2: Respondent Identification

Name of Evaluator: ________________________________________________

Relation to Contract/Project: ___________________________________________

Company Name: ____________________________________________________

Phone Number (Commercial/DSN): ____________________________________

Email Address: ____________________________________________________

USE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE DESIGN-BUILDER

SECTION 3: Rating of Offeror

To be completed by the customer:

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

Score Performance Level

EXCELLENT - The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many (requirements) to the Government’s or customer’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

VERY GOOD- The contractor’s performance meets or exceeds contractual requirements to the Government’s or customer’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

ACCEPTABLE – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appears, or were, satisfactory.

MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

UNACCEPTABLE – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

N NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score.

Management

Professional conduct

Cooperation/responsiveness –timely, solicits feedback, suggests alternatives

Offeror is easy to work with, friendly, courteous

Oversight of project management/superintendents

Quickly/professionally resolves issues/disputes

Review/resolution of subcontractors issues

Clear line of supervision on construction site, effective

Followed and maintained project budget

Implementation of Subcontracting Plan (applicable to large businesses)

Construction

Compliance with laws and regulations

Coordination\control of subcontractors – ensures adherence to work schedule

Resource Management – maintains good construction pace/work environment

Site Management (i.e. materials properly staged/stored, job site cleanliness)

Adequacy & adherence of initial progress schedule/submission of revisions

Resolution of Delays

Timely completion of punch-list items

Adequacy and implementation of Safety Plan

Use of specified/equal materials

Identification/correction of deficient work in a timely manner

Quality of workmanship

Adequacy of QC Testing – provides all tests as required

Closeout/Warranty

Submission of required documentation

Timeliness of submissions

Adequacy of As-Builts - maintains accurate red line drawings on site per specs

Format of closeout documentation

Warranty response

Correction of noted deficiencies

SECTION 4: Narrative Summary

Please indicate in writing any additional comments you have of the Offeror and suggestions you may have concerning the following categories:

Strengths of performance:

Weaknesses of performance:

Additional Thoughts:

SECTION 5: Submission

Thank you for taking the time to fill out this questionnaire. As stated above, when filled in this document is source selection sensitive information IAW FAR 3.104. When completed please mail, hand-deliver, or email directly to:

U.S. General Services Administration

8PSC- Public Building Services

P.O. Box 25546

Denver, Colorado 80225-0546 PHONE: (303) 236-8000, Ext. 2133 ATTN: Jessica Pasicznyk (8PSC) EMAIL:Jessica.Pasicznyk@gsa.gov Your participation is important to us and responses are required by December 4, 2009, 2:00 PM (Mountain Time) for inclusion in our evaluation. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Respondent Signature:

Date:

USE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE LEAD DESIGNER

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

When filled in this document is source selection sensitive information iaw FAR 3.104 u.s. General Services administration

Public BuildingS service

Rocky MOUNTAIN REGION

OVERVIEW

The Offeror shown below is submitting qualifications for Design/Build services on the New Custom House Modernization project in Denver, Colorado, and provided your name as a customer reference. Part of our evaluation process requires information on the Offeror’s past performance. Your participation is important to us and responses are required by December 4, 2009, 2:00 PM (Mountain Time) for inclusion in our evaluation. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

SECTION 1: Contract Identification

To be completed by the Offeror and provided to the customer referenced Name of Offeror being evaluated: _______________________________________

Project Number/Title: _________________________________________________

Project Location:_____________________________________________________

Project Description: ___________________________________________________

Project Award Amount: $_______________________________________________

Project Final Dollar Amount: $___________________________________________

Year Completed: _________ Project Manager: _________________________

SECTION 2: Respondent Identification

Name of Evaluator: ________________________________________________

Relation to Contract/Project: ___________________________________________

Company Name: ____________________________________________________

Phone Number (Commercial/DSN): ____________________________________

Email Address: ____________________________________________________

USE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE LEAD DESIGNER

SECTION 3: Rating of Offeror

To be completed by the customer:

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

Score Performance Level

EXCELLENT - The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many (requirements) to the Government’s or customer’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

VERY GOOD- The contractor’s performance meets or exceeds contractual requirements to the Government’s or customer’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

ACCEPTABLE – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appears, or were, satisfactory.

MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

UNACCEPTABLE – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

N NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score.

Professional conduct

Cooperation/responsiveness –timely, solicits feedback, suggests alternatives

Offeror is easy to work with, friendly, courteous

Oversight of project management

Quickly/professionally resolves issues/disputes

Followed and maintained project budget

Design

Design submittals provided on time/schedule

Adequacy of submittals - re-submittals not excessive, clear/concise data

Timeliness of response to design comments

Inclusion of proper, industry accepted, documents

Plans comply w/applicable codes and are properly designed/stamped/approved

Quickly identifies design issues for resolution

Competency of design staff

USE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE LEAD DESIGNER

Closeout

Submission of required documentation

Timeliness of submissions

Adequacy of As-Builts

Format of closeout documentation

Please indicate in writing any additional comments you have of the Offeror and suggestions you may have concerning the following categories:

Thank you for taking the time to fill out this questionnaire. As stated above, when filled in this document is source selection sensitive information IAW FAR 3.104. When completed please mail, hand-deliver, or email directly to:

U.S. General Services Administration

Public…