St. Es USCG DB RFQ_r5 1 .doc

Issued under Amendment No. Two

Issued under Amendment No. Two

U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20407

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Each Offeror shall submit a Proposal as outlined in Section C, Proposal Content and Format Instructions, of this Phase One Solicitation. Proposals may be mailed or hand carried to the address noted below. Offers must be delivered to the Contracting Officer, at the designated location, no later than the time, date, and address as specified in the Solicitation.

All Proposals shall be submitted in original; no facsimile Proposals will be accepted.

The complete Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) is available through the U.S. Government Printing Office or via Internet access at http://www.arnet.gov/far/.

The General Services Administration’s (GSA) point of contact for inquiries and clarifications is Bonnie Echoles, Contracting Officer. Each Offeror must designate one point of contact for all communications between the Offeror and GSA. No other communications regarding this Solicitation or Project are allowed. Communications that occur between any other individual on an Offeror’s team, including consultants and subcontractors, and any other GSA staff member may be grounds for disqualification of the Offeror’s Proposal.

Proposal Due Date:

May 11, 2009, 3:00 PM EST Submit Your Proposal To:

General Services Administration

GSA, NCR, ROB – Bid Opening Room 301 7th Street, SW, Room 1065

Washington, DC 20407

Use the above address for US Postal Service deliveries only For Courier or Hand Delivery:

General Services Administration

GSA, NCR, ROB – Bid Opening Room

301 7th Street, SW, Room 1065

Washington, DC 20407 GSA Point of Contact:

Bonnie Echoles Contracting Officer

(202)708-6190 (202)708-4964 (fax) bonnie.echoles@gsa.gov

ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTICE

GSA wants to ensure all business is conducted in a manner above reproach, with complete impartiality and with preferential treatment for none. Therefore, each Offeror, as they assemble their design-build team, shall evaluate the eligibility of their team members to ensure potential organizational conflicts of interest do not exist. An organizational conflict of interest means that because of other activities or relationships with other persons, a person is unable or potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the Government or the person’s objectivity in performing the contract work is or might be otherwise impaired or a person has an unfair competitive advantage. See Federal Acquisition Regulation 9.5 for additional information concerning organizational conflicts of interest. An organizational conflict of interest certification shall be included in the Phase One Proposal.

In addition, by submitting a proposal, it is understood and agreed, pursuant to Subpart 9.505 of the FAR that an Offeror (or any part of the Offeror’s team) that is affiliated with the Architectural/Engineering firm of Perkins (+) Will (P+W) of Chicago, Illinois is expressly prohibited from and shall not submit bids or offers or otherwise participate directly or indirectly in the preparation of any bids or offers to any solicitation issued by the Government or perform any portion of a contract awarded by the Government regarding or relating to the USCG Building. Moreover, Offerors are hereby placed on notice that if selected for award, this may preclude the Offeror’s affiliates (as defined in FAR 2.101) from being awarded future contracts for work on the St. Elizabeths Campus, especially the forthcoming Construction Manager solicitation.

Solicitation Table of Contents

4A.

GENERAL INFORMATION

1.

Executive Summary 2.

Background Information and Project Description 3.

Offeror Organization and Team 4.

GSA’s Bridging Documents 5.

Operation and Maintenance (O & M) 6.

Unique Nature of the Project 7.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 B.

Phase I – Request for Qualifications (RFQ) 1.

Evaluation Factors a.

Offerors’ Experience and Past Performance – 40% b.

Key Personnel Experience and Past Performance – 40% c.

Management Approach – 20% C.

Proposal Content and Format Instructions D.

Questions to the Phase One RFQ E.

Notification of Phase One Qualification and Selection F.

Summary of the Phase Two Solicitation Process G.

Service of Protest (FAR 52.233-2) (Aug 1996) H.

Listing of Attachments

A. GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Executive Summary Continuing a legacy of outstanding public architecture and construction, the GSA Design and Construction Excellence Programs seek to commission our nation’s most talented designers and constructors to complete the design and to construct federal buildings of outstanding quality and value. These projects are to demonstrate the value of true integrated design that balance aesthetics, cost, constructability, and reliability; create environmentally responsible and superior workplaces for civilian federal employees; and give contemporary form and meaning to our democratic values.

GSA’s Construction Excellence Program provides 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.

In the context of both programs, GSA announces an opportunity, through this Solicitation, for Design Excellence in public architecture/engineering and in construction through design-build. Design Excellence shall include the performance of architectural/engineering (A/E) design in accordance with GSA quality standards and requirements. Specifically, this Solicitation is to procure a design-build contractor to complete the design and to construct a hard metric 124,292 gross square meter (1,337,868 million gross square foot) new headquarters facility for the U.S. United States Coast Guard (USCG), a military, multi-mission, maritime service within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and one of the nation’s five armed services. There is also 32,400 gross square meters (350,000 gross square feet) of structured parking to accommodate 990 cars. The scope also includes utility relocation, site work, central utility plant, and temporary surface parking.

The anticipated award date for the design-build contract is September 9, 2009. The estimated cost for the design-build delivery of the USCG Building is between $300,000,000 and $400,000,000. The anticipated completion date for the USCG Building is April 2012.

GSA intends to award a firm-fixed price design-build contract pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedures (FAR Subpart 36.3). 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 analogous to a Request for Qualifications) is to determine which Offerors demonstrate the highest qualifications to successfully deliver the project. All responsible sources may submit a Phase One Proposal; a maximum of five (5) design-build entities (Offerors) that are found to demonstrate the highest qualifications will be selected to participate in Phase Two (analogous to a Request for Proposals).

GSA has engaged P+W to assist in preparing project specific design criteria, finalizing the building program, and assisting with portions of the design/build Solicitation. GSA intends to disclose proposals received in response to the Solicitation to non-government entities. GSA will require each non-governmental entity to sign and provide GSA with a Conflict of Interest Acknowledge and Nondisclosure Agreement.

GSA is hereby requesting Phase One Proposals. This Phase One Solicitation provides Offerors with instructions regarding the submission of their complete Proposals and the evaluation thereof. Utilizing the format prescribed within, Offerors are to provide the requested information and demonstrate their qualifications. Responses shall be as complete and accurate as possible and present data relative to the specific Project under consideration. Offerors shall make every effort to present information clearly and concisely in accordance with the formats described herein.

2. Background Information and Project Description The purpose of this Phase One Solicitation is to solicit Proposals from Offerors for evaluations by GSA to determine which Offerors demonstrate the highest qualifications to successfully deliver the Project.

The USCG Building will be located on the site of St. Elizabeths, a National Historic Landmark, and former mental health hospital that was previously operated by the United States Department of Health and Human Services. The St. Elizabeths Campus is located on Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue in the Anacostia neighborhood of Southeast Washington, D.C. The West Campus and a portion of the East Campus have been selected to meet the operational housing needs for the DHS. The West Campus, a 176-acre site, is situated on the “topographic bowl” of the District of Columbia and offers panoramic views of the city. The campus contains 62 historic buildings, 134 character defining landscape features and a historic cemetery, in which soldiers from the Civil War era, as well as former patients, are interred.

The design-build scope of work includes architectural, engineering, construction, security, commissioning, operation and maintenance and other related services necessary to construct the new USCG Building. Related services include, but are not limited to, site planning and infrastructure, geotechnical evaluation and monitoring, archaeological monitoring, permitting, testing and inspection during construction, commissioning and potential additional geotechnical analysis of the site. The design will conform to GSA Design and Construction Excellence requirements. Preliminary consultations have taken place, and are ongoing, with the National Capital Planning Commission, the Commission of Fine Arts, the State Historic Preservation Office, and various other reviewing agencies in the metropolitan area for the current bridging design. Additional submissions will be required by the Offeror to secure final design approvals.

3. Offeror Organization and Team Interested Offerors must be a firm or joint venture with experience, individually or as a member of a team, which has successfully and satisfactorily completed projects of similar size, scope, quality, cost, magnitude, and design/construction approach.

Participation by architects, engineers, consultants, contractors and subcontractors located within the District of Columbia is encouraged. The design of the architectural and engineering features of the project shall be accomplished or reviewed and approved by architects and engineers registered to practice in their particular field within the District of Columbia. The architect-engineer portion of this design-build entity must be a firm or joint venture having an existing active office located within the Washington, DC metropolitan area. This existing active office will have the responsibility for providing the architectural and engineering services. The operation and maintenance firm must have an existing office located within the Washington, DC metropolitan area. This existing office shall be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the facility and will be involved from the beginning of the commissioning process until three (3) years after the last tenant occupied the building.

It is intended that the Offeror’s design team be able to display Design Excellence as is outlined by the GSA Design Excellence program. The design shall include sustainable design features and shall be eligible for LEED® Silver – NC certification. It will be the responsibility of the Offeror to: design this project under the GSA Design Excellence guidelines for Federal Architecture; construct the new facility within the budget; and, complete the design and construction (including Commissioning) on or before April 2012.

Offerors, individually or as a team, must have the capacity to obtain performance and payment bonds for 100% of the firm-fixed-price Design-Build Contract.

An Offeror's proposed Phase One team, or firms and key personnel proposed in response to this Phase One Solicitation, must remain fixed for the duration of the contract and warranty period unless a change is submitted in writing to the Contracting Officer, whom, at his or her sole discretion, provides written authorization of the change. Unauthorized changes to the Offeror's team at anytime during the two-phase selection process can result in the elimination of the Offeror from further consideration. During Phase Two, an Offeror may add consultants, subcontractors and/or key personnel to supplement design and/or construction resources that the Offeror feels is necessary to meet the needs of the Project and the terms and conditions of the contract.

Participation by small, small-disadvantaged, veteran-owned, small woman-owned and HUB zone business is also encouraged. The Offerors invited to participate in Phase Two will be required to submit an acceptable subcontracting plan for this procurement regarding the utilization of small, small-disadvantaged, veteran-owned, small woman-owned and HUB zone businesses.

4. GSA’s Bridging Documents

GSA will utilize the design-build “bridging” method to deliver this Project. This contracting strategy is a hybrid of traditional design-bid-build project delivery and design-build project delivery (See Attachment 3 – Delivery Model). GSA will enter into a separate contract with a Construction Manager (CM) firm to be determined at a later date. This CM firm will assist in the administration of the design-build phases of the Project. In the design-build “bridging” delivery method, P+W (GSA’s Bridging Architect/Engineer) has developed the Government’s needs for the Project through the planning and final concept design and specifications. These bridging documents are not intended, nor are they adequate, for actual construction. Rather, they are intended to convey the conceptual design of the Building as well as the Project specific design criteria and requirements. The “bridging” concept design will serve as the basis for the Offeror’s Phase Two Proposal submissions. The selected Offeror will be required to take the concepts (final concepts) through GSA’s design excellence process and to work with the various consulting parties in order to obtain any required approvals or concurrences from, among others, the National Capital Planning Commission and Commission of Fine Arts.

The selected Offeror will be responsible for completing the design and preparing all drawings and specifications necessary to construct the Project based on the bridging documents. The selected Offeror will serve as the Architect of Record. In completing the final construction documents, the selected Offeror will be required to follow the design intent and design philosophy as expressed in the bridging documents.

P+W will serve as GSA’s representative during the design-build phase of the Project, and will review the selected Offeror’s completed design for conformance with the design intent and design philosophy as expressed in the bridging documents. P+W may also serve as GSA’s representative during the construction phase.

5. Operation and Maintenance (O & M)

The USCG Project has an O & M component. All Offerors are required to have a qualified O & M Firm as part of their development team. The O & M firm shall meet the requirements as specified in this solicitation. O & M are the activities related to the performance of routine, preventive, predictive, scheduled, and unscheduled actions aimed at preventing equipment failure or decline with the goal of increasing efficiency, reliability, and safety of all building systems and equipment. Operational efficiencies represents the life-cycle cost-effective mix of preventive, predictive, and reliability-centered maintenance technologies, coupled with equipment calibration, tracking, and computerized maintenance management capabilities all targeting reliability, safety, occupant comfort, and system efficiency. The purpose of the O & M activities is to ensure the efficient and effective operation of all building systems and equipment; to ensure that facilities constructed will be properly operated and maintained to achieve normative efficiencies, reliabilities and safety in an optimum manner; and on-going management plan in the facilities include regular inspections and various methods of proactive maintenance of the facilities. The Offeror’s O & M Firm must establish effective operation and maintenance procedures to protect the investment in, and performance of, all building systems. It is up to the Offeror to determine at what point to engage the O & M Firm, but at a minimum, the O & M Firm must begin its initial work during the design and specification phase (pre-construction phase), have an active role in the commissioning process, performs phase-in activities during the early stages of contract prior to occupancy and extend services to occupancy phase of project to include operational, maintenance, training and warehousing activities. The O & M contract will end three (3) years after the last group of the USCG occupies the facilities. After the three (3) year period is up, the Offeror’s will turn the O & M responsibilities over to the GSA and or its representative O & M Firm. The Offeror shall be responsible for training and phasing-in the GSA follow-on staff.

6. Unique Nature of the Project Potential Offerors are encouraged to review the documents and supporting materials posted at http://www.stelizabethswestcampus.com in order to better appreciate the unique nature of the St. Elizabeths campus, especially from historical and environmental perspectives, and to understand how the USCG Building fits into the overall development. As indicated in the Master Plan (which is available on the website), as part of a multidisciplinary planning process, “GSA engaged a team of urban designers/planners, architects, preservation and landscape architects, architectural historians, environmental scientists, civil engineers, transportation planners, community engagement, economic consultants, and projects managers. The plan was developed concurrently with, and is informed by, the National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Impact Statement (NEPA EIS) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 and 110 processes.” In addition, “The Master Plan was developed in an inclusive process involving GSA; the tenant, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the US Coast Guard (USCG); the design team; officials from local District of Columbia and Federal agencies; the Section 106 Consulting Parties, made up of local and national organizations; and representatives of the local community.”

GSA fully expects that the selected Offeror will assimilate its design-build team into a pre-existing framework that includes multiple national, federal, state, and local agencies, organizations, and other entities that will be involved in the design and construction of the USCG Building. Offerors are placed on notice that, during the Phase Two process, GSA will evaluate the proposed Offeror’s ability to preserve the historic nature of the property, forge a collaborative relationship with the various consulting parties, and to interact with the local community.

7. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Partial funding for this project will be with funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ("Recovery Act") of 2009, in which the Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference (H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 111-16, at 432 (2009)) provided $450,000,000 for a new headquarters for DHS. Accordingly, the project will be subject to unprecedented levels of transparency and accountability so Americans know where their tax dollars are going and how they are being spent. Mechanisms through special contract terms and conditions will be implemented to accurately track, monitor and report on taxpayer funds. The Recovery Act requires extensive reporting from the prime recipients of Federal funding. This may include special Buy American Act requirements, additional requirements for contractor reporting, and expanded Government Accountability Office and Office of Inspector General access to contractor records.

B. Phase I – Request for Qualifications (RFQ)

1. Evaluation Factors

Proposals submitted in response to this Solicitation will be evaluated using the following evaluation factors, which are listed in descending order of importance:

a. Offerors’ Experience and Past Performance – 40% For this factor, Offerors must identify by name its member firms, both General Contractor (GC) and Architect-Engineer (A/E). If an Offeror consists of more than one GC or more than one A/E, then the Offeror must identify by name its lead GC and its lead A/E. Accordingly, this factor will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror has a successful and satisfactory track-record on relevant projects. The currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in performance will be considered. Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated based on the information received as part of the past performance questionnaires, phone interviews with identified customers on the Project Master List, project descriptions, and relevance summaries. The Government may also consider information obtained from any other sources. 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.

Experience will be evaluated based on the information received in the Project Master List, Most Relevant Project Summaries, project descriptions, the Standard Form (SF) 330, and phone interviews with identified customers.

Experience and past performance are of equal importance for evaluation purposes.

In addition to submitting a completed SF330 for the lead A/E firm, Offerors shall address the following in its technical submission for this evaluation factor:

1. Project Master List (PML) – Offerors shall provide a list of at least two (2), but no more than six (6), relevant projects that are ongoing or have been completed within the last five (5) years of this RFQ issue date by the Offeror alone, or its GC alone, or it’s A/E. For purposes of evaluation, the term relevant projects are those that contain all or some of the following characteristics:

· Contract value at award in excess of $300,000,000;

· Size: 750,000 gross square feet or larger;

· Use of design-build as the delivery method;

· Sustainable design (LEED® certified);

· Physical site constraints;

· Work within a campus-environment with existing, on-going operations and construction;

· Phased turnover;

· Structured parking for a similar number of vehicles anticipated at the USCG Building;

· Utility infrastructure;

· Work was performed on historic sites, including sites listed or eligible for listing on the National Registry of Historic Places.

Offerors shall provide the following information for each PML:

· Companies performing the Project (Offeror only, GC only, A/E only, or combinations)

· Name and location of the Project

· Contract type -- Traditional design-build or bridging design-build. If bridging design-build: name of bridging A/E

· Brief description (maximum three sentences);

· Name and current telephone number of the owner’s representative most knowledgeable of the Project;

· Contract number for GOVERNMENT contracts;

· Offeror’s team members’ role or roles on the Project (prime or subcontractor/sub-consultant);

· Original and final contract value of OFFEROR’s contract;

· Percentage increase or decrease in final cost from the original contract value;

· Scheduled and actual contract completion dates for OFFEROR’s contract;

· Percentage increase or decrease in scheduled time from original contract completion date;

· Offeror’s (or affiliated firms) ownership or partial ownership in the Project, IF ANY.

Although there is no page limit to the Project Master List (PML), the PML shall be limited to providing ONLY the information as described above.

2. Most Relevant Project Summary (MRPS) – Offerors shall provide a summary for at least one (1) ), but no more than three (3), relevant projects that are ongoing or have been completed within the last five (5) years of this RFQ issue date that the key personnel of the Offeror alone, or its GC alone, or it’s A/E have worked together. T term relevant shall be the same as set forth in Evaluation Factor 1 – Project Master List. The MRPS can, but is not limited to, projects in the PML. The MRPS shall include the following:

· Narrative that describes the Project attributes listed above and any other information the OFFEROR deems relevant to this solicitation;

· Brief description of key personnel’s roles and responsibilities;

· Cost and schedule performance (include explanations for any growth experienced in cost, time or both);

· Claims submitted: amount of days and dollars requested; amount of days and dollars settled;

· Description of the incentive pricing structure utilized, if any, and the benefits realized by the OFFEROR and the owner;

· Change Orders: number of change order and total amount that are attributable to unforeseen conditions and or design deficiencies, e.g., design errors or omissions and the likes.

The Most Relevant Project Summaries shall not exceed two pages for each Project.

2. Offeror’s Performance Questionnaires Offerors shall be responsible for initiating a request for questionnaires for at least two (2) of the projects selected from the Master Project List. Offerors shall complete the top section the “Organization’s Performance Questionnaire,” which is included as Attachment 3 to this RFQ, and request that the reference complete the remaining sections and send directly to the Contracting Officer to ensure receipt no later than the Phase One Proposal due date and time. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that the responses are sent to the correct place and are received no later than the Phase One Proposal due date and time. The questionnaire will ask, but not be limited to, questions relating to ratings of the Offeror’s timeliness of performance, cost control, quality of product, business relationship, continuity of personnel, qualification of personnel, etc. The Government will not impute additional experience with regard to a specific transaction based on information provided by a reference.

Offerors are responsible for ensuring that the references provided are willing and available to be contacted by Government. If, after three (3) attempts to contact the reference, the Government is unable to speak directly with the reference provided, the specific transaction related to the reference may be excluded from evaluation.

b. Key Personnel Experience and Past Performance – 40% This factor will evaluate the extent to which each of the Key Personnel has a successful and satisfactory track-record on relevant projects. Offerors shall identify the Key Personnel who will manage the overall efforts and perform the major duties required in this Solicitation. Key Personnel shall be those persons who will have major project responsibilities and/or who will provide unusual or unique capabilities and whose availability are considered critical to the accomplishment of required services. More favorable consideration will be given to those Key Personnel who have worked together on relevant projects.

The currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in performance may be considered. Key Personnel past performance will be evaluated based on the information received as part of the past performance questionnaires, phone interviews with identified customers, project descriptions, and relevance summaries. The Government may also consider information obtained from any other sources.

Experience and past performance are of equal importance for evaluation purposes.

1. Key Personnel Experience Offerors shall provide resumes for each of the following seven (7) Key Personnel: (1) Offeror’s Principal-In-Charge; (2) Offeror’s Project Manager; (3) Construction Superintendent; (4) A/E Lead Designer; ((5) A/E Project Manager; (6) Historic Landscape Architect; and, (7) Historic Preservation Architect. Except for the Lead Designer, resumes shall not exceed four (4) pages per person.

For the Principal-In-Charge, A/E Project Manager, Offeror Project Manager, and Construction Superintendent, Offerors shall provide the following information for at least one (1), but no more than four (4), relevant projects. For purposes of evaluation of these four (4) Key Personnel only, the term relevant project is the same as that set forth above in Evaluation Factor 1 (Offeror’s Experience and Past Performance).

· Project details, including name, location, date of award, and date of completion;

· Title while serving on the project and length of time spent on the project in that capacity;

· Address the characteristics for “relevant projects” as set forth in Evaluation Factor 1 (Offeror’s Experience and Past Performance);

· Describe the area(s) of responsibility and how that prior experience relates to the position that the person will perform on the USCG project;

· List of all applicable licenses, degrees, certifications, awards, or other noteworthy professional achievements, accolades, or recognitions.

a. Lead Designer Qualifications For the Lead Designer, in ten (10) pages or less, Offerors shall submit appropriate documentation to demonstrate:

· Lead Designer Profile – designs demonstrate innovative and creative approaches to solving functional program requirements; designs demonstrate a response to specific client requirements and criteria; designs demonstrate a consistently high level of exploration, rigor, and personal commitment to design excellence; and, projects demonstrate special criteria called for by this Project. This will be demonstrated by providing the following information:

· Project Objectives: The project objectives were clearly identified and fully realized.

· Project Approach: The design team organization promoted clear communication, responsibility and response to client needs. Effective methods were used for cost, schedule and quality control.

· Project Results: The projects were completed on time, budget and schedule. The owner/tenant was satisfied with the final result.

· Project Significance: The characteristics of the submitted projects are applicable to the USCG in terms of size, function, location, and tenant (i.e., governmental, institutional or corporate headquarters), demonstrating that the subject firm has applicable experience.

· Key Features: Key features or constraints that required additional effort, creativity, or innovation were involved in project execution and were successfully addressed (e.g., a limited budget, accelerated schedule, difficult site, unusual functional requirements, or phased construction in an occupied space).

· Awards or Peer Recognition: The projects received juried awards (not including participation awards) or peer recognition; projects chosen from large fields (e.g., national versus regional versus local) and which received high level awards (e.g., best overall versus best in class versus honorable mention).

· Lead Designer Portfolio – credentials are complete (education, work history) and all time periods registered; and, demonstrate a history of dedication to clients with complex building projects.

b. Historic Landscape Architect and Historic Preservation Architect

For the Historic Landscape Architect and the Historic Preservation Architect, Offerors shall provide the following information for at least one (1), but no more than four (4), projects. More favorable consideration will be given if these Key Personnel have worked on historic sites, particularly including National Historic Landmarks or sites listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, of the magnitude and complexity as the USCG Building at St. Elizabeths Campus. More favorable consideration will be given if these key personnel demonstrate competency under the proposed Secretary of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Professional Qualification Standards for these professions as outlined in the Federal Register, vol. 62, no. 119, June 20, 1997.

· Project details, including name, location, date of award, and date of completion;

· Title while serving on the project and length of time spent on the project in that capacity;

· Describe the area(s) of responsibility and how that prior experience relates to the position that the person will perform on the USCG Project;

· Describe any unusual or unique capabilities and how those attributes relate to the position that the person will perform on the USCG Project;

· List of all applicable licenses, degrees, certifications, awards, or other noteworthy professional achievements, accolades, or recognitions.

The information provided for each project shall not exceed one page.

c. Operations and Maintenance (O & M) Qualifications

For the proposed O & M Firm, Offerors shall provide illustrative materials that demonstrate the quality of the firm's performance and ability to meet all requirements set forth in this solicitation. Identify at least one (1) but not more than four (4) past performances by such firm on Class A office projects of at least 750,000 rentable square feet each within the past three (3) years, providing among other information, the following: the name and specific location of the project; physical characteristics of the project (e.g., size, function, age, type of structure); significant O & M features that presented unique challenges; the estimated dollar value of the contract; the services included in the contract; identification of subcontracted services and estimated annual cost of each such service; the type of contract (e.g., cost reimbursable, incentive fee, time and material, fixed price); and the date of contract start and firm term.

For each project, the proposed O & M Firm must provide one reference. The references shall be principals or officers of the client or the lead tenant. At least one reference must be from a lead tenant of at least 250,000 rentable square feet. The references must be able to speak to the O & M Firm’s role in the successful operation and maintenance of the project.

The information provided for each project shall not exceed one page.

2. Individual Performance Questionnaires Offerors shall be responsible for initiating a request for Individual Performance Questionnaires for at least one (1), but no more than four (4), relevant project identified on each Key Personnel’s resume and the O & M Firm. Offerors shall complete the top section the “Individual’s Performance Questionnaire,” which is included as Attachment 4 to this RFQ, and request that the reference complete the remaining sections and send directly to the Contracting Officer to ensure receipt no later than the Phase One Proposal due date and time. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that the responses are sent to the correct place and are received no later than the Phase One Proposal due date and time.

Offerors are responsible for ensuring that the references provided are willing and available to be contacted by Government. If, after three (3) attempts to contact the reference, the Government is unable to speak directly with the reference provided, the specific transaction related to the reference may be excluded from evaluation.

c. Management Approach – 20% This factor will evaluate the Offeror’s Proposed Organization and Management Plan with regards to design-build, project management philosophy, plan for executing the project and related contract administration, and how the Offeror plans to achieve the project requirements.

1. General Approach

Offerors shall describe their general approach to managing and delivering design-build projects of the magnitude and complexity of the USCG Building. In describing this general approach, Offerors should address such areas as risk analysis/management/mitigation; cost estimating and how costs are controlled; and, schedule development and monitoring; and, site access. Offerors are encouraged to provide examples of where they have successfully utilized such approaches.

The page limit for the General Approach is three (3) pages.

2. Organizational Chart and Explanatory Statement - Offerors shall provide a detailed organizational chart that clearly delineates the following:

· The name of the design-build entity with which the Government will enter into a contract;

· The name of the General Contractor;

· The name of the A/E firm, Historic Preservation Architect, Historic Landscape Architect and O & M Firm;

· The names, positions, and titles of the Key Personnel;

· Names(s) of sub-consultants and subcontractors (if applicable);

· The names, positions, and titles of other personnel within the proposed entity that will have major duties or responsibilities during the project;

The page limit for the Organizational Chart is one (1) page that may be 11 x 17 inches and folded. In addition, Offerors shall provide a one (1) page statement that explains the general organizational structure of the proposed entity and a detailed description of the proposed overall project team and development responsibilities for each individual and/or firm.

3. Resource Capacity Offerors shall provide a written narrative that describes its capacity to provide the necessary resources for a project of the magnitude and complexity of the USCG Building in terms of management, personnel, information technology, and equipment, materials, and other supplies. Offerors shall describe its manpower resources from the standpoint of in-house architectural, construction, and management personnel. Offerors shall also discuss how it will supplement their in-house resources with major subcontractors, especially with regards to foundations, structural, mechanical, and electrical work. Offerors shall provide short- and long-term plans for securing and maintaining the manpower resources necessary to successfully complete the USCG Building. Offerors shall describe their ability to expeditiously obtain equipment, material, and supplies at a price that is advantageous to the Government.

Lastly, Offerors shall address their resources from the standpoint of information technology. Offerors are advised that a contract requirement in the Phase II RFP will be the use of the Government’s ePM application – Meridian –to distribute all deliverables, communicate, coordinate its work activities and automate all of its workflow activities. Offerors will be required to use Meridian to its fullest extend for all of its work activities that includes, but is not limited to development, management, coordination, submission, filling-out, completion, approvals and archiving of: RFIs; document management and storage; change orders; procurements; reviews; meeting minutes; schedules; reports; testing and inspections; requisitions; photographs; plans and specifications; budgets and estimates. Accordingly, Offerors shall discuss whether they have used Meridian on past projects, and, if not, provide examples of instances of prior projects in which they have had to learn the owner’s computer-based document management and tracking system.

The page limit for the Resource Capacity is four (4) pages.

4. Coordination Offerors shall provide a written narrative that describes its means, methods, and processes used to manage clients, subcontractors, consultants, and other entities. The Offeror shall describe whether, and where, its system for coordinating projects has been successfully implemented, and why that proven system is capable of working on a project of the magnitude and complexity of the USCG Project.

The page limit for the Coordination narrative is two (2) pages. Offerors may submit flow charts and illustrations of the processes or systems. These documents can be provided in addition to the narrative.

5. Methodologies for Claims Avoidance, Delays, and Change Orders

Offerors shall provide a written narrative that describes its means, methods, and processes used to manage change orders. The Offeror shall describe whether, and where, its system for managing change orders has been successfully implemented, and why that proven system is capable of working on a project of the magnitude and complexity of the USCG Project. Offerors shall also describe the types of causes of claims and delays for a project of the magnitude and complexity of the USCG Project, and shall also describe what best practices and methodologies it will follow to avoid such causes. Offerors shall list projects where their best practices and methodologies were implemented and briefly describe what was done and whether or not the outcome of avoidance of delays and claims were achieved.

The page limit for the Methodologies for Claims Avoidance, Delays, and Change Orders narrative shall be three (3) pages. Offerors may submit flow charts and illustrations of the processes. These documents can be provided in addition to the narrative.

C. Proposal Content and Format Instructions

Utilizing the format prescribed below, Offerors are to provide the requested information in a brief and succinct manner making every effort to present information clearly and concisely. Lengthy narratives containing extraneous information are discouraged. All information shall be submitted in English. Proposals that do not follow these Instructions, or otherwise include documentation that is difficult to read, may result in Phase One disqualification or a lower Phase One evaluation rating.

Proposals shall be submitted in the following format. Pages shall be 8-1/2x11 inch white paper, with lettered/numbered dividers for each section as directed below. Single sided pages shall be used. Proposal text shall be in a standard font a minimum of ten (10) points or a maximum of twelve (12) points in height, single-spaced. The entire Proposal must be submitted on white paper. Proposal submissions must include one (1) original that is not bound and seven (7) copies contained in 3-ring binders or “GBC” bound. The external cover of each Proposal (original and copies) shall clearly identify the Offeror’s name, clearly be labeled “Proposal for Phase One Solicitation, RFQ – GS11P09MKC0051,” and clearly state the time and date for the receipt of Proposals. Each copy shall be identified on its cover as “Copy of 7 Copies.” The information provided in the Proposal shall be easily reproducible by normal black and white photocopying machines.

All signatures on all documents, originals and copies, must be original signatures in ink and in a color other than black.

All Phase One Proposal development costs shall be borne by the Offerors without reimbursement from GSA.

Phase One Proposals shall be submitted using the following organizational structure:

1. Section I – Cover Letter: Provide a letter consisting of no more than two (2) pages on letterhead identifying a single point of contact, address, phone and fax numbers, and e-mail address (if any) where GSA inquiries or notices should be directed. The letter shall also contain a statement that: (1) outlines the extent of availability and corporate commitment of the Key Personnel for this contract that clearly indicates the name and proposed title of individuals; and (2) certifies that the information contained in the Proposal is complete, accurate, and is free of any false representations to the best of the Offeror’s knowledge and belief. Also, if the Offeror is not yet a legal entity or is a joint venture, all major participants or joint venture members shall sign the letter. Provide a statement declaring the Offerors’ intent, if selected to participate in Phase Two, to enter into a Contract with GSA to deliver the Project in the event the Offeror is ultimately selected for award.

2. Section II – Forms/Questionnaires: Include all of the completed forms required by this RFQ.

3. Section III – Offeror’s Experience and Past Performance

4. Section IV – Key Personnel Experience and Past Performance

5. Section V – Management Approach

6. Section VI – Minimum Requirement of Bonding Capacity: Provide a notarized letter from a corporate surety, or multiple corporate sureties, whose name appears on the list contained in Treasury Department Circular 570 that the Offeror has the capacity to obtain payment and performance bonds with penal sums in excess of $300,000,000 (three-hundred million dollars).

7. Section VII – Professional Licenses: Provide proof that the Offeror maintains any licenses that may be required in order to perform architectural, engineering, and construction services in the District of Columbia.

D. Questions to the Phase One RFQ Submit questions to the Phase One RFQ in writing to the Contracting Officer on or before 3:00, EST, April 24, 2009. At GSA’s discretion, GSA may provide written responses to the questions as appropriate. Any such responses will be published on FedBizOpps via an Amendment.

E. Notification of Phase One Qualification and Selection

Upon completion of the Phase One evaluation and selection process, a maximum of five (5) Offerors deemed to be most highly qualified shall be invited to submit proposals in response to the Phase Two Solicitation. However, GSA reserves its right to select less than five (5) Offerors for Phase Two. Only those Offerors selected to participate in Phase Two will be sent a Phase Two Solicitation after their selection. Unsuccessful Phase One Offerors will be sent a notice of their non-selection at the same time. Phase Two proposals will not be accepted from Offerors that are not invited to submit a proposal.

F. Summary of the Phase Two Solicitation Process

The most highly qualified Offerors selected in Phase One will be provided the opportunity to submit competitive technical and price Proposals as detailed in the Phase Two Solicitation. Phase Two Proposals will require submittal of final design concepts, partial schematic drawings (architecture and engineering), a site plan, and a rendering. Exhibit boards and a massing model may be prepared at the Offeror’s option. Phase Two will require an acknowledgment by each Offeror that the selected Offeror will comply with all the mandatory performance criteria, technical specifications, and space program requirements within a pre-established maximum cost for the complete Project. Phase Two shall be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15 (Contracting by Negotiation); one Contract will be awarded using competitive negotiation.

The Evaluation Factors to be used in Phase Two are listed below in descending order of importance. While price is an important consideration, all non-price evaluation factors when combined are significantly more important than price. However, as proposals become more equal in their technical merit (as determined by the evaluation of the non-price evaluation factors set forth below), the evaluated price becomes more important and may become the determining factor for award. The non-price evaluation factors are set out below in descending order of importance.

Non-financial

· Schedule – 30%

· Detailed Project Management Plan – 30%

· Performance Plans – 15%

· Organizational Breakdown Structure – 15%

· Apprenticeship Plan – 10%

Financial

· Liquidity

· Cost Realism of Budget

· Fees

· Bonding

G. Service of Protest (FAR 52.233-2) (Aug 1996)

Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the General Accounting Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from:

Bonnie Echoles, Contracting Officer

U.S. General Services Administration National Capital Region

Acquisition Management Division (WPP) Suite 7107 301 7th Street, SW

Washington, D.C. 20407-0001 The copy of any protest shall be delivered to and received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the General Accounting Office.

H. Listing of Attachments

The following attachments to this Solicitation are provided for the convenience and/or use of the Offerors in developing Phase One Proposals:

1. Ph 1 – Offeror’s Performance Questionnaire

2. Ph 1 – Individual Performance Questionnaire

3. Project Delivery Model

4. GSA Conflict of Interest Certification

5. Perkins + Will Bridging Documents

Attachment 4

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CERTIFICATION

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

USCG -- Washington, DC RFQ GS11P09MKC0051

Offeror Name & Location:

Subcontractor Names & Locations:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

If more space is required, please continue on an additional 8 ½" x 11" sheet.

I hereby certify to the best of my knowledge and belief, that I am not aware of any information bearing on the existence of any potential organizational conflict of interest for the Design-Build team as proposed above for work at the USCG Building.

Signature & Date:

Printed Name & Title:

Address:

Phone & Fax Number:

Email address:

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

PAGE

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009