Amendment_0003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

N3319118R0601 - Djibouti Mini-MACC Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Aw ard Construction Contract (MACC), Djibouti.

General Description: The w ork to be performed w ill provide for Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build projects, primarily consisting of general building type projects inluding new construction, renovations, alterations, demolition, repair w ork, and any necessary design w ork for various locations throughout Djibouti and Kenya including, but not limited to Camp Lemonnier and Chabelley Airfield in Djibouti and Camp Simba and Manda Bay in Kenya.

The duration of the contract w ill be a 12-month Base Period w ith four (4) 12-month option periods, for a total of 60 months, or a total aggregate value of $95,000,000 for all MACC task orders aw arded across all contractors, w hichever occurs first. Option periods shall be executed at the Government's discretion. All task orders w ill be aw arded in U.S. Dollars.

The minimum guarantee for each offeror aw arded a contract is $1,000 over the five (5) years.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 7

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 26-Apr-2018

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N3319118R0601

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Mar-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

26-Apr-2018

CODE

NAVFAC EUROPE AFRICA SOUTHWEST ASIA

PSC 817 BOX 51

FPO AE 09622-0051

N33191 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N3319118R0601

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0003

The Purpose of this amendment is to:

Provide responses to Pre-Proposal Inquiries # 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 19, 20 and 21.

Revise Factor 1 – Technical Approach.

Revise Factor 2 – Experience.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

The proposal due date is Wednesday 09 May 2018 at 02:00PM Central European Summer Time (CEST).

Pre-Proposal Inquiries (PPIs) Responses:

Q2. With reference to the RFP Section 2.2, Factor 1 – Technical Approach, page 14 of 54, would it be possible to exclude the organizational chart from the 2 single-sided pages limit? In such case, could be the organizational chart be presented on a separate page from the narrative, so that Factor 1 would be composed of two pages for the narrative plus one page for the chart, for a total of three pages?

A2. Please refer to the revised Factor 1- Technical Approach incorporated as part of Amendment 0003.

Q3. We make reference to the relevancy criteria outlined in the RFP Section 2.2, Factor 2 – Experience, page 15 of 54. The first bullet point introduces two dimensional limits: between 3,000 and 10,000 SF for new construction or renovation and between 500 to 1,500 LF for utility works.

Whereas it appears clear the purpose of introducing the minimum dimensional limit (3,000 SF and 500 LF respectively), the maximum limit results in a very tight cut-off, limiting the size of relevancy to very small projects.

As an example, most of the otherwise relevant projects built in Camp Lemonnier over the past years would be excluded because of this limit. Various offerors could therefore find themselves in the situation where they dispose of perfectly relevant experience, in terms of scope, multiple trades and higher ratings, but would not be able to present it because of the such superior limit.

In consideration of the above, we respectfully demand to remove the superior limits of 10,000 SF and 1,500 LF, while maintaining intact the minim limits.

A3. Please refer to the revised Factor 2 – Experience incorporated as part of Amendment 0003.

Q5. Evaluation Factors for Award, page 15 of 54, no paragraph addressing the question Can an Offeror utilize a subcontractor's past performance if a letter of commitment is executed between Offeror and Subcontractor and provided with Phase 1 proposal submission?

A5. As per the submittal requirements of the past performance factor, past performance evaluations shall be submitted for each project included in Factor 2.

Q6. With reference to FAR Subpart 9.6 and to the RFP Section 2.2, Factor 1 - Technical Approach, page 14 of 54, please indicate if the Design-Build Team should be limited to only one design firm, or if it is possible to enlarge the team to two design firms with different profiles. In such case, also confirm that experience for both design firms should be provided in Factors 2 and 3, without exceeding a total of 5 projects combined.

A6. The proposed Design Experience for Factor 2 – Experience shall be in accordance with the solicitation submittal requirements for that factor and comply with the solicitation submittal requirements for Factor 1 – Technical Approach.

Q8. With reference to the RFP Section 2.2, Factor 2 – Experience, page 15 of 54, kindly clarify the criteria required for a project to be considered relevant.

In the current text, there are three main bullet points each comprised of two sub-points marked with the letters (a) and (b). It appears that the three main points are to be considered as possible alternatives, in other words a project that meets any one of these points may be considered as relevant. Similarly, it also seems that the sub-points (a) and

(b) should also be considered as alternatives, since they are linked by the word “or”.

If this is correct, what is the purpose of introducing the main three points and the two sub-points, if they ultimately all represent equal alternatives? Can you kindly confirm that a project that meets any of the listed main points or sub-points may be considered as relevant?

A8. Please refer to the solicitation submittal requirements for the revised technical Factor 2 – Experience incorporated as part of Amendment 0003.

Q9. The description of works to be performed under the Mini MACC calls for general building and infrastructural projects, as stated in RFP, Section 1.1, page 6 of 54:

The work to be performed provides for Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build projects, primarily consist of general building type projects (new construction, renovations, alterations, demolition, repair work, and any necessary design) including: waterfront, pier, quay, industrial, airfield, aircraft hangar, infrastructure, administrative, training, retail, food service, dormitory, community support facilities and both vertical and horizontal construction for various locations […] In Section 2.2, Factor 2 – Experience, page 15 of 54 it is required that: At least one (1) relevant construction project shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in performing primarily renovation/repair of existing buildings.

Given the broader scope of works to be performed in the Mini MACC, we respectfully ask whether the above-mentioned point may be extended to account for the renovation and repair of infrastructures, and not only of buildings.

A9. Please refer the solicitation submittal requirements for the revised technical Factor 2 – Experience incorporated as part of Amendment 0003.

Q19. Page 14 of Solicitation sub-para (1): Our understanding is that the organizational chart shall be included within the two pages of the technical approach. Is it acceptable to include the organizational chart as an additional separate third page to the technical approach since a chart requires some sufficient space in order to be readable.

A19. Please refer to the revised Factor 1- Technical Approach incorporated as part of Amendment 0003.

Q20. In Factor 2-Experience, RFP it requires projects submitted for the Offeror must have been completed within five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP or be at least 70% complete at the date of issuance of this RFP. Given recent market in Djibouti and lack of many relevant projects, can the government extend the time frame to allow projects completed within seven (7) years of the date of issuance of the RFP?

A20. Please refer to the solicitation submittal requirements for the revised technical Factor 2 – Experience incorporated as part of Amendment 0003.

Q21. We make reference to the relevancy criteria outlined in the RFP Section 2.2, Factor 2 – Experience, page 15 of 54. The second bullet point calls for: New construction, renovation, or repair, by design-build or design-bid-build, of administrative buildings, warehouses, maintenance/repair facilities, and other similar facilities.

Kindly clarify if the installation of containerized structures hosting administrative buildings and involving multiple trades may be considered as relevant past experience.

A21. Please refer to the solicitation submittal requirements for the revised technical Factor 2 – Experience incorporated as part of Amendment 0003.

Factor 1 - Technical Approach:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The composition and management of the firms proposed as the design-build (DB) team for this contract will be evaluated in this factor.

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement. Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the various firms (see FAR Subpart 9.6). The narrative shall also include a simple organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the entities. If the experience of an entity is being claimed in Factor 2, that entity must be named in the above narrative and organizational chart.

The technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages) excluding the organizational chart that shall be limited to one (1) single-sided page. The information requested in item #2 below is not included in this page limitation.

(2) In addition to the narrative, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor protégé agreement (MPA), or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., joint venture member, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.).

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will be used as a means to evaluate the organizational structure and teaming relationships proposed by the Offeror. This factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis.

Factor 2 – Experience:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Construction Experience:

Submit a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the projects that may be ordered under this contract.

For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project for Construction Experience is further defined as:

Construction or Renovation of over 3,000 SF of space, New construction, renovation, or repair, by design-build or design-bid-build, of administrative buildings, warehouses, maintenance/repair facilities, and other similar facilities Involving multiple trades (architectural, mechanical, electrical, fire protection).

OR

Utility work over 500 LF.

Underground utility systems such as sanitary, domestic water, storm water, electrical or communication ductbank.

Involving numerous manholes, intakes, retention or detention basins, and pump or lift stations.

In addition, the Offeror shall meet the following minimum requirements:

At least one (1) relevant construction project shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in performing primarily new construction of buildings.

At least one (1) relevant construction project shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in performing primarily renovation/repair of existing buildings.

At least one (1) relevant construction project shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in performing utility work.

At least two (2) relevant construction projects shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in design-build construction.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP or be at least 70% complete at the date of issuance of this RFP.

A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project;

rather Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods). In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features. Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members may be rated lower.

Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

(2) Design Experience

Submit a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) relevant design projects for the design team that best demonstrates design experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. All design projects shall have been performed by the design firm(s) as the Designer of Record.

For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project for Design Experience is further defined as:

Design of new Construction or Renovation of over 3,000 SF of space, Design, by design-build or design-bid-build, of administrative buildings, warehouses, maintenance/repair facilities, and other similar facilities.

Involving multiple trades (architectural, mechanical, electrical, fire protection).

OR

Design of Utility work over 500 LF.

Design of underground utility systems such as sanitary, domestic water, storm water, electrical or communication ductbank.

Involving numerous manholes, intakes, retention or detention basins, and pump or lift stations.

In addition, the Offeror shall meet the following minimum requirements:

At least one (1) relevant design project shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in performing primarily new construction of buildings.

At least one (1) relevant design project shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in performing primarily renovation/repair of existing buildings.

At least one (1) relevant design project shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in performing utility work.

At least two (2) relevant design projects shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in design-build construction.

Projects submitted shall be completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP or be at least 70% complete at the date of issuance of this RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. The design completion date shall reflect the date the plans and specifications were complete, signed off by an Architect-Engineer, and approved for construction, and does not include architect/engineering services during construction.

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

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods). In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features. Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor to demonstrate design experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor. Offerors proposing multiple design firms should submit relevant project experience for all design firms. Failure to do so may result in a lower rating. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined."

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction and design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review five projects for construction and five for design. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Construction Experience and five (5) for Design Experience will not be considered.

Favorable factors listed in descending order:

1. Relevant projects performed for the US Government and in compliance with Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) may be considered more favorably than those that have not been performed for the US Government.

2. Relevant projects performed in Djibouti may be considered more favorably than those performed elsewhere.

3. Relevant projects that demonstrate design-build experience may be considered more favorably than those that do not have design-build experience.

4. Relevant projects where the Offeror and the proposed design firm(s) have previously worked together may be considered more favorably than those that have not worked together.

(End of Summary of Changes)