24R1328-AMD1.pdf

24RXXXX

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

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL N62742-24-R-1328, INDO-PACIFIC MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR PROJECTS IN THE

NAVFAC PACIFIC AREA OF OPERATIONS

The proposal due date remains unchanged.

Continued on page 2.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 2

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 27-Jun-2024

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 N6274224R1328

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-Jun-2024

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

27-Jun-2024

CODE

NAVFAC PACIFIC

A-E CONTRACTS BRANCH (CODE ACQ31)

258 MAKALAPA DR STE 100

JBPHH HI 96860-3134

N62742 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

RFP No. N6274224R1328 Amendment No. 0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

PART 1, PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS

DOCUMENT 00 22 00 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Delete Document 00 22 00 (pages 1 through 9) and replace with the attached Document 00 22 00 (pages 1 through 9).

Delete Attachment A, Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet in its entirety and replace with the attached Attachment A, Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet

PART 7, SEED PROJECT

DOCUMENT 00 73 00 SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS

Delete Document 00 73 00 Supplementary Conditions (pages 1 and 2) in its entirety and replace with the attached Document 00 73 00 Supplementary Conditions (pages 1 and 2).

INDO-PACIFIC MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION

CONTRACT FOR PROJECTS IN THE NAVFAC PACIFIC

AREA OF OPERATIONS

RFP N62742-24-R-1328

Document 00 22 00

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I. GENERAL

1.1 INTENT TO SELECT/AWARD WITHOUT DICUSSSIONS

1.2 COMPETITIVE RANGE

1.3 ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL

1.4 PREFERENCE FOR MULTIPLE AWARDS

PART II. EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS OF AWARD

2.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD

2.2 NON-PRICE EVALUATION FACTORS

2.3 RATING SCHEME

2.4 PRICE EVALUATION FACTOR

ATTACHMENTS

A Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet B NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0)

Document 00 22 00

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

PART I. GENERAL

1.1 INTENT TO SELECT/AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract(s) without conducting discussions; therefore, the initial proposal shall conform to the solicitation requirements and shall contain the best offer from a non-price and price standpoint.

1.2 COMPETITIVE RANGE

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines discussions are necessary, the Contracting Officer may conduct discussions with Offerors determined to be in the competitive range. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

1.3 ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL

The proposal must set forth full, accurate, and complete information as required by this solicitation. The Government will rely on such information in the award of a contract. The awardee’s proposal will be incorporated into the contract and all items proposed will become binding requirements of the contract. By submission of the offer, the Offeror agrees that all items proposed (e.g., teaming agreements, etc.) will be utilized for the duration of the contract.

Any substitutions after contract award will be equal or better than as proposed and shall require Contracting Officer’s approval prior to implementation.

1.4 PREFERENCE FOR MULTIPLE AWARDS

A MACC is a contract awarded from a single solicitation, and may result in award to multiple contractors. This procurement consists of one solicitation with the intent to award a minimum of three (3) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type construction contracts to the Offeror(s) whose proposal(s), conforming to the RFP, will be most advantageous to the Government resulting in the best value, price and non-price factors considered.

Successful Offerors will compete for future work during the term of the contract. If determined to be in the best interest of the Government, less than three (3) contracts may be awarded or the Government may cancel the procurement.

PART II. EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS OF AWARD

2.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD

The term “technical factors” refers to any non-cost/price factor other than past performance. Factor 4 will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. An Unacceptable rating in any of the non-cost/price factors will result in an overall rating of Unacceptable for non-cost/price factors, unless corrected through discussions. In making the best value award decision, the Government will consider Factors 1, 2, 3, and price. The relative importance of evaluation factors 1, 2, and 3 is as follows: Technical factors (Factors 1 and 3) are of equal importance to each other, and when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance factor (Factor 2). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance factor combined (i.e., the non-price evaluation factors) are significantly more important than price. The contracts resulting from this solicitation will be awarded to

Document 00 22 00 the responsible Offerors whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government considering price and non-price evaluation factors. The Government will select the best value Offerors using the tradeoff source selection process pursuant to FAR 15.101-1 for award of the MACC. Award may be made to other than the lowest priced Offerors or other than the highest non-price rated Offerors. Business judgments and tradeoffs will be used to determine the proposal offering the best value to the Government. In determining the best value to the Government, the Government need not quantify the tradeoffs that led to the best value decision.

2.2 NON-PRICE EVALUATION FACTORS

Factor 1: Experience Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Management Plan Factor 4: Safety

Factor 1 – Experience

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall complete the attached Construction and Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) for each construction and design project submitted and shall complete all individual blocks. Attachment A and all information therein is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to evaluate experience. The Government will evaluate only the information provided in Attachment A and all other information provided on other than Attachment A will not be considered. The Offeror may expand individual blocks on the Attachment A; however, Attachment A for each project submitted shall not exceed a total of four (4) single-sided pages [or, two (2) double-sided pages], 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger. Attachment A submittals that do not comply with these requirements will not be evaluated. For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP.

(1) Construction Experience

Submit a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects that best demonstrates the Offeror’s experience that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the types of projects described below. If the Offeror submits more than five (5) projects for evaluation, the Government will evaluate the first five (5) projects and disregard any other project information after the first five (5). For purposes of this evaluation, the types of relevant construction projects are further defined as:

(1) New Multi-Purpose Warehouse Pre-Engineered Building in a country outside the United States. Relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately $500,000 or more in USD value.

(2) New construction or repair of cast-in-place reinforced concrete and/or masonry structures/buildings supporting Military Operations in conformance with UFC 1-201-01 Non-Permanent DoD Facilities in Support of Military Operations where the structures/buildings are located in a country outside the United States. Relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately $500,000 or more in USD value.

(3) New construction of military training facilities (e.g., indoor and outdoor shooting ranges) located in a country outside the United States. Relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately

Document 00 22 00

(4) New construction or repair of an airfield (aircraft runway, taxiway, or apron) located .in a country outside the United States. Relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately $500,000 or more in USD value.

(5) New construction or repair of waterfront facilities (i.e, piers, wharves, boat ramps, quay walls) located in a country outside the United States. Relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately

NOTES:

1. Definitions:

a. United States means the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Marianas Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Wake Island.

b. “Substantially Complete” is defined as at least 90% physically complete.

2. Failure to demonstrate experience in relevant types (1), (2) and (3) shall be considered a deficiency. See Factor 1, Basis of Evaluation, for relevant types (4) and (5).

3. A relevant construction project is further 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.

4. There is a clear distinction between “experience” and “past performance.” Experience is related to the types and amounts of projects previously accomplished. Past performance relates to how well a contractor has performed.

5. The “Offeror” is defined as the exact name in Block 14 of the Solicitation, Offer and Award (SF1442). If the Offeror is utilizing experience and past performance information of any entity other than (1) the Offeror; (2) if the Offeror is a joint venture, its joint venture partners jointly and severally liable for the contract; or (3) a firm that has been acquired by the Offeror and is now part of the Offeror (separate legal entities are not considered part of the Offeror), the Offeror shall provide in its proposal a fully-executed teaming agreement or other contractual agreement. The teaming agreement or other contractual agreement shall, at a minimum, (1) be signed by the Offeror (authority to bind the entity must be clearly stated) and the other entity, (2) specifically reference this solicitation/contract, and (3) specify the work to be performed by the other entity such that it is clear that the other entity will be meaningfully involved in this contract. For item (3), clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the other entity in terms of the work it will specifically perform or manage, or the key personnel it will provide in the performance or management of the contract. Note that generalized statements concerning commitment of resources are not sufficient to demonstrate that an entity will be meaningfully involved in the performance of the contract. Examples of “generalized statements” include a commitment of resources merely based on an entity’s “access” to resources and other generalized statements such as an entity will “provide support and expertise on the project.” The government will only consider information provided in the teaming agreement for the purpose of determining whether the Offeror has clearly demonstrated that any entity (other than the Offeror and, if the Offeror is a joint venture, its joint venture partners jointly and severally liable for the contract) will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. For experience and past performance information of a firm that has been acquired by the Offeror and is no longer a separate legal entity, the Offeror shall provide an explanation of the acquisition sufficient to demonstrate that the predecessor firm is now part of the Offeror in Block 1 of Attachment A.

(2) Design Experience

Document 00 22 00

Submit a maximum of five (5) design projects that best demonstrates design experience that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the types of projects described below. If the Offeror submits more than five (5) projects for evaluation, the Government will evaluate the first five (5) projects and disregard any other project information after the first five (5). For purposes of this evaluation, the types of relevant design projects are further defined as the design of:

(1) New Multi-Purpose Warehouse Pre-Engineered Building in a country outside the United States.

Construction of relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten

(10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately $500,000 or more in USD value.

(2) New construction or repair of cast-in-place reinforced concrete and/or masonry structures/buildings supporting Military Operations in conformance with UFC 1-201-01 Non-Permanent DoD Facilities in Support of Military Operations where the structures/buildings are located in a country outside the United States. Construction of relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately $500,000 or more in USD value.

(3) New construction of military training facilities (e.g., indoor and outdoor shooting ranges) located in a country outside the United States. Construction of relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately $500,000 or more in USD value.

(4) New construction or repair of an airfield (aircraft runway, taxiway, or apron) located .in a country outside the United States. Construction of relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately

(5) New construction or repair of waterfront facilities (i.e, piers, wharves, boat ramps, quay walls) located in a country outside the United States. Construction of relevant projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation and shall be approximately $500,000 or more in USD value.

NOTES:

1. Construction Experience Notes apply.

2. A relevant design project is further defined as a design-bid-build, complete design performed under a single task order or stand-alone A-E contract, or a complete design performed under a design-build construction 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.

3. Provide a fully executed teaming agreement or other contractual agreement between the Offeror and the designer-of-record(s) (DOR), if the DOR(s) is not the Offeror. The teaming agreement or other contractual agreement shall, at a minimum, (1) be signed by the Offeror (authority to bind the entity must be clearly stated) and the DOR, (2) specifically reference this solicitation/contract, and (3) specify the work to be performed by the DOR such that it is clear that the DOR will be meaningfully involved in this contract in a role that is consistent with the DOR’s role in the project submitted for evaluation. The government will only consider information provided in the teaming agreement for the purpose of determining whether the Offeror has clearly demonstrated that the DOR will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

Document 00 22 00

The basis of evaluation will include the demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction and design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the relevant project experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Proposals demonstrating experience with a larger variety of relevant design and construction projects may be considered more favorably.

Proposals demonstrating experience in design and construction projects involving relevant types (4) and (5) may be considered more favorably.

Proposals demonstrating experience in relevant design and construction projects that were in locations anticipated under this MACC (Caroline Islands, Philippines, Northern Territory Australia, Papua New Guinea, Timor Leste, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Fiji, Maldives) or other tropical locations within NAVFAC Pacific AOR that are outside the United States with similar manpower/logistical challenges may be considered more favorably.

If the Offeror utilizes a subcontractor’s experience to demonstrate relevant construction project experience, the project may not be given the same level of consideration as either a prime contractor, a joint venture partner, or LLC member company, because there is no direct legal relationship between the Government and the subcontractor.

Proposals that utilize a subcontractor’s experience to demonstrate relevant project experience may be lesser considered.

Factor 2 –Past Performance:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) or Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 1 for Construction Experience. If a completed CPARS or AE Contractor Appraisal Support System (ACASS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 1 for Design Experience. If there is not a completed CPARS, CCASS or ACASS evaluation, then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ - Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 1 for both Construction Experience and Design Experience. The same CPARS/CCASS evaluation may be submitted for the DOR if the CPARS/CCASS specifically evaluated the DOR’s performance for quality, schedule, management, and regulatory compliance. If not, a PPQ solely evaluating the DOR’s performance shall be provided. PPQs will not be accepted from the designer on a design-build project or from a prime contractor for work performed by a subcontractor. PPQs shall be completed and signed by the contracting agent and/or their representative responsible for construction contract administration. The Offeror shall provide completed PPQs in the proposal. Offeror’s may submit PPQs previously submitted for other solicitations as long as complete, required information is included.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues.

Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger in total.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the Offeror’s references or the references unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

Performance awards or additional information submitted will not be considered.

Document 00 22 00

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 1 – Experience and past performance on other relevant projects currently documented in known sources. In addition to the above, the Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any and all sources including sources outside of the Government. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) using all CAGE/Unique Entity ID numbers of Contractors who are part of a partnership or joint venture identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), SAM.gov, and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

A subcontractor’s past performance may not be given the same level of consideration as either a prime contractor, a joint venture partner, or LLC member company, because there is no direct legal relationship between the Government and the subcontractor. Proposals that utilize a subcontractor’s past performance information may be lesser considered.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance and will receive a Neutral rating. However, the Offeror with favorable past performance may be considered more favorably than an Offeror with a Neutral rating.

There is a clear distinction between “experience” and “past performance”. Experience is related to the types and amounts of projects previously accomplished. Past performance relates to how well a contractor has performed.

Factor 3 – Management Plan

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall provide a narrative of their management plan for seed project Command and Control Fusion Center, Camp Melchor Dela Cruz, Philippines limited to eight (8) single-sided pages or, four (4) double-sided pages, 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger.

At minimum, the plan shall address the following:

(1) Manpower Management: Detailed strategy for (1) staffing of skilled and unskilled labor locally and from other locations, as well as, if personnel rotations will be utilized for the project; (2) providing workforce housing (or temporary housing facilities) and subsistence; and (3) transportation of the workforce to/from the worksite and workforce housing. Strategy shall address prime and subcontractor workforce and staffing of Qualified Key Personnel and alternates, such as the Site Project Superintendent, Quality Control (QC) Manager, and Site Safety Health Officer (SSHO). Strategy shall also address working in Camp Melchor Dela Cruz with logistical and climate challenges.

“Logistical challenges” is where construction materials, equipment, manpower, and workforce infrastructure are not readily available due to remote worksite location, which may require material/equipment advanced scheduling and personnel rotations, as well as the use of temporary housing facilities. “Climate challenges” is considered the typhoon season in the Philippines, where prevailing weather conditions inhibit construction activity for significant periods of the year.

Document 00 22 00

(2) Logistics Management: Detailed strategy for transportation of workforce subsistence, supplies, construction materials, and equipment to and from the project location, which is considered to be remote. Strategy shall include comprehensive equipment and construction material projection plans. Strategy shall also address working in Camp Melchor Dela Cruz with logistical and climate challenges.

The Government will evaluate management plan narrative considering the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of manpower and logistics management requirements for seed project Command and Control Fusion Center, Camp Melchor Dela Cruz, Philippines.

Factor 4 – Safety

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit a Technical Approach for Safety which describes the offeror’s plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. The Offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work. The Offeror will describe methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels. Additionally, the Offeror shall describe their methodology to execute an effective program that utilizes sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps.

The Technical Approach shall not exceed two (2) pages (single-sided, 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger). Narrative pages shall contain the page number.

The basis of evaluation and acceptability an acceptable technical approach for safety as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements and below:

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

2.3 RATING SCHEME

The following information is pertinent to the rating of the non-price proposals (for factors that are rated other than acceptable/unacceptable):

a. Significant Strength: An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

b. Strength: An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

c. Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

d. Significant Weakness: A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Document 00 22 00

e. Uncertainty: Any aspect of a non-price factor proposal for which the intent of the offer is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

f. Deficiency: A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

g. Any proposal found to have a deficiency will render a proposal ineligible for award.

2.4 PRICE EVALUATION FACTOR

a. The SEED project pricing will be utilized for the price evaluation.

b. One or more of the following techniques will be used to evaluate the total price to ensure that it is fair and reasonable:

Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation Comparison of proposed prices with the independent Government Estimate

Document 00 22 00

ATTACHMENT A

ATTACHMENT A

CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET

Project No. (check one) : CON #1 CON #2 CON #3 CON #4 CON #5

DESIGN #1 DESIGN #2 DESIGN #3 DESIGN #4 DESIGN #5

1. Name of Firm that Performed Project*: ____________________________________________ Address: __________________________________________________ Phone Number: _____________ Entity Identifier (UEI #):__________________ Point of Contact: _____________________________ Contact Phone Number: ____________________

a. If the firm that performed the project has been acquired by the Offeror and is no longer a separate legal entity, the Offeror shall provide an explanation of the acquisition sufficient to demonstrate that the predecessor firm is now part of the Offeror.

b. Name of Firm Experience is Claimed for* (i.e.; if the project was performed by a J/V and Offeror is claiming experience of one of the J/V members, state the exact legal name of the JV member Offeror claims experience for):

Address:

Phone Number: _____________ Entity Identifier (DUNS #):__________________ Point of Contact: _____________________________ Contact Phone Number: ____________________

2. Work Performed as*: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain)

Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Number: Delivery/Task Order Number:

Title:

Location:

4. Construction Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

5. Type of work:

New Construction Renovation Repair Alteration Other (explain):

6. Type of Contract/Task Order: (Check ALL that apply)

Firm-Fixed Price Cost/Time and Material Other (explain):

Document 00 22 00

ATTACHMENT A

Complete Block 7 for Construction Projects.

7. Construction Project:

Total Award Amount: $_____________________ Final Price: $__________________________

Type of Contract/Task Order: (Check ALL that apply)

Design-Build Design-Bid-Build Delivery/Task Order (IDIQ) Other (explain):

If Design-Build, identify the Lead Design Firm:______________________________________________

Complete Block 8 for Design Projects.

8. Design Project:

A/E Design Fee: $________________ Total Construction Value: $_______________

Type of Contract/Task Order: (Check ALL that apply)

Design-Build RFP Development Designer of Record Engineering Services Full Plans & Specs

Other (explain):

9. Complete the following project details (at least one of the following must be completed) as applicable to the contract identified in block 3. Provide a detailed description of the work in Block 10.

(1) New multi-purpose warehouse PEB and dollar value of $______________

(2) New construction or repair of cast-in-place reinforced concrete and/or masonry structures/building supporting military operations in conformance with UFC 1-201-01 Non-Permanent DoD Facilities in Support of Military Operations where the structures/buildings with a dollar value of $_________________

(3) New construction of military training facilities _____________________(e.g., indoor and outdoor shooting ranges) with a dollar value of $______________________

(4) New construction or repair of an airfield (aircraft runway, taxiway, or apron) and a dollar value of $_________________

(5) New construction or repair of waterfront facilities _______________________(i.e, piers, wharves, boat ramps, quay walls) with a dollar value of $______________________

Document 00 22 00

ATTACHMENT A

10. Provide a detailed description of the project and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e.: unique features, square footage, construction methods). If design-build, include a description of the design-effort.

D/B UFC PC24-03, COMMAND & CONTROL (C2) FUSION CENTER WON 1795624

CAMP MELCHOR DELA CRUZ, ISABELA, PHILIPPINES

RFP N62742-24-R-1328/TASK ORDER

DOCUMENT 00 73 00

SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS

1.1 AUTHORITY

1. No person other than the Contracting Officer has authority to bind the Government with respect to this contract.

2. No action or omission of any government employee or representative other than the Contracting Officer shall increase or decrease the scope of this contract or shall otherwise modify the terms and conditions of this contract.

3. In no event shall any of the following be effective or binding on the Government or imputed to the Contracting Officer with respect to this contract:

(a) An understanding or agreement between the Contractor and anyone other than the Contracting Officer;

(b) A purported modification or change order issued by anyone other than the Contracting Officer;

(c) A promise by anyone other than the Contracting Officer to provide additional funding or make payments; or

(d) An order, direction, consent, or permission from anyone other than the Contracting Officer to:

(i) Incur costs in excess of a specified estimated cost, allotment of funds, or other ceiling; or

(ii) Expend hours in excess of a specified level of effort.

1.2 PHASED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE

Within the overall project schedule, commence and complete the work in phases. Complete each phase of the work within the number of calendar days stated in the following schedule:

a. Schedule start day: The day designated as the beginning of a particular phase; the number listed is the number of calendar days from the notice to proceed.

b. Completion day: The day designated as the end of a given phase and the day the work in that phase must be completed; the number listed is the number of calendar days from the notice to proceed.

c. Schedule:

PHASE DESCRIPTION SCHEDULE START

DAY

SCHEDULE

COMPLETION DAY

1 Final Design Submittal No later than 15 calendar days after NTP

100 calendar days after

NTP

2 All remaining work. 101 calendar days after

NTP

450 calendar days after

NTP

d. If the work of a particular phase is complete and accepted before the scheduled completion day, immediately begin work on the subsequent phase unless otherwise restricted.

1.3 ENHANCED DEFENSE COOPERATION AGREEMENT (EDCA) BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

It is the Offeror’s/Contractor’s responsibility to ensure that all requirements of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation

D/B UFC PC24-03, COMMAND & CONTROL (C2) FUSION CENTER WON 1795624

CAMP MELCHOR DELA CRUZ, ISABELA, PHILIPPINES

RFP N62742-24-R-1328/TASK ORDER

Agreement are adhered to.

The following website provides the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement:

https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/14-625-Philippines-Defense-Cooperation.pdf

The following website provides a listing of the major U.S. Philippines international agreements:

https://www.state.gov/treaties-in-force/

1.4 UTILITIES FOR CONSTRUCTION AND TESTING

FAR 52.236-14 does not apply to this task order. The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining all utilities required for construction and testing. The Contractor shall provide these utilities at his expense, paid for at the current utility rate delivered to the job site. The Contractor shall provide and maintain all temporary utility connections and distribution lines, and all meters required to measure the amount of each utility used.

1.5 BID, PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS

Bid, performance and payment bonds are not required for the seed project.

-- End of Document--