Synopsis MD AE 400M Gen 5_ 2 Jan 25 DRAFT.docx

INDEFINITE DELIVERY CONTRACT (IDC)

FOR ARCHITECT-ENGINEERING (A-E) SERVICES,

UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,

HUNTSVILLE CENTER

GENERAL INFORMATION

NOTICE: This notice is for market research purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation nor does it restrict the Government in any way. This notice is open for responses from both small and large businesses. Interested firms are requested to reply with comments or questions in reference to this document and the statement of work (SOW, Attachment 1) to ensure no ambiguity at the time of solicitation. Each question or comment shall be in a MS excel document with one question per cell for ease of identification. Proposed changes to the document shall be submitted via tracked changes to this document or its attachments. The Government will not reimburse respondents for any costs incurred in preparation of a response to this notice. Responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. The Government does not intend to rank responses or provide any reply to interested firms.

CONTRACTING OFFICE ADDRESS:

USPS Mailing Address:

P.O. Box 1600 Huntsville, AL 35807-4301

1. CONTRACT INFORMATION. This is not a Request for Price Proposal (RFPP).

This acquisition is being procured in accordance with (IAW) the 40 United States Code (U.S.C) Chapter 1101 et seq, “Selection of Architects and Engineers” statute (formerly known as the Brooks Act) as implemented per the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.6, Defense Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) 236.6 and Army Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS) 5136.6; the USACE Acquisition Instructions (UAI); and Engineering Pamphlet (EP) 715-1-7, “Architect-Engineer Contracting in USACE”.

The U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center Huntsville Center (CEHNC) plans to award a multiple award Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) suite on an unrestricted basis. Firms will be selected for negotiation based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for the required work.

The multiple award IDC suite will have one 36-month base period and two 24-month option periods for a total of 7-years. FAR 52.217-9, “Option to Extend the Term of the Contract” and FAR 52.217-8, “Option to Extend Services” will be included in the contract. Work will be issued by negotiated Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) task orders. It is anticipated that the Government will award at least six IDCs; however, the Government reserves the right to award more, less (minimum of three), or none at all, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code for this procurement is 541330—Engineering Services with a small business size threshold of $25,500,000. This announcement is open to all businesses regardless of size. The applicable Product Service Code (PSC) for this acquisition is “C1BF - Missile Systems Facilities”. The total capacity to be shared among all awardees will be $400,000,000.00. The contract is anticipated to be awarded in fiscal year 2026. The Government's minimum obligation shall not exceed the minimum guarantee of $2,500.00 for the life of each contract. To be eligible for contract award, a firm shall be registered in System for Award Management (SAM) via sam.gov at the time of their submission. In addition, FAR 52.236-23, Responsibility of the Architect-Engineer Contractor, applies to this acquisition.

The main activities that comprise the selection process for this A-E IDC suite are as follows:

1. Public Announcement

2. Receipt of Standard Form (SF) 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications

3. Conduct Pre-Selection Evaluation Board (if determined necessary)

4. Conduct Selection Evaluation Board

5. Approval of Selections by Selection Authority

6. Issuance, Evaluation, and Negotiation of Price Proposals

7. Preparation of Contract Award Documents

2. REQUIREMENTS INFORMATION:

Firms will be required to provide all labor, materials, logistical, and administrative support in the performance of the task orders awarded under this IDC; and perform and deliver all work in keeping with commonly accepted practices, quality, and professional standards for the A-E industry and in keeping with all applicable local, state, and federal requirements. Specific work requirements defined in the base contract will be implemented in subsequent task orders.

This multiple award IDC suite will be used to procure A-E design services in support of the evolving global missile systems. This contract will provide technical support for the design of new and existing facilities and sites in support of the deployment of Mission Critical and Mission Essential missile systems for the Government IAW the statement of work (Attachment 1).

a. Location. This acquisition will require the contractors to have the capability to respond to multiple task order requests for work for diverse locations. This IDC has a broad geographic scope that includes the United States, U.S. Territories and Possessions, and Outlying Areas (as defined in FAR 2.101), as well as foreign locations such as Germany, Denmark, Turkey, Bulgaria, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Poland, Romania, United Kingdom, Japan, Australia, Canada, and Czech Republic. Excluding site visits for fact-finding, consultation, and information gathering, all work for foreign locations will be at the contractors’ United States place of performance. Other foreign jurisdictions outside the Continental United States may be added to the geographic scope of the IDCs if deemed appropriate after an analysis of relevant statutes and regulations. However, the bulk of the work is anticipated to be performed in the home offices of the A-E firm.

b. Security Considerations. All A-E firms and all associated sub-contractors’ employees shall comply with applicable installation, facility and area commander installation/facility access and local security policies and procedures (provided by Government representative). The firm shall also provide all information required for background checks to meet installation/facility access and control requirements to be accomplished by installation Provost Marshal Office, Director of Emergency Services or Security Office. The A-E firms’ workforce must comply with all personal identity verification requirements IAW FAR 52.204-9, “Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel”. In addition to authorized changes, should the Force Protection Condition (FPCON) at any installation facility change, the Government may require changes in A-E firm security matters or processes.

Only firms who hold a facility security clearance at the Secret level at the time of submission will be eligible for award under this acquisition. It is anticipated that some task orders may involve classified data and work in Secret and Top-Secret secure areas. A DD254 may be required. The firm will be required to store and generate classified material. At a minimum, all documents submitted to the Government shall be marked Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) IAW the Controlled Unclassified Information sections of DoD Manual 5200.01 DoD Information Security Program. The A-E firm shall put into place a system to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of data, photographs, reports, and other material generated or acquired as a result of this contract. Access to data, maps, photographs, and similar material under the firm’s controls shall be limited to those with a valid need. Each A-E prime and each member of a JV partner firm shall have, at the time of submission, a Facility Clearance at the Secret level. The prime(s) firms and each member of a JV partner firm shall also demonstrate employee secret security clearances as well as ability to store and process classified material. This acquisition will not be acquiring information technology products or services.

c. On-Ramping. The Contracting Officer may evaluate the market every 24 months throughout the life of the IDC to determine if it is in the Government’s best interest to initiate a contract “On- Ramp” procedure. During a contract “On-Ramp,” the Government will accept and evaluate new SF330s with the intention of adding additional firms to the IDC suite to refresh the suite’s competition. These SF330s shall be subject to the same instructions and evaluation procedures as contained in the original synopsis. Competition for inclusion in the IDC suite via on-ramping will be sought, promoted, and sustained by querying SAM, synopsizing proposed actions, and posting the synopsis in the Government- wide point of entry website https://sam.gov/. The terms and conditions of any resulting awards will be materially identical to the existing version of the contract. The performance period for any new awards will be concurrent with the existing term for all other firms. Immediately upon on-ramping, the contractor will be eligible to submit a proposal in response to any task order solicitation and receive task order awards with the same rights and obligations as any other firm.

d. Dormant Status. Due to extenuating circumstances and not related to performance, firms that do not propose can request to be placed in a dormant status. Firms in dormant status cannot compete in new task order solicitations however, they may continue to work on awarded task orders. Dormant status is granted for a defined finite period, after which it will lift, and the firm will be expected to compete.

3. SELECTION CRITERIA: Firms that demonstrate higher aggregate qualifications relevant to the primary selection criteria are considered to be the most highly qualified firms. If two or more firms are technically equal, the secondary criteria will be used as “tie-breakers” and the final ranking of the most highly qualified firms will be decided after interviews are conducted. If justified by the submissions, a sufficient number of firms will be recommended to ensure that at least two (2) most highly qualified firms remain “in reserve” when negotiations commence on the final contract. Negotiations for fully burdened labor rates in each labor category will take place with the most highly qualified firms. The selection process for this acquisition will be IAW EP 715-1-7, FAR 36.6, DFARS 236.6, and AFARS 5136.6, using the selection criteria listed below:

PRIMARY SELECTION CRITERIA

The primary criteria are listed in descending order of importance:

Criteria A: Specialized Experience & Technical Competence

1. The Government will evaluate the specialized experience and technical competence of each firm as demonstrated by three to five (3-5) recent and relevant key projects. Any additional projects will not be evaluated. A project is defined as efforts leading to the completion of a specific requirement. Individual task orders from an IDC can be submitted as one (1) project. Single projects that were completed using multiple task orders may be submitted as a key project. However, multiple projects performed under a multiple-award contract may not be submitted as a single key project and will be disqualified from further evaluation. Each project will be submitted using one (1) SF330 Part I, Section F form. Projects that do not fall into the specified work will not be considered relevant. Proposals that have fewer than three relevant and recent projects will be considered non- responsive and will be rated “Unsatisfactory” for this criterion.

2. It is not required that the submitted key projects be in support of a missile systems program, but the key projects should demonstrate recent and relevant experience in the design of facilities and infrastructure including core competencies and specialized analytical techniques and features such as FMECA, RAM analyses, HEMP survivability, Anti-Terrorism Force Protection, explosives safety site plans, prediction of explosive effects, protective construction to mitigate explosive effects, extreme environmental conditions, TEMPEST, Secret Compartmentalized Information Facilities, physical and electronic security systems, power plants, radar facilities, standard and critical communication facilities, and intrusion detection systems requirements.

3. A key project will only be considered recent if the contractor demonstrates through documentation that the completed design product has been accepted by the ultimate project owner within the last 10 years and led to a construction project which is no less than 50% complete at the time of the release of this synopsis. Otherwise, the key project that were completed more than 10 years and less than 50% completed will still be evaluated but will be considered weaker than a recently completed key project.

4. Greater relevance will be assigned to key projects: (1) that demonstrate greater complexity; (2) where the firm has demonstrated greater depth of involvement; (3) where the firm has performed a greater portion of the design; (4) and where the project involves a greater number of features as described in paragraph 2 above. Projects with a greater relevance will be evaluated higher than those with lesser relevance.

5. Key projects are performed by the prime contractor A-E firm, JV partners, or key subcontractors that are being proposed as team members for this synopsis submission. A key subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor which is expected to perform 10% or more of the total contract effort across all task orders awarded on this contract. The effectiveness of the proposed project team (including management structure; coordination of disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior working relationships) shall be demonstrated.

Criteria B: Professional Qualifications

1. Certificate of Authorization (or equivalent): If the firm has not provided a Certificate of Authorization, an equivalent certification, or (otherwise) a letter explaining why the firm may, by law, practice architecture and/or engineering in at least one state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States as required by FAR 36.601-4(b), “Implementation”, the firm will be disqualified for further consideration.

2. Evaluation of Key Personnel: The qualifications of proposed personnel must meet the minimum requirements as outlined in this synopsis. Key personnel will be evaluated in terms of education, professional credentials, training, registration, relevant and specialized experience, career longevity with the firm, and teaming experience among key personnel. If the firm has not provided a resume for each of the required key disciplines the submission will be considered non-responsive and will be rated “Unacceptable” for this criterion. The lack of a require credential for any key discipline will constitute an “Unacceptable” rating for this criterion. Dual-hatting of key discipline positions is not acceptable. The key personnel to be evaluated are as follows:

· Lead Program Manager

· Lead Project Manager

· Lead Architect

· Lead Civil Engineer

· Lead Geotechnical Engineer

· Lead Structural Engineer

· Lead Environmental Engineer

· Lead Mechanical Engineer

· Lead Fire Protection Engineer

· Lead Electrical Engineer

· Lead Communications Systems Professional.

· Lead Quality Control Manager.

· Lead Cost Engineer or Cost Estimator.

· Lead Scheduler.

· Lead Electronic Security System Designer

3. Evaluation of Work Management and Teaming: A team will be rated stronger whose matrices demonstrate team experience where a greater percentage of its members have worked together on more Key Projects.

4. Joint Venture Partnership Agreement: If the firm is proposing as a joint venture partnership, it must include a copy of their signed agreement.

5. Mentor Protégé Agreement: If the firm is proposing under a Mentor-Protégé program, it must include a copy of their signed agreement.

6. Evaluation of the Organization Chart: The organization chart will be evaluated for potential performance risks and opportunities related to organizational structure.

7. Evaluation of Quality Control (QC) Process: The QC Process will be evaluated for potential performance risks and its ability to maintain a level of quality consistent with the industry standard.

Criteria C: Past Performance

1. Past Performance will be evaluated primarily upon official information available about the key projects that have been submitted under Criteria A, the Specialized Experience & Technical Competence criteria.

2. For key projects Government will review the submitted Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs). The Government reserves the right to evaluate past performance evaluation information from any other relevant sources for recent and relevant projects performed by the prime A-E firm, JV Partners, and Key Subcontractors. The Government may elect to consider any credible and reliable information obtained from other sources. The relevance of such past performance information will be evaluated prior to consideration. If adverse past performance information is obtained from the PPQ or other sources, the firm will have the opportunity to respond to any adverse information received which it had not had a previous opportunity to comment.

3. Past performance information (PPQ or CPARS) submitted must match the key project period of performance described in the respective Key Project fields provided in Criteria A. More relevant past performance will be treated as a stronger predictor of future success and will therefore have more influence on the overall performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

4. Past Performance Questionnaire. The Government will evaluate each firm’s Past Performance as follows:

Past Performance will be evaluated primarily upon official information available about the Key Projects submitted. However, the Government reserves the right to evaluate past performance evaluation information from any other relevant sources for recent and relevant projects performed by the prime firm, Key Subcontractors and JV Partners. The Government may elect to consider any credible and reliable information obtained from other sources. The relevance of such past performance information will be evaluated prior to consideration. In the event adverse past performance information is obtained from the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) or other sources, the firm will have the opportunity to respond to any adverse information received which it had not had a previous opportunity to comment.

5. Criterion C will be evaluated using the following two-part adjectival rating scheme of confidence and relevancy ratings:

Each project will be evaluated for recency and relevancy using the following adjectival methodology:

Based on the relevancy determinations, a past performance confidence assessment will be assigned using the following ratings:

Unknown Confidence (Neutral) No recent/relevant performance record is available or the firm’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Criteria D: Capacity

1. The A-E firm, at a minimum, must demonstrate capacity or an effective organization structure, project team and quality management plan to accomplish up to an estimated five (5) task orders simultaneously, with an estimated value of $5 million each in a one (1) year period of time. Further, the Offeror should describe its approach to down ramping or above and beyond work as requirements increase or decrease during the period of performance of this IDC. The evaluation will consider the management approach, coordination of disciplines and subcontractors, and quality control procedures to complete the aforementioned projects. Those firms which cannot demonstrate this capacity will be rated Unsatisfactory for this criterion.

2. More consideration will be given to firms who can effectively demonstrate a greater capacity for their proposed team to effectively handle additional work of the type demanded of this contract relative to their present workload.

3. Capacity is not simply a measure of the depth of the overall resources available to the A-E firm, but rather a measure of the proposed team’s ability to provide the expertise required under this specific contract (e.g., architecture and engineering services supporting missile systems).

Criteria E: Knowledge of Locality

Greater consideration will be given to firms who have demonstrated greater geographic diversity of project experience and capability.

1. Greater consideration will be given to firms with the experience and capability of performing work on projects located in:

(a) in diverse locations;

(b) in extreme, and geographically remote locations;

(c) in the targeted areas of execution described in paragraph 2(a) above.

2. The firm shall provide a logical narrative explanation (with charts or other aids as necessary) to demonstrate their familiarity and capabilities.

Criteria A, B, D, and E will be evaluated using the following adjectival rating methodology:

SECONDARY SELECTION CRITERIA

The secondary criteria will be used as “tie-breakers. The secondary criteria will only be used as a "tie-breaker,” if necessary, in ranking the most highly qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be commingled with the primary criteria in the evaluation. The secondary criteria is:

Criteria F Volume of DoD Contract Awards

Greater consideration will be given to those firms who have been awarded a lesser total dollar amount of stand-alone DoD contracts and task orders in the last 12 months than those who have been awarded a greater total amount. This will be evaluated via the firm’s total dollar value of all stand- alone contracts and task orders as provided in Part I, section H of the SF330. This consists of those requirements awarded by DoD in the last 12 months to the Prime A-E firm or Joint-Venture Partnership IDC. Capacity of unawarded options will not be considered under this criterion. Contracts may include those for the Missile Defense Agency.

Criteria F will be evaluated using the same adjectival rating methodology as Criteria A, B, D, and E listed above.

4. PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS

The A-E firm’s SF330 documentation must conform to the following special instructions. See EP 715-1-4 for further instructions and tips for preparing your submission:

SF330 Part I - Contract Specific Qualifications. The SF 330 Part I presents the corporate team members and their roles in the proposed contract, an organization chart, resumes of the key personnel to be assigned to the contract, projects which illustrate the team’s experience in the required type of work, the key personnel’s participation in the example projects, and any other qualifications relevant to the announced contract. A single SF 330 Part I is submitted for the entire team. The contents of Part I shall not exceed 60 pages (8.5” X 11”) including no more than 10 pages for Section H. Charts, graphs, etc., may have only that amount of text to explain the item and shall not contain excessive text that circumvents the page and font limits. Pages that extend beyond this limit will be removed from the submittal and will not be evaluated. This page limitation only applies to the official contents of Sections A through I of Part I. Cover letters, tab pages, acronym tables, and other such pages do not count against this limit. Firms may use no smaller than 10-point font for narrative, organizational charts, graphs, tables, or matrices. Charts, graphs, etc., may have only that amount of text to explain the item.

A. Part I – Section A: General Information. Fill out completely.

B. Part I – Section B: General Information. Fill out completely. Include the prime firm’s POC name, email address, and contractor A-E firm Unique Entity ID (UEI) number and in this Section.

C. Part I – Section C: Partner Firms. Fill out completely. Only the Prime contractor A-E firm, JV Partners, and Key Subcontractors are required to be listed. For work not performed by the prime, JV Partner or Key Subcontractor, do not identify any other firms in the accomplishment of the work.

D. Part I – Section D: Organization Chart. The firm shall submit an organization chart of the proposed team that clearly demonstrates the team and organizational relationships among key personnel, delineates responsibility, and identifies for which firm each person directly works. The organization chart shall not exceed a single side of one page (no greater than 11”x17”). Non-key personnel may also be referenced on the organization chart.

E. Part I – Section E: Key Personnel. The firm shall submit one resume for each of the key personnel listed below. Multiple personnel shall not be submitted for a single key personnel position. Dual-hatting of key discipline positions is not allowed (e.g. John Smith cannot be both the Lead Project Manager and the Lead Architect). Firms shall clearly identify the role of every individual on each resume submitted specific to the roles specified herein.

· Lead Program Manager - Registered Architect or registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Project Manager - registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Architect - Registered Architect in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Mechanical Engineer - registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Electrical Engineer -registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Civil Engineer -registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Geotechnical Engineer -registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Structural Engineer - -registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Environmental Engineer - registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Fire Protection Engineer - registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Communications Systems Professional - Registered Communications Distribution Designer (RCDD)

· Lead Quality Control Manager - Registered Architect or registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory

· Lead Cost Engineer or Cost Estimator. This person shall demonstrate proficiency with the 2nd Generation Micro-Computer Aided Cost Engineering System (MII) cost estimating software.

· Lead Scheduler. This person must have demonstrated field construction experience with Primavera scheduling software.

· Lead Electronic Security System Designer, registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory, with six (6) years of experience and must demonstrate proof that the individual currently holds of one (1) of the three (3) below certifications:

· Physical Security Professional (PSP)

· Certified Protection Professional (CPP), or

· Registered Communication Distribution Designer (RCDD)

Additionally, the resumes submitted shall demonstrate the following credentials/competencies are possessed by 1- key personnel above or by another identified discipline whose resume is separately submitted:

· LEED Accredited Professional (AP)

· Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection. Minimum of 6- years’ experience required.

· Experience in the prediction of explosive effects and protection construction design to mitigate explosive effects

· Experience in High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) design

If a submitted key discipline works for a subcontractor to the primary firm, then they should demonstrate successful project execution as a subcontractor with the primary firm over a period of time.

F. Part I – Section F: Example Key Projects.

Firms proposing must submit 4-key projects that demonstrate recent and relevant experience in the design of facilities in support of the deployment of Mission Critical and Mission Essential Operations for the Government. or designs demonstrating similar core competencies. Key relevant projects are expected to include specialized analytical techniques and features such as FMECA, RAM analyses, HEMP survivability, Structural, seismic Risk Category V, Anti-Terrorism Force Protection, explosives safety site plans, prediction of explosive effects, protective construction to mitigate explosive effects, extreme environmental conditions, TEMPEST, Secret Compartmentalized Information Facilities, physical and electronic security systems, power plants, facilities in support of the missile systems, radar facilities, communication facilities, and intrusion detection systems requirements. A project is defined as efforts leading to the completion of a specific requirement. Individual task orders from an IDC can be submitted as one (1) project. Each project will be submitted using one (1) SF330 Part I, Section F form. Recent projects are within 10-years and led to a construction project which is no less than 50% complete at the time of the release of this synopsis. Projects that were completed more than 10-years ago or are currently less than 50% complete may be submitted for consideration.

G. Part I – Section G: Key Personnel Participation Matrix. Fill out completely.

H. Part I – Section H: Additional Information. The contractor A-E firm may provide any additional information they deem helpful in describing their qualifications. It may also be used to provide information specifically requested by the Government. Any information requested by the Government and the firm is uncertain of where to place, shall be placed in this section. Further, information specifically requested to be provided in Section H includes:

1) Quality Control Process: Describe the A-E firm’s Quality Control Management approach tailored to this procurement. The approach should include:

a. The name and contact information of the individual responsible for safety and quality control implementation and oversight.

b. Comprehensive description and explanation of the system that will be in place at the time of contract award to assure quality is maintained.

c. A process that allows the Government to verify sufficient internal contractor A-E firm review was performed.

d. A systematic review process that ensures quality of deliverables is tracked for all TOs awarded under this IDC to note trends in overall quality over the period of performance.

2) Capacity Demonstration. The firm must provide a logical narrative explanation to analytically demonstrate their capacity to perform additional workload above and beyond work on other contracts projected to be performed during the period of performance of this IDC. This is not simply a measure of the depth of a team’s resources (i.e., number of people), but a measure of the proposed team’s ability to provide the specific expertise required under this specific contract. Use charts, aids, and a narrative of the calculations in a way that simply but effectively explains how the firm’s additional capacity was derived. The analysis should discuss capacity in terms of full time equivalent (FTE) employees.

The analysis of capacity should discuss a firm’s ability to effectively schedule projects to maximize available resources while considering deadlines. It should also discuss the ability of the prime to bring on and manage subcontractors to meet demand. Further, the firm shall discuss how it would down ramp work in the event the work is decreased.

3) Knowledge of Locality. The firm must provide a logical narrative explanation (with charts or other aids as necessary) to demonstrate their familiarity and capability of working in multiple geographic locations to include locations Outside the Continental United States.

4) Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business. The firm must provide their intended subcontracting targets (as a percentage of Total Acquisition Value of the contract) in several small business categories.

5) Volume of DoD Contract Awards: The firm must provide the total dollar value of all stand-alone contracts and TOs awarded by the Department of Defense in the last 12 months to the Prime Contractor A-E firm or JV Partnership. Do not include IDC capacity or capacity of unawarded options.

6) Safety. The firm must provide information on programs for safety training while on Government installations and how safety training is tracked.

I. Part I – Section I: An authorized representative of the firm must sign the document confirming that the information in Part I of the SF330 is factual.

Part II: Architect-Engineer General Qualifications: Part II provides basic information about the capabilities and experience of a firm and is not specific to a contract. The firm must provide one updated and signed form for each Prime Contractor A-E firm, JV Partnership, and Key Subcontractor on the proposing team and is prepared on a branch office basis. It must include the type of ownership, small business type (if applicable), point of contact, number of personnel in each discipline, profile of the firm’s experience, and annual volume of work. There is no page limit to Part II, however, it must only include Architect-Engineer General Qualifications information.

Supplemental Information: Supplemental information being requested by the Government will be provided after the Part II information in a separate tabbed section. There is no page limit to Supplemental Information section, however, it should only include the information specifically requested below (as applicable). The following items will be included with each identified with the appropriate file name:

A. State Certificate of Authorization to Practice Engineering or Architecture: The submitting A-E firm (as Prime Contractor A-E firm or one JV Partner) shall provide a Certificate of Authorization, an equivalent certification, or (otherwise) a letter explaining why the firm may, by law, practice architecture and/or engineering in at least one state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States as required by FAR 36.601-4(b).

B. Past Performance Information: For each Key Example Project provided in Part I – Section F, the A-E will provide past performance information (described below) in the order provided in Section F (above).

1) For each Key Example Project performed for the U.S. Federal Government by any team member of the A-E firm in the role of the Prime Contractor A-E firm or JV Partner, the A-E firm shall provide a copy of the most recent (preferably “final”) signed performance evaluation from the CPARS.

2) For each Key Example Project performed by any team member of the A-E firm in the role of Prime Contractor A-E firm or JV Partner which did not require a CPARS evaluation, the A-E firm shall solicit a PPQ to be completed by the customer representative of the project who was directly involved in the oversight of the A-E firm’s work.

3) For each Key Example Project performed by any team member of the A-E firmin the role of a subcontractor to the prime, the A-E firm shall solicit a PPQ) to be completed by the ultimate customer representative of the project who was directly involved in the oversight of the A-E firm’s work (NOT the prime contractor A-E firm). The customer representative shall be requested to focus their evaluation to that of the specific subcontractor’s contribution rather than the project as a whole. The prime contractor A-E firm for whom the subcontractor worked directly for may not fill out the PPQ.

4) In lieu of requesting a new PPQ from the customer, the A-E may include a PPQ previously provided by the customer for the same Key Example Project from a previous proposal.

5) These questionnaires must include instructions to send the responses back to the proposing firm for timely inclusion into their proposal. A PPQ template (Attachment 2) has been provided for use. The solicitation number and A-E firm’s name shall be clearly indicated on the PPQ. Provide the Government a list using the format below of all points of contact that were sent a PPQ for submission.

EXAMPLE:

Each firm should follow-up with clients to ensure timely submittal of the PPQ. The purposed of the list is to allow the Government an opportunity to investigate performance in the event that a PPQ is not returned by the customer representative in a timely manner.

C. Joint-Venture Partnership Agreement: If proposing as a JV, all members of the JV shall sign a written agreement designating one firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the JV. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration. If this is an 8(a), HUBZone, or Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned JV, the Offeror should ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124, 13 CFR Part 125, and 13 CFR Part 126 respectively.

In addition, a small business JV offeror must submit, with its offer, the representation required in paragraph (c) of FAR solicitation provision 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Products and Commercial Services, and paragraph (c) of FAR 52.219-1, Small Business Program Representations, in accordance with 52.204-8(d) and 52.212-3(b) for the following categories:

(A) Small business;

(B) Service-disabled veteran-owned small business;

(C) Women-owned small business (WOSB) under the WOSB Program;

(D) Economically disadvantaged women-owned small business under the WOSB Program; or

(E) Historically underutilized business zone small business.

D. Mentor-Protégé Agreement: If proposing as part of a Mentor-Protégé Agreement, include a signed copy of the agreement and the Small Business Administration approval of the agreement with the SF330.

5. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

A. Interested parties are to submit an SF330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications package. SF330’s and supporting information shall be submitted via the Solicitation Module of PIEE at https://piee.eb.mil. Offerors must be registered in PIEE in order to submit a proposal. All firms are encouraged to register in the PIEE Solicitation Module as soon as possible. The registration instructions are available at:

https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/cap/docs/piee/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Access_Instructions.pdf.

Failure to successfully register in PIEE will prevent the firm from completing the submission for this acquisition. For instructions, please refer to the Posting Offer demo available at: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf. Questions in reference to how to submit your proposal shall be directed to the PIEE help desk at 866-618-5988.

In the event of a PIEE System outage within 24 hours of the proposal due date that prevents the Offeror from submitting a timely proposal, the Offeror shall notify the Contracting Officer, via email at CEHNC-MDAE5@usace.army.mil and kijafa.t.johnson-cooper@usace.army.mil at least 2 hours before the proposal is due and include a screenshot of the error message or outage notification. The notification may be in conjunction with verbal notification, but verbal notification alone shall not be sufficient.

For the purposes of establishing timely proposal submission, the Government will use the date and time an Offeror’s entire submission is successfully uploaded in PIEE Solicitation Module or in the event a PIEE submission was unavailable the Government will use the time and date provided by the mailroom. The Government cautions Offerors that electronic submissions are not instantaneous and file uploads are subject to system connectivity. Submissions may take several minutes or hours, and Offerors should print confirmation information for their files.

B. All submissions shall be submitted in word searchable Adobe PDF format with no smaller than 10-point font. It is the responsibility of the firm to ensure that all files contained therein are readable, complete, and accessible without a password.

C. The Government will not be responsible for SF330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications package to be delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive the package on its behalf. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that SF330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications package are submitted so as to reach the designated recipient within the required suspense date and time. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the package to be received IAW the instructions provided.

D. Facsimile transmissions will not be accepted.

E. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to check the internet address provided as necessary for any posted changes to this solicitation and all amendments.

F. The penalty for making false statement in the SF330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications package is prescribed in 18 U.S.C. 1001.

6. PRE-SYNOPSIS CONFERENCE

The Government anticipates a Pre-Synopsis conference in early 2025. More information will be posted to sam.gov as the date gets closer.

7. POINT OF CONTACTS

Kijafa T Johnson-Cooper (Contracting Officer) Office Number: (256) 895-1614 Email: kijafa.t johnson@usace.army.mil

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Statement of Work

2. PPQ Template image1.png