A07-W56ZTN-19-R-0005-0005.docx

W56ZTN-19-R-0005

W56ZTN-19-R-0005

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 0005 CONTINUATION

The purpose of this Amendment 0005 is as follows:

a.) Provide answers to additional questions received in response to the solicitation. See attached Q&A, dated 23 October 2019. If offerors have follow-up questions or additional questions, they must be submitted via email by 11:00AM ET on 28 October 2019. If additional relevant questions are received, the Government will provide answers and determine if any further extension of the due date of proposals is warranted.

b.) Make additional revisions to the Instructions to Offerors and Basis for Award sections of the RFP. These changes are limited to the Subfactor b: Safety portion and to Subfactor c - Site Superintendents requirements. Offerors may provide EMR and DART data for beyond three (3) years and could potentially earn a strength. For the proposed site superintendents, experience and a degree in lieu of a journeyman level trade certification is permitted.

c.) Update the PWS, paragraph 1.6.11.4 Site Superintendents (SSs) under 1.6.11 Key Personnel to allow for experience and a degree in lieu of a journeyman level trade certification. No other changes are made to the PWS via this Amendment.

d.) The due date and time for receipt of proposals remains unchanged.

QUESTIONS - 10232019

2. Ref. Volume II: Past Performance, Section 1:

What is a Government Contract Admin Pre-Award Monitor person, and why so you need to know who they were, and what could that possibly have to do with a contractor’s performance on a project?

COR or Technical Representative.

6. Ref. Proposal Submission Requirements / Amendment 1, Question 3; Gov’ts Answer/DoD SAFE Drop-Off Requirements

In Amendment 1 Q&A 3 regarding Proposal Submission Requirements from RFP, Pg. 17: “ACC-APG will not accept proposals from AMRDEC SAFE. DoD SAFE has replaced it as of 15 August 2019”. In order to submit our proposal via DOD Safe as an outside or unauthenticated user, a request code has to be provided by the recipient [i.e. the Government], according the DOD Safe website. When can the contractor request this code, who do we submit a request to and for how long is the code valid?

All those who are "outside or unauthenticated users" should submit their names and email address to us not later than 5 days prior to the solicitation due date. The Government will submit a Drop-off Request from SAFE who will issue a link to submit the file. The link will be valid for 14 days. See Amendment 0004 which made changes to the Instructions section allowing for other proposal delivery methods.

59. Ref. Price page. Item 1001. Task Order Price shall be priced using RS Means Cost works.

Will items not included in the Means Cost Works program be priced as “non prepriced items”?

Yes, see previous response.

60. Ref. Price page. Item 1001. Task Order Price shall be priced using RS Means Cost works.

Is the purpose of these price sheets to have both “prepriced and Non-Prepriced items” use the same coefficient for the price sheets?

Yes.

61. Ref. Volume III- (Price). Task Order Price shall be priced using Baltimore City Cost Index RS Means Cost works.

What “Indirect Cost Items” are to be included in the Coefficient multiplier?

See updates made via Amendment 0003.

62. Ref. Volume III- (Price). Task Order Price shall be priced using Baltimore City Cost Index RS Means Cost works.

Is Prime Contractor Overhead and Profit excluded from the “indirect Cost Items”?

See updates made via Amendment 0003.

63. Ref. Section A- Basis for Award. Third paragraph refers to a Phase 2 Evaluation and award.

Is the intent of this RFP to issue a two phase procurement?

No. The Government states in the RFP that it intends to make award without discussions; however, in order to reach the desired number of awards, approximately five (5), if negotiations are considered necessary, they will be conducted with those offerors in a competitive range. The determination of the competitive range will be the responsibility of the Contracting Officer and the Source Selection authority.

64. Ref. Section A- Basis for Award. Third paragraph refers to a Phase 2 Evaluation and award.

Will a Sample Task to be priced using Means Cost Works for contractors be given the opportunity to be evaluated in the second phase?

There is no sample task included in the RFP. See previous answer regarding a second phase. If the Government decides to utilize a Phase 2, those offerors still in the competitive range would be given an opportunity to make proposal revisions. For instance to correct deficiencies and weaknesses.

74. Under C. Evaluation Approach, the RFP states: "Any proposal containing a deficiency for Subfactor a or Subfactor b may not be evaluated further." Can you please clarify if the use of the word "may" in this situation? It is unclear if we are to interpret this as "might" or "will." Each word indicates a completely different meaning, yet both interpretations could be made.

If the Government decides discussions are necessary and a proposal contains a deficiency in Subfactor a and/or Subfactor b, the Government may continue evaluations of proposals that could have correctable deficiencies. Example: Offeror submits a letter from its Surety demonstrating its bonding capacity, but the letter is not signed as required by the RFP. If an Offeror has a deficiency which cannot possibly be corrected during proposal revisions, there Government would not continue with the evaluation.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

BASIS FOR AWARD

BASIS FOR AWARD AND FACTORS/SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

Awards will be made to the offerors who provide the best proposals that are determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the following three (3) evaluation factors: Technical (Factor I), Past Performance (Factor II), and Price (Factor III). Technical (Factor I) and Past Performance (Factor II), when combined are significantly more important than Price (Factor III). Technical is more important than Price, but slightly less important than Past Performance. The Technical subfactors are all weighted equally. Past Performance is the most important factor. The Government will complete its evaluation by performing a best value trade-off among Technical, Past Performance, and Price. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Technical factor and the Past Performance factor must be rated at least Neutral. Offerors are cautioned that the awards may not necessarily be made to the offerors offering the lowest pricing. Price will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.404-1. The Government will not conduct price realism on the coefficient or price. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and make awards without discussions.

Approximately five (5) awards are anticipated, but the Government reserves the right to make greater than or fewer than five awards if appropriate. Offerors should ensure the completeness of their proposals and offer their best terms and conditions with their initial proposals. If negotiations are considered necessary, they will be conducted with those offerors in a competitive range. The determination of the competitive range will be the responsibility of the Contracting Officer and the Source Selection Authority.

If appropriate and necessary to reach the desired number of MATOC awards, the Government reserves the right to make initial awards to the most qualified offerors and then to establish a competitive range with additional unawarded offeror(s) who would be given an opportunity to submit a revised proposal for a Phase 2 evaluation and award. Any offeror receiving a Phase 2 award would be added to the MATOC.

Factors and sub-factors under this solicitation are not numerically weighted.

In order to be considered for award, offerors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) under NAICS 236220 (Size Standard $33.5M) prior to contract award.

B. FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Awards will be made to the offerors whose proposals are most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and sub-factors described below.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each sub-factor as it applies to the Performance Work Statement (PWS). A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government evaluation team will review each subfactor. Strengths, Weaknesses, and Deficiencies will be documented for Subfactors a, b, and d. Subfactor c - Key Personnel will only be evaluated for deficiencies. It is a pass/fail subfactor.

For the Technical Factor, each sub-factor will be evaluated to determine if the information provided and the proposed approach associated with each factor meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirement. To receive an overall “Acceptable” Technical factor rating, all sub-factors must not contain deficiencies. Numerous identified weaknesses, could cause the overall Technical Factor to be rated as Marginal or Unacceptable. Based on the evaluations of the technical subfactors and noted strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies, the Government will then assign an overall color/adjectival rating for the Technical Factor.

Factor 1: The Technical factor is further divided into the following sub-factors:

a. Bonding Capacity

b. Safety

c. Selected Key Personnel

d. Contract Management Plan (CMP)

Factor 2: Past Performance: Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment.

Factor 3: Price: Price will be evaluated per FAR 15.404. Examples of methods that may be used include a comparison to the other competitive pricing received in response to the solicitation, comparison to previous prices paid, and a comparison to the IGCE pricing. For evaluation purposes, Offeror’s pricing will be evaluated based on the total amount proposed for CLIN 1001, 1004, 2001, 3001, 4001, and 5001. Pricing must be balanced between years and CLINs, and the pricing for the Seed Project Task Order proposed in CLIN 1004 must be reasonable.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST). The SST will first evaluate Technical Subfactors a and b from below. Any proposal containing a deficiency for Subfactor a or Subfactor b may not be evaluated further.

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and subfactors is as follows:

Technical Evaluation Method:

2. The Technical factor is divided into the following sub-factors and will be evaluated on an overall basis using the following color/adjectival ratings:

Table A – Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method (ref. DoD Source Selection Procedures Guide)

a. Subfactor a: Bonding Capacity

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide documentation from a certified and approved Surety demonstrating that it currently has or can obtain $5 Million of payment and performance bonds per year specifically for this MATOC.

The minimum (threshold) amount of bonding required is $5M per year. Offerors who can demonstrate significantly greater than $5M of bonding capacity/ability may earn an evaluated strength which could increase the Technical Factor rating.

NOTE: Surety companies utilized for the proposal and contract must be listed on the U.S. Department of the Treasury website.

Reference https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/surety-bonds/list-certified-companies.html

b. Subfactor b: Safety

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s (to include major subcontractors and both JV partners, if a JV is proposed) recent record of safe operations based on its Experience Modification Rate (EMR). NOTE: An EMR of greater than 1.0 during any portion of the previous three (3) year operating period will be considered unacceptable (a deficiency). A major subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor which is expected to perform 20% or more of the total work on the contract.

Offerors who can demonstrate EMRs of less than 1.0 during the previous three (3) year operating period with an emphasis on the most recent operating years may earn evaluated strength(s) which could increase the Technical Factor rating. Offerors who can demonstrate EMRs which are less than 1.0 for additional operating years beyond the required three (3) year period may also earn an evaluated strength which could increase the Technical Factor rating.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s (to include major subcontractors) recent record of safe and regulatory compliant operations based on its OSHA recordable injuries/illnesses reports and its Days Away Restricted or Transferred (DART) rate. The offeror’s DART rate shall be at or below the industry average for NAICS code 236220 for at least the previous three (3) year operating period. A major subcontractor for this subfactor is defined as a subcontractor which is expected to perform 20% or more of the total work on the contract.

Offerors who can demonstrate DART rates which are lower than industry average during the previous three (3) year operating period with an emphasis on the most recent operating years may earn evaluated strength(s) which could increase the Technical Factor rating. Offerors who can demonstrate DART rates which are lower than industry average for additional operating years beyond the required three (3) year period may also earn an evaluated strength which could increase the Technical Factor rating.

Subfactor c: Selected Key Personnel (Reference PWS paragraph 1.6.11 and subparagraphs)

(IMPORTANT NOTE: Qualifications, education, and other information as outlined below and in the "Proposal Submission Requirements" must be clearly demonstrated by documentation submitted or by information provided in resumes. The Government will not make assumptions or fill-in the blanks)

Quality Control Manager (QCM):

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide at least one prime contractor Quality Control Manager (QCM) that possesses the following experience/qualifications:

· Minimum of ten (10) years of experience in the construction field and five years’ experience as a QCM on industrial, Governmental, or commercial construction contracts.

· QCM experience on at least three (3) projects in excess of $500,000 or for projects such as new building construction or building renovations which encompass multi-discipline requirements.

· Possesses a current OSHA 30 hrs Safety Inspection Certification

Project Manager (PM):

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide at least one prime contractor PM that possesses the following experience/qualifications:

· Minimum of eight years’ experience in construction projects with five years’ experience as a manager of construction projects on industrial, Governmental, and/or commercial construction contracts which included simultaneous multi-disciplined requirements. Provide proof of PM experience on projects at least three (3) of which were in excess of $1,000,000 per project. The projects cited shall be for new building construction or building renovations in which multiple discipline work was performed.

· Possess one of the following: engineering degree, construction science or construction management degree, architectural degree, or be a Certified Construction Manager (CCM) or equivalent experience of a minimum total of 8 years on construction projects of which 5 years is in construction management as described above.

· Has 1 year experience in a construction estimation software program and scheduling software.

Superintendents:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide at least two (2) prime contractor superintendents that possess the following experience/qualifications:

· Three years’ experience as a site supervisor or superintendent on industrial, Governmental, or commercial construction contracts. Provide proof of site supervisor or site superintendent experience on at least two (2) projects in excess of $500,000. The projects shall be for new building construction and/or building renovations.

· Possess a journeyman level certification in a construction trade by a Trade Union, The Associated Builders and Contractors, or other recognized trade certifier. Equivalent military experience with documentation may be used as a substitute as outlined in the Q&A from the RFP Amendments. Four years of relevant experience and an engineering degree or construction management degree from an Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) college or university may be substituted for the journeyman level trade certification requirement.

Contract Safety Manager/Safety Consultant*:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to provide a Contract Safety Manager/Safety Consultant that possesses the following experience/qualifications:

· 30-hour OSHA Construction Industry safety class completion

· Five (5) years of continuous construction industry safety experience in supervising/managing general construction (managing safety programs or processes or conducting hazard analyses and developing controls) within the past decade.

· 5 years’ experience managing safety on multi-disciplinary projects exceeding $500,000. Must have experience managing safety in the following high risk areas: excavations, fall-protection, HAZWOPER, confined space, scaffolding, lead abatement, asbestos, hazardous energy procedures, and load handling.

NOTE: If the offeror is proposing key personnel who are not currently employees of the prime contractor, but are willing to work for the new prime contractor and are being proposed to work for the new contractor, this must be clearly discussed/noted in the proposal. Furthermore, the organizational chart, as required elsewhere in the proposal, must clearly show that the key personnel are being proposed as employees of the prime contractor.

*This position is not required to be an employee of the prime contractor. See PWS paragraph 1.6.11.5 for additional information.

Subfactor d: Contract Management Plan (CMP)

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to perform based on its submitted information for the CMP. The evaluation will be based on the adequacy and quality of response for the following items:

· Description of the overall company structure related to the performance and PWS.

· General overview of planned contract execution.

· Organization and ability to manage multiple projects through adequate and qualified on-site staffing to support at least 7 ongoing task orders.

· Scheduling methodology and criteria for selecting and qualifying subcontractors.

· Description of the offeror’s plan to ensure Quality control of the contract and projects.

· Method for managing multiple projects simultaneously.

· Method to meet peak workload demands, identify resources, availability and time frames.

· Plan for providing additional resources, manpower and technical expertise for support of the field office to cover peak workloads, special projects and urgently required projects. Response time shall be not more than one hour from notification of emergency projects.

· Description of how multiple projects in the security areas will be staffed to ensure timely completion.

· Documentation and discussion of how the offeror has the ability to or plans to provide a sufficient quantity of qualified personnel, i.e. U.S. Citizens, who can obtain mobility access badges for the security areas of Aberdeen Proving Ground.

3. Past Performance Factor.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the PWS and RFP. Past Performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in providing services that meet the contract requirements. Recent past performance is considered to be efforts awarded during the past five (5) years, from the issue date of this RFP.

Relevant efforts are defined as services that are the same as or similar services as compared to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 236220 (Commercial and Institutional Building Construction). Work may include new work, additions, alterations, maintenance and repairs performed for commercial or Governmental clients. The size, scale, and type of work of the projects provided will also be considered when determining relevancy.

A relevancy determination of the offeror’s (including joint venture partner(s), major and critical subcontractor(s) past performance) will be made by the Government. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated.

An assessment of the information will be made to determine if it is recent. Offerors shall supply a list (maximum of 20) task orders or contracts that contain a relevant renovation or construction component with a value of at least $50,000.00 and the type of work specified in the scope of work must be ongoing or must have been performed during the last five (5) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Offerors must include at least 5 task order or contracts valued at greater than $250K, and at least two additional task orders or contracts valued at greater than $1M. This information must include those contracts used for the Past Performance Questionnaires required below. Numerous Task Orders (TO) combined to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein is not acceptable for Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts.

Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Attachment 2. The Government may consider a wide array of information from a variety of sources, but is not compelled to rely on all the information available.

The Government may use data provided by the offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files (i.e., CPARs) or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance. Data used in conducting past performance assessments shall not extend past five years prior to the issue date of the RFP, but may include performance data as a prime. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of references it decides to contact and to contact references other than those provided by the Offeror including sources outside the Government.

The…