A.2.11.3.1_SolicAmend_EIE326-AM4.pdf

EIE326

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

PROJECT TITLE/LOCATION: EIE326 Design/Construct 168 Person Dormitory, Eielson AFB, Alaska

PROPOSAL DUE DATE remains 12 May 2014, 2:00 PM Alaska Time. Proposals shell be submitted in accordance w ith Section 00 21 00 Paragraph 1.10 Proposal Submittals.

This Amendment provides changes to the solicitation as indicated on page 2 of this document.

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS AMENDMENT ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THE STANDARD FORM 1442.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Apr-2014

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 W911KB-14-R-0017

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Jan-2014

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

15-Apr-2014

CODE

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, AK

CEPOA-CT (W911KB)

PO BOX 6898

JBER AK 99506-0898

W911KB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W911KB-14-R-0017

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 MODIFICATION CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT #0004

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

AMENDMENT #0004

• The following drawings are substituted for the superseded drawings:

− C1.00 − C2.00 − D1.00 − L101 − L102

• The following revised documents are substituted for the superseded documents. The identifier “AM#04” appears before and after new and/or revised material and replacement pages are provided, except as noted:

− Section 00 11 00, Proposal Schedule (Revised Proposal Schedule provided).

− Section 00 22 20:

Paragraph 5.2.1.1. - #5 is deleted Paragraph 5.4 – Header is changed from TAB D to TAB C Paragraph 5.5 – Header is changed from TAB C to TAB D

− 01 19 10.00 29 2.1 − 01 19 10.00 29 2.2 − 01 19 10.00 29 2.3 − 01 19 10.00 29 2.7 − 01 19 10.00 29 2.9 − Revised Room Criteria Sheets

NOTE: REVISIONS WITHIN THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS DO NOT

CONTAIN THE ABOVE REFERENCED IDENTIFIERS

− Wage Rates have been updated from General Decision Number: AK140001

03/7/2014 AK1 to General Decision Number: AK140001 04/11/2014 AK1

• The following documents/drawings are deleted:

NONE

• The following documents are added:

− Eielson AFB AK Map (Services)

• The following revisions are incorporated:

NONE

• Other:

− Spreadsheet with Bldg 2206 & 2208 Fire Hydrant Flow data is attached.

− Drawing of Bldg 2206 & 2208 with Fire Hydrants is attached

(End of Summary of Changes)

PROPOSAL SCHEDULE

CONSTRUCT 168 PERSON DORMITORY

EIELSON AFB, ALASKA

Item Estimated No. Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount

BASE ITEMS (Design and Construct)

0001. Design Dormitory and Site Work, complete. 1 Lump sum $ $

0002. Construct 144 Person Dormitory (36 modules) within the building 5-foot lines, complete. 1 Lump sum $ $

0003. Construct Dormitory site work and utilities beyond the building 5-foot lines, complete. 1 Lump sum $ $

0004. Demolish Buildings 2206 and 2208, complete. 1 Lump sum $ $

Total of Items 001 thru 004: $

OPTIONAL ITEMS (Design and Construct)

0005. (Option 1) Design and construct Additional Two modules with 4 people/module To total 38 modules 1 Lump sum $ $

0006. (Option 2) Design and construct Additional Two modules with 4 people/module To total 40 modules 1 Lump sum $ $

0007. (Option 3) Design and construct Additional Two modules with 4 people/module To total 42 modules 1 Lump sum $ $

0008. (Option 4) Enhanced Landscaping 1 Lump sum $ $

0009. (Option 5) Add 136 Headbolt Heaters 1 Lump sum $ $

0010. (Option 6) Upgrade Parking Lot Lighting 1 Lump sum $ $

0011. (Option 7) Underground Power Distribution Inside Project Boundary 1 Lump sum $ $

AM#4…

0012. (Option 8) Exterior LED Site Lighting Deleted in its entirety.

0013 0012. (Option 9) BBQ Shelter 1 Lump sum $ $

0014 0013. (Option 10) Reconfigure Kobuk Loop Traffic Flow 1 Lump sum $ $

0015 0014. (Option 11) Smoking Shelter 1 Lump sum $ $

0016 0015. (Option 12) Remove, Sample and Stockpile 100 cubic yards of Potentially POL Contaminated Soil (PID readings of 20 ppm and above), including construction of ADEC-compliant temporary holding cells, complete.

100 Cubic Yards $ $

Total of Items 0005 and through 0016 0015: $

…AM#4

Total of Base and Options Items: $

EVALUATION OF OFFERS.

1. AWARD: Award will be made in accordance with Section 00 22 20 – Phase 2 Design-Build Selection

Procedures and Basis of Award.

2. INCOMPLETE OFFERS: Failure to submit an offer on all items in the schedule constitutes an incomplete offer. Incomplete offers may be rejected. Lump sum or unit prices must be shown for each item within the schedule.

3. EXTENSIONS: All extensions of the unit prices shown will be subject to verification by the Government. In case of variation between the unit price and the extension, the unit price will be considered to be the offer.

4. SPECIAL CONDITION: If a modification to an offer based on unit price is submitted which provides for a lump sum adjustment to the total estimated cost, the application of the lump sum adjustment to each unit price in the proposal schedule must be stated. If it is not stated, the offeror agrees that the lump sum adjustment shall be applied on a pro rata basis to every unit price in the proposal schedule.

5. EVALUATION OF OPTIONS: The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price of all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Options may be awarded in any order; the Contractor will be notified in writing of the Government’s intent to exercise an option. Options may be awarded up to 60 calendar days from date of award.

--END OF PROPOSAL SCHEDULE –

Section 00 22 20 W911KB-14-R-0017

Section 00 22 20

SECTION 00 22 20

REV 6.15 – 31 MAY 2011

PHASE 2 DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES AND BASIS OF AWARD

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

3.0 STIPEND FOR UNSUCCESSFUL PHASE 2 OFFERORS

4.0 PHASE 2 PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS, SUBFACTORS AND

ELEMENTS

5.0 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 1 – DESIGN TECHNICAL

5.1. GENERAL

5.2. TAB A – SUBFACTOR 1 – BUILDING FUNCTIONAL, AESTHETICS AND SPACE

5.3. TAB B – SUBFACTOR 2 – QUALITY OF BUILDING SYSTEMS AND MATERIALS

5.4. TAB C – SUBFACTOR 3 – SITE DESIGN

5.5. TAB D – SUBFACTOR 4 – PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND SUMMARY SCHEDULE

6.0 VOLUME 2 - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN, PRICE AND PRO FORMA

INFORMATION

6.1 TAB A – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

7.0 FACTOR 3 – PHASE 1 PROPOSAL ROLL-UP RATING

8.0 PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

8.1 GENERAL

8.2 TAB B – FACTOR 4 - PRICE

8.3 TAB C – REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

8.4 TAB D – SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

9.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

PHASE TWO – SECTION 00 22 20 ATTACHMENTS

6 – FORMAT FOR TABLE OF FACILITIES

7 – FORMAT FOR TABLE OF SPACES

8 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN FORMAT

9 – SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN FORMAT

1.0 OVERVIEW

Those Offerors short-listed in Phase 1 are invited to submit a Phase 2 proposal, as indicated below. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria described herein, using the evaluation rating systems outlined in the Phase 1 Design-Build selection procedures. Price information will be evaluated for fairness, reasonableness, and for material unbalancing, as described herein. The Phase 2 evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15 and will utilize the Tradeoff Process described in FAR 15.101-1.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to that responsible Phase 2 Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering the non-price factors described herein, and price. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than the price; however, the contract award may not exceed the funds available for this project. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best proposal within the cost limitation. There is no obligation to approach or match the cost limitation in the offer.

After the Government individually evaluates and rates each proposal, the Source Selection Authority will compare proposals to determine which proposal represents the best value. Proposals will not be ranked. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR

15.001. If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal (within the funds available) would justify award to that Offeror.

2.1 As part of the evaluation, the Government will evaluate betterments in proposals relative to the minimum standards in the RFP to determine if they offer additional value to the Government. In addition, innovations in proposals will be evaluated to determine if creative ideas of the Offeror are a better value to the Government compared to the minimum criteria.

2.2 Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint.

Do not assume that offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

3.0 STIPEND FOR UNSUCCESSFUL PHASE 2 OFFERORS

3.1 A stipend is not currently authorized for this acquisition.

4.0 PHASE 2 PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS, SUBFACTORS

AND ELEMENTS

AM#2…

(VOLUME 1 – DESIGN TECHNICAL)

Factor/Sub Factor

Location

Description

Relative Importance

FACTOR 1

DESIGN TECHNICAL

Most Important Factor

Subfactor 1

Vol. 1 TAB A

Building Functional, Aesthetics and Space

Equally Important to Subfactor 2 (slightly more important than Subfactors 3 and 4)

Subfactor 2

Vol. 1 TAB B

Quality of Building Systems and Materials

Equally Important to Subfactor 1 (slightly more important than Subfactors 3 and 4)

Subfactor 3

Vol. 1 TAB C

Proposed Contract Duration and Summary Schedule

2nd Most Important Subfactor (slightly less important than Subfactors 1 and 2, and slightly more important than Subfactor 4)

Subfactor 4

Vol. 1 TAB D

Site Design

3rd Most Important Subfactor (slightly less important than Subfactor 3)

(VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION)

Factor/Sub Factor

Location

Description

Relative Importance

FACTOR 2 Vol. 2 TAB A

Small Business Participation Plan

2nd Most Important Factor (slightly less important than Factor 1, equal to Factor 3)

FACTOR 3

Phase 1 Proposal

Phase 1 Proposal Rating Roll-Up 3rd Most Important Factor (slightly less important than Factor 1, equal to Factor 2)

FACTOR 4

Vol. 2 TAB B

Price (Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Bid Schedules)

4th Most Important Factor; significantly less important than Factor 1, slightly less important than Factors 2 & 3

N/A

Vol. 2 TAB C

Required Pre-Award Information

Not Rated

N/A Vol. 2 TAB D Subcontracting Plan Scored in accordance with AFARS Appendix

DD

…AM#2

5.0 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 1 – DESIGN-TECHNICAL

5.1 GENERAL: The Design-Technical Factor consists of conceptual level presentation drawings, technical approach narratives and information regarding material and system quality. It must clearly define the proposed scope and quality levels that the design-build team is offering to the Government in enough detail for the Government and the Offeror to mutually understand whether or not the proposal meets or exceeds the minimum Solicitation requirements. The use of Building Information Modeling (BIM) to prepare or submit proposals is NOT required. Fully developed drawings, details or specifications are not required or desired. Unless specifically stated herein, the Government will not be performing a detailed engineering analysis or design review at the proposal stage. The intent during the proposal submission and review process is not to require detailed design effort or to perform a detailed design engineering review, but to focus on the proposed quality levels of materials and systems. If the Government evaluators have actual knowledge or strong suspicion that a proposed product or solution is inappropriately sized, being used in the wrong application or otherwise does not meet the contract requirements, the Government will inform the Offeror in the event that discussions are conducted with the firm.

But the Government is not asking for design analyses in the proposal and is not obligated to perform an engineering design review at this stage. After award, in the event of conflict between the contractor’s accepted proposal and the requirements in the final amended RFP, the order of precedence is indicated in Special Contract Requirement 52.236-5000, DESIGN/BUILD CONTRACT – ORDER OF PRECEDENCE. The Offeror shall identify what it considers to be Betterments in its proposal for Subfactors 1-4 of Factor 1 (See Section 00 73 00, SCR “Proposed Betterments“). Betterments included in the technical submission must also be included in the base price under Factor 3. Do not describe in the narratives or show in the drawings any betterments that are not included in the base price. The final design must comply with the RFP requirements except that accepted betterments become the new contract minimum requirements. Note that the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, where indicated below.

5.2 VOLUME 1 – TAB A – SUBFACTOR 1 – BUILDING FUNCTIONAL, AESTHETICS AND SPACE

5.2.1 Submission Requirements:

5.2.1.1 Presentation Drawings: Limit presentation drawings no more than twenty-five (25) drawings to include the following:

1. Exterior Elevation(s) of the primary elevation(s) of each facility clearly noting proposed materials and colors.

2. Provide at least two (2) renderings: showing a perspective from a location northwest and southeast of the facility with enough realistic detail to aid in the evaluation of the exterior building aesthetics, as described in paragraph 5.2.2.2 (a), below. Renderings shall include a slightly overhead view of the entire building to encompass elevations and the roof configuration of the building (reference Section 01 19 20.00 29). Renderings should be at least 11" x 17" in order to show a detailed perspective view of the building.

3. At least one building section demonstrating typical exterior wall sections, typical exterior construction materials, finished floor elevations, and ceiling heights.

NOTE: The Government will use this information to evaluate functional and aesthetic considerations, such as floor to ceiling heights and may use it to help evaluate exterior aesthetics and appearance. The Government may also use this information in conjunction with the submission information under the subfactor: QUALITY OF BUILDING SYSTEMS AND MATERIALS below, to evaluate quality of wall finishes as well as to look at how the proposer has considered air barrier.

4. Schematic floor plans for each floor of the Dormitory. Floor plans shall show furnishings, equipment, and other specifically identified items.

AM#4…..

5. Offerors shall include one presentation drawing showing entire/overall floor plan of the COF on one sheet.

….AM#4

6. A color board including primary interior and exterior finish materials. Format shall be in accordance with Section 01 19 20.00 29 Design After Award.

5.2.1.2 Technical Approach Narrative

Provide technical approach narrative defining the elements of the proposal. This narrative shall be no longer than five (5) typewritten pages. The page limit does not include the space and facility tables.

(a) Building Functional Arrangement. Describe the spaces provided for the Dormitory, and how the planning and design of the spaces accommodates soldier working conditions and the operations of the facility. Preface the narrative with a design concepts narrative, providing the design rationale and basis of the proposal.

(b) Building Aesthetics. Describe the architectural themes of the facility and spaces which demonstrate how the proposal achieves the results desired by the Statement of Work. Narrative should address how the selection of materials and colors enhances the exterior and interior aesthetics of the facilities and improves the living conditions for the soldier populations who will utilize the facilities. This narrative is not intended to be a material listing, but to explain/reflect how the selections were made and how they address the requirements.

(c) Minimum Space and Facility Size. Provide a tabulation of the net square footage for rooms, zones, or other areas, the total gross square footage for each floor of the facility, and the total gross square footage for the facility to clearly demonstrate compliance with the project requirements. See the sample spreadsheets in Attachments 6 and 7 at the end of this section.

5.2.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The following three elements are equal in importance (not rated separately).

5.2.2.1 Building Functional Arrangement: This element considers the overall functional layout (Floor Plan) and interaction of the spaces in the facilities as well. This element considers the planning and design of the spaces with respect to soldier working conditions and the operations of the facility.

The following criteria will be considered in the evaluation of the functional arrangement of the various facilities:

(a) How well the floor plan responds to the Functional Relationship requirements described in the Statement of Work.

(b) How well the floor plan and space arrangement facilitate work flow and access necessary to successfully operate this facility in accordance with its mission.

(c) Do the facilities provide acceptable life safety and fire safety measures?

(d) Do the proposed plans demonstrate compliance with the mandatory requirements for circulation, furnishings, equipment, and other specifically identified items in the Statement of Work?

5.2.2.2 Building Aesthetics: This element considers the overall “appeal” of the facility and the desire that both the interior and exterior of the facilities present a professional, attractive appearance. The following two areas will be considered under this element and are equal in consideration (not separately rated):

(a) Exterior Considerations:

To the extent possible within the Government identified contract cost limitation (CCL), the proposal must comply with the look and feel of the Installation architectural theme identified in the Request for Proposal. The first priority in order of importance is how well the proposal provides comparable building mass, size, height, and configuration in comparison with the architectural theme expressed in the Solicitation. The second priority in order of importance is how well the proposal provides compatible exterior skin appearance based upon façade, architectural character (period or style), exterior detailing, matching the architectural theme expressed in the Solicitation.

Proposals shall be evaluated on mass, size, height, and configuration in comparison with the architectural theme expressed in the Solicitation, design of facades, roof lines, delineation of entrances, proportions of fenestration in relation to elevations, shade and shadow effects, materials, textures, architectural character (period or style), exterior color schemes.

How compatible is the proposed design with the installation architectural theme expressed in the RFP? If not an exact "copy" of the theme, how well does it harmonize or blend with the expressed theme?

How well does the proposal provide comparable building mass, size, height, and configuration in comparison with the architectural theme expressed in the Solicitation?

How well does the proposal provide compatible exterior skin appearance based upon façade, architectural character (period or style), exterior detailing, matching the architectural theme expressed in the Solicitation?

Is the building’s scale and proportion complimentary of the adjacent structures?

Is the building an attractive addition to the Installation?

How well does the building harmonize with its environment, including surrounding facilities?

Has the proposer addressed/coordinated the arrangement of stacks, louvers, vents, and roof mounted equipment, etc. to provide a visually attractive structure?

(b) Interior Considerations:

Are the proposed colors and material finishes conducive to the working environment of the facility?

For administrative areas, does the interior design provided establish a positive working environment?

Has the proposal addressed/provided for natural and artificial light in the work spaces and is the arrangement of fenestration and lighting fixtures in the spaces conducive to furniture placement and space usage?

Do the proposed ceiling material, elevation, and design enhance the environment?

Has “support item” placement been considered and addressed in the proposal to enhance the environment? For example: placement of supply/exhaust devices, placement of electrical panels, and placement of exhaust fans, etc.

Does the proposal provide for acoustic control of noise from service/support spaces to administrative areas?

5.2.2.3 Minimum Space and Facility Size: The proposal must include all the mandatory spaces in response to the requirements set forth in Section 01 19 10.00 29, Statement of Work. For this element, proposals will be evaluated on compliance with these requirements. Individual areas may slightly exceed the requirements, so long as building function is not compromised elsewhere and as long as the overall square footage is not greater than that as described in Section 01 10 00, as authorized by Congress.

5.3 VOLUME 1 – TAB B – SUBFACTOR 2 – QUALITY OF BUILDING SYSTEMS AND MATERIALS

5.3.1 General. As part of this Subfactor, the Government has identified certain items as desirable features or preferable items. Desirable features are identified below in the evaluation criteria. Preferable items are listed in order of priority. These items, along with any Offeror-identified betterment, will be given additional consideration during the evaluation process, provided that they are included in the proposed base price and are within the contract cost limitation (CCL) identified in the Solicitation.

Preferable Item:

1. Laminate solar panels mounted to vertical building surfaces.

5.3.2 Submission Requirements:

5.3.2.1 Presentation Drawings

(a) At least one civil/structural section demonstrating conceptual foundation plan, foundation elements, and ground improvement method.

(b) The Offeror has the option of providing concept level drawing information for specific materials and/or systems which the Offeror feels are necessary to describe the proposed systems or materials in the drawings provided under Tab A.

5.3.2.2 Technical Approach Narrative:

Provide technical approach narrative, both qualitative and quantitative, defining the elements of the proposal. It is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that all aspects identified in the evaluation criteria below are addressed.

Maximum total length for the narrative shall be ten (10) typewritten pages.

(a) Architectural Finishes: Describe how the materials selected provide for a suitable environment for the expected population of the facility and how exterior envelope assemblies (roof and wall systems) will meet LEED and thermal requirements without creating a “brutal” aesthetic. Describe the envelope assemblies and how they will meet cold climate thermal and vapor retarder requirements. In particular discuss thermal and vapor retarder continuity through the assemblies and around structural components, calculations confirming dew point location within the assemblies and methods of dealing with thermal bridging. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative on finishes should focus on durability and maintenance of the finishes proposed. Provide duration of roof system warranty.

(b) Foundation System: Describe the building foundation system, ground improvement techniques, and innovative methods to mitigate the effects of thawing permafrost below building.

(c) Structural Systems: Describe design loads and structural member and wall framing deflection limits used for design. Describe the building's gravity system and lateral system. Describe exterior wall systems and building foundation. Describe how partitions and curtain walls are to be isolated from structural deflections. Discuss measures used to limit cracking in veneer, walls and slabs-on-grade.

Discuss measures used to prevent slabs-on-grade from delaminating.

(d) Mechanical Systems: Describe how the mechanical systems selected provide for a highly efficient environmental control system including information about provisions for indoor air quality maintenance. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on maintenance considerations, limiting energy consumption, and suitability of the proposed systems for the expected usage.

(e) Plumbing Systems: Describe how the plumbing systems selected provide for a highly efficient domestic hot water system and an efficient piping system. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on maintenance considerations, energy consumption, and suitability of the proposed systems for the expected usage.

(f) Electrical Systems: Describe how the electrical power and lighting systems, telephone, data, and cable television systems selected provide for a highly efficient electrical system. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on maintenance considerations, energy consumption, and suitability of the proposed systems for the expected usage.

(g) Fire Protection Systems: Describe the fire suppression, detection and alarm system with associated site and equipment needs. Discuss basic life safety and building code implications. Discuss how the systems provide value to the Government and address the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Narrative should discuss maintenance considerations, and how the proposed systems will interface with existing and future facilities.

(h) Interoperability: Describe how systems integrated into the new facilities which require connection and interface with existing Installation-wide systems will be accommodated in the proposed project.

Narrative should address the following systems as minimum: Fire Alarm, Mass Notification System, Telephone, Cable Television, UMCS, and privatized utility companies where applicable.

5.3.2.3 Proposed Material Identifications:

In the proposed material identification submission, the Offeror shall include only major materials in each of the areas shown below (there is no need to include materials such as fasteners, adhesives, wire, etc.). Provide this information in tabular form supported by catalog information. Table should include manufacturer’s name, model number if known or at least model series, length of warranty, size/capacity (where available), efficiency (where applicable), country of origin and any other notes or information selected by the Offeror. Catalog cuts shall be organized and tabbed in accordance with the disciplines listed below and each section shall contain a table of contents identifying the products included. On catalog cut sheets that show more than one product, clearly identify the specific product proposed for this project. Provide only one hard copy of catalog cut sheets with original proposal. Provide CD-ROM with catalog cut sheets for each copy of proposal. Information on CD shall be bookmarked.

The Government will evaluate and consider materials and equipment proposed by brand name and model series or number as a quality standard. Unless substitution of a manufacturer, brand name or model is otherwise specifically prohibited in the contract, if the successful Offeror desires to substitute manufacturers, brand names or models after award, the substituted product must meet the contract requirements and be approved by the designer of record and the Government as equal in function, performance, quality and salient features to that initially proposed.

Acceptance of the proposal is not a guaranty that the proposed products meet the contractual requirements. See below under Evaluation Criteria for more explanation.

(a) Architectural Finishes

Interior Walls Floors Ceilings Exterior Walls Any Special Features Hardware systems (not individual hardware sets) Door systems/types (not individual doors) Window systems/types (not individual windows) Roofing Systems Insulation Systems (insulation R-values shall meet the minimum requirements of ASHRAE 189.1.

R-value shall meet the definition of "rated R-value of insulation" in ASHRAE 90.1)

(b) Mechanical Systems

Central Heating/Cooling Equipment Pumps Air Handling Equipment HVAC System Control Equipment Energy Conservation Features

(c) Plumbing Systems

Fixtures Domestic Hot Water Generator

(d) Electrical Systems

Lighting Fixtures Main Switchgear and Panels Fire Alarm, DDC and Mass Notification Systems Data, Telephone, Cable TV, Intercom, CCTV, and Other Special Systems as Identified in the

SOW

(e) Fire Protection Systems

Fire Pumps

5.3.2.4 Quality Improvements:

Provide a list of quality improvements that are above the minimum stated in the performance specifications.

Develop the following table, or similar, to identify desirable features (see 5.3.3.2), preferable items (see 5.3.1) and other Offeror identified betterments (mark appropriate column). Desirable features, preferable items and offeror identified betterments shall be included in the following table only if included in the base price.

Preferred

Item Desirable Feature

Contractor Betterment

Concise description of improved quality

Location of catalog information (page number)

Arch.

Finishes

Etc.

5.3.3 Evaluation Criteria:

5.3.3.1 General: It is the Air Force's objective that this building will have a 50 year useful life. The design and construction should provide an appropriate level of quality to ensure the continued use of the facility over that time period with the application of reasonable preventive maintenance and repairs that would be industry-acceptable to a major civilian sector project OWNER. The facility design should consider that the Army may repurpose the use of the facility over the 50 year life. The Army's intent is to install products and materials of good quality that meet industry standard average life that corresponds with the period of performance expected before a major renovation or repurpose. The design should be flexible and adaptable to possible future uses different than the current to the extent practical, while still meeting the operational and functional requirements defined within. Flexibility is achieved through design of more flexible structural load-bearing wall and column system arrangements. The site infrastructure will have at least a 50-year life expectancy with industry-accepted maintenance and repair cycles.

Develop the project site for efficiency and to convey a sense of unity or connectivity with the adjacent buildings and with the Installation as a whole. Building useful life is defined by the length of service of the structural systems;

concrete, masonry, steel, and wood in any combination. These structural systems last a lifetime when properly constructed and maintained. The building systems; electrical, mechanical, interior finishes etc. vary in useful life based on quality of the products and materials. Generally speaking these systems will last an average of 20-30 years. Historically, the Army has often performed a major renovation or changed the use of the facility once in the first 25 years. Within that overriding theme, the Government will evaluate the Offeror selected systems and components proposed in terms of extended warranties provided, maintenance considerations (frequency, estimated cost, access, equipment locations), operability (ease of use, placement of control features, simplicity), durability (withstand troop usage, ease of cleaning), sustainability, and energy consumption (HVAC, lighting, power). The minimum acceptable level of quality for finishes and materials for these buildings are those materials suitable for the expected population and usage. Residential or similar grade finishes and materials are not acceptable for inclusion in these buildings, unless otherwise specifically allowed in Section 01 10 00. Acceptance of the proposal is not a guaranty that the proposed products meet the contractual requirements or that they are the appropriate size or application for the design which will be developed after award. The intent during the proposal submission and review process is not to require detailed design effort or to perform a detailed design engineering review, but to focus on the proposed quality levels of materials and systems. If the Government evaluators have actual knowledge or strong suspicion that a proposed product or solution is inappropriately sized, being used in the wrong application or otherwise won’t meet the contract requirements, the Government will inform the Offeror in the event that discussions are conducted with the firm. But the Government is not asking for design analyses in the proposal and is not obligated to perform an engineering design review at this stage. After award, in the event of conflict between the contractor’s accepted proposal and the requirements in the final, amended RFP, the order of precedence is indicated in Special Contract Requirement 52.236-5000, DESIGN/BUILD CONTRACT – ORDER OF

PRECEDENCE.

5.3.3.2 The Government encourages the Offeror to place emphasis on those design features which optimize and emphasize functional/operational requirements; interior/exterior finishes and systems; and life cycle/energy efficiency. The Offeror may choose the most economical “Type of Construction” allowed by the Building Code for this occupancy/project and put the money into durable finishes and efficient systems. The features that the Government has identified below as desirable features, the items that the Government has identified in paragraph

5.3.1 as preferable and Offeror-identified betterments may be given additional consideration during the evaluation process, provided they are included within contract cost limitation identified in the solicitation and the offeror’s proposed base contract price. The order of importance for proposed betterments for rating purposes is as follows:

desirable features, preferable items and other Offeror-identified betterments. The Government will identify those Offeror-identified betterments that are not desired, or are otherwise objectionable or unacceptable, if discussions are conducted with that Offeror. Unsubstantiated claims or narrative information will not be given evaluation credit during the evaluations. The following elements (not rated separately) will be considered in the evaluation of the building systems and materials of the facility:

(a) Architectural Finishes, Components and Systems: Acceptable proposals include finishes, components and systems which provide usable spaces for the intended purposes. Proposals will receive additional consideration for materials and systems offered that include enhanced thermal and vapor barrier performance such as use of Spray-applied Polyurethane Foam in lieu of batt insulation and polyethylene plastic sheeting, extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, durability (stand up to troop usage), have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility.

Desirable features: solid wood cabinetry; solid surface counter tops; ceramic tile; increased R-values for roof and walls; vapor retarders less susceptible to compromise from interior side wall damage;

extended non-pro-rated, no-leak roof warranty; high efficiency windows and doors; welded door frames in heavy use/shop/storage areas.

(b) Foundation System: Acceptable proposals include conceptual foundation systems in combination with ground improvement techniques that addresses permafrost, soil liquefaction, soil compaction, and other geotechnical issues.

(c) Structural Components and Systems: All proposals must be compliant with the structural requirements of the Statement of Work to be considered for award. Type I or type II construction as defined in the International Building Code is considered more desirable than Type V construction.

(d) Mechanical Components and Systems: Acceptable proposals include components and systems that provide the basic environmental control function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, reduce energy consumption, sustainability, maintainability (cyclical maintenance, access, equipment placement), and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility.

(e) Plumbing Components and Systems: Acceptable proposals include components and systems that provide the basic function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, durability (stand up to troop usage), have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life-cycle cost efficiency of the facility.

Desirable features: lifetime domestic hot water storage tank warranty; high efficiency equipment;

easy/local availability of replacement/repair parts; zoned/valved sub-systems to allow repair without building shutdown.

(f) Electrical Components and Systems: Acceptable proposals include components and systems that provide the basic function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, durability (stand up to troop usage), have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility.

Desirable features: all copper conductors; additional telephone/data/cable TV outlets; Holocom interlocking PDS.

(g) Fire Protection Systems: Acceptable proposals include components and systems that provide the basic suppression, detection, alarm, and life safety functions necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems that improve life safety, minimize collateral damage to aircraft in the event of a fire incident, include extended warranties, improved maintainability, longer life expectancies, and improved interface with existing and future facilities.

(h) Interoperability: Fire Alarm, Telephone, Cable Television, Mass Notification System , UMCS, AM

#2…and privatized utility systems (where applicable) … AM #2 must be integrated into the new facilities which require connection and interface with existing installation-wide systems and must be accommodated in the proposed project.

5.4 VOLUME 1 – AM#4 TAB D C AM#4– SUBFACTOR 3 – PROPOSED CONTRACT

DURATION AND SUMMARY SCHEDULE

5.4.1 Submission Requirements:

5.4.1.1 Proposed Contract Duration: The Offeror shall propose the contract duration where indicated in the CLIN Schedule and in the narrative provide under this Tab. Proposed contract duration shall not exceed the maximum contract duration specified in FAR 52.211-10.

5.4.1.2 Summary Schedule: Submit a summary level schedule for integrated design and construction. Schedules or diagrams may be provided separately in a size that is easily read, but shall be bound and clearly labeled as Tab D.

This summary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Section 01 32

01.00 29: Project Schedule. The summary schedule shall be task-oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which milestones are to be achieved. For proposal purposes, utilize a Notice to Proceed date of AM#2 15 April 2014 12 June 2014 AM#2. This date is solely to assist in evaluation of offeror’s proposals and shall not be construed as a contractual NTP date. Offeror may use a critical path or other method of his choice;

however, schedules shall be graphically represented. The proposed project schedule shall reflect the proposed contract duration. Give attention to the following features but limit narrative information to no more than three (3) pages total:

(1) Narrative:

(a) Provide the proposed contract duration.

(b) Provide a narrative, describing the design packaging plan for separate design packages, based on the Offeror’s plan for fast tracking. Describe all design and construction to be “fast-tracked” (See Section 01 19 20.00 29 Design After Award). If long lead item equipment must be ordered prior to completion of a design phase, describe the requirement in the narrative and show the required ordering date in the schedule.

Complete the following matrix summarizing the proposed design package review schedule (not included in schedule narrative page limit).

Submittal Package Name (e.g. Site / Utilities)

Stage (Interim, Final, Design Complete)

Submittal Date

Review Start Date

Review End Date

Review Conference Date (if applicable)

AM #2… (c) Provide a narrative describing how contractor plans on coordinating design and construction efforts with Doyon Utilities. Describe the coordination, accommodations, scheduling, and procedures that will be employed with DU in order for the contractor to design and construct project utilities and connect with existing utility mains owned by DU. Describe potential impacts and risks to schedule from delays by DU and what measures will be taken to mitigate risks to schedule and project costs. …AM #2

(2) Summary Schedule:

(a) Show the design phase, including events associated with coordinating the interim and final design submittals for each package and the proper handling of the review comments for each design package (See Section 01 19 20.00 29). For each submittal package noted in 5.5.1.2. (1)(b) above, show date submitted to Government, Government review period and Review Conference on summary schedule.

(b) Show the overall construction phase for the facility, for the site work, and for utilities.

Show fast track starts for design packages but it isn’t necessary to show the detailed breakdown construction (e.g., by trades) of the facility, site work and utilities.

(c) Show commissioning activities.

(d) Show turnover of the facility. Identify any proposed phased turnovers. The time to complete the facility and turnover to the Government must consider the requirement for the Contractor’s CQC completion inspection and the subsequent joint Contractor-Government turnover inspections.

(e) Constraints: Offeror must demonstrate the capability and flexibility to plan and schedule the complete project to meet the proposed contract completion period. Clearly identify any constraints on the schedules presented (e.g., labor or material availability, permits, weather, etc.).

Indicate the anticipated overall critical path on the schedule.

5.4.2 Evaluation Criteria:

5.4.2.1 Proposed Contract Duration: The offeror’s proposed contract duration will become the contractually binding completion period and will replace the duration stated in FAR 52.211-10 upon contract award. The Government will evaluate the contract duration, as proposed by the Offeror under this Tab and in the Contract Line Item Schedule, not to exceed the maximum allowed duration stated in FAR 52.211-10. In assessing the reasonableness of the proposed contract duration, the Government may take into account how well the proposed summary schedule supports the proposed duration, as well as use other information, such as but not limited to independent judgment concerning logic, constraints and typical construction durations.

A proposed contract duration matching the maximum allowed contract duration is “Acceptable.” A proposed contract duration shorter than the maximum allowed duration will receive additional rating consideration, provided it is realistic and deemed to be achievable. The Government will consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places additional cost or schedule risk on the Government or which may create a risk of contract or performance failure, as a significant weakness or a deficiency, depending upon the evaluators' judgment.

5.4.2.2 Summary Schedule: In addition to the proposed contract duration, the Government will evaluate the summary schedule for integrated design and construction. The length of the schedule must match the Offeror’s proposed contract duration. If it is shorter than the proposed contract duration, it offers no advantage to the Government because it is non-binding, only representing a preliminary planned schedule. A schedule shorter than the proposed contract duration may indicate the Offeror is placing additional risk on the Government for any delays between the scheduled completion date and the required contract completion period. Both parties shall assume field overhead costs are included in the contract price for the full proposed contract duration. Therefore, the Government believes that there is no valid need to shorten the schedule less than the full proposed contract duration. The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess the strength of understanding of the project scope, restrictions which must be considered in the schedule e.g., permitting (see Section 01 10 00), long lead items, etc. The Government will evaluate the strength of understanding of events associated with coordinating design submittals, reviews and incorporating review comments, the Offeror's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration, and the realism of the schedule. The Government will evaluate the design packaging plan for logic, reasonableness, how it facilitates meeting the proposed contract duration and how it facilitates the Government’s ability to timely perform its design reviews. The packaging plan should minimize risk to the Contractor and to the Government for tear-out and coordination for reviews. For example, is the footing and foundation plan based on adequate design for building loads; etc.? A schedule that offers advantage(s) to the Government over one that merely indicates an adequate understanding of the scope, restrictions, major milestones and general understanding of the various events that can affect start and completion of construction will receive additional consideration.

5.5 VOLUME 1 - AM#4 TAB C D AM#4– SUBFACTOR 4 – SITE DESIGN

Offerors are expected and encouraged to exercise ingenuity and innovativeness to propose a site design which meets the requirements of the RFP while taking into account the existing site features and potential obstacles, including utilities. Relocation of existing utilities should be avoided if possible, however, if the offeror identifies an existing utility that needs to be relocated to provide sufficient clearance for proposed site improvements, such as the parking lot, the offeror shall identify the specific utility feature(s) that needs to be relocated. Offeror shall be responsible for obtaining permission and coordinating with owner of utility prior to relocating, modifying or connecting to any privatized utility system.

5.5.1 Submission Requirements:

5.5.1.1 Presentation Drawings:…