A.07.23_W911KB-15-R-0023.pdf

Humanitarian Assistance Design-Bui;ld Contruction Projects - Vietnam (Multiple Aw ard Task Order Contract) Tam Dam Clinic Vietnam.

The contractor shall provide all required management, labor, travel, administration, coordination, furnishings, equipment, materials, earthw ork, concrete, reinforcing, civil, structural, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, building services, training, documentation, and all other associated w ork to complete site-adapt design and construction of the Clinic. The Contractor is expected to design the facility in accordance w ith applicable host nation standards and requirements identif ied in Section 2.0 and this statement of w ork.

Type of contract: Firm Fixed Price Magnitude of construction: betw een $300,000 and $600,000 Point of Contact Information:

Contract Specialist - LTC Ryan Zachry Email at ctha.asia@usace.army.mil or ryan.b.zachry@usace.army.mil Phone Number (907) 753-2817

RYAN B ZACHRY MAJ 907-753-2817

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

24-Apr-2015

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

X

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______ calendar days and complete it w ithin ________ calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

YES X NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________28 May 2015 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______90 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, AK

CEPOA-CT (W911KB)

PO BOX 6898

JBER AK 99506-0898

W911KB

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

11:00 AM (hour) Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W911KB-15-R-0023 67

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION FAR 3.104

C-1

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 21,000,000 Dollars, U.S.

DB - Vietnam - Base Period

FFP

Humanitarian Assistance – Design Build Construction Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC), Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) for Design-Build Construction. It is the Governments intention to award at least one (1) contract to fulfill the required Design-Build construction services.

Base Period: 06 June 2014 – 05 June 2017 Contractor must provide labor rate/cost for the above referenced project: Tam Dam Clinic, Vietnam. Specific project requirements will be documented on individual project task orders.

Progress Payments are authorized.

Contract Term:

Base Period: 28 July 2015 – 27 July 2018 Option Year 1: 28 July 2018 – 27 July 2019 Option Year 2: 28 July 2019 – 27 July 2020

The total duration of the contract (base and optional periods included) shall not exceed 5 years (except the performance period of awarded Task Orders shall continue until completed). Contract point of contact information:

Contract Specialist: LTC Ryan Zachry at (907) 753-2817 Project Manager: Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald at (907) 753-5638

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0002 7,000,000 Dollars, OPTION DB - Vietnam - Option Year 1

Humanitarian Assistance – Design Build Construction Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC), Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) for Design-Build Construction. It is the Governments intention to award at least one (1) contract to fulfill the required Design-Build construction services.

Base Period: 06 June 2014 – 05 June 2017 Contractor must provide labor rate/cost for the above referenced project: Tam Dam Clinic, Vietnam. Specific project requirements will be documented on individual project task orders.

Progress Payments are authorized.

Contract Term:

Base Period: 28 July 2015 – 27 July 2018 Option Year 1: 28 July 2018 – 27 July 2019 Option Year 2: 28 July 2019 – 27 July 2020

The total duration of the contract (base and optional periods included) shall not exceed 5 years (except the performance period of awarded Task Orders shall continue until completed). Contract point of contact information:

Contract Specialist: LTC Ryan Zachry at (907) 753-2817

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0003 7,000,000 Dollars, OPTION DB - Vietnam - Option Year 2

Humanitarian Assistance – Design Build Construction Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC), Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) for Design-Build Construction. It is the Governments intention to award at least one (1) contract to fulfill the required Design-Build construction services.

Base Period: 06 June 2014 – 05 June 2017 Contractor must provide labor rate/cost for the above referenced project: Tam Dam Clinic, Vietnam. Specific project requirements will be documented on individual project task orders.

Progress Payments are authorized.

Contract Term:

Base Period: 28 July 2015 – 27 July 2018 Option Year 1: 28 July 2018 – 27 July 2019 Option Year 2: 28 July 2019 – 27 July 2020

The total duration of the contract (base and optional periods included) shall not exceed 5 years (except the performance period of awarded Task Orders shall continue until completed). Contract point of contact information:

Contract Specialist: LTC Ryan Zachry at (907) 753-2817

CONTRACT MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND CONTRACT VALUE

The minimum quantity and contract value for all orders issued against this contract shall not be less than the minimum quantity and contract value stated in the following table. The maximum quantity and contract value for all orders issued against this contract shall not exceed the maximum quantity and contract value stated in the following table.

MINIMUM

QUANTITY

MINIMUM

AMOUNT

MAXIMUM

QUANTITY

MAXIMUM

AMOUNT

1.00 $1.00 35,000,000.00 $35,000,000.00

DELIVERY/TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND ORDER VALUE

The minimum quantity and order value for each Delivery/Task Order issued shall not be less than the minimum quantity and order value stated in the following table. The maximum quantity and order value for each Delivery/Task Order issued shall not exceed the maximum quantity and order value stated in the following table.

MINIMUM

QUANTITY

MINIMUM

AMOUNT

MAXIMUM

QUANTITY

MAXIMUM

AMOUNT

1.00 $1.00 7,000,000.00 $7,000,000.00

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE TERMS

Supplies/services will be inspected/accepted at:

CLIN INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

0001 Destination Government Destination Government 0002 Destination Government Destination Government 0003 Destination Government Destination Government

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS UIC

0001 POP 28-JUL-2015 TO

27-JUL-2018

N/A N/A

0002 POP 28-JUL-2018 TO

27-JUL-2019

0003 POP 28-JUL-2019 TO

27-JUL-2020

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

SECTION 00 22 10

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD TWO

STEP - - BEST VALUE

(MULTI- AWARD)

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

4.0 PHASE 1 - PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

5.0 PHASE 1 TAB A – STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

6.0 PHASE 1 TAB B – FACTOR 1 – ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

7.0 PHASE 1 –TAB C – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

8.0 PHASE 1 – EVALUATION PROCEDURES

9.0 PHASE 2 - PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

10.0 PHASE 2 – TAB D – FACTOR 3 - DESIGN TECHNICAL APPROACH

11.0 PHASE 2 – TAB E – FACTOR 4 - PRICE (PROPOSAL BID SHEET)

12.0 PHASE 2 – EVALUATION PROCEDURES

D-2

12.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

12.2 EVALUATION

12.3 DEFINITIONS

12.4 EVALUATION RATING SYSTEM

12.5 PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATING AND PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT

ATTACHMENTS

1 – EXPERIENCE FORM

2 – KEY PERSONNEL

3 - PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

4 – PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

D-3

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1 This is a “Best Value” solicitation for the Construction of Schools, Health Clinics, Hospitals, and other horizontal and vertical projects via the Humanitarian Assistance Program, too include other potential projects that might assist in emergency and humanitarian assistance requirements and needs. The seed project for this solicitation is a Health Clinic in Tam Dam Vietnam . The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with FAR 15.101-1, Tradeoff Process, and the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation, and whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award at least one (1), and up to three (3) firm-fixed price contract(s) to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal conforms to all the terms and conditions of the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering all non-price factors and price.

1.2 Evaluation Factors

Factor 1 – Organization and Management Factor 2 – Past Performance Factor 3 – Design Technical Approach Factor 4 - Price

Evaluation Factors 1 through 3 are of equal importance.

When factors 1 through 3 are combined they are equal to Factor 4 Price

The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best technical proposal. After the Government individually evaluates and rates each proposal, the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority, will compare proposals to determine which proposal represents the best value.

The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Official must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal (within the cost limitation) would justify award to that offeror. It is noted that discussions may be held at late hours or during weekends, depending on schedule.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

2.1 The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to the responsible Offeror(s) whose proposal conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering all non-price factors described herein, and price. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are equal to price; however the Contract award may not exceed the cost magnitude identified in Section 00 21 00 for this project. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best proposal within this cost magnitude. 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. To be eligible for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for Factors 1 through 3. 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 Source Selection Authority must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal (within the cost magnitude) would justify award to that offeror.

D-4

Task Orders will be issued and evaluated using one of three methods:

1Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) 2Lowest Price 3Best Value

Each Request for Proposal (RFP) will indicate which one of three methods will be used for the particular project and will also describe the factors for which the proposals will be evaluated. Evaluation factors pertain to LPTA and Best Value.

2.2 Award Orders under Multiple Award Contracts:

2.2.1 All multiple award contractors shall be provided a fair opportunity to be considered for each order in excess of $3,000 pursuant to the procedures established in this clause, unless the Contracting Officer determines that:

a. The Government’s needs for the services or supplies is of such urgency that providing such opportunity to all such contractors would result in unacceptable delays;

b. Only one such contractor is capable of providing the services or supplies at the level of quality required because the services or supplies ordered are unique or highly specialized;

c. The task or Task Order should be issued on a sole source basis, in the interest of economy or efficiency, because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract (provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity pursuant to the procedures in this clause to be considered for the original order); or

d. It is necessary to place an order to satisfy a minimum guarantee;

e. The individual requirement is suitable to be set-aside for small businesses and/or 8(a) concerns.

2.2.2 Unless the procedures in paragraph 2.2.1(a) are used for awarding individual orders, multiple award contractors will be provided a fair opportunity to be considered for each task order IAW FAR 16.505.

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.1 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.

3.2 The Government may not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, where indicated.

3.3 Submit your proposal packages via email to Lieutenant Colonel Ryan Zachry at ctha.asia@usace.army.mil .

The Government must receive your proposal no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form

1442. Proposal clarity, organization and cross-referencing are mandatory. Offerors shall sufficiently detail and clearly define all items addressed in this section. Deviations from the RFP: The minimum requirements of the

RFP shall be met and proposals shall not include any deviations or exceptions. The contractor may exceed the basic mailto:ctha.asia@usace.army.mil

D-5

Design Build requirements of the RFP.

Proposals must be submitted via email.

3.4 Only Tabs A, B, and C are needed for phase 1 proposals. Contractors shall not submit phase 2 proposals until notified by the contracting officer.

3.5 The offeror shall label and attach their proposal consistent with the solicitation format index below. Page numbers can be numbered independently within each attachment; the entire document is not required to be numbered sequentially. Pages changed through proposal revisions shall have the original page number with an “R” to indicate the page has been revised and the date of the revision.

No material shall be incorporated by reference. Any such material will not be considered for evaluation. The technical proposal shall be presented in a manner that allows it to “stand alone” without the need to reference other documents.

Unnecessarily elaborate or voluminous brochures or other presentations, beyond those sufficient to present a complete and effective response, are not desired and may be construed as an indication of the firm’s lack of cost-consciousness. Elaborate artwork, expensive paper and bindings, and expensive/extensive visual and other presentation aids are unnecessary. Material not directly related to the information requested should not be included in the proposal. Any information not requested will be disregarded during the evaluation process.

D-6

4.0 P H A S E 1 - PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS AND

ELEMENTS

Phase 1 – Proposal

Factor/Sub Factor

Location

Description

Factor 1

TAB B

Organization & Management

Factor 2

TAB C

Past Performance (Relevancy Rating and Confidence Assessment will be assigned overall considering all projects provided)

D-7

6.0 PHASE 1– TAB B – FACTOR 1 - ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

6.1 Submission Requirements:

6.1.1 Provide an Organization and Management section that describes the offeror’s organization and management approach to executing this contract per the detailed requirements.. Clearly and concisely describe the organizational approach to project management and execution. Limit the information to fifteen (15) pages or less and individually address each subparagraph below. Present the material sequentially under Tab B, to facilitate evaluation.

6.1.1.1 Organization and Management Narrative: Provide a brief but concise written summary of the organization and the approach to management. The narrative shall address both the approach to managing the project included in the scope of work and the approach to managing multiple projects located in remote areas. Describe the organizational resources of the company and how their resources will be utilized. Clearly describe all teaming or joint venture arrangements, including a clear description of each firm’s roles and responsibilities on the project (i.e., design, construction). A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) may be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation). Discuss any contractual arrangements that have been established. Identify the design team and describe the role of the design team during construction. Identify your procedures for safety and quality control throughout the design and construction process. Discuss your ability to perform work at multiple project sites throughout the country. Demonstrate that your company meets the minimum legal requirements to perform construction projects within the country of Vietnam. The narrative must include a copy of the Business License issued by the Vietnam Government Provincial Planning and Investigation Department, and the Architectural Design License issued by the Vietnam Government Department of Construction.

6.1.1.2 Organizational Chart (or Organogram): Include a simple organizational chart, illustrating the lines of communication within the proposed organization and the key personnel proposed for the specific project included in the scope of work The chart shall clearly depict the names or positions of key personnel, including the company owner(s), design lead, design team, project manager, site engineer, quality control manager, safety manager, and any other key personnel the contractor proposes to complete the work.

6.1.1.3 Responsibilities of Key Personnel: Discuss the responsibilities for each key personnel described in the Organizational Chart. Discuss the responsibilities of the key personnel listed in the organizational chart. Discuss their project specific duties (i.e., prepares design, reviews designs, prepares monthly reports, conducts inspections contained in the safety plan etc.), responsibilities, and lines of communication.

6.1.1.4 Resumes of Key Personnel (Attachment 2): Provide resumes of all Key Personnel using the format included in Attachment 2. Ensure the information is included for all key personnel. The information provided should include experience that is relevant to the project.

6.2 Evaluation Criteria:

6.2.1 For Organization and Management the Government will evaluate each offeror’s organizational and

D-8 management approach, proposed organizational structure, key personnel responsibilities, and qualification of key personnel. The Government will evaluate the offerors approach to managing the project and their approach to

D-9 managing multiple projects at the same time. The government will evaluate whether the company meets the licensing requirements as stated in paragraph 6.1.1.1. The government will evaluate the organizational structure considering whether there are clear lines of communication and authority from the project site, design team and company owner. The organizational structure will be evaluated to verify that key personnel are included in the chart.

The government will evaluate the responsibilities of key personnel to determine whether the contractor understands the requirements and the importance of various work elements to include design, construction management, scheduling, quality control and safety. Finally, the government will review the qualifications of the key personnel to evaluate their overall experience and education as it relates to completing similar work within the same country.

7.0 PHASE 1 - TAB C – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

7.1 Submission Requirements: Past Performance Questionnaire and Experience Form

7.1.1 Past performance refers to the quality of recent project experience from the owner's perspective. The offeror shall provide customer reference name(s), company affiliation and current contact information (phone number and email address) on the specific project experience sheets and include the performance rating by the owner on the form, if the offeror was rated. The offeror shall utilize the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment

3) to fulfill the past performance requirement. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal in TAB C. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. This does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. Projects cited shall be currently well underway (fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or construction substantially completed within 5 years preceding the date of this solicitation. An offeror may receive credit for relevant past performance of a parent, affiliate or separate division if the offeror’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent, affiliate or separate division will affect the performance of the offeror. An offeror may also receive credit for relevant past performance under a previous business arrangement (joint venture for example) if the offeror demonstrates that their role on the submitted project is relevant to their role on this project. The Government may contact and interview the points of contact and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the listed reference, if the listed reference is not available. The Government may also review data from CCASS, CPARS or other agency performance databases on projects determined to be recent and relevant as defined above. Team members are encouraged to briefly provide information on problems encountered on identified or other contracts and the corrective action taken. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror.

The Offeror shall complete the Experience Form (Attachment 1). The prime contractor and key subcontractors or teaming partners shall demonstrate experience with recent and relevant projects. Offerors may identify host nation government and private contracts that are similar to the requirements contained in the scope of work. If the offeror is a joint venture, each partner firm shall demonstrate experience relevant to their role on this project or explain in the supplemental narrative how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project.

To demonstrate recent experience, submit projects that are currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no longer than five (5) years preceding the date of this solicitation. Project examples should be limited to those projects performed by the firm submitting an offer, however, an offeror may receive credit for relevant experience of a parent, affiliate or separate division if the

D-offeror’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent, affiliate or separate division will affect the performance of the offeror. An offeror may also receive credit for relevant experience under a previous business arrangement (joint venture for example), if the offeror demonstrates that their role on the submitted project is relevant to their role on this project. The prime contractor and key subcontractors shall each submit three (3) projects for facilities of similar type to include schools, shelters, clinics, hospitals and other multi- story steel/concrete structures.

Present the material under Tab C.

7.2 Evaluation Criteria:

7.2.1 The Government will evaluate the offerors’ past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort being acquired under this solicitation. The Government will also perform a performance confidence assessment, considering the degree of success of the construction team’s recent (well under way or turned over no longer than 5 years preceding the date of this solicitation) and relevant experience submitted under Volume 1, Tab C. See explanation of “well underway” and relevancy under the Factor “Experience.” The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance. Past performance of a parent, affiliate or separate division will not be considered relevant unless the offeror demonstrates that the resources of the parent, affiliate or separate division will affect the performance of the offeror on this project. Past performance under a previous business arrangement will not be considered relevant if the offeror’s role on the project is not considered relevant. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting construction errors, warranty work, etc. (see the PPQ form at Attachment 3). The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, problem resolution for construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government also places a higher value on recent, relevant projects which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation, for example, but not limited to telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal, CCASS or other agency performance databases, offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on projects, which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully. The Government’s evaluation is not limited to past performance information on the cited example projects and may also consider past performance on other recent, relevant projects which may be indicative of how the offeror may perform on this project.

The Government defines experience as what the offeror has done. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent and related experience of the prime contractor and key subcontractors as relevant to their role on this project.

Experience on the similar projects identified in the project experience sheets will receive more consideration than experience provided in the supplemental narrative. The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations.

The Government will evaluate the depth and breadth of an offeror's experience on the basis of projects that were similar in nature, scope, and complexity to the work that will be required under the contract for which offers are solicited by this RFP. The Government will evaluate recent (construction complete within five years of proposal date) and relevant experience to assess the offerors ability to provide quality designs and construction. Experience provided will be evaluated for the construction and/or design firm individually and as a team. Teaming experience with other firms will also be evaluated if provided. Ability to perform work in multiple areas or in subcontractor teams will also be evaluated.

7.2.2 The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Corps of Engineers Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), other DOD or Government appraisal systems or to interview owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

7.2.3 The Government will consider extent of recent experience, degree of relationship of such experience to this project, demonstrated familiarity with applicable codes and local conditions. Some examples of relevancy to this project may include, but not be limited to:

1. Number, size, type work, complexity;

2. Location of work , work performed outside of Vietnam is not considered relevant to this procurement

3. Firm's role and extent of work self-performed (brokering out all work and simply “pouring the sidewalks” on a cited project are examples of less relevant experience)

7.2.4 The Government may consider previous recent teaming experience among the team members as value added, even if on different types of construction projects than this project. The more relevant the experience, the more credit will be given.

7.2.5 Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its proposed key personnel, apart from that of the entity. If the Government does not obtain past performance information for the projects identified by the offeror and cannot establish a past performance record for the offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance confidence assessment will be considered “Unknown (Neutral)” and receive a relevance rating of “Not Relevant.”

8.0 P H A S E 1 - EVALUATION PROCEDURES

8.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

8.1.1 The SSEB will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to phase 1 of this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the content of the phase 1 proposal (TABs A through C) and any subsequent discussions required, as well as information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any information incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

8.2 EVALUATION

8.2.1 The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor, except that past performance relevancy ratings and performance confidence assessments are assigned for past performance (see below).

8.2.2 The Government intends to award with discussions. Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to evaluate proposals. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to correct anything in their proposal after submitting it.

8.2.3 A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of the most highly rated proposals in the event that the

Government decides that discussions with offerors are required or are considered to be in the Government’s best interests. In such an event, the Contracting Officer will establish a competitive range of all the most highly rated proposals. The Government will select the most highly rated proposals at the conclusion of phase 1, and notify the selected contractors to submit proposals for phase 2 evaluations.

8.2.4 If discussions are held, the Government may engage in a broad give and take with those offerors in the competitive range, in accordance with FAR 15.306(d). During discussions, the Government may ask the Offeror to further explain its proposal and to answer questions about it.

8.2.5 Upon conclusion of discussions, those offerors still considered the most highly rated, will be afforded an opportunity to submit their proposal revisions for final evaluation and selection.

8.3 DEFINITIONS

8.3.1 Deficiency

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

8.3.2 Weakness

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

8.3.3 Significant Weakness

A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

8.3.4 Strength

Any aspect of a proposal that, when judged against a stated evaluation criterion, enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

8.3.5 Significant Strength

A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably enhances the probability of successful contract performance.

8.3.6 Deviation

Proposal implies or specifically offers a deviation below the specified criteria. The offeror may or may not have called the deviation to the Government’s attention. A deviation is a deficiency. The proposal must conform to the solicitation requirements for award.

8.4 EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

8.4.1 General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor and subfactor (if any). The SSEB will rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements. They will not compare proposals at this time. After all proposals are rated, the Government will compare the ratings and relative strengths and weaknesses of proposals against each other in order to determine which Offerors are the most highly qualified.

8.4.2 Review Write-up: The Government will support each rating with a narrative, separately listing all strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and required clarifications.

8.4.3 Rating System: After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of “Outstanding,” “Good,” “Acceptable,” “Marginal,” or “Unacceptable” to each factor and subfactor (except the Past Performance Factor, addressed in 12.5, below), which reflect the Government's confidence in each offeror's ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP.

The adjectival ratings shall be assigned using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:

8.4.3.1 Outstanding: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

8.4.3.2 Good: Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

8.4.3.3 Acceptable: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

8.4.3.4 Marginal: Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

8.4.3.5 Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

8.5 PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATING AND PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE

ASSESSMENT

8.5.1 Past Performance Relevancy Rating: Offeror past performance will be evaluated to determine how relevant recent contracts performed by the offeror are to the effort required under this solicitation. (See explanation of relevancy under the Factor “Specialized Experience”). A past performance relevancy rating will be assigned using the following criteria and will be considered in determining the offeror’s Performance Confidence Assessment rating:

8.5.1.1 Very Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

8.5.1.2 Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

8.5.1.3 Somewhat Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of

8.5.1.4 Not Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of

8.5.2 Performance Confidence Assessment: Performance Confidence Assessments will assess each offeror's likelihood of success in performing the requirements stated in the RFP based on the offeror's demonstrated performance on recent contracts and the relevance to the effort required under this solicitation. SSEB members and the SSA may use personal knowledge or information from other sources in its evaluation of an offeror’s past performance, provided such information is consistent with the established evaluation criteria of the RFP. Offerors that have no relevant performance record will be given an “unknown” performance confidence assessment. The performance confidence assessment shall be assigned using the following criteria:

8.5.2.1 Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

8.5.2.2 Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

8.5.2.3 Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

8.5.2.4 No Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

8.5.2.5 Unknown Confidence (Neutral): No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

9.0 P H A S E 2 - PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS AND

ELEMENTS

Factor/Sub Factor

Location

Description

Factor 3

TAB D

DESIGN TECHNICAL APPROACH (Design narrative, 35% drawings, Materials list, and Summary schedule)

Factor 4

TAB E

Price (Standard Form 1442, Proposal Data Sheet and Contract

Line Item Schedule)

10.0 PHASE 2 – TAB D – FACTOR 3 - DESIGN TECHNICAL APPROACH

10.1 Submission Requirements:

10.1.1 Provide a project-specific Design Narrative that describes the offeror’s intended technical approach to executing this contract per the detailed requirements herein. Clearly but concisely describe the technical approach to execution. Limit the information to ten (10) pages or less and individually address each subparagraph below. The technical solution is an opportunity for you to provide your team’s solution for design and construction needed to accomplish the requirements.

As part of the narrative, the Offeror shall specifically discuss the Structural Design requirements in Attachment C.1.

of the SOW. Structural calculation shall be included. The Offeror shall discuss their use and understanding of the requirements. Any proposed deviations shall be discussed in the section to include justification and supporting documentation and calculations. Include the Design Narrative in Tab D.

10.1.2 Concept Design. Concept design drawings shall be provided. The Contractor shall design the facility in accordance with local standards, International Building Codes and the attached SOW and all associated Attachments. The design shall consist of project specific drawings, specifications, calculations, and a design analysis. At a minimum, the Contractor shall include the following concept drawings within the proposal. The Offeror is free to include other drawings as needed to demonstrate design ability and approach.

• Site Layout Drawings showing location of existing buildings, wells, septic tanks, and the proposed locations of new facilities.

• Architectural Drawings showing floor plans, elevations, dimensions, etc.

• Structural Drawings showing pilings, footings, columns, beam, etc.

• Electrical Drawings showing locations of outlets, switches, lights and other electrical fixtures

• Mechanical (or plumbing) Drawings showing piping runs, fixtures, cleanouts, valves and other plumbing appetencies.

• Well and Sanitary Drawings

Include the Concept Design in Tab D.

10.1.3 Proposed Contract Duration and Summary Schedule: The offeror shall propose a project schedule that provides the overall design and construction duration and details main items of work such as final design submittals, submittal of safety plan, submittal of site specific quality control plan, geotechnical evaluations (if applicable), site surveys, start of site work, demolition activities (if applicable), earthwork, main structural work, electrical, building services, plumbing, sanitary and sewage works, finish work, and all other major elements of the project. Schedules shall be graphically represented. An example of a construction schedule has been provided in the Scope of Work (Attachment E.4, The revised SOW provides an example schedule as Attachment E4). The Contractor’ schedule shall demonstrate how work will cause the least amount of interference with normal operations in the areas impacted by the proposed construction and all project schedules are subject to approval by the Government Team. Present the schedule under Tab D, to facilitate evaluation.

10.1.4 Materials: Offerors shall complete and attach Bill of Materials (BOM) as required in the Scope of Work (Attachment E.3, The revised SOW provides an example BOM as Attachment E3). The BOM shall provide materials for structural, finishing, doors/windows, hardware, plumbing fixtures and accessories, electrical fixtures and accessories, and furnishings. Offerors are encouraged to include catalog/cut sheets or other vendor data to demonstrate quality of the materials and supplies. Technical merit will be based on the degree to which the proposed materials satisfy functional and operational requirements and achieve quality including, durability, maintainability, and reliability specified in the RFP. Present the material sequentially under Tab D to facilitate evaluation.

10.2 Evaluation Criteria:

10.2.1 The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the narrative.

The Government will evaluate the firm’s technical approach, understanding of the requirements described in the Solicitation and the capability to execute the project.

10.2.2 Concept Design & Drawings. The Government will evaluate the site layout, architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical, well and sanitary drawings provided. The Government will evaluate the detail of drawings and how well conceived the drawings are. Other areas that the Government must review are the acknowledgement of structural design criteria (Attachment C.1.). The Government will rate proposals that contain recommended design approaches and supporting rationale with extra consideration because these demonstrate knowledge of local design approaches and the ability to provide professional design capability.

10.2.3 Summary Schedule : The Government will evaluate the summary schedule for construction of the project.

The length of the schedule must match the proposed contract duration. If it is shorter than the Offeror’s 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., design, mobilization, long lead items, etc. The Government will evaluate the offeror's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule. 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. The Government will evaluate the Schedule and Network Analysis or Gantt chart along with all additional required data showing the offeror's proposed schedule to ensure that the project can be completed within the specified time stated in FAR 52.211-10. The schedule shall be complete, reasonable, and realistic in order to evaluate the contractor’s understanding of all construction requirements. 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.

10.2.4 Materials : The Government will evaluate the overall level of quality that can be expected based on the salient features, durability, and suitability of materials. Technical merit will be based on the degree to which the proposed materials satisfy functional and operational requirements and acceptable quality including, durability, D-13 maintainability and reliability specified in the RFP.

11.0 PHASE 2 – TAB E – FACTOR 4 - PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

11.1 GENERAL

Submit the Pro Forma information in a separate file labeled “TAB E PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION –

COMPANY NAME”

11.2 – PRICE (PROJECT BID SHEET AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET)

11.2.1 Submission Requirements:

11.2.1.1 Submit the Proposal Data Sheet…