W911KB-17-R-0039_AM_2.pdf

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: EIE384 F-35 AGE Facility/Fillstand Eielson Alaska

DUE DATE FOR PHASE 2 PROPOSALS is not extended.

Proposals shall be submitted in accordance w ith Section 0021 00, paragraph 1.9 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

1 5

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 04-May-2017

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-17-R-0039

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

18-Apr-2017

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

04-May-2017

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:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

a. The following drawing is substituted for the superseded documents/sections:

NONE

b. The following revised documents/sections are substituted for the superseded documents/sections. The identifier “AM#002” appears before and after new and/or revised materials, except as noted below.

SECTION 00 22 10 – PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

-Revised paragraphs 5.1 and 6.1.3

NOTE: Revisions within the following documents do not contain the above referenced identifiers:

NONE

c. The following sections are deleted:

NONE

d. The following documents are added:

NONE

e. The following revisions are incorporated:

NONE

f. Other:

NONE

(End of Summary of Changes)

ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS SHALL REMAIN THE SAME.

Section 00 22 10 W911KB-17-R-0039

EIE384

Section 00 22 10

5.0 TAB B – FACTOR 1 - SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

AM#001

AM#002

5.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The prime contractor and designer of record design firms for civil, architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical design shall each demonstrate recent, relevant experience on similar projects, using the Company Specialized Experience –

Construction or Prime Contractor form (Attachment 2), and the Company Specialized Experience – Design Firm or In-House

Design Capability form (Attachment 3) at the end of this Section (no more than 2 pages per project). Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements. If the offeror is a Newly formed joint venture, without any previous experience as the joint venture, each firm of the joint venture shall provide information demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project. Submit projects that are currently well underway

(designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no longer than ten (10) years preceding the date of this Solicitation. Project examples should be limited to those projects performed by the firm submitting an offer. The Government will only evaluate the experience of the firm submitting the offer. The requirements of this factor cannot be met through the experience of the offeror’s parent, affiliate, or separate division. An offeror may 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. Offerors who submit experience information of a parent, sister or other affiliated company must describe what involvement such company will have on the instant acquisition. The offeror shall provide a one page narrative that clearly and specifically indicates what resources of the parent, sister or other affiliated company – its workforce, management, facilities, or other resources – will be provided or relied upon for contract performance. The Government may discount the experience of a parent, sister or other affiliated company unless the prime contractor clearly provides evidence of a binding teaming agreement or other contractual agreement which creates legal responsibility on the part of the parent, sister or other affiliated company or provides a Meaningful Relationship Commitment Letter including the following:

1. A statement of commitment as to the performance and utilization of the identified entity’s resources on the project.

2. Signatures of both the Offeror and Meaningful Relationship Entity. AM#2

The offeror shall select the design firm(s). Design firms may list projects of prime contractors they have worked for, or projects directly contracted with Government, private or commercial customers. If projects were design-build, so identify them. Submit no more than five (5) projects for the prime contractor for the below facility type or equivalent or similar commercial or institutional type facility. Submit no more than six (6) projects total for the design firms and consultant, if applicable, and no more than five (5) projects for any individual design firm/consultant. Submit relevant projects for the below facility type or similar commercial or institutional type facility:

AM#001

• Ground Support Equipment Facility

• Airport Ground Equipment Facility

5.1.1 Provide a one page consolidated list of submitted projects for prime contractor and design firms to include a matrix that identifies the Specialized Experience projects and the firms that worked on each (teaming). If needed, the Specialized Experience matrix may be submitted on one 11” x 17” sheet.

AM#002

Section 00 22 10

5.2.6. Previous design-build (D-B) experience is not necessary for an acceptable rating. The Government may consider previous D-B experience a strength, even if the experience is on different type projects than this project. Similarly, the

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

5.2.7. The firm(s) preparing the design must demonstrate qualifications and experience in Sustainable Design and

Development based on project experience. Additional consideration will be given if both the constructor and the design firm(s) demonstrate qualifications and experience in Sustainable Design and Development.

6.0 TAB C – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE (CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT)

6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: 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 submitted for TAB B and include the performance rating by the owner on the form, if the offeror was rated. For Federal projects submitted under Specialized Experience (Tab B), the offeror may rely on finalized CCASS, ACASS or CPARS reports, otherwise the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project. Previously completed PPQ’s may be submitted, however, ensure current phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. The completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal and may be duplicated for submission on future solicitations. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first 2 pages of the

PPQ (Attachment 4), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Yolanda M. Ikner, via email at yolanda.m.ikner@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

AM#001

6.1.1 Projects cited shall be currently well underway (fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or construction completed and turned over within ten (10) years preceding the date of this solicitation. Also include performance recognition documents received within the last ten (10) years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

AM#001

6.1.2 In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past

Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

(CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee

Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. 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.

AM#2

6.1.3 An offeror will not receive credit for relevant past performance of a parent, affiliate or separate division. A firm will mailto:yolanda.m.ikner@usace.army.mil

Section 00 22 10 not receive credit under this factor for past performance of key personnel proposed for this project. Experience of a parent, sister or other affiliated company will not be considered if the offeror fails to demonstrate what resources of the parent, sister or other affiliated company will be provided or relied upon or fails to demonstrate the existence of a contractual or meaningful relationship with the parent, sister or other affiliated company. AM#2 An offeror may 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.

6.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

6.2.1 The Government will first assess and rate the relevancy of recent projects accomplished by the offeror to the scope of this contract for overall application to the performance confidence assessment ratings described hereinafter. The projects will include those submitted under the Specialized Experience Factor as well as from other sources described above. This rating is not a separate proposal rating but is only used in developing overall past performance confidence assessment rating assigned to the Past Performance Factor. The past performance relevancy ratings are described below:

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

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

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

6.2.2. The Government will next consider how well the offeror performed on the contracts. 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. With respect to relevancy, past performance on projects with more relevance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment rating than past performance on projects of lesser relevance. The Government will only evaluate the past performance of the firm submitting the offer. The requirements of this factor cannot be met through the past performance of a parent, affiliate or separate division. Past performance under a previous business arrangement (joint venture, for example) 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 design or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and designer or contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, warranty work, etc. 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 design or construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government 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 rating for this factor will be expressed as a degree of confidence in the offeror’s ability to successfully accomplish the contract requirements. The rating system used for the performance confidence assessment is described at the end of this section.

6.2.3 Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance. An entity may not establish past performance based on the