Draft RFP W9123824S0011.pdf

-DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL -

DRAFT RFP

This is a DRAFT for informational pruposes only and not a Request For Proposal.

Plating Shop Renovations, Hill Air Force Base, Utah

North American Industry Classif ication (NAICS) Code: 236210, Industrial Building Construction Product or Service Code: Z2EZ, Code Description, Repair or Alteration of Other Industrial Buildings.

Small Business Administration (SBA) Size Standard: $45,000,000.00 Annual Revenue

In accordance w ith the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 236.204(i), the estimated magnitude of construction for this project is estimated to be betw een $10,000,000 and $25,000,000.

Requirement is full and open competition.

D. Per FAR 3.101, 15.201(f), and 15.303(c), to preserve procurement integrity, all contacts shall go to either the Contracting Officer or Contract Specialist. Contacts to others regarding this solicitation may result in the disqualif ication of the offeror or cancellation of the solicitation. Disqualif ication w ill be the result of any communication that explicitly or implicitly, intentionally or unintentionally gives one prospective offeror a competitive advantage or the mere appearance of a competitive advantage of that of another.

THOMAS COCHRAN 916-557-7299

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 (RFP)

(IFB)

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

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 _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________1825 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

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.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________0 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________ (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 _______120 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

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SACRAMENTO

CONTRACTING DIVISION

1325 J STREET

SACRAMENTO CA 95814-2922

W91238

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

(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:

W9123824S0011 68

-DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL -

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

- DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - W9123824S0011

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Job Phase 1: Demo and Removal

FFP

Demolition of existing ‘A’ tank line (BLDG 507); Removal of internal center ovens and exterior ovens (BLDG 505) FOB: Destination

PSC CD: Y1PZ

NET AMT

0002 1 Job Phase 1 Real Property Instillation

FFP

Phase 1 Real Property: Install new Type II Anodize tank line (BLDG 507); Install new Chrome, Type III Anodize, and Phosphate/Passivate tank lines (BLDG 505)

0003 1 Job PHASE 2 Demolition

FFP

Phase 2: Demolition of existing Chrome, Type II Anodize, Type III Anodize, and Phosphate/Passivate tank lines.

0004 1 Job Phase 2 Real Property Instillation

FFP

Phase 2 Real Property: Install new Cadmium, Zinc Nickel, Temper Etch, Nickel and Electroless Nickel tank lines.

0005 1 Job Phase 3 Demolition

FFP

Phase 3: Demolition of existing Cadmium Plating, Cadmium Iridite, Zinc Nickel, Temper Etch, Nickel and Electroless Nickel tank lines.

0006 1 Job Phase 3 Real Property Instillation

FFP

Phase 3 Real Property: Install new Chrome Strip, FPI, Future and Degrease tank lines

0007 1 Job Phase 4 Demolition

FFP

Phase 4: Demolition of existing Chrome and FPI tank lines.

0008 1 Job Phase 4 Real Property: Installation

FFP

Phase 4 Real Property: Install new Chrome tank line

0009 1 Job Chemical Addition System

FFP

1001 1,500 Cubic

Yard

OPTION Contaminated Soil Removal

FFP

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 1825 dys. ANP 1 UTAH AREA OFFICE

7227 6TH STREET (COE) BUILDING 366

HILL AFB UT 84056-5214

W91238

0002 1825 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0003 1825 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0004 1825 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0005 1825 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0006 1825 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0007 1825 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0008 1825 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0009 1825 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

1001 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

00 21 00

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

1. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

In accordance with the requirements for Part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), no contract shall be entered into unless the Contracting Officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met.

This includes the FAR requirement that no award shall be made unless the Contracting Officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the general standards in FAR Part 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

2. SOURCE SELECTION USING THE “BEST VALUE” TRADEOFF PROCESS

The Government will select the offer that represents the best value to the Government by using the tradeoff process described in FAR Part 15. This process permits tradeoffs between price and technical (“non-price”) factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced offer when determined to be in the best interest of the Government. The award decision will be based on a comparative analysis and an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

3. THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

a. The Government will evaluate each offeror’s technical proposal based on how well the proposal addresses each of the evaluation factors, listed below, and on how well the offeror has performed on related projects through the evaluation of the past performance information provided from references or obtained from other sources. Each evaluation factor will be evaluated by the Government and an adjectival rating and risk rating will be determined by the Government evaluation board for all technical factors other than Past Performance. The Past Performance factor will be evaluated by the Government to determine a Performance Confidence Assessment rating.

b. The evaluation factors correlate directly to the main organizational tabs identified in the proposal submission instructions.

Factor 1: Past Performance Factor 2: Technical Narrative Factor 3: Network Analysis Schedule (NAS) Factor 4: Organization, Management, and Quality Control

Factor 5: Small Business Participation Commitment Document

c. After all the evaluations have been completed, the Source Selection Authority will consider all factors in determining which Offeror submitted the proposal that represents the best value to the Government for this project.

4. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS AND OF PRICE TO THE

TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

All non-price evaluation factors, when combined, are MORE IMPORTANT to cost or price. The Government is concerned with striking the most advantageous balance between technical merit (“quality”) and cost to the Government (i.e., the price). If competing technical proposals are determined to be essentially equal, price could become the controlling factor.

The Technical Evaluation Factors are listed below in order of importance:

FACTOR DESCRIPTION RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

1 Past Performance Most important factor

2 Technical Approach Less important than Factor 1 but more important than Factor 3

3 Technical Narrative and Network Analysis Schedule (NAS

Less important than Factor 2 but more important than Factor 4

4 Organization, Management, and Quality Control Less important than Factor 3 but more important than Factor 5

5 Small Business Participation Commitment Document

Less important than Factor 4

B. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

Instructions to offerors for proposals are provided in the solicitation.

1. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS: TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

a. The offeror’s conformance with the specified format and submission requirements will be considered during the technical evaluation. Failure to comply with the formatting and/or submission requirements may be seen as indicative of the type of problems that could be expected during contract performance. Lack of conformance may therefore result in a higher risk assessment, in addition to any other impacts on the evaluation. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable. However, in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, the Government, may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals. For example, a failure by a proposed key subcontractor to submit a properly executed letter of commitment may be considered reflective of increased risk but not an outright proposal deficiency.

b. Any technical proposals which do not provide the specified information in the specified location in accordance with the submission instructions may receive a lower rating. The Government is under no obligation to search for information that is not in the specified location.

c. Proposals which are generic, vague, or lacking in detail may receive a lower rating. Responses that are essentially blanket offers of compliance are not adequate substitutes for the detailed and complete technical information necessary to establish that an offeror can meet or exceed the needs of the Government. The proposal submission instructions are written to give prospective contractors, where feasible, an indication of the level of detail desired by the Government. The offeror’s failure to include information that the Government has indicated should be included may result in the proposal receiving a lower rating and/or being found deficient if inadequate detail is provided.

d. Any prescribed page and formatting limitations will be strictly adhered to and enforced by the

Government. The Government will not evaluate any excess information resulting from the offeror’s failure to comply the submission instructions. Examples: if an offeror were to submit three pages in response to an item with a two-page limitation, the information on the first two pages would be evaluated but the information on the third page would not be evaluated. If an offeror were to submit a fold-out sheet (e.g., 11” x 17”) in response to a one-page limitation where fold-out sheets were not authorized, only the information that would reasonably have been submitted on one 8.5” x 11” sheet would be evaluated. If offeror were to submit three 8.5” x 11” pages in responses to a one not-to-exceed 11” x 17” page limitation, only the information that could reasonably have been submitted on one 11” x 17” sheet would be evaluated.

e. The degree of risk to the Government inherent in the offeror’s technical proposal will be a consideration under every evaluation factor.

f. A “deficiency” is 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.

g. “Weakness” means a flaw in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

A “significant weakness” is a proposal flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

h. The term “acceptable” is therefore used in this context to describe a technical proposal that does not contain a deficiency and thus could be accepted by the Government, notwithstanding any weaknesses or significant weaknesses in the proposal.

i. The Government cannot make award based on a deficient offer. Therefore, a rating of “Unacceptable” under any factor will render the offer ineligible for award, unless the Government elects to enter discussions with that offeror and all deficiencies are remedied in a revised proposal.

j. Technical/Risk Rating for other than past performance and Project Labor Agreement.

TABLE 1 – Technical/Risk Ratings Color Rating Adjectival Rating Description

Blue Outstanding

Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements, and contains at least one strength, or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptably high.

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS: PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS

Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). In this case, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “Neutral.”

The past performance evaluation will focus on three elements: the recency, the relevancy, and the quality of the offeror’s past performance information.

TABLE 2 – Past Performance Ratings Adjectival Rating Rating

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 the scope and magnitude or effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements.

Past Performance Confidence Assessments – In conducting a performance confidence assessment, the offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in the table below:

TABLE 3 – Past Performance Confidence Assessments Adjectival Rating Description

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.

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.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence

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

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.

3. GENERAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION

The proposal shall be submitted as summarized below and as required by the specifications.

a. Marking of Proposal Volumes. Mark each volume as the “Technical Volume” or “Price Volume” and include the project title, location, solicitation number, name, and address of the offeror.

b. Tabbing of Proposal Volumes. Offers are to be formatted and tabbed in accordance with the instructions that follow for each proposal volume.

c. Table of Contents. Include a table of contents for each proposed volume.

C. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

For purposes of this Request for Proposal (RFP), an “Offeror” may include a group of two or more entities that have a formed a “contractor team arrangement,” as that term is defined in FAR 9.601. In the case of entities that have formed a contractor team arrangement, the experience and performance history of any member of the team, whether gained while worked with the other member(s) of the currently proposed contractor team arrangement, may be considered as a part of the evaluation of the offeror’s proposal.

In the case of contractor team arrangements involving a prime contractor and subcontractor(s), where the prime contractor submits the proposal in response to the RFP, the prime contractor must have completed two of the total number of projects submitted for Factor 1 for consideration in response to the past performance requirements of this RFP. If information about a subcontractor is submitted and considered during the evaluation, the expectation is that this subcontractor will perform this work. Before utilizing another subcontractor for this work, the Government must provide written consent.

An offeror that relies upon the performance history of a member or members of a proposed contractor team arrangement will be expected to maintain that arrangement during performance of any contract awarded to that offeror under this RFP. As a part of their proposal, the offeror must provide a contractor team agreement signed by all parties, identifying the legal name(s) of all entities, and describing the nature of each entity’s relationship (teaming/partnering, joint venture, etc.) and its role on this project.

Past performance information of other than the offeror will not be considered without the teaming agreements. In the case of joint ventures, at least one project will be submitted from each member to demonstrate experience. This documentation shall be provided in applicable section of the offeror’s proposal.

1. Media, Page Size, Margins, Fonts, and Page Limitations.

Submit only electronic files as specifically stated in this section. The Technical Proposal must be submitted as one complete PDF original. Do not submit excess information, to include audio-visual materials, electronic media, etc. Do not include links to information on websites in lieu of incorporating the information physically into the proposal. Except where another size is specifically authorized for a submission, use only 8.5” x 11” paper. Use at least 1” margins, except headers and footers may be outside the 1” margins. Do not justify the right margin. Ensure that all text and graphics are clearly legible.

Do not use a font size smaller than 10-point font, unusual font styles such as script, or condensed fonts.

For submissions with page limitations, the PDF pages will be counted as one page. Pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as “Table of Contents” or divider tabs, are excluded from page limitations.

2. Conditioning of Offer.

Do not include exceptions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation in either the technical or price proposal volumes. Inclusion of any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in a determination that the offer is unacceptable and this ineligible for award. Resolve questions about the terms or technical requirements of the solicitation prior to submission of the offer; see “How to Submit Inquiries,” located in Section 00 21 16.

3. Restrictions on Offeror-Provided Information.

Proposals shall not contain classified data. “Confidential” projects may be submitted to demonstrate capability if all the information required for evaluation as specified herein can be provided to the Government as part of the offeror’s technical proposal. Offerors that include data in their proposals that they do not want disclosed or used except for evaluation purposes, must redact the data in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition.”

4. Organization of Proposal.

Tabbing of Volumes. Proposal Volumes are to be formatted and tabbed in accordance with the Detailed Submission Requirements instructions that follow for each volume.

C.1. VOLUME I - TECHNICAL VOLUME

DETAILED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

FORMAT, CONTENTS AND LIST OF TABS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Limit responses to required information. Excess information will not be evaluated. Organization of Technical Proposal as indicated below:

VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL VOLUME (separate PDF)

TAB FACTOR CONTENTS OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

N/A Preface 1 Factor 1 Past Performance 2 Factor 2 Technical Narrative 3 Factor 3 Network Analysis Schedule (NAS) 4 Factor 4 Organization, Management, and Quality Control 5 Factor 5 Small Business Participation Commitment

1. Volume I - Tab 1: Preface (NOTE: This information is not rated as part of the evaluation factors)

a. The offeror is required to propose a specific project team including key subcontractors for evaluation in response to this request for proposal (RFP). For purposes of this procurement, the terms “key subcontractors” are used to refer only to the prospective subcontractors whose qualifications, experience, and past performance will be evaluated by the Government as part of the source selection process. For reasons of efficiency, not all every subcontractor critical to successful post-award contract performance have been included in this group. To streamline the proposal submission and evaluation process, please limit your submission to the information specifically requested.

b. For the purposes of this procurement, a key subcontractor is defined as any subcontractor performing

“key” major work elements for which capability information is required to be submitted for evaluation as part of the offeror’s technical proposal. The Government has designated the following work elements as “key”: plating process specific work, including installation of plating line components (tanks, ovens), testing, commissioning of plating lines.

c. Any changes to key subcontractors in your proposal will not be allowed.

d. Any subcontractors and outside associates or consultants required by the Contractor in connection with the services covered by the contract will be limited to individual or firms that were specifically identified and agreed during negotiations. The Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer’s written consent before making any substitution for these subcontractors, associates, or consultants.

e. Provide a brief introduction narrative, identify, and provide the name, UEI number, address, point of contact email address, and a brief description of the role and authority of each firm* that will be involved in performance of this contract at the prime contractor and key subcontractor levels. If the proposed prime contractor is a Joint Venture, describe the relationship, role, and authority (to include management authority) of each firm. List the major work elements to be self-performed by the offeror’s in-house force, the major work elements to be performed by each key subcontractor, and any other major work to be subcontracted to other contractors. The submission is limited to two (2) 8.5” x 11” PDF pages for narrative.

*Note: If a proposed firm has branch offices, provide information for each individual branch office that will perform work under the contract with its own workforce.

f. The Government will not evaluate the Preface – Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Introduction.

The purpose of this narrative is to provide a brief introduction for information purposes; however, if applicable, the Government reserves the right to consider it throughout the evaluation of the other factors.

2. Volume I - Tab 2: Factor 1 – Past Performance

a. Recency: The Government will first evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance. Recent projects are ones that are substantially completed within the last ten (10) years of the original date of issuance of this RFP. For this purpose, “substantially complete” means that only punch list items remain for project acceptance, or that the major elements of the project have been turned over to the customer for beneficial occupancy.

b. Relevant Experience: The Government will then determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, similar:

• Scope – New construction or substantial renovation of 30,000 square feet or larger building

• Magnitude - $25,000,000 to $150,000,000

• Complexity – Construction of facilities with linear manufacturing lines and/or specialized parts fabrication and assembly;

i. The offeror shall submit “example projects” (either commercial or institutional) that demonstrate the primes and key subcontractor’s experience which meets the evaluation criteria and demonstrates their ability to successfully perform under the resulting contract.

ii. The offeror should submit no more than five (5) projects similar in project size, scope, and complexity to this project to be performed. Offeror should limit each project example to two (2) narrative pages per project submitted. If more than two (2) narrative pages are submitted per project, only the first two pages will be evaluated.

iii. The offeror must provide a narrative to explain how the experience shown by the example projects is relevant to this project and shows the contractor’s and key subcontractor’s understanding of the risks, work requirements, and approach necessary to successfully completely this project. Relevant projects are of similar scope, square footage, security requirements, and complexity of this project.

iv. Demonstrated experience and capability in the following areas may be considered more favorably:

(1) Example projects that demonstrate experience renovating a facility for plating processes of multiple different aircraft parts.

(2) Example projects that demonstrate experience installing chemical plating process lines of the type and nature included in this solicitation; including (but not limited to) Electroless Nickel, Cadmium Plating, Chrome and HVOF Strip, Chrome Plating, Anodize/Alodine, Zinc Nickel Plating, Nickel Sulfamate Plating, Phosphate, Temper Etch, Passivate Aluminum Conversion Coat and Titanium Pickle.

(3) Example projects that demonstrate experience renovating and/or installing plating process control systems and supporting infrastructure.

(4) Example projects that demonstrate experience with the installation and testing of air scrubbers and other air quality management systems.

(5) Example projects that demonstrate experience with the installation of Industrial Waste Treatment Plant (IWTP) systems.

(6) Example projects that demonstrate experience managing phased demolition and construction that required coordination with ongoing facility operations.

(7) Example projects that demonstrate experience executing project managed by

USACE.

(8) Example projects that demonstrate experience executing projects on DoD installations.

(9) Example project that demonstrate experience executing multi-year, phased renovation project in an occupied, operational facility.

v. Example projects may demonstrate multiple experiences and capabilities. If an example project is submitted for multiple experiences and capabilities, identify each attribute of experience and capability the offeror seeks to demonstrate. Each example project submitted does not need to demonstrate multiple experiences and capabilities, but all the example projects should collectively demonstrate the offeror’s range of relevant experience and capabilities.

v. Do not submit construction projects that are not substantially complete.

The offeror will also provide a Summary Matrix that indicates which submitted example project(s) demonstrate which experience and/or capability. The example provided is instructional only; develop and provide your own matrix that best explains your proposal.

Project #1 Project #2 Project #3

Prime Contractor

Subcontractor Management

Plating Shop Experience

In addition to the project examples, the offeror may submit a two (2) page narrative to describe any past teaming experience between current team members as it relates to any or all the submitted project examples.

vi. Formatting and other restrictions:

(i) Start the information for each example project on a new page.

(ii) Narratives will be presented in a size 12 font.

(iii) Example project narratives and teaming narrative are limited to two (2) 8.5" x 11"

PDF pages each and a maximum of thirteen (13) PDF pages total, for all projects.

(iv) The Summary Matrix is limited to one (1) PDF 8.5”x11” page.

*Note: Do not submit a group of related jobs as one project unless all the work was done under the same contract, or for indefinite delivery contract, under one task order.

c. Past Performance

i. Offerors shall provide this information in a separate PDF document. The information provided will be used to evaluate the past performance record of the Offeror and proposed key subcontractors. Information other than supplied by the Offeror may be utilized by the Government in its evaluation of past performance.

ii. Offerors shall provide past performance evaluation information on the example projects submitted above. The Offeror shall provide completed performance evaluations for the submitted projects that demonstrate the Offeror’s performance on recent and relevant projects of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity. The Offeror shall provide formal performance evaluations if they are available.

iii. The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), see Solicitation Attachment, is provided for the

Offeror or its team member to submit to the client for each project the Offeror included in this factor. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs shall be submitted with your proposal. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal for questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact To Be Determined the proposal closing date and time. Offerors shall not incorporate, by reference, into their proposal PPQs, previously submitted for other request for proposals. They shall be included with proposal submission. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

iv. 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. It is preferred that performance recognition documents be provided for the example projects; performance recognition documents from other than example projects will considered less relevant.

v. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluation past performance. Sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting (CPARS), using CAGE/UEI 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.

vi. Formatting and other restrictions: Start the information for each example project on a new page.

There is no page limitation for this submission.

2.1 Key Subcontractor Authorization Letters:

a. Letters of authorization: Submit a letter of authorization from each proposed key subcontractor allowing the Government to discuss the key subcontractor’s past performance record with the Offeror in conjunction with the Government’s evaluation of the Offeror’s technical proposal.

b. Formatting and other restrictions: Each letter should be furnished on the business concern’s letterhead and signed by an authorized representative of the concern.

c. Failure of a key subcontractor to provide authorization for the Government to discuss its past performance record with the Offeror will be considered a proposal deficiency. However, if the Government is unable to discuss in detail any key subcontractor past performance problems with the Offeror, the Offeror’s overall rating for this factor may suffer.

3. Volume I - Tab 3: Factor 2 – Technical Narrative

a. The Offeror provides a technical narrative in sufficient detail to clearly demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the principal components of work described in the project specifications and drawings and the offeror’s understanding of the site and other conditions that could impact schedule. The narrative must contain sufficient information to allow the government to perform a basic analysis of the proposed design and construction approach.

b. The technical narrative should describe how the offeror will approach the construction of the project. The Government is interested in information such as:

security requirements; phased demolition and construction of specific process line areas; coordination with ongoing facility operations during construction; coordination with USACE and Air Force QA/QC assurance, and clean- up.

c. The offeror’s technical narrative should also describe any significant challenges anticipated in performing or accomplishing the work of this project, lessons learned from similar projects that could be applied to the challenges of this project, and the offeror’s plan for mitigating risks which could adversely impact project schedule.

d. Formatting and other restrictions: The submission is limited to four (4) 8.5” x 11” pages total.

4. Volume I - Tab 4: Factor 3 – Network Analysis Schedule (NAS)

a. The offeror provides a NAS or GANTT chart (not a PERT chart), broken down to the “Feature of

Work” level, that graphically illustrates the proposed integration, scheduling, and phasing of all major features of work on the critical and near-critical path for this project. Assume an arbitrary estimated, non-binding Notice to Proceed (NTP). This summary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Section 01 32 01.00 10: Project Schedule

b. The schedule is to include activities on the near-critical and critical paths, including the following:

- NTP – (Assume 30 days after 17FEB2025)

- Design/Post Award Kick-Off Meeting

- Preconstruction submittals and Design Transmittals

- Long lead time items

- Design/Post Award Kick-Off Meeting

- Preconstruction submittals and Design Transmittals

- Proportioning Study

- Adverse Weather per Section 01 00 00

- Construction activities broken down to the “Feature of Work” level

- Phasing plan that indicates coordination with ongoing facility operations during construction

- Onsite Mobilization

- Start and End of Phase 1 Construction

- Commissioning of Phase 1

- Start and End of Phase 2 Construction

- Commissioning of Phase 2

- Start and End of Phase 3 Construction

- Commissioning of Phase 3

- Start and End of Phase 4 Construction

- Commissioning of Phase 4

- Testing and permitting of all air quality systems

- Prefinal Inspection(s)

- Final Inspection(s)

- As-Built Drawing submission

- Contract Closeout

- Project Complete

c. Clearly identify the critical path.

d. Clearly indicate the following time frames:

1) The durations of the principal components of work with anticipated start and finish dates. For this pre-award construction sequence plan only, assume an award date of 17FEB2025.

2) The total number of calendar days allocated to construction.

(1) The total number of calendar days from Notice to Proceed (NTP) to Project Complete.

e. The milestone schedule must not exceed the contract performance period specified in box 11 of the

Standard Form (SF) 1442 and must follow any contractually required interim completion dates specified in the solicitation for separate parts or stages of work (should the Offeror discover during proposal preparation that the project cannot be completed within the required contract performance period; the contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer immediately.)

f. The NAS project schedule that is required to be included as part of the Technical Approach is a preliminary schedule for pre-award evaluation purposes only, the actual NAS project schedule submitted in the Offeror’s Technical Proposal will not be incorporated into the contract. Therefore, the Government may, at its discretion, consider minor irregularities to be weaknesses in the proposal, rather than deficiencies. Nonetheless, the successful Offeror will be required to submit a schedule after contract award that fully complies with all requirements, whether all pre-award discrepancies were noted or corrected prior to award. Although the schedule will need to be resubmitted after award, the proposed period of performance will remain as proposed.

g. Formatting and other restrictions.

(1) Include an electronic file “.prx” of the NAS Project Schedule (Primavera preferred) in the technical proposal.

(2) There is not a page limitation for this submission; however, pages must not exceed 11” x 17” size in PDF. Ensure the font size is legible so each activity and its duration can be read.

(3) Number line items on the NAS Project Schedule for easy reference.

5. Volume I - Tab 5: Factor 4 – Organization, Management, and Quality Control

Factor 4 Tab 5A - Project Organization Chart

a. Provide an organizational chart that, at minimum, graphically depicts the Offeror’s proposed project team, to include “key” major work elements and identification of:

(1) The Prime Contractor.

(2) All Key Subcontractors by Firm Name; and

(3) All Key Personnel listed below:

(4) The separate Joint Venture (JV) (if applicable) concern’s firm names and proposed personnel’s roles and responsibilities.

In addition, indicate the organizational placement of the prime’s key personnel:

(1) Prime Contractor

(2) Key Subcontractors by Firm Name

(3) Key Personnel

(4) Joint Venture (JV) and Responsibilities by Company Name

(5) On-Site Project Superintendent

(6) On-Site CQS System Manager

(7) On-Site Safety Manager

(8) On-Site Quality Control Manager

(9) Site Security Manager

b. Indicate lines of authority and lines of communication using a separate depiction (either color, solid, etc. lines).

c. Provide a legend.

d. Formatting and other restrictions: This submission is limited to one (1) PDF page not to exceed 11” x 17” in size.

Factor 4 Tab 5B - Management Plan

a. Provide a comprehensive Management Plan specifically developed for implementation for this project. Discuss the management approach used to plan, organize, direct, control, and staff the construction and closeout. Provide information that clearly demonstrates that the Offeror can deliver a quality product; effectively manage the consultants and subcontractors on the team; and the ability to coordinate all work throughout the construction phases. Explanation to include specific quality control procedures used; permit acquisition in a timely fashion; utility coordination; ensuring safety and safe working conditions throughout the projects; cost and schedule control; preparation and submission of record (i.e., as-built) documents and all other required administrative and logistical requirements for successful completion of project.

b. Provide a separate, detailed discussion of how the prime contractor will pro-actively manage the construction effort.

c. Provide a discussion of the Project Manager’s access to higher levels of corporate management and ability to obtain support from other corporate elements and subcontractors.

d. Provide a discussion of the Offeror’s plan for coordinating the information flow between the Offeror

(prime contractor) and any subcontractor(s) or other prime contractors who may be employed in the project area, and between the Offeror and the Government.

e. Provide a brief description of other technical and organizational resources (excluding key personnel and key subcontractors) necessary and available to be employed in the successful accomplishment of this project.

f. Provide a discussion on how other projects the Offeror is, or may be performing, might impact the resources to be utilized on this project (including the availability of key personnel), and address how the adverse impacts of such other work would be mitigated.

g. Formatting and other restrictions: The submission may include narrative and/or graphics and is limited to six (6) 8.5” x 11” PDF pages. Although a standard format is not specified, the information should be presented in essentially the same order as discussed above.

Factor 4 Tab 5C - Approach to Quality Control

a. Provide a comprehensive Quality Control procedure specifically developed for implementation of this project. Provide a detailed narrative discussion of the Offeror’s plan for ensuring quality control during the construction of this project.

The discussion should address the Offeror’s understanding of, familiarity with, and intended use of USACE-specific procedures and automated information management/tracking systems related to quality control. The Government is interested in the Offeror’s plan to build quality into the project during the construction.

b. Formatting and other restrictions: The submissions may include narrative and/or graphics and is limited to six (6) 8.5” x 11” PDF pages. Although a standard format is not specified, the information should be presented in essentially the same order as discussed above.

6. Volume I – Tab 6: Factor 5 – Small Business Participation Commitment Document

a. All Offerors (both large and small business) will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of

U.S. small businesses in the performance of acquisition (as small business prime Offerors or small business subcontractors) relative to the objectives and goals established herein. The Government will evaluate:

i. The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals;

ii. The extent of commitment to use such firms (and enforceable commitments will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones. Enforceable commitments are letters submitted by the Offeror to small business stating if the project is awarded, then a particular feature of work would go to the small business.);

iii. Identification of the complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

iv. The extent of participation of small business prime Offerors and small business subcontractors in terms of the percentage of the value of the total acquisition; or alternatively may consider the percentage of planned subcontracting dollars.

v. The extent to which the Offeror meets or exceeds the goals: Goals for this procurement are:

Small Business: 41% of the total contract value;

Small Disadvandaved Business (SBD) 14.25% of the total contract value, Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB): 3.20% of the total contract value, Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small Business: 3.2% of the total contract value, and Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB): 1.5% of the total contract value.

*Note: For example – a Participation Plan that reflects 1% of the contract value for WOSB would also count towards the overall Small Business Goal.

b. Please use the sample format provided in Solicitation Attachment, Small Business Participation

Commitment Document.

c. Formatting and other restrictions: The submission is limited to six (6) 8.5” x 11” pages total.

7. Volume I – Tab 7: Factor 6 – Project Labor Agreement

Offerors shall submit a proposal subject to the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) requirement set forth in section 00 73 00 of this solicitation. Any PLA reached pursuant to the PLA requirements in this solicitation does not change the terms of the contract or provide for any price adjustment by the Government.

See FAR provision 52.222-33, Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement, and clause 52.222-34, Project Labor Agreement, for definitions and requirements pertaining to the use of a PLA for this contract.

PLAs shall be reviewed for compliance with all statutes, regulations, Executive Orders, and contract requirements.

C.2. VOLUME II - PRICE VOLUME (separate PDF)

DETAILED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR PRICE PROPOSAL

FORMAT, CONTENTS AND LIST OF TABS FOR THE PRICE PROPOSAL

Use only 8-1/2” x 11” PDF pages. There are no page limits for the price proposal; however, limit responses to required information. Excess information will not be evaluated. Organization of Price Proposal as indicated below:

your price proposal as indicated below. If a tab is not applicable to your proposal, omit that tab but do not renumber the subsequent tabs.

VOLUME II – PRICE VOLUME (separate PDF)

TAB CONTENTS OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL

1 Proposal Covert Sheet 2 SF 1142; Acknowledgement of Amendments; Joint Venture Agreement 3 Pricing Schedule 4 Work Breakdown Structure 5 Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors 6 Bid Guarantee 7 Pre-Award Survey Information 8 Subcontracting Plan 9 Project Labor Agreement

1. Volume II - Tab 1: Proposal Cover Sheet

The proposal cover sheet is required by FAR 52.215-1(c)(2). This provision, titled “Instructions to Offerors

– Competitive Acquisition” is incorporated by reference in Section 00 21 00.