W9123020R0058 Amend 0001.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

A. The purpose of this amendment is to revise Section 00 22 00 Supplementary Instructions. All changes in this section are highlighted in red, and all deleted instructions are indicated w ith striketrhough.

B. The proposal due date is 19 March 2020 at 10:00 am Pacif ic Standard Time.

C. Close Projnet Bidder Inquiry 7 Days prior to the close of this solicitation amendment.

D. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 21

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Mar-2021

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 W9123820R0058

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

13-Jan-2021

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 X is extended, 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

05-Mar-2021

CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SACRAMENTO

CONTRACTING DIVISION

1325 J STREET

SACRAMENTO CA 95814-2922

W91238 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9123820R0058

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 12-Feb-2021 10:00 AM to 19-Mar-2021 10:00 AM.

SECTION 00 21 16 - INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

The following have been modified:

CONDITIONS AND NOTICES

INQUIRIES:

Prospective offerors should submit inquiries related to this solicitation in accordance with the following (collect calls will not be accepted):

a. For information related to amendments, and the dates set for receipt of proposals, please check https://beta.sam.gov

b. Contractual and Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at https://www.projnet.org/projnet.

1. To submit and review bid inquiry items, offerors will need to be a current registered user or self-register into the system. To self-register go to the aforementioned web page and click on the QUICK ADD link. Select agency as USACE, and enter the Bidder Inquiry Key for this solicitation listed below, your e-mail address, and then click continue. Fill in all required information and click Add User.

2. From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add an inquiry.

3. Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via e-mail, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed.

4. The Solicitation Number is: W9123820R0058 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: 5DN2GM-ZD3JPF

c. The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries 7 days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

d. Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety, and review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

e. The call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago). The telephone number for the Call Center is 800-428-HELP.

f. Offers will NOT be publicly opened. Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of proposals.

g. The point of contact for this solicitation is:

Contract Specialist: Sara Kimsey Telephone: (916)423-5185 https://beta.sam.gov/ https://www.projnet.org/projnet

E-MAIL: Sara.D.Kimsey@usace.army.mil

CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY, PREAWARD SURVEY:

In order to determine a contractor's responsibility for purposes of contract award in accordance with FAR Part 9, the contractor is required to provide a statement regarding previous experience and past performance in performing comparable work, information related to the business organization, financial resources, and/or plant to be used in performing the work (see Section 00 22 11 or 00 22 20 OR Attachments, Preaward Survey). All offerors will complete and return the Preaward Survey as part of the Price/Cost proposal. Failure to submit the Preaward Survey in conjunction with the price proposal will not of itself render the offer unacceptable.

Determination of Contractor Responsibility will be completed in accordance with FAR 9.104-1.

If the contractor or subcontractor does not already have sufficient resources demonstrated in the completed Preaward Survey, acceptable evidence of "the ability to obtain" the required, adequate resources (all of the resources discussed in FAR 9.104-1) normally consists of a commitment or explicit arrangement that will be in existence at the time of contract award to rent, purchase or otherwise acquire the needed facilities, equipment, other resources, or personnel.

The Preaward Survey as a tool used by the Government in determining responsibility of the offeror is submitted as part of the Price/Cost proposal and is separate from the technical proposal's response to the technical evaluation criteria found later in this section. Some of the information required from the offeror for completion of the Preaward Survey and the technical proposal may be duplicative but it is necessary that the information be provided in full in both places and that the Price/Cost proposal and the Technical proposal be separate documents. DO NOT state, for example, in the technical proposal, "See Price/Cost proposal for past performance information".

AVAILABILITY OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS PUBLICATIONS DESCRIPTIONS:

a. The internet URL for Corps of Engineers publications is:

http://www.publications.usace.army.mil/

b. Construction Criteria Base (CCB). The Construction Criteria Base (CCB) system available through the National Institute of Building Sciences includes copies of Corps of Engineers methods and specifications.

Information about the CCB can be obtained from:

http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/ccb.php

FACSIMILE BIDS/OFFERS:

Facsimile bids/offers, modifications thereto, or cancellations of bids/offers will not be accepted.

PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS:

The bidder/offeror whose bid/offer is accepted will, within the time established in the contract, furnish performance and payment bonds in accordance with FAR 52.228-15.

INDIVIDUAL SURETIES IN SUPPORT OF BID BONDS:

Bidders/offerors utilizing individual sureties in support of a bid bond shall include a Standard Form (SF) 28 (Affidavit of Individual Surety), accompanied by a pledge of acceptable assets from each person acting as an mailto:Sara.D.Kimsey@usace.army.mil http://www.publications.usace.army.mil/ http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/ccb.php individual surety, and include these with the SF 24 (Bid Bond), and the bid itself (see clause titled "Pledges of Assets," FAR 52.228-11).

Pledges of acceptable assets shall be in the form of (1) evidence of an escrow account and/or (2) a recorded lien on real estate.

If this is an IFB, failure to provide pledges of acceptable assets, with the bid, in the specified form, accompanied by a properly executed SF 24 and SF 28, will render the bidder nonresponsible and thus ineligible for award. If this is an RFP, failure to provide required documentation described herein may cause the offeror to be deemed "unacceptable".

ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS:

A written award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party.

System for Award Management (SAM) Registration:

It is a requirement that any and all contractors that intend to do business with the government must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database. No contract may be awarded by the government to any contractor who is not registered in SAM. If your company is not registered in SAM, you must register in order to be eligible for any government award.

The following link provides access to the SAM website:

https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/

If you have difficulties with or questions regarding the SAM registration, the following link has been set up by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to assist contractors registering for CAGE codes for enrollment and navigation within SAM:

https://www.logisticsinformationservice.dla.mil/CAGETier3/

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 12-Feb-2021 10:00 AM to 19-Mar-2021 10:00 AM.

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION 00 21 16 – Instructions to Proposers https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ https://www.logisticsinformationservice.dla.mil/CAGETier3/

b. Contractual and Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at https://www.projnet.org/projnet.

1. To submit and review offeror inquiry items, offerors will need to be a current registered user or self-register into the system. To self-register go to the aforementioned web page and click on the QUICK ADD link.

Select agency as USACE, and enter the Bidder Inquiry Key for this solicitation listed below, your e-mail address, and then click continue. Fill in all required information and click Add User.

2. From this page you may view all offeror inquiries or add an inquiry.

3. Offerors will receive an acknowledgement of their question via e-mail, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed.

4. The Solicitation Number is: W9123820R0055

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: 9E99NV-WPXZ9T

c. The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries 7 days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

The following have been modified:

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEROR

1. OVERVIEW

a. This solicitation is for the Design-Build contract for the P203 Naval Operations Support Center (NOSC) at Hill

AFB, UT.

b. This solicitation utilizes a two-phase source selection process requiring two separate proposal submittals.

c. The Phase-One proposal consists of only non-price technical factors. The Government shall select approximately 3-5 of the most highly qualified offerors from Phase-One who will be given the opportunity to submit a Phase-Two proposal that consists of price and technical factors.

d. In accordance with FAR 15.306 the Government does not intend to conduct discussions during either phase of this solicitation but reserves the right to do so if discussions appear to be in its best interest.

2. BASIS OF CONTRACT AWARD

2.1 ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

In accordance with the requirements of 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.

https://www.projnet.org/projnet

2.2 SOURCE SELECTION USING SOURCE SELECTION USING THE “BEST VALUE” TRADE-OFF

PROCESS

The Government, during Phase-Two, will select the offers 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. The award decision will be based on a comparative analysis and an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

2.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

Phase-One proposals

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 element of each technical proposal will be evaluated by the Government and an adjectival rating and risk rating will be determined by consensus of 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 organization tabs identified in the proposal submission instructions.

Phase-One Proposal (Section 00 22 00)

Factor 1: Experience (separate PDF to be submitted electronically) Factor 2: Past Performance (separate PDF to be submitted electronically)

Phase-Two proposal (Phase Two proposal instructions and evaluation standards will be provided to the offerors selected for the competitive range at the time the amendment initiating Phase-Two is circulated.

c. The Source Selection Authority will conduct only the Phase-One evaluations during Phase-One, however during Phase Two, both the Phase-One and the Phase-Two proposal evaluations and all the relative strengths and weaknesses will be used in determining the best value to the Government.

2.4 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS AND PRICE

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

Phase-One:

Factor 1 – Experience is the most important factor.

Factor 2 – Past Performance is the second most important factor, less than Factor 1.

Phase-Two: (Phase Two proposal instructions and evaluation standards will be provided to the offerors selected for the competitive range at the time and the amendment initiating Phase-Two is circulated.)

d. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical proposal against the evaluation criteria contained herein in order to determine the proposal’s technical acceptability. The process will continue until a technically acceptable proposal is identified. Once a technically acceptable proposal is identified, proposal evaluation will cease; and the Government will proceed to evaluate the technical acceptable offeror’s price proposal and upon the contracting officer’s affirmative determination of responsibility, the Government will proceed to award the contract. Each of the evaluation factors will be evaluated by the Government and an acceptability rating will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board for all technical factors other than past performance. The Past Performance factor will be evaluated by the Government and an acceptability will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board.

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

Phase-One Proposal.

(1) Factor 1: Experience (separate PDF submitted electronically)

(2) Factor 2: Bonding Capacity (separate PDF submitted electronically)

(3) Factor 3: Past Performance (separate PDF submitted electronically)

Phase-Two Proposal. To be included with the amendment initiating Phase two.

c. The Source Selection Authority will consider only the Phase One proposals during Phase One, however both the Phase One and the Phase Two proposals will be used in determining the lowest price technically acceptable to the Government in Phase Two.

2.4 TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

a. Beginning with the lowest priced offer, the Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical proposal against the evaluation criteria contained herein in order to determine the proposal’s technical acceptability. The process will continue until a technically acceptable proposal is identified. Once a technically acceptable proposal is identified, proposal evaluation will cease; and the Government will proceed to evaluate the technical acceptable offeror’s price proposal and upon the contracting officer’s affirmative determination of responsibility, the Government will proceed to award the contract. Each of the evaluation factors will be evaluated by the Government and an acceptability rating will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board for all technical factors other than past performance. The Past Performance factor will be evaluated by the Government and a relevancy acceptability will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board.

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

Phase-One

Factor 1 – Experience Factor 2 – Bonding Capacity Factor 3 – Past Performance

Phase-Two

“Phase Two criteria will be supplied once we are that point in the acquisition.” *Note: Phase One criteria will be used in the ultimate award decision.

2.5 GENERAL TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

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 (see below) may be seen as indicative of the type of problems that could be expected during contract performance. More than a nominal number of errors/mistakes or egregious errors/mistakes may affect the offeror’s ability to clearly meet the minimum requirements. 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.

b. Technical proposals which do not provide the specified information in the specified location in accordance with the submission instructions may be found to be unacceptable. 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 be found unacceptable. 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 the specified requirements. The proposal submission instructions are written to give offerors, where feasible, an indication of the level of detail desired by the Government. An offeror’s failure to include information that the Government has indicated should be included may result in the proposal being found unacceptable 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 with 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.

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

f. The Government cannot make award based on an unacceptable offer. Therefore, a rating of “Unacceptable” under any factor will render the offer ineligible for award.

g. Technical Ratings: Other than Past Performance

Table 1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

ADJECTIVAL RATING

DESCRIPTION

“ACCEPTABLE”

Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

“UNACCEPTABLE”

Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

h. Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the resulting contract requirements. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements.

Past performance shall be used as an evaluation factor within the LPTA process, unless waived by the PCO in accordance with FAR 15.304(c)(3)(iii). It shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305 and DFARS 215.305.

However, the comparative assessment in FAR 15.305(a)(2)(i) does not apply. Therefore, past performance will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis using the ratings in Table 1.

Past performance should be initially evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s present/past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. The criteria to establish what is recent and relevant shall be unique to each LPTA source selection. Therefore, the solicitation shall establish the criteria for recency and relevancy in relation to the specific requirement being procured. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to what aspects of an offeror’s contract performance history would give the most confidence that the offeror will satisfy the requirements of the contract that is contemplated to be awarded as a result of the evaluation of proposals in the current procurement.

Second, the past performance evaluation should determine how well the offeror performed on the prior contracts.

The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

Table 2 Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note above)

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Sources of Past Performance Information for Evaluation.

Sources are as follows:

• Past performance information may be provided by the offeror, as solicited.

• Past performance information may be obtained from questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of the acquisition.

• Past Performance information may be obtained from established systems such as the Contractor

Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of entities (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror's proposal, Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; and may be obtained from other sources available to the Government, such as the Defense Contract Management Agency, and interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials. 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, PPQs submitted on prior RFPs, and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

The technical evaluation team will review this past performance information and determine whether the proposal is technically acceptable or unacceptable based on the definition above at Table 2. Per FAR 15.101-2(b)(1), small business offerors that are found to be technically unacceptable will be referred to the Small Business Administration for a Certificate of Competency determination.

3. GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS:

(INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS FOR PHASE-TWO WILL BE ISSUED, VIA AN AMENDMENT TO

THE SOLICITATION, TO OFFERORS SELECTED FOR THE COMPETITIVE RANGE AT THE

CONCLUSION OF PHASE I.)

3.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS. PHASE-ONE

3.1.1 Media, Margins, Fonts, and Page Limitations.

Submit only one electronic copy specifically authorized in this section. 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 specific submission. Use pages equivalent to a standard 8 ½ x 11 sheet with at least 1 inch margins, which may include headers and footers. Do not justify the right margin. Ensure that all text and graphics are clearly legible. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, unusual font styles such as script, or condensed fonts. Pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as a “Table of Contents” or divider A = Actual which means it has been completed tabs, are excluded from page limitations.

3.1.2 Proposal Binding.

This will be an electronic submission. Please follow instructions (proper Tabbing, etc.) for preparing the electronic file.

3.1.3 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 thus ineligible for award.

Resolve questions about the terms and conditions or technical requirements of the solicitation prior to submission of the offer; see “Inquiries”, located in Section 00 21 16, for points of contact. Notwithstanding the above, the offeror must clearly describe in the proposal cover sheet submitted with the price volume any exceptions, within the offer, to the contractual and/or technical terms and conditions of the solicitation.

3.1.4 Restrictions on Offeror-Provided Information.

“Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can nonetheless be provided to the Government as part of the offeror’s technical proposal. Offerors that include in their proposals information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must clearly mark the information in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offeror – Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (e), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”. Files shall not contain classified data.

3.2 GENERAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION. PHASE-ONE

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

DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS/BIDS

The Government will not accept telegraphic or facsimile bids.

Proposals/Bids MUST BE submitted electronically using the DoD Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE):

https://safe.apps.mil/

Proposals/Bids submitted through SAFE require an Offeror-unique link sent by the Contract Specialist to the Contractors point of contact and associated e-mail address. Registration with DoD SAFE is not required to upload files. Submissions are limited to 8 GB and are due regardless of technical difficulties.

Please request a link from the Contract Specialist by e-mail to sara.d.kimsey@usace.army.mil

To ensure accurate receipt and prompt processing, Offerors are encouraged to request a DoD SAFE invitation link from the Contract Specialist no later than 24 hours prior to proposals/bid due date.

Links must be requested from the Contract Specialist at least 2 hours prior to the proposal/bid opening due date and time.

Only one (1) SAFE submission is allowed per Offeror.

Once sent by the Contract Specialist, a SAFE invitation link is only active ONCE (i.e., multiple sessions or versions are not allowed - if the link is clicked, it will not be active later for changes to be made). The Contract Specialist can verify bid submission receipt upon request; e-mail requests for confirmation are preferred. SAFE links are valid for 14 days after being issued.

Late proposals/bids will NOT be accepted for any reason.

Naming of proposal electronic files:

Each ‘tab’ as defined below, will be a separately uploaded file. Note, with DoD safe the link will allow you to upload multiple files for one submission.

“Offeror_Name” Tab 0: Preface (separate PDF submitted electronically) “Offeror_Name” Tab 1 Factor 1 Experience (separate PDF submitted electronically) “Offeror_Name” Tab 2 Factor 2 Bonding Capacity (separate PDF submitted electronically) “Offeror_Name” Tab 23 Factor 23 Past Performance (separate PDF submitted electronically)

4.0 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS FOR PHASE ONE TECHNICAL PROPOSALS:

REQUIRED CONTENTS OF PHASE ONE PROPOSALS

4.1 NUMBER OF SETS OF THE PHASE ONE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Due to the ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic, physical bids/proposals will not be accepted. All bids/proposals must be submitted electronically.

DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS/BIDS

The Government will not accept telegraphic or facsimile bids.

Proposals/Bids MUST BE submitted electronically using the DoD Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE):

https://safe.apps.mil/

Proposals/Bids submitted through SAFE require an Offeror-unique link sent by the Contract Specialist to the Contractors point of contact and associated e-mail address. Registration with DoD SAFE is not required to upload files. Submissions are limited to 8 GB and are due regardless of technical difficulties.

Please request a link from the Contract Specialist by e-mail to sara.d.kimsey@usace.army.mil

To ensure accurate receipt and prompt processing, Offerors are encouraged to request a DoD SAFE invitation link from the Contract Specialist no later than 24 hours prior to proposals/bid due date.

Links must be requested from the Contract Specialist at least 2 hours prior to the proposal/bid opening due date and time.

Only one (1) SAFE submission is allowed per Offeror.

Once sent by the Contract Specialist, a SAFE invitation link is only active ONCE (i.e., multiple sessions or versions are not allowed - if the link is clicked, it will not be active later for changes to be made). The Contract Specialist can verify bid submission receipt upon request; e-mail requests for confirmation are preferred. SAFE links are valid for 14 days after being issued.

Late proposals/bids will NOT be accepted for any reason.

4.2 FORMAT, CONTENTS, AND LIST OF TABS FOR THE PHASE ONE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The overall technical proposal has no page limit; however, limits may be imposed at the tab level as described below in the instructions for each individual factor. Number the pages by Tab so that the first page under each tab is numbered “Page 1” and following pages are numbered consecutively. The tabs directly correlate to the technical evaluation factors. Although the Government may use information contained anywhere within the technical proposal in its evaluation of any technical evaluation criteria, the Government is not obligated to search for or to consider information that is not located in the specified location. Do not include any information pertaining to proposed pricing for this project in the technical proposal; price proposals shall be submitted only during Phase Two of the source selection process. Limit your submittals to the information specified; excess information will not be evaluated. Organize your technical proposal as indicated below.

4.3 ORGANIZATION OF PHASE-ONE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

TAB Content to be included under each tab

TAB 0. – PREFACE (a separate PDF)

Proposal Data Sheet Prime Contractor / Key Subcontractor Introduction The completed Standard Form 1442 with continuation pages, without a price, duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company. Ensure that the firm’s DUNS or DUNS+4 Number is entered in the block with its name and address.

Your acknowledgement of all Amendments to the solicitation in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 Amendment.

Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

Your completed Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Bidders/Offerors (Section 00 45 00).

TAB 1. FACTOR 1 - Experience (a separate PDF)

TAB 2. FACTOR 2 - Bonding Capacity (a separate PDF) TAB 23. FACTOR 23 - Past Performance (a separate PDF)

4.4 DETAILED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PHASE-ONE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

4.4.1 Tab 0 of the Technical Proposal: Preface (Not Evaluated) See 4.3 for content of Preface.

4.4.1.1 Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Introduction

a. The Offeror is required to propose a specific project team including key subcontractors for evaluation in response to this Request for Proposals. 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 of the subcontractors critical to successful post-award contract performance have been included in this group. In order to streamline the proposal submission and evaluation process, please limit your submission to the information specifically requested.

Information pertaining to other subcontractors not designated as “key” by the Government will be considered excess and may not be evaluated.

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 Phase-One technical proposal. The Government has designated the following major work elements as “key”:

- Architect-Engineer Design

c. Any changes to key subcontractors in your Phase 2 proposal from your Phase 1 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 individuals or firms that were specifically identified and agreed to 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, DUNS number, address, point of contact e-mail 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 level. If the proposed prime contractor is a Joint Venture, describe the relationship, role, and authority (to include management authority) of each firm. (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.) List the major work elements to be self-performed by the offeror’s in-house work 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) 8-1/2”x11” pages for narrative.

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.

4.4.2. Tab 1 of the Technical Proposal: Factor 1 – Experience:

The example projects submitted at Tab 1 provide the primary basis for the Government’s evaluation of each offeror’s project experience and capability. Use Attachment – Offeror’s Project Experience form to submit example projects for this Factor.

4.4.2.1 Prime Contractor / Key Subcontractor Example Projects Demonstrating Experience

a. The offeror shall submit “example projects” (either commercial or institutional) that demonstrate the prime’s and key subcontractor’s experience and capability to successfully perform the subject contract.

b. The offeror must provide a narrative to explain how the experience and capabilities shown by the example projects are relevant to this project and show the contractor’s and key subcontractor’s understanding of the risks, and work requirements and approach necessary to successfully complete this project.

c. The offeror shall submit at least four (4) but not more than six (6) example projects that individually or collectively demonstrate the following characteristics of the prime contractor and key subcontractor:

(1) The offeror’s experience as a prime contractor to successfully perform this contract. Explain how the experience and capabilities shown by the example projects are relevant to this project and show the contractor possesses an understanding of the risks and requirements and approach necessary to successfully act as the prime contractor for this project.

(2) The offeror’s design-build management capability. Explain how the experience and capabilities shown by the example projects are relevant to this project and demonstrate the contractor and/or key subcontractor understand the risks, requirements and approach necessary to successfully manage the design-build challenges of this project.

(3) The experience of the lead designer to design this project. Explain how the experience and capabilities shown by the example projects are relevant to this project and show the contractor and/or the key subcontractor possesses an understanding of the risks and requirements and approach necessary to successfully design this design-build project.

(4) Explain whatever other characteristics the offeror feels the example projects show that the contractor and/or its key subcontractor possess an understanding of the risks, and requirements and approach necessary to successfully complete this project

d. Demonstrate experience in the following areas:

(1) Prime contractor and Architect-Engineer designer experience on similar design-build projects of mixed-use office and training facilities;

(2) Architect-Engineer designer experience on similar (defined below in paragraph c) design-build projects;

(3) Prior Prime Contractor experience on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Naval Facilities

Engineering Systems Command (NAVFAC) or Air Force construction projects with a contract value of at least $10,000,000 each.

a. 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.

b. Complete: Do not submit construction projects that are not substantially complete. (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.) If a design-build project is submitted to demonstrate the design capability of an A-E firm, the design portion of the contract must be complete in order to be considered.

c. Relevant Projects for this solicitation “must be at least 25,000 square feet and a mixed-use office facility. Mixed use office facility is defined as A facility with areas of distinct and separate uses. Example would be a office building with a lab area and locker room with shower. The offeror must provide a narrative to explain how the experience and capabilities shown by the example projects are relevant to this project and show the contractor’s and key subcontractor’s understanding of the risks, and work requirements and approach necessary to successfully complete this project. Relevant projects are of similar scope, square footage, security requirements and complexity of the requirements. Example projects that demonstrate over 25,000 square feet and are of mixed-use office facility (i.e. combination of gym, cafeteria, conference rooms, office space, and general purpose multiuse rooms.) will be rated more favorably.

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

Experience Project #1 Project #2 Project #3 Project #4 Project #5 Project #6 Prime Contractor/ Sub-Contractor

Design-Build mixed use facilities

A&E Design USACE Projects Air Force Projects

NAVFAC

Projects

h. Formatting and other restrictions:

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

(2) Example projects are limited to four (4), equivalent to two, 8-1/2" x 11" pages each and a maximum of 24 two-sided pages total, for all projects.

(3) The Summary Matrix is limited to one page.

(4) Use the “Offeror’s Project Experience” Form provided as an attachment in this solicitation for submitting example projects. Use of an alternate format could result in an unacceptable rating if all of the specified information is not provided. (Note: Do not submit a group of related jobs as one project unless all of the work was done under the same contract, or for indefinite delivery contracts, under one task order.)

i. Evaluation Criteria:

The proposal rating for Factor 1 will be adjectival. See Table 1. Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for the evaluation of proposals.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and a risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and a 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 contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Proposal is unawardable.

The Government will review each of the example projects provided by the Offeror to assess whether they meet the specified minimum criteria for this factor. Offerors providing at least the minimum number of projects each of which meets all of the minimum criteria will be rated ACCEPTABLE for this factor. Offerors failing to provide at least the minimum number of projects which individually meet all of the minimum criteria will be rated UNACCEPTABLE for this factor. The burden is on the offeror to establish in its proposal that the submitted projects clearly meet the minimum requirements. Offerors should not assume that there will be any additional opportunity to substantiate that their projects meet the criteria for Relevant Experience.

Table 2. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable ratings

4.4.3. Tab 2 of the Technical Proposal: Factor 2 – Bonding Capacity:

a. The offeror must have bonding capacity of at least $25 million for a single project.

b. Offerors shall demonstrate sufficient bonding capacity in the form of a letter from their Surety. The Surety must be listed on the Department of the Treasury’s Listing of Certified Companies in accordance with FAR 28. The listing is available below:

http://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/ref/suretyBnd/c570_a-z.htm

c. Formatting and Other Restrictions: There is not a page limitation for this submission.

d. Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s bonding capacity to ensure bonding capacity of $25 million for a single contract and an aggregate bonding capacity of $50 million has been provided by a Surety listed on the Department of the Treasury’s Listing of Certified Companies. This submission will be evaluated for acceptability. This element will receive a rating of either “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. “Acceptable” is defined as a proposal that meets the requirements of the solicitation. “Unacceptable” is defined as a proposal that does not meet the requirements of the solicitation. An “Unacceptable” rating will render the proposal unawardable; therefore, the proposal will not be further considered.

Table 1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable ratings http://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/ref/suretyBnd/c570_a-z.htm

4.4.4. Tab 23 of the Technical Proposal: Factor 23 –Past Performance:

The information provided under this tab will be used to evaluate the past performance record of the offeror and proposed key subcontractors. Information other than that supplied by the offeror may be utilized by the Government in its evaluation of past performance.

4.4.4.1. Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example Projects Past Performance.

(1) Submission requirements: Offerors shall provide past performance evaluation information on the example projects submitted under Factor 1, Experience.

a. 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.

Formal performance evaluations are those that are similar to the Department of Defense Performance Evaluation (Construction) Form DD2626. Offerors must submit the project information on the same form used for Factor 1, Attachment, OFFEROR’S PROJECT

EXPERIENCE.

b. Offerors shall provide the following additional information for each of the example projects submitted under the Experience Factor 1:

• Safety Record: Detailed information pertaining to reportable injuries with lost workdays or fatalities on each project. For contracts with reportable injuries (lost workdays or fatalities), also include the total number of hours worked under the contract. Provide Days-Away from Work, days of Restricted work activity, and/or days of jobs Transfer (DART) for the Prime and key Subcontractors;

• Performance Problems: Describe any performance problems where a customer made adverse remarks. Describe actions taken to correct any performance shortcomings. Describe any pending, on-going, or completed litigation. If there are no performance problems to report, provide a statement to this effect.

c. If a formal evaluation is unavailable, the Offeror shall obtain the information using the Past

Performance Questionnaire included (See Attachment). 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 the Offeror includes in its proposal for this factor. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal.