A09R0017-01.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

AMENDMENT No. 0001 to W91236-09-R-0017, Multiple Aw ard Task Order Contract (MATOC) in Support of the Center of Standardization for Dining Facilities w ithin the jurisdiction of the Norfolk District and the North Atlantic Division, Corps of Engineers for the Southeast Region is amended as follow s:

See Schedule on Continuation Page

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

1 4

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 28-Apr-2009

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 W91236-09-R-0017

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-Feb-2009

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 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

28-Apr-2009

CODE

USA ENGINEER DISTRICT, NORFOLK

CONTRACTING OFFICE

803 FRONT STREET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

W91236 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91236-09-R-0017

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SCHEDULE

1. The proposal due date is 29 MAY 2009, 2:00pm. All proposals are to be delivered to the attention of Veronica McGuire, 803 Front Street, Norfolk, VA 23510.

2. Phase II proposals will be accepted from the following contractors who were selected to participate in Phase II.

a. Centerre Government Contracting Group of Denver, Colorado

b. GSC Construction, Inc of Augusta, Georgia

c. H-S, LLC of Atlanta, Georgia

d. RCG & Akins of Pensacola, Florida

3. The Construction Cost limit for this seed project: DELETE “$10,100,000.00” and REPLACE with “$8,900,000.00”.

4. Phase II proposals will be good for 120 calendar days from Phase II receipt date established in this amendment.

5. The Site Visit is to be determined.

6. SECTION 00700, Contract Clauses: The following clause is hereby incorporated 252.232-7007 Limitation of Government’s Obligation.

7. Contracting Office Point of Contact:

Veronica McGuire, Phone: 757-201-7366, Fax 757-201-7183, Email: veronica.a.mcguire@usace.army.mil.

mailto:veronica.a.mcguire@usace.army.mil

SECTION 00700 - CONTRACT CLAUSES

252.232-7007 LIMITATION OF GOVERNMENT'S OBLIGATION (MAY 2006)

(a) Contract line item(s) 0001 through 0003are incrementally funded. For these item(s), the sum of $7,000,000.00 of the total price is presently available for payment and allotted to this contract. An allotment schedule is set forth in paragraph (j) of this clause.

(b) For items(s) identified in paragraph (a) of this clause, the Contractor agrees to perform up to the point at which the total amount payable by the Government, including reimbursement in the event of termination of those item(s) for the Government's convenience, approximates the total amount currently allotted to the contract. The Contractor is not authorized to continue work on those item(s) beyond that point. The Government will not be obligated in any event to reimburse the Contractor in excess of the amount allotted to the contract for those item(s) regardless of anything to the contrary in the clause entitled "TERMINATION FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT." As used in this clause, the total amount payable by the Government in the event of termination of applicable contract line item(s) for convenience includes costs, profit and estimated termination settlement costs for those item(s).

(c) Notwithstanding the dates specified in the allotment schedule in paragraph (j) of this clause, the Contractor will notify the Contracting Officer in writing at least ninety days prior to the date when, in the Contractor's best judgment, the work will reach the point at which the total amount payable by the Government, including any cost for termination for convenience, will approximate 85 percent of the total amount then allotted to the contract for performance of the applicable item(s). The notification will state (1) the estimated date when that point will be reached and (2) an estimate of additional funding, if any, needed to continue performance of applicable line items up to the next scheduled date for allotment of funds identified in paragraph (j) of this clause, or to a mutually agreed upon substitute date. The notification will also advise the Contracting Officer of the estimated amount of additional funds that will be required for the timely performance of the item(s) funded pursuant to this clause, for subsequent period as may be specified in the allotment schedule in paragraph (j) of this clause, or otherwise agreed to by the parties. If after such notification additional funds are not allotted by the date identified in the Contractor's notification, or by an agreed substitute date, the Contracting Officer will terminate any item(s) for which additional funds have not been allotted, pursuant to the clause of this contract entitled "TERMINATION FOR THE

CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT".

(d) When additional funds are allotted for continued performance of the contract line item(s) identified in paragraph

(a) of this clause, the parties will agree as to the period of contract performance which will be covered by the funds.

The provisions of paragraph (b) through (d) of this clause will apply in like manner to the additional allotted funds and agreed substitute date, and the contract will be modified accordingly.

(e) If, solely by reason of failure of the Government to allot additional funds, by the dates indicated below, in amounts sufficient for timely performance of the contract line item(s) identified in paragraph (a) of this clause, the Contractor incurs additional costs or is delayed in the performance of the work under this contract and if additional funds are allotted, an equitable adjustment will be made in the price or prices (including appropriate target, billing, and ceiling prices where applicable) of the item(s), or in the time of delivery, or both. Failure to agree to any such equitable adjustment hereunder will be a dispute concerning a question of fact within the meaning of the clause entitled "disputes."

(f) The Government may at any time prior to termination allot additional funds for the performance of the contract line item(s) identified in paragraph (a) of this clause.

(g) The termination provisions of this clause do not limit the rights of the Government under the clause entitled "DEFAULT." The provisions of this clause are limited to work and allotment of funds for the contract line item(s) set forth in paragraph (a) of this clause. This clause no longer applies once the contract if fully funded except with regard to the rights or obligations of the parties concerning equitable adjustments negotiated under paragraphs (d) or

(e) of this clause.

(h) Nothing in this clause affects the right of the Government to this contract pursuant to the clause of this contract entitled "TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT."

(i) Nothing in this clause shall be construed as authorization of voluntary services whose acceptance is otherwise prohibited under 31 U.S.C. 1342.

(j) The parties contemplate that the Government will allot funds to this contract in accordance with the following schedule:

On execution of contract $--

(month) (day), (year) $----

(month) (day), (year) $----

(month) (day), (year) $---- (End of clause)

Design-Build

Request For

Proposal

Southeast region Standard Dining Facility

PN 68844, FY2009

Southeast Region (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN) , with seed TO at

Ft Stewart

SECTION 00 01 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS (ID/IQ) – PHASE II

REV 1.8 – 31 JAN 2009

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

Southeast region Standard Dining Facility

Southeast Region (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN) , with seed TO at Ft Stewart

PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, CONTRACT FORMS AND CONDITIONS

Sections

00 22 20 Phase 2 Design-Build Selection Procedures and Basis of Award

00 72 00 Contract Clauses – Table of Contents ** (see also section 00700)

00 73 00 Special Contract Requirements ** (see also section 00800)

DIVISION 01 - General Requirements

Sections **

01 32 01.00 10 Project Schedule

01 33 00 Submittal Procedures

01 33 16 Design After Award

01 45 01.10 Quality Control System (QCS)

01 45 04.00 10 Contractor Quality Control

01 50 02 Temporary Construction Facilities

01 57 20.00 10 Environmental Protection

01 62 35 Recycled/Recovered Materials

01 78 02.00 10 Closeout Submittals

TASK ORDER SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS:

Sections

00 73 10 Supplemental Contract Requirements

DIVISION 01 - General Requirements

Sections (Task Order Specific Requirements)

01 10 00.01 Task Order Statement of Work

01 33 00 Submittal Procedures

01 33 16 Design After Award

01 45 04.00 10 Contractor Quality Control

01 50 02 Temporary Construction Facilities

APPENDICES (TASK ORDER SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS):

Initial Task Order Appendices

Appendix A Geotechnical Information

Appendix B List of Drawings

Appendix C Utility Connections

Appendix D Results of Fire Flow Tests

Appendix E Environmental Information

Appendix F Conceptual Aesthetic Considerations

Appendix G GIS Data

Appendix H Exterior Signage

Appendix I Acceptable Plants List

Appendix J Drawings

Appendix K Utility Cost Information

Appendix L LEED Project Credit Guidance

Appendix M LEED Owner’s Project Requirements

Appendix N LEED Requirements for Multiple Contractor Combined Projects

Appendix O LEED Strategy Tables

Appendix P USGBC Registration of Army Projects

Appendix Q AREA COMPUTATION

Appendix R - Architectural and Site Theme

Appendix S - Standard Dining facility plans

Appendix T - Food Service Equipment Specifications

Appendix AA - Environmental Assessment

Appendix BB - Infrastructure Geotechnical Report

Appendix CC - General Interior Electrical Requirements

Appendix DD - Contractor/Canoochee Demarcation Line

Appendix EE - Canoochee EMC Responsibilities

Appendix FF - DFAC Utility Connection Plans

Appendix GG - Grading, Paving and Drainage Plans

Appendix HH - DFAC Erosion & Sediment Control Plans

Appendix II - Phasing and Staging

End of Table of Contents

NOTE: ** Indicates the Sections which are included in the Base ID/IQ Contract. From time to time the Government may update these Sections by Administrative Modifications for application to task order orders issued subsequently. Other Sections, Appendices, etc. will be included in each Specific Task Order, as indicated in TASK ORDER SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS, above.

SECTION 00 22 20 (ID/IQ)

REV 2.6- 30 NOV 2008

PHASE 2 DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES AND BASIS OF AWARD

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

3.0 NOT USED

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

5.0 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 1 – DESIGN TECHNICAL

5.1 GENERAL

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

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

5.4 VOLUME 1-TAB C – SUBFACTOR 3 – SITE DESIGN

5.5 VOLUME 1-TAB D – SUBFACTOR 4 – SUSTAINABILITY REQUIREMENTS

6.0 VOLUME -2 FACTOR 2 –REMAINING PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY PROPOSAL

6.1 VOLUME 2 - TAB A– SUBFACTOR 1– PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND SUMMARY SCHEDULE

6.2 VOLUME 2 - TAB B– SUBFACTOR 2– KEY SUBCONTRACTORS

6.3 VOLUME 2 - TAB C– SUBFACTOR 3–UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS

7.0 VOLUME 3 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

7.1 GENERAL

7.2 TAB A – FACTOR 5 – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442 AND CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE)

7.3 TAB B – BID GUARANTEE

7.4 TAB C – REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

7.5 NOT USED

7.6 NOT USED

8.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

8.1 GENERAL

8.2 DISCUSSIONS (IF NECESSARY)

8.3 PHASE I PROPPOSAL

PHASE TWO – SECTION 00 22 20 ATTACHMENTS

8 – FORMAT FOR TABLE OF FACILITIES

9 – FORMAT FOR TABLE OF SPACES

10 – COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE KEY SUBCONTRACTOR (OR PRIME IF WORK NOT TO BE

SUBCONTRACTED)

11 – LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY SUBCONTRACTORS

1.0 OVERVIEW

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

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD (MATOC)

2.1. The Contracting Officer will award up to three firm fixed-price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contracts to the responsible Offerors whose proposals the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable with regard to pricing for the initial task order, and whose proposals offer the best overall value to the Government, considering the price and non-price factors described herein.All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than the price. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best proposals within the contract cost limitation for the initial task order. There is no obligation to approach or match the contract cost limitation in the offer. As part of the evaluation, the Government will evaluate betterments in proposals relative to the minimum standards in the RFP to determine if they offer additional value to the Government. In addition, innovations in proposals will be evaluated to determine if creative ideas of the Offeror are a better value to the Government compared to the minimum criteria. After the Government individually evaluates and rates each proposal, the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority will determine which proposals represent the best value for award. Award of the first IDIQ and initial task order will be made to the Offeror whose proposal is determined to represent the best overall value to the Government based on the evaluated ratings from the Phase 1 and Phase 2 proposal. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Official must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal for the initial task order would justify award to that Offeror.

2.2. The Contracting Officer will award the subsequent contracts to the Offerors whose proposals are considered to represent the remaining best value to the Government based on the evaluated rating from Phase 1 and Phase 2. Although the initial task order will not be awarded under the subsequent firm fixed-price IDIQs, the price proposed under Phase 2 will only be used to conduct a price evaluation for award of the IDIQ. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined under FAR Subpart 15.001. If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Official must determine that the value added of a more expensive proposal than accepted for the initial task order justifies award of the basic IDIQ to that Offeror.

3.0 NOT USED

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

AND SUBFACTORS

(VOLUME 1 – DESIGN TECHNICAL)

Factor/Sub Factor

Location

Description

Relative Importance

FACTOR 1

DESIGN TECHNICAL

Most Important Factor

Subfactor 1

Vol. 1 TAB A

Building Functional and Aesthetics

Equally important with Subfactor 2

Subfactor 2

Vol. 1 TAB B

Quality of Building Systems and Materials

Equally Important with Subfactor 1

Subfactor 3

Vol. 1 TAB C

Site Design

3rd Most Important Subfactor (less important than

Subfactors 1 and 2, which are equal in importance)

Subfactor 4

Vol. 2 TAB D

Sustainability

4th Most Important Subfactor (less important than

Subfactor 3)

(VOLUME 2 – REMAINING PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY AND SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION)

FACTOR

Volume 2

REMAINING PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

2nd Most Important Factor (less important than Factor 2)

Subfactor 1 Vol. 2 TAB A Proposed Contract Duration and Summary Most Important Subfactor

Schedule

Subfactor 2

Vol. 2 TAB B

Key Subcontractors

2nd Most Important Subfactor (less important than

Subfactor 1)

Subfactor 3

Vol. 2 TAB C

Utilization of Small Business Concerns

3rd Most Important Subfactor (less important than

Subfactor 2)

(VOLUME 3 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION)

FACTOR

Vol. 3 TAB A

Price (Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Bid

Schedules)

3rd Most Important Factor (less important than Factor 2)

N/A

Vol. 3 TAB B

Bid Guarantee

Not Rated

Vol. 3 TAB

C

Required Pre-Award Information

Not Rated

5.0 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 1 – DESIGN- TECHNICAL

5.1. GENERAL: The design-technical Factor consists of conceptual level presentation drawings, technical approach narratives and information regarding material and system quality. It must clearly define the proposed scope and quality levels that the design-build team is offering to the Government in enough detail for the Government and the Offeror to mutually understand the whether or not the proposal meets or exceeds the minimum Solicitation requirements. Fully developed drawings, details, or specifications are not desired or required. The Offeror shall identify what it considers to be Betterments in its proposal for Subfactors 1-4 (See Section 00 73 00, SCR “Proposed Betterments“). Note that the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, where indicated below.

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

5.2.1. Submission Requirements:

5.2.1.1. Presentation Drawings:

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

(b) At least one (1) Exterior Perspective Rendering (may be CADD rendering) for each facility type included in the contract with enough detail to aid in the evaluation of the exterior building aesthetics, as described in paragraph 5.2.2.2 (a), below.

Rendering should be at least 11" x 17" in order to show a detailed perspective view of the building

(c) Typical building or wall section(s) with appropriate details for each building type to depict proposed story height.

(d) Schematic floor plans for each floor of each facility.

(e) A color board including primary interior and exterior finish materials.

5.2.1.2. Technical Approach Narratives

Provide technical approach narratives, both qualitative and quantitative, defining the elements of the proposal. Preface the narratives with a design concepts narrative, providing the design rationale and basis of the proposal.

(a) Minimum Space and Facility Size. Describe the spaces provided for each facility, in accordance with Section 01 10 00, Statement of Work. As a minimum, include a tabulation of the net square footage for rooms, zones, or other areas, the total gross square footage for each floor of each facility, and the total gross square footage for each facility to clearly demonstrate compliance with the project requirements. See the sample spreadsheets at the end of this section attachments 8 and 9.

(b) Architectural Theme and Materials. This narrative shall be no longer than three (3) typewritten pages. Describe the architectural themes of the various facilities and spaces which demonstrate how the proposal achieves the results desired by the Statement of Work. Narrative should address how the selection of materials and colors enhances the exterior and interior aesthetics of the facilities and improves the living and/or working conditions for the soldier populations who will utilize the facilities. This narrative is not intended to be a material listing, but to explain/reflect how the selections were made and how they address the requirements.

5.2.2. Evaluation Criteria:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(a) Exterior Considerations:

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

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

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

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

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

• Is the buildings scale and proportion complimentary of the adjacent structures?

• Is the building an attractive addition to the Installation?

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

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

(b) Interior Considerations:

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

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

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

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

• Has “support item” placement been considered and addressed in the proposal to enhance the environment? For example:

placement of supply/exhaust devices, placement of electrical panels, placement of exhaust fans, etc.

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

• Does the proposal provide a pleasant, “themed” eating environment?

• Does the proposal include a pleasing professional environment in the cooking/serving areas?

5.2.2.3. Minimum Space and Facility Size

The proposal must include all the mandatory spaces in response to the requirements set forth in Section 01 10 00, Statement of Work. For this element, proposals will be evaluated on compliance with these requirements. Proposals shall identify any individual areas which are less than the required areas and describe how such deviation would enhance the building function.

Individual areas may slightly exceed the requirements, so long as building function is not compromised elsewhere and as long as the overall square footage is not greater than that as described in Section 01 10 00, as authorized by Congress

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

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

Preference #1. Standing Seam Metal Roof Systems

Preference #2. Brick or brick veneer exterior facades with white column(s). (As shown in Appendix of existing facilities at the installation).reflective of the Southern Colonial Revival Style

Preference #3. The installation desires to cultivate a "campus feel" for facilities that occupy the site similar to what exists at barracks facilities located near the intersection of 6th Street and Essayons on Ft Stewart. The architectural aspects of this theme once again is indicative of the Southern Colonial Revival Style that promotes the "Southern Living Station of Choice" as outlined and referred to in the 5th BCT Area Design Guide.

Preference #4. All roofs pitched no less than 5 on 12.

Preference #5. No mounted roof HVAC equipment.

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

5.3.1.1. Presentation Drawings

(a) There are no specific drawings requirements for this Subfactor. However, the Offeror has the option of providing concept level drawing information for specific materials and/or systems which the Offeror feels are necessary to describe the proposed systems or materials.

5.3.1.2. Technical Approach Narratives:

Provide technical approach narratives, both qualitative and quantitative, defining the elements of the proposal. It is acceptable to include all the sub-items shown below into a single combined narrative for the entire facility. It is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that all aspects identified in the evaluation criteria below are addressed. Whether individual narratives or a single combined narrative is provided, the maximum total length for narratives shall be ten (10) typewritten pages.

(a) Architectural Finishes: Describe how the materials selected provide for a suitable environment for the expected population of the facility. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on durability and maintenance of the finishes proposed.

(b) Furniture Systems: Not Used

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

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

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

(f) ATFP Considerations: Describe how the proposed materials, systems, and designs address the mandatory building ATFP requirements included in the Statement of Work.

(g) Site Utilities and Site Systems: Describe how the site utility systems selected provide for an efficient piping system.

Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on maintenance considerations and suitability of the proposed systems for the expected usage. Include information regarding coordination with privatized utility providers where applicable.

(h) Interoperability: Describe how systems integrated into the new facilities which require connection and interface with existing installation-wide systems will be accommodated in the proposed project. Narrative should address the following systems as minimum: Fire Alarm, Telephone, Cable Television, UMCS, and privatized utility companies where applicable.

(i) Solar Hot Water Heating: Include provisions to provide at least 30% of the domestic hot water requirements through solar heating methodologies, unless the results of a Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA), developed utilizing the Building Life

Cycle Cost Program (BLCC) or the Life Cycle Cost in Design (LCCID) Program, demonstrates to the Government’s satisfaction that the solar hot water system is not life cycle cost effective in comparison with other hot water heating systems.

Discuss and outline Offeror's strategy for this solar system including components, placement of collectors, and controls Include all applicable input data, assumptions, first cost, replacement cost, and maintenance and repair cost that were utilized in the calculations. If using the LCCA to justify non-selection of solar hot water heating, make all life cycle cost comparisons to a baseline system to provide domestic hot water without solar components. Analyze at least two different solar hot water methodologies to compare against the baseline system. Use a study period of 25 years and use the Utility cost information in Appendix K.

5.3.1.3. Proposed Material Identifications: In order to evaluate and rate the quality of the materials being proposed, including any material or equipment warranties exceeding the one year warranty in the contract clause “Warranty of Construction”, the Offeror shall include in the proposal material identification for major materials in each of the areas shown below. Provide this information tabular form supported, if necessary to clearly identify level of proposed quality, by catalog information (may provide on CD-ROM). . Table should include manufacturer’s name, model number, length of warranty, size/capacity (where available), efficiency (where applicable), and any other notes or information selected by the Offeror.

The Government will evaluate and consider materials and equipment proposed by brand name and model number as a quality standard. Unless substitution of a manufacturer, brand name or model is otherwise specifically prohibited in the contract, if the successful Offeror desires to substitute manufacturers, brand names or models after award, the substituted product must meet the contract requirements and be approved by the designer of record and the Government as equal in function, performance, quality and salient features to that initially proposed. Acceptance of the proposal is not a guaranty that the proposed products meet the contractual requirements.

(a) Architectural Finishes

• Interior Walls

• Floors

• Ceilings

• Exterior Walls

• Any Special Features

• Hardware systems (not individual hardware sets)

• Door systems/types (not individual doors)

• Window systems/types (not individual windows)

• Roofing Systems

(b) Furniture Systems: Not Used

(c) Mechanical Systems

• Central Heating/Cooling Equipment

• Pumps

• Air Handling Equipment

• HVAC System Control Equipment

• Energy Conservation Features

(d) Plumbing Systems

• Fixtures

• Domestic Hot Water Generator

(e) Electrical Systems

• Lighting Fixtures

• Main Switchgear and Panels

• Data, Telephone, Cable TV, Intercom, CCTV, or Other Special Systems as Identified in the SOW

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

Develop the following table, or similar, to identify quality betterments.

Improved Quality

Concise description of improved quality

Feature is included within the C ontract

Cost Limitation – YES/NO

Arch. Finishes

Etc.

5.3.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.3.2.1. General: It is the Army's objective that these buildings will have a 25-year useful design life before a possible reuse/repurpose or renovation requirement, to include normal sustainment, restoration, modernization activities and a 50-year building replacement life. Within that overriding theme the Government will evaluate the Offeror selected systems and components proposed in terms of warranties provided, maintenance considerations (frequency, estimated cost, access, equipment locations), operability (ease of use, placement of control features, simplicity), durability (withstand troop usage, ease of cleaning), sustainability, and energy consumption (HVAC, lighting, power). The minimum acceptable level of quality for finishes and materials for these buildings are those materials suitable for the expected population and usage. Residential or similar grade finishes and materials are not acceptable for inclusion in these buildings, unless otherwise specifically allowed in Section 01 10 00.

5.3.2.2. The Government encourages the Offeror to place emphasis on those design features which optimize and emphasize functional/operational requirements; interior/exterior finishes and systems; and life cycle/ energy efficiency. The Offeror may choose the lowest “Type of Construction” allowed by the Building Code for this occupancy/project and put the money into durable finishes and efficient systems. The features that the Government has identified below as desirable features will be given additional consideration in the evaluation. The items that the Government identified in paragraph 5.3.1 as preferable will be also be given additional consideration during the evaluation process, provided that they are included within the contract cost limitation identified in the Solicitation. Offeror-identified betterments may also be given additional consideration during the evaluation process, provided that they are included within the contract cost limitation identified in the solicitation. The order of importance for proposed betterments for rating purposes is as follows: desirable features, preferable items and other Offeror identified betterments. Unsubstantiated claims or narrative information will not be given evaluation credit during the evaluations. The following elements (not rated separately) will be considered in the evaluation of the building systems and materials of the various facilities:

(a) Architectural Finishes, Components and Systems:

Satisfactory proposals include finishes, components and systems which provide usable spaces for the intended purposes and that provide the basic function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for materials, and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, durability (stand up to troop usage), have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility.

Specific examples of desirable features: solid wood cabinetry; solid surface counter tops; ceramic tile; 25 year non-pro-rated, no-leak roof warranty; high efficiency windows and doors.

(b) Furniture Systems: Not Used

(c) Mechanical Components and Systems:

Satisfactory proposals include components and systems that provide the basic environmental control function necessary.

Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, reduce energy consumption, sustainability, maintainability (cyclical maintenance, access, equipment placement), and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility.

Specific examples of desirable features: sheet metal ductwork systems; high efficiency central equipment (i.e. 0.5 kW/ton chillers, variable speed pumping and air handlers, etc.)

(d) Plumbing Components and Systems:

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

Specific examples of desirable features: lifetime domestic hot water storage tank warranty; high efficiency equipment;

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

shower heads on hoses.

(e) Electrical Components and Systems:

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

Specific examples of desirable features: all copper conductors; additional telephone/data/cable TV outlets .

(f) ATFP Considerations: This consideration verifies the inclusion/compliance with the building related (laminate windows, design for progressive collapse, etc.) ATFP minimum standard constraints included in the Statement of Work. All proposals must be compliant with the ATFP requirements of the Statement of Work to be considered for award. Satisfactory proposals are compliant with all ATFP requirements.

(g) Site Utilities Components and Site Systems:

Satisfactory proposals include components and systems that provide the basic function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility.

Specific examples of desirable features: enhanced parking/roadway construction/surfaces; sidewalks above the minimum size and construction required; corrosion resistance; valves for isolation/repair of fluid systems; placement to allow future replacement/maintenance without significant impact to other systems or access to facilities

(h) Interoperability: Fire Alarm, Telephone, Cable Television, UMCS, and privatized utility systems (where applicable) must be integrated into the new facilities which require connection and interface with existing installation-wide systems must be accommodated in the proposed project.

(i) Solar Hot Water Heating: The Government will evaluate the systems and materials proposed for use in the solar domestic hot water system. Proposals that demonstrate solar hot water provisions above 30% will receive additional consideration during the evaluation, provided that it does not increase first cost beyond the contract cost limitation (CCL). No additional consideration will be given for proposals providing for more than 30% solar hot water if the proposed price exceeds the CCL. If the Offeror has provided life cycle cost analyses documenting the non-feasibility of the solar system provision, the Government will verify as reasonable and complete. Errors or inconsistencies in the calculations will be considered deficiencies during evaluations.

5.4. VOLUME 1 - TAB C – SUBFACTOR 3 – SITE DESIGN

5.4.1. Submission Requirements:

5.4.1.1. Presentation Drawings:

(a) Conceptual Site Plans showing improvements for grading, drainage, power, utilities, buildings, paving, walks, site lighting, and landscaping if applicable. Indicate all building setbacks and separations, which must meet antiterrorism design requirements.

(b) Schematic site/land-use plan showing facility placement and orientation, vehicular circulation, pedestrian circulation, and other site improvements to the extent applicable. This plan should demonstrate soldier/occupant considerations in the site design and the advantages included in the proposal with respect to pedestrian and vehicle circulation within the site and integration into the surrounding community.

5.4.1.2. Technical Approach Narrative:

Provide technical approach narrative, both qualitative and quantitative, defining the elements of the proposal. Preface the narratives with a design concepts narrative, providing the design rationale and basis of the proposal. It is acceptable to include all the sub-items shown below into a single combined narrative for the entire project. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure that all aspects identified in the evaluation criteria below are addressed. Whether individual narratives or a single combined narrative is provided, the maximum total length for narratives shall be five (5) typewritten pages.

(a) Grading – Not applicable

(b) Landscaping

• Plant Material Selection

• Other Feature Selection

(c) Pedestrian Circulation

• Development of Circulation Patterns

• Way Finding Between Facilities

• Separation from Vehicular Circulation

(d) Vehicle Circulation

• Development of Circulation Patterns

• Interface with Existing Street/Roadway Systems

(e) Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection

• Compliance with the Statement of Work Requirements.

5.4.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.4.2.1. This Subfactor considers the overall layout of the site and the various specialties which define a workable, pleasing environment for the soldiers. The proposed site development plan must incorporate all the specific requirements from the Statement of Work as well as comply with all statutory and regulatory requirements outlined therein. All site related Anti- Terrorism/Force Protection (ATFP) considerations must be included and/or addressed in the proposal.

Elements one (1) and two (2) below are equal in importance and are not separately rated. Element (3) is not separately rated but must meet the Solicitation requirements to be rated acceptable.

(1) Grading and Landscaping: Satisfactory proposals include reasonable amounts of cut/fill and regarding as necessary to ensure proper drainage and positive drainage away from facilities and parking areas. Landscaping provided would be the minimums required by the Statement of Work. Proposals which include innovative solutions to storm water management, landscaping to enhance the complex environment, or other similar improvements beyond the basic requirements will receive additional consideration during the proposal evaluation process.

(2) Pedestrian and Vehicle Circulation and Storage: Satisfactory proposals address and include all the specific requirements of the Statement of Work.

The following items will be considered with respect to pedestrian and vehicle circulation and storage. These are not sub-factors.

Pedestrian Considerations:

• Are all parking areas served by sidewalks?

• Are all facility entrances/exits served by a paved sidewalk system?

• Does the proposed sidewalk system provide direct, convenient access to all facilities?

• Is the new sidewalk system an extension of the existing adjacent sidewalk system?

• Are sidewalk systems enhanced by appropriate landscaping?

Vehicle Considerations:

• Are the vehicle entrance/exit ways pathways clear?

• Do the new vehicle roadways and access points tie into the existing roadway network in an efficient manner?

(3) ATFP Considerations: This element verifies the inclusion/compliance with the site related (setbacks, etc.) ATFP constraints included in the Statement of Work. All proposals must be compliant with the ATFP requirements of the Statement of Work to be considered for award. Satisfactory proposals are compliant with all ATFP requirements. This is a mandatory requirement to be rated as acceptable. Acceptance of the successful proposal does not constitute acceptance of design that does not conform to ATFP requirements.

5.5. VOLUME 1 - TAB D – SUBFACTOR 4 – SUSTAINABILITY REQUIREMENTS

5.5.1. Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall acknowledge that it understands the contract requirements for sustainable design and construction and that the final project will achieve a LEED Silver rating. The Offeror shall submit LEED NC v 2.2 Project Checklist for each non-exempt facility demonstrating how it will achieve the Silver LEED rating. One checklist may be provided for multiple identical facilities. If the Offeror proposes a higher LEED rating than silver, the proposal shall describe whether or not it involves additional costs and clearly indicate if such costs would detract from higher rated factors herein, such as functionality, quality of materials and systems, site work, etc.

5.5.2. Evaluation Criteria:

All requirements identified as mandatory in Section 01 10 00 or elsewhere in the Solicitation must be included and the proposal must meet the requirements of the LEED NC v 2.2 requirements for a Silver rating. The Government will provide additional evaluation consideration for proposals which include LEED points identified as preferred. The Government does not desire to pay more to obtain a higher LEED rating, such as Gold, if the additional cost would detract from the higher rated factors, herein.

6.0 VOLUMNE 2 - FACTOR 2 – REMAINING PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY PROPOSAL

6.1. VOLUME 2 - TAB A – SUBFACTOR 1 – PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND SUMMARY SCHEDULE

6.1.1. Submission Requirements:

6.1.1.1. Proposed Contract Duration: The Offeror shall propose the contract duration in the appropriate Contract Line Item Number in the CLIN Schedule, not to exceed the maximum contract duration specified in the CLIN.

6.1.1.2. Summary Schedule: Submit a summary level schedule for integrated design and construction. Schedules or diagrams may be provided separately in a size that is easily read, but shall be bound and clearly labeled as Tab B. This summary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Section 01 32 01.00 10:

Project Schedule. The summary schedule shall be task oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which…