12R0019_1.pdf

W26GLG20276136

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

AMENDMENT NO. 0001 to W91236-12-R-0019, Multiple Aw ard Task Order Contract (MATOC) for Construction Projects at Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington, VA.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 40

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 16-Feb-2012

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 W91236-12-R-0019

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Feb-2012

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

16-Feb-2012

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:

W91236-12-R-0019

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SECTION 00 11 00 - SOLICITATION, OFFER & AWARD

CONT

1. SECTION 00 21 00

a. Page 12, Provision A, OFFEROR’S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. ADD to paragraph 1.5.1.1.5:

“The Bidder Inquiry Key is: HWK51G-G1Z141.”

b. Page 15, Provision M, Bid Bond. Add the following: “The contractor will be required to submit, in Phase II, a letter of intent from their bonding company (on Bonding Company’s letterhead) that the contractor will be able to obtain bonding in the amount of $7,000,000.00. The contractor will also be required to submit a bid bond in Phase II with the amount based on the seed project amount.”

2. SECTION 00 22 10: DELETE in its entirety and REPLACE with the attached revised section. (NOTE: the changes are with track changes so that the contractors can see the changes).

3. SECTION 00 22 20: DELETE in its entirety and REPLACE with the attached revised section. (NOTE: the changes are with track changes so that the contractors can see the changes).

SECTION 00 22 10

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE SELECTION PROCEDURES

1. OVERVIEW

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3. PHASE 1 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION

FACTORS

4. PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

4.1 TAB A – STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

4.2 TAB B – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

4.3 TAB C – PAST PERFORMANCE

4.4 TAB D – TECHNICAL APPROACH

4.5 TAB E - ORGANIZATION

5. PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

5.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

5.2 EVALUATION

5.3 DEFINITIONS

5.4 EVALUATION RATING SYSTEM

5.5 PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE RATINGS

5.6 ATTACHMENTS

1 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME

CONTRACTOR

2 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE KEY SUBCONTRACTOR (OR PRIME IF

WORK NOT TO BE SUBCONTRACTED)

3 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE DESIGN FIRM OR IN-HOUSE DESIGN

CAPABILITY

4 - KEY PERSONNEL RESUME

5 - LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY PERSONNEL

6 - LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY SUBCONTRACTOR

7- LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR DESIGN FIRM

8 - PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

9 - PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TELEPHONE INTERVIEW

QUESTIONNAIRE

1. OVERVIEW

1.1 The Government is looking for ways to streamline construction, manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and achieve an aggressive schedule in executing task orders to meet the needs of Arlington National Cemetery. In this selection procedure, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as ”Offerors”) submit certain specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the construction with incidental design under the contract resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the qualifications in accordance with the criteria described herin and will short-list approximatelyno more than five (5) of the Phase 1 offerors to compete for the design-build contract in Phase 2. The Government will award at least one contract with multiple task orders to the Offeror(s) whose proposal(s) provides the Best Value to the Government.

1.2 In Phase 2, the short-listed offerors will submit proposals in accordance with Section 00 22 20. In Phase 2, the short-listed offerors will be evaluated based on the additional evaluation criteria contained in Section 00 22 20. This procurement contemplates the initial award of a task order for a project whose specifications will be defined as part of an amendment to this solicitation.

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Proposals should be submitted initially in Phase I on the most favorable terms from a capability standpoint. Do not assume that offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

2.2 Firms formally organized as construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals.

Associations may be as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal.

2.3 Submit the proposal in a tabbed, three-ring binder. Note that the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, where indicated below. PHASE 1 DOES

NOT INVOLVE PRICING SUBMISSION.

Proposal Format

Written materials: 8 ½” x 11” format, using 10 point or larger font size, in bound volumes, using 3-ring binders (except that Pro Forma material and price proposal shall be submitted in a closed manila envelope). Each bound volume will contain a Title Sheet on the cover for ready identification of the proposal and a full table of contents, separated by Tabs, as prescribed herein.

One searchable electronic portable document format (* .pdf) of the entire submittal should be submitted (except the Pro Forma material).

The prime, consortium, or joint venture’s name, address, a signature of the official that can bind the firm and a telephone number shall appear in the lower left corner of the title page of any document/volume to be evaluated.

Volume number, section and date submitted shall appear in the bottom right corner of each page (along with the revision number for the amended page, if necessary).

Number of pages: The proposal shall be limited to a maximum of 75 typewritten pages. Each side of a double sided page shall constitute one page.

Number of copies: Submit one original and four (4) copies of printed matter (Bound Volumes).

For Pro Forma information; Submit the original and one copy. Pro Forma information at this phase (Phase I) includes; SF 1442 without price, and Proposal Data Sheet attached to this section.

2.4 Joint Venture Proposal Requirements

2.4.1 When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign the SF 1442 unless a written agreement by the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. In addition, a copy of the joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the proposal. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration. If this is an 8(a) or HubZone joint venture, the offeror shall ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124 and 13 CFR Part 126, respectively

2.4.2 NOTE: 8(a) Joint Venture Offeror or Offeror submitting Proposal as HubZone Joint Venture shall submit evidence from Offerors SBA Servicing Agency that the Offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this specific project with the appropriate SBA Representative or Business Opportunity Specialist

3. PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

Location Factor

Number Description Relative Importance

Tab A SF 1442 and Proposal Data Sheet N/A

Tab B Factor 1 Specialized Experience 1st (Most Important Factor) Tab C Factor 2 Past Performance 2nd (Slightly less important than

Factor 1) Tab D Factor 3 Technical Approach 3rd (Slightly less than Factor 2) Tab E Factor 4 Organization 4th (Slightly less than Factor 3)

4. PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

4.1 TAB A – STANDARD FORM (SF) 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

Submit the SF 1442 without price, completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror. Include the completed proposal data sheet (See Attachment 8, provided at the end of this Section).

4.2 TAB B – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

4.2.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The Offerors should demonstrate recent, relevant construction and/or design-build experience on similar projects, using the “Company Specialized Experience” forms attached. Offerors may demonstrate experience as the prime contractor or subcontractor for the projects chosen. Offerors may identify state and local government, or private projects that are similar to the Government’s requirements. If the Offeror is a joint venture or limited liability corporation provide experience information demonstrating the experience of each proposed entity as is relevant to their proposed role on in this project procurement. Submit projects that are currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no more that five (5) years preceding the date of this Solicitation. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those preformed by the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member. The Offeror shall submit not less than three (3) projects nor more than five (5).

4.2.1.1 The offeror’s specialized experience will be considered relevant to the Government’s requirements per this solicitation based upon: scope and type of work, magnitude, and complexity compared to the following list. The projects submitted should include The work contemplated in this procurement will include the following features:

(a) Repair or expansion of parking structures to include: structural, drainage, driving surface (if separate from structural), signage, traffic controls, associated landscaping and site work.

(b) New work, repair, or improvements to roads, pavement, outdoor assembly areas and walkways to include: concrete, flagstone, associated landscaping, utility relocations and improvements, drainage, soil erosion control.

(c) New work, repair, or expansion of existing columbaria to include: landscaping, monumental natural stone, tuck pointing with Portland cement-based mortar, sealants, lighting and power, access walks, drainage.

(d) Re-routing underground utilities including: water, sanitary sewer, electrical, drainage and storm sewers, natural gas, communications.

(e) Building restoration in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for Historic Preservation,

(f) New work, repair or improvements to landscaping or construction approved by either the National Capitol Planning Commission or the Commission on Fine Arts.

(g) Repair or expansion of office buildings or special use buildings including:

HVAC, plumbing, structural, electrical, roofing and flashing, exterior envelope, fenestrations, architectural, finishes.

(h) NOT USEDApplication of LEED/sustainability concepts in construction and/or design

(i) Construction value of at least $750,000.00

4.2.1.2 If not described in the project list, The the offeror should describe; (1) any previous teaming experience between current team members proposed pursuant to Section 4.5.2.1 for TAB “E” (ORAGANIZATION);, if not described in the project list. Describe (2) team members’ experience on LEED projects; , if not included on the project list.

Describe (3) team members’ experience designing and constructing to the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for Historic Preservation. Describe (4) team members’ experience designing and constructing projects approved by either the National Capitol Planning Commission or the Commission on Fine Arts. Offeror may describe design-build experience on other type projects. The above information is limited to projects that are well underway or that have been completed and turned over no more than the past five years preceding the date of this solicitation.

4.2.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

4.2.2.1 The following extent of experience elements are in order of relative importance (not separately rated):

(1) Prime/construction contractor (most important)

(2) Design firm(s) and subcontractor design consultants ( important)

4.2.2.2 The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, relevant experience of the prime contractor and design firms in design, construction or design-build, as relevant to their role in this procurement on this project. The Government’s evaluation will assess the extent of the relevancy and breath of the Offerors’ experiences as measured against the range of project features listed in paragraph 4.2.1.1 above. If the design will be accomplished in-house, rather than by subcontract, then the design element of specialized experience will still be evaluated, realizing that the work is being done in-house.

Experience on the relevant projects identified in the project lists will receive more consideration than experience provided in the supplemental narrative. The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations. Federal Government project experience will not be rated inherently more important than non- Federal Government project experience.

4.2.2.3 The Offeror must submit the requested information to demonstrate a record of recent, relevant experience in both design and construction of the types of work listed (which can include similar state or local government or private counterparts) in this solicitation.

Recent experience includes projects well underway (see above criteria) or those completed and turned over within five (5) years of the solicitation issue date for this RFP for design or construction experience. Joint Venture partners should each demonstrate experience commensurate with their role on this project or explain in the supplemental narrative how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project.

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

4.2.2.5 The Offeror and its proposed design firm(s) shall demonstrate a history of recent, relevant experience. Relevant experience of proposed key personnel alone will not be sufficient to demonstrate a firm’s specialized experience.

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

(1) Number, size, type work, complexity, location

(2) Dates (well under way or completed no more than 5 years preceding date of this Solicitation)

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

4.2.2.7 Previous design-build experience is not necessary to be eligible for award, but the for a satisfactory rating. The Government may consider previous D-B experience a strength, even if the experience is on different type projects than this project. Similarly, the Government may consider previous recent teaming experience among the team members as value added, even if on different type design and/or construction projects than this project.

4.2.2.8 The Prime Contractor or design firms, if design is not to be self-performed, must demonstrate qualifications and experience in sustainable design. Qualification will be based on The Government will evaluate the Offerors’ experience on projects that have achieved US Green Building Council’s LEED certification or project experience on completed design-build projects that were validated as having achieving LEED Silver rating or higher. Additional consideration will be given if both the Prime and its design firms demonstrate qualifications and experience on LEED projects. The Prime Contractor or design firms, if design is not to be self-performed, must demonstrate qualifications and experience in work approved by either the National Capitol Planning Commission (NCPC), or approved by the Counsel on Fine Arts (CFA), or compliant with the Secretary of Interior’s standards for Historic Preservation (SIHP). Qualifications will be based upon The Government will evaluate the Offerors’ experience with work approved by the National Capitol Planning Commission (NCPC), or approved by the Counsel on Fine Arts (CFA), or compliant with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Preservation (SIHP) . Additional consideration may be given where both the prime contractor and its designers demonstrate qualifications and experience on real property work approved by the NCPC or CFA, or where both the prime contractor and designers demonstrate work in compliance with the SIHP.

4.3 TAB C – PAST PERFORMANCE

4.3.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Past performance refers to relevancy of the experience provided by the offeror to the Government, and quality of recent project experience from the owner’s perspective.

The Offeror shall provide customer reference name(s), company affiliation and current phone numbers, as well as other information indicated on the “Company Specialized Experience” forms. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division, unit or team member submitting the offer.

Additional past performance examples may be submitted for consideration on any other member of a Teaming Arrangement that will perform a major or critical aspect of the project. Projects cited shall be currently well underway (fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or construction substantially completed within five (5) years preceding the date of this solicitation. The Government may contact and interview the points of contact and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the listed reference, if the listed reference is not available. See the sample questionnaire shown at Attachment 9. The Offeror may briefly provide information on problems encountered on identified projects and any corrective action. In addition to the references provided under TAB B, Specialized Experience, provide no more than five (5) additional references on completed Company Specialized Experience forms.

4.3.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

4.3.2.1 Elements to be considered under Past Performance in relative order of importance (not rated separately):

(1) Relevance

(2) Confidence

4.3.2.2 The Government will perform a confidence assessment, considering the degree of success of the team's recent (well under way or turned over no longer than five (5) years preceding the date of this solicitation) relevant experience. See explanation of “well underway” and “relevant” under the Factor “Specialized Experience”. The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance. The Government will assess it’s confidence level that the offeror will successfully complete the work. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member.

Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of design or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and designer or contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, warranty work, etc. (see the interview form at Attachment 9). The Government will not release the interview forms to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments. The Government places a higher value on projects, which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation including, but not limited to, telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal, CCASS/ACASS or other agency performance databases, offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government may place a higher value on projects which demonstrate successful completion of projects approved by the National Capitol Planning Commission, or Counsel on Fine Arts, or compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s standards for Historic Preservation . The Government’s evaluation is not limited to past performance information on the cited example projects. Past Performance information related to the applicable projects submitted for Specialized Experience may be afforded more importance than other sources of past performance information or projects.

4.3.2.3 Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its proposed key personnel, apart from that of the entity. If the Government does not obtain past performance information for the projects identified by the offeror and cannot establish a past performance record for the offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance risk will be considered “unknown”. The Government may be unable to obtain much, if any, qualitative information on past performance from references for efforts as subcontractors on submitted projects due to the Government’s or other owner’s lack of privity with subcontractors.

4.4 TAB D TECHNICAL APPROACH

4.4.1 Design and Construction Overall Technical Approach:

Provide information that describes the offeror’s intended technical approach to executing construction of work designed by others, and design-build task orders per the detailed requirements herein. Limit the information defining the overall technical approach to ten pages or less. Clearly but concisely describe the technical approach to project initiation, project management and execution, project completion and close out. The ten page limit does not include resumes submitted for key personnel, below.

4.4.1.1 Submittal Requirements for Overall Technical Approach:

Describe the technical approach to construct and design-build the project types discussed in paragraph 4.2.1.1. design and construction of these facilities. Include any considerations of fast-tracking design and construction; panelized construction, or pre-engineered components. Address parking structures, monumental stone work, roads, pavement and walkways, columbaria, multiple utilities, pre-cast parts, standard designs of stick-built framing, etc. Include the technical approach for historic preservation, and approval by either the National Capitol Planning Committee (NCPC) or the Commission on Fine Arts (CFA).

4.4.1.2 Evaluation Criteria for Overall Technical Approach

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach for work designed by others or design-build including, but not limited to; task order initiation, project management and execution, fast tracking design and construction, compliance with Secretary of Interior’s standards for Historic Preservation, and obtaining approval by either the NCPC or CFA, and close out.

4.4.2 NOT USED

4.4.3 Planning and Scheduling:

4.4.3.1 Submittal Requirements:

Describe the procedures used to plan and schedule construction of work designed by others and design-build work. Address the use of planning and scheduling to (1) accommodate the dignity of internments and ceremonies, and (2) fast track construction of work designed by others, and (3) integrate the constructors and designers into design-build work, and (4) during design, provide the Government sufficient information and calendar time for review prior to acceptance for construction . Include specific means of integrating schedule, work physically completed, and cost control such as; Budgeted Cost of Work Performed, Earned Value, or similar. Address how the offeror, including designers, constructors, consultants and subcontractors, will use schedules during execution of the work. Address the level of company management engaged in planning and scheduling for each company engaged.

4.4.3.2 Evaluation Criteria Planning and Scheduling

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s planning and scheduling capabilities to manage construction and integrated fast track design-build schedules. Considerations may include use of automated scheduling methods, specific means of integrating physical work complete with schedule and cost as well as the level of management involved in planning and scheduling.

4.4.4 NOT USED

4.4.5 Quality Control:

4.4.5.1 Submittal Requirements for Quality Control:

Describe the elements of, and processes used in Quality Control. Address how it will be applied across the offeror’s entire team for both construction of work designed by others, and for design-build. Address by name or position in each firm who is responsible for Quality Control and their interaction with each project team. Include the roles and authorities of the key Quality Control personnel. . Describe the proposed quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan. Provide specific information on how you will manage design quality control, track design evolution and changes during design to meet the schedule and to facilitate quicker Government reviews. Provide information on how you will handle internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, submittal reviews, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as-built, and completion documentation. In addition to the required designer-of-record roles specified within the RFP for maintaining integrity of the design, describe any other DOR involvement in the quality control process, if any. There is no need to submit a quality control plan as the successful offeror will provide that after award. In phase 1, the Government is interested in demonstrable capabilities to assure and control quality and how the offeror can achieve or exceed the contract’s minimum quality control system requirements.

4.4.5.2 Evaluation Criteria for Quality Control:

The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the firms Quality Control elements, and processes, as well as roles and authority of key Quality Control personnel. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in Quality Control of design evolution, shop drawings, submittal reviews, Designer of Record engagement in Quality Control, and other aspects noted in this section . The Government will assess the firm’s understanding of, and likely effectiveness of the firm’s Quality Control.

4.5 TAB E – ORGANIZATION

4.5.1 Submission Requirements:

Provide information that describes the offeror’s organizational approach to executing construction designed by others and design-build per the detailed requirements herein.

Limit the information to seven pages or less. Clearly but concisely describe the organizational approach to project management and execution. The seven page limit does not include resumes submitted for key personnel, below. The information submitted for TAB E shall not exceed seven pages, exclusive of the resume’s for the key personnel.

4.5.2 Organization:

4.5.2.1 Submittal Requirements for Organization

Describe what firms, their resources (numbers of personnel available for each key position, and how their resources will be utilized. Describe their roles and responsibilities, and any contractual arrangements that have been established. Clearly describe any teaming or joint venture arrangements, including a clear description of each firm’s roles and responsibilities on the project. The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its design firms(s) (see attachment 7). A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) may be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation). Include a simple organizational chart, illustrating the organization, including the proposed quality control personnel, and including the total number of personnel available for each key position other than corporate officers. Present a matrix of responsibilities for each firm in executing design and construction activities for each major type of work detailed in paragraph 4.2.1.1 of this solicitation. shown for this contract (parking structures pavement and walks, columbaria, monumental natural stone work, …). Identify the design firm(s) chosen for the project, if not to be self-performed.

The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its design firms(s) (see attachment 7). Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how the design and construction process will be managed and the delegations of authority within the team. Include a key personnel organization chart that clearly depicts the key positions and the names of the personnel, their firm affiliations and their office locations, their job/position title within this organization. The key personnel organization chart shall be consistent with the corporate organization chart, with the matrix of responsibilities assigned to the D-B team firms, and with the list of key personnel to be provided under the Tab, “Key Personnel”.

4.5.2.2 Evaluation Criteria for Organization

The Government will evaluate the clarity and strength of the overall organization., The Government will evaluate the performance capability of the Offeror through it’s proposed the structure and staffing to execute approximately eight four simultaneous task orders in addition to other projected work of the firm.

4.5.3 Key Personnel Capabilities and Experience:

4.5.3.1 Submittal Requirements for Key Personnel

Provide resume’s of key personnel in the format at attachment, KEY PERSONNEL RESUME. Provide resumes for each position on the key personnel organization chart at paragraph 4.5.2.1, Submittal Requirements for Organization and as specified below.

a. Designers-of-record (architectural, electrical, mechanical, fire protection, civil, landscape architect, structural separate from civil, and communications) shall be registered in the one of the 50 United States, its territories or protectorates. The fire protection engineer of record shall also be a registered professional engineer (P.E.) who has passed the fire protection engineering written examination administered by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES), or a registered P.E. in a related engineering discipline with a minimum of 5 years experience, dedicated to fire protection engineering that can be verified with documentation.

b. The minimum qualifications of the Design Manager are: (i) baccalaureate or higher degree in engineering, architecture, or landscape architecture, plus (ii) 5 years experience in design, plus (iii) 3 years experience as person in responsible charge of multi-discipline work, plus (iv) professional registration in engineering, architecture or landscape architecture.

c. The minimum qualifications of Design Quality Manager (Design Quality Control Manager) are: (i) baccalaureate, or higher degree in engineering, architecture or landscape architecture, plus(ii) professional registration, plus (iii) 5 years of design experience, plus (iv) 3 years experience in design quality management in addition to the design experience.

d. The minimum qualifications for construction Contractor Quality Control System Manager are: (i) 10 years of construction experience, plus (ii) 3 years experience as Quality Control manager for construction (which may be included in the 10 years of construction experience), (iii) plus familiarity with shop drawing submittals and approvals, plus (iv) familiarity with Corps of Engineers three-phase construction inspection system, or other formally documented inspection system that addresses approved submittals, review of drawings and specification, preceding work, safety, establishes quality of workmanship, compliance with approved submittals, daily or periodic checks to ensure continued compliance.

e. The minimum qualifications of Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) are: (i) 5 years experience in construction industry safety, or 3 years experience in construction industry safety with a current Certified Safety Professional (CSP) issued by the Board of Certified Safety Professionals, or 3 years experience in construction industry safety with a baccalaureate or higher degree in safety or health, plus (ii) documented completion of the 30-hour OSHA Construction Safety class, or equivalent 30 hour class, completed within the last 5 years, plus (iii) an average of 24 hours safety training per year for the last 5 years.

f. The minimum qualifications for the firm’s Project Manager are: (i) baccalaureate or higher degree in engineering, architecture, landscape architecture, engineering management, or construction engineering, plus (ii) 5 years of construction management experience, plus (iii) 24 hours training in project management principals, or 3 college semester hour credits in project management, plus (iii) 3 years experience in management of design or design-build projects.

g. The minimum qualification for On-Site Superintendent are; (i) 10 years construction experience, plus (ii) 5 years experience as superintendent managing multiple trades and subcontractors in addition to the 10 years of other construction experience, plus (iii) familiarity with using automated network analysis software to control schedule.

4.5.3.2 Evaluation Criteria for Key Personnel

The Government will evaluate the required information to determine how well the Offeror identified and demonstrates that its key personnel meet or exceed minimum qualifications necessary. Factors include previous satisfactory experience in similar types of work to manage, control, and perform the design; and to manage control and perform construction; as well as professional registration. The Government will consider whether a resume is provided for each position in the key personnel organization chart under paragraph 4.5.2.1 Submittal Requirements for Organization. Past Performance of key personnel proposed for this contract may be taken into account when it comes to the attention of the Government. Additional consideration may be given for key design personnel with prior experience obtaining approvals from the NCPC or the CFA.

Additional consideration may be given where both key designers and key construction personnel have prior experience completing projects in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for Historic Preservation.

5. PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

5.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

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

5.2 EVALUATION

The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor.

Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for the Phase 1 submission, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine their performance capability. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to discuss, clarify, or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it in response to Phase 1.

The Government reserves the right to allow proposal corrections, if deemed necessary to determine the most highly qualified offerors to shortlist for Phase 2.

The Contracting Officer, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will select up to five (5) of the most highly qualified offerors to short-list for Phase 2.

5.3 DEFINITIONS

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

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

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

Strength Means an aspect of a proposal that appreciably decreases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance or that represents a significant benefit to the Government.

Deviation Proposal implies or specifically offers a deviation below specified criteria. The offeror may or may not have called the deviation to the Government's attention. A deviation is a deficiency.

The proposal must conform to the solicitation requirements for award.

5.4 EVALUATION RATING SYSTEM

General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor and subfactor (if any). The SSEB will rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements. They will not compare proposals. After all proposals are rated, the Government will compare the ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages of proposals against each other in order to determine which Offerors are the most highly qualified under Phase 1 to short-list for participation in Phase 2.

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

Rating System: After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of “Unacceptable”, “Marginal”, “Acceptable”, “Good” or “ Outstanding” to each factor (with the exception of Factor 2, PAST PERFORMANCE) (except those factors rated as GO/NO-GO), which will reflect the Government's confidence assessment in each offeror's performance capabilitytechnical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP. The adjectival ratings shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:

1. Outstanding: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has significant technical strength(s). Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

2. Good: Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains technical strength(s). Strengths outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

3. Acceptable: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

4. Marginal: Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses that are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

5. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.

If the Government determines that a proposal contains a deficiency or that its assessment rating of any factor is “unacceptable”, the proposal will not be eligible for award.

5.5 PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT

5.5.1 The Government will assess the level of confidence the Government has that the offeror will successfully complete the contract based upon Past Performance information provided by the offeror. The Government’s Performance Confidence Assessment includes two elements;

relevance of, and demonstrated performance on, contracts projects provided by the offeror.

SSEB members and the SSA may use personal knowledge or information from other sources in its evaluation of an offeror’s past performance, provided such information is consistent with the established evaluation criteria of the RFP. Each contract project provided by the offeror will be assigned a factor evaluated for Relevance:

1. Very Relevant: Past performance involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

2. Relevant: Past performance involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

3. Somewhat Relevant: Past performance involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

4. Not Relevant: Past performance involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Each contract project provided by the offeror will be assigned a factorevaluated for Confidence.

After evaluating all projects submitted, the SSEB will assign one of the adjectival ratings defined below, which will reflect the Government’s confidence in the Offerors’ performance capability, as demonstrated in it’s proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the solicitation. Offerors that have no relevant performance record will be given a neutral/unknown confidence rating.

The ratings are:

1. Unknown Confidence (Neutral): No relevant performance record is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the Offeror or key team members/subcontractors. This is neither a negative or positive assessment.

2. Substantial Confidence: Based on the Offeror's recent relevant performance record, The Government has a high expectation the offeror will successfully perform the required work.

3. Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the Offeror's recent relevant past performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required work.

4. Limited Confidence: Based on the Offeror's recent relevant past performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required work.

5. No Confidence: Based on the Offeror's recent relevant past performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required work.

SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 1

COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME CONTRACTOR

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company constructed within the last five years indicating experience with projects of similar type and scope. Use one form per project.

1. Type of Facility Represented _________________________________________________________________

2. Your Firm’s Name ____________________________________________________________________

3. Name of Project______________________________________________________________________________

4. Location of Project______________________________________________________________________________

5. Owner ______________________________________________________________________________

6. General Scope of Construction Project

7. Your Role (Prime, Joint Venture, or Subcontractor, etc.) and Work Your Company Self-Performed :

8. Construction Cost ____________________________________________________________________

9. Extent and Type of Work You Subcontracted Out

10. Was construction documentation created in accordance with LEED requirements?

11. Were construction documents or design approved by the National Capitol Planning Commission or the Counsel on Fine Arts, or compliant with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for Historic Preservation?

12. Dates Construction: Began___________________ Completed______________

13. Your Performance Evaluation by Owner, if known

14. Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages? ____________________________________

(If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation)

15. Owner’s Point of Contact for Reference (Name and Company Affiliation)

16. Current Telephone Number of Reference POC________________________________________________

SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 2

NOT USED

SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 3

COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

DESIGN FIRM OR IN-HOUSE DESIGN CAPABILITY

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company designed within the last five years indicating experience with projects of similar type and scope. Use one form per project.

1.Type of Facility Represented __________________________________________________________

2. Your Firm’s Name __________________________________________________________________

3. Name of Project_____________________________________________________________________

4.Location of Project___________________________________________________________________

5.Owner ____________________________________________________________________________

6.General Scope of Construction Project ___________________________________________________

7.Summary of Your Role in Design of this Project, including implementing LEED

8. Were construction documents or design approved by the National Capitol Planning Commission or the Counsel on Fine Arts, or compliant with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for Historic Preservation?

9. Identify Estimated (“E”) or Actual (“A”) Construction Cost __________________________________

10. Extent and Type of Work You Subcontracted _______________________________________________

11. Dates Design: Began___________________ Completed______________

12. Dates Construction: Began___________________ Completed______________

13. Your Performance Evaluation, if known __________________________________________________

14. Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages? ______________________________ (If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation)

15. Owner’s Point of Contact for Reference (Name and Company) ___________________________

Current Telephone Number of Reference POC____________________________________

SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 4

KEY PERSONNEL RESUME

Use a continuation sheet, if needed. NOTE: Match the positions on this page to the list of key personnel in the narrative submission requirements and evaluation criteria.

1. Your Name and Title_________________________________________________________________

2. Your Assignment on this Project________________________________________________________

3. Name of Your Firm___________________________________________________________________

4. No. of Years: With this Firm__________ With other Firms____________

5. Education: Degree(s)/Year/Specialization_________________________________________________

6. Active Registration, if any: No._______, State(s) ______, First Year/ Current Year ______/______

7. Describe Your Specific Experience and Qualifications Relevant to this Project:

8. SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 5

LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY PERSONNEL

TO: Contracting Officer SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Contract for ____________________

Dear Sir or Madam:

I hereby make the unequivocal commitment that, in the event of an award of a contract to (Fill in name of Proposer), that I will fulfill the duty of (Job Title).

Sincerely, (prospective employee signs) Date: __________

SECTION 00 22 10 – ATTACHMENT 6

NOT USED

SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 7

LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR DESIGN FIRM

(USE COMPANY LETTERHEAD)

TO: Contracting Officer SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Contract for ____________________

Dear Sir or Madam:

I hereby…