W91236-20-R-2005 Amendment 4 DLA Ops Center.pdf

W9123620R2005

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 0005 is issued to provide the follow ing:

1. Provide changes to Factor 1, Past Performance, and Factor 3, Small Business Participation Plan.

2. Modify CLIN 0005 “DLA Aviation Ops Center - WELLS IN ROCK - UNIT COST”.

3. Modify CLIN 0006 “SPECIAL FOUNDATIONS (PILES AND PILE CAPS)” unit of measure and quantity.

4. Provide the revised CLIN Schedule.

5. Modify solicitation to reflect revised CLIN structure.

All other terms and conditions remains unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 39

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 17-Jul-2020

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 W9123620R2005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-May-2020

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

17-Jul-2020

CODE

USACE, NORFOLK DISTRICT OFFICE

CONTRACTING OFFICE

803 FRONT STREET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1011

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0005

Amendment 0005 is issued to provide the following:

1. Provide changes to Factor 1, Past Performance, and Factor 3, Small Business Participation Plan.

2. Modify CLIN 0005 “DLA Aviation Ops Center - WELLS IN ROCK - UNIT COST”.

3. Modify CLIN 0006 “SPECIAL FOUNDATIONS (PILES AND PILE CAPS)” unit of measure and quantity.

4. Provide the revised CLIN Schedule.

5. Modify solicitation to reflect revised CLIN structure.

All other terms and conditions remains unchanged.

REMINDER: THIS IS THE FOURTH AMENDMENT FOR W91236-20-R-2005, AND IS LISTED AS

AMENDMENT 0005. THE THIRD AMENDMENT FOR W91236-20-R-2005 WAS LISTED AS

AMENDMENT 0004. AMENDMENTS 0003 DOES NOT EXIST.

THE GOVERNMENT INTENDS TO ISSUE ONE MORE AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE ALL

PROJENET REPOSNES. THIS AMENDMENT WILL BE ISSUED NO LATER THAN COB 07/20/2020.

THE PROPOSAL DUE DATE WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED. PLEASE PLAN ACCORDINGLY.

1. REVISIONS TO EVALUATION CRITERIA

Refer to the changes as reflected in the amendment below.

2. MODIFICATION TO CLIN 0005

CLIN 0005 “DLA Aviation Ops Center – WELLS IN ROCK – UNIT COST” is hereby revised to remove “steel encasements”.

3. MODIFICATION TO CLIN 0006

CLIN 0006 “SPECIAL FOUNDATIONS (PILES AND PILE CAPS)” unit of measure is hereby changed from Job to Linear Foot. The pricing detail quantity has increased by 5,739.00 from 1.00 to 5,740.00.

4. ATTACHMENTS

The following attachment accompanies this amendment:

Attachment 7: Revised Clin Schedule Rev 1

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

CLIN 0001

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

DEMO BLDG 33 - All costs in connection with demolition of warehouse Building 33, including removal and disposal of Hazardous Materials, all related site demolition, site improvements and site utilities complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0002-0015. Source of funds is MILCON.

To:

DEMO BLDG 33 - All costs in connection with demolition of warehouse Building 33, including removal and disposal of Hazardous Materials, all related site demolition, site improvements and site utilities complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0002-0011 and 0014. Source of funds is MILCON.

CLIN 0002

CONSTRUCT OPS CTR PH2 - All costs in connection with construction of new DLA Ops Center, building construction only, excluding all "special costs" as identified in CLIN 0006, complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001 & 0003-0015. Source of funds is MILCON.

CONSTRUCT OPS CTR PH2 - All costs in connection with construction of new DLA Ops Center, building construction only, excluding all "special costs" as identified in CLIN 0006, complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001 & 0003-0011 and 0014. Source of funds is MILCON.

CLIN 0003

SITE WORK - All costs in connection with construction of new DLA Ops Center Site Work, including all related site preparation, site improvements and site utilities complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0002 & 0004-0015.

Source of funds is MILCON.

SITE WORK - All costs in connection with construction of new DLA Ops Center Site Work, including all related site preparation, site improvements and site utilities complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0002 & 0004-0011 and 0014. Source of funds is MILCON.

CLIN 0004

WELLS IN SOIL - UNIT COST for installation of geothermal wells through SOIL (installation is as described in SPEC SECTION 23 81 47); include drilling, steel encasement, grouting and associated vertical piping. The cost of the rest of the items in SPEC SECTION 23 81 47 (including permits, heat pumps, system equipment, piping pumps, electrical equipment, controls, ground heat exchanger) shall be included in CLIN 0003. Assume total bid quantity for well installation through SOIL is 16,280 LF; in accordance with FAR 52.211-18, the UNIT PRICE in this CLIN 0004 is intended to provide for field adjustment in the case where the actual field amount drilled through SOIL varies. Complete work as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0003 & 0005-0015. Source of funds is MILCON.

WELLS IN SOIL - UNIT COST for installation of geothermal wells through SOIL (installation is as described in SPEC SECTION 23 81 47); include drilling, steel encasement, grouting and associated vertical piping. The cost of the rest of the items in SPEC SECTION 23 81 47 (including permits, heat pumps, system equipment, piping pumps, electrical equipment, controls, ground heat exchanger) shall be included in CLIN 0003. Assume total bid quantity for well installation through SOIL is 16,280 LF; in accordance with FAR 52.211-18, the UNIT PRICE in this CLIN 0004 is intended to provide for field adjustment in the case where the actual field amount drilled through SOIL varies. Complete work as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0003 & 0005-0011 and 0014. Source of funds is

MILCON.

CLIN 0005

WELLS IN ROCK - UNIT COST for installation of geothermal wells through ROCK (installation is as described in SPEC SECTION 23 81 47); include drilling, steel encasement, grouting and associated vertical piping. The cost of the rest of the items in SPEC SECTION 23 81 47 (including permits, heat pumps, system equipment, piping pumps, electrical equipment, controls, ground heat exchanger) shall be included in CLIN 0003. Assume total bid quantity for well installation through ROCK is 93,720 LF; in accordance with FAR 52.211-18, the UNIT PRICE in this CLIN 0005 is intended to provide for field adjustment in the case where the actual field amount drilled through ROCK varies. Complete work as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0004 & 0006-0015. Source of funds is

WELLS IN ROCK - UNIT COST for installation of geothermal wells through ROCK (installation is as described in SPEC SECTION 23 81 47); include drilling, grouting and associated vertical piping. The cost of the rest of the items in SPEC SECTION 23 81 47 (including permits, heat pumps, system equipment, piping pumps, electrical equipment, controls, ground heat exchanger) shall be included in CLIN 0003. Assume total bid quantity for well installation through ROCK is 93,720 LF; in accordance with FAR 52.211-18, the UNIT PRICE in this CLIN 0005 is intended to provide for field adjustment in the case where the actual field amount drilled through ROCK varies. Complete work as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0004 & 0006-0011 and 0014. Source of funds is

CLIN 0006

SPECIAL FOUNDATIONS (PILES AND PILE CAPS) - All costs in connection with construction of new DLA Ops Center special foundations (piles and pile caps), complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0005 & 0007- 0015. Source of funds is MILCON.

SPECIAL FOUNDATIONS (PILES AND PILE CAPS) - UNIT COST for installation of new DLA Ops Center special foundations (piles and pile caps), complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0005 & 0007-0011 and 0014. Source of funds is MILCON.

The pricing detail quantity has increased by 5,739.00 from 1.00 to 5,740.00.

The unit of issue has changed from Job to Linear Foot.

CLIN 0007

PARKING LOT PAVEMENT - All costs in connection with provision of asphalt to final grade in lieu of gravel in employee parking lot (COST DIFFERENCE - Cost to provide gravel parking should remain in CLIN 0003 Site Work), as indicated on CP103 and CP104 and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0006 & 0008 -0015. Source of funds is MILCON.

Option to be exercised within 180 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

PARKING LOT PAVEMENT - All costs in connection with provision of asphalt to final grade in lieu of gravel in employee parking lot (COST DIFFERENCE - Cost to provide gravel parking should remain in CLIN 0003 Site Work), as indicated on CP103 and CP104 and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0006 & 0008 -0011 and 0014. Source of funds is MILCON. Option to be exercised within 180 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

CLIN 0008

ADDITIONAL CANOPY - All costs in connection with construction of a canopy that stretches from the entrance vestibule of the two-story portion of the building to the east and west, stopping at the five-story portion and at the finished face of Building 32 complete as shown on drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0007 & 0009-0015. Source of funds is MILCON. Option to be exercised within 180 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance

ADDITIONAL CANOPY - All costs in connection with construction of a canopy that stretches from the entrance vestibule of the two-story portion of the building to the east and west, stopping at the five-story portion and at the finished face of Building 32 complete as shown on drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0007 & 0009-0011 and 0014. Source of funds is MILCON. Option to be exercised within 180 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

CLIN 0009

GENERATOR RELOCATION - All costs in connection with relocation of existing emergency generators, site demolition, site repair, and site preparation complete as shown on drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0008 & 0010-0015. Source of funds is MILCON. Option to be exercised within 180 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance

GENERATOR RELOCATION - All costs in connection with relocation of existing emergency generators, site demolition, site repair, and site preparation complete as shown on drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001-0008 & 0010-0011 and 0014. Source of funds is MILCON. Option to be exercised within 180 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

CLIN 0010

FF&E - All costs in connection with providing Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment (FF&E) complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001- 0009 & 0011-0015. Source of funds is Non-MILCON. Option to be exercised within 365 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

FF&E - All costs in connection with providing Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment (FF&E) complete as shown on the drawings and specified excluding the work described in CLIN 0001- 0009 & 0011 and 0014. Source of funds is Non-MILCON. Option to be exercised within 365 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

CLIN 0011

NEW GENERATOR - All costs to procure and install all 150 KW Standby Diesel Generator per specifications SECTION 26 32 15.00 10 for the DLA Operations Center - PH-2, complete, including all work incidental thereto as shown on the drawings and as specified exclusive of CLIN 0001-0010 & 0012-0015. Source of funds is Non-MILCON. Option to be exercised within 365 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

NEW GENERATOR - All costs to procure and install all 150 KW Standby Diesel Generator per specifications SECTION 26 32 15.00 10 for the DLA Operations Center - PH-2, complete, including all work incidental thereto as shown on the drawings and as specified exclusive of CLIN 0001-0010 & 0014. Source of funds is Non-MILCON. Option to be exercised within 365 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

CLIN 0014

PROCURE & INSTALL TVs - All costs to procure and install all Audio-Visual Equipment (Televisions) for the DLA Operations Center - PH-2, complete, including all work incidental thereto as shown on the drawings and as specified exclusive of CLIN 0001-0013 & 0015. Source of funds is Non-MILCON. Option to be exercised within 365 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

PROCURE & INSTALL TVs - All costs to procure and install all Audio-Visual Equipment (Televisions) for the DLA Operations Center - PH-2, complete, including all work incidental thereto as shown on the drawings and as specified exclusive of CLIN 0001-0011. Source of funds is Non-MILCON. Option to be exercised within 365 days of Contract Notice To Proceed in accordance with FAR 52.217-7.

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0001 has been changed from:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254 FOB: Destination

W91236

CAGE

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0002 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0003 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

CAGE

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0004 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 16,280 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

1020 dys. ANP 16,280 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0005 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 93,720 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

CAGE

1020 dys. ANP 93,720 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0006 has been changed from:

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

CAGE

1020 dys. ANP 5,740 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0007 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

CAGE

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0008 has been changed from:

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

CAGE

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0009 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0010 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

CAGE

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0011 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0014 has been changed from:

CAGE

1020 dys. ADC 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

CAGE

1020 dys. ANP 1 PROGRAMS & PROJ MGMT DIV(PPMD)

JONATHAN JONES

US ARMY ENGR DIST NORFOLK ATTN:

CENAO-PM 803

EET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1096

757-201-7254

The following have been modified:

TOTAL

TOTAL SCHEDULE I - BID ITEMS MILCON FUNDED COSTS $0

(CLINs 0001-0006)

TOTAL SCHEDULE II - OPTIONAL BID ITEMS MILCON FUNDED COSTS $0

(CLINs 0007-0009)

TOTAL SCHEDULE III - OPTIONAL BID ITEMS NON-MILCON FUNDED COSTS $0

(CLINs 0010, 0011, and 0014)

TOTAL SCHEDULE I, II, & III- BASE BID,

OPTIONAL NON-MILCON AND OPTIONAL ITEMS $0

STATUTORY COST LIMITATION IN THIS SOLICITATION:

Per FAR 36.205 CLINS 0001 ‐ 0009 are subject to STATUTORY COST LIMITATION OF $89,013,000.

1. For purposes of source selection as referenced in Section 00 22 16 of the Solicitation, and in particular Subsection 6.1, "Price" shall mean the Total Evaluated Price which will be the sum of the pricing submitted for CLINs 0001 through 0011 and 0014, inclusive. Failure to provide a price for each CLIN may be deemed a deficiency because it may prevent the Government from conducting a meaningful evaluation of price, which could result in the proposal being ineligible for award.

2. Contract Completion Date: Unless indicated otherwise, the completion date for the scope of the

CLIN is 1,020 days after Notice to Proceed.

SECTION 00 22 16 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION

1. OVERVIEW

1.1 The purpose of these instructions is to establish a uniform procedure for evaluating proposals by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and making a Best Value decision by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) using the Best Value Tradeoff Process (See Federal Acquisition Regulation 15.101-1). In as much as the proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the resulting contract, the proposal shall be specific and complete in every detail as well as be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the contract.

1.2 The Government will conduct a Best Value Tradeoff of four evaluation factors. The factors are as follows:

Non – Price Factors

Factor 1 – Past performance Factor 2 – Project Approach Factor 3 – Small Business Participation Plan

Factor 4 - Price

Non-price Factors 1 and 2 will be weighted equally. Non-price Factor 3 is less important than Factors 1 or 2. The non-price factors, when combined, are considered approximately equal to Factor 4 - Price.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Any legally organized Offeror who agrees to follow the conditions of the RFP may submit a proposal.

2.2 Do not submit any materials not required by this solicitation (such as company brochures, etc.).

2.3 The Government is not liable for any costs incurred by the Offerors submitting an offer in response to this solicitation.

2.4 Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the requirements with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of their proposal. Failure to provide sufficient detail may result in an unacceptable rating. Proposals received will be considered proprietary information and shall be clearly marked as such by the Offeror.

2.5 Electronic Proposal Submission Requirements:

2.5.1 The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted as electronic files as set forth in section B, and below. The Offeror’s proposal shall consist of two (2) volumes, i.e., Volume I – Performance Capability and Volume II – Price and Pro Forma Information. The proposal shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

2.5.2.1 Offers received by telegraph, fascimille, or unauthorized email, and the modifications thereto, or cancellations of offers will not be accepted.

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

2.5.3 The proposal shall be submitted in an 8-½ inch x 11 inch format (except that tables and graphic representations may be submitted on Z-folded 11 inch x 17 inch pages). Pages may be double-sided where practical and shall be numbered. Text shall have a minimum eleven (11) point Arial or Times New Roman font. No proposal information may be included by reference. Proposals shall adhere to the allowable number of pages specified under each evaluation factor. If a proposal submission exceeds the page number limits reflected throughout the Solicitation, the Government will not consider the matters submitted within the pages that exceed the limits. Text printed on two sides of a page will be counted as two (2) pages.

2.5.4 Any information that is changed as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions shall be of a different color and clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page. The revised pages shall be dated.

2.5.5 All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete project name, installation name, solicitation number, and the Offeror’s name in the header and/or footer. Each volume shall have a Table of Contents and use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11”

NOTE: 11 inch X 17 inch Z-folded pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations and will be counted as one page.

The following additional restrictions apply:

a. File Packaging. PDF Files shall be submitted in read-only (non-editable) format. All price breakdown information shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel 2013 Excel Workbook (*.xlsx) format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2013 to aide in the cost/price evaluation, as read-only (non-editable/locked).

b. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. The Offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner and to permit a complete and accurate evaluation.

2.5.6 All constituent members of the Offeror, if applicable, MUST sign the SF1442 and the bid bond unless a written agreement executed by all team members is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the authority to bind the other members. Failure to comply with this requirement WILL eliminate the proposal from further consideration.

2.5.7 Any deviation and/or exceptions to the contractual terms and conditions of the solicitation (e.g., standard terms and conditions) may result in a determination to reject a proposal.

3.0 BASIS OF AWARD

It is intended that this RFP will result in a Firm-Fixed-Price contract. The Contracting Officer will award this contract to that responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the best overall value to the Government. The relative order of importance of factors is such that the Non-price Factors 1 and 2 will be weighted equally. Non-price Factor 3 is less important than Factors 1 or 2. When the proposal is evaluated as the whole, the non-price factors, when combined, are considered approximately equal to price. After the Government individually evaluates and rates each proposal, the Source Selection Authority will compare proposals to determine which proposal represents the best value. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced or the highest rated technical 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 unless corrected through discussions, should the Government decide to conduct discussions.

The Government’s intent is to make the award without conducting discussions, but the Government reserves the right to set a competitive range and discuss aspects of proposals with offerors if the Government determines it to be necessary to do so. Offerors should be aware that the Government may make award without discussions, clarifications, or any contact concerning the proposals received; therefore, proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Offerors should not assume that they will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

This RFP does not commit the Government to reimburse any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal or for any other costs incurred by any firm submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation. Note specifically that the offeror will not be participating in a sealed bid procurement process under this acquisition method. Issuance of this RFP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government.

4.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT and EVALUATION RATING DEFINITIONS

4.1 VOLUME I - PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

Factor Location Description

TAB A

- SF 1442 and all amendments, signed

- Proposal Data Sheet (Included at Attachment 1, Section 00 22 11)

- Contractor Team Arrangements, e.g., JV Agreement/LLC, Letter of

Commitment (if applicable)

Factor 1 TAB B Past Performance

Factor 2 TAB C Project Approach

Factor 3 TAB D Small Business Participation Plan

4.2 VOLUME II –PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

Factor Location Description

Factor 4 TAB A Price (Contract Line Item Schedule and supporting detailed pricing data)

TAB B Bid Guarantee

TAB C Required Pre-Award Information

4.3 EVALUATION RATING DEFINITIONS

4.3.1 The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will ensure that the evaluation of all Factors has been conducted in accordance with the Solicitation and all applicable acquisition laws and regulations.

4.3.2 Factor 1 evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. Factor 1 will be adjectivally evaluated in accordance with paragraph 4.3.8 by the SSEB.

4.3.3 Factor 2 will be adjectivally evaluated in accordance with paragraph 4.3.9 by the Technical Evaluation Team

(TET).

4.3.4. Factor 3 will be adjectivally evaluated in accordance with paragraph 4.3.10 by the Small Business Specialist, member of the SSEB.

4.3.5 Factor 4 will be evaluated by the Price Evaluation Team (PET) in accordance with paragraph 6.1. Proposals will be evaluated using price analysis techniques and will be evaluated for price fairness and reasonableness. Price will not be rated or scored.

4.3.6 The overarching evaluation approach for all factors is as follows:

Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the solicitation. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission requirements of the solicitation.

Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven practices/processes and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

4.3.7 The Government will evaluate the proposals and rate the quality of each non-price evaluation factor.

4.3.8 Rating Definitions for Factor 1 – Past Performance:

4.3.8.1 Recency. The Government will first evaluate the recency of the Offeror’s past performance as defined in paragraph 5.2.2 below.

4.3.8.2 Relevance. The Government will next rate the relevancy of recent projects submitted in accordance with the definitions of "Very Relevant," "Relevant," "Somewhat Relevant," and "Not Relevant" as presented below. The relevancy rating is not a separate proposal rating but is only used in developing overall past performance confidence assessment rating. The past performance relevancy rating is as follows:

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

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

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

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

4.3.8.3 The Government will next consider how well the Offeror performed on the submitted projects. The Government will consider the recency and relevancy of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance. With respect to relevancy, past performance on projects with more relevance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment rating than past performance on projects of lesser relevance.

4.3.8.4 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 subcontractors 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 Telephone Interview Questionnaire at the end of this Section, Attachment 4). The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this solicitation including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, problem resolution for design or construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government will not release the Telephone Interview Questionnaire Forms to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments. The Government also places a higher value on projects, which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation, for example, but not limited to telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal, Contractor Performance Appraisal Reporting System (CPARS) or other agency performance databases, Offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on projects, which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully.

4.3.8.5 The rating for Factor 1 – Past Performance will be expressed as a degree of confidence in the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the contract. The rating system used for the performance confidence assessment is as follows:

Substantial Confidence: Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

Limited Confidence: Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence: Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

4.3.9 Rating Definition for Factor 2 – Project Approach:

4.3.9.1 The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. The combined Technical/Risk definitions are as follows:

Outstanding (O): Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good (G): Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

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

Marginal (M): proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable (U): Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is un-awardable.

4.3.9.2 The definitions for a strength, weakness, significant weakness, and deficiency are as follows:

Strength – Is an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness – Is a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness – Is a flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

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

4.3.10 Rating Definitions for Factor 3 – Small Business Participation Plan

Outstanding (O): Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good (G): Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Acceptable (A): Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Marginal (M): Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable (U): Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

5.0 VOLUME I – PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY - PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.1 TAB A – STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

Submit the SF 1442, and all amendments completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror. Include the completed Proposal Data Sheet provided at the end of this Section, Attachment 1.

5.1.1 TAB A – Contractor Team Arrangements, if applicable – If an Offeror forms a contractor teaming arrangement, include a copy of the Agreement in Volume I, TAB A of its proposal. Team Agreements must be signed by all partners and clearly indicate the percentages of the teaming partners, in particular the percent of the controlling party, and a clear delineation of responsibilities and authorities between the partners. If the Offeror is a Limited Liability Company, include a copy of the Articles of Organization in Volume I, TAB A.

5.1.2 TAB A – Letter of Commitment if applicable shall be provided using the format provided as Attachment 5, and shall be signed by all parties.

5.2 TAB B - FACTOR 1 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.2.1 Submission Requirements

The Past Performance factor addresses how well the Offeror performed recent, relevant projects from the owner's/client’s perspective. The Offeror may submit no greater than five (5) example projects that best demonstrate the Offeror’s past performance on recent and relevant projects, as these terms are defined in the Evaluation Criteria.

So that the Government may evaluate the recency and relevancy of the submitted example projects, Offerors should demonstrate recent and relevant construction experience on the submitted projects by providing the information requested on the Relevant Experience form, Attachment 2. Offerors may provide this information in the format shown on this form or in another format so long as the information is clearly presented.

So that the Government may evaluate how the Offeror performed on the submitted example projects, the Offeror should provide past performance evaluations for the submitted projects. If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each example project included. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation then submit Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for each project included. The PPQ, along with the instructions for completing the questionnaire, is provided as Attachment 3. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the solicitation closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). For all submitted projects, the offeror shall provide a completed Relevant Experience Form included as Attachment 2. The Government may make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project(s) to obtain the PPQ information. However, Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to help ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Tarik Booze, via email at tarik.a.booze@usace.army.mil.

If the Offeror is comprised of more than one member via a teaming agreement, joint venture (JV) agreement, or other appropriate instrument, relevant project performance should be submitted for projects completed by the Offeror as the proposed collective. If the JV does not have shared performance, projects may be submitted for the constituent members. In this event, the Offeror should indicate what role(s) the member actually performed on the submitted project and what role is proposed for that member for this project if it is awarded the contract.

If an Offeror is comprised of more than one member, see paragraph 5.1.1 TAB A – Contractor Team Arrangements, for additional submittal requirements.

The Government will evaluate only the first five example projects submitted, inclusive of any projects submitted demonstrating experience of an Offeror member or proposed subcontractor. Any projects submitted beyond this limit will not be considered.

A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract.

For task order and/or indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) type contracts, the contract as a whole should not be submitted as a project and will NOT be considered by the Government; rather, Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

Offerors may submit projects that involve contracts with private concerns, local or state governments, or the Federal Government.

For each example construction project submitted, Offerors should provide a project narrative to assist the Government in identifying project relevancy as defined in the evaluation criteria in this Factor.

The narrative should clearly describe the scope of work performed by the Offeror, team member, or proposed subcontractor, as applicable, and the relevancy to the proposed role for this project.

Attachment 2, Project Data Sheet: Offerors must limit the example project submission to two pages (two single sided or one double sided page). Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider any pages in excess of this limitation; only the first two pages will be evaluated. This page limitation does not apply to PPQ or CPAR records submitted.

If the Offeror (including teaming partner/s, if applicable) is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). The Government may, but is under no obligation to the Offeror to do so, make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project(s) to obtain the PPQ information. However, Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to help ensure timely submittal of questionnaires.

If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the following email addresses:

tarik.a.booze@usace.army.mil and PPMDContracts@usace.army.mil with a copy furnished to Dianne.k.grimes@usace.army.mil.

If past performance information is submitted directly by a client/reference, the Offeror must instruct the submitter to include the words “Past Performance Information” and the solicitation number in the subject line of the email. The Government will not be responsible for evaluating email submissions that fail to comply with these requirements.

Offerors are encouraged to require their clients/references to maintain proof of delivery of email submissions, but the Offeror shall be solely responsibility for ensuring timely delivery of the past performance submissions in accordance with proposal submission requirements defined on the Standard Form 1442.

Offerors are strongly encouraged to provide any information on problems encountered and corrective actions taken on projects submitted. Similarly, Offerors are also strongly encouraged to address any adverse past performance issues, and must address any projects in the overall performance record for which the Offeror, or member a member, or proposed subcontractor was issued a Cure Notice, Show Cause, or Termination for Default. Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total. The Government reserves the right to review in detail any past performance record for which an adverse rating is noted

In addition to the information outlined above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluation past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including CPARS, using all CAGE/DUNS number of team members (Partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardees Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

Page Limits: The total page limit for this factor is defined by page limit requirements identified above.

5.2.2 Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s submitted example projects to assess the extent to which the Offeror’s experience demonstrates recent and relevant Past Performance and/or a benefit to the Government. Each Offeror shall provide a completed Relevant Experience (via Attachment 2) and Past Performance Records (via Attachment 3, PPQ, or by providing a corresponding CPAR report) on each example project submitted, as specified below:

Recent. For a submitted project to be considered “Recent” it shall be completed and turned over no longer than seven (7) years preceding the issuance of this Solicitation.

Relevant. The Government will evaluate Offerors’ Past Performance to assess the extent to which it clearly demonstrates experience similar in type, scope, and complexity to the project in this RFP as follows:

Those Offerors that demonstrate the highest degree of similarity to the requirements of this RFP. will be evaluated most favorably.

To be evaluated as similar, a submitted project must reflect the Including the following two key aspects or features at minimum:

Vertical new construction of a fully enclosed building with more than 280,000 270,000 square feet of space. Renovations will not be considered relevant, and

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the construction value of a submitted project approximates a range from $75M to $150M.

An Offeror may receive additional consideration to the extent that its Past Performance demonstrates the following conditions or features:

Multi-story construction of four floors or greater.

Projects constructed within a congested space on a military installation.

An Offeror may receive additional consideration to extent that its relevant Past Performance demonstrates overcoming performance challenges or difficulties.

Offerors are advised that the Government will not be able to infer any of the details from pictures, schematics or graphics unless they are presented within the page limits described in Section 5.2.1. Provide sufficient details to describe how submitted projects demonstrate elements requested by this factor.

The Government will perform a performance confidence assessment of the Offeror’s probability of successfully meeting the contract requirements, considering the degree of success of the team’s recent, relevant experience.

Federal government project past performance will not be rated inherently more important than non-federal government project past performance.