W91238-10-R-0053-0005.pdf

W62N6M00000081

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

Single Award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIA) contract supporting the Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division mission for use primarily for areas around and including Hill AFB/Dugway Proving Grounds/Salt Lake City, Utah. The work includes mechanical efforts (including new work, additions, alterations, maintenance and repairs).

The purpose of this amendment is to:

(1) Revise Factor 3, Section 00120

(2) Provide New Revised Pricing Schedule

(3) Provide Statement of Work Changes (Add Appendices 17, 18 & 19) and a 01 10 10 Addendum

(4) Extend Bidder Inquiry to 30 August 2010

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 4

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 24-Aug-2010

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 W91238-10-R-0053

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Jun-2010

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

24-Aug-2010

CODE

USACE SACRAMENTO DISTRICT

ATTN: CONTRACTING DIVISION

1325 J STREET-ROOM 878

SACRAMENTO CA 95814-2922

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91238-10-R-0053

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION 0120 TECHNICAL

2 PHASE-TWO TECHNICAL VOLUME

2.1 NUMBER OF SETS OF THE TECHNICAL VOLUME.

The Technical Volume is to be submitted in one hard copy “original” and two (2) copies, each individually put together. In addition, submit one complete copy of the technical volume on Compact Disk (CD) using a “pdf” searchable file format. Also include on the CD an electronic file (e.g., “.prx”) for the Network Analysis System (NAS) schedule (P3 preferred) required to be submitted under Tab 3 of the Phase-Two Technical Volume.

2.2 FORMAT, CONTENTS, AND LIST OF TABS FOR THE TECHNICAL VOLUME.

Use 8 ½” x 11” pages for the narrative portions of the volume. There is not a page limit for the overall technical volume; however, there may be limits imposed at the sub-tab level. Organize your technical volume as indicated below. The main tabs directly correlate to the technical evaluation factors. Although the Government may use information contained anywhere within the technical volume in its evaluation of any technical evaluation criteria, the Government is not obligated to search for or to consider information that is not located in the specified location.

Number all pages. Do not include information pertaining to your proposed pricing for this project in the technical volume. Limit your submittals to the information specified; excess information will not be evaluated. Note: No information is to be submitted directly under the main tabs, as they are for organizational purposes only.

PHASE-TWO TECHNICAL VOLUME

TAB CONTENTS

3. FACTOR 3 –TECHNICAL APPROACH

Technical Narrative Project Schedule

2.3 DETAILED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TECHNICAL VOLUME.

Tab 3 of the Technical Proposal: Factor 3 – Technical Approach.

1. Technical Narrative.

a. Describe in general terms how the offeror will approach the management and construction of this and future Task Orders from preparing submittals after receipt of Notice to Proceed to punch list. If more than one Architect- Engineer design firm will be involved in this or future Task Order projects, clearly distinguish the roles of each.

Also address any design effort that will be performed “in -house” by the prime contractor. Describe the roles and planned interaction between the Independent Technical Reviewers and various contractor and government personnel.

b. Describe in general terms how the offeror will approach the quality control and safety of this and future Task Order construction projects.

c. For this and future Task Order, describes any significant problems or major difficulties anticipated in performing or accomplishing work, challenges associated with project, and offeror’s plan for avoiding problems and mitigating difficulties which could adversely impact project schedule. If no problems and difficulties are anticipated, state so and why.

d. Formatting and Other Restrictions: The submission is limited to seven 8-1/2” x 11” pages total.

e. Evaluation Criteria:

(1). The Government will evaluate the soundness and workability of the offeror’s approach and method to management, construction, design, quality control, safety, avoid problems, and mitigate difficulties/challenges. As part of its evaluation, the Government will consider whether the Offeror’s approach appears reasonable, realistic, achievable, and reflects logical sequencing and progression of activities.

(2). The greater the narrative demonstrate thoroughness knowledge and understanding based on the prospective IDIQ contract and Task Order specifications, the higher the evaluation rating.

(3). Offerors will receive a rating of no lower than “Marginal”, as long as the offeror has made a reasonable attempt to respond to the proposal submission requirements. Notwithstanding the above, an offeror who fails to provide the requested information for evaluation will receive an “Unacceptable” rating.

2. NAS Project Schedule.

a. Provide a hard copy of the NAS Project Schedule or GANTT chart (not a Pert Chart), broken down to the “Feature of Work” level, that graphically illustrates the proposed integration, scheduling, and phasing of the major features on the critical and near-critical path for this project, including final close-out. Also include an electronic file (e.g., “prx” of the NAS Schedule (Primavera P3 preferred)) on the CD containing the technical proposal.

b. The schedule is to include activities on the near critical and critical paths.

c. Clearly indicate the durations of the principle components of work with anticipated start and finish dates. For the purpose of this pre-award design and construction sequence plan only, assume a Notice to Proceed (NTP) date of October 1, 2010.

d. Propose the period of performance to complete all design and construction on this project after Notice to Proceed, inclusive of all review periods and Government phasing requirements specified. If offer is accepted, the Government will incorporate the period of performance into the resultant contract.

e. As the NAS project schedule that is required to be included as part of the Technical Approach is a preliminary schedule for pre-award evaluation purposes only, the actual NAS project schedule submitted in the offeror’s Technical Proposal will not be incorporated into the contract. Therefore, the Government may at its discretion consider minor irregularities to be weaknesses in the proposal, rather than deficiencies. Nonetheless, the successful offeror will be required to submit a schedule after contract award that fully complies with all of the requirements of Section 01 32 01.00 10, whether or not all pre-award discrepancies were noted or corrected during negotiations.

f. Formatting and Other Restrictions.

(1). Include both a hard copy NAS Project Schedule in each copy of the technical proposal and an electronic file (e.g. “.prx”) of the NAS Project Schedule on the CD containing the technical proposal.

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

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

g. Evaluation Criteria.

(1) The Government will evaluated the technical approach to determine the extent to which it demonstrates (a) the Offeror’s understanding of the unique requirements and challenges of the Task Order project, (b) the Offeror’s understanding of the basic IDIQ specifications, and (c) the Offeror’s ability to schedule and integrate the major work elements, construction and close-out activities critical to meeting the contract performance schedule specified in the solicitation. As part of its evaluation, the Government may consider whether the Offeror’s approach to the scheduling/phasing of these major activities appears reasonable, realistic, and achievable.

(2) Offerors will receive a rating of no lower than “Marginal”, as long as the offeror has made a reasonable attempt to respond to the proposal submission requirements. Notwithstanding the above, an offeror who fails to provide the requested information for evaluation will receive an “Unacceptable” rating.

3. Coordination.

a. While working on the facility’s cooling system, describe the offeror’s approach to minimizie the facility’s cooling service disruption to half an hour or less.

b. Describe the proposed control work system. If the proposed control system is not a native BACNET system system with KMC controllers, explain how it will work with the current control system, how it is compatible with the current control system, how it will not void the exisiting warranty, and required O&M service.

c. If using other than DISA’s SPEC LLC contractor to install the control system, explain how the offeror’s proposed control contractor will interact with SPEC LLC, install the control system, the warranties, and required O&M service. Explain approach to minimize disruption and interaction between the two contractors while installing the control system.

d. Formatting and Other Restrictions: The submission is limited to four 8-1/2” x 11” pages total.

e. Evaluation Criteria:

(1). The Government will evaluate the soundness and workability of the offeror’s approach and method to minimize downtime of the cooling system, the proposed control system, and proposed control system contractor. As part of its evaluation, the Government will consider whether the Offeror’s approach appears reasonable, realistic, and achievable.

(2). The greater the narrative demonstrate the use of native BACNET system with KMC controllers, the higher the evaluation rating. The greater the narrative demonstrate the use of DISA’s SPEC LLC contractor, the higher the evaluation rating.

--End Section--

(End of Summary of Changes)