W91238-13-R-0027-0013_Conform.doc

Section 00 00 00 - Procurement and Contracting Requirements

CONTINUATION OF SF 1442

CONTINUATION OF STANDARD FORM 1442

BLOCK 20D:

(1) IF THE OFFEROR IS A JOINT VENTURE, EACH PARTICIPANT IN THE JOINT VENTURE MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING:

Company Name Signature Title

Company Name Signature Title

Company Name Signature Title

NOTE: If a corporation is participating as a member of a Joint Venture, the certificate below must also be completed and signed.

CORPORATION AUTHORIZATION TO PARTICIPATE IN JOINT VENTURE CERTIFICATE

I, _______________________, certify that I am the Secretary of the corporation

(name) named as a participant in a Joint Venture on this offer; that

_____________________, who signed said offer on behalf of the corporation, was

(name) then ______________________ of said corporation; that the signature thereto is

(title) genuine; that said contract was duly signed, sealed and attested for and in behalf of said corporation by authority of its governing body; and that the corporation is authorized to participate in the Joint Venture on this offer.

(Name of Corporation)

(Secretary)

(2) IF THE OFFEROR IS A PARTNERSHIP, LIST FULL NAME OF ALL PARTNERS BELOW. SIGNATURES BY ALL PARTNERS HERE SIGNIFY THAT THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE OFFER IN BLOCK 20B HAS THE AUTHORITY TO BIND THE PARTNERSHIP.

Name

Signature

(3) IF THE OFFEROR IS A CORPORATION, THE OFFER SHALL BE SIGNED IN THE CORPORATE NAME FOLLOWED BY THE WORD "BY" AND THE SIGNATURE OF THE PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE OFFER IN BLOCK 20B. PROVIDE PROOF THAT THE PERSON SIGNING FOR THE CORPORATION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO BIND THE CORPORATION BY COMPLETING THE FOLLOWING CERTIFICATE:

CONTINUATION OF STANDARD FORM 1442

CORPORATION AUTHORIZATION CERTIFICATE

I, ___________________________________, certify that I am the Secretary of the

(name) corporation named as offeror in the within offer; that ______________________, (name) who signed said offer on behalf of the corporation, was then

_____________________________________ of said corporation, that the signature

(title) thereto is genuine; that said contract was duly signed, sealed and attested for in behalf of said corporation by authority of its governing body.

(Name of Corporation)

(Secretary)

(4) IF THE OFFEROR IS AN INDIVIDUAL DOING BUSINESS AS A FIRM, THE OFFER SHALL BE SIGNED BY THAT INDIVIDUAL IN BLOCK 20B FOLLOWED BY THE WORDS "AN INDIVIDUAL DOING BUSINESS AS _____________________________________ (INSERT NAME OF FIRM).

(5) WHEN AN AGENT SIGNS THE OFFER, PROVIDE PROOF OF THE AGENT'S AUTHORITY TO BIND THE PRINCIPAL.

Section 00 01 10 - Table of Contents Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

CLIN BREAKOUT SCHEDULE

CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL LABOR, MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, ETC. NECESSARY TO PERFORM ALL WORK IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE CONTRACT TO INCLUDE ALL ATTACHMENTS THERETO.

SPECIAL NOTE TO BIDDERS: BE AWARE OF A RECENT SIGNIFICANT INCREASE OF SEWAGE CONNECTION FEES.

CLINS

***Please note: all CLINs to be performed in accordance with the attachments to this solicitation and the resulting contract.***

Lot at Athletic Field Complete.

Demolition to commence no earlier than the two months after Barracks Beneficial Occupancy Date.

12*

Notes:

1. Period of Performance for completion of all CLINs (and subCLINs) is 1,295 days after NTP.

2. All quantities with an * are estimated quantities.

3. Prices must be submitted on all individual items of this CLIN Schedule. Failure to do so may cause the proposal to be determined "unacceptable".

4. If a modification to a price is submitted which provides for a lump sum adjustment to the total price, the application of the lump sum adjustment to each item in the CLIN Schedule must be stated. If it is not stated, the offeror agrees that the lump sum adjustment shall be applied on a pro rata basis to every item in the CLIN Schedule.

5. The offeror shall distribute his indirect costs (overhead, profit, bond, etc.) over all the items in the CLIN Schedule. The Government will review all submitted CLIN Schedules for any unbalancing of the items. Any submitted CLIN Schedule determined to be unbalanced may cause the proposal to be determined "unacceptable".

6. The construction contract limit for contract award for design and construction is $31,000,000.00 (MILCON) based on the funds made available for this project. The Government cannot guarantee that additional funds can be made available for award. Offerors are under no obligation to approach this ceiling.

Funds are not presently available for this contract. The Government’s obligation under this contract is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payment for contract purposes can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Government for any payment may arise until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for this contract and until the Contractor receives notice of such availability, to be confirmed in writing by the Contracting Officer.

Arithmetic Discrepancies:

(a) For the purpose of initial evaluation of bids, the following will be utilized in the resolving arithmetic discrepancies found on the face of CLIN Schedule as submitted by the bidder:

(1) Obviously misplaced decimal points will be corrected;

(2) Discrepancy between unit price and extended price, the unit price will govern;

(3) Apparent errors in extension of unit prices will be corrected;

(4) Apparent errors in addition of lump-sum and extended prices will be corrected.

(b) For the purpose of bid evaluation, the Government will proceed on the assumption that the bidder intends the bid to be evaluated on basis of the unit prices, the totals arrived at by resolution of arithmetic discrepancies as provided above and the bid will be so reflected on the abstract of bids.

(c) These correction procedures shall not be used to resolve any ambiguity concerning which bid is low.

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.211-14 NOTICE OF PRIORITY RATING FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE, EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, AND ENERGY PROGRAM USE (APR 2008)

Any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation will be DX rated order; X DO rated order certified for national defense, emergency preparedness, and energy program use under the Defense Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS) (15 CFR 700), and the Contractor will be required to follow all of the requirements of this regulation.

(End of provision)

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a Firm, fixed-price design-build construction contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.252-3 ALTERATIONS IN SOLICITATION (APR 1984)

Portions of this solicitation are altered as follows:

N/A

Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers

SECTION 00 21 16

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS & NOTICES TO OFFERORS

SUBMITTAL INFORMATION FOR OFFERORS (RFPS):

The following documents must be returned with your quote, bid, or offer.

--The completed Standard Form 1442 with continuation pages, duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company. Ensure that the firm’s DUNS or DUNS+4 Number is entered in the block with its name and address.

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

Note: If the SF 1442 and/or the CLIN schedule was changed by amendment, be sure to use the amended pages when submitting your quote, bid, or offer.

--The completed CLIN Schedule with your proposed contract line item prices inserted in the appropriate spaces. Prices must be proposed for all contract line items. Unit prices are to be extended to the actual “dollar and cents” amounts (i.e., to two decimal places). Do not round off extended prices to the nearest dollar. Check your pricing submission very carefully for mathematical and clerical errors prior to submission.

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

--Your Bid Guarantee (e.g., Standard Form 24, “Bid Bond”)

--Any other documents required by the solicitation (see Attachments and/or Section 00 22 10 and 00 22 20 for competitive RFPs).

INQUIRIES:

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

a. For information related to amendments, and the dates set for receipt of proposals, please check http://www.fedbizopps.gov

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

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

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

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

4.

The Solicitation Number is: W91238-13-R-0027

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: HF9UB7-JAXX85

c. The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries 10 days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

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

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

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

g. The point of contact for this solicitation is:

Contract Specialist: Ryan Bayless

Telephone: (916) 557-7090

E-MAIL: Ryan.J.Bayless@usace.army.mil AND Carol.A.Dones@usace.army.mil

CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY, PREAWARD SURVEY:

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

In order to be determined to be responsible a prospective contractor must:

a. Have adequate financial resources to perform the contract or the ability to obtain them.

b. Be able to comply with the required or proposed delivery or performance schedule, taking into consideration all existing commercial and governmental business commitments.

c. Have a satisfactory performance record. In making the determination of responsibility, the Government Contracting Officer shall consider relevant past performance information. A prospective contractor shall not be determined responsible or nonresponsible solely on the basis of a lack of relevant performance history except when there are special standards set forth in the solicitation which applies to all bidders that must be met in order to receive the award. These special standards may be necessary when unusual expertise or specialized facilities are necessary in the performance of the contract; therefore, in order to be determined to be responsible for that particular contract, the offeror must be able to meet those special standards. A prospective contractor that is or recently has been seriously deficient in contract performance shall be presumed to be nonresponsible unless the Contracting Officer determines that the circumstances were beyond the contractor's control or that the contractor has taken appropriate corrective action. Other responsibility considerations by the Contracting Officer will include past efforts by the contractor to apply sufficient tenacity and perseverance to perform acceptably, to meet quality requirements of contracts, and the contractor's past compliance with subcontracting plans (if required) under recent contracts.

d. Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics.

e. Have the necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls, and technical skills, or the ability to obtain them (including, as appropriate, such elements as production control procedures, property control systems, quality assurance measures, and safety programs applicable to materials to be produced or services to be performed by the prospective contractor and subcontractors).

f. Have the necessary production, construction, and technical equipment and facilities, or the ability to obtain them.

g. Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations.

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

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

AVAILABILITY OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS PUBLICATIONS DESCRIPTIONS:

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

http://140.194.76.129/publications/

b. Construction Criteria Base (CCB). The Construction Criteria Base (CCB) system available through the National Institute of Building Sciences includes copies of Corps of Engineers methods and specifications. Information about the CCB can be obtained from:

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

FACSIMILE BIDS/OFFERS:

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

PREPARATION OF SUBCONTRACTING PLAN:

(a) See FAR 52.219-9, Section 00 70 00, of this solicitation. Subcontracting Plans will be developed considering only the subcontracts actually to be awarded. Subcontracting Plans are required from other than small businesses if the contract price is over $1,500,000; they are not required from small business firms regardless of the contract price.

(b) For information on the evaluation of subcontracting plans, see Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement, Appendix DD.

(c) Contact Ms. Michelle Stratton (916)557-7641, Deputy for Small Business, with questions on the Subcontracting Plan requirements and further instructions on submission of Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) as required by FAR 52.219-9.

(d) The Corps of Engineers highly encourages all bidders/offerors to meet the recommended subcontracting goals as follows:

Small Businesses

50.0%

Small Disadvantaged Businesses 17.0%

Women-Owned Small Businesses 18.0%

HUBZone Small Business

10.0%

Veteran-Owned Small Business

8.5%

Service Disabled Veteran Owned

Small Business

4.0%

The goals are calculated as a percentage of the TOTAL SUBCONTRACTING DOLLARS, NOT THE TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT.

PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS:

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

INDIVIDUAL SURETIES IN SUPPORT OF BID BONDS:

Bidders/offerors utilizing individual sureties in support of a bid bond shall include a Standard Form (SF) 28 (Affidavit of Individual Surety), accompanied by a pledge of acceptable assets from each person acting as an individual surety, and include these with the SF 24 (Bid Bond), and the bid itself (see clause titled "Pledges of Assets," FAR 52.228-11).

Pledges of acceptable assets shall be in the form of (1) evidence of an escrow account and/or (2) a recorded lien on real estate. If this is an RFP, failure to provide required documentation described herein may cause the offeror to be deemed "unacceptable".

BID GUARANTEE FORM AND AMOUNT:

The offeror shall furnish a separate bid guarantee in accordance with the solicitation provision titled "Bid Guarantee", FAR 52.228-1. In accordance with FAR 28.101-2 the bid guarantee amount shall be at least 20 percent of the "bid price" but shall not exceed $3 million. When the penal sum is expressed as a percentage, a maximum dollar limitation may be stated. FAR 28.106-1 states that a Standard Form (SF) 24 shall be used for the bid bond. In accordance with FAR 28.202(a)(1), corporate sureties utilized must appear on the list contained in the Department of Treasury Circular 570 titled "Companies Holding Certificates of Authority as Acceptable Sureties on Federal Bonds and Acceptable Reinsuring Companies."

ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS:

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

Section 00 22 00 - Supplementary Instructions

SECTION 00 22 10 (PHASE I)

PROPOSAL BASIS OF AWARD,

GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS,

PHASE I INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATIONS,

AND CONTRACT AWARD

***Note: There are no Changes to the Phase 1 Solicitation Procedures.***

1. OVERVIEW.

a. This is a "Best Value" solicitation for the construction of an Advanced Individual Training (AIT) Barracks project at Presidio of Monterey, Monterey, California. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to that responsible Offeror whom the Source Selection Authority determined conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering all non-price factors described herein, and price.

b. This is a two-phase design-build selection process acquisition requiring two separate proposal submittals, a phase-one (non-price technical volume) proposal and a phase-two (price and technical volumes) proposal. Phase-one will consist of an evaluation of only non-price factors which include Organization and Technical Approach, Experience and Capability, and Past Performance of the offeror. No more than five (5) of the most highly qualified offerors in phase-one will be offered the opportunity to submit a proposal under phase-two. Phase-two will consist of an evaluation of price and a non-price factor which include Technical Solution, Performance and Capability, and Socio-Economic Considerations.

c. The Government does not intend to conduct discussions during phase-one, nor request revised phase-one proposals. The Government reserves the right to conduct phase-one discussions, if it deems such to be in its best interest. The Government may communicate with an offeror to afford it the opportunity to respond to adverse past performance evaluations obtained from references on which it has not previously had an opportunity to comment, if that information makes a difference in the Government’s decision whether or not to include the offeror in the shortlist for phase-two.

2. BASIS OF AWARD.

2.1. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

In accordance with the requirements of Part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), no contract shall be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met. This includes the FAR requirement that no award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the general standards in FAR Part 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

2.2. SOURCE SELECTION USING THE TRADE-OFF PROCESS

The Government will select the offer that represents the best value to the Government by using the trade-off process described in FAR Part 15. This process permits tradeoffs between price and technical (“noncost”) factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced offer. The award decision will be based on a comparative analysis and an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

2.3. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF PRICE TO THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are equal to price. The Government is concerned with striking the most advantageous balance between technical merit (“quality”) and cost to the Government (i.e., the price). The degree of importance of price could become greater depending upon the equality of the technical proposals. If competing technical proposals are determined to be essentially equal, price could become the controlling factor.

2.4. EVALUATION OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL

a. Price to the Government will be evaluated and considered but will not be scored or combined with other aspects of the proposal evaluation. The proposed price will be analyzed for reasonableness. It may also be analyzed to determine whether it reflects a clear understanding of the requirements; and is consistent with the offeror’s Technical Proposal. Additionally, all offers will be analyzed for unbalanced pricing.

b. The Price Evaluation Adjustment for Small Disadvantaged Businesses will not apply to this procurement as it is currently suspended for Department of Defense.

c. Information required to be submitted in the Price Proposal volume in addition to the executed SF 1442 with acknowledgement of amendments and the completed pricing schedule will be used to determine the offeror’s eligibility for contract award in accordance with paragraph 2.1 above (for example, the offeror’s representations and certifications; the bid guarantee; and the offeror’s pre-award survey information). The Government may enter into exchanges with offerors about such information without it constituting discussions, subject to applicable FAR limitations, including FAR 15.306, Exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals; FAR 28.101-4, Noncompliance with bid guarantee requirements.

d. The funds anticipated to be made available for award of the MILCON- and/or Equipment- funded contract line items have been identified in the Notes to the Pricing Schedule in Section 00 10 00. The Government may consider the availability of funds for contract award in determining which proposal offers the best value to the Government. If an offeror’s proposed price(s) exceeds the funds made available for any item or group of items on the pricing schedule (excluding option line items, if applicable), that offer may be ineligible for contract award, notwithstanding the reasonableness of the total proposed price for all of the line items on the pricing schedule

The offerors are reminded that the Contract award shall not exceed the cost limitation described in Section 00 10 00 for this project. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best proposal within the cost limitation. There is no obligation to approach or match the cost limitation in the offer.

2.5. THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

a. The Government will evaluate each offeror’s technical proposal based on how well the proposal addresses each of the evaluation factors, listed below and further described in the submission requirements in Sections 00 22 10 and 00 22 20, and on how well the offeror has performed on related projects through the evaluation of the past performance information provided from references or obtained from other sources. Each of the evaluation factors will be evaluated by the Government and an adjectival rating and risk rating will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board for all technical factors other than past performance. The Past Performance factor will be evaluated by the Government and a relevancy and confidence level will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board.

b. The evaluation factors correlate directly to the main organizational tabs identified in the proposal submission instructions in Sections 00 22 10 and 00 22 20. However, any information contained in the technical proposal can nonetheless be considered by the Government in its evaluation under any factor.

Phase-One Proposal. (Section 00 22 10)

(1) Factor 1: Management and Technical Approach

(2) Factor 2: Experience and Capability

(3) Factor 3: Past Performance

Phase-Two Proposal. (Section 00 22 20)

(1) Factor 4: Technical Solution

(2) Factor 5: Performance Capability

(3) Factor 6: Socio-Economic Considerations

2.6 RELATIVE WEIGHTING OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

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

Factor 1 – Management and Technical Approach is the most heavily weighted factor.

Factor 2 – Experience and Capability is weighted less than Factor 1.

Factor 3 – Past Performance, Factors 2, 3, and 5 are of approximately equal importance.

Factor 4 – Technical Solution, Both Factors 1 and 4 are of approximately equal importance.

Factor 5 – Performance Capability, Factors 2, 3, and 5 are of approximately equal importance.

Factor 6 - Socio-Economic Considerations is the least heavily weighted factor.

2.7 GENERAL TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

a. The offeror’s conformance with the specified format and submission requirements will be considered during the technical evaluation. Failure to comply with the formatting and/or submission requirements may be seen as indicative of the type of problems that could be expected during contract performance. Lack of conformance could therefore result in a higher risk assessment, in addition to any other impacts on the evaluation. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable. However, in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, the Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals. For example, a failure by a proposed key subcontractor to submit a properly executed letter of commitment may be considered as increasing risk, but will not be considered a proposal deficiency.

b. Technical proposals which do not provide the specified information in the specified location in accordance with the submission instructions may be downgraded. The Government is under no obligation to search for information that is not in the specified location.

c. Proposals which are generic, vague, or lacking in detail may be downgraded. The proposal submission instructions are written to give prospective contractors, where feasible, an indication of the level of detail desired by the Government. The offeror’s failure to include information that the Government has indicated should be included may result in the proposal being downgraded and/or being found deficient if inadequate detail is provided.

d. Any prescribed page and formatting limitations will be strictly adhered to and enforced by the Government. The Government will not evaluate any excess information resulting from the offeror’s failure to comply with the submission instructions. Examples: If an offeror were to submit three pages in response to an item with a two page limitation, the information on the first two pages would be evaluated but the information on the third page would not be evaluated. If an offeror were to submit a fold-out sheet (e.g. 11”x17”) in response to a one-page limitation where fold-out sheets were not authorized, only the information that could reasonably have been submitted on one 8-1/2 x 11 inch sheet would be evaluated. If an offeror were to submit three 8-1/2 x 11 inch pages in response to a one not-to-exceed 11 x 17 inch page limitation, only the information that could reasonably have been submitted on one 11 x 17 inch sheet would be evaluated. If an offeror submitted alternates that were not requested (e.g. key subcontractor), the information will not be evaluated.

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

f. A “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. “Weakness” means a flaw in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A “significant weakness” is a proposal flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. The Government cannot accept an offer with a deficiency in its technical proposal. The term “acceptable” is therefore used in this context to describe a technical proposal that does not contain a deficiency and thus could be accepted by the Government, notwithstanding any weaknesses or significant weaknesses in the proposal.

g. The Government cannot make award based on a deficient offer. Therefore, a rating of “Unacceptable” under any factor will render the offer ineligible for award, unless the Government elects to enter into discussions with that offeror and all deficiencies are remedied in a revised proposal.

h. Failure of a proposed key subcontractor to furnish authorization for the Government to discuss its past performance with the offeror will not be considered a proposal deficiency. However, the Government will not be able to disclose to the offeror any details pertaining to their performance problems.

h. Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements The past performance evaluation considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements.

There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The Government will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment.

1. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

2. Past Performance Confidence Assessments - In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in the table below:

successfully perform the required effort.

i. Technical/Risk Rating for other than past performance.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Proposal is unawardable.

3 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR A TWO-PHASE DESIGN-BUILD PROPOSAL.

3.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

3.1.1 Media, Page Size, Margins, Fonts, and Page Limitations.

Submit only the hard-copy paper documents and electronic files specifically authorized elsewhere in this section. Do not submit excess information, to include audio-visual materials, electronic media, etc. Do not include links to information on websites in lieu of incorporating the information physically into the proposal. Except where another size is specifically authorized for a specific submission, use only 8 1/2” x 11” paper. Use at least 1 inch margins, which may include headers and footers. Do not justify the right margin. Ensure that all text and graphics are clearly legible. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, unusual font styles such as script, or condensed fonts. For submissions with page limitations, the pages will be counted as follows: One side of the paper is one page; information on both the back and front of one sheet of paper will be counted as two pages. Where authorized, a foldout sheet will count as one page. Pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as a “Table of Contents” or divider tabs, are excluded from page limitations.

3.1.2 Proposal Binding.

The preferred method for assembling proposals is a method that enables the rapid insertion or deletion of pages such as three ring binders. Ensure recommended capacity is not exceeded and that pages turn freely. Do not use spring clamps, spiral binding systems, or heat binding systems.

3.1.3 Conditioning of Offer.

Do not include exceptions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation in either the technical or price proposal volumes. Inclusion of any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in a determination that the offer is unacceptable and thus ineligible for award. Resolve questions about the terms and conditions or technical requirements of the solicitation prior to submission of the offer; see “Inquiries”, located in Section 00 21 16, for points of contact. Notwithstanding the above, the offeror must clearly describe in the proposal cover sheet submitted with the price volume any exceptions, within the offer, to the contractual and/or technical terms and conditions of the solicitation.

3.1.4 Restrictions on Offeror-Provided Information.

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

3.2 GENERAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION.

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

a. Phase-One Proposal.

(1) Factor 1: Management and Technical Approach

(2) Factor 2: Experience and Capability

(3) Factor 3: Past Performance

b. Phase-Two Proposal.

(1) Volume I – Price Volume

(a) Proposal Cover Sheet

(b) Standard Form 1442, Acknowledgement of Amendments, Joint Venture Agreement

(c) Pricing Schedule

(d) Work Breakdown Structure

(e) Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors

(f) Bid Guarantee

(g) Pre-Award Survey Information

(2) Volume II – Technical Volume

(1) Factor 4: Technical Solution

(2) Factor 5: Performance Capability

(3) Factor 6: Socio-Economic Considerations

Each offeror must submit a phase-one proposal consisting of only a “technical” volume and each selected phase-two offeror must submit a phase-two proposal consisting of both a “price” volume and a “technical” volume. The price volume includes the signed offer and the offeror’s proposed prices, as well as other “pro forma” requirements. The technical volume includes all required information relating to the “non-price” evaluation factors, which may include both technical and management evaluation criteria. The two volumes must be submitted as separate, physically distinct volumes. Both volumes must be received at the location shown in Block 8 of Standard Form 1442, not later than the date and time specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442. The information in the two volumes is evaluated separately and independently. Therefore, all information intended by the offeror to be evaluated as part of the price volume must be submitted as part of the price volume. All information intended by the offeror to be evaluated as part of the technical volume must be submitted as part of the technical volume. Do not merely cross-reference similar material between the technical and price volumes. Information in the price volume will not be considered in the technical evaluation, and vice versa.

3.2.1 Marking of Proposal Volumes.

Mark each volume as either the “Price Volume” or the “Technical Volume”. Additionally, mark the outside front cover of each volume with the project title and location, solicitation number, name and address of the offeror, and volume copy number. (Markings which identify the offeror are not required on either the back cover or on the spine/binding.)

3.2.2 Tabbing of Proposal Volumes.

Offers are to be formatted and tabbed in accordance with the instructions that follow for each proposal volume.

3.2.3 Table of Contents.

Include a table of contents for each proposal volume.

4 PHASE-ONE PROPOSAL.

4.1 NUMBER OF SETS OF THE TECHNICAL VOLUME.

The Technical Proposal is to be submitted in one hard “original” and five (5) copies. In addition, submit one complete copy of the technical proposal on Compact Disk (CD) using a searchable and bookmarked “pdf” file format.

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

Use 8-1/2” x 11” pages for the narrative portions of the proposal. There is not a page limit for the overall technical proposal; however, there may be limits imposed at the tab level. Organize your technical proposal as indicated below. The tabs directly correlate to the technical evaluation factors. Although the Government may use information contained anywhere within the technical proposal in its evaluation of any technical evaluation criteria, the Government is not obligated to search for or to consider information that is not located in the specified location. Number the pages. Do not include information pertaining to your proposed pricing for this project in the technical proposal. Limit your submittals to the information specified; excess information will not be evaluated.

PHASE-ONE TECHNICAL VOLUME

TAB

CONTENTS

1. FACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

Management and Technical Approach

2.

FACTOR 2 – EXPERIENCE AND CAPABILITY

Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example Projects Demonstrating Experience and Capability

Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Corporate Resumes

3.

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example Projects Past Performance

Key Subcontractor Commitment and Authorization Letters

4.3 DETAILED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

a. The Offeror is required to propose a specific project team including key subcontractors for evaluation in response to this Request for Proposals. For purposes of this procurement, the terms “key subcontractors” are used to refer only to the prospective subcontractors whose qualifications, experience, and past performance will be evaluated by the Government as part of the source selection process. For reasons of efficiency, not all of the subcontractors critical to successful post-award contract performance have been included in this group. In order to streamline the proposal submission and evaluation process, please limit your submission to the information specifically requested. Information pertaining to other subcontractors not designated as “key” by the Government will be considered excess and may not be evaluated.

b. For the purposes of this procurement, a key subcontractor is defined as any subcontractor performing “key” major work elements for which capability information is required to be submitted for evaluation as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal. The Government has designated the following major work elements as “key”:

--Architect-Engineer Design Firm

--Structural construction effort

--Crane erecting/operating effort

--Electrical construction effort

--Mechanical construction effort

c. Any changes to key subcontractors in your Phase 2 proposal from your Phase 1 proposal will not be allowed.

d. The Offeror’s attention is directed to the clause in Section 00 73 00 titled “Key Personnel and Subcontractors”. In accordance with this clause, any post-award changes to the key personnel and/or key subcontractors in the accepted proposal will require contracting officer approval.

e. Preface – Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Introduction

(1). Provide a brief introduction narrative. Identify and provide the name, DUNS number, address, POC e-mail address, and a brief description of the role and authority of each firm that will be involved in performance of this contract at the prime contractor and key subcontractor level. If the proposed prime contractor is a Joint Venture or teaming arrangement (i.e. mentor protégé), describe the relationship, role, and authority (to include management authority) of each firm. (Note: If a proposed firm has branch offices, provide information for each individual branch office that will perform work under the contract with its own workforce.) List the major work elements to be self-performed by the offeror’s in-house work force, the major work elements to be performed by each key subcontractor, and any other major work to be subcontracted to other contractors. The submission is limited to two (2) 8-1/2”x11” pages for narrative.

Tab 1 of the Technical Proposal: Factor 1 – Management and Technical Approach.

1. Management and Technical Approach

a. Provide information that describes the offeror’s management and technical approach by the Home Office, the Prime Contractor, the Architect-Engineer Design Firm, and key-subcontractors.

b. Management and Technical Approach: Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how the design and construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team. Key elements to include but are not limited to:

i. Home office management resources available/assigned to the project.

ii. Construction Team involvement during the design phase.

iii. Design Team involvement during the construction phase.

iv. Problem avoidance and mitigation techniques

v. Safety

vi. Monterey region environmental concerns/sensitivities

vii. Design and construction quality

viii. Sustainability

d. Formatting and Other Restrictions: The submission is limited to four (4) 8-1/2” x 11” pages total.

e. Evaluation Criteria:

(1) Management and Technical Approach: The Government will evaluate to determine if the offeror’s management and technical approach makes sense logically and demonstrates feasibility with home office resources, total design & construction team participation during both the design and the construction activities, problem avoidance and mitigation techniques, safety, local environmental concerns, sustainability, and quality control processes. A proposal demonstrating prior management experience of the aforementioned elements with regards to barracks or similar type complex(s) would receive greater consideration.

Tab 2 of the Technical Volume: Factor 2 – Experience and Capability.

1. General.

a. The resumes and example projects will provide the primary basis for the Government’s evaluation of their experience and capability.

2. Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example Projects Demonstrating Experience and Capability.

a. The offeror is required to submit “example projects” for each of the three (3) below capability areas that demonstrate the prime’s and/or key subcontractor’s experience and capability to successfully complete the example project. Multiple projects can demonstrate an experience and capability or an example project can demonstrate multiple experiences and capabilities.

-- At least one with no more than three example projects demonstrating the offeror’s design-build project management experience and capability as a prime contractor on a construction project of similar type and scope;

-- At least one with no more than three example projects demonstrating the experience and capability of the Architect-Engineer Design Firm (prime or subcontractor) on a design effort of similar type and scope;

-- One example project each demonstrating the offeror’s key subcontractors experience and capability in the following efforts on a construction project…