17R0025_A0003.docx

W91238-17-R-0025

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SECTION - CONTRACT LINE ITEM NUMBER (CLIN) SCHEDULE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 01 10 - TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 23-Jun-2017 03:00 PM to 30-Jun-2017 03:00 PM.

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

SOLICITATION SECTIONS PERTAINING TO OFFEROR’S SUBMISSION AND EVALUATION

PROPOSAL BASIS OF AWARD

GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS, INSTRUCTIONS, EVALUATIONS, AND CONTRACT AWARD

1. OVERVIEW

This is a "Best Value" solicitation for the construction of Munitions Storage magazines at Hill AFB, Utah. 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.

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 (“non-price”) 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 approximately equal to price. The Government is concerned with striking the most advantageous balance between technical merit (i.e., 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 the 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 CLIN schedule will be used to determine the offeror’s eligibility for contract award in accordance with paragraph 2.1 above (for example, the work breakdown structure, 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.

2.5. TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

The Government will evaluate each offeror’s technical proposal based on how well the proposal addresses each of the evaluation factors, listed below, 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.

The evaluation factors correlate directly to the main organizational tabs identified in the proposal submission instructions.

Technical Proposal

(1) Factor 1: Experience and Capability

(2) Factor 2: Technical Approach

(3) Factor 3: Past Performance

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 – Experience and Capability is the most heavily weighted factor.

Factor 2 – Technical Approach is weighted less than Factor 1.

Factor 3 – Past Performance is weighted less than Factor 2.

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 personnel), 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, with the exception of past performance, which will be evaluated as Past Performance Confidence Assessment.

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 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 that may contribute to a lower overall rating.

i. 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:

j. Combined Technical/Risk Rating for other than past performance.

RATING

DESCRIPTION

Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

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

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

3 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

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.

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.

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.

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.

REQUIREMENT FOR SEPARATE PRICE AND TECHNICAL PROPOSAL VOLUMES.

Each offeror must submit both a “price proposal” volume and a “technical proposal” volume. The price proposal includes the signed offer and the offeror’s proposed prices. The technical proposal includes all required information relating to the “non-cost” evaluation factors. 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 proposal must be submitted as part of the price proposal. All information intended by the offeror to be evaluated as part of the technical proposal must be submitted as part of the technical proposal. Do not merely cross-reference similar material between the technical and price proposals. Information in the price proposal will not be considered in the technical evaluation, and vice versa.

Marking of Proposal Volumes.

Mark each volume as either the “Price Proposal” or the “Technical Proposal”. 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.)

Tabbing of Proposal Volumes.

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

Table of Contents.

Include a table of contents for each proposal volume.

PRICE PROPOSAL VOLUME.

NUMBER OF SETS OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL.

Submit the original (no copies) of the price proposal volume.

FORMAT, CONTENTS, AND LIST OF TABS FOR THE PRICE PROPOSAL.

Use only 8-1/2” x 11” pages. There are no page limits for the price proposal; however, limit responses to required information. Excess information will not be evaluated. Organize your price proposal as indicated below. If a tab is not applicable to your proposal, omit that tab but do not renumber the subsequent tabs.

PRICE PROPOSAL VOLUME

TAB CONTENTS OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL

1 Proposal Cover Sheet

2 SF 1442; Acknowledgement of Amendments; (Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable))

3 CLIN Schedule

4 Work Breakdown Structure

5 Representations and Certifications

6 Bid Guarantee

7 Pre-Award Survey Information

8 Subcontracting Plan

DETAILED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PRICE PROPOSAL.

Tab 1 of the Price Proposal: Proposal Cover Sheet.

The proposal cover sheet is required by FAR 52.215-1 (c)(2). This provision, titled “Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition” is provided in full text in Section 00 21 00. The format and content for the proposal cover sheet follows:

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

1. Solicitation Number:

2. The name, address, DUNS number, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the offeror.

3. A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the Solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item.

4. Names, titles, email addresses, and telephone and facsimile numbers of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation:

5. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

(End of Proposal Cover Sheet)

Tab 2 of the Price Proposal: SF 1442; Acknowledgement of Amendments; Joint Venture Agreement.

The Standard Form (SF) 1442 must be completed by the offeror and duly executed with an original signature by the official(s) identified in the proposal cover sheet as authorized to bind the offeror in accordance with FAR 4.102, which includes specific instructions pertaining to individuals, partnerships, corporations, Joint Venture participants, and agents. Include the offeror’s DUNS number in block 14 of the SF 1442, along with the offeror’s address. All amendments must be acknowledged in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30, Amendment. If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), include a copy of the JV agreement and indicate its status. (Note: It is preferred, but not required, that you use a document protector in lieu of punching holes in the original SF 1442.)

Tab 3 of the Price Proposal: CLIN Schedule.

Submit the completed CLIN Schedule with the offeror’s proposed contract prices inserted in the appropriate spaces. Prices must be proposed for all contract line items. Unit prices must be extended to the actual “dollar and cents” amounts (i.e., to two decimal places). Do not round off the extended prices to the nearest dollar. Check your pricing submission very carefully for mathematical and clerical errors prior to submission. Any qualification of pricing may render the proposal unacceptable and therefore not eligible for award. (Note: It is preferred, but not required, that you use a document protector in lieu of punching holes in the completed “original” CLIN schedule.)

Tab 4 of the Price Proposal: Work Breakdown Structure.

Submit a Work Breakdown Structure of the offeror’s proposed contract prices for each CLIN using the format below, in accordance with Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 3-740-05. The contractor shall submit the following breakdown within two (2) business days after the offer due date; this breakdown will support the proposed price at the time of the offer due date. No change in price will be accepted. This shall be submitted via EMAIL to Karen.Scott@usace.army.mil. The subject line should read “W91238-16-R-00XX, Work Breakdown Structure”.

Tab 5 of the Price Proposal: Representations and Certifications.

The offeror must have electronically completed the annual representations and certifications on the System for Award Management (SAM) website in accordance with FAR 52.204-8. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that these on-line Representations and Certifications are updated as necessary to reflect changes, but at least annually to ensure that they are kept current, accurate and complete. Additionally, the offeror must also complete and return the “Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors” included in Section 00 45 00 of the solicitation. If the offeror is a Joint Venture, all participants must separately complete annual representations and certifications and Section 00 45 00.

Tab 6 of the Price Proposal: Bid Guarantee.

All offerors must submit a bid guarantee (e.g., Standard Form 24, Bid Bond) which complies with the requirements of FAR 28.101 Bid Guarantees, and any Defense and Army supplements thereto.

Tab 7 of the Price Proposal: Pre-Award Survey Information.

a. The Contracting Officer is required to make an affirmative pre-award determination of the prospective contractor’s responsibility in accordance with the mandatory requirements of Part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and its supplements. The Contracting Officer must have sufficient information available to determine that a prospective contractor meets these minimum standards. Therefore, the offeror is requested to provide the pre-award survey information described below with its price proposal:

(1) The completed Construction Contractor Data Form with Supplemental Schedules A-C (see format which follows). If the offeror is a large multi-segmented business concerns, the data provided on the supplemental schedules may be limited to information that directly pertains to the specific segment of the business concern (e.g., the division, group, unit, etc.) proposed to perform work under the prospective contract with its own work force. If the offer is being submitted by a Joint Venture, submit a separate form for each Joint Venture participant. The offeror may submit pre-award survey information in another format, provided that the information furnished is substantially the same as that which would be furnished on the Construction Contractor Data Form and its supplemental schedules.

(2) Current financial statements. If the financial statement is more than 60 days old, submit a certificate stating that the firm's financial condition is substantially the same, or, if not the same, state the changes that have taken place. If a Joint Venture, provide this information for each participant in the Joint Venture.

(3) Banking information. Provide letters from banks or other financial institutions with which the contractor conducts business. The letters should contain information about your firm's accounts, loans, lines of credit, etc. The Government is interested in financial stability, timely payments, the length and nature of the relationship between the firm and the financial institution, and the firm's financial ability to perform the contract. The letters should also provide the name and telephone number of the bank representative the Government may contact. If a Joint Venture, provide this information for each Joint Venture participant.

b. The Government will treat the pre-award survey information submitted by the offeror as proprietary.

· Construction

· Design

· Consultant

State:

Names of Officers and Other Key Personnel

I – PRESENT PAYROLL PERSONNEL (List Number of Each Category Below)

Maximum Personnel at Any Time: Date:

Total:

Present Value ($)

Current Assets:

Net Worth:

(If Other Than in Past Six Years)

Avg.

Annual

Income Owner:

O wner:

VI—TYPE

OF

WORK

IN

WHICH

FIRM

SPECIALIZES

NAME

AND

POSITION/TITLE

OF

PERSON

SIGNING

SIGNATUR

See attachment for explanations or detailed description of item(s) reported above.

)E

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE A – EXISTING COMMITMENTS

List below the construction projects your firm currently has under way, including recent awards. Also list construction projects for which your firm is the apparent successful offeror/bidder, but for which a contract has not yet been awarded.

CONTRACT NUMBER

CONTRACT AMOUNT

DESCRIPTION/ LOCATION

ORGANIZATION/ CONTACT PERSON/ PHONE NUMBER

PERCENT COMPLETE

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE B – COMPLETED PROJECTS

List below the principal construction projects your firm has completed within the past six years, including all DoD contracts with a total value exceeding $500,000.00

CONTRACT NUMBER

CONTRACT AMOUNT

DESCRIPTION/ LOCATION

ORGANIZATION/ CONTACT PERSON/ PHONE NUMBER

PERCENT SUBLET

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE C – CONSTRUCTION AND/OR TECHNICAL EQUIPMENT

List total equipment and facilities owned for performing the prospective contract and present status as to whether or not it is currently committed to existing contracts.

QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION

CONDITION

YEARS OF SERVICE

PRESENT STATUS

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL VOLUME.

NUMBER OF SETS OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

The Technical Proposal is to be submitted in one hard “original” and three (3) copies. In addition, submit one complete copy of the technical proposal on Compact Disk (CD).

FORMAT, CONTENTS, AND LIST OF TABS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

Use 8-1/2” x 11” pages for the narrative portions of the proposal. There may be page 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.

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL TAB CONTENTS

PREFACE

Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Introduction

1. FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE AND CAPABILITY

Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example Projects Demonstrating Experience and Capability Key Personnel Resumes

2. FACTOR 2 – TECHNICAL APPROACH Narrative and Discussion of Technical Approach Network Analysis Schedule

3. FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example Projects Past Performance Key Subcontractor Authorization Letters

Detailed Submission Requirements and Evaluation Criteria for the Technical Proposal

Preface – Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Introduction

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

c. The Offeror’s attention is directed to the clause in Section 00 72 00 titled “Personnel, Subcontractors and Outside Associates or Consultants.” 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.

d. Provide a brief introduction narrative. Identify and provide the name, DUNS number, address, point of contact 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, 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.

e. The Government will not materially evaluate the ‘Preface - Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Introduction,’ because the purpose of this narrative is to provide a brief introduction for information purposes. However, if applicable, the government reserves the right to consider information contained therein throughout the evaluation of the other factors.

Tab 1 of the Technical Volume: Factor 1 – Experience and Capability

General

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

b. The Government is interested in selecting a contractor with the ability to complete projects similar in size, complexity, and scope to that of the prospective contract, including Design-Build and Construction experience of munitions storage magazines (New Construction). Similar facilities shall include heavily reinforced concrete building structures with “blast door” construction/installation and “explosion proof” fixtures.

c. Offerors must submit example projects (either commercial or institutional) demonstrating the following capabilities:

(1) At least one project demonstrating the offeror’s capability as a prime contractor on a construction project of similar type and scope.

(2) At least one project demonstrating the capability of the lead firm that will be designing the project, on a construction project of similar type and scope.

(3) At least one project demonstrating the offeror’s design-build management capability as a prime contractor on a construction project of similar type and scope.

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

a. The offeror shall, if possible, submit “example projects” per paragraphs (1) and (2) below, that demonstrate the prime’s and/or key subcontractor’s wide experience and capability meeting the Evaluation Criteria to successfully perform under the resulting contract. The offeror must explain how the work performed by the proposed firm in the example project is relevant to this project. Example projects can demonstrate multiple experiences and capabilities. However, if an example project is being used for multiple experiences and capabilities, ensure sufficient information is provided to demonstrate those applicable experiences and capabilities. Each example project submitted does not need to demonstrate multiple experiences and capabilities; however, all the example projects should collectively demonstrate wide experience and capability. Submit three to five example projects demonstrating the those capabilities listed above.

b. Do not submit construction projects that are not substantially complete. (For this purpose, “substantially complete” means that only punch list items remain for project acceptance or that the majority of the elements of the project have been turned over to the customer for beneficial occupancy.) If a design-build project is being used by an A-E to demonstrate their design capability, the design portion of the contract must be complete in order for it to be considered.

c. Provide a Summary Matrix that indicates which submitted example project(s) demonstrates which experience and/or capability. The example provided is not mandatory, develop and provide your own matrix that best explains your proposal.

PRIME

A/E

X

A-E Design of project of similar type and scope

X

Design-build management capability as a prime contractor on a construction project of similar type and scope.

X

X

Prime and A/E teaming

X

X

X

X

d. Formatting and Other Restrictions.

(1) Start the information for each example project on a new page.

(2) Use the “Project Information Form” below to submit the example projects. Use of an alternate format may result in a lower rating if all of the specified information is not provided. (Note: Do not submit a group of related jobs as one project unless all of the work was done under the same contract, or for indefinite delivery contracts, under one task order.) Example projects are limited to 10 pages 8-1/2" x 11" (or a maximum of 20 pages front and back) total, for all projects.

(3) The Summary Matrix is limited to one (1) 8-1/2”x11” page.

PROJECT INFORMATION FORM

1. Example Project Number: Start with “1” for the first of all submitted projects and number consecutively.

2. Name of Contractor(s)/Key Subcontractor (s) that Project is Demonstrating Experience: Provide the name of the proposed firm(s) that this example project is demonstrating experience and capability.

3. Contract Number and Awarded Prime Contractor Name: Provide contract number assigned by the procuring Contracting Office and the name of the contractor that was awarded the contract.

4. Title and Location: Title and location of project or contract.

5. Month and Year Project Work Commenced and Month and Year Project was Completed. Include original completion date and actual completion date and a succinct description for changes in these two dates.

6. Project Owner: Project and contract owner or user, such as a government agency or installation, an institution, or corporation or private individual.

7. Point of Contact Name: Provide name of a person associated with the project owner or the organization that contracted for the construction, who is very familiar with the project and the firm’s (or firms’) performance.

8. Point of Contact Telephone Number: Include area code.

9. Description of the Project: Provide information relevant to the Evaluation Criteria, including but not limited to the following information. Provide contract type, dollar amount (original contract amount and final dollar value (include an explanation for the difference)), physical size, and brief description of prime contracted effort. If the firm (prime/key subcontractor) performed as a subcontractor, describe the work effort pertaining to the subcontracted effort, not the prime contract requirement. Provide the performance period in month and year. Explain how the project demonstrates the ability to manage multiple projects at once. Explain how the project demonstrates proper management of scope, schedule, and budget.

10. Provide name of firm(s) (prime/key subcontractor) and branch offices, if appropriate, that were involved in the example project, their roles, and their respective contract numbers.

11. Please list the other projects you were completing concurrently (please include dollar value for each concurrent project).

Evaluation Process:

Evaluation Criteria.

(1) Demonstrated experience and capability in the following areas will be evaluated for relevancy (similar in project type, dollar value, contact type, complexity, scope, and magnitude to the instant procurement) and recency (example projects completed before 2012 will be considered by the Government to be less recent, than projects completed on or after 2012; the more recent the project is, the greater the consideration).

(a) Prime Contractor’s contractor/construction/project management experience and capability.

(b) Architect-Engineer Design firm’s experience and capability.

(c) Experience and capability with projects similar to that of the project in the resulting contract.

(2) Demonstrations of experience and capability in the following areas may be considered advantageous. (A lack of any of the below items will not be considered unfavorable.):

(a) Prime contractor and Architect-Engineer designer teaming experience on similar design-build projects.

(b) Prior experience on Corps of Engineers construction projects.

(c) Prior experience on Hill AFB construction projects.

(3). Key Personnel Resumes

a. The offeror must submit a resume of the qualifications for each of the persons proposed for each of the key positions identified by the Government. The offeror may only submit the qualifications of one person for each key position (i.e., do not submit alternates).

b. Key positions with minimum criteria:

· On-site Project Superintendent – five years’ experience as construction site project superintendent on a substantially completed construction projects with similar construction features, complexity, physical size as the instant procurement, occurring within the last five years.

· On-site CQC System Manager – This individual must be a construction person with a minimum of five years’ experience in related work (to the instant procurement) with a four-year college degree. See Section 01 45 00 for additional minimum qualifications for this position.

c. The Government is especially interested in the experience of the proposed key personnel in the same capacity on relevant projects. For example, experience in the following areas would be considered advantageous:

· Experience on a munitions storage magazine project.

Tab 2A of the Technical Volume: Technical Approach

Technical Narrative.

(a) The plan/approach must be in sufficient detail to clearly demonstrate (1) the offeror’s understanding of the principal components of work described in the project specifications and drawings and (2) the offeror’s understanding of the site and other conditions that could impact schedule. The narrative must contain sufficient information to allow the Government to perform a basic analysis of the proposed approach.

(b) Describe how the offeror will approach the design of Munitions Storage Magazines project at Hill AFB, UT. Clearly distinguish the roles and involvement of the Architect-Engineer design firm in the project. Also address any design effort that will be performed “in-house” by the key subcontractor. Describe the roles and planned interaction between the Independent Technical Reviewers and various contractor and government personnel.

(c) Describe how the offeror will approach the construction of the Munitions Storage Magazines project at Hill AFB, UT. The Government is interested in information such as: (1) site prep, (2) phasing/relocating, (3) demolition, (4) utilities, (5) construction work discipline sequencings, (6) site work, and (7) clean-up. Identify any betterments included in the offer, i.e., those items, materials, equipment or processes that exceed the minimum requirements in the contract specifications, and discuss how these betterments increase value to the Government. Betterments may be considered favorable and advantageous; however, the lack of betterments will not be considered unfavorable. In addition, see the specific instructions for betterments, identified in section 00 72 00, under "PROPOSED BETTERMENTS." Provide catalog cuts or other documentation necessary to clearly indicate the quality of the proposed betterments. The offeror shall make a statement that their design complies with the most current regulations, standards, codes, and Design Requirements

(d) Discuss how the offeror plans to ensure quality control throughout the project. This discussion should address the offeror’s understanding of, familiarity with, and intended use of Corps-specific procedures and automated information management/tracking systems related to quality control, per Section 01 45 00. Special areas of interest include the DrChecks review management system, three-phase inspection process, RMS/QCS utilization, and the submission/approval process.

(e) Demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the roles and planned interaction between the various contractor personnel involved, such as the on-site Project Superintendent, the CQC System Manager, the CQC System Manager’s staff, and the subcontractors. Discussion must address lines of communication with the Government team.

(f) Describe any significant problems or major difficulties anticipated in performing or accomplishing the work, challenges associated with this 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.

Formatting and Other Restrictions: the submission is limited to six (6) 8-1/2” x 11” pages total

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s approach to the extent that it successfully addresses those items mentioned above, in (3) Furthermore, offerors clearly demonstrating the ability to effectively manage the designers, consultants, and subcontractors on the team, ability to coordinate all of the work throughout the design and construction phases, understanding of the phasing of the work, the planned approach to accomplish the project’s scope, and understand of the roles and planned interaction between the various contractor personnel involved.

The greater the proposal demonstrates those items identified in (3) and lowers the risk of unsuccessful performance, the greater the rating.

Tab 2B Network Analysis Schedule

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.

The schedule is to include activities on the near critical and critical paths, including the following:

(a) NTP,

(b) Charrette Meetings,

(c) Design Reviews,

· Government,

· Contractor,

· Designer,

(d) Independent Technical Reviews

(e) Design review conferences

(f) DDESB Review

(g) Construction activities broken down to the “Feature of Work” level

(h) Adverse weather per section 01 00 00

(i) Pre Commissioning System Testing (if applicable)

(j) Final Commissioning System Testing (if applicable)

(k) Mechanical System Testing (if applicable)

(l) Electrical System Testing (if applicable)

(m) Test and Balancing (if applicable)

(n) As-Builts

(o) Landscaping (if applicable)

(p) Contractor Punch-out Inspection items

(q) Pre-final Inspection

(r) Correction of pre-final inspection items

(s) Final Inspection

(t) Correction of Final Inspection items.

(u) Project Complete

(v) Long Lead Item (if applicable)

*Note: Missing items from the list above shall be considered non-compliant and will not be considered for award.

**Note: The use of a Pert Chart shall be considered non-compliant and will not be considered for award.

(a) Clearly indicate the following time frames:

(b) 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 on or about 1 August 2017.

(c) The total number of calendar days allocated to design

(d) The total number of calendar days allocated to construction

(e) The total number of calendar days from NTP to Project Complete

The milestone schedule cannot exceed the contract performance period specified in item specified in box 11 of the SF 1442, and must be in compliance with any contractually required interim completion dates specified in the solicitation for separate parts or stages of the work. (Should the offeror discover during proposal preparation that the project cannot be completed within the required contract performance period, please notify the Contracting Officer immediately.)

The Government’s requirement is that all design and construction on this project be completed within the specified period of performance after receiving a Notice to Proceed, inclusive of all review periods and Government phasing requirements specified. The offeror may propose a completion period of lesser duration, subject to the following conditions:

(a) If the offeror proposes a completion period of lesser duration than the performance period specified in the solicitation, a compliance statement completed by the offeror and duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company must be included in the technical proposal.