Amendment_0003.pdf

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

The purpose of this amendment is to:

a. Remove the bid bond submission reference from the Volume 1 - General Volume requirements.

b. Add Attachment 6, a Technical Volume Crossw alk of solicitation sections L and M to assist Offerors w ith proposal compliance (Note: Use of the crossw alk is optional and not a requirement). See Section L(I)(C)(3)(b)(ii).

c. Clarify evaluation criteria in Section M.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-Nov-2012

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W9124J-12-R-0014

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12-Sep-2012

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

08-Nov-2012

CODE

MICC - FSH

ATTN: MICC - FSH

2205 INFANTRY POST RD

210-466-2145

FORT SAM HOUSTON TX 78234-1361

W9124J 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9124J-12-R-0014

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION

Attachment 1 Past Performance Information Sheet

Attachment 2 Past Performance Questionnaire

Attachment 3 Sample Task Order Attachments:

Request For Task Order Proposal Cover Sheet

Statement of Work

Specifications

Drawings

Davis Bacon Wage Determination

Attachment 4 Site Visit Agenda

Attachment 5 Price Evaluation Example

Attachment 6 Section L and M Technical Volume Crosswalk

Section K, L, & M will be physically removed from the resultant contract, but will be deemed to be incorporated by reference in the awarded contract.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

OFFEROR INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

The Government intends to select up to three contractors for the MATOC. However, the Government reserves the right to award more or fewer total contracts if the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines it is in the

Government's best interest. The SSA will consider the Government's expected volume of work, available funding, adequate competition, and the availability of best value proposals. The Government reserves the right to award contracts without discussions. Each contract will have a five year ordering period. Individual task orders will be competed under fair opportunity rules cited in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16 and the ordering procedures in the resultant contract.

I. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

A. Proposal Submittal and Inquiries.

1. Proposals shall be submitted prior to the closing date and time identified on the SF 1442, to the following address:

Mission and Installation Contracting Command – Fort Sam Houston

ATTN: Kimberly Miller, Contract Specialist

2205 Infantry Post Road, BLDG 604

Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234

2. Electronic submissions via email or facsimile will not be accepted. Offers shall be mailed through a commercial/Government carrier or hand carried.

3. The point of contact responsible for supplying additional information and answering all inquiries is the

Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) via the Contract Specialist at kimberly.miller19@us.army.mil .

Address all questions or concerns the offeror may have to the Contract Specialist, Kimberly Miller.

All questions regarding this solicitation shall be submitted in writing via email with subject line reference, “Question (or Comment) for 63 rd

RSC MATOC W9124J-12-R-0014.” The deadline for the submittal of all questions and/or comments is 5 October 2012, at 04:30 PM CDT.

4. Site Visit. The Government will hold a site visit at Las Alamitos on 24 Sept 2012 beginning at 09:00

AM. Please see Solicitation Attachment for site visit address and agenda. All interested firms may attend with a limit of three (3) attendees per firm. Please submit, via email, the names of attendees to the Contract Specialist, Kimberly Miller by 21 Sept 2012 at 4:30 PM CDT. The email subject line reference should be, “W9124J-12-R-0014 Site Visit Reservation.” There will be a Pre-Proposal

Conference held at the conclusion of the site visit. Technical questions may be addressed at the Pre-

Proposal Conference at the conclusion of the site visit. If the Government responses to technical questions affect the Statement of Work requirements or any other portion of the solicitation, then a solicitation amendment will be issued.

All attendees must possess a valid photo ID or valid photo driver’s license. All drivers must provide a valid photo driver’s license, current vehicle registration, and current proof of vehicle insurance.

Failure to attend the pre-proposal conference/site visit will not disqualify an offer; however, the offeror acts at its own risk and will not be relieved from complying with the terms and conditions of any resultant contract by reason of such failure. In no event will a failure to inspect the site constitute grounds for a claim after award of the contract.

B. General Instructions

1. The source selection will be conducted utilizing negotiated source selection procedures as delineated in

FAR Part 15.3. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria under Section M, “Evaluation Factors for

Award.” Noncompliance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) requirements may hamper the

Government's ability to properly evaluate the proposal and may result in elimination of the proposal from further consideration for contract award.

2. The Offer. The submission of the documentation specified below will constitute the offeror's acceptance of the terms and conditions of the RFP, concurrence with the Statement of Work, and contract type.

3. It is the Government’s intention to award without discussions. Offerors are encouraged to present their best technical proposal and prices in their initial proposal submission. However, in accordance with

FAR Part 15.306, should discussions become necessary, the Government reserves the right to hold them. If this occurs, a competitive range will be determined and offerors notified. The competitive range may be limited for purposes of efficiency in accordance with FAR Part 15.306 (c)(2).

mailto:kimberly.miller19@us.army.mil

4. Instructions outlined in paragraph C below, prescribe the format for the proposal and describe the approach for the development and presentation of proposal data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of proposals.

5. If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, an ambiguity, omission, or are otherwise deemed unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

6. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

7. All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities

(FedBizOpps) website at http://www.fbo.gov and Army Single Face to Industry (ASFI) at http://acquisition.army.mil/. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

8. Debriefings. The PCO will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR

15.505. The PCO will notify offerors who were in the competitive range but were not selected for award in accordance with FAR 15.503(b). Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.506.

9. Team/Team Member(s)/Teaming Partner(s). The Government will consider the offeror and all subcontractors a “team” when evidence of a signed Teaming Arrangement or Letter of Intent is provided. This RFP will refer to the offeror and all identified teaming subcontractors as a “team.”

This RFP will refer to all identified teaming subcontractors as “team members” or “teaming partners.”

Teaming Arrangement (TA) or Letter Of Intent (LOI). To be valid under this solicitation, all team members shall have a signed TAs or LOI that commits the parties to performance under this contract, should it be awarded to the offeror.

(a) If any subcontractor is projected to perform more than 20% of all work on the Multiple Award

Task Order Contract (MATOC) or is projected to perform a specific construction trade through the duration of the MATOC ordering period, then a signed TA or LOI shall be provided for that subcontractor.

(b) Subcontractors projected to perform less than 20% of all work on the contract may be included as team members at the Prime’s discretion. If included as a team member, a signed TAs or LOI shall be provided for that subcontractor.

(c) A subcontractor without a TA or LOI with the offeror is not considered as part of the “team” and will not be evaluated as such.

(d) Technical capability proposal information, past performance information, and Past Performance

Questionnaires submitted for subcontractors without a TA or LOI will not be evaluated.

(e) The Government will consider the offeror and all subcontractors a “team” when evidence of a signed TA or LOI is provided in Volume I - General.

(f) A Joint Venture (JV) will be considered a sole business entity. A copy of the JV Agreement

(JVA) signed by all the partners shall be provided. The JVA shall specify the rights and http://www.fedbizzopps.gov/ http://acquisition.army.mil/ responsibilities of each partner and shall identify the managing partner. In addition, the offeror shall provide a summary narrative that specifically delineates what each partner will do in regard to performing the contract. The responsibilities of the managing partner are significantly more important than the responsibilities of all other partners combined. In accordance with 13 CFR, Section 124.513, Paragraph (e), the SBA must approve the JVA prior to the award of an 8(a) contract on behalf of the joint venture.

(g) Mentor-Protégé (M-P) is a relationship and not a business entity. M-Ps require formal TAs or

LOIs to qualify for consideration as a team member.

(h) The proposal shall present a complete, coherent presentation of team abilities as applicable.

C. Proposal Preparation Instructions

1. Offerer’s proposal shall consist of four volumes:

Volume I - General

Volume II - Technical Proposal

Volume III - Past Performance

Volume IV - Price Proposal

2. Proposal Format

(a) Offerors shall submit the number of copies listed in paragraph (d) below of their proposal.

(b) Exceptions. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors and subfactors (Sections A through M). Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. If the offeror finds it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, the offeror shall clearly identify the applicable Volume and exceptions with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken, what benefit accrues to the Government (if any), and its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Offerors are cautioned that taking an exception may render the offer ineligible for award. This information shall be provided in the format below.

Solicitation Exceptions

Solicitation

Document

Page/

Paragraph

Requirement/

Portion Rationale & Impact

Section B, PWS, Section

L&M, etc.

Applicable

Page and Paragraph

Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe the rationale and impact of the exception

(c) Page Format. A page shall be defined as an 8 ½ X 11” sheet of paper. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Letter size and spacing requirements for illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the offeror but must be easily readable. Fold-outs will be counted as the appropriate number of pages based on an 8 ½” X 11” sheet of paper.

Margins shall be at least 1 inch on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch on the side. The Offeror shall number each page in order to eliminate any confusion. In the event the Offeror creates an ambiguity in their numbering of pages, the Government may exercise its own discretion in counting pages. All text shall be single spaced and printed black on white paper (black and white requirement does not apply to graphics, photos, etc., Company stationary and logos are acceptable). Printing shall be easily readable (12-pitch type or 10 point proportional spacing.)

Cross-references should be utilized to preclude unnecessary duplication of data between sections.

Page limitations are as follows:

VOLUME TITLE

NO. HARD

COPIES

NO. OF DIGITAL

COPIES (CD ROM)

PAGE LIMITS

I General Original 1 No limit

II Technical 4 Copies 1

30 Pages for Sub-Factor 1

10 Pages for Sub-Factor 2

30 Pages for Sub-Factor 3

No page limit for QC Plan (in

Appendix for Sub-Factor 3)

No page limit for Safety Plan

(in Appendix for Sub-Factor 3)

III Past Performance 2 Copies 1 50

IV Price 3 Copies 1 No limit

(d) The proposal shall be organized into four volumes. Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring loose leaf binder which shall permit the volume to lie flat when open, except for the General Volume. Instructions for the General Volume are in the paragraph below. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification and the offeror's name. A cover sheet may be placed on the front cover of each binder, but no labels or other identifying data should be placed in the outside spine of the binder. Document protectors shall not be used.

The original of the General volume shall be clearly identified as “Original” and hole-punched with a standard 2-hole punch at the top center of each page and submitted in a classification folder (six-part folder).

(e) Electronic Copies. In addition to submitting hard copies of the proposals, digital copies shall be provided on CD-ROM disk in Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, Excel, or a searchable Adobe Acrobat

Portable Document File (pdf). The electronic copies of the proposal shall be an exact duplicate of the submitted paper proposal. The Government will not perform a word-by-word check of the paper submission against the electronic copies. However, if discrepancies are identified between the electronic copies and the paper proposal, the paper proposal shall prevail.

The file name shall be “Company Name_Volume #_Initial” for the first submission. The file name of later submissions (if necessary), shall be “Company Name_Volume#_Revision X” with X indicating the number of the revision.

(f) Proposal Limitation. The proposal shall not exceed the limits stated above. Page limit includes all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, etc. If the page limits are exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit shall be removed and not evaluated. The Government will not accept any changes to the contractor’s proposal after the closing date of the solicitation

(See FAR 15.208 for further information regarding late proposals). If discussions become necessary, page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the offerors.

Page Limit does not include covers for volumes, tables of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, consent letters, and section dividers/tables if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal.

Pages will be counted if they contain any other information, i.e., diagrams, extraneous data, etc.

Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted.

(g) Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with a definition for each.

3. Proposal Content

(a) Volume I – General. Offerors are required to submit a completed SF 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) (including acknowledgment of Amendments), Section B, and Section K. Failure to follow the below Contract Proposal preparation instructions may cause your proposal to be deemed unacceptable by the Government. The General Volume shall be organized as follows and contain the identified information.

TAB A, Exceptions/Assumptions (if required) - Identification and explanation of any exceptions or deviations. Additionally, any assumptions used in the proposal preparation must be identified.

TAB B, Solicitation, Offer and Award – The SF 1442 shall be submitted fully completed. The offeror is cautioned that the SF 1442 must contain an original signature in block 20B of the form.

The contractor shall acknowledge any amendments to the RFP in accordance with the instructions on the SF1442.

TAB C, The offeror shall include a contact list (with phone numbers, e-mail addresses, fax numbers, and mailing addresses) of all key personnel. Specifically, the contact list shall identify those personnel authorized to negotiate on behalf of their team, as well as a single point of contact for all correspondence. Furthermore, the list shall indicate the person to contact in the event the offeror is awarded a contract (provide, at a minimum, contact’s title, phone number, and e-mail address); typically the person to notify in the event of award is a senior professional of the corporation.

TAB D, Section B (Coefficient Schedule) shall be submitted fully completed and error free.

Coefficients shall be limited to three decimal places. The price proposal for the Sample Task shall not be included here.

TAB E, Section K (Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors) – The offeror shall ensure that Section K is submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/ representation completed truthfully and completely. Offerors may submit full, current, accurate printout of their company’s ORCA record in lieu of completing Section K in accordance with

FAR 52.204-8(d).

TAB F, Payment and Performance Bond capacity – The offeror shall submit a prequalification letter from a Federally acceptable surety that verifies the bonding relationship and shows a minimum aggregate bond capacity of $5 Million for this MATOC. The letter should also identify a single project bond limit. A directory of acceptable sureties can be found at http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570/c570.html#certified. Failure to provide this letter may result in rejection of the Offeror’s proposal.

TAB G, Letters of Intent/Teaming Agreements - Provide all Joint Venture Agreements, Teaming

Arrangements and Letters of Intent for subcontractors to receive credit for performing as a team, in accordance with Paragraph 9 of this Section.

http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570/c570.html#certified

(b) Volume II – Technical Volume

i. The Technical Volume shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims in the Offeror’s proposal. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Responses will be evaluated against the Technical factors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Statements that the offeror understands, can, or will comply with the SOW (including referenced publications, technical data, etc.); statements paraphrasing the SOW or parts thereof (including applicable publications, technical data, etc.); and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used,” etc., will be considered unacceptable. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

ii. A Technical Volume Crosswalk has been provided as Attachment 6, for Offerors to utilize in proposal preparations. The purpose of this Crosswalk is to assist Offerors in Technical Proposal preparations to ensure compliance with Sections L and M of the Solicitation. The Offeror is

NOT required to utilize or submit this Crosswalk with the proposal submission. If the

Offeror chooses to utilize this Crosswalk then it shall be inserted at the beginning of the Technical

Volume of the Proposal after the title page. The Crosswalk will not be counted against the page limit requirements. The Offeror shall only indicate the Paragraph Number (or other alphanumeric indicator) where the information is located in their proposal in the final column on the sheet.

Narrative or other supplementary shall not be included on this document and will not be evaluated.

This is only being offered as assistance and will not be counted against an Offeror if one chooses not to utilize this tool.

iii. The Technical Volume shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the SOW and the evaluation criteria for award set forth in Section M of this solicitation. The section shall be prepared in an orderly format and in sufficient detail to enable the Government to make a thorough evaluation of the contractor’s technical competence and ability to comply with the contract task requirements specified in the SOW. The offeror shall address as specifically as possible the actual methodology they would use for accomplishing the SOW tasks. The volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

TAB A - FACTOR 1

o Sub-factor 1, Management Approach (This sub-factor element is applicable to the overall

MATOC).

(a) Element 1: Organizational Chart/Management Approach/ Multi-State Management Plan.

The offeror’s Management Approach shall describe their overall management approach with regard to the lines of authority and communications between home office, construction teams, subcontractor operations, government project managers, contracting officials, inspectors, and users. The offeror shall discuss plan to adhere to the requirements of FAR Clause 52.219-4 Limitations of Subcontracting, at least 15% of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern

The offeror shall provide an organizational chart that clearly illustrates the lines of authority between the home office, project managers, construction teams, and the

Government.

The offeror must outline their Multi-State Management Plan to clearly indicate how they will manage multiple contemporaneous projects that are geographically dispersed. The plan shall demonstrate an understanding of the task order proposal process, construction processes, coordination, monitoring, and control of construction projects. The Offeror’s ability to manage multiple projects through adequate and properly qualified staffing to support multiple ongoing, active construction projects in varying degrees of completion at any given time across a disperse geographic area will be evaluated. The Plan shall clearly identify the methods the Offeror will implement to coordinate and schedule work on multiple task order projects, and the ability to procure and provide materials in a timely manner.

(b) Element 2: Key Personnel. Provide a consolidated list of key personnel with name, position, title, education, experience/qualifications, and description of specific project responsibility for each. The Key Personnel that shall be presented include: Project

Manager(s), Quality Control Manager(s), Safety Manger(s), and Site Superintendent(s).

The Offeror shall fully describe its Project Manager’s role in the organization and how the Project Manager will ensure successful completion of all construction task orders issued under the resulting contract. The offeror shall also identify all key personnel who will work with the Project Manager and their respective responsibilities on the construction management team.

(c) Element 3: Quality Control Program (QCP) and Safety Plan (SP). The Contractor shall submit a quality control plan and a safety plan for the overall MATOC. The Offeror shall provide a comprehensive overview of the QCP proposed for this MATOC. The Offeror shall identify the quality control representative(s) position in the company hierarchy and discuss communication interfaces with Government inspectors. The submission shall describe offeror’s inspection system for covering all services to include, but not limited to, areas to be inspected on either a scheduled or unscheduled basis, how daily inspections will be performed and individuals(s) (by title) who will perform the inspections, procedures for correcting unacceptable services and timeliness of correcting unacceptable services. The Offeror shall also provide a comprehensive overview of the

Safety Plan proposed for this MATOC.

TAB B - FACTOR 1

o Sub-factor 2, Subcontractor Management Plan (This will be applied to the overall

MATOC)

Describe the methodology for management of various subcontractors in varying fields of expertise. Describe the criteria for selecting and qualifying subcontractor support; include any forms or questionnaires used in this selection process. Discuss the company’s commitment to obtaining/reviewing submitted subcontractor payroll records timely.

TAB C - FACTOR 1

o Sub-factor 3, Sample Task Order(STO)/Project Execution

i. Element 1: Project Execution Narrative: The offeror shall submit their overall approach for accomplishing the STO from commencement to completion. The approach must demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the work required utilizing the SOW, specifications, and drawings.

ii. Element 2: Project Management. The Critical Path Method (CPM) is a system of construction management that involves the complete planning and scheduling of a project and the development of a diagram showing each activity, its appropriate place in the timetable and its importance relative to other tasks and the complete project. Accordingly, to achieve an “Acceptable” evaluation for this sub-factor element, the offeror shall submit a CPM schedule that demonstrates that the offeror fully understands the scope of work for the task order, the specifications, and any additional relevant task order documentation (e.g., drawings) to complete the task order successfully. The CPM schedule must be complete, accurate, realistic, and adherent to the performance period and specifications, thereby demonstrating that the offeror can, in fact, comply with the CPM schedule

iii. Element 3: RS Means Based Proposal. The offeror shall submit an RS Means Based proposal. The price shall utilize the applicable line items from the Unit Price Book

(RS Means) to the maximum extent possible. Offerors shall review the Bid Schedule

Notes regarding coefficients, the Unit Price Book, and Non-Priced Items (NPIs) prior to price proposal preparation. The Sample Task Order proposal will be evaluated for technical acceptability only. The Offeror shall apply their appropriate proposed coefficient to the price proposal.

NOTE: The Sample Task Order WILL NOT be awarded.

NOTE: The price proposal will be evaluated in this section for the proper and effective utilization of appropriate line items and quantities from the Unit Price

Book. Note: The coefficient applied to the price proposal will not be evaluated in the technical evaluation.

(c) Volume III - Past Performance. The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an Offeror's recent and relevant Past Performance, focusing on and targeting performance which is relevant to the effort as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation and as defined in Section M.

Submission Requirements. The offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume containing the following:

TAB A, Table of Contents

TAB B, Summary Page - Describe the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and /or joint venture partner. This summary shall also include the DUNS and CAGE code for the

Offeror and each teaming partner. The Tax Identification Number for the Offeror shall also be included.

TAB C, Consent Letters – Letters executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing the release of past performance information so the offeror can respond to such information.

TAB D, Client Authorization Letters – Letters for each identified effort for a commercial customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror’s performance.

TAB E, Organization Structure Change History (if applicable) — Organizational Structure Change

History. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the offeror(s), your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

TAB F, Past Performance Information Sheets - Complete Past Performance Sheets in accordance with Attachment 1. Sheets are limited to 3 pages per reference. The offeror shall provide documentation outlining the offeror’s past performance with contracts, as a prime or major subcontractor, which is the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the services being procured under this Solicitation. The submittal shall include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the work specified by this solicitation. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. Offerors are encouraged to address any performance problems/issues that the Government may identify and explain corrective action taken and the current status. The Government will consider this information in determining the Offeror’s past performance rating.

Past Performance information described herein is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners. The Government will only consider past performance of the Offeror and subcontractors/teaming partners/joint venture partners/etc.

identified in accordance with Paragraph B.9 of this section. The minimum number of recent and relevant past performance references required is:

1. If proposing without teaming partners, then past performance information shall be submitted on a minimum of five contracts; or

2. If proposing as a JV, then past performance information shall be submitted on a minimum of three contracts for each partner; or

3. If proposing as a team, then past performance information shall be submitted on a minimum of three contracts for the prime, and a minimum of one contract for each team member.

The offeror shall include documentation regarding their relevant past performance as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation. The offeror SHALL NOT go back any farther than 6 years for the submitted data. The past performance data shall document a successful history of past contract performance.

In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the offeror’s Past Performance Volume and information obtained from other sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) or similar systems, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and commercial sources. Offerors are reminded that both independent data and data provided by offerors in their proposals may be used by the Government to evaluate offeror past performance. However, the burden of providing thorough, complete, and current past performance information as requested in this paragraph remains with the offerors. Proposals that do not contain the information requested by this paragraph risk rejection or a less than acceptable performance rating by the Government. All past performance comments received will be taken into account and could affect the overall rating.

The overall past performance evaluation is a subjective decision based on the whole of all data received. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

Past Performance Questionnaires (See Attachment 2) - For the contracts identified on each Past

Performance Information Sheet, the offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance

Questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. The points of contact shall return the questionnaires directly to Ms. Kimberly Miller, Contract Specialist. Past Performance Questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Contract

Specialist via regular mail or electronic mail at kimberly.miller19@us.army.mil. Past

Performance Questionnaires must be received by the closing date of the solicitation. Any questionnaires not returned directly to the Government will not be reviewed and evaluated. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure a minimum of three (3) past performance questionnaires are received for the team by the closing date of this solicitation. The Offeror shall provide a list of all the POCs who were sent a Past Performance Questionnaire under TAB B of this Volume. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the offeror’s past performance. New entities that have no past customers shall annotate on the Summary Page that they have had no previous clients and that the minimum number of questionnaires cannot be provided.

(d) Volume IV- Price

i. Submission Requirements

a. TAB A - The price proposal shall contain the completed Section B, Pricing Schedule only. The coefficient shall be expressed as a decimal (e.g. 1.384) rounded off to no more than three decimal places, see Section B.1. The coefficient(s) proposed by the

Offeror and accepted by the Government will be incorporated in the MATOC. The electronic version of the Price Schedule shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format.

b. TAB B – Coefficient Data. The coefficient data shall identify what types of costs are included in its coefficients and provide its coefficient formula and calculations. This data shall be submitted in Excel format on the electronic version (CD) of the proposal. All formulas, lookup tables, and links shall be intact, and no links shall exist to files not included with the submission. Spreadsheets shall not contain hidden worksheets.

c. Unbalanced Pricing (coefficient schedule) may be evaluated in accordance with FAR

15.404-1(g), as applicable, to assess potential performance risk which could result in unreasonably high prices.

d. The Government may reject any proposal that is unrealistically high or low in price.

ii. Unbalanced Pricing may be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), as applicable, to assess potential performance risk which could result in unreasonably high prices.

iii. The Government may reject any proposal that has an unrealistically high or low coefficient.

The Government reserves the right to require the submission of Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data as is deemed necessary to arrive at a fair and reasonable price.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

mailto:kimberly.miller19@us.army.mil

EVALUATION FACTORS

I. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

A. Basis for Contract Award

1. This is a best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation

Supplement (DFARS), and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS). Award will be made to Offerors who are deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition

Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, represents the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) offer.

2. Trade-offs between price and non-price factors are not permitted. Unreasonably high/unrealistically low, unbalanced, inaccurate or incomplete price proposals may be the grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

The Government will evaluate proposed prices for reasonableness using price analysis techniques.

Proposed prices evaluated as unreasonable may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

3. The Government reserves the right to conduct technical and past performance evaluations beginning with the lowest priced Offerors. Evaluations will cease when an adequate number of technically acceptable proposals receive acceptable technical and past performance rating. In the instance an adequate number of technically acceptable offers cannot be established, a Competitive Range will be established.

B. Award for All of the Work. The Government intends to award up to three contracts as a result of this solicitation. Offers submitted with incomplete coefficient schedules will be considered ineligible for award. As set forth in FAR 52.215-1 (f)(4), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a), Clarifications and

Award Without Discussions). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In the event that discussions are held, a competitive range determination will be made. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

C. Evaluation Criteria

1. Evaluation criteria consist of factors and sub-factors. The proposals will be evaluated under three evaluation factors:

Factor 1: Technical Capability

Sub-factor 1: Management Approach

Sub-factor 2: Subcontractor Management Plan

Sub-factor 3: Sample Task Order/Project Execution

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Price

2. Factor 1 - Technical Factor. The Technical Factor evaluation provides an assessment of the Offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements.

TAB A - FACTOR 1

o Sub-factor 1, Management Approach

(a) Element 1: Organizational Chart/Management Approach/ Multi-State Management Plan.

The Management Approach will be evaluated for practicability of the lines of authority and communication of the Offeror. For an “acceptable” rating, a clear, logical and effective approach shall identify communications between home office, construction teams, subcontractor operations, governmental project managers, contracting officials, inspectors and users. The Offeror’s plan for adherence to FAR 52.219-4 will be assessed.

The organizational chart shall clearly delineate the lines of authority between the home office, project managers, construction teams, and the Government.

The Multi-State Management Plan will be assessed to determine the Offeror’s understanding, capability, and resources to effectively manage multiple geographically dispersed projects to include maintaining adequate and properly qualified staff. The

Offeror’s process and commitment for full participation in the MATOC task order competition process, to include, attending site visits, preparing and negotiating task order proposals, and timely material submittals, while simultaneously completing task orders in varying degrees of completion across geographically dispersed locations will be evaluated.

(b) Element 2: Key Personnel. The Offeror’s proposed key personnel will be evaluated to assess the Offeror’s capability to provide personnel with the proper knowledge, skills, and experience to perform the Statement of Work. The Offeror’s narrative will be evaluated on the practicability of the proposed key personnel to fulfill the requirements of the Statement of Work.

(c) Element 3: Quality Control Program (QCP) and Safety Plan (SP). The QCP will be evaluated to assess the feasibility and appropriateness of the Quality Control Manager’s responsibilities and authority. All aspects of quality control to include the description of the quality control organization, the responsibility for surveillance of work, acceptance, rejection, documentation and resolution of deficiencies, and corrective actions will be evaluated. The review of the Quality Control Plan will include the proposed quality control processes to include inspection procedures and reporting procedures to include interface with Government inspectors. A review will be conducted on the appropriateness of the quality control representative(s) position in the company hierarchy. The SP will be evaluated to assess the Offeror’s protocols established to anticipate, recognize, evaluate, and control any hazards involved with the completion of multiple task orders and individual task orders.

TAB B - FACTOR 1

o Sub-factor 2, Subcontractor Management Plan (This will be applied to the overall

MATOC)

The Offeror’s plan will be evaluated to assess the proposed methodology for selecting and managing qualified subcontractors amid a geographically dispersed area. The plan shall also discuss the Offeror’s commitment to prompt subcontractor payments, obtaining/reviewing submitted subcontractor payroll records, and processes for ensuring adequate subcontractor oversight during task order performance.

TAB C - FACTOR 1

o Sub-factor 3, Sample Task Order (STO)/Project Execution

(a) Element 1: Project Execution Narrative. The Offeror’s narrative will be evaluated for the Offeror’s understanding of the sample task order statement of work, specifications, and drawings.

(b) Element 2: Project Management. The Offeror’s proposal will be assessed for feasibility, adherence to the sample task order statement of work, and realism of the proposed

Critical Path Method schedule.

(c) Element 3: RS Means Based Proposal. The Offeror’s RS Means Based proposal will be evaluated for utilization of the applicable line items from the Unit Price Book (RS

Means). The Sample Task Order proposal will be evaluated for technical acceptability only. The Offeror shall ensure a complete proposal which addresses all aspects of the statement of work. The Sample Task Order will not be awarded. Note: The coefficient applied to the price proposal will not be evaluated in the technical evaluation.

Each technical sub-factor will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined below. The sub-factor ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for the factor. Note: Any sub-factor rating that receives an unacceptable rating will result in an overall unacceptable rating for the factor and render the proposal ineligible for award.

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

3. Factor 2 - Past Performance. The Past Performance evaluation will assess the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that offeror’s record of past performance. Past

Performance is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror’s recent past performance and focusing on performance that is relevant to the services being procured under this solicitation. The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an offerors recent and relevant past performance focusing on and targeting performance relevant to the

MATOC (and task orders) being procured under this solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that in conducting the performance risk assessment, the Government may use data provided in the offeror’s proposal and data obtained from other sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval

System (PPIRS) or similar systems and State Department Watch Lists. Past performance areas of evaluation include:

o Quality of Service (i.e.: record of compliance with previous contract requirements, accuracy of reports, technical excellence, and quality awards/certificates) o Schedule (i.e.: adherence to construction schedules, reliability, and responsiveness to changes) o Cost Control (i.e.: record of cost efficiencies and efficient utilization of unit price guides) o Business Relations (i.e.: record of effective management, subcontractor management, cooperative and proactive behavior with Government personnel, flexibility, and responsiveness to inquiries)

Each offeror will receive a performance rating based on the Offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the Contract requirements.

(a) Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past six years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

(b) Relevancy Assessment. To be relevant, the effort must be similar in nature of work, size, and complexity.