g11r0188.pdf

Request for Proposal

Industrial Complex Infrastructure, PN 69286

Fort Bliss, Texas

W9126G-11-R-0188 September 2011

US Army Corps of Engineers Fort Worth District

Jacobs/Huitt-Zollars Dallas, Texas

Ft Bliss Industrial Complex Infrastructure, PN 69286 FBICI

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS

DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

00 11 00.01 SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD,. SF-1442

00 11 00.02 CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE

00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERRORS

00 21 30 SITE VISITS

00 45 00 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

00 72 00 CONTRACT CLAUSES

00 73 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

00 73 46 WAGE DETERMINATION SCHEDULE

DIVISION 01 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 00 00.00 44 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE

01 30 10.00 44 PARTNERING

01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

01 33 40.00 44 COLOR/FINISH SAMPLE BOARDS

01 35 11.00 44 SPECIAL PROJECT PROCEDURES FOR FORT BLISS

01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

01 42 00 SOURCES FOR REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

01 45 00.00 10 QUALITY CONTROL

01 45 00.10 10 QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM (QCS)

01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES AND CONTROLS

01 56 00.00 44 DUST CONTROL

01 57 20.00 10 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

01 57 24.01 44 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (Texas)

01 62 35 RECYCLED / RECOVERED MATERIALS

01 71 23.00 44 SURVEY, LAYOUT, AND OTHER DATA

01 74 19 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE MANAGEMENT

01 78 00 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

01 78 23 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE DATA

DIVISION 02 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 41 00 DEMOLITION

DIVISION 03 - CONCRETE

03 15 00.00 10 CONCRETE ACCESSORIES

03 20 00.00 10 CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT

03 30 00.00 10 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

03 30 53 MISCELLANEOUS CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

03 40 00.00 10 PLANT-PRECAST CONCRETE PRODUCTS FOR BELOW GRADE

CONSTRUCTION

DIVISION 4 - MASONRY

04 20 00 MASONRY

DIVISION 05 - METALS

05 21 19 OPEN WEB STEEL JOIST FRAMING

05 30 00 STEEL DECKS

05 50 13 MISCELLANEOUS METAL FABRICATIONS

05 51 00 METAL STAIRS

05 52 00 METAL RAILINGS

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1

DIVISION 06 - WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES

06 10 00 ROUGH CARPENTRY

DIVISION 07 - THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 22 00 ROOF AND DECK INSULATION

07 53 23 ETHYLENE-PROPYLENE-DIENE-MONOMER ROOFING

07 60 00 FLASHING AND SHEET METAL

07 84 00 FIRESTOPPING

07 92 00 JOINT SEALANTS

DIVISION 08 - OPENINGS

08 11 13 STEEL DOORS AND FRAMES

08 33 23 OVERHEAD COILING DOORS

08 71 00 DOOR HARDWARE

DIVISION 09 FINISHES

09 22 00 SUPPORTS FOR PLASTER AND GYPSUM BOARD

09 29 00 GYPSUM BOARD

09 67 23.13 STANDARD RESINOUS FLOORING

09 90 00 PAINTS AND COATINGS

DIVISION 10 - SPECIALTIES

10 44 16 FIRE EXTINGUISHERS

DIVISION 23 - HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR CONDITION

23 00 00 AIR SUPPLY, DISTRIBUTION, VENTILATION, AND EXHAUST SYSTEMS

23 05 48 VIBRATION AND SEIMIC CONTROLS FOR HVAC PIPING AND

EQUIPTMENT

23 05 93 TESTING, ADJUSTING, AND BALANCING FOR HVAC SYSTEMS

23 07 00 THERMAL INSULATION FOR MECHANICAL SYSTEMS

23 09 23 LONWORKS DIRECT DIGITAL CONTROL FOR HVAC AND OTHER

BUILDING CONTROL SYSTEMS

23 31 13 METAL DUCTS

23 34 23 HVAC POWER VENTILATORS

23 37 13.00 40 DIFFUSERS, REGISTERS, AND GRILLS

23 82 02.00 10 UNITARY HEATING AND COOLING EQUIPMENT

DIVISION 26 - ELECTRICAL

26 00 00.00 20 BASIC ELECTRICAL MATERIALS AND METHODS

26 05 00.00 40 COMMON WORK RESULTS FOR ELECTRICAL

26 05 71.00 40 LOW VOLTAGE OVERCURRENT PROTECTIVE DEVICES

26 08 00 APARATUS INSPECTION AND TESTING

26 11 14.00 10 MAIN ELECTRIC SUPPLY STATION AND SUBSTATION

26 12 19.10 THREE-PHASE PAD-MOUNTED TRANSFORMERS

26 20 00 INTERIOR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

26 24 16.00 40 PANELBOARDS

26 36 00.00 10 AUTOMATIC TRANSFER SWITCH

26 41 01.00 10 LIGHTNING PROTECTION SYSTEM

26 42 14.00 10 CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEM (SACRIFICIAL ANODE)

26 51 00 INTERIOR LIGHTING

26 56 00 EXTERIOR LIGHTNG

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2

DIVISION 27 - COMMUNICATIONS

27 10 00 BUILDING TELECOMMUNICATIONS CABLING SYSTEM

DIVISION 28 - ELECTRONIC SAFETY AND SECURITY

28 31 63.00 ANALOG/ADDRESSABLE INTERIOR FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

DIVISION 31 - EARTHWORK

31 00 00 EARTHWORK

31 05 19 GEOTEXTILE

31 11 00 CLEARING AND GRUBBING

31 23 00.00 20 LANDSCAPE FINE GRADING

DIVISION 32 - EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 01 19 FIELD MOLDED SEALANTS FOR SEALING JOINTS IN RIGID

PAVEMENTS

32 05 33 LANDSCAPE ESTABISHMENT

32 11 16 BASE COURSE FOR RIGID AND SUBBASES FOR FEXIBLE PAVING

32 12 16 HOT-MIX ASPHALT (hma) FOR ROADS

32 16 13 CONCRETE SIDEWALKS AND CURBS AND GUTTERS

32 17 24.00 10 PAVEMENT MARKINGS

32 84 24 IRRIGATION SPRINKLER SYSTEM

32 93 00 EXTERIOR PLANTS

DIVISION 33 - UTILITIES

33 11 00 WATER DISTRIBUTION

33 30 00 SANITARY SEWERS

33 40 00 STORM DRAINAGE UTILITIES

33 51 15 NATURAL GAS / GAS DISTRIBUTION

33 70 02.00 10 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, UNDERGROUND

33 82 00 TELECOMMUNICATIONS OUTSIDE PLANT (osp)

DIVISION 40 - PROCESS INTEGRATION

40 05 13.96 WELDDING PROCESS PIPING

-- End of Project Table of Contents --

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 3

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NUMBER 2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

3. DATE ISSUED PAGE OF PAGES

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by the offeror.

4. CONTRACT NUMBER 5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER 6. PROJECT NUMBER

7. ISSUED BY CODE 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO

9. FOR INFORMATION CALL

A. NAME B. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

SOLICITATION

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS (Title, identifying number, date):

11. The Contractor shall begin performance within calendar days and complete it within calendar days after receiving award, notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory, negotiable. (See .)

12A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and copies to perform the work required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by (hour) local time (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers will be publicly opened at that time. Sealed envelopes containing offers shall be marked to show the offeror’s name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) work requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will be rejected.

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

Designed using Perform Pro, WHS/DIOR, Oct 96

1442-103 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85) (EG)

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(d)

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK (REV. 4-85)

14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR (Include ZIP Code) 15. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS (Include only if different than Item 14)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the work required at the prices specified below in strict accordance with the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in writing within calendar days after the date offers are due. (Insert any number equal or greater than the minimum requirement stated in 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation - give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER (Type or print) 20B. SIGNATURE 20C. OFFER DATE

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24.SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

ITEM 25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) ( ) 41 U.S.C. 253(c) ( )

26. ADMINISTERED BY 27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BYCODE

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT (Contractor is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.) Contractor agrees to furnish and deliver all items or perform all work requirements identified on this form and any continuation sheets for the consideration stated in this contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be governed by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and

(c) the clauses, representations, certifications, and specifications incorporated by reference in or attached to this contract.

29. AWARD. (Contractor is not required to sign this document.) Your offer on this solicitation is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award consummates the contract, which consists of (a) the Government solicitation and your offer, and (b) this contract award. No further contractual document is necessary.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

(Type or print)

30B. SIGNATURE 30C. DATE

31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

31C. AWARD DATE

BY

Section 00 11 00 Page 1

Item No. Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount

0001 All work for construction of the Fort Bliss Industrial Complex Infrastructure, including sitework, utilities, roads, and substation, exclusive of of all other work listed separately. 1 LS $ *** $

0002 Operation and Maintenance Manuals 1 LS *** $ 20,000.00

0003 Final Record Drawings 1 LS *** $ 84,000.00

Industrial Complex Infrastructure Fort Bliss Texas

Solicitation No.W9126G-11-R-0188

CLIN SCHEDULE

*Contract Duration in Calendar Days After the Notice to Proceed is Received (Not To Exceed the maximum time stated in Section 01 00 00.00 44 CONSTUCTION

SCHEDULE)

PROJECT COMPLETION TIME ______ Calendar days*

TOTAL

Solicitation No.W9126G-11-R-0188

CLIN SCHEDULE

Section 00 11 00 Page 1

NOTES:

1. ARITHMETIC DISCREPANCIES (EFARS 14.407-2)

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

(1) Obviously misplaced decimal points will be corrected;

(2) In case of discrepancy between unit price and extended price, the unit price will govern;

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

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

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

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

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

3. Offerors must bid on all items.

NOTES: (cont)

4. Costs attributable to Division 01 - General Requirements are assumed to be prorated among bid items listed.

5. Responders are advised that this requirement may be delayed, cancelled or revised at any time during the solicitation, selection, evaluation, negotiation and/or final award process based on decisions related to DOD changes in force structure and disposition of the Armed Forces.

Solicitation No.W9126G-11-R-0188

CLIN SCHEDULE

Section 00 11 00 Page 2

6. ABBREVIATIONS

For the purpose of this solicitation, the units of measure are represented as follows:

a. LS (lump sum)

END OF CLIN SCHEDULE

Utility Feed Industrial Complex

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-1

SECTION 00 21 00

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS,

NOTICE TO OFFERORS, BASIS OF AWARD, AND LOCAL INSTRUCTIONS

FORT BLISS, TEXAS

PERFORMANCE PRICE TRADE-OFF

1. PROPOSAL OVERVIEW. This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits a Utility Feed for the Industrial Complex at Fort Bliss, Texas Firm Fixed-Price Construction. The purpose of the Source Selection plan is to establish a uniform evaluation procedure for the technical evaluation of proposals by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and the development of the Best Value Decision by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) using the Trade-Off Process (See Federal Acquisition Regulation 15.101-1).

In-as-much as the proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform any resulting contract, the proposal should be specific and complete in every detail. The proposal should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the contract. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent. Local Instructions, including Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Provisions are annotated at the end of this section.

1.1 Proposal Submissions and the Trade-Off Process. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal.

Offerors submit their performance and capability information for review and consideration by the Government. Relative weights among technical factors are provided in paragraph 5 Evaluation Factors and Weights. The SSEB reviews, evaluates, and rates the proposals against the source selection criteria in the RFP. Concurrently, the Government analyzes price proposals of Offerors. Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in establishing the competitive range prior to discussions (if held) and in making the final best value determination for award. The SSA compares proposals to one another and determines the best value for the government. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal must merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Who May Submit. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal.

2.2 Where to Submit. Offerors shall submit their proposals to the Fort Worth District at the address shown in Block 7 of the Standard Form 1442.

2.3 Submission Deadline. Proposals shall be received by the Fort Worth District no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-2

2.4 General Requirements.

2.4.1 In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failures to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affect an Offeror's evaluation. Offerors should provide sufficient detail and clearly define all items required in this section. The Contracting Officer may remove any Offeror from further consideration during any phase of the procurement if the Offeror fails to meet the submittal requirements of the RFP or to reduce the competitive range for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2).

2.4.2 Tabs. Proposal shall be organized and tabbed as shown in paragraph 2.5 Submission Format.

2.4.3 Size of Printed Matter Submissions.

2.4.3.1 Written proposal materials shall be submitted in standard three ring loose-leaf binders. Proposals shall be tabbed and labeled in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of Contents. Font size shall not be less than 10 point. Each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page. Sheet size of the proposal contents shall be 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches where sheets are prepared specifically for this proposal; however, if drawings, charts, or other graphics are submitted, sheets no larger than 11 inches x 17 inches and folded to 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches shall be used. 11 x 17 inch sheets will be counted as 2 8-1/2 inch x 11 inch sheets. Volume II, Technical Proposal, shall not exceed 50 pages (50 single-sided or 25 double-sided sheets), excluding the cover sheet and Table of Contents. The Government will not review any information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. The Offeror must comply with the page limitation. The Offeror shall not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of their proposal. Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

2.4.3.2 The proposals shall contain a detailed table of contents. If more than one binder is used, the complete table of contents shall be included in each. A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact) project description and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a Table of Contents. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration. The Government will not evaluate any information beyond the page limitation noted above.

2.4.3.3 Proposal revisions shall be submitted as page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g., bold face print or underlining. The source of the revision, e.g., Error, Omission, or Clarification, or amendment shall be included and be annotated for each revision. Proposal replacement pages shall be numbered, shall be clearly marked “REVISED”, shall show the date of revision, shall be submitted in appropriate number of copies (e.g., if two (2) copies of the original page was required, then two (2) copies of the revised page will also be required, and shall be a different color than the original pages they are to replace.

2.4.4 Number of Copies. Offerors shall submit an original and one (1) hard copy of Volume I and an original and five (5) hard copies of Volume II of their Proposal in both hard copy and electronic format.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-3

Within three (3) days of contract award, the awardee shall submit both volumes, updated to include all revisions, in electronic format on a CD-ROM.

2.5 Submission Format.

2.5.1 The Proposal will be tabbed and submitted in a three ring binders in the following format:

VOLUME I – Price/Cost Proposal

TAB A – SF 1442, completed and signed by an authorized person from the company or team

TAB B – Section 00 11 00 – Supplies or Services and Price/Costs Schedule

TAB C – Section 00 45 00 – Representations and Certifications

TAB D – PROPOSAL DATA SHEET – See the format provided in this Section. Be sure to include Offeror’s telephone number, FAX number, e-mail address and DUNS number. Duns number will be used to access CCASS data.

TAB E – Bid Bond (Standard Form 24)

TAB F – Pre Award Information (e.g. Bank and Supplier References)

In accordance with FAR 9.103(a) “… contracts shall be awarded to responsible prospective contractors only.” To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the standards at FAR 9.104 that requires a prospective contractor to have adequate financial resources to perform the contract or the ability to obtain them. As an aid in assessing responsibility, the offeror shall notify their bank/suppliers that the Corps of Engineers may contact them, and shall authorize the bank/suppliers to release the following information regarding the Offeror’s account. If a written authorization is required by their bank, Offerors shall provide that authorization with their proposal.

Name and telephone number of bank’s point of contact Number of year’s business has been conducted with each bank Types of open accounts (checking, loans, etc.)

Balance of current accounts (the banks will provide a "range of figures" for this information, such as, medium five-figures range) Means by which loans are secured and if paid as agreed Point of contact and telephone number of three (3) different suppliers

For the purpose of evaluating the preaward survey information submitted hereunder:

Preaward survey data will be evaluated and scored, as it relates to the probability of the offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort.

The Government will use pre-award survey data provided by the offeror and data obtained from other sources to perform this assessment.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-4

VOLUME II – Technical Proposal

THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY COST INFORMATION AND

SHALL NOT EXCEED THE PAGE LIMIT ANNOTATED ABOVE. ALL INFORMATION

SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN THESE TABBED SECTIONS AND SHALL NOT BE

INCLUDED AS AN APPENDIX OR ATTACHMENT).

TAB 1 – FACTOR 1: CONSTRUCTION PAST PERFORMANCE (Worksheet & Questionnaire Provided)

TAB 2 – FACTOR 2: CORPORATE RELEVANT SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE (No Worksheet Provided)

TAB 3 – FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (No Worksheet Provided)

TAB 4 – FACTOR 4: CONSTRUCTION DURATION (No Worksheet Provided)

3. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS.

3.1 FACTOR 1: CONSTRUCTION PAST PERFORMANCE (VOLUME II, TAB 1). Offerors shall be evaluated on construction projects completed or in progress in the last five years that are same/similar in nature to the project requirements solicited under this RFP. The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated to determine technical capability to perform the proposed contract and how well it satisfied its customers. The information presented in the Offeror’s submittal, together with that from other sources available to the Government will comprise the input for evaluation of this factor. The following elements will be evaluated:

• Quality of Construction

• Timeliness of Performance

• Customer Satisfaction

• Subcontractor Management

• Documentation

• Safety Record

3.1.1 Offeror’s Submission Requirements.

3.1.1.1 Project Information Worksheets. Offerors shall provide project information on no more than five completed (or substantially complete) projects, of which 1 project submitted can be currently under construction and at least 50% complete, that reflect prior past performance in the construction elements referenced in paragraph 3.1 above The examples should be similar to this solicitation in project type and scope. As a minimum, the contractor shall provide the data specified in the attached “Project Information” Worksheet. If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies for the purpose of this RFP, each company shall list project examples. The information provided on the Project Information Worksheets will be used in the evaluations of Factor 1, Construction Past Performance, and Factor 2, Corporate Relevant Specialized Experience.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-5

3.1.1.2 Performance Documentation. For each project submitted, offerors shall submit available performance documentation. If no performance documentation is available, state so on the project information worksheet.

3.1.1.2.1 For Corps of Engineer or other DOD contracts, provide a copy of the signed CCASS (Construction Contract Administration Support System) evaluation issued at the completion of the project.

3.1.1.2.2 For non-Corps of Engineer contracts, provide a copy of the performance rating issued by the contracting agent.

3.1.1.2.3 Offerors may submit awards, letters or other forms of recognition relevant to the submitted projects that demonstrate the offeror’s performance capabilities and customer satisfaction.

3.1.1.3 Past Performance Questionnaires. For each project that does not have a final CCASS evaluation, offerors shall provide a questionnaire to the point of contact, clearly identifying the project to be evaluated. A sample Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire is included at the end of this section.

When completed, these forms shall be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to the Fort Worth District Contract Specialist identified in the sample transmittal letter provided. It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that the reference documentation is provided, as the Government may not make additional requests for past performance information from the references. The evaluation form shall be provided to the Contract Specialist directly from the reference. Do not request past performance questionnaires on projects that have final CCASS evaluations.

3.1.1.4 Safety Record. The offeror shall submit either OSHA Form 300, or 300a showing the incident rates for their firm for all projects within the past three years. This form, in Microsoft Excel format, can be downloaded from the Internet at:

http://www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/new-osha300form1-1-04.xls http://www.nccrimecontrol.org/HR/OSHA_Form_300.doc http://www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/dosh_publications/oshalog300.pdf

This data is to be converted using the following formula for each of the three years:

Number of Lost Time Accidents for the year (Column H on Form 300 or 300A) x 200,000 divided by Man-Hours Worked that Year (from Form 300A) = Incident Rate for the Year

The contractor shall calculate the lost time incident rate for each of the past 3 years using the appropriate OSHA Form data. These calculations shall be presented r for each year with the mathematical average of all 3 years. The target average lost time incident rate is 1.0. Offerors with an average lost time incident rate exceeding 1.0 are encouraged to submit an explanation of their incident rate and/or what they have done to improve their safety record. All offerors may submit documentation indicating improvements in their safety record, safety awards, and other safety recognition.

http://www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/new-osha300form1-1-04.xls http://www.nccrimecontrol.org/HR/OSHA_Form_300.doc http://www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/dosh_publications/oshalog300.pdf

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-6

If the Offeror has a safety incentives program, information may be submitted describing this program.

The description of the safety incentives program shall include as a minimum a description of what benefits the firm has seen by implementing the program, benefits to the customer and a description of how the program is administered.

3.1.1.5 Other Sources. The Government may contact sources other than those provided by the Offeror for information with respect to past performance on projects completed or substantially completed within the past 5 years and on projects that are currently under construction, and only one project can be at least 30% complete,. These other sources may include, but are not limited to, CCASS, telephone interviews with organizations familiar with the Offeror’s performance, and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability.

3.1.1.6 New Companies and Joint Ventures. New companies and joint ventures entering the marketplace (without relevant company experience) are reminded that they, along with all other offerors, may submit past performance information for key personnel, using the attached “Project Information” worksheets. If such information is submitted, how long key personnel stayed on their assigned projects and how well they managed their portion of the referenced projects shall be used to judge past performance, along with any other information regarding such key personnel from any other sources the Government may choose to contact. If no such information regarding key personnel is given, then the new company or joint venture shall be given a neutral rating.

3.1.2 Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's responsiveness to the solicitation regarding past performance using the sources identified above. New Companies and Joint Ventures shall be evaluated on their own past performance, including the performance of key personnel as noted in 3.1.1.6, above, to determine the company’s ability to perform satisfactorily under the elements of evaluation.

Offerors may be provided an opportunity to address any negative past performance information about which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. The Government treats an Offeror's lack of past performance as having no positive or negative evaluation significance. The Government will evaluate past performance based on the elements listed below:

• Quality of Construction. Based on all information available, the Government will assess the quality of the actual construction undertaken and the standards of workmanship exhibited by the Offeror.

• Timeliness of Performance. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror completing past projects within the scheduled completion times.

• Customer Satisfaction. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s past customer satisfaction, cooperation with customers, and interaction on past projects.

• Subcontractor Management. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s management of subcontractors, including mitigation of conflicts and resolution of disputes at the lowest level. For large businesses, the Government will also evaluate compliance with subcontracting plans.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-7

• Documentation. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the

Offeror’s level of meeting customer satisfaction on timeliness and quality of the documentation, reports, and other written materials completed by the Offeror on past projects.

• Safety Record. All information available with respect to the Offeror’s safety record, to include CCASS rating for safety, lost time incident rate, safety incentive program, safety awards, and other indications of improvements in safety will be taken into consideration in evaluating the Offeror’s overall safety record.

3.2 FACTOR 2: CORPORATE RELEVANT SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE (VOL II, TAB 2).

Offerors shall be evaluated on projects similar to this solicitation in project type and scope.

3.2.1 Offeror’s Submission Requirements. For each of the projects submitted on the Project Information Worksheets in Factor 1, provide a narrative discussing the technical relevancy of the submitted project to this solicitation.

3.2.2 New Companies and Joint Ventures. If offeror represents the combining of two or more companies for the purpose of this RFP, the proposal shall clearly identify the contractual responsibilities of each firm and the work to be performed by each; describe the nature of the association; indicate whether the firms have experience working together in construction ventures, including how long and how many projects. In addition, each company including joint ventures shall list their Government contract experience. Provide a copy of the commitment letter of the firms or the joint venture agreement.

Prior to award of any contract, a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement will be required. If approval of the Joint Venture Agreement is required by the Small Business Administration, failure to timely provide an approved SBA Joint Venture Agreement may prevent award of a contract.

3.2.3 Evaluation. The Government will review the projects provided by the Offeror to evaluate and rate the recent relevant specialized experience of the Offeror with similar projects. The Government will place a higher value on experience with similar task order contracts executed with the Corps of Engineers or other DoD Components. If the Offeror cannot provide suitable relevant experience and the evaluators consider that the information provided indicates that the Offeror has no relevant experience, a determination will be made as to the risk this lack of corporate experience presents to the Government and the proposal will be evaluated accordingly. The experience of individuals will not be evaluated under this factor.

3.3 FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (VOLUME II, TAB 3). The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s management effectiveness by considering the Offeror’s understanding and capability of successfully managing the project to completion. The following elements will be evaluated:

• Personnel Qualifications.

• Home Office Management and Support.

• Small and Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization.

3.3.1 Offeror’s Submission Requirements.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-8

3.3.1.1 Personnel Qualifications. Offeror shall identify the principal program personnel with their areas of responsibility and relationship with the management structure. Principal program personnel are defined as, but not limited to, Project Manager, Project Scheduler, Site Superintendent, Quality Control System Manager ref: Section 01 32 01.00 1.3 Project Scheduler and 01 45 04.00 CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL for minimum qualifications). Offeror shall provide key personnel resume information that includes as a minimum, the following:

• Name and Title

• Specific assignment on this project

• Name of Firm (If different from Offeror)

• Number of years with this firm/with other firms

• Education - Degree(s)/year/specialization

• Active registration: number/state/year

• Specific experience, including dates, and qualifications relevant to this project

Offerors are encouraged to provide descriptive analysis of why they feel their proposed personnel meet the criteria for principal program personnel experience.

3.3.1.2 Home Office Management and Support.

3.3.1.2.1 Describe the home office organization, responsibilities and lines of authority established for the contract. The use of a flow chart diagram of the home office management/support structure is encouraged.

3.3.1.2.2 Describe your plan for managing subcontract performance, acquisition, execution and administration.

3.3.1.2.3 Describe your material purchasing system and capabilities.

3.3.1.2.4 Describe your resources in personnel, construction plant and equipment available to self-perform required work under this contract. Fully describe the type of work your firm is capable of self-performing and describe the types of work you intend to self-perform, if awarded this contract.

3.3.1.2.5 Describe your resources available and your capabilities to support this project concurrently with other projected on-going or new work. Describe your resources available and your capabilities to manage and execute this contract. State why your firm is especially qualified to undertake this contract.

3.3.1.3 Small and Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization. ALL OFFERORS are required to provide a narrative discussion of their plan, as well as provide the information requested in the below table, for utilization of small and small disadvantaged businesses. At a minimum, the narrative shall discuss:

3.3.1.3.1 Goals for subcontracting with small and small disadvantaged businesses in sufficient detail to allow Government evaluators to determine that these goals are realistic, justifiable, positive, and in accordance with the Government’s policy to maximize opportunities for these types of businesses.

3.3.1.3.2 The extent to which small disadvantaged businesses, and where appropriate, historically black

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-9 colleges and universities/minority institutions (HBCU/MI) have been identified for participation as part of the Offeror’s team.

3.3.1.3.3 The Offeror’s past and present commitment to providing subcontracting opportunities and encouragement to small and small disadvantaged businesses.

3.3.1.3.4 The Offeror must complete the following table as part of their proposal to express in percentage what they plan to execute as a prime contractor and what they plan to subcontract for this project.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-10

Utilization of Small and Small Disadvantaged Business

*Percentage

Self Perform (Prime Contractor) %

Subcontracted Work:

- Small and Small Business Disadvantaged Business %

- HBCU/MI %

Total: 100%

*Representative of the percentage of the total project.

3.3.2 Evaluation.

3.3.2.1 Personnel Qualifications. The Government will review the key personnel provided by the Offeror to evaluate and rate the recent experience of the key personnel in similar projects. Resumes will be evaluated for qualifications and relevant technical experience to this project. The key personnel example projects should closely resemble the project identified in this solicitation.

3.3.2.2 Home Office Management and Support. The Government will evaluate the clarity, adequacy, capabilities and strengths of the Offeror’s organization, systems and plans for completing construction, for managing subcontractors, capability and commitment to self-perform the required percentage of work, and the capacity to successfully accomplish the contract along with other ongoing work, all in a timely manner.

3.3.2.3 Small and Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization. The Government will evaluate narratives provided for the following elements. Greater detail and specificity will be given greater credit than general statements and commitments.

3.3.2.3.1 The extent to which the goals for subcontracting with small and small disadvantaged businesses are realistic, justifiable, positive, and in accordance with the Government’s policy to maximize opportunities for these types of businesses.

3.3.2.3.2 The extent to which small disadvantaged businesses, and where appropriate, historically black colleges and universities/minority institutions (HBCU/MI) have been identified for participation as part of the Offeror’s team.

3.3.2.3.3 The Offeror’s past commitment to providing subcontracting opportunities and encouragement to small and small disadvantaged businesses.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-11

3.4 FACTOR 4: CONSTRUCTION DURATION (VOLUME II, TAB 4). The Government’s requirement is that all work on this project be completed within (See Section 01 00 00.00 44 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE, Construction Schedule) days of Notice to Proceed, inclusive of all review periods and Government phasing requirements specified. Offeror may propose a completion period of lesser duration; however, any such proposals for a completion period of lesser duration must include the same time periods for review and phasing as are specified in this request for proposals. If the Government accepts a proposal for a completion period of lesser duration, and such proposal alters the time periods for review and phasing, the contract shall be read to include the original periods for review and phasing. Completion periods of significantly lesser duration may be rated as more advantageous to the Government. If a completion period of lesser duration is proposed and accepted by the Government, the accepted completion period will replace the original construction schedule listed under Section 01 00 00.00 44. In addition, if a completion period of lesser duration is proposed, the Bid Schedule must reflect pricing information for the lesser proposed completion period. Offers who propose completion of the work beyond the maximum completion period specified above, will be rated unsatisfactory for this factor.

3.4.1 Offeror’s Submission Requirements. Offerors must provide a proposed schedule to show how the contractor intends to perform the work within the proposed construction duration. This shall be shown in a time-scaled [Gantt Chart] summary network, which shall have 50-100 activities.

3.4.2 Evaluation. This factor will be evaluated by reviewing the submitted scheduling documents.

Completion periods of significantly lesser duration may be rated as more advantageous to the Government. Offers who propose completion of the work beyond the maximum completion period specified above, will be rated unsatisfactory for this factor. The total contract duration in calendar days, must be reflected on the Chart

4. EVALUATION STANDARDS. Evaluation criteria (factors) – except for past performance - will be rated using the following adjectival descriptions. Evaluators will apply the appropriate adjective to each criterion rated. The evaluator’s narrative explanation must clearly establish that the Offeror’s submittal meets the definitions established below. As each criterion is evaluated an assessment of Risk will be made. The “Proposal Risk Assessment” ratings are applicable to all criteria except Past Performance.

Past Performance Risk is rated using the “Past Performance Relevancy Assessment” listed below.

4.1 Technical Rating Adjectives

4.1.1 Outstanding. The proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weakness.

4.1.2 Good. The proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weakness.

4.1.3 Acceptable. The 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.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-12

4.1.4 Marginal. The 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.

4.1.5 Unacceptable. The proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

4.1.6 Neutral / Unknown. No relevant performance record is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the Offeror or key team members/subcontractors. This is neither a negative or positive assessment.

4.2. Technical Risk Ratings:

4.2.1 In addition to adjectival ratings, risk ratings shall be assigned to all Technical factors.

4.2.2. Risk Rating System

4.2.2.1. Low Risk. Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

4.2.2.2. Moderate Risk. Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

4.2.2.3. High Risk. Is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

4.3. Past Performance Revelancy Ratings:

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

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

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

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

4.4. Past Performance Confidence Assessments:

4.4.1. Substantial Confidence. Based on the offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-13

4.4.2. Satisfactory Confidence. Based on the offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

4.4.3. Limited Confidence. Based on the offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

4.4.4. No Confidence. Based on the offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

4.4.5. Unknown Confidence (Neutral). No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

5. TECHNICAL EVALUATION WEIGHTS

5.1 Relative Importance Definition. For the purpose of this evaluation, the following terms will be used to establish the relative importance of the technical factors and subfactors.

• Significantly More Important: The criterion is at least two times greater in value than another criterion.

• More Important: The criterion is greater in value than another criterion but less than two times greater.

• Equal: The criterion is of the same value or nearly the same as another criterion.

5.2 ALL TECHNICAL FACTORS when combined are equal in importance to PRICE.

5.3 Weight among technical factors (listed in descending order of importance):

FACTOR 1: CONSTRUCTION PAST PERFORMANCE: This factor is more important than Factors 2, 3 and 4.

FACTOR 2: CORPORATE RELEVANT SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE: This factor is equal in importance to Factor 3.

FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS: This factor is equal in importance to Factor 2 and is more important than Factor 4.

FACTOR 4: CONSTRUCTION DURATION: This factor is less in importance to the above factors.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-14

6. PRICE.

6.1 The Government will perform a price analysis on all proposals received. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine completeness, reasonableness, and understanding of the work. The evaluation will determine the adequacy of the offer in fulfilling the requirements of the proposal. Completeness addresses the extent to which the elements of the price proposal are consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Reasonableness will be established using historical price information, price competition information, the IGE, and any other pricing tools necessary.

6.2 Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in establishing the competitive range prior to discussions (if held) and in making the final best value determination for award.

7. EXCEPTIONS. Exceptions to the contractual terms and conditions of the solicitation (e.g., standard company terms and conditions) may result in a determination to reject a proposal.

8. RESTRICTIONS. Failure to submit all the data in the format indicated in this solicitation may be cause for determining a proposal incomplete and, therefore, not considered for evaluation, and for subsequent award.

9. PROPOSAL EVALUATION.

9.1 Each member of the Government evaluation team (Source Selection Evaluation Board) will independently consider all information provided in the proposal. Worksheets are provided on the following pages, which the evaluators will use to review and rate the individual proposals.

9.2 Once these individual analyses are completed, the team will meet and determine a rating for each of the evaluation factors by consensus decision.

9.3 The evaluation team will document strengths (e.g., advantages), weaknesses (e.g., disadvantages), and other comments (e.g., deficiency and/or clarification) to support the rating for each factor, as well as the overall rating. Documentation and comments are required for all ratings.

9.4 This final overall rating, along with ratings on individual factors, will be provided to the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority for the best value decision.

10. BASIS FOR AWARD

10.1 Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP in order to be eligible for award, to include responsiveness, technical acceptability and responsibility.

10.2 In order to determine which proposal represents the best overall value, the Government may compare proposals to one another. The Government will award a contract to the responsible Offeror whose technical submittal and price proposal contains the combination of those criteria described in this document offering the best overall value to the Government. Best value will be determined by a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in this RFP.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-15

10.3 As technical ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages become less distinct, differences in price between proposals are of increased importance in determining the most advantageous proposal.

Conversely, as differences in price become less distinct, differences in rating and relative advantages and disadvantages between proposals are of increased importance to the determination. In the event that the technical and cost/price proposals become more equivalent for two or more large businesses, the subcontracting plan will become more significant and may become the determining factor for award.

10.4 The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer. The right is also reserved to reject any and all offers. The basis of award will be a conforming offer, the price or cost of which may or may not be the lowest. If other than the lowest offer, it must be sufficiently more advantageous than the lowest offer to justify the payment of additional amounts. Any award price must be determined to be fair and reasonable.

10.5 Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer. The Government may make award of a conforming proposal without discussions, if deemed to be within the best interests of the Government.

10.6 The Government intends to award a contract without discussions based on initial proposals received;

therefore, the proposals shall contain the offerors best terms from a cost and technical standpoint.

However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions in accordance with FAR 52.215-1.

Should discussions be necessary after evaluations, the Government will establish a competitive range of the offerors that are the most highly rated. The Government reserves the right to address any pertinent issues in the proposals.

W9126G-11-R-0188 Section 00 21 00-16

VOLUME II – TAB 1

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

1. Name of Firm:

2. Address:

3. Phone:

4. Fax:

5. E-mail:

6. Duns # (used for accessing CCASS)

7. If a joint…